The Native Alaskan Village: a Multiethnic Community at Colony Ross. Volume 2 of The Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Fort Ross, California. Kent G. Lightfoot, Ann M. Schiff, and Thomas A. Wake, editors.
No. 55 of the Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility, Berkeley
This comprehensive study of the material remains of the Native Alaskan Neighborhood examines how the lives of the Native Alaskan and Native Californian residents at the Russian fur-trading outpost, Fort Ross, were affected by the broader world system to which they were exposed. 430 pp., 201 illustrations, 272 pp. of appendices in microfiche, 18 chapters, 1997. $35.00.
Preface
When Ivan Kuskov and his workers first began digging the foundations for the impressive redwood palisade walls of Fort Ross in March 1812, they initiated a distinctive chapter in California history-Russian colonial expansion and settlement north of San Francisco Bay that continued for the next twenty-nine years. The Russian-American Company was a mercantile monopoly that represented Czarist Russia's interests in the lucrative North Pacific fur trade. It established Colony Ross as a staging area for sea otter and fur seal hunts along the coast of California; as an agricultural community for raising crops and livestock primarily for the Company's North Pacific colonies; and as a small shipyard and crafts production center. Fort Ross was one of California's earliest pluralistic communities where peoples recruited from across Europe and the Pacific lived, worked, and socialized with one another. The Company's rosters at Fort Ross included an international work force of Europeans, Native Siberians, Creoles (people of mixed Russian/Native American ancestry), Native Hawaiians, Native Alaskans, and Native Californians.
In the first volume of the Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Fort Ross, California series, we introduced the research objectives of the ongoing Fort Ross Archaeological Project, outlined the historical background and natural history of the region, and synthesized archaeological research up to 1991, including the results of a recent survey of the Fort Ross State Historic Park. The primary purpose of the Fort Ross Archaeological Project is to consider how Pacific Coast hunter-gatherers responded to Russian colonialism in northern California. We initiated a study of long-term cultural change that is examining the economies, gender relations, sociopolitical organizations, and religious practices of native peoples before, during, and after the colonization of Fort Ross.
One finding of our investigation is that the Ross Colony was organized into four ethnic residential areas or neighborhoods: 1) the Stockade Compound, 2) the Russian Village, 3) the Native Californian Neighborhood, and 4) the Native Alaskan Neighborhood. We focused our initial investigation on the Native Californian Neighborhood, where careful readings of ethnohistorical documents and interpretations of surface survey data were employed to outline diachronic changes in native subsistence and settlement systems. Archaeological investigations are now underway at selected Kashaya Pomo village locations in the greater Fort Ross Region that will greatly refine and modify this preliminary study (e.g. Martinez 1995).
This second volume of The Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Fort Ross, California series details the results of the archaeological investigation of two sites that constitute the material remains of the Native Alaskan Neighborhood. The Native Alaskan Village Site, or NAVS, was the primary residential area for single Native Alaskan men, Native Alaskan families, and interethnic households composed of Native Alaskan men and local Native Californian women. This site, whose official trinomial number is CA-SON-1897/H, sits on an uplifted marine terrace directly south of the Ross Stockade walls. The extensive archaeological deposit, measuring over 8000 sq. m in size, was investigated by archaeologists from the California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) and U.C. Berkeley in the summers of 1989, 1991, and 1992. The second site, the Fort Ross Beach Site, or FRBS, extends approximately 30 meters along an eroding cliff face directly below NAVS at the base of the marine terrace. Assigned the state trinomial of CA-SON-1898/H by the Northwest Information Center at Sonoma State University, FRBS is a midden deposit associated with the nearby Village and with other mercantile activities that took place in Fort Ross Cove. Excavations by DPR and U.C. Berkeley crews took place in the summers of 1988 and 1989.
The archaeological investigation of the Native Alaskan Neighborhood is being conducted for several reasons. It generates essential information for the cultural resource management program in the Fort Ross State Historic Park, provides background research for the further development of the public interpretation program in the State Park, and addresses two research objectives of the Fort Ross Archaeological Project.
