Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T02:04:47.114Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Occurrence and Significance of Southwestern Grooved Axes in California

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2017

Robert F. Heizer
Robert F. Heizer*
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles, California
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

To the archaeologist whose primary field of endeavor is California, the grooved stone ax is a relatively unfamiliar object, since it occurs but rarely either in the course of excavation or in the perusal of the literature. That the grooved ax occurs at all in this region is significant, chiefly for the reason that in western North America it is a form highly characteristic of, and, with few exceptions, restricted to the Southwestern culture province proper. Since southern California is generally considered a western peripheral extension of the Southwestern culture area, it is not surprising occasionally to encounter the grooved ax here. It is interesting to note that this implement also occurs far to the northward in central and northeastern California, a region commonly thought to be beyond the zone of direct influence by or immediate contact with the Southwest proper. Presumably the grooved ax in central and northern California represents an extreme northwesterly extension from its native locale, which we assume to be the Southwest.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , January 1946 , pp. 187 - 193
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1946 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barrett, S. A. 1908. The Ethno-Geography of the Pomp and Neighboring Indians. University of California, Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 6, No. 1.Google Scholar
Beals, R. L. 1932. “The Comparative Ethnology of Northern Mexico before 1750.” Ibero-Americana, No. 2.Google Scholar
Beals, R. L. 1933. Ethnology of the Nisenan. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 31, pp. 335-414.Google Scholar
Beals, R. L. 1943. “Relations between Meso-America and the Southwest.” Tercera Reunion de Mesa Redonda sobre Problemas Antropologicos de Mexico y Centro-America, pp. 245-252. Sociedad Mexicana de Antropología. Mexico, D. F.Google Scholar
Brand, D. D. 1938. “Aboriginal Trade Routes for Seashells in the Southwest.” Yearbook, Association of Pacific Coast Geographers, Vol. 4.Google Scholar
Cook, S. F. 1943a. “The Conflict Between the California Indian and White Civilization: I, the Indian Versus the Spanish Mission.” Ibero-Americana, No. 21.Google Scholar
Cook, S. F. 1943b. “The Conflict between the California Indian and White Civilization: II. the Physical and Dem Demographic Reaction of the Nonmission Indians in Colonial and Provincial California.” Ibero-Americana, No. 22.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. B. 1905. The NorthernMaidu. American Museum of Natural History, Bulletin 17, pp. 119-346.Google Scholar
Driver, H. E. 1936. Wappo Ethnography. University of California, Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 36, pp. 179-220.Google Scholar
Drucker, P. 1941. Culture Element Distributions: XVII,Yuman-Piman. University of California Anthropological Records, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 221-227, “Cultural Relations of Yuman-Piman tribes.“Google Scholar
Dubois, C. G. 1908. Religion of the Luiseno Indians. University of California, Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 8, No. 3.Google Scholar
Eisen, G. 1898. “Long Lost Mines of Precious Gems Are Found Again.” San Francisco Call (newspaper), March 18,19,27.Google Scholar
Fages, P. 1937. A Historical Political and Natural Description of California. Transl. by Priestley, H. I.. Berkeley.Google Scholar
Forde, C. D. 1931. Ethnography of the Yuma Indians. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 28, No. 4.Google Scholar
Gifford, E. W. N.D. “Californian Shell Artifacts.” University of California Anthropological Records. In press.Google Scholar
Gifford, E. W. and Kroeber, A. L. 1937. Culture Elements Distributions: IV, Porno. University of California, Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 37, No. 4.Google Scholar
Haury, E. W. 1945. “The Problem of Contacts between the Southwestern United States and Mexico.” Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, Vol. I, pp. 55-74.Google Scholar
Heizer, R. F. 1941a. “The Direct-Historiqal Approach in California Archaeology.” American Antiquity, Vol. 7, pp. 98-122.Google Scholar
