How Became Chumash and Other Tales of Ethnogenesis Author(s): Brian D. Haley and Larry R. Wilcoxon Source: American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 107, No. 3 (Sep., 2005), pp. 432-445 Published by: Wiley on behalf of the American Anthropological Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3567028 . Accessed: 12/01/2014 01:46

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Wiley and American Anthropological Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Anthropologist.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 130.70.241.102 on Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:46:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BRIAN D. HALEY U LARRY R. WILCOXON How Spaniards Became Chumash and other Tales of Ethnogenesis

ABSTRACT Inthe 1970s,a networkof families from Santa Barbara, , asserted local indigenous identities as "Chumash." However,we demonstratethat these families have quite different social histories than either they or supportive scholars claim. Rather thandismissing these neo-Chumash as anomalous"fakes," we placetheir claims to Chumashidentity within their particular family socialhistories. We showthat cultural identities in these family lines have changed a numberof timesover the pastfour centuries. Thesechanges exhibit a rangethat is often not expected and renderthe emergence of neo-Chumash more comprehendible. The social historyas a wholeillustrates the ease andfrequency with which cultural identities change and the contexts that foster change. In light ofthese data, scholars should question their ability to essentializeidentity. [Keywords: ethnogenesis, indigenization ofmodernity, social constructionofidentity, Southwest borderlands, Mexican ]

N THERECENTLY RECONSTRUCTED north wing of the have become emblematicof postmodernity.Luckily for Royal Presidioof Santa Barbara,California, there is a neo-Chumash(and the positionwe takehere), Baudrillard small museum.The museumhouses the following:(1) the chose Disneylandto symbolizethe pervasivesubstitution usual displaysof artifacts, photographs, and gifts;(2) a scale of simulationfor reality in the UnitedStates. model of the originalpresidio quadrangle, which was built It is temptingto suggestthat neo-Chumashare per- in 1782 by troopsrepresenting the kingof Spain; and (3) a petrating"ethnic fraud" by assertingancestry they do not largefolding display of family genealogies linking the 18th- have (Gonzales 1998). But should social scientistsdismiss and 19th-centurysoldados of the fortto los descendientes- neo-Chumashidentity as some kindof anomaly?Anthro- theirliving local descendants.The supportof los descen- pologistshave wrestled with the nature of cultural identities dientesis importantto the managementof Santa Barbara forat leasthalf a century.Initially, cultural identities were PresidioState Park. Yet not all descendantsare listedin the consideredprimordial and fundamentalto personhood, display,and amongthese are somewho wishthey were not only changingthrough the modernizationof "traditional soldado descendants.The lattergroup has had some suc- cultures"and nationbuilding. Others argued that identities cess achievingan identityas local indigenes-specifically, wereinstrumental cultural tools that people createdand re- as ChumashIndians. These neo-Chumash who emergedin shaped in the politicsof groupinteraction. Recognition of the 1970s lack Chumash or otherNative Californianan- identitychange grewwhen the "ethnicboundaries" con- cestryand are descendedalmost exclusively from the peo- ceptwas introducedby FredrikBarth (1969), and boundary ple who colonizedCalifornia for Spain from1769 to 1820. crossingwas recognizedas common.As culture was brought Theirsocial historyis distinctfrom that of local indigenous back into the picturein the 1980s,essentialists continued communities.Yet local governmentsrepatriate precolonial a position similarto earlierprimordialists, insisting that human remainsto them forreburial and scholarsdefend tradition,language, or ancestrydefines and dictatesiden- and promotetheir claims of Chumashancestry, try to "re- tity,whereas constructivists demonstrated how such seem- store"Chumash traditions to themthrough their research, ing essenceswere activelyproduced, and ethnohistorians or approachthem for lessons in traditionalChumash cul- honed the concept of "ethnogenesis"-theemergence of tureto putinto papers and textbooks.Had Jean Baudrillard's new groupsand identities-todescribe community fission (1988) travelsthrough "America" not missedthis little cor- and coalescence.By the end ofthe century, most anthropol- nerof California"simulacra," neo-Chumash culture might ogistsappeared to acceptthat cultural identities are socially

AMERICANANTHROPOLOGIST, Vol. 107, Issue3, pp. 432-445, ISSN0002-7294, electronic ISSN 1548-1433. ? 2005 bythe American Anthropological Association.Allrights reserved. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy orreproduce article content through the University ofCalifornia Press'sRights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpress.edu/journals/rights.htm.

This content downloaded from 130.70.241.102 on Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:46:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Haleyand Wilcoxon * Talesof Ethnogenesis 433 contextualized,constructed, manipulated, and both polit- and contextualizethe identitychanges we did not present icallyand emotionallymotivated. However, cultural iden- earlier. titiesalso maintainthe appearanceof havingessential and To documentneo-Chumash social history,we were enduringqualities. We now knowthat the historicalmem- drawnback intoa literatureand documentaryevidence on orylong consideredcrucial to culturalidentity is balanced identityformation in colonialMexico and amongMexican- by a historicalimagination. originimmigrants to the UnitedStates familiar to us from Nevertheless,questions remain over just how malleable otherresearch (e.g., Haley 1997). We were struckby how identitiesare and whatthese new understandings mean for abundantand well documentedidentity changes in par- policyand practice.Taking up the former,Philip Kohl ar- ticularfamily lines were. Using primary sources, we found gues that "culturaltraditions cannot be fabricatedout of sequentialidentity changes in particularfamilies back to whole cloth," as he believes strictconstructivists allege. themid-18th century; using secondary data, we tracedback He favorscontextual constructivism, which "acceptsthat to the mid-16thcentury.2 We knowof no cases in the lit- social phenomenaare continuouslyconstructed and ma- eraturewith similarlylong historiesof repeatedidentity nipulatedfor historically ascertainable reasons" (1998:233). changesin particularfamily lines, but withsimilar meth- The neo-Chumashpose a challenge:Their example ap- ods otherssurely could be added. Also,unlike most pub- pearsto be a clearcase of whole-clothfabrication, yet the lished cases, the identitychanges in this historyare not reasonsfor their ethnogenesis are readilyascertained. Per- confinedto macro categories,such as fromone type of haps most intriguingis the factthat the social historyof AmericanIndian to another.They cross supposedlyim- neo-Chumashfamilies contains a clear sequence of iden- permeableboundaries without intermarriage or adoption. titychanges with ascertainable causes spanningfour cen- These boundarycrossings are one reasonwhy scholars of- turies.Rarely do anthropologistsconfront such unequivo- ten failto accuratelydescribe neo-Chumash social history: cal evidenceof manyidentity changes and its contextsin Few expectto have to crossborders of ethnicliteratures to the same familylines over such a long time.We feelthat traceparticular families. thishistory reveals in starkfashion the normalcyof iden- As JohnMoore pointsout withrespect to the signif- titychange as politicallymotivated, socially contextualized icance of ethnicgroup names and naming,"the mutual action. perspectivesrepresented in ethnonymyare a sensitivein- In a 1997 article,we addressedthe implicationsof dicator[sic] of social and politicalissues, past and present" ethnogenesisfor policy and practiceby describingthe role (2001:33). Takingvolatile 16th-centuryMexico as an ar- anthropologistsplayed in constructingand legitimizing bitrarystarting point, our subjectswere assignedobliga- ChumashTraditionalism, the spiritualaffiliation of many tions and privilegesvia Spain's impositionof a caste sys- neo-Chumash.We expressedconcern about both conceal- temand a gentede raz6n-gentesin raz6ndivision associated mentof thislegitimization and the dismissalof such new withthe legal distinction between the repablicade espaioles cultureas spuriousor fakeunder federalheritage policy and repablicade indios.3We can tracemobility between cat- (Haleyand Wilcoxon1997, 1999). AmongChumash schol- egories,facilitated by frontiersocial conditionsand willing ars, criticsdenied the firstargument and overlookedthe orunaware authorities, to theend ofthe 18th century when second. They raised objectionsbased on theirrejection the castesystem collapsed. Our subjectswere among those of evidence that showed foundingTraditionalists lacked who participatedin Californioethnogenesis when theyfelt Chumashancestry or historicalaffiliation (Erlandson et al. estrangedand isolatedfrom a distractedpostindependence 1998). Initially,we expectedreaders would recognize the in- Mexico. They keenlyfelt the effectsof U.S. conquestand herentflaw of our critics' admissions that they had neverin- itsimposed racial ideology after 1848. Retainingwhite sta- vestigatedthis history and theirself-contradictory declara- tus becamea challengebecause of decliningclass standing tionsregarding it. Because our focus at thetime was cultural and politicalpower. In the late 19th century,they began productionrather than ancestry, we did notrespond imme- assertingSpanish identity to avoid prejudiceagainst rising diatelyto this argument.However, it became clear that some numbers of Mexican immigrants.In this regard,they were readersaccepted our critics'claims regarding ancestry and, assisted by the rise of cultural tourismthat valued Spanish- as a result,severely misinterpreted our arguments and their ness. A criticalscholarly assault on Spanishness in the 1960s implications (see, e.g., Boggs 2002; Field 1999:195; King and 1970s weakened this strategy.Simultaneously, the fed- 2003:111-114, 279-280; Nabokov 2002:146-147).1 We re- eral government's search for unrecorded indigenes to set- sponded brieflyto a few of these (Haley 2003, 2004; Haley tle a land dispute, elevation of the stature of indigenous and Wilcoxon 2000) but realized we would have to revisit identity by countercultural and ecopolitical movements, the question in detail ifthe practical implications of ethno- and local organizing made Chumash identity appeal to genesis were going to be widely recognized and discussed. these working-class families. Last, negative public reac- So far,we have described the documentary evidence that tion to risingMexican immigrationat the close of the cen- underminesscholars' assertions of a Chumash originfor turyappears to reinforcea willingness to assert indigenous Chumash Traditionalists (Haley 2002) but not the multi- identity. plicityand range of identitychanges. JohnJohnson (2003) Figure 1 summarizes these changes. They follow the corroboratesour statementsabout ancestry.Here we present reticularpattern of ethnogenesis described by Moore (1994)

This content downloaded from 130.70.241.102 on Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:46:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 434 American Anthropologist * Vol. 107, No. 3 * September 2005

Colonization [Europe] [Africa] [Mexico] ofMexico

" Northwest. Gentede razdn Mexican Frontier1drao (variouscastes)

California] Mexicans 1820-18481820-1848 1

California White White, 1848-1960 American Spanish

P Spanish, "Chumash" , Present Californio, Mexican- etc. American,etc.

