CRAFTING IDENTITY: ACQUISITION, PRODUCTION, USE, …...de Santa Bárbara a través del análisis de...

CRAFTING IDENTITY: ACQUISITION, PRODUCTION, USE, ANDRECYCLING OF SOAPSTONE DURING THE MISSION PERIOD IN

ALTA CALIFORNIA

Kaitlin M. Brown

This article investigates the daily practices and social processes of indigenous identity negotiation in the Santa BarbaraChannel region through an analysis of soapstone ollas, bowls, and comales. After assessing the source of the raw materialand using a typological classification based upon form and function, I discuss the ways in which soapstone cooking wares wereused diachronically and across the colonial landscape. These finds show a reorganization of the soapstone industry inside themission space: soapstone was acquired from new sources, an emphasis was placed on the production of bowls and comales,and more soapstone vessels show evidence of remodification. However, the continued use of traditional soapstone ollas inhistorically occupied Chumash villages outside the mission indicates persistent practices that linked indigenous peoples toa deep ancestral past. I argue that these changes and continuities illuminate a range of identities that existed between thecultural spaces previously described as “native” and “Spanish.” This study illustrates that indigenous peoples negotiated,redeployed, and expressed their identities in new ways that allowed them to adapt and persist under colonialism.

Este trabajo investiga las prácticas diarias y los procesos sociales de negociación de identidad indígena en la región del Canalde Santa Bárbara a través del análisis de ollas, cuencos y comales de esteatita. Después de evaluar la fuente de la materiaprima y emplear una clasificación tipológica basada en la forma y función, se discuten las formas en que las vajillas de cocinade esteatita se usaron diacrónicamente y a lo largo del paisaje colonial. Estos hallazgos muestran una reorganización de laindustria de la esteatita dentro del espacio de la misión: la esteatita fue adquirida de nuevas fuentes; se enfatizó la producciónde tazones y comales; y más vasijas de esteatita muestran evidencia de remodificación. Sin embargo, el uso continuado deollas tradicionales de esteatita en aldeas Chumash históricamente ocupadas fuera de la misión indica prácticas persistentesque vinculaban las comunidades indígenas a un profundo pasado ancestral. Estos cambios y continuidades iluminan unrango de identidades que existían entre los espacios culturales previamente descritos como “nativo” y “español”. Esteestudio ilustra que las comunidades indígenas negociaron, reasignaron y expresaron sus identidades de nuevas maneras queles permitieron adaptarse y persistir bajo el régimen colonial.

Why are certain practices adopted andothers rejected in colonial encoun-ters? How did the acceptance or rejec-

tion of nonnative material culture and prac-tices manifest across the colonial landscape?Answering these questions demands analysis ofthe ways particular materials were used, bothspatially and temporally (Dietler 2010:8–14).Colonial encounters involved sociopolitical andeconomic negotiations on a variety of scalesthrough time and across space, with far-reachingeffects on the local region, macroregion, andglobe (see Stein 2005). Archaeologists investi-

Kaitlin M. Brown Department of Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara, 552 University Road, SantaBarbara, CA 93106, USA ([email protected])

gating colonial situations have turned away frommodels that stress the asymmetrical assimilationof a passive culture into a dominant partnertoward an understanding that both the colonizersand the colonized have significant inputs intostructures of domination, power, and resistance(Ferris, Harrison, and Wilcox 2015; Gosden2001; Jordan 2009; Liebmann and Murphy 2011;Lightfoot 2005; Panich 2013; Silliman 2005;Stein 2005; Voss 2005). These entanglementsproduce conditions under which new identi-ties emerge—inadvertently or intentionally—from multiple active agents taking part in the

American Antiquity 83(2), 2018, pp. 244–262Copyright © 2018 by the Society for American Archaeology

doi:10.1017/aaq.2018.2

244

mailto:[email protected]

https://doi.org/10.1017/aaq.2018.2

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1017/aaq.2018.2&domain=pdf















Brown] 245CRAFTING IDENTITY

transformation of culture (Deagan 1998; Ortiz1995; van Dommelen 1998; Voss 2005, 2008).

In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries,the establishment of the mission system in AltaCalifornia represented one colonial enterprisethat sparked a series of negotiations across thelandscape (Panich and Schneider 2014, 2015).Specifically, these colonial operations were artic-ulated through a regional system composed ofkey political and economic institutions whoseprimary goal was to enculturate native peoplesand make them into loyal Spanish subjectsthrough relocation programs, intensive laborregimes, and strict religious indoctrination (Haas2014; Hackel 2005; Lightfoot 2005; Milliken1995). Settler communities maintained two pri-mary social categories to distinguish themselves(españols or gente de razón [people with reason])from Indians (indios or gente sin razón [peoplewithout reason] [Haas 1995, 2014; Lightfoot2005; Voss 2008]). This system supplanted theSpanish castas system, or sistema de castas,which was based upon the idea that individualsof primarily Spanish ancestry were of higherstatus, while persons of mixed heritage wereof lower status (Haas 1995:29–32, 2014:54–56;Voss 2008:101). Yet the distinctions betweengente de razón and gente sin razón were notstatic; these boundaries were fluid and nego-tiable, allowing Indians who accepted coloniallifeways to elevate their social identities (Light-foot 2005:68; Haas 1995:30; Voss 2008:101–102). Gente de razón status was especiallyimportant for indigenous peoples because theycould gain higher-status occupations, receivemore rights and responsibilities such as landownership, have greater access to prestige goods,or even occupy specialized adobe apartmentsset aside for the most “tried and true” mis-sion residents (Farris and Johnson 1999; Haas2014; Hackel 2005; Lightfoot 2005; Voss 2008).Indigenous peoples who rejected these colonialexpectations remained lower-ranked within thecolonial order and were thus classified as gentesin razón.

However, not all indigenous peoplesresponded to this system in the same way;nor were colonial ideas and practices acceptedpassively or homogeneously across thelandscape (Castillo 1989; Lightfoot 2005;

Panich and Schneider 2014). In fact, theseinstitutions were established in regions wherenative California groups were socially situatedin small, linguistically diverse, autonomousterritories that had developed their own historiesfor thousands of years before the Spanisharrived (Bettinger 2015; Heizer 1978). Forat least the last 9,000 years, people speakingChumashan languages made up several of thesesociopolitical groups occupying the coastalregion of south-central California. From thefounding of Mission San Buenaventura (AD1782) to the end of the mission system (AD1833), the Chumash experienced everyday lifeunder colonialism differently, depending uponwhere they were spatially and socially situated.Left behind in the archaeological record arethe material signatures of these sociohistoricalcircumstances, the study of which can provideinsight into the operation of colonialism.

In this study, I focus upon one type of materialculture used by the Chumash for thousands ofyears—soapstone. This type of stone toleratesdirect heat and can be modified into variousforms, making it an ideal medium to cook,prepare, and store foods. Previous research hasidentified the importance of soapstone in Chu-mash foodways, but there is no serious inves-tigation of these cooking vessels through timeand across space, even though they are availableto study in museum collections. To advanceunderstanding of this artifact class, I identifyprocurement sources and develop a functionaltypology to determine how the objects were used.I then conduct diachronic and spatial analysesto show how practices changed or remained thesame across the landscape. I conclude that theChumash acquired, produced, consumed, andrecycled soapstone in recombinant ways duringthe Mission period. Although some Spanishpractices were integrated into local traditions,the Chumash rejected or transformed others.The contexts of these objects provide criticalelements in understanding the dynamic nature ofindigenous social identity in Alta California.

Situating Identity

Over the course of the last decade, identity issueshave become a predominant topic of study in

246 [Vol. 83, No. 2, 2018AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

anthropology; however, their widespread use canlead to ambiguous meanings and interpretations(see Insoll 2007). Indeed, the paradoxical natureof identity makes it difficult to define, for iden-tity is both fixed and fluid; it incorporates theindividual and society; it can be ascribed orcast out of free will; moreover, it is not onlyrooted in the past but also linked to expec-tations of the future (Díaz-Andreu and Lucy2005; Gardner 2011; Hodos 2010; Smith 2014;Voss 2008). In this article, I refer to identity as“individuals’ identification with broader groupson the basis of differences socially sanctionedas significant” (Díaz-Andreu and Lucy 2005:1;emphasis added). Status, race, ethnicity, gender,and age are elements that crosscut each other inidentity studies; one category of social differencecan prevail over the other or be deemed moresignificant in certain contexts.

