An Investigative Report by the Alameda Native History Project
Preserving Accurate Ohlone History and Culture
The Alameda Native History Project is dedicated to preserving the accurate history and culture of the Ohlone people. As part of this effort, we have conducted research on Sogorea Te Land Trust, a non-profit organization [501(c)(3)], and its claims of representing the Ohlone people.
Why We Investigated
We followed this story because it was newsworthy and of significant public interest. Moreover, we believe that people have the right to know where their money is going, particularly when it comes to donations intended to support Native American communities–in this case: Ohlone people, the First Alamedans.
Concerns and Findings
Our research has raised several concerns about Sogorea Te Land Trust’s claims and actions:
Claims by trust leaders, particularly Corrina Gould, about being part of an Ohlone tribe called “Lisjan“, which is actually a Nisenan name for “Pleasanton”, not East Oakland or Berkeley.
Over the past three years, the Alameda Native History Project has reached out to Sogorea Te Land Trust multiple times seeking clarification on these issues, but they have not provided any substantive responses.
Call to Action
We encourage everyone to seek out multiple sources and consult with Ohlone elders and experts before supporting or promoting initiatives related to Ohlone history and culture. Specifically, we recommend reaching out to the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area and other Ohlone leaders who may have valuable insights and perspectives on the issues raised in this report. By engaging in open and respectful dialogue, we can work together to ensure the accurate representation and well-being of the Ohlone people.
“Lisjan” has been referred to as a Traditional Ohlone Village Site, in East Oakland.
Both the San Leandro Creek, and San Lorenzo Creek bear the name of “Lisjan” creek.
But “Lisjan” isn’t even an Ohlone word.
“Lisjan” is what Nisenan People call the city of Pleasanton, California.
Uldal, J. & Shipley, W. (1966) “Nisenan Texts and Dictionary”
And, just to be clear: Pleasanton wasn’t called “Pleasanton” until the 1860’s. Up to that point, it was called “Alisal”, or “Alizal”, or “El Alizal”, or “Alisal Rancheria”. And, before that, Alisal was the Bernal Rancheria.
And Nisenan People are not Maidu People. They’re totally seperate tribes.
You could say, the present day Nisenan capitol is Nevada City, California….
The “definition” of Lisjan, a Nisenan Word…
In 1929, A.L. Kroeber published “The Valley Nisenan“, which contained an expansive, and categorized Nisenan vocabulary; and a decent explanation of phonetics. However, this was only a short list, which did not contain Place Names. But, this book is an indication of the linguistic study and research going on behind the scenes, in California, in the early 20th century.
It wouldn’t be until 1966, that Hans Jørgen Uldall, would publish “Nisenan Texts and Dictionary“, with William Shipley. This volume includes some very adult stories. So, beware. But, there are Nisenan-English, and English-Nisenan dictionaries in the back.
Uldall’s dictionary contains the entry for “Lisjan”; as a Place Name for Pleasanton, California.
But, how did that name, get all the way up to Nisenan territory, 100 miles away from Pleasanton? And 45 years after Harrington’s interviews? Why is “Lisjan” being touted as a traditional Ohlone Village Site in deep East-Oakland, if “Lisjan” is another name for Pleasanton?
Excerpt from “Chochenyo Field Notes” showing the word “muwekma”.
J.P. Harrington’s “Chochenyo Field Notes” (1921)
One of the most-cited references in Ohlone History…
In 1921, J.P. Harrington performed a Language Survey of Native Americans in the East Bay. Harrington gathered numerous languages during this time, including the “Chocheño” language; which is known as the East Bay Ohlone language, today. Despite being deeply flawed, and extremely sus at times, this document continues to be a primary influence on mainstream discussions about Ohlone History in the San Francisco Bay Area.
One of Harrington’s interviewees was a man by the name of Jose Guzman. Guzman was interviewed, along with a man named “Angelo”, and a third man who is known as “informant”–presumably, Harrington’s fixer. Francisca is another interviewee who appears separately from Jose and Angelo, most times.
This volume is incredibly informative. Even though, a good portion of the information provided by Jose Guzman, and Angelo become problematic in many places–when viewed in context with later anthropological work, and the lack of clear attribution to a speaker (if any) in many of the entries. This is a problem with Harrington, really.
A majority of contemporary work on East Bay Ohlone People cite J.P. Harrington’s “Chochenyo Field Notes”, from 1921.
This document is never more than one step removed from almost any article or research paper.