FIGURE1. The ethnogenesisof neo-Chumashand otherCalifornio identities deriving from the same immigrantgroup. and others(e.g., Terrell 2001). These identitychanges cor- upperchart.4 Our writingson identitychange among de- respondto theinteractionalist theories of Barth (1969) and scendantsof colonial Santa Barbara address several kindreds the mercantileand capitalistdynamics described by Eric (e.g., Haley in press).The presentwork implicates more. Wolf(1982). They are developedfurther in applicationto Otherfamily histories illustrate the same processes,but we indigenization,the power of states,class, and migration selectedthese examplesfor their richness and to correct by MichaelKearney (2004) and JonathanFriedman (1999). errorsby otherscholars. To add context,we occasionally Ourhistorical reconstruction resembles two other works but presentinformation on collateralkin and affines-many differsfrom both in importantways. LisbethHaas (1995) prominentin Californiahistory. Richard Handler (1985) describesmany of the same historicalidentity changes in advocatesavoiding ethnonyms because of theirethically southernCalifornia, but she neither includes the earlier data problematiclegitimizing effect, but we use all ofthe known nor recognizesthe indigenizationof identitywe demon- ethnonymsin the group'shistory to emphasizethe flu- stratehere. Martha Menchaca (2001) coversthe same time idityof identity.We also feelwe mustuse the termneo- span,yet she essentializesidentity in waysthat we directly Chumashto acknowledgethe sustainedexistence of a con- challengeand failsto recognizeher own absorptioninto testedsocial boundarybetween the neo-Chumashand the the neo-Chumashmovement. We furtherexplore her case Chumashcommunities living in SantaYnez, Santa Barbara, laterin thisarticle. and Ventura,who are descendedfrom contact-era villages Our focushere is on thelineal kin depicted in Figure2. and who have maintaineda continuousidentity as local in- Reflectingthe small size of the partythat foundedSanta digenes(Johnson 2003; McLendonand Johnson 1999). The Barbara,members of the two chartsare related:All of gen- legitimacythat neo-Chumashderive from outsiders pres- erationC and two in D in the lowerchart are also in the suresChumash to acceptthem as coethnics,but enduring

This content downloaded from 130.70.241.102 on Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:46:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Haley and Wilcoxon * Tales of Ethnogenesis 435

A B A C DE F

cH 9 I

AG B C D E F

FIGURE2. Kinshipcharts of neo-Chumash(gray) and theircolonial immigrant ancestors from northwest Mexico (black). Dashed linesin the upperchart indicate unmarried (generations B and E) and adoptive(generation C-D) parents.

This content downloaded from 130.70.241.102 on Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:46:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 436 AmericanAnthropologist * Vol. 107,No. 3 * September2005 collaborationshave been rare.We knowa fractionof those The northernfrontier offered such conditions. Catholic ourwork addresses. If any of them were to lose publiclegiti- missions,as well as gentede raz6n soldiersand settlersof macy,it is notclear who, if anyone, might benefit. However, many castes,moved the frontiernorthwestward. Mission thereare potential consequences, so we omitnames and sex communitieswere reservedfor indio neophytes,whereas aftera certaindate. the gentede raz6n settledin presidialcommunities, min- ing camps, and towns. Social mobilityoccurred as mis- sion secularizationturned protected neophytes into tribute- CULTURALIDENTITIES ON 'S payinggente de raz6n citizens,and migrationfacilitated NORTHERNFRONTIER hiding one's background.Military service, tenantry, and When Spanishcolonizers seized controlof centralMexico miningbrought together indios and lower-classgente de in the 16thcentury, they used racialcriteria for making and raz6nin commoncommunities that fostered intermarriage preservingmajor social distinctionsbetween themselves as and castemobility, muting caste distinctions. Officials who elites,Africans as slaves,and Indians residingin semiau- recordedcaste emphasizeddifferent criteria among skin tonomousrepuiblicas de indios as tributepayers and food color,clothing, hairstyles, occupation, behavior, a person's producers.This legal systemof identitiesbecame more local standing,and knownancestry. With skilled individu- complexas intermediatecategories were added to address als oftenin shortsupply and authorityfar to thesouth, up- the rapidlyrising numbers of people of multipleances- ward caste mobilitybecame commonplace(Jackson 1997; tries(Seed 1982). A secondclassification distinguished gente Radding 1997). The frontierwas a zone of opportunity, de raz6n (people of reason) fromgente sin raz6n (peo- whereindios became gentede raz6nand ,negros ple withoutreason): This was, essentially,a contrastbe- became mulatosand ,and mestizosand mulatos tween"civilized" people and the Native"barbarians" who became espafioles.Caste termson the frontieron the eve resistedcolonial control(Nugent 1998). It grewout of the of California'scolonization were termsof statusand re- 1550-51 debatesover whether New Worldpeoples should spect,and not simplylabels of presumedbiological ances- be subduedby force.The distinctiongained salience as the try(Gutierrez 1991:196-206; Mason 1998;Weber 1992:326- frontierpushed northwardfrom central Mexico into the 329). desert,where the Spanish encounterednomadic and re- In 1769,the colonization of California () sistantChichimecans who contrastedwith the sedentary began via a seriesof expeditionslaunched fromfrontier peoplesof centralMexico, many of whom had allied with communitiesin Baja Californiadel Sur,Sonora, and Sinaloa. the Spanish,accepted Catholicism, and weresent to settle The Portoldexpedition of 1769-70 foundedpresidios and and pacifythe northern desert in the latterhalf of the 16th missionsat San Diego and Monterey.A fewadditional sol- century(Powell 1952:44, 108-109, 252 n. 12). In 1573,the diersfrom Mexico were posted to Californiathrough 1775, Crowngave primary responsibility for exploration and paci- includingthe firstfamilies in 1774. In 1776, the Anza ex- ficationto missionaries(Weber 1992:78). As mission-based peditionbrought nearly 200 soldiers,colonists, wives, and settlementand pacificationsucceeded, the Holy Officeof children,doubling Spain's representatives in California.A the Inquisitionsought to convertand then protectthese trickleof postingsoccurred until 1781, when the Rivera Indian neophytesfrom prosecution for heresies: As gente y Moncada expeditionbrought 62 soldiers,their families, sin raz6n,they were, like children, not yetfully rational or and 12 settlerfamilies, who foundedLos Angelesand the responsible(Gutierrez 1991:195). Santa Barbarapresidio. The expeditionignited a revoltby The conflationof legallysanctioned identity with an- Yumasthat closed the best land routeto California,curtail- cestryproduced notions of purityand mixturebelied by ing major colonizing.By 1790, California'scolonial pop- historicalevidence. Espafiolesclaimed "purityof blood" ulationnumbered about 1,000 personsdistributed among justifiedtheir high status;mixed ancestrymestizos, mu- fourpresidios, two pueblos,and 12 missions;only about latos, and otherscarried the stigmaof presumedillegit- 300 morehad arrivedby 1820 (Mason 1998:17-44;Weber imacy; an association with slave status furtherstigma- 1992:236-265). tized Africanancestry (negros, mulatos, etc.).5 In fact, the firstmestizos were absorbed by the espailoles, and later CASTE YIELDS TO RAZON the child of an espaflol and a castizo (idealized as 3/4 espafiol) was also classifiedas espafiol. Record keeping was The castes of California's colonists reflectthe diverse and not rigorous. Officials usually "lightened" caste by "cor- fluid composition of the colonial military in northwest recting" it to correspond to occupation and to approx- Mexico at the time. Table 1 lists the colonial immigrantan- imate spouse's caste as they felt it should (Seed 1982). cestorsof our neo-Chumash by date of immigration.A letter Mobility between castes was constrained by one's social in the third column corresponds to generations marked in networks. According to R. Douglas Cope (1994), minor Figure 2 and the text. The immigrantsoriginate primarily changes, such as indio to , might reflect mar- in presidial towns of Sonora, Sinaloa, and Baja California riage or closer association with Spanish patrons, but ma- del Sur. Garrison lists and other sources indicate that at jor shifts,such as negro to mestizo, required new social least 32 of the 34 male immigrantswere soldados at some networks. point in their lives. Caste can be tallied only for a specific

