Volume 13: Southeast Analytical Zone

The Contact-Period Native California Community Distribution Model

July 2010 DRAFT

By:

David Earle,Antelope Valley College
Randall Milliken,Consulting in the Past

With:

Patricia Mikkelsen,Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc.
Paul Brandy,Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc.
Jerome King,Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc.

Submitted to:
California Department of Transportation, District 6, 2015 East Shields Ave, Fresno, CA 93726

---

It may be anticipated that future scholars, undaunted by the huge mass of available published and manuscript data on California Indians, will work over the information on a tribe-by-tribe basis and prepare maps showing the domains of the identifiable or inferable tribelets. -R. F. Heizer 1966

Abstract

The in-progress Contact-Period Native California Community Distribution Model (CDM) brings together decades of research and mission record analysis into selected volumes that will eventually be part of a 15 volume print/wiki encyclopedia portraying the socio-political landscape of native California after first contact with the Spanish, between 1770 and 1830.

Volume 1 of the series presents an overview of the CDM model, explaining the process of ethnographic data analysis and regional mapping unit construction across all portions of California. Volumes 2-15 will eventually represent contextual overviews of each of the 14 analytical zones identified within California. Each zone has a group of independent, landholding regions (totaling 663) defined by mutual history, shared languages, and similar land-use patterns. An introduction to each volume will focus on multi-regional issues (overview of history, ethnography, and research techniques) followed by individual regional monographs (some complete, some unfinished) covering languages, environment, and early expedition, mission, historic, and ethnographic sources, as applicable. A comprehensive bibliography will conclude each volume.

Volume 13, entitled Southeast Analytical Zone, covers the Numic and Takic language family areas within southeast California. The zone contains 45 regions including portions of Fresno, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, Mono, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Tulare counties. Currently, the volume contains an introduction, five complete monographs and one in progress, and a list of references applicable to the entire zone.

The CDM is also presented in a collaborative Wiki website (currently accessible through farwestern.com) which consists of several major elements—ACCESS data tables, GIS maps, and narrative text. In this format, the ethnographic data are available to scholars from academia, tribal communities, and agencies that can locate and organize data effectively, add new information as it becomes available, and generate feature articles that can include maps, pictures, or cross-references.

This series has been produced by Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc., with support from a number of district environmental branches within the California Department of Transportation.

Table 1. Volume, Analytical Zone, and Languages Spoken.

VOLUME Number	ANALYTICAL ZONE	LANGUAGE	NUMBER OF REGIONS
2	Northwest	Wiyot/Yurok Athabascan Karok Takelman	37
3	North	Shastan, Chimariko Wintu and Nomlaki Yana	48
4	Northeast	Modoc Mountain Maidu Numic Pit River Washoe	28
5	North Coast Ranges	Lake Miwok Pomo Wappo Yuki	59
6	Middle Sacramento Valley	Northwest Maidu and Nisenan Maidu Patwin Wintuan Bay Miwok, Coast Miwok Northern Ohlone	66
7	Bay Area	Patwin Wintuan Bay Miwok, Coast Miwok Northern Ohlone	56
8	Delta-North San Joaquin	Plains Miwok and Sierra Miwok Delta Yokuts	54
9	South San Joaquin	Mono Numic Tubatulabal Yokuts	56
10	South Coast Ranges	Northern Chumash Esselen Ohlone Salinan	56
11	Santa Barbara Channel	Chumash	68
12	Los Angeles Vicinity	Takic	58
13	Southeast	Numic Takic	45
14	South	Yuman	20
15	Colorado River	Yuman	13
Total			663

Introduction: The Southeast Analytical Zone

Numic and Takic Speakers of Southeastern California
By David Earle and Randall Milliken

The Southeast zone is an area of transmontane California within which languages of the Numc and Takic branches of the Uto-Aztecan language family were spoken. It shares with the Northeast and Colorado River zones an important distinction from the other eleven CDM analytic zones—that the great majority of its year-round habitation regions adjoin extensive areas of seasonal land use, areas that did not sustain year-round villages due either to winter snows or summer water deficit. Being on the edges of such seasonal landscapes, dispersed resources and low population densities were characteristic of the regions in this zone (Figure 1).

As a result of the zone’s low population density, a number of contrasting settlement and social organization strategies were developed. The first of these was the adaptation of elements of the social organization and settlement adaptations of ’parent’ cismontane groups to outlying desert areas. This was the case with the Vanyume Serrano of the Mojave River region, who sustained a ’Californian’ way of life partly through the importation of tree-crop foods from the transverse ranges out onto the desert. The Desert Kawaiisu may have followed a similar approach. A second strategy involved the deployment of mobile groups that circulated through patrilineally inherited hunting territories. These groups were linked together by ties to regional religious chiefs. These forms of organization were found among the Chemehuevi/Southern Paiute of the central and eastern Mojave Desert. Oasis horticulture was a third type of desert adaptation. It was present among some Southern Paiute desert groups away from the Colorado River in Nevada in the eighteenth century, and spread westward across the Mojave Desert in early historic times. The Desert Cahuilla of the Coachella Valley had also developed oasis horticulture prior to the nineteenth century.

All of the desert groups, different as they were in social organization, shared an orientation to long-distance travel, interregional long-distance exchange, and regional social interaction at mourning ceremonies and other events. These interactions coordinated networks of marriage and political alliance in areas of low population density. Thus Julian Steward’s concept of desert groups being socially and politically isolated in pre-contact times is not borne out by the evidence.

For all portions of the zone, except the Owens Valley, the Kitenamuk land on Tejon Creek, and perhaps cismontane Kawaiisu territory, there was no political meaning to the regions that we have isolated. Rather, the regions are often just convenient divisions for a discussion of nuances of land use and social organization across the larger landscape.

Another problem in reconstructing the ethnogeography of the Southeast zone was the long period between the first Spanish expedition into the area and the time when anyone began to document native lifeways. Evidence exists that much change occurred away from the eyes of westerners between the 1770s and 1850s. Of particular importance was movement of populations across the region, the Chemehuevi being a particularly spectacular example. Then, in the late nineteenth century, the picture was further distorted by the arrival of miners and ranchers; they destroyed fragile springs and harvesting areas, but they also offered year-round employment to Indian people in areas they had previously visited for only a few days each year. These problems have shaped the anthropological record for the area, and we deal with them as best we can.

Linguistic Groups

A single language family, Uto-Aztecan, was represented in this zone at the time of Spanish settlement of coastal California<ref>Intriguing fragmentary evidence suggests that there was a desert Yuman-speaking group, the Desert Mohave, in the Soda Lake area of the eastern Mohave Desert in the late eighteenth and possibly the early nineteenth century (Earle 2004). That evidence will be addressed in the future CDM monograph for the Baker region in eastern San Bernardino County.</ref>. The Uto-Aztecan family has nine major branches spoken over a wide area from Idaho on the north to El Salvador on the south: Numic, Tubatulabal, Takic, Hopi, Tepiman, Taracahitan, Tubar, Corachol, and Aztecan (Goddard 1996:323). The languages of Southeast California are all members of the Numic and Takic branches. Numic and Takic, along with Tubatulabal and Hopic, form the Northern Uto-Aztecan subgroup of the family, the subgroup formerly known as Shoshonean (Miller 1986; Mithun 1999:540).

Numic Languages in the Southeast Zone

The Numic branch of Uto-Aztecan itself has three branches and all three are represented in the Southeast zone of California (Miller 1986:98-99). The Western (or Mono-Northern Paiute) Branch has two languages: (1) the Mono language of the Owens Valley Paiute of the Southeast zone, a language also spoken by the Western Mono people directly to the west in the South San Joaquin zone; and (2) Northern Paiute, spoken outside the Southeast zone in Mono County and in much of central Nevada and farther north. The Central (or Shoshoni-Comanche) Branch is represented by three languages: (1) the Panamint/Koso language spoken in a small area just south of Owens Lake, then widening eastward and northward to Saline Valley and Death Valley and just across the border to the Ash Meadows area of Nevada; (2) the Shoshone language spoken in Nevada and areas to its north and east; and (3) the Comanche language of the southern Plains. The Southern (or Ute-Chemehuevi) branch also has two languages, both spoken in the Southeast California zone: (1) Kawaiisu, spoken in the southernmost Sierran valleys and eastward to the southern end of the Panamint Range and Amargosa River; and (2) the Ute language, spoken in California by the Chemehuevi of the dry eastern Mohave Desert and Whipple Mountain area adjacent to the Colorado River (these two languages are to some extent mutually intelligible). Mithun (1999:540-543) provides a bibliography of linguistic studies of each of these languages.

Takic Languages in the Southeast Zone

The Takic branch of Uto-Aztecan consists of at least six and as many as nine languages (depending on which language/dialect criteria are used), all spoken in southern California: Serrano-Kitenamuk-Vanyume, Tataviam, Gabrieliño (Tongva), Luiseño-Juaneño, Cahuilla, and Cupeño. Of these languages, the Serrano-Kitenamuk-Vanyume cluster and Cahuilla were spoken in the CDM Southeast zone. Kitenamuk was limited to the Tejon Creek region overlooking the southern San Joaquin and Antelope valleys, while Serrano was spoken along the north slopes of the San Gabriel Range and on the west, north, and east slopes of the San Bernardino Mountains. Vanyume, the language spoken along the Mojave River in the center of the Southeast zone, is related to or a dialect of Serrano. Cahuilla was, and continues to be, spoken farther south in the San Gorgonio Pass area, the San Jacinto Mountains, and the Coachella Valley. Mithun (1999:543-545) provides a detailed overview of field sources, the numbers of current speakers, and a bibliography of linguistic studies of each of the Takic languages.

