4 The Napa District and Wappo Prehistory James A. Bennyhoff (1977, with revision in 1986) A S THE SOU HERNO UInERS of the Yukian stock, the Wappo of Napa Valley have posed intrigu- ing interpretive problems ever since Powers (1877:197) suggested a Russian River Valley home- land for the Yuki-Wappo, with later displacement by intruding Pomo. It has long been recognized that archaeology could contribute crucial insight on the prehistory of this most ancient (?) of surviving linguis- tic stocks in California, but the published results to date have been so deficient that we are faced with more questions than answers. In this paper, after a brief review of the problems, I will summarize the available archaeological sequence and suggestcertain marker types which serve to distinguish the Napa District from neighboring districts. Despite inad- equate data, I will conclude with a series of hypotheses for future testing as to when the Wappo first entered Napa Valley. Unresolved Problems The major problem facing the prehistorian who seeks to link the ethnographic Wappo with the ar- chaeological Napa District is the lack of established ethnic boundaries as of A.D. 1770. The "standard" maps (Barrett 1908; Kroeber 1925; Heizer 1966:map 4) are not in agreement and clearly reflect post-1830 changes. As documented by McClellan (1953:map 2) and Gifford (1967), the Lile'ek of Clear Lake and the Alexander Valley Wappo represent post-Contact movements. Mission documents and archaeology indicate that Southern Patwin (Pooewin) claims to Sonoma Valley and Suscol (Nap-15) reflect post- Secularization shifts. While Powers's (1877:196) restriction of the Wappo to the Geysers-Calistoga locality is too extreme, I suggest that Merriam (Heizer 1966:map 5) was correct in placing the southern Wappo boundary near Yountville, with an expanded Napato-Nanutawe group (Hill dialect of Southern Patwin) occupying the mouth of the Napa Valley and the Soda Creek drainage. In addition to the fact that the Valley was named after the Napato Patwin, the burials and primary cremation found at Nap-14 pro- vide links with Sol-2 in Patwin territory. Moreover, preliminary analysis of female personal names sup- port Merriam's dialect separation of tex Napato. Fi- nally, I suggestthat the Wilikos Wappo didnotoccupy theheadwatersofSonomaCreekaboriginally; Sonoma ValleywasdesertedwhenMissionSolanowasfounded in 1823, and the late baptismal dates for Guiluc (first contacted by Mission San Rafael) indicate a more distant location in 1822-23. Thus, in addition to more archaeology inborderlocalities, more intensive analy- sis of mission records, place names, and linguistics is needed to define aboriginal Wappo boundaries. For 50 Toward a New Taxonomic Framework for Central California present purposes, my definition of the Napa District includes only the watershed of the Napa River north of Yountville. With minor exceptions, our ethnographic view of Wappo culture is derived from Alexander Valley informants; no Culture Element Distribution list was attempted. The archaeological record at present does not support the universal opinion of ethnographers that Wappo culture was indistinguishable from that of Pomo. Rather, it would appear that the remnant Western Wappo group was forced to acculturate to the more integrated Russian River and Clear Lake Pomo tribelets as pressure from white settlement in the Napa Valley increased. The deficient archaeological record is well known. Such major sites as Nap-I and Nap-32 were excavated by shovel in foot levels without screening; and no adequate horizontal or vertical samples from either site were obtained. Few recorded grave lots are available to establish contemporaneity of types found scattered in multicomponent middens and in the large undocumented collections obtained by amateurs. The major work (Heizer 1953) was written by beginning students in 1949 who failed to incorporate crucial information. My recent reanalysis of this material revealed numerous errors (e.g., the location of Nap- 37; confusion of Burials 1 and 7 in table 3; "clam disc beads" reported in table C, app. IV, Bur. 3), omissions (e.g., dtree burials were omitted in the Nap-32 analy- sis; points with cremations were omitted in table 3; no tabulation of the artifacts with cremations was pro- vided; no depth analysis was provided for the bone tools), inadequate typologies (e.g., stemmed and cor- ner-notched points both lumped in Type 25; serrated and non-serrated forms were not separated; willow- leaf points mixed with drills at Nap-131), and mean- ingless