This content downloaded from 130.70.241.102 on Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:46:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Haleyand Wilcoxon * Talesof Ethnogenesis 437

TABLE1. Ancestorsof neo-Chumash who emigrated from Mexico to California,1769-1820; arranged by date of immigration, generation (Gen.),birthplace, and occupation.6

Immigrants:Individuals and Family ImmigrationDate and Event Groupsby Head Gen. Birthplace Occupation

1769 PortoldExpedition Dominguez,Juan Jos6 B VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Soldier Cordero,Mariano Antonio D Loreto,Baja California Soldier ByOctober 5, 1773 Sinoba,Jos6 Francisco C CiudadMexico, M6xico Soldier 1774 RiveraSinaloa Recruits Lugo,Francisco Salvador de C VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Soldier Martinez,Juana Maria Rita C VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa By 1776 Verdugo,Juan Diego B El Fuerte,Sinaloa Soldier Carrillo,Maria Ignacia de la Concep. B Loreto,Baja California 1776 De Anza Expedition Arellano,Manuel Ramirez B Puebla,Puebla Soldier L6pez De Haro,Maria Agueda B Alamos,Sonora Boj6rquez,Jose Ramon B VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Soldier Romero,Maria Francisca B VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Boj6rquez,Maria Gertrudis C VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Lisalde,Pedro Antonio C VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Soldier Pico,Felipe Santiago de la Cruz C San Xavierde Cabazan,Sinaloa Soldier Bastida,Maria Jacinta C Tepic,Nayarit Pico,Jos6 Miguel D San Xavierde Cabazan,Sinaloa Pinto,Pablo C VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Soldier Ruelas,Francisca Xaviera C VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Pinto,Juana Francisca D VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Circa1778 Cota,Roque Jacinto De C El Fuerte,Sinaloa Soldier Verdugo,Juana Maria C Loreto,Baja California Cota,Maria Loreta D Loreto,Baja California Cota,Mariano Antonio D Loreto,Baja California Dominguez,Maria Ursula C SantaGertrudis, Baja California Rubio,Mateo C Ypres,Flanders (Belgium) Soldier 1781 RiveraExpedition Alanis,Maximo C Chametla,Sinaloa Soldier Miranda,Juana Maria C Alamos,Sonora Alipaz-Perez,Ignacio B Mexico Soldier P&rez,Maria Encarnaci6n C Pueblode Ostimuri,Sonora Dominguez,Ildefonso C VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Soldier German,Maria Ygnacia C VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Dominguez,Jose Maria D VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Soldier Feliz,Juan Victorino C Cosalhi,Sinaloa Soldier Landeros,Maria Micaela C Cosala,Sinaloa Feliz,Maria Marcelina D Cosala,Sinaloa Fernandez,Jos6 Rosalino C El Fuerte,Sonora Soldier Quintero,Maria Josefa Juana Concep. C Alamos,Sonora Lugo,Josef Ygnacio Manuel C VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Soldier Sanchez,Maria Gertrudis C VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Lugo,Jos6 Miguel D VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Quijada,Vicente D Alamos,Sonora Soldier Quintero,Luis Manuel B Guadalajara,Jalisco Armytailor Rubio,Maria Petra Timotea B Alamos,Sonora Ruiz,Efigenio B El Fuerte,Sinaloa Soldier L6pez,Maria Rosa B El Fuerte,Sinaloa Ruiz,Jos6 Pedro C El Fuerte,Sinaloa Villavicencio,Antonio Clemente Feliz C Chihuahua,Chihuahua Settlerrecruit Flores,Maria de los Santos C Batopilas,Chihuahua Pifluelas,Maria Antonia Josefa D VillaSinaloa, Sinaloa Rodriguez,Jos6 Ygnacio C Alamos,Sonora Soldier Parra,Juana Paula de la Cruz C Alamos,Sonora 1787 Romero,Juan Maria C Loreto,Baja California Soldier Salgado,Maria Lugarda C Loreto,Baja California Romero,Jose Antonio D Loreto,Baja California Circa1788-1789 Guevara,Joseph Ignacio R. Ladronde D Queretaro,Queretaro Soldier Rivera,Maria Ygnacia D SantaCriz del Mayo,Sonora Circa 1804-1810 Urquides, Jos6 Encarnaci6n D El Fuerte,Sinaloa Poss. Soldier 1819 Mazatlan Squadron Espinosa, Jos6 Ascencio E Mazatlan, Sinaloa Soldier By 1820 (prob. 1817) Policarpio E San Vicente, Baja California Poss. Servant

This content downloaded from 130.70.241.102 on Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:46:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 438 American Anthropologist * Vol. 107, No. 3 * September 2005

TABLE 2. Caste changes among the immigrantsand early U.S. war of independence,lasted formore than 40 years,set- censusrace classification of those surviving. ting the scene for the formationof a regionalidentity (Mason 1998:36-37). Haas (1995:32-38) locates the ori- Before 1782- 1850- gins of Californioidentity in policy debates regarding 1780 1780 1785 1790 1852 land, missionsecularization, and neophyteemancipation afterMexican in 1821. Mexico's of MaximoAlanis mulato indio mestizo espaflol white independence neglect JoseMa. Dominguez espafiol mestizo California,refusal to appointa Californiangovernor, and RosalinoFernandez mestizo mulato mulato talk of Californiaa an- JuanaMa. Miranda mestizo periodic making penal colony espalol JuanaPaula Parra mulato mestizo mestizo gered California'sgente de raz6n. As the federalgovern- LuisQuintero negro mulato mulato ment secularizedmissions, redistributed their lands, and Vicente indio mestizo Quijada transformedneophytes into Mexican citizens,prominent IgnacioRodriguez mestizo mestizo espafiol GertrudisSAnchez mestizo espafiol Californianshoped to retainIndian labor by givingthe Mateo Rubio espafiol europeo emancipatedneophytes lands sufficientonly for houses TeodoroArrellanes white espafiol and gardens.They wantedmost missionlands forthem- MarcelinaFeliz espafiol espafiol white CasildaSinoba espafiol white selves,but the appointed governorsdelayed land redis- tribution.In a for Sources:Forbes 1966; Goycoechea1785; Hoar 1852; Mason 1978, reaction, "protonationalism"calling 1998;U.S. Census Bureau 1850. Californiasovereignty emerged in the 1820s and 1830s (Sainchez1995:228-267). The movementpromoted be- lief that bonds of culture, countingevent because people's caste changedover time. territory,language, religion, and blood Californiosfrom mexi- No tallyis completebecause of differinglifespans and the kinship, distinguished canos. Californiosclaimed to be influenced the virtualdisappearance of casteuse in Californiaafter 1790. uniquely by Franciscanmissions and to have more azul The 1790 censusrecords the immigrantsin Table 1 as one "sangre [blue of than the restof Mexico europeo,24 espafioles,ten mestizos,seven mulatos,two blood] Spain" (Haas 1995:37). This that Californios the coyotes,two indios,and one .7 Typicalof the fron- suggests reinterpreted espafiol caste of theirimmediate ancestors tier,at least six of our 1790 colonistspreviously had been literally.They began Mexicans a label lower-rankingcastes (see Table 2). As the mastertailor for calling "extranjeros"(foreigners), previ- to non-Mexicans. of inde- Santa Barbara'spresidio, Luis Quintero(B) is listed as a ouslyapplied only Proponents included SantaBarbarans who wereclose mulato in 1785-90 but as a negro in 1781. Eithercaste pendence leading affinal,collateral, and fictivekinsmen to individuals could have excludedhim fromthe mastertailor position. repre- sentedin Figure2 and firstcousins of generationsD and E Jos6Maria Pico, son of FelipeSantiago de la Cruz Pico (C), in other (Sanchez advanced frommestizo in 1782 to espafiolin 1790 while regions 1995:228-267). Their own divisions and the U.S.-Mexican War stationedin San Diego,because he probablywas considered thwartedthe Californio's vision of forpromotion. Meanwhile, his fullbrother Jos6 Miguel (D) independence,although did the and most formermis- in SantaBarbara is listedas mulato(Mason 1998:53,62-63; they acquire governorship sion lands beforewar broke out. land formed Northrop1984:205). Large grants the basis of the livestock of Californiain the After1790, caste lost saliencethroughout Spain's U.S. economy 19th someCalifornios as elites,and but- colonies,because centuriesof intermarriageand upward century,positioned tressedtheir sense of Ifthis did not add a class castemobility meant many respectable citizens had ances- uniqueness. dimensionto Californio it at least caused schol- trythey wished to hide.Few authorities were willing to trig- identity, ars to assume the were an aristocratic gerscandals with rigorous reporting. This was quiteevident grantees "Spanish" elite distinctfrom the "mixed race" commonersand the in California.California was also the end of Spain's fron- colonists to assert Californio (Camarillo tier,and social mobilityfor local indios did not exist as only identity 1996:1). Our case to this view it had in northwesternMexico. An identityunifying all supportschallenges (Haas 1995; Miranda1988). Six men in generationsB-D received colonistsin juxtapositionto local indios servedthe small land concessions beforeMexican and remotefrontier population best. After 1790, thismost Spanish independence. By 1845, Mexico had converted two of these to and salientdivision was expressedas two categoriesonly: gente grants six new to men in C-E de raz6n (whichincluded colonizers formerly classified as given grants generations (Allen Bancroft indios)and indio (Mason 1998:45-64;Miranda 1988). 1976:19, 26, 30; 1964:29, 40, 122, 286, 309, 314). The 1790 census lists four of these men as espafloles, one as mestizo, his wife and son (also a grantee) as mulatos, the THE BIRTH OF CALIFORNIO IDENTITY parents of another as mestizos, and the mother of another Gentede raz6nsettlement grew slowly around the presidio as a mulato (Mason 1998). At least three of these-MAximo in Santa Barbara,where the presidiochapel as a focal in- Alanis (C), Jos& Ygnacio Rodriguez (C), and Jos6 Maria stitutionreinforced separation from Chumash neophytes Dominguez (D)-experienced caste mobility (see Table 2), at the mission,two kilometersaway (about 1.24 miles). and it is likely that families embellished their status after California'sisolation after1781, aggravatedby Mexico's obtaining grants (Miranda 1988). Land grants supported

