William C. Massey’s Contributions to Baja California Prehistory

Don Laylander

Abstract Massey had been fellow graduate students at Berke-

William Clifford Massey (1917–1974) was a pivotal figure in the ley, and they collaborated on an article that addressed development of anthropology on the Baja California peninsula. His Native watercraft on the coasts of both Californias investigations were preceded by the observations and speculations (Heizer and Massey 1953). Sauer, one of the leading of eighteenth-century Jesuit missionaries and nineteenth-century twentieth-century American geographers, sponsored naturalists, as well as by the pioneering archaeological survey work of Malcolm J. Rogers in the early twentieth century. However, the and participated in some of Massey’s early fieldwork range and depth of Massey’s studies in the mid-twentieth century in Baja California. Several of Sauer’s geography were unprecedented. His descriptions and interpretations, although students, including Fred B. Kniffen, Peveril Meigs III, they have not gone unchallenged, established the framework for most of the investigations that have followed during the late Brigham Arnold, and Homer Aschmann, made notable twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. His contributions are contributions to Baja California anthropology. reviewed here within their historical contexts, both in light of the work done by Massey’s predecessors and by looking at some of the ways in which his conclusions have been adopted or modified by Massey’s teaching career took him in succession to subsequent research. Merritt Community College in Oakland, the Universi- ty of Washington in Seattle, the University of Florida The Man and His Career in Gainesville, and Texas Christian University in Ft. Worth. In addition to his fieldwork in Baja California, William Massey was born in San Mateo, California, he carried out archaeological investigations in Alta in 1917. He studied at the University of California, California, Washington, Nevada, Texas, and Florida. Berkeley, during the late 1930s and early 1940s and However, the Baja California peninsula remained his then again in the late 1940s and early 1950s, after his preeminent research focus. academic career had been interrupted during World War II for work as a shipyard steamfitter. He died in Massey’s initial survey and excavation work in Baja 1974 at the age of 57, during a fishing trip in Placer California took place in the years 1940–1941 and County (Anonymous 1974; Heizer 1974). 1946–1949. He also directed small anthropological field schools on the peninsula in 1953 and 1954 under Massey received his Ph.D. in anthropology at Berke- the auspices of the University of Washington and ley in 1955 with a dissertation on Culture History in Mexico’s Escuela Nacional de Antropología e Histo- the Cape Region of Baja California, Mexico. Among ria. Those field schools have been vividly described the members of his dissertation committee were Rob- by one of the participating students (Tuohy 1998). ert F. Heizer and Carl O. Sauer. Heizer was a pioneer- Reconnaissance work took Massey through many ing investigator of the archaeology and ethnohistory parts of the peninsula, but his most intensive studies of Alta California and the Great Basin. Heizer and were concentrated in just two areas: the Cape Region

Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly, Volume 51, Number 2 38 Laylander in the far south and the mid-peninsular region around addition, his publications made reference to at least the small community of Comondú, in interior of the eight unpublished manuscripts on the peninsula’s past: Sierra de la Giganta west of Loreto (Figure 1). “An Historical Ethnography of Lower California,” “The Pericú Indians of Lower California,” “Jesuit Between the late 1940s and the middle 1960s, Massey Explorations in Lower California: 1698–1766,” “Fray authored or coauthored 10 substantive studies bearing Luis Sales’ Description,” “Caves of the Sierra de la on Baja California’s prehistory (Massey 1947, 1949, Giganta,” “Petroglyphs of Baja California,” “Pottery 1955, 1957, 1961a, 1961b, 1966a, 1966b; Heizer from the Northwest Coast of Baja California Norte, and Massey 1953; Massey and Osborne 1961). In Mexico,” and “Coiled Basketry from Central Baja

Figure 1. Map of the peninsula of Baja California.

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) William C. Massey’s Contributions to Baja California Prehistory 39

California and Its Affiliations.” The last four of these throughout more than half of the peninsula, from the were coauthored with one of his students, Donald R. Central Sierras to the Cape Region (Grant 1974). Tuohy. Another exception was the work of Malcolm Rogers (Laylander and Bendímez 2013). Rogers personally Along with Massey’s own writings, direct outgrowths documented numerous sites in the northern quarter of of his work can be seen in the publications of Tuohy the peninsula, and he had his father, Frederick Rogers, (1970, 1978, 1984, 1998; Tuohy and Strawn 1989; record sites along both Pacific and Gulf coasts of the Tuohy and Van Wormer 1995) (Figure 2) and of remainder of the peninsula. Massey’s former wife, Lee Gooding Massey (1968, 1972, 1974, 1976). More generally, subsequent Near the start of his career, Massey published his archaeologists and other investigators probing the pen- “Brief Report on Archaeological Investigations in insula’s prehistory have relied heavily on the founda- Baja California” (1947), an overview based primarily tions that were provided by William Massey’s pioneer- on his own initial reconnaissance of the peninsula. ing work. A symposium commemorating his contri- The article provided comparative comments on the butions was held in 1998 at the Annual Meeting of artifacts, features, sites, and regional patterns ob- the Society for California Archaeology in San Diego, served in the Cape Region, Magdalena Plain, Great and many papers from that session were published in Volcanic Plateau (Central Sierras), Northern Deserts two issues of the Pacific Coast Archaeological Society (the northern half of Aschmann’s [1959] Central Quarterly (Ritter 1998). Desert), and Northwestern Baja California. The presence or absence of shell middens and interior Peninsula-Wide Archaeological Inventory sites, their horizontal extents and stratigraphic depths, and noteworthy artifacts and features were recorded. Most field investigations of Baja California’s pre- Significant gaps in Massey’s coverage included the historic archaeology, both before and after Massey’s Colorado Desert in the northeast and the islands lying time, have been relatively narrow in geographical off the two coasts, particularly Isla Espíritu Santo in scope. They have usually focused on a single site, a the southern Gulf and Isla Cedros off the west coast, small group of sites, or a limited region. One partial both of which would figure prominently in subse- early exception was provided by the 1890s investiga- quent archaeological studies (e.g. Des Lauriers 2010; tions of Léon Diguet, who inventoried rock art sites Fujita 2010).

Figure 2. William C. Massey (left) and Donald R. Tuohy in 1960 (reprinted from Tuohy 1998:84).

