Indigenous Archaeology at Tolay Lake: Responsive Research and the Empowered Tribal Management of a Sacred Landscape by Peter Andrew Nelson A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the Requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Kent G. Lightfoot, Chair Professor Margaret Conkey Professor Shari Huhndorf Summer 2017 Abstract Indigenous Archaeology at Tolay Lake: Responsive Research and the Empowered Tribal Management of a Sacred Landscape by Peter Andrew Nelson Doctor of Philosophy in Anthroplogy University of California, Berkeley Professor Kent G. Lightfoot, Chair The Tolay Archaeology Project (TAP), of which this dissertation is a part, is a multi-year, Community-Based, Participatory Research Project that seeks to support the work of the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria (FIGR) within the Tolay Valley. The Tolay Valley is the location of a sacred lake to FIGR where doctors healed sick people with charmstones for thousands of years. Tolay Lake was the repository for these charmstones and is a sacred place to the contemporary tribe. Coast Miwok and other indigenous peoples traveled to Tolay to participate in ceremonies up to 1870 when the lake was drained by William Bihler. In the years following the draining of this lake, Coast Miwok and neighboring tribal people maintained stories and memories about Tolay, even though the charmstones and the sicknesses within them deterred many California Indian people from visiting the lake. Today, FIGR and the Sonoma County Regional Parks Department (SCRPD) are collaboratively planning the development of this area as Tolay Lake Regional Park, and are conducting studies of biological and cultural resources to learn more about how to appropriately manage and interpret these resources. This dissertation addresses the need for more information about Tolay’s environmental and cultural history by conducting low-impact archaeology to answer questions about environmental change, indigenous land management, and the ways in which Coast Miwok people navigated settler colonialism in the nineteenth century to reaffirm connections to the valley. The relationships between Native Americans and archaeologists have been fraught with over a century of contention. Avocational and professional archaeologists have repeatedly removed Native American ancestors from the ground and written Native American histories from Western perspectives without meaningfully consulting tribes. Community-based approaches to archaeology are strategies that some archaeologists are now employing to find the commonalities between their values and the values of Native American communities to forge ethical pathways forward in cultural resource preservation and research. The approach that I developed for this dissertation project in collaboration with FIGR is rooted in responsive justice and community- and desire-based research practices. This approach involved establishing and adhering to core research values and working with tribal committees to ensure that the research continues to be relevant and worthwhile to the tribe. Unlike much of the early research from the past century that did damage to cultural resources and did not meaningfully consult tribes, this dissertation 1 research was designed, conducted, and written with constant feedback and collaboration from FIGR’s citizen committees. I have found that research co-produced with Native American communities can lead to richer understandings of the past and can positively impact the lives of many different peoples today. In this dissertation, I summarize the history of indigenous archaeologies, including community- based or community engaged research. I present my own process for community-engaged research with FIGR in which my research was continually reevaluated and reworked. I then review the regional traditions and theoretical considerations in California archaeology and situate the TAP within this larger body of research within the state. I offer a brief overview of previous research in the Tolay Valley to contextualize the approach taken in the TAP and present results from extensive non-invasive and low impact strategies (such as terrestrial LiDAR, geophysical survey, surface pedestrian survey, and intensive surface collection) as well as limited excavation and augering. I expand my discussion of the paleoethnobotanical and faunal results, which show how a grassland/shrubland environment was maintained at Tolay for thousands of years. I also expand on evidence from the Historic Period within the Tolay Valley, and show how Coast Miwok people maintained their connections to the Tolay Valley and refused settler colonial ways of engaging with land within the valley. These data and narratives were utilized to generate histories for tribal youth hikes and public interpretation at Tolay, supported the review of the master plan documents for Tolay Lake Regional Park, and will inform ecological restoration efforts at Tolay in the future. 