Tag: pleasanton

  • Who, What, and Where is Lisjan?

    “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.

    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.

    As a digital file this document is 2.3 gigabytes large. It has 355 pages of original scans. It is entirely hand-written in cursive. [J. Alden Mason’s “Plains Miwok, Chocehnyo Field Notes”, from 1916, actually are written in cursive.] And uses a mix of Chochenyo, Spanish, and English (in that order.)

    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

    ‘aji jinijmin mak[n]ote, puros muchachos estamos aqui”

    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:

    1. Where is Lisjan? Is it in Oakland, Pleasanton, or somewhere else?
    2. Who are the Lisjanes? Are they a specific group, or family?
    3. 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:

    1. Lisjan was not located in Oakland.
    2. Lisjan was not bound by the historical Mission San Jose property lines.
    3. 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.

    Stay tuned.


    References:

  • Shuumi Does Not Benefit Ohlone Tribe

    Most people are familiar with the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.;

    and their fundraising (“trust”) corporation known as Sogorea Te Land Trust, INC.

    Both are fronted by Corrina Gould, an Ohlone woman, who has managed to command the attention and monies from thousands of people in the San Francisco Bay Area, and beyond.

    Corrina Gould has been lauded for her fundraising to establish urban gardens; create ad-hoc Ohlone language programs; and even negotiate for a cultural easement at a well-known park, in the City of Oakland, California.

    But Corrina Gould’s work has been done without the inclusion, consultation, or participation of her own tribe.

    And the victories that Gould has managed to score, however shallow—and in the name of “all Ohlone people”—do not actually benefit all Ohlone people. In fact, Corrina Gould is actively diverting money and support away from her own tribe.

    Shuumi Land Tax, (fundraising donations) collected by the Sogorea Te Land Trust, does not go to all Ohlone People.

    Shuumi” stays within the Sogorea Te Land Trust, and is only disbursed to Corrina Gould’s personal corporation: the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.–which, in turn, only benefits Gould’s immediate family.

    [For reference, Corrina Gould’s immediate family are:
    (1) herself,
    (2) Cheyenne Gould,
    (3) Deja Gould, and
    (4) Chatah Gould.
    For all intents and purposes, these are the only members of what Corrina Gould alleges is a “confederation of villages.]

    And…. While Corrina Gould claims that her non-profit corporation is a Tribal Government, it is not. And, despite Corrina Gould’s claims that she is a Tribal Chairwoman, she is not.

    Tribal Chairpersons are voted for by the enrolled members of a tribe, in a democratic process which all legitimate Native American tribes are required to employ, per the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

    Not only do enrolled tribal members vote for the Tribal Chairpersons; they vote for Tribal Council Members; and vote for or against the laws, regulations and actions taken by their Tribe.

    [Link to Federal Bar PDF document, “Introduction to Tribal Election Law“.]

    At most, Gould was “elected” as CEO by the Board of Directors of her corporation.

    But, in reality, Corrina Gould is the self-appointed Chief Executive Officer of a corporation she formed to affect the illusion of legitimacy; a shell corporation she could use not just for her own personal monetary gain, but also satisfy her narcissistic need to be the only indian in the room—the end-all, be-all expert on Ohlone “indianness”.

    Gabriel Duncan

    The fact that the three officers of the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC. are: Corrina Gould, Deja Gould and “Chayenne Zepeda” (AKA, “Cheyenne Gould”), should be a red flag regarding the legitimacy of the corporation as a “tribal government”, and “confederation of villages”.

    The name of Gould’s corporation itself; a so-called “confederation of villages” forming a “nation” would imply the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC. is a large group of people—presumably, Ohlone people—who represent a number of different Ohlone villages in the San Francisco Bay Area.

    If this were true: one would expect to see a roll or roster of villages; articles of confederation signed by representatives of all the villages in the confederation.

    So, how come Corrina Gould is only pictured with her daughter and grand-children in most “official tribal portraits”?

    You may be blinded by the white faces surrounding Corrina Gould; and Indigenous supporters who are neither Ohlone, nor even from the San Francisco Bay Area.

    But those people are not tribal members. And they are not eligible to be tribal members because they’re not even Ohlone.

    This begs the question:

    • Who are the other villages in the confederacy?
    • Where are the members of those other villages?
    • Why aren’t other members of the confederacy represented in these official pictures and at official events with Corrina Gould?
    • Why are the PR photos only showing Corrina Gould’s immediate family, and a slew of non-indigenous supporters?
    Why hasn’t anyone asked these very basic questions?

    People are less familiar with the real, bona fide, Ohlone tribe Corrina Gould is a recognized descendant of: The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.

    The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe is composed of all surviving lineages of Missions San Jose, Delores, and Santa Clara.
    Muwekma boasts over 700 enrolled tribal members; and a proven, documented contiguous history of living in the San Francisco Bay Area for over 10,000 years.