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) 40 Laylander

Although Massey’s article amounted to little more (Figure 3). Particularly notable were his efforts to than a dozen pages, it was a more thorough and de- define precise linguistic boundaries by plotting the tailed firsthand archaeological overview than anything locations of named Pericú, Guaycura, Monqui, and that had been produced by any single observer. Its Cochimí rancheria sites in Baja California Sur. For geographical scope would not be matched during the the northern quarter of Baja California, where Yuman decades that followed. Partly because the general groups survived and were known through ethnograph- framework of Massey’s overview was available to ic rather than historical reports, he was content to subsequent investigators, those archaeologists have adopt the ethnolinguistic mapping that was provided felt free to focus their fieldwork within narrower by the Berkeley ethnographers and geographers. geographical contexts. Partial exceptions have been the reconnaissance of Great Mural pictograph sites Massey’s delineation earned its place as the peninsu- throughout the peninsula’s central sierras by Harry la’s standard linguistic map for several decades. How- W. Crosby (1975) and Enrique Hambleton (1979) and ever, in a few areas, subsequent revisions of his maps Eric W. Ritter’s many successive studies in diverse and interpretations have been necessary (Mixco 1978, areas on the central peninsula’s coasts, around Bahía 2006; Laylander 1997). In part, these revisions result- Concepción, the Vizcaíno Lagoons, and Bahía de ed from the more extensive publication of primary los Ángeles (e.g., Ritter 2006a, 2006b, 2006c). The ethnohistoric sources by Ernest J. Burrus, W. Michael resource management responsibilities of the Instituto Mathes, Miguel León-Portilla, and others during the Nacional de Antropología e Historia (INAH) centers second half of the twentieth century. However, Massey for Baja California in Mexicali and for Baja California had been able to consult most of the sources in manu- Sur in La Paz are also tending to impel their staffs to script form at the Bancroft Library in Berkeley. adopt broad geographical perspectives within the pen- insula’s northern and southern halves, respectively. In the Cape Region, Massey projected a separate Huchiti language or a group of languages, including Ethnogeography Periue, Aripe, Huchiti proper, and Cora. A reevalua- tion of the evidence has suggested that this separation Eighteenth-century Jesuit missionaries and histori- was not warranted. The Periue and Aripe may be ans devoted considerable attention to the ethnic and more plausibly considered as Guaycura speakers. The linguistic geography of aboriginal Baja California, Cora were identical with the Pericú, while the Huchi- although the conclusions they proposed were often ti proper may have been either Guaycura or Pericú ambiguous or inconsistent. Subsequent scholars (Laylander 1997:14–29). In the immediate vicinity of during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries Loreto, Massey’s identification of the Monqui with the usually followed the secondhand syntheses offered by Cochimí also seems to have been based on a misread- the Jesuit historians Miguel Venegas, Andrés Burriel, ing of the early historic evidence. The Monqui appear and Francisco Javier Clavijero (Venegas 1757, 1759; to have spoken a separate language, possibly related to Clavijero 1789, 1937). Guaycura (Laylander 1997:33–40).

Massey made a notable contribution in his 1949 In higher-level linguistic classifications, two of article, “Tribes and Languages of Baja California,” Massey’s conclusions have also been questioned, in which he returned to the original early historical although not definitively rejected. Massey followed sources and attempted to work out the prehistoric previous investigators in including Cochimí (“Pen- linguistic geography of the peninsula in greater detail insular Yuman”) within the Yuman language family.

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) William C. Massey’s Contributions to Baja California Prehistory 41

Figure 3. Aboriginal linguistic geography of Baja California, according to Massey (1949:274) (left) and as revised (Laylander 1997:13; Mixco 2006:25) (right).

While a genetic relationship between Cochimí and Yu- contributions was providing detailed descriptions of man is evident, Mixco (1978, 2006) suggested that the several collections, including those resulting from his weakness of the connection is such that the two should own fieldwork and those from two of his predeces- instead be considered sister linguistic families. In the sors. His published descriptions and analyses included far south, Massey linked Guaycura and Pericú (as well the materials from his dissertation work in the Cape as Huchiti) into a single “Guaicurian” family, appar- Region (Massey 1955), the 1877 Edward Palmer col- ently on the basis of their geographical propinquity lection from near Bahía de los Ángeles (Massey and and the smallness of the region involved. No evidence Osborne 1961), and the early-twentieth-century col- to support such a link was adduced by Massey or by lection of César Castaldí from the southern half of the subsequent investigators, probably because the surviv- peninsula (Massey 1966a). The materials described ing linguistic evidence concerning the Pericú language in detail included not only the usual lithic artifacts, is extremely meager (León-Portilla 1976). ceramic artifacts, and invertebrate and vertebrate fau- nal wastes but also many less commonly encountered Artifact Description and Classification items (Table 1).

Published descriptions of the prehistoric artifacts Because of the pioneering character of his work, found at Baja California sites were generally cur- Massey faced the question of adopting or creating sory prior to Massey’s work. One of his major appropriate standards for describing, classifying, and

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) 42 Laylander

Table 1. Artifact Categories Discussed in Massey’s Publications.

Category Dissertation Palmer Collection Castaldí Collection Projectile point, blade + a + a Knife + + Scraper, scraper-plane + + Chopper + + Drill + Core + Flake + Lithic Hammer + Pick + Tubular pipe + + a Mano + + Metate + + Drilled sandstone ring + Worked pumice + Worked gypsum + Pottery + Tool + a Shell Bead + a + Other ornament + a + Awl + + + Spatula + + Bone Flaker + Tooth ornament + Skin + + Other animal products Feathers + + Human hair cape + Atlatl + Projectile shaft + Flaker handle + Hook + Hinged stick snare + Paddle + Wood, cane Fire drill hearth + Lozenge-shaped board + Bull-roarer + Bead + + Pin + Whistle + Cactus spine + +

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) William C. Massey’s Contributions to Baja California Prehistory 43

Table 1. Continued.

Category Dissertation Palmer Collection Castaldí Collection Mat + + Sewn bark Container + Cotton cloth + Netting + + + Twined fiber bundle + Braid + Cordage String + + + Knot + + + Tump band + Coiled + + Basketry Sandal + Mat +

a Formal typology used. Note: + = described. Sources: Massey 1955, 1966a; Massey and Osborne 1961.

naming the artifacts he reported. The issue was partic- type, and a large broad type with a stubby convex ularly pertinent in the case of projectile points. Possi- stem” (Massey 1947:347). ble alternative approaches have included: (1) simple description; (2) intuitive morphological classification; Next, in his dissertation on the Cape Region, Massey (3) rigorous (keyed) morphological classification; (4) (1955:359–360) implemented a more rigorous, technological classification; and (5) interpretive typ- systematic, keyed typology based on the points’ ing, lumping together points that were believed to be morphological attributes, modified from the point clas- associated chronologically or to belong to a common sification used by Emil Haury (1950) at Ventana Cave culture. It has been possible to mix more than one in Arizona. Massey applied this same scheme with approach. For instance, within a general interpretive minor changes to the more extensive Castaldí collec- (chronological/cultural) category of “Pinto projectile tion of points from throughout southern Baja Califor- points,” Rogers (1939:Plate 13) included large and nia (Massey 1966a:40). Attributes considered in the small points; side-notched, corner-notched, triangu- typology included overall shape, presence or absence lar, and leaf-shaped points; and concave, convex, and of a stem, the stem’s relative width, the stem’s shape, straight-based points. These Pinto points were then the shoulder’s shape, and the base’s shape (Table 2). assigned to intuitively distinguished morphological Conspicuously not considered was the attribute of Types 1, 2, 3, etc. point size (cf. Thomas 1981).