2 For my Grandpa and my Great Great Uncle For my tribe, the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, because it takes a strong community to raise an academic… i Table of Contents List of Figures iii List of Tables viii Acknowledgements ix Chapter 1 Introduction 1 Chapter 2 Decolonizing Archaeological Methodologies: The Making and Remaking of Research Practices with Tribal Communities 10 Chapter 3 A History of Research in California Archaeology: Diversity, Complexity and the Reimagining of Indigenous Peoples as Land Managers 23 Chapter 4 Previous and Current Archaeological Research in the Tolay Valley 41 Chapter 5 Tolay Valley Geophysical Prospection 86 Chapter 6 Results of Faunal and Paleoethnobotanical Analyses from Excavated Contexts 111 Chapter 7 A History of Tolay: Indigenous Refusal of Settler Colonialism in 19th Century Central California 151 Chapter 8 Conclusion: Refusal, Relationships and California Indian Futurities in Archaeological Research 164 References 168 Appendix A Tolay Archaeology Project / California Archaeology Lab Confidentiality Agreement 197 Appendix B Accelerated Mass Spectrometry (AMS) Radiocarbon Dating Results 199 ii List of Figures Figure 1.1 Map illustrating the boundaries of Tolay Lake Regional Park, which defines the project area, and the tribal territory of the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria. 3 Figure 4.1 Map of the survey blocks within Grid 1 of TAP-39. 54 Figure 4.2 Map illustrating the results of surface pedestrian survey for groundstone materials on top of the midden area of TAP-39. 56 Figure 4.3 Map of the intensive surface collection units at TAP-39. 58 Figure 4.4 Map illustrating the density of obsidian lithics collected from intensive surface units. 60 Figure 4.5 Map illustrating the density of faunal materials collected from intensive surface units. 61 Figure 4.6 Map illustrating the density of historic materials collected from intensive surface units. 62 Figure 4.7 Image of a wooden house/shed on sleds that could be pulled by a team of horses to different parts of the property and propped up in a level position with additional blocks and beams. 64 Figure 4.8 A. Knapped/reworked historic, aqua colored glass scraper. B. Knapped/ reworked historic green bottle glass scraper. C. Knapped/reworked historic brown, bottle burin, etcher, or perforator tool. D. Unworked champagne finish and neck of a mouth blown bottle, circa 1880 and 1920. 65 Figure 4.9 Map illustrating regularly-shaped, circular depressions on the ground surface of TAP-39. 67 Figure 4.10 Surface rendering of LiDAR point cloud from TAP-39 showing multiple surface features including circular depressions, undulating topography of the top of the midden, and historic trenches for pipes connected to the spring boxes. 69 Figure 4.11 Point cloud generated from LiDAR data showing the flat platform-like top of the midden (light-colored area in the center of the image). 70 Figure 4.12 Map of excavation and auger units at TAP-39. 73 Figure 4.13 Profile and planview drawings of EUs 1 and 3. Planview is drawn at a depth of about 53 cm BD or the surface of the house floor. 78 iii Figure 4.14 GPR Profile from Block 30 highlighting the stratigraphy and features observed in EUs 1 and 3. 80 Figure 5.1 Interpolated topographic-style map illustrating the results of the gradient magnetometry survey. The z-value shown in a “terrain” color scale represents magnetic susceptibility in terms of nanotesla (nT). 91 Figure 5.2 Map illustrating Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) data produced with a 900 mhz antenna. The depth of the slice is 7.5 to 12.5 nanoseconds. The GPR profile locations illustrated in figures 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, and 5.6 are highlighted as white lines. 93 Figure 5.3 GPR profile 1. 900 mhz antenna GPR data showing location of the west sidewall of EU 3 and a planar feature that crosses through the unit. 94 Figure 5.4 GPR profile 2. 900 mhz antenna GPR data showing location of the west sidewall of EU 1, the east sidewall of EU 3, and a planar feature that crosses through the unit. 94 Figure 5.5 GPR profile 3. 900 mhz antenna GPR data showing location of the east sidewall of EU 1 and a planar feature that crosses through the unit. 95 Figure 5.6 GPR profile 4. 400 mhz antenna GPR data showing location of a large planar feature. The profile is skewed vertically to make the feature more visible. 95 Figure 5.7 GPR profile 5. 400 mhz antenna GPR data showing a close up (vertical skewing of the profile) of the planar feature from figures 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5. 95 Figure 5.8 GPR profile 6. 200 mhz antenna GPR data showing location of the planar feature (house floor) from figures 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, and 5.7, and the bottom of midden soils. 97 Figure 5.9 Gradient magnetic data from all blocks of Grid 1 of Tolay lakebed area geophysics survey. The blocks are oriented correctly in relation to each other, and the boundary of TAP-56 (not depicted) intersects with the shared edge of blocks 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10.