A problem faced by archaeologists, however,is how to study identity issues without essen-tializing people in the past. Engagement withpostcolonial frameworks calls into question theassignment of categories based upon specificattributes or styles and illustrates the difficultiesin classifying artifacts into dichotomies, such asindigenous/colonial, traditional/innovative, andSpanish/native, or as merely “hybrid” things(e.g., Law Pezzarossi 2014; Liebmann 2015;Silliman 2015). One way to avoid such rigid cat-egorical distinctions is to bring together changeand continuity while recognizing the importantroles of practice, memory, and material dis-course (e.g., Liebmann 2012:135–188; Silliman2009). This framework is especially useful wheninvestigating identity issues and indigenous craftindustries at the local level. For instance, archae-ologists can horizontally and vertically traceboth change and continuity in localized craftproduction to see what practices were adoptedduring colonial encounters, the contexts in whichthese practices were performed, and the shifting,dynamic ways indigenous identities manifestedacross the colonial landscape. These data canilluminate the ways local groups constructed,reconstructed, negotiated, and expressed theiridentities in different social circumstances.

Here, I investigate the acquisition, production,use, and recycling of soapstone vessels employedin food preparation and storage to evaluate how

the Chumash negotiated their social identitiesacross the landscape during the Mission period(AD 1782–1833). Rather than simply reflectingchanges, the dataset demonstrates that the pro-duction and use of particular vessel classes wereimportant in the creation and maintenance ofindigenous social identity. I find a shift in thesoapstone industry inside the mission space andthus a change in foodways. Specifically, the Chu-mash acquired raw materials from new sources,changed from ollas to bowls, and emphasizedthe production of comales. However, the primaryuse of ollas at the outlying ranchería illustratesthat traditional soapstone use remained relativelysimilar throughout the Protohistoric and Missionperiods. I argue that these differences in practicearticulate specific means of understanding newways that the Chumash negotiated their identitiesunder colonialism at different points across thelandscape.

The Chumash of South-Central California

People speaking Chumashan languages occu-pied the area between Paso Robles in the northand Malibu in the south, the Northern ChannelIslands (i.e., Santa Rosa, San Miguel, Santa Cruz,and Anacapa), and as far inland as the west-ern edge of the San Joaquin Valley (Figure 1).They were a complex, nonagricultural, hunter-gatherer-fisher society characterized by highpopulation density, sedentism, hereditary lead-ership, craft specialization, and a large-scaleregional trade network (Arnold 2001; Gam-ble 2008:276–300; Johnson 2000; King 1990).The Gabrieliño (Tongva), who spoke a Takiclanguage of the Uto-Aztecan linguistic stock,occupied the south coast and interior regionsimmediately south of the Chumash. Historically,their territory extended south to Newport Bay andeastward to encompass the San Gabriel and SantaAna Mountains; it also included the SouthernChannel Islands—Santa Catalina, San Clemente,Santa Barbara, and San Nicolas (McCawley1996).

Historical documents suggest that the Chu-mash first encountered peoples from overseaswith the arrival of Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo inAD 1542, thus marking the beginning of cul-ture contact (see Silliman 2005). In the Santa


Figure 1. Map depicting the extent of Chumash territory in the Santa Barbara Channel region. (Color online)

Barbara Channel region, this period is knownas the Protohistoric period, or the Late period2 a/b (Johnson 1982). The colonial era, however,with long-standing, daily interaction between theChumash and European colonists, began with thefounding of Mission San Buenaventura in AD1782. This era is referred to here as the Missionperiod.

The mission system was established not onlyto prevent the advance of Russian fur traders fromthe north but also to convert indigenous peoplesinto gente de razón. The latter included teach-ing them characteristics of “rational” peoples(i.e., urban, agricultural, Christian, and Spanish-speaking; Hoover 1989:397). Under the Fran-ciscan policy of reducción, Chumash peoplesfrom multiple surrounding villages were reset-tled into mission establishments in an effort toform Christian communities (Farris 2014; Haas2014). Once baptized, indigenous peoples couldnot leave the mission without permission; ifthey ran away, they were persuaded to returnthrough negotiation or were brought back byforce (Milliken 1995). When neophytes abidedby mission rules and remained disciplined intheir daily responsibilities, they gained staturewithin the mission community and were givenincreased rights and enhanced status or occupa-tions (Hackel 2005:272–320).

Although there was much change in theSanta Barbara Channel region during the Missionperiod, even as late as AD 1813, evidence ofcontinuity in practice is present with the useof traditional shell beads, local lithic produc-tion detritus, and ground stone fashioned fromnearby soapstone sources. The analysis of theselocal craft industries within colonial establish-ments provides insight into the social positionof the Chumash who relocated to the missionsetting and the new identities that were forgedthere.

Previous Research on Soapstone Use amongthe Chumash

The use of soapstone among the Chumashhas long interested scholars working in theSanta Barbara Channel region. Archaeologicaland ethnographic evidence suggests that SantaCatalina Island was the primary source forsoapstone acquisition for thousands of years(Gamble 2008, 2015; Heizer and Treganza 1944;Howard 2000; King 1982; Romani 1982; Rosen-thal and Williams 1992; Schumacher 1878, 1879;Wlodarski 1979). To date, archaeologists haveidentified 76 quarries on the island near Air-port in the Sky, Potts Valley (or Valley of theOllas), Empire Landing, Eagle’s Nest, and Little


Table 1. Soapstone Sources.

LocationNumber of

Sources

Channel IslandsSan Clemente Island 1Santa Catalina Island 7Santa Barbara Island 1Santa Cruz Island 2Santa Rosa Island 1

Los Angeles CountyPalos Verdes Peninsula 1Redondo Beach 1Pacific Palisades 1Point Dume 1San Gabriel Mountains 1Simi Valley 1Sierra Pelona Range 1Ritter Ranch 1

Santa Barbara CountySan Emigdio Range 1San Rafael Mountains 2

Southern San Joaquin ValleyLindsay, Tulare County 1

San Diego CountyCuyamaca Peak 1

Note: All sources documented in Romani 1982.

Springs Drainage (Howard 2000:601). Soap-stone sources occur in a variety of outcroppingtypes, ranging from talc schists to short-fiberedtremolite-asbestos-talc; colors vary from lightgray and pink to dark green and black; and forma-tion types include globular outcrops, lenticularveins, and foliated aggregates. However, archae-ological evidence shows that people acquired rawmaterial to make ollas, bowls, and comales fromcoarse-grained soapstone sources that occur aslarge surface mounds (Wlodarski 1979). Due tothe rarity of these largest soapstone artifacts inthe Tongva (Gabrieliño) area, King (1982:435–436) posits that these objects were made onSanta Catalina Island and largely traded to theChumash area.

While there is clear evidence of soapstone ves-sel production on Santa Catalina Island, archae-ologists have identified other quarries throughoutSouthern California, including at least 18 on themainland and other islands (Romani 1982:164–171; Table 1). While analytic techniques such asX-ray fluorescence and laser ablation inductivelycoupled plasma mass spectrometry aid in thediscovery of soapstone sources (e.g., Basgall

and True 1985; Eddy 2013), visual identificationalso documents mineralogical subtypes, granularinclusions, and fine- and coarse-grained mate-rials to identify acquisition locations (Romani1982; Rosenthal and Williams 1992; Weide1973; Wlodarski 1979). For instance, Romani(1982:28–31) explains that micaceous soapstonewith abundant content of anthophyllite (a mineralcharacterized by radiating bundles of needlelikecrystals) occurs in a unique locality on SantaCatalina Island (see also Weide 1973).

Hollowware soapstone vessels (ollas andbowls) were documented by some of the region’searliest antiquarians (e.g., Abbott 1879), whoeven noted distinct differences in soapstone ves-sel shapes, including ollas of “globular form,with a narrow opening on the top” and bowlsof “Mexican form, with a wide opening” (Schu-macher 1879:117). Others called attention tosoapstone griddles (“frying pans” or comales)—flat pieces of soapstone used for heating fooddirectly over a fire (Hudson and Blackburn1983:196). These objects have a range of stylisticattributes, such as rounded edges, an incised linenear the edge of the cooking surface, a protrudinglip around the rim, and handles on one or bothsides. Many of these griddles exhibit a straight,conical, or biconical hole or holes drilled at oneend for the insertion of a stick to remove it fromthe fire.

