Jerry Schaefer - Society for California Archaeology

ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE OF NATIVE AMERICAN PARTICIPATION
IN THE CASA DE BANDINI HOUSEHOLD, OLD TOWN SAN DIEGO STATE HISTORIC PARK
JERRY SCHAEFER
ASM AFFILIATES, INC., CARLSBAD
The local Kumeyaay Indians appear to be almost invisible in the historical record of the Casa de Bandini,
but their presence and importance to the operation of the Bandini household is manifest in the abundant
archaeological remains, including Tizon Brown Ware ceramics, milling equipment, and other finds. Their
participation in the daily life of the Bandini household and how their experiences transformed their own
cultural traditions are explored by a detailed examination of distinctive Native American artifacts.
HISTORIC CONTEXT OF NATIVE AMERICANS IN OLD TOWN
AND THE CASA DE BANDINI
The native Kumeyaay Indians are almost invisible in the historical record of Old Town San
Diego. In one early American-era lithograph, there is the Bandini Adobe (Figure 1, arrow) and there are
the Native Americans on Presidio Hill looking down from a distance. In a way, this image reflects the
marginalization of Native Americans from Euro-American society after the collapse of the missions and
the American takeover. Life in Old Town could be very severe for them, as Richard Carrico documents. It
included indentured servitude of Indian children and adults, public flogging for minor offenses, and even
unprosecuted murders at the hands of Euro-Americans (R. Carrico 1986; Shipek 1986, 1987). At the same
time, some Native American children and adults who were taken into American households were treated
kindly, if not paternally (Chandler and Quinn 1991). Such Americans thought they were following
religious precepts of good works by helping their wards assimilate into Yankee Victorian society. This
might mean they were training Indians to be servants or skilled workers only, with no regard for their
traditional culture, and permanently assigning them to the socioeconomic underclass. Throughout this
period, Native Americans increasingly lost their land base and traditional means of livelihood as their
numbers steadily diminished. As a result, the threat of Native uprisings was a constant source of worry,
including to Bandini himself, as his personal letters attest. Conditions were especially unsettled at his
Tecate Rancho below the U.S./Mexican border.
Despite these abuses, many Native Americans found gainful employment in Old Town, and a
small number became integral members of important households. Although the written record about the
Native Americans who lived and worked in Old Town is scant indeed, it is through the archaeological
context of ceramics, milling tools, stone tools, and personal items that insights can be gained about the
diversity of cultural traditions and technologies that were practiced under the roof of the Casa de Bandini,
for example.
Indian laborers were very likely involved in the construction of the adobe and very likely were
installed as household servants when the Bandini family took up residence around 1829. Among the
people very familiar with the southern California Indians was Juan Bandini himself, as trustee for Mission
San Gabriel, proprietor of a rancho that employed Indians, and intimately involved in local affairs
involving Native Americans (Caughey 1995:16, 18, 21). Bandini employed many Indians at his Rancho
Jurupa on the Santa Ana River across the present Riverside-San Bernardino county border and at his
Tecate Rancho in Baja California. Bandini’s letters from the 1840s reflect both benign and harsh
treatment of his Indian workers and ex-mission wards on different occasions. He could be both exploitive
and humane, it seems, depending on the situation (Walch 2011:39-40). Of Bandini, Richard Henry Dana
on January 6, 1836, wrote that at his home in Old Town he “kept a retinue of Indians” (Dana 1911:297).
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 137