tables (e.g., table 4 [shell beads]; table A, app. HI Rumped araIngement of traits from Nap- 129, -131]; tabes A, B. app. IV [the Late occupation at Nap-32 is largely confined to the northeast edge, but Middle and Late horizon traits are a mixed jumble in this single depth table]). Hence, significant details of a skeletal frame- work remain concealed to this day, and a complete and repetitious reanalysis will have to be done. I will merely attempt to indicate major gaps in the available data on the basis of an extremely preliminary and incomplete survey. While the existing collection in the Lowie [now Phoebe A. Hearst] Museum of An- thropology should be large enough to be representa- tive of the later periods, most specimens lack prove- nience. Hence, many problems of phasing and func- tion can only be resolved by new, carefully controlled excavations in addition to rigorous typological and laboratory analyses. The full significance of most types will remain quite uncertain until more grave lots become available. Both radiocarbon and obsidian hydration dating pose problems too numerous to men- tion herein. The cultural sequence, as currently con- ceived, appears in figure 4.1; site locations appear in Heizer (1953:map 1). Cultural Phases Heizer and Elsasser (1953:23, note 6) suggested that a basalt-using culture might have occupied the Napa Valley prior to the shift to the use of obsidian. If correct, aMerriam phase (type componentNap-129D), characterized by the use of basalt core tools, might be defined as the oldest remains yet recognized in the Napa District. However, Fredrickson (1973) found that the occasional use of basalt is typical of the later Borax Lake Pattern, and handstones/milling slabs were associated with the abundant basalt tools that characterize the Oakshores assemblage (Berryessa I:True, Baumhoff and Helen 1979). The scattered distribution of artifacts and near-absence of projectile points associated with the Oakshores assemblage sug- gest that specialized procurement activities, rather than temporal factors, account for the basalt emphasis. Hence, until stratigraphic evidence demonstrates the priority of basalt core tools over milling equipment, theMerriam/Oakshores assemblage (6000 -3000 B.C.) will be assigned to the early phase of the Borax Lake Pattern. The Hultman phase (type component Nap- 13 1 A) appears established as a late component of the Borax Lake Pattern (Fredrickson 1973). The unpublished 1960 excavations presumably strengthened the small number of reported handstones (and milling stones?), but Borax Lake wide-stem points have yet to be reported. The next two phases (Bale and Rutherford) must remain tentative until a detailed analysis has been The Napa District and Wappo Prehistory FIGURE 4.1 Napa District Cultural Sequence DATING SCHEMES C A2 Bi Obsidian Clark (1964) A.D. 1800 A.D. 1800 A.D. 1800 .5 1700 1700 1700 .7 1500 1500 1500 1100 1300 1100 1.15 1.35 1.65 900 1.95 Hydration Origer (1987) 1.0 1.3 1.75 2.1 2.4 2.65 A.D. 500 700 2.25 500 2.45 300 2.75 2.9 3.1 3.3 Napa District Phase Historic WAPPO Late LYMAN Early LYMAN DAVIS OAKVILLE *.-....-...................-... BRIDGE YOUNT RIVER GLEN 500 3.65 GODDARD KOLB ........................ ..........._ . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ........... ... .. . . ....... ..... ......... .............. E/ T ,,,'......... ... . . . RUTHERFORD BALE HULTMAN ,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .." . . .b ... . . . . . ..... .... :::..... .::::::.:- 2b .......... I C ... ... ... .............. ......... ...... lb.. ....................... la M/LT Terminal Late Inter- mediate zJ 4 A.D.100 B.C. 200 2.95 3.3 3.5 3.8 4.0 1000 1500 B.C. 3000 4.13 4.7 6.1 4.4 4.8 5.7 Dating schemes C, A2, and BI are from Bennyhoff and Hughes (1987:147, fig. 10); obsidian hydration rim thickness expressed in microns (j). 51 52 Toward a New Taxonomic Frameworkfor Central California completed. Both phases are represented by strati- graphic layers below Kolb phase burials at Nap-32. Since the Kolb phase can be firmly placed in the Early/ Middle Horizon Transition, both Bale and Rutherford must be contemporaneous with the Windmiller Pat- tern of the Delta region. However, both phases feature exclusive use of the mortar and pestle, so they repre- sent early phases of the Berkeley Pattern. Movement from the south is inferred, where older relatives are known (SMa-77, Ala-307, Mrn-152, Mm-138, Mrn- 266). Assignment to the Houx aspect must remain quite tentative until more analysis of the Main mate- rial has been completed. The