Western Contact and Disruption

The time of first non-native contact varied greatly, from as early as 1771 in the Antelope Valley and Tehachapis to as late as the 1840s in the Owens Valley. Even where the first contact was early, those areas where Father Garcés traveled in 1776, no important follow-up occurred until mission outreach became important after 1805. Below are highlighted some significant expeditions and events that contribute to the understanding of the "model" contact ethnogeography of the zone.

Spanish Period

First Contact
The year 1771 marked the first Spanish expedition into southeast California. It was led by Pedro Fages, who came into the area from the south in search of deserters from the Spanish military. Herbert Bolton (1935), translator of the journal entries that indirectly describe that trip, reconstructed Fages’ journey from San Diego up to Cajon Pass and Antelope Valley, then over Tejon Pass into the Buena Vista Lake region. The trip seems to have occurred in winter, perhaps February of 1771, because Fages was later able to provide the earliest description of a southern Yokuts winter village:

In their villages the natives live in the winter in very large squares, the families divided from each other, and outside they have very large houses in the form of hemisphere[s], where they keep their seeds and utensils [Fages 1772 in Bolton 1935:12].

In 1776 Father F. Garces came into the southern San Joaquin Valley from the south as an unarmed evangelizer for Christianity. Garces probably entered the valley by way of Cottonwood Creek and Tejon Creek, and then went north to the Kern River in the present Bakersfield area. He learned that the Yokuts people of the Kern Lake and Bakersfield regions had been visited by Spanish deserters who abused the Native women; the tribal people executed them for committing these assaults. He also was told that one Spanish deserter was living happily in a nearby community, married to an Indian woman (Coues 1900:272-302).

Post-1800 Spanish Expeditions
No Spanish mission expeditions into southeast California are documented from the time of Garcés to 1805. Beginning in that year, numerous Spanish expeditions entered the valley. Whether led by soldiers or missionaries, these parties always included soldiers and always searched for baptized Indians who had broken the territorial law by leaving their missions without permission. The expeditions included the following:

• 1806 Zalvidea (in Cook 1960:245-247): Mission Santa Barbara over San Rafael Mountains to Buena Vista and Kern lakes, then to the Kern River at present Bakersfield (Kern County), over Tejon Pass to Antelope Valley, Cajon Pass, and Mission San Gabriel
• 1808 Palomares (in Cook 1960:256-257): From Mission San Fernando to the Antelope Valley (Los Angeles and Kern counties), to the Tehachapi range country overlooking the southern San Joaquin Valley (Kern County), and back to Mission San Fernando
• 1819 Nuez (in Walker 1986): In 1819, Gabriel Moraga, with Father Pascual Nuez of Mission San Gabriel as diarist, led a military expedition down the Mojave River. The expedition unsuccessfully attempted to cross the desert to the east to punish the Mojaves of the Colorado River for frontier attacks on other Indians. Nuez provided the names of a number of rancherías visited along the river.

Mission Outreach
During the years prior to 1810, the pace of Serrano missionization at Mission San Gabriel had been rather desultory, with parents having their children baptized but refusing to enter the missions themselves. This frustrated Father Zalvidea, who had arrived at San Gabriel in 1806. By 1808 neophytes fleeing the mission were already a problem for Zalvidea, who had a reputation for cruelty in his treatment of runaways. An unsuccessful neophyte revolt at Mission San Gabriel in the autumn of 1810 had involved unconverted Serranos, as well as Chemehuevis and Mojaves from distant desert settlements (Earle 2005:17-21). The following year, Gabriel Moraga led a number of military forays into the territories of Serrano villages to the north and east of the mission, including the upper Mojave River region. This led to roundups of large numbers of families that were baptized at Mission San Gabriel. Similar roundups appear to have occurred on the southern margin of Antelope Valley, with local native populations being taken to Mission San Fernando. A further military expedition is reported on the Mojave River in 1816. The roundups occurred against the background of Serrano neophytes fleeing as far as the Mojave villages on the Colorado River, and a continuing resistance movement among unconverted Serranos (Earle 2005:19-21). By the mid-1820s, the Mojave River region had been largely depopulated of Serranos due to voluntary or forced missionization.

Mexican Period

Conditions of changing native occupation of the Mojave Desert and the Mojave River were described by American travelers from the 1820s through the early 1840s.

Jedediah Smith 1826-1827
Trapper Jedediah Smith crossed the Mojave Desert from the Colorado River to Cajon Pass and the southern California settlements in 1826 and 1827 (Earle 2005:24). During his 1826 trip he engaged fugitive neophyte Desert Serranos living among the Mojaves to act as guides. He called the Mojave River the "Inconstant River," perhaps because the reception of his party by the Mojaves in 1826 had been peaceful, but in 1827 on a return trip they attacked him in retaliation for attacks on them by other trappers. During both years, Smith described Vanyumé (Desert Serrano) as still resident on the upper Mojave River, and in 1827 he noted Chemehuevis beginning to occupy the lower river. By this time the raiding of Southern California saddle stock by native groups coming across the interior frontiers was already well established; Smith had seen and purchased stolen horses at the Mojave villages.

Ewing Young 1829
In 1829, Ewing Young also crossed the Mojave Desert, part of an increasing presence of American trappers in the California interior. The travel accounts left by Young and others of these parties were not as revealing of conditions on the Mojave Desert as was Jedediah Smith’s diary.

Antonio Armijo 1829-1830
New Mexican trader Antonio Armijo established a route for trade caravans between Los Angeles and Santa Fe, New Mexico in 1829-1830. This was the so-called Old Spanish Trail. While Armijo made a wide detour to the north to avoid the Mojave villages, his route did ascend the Mojave River. His trailblazing account provides a few interesting clues as to native activities in the region. After 1830, caravans traveling along the upper Mojave River, as well as native stock raiders from the desert, made that portion of the river a somewhat hazardous place for native people to live.

John Frémont 1844
In the spring of 1844, an expedition led by John C. Frémont made its way from the San Joaquin Valley across Kawaiisu territory in the Tehachapis, and eastward through the southern end of Antelope Valley. They then traveled down the upper and middle stretches of the Mojave River, where Frémont encountered a Desert Serrano ex-neophyte traveling with Mojaves who was probably taking part in a trade expedition to the San Joaquin Valley. The man told Frémont tales about Mojave Indians formerly living on the Mojave River (Earle 2005:6).

American Period (post-1845)

Mormons and Gold Rush Travelers
During the Gold Rush era, the portion of the Old Spanish Trail that looped from the Mojave Desert into Nevada and southern Utah was taken over by emigrants traveling from Salt Lake to southern California. Many diaries of these travelers describe the frequently rather hot and dry trip from the Springs at Las Vegas to the Mojave River. Occasional details on native presence in the Mojave Desert can be gleaned from these sources. The most important sources for this period are the accounts of railroad survey expeditions in 1853-1854 that describe Kawaiisu in the Tehachapi region and Chemehuevi/Southern Paiutes ranging from near the Colorado River to the Mojave River region (Mollhausen 1969).

Unratified Treaties and Reservations
Attempts were made by federal authorities to deal with non-missionized or only partly missionized native groups in the California interior through the signing of treaties in 1851 and 1852. The imposition of American rule came after decades of stock raiding against coastward ranchos by interior native groups. The Americans made pretenses of putting an end to this raiding, although it would continue in more attenuated form for another 20 years. Federal representatives and native leaders signed Treaty D at Tejon on June 10, 1851. A second treaty, Treaty K, was signed with Luiseño and Cahuilla leaders at Temecula, in what is now Riverside County, on January 5, 1852. The Temecula signing had followed an uprising the previous year in San Diego County led by a Luiseño named Antonio Garra, protesting American taxation of local Indians (Phillips 1975). There was widespread American fear of native plans for further revolts. The signed treaties were rejected by California representatives in Congress and were never ratified, which did not improve relations with native leaders.

Plans were discussed for the federal government to create reservations on the Mojave River and in the southern San Joaquin Valley (Caughey 1952). Only the latter plan was actually carried out, in 1853 (Phillips 2004). The creation of the Sebastian reservation in 1853 was accompanied the following year by the establishment of nearby Ft. Tejon. For the next eight years, sporadic attempts were made to settle native people from the southern Sierra, Antelope Valley, and the southern San Joaquin Valley at the reservation. Attempts were also made by troops stationed at Fort Tejon to end stock raiding from the desert.

Pacification of the Interior, 1859-1869
In 1859, an expedition under Lieutenant Davidson, looking for stock raiders, visited the eastern Sierra and the Owens Lake region and parlayed with local native people (Wilkie and Lawton 1976). As the result of Mojave resistance to establishment of a wagon road through their territory, the Secretary of War had ordered that the Mojaves be "pacified." This was undertaken in 1859, allowing the development of a government wagon road across the Mojave Desert to support the military post established on the Colorado River.

In the spring of 1860 a detachment was sent from the Fort to the Mojave River under Major Carleton to punish an alleged attack on travelers on the Salt Lake Road by Southern Paiute/Chemehuevi (Casebier 1972). The troops swept a broad area of the Mojave Desert. Various skirmishes took place against local bands, some of which may have been involved in stock raiding.

During the Civil War years, the Mojave Desert and the eastern Sierra were scenes of conflict between native people, settlers, and the U.S. Army. In the eastern Sierra, native attacks on miners lead to Army intervention and the establishment of military posts. Army posts were also established in the Mojave Desert during and after the Civil War to protect the road to Fort Mojave from raids by Chemehuevi/Southern Paiutes. A war between the Mojaves and Chemehuevis in about 1865 complicated matters, as did Army fighting against native groups in Arizona at around this time. Efforts were made at the end of the Civil War to establish a reservation for the Mojaves in the Parker area on the Colorado River, and later attempts were made to settle Chemehuevis at this reservation (Kelly and Fowler 1986:388). With the suppression of the Mojave Chemehuevis, Desert raiding and warfare came to an end around 1869-1870, leading to an influx of miners.

