English their infirmities, aches, sores, and wounds, and it was made
clear that if the English would but blow upon them they would be made
well. This accords fairly well with the curing aspect of certain local
ceremonies. For example, the Kuksu doctor of the Pomo might cure by
blowing "his whistle over the various parts of his body, particularly
those recognized by the patients as the seats of pain."[96] There is no
mention of the use of whistles in connection with the ceremony enacted
by the Indians. Whistles are so commonly used in local ceremonies that
their omission is noteworthy. The detailed nature of the account
indicates that this feature was not so strongly developed in 1579 as it
is today in local native custom.
_General observations, and occurrences from June 27 to July 23._--The
natives were almost constant visitors, and it is noted that ordinarily
every third day they brought their "sacrifices" (?). From this and other
indications it seems possible that the ceremonial number of the Indians
was three. The ceremonial number of the adjoining Pomo is four.[97] The
Coast Miwok ceremonial number was probably four, though there is no
direct evidence to support this supposition. The Indian bow is spoken of
as weak and "more fit for children than for men," a remark to be
expected from the English, who were even then employing the famous
longbow. The English were impressed with the strength of the natives,
but, for Indians accustomed to transporting everything on their backs,
their feats of strength seem not surprising. It is also noted that the
natives were good at running and that this was the ordinary means of
travel. The English admired the native surf fishing. Kroeber has
interpreted the passage, "if at any time, they chanced to see a fish, so
neere the shoare, that they might reach the place without swimming, they
would neuer, or very seldome misse to take it," as signifying diving for
fish in the surf. Since this unusual practice is not otherwise recorded
ethnographically for any coastal Californian tribe, some other
explanation may be in order, and I suggest that Fletcher may have had
reference to surf fishing with a round hand net, a practice known to
have been followed by the Coast Miwok.[98] One gets the impression that
the English found much to admire in their native friends.
Drake, his gentlemen, and others of the ship's company made an
expedition into the interior to see the native villages and the country
round about. The houses were all of the semisubterranean, circular type
discussed previously. Two animals were seen, as also herds of deer and
great numbers of "conies," a name which, as used by Fletcher, seems to
fit no known animal living today in this coastal area.[99]
The country was named _Albion_ "in respect of the white bancks and
cliffes, which lie toward the sea ...," and a post was set up with an
engraved brass plate nailed to it. The white cliffs are one of the most
conspicuous features of Drake's Bay.[100] That the plate of brass has
been found at Drake's Bay is a fact of the greatest significance.
Upon the departure of the English, the Indians were sorrowful, and they
burned a "sacrifice" of a string of disk beads and a bunch of feathers.
The burning of shell beads in memory and honor of the dead, a custom
which Fletcher may have described, is known for the Coast Miwok,[101]
Pomo,[102] and neighboring groups.[103]
Aside from those actions of the natives which are usually associated
with their attitudes toward the dead (weeping, moaning, self-laceration,
use of feathered baskets, sacrifice of shell beads and feathers in the
fire), there are other evidences that the English were regarded as the
returned spirits of the dead. First is Fletcher's observation that the
Indians were "standing when they drew neere, as men rauished in their
mindes, with the sight of such things as they neuer had seene, or heard
of before that time: their errand being rather with submission and feare
to worship vs as Gods, then to haue any warre with vs as with mortall
men. Which thing as it did partly shew it selfe at that instant, so did
it more and more manifest it selfe afterwards, during the whole time of
our abode amongst them." Except for the sole occasion, at the conclusion
of the ceremony on June 26, when the Indians embraced the youthful
Englishmen, the natives seem to have avoided touching the whites. This
is most understandable if it is believed that they looked upon the
English as the dead returned,[104] for bodily contact with a dead person
or spirit was certain, in their minds, to have disastrous results.