In his initial overview of peninsular archaeology, In later publications Massey (1961a, 1966a, 1966b) Massey simply characterized the points morpholog- relied more heavily on intuitively recognized, ically. For instance, he wrote that “projectile points morphological-interpretive projectile point types. in the La Paz area were usually large; common, and A system of named point types had been developed unique to the area, are a long slender tang-stemmed primarily in the Mojave Desert and Great Basin, and

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) 44 Laylander

Table 2. Massey’s (1966a) Projectile Point Typology.

Type Pointed base I B 1 Convex base I B 2 Leaf-shaped Straight base I B 3 Concave base I B 4 Convex base I C 1 Without stem Triangular Straight base I C 2 Concave base I C 3 Pointed I D 1 Diamond Straight or convex base I D 2 Concave base I D 3 Convex base II A 1 Stem wider than body Straight base II A 2 Concave base II A 3 Pointed base II B 1 a 1 Rounded shoulder Convex base II B 1 a 2

Tapering (tanged) Pointed base II B 1 b 1 Straight shoulder stem Convex base II B 1 b 2 Pointed base II B 1 c 1 Barbed shoulder Convex base II B 1 c 2 Convex base II B 2 a 1 Rounded shoulder Straight base II B 2 a 2 Concave base II B 2 a 3 Convex base II B 2 b 1 With stem Parallel-sided stem Straight shoulder Straight base II B 2 b 2 Concave base II B 2 b 3 Stem narrower than body Convex base II B 2 c 1 Barbed shoulder Straight base II B 2 c 2 Concave base II B 2 c 3 Convex base II B 3 a 1 Rounded shoulder Straight base II B 3 a 2 Concave base II B 3 a 3 Convex base II B 3 b 1 Expanding stem Straight shoulder Straight base II B 3 b 2 Concave base II B 3 b 3 Convex base II B 3 c 1 Barbed shoulder Straight base II B 3 c 2 Concave base II B 3 c 3

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) William C. Massey’s Contributions to Baja California Prehistory 45

Massey incorporated two of those designations, Pinto the Dart-thrower on the Peninsula of Baja California” Basin and Gypsum Cave, into his own work, and he (Massey 1961b). added two new point type designations, La Paz and Loreto. According to Massey, early ethnohistoric evidence provided the key to understanding the anomaly: Subsequent to Massey’s work, several investigators have analyzed and classified large collections of pre- Many of the reports [concerning southern historic Baja California projectile points (Davis 1968; Baja California] for the period between 1535 Ritter 1979; Carmean 1994; Serafín 1995; Ritter and and 1697 contain information on the use Burcell 1998; Moranchel 2014). Those studies adopt- of the dart-thrower by the natives, or of the ed a variety of approaches to point classification, but wooden darts with fire-hardened tips which Massey’s attempt to establish a rigorous morphologi- seem to have been associated with the throw- cal classification has been generally ignored. Instead, er. There is no such evidence for the use of the most prevalent approach has been based on named, the dart-thrower from central and northern intuitively distinguished, morphological-interpretive Baja California for this or later periods point types. Named types that were defined mostly in [Massey 1961b:84]. the Great Basin and southern California and that have had their ranges extended into the peninsula include Massey acknowledged that the bow and arrow had Clovis, Lake Mojave, Silver Lake, Elko, San Pedro been in use throughout the peninsula by the time of (from southern Arizona), Cottonwood, Desert, and initial European contacts. However, the persistence of Dos Cabezas. New types proposed for Baja Califor- this alternative technology side-by-side in the extreme nia have included Comondú, Descanso, El Arco, El south until the mid-seventeenth century suggested the Zacateco, Guajademí, Guerrero Negro, Huamalgüeño, likelihood that the arrival of the bow and arrow in that Manuela, Roma, San Felipe, Vallecito, Vizcaíno, and region had been relatively recent and that prehistoric Zacatecas. Whether this intuitive morphological-in- cultural diffusion down the peninsula had therefore terpretive approach to point typology has been or is been extremely slow, perhaps requiring as many as likely to be a fruitful one remains an open question. 1,000 years in this instance.

Atlatls and Darts Massey somewhat overstated the evidence in support of this view (cf. Laylander 2007). He only identified two One outcome of Massey’s 1947 fieldwork in the Cape historic references to the atlatl itself, and one of those Region was the discovery of four wooden atlatls now appears likely to have been based on a misread- (dart-throwers) in a cave burial bundle. The rarity ing of the evidence. Ethnohistoric references to darts of such artifacts at North American archaeological (dardos) and other large projectiles were considerably sites led him to consider the culture-historical im- more numerous, more widely distributed throughout plications of the finds. In this, as in much else, he the Californias, and more persistent throughout the was following in the footsteps of his colleague Paul historic period than Massey had recognized. However, Kirchhoff (1942:xxxiii–xxxiv; see also Kirchhoff, this the physical survival of wooden atlatls at Cape Region Quarterly issue). Massey’s observations, research, archaeological sites was confirmed by subsequent and speculations were published in an article on “The additional finds (Fujita 1995; Molto and Fujita 1995), Dart-thrower in Baja California” (Massey 1957) and and this does suggest the possibility of an unusual per- then in a slightly revised version as “The Survival of sistence of atlatl-and-dart technology in that region.

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) 46 Laylander

Watercraft higher elevations of Isla Cedros offered “cedar” (ac- tually pine; Monterey pine, Pinus radiata, or Bishop Another anomalous geographical pattern was discussed pine, P. muricata). Forested areas in the Cape Region by Heizer and Massey in their 1953 article on “Ab- offered pine and other trees. original Navigation off the Coasts of Upper and Baja California.” Along most of the Pacific and Gulf coasts Heizer and Massey minimized the importance of ma- of both Californias, the prevalent form of prehistoric rine watercraft to most of aboriginal California: watercraft was the balsa, made from bundles of tule (bulrush; Scirpus sp.) or similar materials. Heizer and With the partial exceptions of the Chumash Massey documented exceptions in four regions on of the Santa Barbara Channel, who were the basis of ethnohistoric and ethnographic evidence. accustomed to fish in deep waters in their On the coast of Alta California north of Bodega Bay, sea-going plank canoes, and the Pericue of dugout canoes and log rafts were constructed. In the Cape San Lucas, who went out of sight of Southern California Bight, elaborate plank canoes were land on fishing expeditions, the coastal tribes made in the Santa Barbara Channel area, and dugout of Upper and Baja California could hardly canoes were made farther south by the Luiseño. On be called maritime. Boats, whether dugouts, Isla Cedros, lying off the west coast of Baja California, balsas, or rafts, seem incidental and generally and again in the Cape Region from Cabo San Lucas to nonessential cultural features of the whole Bahía de La Paz, log rafts were made (Figure 4). area [Heizer and Massey 1953:290–291].