This content downloaded from 130.70.241.102 on Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:46:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Haleyand Wilcoxon * Talesof Ethnogenesis 439 extendedsets of kin who suppliedsome of the rancho's century.A fewhouseholds helped establish a Californioen- labor.At least fiveadults in generationsC-E plus an un- clave in the suburbof Montecitobefore 1880 but retained known numberof theirchildren were in such positions strongties to PuebloViejo (Camarillo1996:63, 72, 110,185; (Allen 1976:19-40). Young men in these ranchingfami- Conrow1993:115; Garcia-Moro et al. 1997:215;U.S. Census lies werevaqueros (cowboys), rancheros, farmers, laborers, Bureau1850, 1860, 1870, 1880, 1900, 1910). and shepherds(U.S. CensusBureau 1850, 1860). We cannot In 1849, the Californiaconstitutional convention ful- definitivelyanswer the questionabout class and Californio filledtreaty protections for the rightsof formerMexican identity,but we can unequivocallystate that some of our citizensby enfranchisingCalifornios (Pitt 1966:45, 84). At "Spanish"elites and their"mixed race" workers shared the thetime, the United States granted full legal privileges only same ancestry. to personsconsidered "white," so the phenotypicallydi- verseCalifornios officially became white.Table 2 includes fourindividuals who have Spanishcaste and U.S. raceclas- WHITEAND SPANISH BECOMING sificationsrecorded. In additionto thechangeling, Maximo Withthe close of the U.S.-Mexican War in 1848,Californios Alanis(C), who previouslywas recordedas mulato,indio, themselvesbecame a colonized people. The imposition mestizo,and espafiol,Casilda Sinoba's(D) motherand ma- by the United States of its policies and culture pro- ternalgrandparents were listed as mestizosin 1790 (Mason foundlyinfluenced identities. Four processesare crucial 1998:83, 104). Despiteofficial classification, ambiguity re- in this period: the marginalizationof Californios,ne- mainedin practice.In the 1880s,Hubert H. Bancroftchar- gotiationof white racial status,anti-Mexican prejudice acterizedCalifornios' whiteness as a mere "badge of re- associated with postwarMexican immigration,and the spectability"(Haas 1995:172). Complicatingmatters and emergenceof Spanish identity.The postwar marginal- givingnew salienceto theold divisionbetween Californios ization of Californiosis well documented (Pitt 1966). and Mexicanswas growinganti-Mexican sentiment stirred Anglo-Americanstook control of the state'swealth, ra- by labor migrationfrom Mexico between1890 and 1920. tionalizingtheir actions with claims of ManifestDestiny, Santa Barbara'sCalifornios felt this prejudice in 1916-27, racialpurity, and superior"civilization." Land and author- even thoughMexican newcomerssettled mainly in other ity were wrestedfrom Californios, leaving most in low- neighborhoods.Pejorative use of Mexicanand greaserby payingmanual labor jobs. The UnitedStates erected a costly Anglostriggered schoolyard and workplaceconflicts. Some procedurefor patenting Mexican land titlesto meet U.S. facilitiessegregated or excluded darker-skinned Californios. standards.Even rancheroswho securedtheir patents were Voluntaryrepatriations of indigentfamilies to Mexico to bankruptedor so weakenedfinancially by the processthat relievewelfare costs started in 1926; mass deportationsin subsequentcalamities ruined them (Camarillo 1996:86; 1930-33 includedsome Californios.In 1923, membersof Conrow1993:113). Most land grantspassed from Californio a recentlyformed Santa BarbaraKu Klux Klan chapterac- ownershipby 1875 (Pitt1966:250-251). costed a descendantof a presidiosoldier. Although the In SantaBarbara, the impactsare apparentin the 1870 incidentignited public scornof the Klan, the eventwas U.S. Census. For example,land grantheir Geronimo Ruiz searedinto the memoriesof cousinsof generationsG and (E) is recordedas a farmerin 1852,a stockraiser (a termap- H (Camarillo1996:55, 142, 161-163, 188, 190-195,290 n. pliedto economicelites) in 1860,and an electionofficial in 26; Conrow1993:117; Ruiz n.d.b). By 1910, two households 1864 (de la Guerra1864; Hoar 1852:20;U.S. CensusBureau in generationF and one in generationG increasedtheir sep- 1860:196).8By 1870,he was a day laborer(U.S. CensusBu- arationfrom most Mexican immigrants by moving to Santa reau 1870:475).From 1860 to 1870,most of Santa Barbara's Barbara'swest side, where all of generationsH and I in one rancherosand farmersbecame vaqueros, herders, and team- chartof Figure 2 concentratedshortly thereafter. The others sters;from the late 1870sthrough World War I, theysheared continuedto residein the Montecitoenclave.10 sheepand foundpart-time urban work (Camarillo 1996:83- By the late 19th century,asserting Spanish identity 100). emergedas a strategyto evade anti-Mexicanprejudice. Intensified poverty in the 1870s and 1880s drove Espafiol or gente de raz6n ancestry became widely in- women and children into farm, domestic, and laundry terpreted as proof of pure Spanish "blood" and white- work. Some required public assistance (Conrow 1993:115). ness (Miranda 1981:8, 20 n. 24; 1988). This was risky The men of generations F-H and nearly all their collateral for Californios because any other ancestry implied racial kinsmen worked as farmworkers, day laborers,or laborers, inferiority,as some early Anglo historians declared. Sym- according to censuses through 1930.9 Afterthe city elec- pathetic scholars, therefore,left caste out of their pub- tion of 1874 left Californios with a single representative, lications until the 1970s (Mason 1998:45-46). The suc- they were an economically and politically weak minority cess of Spanish identity lies in its importance to Santa enclave in Pueblo Viejo, the neighborhood surroundingthe Barbara tourism.The City of Santa Barbara spent the 1870s remains of the old presidio. Households headed by gen- and 1880s demolishing Pueblo Viejo adobes to create new erations E-H were part of the close-knit,intricately inter- streets,yet the city was quickly becoming a tourist desti- related, and endogamous community into the early 20th nation with Pueblo Viejo one of its attractions.As tourism

