The Aboriginal Population of the North Coast of California Part 13

_Lah-ki-yo-me-po-goot_ (Merriam), _Loknoma_ (Barrett). Refer to preceding discussion.

_Tu-le-yo-me-po-goot_ (Merriam). _Tuleyome_ (Barrett), _Tule-yomi_ (Kroeber). This is widely known as the largest village of the Lake Miwok.

_O-la-yo-me-po-goot_ (Merriam), _Oleyome_ (Barrett), _Ole-yomi_ (Kroeber). This village is also known as having been large and important.

_Wen-nok_ (Merriam), _Guenoc_ (Barrett), _Guenoc_ (Kroeber).

Considerable mystery surrounds this name, although it has been known and used for nearly one hundred years. Barrett says that the Indians never employed the name but that it referred to a subtribe, or group a.s.sociated with the Oleyome. Kroeber says that "it was admitted as a native name, but untranslated." He thinks it may be identical with _Wilok-yomi_, a village mentioned by his informant.

Merriam says it was either (1) the name of a lake the valley of which contained three rancherias or (2) on Oleyome band, located 4 miles northeast of Middletown. In view of the wide divergence of opinion the safest procedure is to consider the Guenoc as simply const.i.tuting a portion of the Oleyome.

_Kah-we-yo-me_ (Merriam), _Kahweyome_ (Barrett), _Kawi-yomi_ (Kroeber). Merriam says the village was located on Cache Creek, as do Barrett and Kroeber. Kroeber says: "My informant did not refer to the two sites mentioned here by Barrett, Tsitsa-pukut and Kawi-yomi, and when asked about the former replied that some of the Miwok had drifted there, presumably in later years." If Kroeber's informant was correct, then both Barrett's villages are postaboriginal and must be omitted from further consideration.

_Shoyome_ (Merriam), _Coyome_ (Barrett), _Kai-yomi-pukut_ (Kroeber). This town is placed by all three authorities on Putah Creek, and hence is to be distinguished clearly from the preceding town, Kah-we-yo-me. Furthermore it was known to the pre-American Californians as Coyayomi, Joyayomi, or Cauyomi. Its aboriginal existence seems established.

_Pe-te-no-mah_ (Merriam), _Petinoma_ (Barrett). This village is placed on upper Putah Creek by both Merriam and Barrett; hence its existence is probable.

_Holilelemona_ (Merriam), _Holilelenoma_ (Barrett). Barrett says this was a camp site.

_Koo-pa-choo_ (Merriam, MS "Yukean"), _Kupetcu_ (Barrett). Barrett says this was a camp site.

_Uyuhanoma_ (Barrett). _Yawi-yomi-pukut_ (Kroeber). Both authors place this village near Middletown. Its existence is highly probable.

_Hoo-koo-yo-me-po-koot_ (Merriam). _Hukuyome_ or _Siwiyome_ (Barrett). Barrett says that this village was established in 1835 by survivors from Oleyome. It is therefore not aboriginal.

_Ka-bool-po-goot_ (Merriam). _Kebulpukut_ (Barrett). _Tubud_ or _Tubul_ (Kroeber). Existence highly probable since it is mentioned by three investigators.

_Kah-dah-yo-me_ (Merriam), _Kadoi-yomi-pukut_ (Kroeber). Existence probable.

_Kil-le-yo-ke-po-koot_ (Merriam), _Kilinyoke_ (Kroeber). Existence probable.

_Lahl-mok-po-goot_ (Merriam), _Lalmak-pukut_ (Kroeber). Existence probable.

_Lu-pu-yo-me_ (Merriam). No details are given by Merriam but the existence of the village is rendered very probable by the fact that 57 persons are recorded as having been baptized at the mission of San Rafael from _Lupuyome_. The village may have been destroyed in the process of conversion and hence have been unknown to later informants.

_Sahl-sahl-po-goot_ (Merriam), _Shalshal-pukut_ (Kroeber).

Existence probable.

_Sah-ti-yo-me-po-goot_ (Merriam). This village is mentioned by no other investigator but there are recorded baptisms at Solano Mission from _Tsatiyome_, which is undoubtedly the same name, hence its existence is highly probable.

_Tsit-sah-yome_ (Merriam), _Tsitsapogut_ (Barrett), _Tsitsa-pukut_ (Kroeber). This village must be omitted because of the doubt cast by Kroeber's informant. See Ka-we-yo-me.