The differences in watercraft within Baja California The researchers had perhaps underestimated the seemed to have been attributable, at least in large part, role of watercraft on the peninsula’s coasts. Thomas to differences in the locally available materials. The Bowen (2009) found ethnohistoric or archaeological evidence, or both, for Native activity on virtually ev- ery island in the Gulf of California. A similar pattern seems to hold true for the islands off the peninsula’s west coast (Laylander 2013). In particular, archaeolog- ical evidence of substantial prehistoric island settle- ment has been noted on Isla Cedros and Isla Espíritu Santo (Des Lauriers 2010; Fujita 2010).

Subsequent archaeological investigations also suggest that Massey may have misinterpreted the character and significance of Isla Cedros’s “log rafts.” The is- land’s watercraft seem to have been more complex in their construction than simple log rafts (Des Lauriers 2005). Additionally, the source of the wood used in the boats apparently did not simply come from Isla Ced- ros’s own forests, as Heizer and Massey had supposed, but in addition or instead came from large driftwood logs that had been carried south by the California Figure 4. Native use of a log raft at Cabo San Lucas, as Current to the coasts of Bahía de Sebastián Vizcaíno reported by the English privateer George Shelvocke (1726).

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) William C. Massey’s Contributions to Baja California Prehistory 47 from as far away as northern Alta California. On Isla with or without ochre painting of the bones, which Cedros, Des Lauriers reported the probable remains had been particularly noted by the nineteenth-century from two boats, one constructed from cedar (perhaps investigators, as well as primary burial in ventrally incense cedar, Calocedrus decurrens?) and the second extended, side-flexed, and tightly flexed modes, and from redwood (presumably coast redwood, Sequoia possibly also cremation. Considerable variability in sempervirens). Across Bahía de Sebastián Vizcaíno the artifacts that accompanied the burials was noted on the shores of the peninsula itself, several finds of and described. Outside of the Cape Region, Massey large worked logs that may represent the remains of and Osborne (1961) restudied the materials in the prehistoric watercraft have been observed (Moriarty important 1887 Edward Palmer collection, taken from and Moriarty 1980; Porcayo and Bendímez 2013; a burial cave near Bahía de los Ángeles. Julia Bendímez Patterson, personal communication 2013). Whether those logs represent driftwood that Advances in these studies have continued, particularly was locally worked into watercraft or whether they in the study of the human remains themselves. The may represent watercraft that had been manufactured skeletal materials recovered by Massey were subse- in northwestern Alta California is not known. An in- quently analyzed in the 1970s for their morphology triguing possibility is that watercraft technology might and pathologies by Rose Noble Tyson (Noble 1973; have diffused to central Baja California from north- Tyson 1977), Arturo Romano Pacheco (1977), and western Alta California without any personal contacts, José Antonio Pompa y Padilla (1977). Subsequent via the California Current. physical anthropological studies in Baja California have been expanded to include chemical isotope Human Burials analysis to infer diet and DNA analysis to reconstruct descent (e.g., Molto and Kennedy 1991; Monroe and Eighteenth- and nineteenth-century archaeologists Kemp 2013). working in Baja California had two main preoccupa- tions, rock art and human burials (Laylander 2014). Peoples, Cultures, and Industries Massey (1966b:51) published little on rock art, although that topic would continue to be a major focus Closely related to the issue of intuitively recognized for subsequent investigators. He made more substan- and named projectile point types is the issue of larger tial contributions toward the study of human remains descriptive and interpretive categories variously and their archaeological contexts. proposed to represent prehistoric periods, cultures, peoples, industries, or simply archaeological patterns. Massey’s fieldwork in the Cape Region resulted in The peninsula’s earliest archaeological explorers gave the excavation of more than 40 burials. These re- little thought to creating and christening such cate- mains were initially curated at the Lowie Museum in gories. One minor exception was Arthur Walbridge Berkeley and later with INAH in Mexico City. Massey North (1908:244); he wrote of the northern peninsula’s himself did not describe in detail the skeletal materials rock art creators, explaining that “for want of a better he found as some of his predecessors had done (ten name I shall designate them the ‘Petroglyph Makers.’ ” Kate 1884; Rivet 1909). The first archaeologist to apply a relatively elaborate terminology to the sites and assemblages of Baja Cali- Massey’s excavations in the Cape Region document- fornia was Malcolm J. Rogers (1939, 1945, 1966). He ed several different modes of burial (Massey 1947, distinguished a chronological sequence composed of 1966b). These included secondary bundle burials, three major units, each of which was in turn subdivid-

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) 48 Laylander ed into multiple phases: San Dieguito I, II, III, and IV; But while there are enormous shell middens La Jolla I and II; and Yuman I, II, and III. in various parts of the peninsula, there is no basis for assigning them to the La Jol- In his initial overview Massey (1947) adopted parts la culture without first excavating them in of Rogers’ scheme but modified and expanded it, both various areas. As we understand the archae- with other units from western North America and with ology now, the San Dieguito Culture appears patterns that were specific to the peninsula. One early to have played little part. There are few, if suggestion was to designate the producers of secondary any, such materials south of the International cave burials in the Cape Region as the “Cerro Cuevoso Border [Massey 1961a:416]. people” (Massey 1947:345). Another entity recognized in Massey’s earliest formulation was the “Chapala While he limited or rejected the application of La Jolla culture” or “Chapala Industry” at Laguna Chapala in and San Dieguito to the peninsula’s archaeology, he the northern Central Desert (Massey 1947:354). Sim- extended the ranges of some other constructs. Rog- ilarities were recognized between the Chapala culture ers (1939) had defined Pinto-Gypsum and Amargosa and the “Pinto-Gypsum Culture” of the Mojave Desert, industries in the Mojave Desert and the Great Basin but Massey did not explicitly propose that the latter but had not included Baja California within their unit was present on the peninsula. Similarities with the geographical ranges. Massey understood phases I “Lake Mohave and Playa complexes,” “Playa Industry,” and II of Amargosa as corresponding to Pinto Basin or “Lake Mohave Culture” were also noted, and in this and Gypsum Cave assemblages respectively, and he case Massey (1947:356) averred that “we have found recognized those as extending from the 30th paral- that the Playa-San Dieguito Industry (Lake Mohave) is lel south to the Cape Region. In the 1961 article he recognizable as far south as Dry Lake Chapala.” also proposed another new unit, the late prehistoric Comondú culture, distinguished in the eastern portions In his dissertation Massey (1955) proposed a new unit of central Baja California, from Bahía de los Ángeles based on the results of his excavations in the Cape Re- south to Mulegé (Massey 1961a). gion. This was the Las Palmas culture, which replaced the previous designation of the Cerro Cuevoso people. His last published synthesis (Massey 1966b) used a Massey provided detailed descriptions of the features full array of complexes or cultures to sort out the pen- and the recovered Las Palmas assemblages, and he insula’s prehistoric archaeology. He recognized: discussed the problem of their relationship with other manifestations both within and beyond the peninsula. • the San Dieguito complex (Playa complex) in Nonetheless, the definition of the unit was vague and phases I, II, and III (but not Rogers’ phase IV), merely intuitive. represented in particular at Laguna Chapala; • more doubtfully, the La Jolla complex; Later, discussing “The Cultural Distinction of Aborig- • the Pinto Basin complex (Amargosa I), found on inal Baja California” in 1961, Massey rejected some the peninsula from Laguna Chapala south; of Rogers’ claims concerning the peninsula’s early • Gypsum Cave (Amargosa II), represented by pro- cultures: jectile points whose “main concentration seems to be on the gulf coast around Loreto and Mulege” The poorly defined La Jolla culture can be (Massey 1966b:45); traced as far south as the 30th parallel on the • Amargosa (Amargosa III), although “at present, Pacific coast [i.e., the latitude of El Rosario]. the Amargosa culture, as originally outlined by M.