This content downloaded from 130.70.241.102 on Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:46:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 440 AmericanAnthropologist * Vol. 107,No. 3 * September2005 grew,Anglos and Californiosalike expressednostalgia for Allof the ancestors of our neo-Chumash living between the town'sdisappearing character (Camarillo 1996:38-41, 1850 and 1930, includingthe oldestfuture neo-Chumash, 54-56; Schultz 1993:9-15). These feelingspartook of a were recordedas white in U.S. and state censuses:67 of romanticismcreating lucrative interpretations of Spanish those in generationsC-I in Figure2. This includesall of and Native Americancultures throughout the Southwest generationsF-I in one chart(excluding two spouses),even (McWilliams1990:43-50; Thomas 1991). The California as tensionsover immigration heightened. Even in the 1930 movementcreated an idyllicpastoral Spanish past with census-the onlyone withMexican as an officialrace-this sweepingmission architecture,refined rancheros, kindly groupis recordedas whiteor Spanish.Most census enu- missionaries,and contentedyet childlikeIndians. After a meratorsin Santa Barbarafrom 1910 through1930 distin- 1925earthquake leveled much of Santa Barbara, officials im- guishedSpanish or Californiosfrom recent Mexican immi- posed a Santa Barbaraarchitectural style that Hispanicized grants.Suburban Montecito, however, where generations the cityvisually. These moves solidifiedbeing Spanishas F-H in the otherchart in Figure2 lived,was polarizedbe- an acceptableidentity even when beingMexican was not. tweenwealthy elites and theirservants and laboringclasses Spanishnesscould help individualsgain access to thosein (Camarillo1996:63). In 1910, 13 of these were recorded power,escape anti-Mexicanprejudice, and perhapsobtain as Other,with "Mex" writtenin the form'smargin. In a civicappointment (McWilliams 1990:43-50). 1920, theywere recorded as white,but in 1930, fourwere One of Santa Barbara'sexpressions of Spanishnesswas recordedas Mexican.The persistentlow-class status of gen- thecreation of the annual Old SpanishDays Fiestain 1924. erationsF-I in both chartsand theirlong-standing asser- The firstOld Spanish Days FiestaCommittee sought the tions of Spanish ancestrysuggest they all facedrepeated participationof local Californiosto lend "authenticity" challengesto sustainingwhite status. Generations H and to the event (Conrow 1993:115-116,118). Some scholars I were still identifyingthemselves as white by 1946 on suggest that only Californioelites asserted a Spanish Social Securityforms. All continuedto associateprimarily identity(Camarillo 1996:69-70; McWilliams1990:44-50; withother Spanish-Californios (Conrow 1993:116; Schultz Pitt1966:284-296). However, the individualscredited with 1993:13). bringingSpanish participation into the 1924 Old Spanish CLAIMING CHUMASH IDENTITY DaysFiesta were Geronimo Ruiz's (E) nieces(Haley in press), and participantsincluded our farmworkingand laboring Spanish identitylost its lusterin the 1960s, as scholars familiesin generationsG-I. embracedCarey McWilliams's 1948 call forreplacing the The pursuit of Spanish identityby workingclass Southwest'sSpanish "fantasy heritage" with "racial pride" Californiosleft many traces. Because of space limitations, thatrecognized and MexicanAmericans we offerjust one example (see also Haley in press): de- as a singlepeople (Camarillo1996:1; McWilliams1990:53; scendantsof Jose Ygnacio Ladr6n de Guevara(D) through Pitt1966:277-296; Thomas 1991:136). The Chicano move- the "lessdistinguished" family (Miranda 1978:189, 195 nn. ment emergingalongside this essentialistideology briefly 18, 20) of his Santa Barbara-bornson Jose Canuto Gue- attractedsome futureneo-Chumash. However, at the same vara (E; see Table 1). Bythe early1900s, the homesteadsof time,the U.S. Bureauof IndianAffairs reopened judgment Canuto'sson (F) and grandson(G) failed,so theyreturned rollslisting persons qualified to receiveshares of a federal to vaquero,day laborer,and teamsterwork (U.S. Census cash settlementof CaliforniaIndian land claims.Assum- Bureau1900:District 155 Sheet3A, 1910:District173 Sheet ingthat most California Indians had mergedwith Spanish- 13B, District221 Sheet 9B, 1920:District101 Sheet 10B). Californios,Santa Barbaragenealogist Rosario Curletti of- In 1911, the MorningPress memorialized Canuto's just de- feredto help Spanish familiesdocument their California ceased son (F) as the "last of the old vaqueros,"whose fa- Indian ancestryto obtaina settlementshare. Descendants ther[Jose Canuto] "came from Spain, from Madrid. So theold ofgeneration G wereamong Curletti's clients. The oraland vaquero'straditions reached back to old Castile"(Obituary writtenrecord indicates that they knew little of their ances- Filesn.d.:Book G, emphasisadded). The 1930 censusrecords trybefore generation E or G. Once on this path, they con- the race of the grandson's (G) family as Spanish, presum- tinued to claim Native California ancestrydespite Curletti's ably as theyreported it (U.S. Census Bureau 1930:District11 failure to find any. Faced with a deadline in one of these Sheet 26A). His wife,daughters, and granddaughtersmade cases, Curlettisubmitted a letterasserting her clients' right Spanish costumes for and participated in the Old Spanish to judgment fund payments based on descent fromMaria Days Fiesta formany years. Decades later,a granddaughter Paula Rubio (D), whose mother Ursula was an indio from (H) and grandson of the "old vaquero" (F) stated separately Baja California. Curletti hoped to take advantage of the that Canuto had been born in Spain but gave differentlo- judgment's definitionof California Indians as "all Indians cations Files n.d.:Books G and Pico Ruiz who were in the State of Californiaon (Obituary H; n.d.; residing June 1, 1852, n.d.a). The grandson also rationalized the "old vaquero's" and theirdescendants now living in said State" (25 USC 14, (F) physical appearance: He had spent "many hours each Sub. 25, Sec. 651). Curlettiwrote, "So I submitthat although day on horseback caring for the animals. The outdoor life the original bloodline of Ursula is fromBaja California,she gave him a tawny brown skin, which contrasted dramati- moved into California a full 200 years ago and her descen- cally with his curlywhite hair" (Ruiz n.d.a). dants continue to enrich the warp and woof of California

This content downloaded from 130.70.241.102 on Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:46:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Haleyand Wilcoxon * Talesof Ethnogenesis 441 being. Paula was consideredIndian and her Indian blood environmentaldisputes; there, Chumash identityproved was respectedby hercontemporaries" (Curletti 1969). valuable to developmentopponents. These environmen- Curlettiaccurately reconstructed descent, but her claim tal disputes,often involving interventions on behalfof the thatPaula's contemporariesconsidered her Indian appears neo-Chumashby anthropologists,earned them widerle- unfounded.Ursula was Maria UrsulaDominguez (C) from gitimacy(Haley and Wilcoxon1997; O'Connor 1989). The Baja California(see Table 1). Her motherwas a neophyte coalitionalso soughtfederal acknowledgment as an Indian of MissionSanta Gertrudis,Baja California,probably eth- tribefor neo-Chumash members. Because federal acknowl- nicallyCochimi. Ursula's recorded natural father was Juan edgmentrequires political and social continuities,the pro- JoseDominguez (B), stationedin San Diego when Ursula cess fosteredclaims that earliergenerations "had to hide arrivedfrom Baja Californiain 1778 at roughly15 yearsof theirIndianness," went "underground,"or had "passedas age and marriedMateo Rubio (C). The 1790 census lists Mexican."However, the push forfederal acknowledgment JuanJose as espafiol,Ursula as india, and Mateo Rubio stalledwhen the coalition ran out offunds and a secondge- as europeo;it does not, however,provide a caste forMa- nealogistconfirmed the lack of Chumashancestry in neo- teo and Ursula'schildren, who could have been classified Chumashhistory. as eithermestizos or castizos.Other Spanish and Mexican In a recent study, Martha Menchaca uses her recordsclassify their children as gentede raz6nrather than "Chumash"in-laws to supporther "unconventionalview indios.11Paula Rubio'sdescendants were recorded as white thatMexican Americans were part of the indigenouspeo- in U.S. censuses,and the "old vaquero" in generationF ples of the AmericanSouthwest," because "by the turnof noted above-whose fatherwas born in Spain according the nineteenthcentury a largepart of the mestizocolo- to his grandchildren-wasthe oldestliving ancestor in this nial populationwas of southwesternAmerican Indian de- line on July1, 1852, the judgment'sdate forqualifying as scent" (2001:2, 17). However,Menchaca makes a serious a CaliforniaIndian (Hoar 1852; U.S. Census Bureau1850, error:She assumesthat castes, races, and currentidentity 1900, 1910). Curlettiappears to be the firstauthority to assertionstransparently reflect ancestry. Unfortunately, her classifyUrsula's descendants as Indians and to assertthat in-lawsare amongthe neo-Chumashin Figure1, so much neo-Chumashhave CaliforniaIndian ancestry.It appears of Menchaca'swork is simplyuntenable. Nevertheless, the likelythat most of the Santa BarbaraSpanish or Californio significanceof Menchaca's legitimizingof neo-Chumash familiesthat subsequently became neo-Chumash got their is its reassertionand racializingof territorialprimacy-as initialspark from Curletti's research. when theirCalifornio ancestors called Mexicans"foreign- In 1969, the two-year-oldIndian Projectat the Uni- ers."Previously an advantageof Spanish identity, territorial versityof California, Santa Barbara, launched the Chumash primacyis reassertednow in indigenousform to counter- IdentificationProject (n.d.) to "restorethe 'Chumash-ness'"' act therenewed immigrant loathing rampant in theregion. to the region.It formeda loose coalitionin 1970 tryingto Borninto an immigrantfamily herself, Menchaca has both uniteChumash and increasepublic awareness of Chumash experiencedand studiedCalifornia's anti-Mexican preju- culture.Included among its 144 foundingmembers were dice.Our own research confirms its severity (Haley 1997), so enrolledmembers of the federallyrecognized Santa Ynez again we findourselves sympathetic to a scholar'smotives Band,Santa BarbaraChumash families, and Curletti'sneo- althoughnot necessarilyher scholarship.Menchaca does Chumash. Althoughthe group'sby-laws required voting not challengethe ideological basis of anti-immigrant preju- membersto be Chumashdescendants, no one verifiedan- dice;instead, she simplyredirects it againstother categories cestry.Therefore, voters in the firstelection included 11 of people. membersof generations H-J, one ofwhom was evenelected NORMALIZINGNEO-CHUMASH to office.Members of generationsI and J then also joined ETHNOGENESIS the coalition. Curletti'sinability to findtheir ostensible From an arbitrary16th-century starting point, we have Chumashancestry, in additionto othercoalition members' traced changes in culturalidentity within relatedfami- memories of them as Spanish, fueled conflictsthat caused lies transiting through various castes, gente sin and de the Santa Ynez and Santa Barbara Chumash to quit. There- raz6n, Californio,white, Spanish, and neo-Chumash. These fore,by the late 1970s, the coalition was controlled by gen- changes occurredbecause of an inherentdefect of the classi- erations I and J (O'Connor 1989:13). ficationscheme, as an identitylost salience amidst changing Some members of generation Jwere participants in a conditions, as subjects sought higher status,or because of a non-Indian counterculturalcommune, the leader of which combination of these. Within this context, the transforma- advanced the idea that Santa Barbara lies in a sacred tion of Santa Barbara Spanish families into neo-Chumash space where the Chumash, an ancient civilized race, would does not seem unusual. Certainly,it is a revision of history return to prominence after a great apocalypse (Trompf from whole cloth, yet it also reflectsthe local social con- 1990).12 GenerationJ participantswere encouraged to ex- text in ascertainable ways. Clearly,people can create iden- press Chumash identityin these settingsand were inspired tities from whole cloth if they have access to appropriate to constructa more satisfyingculture, which theypromoted knowledge and outside support, and if the identityfits lo- as "Chumash Traditionalism."The Chumash Identification cal expectations. Neo-Chumash ethnogenesis is a rejection Project's coalition provided participants entree into local of two viable alternativeidentities, whose origin storiesalso

