Tag: san jose

  • 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:

  • Fallon Statue Removal in San Jose Cause For Hope & Celebration

    On the morning of Friday, August 4th, 2023, the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe, Centro Aztlan Chicomoztoc, their supporters, members of the press, and San Jose government officials (and their designees.) Gathered at the site where a statue of Captain Thomas Fallon was “immortalized” in bronze to commemorate the moment when Fallon rose American Flag for the first time, in San Jose, 1846; and which symbolized the second time this land was stolen.

    However, the statue was no longer there, at the intersection of Julian and St. James, in what’s no known as San Jose, California. The statue was removed on April 25, 2023.

    This meeting was to cleanse the land beneath the concrete and roadways of this area. (The place where the Guadalupe River flowed. Where the Muwekma Ohlone ancestors lived for thousands of years.)

    Charlene Nijmeh speaking at site of former Holiday Inn, where her mother Rosemary Cambra, fought to protect Muwekma ancestral remains unearthed by archeologists right here.

    Charlene Nijmeh, Muwekma Chairwoman said we gathered at the former site of a symbol of oppression and genocide, “To give prayers to our ancestors; and also to give them hope.”

    And, to show that Ohlone people are still here, and that their voices will not be silenced.

    The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe is trying to break the silence on their fight for Federal Recognition, Sovereign Rights, and Land Grants that the tribe rightfully deserves. Things which are granted to Federally Recognized Tribes as a matter of law.

    They want all of these things without the concessions Bay Area Congressional Representative want them to make. Concessions like money for education, and limits on rights affecting the tribe’s long term development and survival.

    San Jose City Council voted unanimously to remove the Fallon Statue on November 9, 2021.

    San Jose Councilmember Peter Ortiz–who led the movement to remove the Christopher Colombus statue from San Jose’s City Hall– recognized the Fallon statue as another reference to the culture of colonialism. He said it sends the wrong message; that we need healing from the violence of the past.

    “The monument symbolized, unfortunately, oppression, it symbolized injustice,” San Jose Councilmember Omar Torres said, “I’m just glad that it’s gone.”

    Peter Ortiz’, and Omar Torres’ pledge to co-write, and introduce a resolution fully recognizing the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area as a “Tribe”, could be the start of the silence surrounding Muwekma’s efforts finally ending.

    Today’s events would start with a cleansing at the former site of the statue, followed by a procession around downtown San Jose to show people historic places which are important to Indigenous and Latinx Communities.

    Left to Right: Miwok Elder Razzle, Charlene Nijmeh (Facing), Centro Aztlan Chicomoztoc (Back to camera), Joey Torres, Muwekma Tribal Members and Supporters Surrounding.

    Controversial from the beginning…

    The early history of the fight to remove the Fallon statue. As told to me by Kathy Chávez Napoli, a Mountain Maidu Elder, and core member of the original group fighting the statue, along with Javier Salazar (who started it), and Felix Arcano. With help from Yolanda Reynolds, and more. I was honored to have met one of the people who fought the installation of the statue from its commission in 1988, and to receive this oral history.

    Centro Aztlan Chicomoztoc Rep. (Left), Kathy Chavez Napoli (right) being recognized during celebrations at St. James Park.

    About the Controversy

    The controversy around the statue stemmed from the fact that it blatantly romanticized American colonization; was a symbol of land theft (the annexation of Mexican land), oppression, and the dark and violent nature of the creation of America literally on top of the bones of Indigenous people.

    There were also serious questions about whether or not Thomas Fallon even deserved to have a statue erected in his honor. Fallon gave himself the rank of captain; it wasn’t actually awarded to him in any official manner. And, John D. Sloat was the one who was ordered to land on Alta California and raise the American flag. Sloat simply gave the flag to Fallon.

    Mayor McEnery’s Book About Fallon Was Fiction

    Aside from those cultural and subject matter objections to the statue, there was also the fact that Tom McEnery wrote a book about Captain Thomas Fallon which was supposed to be based on Thomas Fallon’s journals. And the “historical facts” gleaned from these journal were used to bolster the Mayor McEnery’s argument for commissioning and installing the statue.

    It was later revealed that Thomas Fallon kept no such journal, and the entire book itself was historical (fan) fiction written by Tom McEnery, himself.

    Mayor Tom McEnery, meanwhile, was able to personally commission this art project (in 1988)–with a budget of $250k–which ended up costing $800k; and would require another $500K for installation and infrastructure. (Which is about $1.9M in 2023 dollars for the statue, and about $1.1M for installation and infrastructure.)

    But, where did the money even come from? How did the Mayor Manage to amass the money to pay for the statue? And how did he intend to pay for the installation and infrastructure on top of that?

    This was the fact that moved so many people to action.

    Outcry Over Lack of Accountability Exclusion of Public Input

    Kathy Chávez Napoli remembers the reaction to this sudden, and extreme expenditure: “Wait a minute, we don’t even have stop lights at certain places and you want to spend $800 thousand dollars on a person that you wrote a book about?!

    Tom McEnery (the Mayor at that time) had leveraged an alarming amount of public funds from the city to pay for it. This was possible because of the passage of Measure “G” which gave the mayor of San Jose more power to act without certain checks and balances (like City Council or Committee Approval/Review).

    “Tom McEnery, at the time, was the most powerful mayor that San Jose had ever had.” Kathy Chávez Napoli told me, “They passed Measure G; it gave him a lot more power than the mayor had ever had, prior. And he had never been challenged. And so, when we challenged him, that was his first defeat.”