Romani’s (1982) pioneering study definedollas, bowls, and comales and synthesizedresearch on the role of soapstone cooking waresin the Chumash socioeconomic sphere. However,she conducted no diachronic analysis to showwhether or how these artifact types changedover time. In a later study, King (2011:300)illustrated that soapstone ollas recovered fromChumash mortuary contexts remained relativelyconsistent from the Protohistoric period onward.Nonetheless, his typological classification doesnot show the appearance of the 24 different kindsof soapstone bowls identified by Wlodarski andLarson (1976:43) at Mission San Buenaventura.Furthermore, we do not know when or howsoapstone griddles were introduced. Hudson andBlackburn (1983:196) suggest that these objectswere probably not used until after Spanishcontact; however, I have identified soapstonegriddles in sites as early as the Middle period


in the Malibu Prehistoric Cemetery (CA-LAN-264).

Diachronic analyses of soapstone vessels inChumash mortuary contexts have identified asudden increase in their use in the Protohistoricperiod (Late period 2a, AD 1500–1650), follow-ing a lack of use that lasted nearly 400 years(King 1990:90). This boom is also evidencedby the intensified Late period 2a/b quarrying ofmicaceous soapstone outcrops on Santa CatalinaIsland (Howard 2000; Schumacher 1879; Wlo-darski 1979; Wlodarski et al. 1984). Some ofthese quarries show evidence of the use of metaltools—a technology introduced by the Spanish.Some even reveal how bowls and ollas weremanufactured: by cutting the object out of thesource rock and detaching the chipped formof a pot, with its bottom facing up. Gamble(2015) notes that soapstone vessel manufactureincreased after the introduction of metal tools andsuggests that ollas, especially large, decoratedones, were associated with feasting events, bothbefore and during the Mission period.

Previous archaeological investigations havelaid the groundwork for the study of soapstonecooking vessel production, use, and recyclingover time and across space in California. Thisstudy investigates soapstone ollas, bowls, andgriddles from numerous archaeological sites andtracks vertical and horizontal change and conti-nuity in Mission period soapstone vessel use.

Materials and Methods

Preliminary analysis started with a systematicexamination of soapstone artifacts from fourarchaeological assemblages: Medea Creek (CA-LAN-243), Mission San Buenaventura (CA-VEN-87), Mission La Purísima (CA-SBA-520),and Cemetery D of Helo’ (CA-SBA-46). Toidentify the source of soapstone acquisition, theraw material was visually inspected for granularinclusions, mineralogical components, and colorvariability with the aid of a 3-inch magnify-ing glass with 5× magnification. After theseinitial visual inspections, a Dino-Lite Premier(AM4113ZT4) 400× polarizing digital micro-scope enhanced the mineralogical compositionof these objects, which aided with the identifica-tion of specific minerals. The granular structure,

mineralogical characteristics, and color variabil-ity within each assemblage were then comparedbetween assemblages. Previous reports describ-ing the mineralogical characteristics of soap-stone sources were used to identify acquisitionlocations.

Each artifact was examined for use-wear andstyle (i.e., etching, buffed edges, and rim type).Particular attention was dedicated to analyzingthe object’s primary use (how it was origi-nally designed) and secondary use (a later addi-tion to its primary function), following Adams(2002:21–24). After these initial descriptions,each soapstone object was classified as an olla,bowl, or griddle. Ollas have restricted orificesthat taper in at the shoulder, while bowls featurewide, unrestricted orifices, and griddles haveflat or curved bodies with at least four anglededges (Figure 2). Unfortunately, the minimumnumber of vessels for griddles was indeter-minable because these objects break into unevenfragments that do not allow for an accuratecount of individual specimens. Consequently,the ratio of griddles to ollas and bowls couldnot be determined; therefore, I only focus onthe stylistic attributes of griddles over time andacross space.

Late Period 2a/b (AD 1542–1782)

Data from the Late period 2a/b assemblage werecollected from Medea Creek (CA-LAN-243) inthe Santa Monica Mountains, which is the largestand best-documented Late/Protohistoric inlandChumash cemetery (King 1982). Bone samplesfrom two different burials yielded radiocarbondates of 345 ± 50 BP and 530 ± 60 BP (King1982:34). These data, along with shell beadseriation and obsidian hydration dating, suggestthat the Medea Creek cemetery was used forabout 200–300 years, from AD 1450 to no laterthan AD 1785 (King 1982:32–35).

Mission Period (AD 1782–1833) MissionAssemblages

The first mission assemblage comes from Mis-sion San Buenaventura (CA-VEN-87), whichwas founded in AD 1782 and is in Ventura,California. This mission played a chief role in theconversion of Channel Islanders, especially the


Figure 2. (a) Olla (Cat. No. 524–1107, Fowler Museum at the University of California, Los Angeles, ArchaeologicalCollections Facility); (b) bowl (Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Phelan Collection); (c) comal (Cat. No. 1–32195; Phoebe Hearst Museum of Anthropology, Berkeley, California). (Color online)

Chumash living on Santa Cruz Island, due to itsproximity to some of the island’s largest villages(Johnson 1982:97). The mission grounds wereextensively investigated under the direction ofRoberta Greenwood, and many major structureswere uncovered, including Indian family housing(Loci 1–4) and a segment of the first establishedchurch (Locus 5).

The second mission soapstone assemblagecomes from Mission La Purísima (CA-SBA-519 and CA-SBA-520; Deetz 1963), which wasfounded in 1813 in Lompoc, California. Of theentire neophyte population at the mission, onlyabout 50 individuals lived inside a designatedarea referred to as the Indian family apartments.These residents likely represented baptized Indi-ans who fully accepted Christianity and othercolonial customs, thereby achieving a degree ofstature in the mission community (Farris andJohnson 1999:8). Deetz (1963) exposed sevenrooms in the apartments, with hearth featuresand in situ artifacts associated with domesticactivities.

Mission Period (AD 1782–1833) RancheríaAssemblage

The last historic site used in this study, CA-SBA-46, is located in what is today Goleta,California. The historic village, referred to asHelo’, and its associated cemetery are approx-imately 56 km southeast of Mission La Purísimaand 51.5 km west-northwest from Mission SanBuenaventura. The site is only about 11 km fromthe presidio of Santa Bárbara (established in AD

1782) and Mission Santa Bárbara (establishedin AD 1786). The soapstone assemblage studiedhere was excavated from a section of the historicvillage denoted Cemetery D, which was onlyused during the mission era (AD 1782–1833;Gamble 2008; Glassow, Johnson, and Erlandson1986; Orr 1943:10). In 1875, Henry C. Yarrowand his party excavated one portion of thecemetery, and in 1930, Ronald Olson excavatedanother portion, recording hundreds of burialsand associated artifacts (Olson 1930:11; Putnamet al. 1879).

Comparing Assemblages

These assemblages represent both mortuary anddomestic contexts. A study based solely on mor-tuary goods was not possible, as Indian burialsinside Mission La Purísima—the most exten-sively excavated mission cemetery in the SantaBarbara Channel region—lacked grave goods(Humphrey 1965:189). Additionally, existingsoapstone collections from domestic sites out-side the mission derive from mixed Late periodoccupations, representing both the Protohistoricand Mission periods; therefore, a horizontaland vertical analysis to compare with Missionassemblages was not possible. Although thereis a risk in comparing domestic and mortuaryassemblages, vessels from both contexts showevidence of multiple cooking events (i.e., thickfood residue on the interior, oxidation on theexterior, heavy soot buildup on the base) and thusstill inform us about foodways and the use ofsoapstone in everyday life.


Table 2. Frequency of Ollas and Bowls in Repositories with Chumash Collections.

Site (Number) or Region Time Period Ollas Bowls Location(s)a

S’axpilil (CA-SBA-60) Late 2 0 RAECAwhay (CA-VEN-132) Late 4 0 RAECBurton Mound (CA-SBA-27) Late 2 0 NMAI, SBMNHSunset Valley (CA-SBA-104) Late 1 0 SBMNHDos Pueblos (CA-SBA-78) Late 18 5 SBMNH, NMNHSalisbury Potrero (CA-SBA-1279) Late 4 0 SBMNHCoches Prietos (CA-SCRI-1) Late 4 0 SBMNHCieneguitas (CA-SBA-37) Late 1 0 YPMNHCA-SBA-121 Late 1 0 SBMNHSoule Park site (CA-VEN-61) Late 1 0 SBMNHLa Patera (CA-SBA-46) Late 1 0 YPMNHSanta Barbara County (general) 24 0 SBMNH, NMNHSisquoc River 2 0 NMNHSanta Inez River 5 1 NMNHCuyama Reservoir 1 0 NMNHSan Miguel Island 1 0 NMNHSanta Rosa Island 4 0 NMNHCarpinteria 1 0 SBMNHLos Angeles County (general) 1 1 SBMNH, NMNHChumashb 24 3 RAEC, NMAI, SBMNH, YPMNHTotal 102 10

aRAEC = University of California, Santa Barbara, Repository for Archaeological and Ethnographic Collections; NMAI =National Museum of the American Indian; SBMNH = Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History; NMNH = NationalMuseum of Natural History; YPMNH = Yale Peabody Museum of Natural History.bItems labeled as Chumash in collections but with no specific provenience.