Figure 1. Lithograph of Old Town San Diego, based on the original 1850 sketch by H. M. T. Powell. View
south from Presidio Hill. The arrow points to the Bandini Adobe (Pourade 1963:131).
Other prominent families also likely brought household servants with them when they arrived in
Old Town. Indians, however, were always a small segment of the pueblo population. Farris (2006)
suggests that some Indians formerly at the missions likely sought employment by necessity or choice at
the pueblo after the missions were secularized in 1834-1835, although a much larger number either found
work on the ranchos, joined one of the Indian pueblos libres or took up residence in a rancheria. Farris
found 26 servants and their families in 13 different households listed in the April 17, 1836 census of Old
Town. In most cases, they are described as attached to the woman who was head of the household. Three
Indian servants of Don Juan Bandini are listed: Juan Miguel; his wife, Juana; and a single man also
named Miguel. Married couples were often listed as servants, sometimes with their children who also
likely worked for the family. Farris mentions that the cook was sometimes a male because of his previous
mission experience. Other jobs included housemaids, nannies, and gardeners. The types of manual labor
performed by household staff included cooking, grinding corn and grains, slaughtering animals, and
collecting firewood.
Indian servants continued as household members in Old Town well into the American era. They
can be identified in the 1860 San Diego County Census (San Diego Genealogical Society n.d.) as
“domestic servants” or “servant” born in California and listed with only a first name, as are most of the
people living in the Indian rancherias as enumerated in the census (Figure 2). Approximately 28 Indian
servants can be identified in Old Town, about the same number as counted in the 1836 census. Quite a
number of them were children and teenagers. By this time, Juan Bandini had died and the adobe was
unoccupied. Indian alienation and poverty were getting worse by then, but the Indians continued to live in
small camps in Mission Valley and elsewhere. The 1860 census lists 59 individuals distributed among 11
households at “San Diego Indian Village,” a location at Florida Canyon and Pershing Drive (S. Carrico
1986).
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 138

Figure 2. Late nineteenth-century Kumeyaay rancheria in San Diego (commercial postcard in possession
of the author).
It is not known if Indian servants or workmen attended to the Albert Seeley household, although
it is probable they were employed in the renovation and for various tasks in the hotel and adjacent stables.
The 1870 and 1880 U.S. censuses list no Indians in residence at the Cosmo. As foodways and cooking
technology changed with the conversion of the Casa de Bandini to the Cosmopolitan Hotel, it is likely
that there was much less desire for the cooking staff to use traditional Indian pottery or other Native
American tools for utilitarian purposes. Once a cast-iron stove was installed, round-bottomed cooking
pots were probably not as practical.
Susan Davis Tiffany reported in her memoirs of her time in residence at the Bandini Adobe
(1898-1911) when it was a boarding house during the Ackerman and Tuffley era, that it was no trouble to
acquire the services of Mexican and Indian girls and workmen who lived nearby. In fact, they had a “full
blooded” Indian cook who prepared excellent Mexican dishes on their cast-iron stove (Tiffany 1973:8-9,
17).
CERAMICS
The archaeological record provides the clearest testimony to Indian participation in the Bandini
household. A large sample of Tizon Brown Ware was recovered from the excavations, most of it in good
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 139

Figure 3. Sample of Tizon Brown Ware rim sherds. Note the extensive sooting.
historic contexts and with distinct attributes that indicate it was in use during the Bandini era (Figure 3).
This presence of Native American ceramics is a continuation of a pattern that began at the royal presidio,
where Tizon Brown Ware was found in abundance, along with smaller quantities of Lower Colorado
River Buff Ware (Bartel 1991; Ezell and Ezell 1980; Schuyler 1978; Williams 2004). In fact, Tizon
Brown Ware commonly occurs in Mexican- and early American-era Old Town household debris (Barter
et al. 2012; Schulz et al. 1987), as it does in contemporary ranchos and other establishments in rural San
Diego and elsewhere in southern California (Evans 1969; Wade 2004).
A total of 1,140 sherds (5,508.5g) of Tizon Brown Ware were collected, this being only a small
sample of what must exist there. Although not necessarily a representative sample because of the
purposive nature of testing and recovery, there clearly appear to be some spatial patterns that inform on
the function of native ceramics in the Bandini household (Table 1). The largest percentage by count (41.8
percent) and almost the highest percentage by weight (33.6 percent) derived from Room 105, the kitchen
area, with many small pieces trampled into the floors. Concentrations were highest in the southern half of
the room but also in the sediments in the drain. Numerous vessels are represented by the diverse number
of rim sherds. Almost equal percentages of ceramics derive from the various units and trenches in the
courtyard (27.2 percent) and around the exterior of the building (28 percent). A higher percentage by
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 140

