In September 1892 The San Francisco Morning Call published a series of articles that chronicled the events leading to and after the excavation of an ancient shellmound at the southern edge of the city of Alameda. The first article, titled Graves of Aborigines, included bits of the city’s history, information about the owner of the parcel where the mound was located and how the top was leased and used to grow vegetables. Historical maps of Alameda show the southern section of the town as only sparsely populated and the mound must have been a prominent landmark.
"Sinkers used for fishing"
September 26, 1892
The article was written by James H. Griffes, who had recently moved to Alameda from the East Coast and was aware that the mound was not a natural feature and that residents looted large numbers of artifacts in the years after the edge of the mound was clipped for road construction. Importantly, Griffes claimed that there were two mounds close to each other (a situation that would resemble the one at Emeryville) but the smallest of the two hillocks had been obliterated by housing developments. Now the city had plans for more roads and houses and thus seemed clear that by Christmas 1892 also the main shellmound would be gone for good. That notion set Griffes in action: he felt that the mound was too important for California ancient history and at least the artifacts needed to be rescued before it was too late. Griffes also planned for those artifacts to be housed and curated by the California Historical Society whose members, in fact, apprised him about the ancient Indian village.
How he convinced the newspaper to get involved is speculative but after obtaining a permit from the landowner and the lessess, Griffes hired the Aradas, a father and son, with the former claiming previous experience in archaeology both in California and Peru, and in the early afternoon they pushed their spades in the soft anthropogenic soil. As expected, the excavation immediately uncovered a number of ancient skeletons and the journalist showed surprise in the ghastly discovery and left out valuable details about their context in all his articles. The writer noted, however, that the bones were brittle and they could hardly be touched without turning to powder, that some individuals were buried in a sitting position and that some were buried without their crania. Mortars and pestles were also unearthed together with abundant faunal remains, projectile points and large adobe fragments although the former were discarded almost immediately. The day after, a follow up article titled Antiquarian Treasures included a narrative of the second day of excavations and while the tone remained rather enthusiastic it is also clear that the novelty of field archaeology was rapidly dwindling. To the modern day archaeologist two details stand out in the article, one individual was allegedly buried with a metal axe and a whole pottery vessel is featured in one illustration. Both items would be evidence that the Alameda village was still actively used by Bay Area Indians after a contact with the early Mexican and Spanish explorers, a marked difference from the mounds at Berkeley, Emeryville, Richmond and San Mateo that were abandoned decades or centuries before contact.
Hearst Museum 1-4656
Small mortar
California, Alameda County, Shellmound in Alameda
Collected by John J. Rivers, 1892. Older Collections of the University
Hot weather, fatigue and the sheer number of relics convinced Griffes to prematurely end his own excavations. The same night, however, he called the California Academy of Sciences and asked them if they were willing to take over and on September 13th, Call's readers were informed that following a quick visit by the director and the curator, the Academy agreed to take over the remaining days on the permit obtained by The Call and would immediately commence additional excavations, which were expected to achieve even greater results. At the same time, now fully persuaded of the scientific value of his excavation, Griffes closed the article voicing his regrets about the final destination of the items he collected. The relics were originally thought to be curated by the California Historical Society but he now called the suggestion unadvisable because:
The Society exists scarcely but in name at present, it has no permanent museum or exhibition and would hardly know what to do with the valuable collection. [...] The Call's only wish in the matter is to dispose of the precious relics in such a manner as will make them of the greatest service to the greatest number.
Griffes wrote that steps would be taken to reach out to the State University in Berkeley.
The Academy excavations were allegedly very successful and two days later another article was written highlighting the wonderful items that were collected and quickly transported to San Francisco; Dr. Harkell, director of the academy, was less enthusiastic, however, and he surprisingly depreciated the value of the mound with words that today read rather short sighted:
This is simply an Indian mound, as The Call has characterized it, but, though very interesting, its relics are not so much of scientific value as of antiquarian interest.
Harkell’s tepid endorsement notwithstanding, Griffes was successful in reaching out to the University and the upcoming visit by the curator of the museum was later announced with palpable enthusiasm.