Due to the nature of the two distinct contextsstudied here, I have also incorporated data gath-ered from six different repositories across NorthAmerica that house a total of 112 hollowwaresoapstone vessels (Table 2). These artifacts wererecovered from numerous archaeological exca-vations over the course of the last century andwere unearthed from mixed Late period archae-ological sites within the Santa Barbara Channelarea and some unknown contexts within theChumash region. Together, these data provide themost comprehensive sample available for doc-umenting traditional Chumash patterns outsidethe mission during the Protohistoric and Missionperiods.

Results

Acquisition

All the objects studied here consist of coarse-grained (grain size >1 mm, after Rosenthaland Williams 1992:221), silicate-rich rocks (e.g.,talc-schist, chlorite-schist, chlorite-talc-schist);

however, there are differences in the qualityof the raw material among the sites in termsof mineralogical components and other dis-tinctive features. Among the objects studiedfrom the Protohistoric period and the historicranchería, for instance, the Dino-Lite microscopeshowed evidence of crystal-like minerals thatwere densely compact (Figure 3). To the nakedeye, the aggregation of these minerals givesthe object a distinct silvery, crystalline appear-ance, resembling sources originating from SantaCatalina Island rather than those identified in theinterior Yokuts area (Tulare County) or SierraPelona schists (King 1982:127). These crystalsresemble an abundance of anthophyllite that isknown to exist in unique localities on SantaCatalina Island (Romani 1982:31). The color ofthe soapstone within one artifact can range frompale red (10R6/2), to pinkish gray (7.5YR7/2),to dark gray (2.5Y4/1). Finally, the fracturedareas of these soapstone pieces were smooth androunded.

The raw material used to fashion cookingvessels in the mission displayed more densely


Figure 3. (a) Medea Creek olla showing possible evidence of the mineral anthophyllite and (b) Mission La Purísimabowl with no crystals present. Photos taken at the Fowler Museum at the University of California, Los Angeles,Archaeological Collections Facility and La Purísima Mission State Historic Park Curation Facility, Lompoc, California.(Color online)

concentrated, medium, sheetlike minerals, whichsuggests a source that has more schist in itsgranular composition. These objects also lack theaggregation and abundance of fine crystals. Thus,the distinct crystalline appearance and presenceof needlelike crystals under the Dino-Lite micro-scope were absent within all the artifacts sampledfrom the Mission assemblages. While the rawmaterial was interleaved with what appears tobe quartz, these inclusions were more dispersedrather than aggregated. The primary colors notedon these artifacts were a gray (2.5Y5/1) andvery dark gray (2.5Y3/1). Along the fracturedsurfaces, which broke in blocky structures ratherthan smoothed ones, isolated pieces of bronze-colored mica inclusions as big as 6 mm werepresent, suggesting that this material also camefrom a source rich with mica.

These preliminary results suggest that dur-ing the Protohistoric period the soapstone wasprocured from Santa Catalina Island; however,a shift in soapstone acquisition likely occurredinside the missions as new quarries wereaccessed. Romani (1982:163–171) documentedat least three “chlorite-schist,” “steatite,” and“talc-schist” sources near Mission La Purísima

and Mission San Buenaventura. These includeSanta Cruz Island near the vicinity of ValleyAnchorage, near Mt. Piños in Santa BarbaraCounty, and even in the southern San JoaquinValley in Lindsay, Tulare County. Alternatively,there may have been different localities on SantaCatalina Island that were used to produce mis-sion cooking vessels. Further analytic testingis necessary to determine the exact location ofthese materials; however, some of these sourcesmay no longer be visible or available for studydue to recent construction and mine and quarryoperations.

Olla, Bowl, and Griddle Descriptions

All the ollas from the four soapstone assemblagesfeature orifice diameters ranging from 10 to18 cm and display full, globular bodies. Thisvessel shape has long been recognized as idealfor boiling foods for long periods, as excess watercould not boil over the top of the small openingand food could therefore remain hydrated (Rice1987:240–241). Each vessel also displayed a thinrim that gradually increased in thickness towarda bulbous base, which suggests that the ollaswere positioned over the cooking fire with some


Figure 4. Examples of different etching styles on soapstone ollas and bowls: (a) Medea Creek olla (Cat. No. 524–1102);(b) Medea Creek olla (Cat. No. 524–1103); (c) Medea Creek olla (Cat. No. 534-316); (d) Mission La Purísima olla(Cat. No. 147–1714; photo by Shyra Liguori); (e) Mission San Buenaventura bowl (Cat. No. v-87-5501); (f) MissionLa Purísima bowl (found during a 2017 archaeological survey; photo by Barbara Tejeda). All other photos taken bythe author at the Fowler Museum at the University of California, Los Angeles, Archaeological Collections Facility andthe Albinger Museum, Ventura, California. (Color online)

form of support (Rice 1987:242). The principaluse-wear evident on all the ollas was made upof heavy soot buildup on the lower and middleportions of the vessel body, suggesting that theirprimary use and function was cooking. Thick,well-preserved food residue also adhered to mostof the ollas’ basal interiors, further attestingto their use for long-term cooking. Regardingstyle, the ollas exhibit characteristics such asan upward-protruding lip, an incised line aroundthe orifice to distinguish a rim, and incised linesin the shape of Vs and Xs along the shoulder(Figure 4).

The bowl rims are much thicker than therims of the ollas, and the orifices are muchwider. Indeed, box plots reveal a statisticallysignificant difference in the rims and orifices ofthese two artifact classes (Figure 5). The bowlvessels gradually increase in thickness toward aflat base that joins the vessel wall at an angle; thefunction of this design suggests that cooking wasdone on a flat, stable surface (Adams 2002:218).The shape of these vessels suggests that the foodscooked were not boiled for long periods but,rather, simmered at lower temperatures (Linton

1944). The open form of these bowls would havefacilitated stirring and the frequent addition andremoval of contents (Rice 1987:241). In fact, theprimary use-wear evident on the bowls is carbonsooting, as identified on the vessel exterior nearthe bottom and middle portions of the base,suggesting that they functioned primarily forcooking food. However, the lack of residue inthese bowls reveals that they were not used forlong-term boiling, as was the case with ollas.Regarding decoration, most bowls are plain,while others display incising in the form of Vs orXs on the rim or horizontally protruding lips. Onebowl even displayed a handle on the shoulder.

The griddles come in a variety of shapes,ranging from triangular to diamond and ovu-lar to rectangular. Some griddles were madein a rather crude fashion, while others displaystylistic attributes such as rounded edges and aprotruding lip or handle(s). The principal use-wear among them is sooting along the outeredges and on one side of the griddle; some foodresidue and grease stains are occasionally presenton the other side. These attributes suggest thattheir primary function was for heating solid foods


Figure 5. Box plots showing statistical differences in (a) rim thickness and (b) orifice size of ollas and bowls.

over a hearth—the hole at the top allowed forthe insertion of a stick or metal rod to move thecomal on, off, and around the fire. However, somegriddles, including the four whole specimensidentified from the historic ranchería of Helo’,lack evidence of sooting and food residue.

Diachronic Change

The Late period 2a/b soapstone assemblage isprimarily composed of ollas (n = 14); only onebowl was identified in the collection. A similarpattern exists at Helo’, located some distancefrom the mission, where there continues to bea higher number of ollas (n = 24) than bowls(n = 7). In fact, the use of ollas in mixedLate period sites occupied outside the missionis striking: 39 ollas and only five bowls wereidentified in extant museum collections withinChumash territory. Moreover, ollas figure promi-nently in collections across the Santa BarbaraCounty area, and they even dominate soapstoneassemblages that lack specific locations in theChumash region. In stark contrast to this patternis the higher frequency of bowls inside themissions. At Mission La Purísima, 13 bowls andonly five ollas are present in the assemblage,and at Mission San Buenaventura, 16 bowls andonly six ollas were identified (Figure 6). Thereis a statistically significant difference (Fisher’s

exact test, p < 0.0001) between the number ofbowls and the number of ollas inside the missionscompared with the native villages of Helo’ andMedea Creek.