1) Cultural Resource Management. The investigation of the Native Alaskan Neighborhood was initiated when it became apparent that winter storms were destroying a significant portion of FRBS. Breck Parkman, Associate State Archaeologist of the California State Parks, was concerned about the continued destruction of coastal archaeological resources in the State Park, requested that archaeologists from U.C. Berkeley investigate the site to determine the historical significance of the archaeological deposit, and to evaluate the overall effects of coastal erosion on exposed archaeological materials. It soon became evident in the 1988 field season that materials in the Fort Ross Beach Site were associated with NAVS directly upslope, and permission was granted to investigate the Native Alaskan Village Site as well. Since a detailed archaeological study had never been conducted at NAVS, very little was known about the site, including the depth and stratigraphy of the archaeological deposits, the integrity of architectural features, and the overall diversity and preservation of faunal specimens, floral remains, and artifacts. Our investigation provides pertinent data about the nature and complexity of the archaeological remains that will be used in DPR planning to make informed decisions on how best to manage the two sites in future years.
2) Public Interpretation Program. Another important goal of the study is contributing to the public interpretation program in the State Park (see Murley 1994; Parkman 1994a, 1994b). The reconstructed Stockade complex, as it now exists, provides a wealth of information on the lifeways, architecture, and material culture of the Russian employees who were stationed at Ross. In contrast, there is little opportunity for park visitors to view the house sites, work areas, and material objects of the native laborers who toiled at Ross and made up the greatest portion of its population. The archaeological investigation of NAVS and FRBS is undertaken to heighten awareness of the Native Californian and Native Alaskan workers' many indispensable contributions to the Ross Colony, and to provide details of their day-to-day lifeways to the public through the State Park's active interpretation program. This successful program includes ranger talks, on-site interpreters, and the annual reenactment of the Ross Colony on "Living History" day. The archaeological investigation is also undertaken to plan and promote a proposed "culture" trail in the State Park that will complement existing displays on the Russians by taking the public beyond the reconstructed stockade complex to view the archaeological remains of the multiethnic Ross community.
3) Research Objectives. In considering native responses to Russian mercantile practices at Colony Ross, we outline two research objectives of the Fort Ross Archaeological Project in Volume 1 (Lightfoot et al. 1991:5-6). These research objectives guide the archaeological investigation of the Native Alaskan Neighborhood.
The first objective concerns the participation of native laborers in a commercial enterprise. Native workers in mercantile colonies participated in a market economy either by exchanging their labor directly for trade commodities and/or food, or by selling their labor for scrip which was used to purchase goods in the company store. In principle, native laborers at Colony Ross should have had access to a diverse range of products from the broader world system in which the Russian-American Company participated. In the first decade of the 19th century, the Russian-American Company established a trade network with American merchants and greatly expanded the range of manufactured goods and luxury foods offered for sale to Company employees. Most of the manufactured commodities were believed to have been destined for native consumption (Gibson 1976:172). Furthermore, employees could purchase "European" foods (wheat, beef, pork) raised at Ross or shipped in from Spanish California (Gibson 1976:186-87). One question we address in this volume is the degree to which participation in the broader world system is represented in the material culture of the native employees in the Native Alaskan Neighborhood. Moreover, did increased access to manufactured goods and domesticated foods serve as sources of cultural change among the Native Alaskan and Native Californian workers?
The second objective examines the implications of recruiting a multiethnic labor force for mercantile colonies like Colony Ross. These trade outposts were pluralistic entrepots where people of diverse backgrounds and nationalities lived, worked, socialized, and procreated. The close interaction of ethnic groups from many different homelands may have stimulated the cultural exchange of architectural styles, material goods, methods of craft production, subsistence techniques, diet, dress, and ceremonial practices. Residents of Colony Ross may have modified and adopted cultural practices from European, Creole, Siberian, Native Hawaiian, Native Alaskan, and Native Californian peoples. Cultural innovations may have been created in these pluralistic social environments by combining or modifying traditional cultural elements with those from other ethnic groups. Another question we address in this volume is the degree to which interethnic interaction and cohabitation in the Native Alaskan Neighborhood promoted cultural change as evident in the archaeological remains. Did the synergistic interplay of inter-ethnic households in the Neighborhood produce significant changes in the material culture of Native Alaskan and Native Californian residents?