Southern California Reservations, 1870s-1890s
In Southern California away from the Colorado River, new federal reservations were established beginning in the 1870s, after the termination of the Sebastian Reserve. The latter had been abandoned by the end of the Civil War due to conflicting land claims, and some surviving residents were moved north to a reservation at Tule River. Others remained at the reserve and became workers on the succeeding Tejon Ranch. In 1875-1877 the Grant administration established 12 new Indian reservations to protect ’civilized’ Indians in southern California, including Cabazon, Cahuilla, Morongo, and Torres-Martinez, all Cahuilla speakers. In the early 1880s, Helen Hunt Jackson led a local investigation of deficiencies in the treatment of reservation and non-reservation Indians in southern California. This led to the establishment of additional reservations in the 1880s and 1890s, including San Manuel in 1893. These reservations included several that would later be associated with Chemehuevi refugees from the war with the Mojaves, including Augustine (1893) and Twentynine Palms (1895).

Classic Ethnographers

A number of professionally trained ethnographers and linguists have contributed to our current knowledge of native culture and lifeways in the Southeast zone. These researchers first appeared on the scene at around 1900, and many were active during the first half of the 20th century. The efforts of the Bureau of American Ethnology to record endangered Native American cultures, and the founding of academic anthropology at UC Berkeley under the auspices of Alfred Kroeber, provided an impetus for ethnographic research during the first several decades of the 20th century. Various ethnographers listed below have made crucial contributions to our knowledge of the native peoples of southeastern California; their work figures prominently in any discussion of the lifeways of the native groups of the region.

C. Hart Merriam (1855-1942)

In 1886 Merriam, a university-trained biologist and medical doctor, was made the first chief of what would later become the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. In that capacity he worked in the field in California off-and-on between 1898 and 1910, keeping numerous notes in his biology field notebooks about the Indian people that he met. In 1910 he received a lifetime endowment from the Harriman Trust, which allowed him to retire and conduct any research that he wished. He chose to devote most of his attention to fieldwork with California Indians. From 1910 forward he kept his detailed ethnographic notes separate from his daily journals, the latter becoming his diaries. Those field dairy/journals are now in the Library of Congress (Merriam 1898-1938a). His separate ethnographic journals and notes are housed at the Bancroft Library at UC Berkeley, along with his extensive collection of photographs of Indian people (Merriam [1898-1938b]). His extensive collection of North American Indian basketry is curated at the Anthropology Museum of the Department of Anthropology at UC Davis.

Although Merriam spent less time among Indian people in southern California than in the central and northern parts of the state, at Fort Tejon in November of 1905 he classified the Kitenamuk, Kawaiisu, and various Yokuts groups living there, as well as their villages (Merriam 1967:429-437). At the same time he gathered a description of a Tongva (Gabrieleño) mourning ceremony (Merriam 1955:77-86). Merriam (1955:93-95) also wrote an analysis of the notes on the "Benemé" Indians of the Mojave River from the 1776 diary of Father Garcés, but he certainly was incorrect in identifying them as Chemehuevi speakers.

Alfred L. Kroeber (1876-1960)

In 1901 A. L. Kroeber received the first doctorate in anthropology awarded at Columbia University, under anthropologist Franz Boas. A year earlier, as temporary curator of Indian artifacts at the Academy of Science in San Francisco, he had collected and interviewed Indian people in the Klamath River area of northwest California. With PhD in hand, Kroeber founded the Department of Anthropology at the University of California under the patronage of Phoebe Hearst, who recognized his talent. He later became department head and taught until his retirement in 1946. After his retirement he continued his field research and writing right up until his death in 1960. The entire body of his field notes is housed at the Bancroft Library, UC Berkeley.

During the first decade of the twentieth century, Kroeber worked with a range of consultants in southern California—Mojaves, Luiseño, Yokuts, Cahuilla, Kitanemuk, and others. These were generally summer vacation research forays, in an era when grant money was not to be had. Students and colleagues later supplemented this research, which was reflected in a truly prodigious outpouring of high quality publications. Kroeber’s (1925) published work is particularly important because he had such a unique and wide-ranging comparative knowledge of native cultures up and down the length of California, and a great ethnographic sensibility as well.

John P. Harrington (1884-1961)

J. P. Harrington took a circuitous route to become a great linguist and ethnologist of California Indian people. Finishing undergraduate work at Stanford University in 1905, he went to Leipzig and then Berlin to pursue a Ph.D. But he dropped out and returned to become a high school teacher and work with elderly Chumash speakers between 1912 and 1914. He was hired as a permanent field ethnologist by the Bureau of American Ethnography in 1915 and worked for the Bureau until 1955. Harrington published very little. However, his published annotation of Boscana has been invaluable to our understanding of native southern California social organization. He also left behind more than one million pages of only moderately organized notes, mostly on language but also on mythology and geography, for native groups from Alaska to South America. This corpus of notes has become widely accessible on microfilm and has had a huge impact on ethnographic studies in California. His papers are housed at the Smithsonian Institution, although many are available through copy microfilm at a number of institutions across the United States (Mills and Brickfield 1986).

Harrington’s first work relevant to this area was his fieldwork among the Mojave in 1911, which included gathering information about the Chemehuevi and Vanyume Serrano. During the fall and winter of 1916-1917 he spent months at the Tejon Rancheria among Kitenamuk, Serrano, Chumash, and Yokuts speakers. He visited again in 1921, at which time he made eleven wax cylinder recordings of Kitenamuk Serrano music and song. In 1918, Harrington worked with Santos Manuel, Tomas Manuel, and other residents of the San Manuel Reservation, recording information on the Serrano and Desert Serrano and their ethnogeography. Several years later he was doing research with George Laird and other Chemehuevi consultants, and he worked with a number of Cahuilla speakers and other southern California native people during the 1920s. In the late 1940s he returned to working with Chemehuevi and Kawaiisu consultants at Las Vegas, Victorville, and Tehachapi.

William Duncan Strong (1899-1962)

Strong took his PhD in anthropology under Alfred L. Kroeber at the University of California at Berkeley in 1926. He worked at the University of Nebraska and the Bureau of American Ethnology before joining the faculty at Columbia in 1927, remaining there until his death in 1962. Many of his papers are housed at the Smithsonian Institution National Anthropological Archives, although his southern California field notes have not surfaced. Strong performed fieldwork in Riverside and San Diego counties in 1924 among Serrano, Cahuilla, Cupeño, and Luiseño speakers. The monograph that resulted from that research remains one of the most important studies ever undertaken of native social organization in California. Strong was also interested in cultural relations between native southern California and the American Southwest.

Edward W. Gifford (1887-1959)

Gifford was a colleague of Kroeber’s at the UC Berkeley Department of Anthropology. He made a number of important contributions to California ethnology, particularly in the areas of kinship systems and kinship terminology. This included an important ethnographic study of clans and moieties in the southern part of the state, carried out in 1918. Gifford was a remarkable scholar, particularly given that he had no college degree - something of a rarity for a UC Berkeley faculty member.

Carobeth Laird (1895-1983)

As a young woman, Laird married John Peabody Harrington, shortly before his fieldwork at the Tejón Rancheria in 1916. Laird carried out fieldwork along with Harrington, and turned out to have a talent for learning and transcribing native languages. While working with him with Chemehuevi consultants at the beginning of the 1920s, she met a Chemehuevi man named George Laird. She divorced Harrington in 1922 and later married Laird, collecting additional linguistic and considerable other ethnographic information from him before his death in 1940. Laird returned to working with old and new ethnographic and linguistic data for the Chemehuevi in the 1960s and prepared an important ethnography of the Chemehuevi (1976) and a volume on Chemehuevi mythology (1984), the latter issued after her death in 1983. Laird’s work was particularly important because of her expertise with the Chemehuevi language and her long personal experience with the culture.

Julian Steward (1902-1972)

Julian Steward started his career as a field ethnographer but eventually became known for theoretical work on cultural ecology and studies on modernization. He left his family home in Washington, D.C. at age 16 to attend a unique boarding school in rural Deep Springs, California, in Northern Paiute country. He received his PhD at Berkeley in 1929 under the direction of A. L. Kroeber and Robert Lowie. In the mid-1930s he carried out the portion of Kroeber’s Culture Element Distribution survey for the Numic-speaking peoples, and then published the "Basin-Plateau Aboriginal Sociopolitical Groups" in 1938 as a staff member of the Bureau of American Ethnology. Steward moved on to Columbia University and his more theoretical pursuits in 1946. Considering the importance attached to his name, he really did little field work in the CDM Southeast zone. Steward’s theories about Great Basin social organization were to have great influence, and his Great Basin ethnographic work in the 1930s represents a real contribution. Unfortunately he would later insist on misinterpreting his own data for theoretical reasons (in the 1950s).

Maurice Zigmond (1904-1998)

Maurice Zigmond, ordained a Jewish rabbi in 1929, held a post as rabbi in Pueblo, Colorado while training in anthropology at Yale University. He did his anthropological fieldwork among the Kawaiisu during summers in the late 1930s and published scholarly papers on that work during 1938-1941. After obtaining his PhD in 1941, Zigmond joined the Yale faculty as a professor of anthropology. After World War II he became New England director for Hillel, the Jewish college campus group. He worked for Hillel for the remainder of his career. Nevertheless, Zigmond continued his interest in the Kawaiisu, writing more scholarly papers during the years 1971-1986. He returned to southern California to carry out more fieldwork with the Kawaiisu in the early 1970s. Zigmond (1986) wrote the Kawaiisu chapter in Volume 11 (Great Basin) of the Handbook of North American Indians and published monographs on Kawaiisu ethnobotany and mythology.