Concerning griddles, two prominent patternsare discernible in the Protohistoric and Missionperiod assemblages. First, griddles that display ahigh degree of body curvature and remodificationoccur more often in the Mission period assem-blages than in the Protohistoric period ones. Inthe precolonial assemblage, for instance, onlyone griddle was altered from a bowl or olla, butat Mission La Purísima, at least eight griddlesappear to have been shaped from hollowwarevessels—some even display a portion of the rimfrom the olla or bowl from which they wererefashioned. At Mission San Buenaventura, asmany as 53 soapstone fragments were describedas displaying secondary modifications (Wlo-darski and Larson 1976:51). The refashionedgriddles have a heavy schist content and aremuch thicker, resembling mission bowls ratherthan Santa Catalina Island soapstone ollas, whichsuggests that they were recycled from bowlsproduced in the mission. Finally, the griddleshave traits that show greater elaboration and morestylized features later in time. At the Missionperiod sites studied here, griddles are primarilycomposed of large, rectangular slabs with a


Figure 6. Frequency of bowls and ollas among four sites.

Figure 7. Different styles of soapstone griddles: (a–b) Medea Creek; (c–d) Mission La Purísima; (e) Mission SanBuenaventura. Photos taken at the Fowler Museum at the University of California, Los Angeles, ArchaeologicalCollections Facility; La Purísima Mission State Historic Park Curation Facility, Lompoc, California; and the AlbingerMuseum, Ventura, California. (Color online)

distinct rim etched into a well-defined edge orslightly upward-facing rim. Projecting handleswere also present in the mission assemblages(Figure 7). However, in the Protohistoric perioda variety of shapes (i.e., triangular, diamond,subrectangular, ovular) were noted, and some ofthese objects feature rough, unfinished edges.

Discussion

Acquisition, Production, and Recycling

The patterns identified in the raw materials insidethe missions may have occurred as a result ofchanging procurement practices that emerged


due to destabilized trade networks extendingfrom the Channel Islands to the mainland. By1803, many islanders had left their native villagesto join the missions, and between AD 1814 and1817, the Northern Channel Islands were nearlydevoid of native peoples (Johnson 1982:67–68).The Southern Channel Islands went throughsimilar disturbances: by 1819, Santa CatalinaIsland’s native population was gone (Strudwick2013). This suggests that the mission systemexerted a major impact upon Channel Island traderoutes and that island peoples were experiencingdrastic change by the time the second MissionLa Purísima was established in 1813. Soapstonesources identified by Romani (1982), such as thearea near Mt. Piños in Santa Barbara Countyand the southern San Joaquin Valley in Lindsay,Tulare County, would have provided alternativeprocurement places. The source identified nearMt. Piños is certainly much closer. For instance,a straight linear path from Mission La Purísima tothe northwestern point on Santa Catalina Islandnear Airport in the Sky stretches about 220km; from Mission San Buenaventura, this samepoint is about 112 km away. However, Mt. Piñosis only about 112 km away from Mission LaPurísima and about 64 km away from MissionSan Buenaventura. Alternatively, the soapstonesource from Lindsay in Tulare County mayhave been exploited. King (1982:127) specif-ically distinguished this source in the Yokutsarea as a quarry site that was distinctly differ-ent from soapstone sources on Santa CatalinaIsland due to its heavy schist-like content. Thedifferences identified here may be a result ofindigenous procurement from these two distinctlocations.

While previous archaeological investigationsfound that soapstone vessels were made nearprocurement places on Santa Catalina Island,more soapstone artifacts displaying sequentialsecondary modifications, miscellaneous soap-stone pieces, and unidentifiable vessel frag-ments are found inside mission spaces comparedwith Late period 2a/b assemblages and outly-ing rancherías. For instance, at Mission SanBuenaventura, Wlodarski and Larson (1976:57–58) show that recycled soapstone objects andvessels associated with food preparation (i.e.,bowls, comales, and ollas) increased over time,

based on raw counts from 0 to 180 cm. Theauthors (1976:59) also found twice as muchsoapstone as mission pottery, as represented bypercentages compared with the total numberof artifacts from 0 to 100 cm. At Mission LaPurísima, Deetz (1963) also found that the useof soapstone increased inside the mission. Whencomparing the mission Indian family apartmentswith Alamo Pintado—a historic Chumash vil-lage located 40 km from the mission—Deetz(1963:187) found more than twice the frequencyof soapstone artifacts, illustrating that this mate-rial type was used more intensively in the missionthan in surrounding villages.

The shift in soapstone acquisition, produc-tion, and recycling represents a reconfigurationof social, economic, and political activities, aswell as new practices that emerged inside themission space. The imposed colonial structureoperated such that indigenous peoples couldnot leave Franciscan lands without permission,and they had limited freedom to choose theiroccupation (Lightfoot 2005:66–68). However,mission residents could have elevated their socialstatus and been promoted to jobs with greaterresponsibility by accepting colonial lifeways.Soapstone bowl producers may have been indige-nous peoples who worked their way up thehierarchical mission social system and were thusguided by social customs related to status andidentity. The decision to produce bowls insteadof ollas not only catered to Spanish-influencedcuisine and culinary practices but also fosteredthe construction of new indigenous identities bycreating distinctions in practice across space.Yet these soapstone artifacts were not madeusing ceramic or metal resources; nor werethey imported from colonial seaports such asSan Blas. These bowls were fashioned frommaterials used by indigenous peoples in the SantaBarbara Channel region for thousands of years,illustrating that these changes in practice mappedonto preexisting forms of knowledge and culturalvalues. Some of the bowls even display etchingon the rims, such as the series of Vs and Xs, rec-ognized on ollas in the Protohistoric period andat the outlying ranchería. The symbolic impor-tance of these historically situated materials andstyles inside the mission suggests that indigenousidentities were transformed and redeployed in


ways that allowed the Chumash to adapt to andnegotiate new colonial situations on their ownterms.

Consumption and Foodways

The change identified in the soapstone industryinside the mission also demonstrates a shift inculinary practices. Bowls were used to simmerdifferent types of foods frequently; their openform could facilitate the serving of foods forthe mission community, and their flat basessuggest that they were cooked on level surfacesin specialized cooking areas. Thick-pasted stewsand soups influenced by early Spanish cuisinewould also have been ideal meals to cook inthese vessels. For instance, at El Presidio de SanFrancisco, Voss (2008:248) has found that two ofthe most prominent hollowware cooking vesselswere bowl-shaped. The first type had a slightlyrestricted orifice and a low, flared collar, while theother bowl was shallow, with flaring rims. Theformer may have been used to simmer cereals,beans, and meats, and the latter could have beenused to thicken rice and bean dishes. Ethno-graphic records in the Santa Barbara Channelarea support these archaeological interpretationsand provide insight into the types of foods thatwould have been cooked in soapstone bowls.One informant told the ethnographer John P.Harrington that early Hispanic families woulduse soapstone vessels to cook beans; in a supple-mentary illustration, the vessels are depicted asbeing placed upon beams built above a hearth inan outdoor cooking area (Hudson and Blackburn1983:Figure 138-1).

The diachronic study of griddles before andduring the Mission period offers additionalinsight into the shift in foodways inside themission. In the Protohistoric assemblage, thegriddles are small, irregularly shaped (i.e., dia-mond, triangular, subrectangular, or ovular), andcrudely made, often displaying rough, unfinishededges. This variability in size and design maysuggest that these objects served multiple pur-poses. On the one hand, Chartkoff (1998:174)suggests that griddles may have been used tocook flat cakes made from leached acorn mealor to mill hard seeds. On the other hand, King(1982:439) notes that these objects were used aslids to keep out dirt; they were used as rock cairns

that could have served as markers for familyburial plots; and some of these objects mayhave even been ritually “killed.” Inside the mis-sion space, however, griddles with food residuebecome more formalized, exhibiting “comfortfeatures” (sensu Adams 2002:19) such as pro-jecting rims and handles with well-burnishedsides and upward-lifted edges, making the toolsmore comfortable to hold. These changes mayalso suggest a functional shift regarding the foodsthey were used to cook. For instance, numerousethnographic accounts describe the primary useof comales as reserved for the cooking of tortillas(Hudson and Blackburn 1983:196–197; King1982:440; Romani 1982). The stylistic attributesof soapstone griddles identified inside the mis-sions (i.e., opposing rim handles and thick,burnished edges with elevated rims) may havebeen influenced by Mexican comales, suggestingthat the griddles’ primary function was to cooktortillas.

