Culture Contact in Protohistoric California (33 pages)

en ____ 140 JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY dary source for evaluating specific events mentioned in the chronicles. The search for European and/or Asian artifacts has been undertaken to evaluate potential locations of anchorages, especially in controversial cases such as Drake’s landing (e.g., Treganza 1957, 1958, 1959; Von der Porten 1963, 1973; Shangraw and Von der Porten 1981). Archaeological investigations of contact period sites are also used to evaluate village locations mentioned in many of the chronicles, to elaborate upon the architecture and lifeways of native peoples described by Europeans, and to construct and/or refine local archaeological chronologies and sequences by considering the stratigraphic provenience of European goods in midden deposits (e.g., Heizer 1941; Meighan 1952; Beardsley 1954). With a few notable exceptions (Meighan 1981; Johnson 1982), conspicuously absent are studies that have explicitly addressed the nature and consequences of early encounters in protohistoric California. By protohistoric, we mean the interval that began with the first documented interactions between native peoples and foreigners (1542) and ended with the establishment of Spanish colonial settlements in California (1769). By accentuating the experiences that took place between indigenous peoples and foreign visitors in protohistoric times, the early chronicles and associated archaeological remains can be reanalyzed to address a number of critical theoretical issues in contemporary culture contact studies. The integration of both archival information and archaeology can provide a powerful perspective for considering the use and meaning of material culture during early encounters. The purpose of this article is to consider four main issues underlying initial culture encounters in California: (1) the nature of the contacts; (2) the diverse responses observed; (3) the role of material culture in early contacts; and (4) the probability that lethal pathogens spread from these initial interactions. We begin by examining the social contexts in which early encounters took place, emphasizing the small groups that interacted, the multiethnic composition of ships’ crews, and the short duration of most visits. We then consider the diverse responses of indigenous peoples to voyagers that ranged from fear to friendship to ambivalence to armed conflict. In considering their varied reactions, we examine information exchange among disparate native peoples, the critical role that religious practices played in structuring local and foreigner. relations, and the timing of the encounters, especially in relation to native and Christian ceremonial cycles. In the third section, we undertake an analysis of the materials exchanged between residents and foreigners and consider alternative sources for native acquisition of European/Asian materials in protohistoric California, including long-distance exchange and salvaged shipwrecks. In considering the latter source, we question the conventional view that in California, foreign goods were regarded as “‘merely trifles’? by native peoples (e.g., Heizer 1941; Treganza 1959). Finally, we consider the possibility that lethal epidemics were transmitted during early encounters in California. While Euroasiatic pathogens were probably inflicted on local native populations, epidemics were most likely sporadic and relatively localized. We conclude by identifying those native peoples who probably experienced the greatest risk of infections during protohistoric times. THE ANALYSIS OF EARLY ENCOUNTERS IN CALIFORNIA To address the issues discussed above, this article considers the four early Spanish sailing expeditions of Juan Rodrfquez Cabrillo and Bartolomé Ferrelo (1542-1543), Pedro de Unamuno (1587), Sebastian Rodrfguez Cermefio (1595), and Sebastian Vizcafno (1602-1603), as well as the lone English voyage of Francis Drake (1579). In undertaking this analysis, we first identified primary sources of the encounters between record counte the an the le kinds types chang any a voyag cover of the It many These docur journ mode inacci event count the w enced whicl traye tions, 1990 the f grapl agers used voya: brief. empl 7 forni embz June com} ably The ed b deatl map

en ____ 140 JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY dary source for evaluating specific events mentioned in the chronicles. The search for European and/or Asian artifacts has been undertaken to evaluate potential locations of anchorages, especially in controversial cases such as Drake’s landing (e.g., Treganza 1957, 1958, 1959; Von der Porten 1963, 1973; Shangraw and Von der Porten 1981). Archaeological investigations of contact period sites are also used to evaluate village locations mentioned in many of the chronicles, to elaborate upon the architecture and lifeways of native peoples described by Europeans, and to construct and/or refine local archaeological chronologies and sequences by considering the stratigraphic provenience of European goods in midden deposits (e.g., Heizer 1941; Meighan 1952; Beardsley 1954). With a few notable exceptions (Meighan 1981; Johnson 1982), conspicuously absent are studies that have explicitly addressed the nature and consequences of early encounters in protohistoric California. By protohistoric, we mean the interval that began with the first documented interactions between native peoples and foreigners (1542) and ended with the establishment of Spanish colonial settlements in California (1769). By accentuating the experiences that took place between indigenous peoples and foreign visitors in protohistoric times, the early chronicles and associated archaeological remains can be reanalyzed to address a number of critical theoretical issues in contemporary culture contact studies. The integration of both archival information and archaeology can provide a powerful perspective for considering the use and meaning of material culture during early encounters. The purpose of this article is to consider four main issues underlying initial culture encounters in California: (1) the nature of the contacts; (2) the diverse responses observed; (3) the role of material culture in early contacts; and (4) the probability that lethal pathogens spread from these initial interactions. We begin by examining the social contexts in which early encounters took place, emphasizing the small groups that interacted, the multiethnic composition of ships’ crews, and the short duration of most visits. We then consider the diverse responses of indigenous peoples to voyagers that ranged from fear to friendship to ambivalence to armed conflict. In considering their varied reactions, we examine information exchange among disparate native peoples, the critical role that religious practices played in structuring local and foreigner. relations, and the timing of the encounters, especially in relation to native and Christian ceremonial cycles. In the third section, we undertake an analysis of the materials exchanged between residents and foreigners and consider alternative sources for native acquisition of European/Asian materials in protohistoric California, including long-distance exchange and salvaged shipwrecks. In considering the latter source, we question the conventional view that in California, foreign goods were regarded as “‘merely trifles’? by native peoples (e.g., Heizer 1941; Treganza 1959). Finally, we consider the possibility that lethal epidemics were transmitted during early encounters in California. While Euroasiatic pathogens were probably inflicted on local native populations, epidemics were most likely sporadic and relatively localized. We conclude by identifying those native peoples who probably experienced the greatest risk of infections during protohistoric times.

THE ANALYSIS OF EARLY ENCOUNTERS IN CALIFORNIA To address the issues discussed above, this article considers the four early Spanish sailing expeditions of Juan Rodrfquez Cabrillo and Bartolomé Ferrelo (1542-1543), Pedro de Unamuno (1587), Sebastian Rodrfguez Cermefio (1595), and Sebastian Vizcafno (1602-1603), as well as the lone English voyage of Francis Drake (1579). In undertaking this analysis, we first identified primary sources of the encounters between record counte the an the le kinds types chang any a voyag cover of the It many These docur journ mode inacci event count the w enced whicl traye tions, 1990 the f grapl agers used voya: brief. empl 7 forni embz June com} ably The ed b deatl map