Table 1. Tizon Brown Ware ceramic counts and weights.
PROVENIENCE COUNT WEIGHT (G)
Unit 3 2 12.5
Unit 21 9 31.0
Unit 22 11 16.3
Unit 24 3 11.8
Unit 27 8 23.1
Unit 30 138 991.0
Unit 34 9 46.3
Other 60 260.6
Shovel Test C 5 10.7
Test Scrape 1 1 5.7
Courtyard
Test Scrape 2 2 6.3
Trench 01 1 2.1
Trench 2 3 7.0
Trench 4 34 288.9
Trench 6 1 1.5
Trench 8 1 4.7
Trench 12 1 1.2
Trench – Footing 2 11.2
Trench – Grease 1 3.5
Trench – Sewer 3 85.0
Trench – Storm D 3 10.6
Trench -- T 4 22.8
Courtyard Total 302 1853.8
Unit 1 77 172.5
Unit 2 74 195.7
Unit 3 45 330.1
Unit 5 2 4.7
Exterior
Unit 6 25 147.4
Unit 7 8 47.3
Unit 8 21 57.0
Unit 10 4 8.7
Unit 26 32 684.2
Other 1 0.1
Exterior Total 319 1647.7
Room 103 Trench 12 10 12.0
Unit 19 1 15.5
Room 104
Unit 20 23 77.5
Unit 21 1 1.4
Trench 1 8 50.0
Room 104 Total 33 144.4
Unit 11 50 158.3
Unit 13 11 58.7
Unit 14 4 10.6
Unit 15 153 688.7
Room 105
Unit 16 101 351.0
Unit 19 8 86.0
Drain 82 222.5
Fire Pit B 1 2.4
Other 64 266.4
Trench 11 2 6.0
Room 105 Total 476 1850.6
Grand Total 1140 5508.5
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 141

weight derives from Unit 26 on the exterior in the direction of Calhoun Street, opposite Room 105, where
a trash deposit of domestic artifacts was found near the brick drain under Room 105 where it emptied into
the street. The deposit included Euro-American ceramics, food remains, and the largest concentration of
milling tools to occur at the site. At least four Tizon Brown Ware cooking pots were represented,
including the one small bowl of almost complete profile. A higher percentage by weight was also
represented by the courtyard sample due to the number of large, partially mendable sherds from a single
vessel found at the very southwest corner of the courtyard in Unit 30. Most of the vessel’s exterior was
heavily sooted right up to the lip, while the base of the interior was covered with a carbonaceous residue.
The vessel fragments co-occurred with the vertebral centrum of a cow and highly fragmented sheep/goat
bone that firmly place it in the historical period. The unusual location at the extreme interior corner of the
courtyard and below the top of the foundation may suggest remains from Native cooking and
consumption during the construction of the Bandini Adobe.
The ceramics exhibit little variability of fabric, being made from the typical residual clays of the
San Diego coast and foothills. The fabric contains very high quantities (60-80 percent) of naturally
occurring coarse, poorly sorted angular and subangular grains of quartz, feldspar, and amphibole. Mica is
generally low in frequency but occurs more abundantly in a small number of sherds. As such, the
ceramics fabrics and paddle and anvil construction methods all appear to indicate a persistence of the
Tizon Brown Ware tradition. No fibre-tempered sherds or wheel thrown or moulded shapes of the socalled
“Mission Ware” were found that more typically characterizes the ceramic tradition introduced to
previously non-ceramic-making groups to the north or south of San Diego County (Griset 1990, 1996;
Tuohy and Strawn 1989).
Like Tizon ceramics found elsewhere in Old Town (Barter and Felton 2005; Barter et al. 2012),
vessel walls appear to be thicker on average than in prehistoric assemblages, with thicker and more
rounded lip profiles (Figures 4-5). Almost all the pottery appears to represent only two or three shapes:
large-mouthed jars and bowls with recurved rims, and globular round bowls with incurving or straight
rims. Virtually all the vessels were used for cooking, indicated by the predominance of exterior sooting,
especially on the wide-mouthed bowls (Figure 6). Small-necked ollas, serving bowls, and plates appear to
have been replaced by British, Asian, or Mexican imports.
As a Latin American ethnographic analogy for the uses of Tizon at the Casa de Bandini, although
imported cast-iron and enameled cooking and glazed wares became available, locally produced ceramics
remained an important utilitarian item because of their availability, low cost, and distinctive
characteristics of porosity, resistance to thermal shock, and free soluble salts (Rice 1987:104-106). In
Latin American cooking, beans, in particular, cooked whole or refried, were better-tasting if prepared in
earthenware vessels than in iron pots. Other special functions for unglazed earthenware vessels include
parching or toasting seeds and maize, brewing chicha beer, and making corn flower cakes, rice, fried
bananas, and fried pork (chicharon). Porous water jars naturally cooled the contents through evaporation
(Arnold 1985:136, etc.; Caughey 1995:28). While metal cooking vessels, once available, replaced
ceramic counterparts for many purposes, upper middle class ladino households in Guatemala still
purchased earthenware vessels for certain traditional food preparation and storage (Arnold 1985:142).
Likewise, the advantages of Tizon Brown Ware for certain types of cooking would have been well-known
to the Indian cooks in the Bandini household and most likely also to members of the Bandini family.
MILLING TOOLS
A total of 43 hand stones or manos, either whole or fragmented, were found (Table 2). Some are
well-formed circular or oval hand stones of local quartzite or metavolcanics (Figures 7-8). Others,
however, are the oval and bevel-edged vesicular basalt types that were imported from Mexico and
represent the traditional mano and metate kit found in any Mexican kitchen (Figure 9). Like the Tizon
ceramics, the cobble manos represent the integration of locally made items into Spanish/Mexican
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 142