Though this change in soapstone vessel classmay have been related to a shift in diet, thesepractices also suggest the creation of new socialidentities and status hierarchies shaped insidethe mission space. As has been demonstrated,food and its associated activities (i.e., prepara-tion, processing, and storing) can be a highlyvisible act, and they often play a prominentrole in identity politics (Mintz and Du Bois2002). In historical documents, Franciscans wereclear about the distinctions between categories offood considered acceptable for eating, remarkingupon the “pagan” ways of indigenous Californi-ans, who lived off the land and ate what MotherNature provided (Geiger and Meighan 1976). Atypical Spanish diet considered acceptable forhuman consumption consisted of meats fromdomesticated animals and cultivated crops, and itwas these foods that the colonial community usedto support itself. Mission Indians who followedthese foodway practices may have been rewardedwith social mobility inside the mission. However,traditional food gathering practices were notaltogether eliminated. Popper (2016) reports ona range of plants gathered by native Californiansand colonists in colonial institutions throughoutthe state. In fact, at Mission Vieja de la Purísima,which operated between AD 1787 and 1812, themajority (at least 80%) of fruits and seeds were


Figure 8. Chumash earthenware olla from the historic Chumash village of S’axpilil (CA-SBA-60). Photo taken at theUniversity of California, Santa Barbara, Repository for Archaeological and Ethnographic Collections (color online).

from nondomesticated plants (Popper 2016:18).Traditional gathering practices likely continuedto some extent at the missions studied hereas well; nevertheless, the consumption of wildfoods in distinct ways clearly distinguished thefoodways of mission residents from traditionalculinary practices, suggesting that these newcooking strategies symbolized indigenous ideo-logical affiliations associated with the missioncommunity.

Teasing Apart the Nuances

Though a change in the soapstone industry didoccur during the Mission period, some practicesalso illustrate continuity by way of reconnectionwith traditional practices and social memories.For instance, throughout the Mission period andinside the mission space, the olla continued todisplay traditional elements first recognized atthe Protohistoric site of Medea Creek. The mostprominent style of etching included a seriesof Xs and Vs along the shoulder or rim andan incised line to distinguish a lip. Inside LaPurísima Mission, this design style was iden-tified on one olla in Room 3 of the Indianfamily housing, and the other was found in theapartment’s associated trash pit. These cooking

vessels may represent heirlooms imbued withsocial and symbolic significance. Indeed, oneof Harrington’s (1928:178) Chumash informantsnoted that soapstone vessels were handed downin a family for generations. The continued useof these ollas throughout the Mission periodmay have facilitated social discourses reconnect-ing Chumash peoples to their deep ancestralpast.

Further evidence demonstrating the impor-tance of the olla to the Chumash can be foundin its form, which was created in a variety ofmaterials including clay, wooden bowls, andbaskets produced throughout the Mission period.Nowhere is this phenomenon more apparentthan in an olla-shaped ceramic vessel excavatedfrom Burial 53 (U8) in the historically occupiedvillage of S’axpilil (CA-SBA-60; Figure 8; Crab-tree and Warren 1977). The earthenware vesselwas hand-molded in globular form and displaysa restricted, plain-rimmed mouth. The study ofdiagnostic pottery in colonial outposts through-out California, such as San Antonio de Padua,illustrates that most earthenware vessels in thesecolonial establishments were not ollas but, rather,bowls, jars, and cooking pots. Many of the latterdisplay everted rims and opposing strap handles


(Costello 2014:72–73). This, however, is not thecase with the Chumash pottery vessel from CA-SBA-60, which features a restricted orifice anda plain design. Because ceramic materials werenot a primary medium with which to fashionvessels in the Santa Barbara Channel regionuntil the Spanish arrived, this pottery jar mayprovide a glimpse into the individual negotiationof Chumash identity between the past and thepresent and the ways in which ollas took onnew social symbolism shared through collectivememory.

Griddles, too, changed during the Missionperiod, both inside and outside the mission space.At Helo’, griddles display characteristics resem-bling mission assemblages, including incisedlines around the edges, distinctly thick rims, anda much larger size than what was recognized inthe Protohistoric assemblage. This pattern wasidentified not only at the ranchería of Helo’ butalso in Mission period sites throughout the SantaBarbara Channel area. One example comes fromthe historic village of Sailimihi, CA-SRI-40, onSanta Rosa Island. It was excavated by PhilipMills Jones, who, in 1901, noted the presence ofglass beads in the historic cemetery (see Kennett2005:99–100). Among at least 13 griddles, alldisplayed characteristics of formal, burnishedrims and large sizes or elements that suggestthey were modified from ollas or bowls. Whileit may be that the people occupying this historicvillage emphasized the cooking of tortillas, thereis no evidence to support such a claim. Foodresidue from historic-period sites on the NorthernChannel Islands suggests that dietary patternswere relatively consistent throughout the lateHolocene and mainly involved locally availableflora and fauna, especially maritime foodstuffs(see Arnold 2001; Kennett 2005; Rick et al.2005). Alternatively, Koerper and colleagues(2011) have found that many remodified comaleswere incorporated into the mortuary/mourningarea in the Gabrieliño (Tongva) historic villageof CA-LAN-62 and were used as funerary andritual offerings. These Mission period comales,not being associated with the consumption oftortillas, may have taken on a different meaningamong the Chumash, as they were incorporatedinto ceremonial spheres and used for ritualpurposes.

Conclusion

In following the soapstone industry diachron-ically and across the colonial landscape, thisstudy identified an abrupt and significant shiftin the production, recycling, and use of bowlsand comales inside the mission space. Thesedata suggest that there existed a combination ofchanges in menu and production specialization inthe mission related to the creation of new socialidentities and the enhanced status of missionIndians. Outside the mission, however, while thecontinued use of ollas demonstrates that tradi-tional culinary practices endured, the Chumashinscribed Mexican-influenced comales with newmeaning by incorporating them into ceremonialspheres. The artifacts studied here illustrate thatwhether inside or outside the mission, local peo-ples adapted to new colonial circumstances usingtheir own system of meanings and values, whichallowed them to survive and persevere in new anddifferent ways throughout the Mission period.It is only by examining actual practices andby addressing the ways in which these objectswere used, over time and across space, that onecan reveal the complex ways indigenous peoplescreatively negotiated their identity in new socialenvironments using deeply rooted historical andcultural values.

Acknowledgments. I would like to express my thanks toGregory Wilson for his insightful discussions, which sig-nificantly contributed to this article, and Bob Kelly for hishelp, as well as the thoughtful comments of six anonymousreviewers of an earlier draft of this manuscript. I am alsograteful to Lynn Gamble, John Johnson, Stuart Smith, BrianBarbier, and Mikael Fauvelle for their contributions to earlierversions of this manuscript. Numerous people assisted mewith accessing soapstone vessels, including Freddie Romero,Natasha Johnson, Shyra Liguori, Barbara Tejada, WendyTeeter, Torben Rick, Roger Colten, and Sarah Kerchusky.Also, thanks go to Don Van Dorn for help with the Chumashmap and Albert Thomas for help with the Spanish abstract.

Data Availability Statement. The Medea Creek (CA-LAN-243) soapstone assemblage was located at the FowlerMuseum at the University of California, Los Angeles, underACC 524 but has since been repatriated. The MissionSan Buenaventura (CA-VEN-87) collection is stored at theAlbinger Museum, the Ventura County Museum, an off-site storage facility in Ventura, and a storage unit on theproperty of Moorpark Community College operated by theVentura County Archaeological Society. The accession num-ber assigned for this collection is v-87. The artifacts studiedfrom the Mission La Purísima (CA-SBA-520) collections are


stored on the grounds of Mission La Purísima under ACC155 and 147. Finally, the soapstone assemblage from Helo’(CA-SBA-46) can be found at the Smithsonian Institution’sNational Museum of Natural History’s Museum SupportCenter under ACC 6283 and the Phoebe A. Hearst Museumof Anthropology at the University of California, Berkeley,under ACC 633.