Further evidence of this may be contained in the statement: "Our General
hauing now bestowed vpon them diuers things, at their departure they
restored them all againe; none carrying with him any thing of whatsoeuer
hee had receiued...." There is one more bit of inferential evidence
along this line which comes from the Madox account. This is the phrase
_Nocharo mu_, "touch me not" (i.e., _notcato mu_, "keep away"). It may
be asked why Madox recorded this particular phrase out of the many his
informant must have heard. The answer is perhaps to be found in the
simple fact that the English heard this phrase uttered a great many
times, and it stuck in their memory. In view of the fact that the
natives held the English in fear as dead people, the phrase "touch me
not" might often have been used toward amorous sailors, or against any
form of bodily contact.
ADDITIONAL ETHNOGRAPHIC ITEMS IN THE RICHARD MADOX AND
JOHN DRAKE ACCOUNTS
In the second deposition of John Drake, cousin to Francis Drake (see
below, App. I), there is no new information. There is, however,
independent corroboration of the weeping and self-laceration referred
to repeatedly in the _World Encompassed_ account. The natives are
mentioned as having bows and arrows and as being naked, both of which
items are mentioned by Fletcher. The Indians' sadness at the departure
of the English, as remarked by John Drake, is a further verification of
Fletcher's observations as presented in some detail in _The World
Encompassed_.
The brief Madox account is of particular interest since a number of
words in the Indian language, a song, and the episode of the crowning
are mentioned. The linguistic items are given as follows:
_Cheepe_ bread _Nocharo mu_ tuch me not
_Huchee kecharoh_ sit downe _Hioghe_ a king
As Elmendorf and I have already pointed out, the vocabulary may be
assigned conclusively to the Coast Miwok language.[105] _Cheepe_,
"bread," is equivalent to modern Coast Miwok _tcipa_, "acorn bread."
This word alone is the clearest possible evidence that Drake's Indian
acquaintances were Coast Miwok. _Huchee kecharoh_, "sit down," probably
is an incorrect translation of the phrase. The closest approximation in
modern Coast Miwok is _atci kotcato_, "step into the house," and _hoki
kotcado_, "go into the house" (_tc_ is phonetically equivalent to the
sound _ch_ as in chin). It is possible to explain these differently
stated meanings of these phonetically similar phrases as owing to
incorrect inductions of meaning under specific circumstances. Kelly's
Coast Miwok ethnographic informants stated that, according to old
custom, whenever people came to a house they were asked to walk in and
were offered a seat in the rear of the house, and food was placed before
them. In some such situation, particularly if the English had occasion
to be often in the Indian village, they may have repeatedly heard the
invitation, "step into the house." Likewise, the phrase _Nocharo mu_,
"touch me not," may have been translated by Madox (or his informant)
only vaguely, since it represents a situation rather than a concrete
object, which would be less liable to misinterpretation. Modern Coast
Miwok offers a close parallel in the form of _notcato mu_, which may be
literally translated "stay over there," or "stay away" (_notca_,
"farther," "yonder").
Madox's word for king, _Hioghe_, is similar to that given by Fletcher
(_Hioh_ or _Hyoh_), except that the _ghe_ ending is unusual. From the
words of the Indian song given by Madox (see below), in which _heigh_
(i.e., _hai_) appears, it might be suspected that the _gh_ is silent;
yet why is the terminal _e_ present? It may be that if _Hioghe_ were
exactly similar phonetically to _Hioh_, there would not be a terminal
_e_ in _Hioghe_. Thus Madox's' _Hioghe_ may indicate a terminal sound
(short or weak _e_?) and therefore be close to modern Coast Miwok
_hoipa_ (and Sierra Miwok _haiapo_). That the _gh_ might be an
indication of the _p_ sound is possible, or, again, it could represent
Madox's attempt to render a weak or indefinite labial sound which was
imperfectly remembered by his informant. Too close a phonetic
transcription of an Indian language by Elizabethan Englishmen should not
be expected--there was little standardization in English spelling[106]
at that time. The foregoing is not advanced as an argument to show that
the terminal "e" was sounded, but is merely presented as a possibility.