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) William C. Massey’s Contributions to Baja California Prehistory 49

J. Rogers ..., is represented only by a few projec- Massey’s predecessors. These included the eigh- tile points in the Castaldí Collection” (Massey teenth-century Jesuits Sigismundo Taraval, Miguel 1966b:46); Venegas, Andrés Marcos Burriel, Lambert Hostell, • the Las Palmas culture; and Johann Jakob Baegert, José Mariano Rotea, and • the Comondú culture. Francisco Javier Clavijero, as well as the later in- vestigators Léon Diguet and Arthur Walbridge North The article described the latter two units, confined to (Laylander 2014). The consensus view was that the peninsula and only recently proposed by Massey prehistoric Baja California had been settled by immi- himself, in greater detail than Rogers’ units. While de- grants entering from the north who had arrived either scriptions and illustrations of representative elements as adventurous pioneers or as refugees in flight from of the various units were provided, the complexes their stronger foes. The presumption of northern or cultures remained essentially undefined and only origins was probably based primarily on the peninsu- intuitively distinguished. la’s geographical configuration, although some of the early writers thought that they had received confir- Massey’s archaeological successors have widely, mation in the surviving Native peoples’ oral tradi- although not universally, followed his use of named, tions. An alternative, more radical interpretation was intuitively distinguished cultures, complexes, peri- suggested by the anthropologist Paul Rivet (1909), ods, industries, or ambiguous mixtures of those cat- who proposed that the peninsula’s far south had been egories. However, at least two factors have increas- settled by trans-Pacific voyagers from Australia or ingly complicated this practice. First, the emerging Melanesia. availability of radiocarbon dates, now numbering in the hundreds for Baja California, makes it possible to The first person to develop a more detailed scenario construct an absolute chronological framework rather for the peninsula’s culture history, integrating informa- than relying upon a merely relative one for regional tion from archaeology, ethnography, and ethnohistory, prehistory. Second, the wider distribution of inten- was Malcolm J. Rogers (Laylander and Bendímez sive surveys and excavations makes more acute the 2013). Rogers’ initial formulations of the question problems of distinguishing cultural boundaries and of (Rogers 1939, 1945) predated Massey’s own con- dealing with gradational variation within individual tributions; a subsequent elaboration (Rogers 1966) patterns. overlapped in time with Massey’s most active period, and some cross-fertilization in ideas between the two Migration, Diffusion, and the Layer Cake Model researchers is evident in both men’s writings.

Another lasting contribution from Massey’s Baja Cal- According to Rogers (1939:71), the earliest San ifornia investigations was his formulation of the Layer Dieguito patterns reflected “a definite drift to the south Cake model of the peninsula’s culture history. This into the cul-de-sac of the Lower California peninsula.” model, given its designation by Tuohy (1978; see also The San Dieguito IV pattern in the Cape Region rep- Kowta 1984), was derived to a substantial degree from resented a survival of the early pattern into the historic the ideas of Massey’s predecessors and contemporar- period, the pattern having undergone only limited ies, but Massey gave it its definitive form. subsequent modifications to become the culture of the ethnohistoric Pericú people. Elsewhere on the penin- The questions of prehistoric migrations and van- sula, the San Dieguito people had been replaced by the ished cultures engaged the imaginations of many of littoral-oriented La Jollans.

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) 50 Laylander

Later, around AD 1450, in response to the desiccation southerly areas from some of those waves. He also of Lake Cahuilla in the Salton Basin of southeastern noted the possibility of additional migrations or diffu- Alta California and northeastern Baja California, sion southward along the Pacific coastline or westward Rogers suggested: across the Gulf of California.

… the sudden impact caused by large groups Massey, in his reformulations of the Layer Cake leaving the west half of the Colorado desert model, was able to infuse Kirchhoff’s ethnographic was transmitted into a less leisurely migra- model with archaeologically documented time depth tion than that practised earlier. ... the flow and detail. Massey first addressed the issue in his 1947 was directed principally into the Lower Cali- archaeological reconnaissance article. He noted: fornia peninsula, whose central mountainous area had but meager pre-Yuman population It has been usual to regard the Pericú Indians if archaeology is any index. The La Jolla at the tip of the peninsula of Baja California people’s habitat was confined to a thin Pacific as descendants of old immigrants who were frontage, and the war-like Yumans should forced, or wandered, into the cul-de-sac. Sur- have met with but slight opposition in driving vival was made possible because of their ex- them into the southern half of the peninsula treme marginal position shut off from the rest [Rogers 1945:194]. of North America by hostile deserts, the Gulf of California, and the Pacific Ocean.... The Noting the similarities between central Baja Califor- linguistic ‘strata’ wherein the Guaicurá, Pericú, nia’s Cochimí and the Seri hunter-gatherers living on and Cora are cut off from the north by the deep the Sonoran coast, Rogers (1945:194) also suggested penetration of Yuman groups, lends credence a prehistoric west-to-east emigration of the Seri from to the belief that the southern tribes had been the peninsula across the middle Gulf of California’s pushed to the south [Massey 1947:356]. island chain. A footnote added, “It is noteworthy that in historic Paul Kirchhoff was the key intellectual ancestor of the times the movement in progress was the reverse— Layer Cake model. In the 1950s Kirchhoff would play Pericú and Huchití were moving north and in constant a role in Massey’s Baja California field school, and he aggressive warfare with the more peaceful Yuman was Massey’s colleague in the anthropology faculty groups” (Massey 1947:356). He also noted other com- of the University of Washington until Kirchhoff was plications to Rogers’ model: denied reentry into the U.S. as a result of McCar- thy-era anti-communism (Tuohy 1998). Back in 1942 It is still not certain that the historic groups Kirchhoff published a seminal essay, “Las tribus de la [in the Cape Region] ... were direct descen- Baja California y el libro del P. Baegert,” in which he dants of the earliest migrants. In the south expounded views on the peninsula’s culture history, there is a considerable complexity in the based primarily on inferences drawn from the ethno- cultural inventory, with probably divergent historically recorded distributions of cultural traits cultural traditions, which it is difficult to (Kirchhoff 1942, see also Kirchhoff, this Quarterly assign to a single original branch. issue). He discussed waves of migration and cultural diffusion extending down the peninsula’s callejón ... The Yuman invasion of the peninsula may sin salida (cul-de-sac) and the insulation of more have been late, but the peninsula had been