But who’s actually read it? As daunting as these tomes look in the beginning: I have to be honest, and tell you, it’s not as bad as it seems. 355 pages of hand-written notes goes kind of quickly if you can hang with the kind of Spanglish that’s spoken on many a rez, today.
It’s easy to get a feel for the personalities of the interviewees by how their interviews progress; and even the type of setting. Some interviews were taken at gatherings. There are write-ups of methods of fabrication for food and tools; songs; as well as old stories, passed down to Jose Guzman. Harrington’s hand-writing also changes, depending on the speed of the information he’s being given, and whether or not he’s having a good day. Sometimes, he had to switch pens, until ultimately finding a pencil.
In the beginning, Harrington focuses on the basics. Where are you from? What’s the name of your tribe? Have you heard of these people? Can you tell me the history of this place?
Harrington wouldn’t ask twice about something the same day. He would circle back to it again, on another day.
As his notes progress, the words move to phrases. The lists become Chocheño lists, with Spanish or English translation.
This is how “Lisjan” kept popping up.
Harrington’s Synthesis of Chocheño VS. The Way Chocheño Was Actually Being Spoken
Aside from where the notes explicitly said who the speaker was, or whether or not the interviewees agree, it’s difficult to tell the difference between Harrington’s own ideas and synthesis of Chocheño; and the Chocheño language as it was actually spoken.
The following entry shows how Harrington took a variation of the phrase “makin miwikma” (we are good people), and applied it to “lisjan”, to form “lisjanikma”–which, to Harrington’s understanding of Chocheño, means “lisjan people”.
makin lisjanikma, we are lisjanes. approved lisjanikma but could not get tongue around it.”
The result was a valid form of the word. But not a word which was actually in use; or even really pronounceable.
This would continue on the next page, with:
makin Jinijmin, somos muchachos, cannot say *makin jinijminka inf. tells me clearly
Hand-writing is unclear for “mak[n]ote”, “mak[in]ote”, “mak[s]ote”, “mak[‘n]ote”…
This is when I started suspecting there may have been drinking involved in some of these later sessions with Jose Guzman and Angelo. (Because it looks like they’re having fun, and getting kinda goofy at times.) The informant’s answer seems to say more about the philosophy, or [machismo] culture, of the group being interviewed. I can actually see it playing out:
You can’t just say, “We’re some men.” You have to say, “Puros muchachos estamos aqui!”
It was at this point, that I started noticing the strong Spanish-language influence in many of these examples of Chocheño given to Harrington by Chocheño speakers.
References to “Lisjan”
Page 54: The Ind. name of the Chocheños is lisianij.
In the first few pages, we find an entry that says the “Indian Name” of the Chocheños is “Lisjan“.
This may seem like an authoritative, and all-encompassing reference. But the specifics change over time.
Page 59: lisjanis, In. Infor. They said that S.Jose was an early mission [upside-down triangle symbol]; they called the Inds. here sometimes los viejos cristianos. Jose knows this trbu. too and uses it every day, in talking to me.
In the next entry, we find out that San Jose Mission Indians were also called “los viejos cristianos”.
We also find out that Jose Guzman references San Jose Mission Indians this way, as well. No location information is given yet. But that changes.
Soon, there are distinctions made between who is, and who isn’t Lisjan.
On page 95 of the PDF, a paragraph begins with “lisjanes were the San Jose.” It goes on to say that, neither the Doloreños, nor the Clareños, were Lisjanes.
Page 95: lisjanes were the San Jose — the name covered up as far as S. Lorenzo Angelo thinks. 8ing. lisjan. yo soy lisjan. The Doloreños were not lisjanes, nor were the Clareños. [Mention of Dumbarton Rail Bridge (opened 1910) at bottom of page?]
This entry includes a little more information about location. It states that the name Lisjan covered up as far as San Lorenzo. This is interesting, because the very first entry said Lisjan is the “Indian Name” of the Chocheños.
It’s also interesting, because the Chocheño-speaking Indians at San Lorenzo were called “Los Nepes”. Which means, they were considered a completely different group by Harrington’s interviewees.
Unfortunately, this entry only gives us a rough northern boundary to a possible Lisjan “territory”, certainly not enough information to pin to a certain geographic region. This also means that “Lisjan” was definitely not located in present-day Oakland, at all.
Pages 105-106: kana lisjanka, yo soy lisjan. makin lisjanikma, we are lisjanes. approved lisjanikma but could not get tongue around it.
The next entries that we see, are on pages 105 and 106. While the phrases “yo so lisjan”, and “we are lisjanes” are present; so is a real problem.