Elizabethan English commonly used an unpronounced terminal "e." The song
of the Indians "when they worship god" is given by Madox as _Hodeli oh
heigh oh heigh ho hodali oh_. No Coast Miwok or Pomo song on record
accords exactly with that given by Madox, although some are quite
similar. For example, a Coast Miwok _Suya_ song transcribed by Kelly is
a repetitive line _Yo ya he yo he o_. Other examples from the Coast
Miwok are not available, but some Pomo ceremonial songs may be cited.
Stephen Powers[107] gives a Sanel Pomo song:
_Hel-lel-li-ley
Hel-lel-lo
Hel-lel-lu_
E. M. Loeb[108] gives several Pomo songs which are associated with the
Kuksu or ghost ceremony:
1. _He yo he yo he yo
He yoha eheya ye
To ya he yo ho ho_
2. _Tali, tali, yo yo weya yo, weya yo,
ha hi he ya he hotsaii ya hi ho._
3. _He ha le me, le lu hi ma humane, hu ..._
Other Pomo songs used in ceremonies are given by Loeb:[109]
1. _=U =u hulai leli ha ha._
2. _He he la le ha hi hi hi, ya ya ya, hu wa!_
3. _Yo yo hale e he na gagoya =o he he!_
4. _Ho yu ko, he he, a ha a a. Hi ye ko, lai ye ko, He tsi ye._
5. _Yo ho yo ho yaho, he yo ho waha._
These examples show how generally similar are the Coast Miwok[110] and
Pomo ceremonial songs of today to the song of 1579 given by Madox. Here
again an exact correspondence should not be expected, since it is not
known whether the song given by Madox was one associated with a
particular ceremonial occurrence, nor is it known how changeable these
songs are. And again, in the time that has passed and in the changing
course of circumstances since 1579, some exactness has almost inevitably
been sacrificed. Madox's statement that the natives sang "one dauncing
first wh his handes up, and al ye rest after lyke ye prest and people"
verifies Fletcher's description of the singing and dancing at the time
of the great ceremony of June 26.
SUPPOSED INDIAN TRADITIONS OF DRAKE'S VISIT
Professor George Davidson was the second investigator to use an Indian
tradition as evidence of the Drake's Bay location of the 1579
visit.[111] The source of the tradition is in J. P. Munro-Fraser's
_History of Marin County_,[112] and is stated as follows:
First of all comes an old Indian legend which comes down
through the Nicasios to the effect that Drake did land at this
place [Drake's Bay]. Although they have been an interior tribe
ever since the occupation by the Spaniards and doubtless were
at that time, it still stands to reason that they would know
all about the matter. If the ship remained in the bay
thirty-six days it is reasonable to suppose that a knowledge of
its presence reached every tribe within an area of one hundred
miles and that the major portion of them paid a visit to the
bay to see the "envoys of the Great Spirit," as they regarded
the white seamen. One of these Indians named Theognis who is
reputed to have been one hundred and thirty years old when he
made the statement, says that Drake presented the Indians with
a dog, some young pigs, and seeds of several species of
grain.... The Indians also state that some of Drake's men
deserted him here, and, making their way into the country,
became amalgamated with the aboriginals to such an extent that
all traces of them were lost, except possibly a few names
[Nicasio, Novato] which are to be found among the Indians.