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) William C. Massey’s Contributions to Baja California Prehistory 51

well settled for a long time prior to their historic and prehistoric peoples of the Cape arrival. This is borne out both by the archaeo- Region {Massey1955:344]. logical remains and by the historic ethnogra- phy of the peninsula [Massey 1947:357]. Presumably the historic inhabitants of the south were descendants of the earliest In his 1947 comments Massey manifested his primary migrants; but there could have been absorp- commitment to migration rather than diffusion or local tion or elimination of early groups by later innovation as an explanation for cultural variability. migrants [Massey 1955:345].

In concluding his 1949 article on “Tribes and Lan- There is cultural, linguistic, and somato- guages,” Massey expressed a reservation concerning logical evidence that unity which may have Rogers’ suggestion of a very late entry for the Yumans existed on the peninsula at an early time was (i.e., the Cochimí): subsequently altered by later migrations and cultural diffusions [Massey 1955:346]. Any theory which explains the Peninsular Yu- mans as a recent migration southward from the The culture of the historic and prehistoric California and Colorado deserts must explain, Cape peoples may be derived in severalty among other things, how these groups lost from a number of sources. Firstly, there may such important traits as pottery-making and be retention of early traits which came into possession of the dog. It is more reasonable to the area with the original migrants or which believe that [the Cochimí groups] ... had been have been obtained by diffusion at some ear- in Baja California for a long, long time, and ly time by their descendants. Such traits are that they arrived prior to the adoption of such assumed to have a northern origin. Second, traits and pottery-making by their linguistic traits may have entered by diffusion or with relatives to the north [Massey 1949:305]. later migrations from the north. Third, it is probable that some traits and complexes may Again, the implication is clear that differences in traits have been introduced into the area directly must be explained by migration rather than either by across the Gulf of California, or by indirect the slowness of diffusion or by adaptive unsuitability diffusion from the east by way of some inter- of traits to some regions. mediary group to the north on the peninsula. Last of all, some few traits may be local in In his 1955 dissertation on the Cape Region, Massey origin [Massey 1955:346–347]. returned to these themes: I am inclined to think that the Guaicura There can be no doubt that the ancestors groups are historical representatives of an of the peoples of the Cape Region arrived Amargosa migration. In any event, we can from the north in an overland migration. It is eliminate as implausible the suggestion of possible that there were coastwise, partial- Rogers that non-Yuman historic peoples of ly sea-borne, migrations of fisher people. the peninsula held culture of San Dieguito However, the bulk of the evidence points origin. On the basis of archaeological surveys to a continental orientation of economy for such influences appear to extend only to

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) 52 Laylander

about the thirtieth parallel on the Pacific coast the cultural strata—the older are the cultural [Massey 1955:355]. materials, and the greater the differentiation from those of the north. This is virtually Secondary burial in the Cape Region seemed to true on all time levels. Cultural impulses constitute an important exception to the Layer Cake diffused but slowly toward the Cape Region, model: where older cultural patterns and lifeways were retained into historic times [Massey The entire secondary burial complex appears 1961a:414]. to be intrusive to the area. At the moment there appears little likelihood that it could References to the “diffusion” of “cultural impulses” be local in origin. It is equally unlikely that may be slightly misleading, if it is taken to imply it could be a retention of an old complex non-migrational processes. Massey continued to which disappeared from the record in the equate cultural differences with linguistic identities: Great Basin, California, or the Southwest. It is a known practice directly across the On the historic ethnographic level these Gulf…. The idea of secondary burial … may linguistic differences of major order coin- have been transmitted to the Cape Region cide with cultural differences of major order. by some rude intermediary. A people like the Minor linguistic differences correlate with little-known Guasave coastal dwellers [in minor differences in other aspects of cul- Sinaloa] could have been such cultural inter- ture…. These differences in cultural items ap- mediaries [Massey 1955:352–353]. pear to represent distinct migrations into the

Going beyond the simple Layer Cake model, Massey’s interpretation of Cape Region culture history thus in- cluded consideration of multiple possible mechanisms for cultural differentiation and multiple directions of possible migrations or influences. However, the ori- gins of traits were still apparently to be ascribed, with decreasing probability, to the following: (1) migration from the north, (2) diffusion from the north, (3) diffu- sion from the east, and (4) local innovation.

Massey’s 1961 essay on “The Cultural Distinction of Aboriginal Baja California” was devoted specifically to issues of culture history, and it presented the Layer Cake model both verbally and graphically (Figure 5):

As Kirchhoff pointed out, the peninsula has an aspect of cultural layering (Kirchhoff 1942). Certainly it can be likened to a strati- fied archaeological site. The farther south one Figure 5. Massey’s Layer Cake model of peninsular prehistory proceeds—and consequently the deeper into (after Massey 1961a:419, 1966b:56).

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) William C. Massey’s Contributions to Baja California Prehistory 53

cul-de-sac and the retarded diffusion of traits be reconsidered in the light of further evidence from southward (Massey 1961a:414–415). another half century of increasingly intensive archaeo- logical investigations on the peninsula. However, much Massey’s final 1966 synthesis of peninsular prehis- of what he wrote concerning regional differences in the tory reiterated much of his 1961 discussion, backed archaeological record, ethnogeography, the description with more detailed supporting evidence. Subsequent and comparison of artifacts and assemblages, and cul- investigators have continued to debate the relative ture-historical classification and interpretation in Baja roles of migration, diffusion, and local innovation in California remains fundamental to present-day studies. creating geographical variations in the archaeologi- cal and ethnohistoric records within Baja California Acknowledgments (e.g., Tuohy 1978; Kowta 1984; Laylander and Moore 2006; Macfarlan and Henrickson 2010). It seems fair Thanks are due, as always, to the conscientious editors to say, however, that the layer-cake image of a cultural of the Quarterly. Thanks also go to Zee Malas for stratum that was expressed ethnohistorically in one refining Figure 2. The several reviewers’ comments region but that must underlie archaeologically all the are much appreciated. regions farther north has received little confirmation or support. References Cited