Figure 4. Tizon Brown Ware rim profiles from interior and exterior units.
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 143

Figure 5 Tizon Brown Ware rim profiles from Room 105 and monitoring trenches.
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 144

Figure 6. Range of Tizon Brown Ware shapes. Those marked with an “X” were not represented at the
Casa de Bandini.
Figure 7. Cobble-based mano and vesicular basalt mano from Unit 26, Stratum II.
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 145

Table 2. Milling tools.
CAT.
MATERIAL /
LENGTH WIDTH THICKNESS
WEIGHT
NO. UNIT AREA ARTIFACT TYPE ALTERATION * CONDITION (MM) (MM) (MM) COUNT (G)
4249 27 Courtyard unifacial hand stone metavolcanic complete 102.2 90.4 35.7 1 494.7
4250 26 Exterior multifacial hand stone granite complete 151.5 96.4 44.2 1 1170.1
4251 26 Exterior multifacial hand stone volcanic / basalt complete 137.5 71.3 76.1 1 1068.0
4252 26 Exterior multifacial hand stone cryptocrystalline complete 143.8 110.7 55.8 1 1367.5
4253 26 Exterior multifacial hand stone granite nearly complete 81.7 67.2 56.5 1 479.2
4254 26 Exterior bifacial hand stone cryptocrystalline – FAR end 63.7 29.4 34.1 1 107.2
4255 26 Exterior multifacial hand stone granite - FAR complete 105.2 89.8 41.0 1 595.3
4256 9 Exterior multifacial hand stone metavolcanic - FAR nearly complete 110.0 128.0 70.9 1 1664.1
4257 31 Courtyard multifacial hand stone granite - FAR nearly complete 157.8 96.6 92.6 1 1879.5
4258 Trench 2 Courtyard bifacial hand stone granite complete 99.7 68.3 49.2 1 526.7
4259 Trench 2 Courtyard multifacial hand stone metavolcanic nearly complete 166.6 113.5 62.7 1 1466.2
4260 Trench 2 Courtyard multifacial hand stone granite nearly complete 145.0 90.5 76.6 1 1166.7
4261 26 Exterior multifacial hand stone volcanic / basalt nearly complete 88.0 64.1 29.7 1 143.6
4262 29 Room 105 multifacial hand stone granite end 87.2 48.9 29.1 1 198.4
4263 20 Room 103 bifacial hand stone granite end 81.9 108.1 46.4 1 566.9
4264 24 Courtyard multifacial hand stone granite end 97.1 48.7 40.2 1 255.1
4265 27 Courtyard multifacial hand stone granite end 61.9 48.7 29.8 1 112.7
4266 30 Courtyard multifacial hand stone granite - FAR end 113.2 88.1 50.7 1 566.9
4267 27 Courtyard bifacial hand stone granite - FAR end 71.6 43.1 41.8 1 196.4
4270 7 Exterior bifacial hand stone granite nearly complete 76.9 90.2 51.5 1 516.1
4271 28 Exterior multifacial hand stone granite - FAR nearly complete 93.7 67.6 49.0 1 473.7
4272 30 Courtyard bifacial hand stone granite - FAR end 100.2 88.8 47.4 1 478.4
4273 30 Courtyard multifacial hand stone granite - FAR end 60.9 50.9 25.1 1 73.6
4274 3 Exterior unifacial hand stone granite end 43.5 34.7 27.0 1 49.2
4275 3 Exterior unifacial hand stone granite end 51.0 35.0 15.6 1 27.3
4326 14-15 Room 105 unifacial hand stone metavolcanic complete 88.0 69.0 31.0 3 --
4327 20 Room 104 bifacial hand stone granite - FAR -- -- -- -- 1 564.1
4692 other Other hand stone FAR -- -- -- -- 1 929.0
4697 2 Exterior hand stone granite -- 42.9 23.4 16.3 1 17.0
4718 other Exterior hand stone -- fragment -- -- -- 1 269.0
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 146