    The Fallon protestors had managed to make their points heard, and break through the noise with verifiable facts, in black and white, on paper. An advisory committee was created.

    “Because of that we were able to get a lot more support and they formed the Historic Art Council. I was appointed, Javiar was appointed. And we voted to destroy it, but we were out-voted.”

    However: the statue was never installed in its intended place, or anywhere else. For a decade the statue sat in storage, somewhere in Oakland, California….

    Until it was installed by Mayor Ron Gonzalez. At what’s now a bare median, at Julian & St. James, in downtown San Jose.

    Storage Costs and Locations Still A Mystery

    “We never knew how much it cost to be in storage, in Oakland, for ten years.” Kathy said, “They never would tell us. They never would tell us where the location was.”

    Referring to Mayor Gonzalez’ decision to reinstall the offensive statue, “… we said, ‘When it goes up, it’s gonna get vandalized.’ And ever since it’s gone up, it’s always getting vandalized. Always.”

    “It should never have been there. It should never have even been created.” Kathy told me, “And that’s how we were able to bring so many people in the community together to oppose it.”

    Commenting on how long it took for the statue to finally be removed, Kathy Chavez turned to me and said:

    All of our work, all of the work of all the community has been vindicated. And it doesn’t always happen right when you hope it does. But it happens! What better win?

    Kathy Chávez Napoli

    As I listened to the presentations from Muwekma Tribal Chairwoman Charlene Nijmeh, Muwekma Tribal Member Joey Torres, Muwekma Youth Ambassador, Muwekma Tribal Members, Miwok Elder Razzle, SCU Prof. Lee Panich, SJSU Anthropologist & Archeologist Gustavo Flores, and the Speaker for Centro Aztlan Chicomoztoc–who described some of the horrors of the mission system….

    Centro Aztlan Chicomoztoc Presenting at Plaza De Cesar Chavez
    It became more apparent how the removal of public art dedicated to the symbols of oppression, land theft, and white supremacy can open up pathways to healing wounds that we can’t always see.

    That the removal of these blocks can also open up our eyes to see other places where we could do better. New opportunities to create pathways for healing on a community level. Something which is needed more often than not in area where wide disparities exist.

    George Floyd’s murder (May 25, 2020) by police is what sparked the unanimous urgency behind the the deaccession and removal ordinance passed by the San Jose City Council on November 9, 2021.

    The ensuing protests, and the birth of the Black Lives Matter, Defund Police Movement, Me Too, Missing Murdered Indigenous Movement, and more, reignited the struggle for civil rights which had remained dormant until then. It let loose our collective energy, which had been pent up and held back not just by our collective oppression, but our repression, and our silence.

    All of these events helped people wake up and realize that there is a gap in the way people are treated in our society.

    That the economic, justice, and welfare systems in American society were created to exclude nonwhite society members; or, include them in a predatory, exploitive way, which made the cost of inclusion too great a price to bear.

    Because our eyes were open to the injustices and injuries visited upon other people by an unjust system created to oppress and subjugate them….

    Because we were able to empathize with the pain and struggles of someone else who did not look like us….

    Because we, as a society, started practicing restorative justice instead of making proclamations to do so, we have been able to move forward, and imagine a future which includes everyone.

    “This is a we thing.” Miwok Elder Razzle told us, inviting us to share and participate in the cleansing ceremony, directly, as several people shared songs.

    The removal of the Fallon Statue, and the introduction of a resolution fully recognizing Muwekma as a “Tribe” are the first steps in the journey towards the official recognition of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.

    Muwekma Tribal Member Joey Torres talked about how our ancestors got use ready for this moment, how we are reawakening and searching for knowledge stored deep inside.

    Miwok Elder Razzle talked about the seventh generation, and said this would not have been possible if the youth and young adults of today hadn’t spoken up and taken the lead on a battle that started so long ago.

    We are at an interesting moment in time when the Seventh Generation is now beginning to take the lead as our elders begin to transition. Let’s do them proud and make sure we leave something good for the next seven generations.


    You can help support this journey, too, by helping to support your local tribe and indigenous community.

    You can help the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe’s fight for re-affirmation of their status as a Federally Recognized tribe. Find out more on the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area’s website.

    You can also encourage your local leaders and politicians to acknowledge the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe with a formal Land Acknowledgement.

    Not Sure If You’re In Muwekma Territory?

    The aboriginal homeland of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe includes the following counties: San Francisco, San Mateo, most of Santa Clara, Alameda, Contra Costa, and portions of Napa, Santa Cruz, Solano and San Joaquin

    From Muwekma.org

    What about the “Chochenyo Ohlone”, and the “Lisjan Ohlone”?

    Chochenyo is a dialect of the Ohlone language, spoken in parts of the East Bay. Jose Guzman, a famous Ohlone leader, who referred to himself as “Lisjanes”. [“Yo soy Lisjan.”]

    Jose Guzman was thought to be “the last Chochenyo speaker” until the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe began speaking and learning their language again. He was a member of the Federally Recognized Verona Band of Alameda County.

    The present-day Muwekma Ohlone Tribe is comprised of all of the known surviving American Indian lineages aboriginal to the San Francisco Bay region who trace their ancestry through the Missions Dolores, Santa Clara, and San Jose; and who were also members of the historic Federally Recognized Verona Band of Alameda County.

    So, every time you recognize the “Chochenyo Ohlone“, or the “Lisjan Ohlone“, or Lisjanikma, you’re recognizing the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area. “Muwekma” means la gente.