Isabel Kelly (1906-1982)

Kelly took her PhD under Robert Lowie and A. L. Kroeber at the University of California at Berkeley in 1932. She did fieldwork among the Northern Paiute in 1930 and among the Southern Paiute and Chemehuevi in the early and mid-1930s, which resulted in important papers on these groups. She then turned her main anthropological attention to Latin America, but later prepared a monograph on the southern Paiutes in the 1960s. She wrote the initial draft of the "Southern Paiute" chapter for Volume 11 (Great Basin) of the Handbook of North American Indians in 1971 and 1972 (Buzaljko in Collier and Thalman 1991:ix-xx).

Omer C. Stewart (1908-1991)

Omer Stewart received his PhD from UC Berkeley in the late 1930s. Following service in WWII he founded the Department of Anthropology at the University of Colorado, where he taught until his death in 1991. Known for his advocacy for the rights of followers of the Peyote religion, he also had a special interest in ethno-geography. He specialized in the Shoshone and Northern Paiute, although he also did some fieldwork with Southern Paiute people. Stewart wrote "Tribal Distributions and Boundaries in the Great Basin" in 1966.

Contemporary Ethnographers

Catherine Fowler

Catherine Fowler, of the University of Nevada Reno, co-authored, along with Isabel Kelly, the article in the Great Basin Volume (Volume 11) of the Handbook of North American Indians dealing with the Southern Paiute. Fowler (1996, 2002; Fowler et al. 1995) has also authored or co-authored a number of other publications on Southern Paiute, Chemehuevi, and Timbisha Shoshone culture and history.

Lowell Bean

Lowell Bean (1972; Bean and Mason 1962) has carried out ethnographic fieldwork with the Cahuilla since the 1960s. He has published on Cahuilla and Serrano culture, ethnohistory, ethnobotany, and political geography.

Types of Landholding Groups

Three of the four basic CDM types of landholding groups can be found in the transmontane lands of California’s Southeast zone: loose regional communities, overlapping family-based camp groups, and sedentary village groups.

Loose Regional Communities

Among the Owens Valley Paiute, relatively high populations led to recognition of some ceremonial cohesion in local regions, leading to emergence of loose regional communities. Liljeblad and Fowler (1986) write:

Within Owens Valley proper, Steward (1933b:237) noted that the villages and camps of certain areas were organized into "composite land-owning bands," and he mapped five such units in northern Owens Valley and two more widely-dispersed ones in the south… [1986:414]

Each one of the districts … was originally ascribed by Steward (1933b:304) to a land-owning band under the control and leadership of a headman. … The interaction between villages within a delimited area involved frequent intermarriage, community irrigation, cooperative hunting and rabbit drives, and common use of the musa [men’s ceremonial lodge]…[1986:427]..

Overlapping Family-based Camp Groups

Our understanding of Southern Paiute, Chemehuevi, and other southern Great Basin Numic social organization has been skewed by Steward’s vigorous attempts in the 1950s to rework his 1930s ethnographic data to fit later theoretical preconceptions. Thus those who cite him to deny any supra-local content to group social organization and interaction must be treated with caution as sources.

Shoshone
Thomas et al. (1986:276) cite Steward to argue that "Local food-named groups were not ’bands’ or ’Tribes’ in the strict sense, for membership fluctuated considerably. No descent or rigid kinship structures were involved, and no territorial limits were recognized, families frequently foraging from area to area in the course of an annual seasonal round."

Southern Paiute
Kelly and Fowler (1986:368) say "there was no overall ’tribal’ organization" among the Southern Paiute. "Territorial subdivisions often are called bands," but Kelly and Fowler use the term ’groups’: "Each group was a geographic unit associated with a definite territory. Some differed slightly in speech."

The Chemehuevi branch of the Southern Paiute, at least, was organized in bilateral kindred-type residential groups that were often quite matrilocal in post-marital residence. These groups were called Niwaivi. Along with this non-corporate group, the Chemehuevi clearly also recognized patrilineal lines of descent through which ownership of sacred hunting songs and access to hunting territories were inherited. Ethnographers were told of the association of particular patrilineal descent lines with particular mountain hunting territories (Laird 1976). A male desired to reside in the Niwaivi of his wife, because a male so resident could access the hunting territories of both his wife and of other males similarly residing in their spouses’ Niwaivi. Thus among the Chemehuevi the idea of "territoriality" has to be viewed as more complex than our Euro-American cultural notions of dominion over property and resources has conditioned us to perceive. The concept, in turn, of hunters marrying into other groups to increase their access to hunting territories makes the idea of local group isolation and self-sufficiency, which Steward promoted in the 1950s, seem untenable.

Kawaiisu
The Kawaiisu appear to have incorporated elements of the lifeways of immediately neighboring Yokuts, Chumash, and Takic groups, and could be said to have possessed an amalgam of Great Basin and California cultural traits. The Kawaiisu do not appear to have been organized into corporate territorial- or marriage-regulating lineages, clans, or moieties, unlike some interior Takic groups or the neighboring Southern Valley Yokuts. The exact nature of their territorial organization is unclear. There has so far come to light no evidence to suggest that the Kawaiisu possessed the patrilineally inherited song groups that regulated claims and access to hunting territories among the culturally related Chemehuevi of the Mojave Desert (Earle 2004:45-48). However, it is entirely possible that something approximating the Niwaivi of the Chemehuevi existed among them.

Zigmond (1986:398) says

The concept of territory was weakly developed, and the idea of boundary was probably nonexistent. There was recognition of a home base, but knowledge of regions and resources far beyond indicates that the people moved about to satisfy their needs. Conversely, other groups were not likely to meet with resistance when they came into the Kawaiisu homeland in quest of essential commodities. The characteristic shifting about in relation to the seasons makes it impossible to devise a static map of land occupation. The range of movement depended upon the availability of supplies and thus inevitably varied from year to year.

There are hints in the ethnographic and ethnohistorical record that interactions among the Kawaiisu and with ’foreigners’ may not have always been as compliant as Zigmond supposed. The Kitanemuk and Kawaiisu averred generally friendly relations, but the fact of having Southern Valley Yokuts as neighbors would seem to have necessitated some Kawaiisu capacity for self-defense. Nevertheless, it seems likely that the Kawaiisu were involved in a complex net of exchange relationships and gathering expeditions that linked the Mojave Desert, southern Sierra, and southern San Joaquin Valley at the macro level, and the easterly pinyon zones and westerly acorn zones of the Kawaiisu homeland at the micro level. Garcés, in 1776, noted the Kawaiisu as a ’bartering’ people, and we know that they were a link in the long-distance trading activities of the Mojaves of the lower Colorado River.

In the autumn, families from this area harvested acorns in areas with higher rainfall to the south and west, and pinyon nuts in surrounding mountains. Kawaiisu groups also traveled to the east into the Mojave Desert in the spring to hunt antelope in areas like the southern Panamint Valley, where some permanent Kawaiisu settlements also existed. Mesquite, salt, and other resources were also obtained from the desert, and deer hides (and apparently also pinyon) from the mountains were exchanged toward the San Joaquin Valley and the coast. It is not known whether Desert Kawaiisu settlements were provisioned, at least to some extent, with acorns or pinyon from the Sierra to the west.

Sedentary (Territorial Winter) Village Groups

Serrano
Serrano social organization was based on membership in patrilineal exogamous territorial clans (or sibs). These clans, as Strong called them, were headed by hereditary chiefs who exercised important ceremonial functions for the group as a whole (Strong 1929:11-25). Chiefs guarded a ceremonial bundle, central to the supernatural well-being of the group, in the chief’s house. This position of guardianship conferred supernatural power on these individuals. The clan (or sib) occupied a central winter village containing a dance house, chief’s house, mourning ceremony grounds, and cemetery. For the Serrano of the San Bernardino Mountains region, these tended to be located at lower-elevation springs or canyon mouths. During spring, summer, and fall, constituent families of the group would move to temporary camps, often at higher elevations. Pinyon and acorn gathering areas were found ’up-canyon’ in the mountains.

Individual clans maintained demarcated territories that included both the lowland and highland areas, territories identified with the principal winter village. The individual territorial patrilineal clans were exogamous, so marriage ties between different clans were obligatory and provided one basis for the development of inter-clan political and ceremonial alliances. In addition, all clans were assigned to one of two ceremonial moiety divisions: Wildcat or Coyote. Members of clans in one ceremonial division were obliged to find a spouse in a clan belonging to the other. Ethnohistorical and ethnographic information suggests the importance of a permanent winter village site as the political and ritual/ceremonial ’capital’ of a clan territory. However, subsidiary localities were occupied at least seasonally and perhaps on a longer-term basis as well. While such central villages were not fully sedentary from a seasonal logistical standpoint, they appear to have been sedentary from a political and ritual/ceremonial standpoint.

For the Serrano, like other southern California groups organized into patrilineal territorial clans, the granting of permission by clans for other allied groups to enter their territory to exploit resources was characteristic. In some cases, such as during the acorn or pinyon pine nut gathering seasons, fiestas were held where host clans would invite allied clan groups to come to their territory for nut gathering and an associated feast (Earle 2005).

The Serrano of the San Bernardino Mountains and the San Bernardino Valley to the south were exchange partners and thus allies of the Colorado River dwelling Halchidhoma of the Palo Verde Valley region. The Desert Serrano or Vanyumé on the desert side of the San Bernardino range were exchange partners and allies of the Mojaves, who in turn were enemies of the Halchidhoma. Thus long distance coast-desert exchange networks also impacted political alliances in southern California and the Southwest.