CAT.
NO. UNIT AREA ARTIFACT TYPE
MATERIAL /
ALTERATION * CONDITION
LENGTH
(MM)
WIDTH
(MM)
THICKNESS
(MM) COUNT
WEIGHT
(G)
4719 other Exterior hand stone -- fragment -- -- -- 4 624.1
4751 hearth Exterior hand stone -- fragment -- -- -- 1 85.3
4809 Trench 11 Room 101 hand stone -- fragments -- -- -- 4 195.0
4810 other Exterior hand stone -- fragments -- -- -- 2 331.8
5214 other Courtyard hand stone granite fragment -- -- -- 1 526.3
5215 other Courtyard hand stone granite fragment -- -- -- 1 593.9
5531 drain hearth Courtyard
bifacial hand stone,
sharpening stone
metavolcanic complete -- -- -- 1 74.9
5536 drain hearth Courtyard
percussing tool -
sharpening stone
granite nearly complete -- -- -- 1 139.2
6147 other Courtyard
unifacial hand stone,
used in foundation
granite complete 10.0 9.0 7.5 1 958.4
* FAR = fire-affected rock
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 147

Figure 8. Fire-affected stones from Room 105 with evidence of polish and ground surfaces (Cat. 4326).
foodways and technology that, even before they first appeared in San Diego, incorporated elements of
Native American and European traditions in the Mexican heartland.
LITHICS AND OTHER ARTIFACTS
Other traditional Native American artifacts included 30 pieces of lithic debitage, a late-stage
biface core, two other cores, a couple of retouched flakes, and one hammer stone. There were no
projectile points. All these items occur in obvious historic contexts. Items of possible Native American
ownership include a Phoenix button (Carrico 1982; Strong 1960, 1975), found on top of one of the
earliest wall foundations at the site. Two perforated silver coins may also be from Native American
ornaments or clothing.
Another object of likely Native manufacture is a ceramic disk with ground edges (Figure 10).
Similar worked Euro-American ceramics come from ethnohistoric-period sites. Although typically
classified as “gaming pieces,” they may also have been used as jar stoppers or had some other utilitarian
use. This one was made from a blue transfer-printed earthenware. The pattern is “English Cities,” made
by Enoch Wood & Sons of Staffordshire, England (1828-1846). Several other fragments of the same
pattern were found nearby in the same context (Unit 26), where a Bandini-era trash deposit occurred
outside of the kitchen and in association with milling tools and Tizon Brown Ware.
One whole Olivella biplicata shell bead and 53 glass trade beads are also likely evidence of
Native Americans (Figure 11). Drawn and Mandrel-wound bead types are found in ethnohistoric-period
Native American sites throughout the Pacific West and in historic sites at which Native Americans were
present, including ranches, presidios, pueblos, missions, and early American cities (Baker et al. 1995:18;
Karklins and Sprague 1972, 1980; Kidd and Kidd 1970; Motz and Schulz 1980; Ross 1976). Most of
these inexpensive beads were not used by Euro-Americans. Among the most common of the 12 types
were short, ground, multisided drawn beads that occur in translucent blue, opaque black, and clear. They
are often referred to as “Russian Beads” because they were widely traded in the northern Pacific, although
they likely derive from Bohemian manufacturers.
So, a few final questions remain. By what economic or cultural process did ceramics in particular
come into the Bandini household? Do they represent Tizon ceramics becoming a commodity and Native
potters finding an economic niche in Old Town trade? The quantity of Tizon in historic contexts
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 148