Wagner feels that there is no reason or evidence to indicate that the
Nicasio Indian tradition refers to Drake,[113] a conclusion with which I
agree. If any early expedition did leave pigs with the Coast Miwok, it
could have been the Spanish one of 1793, which attempted unsuccessfully
to form a settlement at Bodega Bay. Felipe Goycoechea, in 1793
specifically mentions seeing some pigs and chickens which the Spanish
had left earlier in the year with the Indians at that place.[114] With
Wagner's statement that, if any credit can be given to the pig episode,
Cermeno may have been the donor,[115] I cannot agree, mainly for the
reason that Cermeno's crew were hungry and would not have given the
Indians any pigs if they had had them. The story of the dog is
interesting since neither the Pomo nor Coast Miwok had dogs in
pre-Spanish times, and the evidence indicates that dogs were introduced
shortly after 1800.[116] Aside from these facts, the supposed Nicasio
tradition does not have a true ring--it is not the type of story that
Indians are accustomed to tell.
A belief among the Coast Miwok[117] and some Pomo[118] tribes that the
home of the dead is associated with Point Reyes should perhaps be taken
into account. The belief is that this seaward projection is associated
with the dead, who follow a string leading out through the surf to the
land of the dead. It is barely possible that this belief, which is quite
clearly of Coast Miwok origin, is a legendary reminiscence of Drake's
visit which seems to have been, in part at least, interpreted by the
Indians as the return of the dead. It may be superfluous to mention that
no Indian has ever stated his idea of the origin of this legend,[119] or
of its association with the visit of Drake's party; yet there remains
the possibility that the occurrence made an impression so deep that
Point Reyes became in this way associated with the home of the dead in
the west, from which the English were supposed to have come and gone. If
this tradition were associated with Drake, it would, of course, signify
that his anchorage was behind Point Reyes in Drake's Bay. On the other
hand, this remarkable point which juts far out into the ocean is a
prominent feature of Coast Miwok territory, and by reason of its unique
topography might have been associated with local ceremonial
beliefs.[120]
I may conclude this discussion by saying that no direct evidence of
Drake's visit in 1579 is to be found in recorded local Indian
traditions. In view of the long time that has intervened, no native
legendary evidence is to be expected. Euhemerism is ordinarily rather an
unproductive and hazardous approach for the historian.
RECAPITULATION AND CONCLUSION
The results of this survey can now be weighed and a solution to the
problem of the location of Drake's California anchorage suggested.
It has been shown that there is not a scrap of ethnographic evidence to
suggest that Drake landed in Trinidad Bay and saw the Yurok Indians. The
Hondius _Portus Novae Albionis_ might apply equally to Bodega Bay or
Drake's Bay, and by itself can only rise to the level of supporting,
rather than primary, evidence. Thus, in reference to the Trinidad Bay
theory, the map cannot alone and unaided prove the point against the
overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
The ethnographic evidence indicates strongly, indeed almost
conclusively, that Drake landed in territory occupied by Coast Miwok
Indians.[121] Since Pomo culture and Coast Miwok Indian culture were so
similar as to be almost indistinguishable, the culture described by
Fletcher might refer to either Coast Miwok or Pomo, and no solution
would be forthcoming were it not for the additional fact that _all_ the
unquestionably native words (_Hioh_, _Gnaah_, _Huchee kecharo_, _Nocharo
mu_, _Cheepe_) are of Coast Miwok derivation. It may therefore be
concluded that Drake had contact mainly with the Coast Miwok. Any effort
to prove that the customs described point expressly to the Pomo as
Drake's visitors would have to deny the linguistic proofs and rest upon
the unlikely assumption that Pomo and Coast Miwok culture were markedly
divergent in 1579.[122] The Pomo ethnographic data cited here are
therefore to be looked upon not as unique Pomo cultural traits, but as
supplementary, comparative material which is at a premium for the Coast
Miwok. But there are two bays in Coast Miwok territory to which Drake
might have brought his ship. These are Drake's Bay and Bodega Bay.