The Serrano of the San Bernardino Mountains exploited black oak acorns and pinyon pine nuts as principal staples. Plants foods such as yucca, agave, islay, chia and other hard seeds, and juniper berries were also exploited. Rabbits, as well as deer, mountain sheep, and antelope, were hunted.

The Desert Serrano depended on the exportation of pine nuts and acorns from the Transfers Ranges down the Mojave River to help feed the populations of their desert villages. They also exploited mesquite stands along the river and obtained juniper berries from the belt of juniper woodland along the upper reaches of the Mojave River. More exotic food resources such as carrizo grass sugar, Joshua tree blossoms, and desert tortoises were also exploited.

Cahuilla
The Desert and Mountain divisions of the Cahuilla were, in historic times, somewhat intermingled by migration between the mountain and desert zones. The Pass Cahuilla were in regular contact with their Serrano neighbors to the west, and intermarried with them. They were also the most thoroughly exposed to missionization by the Franciscans at Mission San Gabriel.

Like the Serrano, the Cahuilla were organized into patrilineal exogamous territorial clans or sibs. They also recognized the role of the moiety divisions in regulating marriage between clans. For the Pass Cahuilla, at least, there is also evidence from mission registers that individual subsidiary named communities existed within the territory of named clan headquarters villages. This specification in the San Gabriel mission registers of named rancherías as being subsidiary to other named rancherías is very unusual for southern California Franciscan mission political geography data. Bean has noted ethnographic data indicating the existence of such subsidiary villages within clans headed by chiefs. These chiefs, like those of the Serrano, were responsible for caring for the sacred bundle that was the spiritual embodiment of the clan.

The Cahuilla, like the Serrano, recognized defined clan territories. The extension of invitations to other groups to gather resources was also characteristic. The Cahuilla were also involved in long-distance exchange networks between the coast and the Colorado River. They, like the mountain division of the Serrano, were allied with the Halchidhoma of the Palo Verde area.

The Cahuilla had access to acorns and pinyon pine nuts in upland areas of their territory, along with islay, chia, yucca, and agave. In the Coachella Valley, extensive mesquite woodland was exploited, yielding mesquite and screw beans. In addition, in the early nineteenth century and probably for some time prior to that, the Desert Cahuilla practiced oasis horticulture. They produced squash, pumpkins, maize, and beans. This development, like their use of ceramics, was probably linked to their ties to the Yuman groups of the lower Colorado River.

Model Map Regions: Construction Approaches and Constraints

For this study we have used three different techniques to delineate the mapping regions, techniques that reflect the different strengths of our data and the variation in the meaning of the regions. Some regions reflect "loose communities" with some historical sense of kinship, and others represent our convenient divisions of large landscapes of mobile village groups with flexible seasonal and annual residence patterns.

Tehachapi Range and Far Southern Sierra

The Kitenmuk in this area are fairly well-documented as holding a territory equivalent to the size of tribelets in central California, but for whom the nature of political cohesion is unknown. Just to the north, at least some of the flexible home-base groups of the Kawaiisu (which varied in size and locations from year to year) seasonally sent their people far out into the Mojave Desert. We do not fully understand the seasonal round of the cismontane Kawaiisu villagers, however. We have arbitrarily divided the Kawaiisu "year-round" habitation landscape to bring focus to possible differences from one local region to another.

North Face of the Transverse Ranges

This area was occupied in the late eighteenth century by what appear to have been related Serrano and Desert Serrano (Vanyume) territorial patrilineal clans. Most of the Serrano were impacted by the mission process. Clues from Harrington help establish some of the village locations in their area, but other settlements have not yet been re-located.

Owens Valley, Death Valley, and North Mojave Desert

There is quite a bit of variety in land use and social organization within this sub-zone, driven mainly by variation in water supply. For the Owens Valley Paiute, various ethnographers captured information that allows regional reconstruction of a series of loose communities down the valley from Bishop to Owens Lake. To the east, in the basins and ranges toward the Nevada border, evidence is less clear regarding the relationship between winter village locations and summer use-areas. South of Owens Lake and Death Valley, Kawaiisu, Panamint, and Chemehuevi people used the land with such flexibility that the concept of seasonal "home bases" may not even apply here. Nevertheless, we have attempted to isolate regions that had the best resources for semi-permanent camping sites all year round, and to leave the surrounding areas as "flexible use areas."

Mojave River

The Beneme or Vanyume of the Mojave River pose an especially difficult problem. Vanyume Serrano territorial villages occupied the river in the late eighteenth century. Some of the locations of these are known exactly or approximately from archaeological, ethnohistoric, and ethnographic data. However, while identifying the settlement regions along the Mojave River is theoretically a feasible task, it will require considerable future interdisciplinary effort to accomplish. Five arbitrary regions of a size comparable to tribelet regions in central California have been established from the Hesperia area downstream to Afton, while a separate Baker region, east of Soda Lake, is here mapped as a locus for discussion of the possible Desert Mojave and later land use by Serranos or Chemehuevis.

San Jacintos and Coachella Valley

Again an area of numerous intermarried hamlets, seasonal and year-to-year mobility, and strict moiety out-marriage rules, this vicinity has been carved into convenient regions for purposes of local area documentation. Village settlement histories in this region are difficult to untangle because mission register data for the desert are somewhat limited, while movement of different corporate kin groups from village site to village site, and between the mountains and the desert, was very common after 1830. It is not clear that this was in fact the pattern in pre-Spanish times. These nineteenth-century groups were not demographically intact, and population loss caused some amalgamation of formerly independent corporate groups, adding to the analytical confusion.

Regions

• Caliente
• Kelso Canyon/Kelso Creek/Kelso Valley
• Loraine
• Tehachapi
• Tejon Creek
• La Liebre

Bibliography

Anderton, Alice

1988

The Language of the Kitanemuks of California. PhD Dissertation, Department of Linguistics, University of California, Los Angeles.

Barras, Judy

1984

Their Places Shall Know Them No More. Private Printing by Judy and Bud Barras, Tehachapi, CA.

Basgall, Mark

n.d.

A Brief Cultural History of the National Training Center, Fort Irwin, San Bernardino County, California. Archaeological Curation Facility, Fort Irwin, California.

Bean, Lowell John

1972

Mukat’s People: the Cahuilla Indians of Southern California. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Bean, Lowell John and Mason, William M.

1962

Diaries and Accounts of the Romero Expeditions in Arizona and California, 1823-1826. Ward Richie Press, Los Angeles.

Bean, Lowell and Sylvia Brakke Vane

1979

Allen-Warner Valley Energy System: Western Transmission System: Ethnographic and Historical Resources. Report Submitted by Cultural Systems Research, Inc. to Southern California Edison Co. December 15, 1979. Cultural Systems Research, Inc, Menlo Park, Ca.

Beatty Bullfrog

1905

Indian Pow Wow. Remnants of the Piute Tribe Meet at Pahrump. Beatty Bullfrog [Beatty, Nevada] 1(27):9/23/1905:1

Benedict, Ruth.

1924

A Brief Sketch of Serrano Culture. American Anthropologist, 26(3):366-392.

Blackburn, Thomas C.

	1975	December’s Child: A Book of Chumash Oral Narratives. University of California Press, Berkeley.
	1976	Ceremonial Integration and Social Interaction in Native California.. in Native Californians: A Theoretical Retrospective, Lowell J. Bean and Thomas C. Blackburn, eds., pp. 225-243.. Ballena Press, Socorro, New Mexico.

Blackburn, Thomas C., and Lowell John Bean

1978

Kitanemuk. In Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, California, R. F. Heizer, ed. Pp. 564-569. Washington: Smithsonian Institution.

Bolton, Herbert

1935

In the South San Joaquin Ahead of Garces. Kern County Historical Society, Bakersfield, California.

Boyd, William H.

1972

A California Middle Border, The Kern River Country, 1772-The Havilah Press, Richardson, Texas.

Brewer, William H.

1966

Up and Down California in 1860-1864. University of California Press.

Brooks, George R., ed.

1977

The Southwest Expedition of Jedediah S. Smith: His Personal Account of the Journey to California, 1826-1827. Arthur H. Clark Co., Los Angeles.

Bureau of Land Management

n.d.

General Land Office Database of California Public Land Patents. Bureau of Land Management, Sacramento, Ca.

Bureau of the Census

	1860	Population enumeration sheets for Tejon Township, Los Angeles County, California. Eighth Decennial Census of the United States, State of California, County of Los Angeles. Bureau of the Census, U.S, Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.
	1880	Population enumeration sheets for Caliente Township, Kern County, California. Tenth Decennial Census of the United States, State of California, County of Kern. Bureau of the Census, U.S, Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.
	1900	Population enumeration district enumeration sheets for Townships 1 and 14, Kern County, California. Twelfth Decennial Census of the United States, State of California, County of Kern. Bureau of the Census, U.S, Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.
	1910	Population enumeration district enumeration sheets for Townships 1 and 14, Kern County, California. Thirteenth Decennial Census of the United States, State of California, County of Kern. Bureau of the Census, U.S, Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.
	1920	Population enumeration district enumeration sheets for Townships 2 and 14, Kern County, California. Fourteenth Decennial Census of the United States, State of California, County of Kern. Bureau of the Census, U.S, Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.
	1930	Population enumeration district enumeration sheets for Township 8, Kern County, California. Fifteenth Decennial Census of the United States, State of California, County of Kern. Bureau of the Census, U.S, Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.

California. Adjutant General’s Office.

1890

Records of California Men in the War of the Rebellion, 1861 to 1867, revised and compiled by Brig. Gen. Richard H. Orton, Adjutant-General of California. California Adjutant General’s Office, Sacramento.

Cappannari, Philip

n.d.

Copies of Ethnographic Field Notes, Kawaiisu, ca. 1946-1948. Department of Linguistics, University of California, Los Angeles, California.

Casebier, Dennis

1972

Carleton’s Pah-Ute Campaign. Tales of the Mojave Road, No.1, pp.1-57. Tales of the Mojave Road, Norco, California.

Caughey, John W.

1952

The Indians of Southern California in 1852: The B. D. Wilson Report and a Selection of Contemporary Comment. Huntington Library, San Marino, Ca.

Collier, Mary E. and Sylvia Barker Thalman

1991

Interviews with Tom Smith and Maria Copa: Isabel Kelly’s Ethnographic Notes on the Coast Miwok and Southern Sonoma Counties, California. Miwok Archeological Preserve of Marin, San Rafael, California Occasional Papers Number 6.

Cook, Sherburne F.

1960

Colonial Expeditions to the Interior of California: Central Valley, 1800-1820. University of California Anthropological Records, 16(6):239-292.

Coues, Elliott. ed.

1900

On The Trail of a Spanish Pioneer: The Diary and Itinerary of Francisco Garcés (Missionary Priest) in His Travels Through Sonora, Arizona, and California 1775- 1776. 2 vols. Francis P. Harper, New York.

Coville, Frederick V.

1892

The Panamint Indians of California. American Anthropologist, o.s., 5:351-361.

Davis, Maj. George W., Leslie J. Perry, Joseph W. Kirkley, eds.

1897

April 12-24, 1863- Expedition from Camp Babbitt to Keysville, Cal. In The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies. Series I, Volume 50, Parts I and II, Ch. LXII:208-210. US Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Davis, James T.

1961

Trade Routes and Economic Exchange Among the Indians of California. University of California Archaeological Survey Report 54. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Deloria, Vine and Richard W. Stoffle

1995

Native American Sacred Sites and the Department of Defense. Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.

d’ Heureuse, R.

1863

Photographic Views of the Mojave Route, Eldorado Canon and Fort Mojave, Photos 1-43. Picture Drawer, Bancroft Library, Berkeley.

Driver, Harold E.

1937

Culture Element Distributions, VI: Southern Sierra Nevada. University of California Anthropological Records 1(2):53-154

Drover, Christopher E.

1979

The Late Prehistoric Human Ecology of the Northern Mohave Sink, San Bernardino County, California. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Riverside.

Dutcher, B.H.

1893

Pinon Gathering Among the Panamint Indians. American Anthropologist, o.s., 6:377-380.

Eargle, Dolan H.

2000

The Earth is Our Mother: A Guide to The Indians of California, Their Locales and Historic Sites. Trees Company Press, San Francisco

Earle, David D.

	1990	New Evidence on the Political Geography of the Antelope Valley and Western Mojave Desert at Spanish Contact. in Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Antelope Valley and Vicinity, Bruce Love and William H. DeWitt, eds., pp. 87-104. Antelope Valley Archaeological Society, Occasional Papers No.2. Antelope Valley Archaeological Society, Lancaster, Ca.
	1997	Ethnohistoric Overview of the Edwards Air Force Base Region and the Western Mojave Desert. Prepared by Earle and Associates, Palmdale, California for Environmental Management Office, Air Force Fight Test Center, Edwards Air Force Base, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles, California.
	2000	Accounts of the Sand Canyon Region Collected from Native Elders at the Tejon Rancheria. Antelope Valley Archaeological Society Newsletter 30(9):4-6.
	2002	Overview of the Buena Vista Lake Region Ethnogeography and Ethnohistory. Earle and Associates, Palmdale, California .
	2003	Overview of the Buenavista Lake Region Ethnogeography and Ethnohistory. Earle and Associates, Palmdale, Ca. Prepared for Far Western Anthropological Group, Davis, Ca. and California Department of Transportation, Fresno, Ca.
	2004	Ethnohistorical and Ethnographic Overview and Cultural Affiliation Study of the Fort Irwin Region and the Central Mojave Desert. Report prepared for TRC Solutions Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah. Report on file with Historic Preservation Officer, Fort Irwin, San Bernardino County, California.
	2004	Native Population and Settlement in the Western Mojave Desert in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. In The Human Journey and Ancient Life in California’s Deserts: Proceedings from the 2001 Millennium Conference, Mark W. Allen and Judyth Reed, eds., pp. 173-186. Maturango Museum Press, Ridgecrest, California.
	2005	The Mojave River and the Central Mojave Desert: Native Settlement, Travel, and Exchange in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 25(1):1-38

Eerkens, Jelmer W.

1999

Common Pool Resources, Buffer Zones, and Jointly Owned Territories: Hunter-Gatherer Land and Resource Tenure in Fort Irwin, Southeastern California. Human Ecology 27(2):297-318.

Estudillo, Francisco

1895

Report of Mission Tule River Agency. In Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1894, Reports of Agents in California, pp. 119-124. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Ferrus Garcia, Anna

1996

1994 Vegetation Studies at the National Training Center, Fort Irwin, CA. Robert Niehous, Inc. Mojave Desert Ecology Project, Bureau of Land Management, Barstow, Ca.

Forde, Cyril Daryll

1931

Ethnography of the Yuma Indians. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 28 (4):83-278.

Fouts, Margaret

1976

A Teacher’s Life. in Once Upon a Desert: A Bicentennial Project, Patricia Jernigan Keeling, ed., p. 219-221. Mojave River Valley Museum Association, Barstow, California.

Fowler, Catherine S.

	1986	Subsistence . In Handbook of North American Indians: Vol. 11, Great Basin, edited by Warren L. d’Azevedo, pp.64-97. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 11, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
	1996	Historical Perspectives on Timbisha Shoshone Land Management Practices, Death Valley, California. In Case Studies in Environmental Archaeology, edited by Elizabeth J. Reitz, Lee A. Nessom, and Sylvia J. Scudder. Plenum Press, New York.
	2002?	Some Notes on Ethnographic Subsistence Systems in Mojavean Environments in the Great Basin. Journal of Ethnobiology 15(1):99-117.

Fowler, Catherine S., Molly Dufort, Mary K. Rusco, and Pauline Esteves

1999

In the Field in Death Valley: Julian Steward’s Panamint Shoshone Fieldwork. In Julian Steward and the Great Basin: The Making of an Anthropologist, edited by Richard O. Clemmer, L. Daniel Myers, and Mary Elizabeth Rudden, pp. 53-59. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Fowler, Catherine S. , Molly Dufort, Mary K. Rusco and the Historic Preservation Committee of the Timbisha Shoshone Tribe (Pauline Esteves, Grace Goad, Ed Esteves, Ken Watterson).

1995

Residence Without Reservation: Ethnographic Overview and Traditional Land Use Study, Timbisha Shoshone, Death Valley National Park, California (Phase I). Submitted to the National Park Service, Washington, D.C.

Fowler, Don D. and Catherine S. Fowler (editors)

1971

Anthropology of the Numa: John Wesley Powell’s Manuscripts of the Numic Peoples of Western North America, 1868-1880. Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology 14, Smithsonian Institution, Washington.

Galvin, John (translator)

1965

A Record of Travels in Arizona and California, 1775-1776, by Fray Francisco Garces. John Howell Books, San Francisco.

Garfinkel, Alan P. and Harold Williams

2009

The Kawaiisu Handbook: A Sourcebook and Guide to the Primary Resources on the Native Peoples of the Far Southern Sierra Nevada, Tehachapi Mountains, and Southwestern Great Basin. With Special Sections and Contributions by Mary L. Claw, David Earle, Mark Faull, Jon Hammond, Albert Knight, Jack Sprague, Del Troy, and Julie Turner. Bakersfield College Publications in Anthropology, Bakersfield, California. September 2009 Draft.

Garrett, Lewis.

1992

Postal History of San Bernardino County. San Bernardino County Museum Association Quarterly 39(4):1-77.

Geertz, Clifford

1983

"From the Native’s Point of View": On the Nature of Anthropological Understanding. in Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology, pp. 55-70. Basic Books, New York.

General Land Office

1854-1855

Survey plat of public lands, Township 32S, Range 31E, MDBM. General Land Office. US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Riverside, Ca.

Gifford, Edward W.

1918

Clans and Moieties in Southern California. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Anthropology, 14(2):155-219. Berkeley.

Goddard, Ives

1996

The Classification of the Native Languages of North America. Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 17 (Languages). Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Goss, James A.

1999

The Yamparika- Shoshones, Comanches, or Utes- or Does It Matter? In Julian Steward and the Great Basin: The Making of an Anthropologist, edited by Richard O. Clemmer, L. Daniel Myers, and Mary Elizabeth Rudden, pp. 74-84. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Gossard, Gloria

2007.

Tehachapi. Arcadia Publishing Co., Charleston, South Carolina.

Grayson, Donald K.

1993

The Desert’s Past : A Natural Prehistory of the Great Basin. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington.

Hall, Matt

1976

Inventory of Spring/Seep Locations in the East Mojave Desert Region. In Background to Historic and Prehistoric Resources of the East Mojave Desert Region; Chester King and Dennis Casebier, eds., pp. 70-193. Prepared for the U.S. Dept. of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, California Desert Planning Program. Riverside, California: The Program.

Harrington, John P.

1986

John P. Harrington Papers, Vol. 3: Southern California. Washington, D.C. Smithsonian Institution, National Anthropological Archives. [Microfilm edition. Millwood, NY: Kraus International Publications.]

Heizer, R. F.

1972

The Eighteen Unratified Treaties of 1851-1852 between the California Indians and the United States Government. University of California Archaeological Facility, Berkeley.

Irwin, Charles N., ed.

1980

The Shoshoni Indians of Inyo County, California : the Kerr Manuscript. Manuscript prepared by Mark Kerr, introductory preface by Charles N. Irwin. Ballena Press, Socorro, New Mexico, and Eastern California Museum, Independence, California.

Jackson, Donald and Mary Lee Spence

1970

The Expedition of John Charles Fremont. Volume 1: Travels from 1838 to 1844. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Johnson, David H., Monroe D. Bryand and Alden H. Miller

1948

Vertebrate Animals of the Providence Mountains Area of California. University of California Publications in Zoology 48(5):221-376.

Johnston, Bernice

1962

California’s Gabrielino Indians. Southwest Museum, Los Angeles.

Kaldenberg, Russell L.

1981

The Archaeology of Selected Springs and Playas on Fort Irwin and in Portions of the Avawatz Mountains. San Bernardino County Museum Association Quarterly 28 (3-4):1-102.

Kelly, Isabel T.

	n.d.	Notebooks of Las Vegas Band, Southern Paiute and Chemehuevi field notes. Department of Anthropology, University of Nevada, Reno.
	1934	Southern Paiute Bands. American Anthropologist 36(4):548-560.
	1953	Notebooks of Las Vegas Band, Southern Paiute and Chemehuevi field notes. University of California, Archives No. 138.1m. Anthropology Documents 17-18.
	1964	Southern Paiute Ethnography. Glen Canyon Series 21, University of Utah Anthropological Papers, 69. University of Utah, Salt Lake City.

Kelly, Isabel T. and Catherine S. Fowler

1986

Southern Paiute. In Handbook of North American Indians: Vol. 11, Great Basin, edited by Warren L. d’Azevedo, pp.368-397. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 11, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Kelsey, C. E.

1971

Census of Non-reservation California Indians, 1905-1906. Edited by Robert F. Heizer. Archaeological Research Facility, University of California, Berkeley.

Kern County Historical Society

n.d.

Kern County Historical Chronology. Kern County Historical Society, Bakersfield, Ca.

Key, Harold

1970

A Mojave Cremation. The Kiva 36:23-38.

King, Chester and Dennis Casebier

1976

Background to Historic and Prehistoric Resources of the East Mojave Desert Region; with sections by Matthew C. Hall and Carol Rector; prepared for the U.S. Dept. of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, California Desert Planning Program. Riverside, California: The Program.

Knack, Martha

1980

Ethnographic Overview. In A Cultural Resource Overview for the Amargosa-Mojave Basin Planning Units, by Claude N. Warren, Martha Knack, Elizabeth von Till Warren ; Eric W. Ritter, general editor. Bureau of Land Management, Desert Planning Staff, Riverside, California.

Kocher, A.E. and F.O. Youngs

1926

Soil Survey of the Palo Verde Area, California. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Soils. Washington, D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Kroeber, Alfred L.

	1907	Shoshonean Dialects of California. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 4(3):65 165).
	1925	Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 78. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
	1948	Seven Mohave Myths. University of California Anthropological Records 11(1).
	1951	A Mohave Historical Epic. University of California Anthropological Records 11(2)
	1959	Ethnographic Interpretations, 7-11. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 47(3):235-310.
	1972	More Mohave Myths. University of California Anthropological Records 27.

Kroeber, Clifton and Bernard L. Fontana

1986

Massacre on the Gila. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Lamb, Sydney M.

1958

Linguistic Prehistory in the Great Basin. International Journal of American Linguistics 24(2):95-100.

Laird, Carobeth

	1976	The Chemehuevis. Malki Museum, Banning, California
	1984	Mirror and Pattern: George Laird’s World of Chemehuevi Mythology. Malki Museum, Banning, California.

Latta, Frank

	1949	Handbook of the Yokuts Indians. Kern County Museum, Bakersfield, CA.
	1974	Saga of Rancho El Tejon. Bear State Books, Santa Cruz.
	1977	Handbook of the Yokuts Indians. Bear State Books, Exeter, CA.

Leland, Joy

1986

Population In Handbook of North American Indians: Vol. 11, Great Basin, edited by Warren L. d’Azevedo, pp.608-619. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 11, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Lerch, Michael K.

n.d.

Another Look at the Desert Mojave. Manuscript.

Liljeblad and Fowler 1986

Lockwood, D. L.

1872

Report of Daniel W. Lockwood. Appendix A in Preliminary Report Concerning Explorations and Surveys Principally in Nevada and Arizona…1871, edited by George M. Wheeler. Government Printing Office, Washington.

Lyman, Leo

1993

History of the Victor Valley. Manuscript, Archives, West Antelope Valley Historical Society, Lancaster, California.

Manners, Robert A.

1974

Southern Paiute and Chemehuevi: An Ethnohistorical Report. Garland American Indian Ethnohistory Series.

Mendenhall, W.C.

1909

Some Desert Watering Places in Southeastern California and Southwestern Nevada. United States Geological Survey, Water Supply Paper 224,

Merriam, C. Hart

1898-1938a The California Journals of C. Hart Merriam. Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.

1898-1938b C. Hart Merriam papers relating to work with California Indians, 1850-1974. Bulk 1898-1938. History of Science and Technology Collection. (Microfilm: BANC FILM 1022; Originals: BANC MSS 80/18 C). The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley.

	1955	Studies in California Indians. University of California Press, Berkeley.
	1967	Ethnographic Notes on California Indian Tribes. Robert F. Heizer, ed. University of California Archaeological Survey Reports, No. 68.

Miller, Wick R.

1986

Numic Languages. In Great Basin, edited by Warren L. d’Azevedo, pp.31-50. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 11, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Mills, Elaine L. and Ann J. Brickfield

1986

A Guide to the Field Notes: Native American History, Language, and Culture of Southern California/Basin. The Papers of John Peabody Harrington in the Smithsonian Institution, 1907-1957, Vol. 3.

Mission San Fernando Rey de Espana

1820-1838 Mission San Fernando Rey de España, Libro de Bautismos: Bautismo Nro. 2390 (1/31/1820) Luisa Albertonia; Nro. 2457 (7/28/1821) Ynocencia; Nro. 2470 (11/21/1821) María de la Presentación; Nro. 2476 (12/31/1821) Esperanza; Nro. 2746 (10/03/1830) Francisca; Nro. 2826 (9/16/1834) Lucia; Nro. 2827 (9/16/1834) Cornelio; Nro. 2828 (9/16/1834) Cipriano; Nro. 2829 (9/16/1834) Manuel; Nro. 2842 (3/1/1835) Rosenda [Rudesinda]; Nro. 2899 (6/7/1837) Juan Bautista; Nro. 2991 (7/26/1837) Ana Teodora; Nro. 2924 (11/19/ 1837) Ysabel; Nro. 2925 (11/24/1837) Juan de la Cruz; Nro. 2932 (3/15/1838) María Jesus.

n.d.

Book I of Baptisms, 1797-1855. Mission San Fernando Rey de España, San Fernando, California.

Mission San Gabriel Archangel

n.d.

Book I of Baptisms, 1773-1821. Mission San Gabriel Archangel, San Gabriel, California.

Mithun, Marianne

1999

The Languages of Native North America. University Press, Cambridge, UK

Moapa Band

2003

Information provided by Moapa Band on the history and current development of the Moapa reservation community.

Mollhausen, Baldwin

1969 [1858] Diary of A Journey from the Mississippi to the Coasts of the Pacific, Vol. 2. Johnson Reprint, New York.

Morris, Lucie.

n.d.

Interviews of Pioneer Residents of Antelope Valley and Surrounding Areas, circa 1935- 1937. Typescript.

Mundie, Christine L.

1970

Tehachapi Pass, Ma’a-puts / Phillips Ranch Excavation Research. On file Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center, California State University, Bakersfield.

Nelson, E. W., Jr.

1891

The Panamint and Saline Valley (Cal.) Indians. American Anthropologist 4(4):371-372.

Nuez, Fr. Joaquín

1819

List of Fugitive Neophyte Indians of Mission San Gabriel Prepared by Fr. Joaquin Nuez, 1819. Santa Barbara Mission Archive Library, Special Collections, California Mission Documents. Document 1639.

Palomares, José

	1808	Diary of José Palomares, 1808. Provincial State Papers, Missions and Colonization, Vol. I, pp. 232-242. California State Archives, Sacramento.
Palomares, Francisco
	1808	Diary of Francisco Palomares. Provincial State Papers, Missions and Colonization, Vol. I, pp.232-242. California State Achieves, Sacramento.

Park, Willard Z., Edgar Siskin, Anne M. Cook, William T. Mulloy, Marvin K. Opler, Isabel T. Kelly, and Maurice L. Zigmond

1938

Tribal Distribution in the Great Basin. American Anthropologist 40(4):622-638

Parker, Patricia and Tom King

1990

Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties. National Register Bulletin No. 38. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Washington, D.C.

Pauley, Joe

1994

Personal communication regarding procurement of desert tortoises in late1920s by himself and others in Muroc region for the urban market.

Phillips, George Harwood

	1975	Chiefs and Challengers: Indian resistance and Cooperation in Southern California. University of California Press, Berkeley.
	1993	Indians and Intruders in Central California, 1769-1849. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma.
	1997	Indians and Indian Agents: The Origins of the Reservation System in California, 1849-1852. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma
	2004	Bringing Them Under Submission: California’s Tejón Indian Reservation and Beyond, 1852-1864.

Powers, Bob

1974

North Fork Country. Westernlore Press, Los Angeles.

Powell, J.W., and G.W. Ingalls

1873-1874 Report of Special Commissioners J.W. Powell and G.W. Ingalls. In Report of the Secretary of the Interior, 1874. U.S. House of Representatives, 43rd congress, 1st Session, Ex. Doc. No. 157, pp. 2-31.

Rhode, David

	2002	Native Plants of Southern Nevada: An Ethnobotany. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Roth, George
	1977	The Calloway Affair of 1880: Chemehuevi Adaptations and Chemehuevi-Mohave Relations. Journal of California Anthropology 4(2):273-286.

Sapir, Edward

1930-1931 The Southern Paiute Language. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 65(1-3). Boston.

Schneider, Joan

1989

The Archaeology of the Afton Canyon Site. San Bernardino County Museum Quarterly 36(1):1-161.

Sebastian, Lynne

1993

Protecting Traditional Cultural Properties Through the Section 106 Process. CRM Vol. 16:22-26.

Service, Elman R

1962

Primitive Social Organization. Random House, New York.

Settle, Glen and Dorene Settle

1984

Antelope Valley Pioneers. Rosamond: Kern-Antelope Historical Society, Inc.

Shapiro, Judith

1986

Kinship In Handbook of North American Indians: Vol. 11, Great Basin, edited by Warren L. d’Azevedo, pp.620-627. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 11, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Stanley , J.Q.A.

1866-1867 Report of J.Q.A. Stanley, Special Indian Agent, Los Angeles, Ca. to Charles Maltby, Superintendent of Indian Affairs, California, August 5, 1866. Report of the Secretary of the Interior. Executive Documents. Thirty-Ninth Congress, Second Session, pp. 102-103.

Steward, Julian H.

	1937	Linguistic Distributions and Political Groups of the Great Basin Shoshoneans. American Anthropologist 39:625-634.
	1938	Basin-Plateau Aboriginal Sociopolitical Groups. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 120.
	1955	The Great Basin Shoshonean Indians. in Theory of Cultural Change, by Julian H. Steward, pp. 101-121
	1977	The Foundations of Basin-Plateau Shoshonean Society. In Evolution and Ecology: Essays on Social Transformation, Jane C. Steward and Robert F. Murphy, eds., pp. 366-406.

Stewart, Kenneth M.

1983

Mohave. in Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 10, Southwest, Alfonso Ortiz, ed., pp.55-70. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution

Stewart, Omer C.

	1939	The Northern Paiute Bands. University of California Anthropological Records 2(3):127-149.
	1966	Tribal Distributions and Boundaries in the Great Basin.
	1942	Culture Element Distributions, XVIII: Ute-Southern Paiute. University of California Anthropological Records 6(4):231-256. University of California Press, Berkeley.
	1959	Shoshone History and Social Organization. In Proceedings of the 33rd International Congress of Americanists, Vol. 2, pp. 132-142.

Strong, William Duncan

1929

Aboriginal Society in Southern California. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 26(1)1-358. Berkeley.

Theodoratus, Dorothea, Geri Emberson, David White, Stephen W. Conkling, and Deborah McLean.

1998

Death Valley National Park Cultural Affiliation Study. LSA Associates. Submitted to Death Valley National Park, Contract No. 1443CX8130-96-003.

Thomas, David Hurst, Lorann S.A. Pendleton, and Stephen C. Cappannari

1986

Western Shoshone. In Handbook of North American Indians: Vol. 11, Great Basin, edited by Warren L. d’Azevedo, pp.262-283. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 11, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Thompson, David G.

1929

The Mohave Desert Region, California: A Geographic, Geologic, and Hydrologic Reconnaissance. United States Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 578. United States Department of the Interior, USGS, United States Govt. Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Thompson , Richard and Kathryn Thompson

1995

Pioneer of the Mojave: The Life and Times of Aaron G. Lane. Desert Knolls Press, Apple Valley, California.

Turner, Raymond M.

1994

Mojave Desertscrub. in Biotic Communities: Southwestern United States and Northwestern Mexico, David E. Brown, ed., pp. 157-168. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Twisselman, E. C.

1967

A Flora of Kern County, California. In The Wasman Journal of Biology 25(1&2):1-395.

United States Decennial Census

1880

Population enumeration district enumeration sheets for Lookout and Resting Springs Precincts, Inyo County, California and Mountain Precinct, San Bernardino County, California. Tenth Decennial Census of the United States, State of California, Counties of Inyo and San Bernardino. Bureau of the Census, U.S, Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.

US Geological Survey

1908

Kernville, CA 30-minute quadrangle.

Van Dyke, Dix

1976

Life on the Mojave River Valley: The Paiutes of 1904. in Once Upon a Desert: A Bicentennial Project, Patricia Jernigan Keeling, ed., p. 41. Mojave River Valley Museum Association, Barstow, California.

Van Valkenburgh, R. F.

1976

Chemehuevi Notes. Indian Claims Commission Docket 88 330. In: American Indian Ethnohistory, California and Basin Plateau Indians, Paiute Indians II, pp. 225 253. Garland Publishing, Inc., New York.

Vernon, Charles Clark

1956

A History of the San Gabriel Mountains. Historical Society of Southern California Quarterly 38(1): 39-60; 38(2): 141-166; 38(3): 263-296; 38(4): 373- 384.

Voegelin, Erminie Wheeler

1938

Tubatulabal Ethnography. University of California Anthropological Records 2(1):1-84.

Vredenburgh, Larry M

1996

Early Mines of the Southern Clark Mountains, the Northern Mescal Range and the Ivanpah Mountains. in Punctuated Chaos in the Northeastern Mojave Desert, Robert E. and Jennifer Reynolds, ed., pp.67-72. San Bernardino County Museum Quarterly 43(1-2): 1-155.

Vredenburgh, Larry M., Gary L. Shumway, Russell D. Hartill

1981

Desert Fever: An Overview of Mining in the California Desert. Living West Press, Canoga Park, California

Walker, Clifford J.

1986

Back Door to California: The Story of the Mojave River Trail. Mojave River Valley Museum Association, Barstow, California.

Wallace, William J.

1978

Southern Valley Yokuts. In California (ed. R. F. Heizer), pp. 448-461. Handbook of North American Indians, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, vol. 8. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Wheeler Survey

1876

Atlas Sheet No. 73. In Topographical Atlas Projected to Illustrate Exploration West of the 100th Meridian of Longitude. Geographical Surveys West of the One-Hundredth Meridian, in California, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, Arizona, and Montana [Under the Direction of George M. Wheeler, First Lieutenant of Engineers, U.S.A.] Washington, D.C.

Whipple, Lieut. A.W., Thomas Eubank, Esq., and Prof. Wm. W. Turner.

1856

Report Upon the Indian Tribes. Reports of Explorations and Surveys to Ascertain the Most Practicable and Economical Route for a Railroad from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean. Vol. 3, Part 3. U.S. 33d Congress, 1st Session. Senate. Ex doc no. 29, Senate executive document (United States. Congress. Senate) ; 33rd Congress, 2nd session. Senate Exec. Doc. No. 78. Washington, D.C.

Whitley, David S.

1998

History and Prehistory of the Coso Range: The Native American Past on the Western Edge of the Great Basin. In Coso Rock Art, A New Perspective, Elva Younkin, ed., pp.29-68. Maturango Museum Press, Ridgecrest, California.

Wilke, Philip J., and Harry Lawton

1976

The Expedition of Captain J. W. Davidson from Ft. Tejon to Owens Valley in 1859. Ballena Press Publications in Archaeology, Ethnology, and History Number 8. Socorro, New Mexico.

Williamson, R. S.

1856

Reports of Explorations and Surveys to Ascertain the Most Practicable and Economical Route For a Railroad From the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean , Vol. 5. Made Under the Direction of the Secretary of War, in 1853-1854. A. O. P Nicholson, Washington, D.C.

Zeitelhack, June and Jan Zeitelhack La Barge

1976

Operations of the Pacific Coast Borax Company 1883-1907: Daggett, Marion, Borate, and the Borate-Daggett Railroad. in Once Upon a Desert: A Bicentennial Project, Patricia Jernigan Keeling, ed., pp.96-104. Mojave River Valley Museum Association, Barstow, California.

Zigmond, Maurice

	n.d.	Ethnographic Field Notes, Kawaiisu, ca. 1936-1974. Department of Linguistics, University of California, Los Angeles, California.
	1938	Kawaiisu Territory. In Tribal Distributions in the Great Basin, by Willard Z. Park, et al, pp. 634-638. American Anthropologist 40(4).
	1941	Ethnobotanical Studies Among California and Great Basin Shoshoneans. PhD Dissertation. Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
	1977	The Supernatural World of the Kawaiisu. In Flowers of the Wind: Papers on Ritual, Myth, and Symbolism in California and the Southwest edited by Thomas C. Blackburn, pp. 59-95. Socorro, New Mexico: Ballena Press Anthropological Papers No. 8.
	1980	Kawaiisu Mythology, An Oral Tradition of South-central California. Ballena Press Anthropological Papers No. 18.
	1981	Kawaiisu Ethnobotany. Salt Lake City, Utah: University of Utah Press.
	1986	Kawaiisu. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 11 Great Basin, edited by Warren L. d’Azevedo, pp. 398-411. Washington, D. C.: Smithsonian Institution.

Zigmond, Maurice, Curtis G. Booth, and Pamela Munro

	1981	Kawaiisu: A Grammar and Dictionary with Texts. University of California Los Angeles, Institute of Linguistics. University of California Press, Los Angeles.
	1991	Kawaiisu: A Grammar and Dictionary with Texts. University of California Publications in Linguistics, Volume 119. University of California Press, Berkeley.