References Cited

Abbott, Charles C.1879 Steatite Cooking Pots, Plates, and Food Vessels. In

Archaeology, edited by Frederick W. Putnam, pp. 93–116. Report upon Geographical Surveys West of theOne Hundredth Meridian, Vol. VII, George M. Wheeler,supervisor, US Army, Office of the Chief of Engineers,Washington, DC.

Adams, Jenny L.2002 Ground Stone Analysis: A Technological Approach.

University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Arnold, Jeanne E. (editor)

2001 The Origins of a Pacific Coast Chiefdom: TheChumash of the Channel Islands. University of UtahPress, Salt Lake City.

Basgall, Mark E., and Delbert L. True1985 Archaeological Investigations in Crowder Canyon,

1973–1984: Excavations at Sites SBr-421B, SBr-421C,SBr-421D, and SBR-713. Submitted to the CaliforniaDepartment of Transportation. Copies available fromArchaeological Information Center, San BernardinoCounty Museum, Redlands, California.

Bettinger, Robert L.2015 Orderly Anarchy: Sociopolitical Evolution in Abo-

riginal California. University of California Press, Oak-land.

Castillo, Edward D.1989 The Native Response to the Colonization of Alta

California. In Columbian Consequences, edited byDavid Hurst Thomas, pp. 377–394. Archaeologicaland Historical Perspectives on the Spanish BorderlandsWest, Vol. 1. Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington,DC.

Chartkoff, Joseph J.1998 Archaeology of Prehistoric Native America: An

Encyclopedia. Garland, New York.Costello, Julia G.

2014 A Typology of Mission Pottery: Drawings andDescriptions of Low-Fire Earthenwares from MissionSan Antonio de Padua, California. In Ceramic Pro-duction in Early Hispanic California, edited by Rus-sell K. Skowronek, M. James Blackman, and RonaldL. Bishop, pp. 69–92. University Press of Florida,Gainesville.

Crabtree, Robert H., and Claude N. Warren1977 A Chumash Pottery Jar. Journals of California

Anthropology 4:118–122.Deagan, Kathleen

1998 Transculturation and Spanish American Ethnogen-esis: The Archaeological Legacy of the Quincentenary.In Studies in Culture Contact: Interaction, CultureChange, and Archaeology, edited by James G. Cusick,pp. 126–145. Occasional Papers No. 25. Center forArchaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois Univer-sity, Carbondale.

Deetz, James F.1963 Archaeological Investigations at La Purísima

Mission. Archaeological Survey Annual Report1962–1963:161–244. University of California, LosAngeles.

Díaz-Andreu G., Margarita, and Sam Lucy2005 Introduction. In The Archaeology of Identity:

Approaches to Gender, Age, Status, Ethnicity and Reli-gion, edited by Margarita Díaz-Andreu G., Sam Lucy,Stasa Babic, and David N. Edwards, pp. 1–12. Rout-ledge, London.

Dietler, Michael2010 Archaeologies of Colonialism: Consumption,

Entanglement, and Violence in Ancient MediterraneanFrance. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Eddy, John J.2013 The Early Middle Period Stone Bead Interdepen-

dence Network. Master’s thesis, Department of Anthro-pology, California State University, Northridge.

Farris, Glenn J.2014 Depriving God and the King of the Means of Char-

ity: Early Nineteenth-Century Missionaries’ Views ofCattle Ranchers near Mission La Purísima, California.In Indigenous Landscapes and Spanish Missions: NewPerspectives from Archaeology and Ethnohistory, editedby Lee M. Panich and Tsim D. Schneider, pp. 135–153.University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Farris, Glenn J., and John R. Johnson1999 Prominent Indian Families at Mission La Purísima

Concepción as Identified in Baptismal, Marriage,and Burial Records. Occasional Papers No. 3. Cal-ifornia Mission Studies Association, Santa Barbara,California.

Ferris, Neal, Rodney Harrison, and Michael V. Wilcox(editors)

2015 Rethinking Colonial Pasts through Archaeology.Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Gamble, Lynn H.2008 The Chumash World at European Contact: Power,

Trade, and Feasting among Complex Hunter-Gatherers.University of California Press, Berkeley.

2015 Subsistence Practices and Feasting Rites: Chu-mash Identity after European Colonization. HistoricalArchaeology 49(2):115–135.

Gardner, Andrew2011 Paradox and Praxis in the Archaeology of Iden-

tity. In Identity Crisis: Archaeological Perspectives onSocial Identity, edited by Lindsay Amundsen-Meyer,Nicole Engel, and Sean Pickering, pp. 11–26. Universityof Calgary, Alberta.

Geiger, Maynard J., and Clement W. Meighan1976 As the Padres Saw Them: California Indian Life and

Customs as Reported by the Franciscan Missionaries,1813–1815. Santa Barbara Mission Archive Library,Santa Barbara, California.

Glassow, Michael A., John R. Johnson, and Jon M. Erlandson1986 Mescalitan Island Archaeology and the Canal-

iño Period of Santa Barbara Channel Prehistory. InSymposium: A New Look at Some Old Sites: Papersfrom the Symposium Organized by Francis A. Riddell,edited by Francis A. Riddell, pp. 9–20. Archives ofCalifornia Prehistory No. 6. Coyote Press, Salinas,California.

Gosden, Chris2001 Postcolonial Archaeology: Issues of Culture, Iden-

tity, and Knowledge. In Archaeological Theory Today,


edited by Ian Hodder, pp. 241–261. Polity Press, Cam-bridge.

Haas, Lisbeth1995 Conquest and Historical Identities in California,

1769–1936. University of California Press, Berkeley.2014 Saints and Citizens: Indigenous Histories of Colo-

nial Missions and Mexican California. University ofCalifornia Press, Berkeley.

Hackel, Steven W.2005 Children of the Coyote, Missionaries of Saint Fran-

cis: Indian Spanish Relations in Colonial California1769–1850. Omohundro Institute of Early AmericanHistory and Culture, University of North Carolina Press,Chapel Hill.

Harrington, John P.1928 The Mission Indians of Southern California.

In Smithsonian Institution’s Exploration and Field-Work of the Smithsonian Institution in 1927, pp.173–178. Government Printing Office, WashingtonDC.

Heizer, Robert F. (editor)1978 California. Handbook of North American Indians,

Vol. 8, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithso-nian Institution, Washington, DC.

Heizer, Robert F., and Adan E. Treganza1944 Mines and Quarries of the Indians of California.

California Journal of Mines and Geology 40:291–359.Hodos, Tamar

2010 Local and Global Perspectives in the Study of Socialand Cultural Identities. In Material Culture and SocialIdentities in the Ancient World, edited by Shelly Halesand Tamar Hodos, pp. 3–31. Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge.

Hoover, Robert L.1989 Spanish-Native Interaction and Acculturation in

the Alta California Mission. In Archaeological andHistorical Perspectives on the Spanish BorderlandsWest, edited by David Hurst Thomas, pp. 395–406.Columbian Consequences, Vol. 1. Smithsonian InstitutePress, Washington, DC.

Howard, Virginia2000 Santa Catalina’s Soapstone Vessels: Production

Dynamics. In Proceedings of the Fifth CaliforniaIslands Symposium, edited by David R. Browne,Kathryn L. Mitchell, and Henry W. Chaney, pp. 598–606. CD-ROM, US Department of the Interior, MineralsManagement Service, Pacific OCS Region, Camarillo,California.

Hudson, Travis, and Thomas C. Blackburn1983 Food Preparation and Shelter. Anthropological

Papers No. 27. The Material Culture of the ChumashInteraction Sphere, Vol. 2, Thomas C. Blackburn, gen-eral editor, Ballena Press, Los Altos, California.

Humphrey, Richard V.1965 The La Purísima Mission Cemetery. Annual Reports

of the University of California Archaeological Survey7:179–192. University of California, Los Angeles.

Insoll, Timothy (editor)2007 The Archaeology of Identities: A Reader. Routledge,

New York.Johnson, John R.

1982 An Ethnohistoric Study of the Island Chumash.Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, Univer-sity of California, Santa Barbara.

2000 Social Responses to Climate Change among theChumash Indians of South-Central California. In TheWay the Wind Blows: Climate, History and Human

Action, edited by Roderick J. McIntosh, Joseph A. Tain-ter, and Susan Keech McIntosh, pp. 301–327. ColumbiaUniversity Press, New York.

Jordan, Kurt A.2009 Colonies, Colonialism, and Cultural Entanglement:

The Archaeology of Postcolumbian Intercultural Rela-tions. In International Handbook of Historical Archae-ology, edited by Teresita Majewski and David Gaimster,pp. 31–49. Springer, New York.