Conclusions Anonymous 1974 Deaths: William Massey. Anthropology News Massey’s investigations into Baja California’s prehis- 15(8):4. American Anthropological Associa- tory can rightly be seen as part of a larger historical tion. movement in New World archaeology. What Willey and Sabloff (1980) termed the Classificatory-Histori- Aschmann, Homer cal period of American archaeology, but what Trigger 1959 The Central Desert of Baja California: De- (1989) termed Culture-Historical archaeology in North mography and Ecology. Iberoamericana Vol. America, was introduced into Baja California by Mal- 42. University of California Press, Berkeley colm Rogers, reaching a peak in Massey’s work. The and Los Angeles. direct historical approach, which relied heavily on the use of ethnohistoric evidence about Native cultures to Bowen, Thomas interpret the prehistoric archaeological record, played 2009 The Record of Native Peoples on Gulf of a large role in Massey’s research. His contributions California Islands. Arizona State Museum also reflect trends toward a greater role for profession- Archaeological Series No. 201. Tucson. al anthropological training and toward more detailed descriptive studies as the foundation for culture histor- Carmean, Kelli ical inferences. 1994 A Metrical Study of Baja California Sur Pro- jectile Points. Pacific Coast Archaeological In Massey’s work there are few if any premonitions Society Quarterly 30(1):52–74. of subsequent trends representing an Explanatory Period, the New Archaeology, or Processualism, Clavijero, Francisco Javier much less Post-Processualism. As well, many of the 1789 Storia della California. 2 vols. Appresso specifics of Massey’s conclusions inevitably need to Modesto Penzo, Venice.

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) 54 Laylander

1937 The History of (Lower) California. Edited Haury, Emil W. by A. A. Gray. Stanford University Press, 1950 The Stratigraphy and Archaeology of Ventana Stanford, California. Cave, Arizona. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Crosby, Harry W. 1975 The Cave Paintings of Baja California: The Heizer, Robert F. Great Murals of an Unknown People. Copley 1974 Recent Deaths and Memorials: William Clif- Press, Salt Lake City. ford Massey (1917–1974). American Indian Quarterly 1(3):267–268. Davis, Emma Lou 1968 An Archaeological Reconnaissance in the Heizer, Robert F., and William C. Massey Central Desert of Baja California. Archaeo- 1953 Aboriginal Navigation of the Coasts of Upper logical Survey Annual Report 10:176–208. and Baja California. In Anthropological Pa- Department of Anthropology, University of pers, Numbers 33–42. Smithsonian Institu- California, Los Angeles. tion Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 151:285–312. Government Printing Office, Des Lauriers, Matthew Richard Washington, D.C. 2005 The Watercraft of Isla Cedros, Baja Califor- nia: Variability and Capabilities of Indige- Kirchhoff, Paul nous Seafaring Technology along the Pacific 1942 Las tribus de la Baja California y el libro Coast of North America. American Antiquity del P. Baegert. In Noticia de la península 70(2):342–360. americana de California, by Jacob Baegert, 2010 Island of Fogs: Archaeological and Ethno- pp. xiii–xxxvii. Antigua Librería Robredo de historical Investigations of Isla Cedros, Baja José Porrúa e hijos, Mexico City. California. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. Kowta, Makoto 1984 The “Layer Cake” Model of Baja California Fujita, Harumi Prehistory Revised: An Hypothesis. Pacific 1995 Lanzadardos encontrados en la península de Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly Baja California. Revista COBACH 11:31–34. 20(1):1–16. 2010 Prehistoric Occupation of Espíritu Santo Island, Baja California Sur, Mexico: Update Laylander, Don and Synthesis. Journal of California and 1997 The Linguistic Prehistory of Baja California. Great Basin Anthropology 30(1):17–33. In Contributions to the Linguistic Prehistory of Central and Baja California, edited by Grant, Campbell Gary S. Breschini and Trudy Haversat, pp. 1974 Rock Art of Baja California. Dawson’s Book 1–94. Coyote Press Archives of California Shop, Los Angeles. Prehistory No. 44, Salinas, California. 2007 Large Projectiles and the Cultural Distinction Hambleton, Enrique of Southern Baja California: A Reexamina- 1979 La pintura rupestre de Baja California. Fo- tion. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society mento Cultural Banamex, Mexico City. Quarterly 39(2&3):11–21.

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) William C. Massey’s Contributions to Baja California Prehistory 55

2013 The Role of Islands in Baja California’s Pre- 1974 Jesuits and Indians: A Brief Evaluation of history. In Memorias de balances y perspec- Three Early Descriptions of Baja California. tivas de la antropología e historia de Baja Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quar- California, 2005–2011. Centro INAH Baja terly 10(1):1–12. California, Mexicali. Electronic document, 1976 Chacuaco: The Tubular Stone Pipe in Baja http://www.xaguaro.com/ MemoriasCD/ California. Pacific Coast Archaeological styled-70/styled-71/index.html, accessed Society Quarterly 12(1):21–29. September 28, 2014. 2014 The Beginnings of Prehistoric Archaeolo- Massey, William C. gy in Baja California, 1732‒1913. Pacific 1947 Brief Report on Archaeological Investiga- Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly tions in Baja California. Southwestern Jour- 50(1&2):1–31. nal of Anthropology 3(4):344–359. 1949 Tribes and Languages of Baja California. Laylander, Don, and Julia Bendímez Patterson Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 2013 Malcolm Rogers in Baja California. Pacif- 5(3):272–307. ic Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 1955 Culture History in the Cape Region of Baja 48(3&4):43–55. California, Mexico. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Laylander, Don, and Jerry D. Moore (editors) California, Berkeley. 2006 The Prehistory of Baja California: Advances 1957 The Dart-thrower in Baja California. David- in the Archaeology of the Forgotten Peninsu- son Journal of Anthropology 3(1):55–62. la. University of Florida Press, Gainesville. 1961a The Cultural Distinction of Aboriginal Baja California. In Homenaje a Pablo Martínez León-Portilla, Miguel del Río en el vigésimoquinto aniversario de 1976 Sobre la lengua pericú de la Baja California. la primera edición de “Los orígenes ameri- Anales de Antropología 13:87–101. canos,” pp. 411–422. Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico City. Macfarlan, Shane J., and Celeste N. Henrickson 1961b The Survival of the Dart-thrower on the 2010 Inferring Relationships between Indige- Peninsula of Baja California. Southwestern nous Baja California Sur and Seri/Comcáac Journal of Anthropology 17(1):81–93. Populations through Cultural Traits. Journal 1966a The Castaldí Collection from Central and of California and Great Basin Anthropology Southern Baja California. Contributions of 30(1):51–67. the University of California Archaeological Research Facility No. 2. Department of An- Massey, Lee Gooding thropology, Berkeley. 1968 Baja’s Plants and Indians. Desert Magazine 1966b Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Lower 31(10):30–33. California. In Archaeological Frontiers and 1972 Tabla and Atlatl: Two Unusual Wooden Arti- External Connections, edited by Gordon F. facts from Baja California. Pacific Coast Ar- Ekholm and Gordon R. Willey, pp. 38–58. chaeological Society Quarterly 8(1):25–34. Handbook of Middle American Indians, Vol. 4. University of Texas Press, Austin.