    In fact, the genetic ties between Muwekma and the San Francisco Bay Area fossil record are only being strengthened with each archaeological “discovery”, and subsequent “ancient DNA” analysis.

    Muwekma is a Chochenyo word which means la gente (“the people”.) This is a commonality, for tribes’ names to literally mean “us”, or “the people”. The reason why is mostly philosophical, and only a teensy bit linguistic; but this is true for the majority of groups of people when asked “what do you call yourselves?” [Indigenous People have the right to name themselves, and be referred to by the name they choose. UN Resolution 61/295; adopted Sept-13-2007.]

    This is completely different than the name “Lisjan”; which is an obscure reference to the Muwekma homeland, which included (among other locales): Alisal Rancheria (around Pleasanton, California), the Area Around Sunol (California), and the historical Hacienda Del Pozo Verona, built by the Hearst family—which had a train station named for it: the Verona Station.

    Alisal was the Land Grant Rancheria Muwekma people lived and worked on after the secularization of the missions, as vaqueros.

    Much of this land was later bought by the Bernal family (which became Pleasanton), and a southern portion was purchased by Randolph Hearst.

    Muwekma people have called themselves by a few names: Lisjannes, Muwekma, the Mission San Jose Band of Indians, and Ohlone.

    However, Ohlone people have never called themselves “Chochenyo, or “The Chochenyo”, because Chochenyo is an Ohlone Language, not a tribal group.

    And Muwekma people have never referred to themselves as the “Verona Band of Alameda County”; this was a name used to identify Muwekma people by the U.S. Government, used in their own internal BIA/Department of Interior documents.

    Aside from the fact that:

    1. “Lisjan” is a Chochenyo and Nisenan name for Pleasanton, California; that,
    2. Corrina Gould’s corporation is not a confederation of Ohlone villages, or a Tribal Government; and that,
    3. Shuumi Land Tax doesn’t actually go to the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area…
    There is the very real and (largely) unreported pattern of hostility and contempt that Corrina Gould harbors for any person who tries to advocate for, or even dares to mention the name “Muwekma”.

    In the four years the Alameda Native History Project has been operating, I have come into contact with countless indigenous people who have (tried to) work with Corrina Gould in various professional and academic capacities. These credible people, experts in their fields, sought me out, to tell me about their experiences with Corrina Gould, after I publicly withdrew my support, and admitted my own mistake in ever co-signing the narrative that Gould had appropriated (almost word-for-word) from the history of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.

    This project completely, and uncompromisingly protects, and will continue to protect the anonymity of our sources; because, some of these sources are afraid of being subjected to even more harassment and possibly violence from Corrina Gould’s supporters than they have already experienced. [However, we are not afraid. And, this topic–and the subjects within this essay–need to be discussed and brought to the general public; because they are newsworthy and important.]

    This public mis-understanding is especially problematic because it means that Corrina Gould is diverting money and support away from the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Franciso Bay Area; the tribe from which Corrina Gould is a recognized descendant. [Alameda City Council, “Listening Session and Partnership Opportunities with Local Indigenous People and Ohlone Tribes“, Dec-6-2022]

    So, while people generously donate to a corporation, which they believe will help all Ohlone people….

    While the Sogorea Te Land Trust, and Corrina Gould, continue to profit from the public’s belief their donations fund programs which benefit a much larger group of Ohlone people than they actually do….

    Ohlone people will continue to suffer harms from colonization and political erasure–not just from the United States, and Spanish Governments’ policies of eradication and assimilation–but also, from misinformation and diversion by someone who would rather exploit their own indigenous identity (, and the public’s genuine good will and support for Ohlone people) for personal gain.

    Right now is a crucial time for the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe; as they struggle to receive re-affirmation of Muwekma’s status as a Federally Recognized Tribe; and restore a Muwekma tribal homeland.

    These are the top two priorities of the indigenous people of the San Francisco Bay Area. Once known as “Costanoans” because they, Muwekma Ohlone people, are among the First Peoples of the California Coast.

    You can help Muwekma, too.

    One of the ways Muwekma can receive reaffirmation of their Federal Recognition Status is by an act of Congress.

    Call/Email your local representative.

    Let them know that the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area has been in the Bay Area for over 10,000 years; and they deserve a land base on their own tribal homeland.

    Muwekma deserves reaffirmation of their status as a Federally Recognized Tribe. Muwekma has the right to have a land base on their ancestral homeland, in a region where they are in danger of being gentrified and priced out of.

    Check out the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area’s website for more ways to help the tribe restore their sovereignty, and provide an Ohlone homeland for generations to come.

    “The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe knows who they are, they don’t have to prove it.”

    Lee Panich, Ph.d.