Heizer, R. F. 1941b. “Aboriginal Trade Between the Southwest and California.” Southwest Museum, Masterkey, Vol. 15, pp. 185-188.Google Scholar
Heizer, R. F. 1942. “Ancient Grooved Clubs and Modern Rabbit-Sticks.” American Antiquity, Vol. 8, pp. 41-56.Google Scholar
Heizer, R. F. N.D. “An Ethnographic Analysis of Fletcher's Account of the California Indians in 1579.” MS.Google Scholar
Heizer, R. F. and Hewes, G. W. 1940. “Animal Ceremonialism in Central California in the Light of Archaeology.” American Anthropologist, Vol. 42, pp. 587-603.Google Scholar
Heizer, R. F. and Beardsley, R. K. 1943. “Fired Clay Figurines in Central and Northern California.” American Antiquity, Vol. 9, pp. 199-207.Google Scholar
Hewes, G. W. 1941. “Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Central San Joaquin Valley.” American Antiquity, Vol. 7, pp. 123-133.Google Scholar
Kroeber, A. L. 1910. “At the Bedrock of History.” Sunset Magazine, Vol. 25, pp. 255-260.Google Scholar
Kroeber, A. L. 1922. Elements of Culture in Native California. University of California, Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 13, No. 8.Google Scholar
Kroeber, A. L. 1923. “American Culture and the Northwest Coast.” American Anthropologist, Vol. 25, pp. 1-20.Google Scholar
Kroeber, A. L. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 78.Google Scholar
Kroeber, A. L. 1928. Native Culture of the Southwest. University of California, Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 23, No. 9.Google Scholar
Kroeber, A. L. 1932. The Patwin and Their Neighbors. University of California, Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 29, pp. 253-423.Google Scholar
Lillard, J. B., Heizer, R. F., and Fenenga, F. F.. 1939. An Introduction to the Archaeology of Central California. Sacramento Junior College, Dept. of Anthropology, Bulletin 2.Google Scholar
Loeb, E. M. 1926. Porno Folkways. University of California, Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 19, No. 2.Google Scholar
Loeb, E. M. 1932. The Western Kuhsu Cult. University of California, Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 33, No. 1.Google Scholar
Lowie, R. H. 1938. “The Emergence Hole and the Foot Drum.” American Anthropologist, Vol. 40, p. 174.Google Scholar
Macleod, W. C. 1929. “On the Diffusion of Central American Culture to Coastal British Columbia and Alaska.” Anthropos, Vol. 24, pp. 417-439.Google Scholar
Mooney, J. 1890. “Notes on the Cosumnes Tribes of California.” American Anthropologist, o.s., Vol. 3, pp. 259-262.Google Scholar
Parsons, E. C. 1939a. “Relations between Ethnology and Archaeology in Southwest.” American Antiquity, Vol. 5, pp. 214-220.Google Scholar
Parsons, E. C. 1939b. Pueblo Indian Religion. Chicago. 2 Vols.Google Scholar
Rogers, M. J. 1929. Report of an Archaeological Reconnaissance in the Mohave Sink Region. San Diego Museum, Papers in Archaeology, Vol. 1, No. 1.Google Scholar
Rogers, M. J. 1936. Yuman Pottery Making. San Diego Museum Papers, No. 2.Google Scholar
Spier, L. 1928. Havasupai Ethnography. American Museum of Natural History, Anthropological Papers, Vol. 29, Part 3.Google Scholar
Stewart, O. C. 1943. Notes on Porno Ethnogeography. University of California, Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 40, No. 2.Google Scholar
Strong, W. D. 1927. “An Analysis of Southwestern Society.” American Anthropologist, Vol. 29, pp. 1-61.Google Scholar
Strong, W. D. 1929. Aboriginal Society in Southern California. University of California, Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 26.Google Scholar
Strong, W. D. 1936. “Anthropological Theory and Archaeological Fact. In Essays in Anthropology in Honor of A. L. Kroeber, pp. 359-370. Berkeley.Google Scholar
U. S. Geographical Surveys 1879. Report upon United States Geographical Surveys West of the One Hundredth Meridian. Vol. 7,Archaeology. Washington.Google Scholar
Voegelin, E. W. 1942. “Culture Element Distributions: XX, Northeast California.” Univ. of Calif., Anthropological Records, Vol. 7, No. 2.Google Scholar
Walker, E. F. 1945. “The Dig at Big Tujunga Wash.” Southwest Museum Masterkey, Vol. 19, pp. 188-193.Google Scholar
Waterman, T. T. 1910. Religious Practices of the Diegueno Indians. University of California, Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 8, No. 6.Google Scholar
Woodbury, R. 1939. “Ground and Pecked Stone Artifacts.” In Preliminary Report on the 1937 excavations, Be 50-51 Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. University of New Mexico Bulletin, Anthropological Series, Vol. 3, No. 2, Section C, pp. 58-79.Google Scholar