Figure 9. Typical Mexican kitchen assemblage (California Department of Parks and Recreation 2003).
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 149

Figure 10. Worked transfer-printed English ceramic.
throughout Old Town suggests persistent and well-established methods of procurement. Was it a barter
system, a currency system, or a combination? Does the appearance of Native American artifacts represent
the product of the social and economic relationships of the household staff with potters, perhaps even
relatives, who continued to practice their craft and who lived in rancherias around Old Town? The
historical record provides no answer. Up to now, no record exists of Tizon vessels being sold in stores, as
occurred for the marketing of Quechan pottery in Yuma (Schaefer 1993; Trippel 1889). Nor is there a
record of Kumeyaay women selling pots in the open markets that characterize many Mexican towns. Did
Old Town even have open markets? I presume they did in the early period, but probably not in the
American period. If some sort of market for Tizon pots existed, perhaps Kumeyaay women, or their
agents, peddled their wares directly to each household in Old Town, or on the street, as was common for
Tohono O’odham potters in Arizona (Fontana et al. 1962). I expect that somewhere a record exists, but
for now we must content ourselves with the rich archaeological record of Native Americans in the life of
Old Town.
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 150

Figure 11. Representative sample of glass trade beads types.
REFERENCES CITED
Arnold, Dean E.
1985 Ceramic Theory and Cultural Process. Cambridge University Press.
Baker, Leo R., Rebecca Allen, and Julia G. Costello
1995 The Archaeology of Spanish and Mexican Alta California. In The Archaeology of Spanish
and Mexican Colonialism in the American Southwest, edited by James E. Ayres, pp. 3-52.
Guides to the Archaeological Literature of the Immigrant Experience in America No. 3.
Society for Historical Archaeology, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Bartel, Brad
1991 Archaeological Excavation and Education at the San Diego Royal Presidio, 1987-1990.
Journal of San Diego History 37(1):1-29.
Barter, Eloise Richards, and David L. Felton
2005 Tizon Brown Ware from Old Town San Diego State Historic Park (Block 408 Entrance
Improvement Project). Cultural Heritage Section, California Parks Department, Sacramento.
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 151

Barter, Eloise Richards, Glenn Farris, and David L. Felton
2012 Native American Ceramics Found at Old Town San Diego: Trade or Local Manufacture? In
Recovering a Legacy: The Ceramics of Alta California, edited by Russell K. Skowronek, M.
James Blackman, and Ronald L. Bishop (in preparation, draft provided by authors).
University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
California Department of Parks and Recreation
2003 Picturing Mexican California, 1821-1846. Sacramento.
Carrico, Richard L.
1982 Phoenix Buttons from the San Diego Presidio Chapel Complex Excavation. In Approaches to
Historical Archaeology: The Case of the Royal Presidio of San Diego. San Diego History
Research Center, San Diego State University.
1986 Strangers in a Stolen Land: American Indians in San Diego 1850-1880. San Diego State
University Publications in American Indian Studies No. 2.
Carrico, Susan H.
1986 San Diego’s Urban Rancherias: A Reflection of Cultural Change. In The Impact of European
Exploration and Settlement on Local Native Americans, pp. 26-37. Cabrillo Historical
Association, San Diego.
Caughey, John Walton (editor)
1995 The Indians of Southern California in 1852: The B.D. Wilson Report. University of Nebraska
Press, Lincoln.
Chandler Robert J., and Ronald J. Quinn
1991 “Emma is a Good Girl.” The Californians 8(5):34-37.
Dana, Richard Henry
1911 Two Years Before the Mast: A Personal Narrative. Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
Evans, William S., Jr.
1969 California’s Indian Pottery: A Native Contribution to the Culture of the Ranchos. Pacific
Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 5(3):71-81.
Ezell, Paul H., and Greta S. Ezell
1980 Bread and Barbecues at San Diego Presidio. In Spanish Colonial Frontier Research,
compiled and edited by Henry F. Dobyns, pp. 85-90. Spanish Borderlands Research No. 1.
Center for Anthropological Studies, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Farris, Glenn
2006 Peopling the Pueblo: Presidial Soldiers, Indian Servants and Foreigners in Old San Diego.
Paper presented at the Society for Historical Archaeology Conference. Electronic document,
www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=24150.
Fontana, Bernard L., William J. Robinson, Charles W. Cormack, and Ernest E. Leavitt, Jr.
1962 Papago Indian Pottery. University of Washington Press, Seattle.
Griset, Suzanne
1990 Historic Transformations of Tizon Brown Ware in Southern California. In Hunter-Gatherer
Pottery in the Far Southwest, edited by Joanne M. Mack, pp. 180-200. Nevada State Museum
Anthropological Papers No. 23. Carson City.
1996 Southern California Brown Ware. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of
Anthropology, University of California, Davis.
Karklins, Karlis, and Roderick Sprague
1972 Glass Trade Beads in North America: An Annotated Bibliography. Historical Archaeology
6:87-101.
1980 A Bibliography of Glass Trade Beads in North America. Electronic document,
http://beadresearch.org/pages/bibliography.pdf, accessed October 2, 2012.
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 152