This content downloaded from 130.70.241.102 on Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:46:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 442 ,American Anthropologist* Vol. 107,No. 3 * September2005 incorporateobjective errors: (1) Spanish-Californio,which alness"to derivemore from their level of commitment and stressesthe frontieras formativeyet tends to romanticize usefulnessto others(Barth 1969). Thishas proveneffective and whitenhistory, and (2) Chicano orMexican American, in establishingand maintainingneo-Chumash legitimacy whichracializes Mexican heritage and appropriates"the de- locallyand in certainwider networks. The ongoingdenial or cline ofthe Californios"for later immigrants. The simulta- concealmentof the historicalrecord by neo-Chumashand neous existenceof all threeidentities challenges assump- supporterssuggests that things are not at thepoint reached tions that an associationwith Mexico dictatesa unified after1790 in Spain'scolonies when authorities precipitated identity. caste'scollapse by decliningto declarepeople's caste. We Nation-statepolicies, frontiers, and bordersplay ma- see no scholarlyneed to demonizeneo-Chumash for mak- jor roles in shapingidentity. The identitieswe have de- ing theirclaims, and we do not seekto defendthe veracity scribedinclude some accompaniedby legal sanctionsand of theirclaims. Their social historydemonstrates and ex- some that are not. The formerinclude colonial castes, plains identity'scontinuous reformulation. Neo-Chumash gentede raz6n-gentesin raz6n,U.S. categoriesof "white- are who theyare now,but not who theyhave alwaysbeen ness"preceding 1960, Indian, Mexican in 1930,and immi- or evenwho theyare likely to alwaysbe. Nevertheless,with grant.Those not legallysanctioned include Californio and new saliencein thecontext of immigration, indigenization Spanish identities.Caste, white,and neo-Chumash(esp. of identityin the Southwestis unlikelyto end soon. throughthe California judgment roll's use ofa dateto define CaliforniaIndians) each conflatelegal statuswith origin, BRIAND. HALEY of State Uni- even thoughprecision regarding origin was not crucialto Department Anthropology, ofNew York at NY 13820 theoriginal act of classifying. This gives rise to similarissues. versity College Oneonta,Oneonta, LARRYR. WILCOXONWilcoxon and Santa Ascriptionof identityby outsidersis one of culturaliden- Associates, CA 93101 tity'smost crucialelements (Barth 1969). It normallyin- Barbara, volvesnegotiation and frequentlycontestation. Legal sanc- formalizessome of the ascriptionprocess, inviting tioning NOTES contestation.Contestation of any identitymay take a per- Olivera thebasic nicious "real" versus"fake" debate but this is vir- Acknowledgments.Phyllis compiled genealogical form, datafor Wilcoxon in 1986.We resumed the study in 1999.Research tuallyguaranteed when legal standingis conflatedwith wasfunded by the University ofCalifornia Institute for Mexico and notions of ancestry.In the debate over the "indigeniza- theUnited States and the State University ofNew York College at Oneonta.We thank the staffs of the Santa Barbara Mission Archive tionof ourdata confirmFriedman's modernity," irrefutably Library;Santa Barbara Presidio Archives; Department ofAnthropol- (1999:392-393) "new and strangecombinations" rather ogy,Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History; Gledhill Library, than MarshallSahlins's (1999) reemergenceof indigenes. Santa BarbaraHistorical Society Museum; and Santa Barbara Genealogical Michael shared But Friedmanclaims that con- SocietyLibrary. Kearneygenerously although indigenization hismanuscript prior to publication. Cynthia Klink, Michael Brown, testsnation-state hegemony, neo-Chumash identity arises RichardHandler, Frances Mascia-Lees, Susan Lees, and threeanony- in symbiosiswith nation-state policies that assisted its rise mousAA reviewers made helpful comments on drafts.We alone are responsiblefor all remainingerrors or omissions. in the judgmentroll processyet also erectedconstraints 1. We to and Wilcoxon1997 also in the federal In a sense, fed- arerelieved see Haley accurately acknowledgmentprocess. represented(see, e.g., Arnoldet al. 2004; Brown2003:171-204; eral acknowledgmentconfers a higherstatus, much as a Warrenand Jackson2002; Weiner1999). court'sor official'sdecision about an individual'scaste did 2. The primarysources consist of colonial expedition and garrison in the past. A problemfor neo-Chumash is that the offi- lists,censuses, church and civilregisters, oral and writtenfamily histories,land records, maps, city directories, obituaries, and letters. cial "realness"of their chosen identity is predicatedon one See thereferences for details. criterionin roll statusand another negotiatingjudgment 3. The repfiblicade espafiolesand reptiblicade indioswere politi- forfederal acknowledgment. It is preciselythe same prob- cal distinctionsimposed early in thecolonial era to establishdiffer- lem that plagued espaftiolcaste and whiteracial statuses, entlegal statuses, settlements, rights, and obligationsfor colonists and thecolonized which fromthe outset never conformed to their idealized (espafioles) (indios). 4. The upperchart in Figure2 excludesa siblingrelationship in purity. generationB, and both chartsexclude individuals in generations The historicaldata we have presented are the same sort H-J. officialsuse to evaluate federal acknowledgment applica- 5. We use a varietyof terms (ethnonyms) to denoteidentity cate- tions. Barringa major change in policy,our findingssuggest gories.Only a fewof the many Spanish colonial caste terms appear in ourdata. foreach casteis and variesconsider- that federal is to be achieved Ancestry putative acknowledgment unlikely by ably.Espahol designated the highest caste and fullSpanish ancestry; these neo-Chumash. This is one potential consequence of negro,a low casteof fullsub-Saharan African ancestry; and indio, historical social analysis to which we alluded in our intro- a low casteof fullNew Worldancestry. Presumed mixed ancestry and intermediatestatuses were duction. The best neo-Chumash have for re- designatedmestizo (1/2 espaiol, 1/2 option may indio),mulato (1/2 espafiol, 1/2 negro), castizo (3/4 espafiol, 1/4 in- taining public identitiesas local indigenes may be what Les dio), coyote(3/4 indio, 1/4espafiol), and morisco(3/4 negro,1/4 Field (1999) calls a "culturalist"strategy, which eschews fed- espafiol).We have one instanceof the use ofeuropeo to designatea casteof full eral in favorof high non-Spanish Europeanancestry (Mason 1998:47- acknowledgment adopting practicesthought 50). Californiois theethnonym chosen by California-born colonial to be central to a particularidentity. This permitstheir "re- descendantsduring Mexican rule. Neo-Chumashis our termfor