There is no distinction between the words and phrases that are actually used/spoken in Chocheño–and given to Harrington; and, the words and phrases J.P. Harrington created, or invented, on his own, and “pitched” to his informant, and interviewees.
Using the information found in Harrington’s notes, I prepared the following visual aids.
I wanted to find the answers to a number of questions I had:
Where is Lisjan? Is it in Oakland, Pleasanton, or somewhere else?
Who are the Lisjanes? Are they a specific group, or family?
Regarding what Angelo said about a Northern Boundary for Lisjan: is it possible the boundaries for Lisjan fall within the historic bounds of Mission San Jose?
Map showing Historic Place Names, Mission San Jose, and approximate North and South Mission Lands boundaries, as surveyed in 1852.
Where is Lisjan? Is it in Oakland, Pleasanton, or somewhere else?
[If this is the only document you’re going by….] And, if the Northern bounds of the name “Lisjan”, were located just before San Lorenzo, that means that:
Lisjan was not located in Oakland.
Lisjan was not bound by the historical Mission San Jose property lines.
Pleasanton was probably not called “Lisjan” by locals.
Who are the Lisjanes? Are they a specific group, or family?
Not much light is shed on who the Lisjanes are. While Jose Guzman probably declared himself Lisjan; it’s unclear the extent of Angelo’s affiliation to the name. At one point, one man touches his chest and tells Harrington that he is Lisjan in name, but his heart is from somewhere else.
Does this mean that Lisjan is somehow a transitory, or new affiliation based on where someone lives, now? Is this person simply saying something akin to, “I left my heart in San Francisco?” Or, “My heart yearns for home?” Or even something like, “This heart was made somewhere else; my blood pumps the blood of my ancestors, from a different place than here?”
We are told that the San Jose’s are Lisjan. The indian name for Chocheños from Mission San Jose are Lisjan. Indians from Santa Clara, and Dolores are definitely not Lisjan. Los Nepes aren’t Lisjan, either. And a tribe, from Sunol, the name of which no one could remember, was never affiliated with Lisjan.
This was one of the reasons I began to suspect that the bounds of Lisjan could be tied to the property lines of Mission San Jose.
But, alas, no matter which San Lorenzo you draw the Northern boundary of the name Lisjan upon, they always exceed the extent of mission property lines.
Wondering which Native American organizations you should give to on Giving Tuesday?
Hopefully, when you read this, you already know that Shuumi Land Tax doesn’t really go to all Ohlone people. (But we don’t want to discourage your well-meaning intent and your need to help Indigenous people in anyway you can.)
If you really want to help the Native American People in the San Francisco Bay Area, I’ve compiled a list of organizations where your generous donation and goodwill have a measurable impact.
This is the real Ohlone tribe you probably thought you were donating money to when you considered paying Shuumi “Land Tax”.
With over 10,000 years of continuous habitation of this place now known as the San Francisco Bay Area, your donation directly to this tribe of over 600 enrolled members will be felt immediately; and put to use as Muwekma reawaken their Chochenyo language, remember dances, and revitalize their culture.
The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe is a bonafide native American Tribe, which has been recognized over and over again by The Courts, but still struggles for recognition with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Muwekma is set to begin their Trail of Truth in their epic battle for justice; in the form of a Tribal Homeland, Education, Housing, Medical Services, and–last but not least: Sovereignty.
If you want to help Ohlone people in the San Francisco Bay Area (and beyond):
Go to Muwekma.org to educate yourself and your friends about the Indigenous People of the San Francisco Bay Area.
Established in 1955 as one of the first urban American Indian community centers in the nation.
It was founded by the American Friends Service Committee to serve the needs of American Indian people relocated from reservations to the San Francisco Bay Area.
Friendship House SF provides a girth of wellness services for Native American People in the SF urban rez.
One of the most important services the Friendship House SF provides is treatment and recovery services for Native Americans. Lots of tribes will send their members to the Friendship House SF for their treatment and recovery services.
The Friendship House SF also provides meeting space for other organizations to hold their events and retreats. Very thankful to the Friendship House SF for giving me and organizations I’ve been a part space for so many years.
Provides primary care, mental health, and dental services primarily. Also organizes and hold the Indigenous Red Market, contributes to Powwows, and other Native American Events and Programs throughout the San Francisco Bay Area.
Contributing to this organization will also support a wider range of programs and services in the Bay Area.
Since 1968, the purpose of the American Indian Center has been to create a community space based on Native American values, culture, programming, traditional foods, and community support.