Kennett, Douglas J.2005 The Island Chumash: Behavioral Ecology of a Mar-

itime Society. University of California Press, Berkeley.King, Chester D.

1990 The Evolution of Chumash Society. A ComparativeStudy of Artifacts Used for Social System Maintenancein the Santa Barbara Channel Region before A.D. 1894.Garland, New York.

2011 Overview of the History of American Indians inthe Santa Monica Mountains. Topanga ArchaeologicalConsultants. Submitted to the National Park Service,Pacific West Region, Santa Monica Mountains NationalRecreation Area, Los Angeles, California.

King, Linda B.1982 Medea Creek Cemetery: Late Inland Chumash

Patterns of Social Organization, Exchange, and Warfare.PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Univer-sity of California, Los Angeles.

Koerper, Henry C., Polly A. Peterson, Benjamin R. Vargas,Donn R. Grenda, and Patrick B. Stanton

2011 Mortuary/Mourning Associated, TransverselyGrooved Stone Artifacts from CA-LAN-62: AnotherCase of Sexualization-Sacralization? Pacific CoastArchaeological Society Quarterly 40(2):51–79.

Law Pezzarossi, Heather2014 Assembling Indigeneity: Rethinking Innovation,

Tradition and Indigenous Materiality in a 19th-CenturyNative Toolkit. Journal of Social Archaeology 14:340–360.

Liebmann, Mathew2012 Revolt: An Archaeological History of Pueblo Resis-

tance and Revitalization in 17th Century New Mexico.University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

2015 The Mickey Mouse Kachina and Other “DoubleObjects”: The Hybridity in the Material Culture ofColonial Encounters. Journal of Social Archaeology15:319–341.

Liebmann, Matthew, and Melissa S. Murphy (editors)2011 Enduring Conquests: Rethinking the Archaeology

of Resistance to Spanish Colonialism in the Americas.SAR Press, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Lightfoot, Kent G.2005 Indians, Missionaries, and Merchants: The Legacy

of Colonial Encounters on the California Frontiers.University of California Press, Berkeley.

Linton, Ralph1944 North American Cooking Pots. American Antiquity

9:369–380.McCawley, William

1996 The First Angelinos: The Gabrielino Indians of LosAngeles. Ballena Press, Banning, California.

Milliken, Randall1995 A Time of Little Choice: The Disintegration of Tribal

Culture in the San Francisco Bay Area 1769–1810.Ballena Press, Menlo Park, California.

Mintz, Sidney W., and Christine M. Du Bois2002 The Anthropology of Food and Eating. Annual

Review of Anthropology 31:99–119.


Olson, Ronald R.1930 Chumash Prehistory. University of California Pub-

lications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 28:1–21.

Orr, Phillip C.1943 Archaeology of Mescalitan Island and the Customs

of the Canaliño. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural His-tory Occasional Papers No. 5. Santa Barbara Museumof Natural History, Santa Barbara, California.

Ortiz, Fernando1995 On the Social Phenomenon of “Transculturation”

and Its Importance in Cuba. Reprint. In Cuban Counter-point: Tobacco and Sugar, translated by Harriet de Onís,pp. 97–102. Duke University Press, Durham, NorthCarolina. (Original Spanish edition published in 1940;original translation by Harriet de Onís published in1947, Alfred A. Knopf, New York.)

Panich, Lee M.2013 Archaeologies of Persistence: Reconsidering the

Legacies of Colonialism in Native North America.American Antiquity 78:105–122.

Panich, Lee M., and Tsim D. Schneider2015 Expanding Mission Archaeology: A Landscape

Approach to Indigenous Autonomy in Colonial Cal-ifornia. Journal of Anthropology Archaeology 40:48–58.

Panich, Lee M., and Tsim D. Schneider (editors)2014 Indigenous Landscapes and Spanish Missions:

New Perspectives from Archaeology and Ethnohistory.University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Popper, Virginia S.2016 Change and Persistence: Mission Neophyte Food-

ways at Selected Colonial Alta California Institutions.Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology36:5–25.

Putnam, Frederic W., Charles C. Abbott, Samuel S. Halde-man, Harry C. Yarrow, and Henry W. Henshaw

1879 Archaeological and Ethnographic Collections fromVicinity of Santa Barbara, California from RuinedPueblos of Arizona and New Mexico, and CertainInterior Tribes. In Archaeology, edited by FrederickW. Putnam. Report upon Geographical Surveys Westof the One Hundredth Meridian, Vol. VII, George M.Wheeler, supervisor, US Army, Office of the Chief ofEngineers, Washington, DC.

Rice, Prudence M.1987 Pottery Analysis, a Sourcebook. University of

Chicago Press, Chicago.Rick, Torben C., Jon M. Erlandson, René L. Vellanoweth,

and Todd J. Braje2005 From Pleistocene Mariners to Complex Hunter-

Gatherers: The Archaeology of the California ChannelIslands. Journal of World Prehistory 19:169–228.

Romani, Gwen R.1982 In Search of Soapstone. Master’s thesis, Depart-

ment of Anthropology, California State University,Northridge.

Rosenthal, Jane, and Stephanie L. Williams1992 Some Southern California Soapstone Sources. Pro-

ceedings of the Society for California Archaeology5:219–227.

Schumacher, Paul1878 Ancient Olla Manufactory of Santa Catalina Island,

California. American Naturalist 12:629.

1879 The Method and Manufacture of Soapstone Pots. InArchaeology, edited by Frederick W. Putnam, pp. 117–121. Report upon Geographical Surveys West of theOne Hundredth Meridian, Vol. VII, George M. Wheeler,supervisor, US Army, Office of the Chief of Engineers,Washington, DC.

Silliman, Stephen W.2005 Culture Contact or Colonialism? Challenges in

the Archaeology of Native North America. AmericanAntiquity 70:55–75.

2009 Change and Continuity, Practice and Memory:Native American Persistence in Colonial New England.American Antiquity 74:211–230.

2015 A Requiem for Hybridity? The Problem withFrankensteins, Purees, and Mules. Journal of SocialArchaeology 15:277–198.

Smith, Stuart T.2014 Identity. In The Oxford Handbook of Archaeologi-

cal Theory, edited by Andrew Gardner, Mark Lake,and Ulrike Sommer, pp. 1–19. Oxford University Press,Oxford.

Stein, Gil2005 The Archaeology of Colonial Encounters. SAR

Press, Santa Fe, New Mexico.Strudwick, Ivan H.

2013 The Native Depopulation on Santa Catalina Island.In California’s Channel Islands. The Archaeology ofHuman-Environment Interactions, edited by Christo-pher S. Jazwa and Jennifer E. Perry, pp. 172–189.University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

van Dommelen, Peter1998 On Colonial Grounds: A Comparative Study of

Colonialism and Rural Settlement in First MillenniumBC West Central Sardinia. Archaeological Studies No.2. Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Voss, Barbara2005 From Casta to Californio: Social Identity and the

Archaeology of Culture Contact. American Anthropol-ogist 107:461–474.

2008 The Archaeology of Ethnogenesis: Race and Sexual-ity in Colonial San Francisco. University of CaliforniaPress, Berkeley.

Weide, David L.1973 Earth Science and Archaeology. Society for Califor-

nia Archaeology Newsletter 7(2):8.Wlodarski, Robert J.

1979 Catalina Island Soapstone Manufacture. Journal ofCalifornia and Great Basin Anthropology 1:331–355.

Wlodarski, Robert J., and Daniel A. Larson1976 Soapstone and Indian Missionization: Part II. In The

Changing Faces of Main Street: Ventura Mission PlazaArchaeological Project, edited by Roberta S. Green-wood, pp. 39–62. Redevelopment Agency, Ventura,California.

Wlodarski, Robert J., John F. Romani, Gwen R. Romani, andDaniel A. Larson

1984 Preliminary Evidence of Metal Tool Use in Soap-stone Quarry-Mining on Catalina Island: Jane RussellQuarry. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly20(3):35–66.

Submitted September 29, 2017; Revised November 15,2017; Accepted November 24, 2017

CRAFTING IDENTITY: ACQUISITION, PRODUCTION, USE, …...de Santa Bárbara a través del análisis de...

Documents

Transcript of CRAFTING IDENTITY: ACQUISITION, PRODUCTION, USE, …...de Santa Bárbara a través del análisis de...