No internal evidence points specifically to either Drake's or Bodega
Bay--the accounts lack geographical detail,[123] the ethnographic Coast
Miwok culture was in operation in both bays, and contemporary maps are
so inaccurate and open to variable interpretation that nothing definite
can be ascertained from their inspection. What is needed, therefore, is
some hint or lead which will break this stalemate. There are two such
leads. The first is the plate of brass left by Drake and recently found
at Drake's Bay. Granted the authenticity of the Drake plate, it now does
not rank as an isolated find, however spectacular, but rather as good
supporting evidence of the conclusion based upon my ethnographic
analysis. The second point of evidence is Fletcher's statement that
"this country our generall named _Albion_, and that for two causes; the
one in respect of the white bancks and cliffes, which lie toward the
sea: the other, that it might have some affinity, euen in name also,
with our owne country, which was sometime so called." The _Famous
Voyage_ version says almost the same, except that the country was named
_Nova Albion_, which agrees more closely with the wording of the Drake
plate. Wagner has discussed the white cliffs,[124] but his argument is
unconvincing. There is no good reason to doubt that the cliffs mentioned
were at the bay, since Fletcher implies that the naming took place
before the departure.[125] And it must be remembered that white cliffs
which face toward the sea[126] are at Drake's Bay and _not at Bodega_.
In June, 1579, then, Drake probably landed in what is now known as
Drake's Bay. He remained there for five weeks repairing his ship, and
found the Indians the most remarkable objects of interest with which he
came in contact. From a comparative analysis of the detailed
descriptions of the native ceremonies, artifacts, and language I
conclude that in the fullest authentic account, _The World Encompassed_,
it is the Coast Miwok Indians that are referred to.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Alfred L. Kroeber, _Handbook of the Indians of California_, Bureau
of American Ethnology, Bulletin 78 (Washington, D.C., 1925).
[2] Robert F. Heizer and William W. Elmendorf, "Francis Drake's
California Anchorage in the Light of the Indian Language Spoken There,"
_Pacific Historical Review_, XI (1942), 213-217.
[3] George C. Davidson, "Directory for the Pacific Coast of the United
States," _Report of the Superintendent of the Coast Survey ... 1858_
(Washington, D.C., 1859). App. 44, pp. 297-458.
[4] George C. Davidson, "An Examination of Some of the Early Voyages of
Discovery and Exploration on the Northwest Coast of America from 1539 to
1603," _Report of the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey ... June, 1886_
(Washington, D.C., 1887), App. 7, pp. 155-253; and _Identification of
Sir Francis Drake's Anchorage on the Coast of California in the Year
1579_, California Historical Society Publications (San Francisco, 1890).
[5] George C. Davidson, "Francis Drake on the Northwest Coast of America
in the Year 1579. The Golden Hinde Did Not Anchor in the Bay of San
Francisco," _Transactions and Proceedings of the Geographical Society of
the Pacific_, ser. 2, Bull. 5.
[6] Henry R. Wagner, "George Davidson, Geographer of the Northwest Coast
of America," _California Historical Society Quarterly_, XI (1932),
299-320. The idea that Drake entered San Francisco Bay was held by
others than Davidson. See, for example, J. D. B. Stillman, "Did Drake
Discover San Francisco Bay?" _Overland Monthly_, I (1868), 332-337. See
also Henry R. Wagner, _Sir Francis Drake's Voyage around the World_ (San
Francisco, 1926), chaps. vii and viii, and notes on pp. 488-499, esp.
pp. 495-496.
[7] J. W. Robertson, _The Harbor of St. Francis_ (San Francisco, 1926).
[8] Hubert Howe Bancroft, _History of California_, Vol. I: _1542-1800_
(San Francisco, 1884), pp. 81-94.
[9] Edward Everett Hale, in Justin Winsor, _Narrative and Critical
History of the United States_, Vol. III, pp. 74-78.
[10] Alexander G. McAdie, "Nova Albion--1579," _Proceedings of the
American Antiquarian Society_, n. s., XXVIII (1918), 189-198. R. P.
Bishop, "Drake's Course in the North Pacific," _British Columbia
Historical Quarterly_, III (1939), 151-182.