Volume 2 is divided into four sections. The first section (chapters 1-5) introduces the reader to the Native Alaskan Neighborhood and outlines the field investigations undertaken at NAVS and FRBS. Chapter 1 begins with ethnohistorical observations of the Village, including census data on the occupation, gender, and ethnicity of its residents and the spatial layout of houses and work space. Lightfoot and Martinez then examine the two research problems in more detail and describe the research design employed to address them. They consider how the identities of Native Californians and Native Alaskans were constructed and transformed through daily practice and interaction in interethnic households. In chapters 2 and 3, Lightfoot, Schiff, and Holm describe the specific field methods employed at FRBS and NAVS, respectively, and detail the stratigraphic units observed, the kinds of features recorded, and the kinds of materials recovered. The field program was designed specifically to delineate the organization of space and daily domestic practices of interethnic households in the Village. Price presents the results of her geoarchaeological study of FRBS and NAVS in chapter 4, concluding with several important observations on formation processes in the creation of both NAVS and FRBS archaeological deposits. Finally, Tschan presents the results of his geophysical survey of NAVS in Chapter 5, outlining a spatial model for the Village that independently supports many of the conclusions in chapter 3.
The second section (chapters 6-15) describes in detail the diverse material culture of the Native Alaskan Neighborhood. Farris introduces the European artifact assemblages in chapter 6. Silliman follows with a thorough overview of the ceramic, glass, and metal artifacts in chapter 7. Ross then presents his detailed analysis of the glass beads in chapter 8. Schiff describes the chipped stone and ground stone assemblages in chapter 9, while Mills details the ground slate artifacts in chapter 10. Wake then reports on the extensive worked bone assemblage that includes both diagnostic tools and workshop debris in chapter 11. The next four chapters present analyses of the rich faunal assemblages, including Wake's study of the terrestrial and marine mammal remains (chapter 12), Simon's identification of bird bones (chapter 13), Gobalet's consideration of the fish assemblage (chapter 14), and Schiff's investigation of the many shellfish remains (chapter 15).
The third section of the Volume (chapters 16-18) addresses the two research problems through a synthetic analysis of the artifacts, refuse deposits, and architectural features. Lightfoot and Silliman begin by detailing the chronological sequence of specific archaeological deposits in chapter 16. The spatial organization of household refuse disposal, the maintenance of house structures, and the layout of the Native Alaskan Neighborhood are then considered in chapter 17. This chapter addresses whether significant cultural changes or synergistic developments were taking place among the residents of the Native Alaskan Neighborhood through a comparison of traditional Native Californian (Kashaya Pomo) and Native Alaskan (Qikertarmiut) lifeways. In chapter 18, we conclude by evaluating the degree to which the residents of the Native Alaskan Neighborhood participated in the broader world system through the consumption of nonlocal goods and domesticated foods. We also consider the organizational principles and world views of the women and men who comprised the interethnic households and whether evidence exists for the creation of new cultural constructs.
The fourth section includes ten appendices that complete the volume. These include Farris's analysis of Kashaya Pomo texts that pertain to Fort Ross, followed by seven tables presenting the provenience, count, and type data of beads, European goods, lithics, mammal bones, bird bones, fish bones, and shellfish remains. Finally, two data tables detail the results of obsidian hydration and sourcing, and the spatial provenience of materials in the bone bed deposits.
Kent G. Lightfoot,
Ann M. Schiff,
and Thomas A. Wake, editorsReferences Cited
Gibson, James R.
1976 Imperial Russia in Frontier America: The Changing Geography of Supply of Russian America, 1784-1867. Oxford University Press, New York.
Martinez, Antoinette
1995 Blurred Boundaries of the Nineteenth Century Kashaya Pomo. Paper presented at the 29th Annual Meeting of the Society for California Archaeology, Eureka.
Murley, Daniel F.
1994 Peopling Ross' Past. In Proceedings of the Society for California Archaeology, M. Rosen, S. Hector, and D. Laylander Eds., pp. 61-5. Society for California Archaeology, San Diego.
Parkman, E. Breck.
1994a Preserving the Fort Ross Archaeological Record. In Proceedings of the Society for California Archaeology, M. Rosen, S. Hector, and D. Laylander Eds., pp. 47-60. Society for California Archaeology, San Diego.
1994b The News Media and the Curious: Interpreting Archaeology at Colony Ross. In Proceedings of the Society for California Archaeology, M. Rosen, S. Hector, and D. Laylander Eds., pp. 227-34. Society for California Archaeology, San Diego.
 |
Main Menu | What We Do | Who We
Are | Lectures |
Archaeological Research Facility
2251 College Building
University of California
Berkeley, CA 94720-1076
Last Modified 4 August 1999.