_Tso-ke-yo-me-po-goot_ (Merriam), T_sok-yomi-pokut_ (Kroeber).

Existence probable.

_Tumistumis_ (Barrett), _Tumistumis-pukut_ (Kroeber). Existence probable.

_Wo-de-di-tep-pe-po-goot_ (Merriam), _Wodidaitepi_ (Kroeber).

Existence probable.

_Al-lok-ko-boo-je_ (Merriam only). Existence possible.

_Al-lok-woo-boo-te_ (Merriam only). Existence possible.

_Haw-hawl-po-goot_ (Merriam only). Existence possible.

_Hol-wah-poo-koot_ (Merriam only). Existence possible.

_Oo-yoo-hah-no-mah_ (Merriam only). Existence possible.

_Kalau-yomi_ (Kroeber only). Existence possible.

_Kitsin-pukut_ (Kroeber only). Existence possible.

_Shanak-yomi-pukut_ (Kroeber only). Existence possible.

_Tsukeliwa-pukut_ (Kroeber only). Existence possible.

Reviewing the above compilation, we find four villages the existence, size, and importance of which are beyond reasonable doubt. There are five the names of which were known to the informants of all three ethnographers, or can be found in the mission records. Hence their existence can be accepted without serious question. Eight others were located by two, but not three, ethnographers. The probability of their actual, aboriginal existence is not high but on the other hand there is no clear reason for excluding them. Four can be omitted from further consideration on the ground that they were camp sites or were founded after 1850. Nine are reported by only one investigator, and therefore all confirmation of their status is lacking. It is quite unlikely that each of these was a permanent aboriginal village. On the other hand, the fact that even one informant remembered the name is presumptive evidence for existence of some sort. As a purely empirical device, in order to settle the matter, let us a.s.sume that each of the nine names represents a small village of 20 inhabitants.

With respect to the size of the villages we suffer from a complete lack of any direct information. By comparison with the rancherias around Clear Lake and in Alexander Valley we could consider that the four large towns contained 200 persons apiece. The five highly probable villages are likely to have been larger than many others, and may have contained 100 each. To the eight reasonably sure, but by no means certain, places we may ascribe 50 persons each. The nine doubtful ones can certainly be covered by a total of 200. The aggregate, then, is 1,900.

In default of further ethnographic help we must fall back on mission data. In the records of San Francisco, Solano, and San Rafael it is possible to find baptisms a.s.signed to the following recognized villages: Coyome, Loknoma (Lah-ki-yo-me-po-goot), Aloquiomi (Al-lok-yo-me-po-goot), Oleyome, Tuleyome, and Lupuyome. These names are no doubt more or less generic in character in that the missionaries were using them to apply to the larger villages or even subtribes. We would not expect them to conform in detail to any of the lists supplied by modern ethnographers. The total baptism number may, however, be taken as covering the area as a whole.

The Lake Miwok (together with the Clear Lake Pomo) and the Northern Wappo were the most remote people, north of the Bay, who were reached for conversion prior to the secularization of the missions. All activity in this area was confined to the period 1824-1834, and was carried on by necessity through well organized, semimilitary, semireligious expeditions. Owing to unavoidable obstacles it was possible to get physical possession of and bring back to the missions only a small proportion of the potential converts. The exact value of this proportion can never be known, and indeed it undoubtedly varied widely from place to place. A similar question arose in connection with a previous study of the population of the San Joaquin Valley. For the latter area the conditions were postulated that the site of native residence was several score miles from the nearest mission, that a formally organized expedition had to be undertaken, and that there was able and determined opposition to missionization on the part of the natives. Under such circ.u.mstances it was concluded on the basis of evidence available that a fair approximation to the proportion of natives actually baptized was 15 per cent of the existing population.

In most respects the situation south and southeast of Clear Lake was very similar to that obtaining in the lower San Joaquin Valley and the delta region. Hence the indicated baptism factor may be employed here.

For the six major subdivisions mentioned above the total baptisms at Solano and San Rafael were 264. If this number represents 15 per cent, the population was 1,760, a value not basically different from the arbitrary figure derived from the village lists. An intermediate estimate, 1,800, will be taken for the population of the Lake Miwok and Northern Wappo.

For the Central Wappo there is a paucity of ethnographic data.