[11] F. P. Sprent, _Sir Francis Drake's Voyage round the World,
1577-1580, Two Contemporary Maps_ (London, 1927), pp. 10-11, map 2.
[12] Samuel A. Barrett, _The Ethno-Geography of the Pomo and Neighboring
Indians_, Univ. Calif. Publ. Am. Arch. and Ethn., Vol. 6, No. 1
(Berkeley, 1908), pp. 28-37.
[13] _Ibid._, n. 7, pp. 36-37.
[14] Kroeber, _Handbook_, pp. 275-278.
[15] J. W. Robertson (_Francis Drake and Other Early Explorers along the
Pacific Coast_, San Francisco, 1927), in discussing Kroeber's analysis
of the Fletcher account (_op. cit._, p. 177), says: "There seems to be
no proof either that Drake landed at any particular harbor, or that
anything can be adduced so specific as to establish his residence on
this coast." The latter part of this statement cannot be maintained
seriously in the face of Kroeber's presentation of direct evidence to
the contrary.
[16] Heizer and Elmendorf, "Francis Drake's California Anchorage."
[17] The words recorded by Fletcher are in _The World Encompassed_. The
Madox vocabulary was printed by E. G. R. Taylor, "Francis Drake and the
Pacific," _Pacific Historical Review_, I (1932), 360-369. Madox's
account has been further discussed by Wagner in the _California
Historical Society Quarterly_, XI (1932), 309-311.
[18] See Barrett, _Ethno-Geography_, map facing p. 332, and Kroeber,
_Handbook_, fig. 22, p. 274, for the area held by the Coast Miwok.
[19] For details see _California Historical Society Quarterly_, XVI
(1937), 192.
[20] For particulars see _Drake's Plate of Brass: Evidence of His Visit
to California in 1579_, California Historical Society, Special
Publication No. 13 (San Francisco, 1937).
[21] See R. B. Haselden, "Is the Drake Plate of Brass Genuine?"
_California Historical Society Quarterly_, XVI (1937), 271-274.
Haselden's queries have been answered already. W. Hume-Rotherby (review
of _Drake's Plate of Brass Authenticated_, in _Geographical Journal_,
CXIV [1939], 54-55) points out that the letters engraved on the plate
(B, N, M) are not paralleled by other sixteenth-century inscriptions,
and that the form of the numeral 5 is suspect. These and other problems
which he poses have the effect of creating a smokescreen of doubt
without contributing anything new. Wagner is skeptical of the date on
the plate (June 17) and of the fact that the plate is of brass rather
than lead ("Creation of Rights of Sovereignty through Symbolic Acts,"
_Pacific Historical Review_, VII [1938], 297-326).
[22] Allen L. Chickering, "Some Notes with Regard to Drake's Plate of
Brass," _California Historical Society Quarterly_, XVI (1937), 275-281,
and "Further Notes on the Drake Plate," _ibid._, XVIII (1939), 251-253.
[23] Herbert E. Bolton, "Francis Drake's Plate of Brass," in _Drake's
Plate of Brass_, California Historical Society, Special Publication No.
13 (San Francisco, 1937).
[24] C. G. Fink and E. P. Polushkin, _Drake's Plate of Brass
Authenticated_ ... California Historical Society, Special Publication
No. 14 (San Francisco, 1938).
[25] Wagner's theory is not stated explicitly in any one place, hence
specific reference is impossible. See his _Sir Francis Drake's Voyage
around the World_ (San Francisco, 1926), pp. 156-158, 169.
[26] This is shown even more clearly on the Hezeta map of 1775
reproduced by Herbert E. Bolton, _Historical Memoirs of New California
by Fray Francisco Palou_, 4 vols. (Berkeley, 1926), Vol. IV, facing p.
16. George C. Davidson in his _Identification_ (pp. 17-18, 34, 39) made
a similar identification of the Indian village site at the Limantour
Estero in Drake's Bay.