Contributing to this organization will help sustain AICC’s mission to improve and promote the well-being of the American Indian community and to increase the visibility of American Indian cultures in an urban setting in order to cultivate awareness, understanding and respect.
The American Indian Child Resource Center is a non-profit social services and educational community-based organization serving American Indian community members from across the greater Oakland/San Francisco Bay Area and surrounding counties.
The American Indian Child Resource Center is a COA Accredited Organization.
Economic Development Corporation which invests in and creates innovative institutions and models that strengthen asset control (land stewardship is one example) and support economic development (through grants and programs) for American Indian people and their communities.
First Nations Development Institute is another solid choice because you know your money will be well invested, and you can read the reports on how it was used.
Which Native American Organizations Should You Donate To?
Hopefully, this helps you decide where to invest for Giving Tuesday in the year 2023!
Just to be clear: eating food grown in contaminated soil may not result in contaminated food…
Even though petrochemical aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) are largely unstudied “likely” carcinogens–some of which have been found to move through the soil easily into water; and that contamination can move from soil to food to animals.
Petrochemical Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) include chemicals like Benzene, Naphthalene, Xylene, and other chemicals which are part of a complex and ever-changing family of petroleum-derived products.
While we know that lead, mercury, arsenic, and other heavy metals can concentrate in root vegetables, causing various ailments. The effects of PAH have not be sufficiently researched or linked to the varying illnesses of those living in and around former brownfields and industrial complexes, or exposed to contaminated soils.
While everyone is so excited to line up for their #landback/#rematriatetheland photo ops, ask yourselves if this is the land that you actually want back.
Proper remediation, decontamination, and detoxification of these places must be done by the city/government and/or corporations “giving” this land back.
It helps no one to turn a blind eye to the real-world challenges behind soil and water contamination.
Exposing us to contaminated soil through dust, accidental ingestion, or to the detritus which accumulates on vegetables and fruit above the ground, is not healing. It’s a slow death.
Furthermore, a substance doesn’t just have to be “carcinogenic” to cause harm. Some mutagenic substances can be carried down through generations.
Part of a proper #landacknowledgement not only mentions the @MuwekmaOhloneTribe; it admits to the harms western society committed against the environment during colonization and industrialization.
Tribal Groups of the San Francisco Bay Region. Compiled and Plotted by Gabriel Duncan, for the Alameda Native History Project. Version 2.1.5.8.21
“Tribal land claims are complex, and overlapping.”
You’ve probably heard that before.
While one group may be the most vocal about claiming their ancestral land, rest assured, there are other groups who claim that exact same place.
While it’s true Indigenous People shared many spaces with each other for a plethora of reasons, including mutual survival, the actual “Tribes” in the San Francisco Bay Area were formed thousands of years ago.
In spite of the fact that the California Native American Heritage Commission recognized corporations as Tribes, it’s important for you to recognize the difference between a corporation and a Tribe.
This is especially important Today; when seeking out indigenous people and tribes to consult with on various projects like land acknowledgements, cultural easements, land back, or deciding whether or not to pay into a “land tax” scheme.
Indigenous People/Native Americans/First People can all do something that the Bureau of Indian Affairs refers to as “Establishing Indian Ancestry”.
Proving our Ancestry, or Blood Quantum, is a common challenge Native Americans face. It may not be right, but it’s the reason we know who our nearest Full Blooded Relative is.
Blood Quantum is an ugly, racist concept. [A tribe is made of family. That’s how tribes work.]
But it’s how we separate the Elizabeth Hoovers and Ward Churchills from actual Indigenous People.
“Who’s your grandmother?” Is one of the most common questions you get asked when you talk about the rez. We keep track of who is who. It’s not hard, because it’s such a small world. But, even if we aren’t close, we’re still native; and we still look out for each other.
It’s appropriate to ask someone basic questions about their tribe, such as:
What is the name of your tribe?
Where is your tribe from?
Who is your Tribal Chairperson?
Are you enrolled in your tribe?
If they are a Tribal Chairperson, it’s okay to ask them how long their term is, and when the next elections will be held.
It’s true that the Native American Heritage Commission is the agency in California which determines the proper Tribes To Consult for NAGPRA and Planning Purposes.
But, the Native American Heritage Commission does not seem to vet the lists, judging by how many corporations are considered not only Tribes, but the “Most Likely Descendant” to Native American Burial Grounds and Cultural Resources.
Corporations cannot be Tribal Governments because the exercise of sovereign powers is not a charitable purpose. Sovereign powers include the right to repatriation of remains, as declared in the United Nations Declaration of Indigenous Rights, article 12.