This content downloaded from 130.70.241.102 on Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:46:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Haleyand Wilcoxon * Talesof Ethnogenesis 443 persons who began claiming local aboriginal-or Chumash- ChumashIdentification Project identityin thelate 1960swho lackthis ancestry. N.d. Papersof the Chumash Identification Project. Archived ma- RosarioCurletti Collection. of 6. Sources:Allen 1976:15, 18; Anonymous1834; Bancroft1884- terial, Department Anthropol- 89, 1964; Barrios1999-2000; Bean and Mason 1962:60; ogy,Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, Crosby CA. 1994:418,420-421; Eldredge1912; FranciscanFathers 1999, n.d.a, n.d.b, n.d.c, n.d.d, n.d.e; Geiger1972; Gillingham1983; Layne Conrow,Douglas 1934; Lo 1977, 1981; Mason 1998; 1984, 1986; 1993 The PresidioHispanic Community, 1880-1920. In Santa Buglio Northrop BarbaraPresidio Area 1840 to the Present.Carl V. Ortega1781, 1939. Harris, JarrelC. Jackman,and Catherine eds. 113-118. 7. We havenot found castes for nine Threeothers not Rudolph, Pp. immigrants. Santa Barbara: of California,Santa BarbaraPub- recordedin 1790 wererecorded at othertimes as University espafiol,mestizo, Slic HistoricalStudies, and Santa BarbaraTrust for Historic and indio.See N. 5 forinformation on terms. Preservation. 8. Ex-granteesJose de la Asenci6nDominguez (E) and JoseRam6n Cope, R. Douglas Romero(F) werelisted as laborersin 1860 and 1880, respectively 1994 The Limitsof RacialDomination. Madison: University of (U.S. Census Bureau1860:181, 1870:475, 1880:District82, Sheet WisconsinPress. 16). Crosby,Harry W. 1994 California:Mission and on thePeninsular 9. Two in generationF owned land thatdid not produceenough Antigua Colony to them. Frontier,1697-1768. Albuquerque: University of support Press. 10. See Santa BarbaraCity Directory1943. Also U.S. Census Curletti,Rosario 150 Sheet District154 Sheets13A 1900:District 5A, and B, District 1969 Letterto the AreaDirector, Bureau of Indian Affairs"RE: 155 Sheet 3A; 1910:District166 Sheet9B, District172 Sheet5A, in labeled:Descendants of Paula Rubio- District173 Sheet District221 Sheet 1930:District Sheet Applications group 13B, 9B; 8 her mother 'la India-Ursula,'" 1969. District54 Sheet6B. being September18, 16A, Archivedmaterial, Rosario Curletti Collection. Department of 11. See Bancroft1964:122-123; Franciscan Fathers 1999: July4, Anthropology,Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa 1793; Gillingham1983:86, 191-192, 392; Layne1934:202; Mason Barbara,CA. 1998:78;Northrop 1986:125, 289. de la Guerra,Jos6 1864 de la Guerrato Pablode la Santa 12. We have mentionedcountercultural influences previously Jose Guerra,May 4, 1864, Barbara.Archived de la Guerra Folder368. (Erlandsonet al. 1998:505; Haley 2002:116) withoutexplaining material, Papers, the roleof those communities' beliefs. Reference here is notto the SantaBarbara Mission Archive Library, Santa Barbara, CA. communeof the lateSemu Huaute. Eldredge,Zoeth Skinner 1912 The Beginningsof San Francisco.New York:John C. Rankin. REFERENCES CITED Erlandson,Jon McVey,Chester King, Lillian Robles,Eugene E. Allen,Patricia Ruyle,Diana Drake Wilson,Robert Winthrop, Chris Wood, 1976 Historyof RanchoEl Conejo. VenturaCounty Historical BrianD. Haley,and LarryR. Wilcoxon SocietyQuarterly 21(1):1-97. 1998 CA Forumon Anthropologyin Public: The Makingof Anonymous ChumashTradition: Replies to Haleyand Wilcoxon.Current 1834 Padr6nde SantaBarbara, afio de 1834. Archivedmaterial, Anthropology39(4):477-510. StatePapers, Missions, vol. V,p. 506. BancroftLibrary, Univer- Field,Les sityof California,Berkeley. 1999 Complicitiesand Collaborations.Current Anthropology Arnold,Jeanne E., MichaelR. Walsh,and SandraE. Hollimon 40(2):193-209. 2004 The Archaeologyof California.Journal of Archaeological Forbes,Jack D. Research12(1):1-73. 1966 Black Pioneers:The Spanish-SpeakingAfroamericans of Bancroft,Hubert Howe the Southwest.Phylon 27(3):233-246. 1884-89 Historyof California.7 vols. San Francisco:A. L. FranciscanFathers Bancroft. 1999 MatrimonialInvestigation Records, Mission San Gabriel, 1964 California Pioneer Registerand Index, 1542-1848. 1788-1861.Archived material, the McPherson Collection, Spe- Baltimore:Regional Publishing. cial Collections,Honnold/Mudd Library, Claremont Colle- Barrios,Phelipe ges, http://voxlibris.claremont.edu/sc/collections/marrinvest/ 1999-2000[1773] List of Individuals of the Compafia de matinvest.htm,accessed October 6, 2000. Cuera of [Loreto]... Garrisonedin the New Presidiosof San N.d.a San GabrielMission Baptisms. Archived material, Santa Diego and San Carlos de Monterrey.In Spanish-American BarbaraMission Archive Library, Santa Barbara, CA. Surname Histories.Lyman Platt, comp. and ed. Records N.d.b San GabrielMission Marriages. Archived material, Santa 312192-312193.Provo, UT: Ancestry, Inc. Electronicdatabase, BarbaraMission Archive Library, Santa Barbara, CA. http://www.ancestry.com,accessed January 12, 2001. N.d.c Santa BarbaraMission Indian Burials.Archived material, Barth,Fredrik SantaBarbara Mission Archive Library, Santa Barbara, CA. 1969 Introduction.In EthnicGroups and Boundaries:The Social N.d.d SantaBarbara Presidio Baptisms. Archived material, Santa Organizationof CulturalDifference. Fredrik Barth, ed. Pp. 9- Barbara Mission ArchiveLibrary, Santa Barbara, CA. 38. Boston:Little, Brown. N.d.e Santa Barbara PresidioMarriages. Archived material, Santa Baudrillard,Jean Barbara Mission ArchiveLibrary, Santa Barbara, CA. 1988 America.New York:Verso. Friedman,Jonathan Bean,John Lowell, and WilliamMarvin Mason 1999 Indigenous Strugglesand the Discreet Charm of the Bour- 1962 Diaries and Accounts of the Romero Expeditionsin geoisie. Journalof World-SystemsResearch 5(2):391-411. Arizonaand California.Los Angeles:Ward Ritchie Press. Garcia-Moro, Clara, D. I. Toja, and Phillip L. Walker Boggs,James P. 1997 Marriage Patterns of California's Early Spanish-Mexican 2002 AnthropologicalKnowledge and Native AmericanCul- Colonists (1742-1876). Journalof Biosocial Science 29(2):205- turalPractice in the LiberalPolity. American Anthropologist 217. 104(2):599-610. Geiger,Maynard, O. F. M. (Order of FriarsMinor) Brown,Michael F. 1972 Six Census Records of Los Angeles and Its Immediate 2003 Who Owns Native Culture?Cambridge, MA: Harvard Area between 1804 and 1823. Southern California Quarterly UniversityPress. 54(4):313-342. Camarillo,Albert Gillingham, RobertCameron 1996[1979] in a Changing Society.2nd edition. 1983[1961] The Rancho San Pedro. Rev. edition. Los Angeles: Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversity Press. Museum Reproductions.

This content downloaded from 130.70.241.102 on Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:46:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 444 AmericanAnthropologist * Vol. 107,No. 3 September2005