Kidd, Kenneth E., and Martha Ann Kidd
1970 A Classification System for Glass Beads for the Use of Field Archaeologists. Canadian
Historic Sites: Occasional Papers in Archaeology and History1:45-89.
Motz, Lee, and Peter D. Schultz
1980 European “Trade” Beads from Old Sacramento. In Papers on Old Scramento Archeology,
edited by Peter D. Schultz and Betty J. Rivers, pp. 49-68. California Archeological Reports
No. 19. California Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento.
Pourade, Richard F.
1963 The History of San Diego, Volume 3: The Silver Dons. Union-Tribune, San Diego.
Rice, Prudence M.
1987 Pottery Analysis: A Sourcebook. University of Chicago Press.
Ross, Lester A.
1976 Fort Vancouver, 1929-1960: A Historical Archaeological Investigation of the Goods
Imported and Manufactured by the Hudson’s Bay Company. National Park Service,
Washington, D.C.
San Diego Genealogical Society
n.d. Census 1860 San Diego County. San Diego.
Schaefer, Jerry
1993 Historic Native American Pottery from the Mining Town of Hedges/Tumco, California. In
Hedges/Tumco, Historic Mining Traditions of Southeastern California, by Michael S. Burney
and Stephen R. Van Wormer, pp. B.1-11. Burney and Associates. Prepared for P.M. De
Dycker and Associates, Inc., Colorado, and USDI Bureau of Land Management.
Schulz, Peter, Ron Quinn, and Scott Fulmer
1987 Archaeological Investigations at the Rose-Robinson Site, Old Town San Diego. Pacific Coast
Archaeological Society Quarterly 23(2):1-51.
Schuyler, Robert L.
1978 Indian-Euro-American Interaction: Archaeological Evidence from Non-Indian Sites. In
California, edited by Robert Heizer, pp. 69-79. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 3,
William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Shipek, Florence Connolly
1986 The Impact of Europeans upon Kumeyaay Culture. In The Impact of European Exploration
and Settlement on Local Native Americans, pp. 13-25. Cabrillo Historical Association, San
Diego.
1987 Pushed into the Rocks: South California Indian Land Tenure, 1769-1986. University of
Nebraska Press, Lincoln.
Strong, Emory
1960 Phoenix Buttons. American Antiquity 25:418-419.
1975 The Enigma of the Phoenix Button. Historical Archaeology 9:74-80.
Tiffany, Susan Davis
1973 Reminiscences of One Who Lived in the Bandini House, 1891-1911. Unpublished
manuscript, San Diego History Center.
Trippel, Eugene J.
1889 The Yuma Indians. Overland Monthly 13:561-584.
Tuohy, Donald R., and Mary B. Strawn
1989 Thin Section Analysis of Mission Period Pottery from Baja California, Mexico. Nevada
Archaeologist 17(2):36-48.
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 153

Wade, Sue Anne
2004 Kumeyaay and Paipai Pottery as Evidence of Cultural Adaptation and Persistence in Alta and
Baja California. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of History, San Diego State
University.
Walch, Victor A.
2011 The Casa and the Don: Juan Bandini’s Quest for Homeland in Early San Diego. Journal of
San Diego History 57(1):25-52.
Williams, Jack S.
2004 San Diego Presidio: A Vanished Military Community of Upper California. Historical
Archaeology 38(3):121-134.
SCA Proceedings, Volume 26 (2012) Schaefer, p. 154