Bale phase (type component Nap-32G) is represented by artifacts from the basal yellow loam layer (ca. 3 feet thick) at Nap-32 (Heizer 1953:figs. 2, 3; app. IV). Traitsinclude morta and pestles,bipointed spears,"Type 17" points, and ulna awls and flakers. Whether steatite and Olivella split drilled beads are intrusive remains to be determined. It can be proposed that dependence on an acorn staple is established in this phase and persists, along with an emphasis on ulna tools, to historic times in the Napa District. The Rutherford phase (type component Nap- 32F) is represented by artifacts from the brown mid- den layer and the grave associations of Burials 2, 6, and 7. In addition to flexed burial, new traits include leaf-shaped points, Excelsior points, one concave- base point, cannon bone awls, a gorge hook, and painted slabs (not to be confused with the shaped tablets of protohistoric and historic times). Mortars, pestles, ulna awls and flakers, and exclusive use of obsidian forpoints continue from the Bale phase. The brown midden suggests seasonal occupation. Heizer and Squire (1953:319) suggest that two slab mortars were used with a basketry hopper, but I have not yet found these specimens in the Phoebe A. Hearst Mu- seum collection. The Kolb phase (type component Nap-32E) is defined on the basis of six flexed burials (nos. 1, 3-5, 8, 9), the graves for which were dug from the upper black midden. In association were Olivella bevelled beads and oval saddles, marker types for the Early/ Middle Horizon Transition as established by occur- rence with Windmiller types at SJo- 142 and SJo-91; bevelled beads occurred with Macoma clam discs (another marker type) at Lak-261. Additional traits include Olivella ring beads (typically early Middle Horizon), unique abalone ornaments (Heizer 1953:app. IV, pl. Bp, q), triangular abalone ornaments (all H. rufescens), bone spatula, incised bone, a bird-bone whistle, ulna tools, Excelsior and leaf-shaped points, and small mortars. Only one of thirty-eight ornaments was made from H. cracherodii, but the punctation on the three wide triangulate ornaments should be related to the similar decorative technique found on abalone ornaments in the terminal Windmiller components at SJo-l 12 and Cal-237 as well as similar decoration on bone in the early Middle Horizon at Ala-309. Seden- tary occupation is inferred at Nap-32 on the basis of the black midden. The Goddard phase (type component Nap-IH) can be defined from the burials at Nap-l and the deeper midden. Olivella saucers and rings place the burials in the early Middle Horizon. Excelsior points and ulna tools continue from the Kolb phase. The brown midden may indicate seasonal occupation. A major problem in the Napa District concerns the definition oflaterMiddle Horizon phases. Despite the large Lillard and Davis collections, only two square saddle beads from mixed deposit are known at present; no fish spears, rectangular ornaments, or other later Middle Horizon diagnostics have been reported. Grave lots will be needed to clarify what appears to be a very stable point sequence. The Yount phase (Nap-IG) is based on four earspools without provenience and may represent the terminal Middle Horizon, rather than the Middle/Late Horizon Transition. Most of our evidence for Phase 1 of the Late Horizon (Augustine Pattern) is based on point types obscured by faulty typology and badly mixed midden deposit. The Bridge phase (Nap-IF) is defined on the basis of one scored abalone ornament and one infant burial with Olivella thin rectangles from Nap-l, and three thin rectangles from Nap-32 (all might represent the early Oakville phase). Since no laterburials occur, one may hypothesize that cremation had become normal, but the earliest datable cremation represents Late Phase 1. The widespread Oakville phase (Middle Phase 1, Nap-lE) is defined by the occurrence of straight- stemmed arrow points with many square serrations The Napa District and Wappo Prehistory 53 ("Type 30"); the expanding stem variant has yet to be separated from 'Types" 29 and 26. Serrated scapulae appear for the first time. Faulty typology also ob- scures late Phase 1 at present (Davis phase, Nap- ID:cremation 6), but it should be noted that no bead lots with Olivella cupped beads or end-perforated thin rectangles have yet been reported. The protohistoric Lyman phase (Phase 2, Nap- 348A,B) is abundant all over Napa Valley, but grave lots of the earlier portion remain rare. Likewise, only minimal data are available for the complex historic period. Marker Traits of the Napa