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) 56 Laylander

Massey, William C., and Carolyn M. Osborne Moriarty, James E., IV, and James R. Moriarty III 1961 A Burial Cave in Baja California: The Palmer 1980 Investigation of a Redwood Log Canoe Collection, 1887. Anthropological Records Discovered at Scammon’s Lagoon in Baja Vol. 16, No. 8. University of California Press, California, Mexico. University of San Diego, Berkeley and Los Angeles. San Diego.

Mixco, Mauricio J. Noble, Rose Adele 1978 Cochimí and Proto-Yuman: Lexical and Syn- 1973 Physical Anthropology of Baja California. tactic Evidence for a New Language Family in Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, Lower California. University of Utah Anthro- California State University, San Diego. pological Papers No. 101. Salt Lake City. 2006 The Indigenous Languages. In The Prehistory North, Arthur Walbridge of Baja California: Advances in the Archaeol- 1908 The Native Tribes of Lower California. ogy of the Forgotten Peninsula, edited by Don American Anthropologist 10(2):236–250. Laylander and Jerry D. Moore, pp. 24–41. University of Florida Press, Gainesville. Pompa y Padilla, José Antonio 1977 Características dentarias de los indígenas Molto, J. Eldon, and Harumi Fujita pericú. Calafia 3(4):29–44. 1995 La Matancita: A Las Palmas Mortuary Site from the West Cape Region of Baja Califor- Porcayo Michelini, Antonio, and Julia Bendímez nia Sur, Mexico. Pacific Coast Archaeologi- Patterson cal Society Quarterly 31(1&2):20–55. 2013 Una embarcación cochimí de casco estabili- zado, de San José del Faro, Baja California. Molto, J. Eldon, and Brenda Kennedy Manuscript on file, Instituto Nacional de An- 1991 Diet of the Las Palmas Culture in the Cape tropología e Historia, Centro Baja California, Region, Baja California Sur. Pacific Coast Ar- Mexicali, Mexico. chaeological Society Quarterly 27(4):47–59. Ritter, Eric W. Monroe, Cara, and Brian M. Kemp 1979 An Archaeological Study of South-Central 2013 Genetic Relationships of Prehistoric Baja Baja California, Mexico. Ph.D. dissertation, California Populations. In Memorias de Department of Anthropology, University of balances y perspectivas de la antropología California, Davis. University Microfilms, e historia de Baja California, 2005–2011. Ann Arbor, Michigan. Electronic document, http://www.xagua- 1998 Preface. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society ro.com/MemoriasCD/page4/styled-53/ Quarterly 34(3):vi–vii. styled-66/, accessed October 16, 2014. 2006a South-central Baja California. In The Prehisto- ry of Baja California: Advances in the Archae- Moranchel Mondragón, Érika Berenice ology of the Forgotten Peninsula, edited by 2014 Del paralelo 28° al 30°: puntas de proyectil Don Laylander and Jerry D. Moore, pp. 99–116. de Baja California. Master’s thesis, Escuela University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico 2006b The Vizcaíno Desert. In The Prehisto- City. ry of Baja California: Advances in the

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) William C. Massey’s Contributions to Baja California Prehistory 57

Archaeology of the Forgotten Peninsula, Shelvocke, George edited by Don Laylander and Jerry D. Moore, 1726 A Voyage Round the World by Way of the pp. 135–152. University Press of Florida, Great South Sea, Perform’d in the Years Gainesville. 1719, 20, 21, 22. J. Senex, London. 2006c Bahía de los Angeles. In The Prehistory of Baja California: Advances in the Archaeolo- ten Kate, Herman Frederik Carel gy of the Forgotten Peninsula, edited by Don 1884 Matériaux pour servir l’anthropologie de Laylander and Jerry D. Moore, pp. 167–178. la presqu’île californienne. Bulletin de la University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Société d’Anthropologie de Paris 7:551–569.

Ritter, Eric W., and Julie Burcell Thomas, David Hurst 1998 Projectile Points from the Three Sisters’ 1981 How to Classify the Projectile Points from Lagoons of West Central Baja California. Pa- Monitor Valley, Nevada. Journal of Califor- cific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly nia and Great Basin Anthropology 3(1):7–43. 34(4):29–66. Trigger, Bruce G. Rivet, Paul 1989 A History of Archaeological Thought. Cam- 1909 Recherches anthropologiques sur la bridge University Press, Cambridge, En- Basse-Californie. Journal de la Société des gland. Américanistes de Paris 6:147–253. Tuohy, Donald R. Rogers, Malcolm J. 1970 The Aboriginal Containers of Baja Califor- 1939 Early Lithic Industries of the Lower Basin nia, Mexico: A Search for Origins. Tebiwa of the Colorado River and Adjacent Desert 13(2):41–51. Areas. San Diego Museum Papers No. 3. San 1978 Culture History in the Comondú Region, Diego Museum of Man, San Diego. Baja California, Mexico, with an Appendix 1945 An Outline of Yuman Prehistory. Southwest- on Metate Cave String and Twine Analysis by ern Journal of Anthropology 1(2):167–198. Carolyn M. Osborne. Master’s thesis, Depart- 1966 Ancient Hunters of the Far West. Edited by ment of Anthropology, University of Nevada, Richard F. Pourade. Union-Tribune, San Las Vegas. Diego. 1984 On Sleeping Circles in Baja California … and Elsewhere. Pacific Coast Archaeological Romano Pacheco, Arturo Society Quarterly 20(1):37–49. 1977 Algunas características craneales de los indí- 1998 Professor William C. Massey’s Anthropo- genas pericú. Calafia 3(4):23–28. logical Field Schools in Baja California, 1953 and 1954. Pacific Coast Archaeological Serafín Esquivel, Eduardo Society Quarterly 34(3):83–96. 1995 Análisis tipológico de puntas de proyectil del área central de la península de Baja Tuohy, Donald R., and Mary B. Strawn California, México. Master’s thesis, Escuela 1989 Thin Section Analysis of Mission Period Pot- Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico tery from Baja California, Mexico. Nevada City. Archaeologist 17(2):36–48.

PCAS Quarterly 51(2) 58 Laylander

Tuohy, Donald R., and Stephen Van Wormer Venegas, Miguel 1995 An Unusual Burial Type from the Cape 1757 Noticia de la California y de su conquista Region of Baja California, Mexico. Pacific temporal, y espiritual hasta el tiempo pre- Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly sente. 3 vols. M. Fernández, Madrid. 31(1&2):79–102. 1759 A Natural and Civil History of California. 2 vols. James Rivington and James Fletcher, Tyson, Rose A. London. 1977 Human Skeletal Material from the Cape Region of Baja California, Mexico: The Willey, Gordon R., and Jeremy A. Sabloff American Collections. Journal de la Société 1980 A History of American Archaeology. 2nd ed. des Américanistes 64:167–181. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.

PCAS Quarterly 51(2)