Furthermore the territory itself is very circ.u.mscribed, since Pope Valley has been allocated for present purposes to the Northern Wappo and embraces little more than the flat land within a radius of a few miles from the modern town of Calistoga. Merriam cites only one name (in the ma.n.u.script ent.i.tled "Yukean"), viz., _Mi-yahk-ma_. Barrett (1908, p. 269) gives _Maiyakma_, together with _Nilektsonoma_ and _Tselmenan_, which were close by. In addition he lists _Mitustul_, five miles to the west of Calistoga. It seems likely that we have here a single small division, or tribelet, with the "capital" at Maiyakma and with three smaller, peripheral villages. If we use the same population estimates as we did farther north, we may ascribe 200 persons to Maiyakma and 100 each to the others, making 500 in all.

The mission records supply two items of interest. The first is a note from Sonoma that there were baptized 103 persons from Mayacma "o Tamalsimas." The latter name is probably a corruption of the term written by Barrett as Tselmenan, and indicates that this village was then in existence. The other item is from San Rafael which reported 9 baptisms from Teluasuenhuca "o Tamalsimela." The total then is 112.

The baptism factor of 15 per cent cannot be used here with confidence because the upper Napa Valley was much more accessible to the San Rafael Mission and particularly the Sonoma Mission than was the area around and above Middletown. At the same time the distance and difficulty of approach were somewhat greater than in the case of the lower Russian River Valley near Santa Rosa and Sebastopol, for which the baptism factor was taken as one-third. As a compromise we may take a factor of one-quarter, or 25 per cent. This yields an estimated population of 450, a figure which appears not unreasonable.

For the Southern Wappo Merriam mentions Guiluc (MS "Yukean") and Kaimus. The latter is very well known and is discussed by Barrett (1908, p. 268). The former is in territory which was disputed between the Pomo and the Wappo and may be either _wilikos_ (Wappo) or _Wilok_ (Pomo)--see Barrett's treatment on page 269 of the Ethnogeography (1908). For present purposes it may be considered as Wappo since it was excluded from the Pomo in computing the population of the latter group.

Merriam cites no other names, but Barrett gives Annakotonoma and Tsemanoma among the Southern Wappo (1908, p. 269) and Tcimenukme, Tuluka, and Suskol as Wintun villages at the mouth of Napa River.

Annakotonoma was known to the missionaries as Callajomanos (and variants), Guiluc as such, and Kaimus as Caymus (and variants). The three Wintun villages have left no trace whatever in the mission records under Barrett's names or any recognizable variants. This is rather surprising, since the area was thoroughly converted by the missionaries at San Rafael and at Sonoma. Very likely the baptisms are in the record but under designations (and there are many) which do not permit the allocation to a specific tribe or village. On the other hand, the area itself is probably included in the appellation "Napa"

which appears to have covered the entire region from the present city of Napa to the sh.o.r.e of the Bay.

The sum of the recorded baptisms from Caymus, Guiluc, Callajomanos, and Napa is 331. A baptism factor of 25 per cent cannot be employed because the territory of these groups was very close to the Sonoma Mission, and from numerous accounts by contemporary writers we know that missionization was nearly complete. A factor of 50 per cent would give a probable population of 662 and one of 75 per cent a population of 442. Both values are evidently too low.

The final resource from which we may seek information is provided by the accounts of the early American settlers. Chief of these is George Yount, who entered Napa Valley in 1831 and took up a grant of land near the present town of Yountville. Yount seems to have been a sober and reliable citizen, and one who was accorded the respect of his fellow pioneers. His story consists of a series of verbal recollections which were written down in ma.n.u.script form by a friend, the Rev. Orange Clark, who visited his ranch in 1851. The Clark ma.n.u.script, together with other material, has been secured and published by Professor Charles L. Camp (1923).

Yount seems to have discoursed at length on the local Indians (1923, p.

55). His description of the tribes follows (I have omitted the explanatory parentheses inserted by Camp).

"Within a distance of no more than One Hundred miles in length & twenty in width, including the Napa Valley, were five distinct nations, no one of which could converse together ... without an interpreter ... The names of these five nations were as follows--The Napa, the Ouluke, Caymus, Conahomanes & Miacamus, the last named tribe inhabited the region of the Hot Springs of that valley...."

Four of these names are clear. The fifth, Ouluke, is very probably Tuluka of Barrett. Since these five groups are sharply defined by the Napa Valley and since Yount obviously was talking about that area, his size estimate was excessive. He says 100 miles by 20, whereas the valley actually is about 40 miles in length from the Bay to Mt. St.