Gonzales,Angela 1998 The Censusof 1790: A DemographicHistory of Colonial 1998 The (Re)Articulationof AmericanIndian Identity:Main- California.Menlo Park,CA: BallenaPress. tainingBoundaries and RegulatingAccess to EthnicallyTied McLendon,Sally, and JohnR. Johnson, eds. Resources.American Indian Cultureand ResearchJournal 1999 CulturalAffiliation and LinealDescent of ChumashPeo- 22(4):199-225. plesin theChannel Islands and theSanta Monica Mountains. Goycoechea,Felipe de Reportprepared for Archaeology and EthnographyProgram, 1785 Census of the Populationof Santa Barbara,October 31, NationalPark Service. Santa Barbara:Santa BarbaraMuseum 1785. Archivedmaterial, State Papers, Missions, vol. 1, pp. 4- of NaturalHistory and HunterCollege, City Universityof 9. BancroftLibrary, University of California,Berkeley. New York. Guti&rrez,Ramon A. McWilliams,Carey 1991 WhenJesus Came, the Corn MothersWent Away. Stan- 1990[1948] Northfrom Mexico: The Spanish-SpeakingPeople ford:Stanford University Press. ofthe United States. 2nd edition.New York:Praeger. Haas, Lisbeth Menchaca,Martha 1995 Conquestsand HistoricalIdentities in California,1769- 2001 RecoveringHistory, Constructing Race: The Indian,Black, 1936. Berkeley:University of CaliforniaPress. and WhiteRoots of . Austin: University of Haley,Brian D. TexasPress. 1997 Newcomersin a Small Town: Change and Ethnicityin Miranda,Gloria E. RuralCalifornia. Ph.D. dissertation,University of California, 1978 FamilyPatterns and the Social Orderin HispanicSanta SantaBarbara. Barbara,1784-1848. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of History, ofSouthern California. 2002 Chumash Identity,Scholars, and Space- University Going Deeper: 1981 Gentede Raz6n Patternsin and Mexi- ports in Radic' and Elsewhere.Acta Americana10(1):113- Marriage Spanish 123. can California:A Case Studyof Santa Barbara and Los Angeles. 2003 Liberalor Cultural: A Comment.American SouthernCalifornia Quarterly 63(1):1-21. Anthropologist 1988 Racialand CulturalDimensions in Gentede RazonStatus 105(2):476-477. in and MexicanCalifornia. Southern California Quar- 2004 Reviewof PlacesThat Count: Traditional Cultural Proper- Spanish tiesin CulturalResource Management. Southeastern Archaeol- terly70(3):265-278. Moore, H. ogy23(2):226-228. John In The Case ofthe Three Baltazars: and the 1994 PuttingAnthropology Back TogetherAgain: The Ethno- press Indigenization ofCladistic American Vicissitudesof the WrittenWord. Southern California Quar- geneticCritique Theory. Anthropologist 96(4):925-948. terly. In Brian and R. Wilcoxon 2001 EthnogeneticPatterns in NativeNorth America. Archae- Haley, D., Larry and Ethnic- 1997 and the ofChumash Tradition. Cur- ology,Language, and History:Essays on Culture Anthropology Making JohnE. Terrell,ed. 31-56. CT: and rentAnthropology 38(5):761-794. ity. Pp. Westport, Bergin 1999 Point Conceptionand the ChumashLand of the Dead: Garvey. from Notes. of Californiaand Nabokov,Peter Revisions Harrington's Journal A of Time: AmericanIndian of GreatBasin 2002 Forest Ways History. Anthropology21(2):213-235. Press. 2000 On Complicitiesand Collaborations.Current Anthropol- Cambridge:Cambridge University Northrop,Marie E. ogy41(2):272-273. 1984 Familiesof California:1769-1850, Handler,Richard Spanish-Mexican Early vol. 2. Burbank:Southern California Genealogical Society. 1985 On Dialogue and DestructiveAnalysis: Problems in Nar- Familiesof California:1769- Nationalismand of 1986[1976] Spanish-Mexican Early rating Ethnicity.Journal Anthropological 1850, vol. 1. 2nd edition.Burbank: Southern California Ge- Research41(2):171-182. EdwardS. nealogicalSociety. Hoar, Nugent,Daniel 1852 CaliforniaCensus, 1852, SantaBarbara Archived County. 1998 Two,Three, Many Barbarisms? The ChihuahuanFrontier material,Santa Barbara Presidio Archives, Santa Barbara, CA. in Transitionfrom to Politics.In ContestedGround: RobertH. Society Jackson, ComparativeFrontiers on theNorthern and SouthernEdges of 1999 Race, Caste and Status: Indians in Colonial Spanish the Donna and ThomasE. America. ofNew MexicoPress. SpanishEmpire. J. Guy Sheridan, Albuquerque:University eds. Pp. 182-199.Tucson: University of Press. Johnson,John R. Files Will "Real" ChumashPlease Stand The Context Obituary 2003 the Up? N.d. BooksG and H. Archivedmaterial, Gledhill Santa fora Radic'al ofChumash ActaAmericana Library, Perception Identity. BarbaraHistorical Society Museum, Santa Barbara, CA. 11(1):70-72. O'Connor,Mary I. Kearney,Michael 1989 Environmental Reviewand the Constructionof 2004 The and Missionsof Borders. Impact Classifying Value-Filtering ContemporaryChumash Ethnicity. In NegotiatingEthnicity: AnthropologicalTheory 4(2):131-156. The Impactof AnthropologicalTheory and Practice.Susan E. King,Thomas F. Keefe,ed. Pp. 9-17. NAPABulletin, 8. Washington,DC: Amer- 2003 Places that Count: Traditional Cultural Propertiesin Cul- ican AnthropologicalAssociation. tural Resource Walnut CA: Alta Mira Management. Creek, Ortega,Jose Francisco Press. 1781 The Company which is to Garrison the Presidio and Mis- Kohl, Philip L. sions of the Channel of Santa Barbara, October 30, 1781. 1998 Nationalism and Archaeology: On the Constructions of Archived material,CA 15 Provincial State Papers, Benicia Mil- Nations and the Reconstructionsof the Remote Past. Annual itary.Pp. 106-108. BancroftLibrary, University of California, Review of Anthropology27:223-246. Berkeley. Layne,J. Gregg 1939[1782] Santa Barbara Presidio Company, July 1, 1782. In 1934 Annals of Los Angeles, Part I. California Historical Society Historyof Santa Barbara County. Owen H. O'Neill, ed. Pp. 54- Quarterly13(3):195-234. 55. Santa Barbara: Union Printing. Lo Buglio, Rudecinda Pico, Georgia 1977 Presidio de San Francisco,31 December 1776. Antepasados N.d. Memories of Mrs. Georgia Pico. Archived material, Fam- 2(3):21-32. ily Files. Gledhill Library,Santa Barbara Historical Society 1981 The 1839 Census of Los Angeles. Antepasados 4:40- Museum, Santa Barbara,CA. 44. Pitt,Leonard Mason, William Marvin 1966 The Decline of the Californios: A Social History of the 1978 The Garrisons of San Diego Presidio: 1770-1794. Journal Spanish-Speaking Californians, 1846-1890. Berkeley:Univer- of San Diego History24(4):409-411. sityof California Press.

This content downloaded from 130.70.241.102 on Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:46:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Haleyand Wilcoxon * Talesof Ethnogenesis 445

Powell,Philip Wayne Comparisonsof New ReligiousMovements. Garry W. Trompf, 1952 Soldiers,Indians and Silver:The NorthwardAdvance of ed. Pp. 35-94. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter. New Spain, 1550-1600. Berkeley:University of California U.S. CensusBureau Press. 1850 Census of Santa BarbaraCounty-Started 8 Oct. 1850. Radding,Cynthia Archivedmaterial, Santa BarbaraPresidio Archives, Santa 1997 WanderingPeoples: Colonialism, Ethnic Spaces, and Barbara,CA. Ecological Frontiersin NorthwesternMexico, 1700-1850. 1860 Eighth Census of the United States, 1860-Population Durham,NC: Duke UniversityPress. Schedules, Santa Barbara County, California. Electronic Ruiz,James T. document,http://www.rootsweb.com, accessed October24, N.d.a Don Vico. Archivedmaterial, Family Files, James T. Ruiz 2000. Recollections.Gledhill Library, Santa Barbara Historical Society 1870 Ninth Census of the United States, 1870-Population Museum,Santa Barbara, CA. Schedules,Santa Barbara County, California. Electronic docu- N.d.b The Ku KluxKlan. Archived material, Family Files, James ment,http://www.ancestry.com, accessed December 11, 2001. T. RuizRecollections. Gledhill Library, Santa Barbara Historical 1880 Tenth Census of the United States, 1880-Population SocietyMuseum, Santa Barbara, CA. Schedules,Santa Barbaraand VenturaCounties, California. Sahlins,Marshall Electronicdocument, http://www.ancestry.com, accessed May 1999 WhatIs AnthropologicalEnlightenment? Some Lessons of 17, 2001. the 20thCentury. Annual Review of Anthropology 28:i-xxiii. 1900 TwelfthCensus of the United States: 1900-Population Sainchez,Rosaura Schedules,Santa BarbaraCounty, California. Electronic doc- 1995 Telling Identities: The Californio Testimonios. ument,http://www.ancestry.com, accessed July 31, 2001. Minneapolis:University of Press. 1910 ThirteenthCensus of theUnited States, 1910-Population SantaBarbara City Directory Schedules,Santa Barbara County, California. Electronic docu- 1943 Electronic document, http://www.vitalsearch-ca.com/ ment,http://www.ancestry.com, accessed August 3, 2001. gen/ca/sba/sbadlink.htm#CD,accessed March 2, 2002. 1920 FourteenthCensus of the United States, 1920-Population Schultz,Karen Schedules,Santa Barbaraand Venturacounties, California. 1993 The Presidioand SurroundingCommunity, 1840-1880. Electronicdocument, http://www.ancestry.com, accessed De- In Santa BarbaraPresidio Area 1840 to the Present.Carl V. cember18, 2000. Harris,Jarrel C. Jackman,and CatherineRudolph, eds. Pp. 1930 FifteenthCensus of the UnitedStates, 1930-Population 1-15. Santa Barbara:University of California,Santa Barbara Schedules,Santa Barbara County, California. Electronic docu- PublicHistorical Studies and Santa BarbaraTrust for Historic ment,http://www.ancestry.com, accessed May 22, 2002. Preservation. Warren,Kay B., and JeanE. Jackson Seed,Patricia 2002 Introduction:Studying Indigenous Activismin Latin 1982 Social Dimensionsof Race: Mexico City,1753. Hispanic America.In IndigenousMovements, Self-Representation, and AmericanHistorical Review 62(4):569-606. the Statein LatinAmerica. Kay B. Warrenand Jean E. Jackson, Terrell,John Edward, ed. eds. Pp. 1-46. Austin:University of Texas Press. 2001 Archaeology,Language, and History:Essays on Culture Weber,David J. and Ethnicity.Westport, CT: Berginand Garvey. 1992 The SpanishFrontier in NorthAmerica. New Haven,CT: Thomas,David Hurst YaleUniversity Press. 1991 HarvestingRamona's Garden: Life in California'sMyth- Weiner,James F. ical Mission Past. In ColumbianConsequences, vol. 3: The 1999 Culturein a Sealed Envelope:The Concealmentof Aus- SpanishBorderlands in Pan-AmericanPerspective. David Hurst tralianAboriginal Heritage and Traditionin the Hindmarsh Thomas,ed. Pp. 119-157.Washington, DC: SmithsonianInsti- Island BridgeAffair. Journal of the RoyalAnthropological In- tutionPress. stitute5(2):193-210. Trompf,Garry Wolf,Eric R. 1990 The Cargoand the Millenniumon BothSides of the Pa- 1982 Europeand the Peoplewithout History. Berkeley: Univer- cific.In CargoCults and MillenarianMovements: Transoceanic sityof CaliforniaPress.

This content downloaded from 130.70.241.102 on Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:46:29 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions