Collection: Directories and Documents > Tanis Thorne Native Californian & Nisenan Collection

About This Item:

Title: Some Explanations for the Rise of Cultural Complexity Collection Type: Directories and Documents Collection Name: Tanis Thorne Native Californian & Nisenan Collection # of Pages: 15 Download PDF: User Login Required Download OCR Text: User Login Required

Date Scanned: 2024-09-03 23:26:21 OCR Software Version #: tesseract 5.4.1 Item Sourced From: PDF First Created: 2025-03-17 05:52:17 Last Updated: 2025-03-17 05:52:17

Original Held At: Searls Historical Library Location: 161 Nevada City Hwy, Nevada City, CA 95959

Page: of 15  

32 southern California Shoshoneans, there were no planters in ancient days and no planting ceremonies. While it is true that there is a very direct relationship between rainfall and yield of maize and that the so-called "corn belt" of the United States appears to possess the best combination of temperature, rain, sunshine, soil, and topography for high-yield production, few anthropological writers on the subject have really understood the matter fully in agricultural terms. Most frequently they have confused the pertinent issue of amount and spacing of rainfall with the idea of a "wrong" rainfall regime for corn in California. However, there is no need to engage in a long technical discussion of optimum conditions for corn-growing since the historical record indicates this problem is beside the point. Forbes (1963:1) first attacked the notion that a summer rainfall regime was essential to corn-growing in California. In spite of dry summers, he pointed out that California’s subsistence was largely based upon maize from 1769 until the 1850's, and California Indians were principal growers of those crops. Actually, despite repeated statements in anthropological literature that California has never been a notably cornproducing state, corn production reached its peak in 1890 when more than two million bushels were harvested in the state (Hardy 1929:221). Nevertheless, Forbes neglected to consider whether corn-growing became possible only with introduction of irrigation by the Spanish. Concerning this problem, a wealth of data indicates California agriculture in the postcontact period was not always irrigation dependent. A few examples will suffice: Lt. E.0. Ore Indians in the San ‘Dieguito Valley near San Diego gathering from twent to forty fanegas of maize on unirrigated lands. Hayes (1929:92) noted in 1853 that an American settlement near Los Angeles "raised every species of vegetable and corn, without irrigation, such is the humidity of the soil." Indian Superintendent Thomas J. Henley reported in 1854 that corn yields that year were far below average on Tejon Reservation because crops were not irrigated and a drought had occurred (Caughey 1953:138). Brockett (1882:592) stated that corn planted in April and May in California matured without rain in areas where soil moisture was abundant. Finally, although a summer rain regime may be desirable for high yields of corn, it should be noted that the Spanish explorer Lt. José Estudillo (Bean and Mason 1962:36) obse ‘ahuilla Indians near Thermal on the Colorado Desert planting corn, pumpkins, melons, and watermelons in the month of December, 1824. ported we 33 In recent years, various research i 5 ers have pointed out flaws i Nita icc ee (Weatherwax 1954; Jennings 1956; Heizer Aes an ; Forbes 1963; Bean 1968; and La ' Jennings (1956) suggested that th shah rte gS ( e dry southern California desert played ae = cae the advance of agriculture from the Colorado ie ts aga : ut fai climate could not be accepted as the sole explanation c he offered for the failure of agri agricultu: become sa roma among coastal Californians was the aeaslntcn ik eae environment which these people had adopted. The cultural _ en Indian groups along the coast in exploiting the sca abst coated avery wears reasonably abundant living Meighan out that the Archaic stage was not necessari “inferior j ; sarily infer ae techniques to simple agricultural communities. ” Where. the et was in all of California except the desert : = S, ee n su ggested, the people may work out such an efficient logica abtationathalathey-asoroctually-Detem Cr Want te eee al oples. He viewed the fact that Californi te vi ia supported th ce amma in the United States without apical as of significance to discussion of this proble WwW : alton B aa also emphasized the general abundance of a natural food siti 3 ornia, hypothesizing that agriculture failed to spread into California ecause bes ee population was in a “Malthusian equilibrium." y a few researchers have challenged the prevaili g vi ? . . . . ail anthropologists that California Indians were aomeeaeaiincal be euiatia ae hrc ate remem existed in certain parts of ws 1900; Gifford 1931; Treganza 1946; Bean and M ees ries 1963; Lawton 1968; Lawton and Bean 1968; Shipek 1971: ae ai — a Saubel 1972; and Wilke and Fain 1972) Although reported on the presence of irrigation ditches i California, which he believed mi wig ie dd ee gitorma, ight be aboriginal, he did not concern a il whether crops were grown or the ditches employed solely to carry water to stands of native plants. Presumably, Patch assumed that the irrigation ditches of Eureka Valley were used in the same manner as fats. urrent conservative estimates of California’s aboriginal population place it at a persons (Heizer and Whipple 1971:66). Villages of 1,000 or more persons have be imated for some California groups (Kunkel 1962). “