District With such a skeletal outline available, it may seem preposterous to attempt to distinguish a Napa District. Sonoma Valley (historic Coast Miwok) remains virtually unknown, as does the northern bor- der occupied historically by Pomo and Lake Miwok. The Solano District (Historic Southern Patwin) has a fair sequence but remains unanalyzed in detail. In addition, we are dealing with a sub-regional diffusion sphere (marked by painted stone tablets and an aba- lone ornaments complex in Protohistoric/Historic times) which blurs the distinctiveness of the Napa District; clarification can only come from detailed percentage frequencies. Nonetheless, the following is offered as a beginning attempt to follow the ethno- graphic Wappo into the past (cf. figure 4.2). Historic burials and identifiable tribelet centers (Nap-l = Callajomanus; Nap-4,5 = Eaimus) allow one to equate the Lyman phase (Protohistoric) with ancestral Wappo, while differences observable at Patwin centers (Nap-15 = Suscol, first occupied after secularization; Nap-59 in Berryessa Valley = Topaito; Nap-39 = Tulukai) and Coast Miwok centers support the definition of the St. Helena aspect as ancestral Wappo. Marker traits in the Lyman phase (stanred traits occur in historic burials) include: * 1. Solid band style of painted stone tablets (Heizer 1953:fig 2, b-e). (The Patwin style is polychrome with crisscross designs; the cen- ter for this protohistoric cult is Nap-57, Wooden Valley Patwin, but tablets have been found as far away as the historic Nisenan site Sac-16). 2. Hatched triangle style on incised bird- bone ear tubes (Heizer 1953:fig. 1 1 e). *3. Absence of Desert Side-notched and side-notched leaf-shaped arrow points. *4. Low frequency of simple leaf-shaped arrow points. *5. Absence of chert drills; use of "Type 40" obsidian drills in the manufacture of clam disc beads. (Strongest contrast with Sonoma Pomo.) 6. Magnesite pipes without double flange (probably historic). *7. Little emphasis on abalone ornaments (strongestcontrast with Berryessa and Wooden Valley Patwin). Positive traits which distinguish the prehistoric phases of the St. Helena aspect ("Phase 1") will require metrics. While Napa Valley knappers almost equalled the square serration skill of Delta knappers, I believe Napa Valley serrated points are thicker with a higher frequency of pointed serration; shorter points and miserable serration distinguish Sonoma and most Main points. More emphasis on leather may be a Wappo legacy from a northern homeland, evidenced archaeologically by special bone beamers (Heizer 1953:298). The late sample is large enough to empha- size such notable absences as simple harpoons and effigy ornaments (especially banjos) which sharply differentiate the Napa District from the Solano Dis- trict. The problem of cremation is too complex to warrant discussion herein, but one may hypothesize that the Wappo entered Napa Valley practicing sec- ondary cremation at the beginning of the Late Hori- zon' and this practice later spread to the Coast Miwok (middle Phase 1), Pomo (Phase 2), and Costanoan (Phase 2). Otherwise, the absence of gravepit burning (strong among the Patwin) is difficult to explain. The sample of components for the Houx aspect is too limited to emphasize, but two ornament types from Nap-32E have not been found elsewhere, while the absence of split-rib strigils, fish spears, mesh By this hypothesis, the single infant burial in the Oakville phase at Nap-l represents an individual too poor to merit cremation. 54 Toward a New Taxonomic Framework for Central Cal#fornia A 4A t ~47 # 9LON4 5685 8 1 " I I a 9 The Napa District and Wappo Prehistory 55 FIGURE 4.2 Napa District: Significant artifact types. Relative scale attempted for related groups. Position of specimens shown within phases has no chronological significance. Approximate length or diameter of artifacts is provided in caption where available. Reproduced courtesy of Academic Press, Inc. 1. Olivella lipped bead; 2. Magnesite disc bead; 3. Magnesite cylinder, 4-S. Haliotis ornaments, 2.9 cm.; 6. Steatite pipe, 2.8 cm.; 7. Decorated stone tablet Qhatched area is painted red), 6.2 cm.; 8. Obsidian corner-notched arrow points, 5.1 cm.; 9-10. Incised bone tube fragments; 11-12. Clam shell disc beads; 13. Olivella thin rectangle bead (pendant); 14. Magnesite disc bead with drilled decoration; 15. Magnesite disc bead; 16. Magnesite cylinder with drilled decoration; 17. Slate pendant, 6.4 cm.; 18. Steatite hourglass bead, 7 mm. (average length); 19. Steatite tubular bead, 1.1 cm.; 20. Steatite disc, 1.5 cm.; 21. Haliotis ornament, 3 cam.; 22. Haliotis ornament, 2.2 cm.; 23. Haliotis ornament,4.7 cm.; 24. Haliotisornament, 2.7 cm.; 25. Haliotisornament, 3.3 cm.; 26. Haliotisomament; 27. Steatite pipe, 41.8 cm.; 28. Ulna flaker, 9 cm. (average length); 29. Decorated stone tablet (hatched area is painted red), 2.54 cm.; 30. Obsidian corner-notchedprojectilepoint, 3.9 cm.; 31. Obsidian projectilepoint, 5.4 cm.; 32. Obsidian drill, 4.4 cm.; 33. Incised bone tube fragment; 34. Hopper mortar and pestle; 35. Obsidian serrated, corner-notched projectile point, 4.7 cm.; 36. Obsidian stemmed projectile point with square serrations, 3.3 cm.; 37. Obsidian corner- notched projectile point with square serrations, 3.3 cm.; 38. Obsidian biface, 9 cm.; 39. Keeled obsidian tool 6 cm.; 40. Obsidianknife, 5.7 cm.;41. Steatiteringbead; 42. Steatitepipefragment; 43. Obsidianexpanding-stem projectile point, 2.2 cm.; 44. Obsidian corner-notched projectile point with square serrations, 5.6 cm.; 45. Obsidian serrated projectilepoint, 5.4cm.; 46. Metapodialawl(TypeAlbII); 47. Bird-bonewhisde;48. Despinedscapulagrasscutter, 49. Ulna matting tool; 50. Metapodial beamer; 51. Olivella thin rectangle bead; 52. Haliotis pendant with scored decoration, 4.35 cm.; 53. Steatite ear plug, 2.85 cm.; 54. Olivella square saddle bead; 55. Obsidian bangle; 56. Obsidian biface; 57. Obsidian burin faceted biface fragment; 58. Scapula saw fragment; 59. Bone needle, 8.8 cm.; 60. Charmstone, 6.7 cm.; 61. Charmstone, 6.1 cm.; 62. Olivella split-drilled bead; 63. Olivella saucerbead; 64. Mica ornament; 65. Bear claw; 66. Bone bead; 67. Obsidian projectile point, 3.1 cm.; 68. Obsidian drill, 5.2 cm.; 69. Metapodial awl (Type AlbI); 70. MetapLodial awl (Type AlbIl); 71. Bone knife fragment; 72. Perforated bone splint, 5.98 cm.; 73. Plummet charmstone, 9.9 cm. (average length); 74. Ulna fiber tool, 12 cm. (average length); 75. Beveled Olivella bead; 75. Olivella ring bead; 77. Olivella oval saddle bead; 78-79. Haliotis ornaments; 80. Haliotis ornament with punctate decoration, 9.3 cm.; 81. Haliotis ornament, 6.7 cm.; 82. Incised bone; 83. Bow moar and pestle; 84. Decorated sandstone tablet (hatched area is painted red), 15.24 cm.; 85. Obsidian shouldered projectile point, 6.5 cm.; 86. Cannon bone awl; 87. Ulna awl; 88. Perforated bone splint; 89. Bipointed bone pin; 90. Quartz crystals; 91. Obsidian projectilepoint, 3.1 cm.; 92. Obsidian drill, 6.7 cm.; 93. Ulna flaker, 9 cm. (average length); 94. Bone punch fragment; 95. Chert chopper, 96. Obsidian drill, 5.5 cm.; 97. Keeled obsidian tool, 6.4 cm.; 98. Obsidian biface, 10.4 cm.; 99. Obsidian projectile point, 5.9 cm.; 100. Obsidian projectile point, 5.7 cm.; 101. Obsidian projectile point, 5.7 cm.; 102. Milling slab and handstone. 56 Toward a New Taxonomic Frameworkfor Central California gauge, tibia 'wands', atlatl spurs, and otherbone tools serves to distinguish the Napa District from neigh- boring districts to the east and south. The emphasis on ulna tools is a Napa District markertrait as farback as the Bale phase, while the emphasis on obsidian (with the non-importation of chipped stone artifacts) extends back to the Hultman phase. Exportation of finished points into the Delta can be documented from at least 3000 B.C. (SJo-68); even when this trade was briefly interrupted in early Middle Horizon times, exportation continued to the Sutter District (Sac-99). Wappo Prehistory On the basis of current evidence, I favor the view that the Wappo entered Napa Valley at the beginning of te Late Horizon, separating Lake and Coast Miwok. The Houx aspect represents ancestral Lake Miwok, the McClure aspect represents ancestral CoastMiwok, while the Morse aspect represents ancestral Bay-Plains Mi- wok. Miwok continuity was broken by intrusive Patwin, bringing key elements of the Augustine Pattern taken over from intrusive Algic. This suggestion, however, conflicts with the linguistic reconstruction of Callaghan (1964) who proposed a Sierra homeland for Miwok. I also suggest that the Houx aspect represents ancestral Yukian, with movement of the Yuki proper northward. The distinctive Yuki physical type and culture devel- oped after the sepamrion from Wappo. The main evidence for this is the importance of obsidian and obsidian ceremony (absent in Round Valley) in Yuld culture. AtpresentaClearLakehearthforYuki-Wappo seems preferable. Greg White (1984; White and Fredrick- son 1992), however, has hypothesized that the Yukian ancestors entered Califomia relatively late, ca. 3000 B.C., as the Willits Pattern.