Sinker
California, Alameda County, Shellmound in Alameda
Collected by John J. Rivers, 1892. Older Collections of the University
John James Rivers was an entomologist and he had been the curator of the collections at Berkeley since at least 1873. Back then, the position was not considered particularly prestigious given that it was listed at the very end of the staff directory, after the phone operator and just above the janitorial team. By 1879 it was listed above the gardener and the University Press editor. Yet, the university was in possession of thousands of objects encompassing many disciplines including geology, biology, agriculture, history and anthropology, he was the sole curator and there was no dedicated building. In spite of his academic background, by 1892 J. J. Rivers was recognized as one of the finest antiquarians and experts in ancient Indian objects. During his visit he displayed that expertise by pointing out that the Aradas surely missed many less evident artifacts and while Griffes tried to assure him of the carefulness placed in the excavation Rivers walked around the spoil heap, kicked the soil with his toe and picked up a stone that once brushed from soil turned out to be shaped and perforated. That day a small crowd had gathered at the mound and it was following the university curate’s visit and that gave him an audience for sharing some knowledge about such objects and their use.
That is a sinker. The Indians who once inhabited this mound were great fishermen. They needed sinkers for their lines and nets. They had no lead and so used cobblestones. This sinker was used at the bottom of the line, as you see by the hole in the top of the stone. That hole was drilled by the Indians. They used a different kind of stone to tie on to the nets they cast. Here is one of them.
As he spoke, Rivers kneeled down, picked up and brushed another stone which, to the delight of the onlookers, had groves on two sides. A short time later all the objects from the Call’s excavation were packed and hauled away.
After a few days, on September 26th, the official letter of acceptance from Rivers on behalf of the regents was published. To the benefit of the readers, Rivers praised the Call’s research, listed a number of animals found during the diggings, highlighted some important items and wrote about the use of mortars for processing nuts and, again, about the fishing tools. The final words he offered, however, were only slightly more passionate than Harkell’s:
The relics are of the usual type of shellmound examples. All the Alameda mounds had been superficially examined and collected over.
The sudden flurry of activity around the ancient mound had come to an end.
Hearst Museum 1-4762
Sinker
California, Alameda County, Shellmound in Alameda
Collected by John J. Rivers, 1892. Older Collections of the University
Rivers was correct with regard to Alameda County as many ancient Indian mounds in the county were well-known; portions of the mound at Emeryville had been chipped away since 1850, the same for the West Berkeley and the Strawberry Creek villages. Only a handful of the thousands of ancient artifacts removed from them arrived at Berkeley but, in his care, Rivers also had objects and skeletal remains from other counties surrounding the Bay and he was definitely well positioned for learning first hand about the material culture of Bay Area Indians.
One important and sizable collection that had been donated to the university at least two decades earlier originated from the work of Charles D. Voy, a businessman who used his considerable financial resources to travel and collect natural and ethnographic specimens from many parts of the world. Later in life he dedicated his efforts to the excavation of mounds in San Francisco, Vallejo, Rio Vista, Sausalito, and Brooklyn (now part of West Oakland). The latter was probably very large since it was the only shellmound noted in a map produced by the State Geological Survey of 1874 but according to Nelson’s survey of 1909 not much was left of it, like many other mounds it had been leveled to make room for housing and the railroad tracks for the bustling Oakland port. The obliteration of California ancient history was gaining speed.
Hearst Museum 1-16414
Short pestle
California, Alameda County, Brooklyn Shellmound
Collected by Charles D. Voy, 1872. Older Collections of the University
The Call published Voy’s death notice in 1894, the same year it printed a short announcement that the Academy had organized a symposium about prehistoric mounds in North America and Arabia; a lecture by Dr. Hittell specific to the Alameda mound was advertised and readers were suggested to participate. Like Voy, however, James Griffes was no longer around to attend the event: he had moved to South California shortly after the atrocious murder of his wife in a San Francisco saloon on June 28, 1893. This story came to fame again in recent times with the proliferation of podcasts and blogs dedicated to unsolved or particularly gruesome murders.
Years went by with no updates on the Alameda mound until 1908 when the city bought part of the mound parcel to establish Lincoln Park and while preparing the grounds the workmen apparently discovered more than 400 burials and countless artifacts some of which were transferred to the newly established Alameda Public Library but, if they did, I doubt that they could still be there. In 1911 the city accepted the suggestion to place a stone monument and a plaque commemorating the ancient mound in the park and it took three years to accomplish it. The unveiling ceremony in 1914 was attended by anthropology professor Thomas T. Waterman who was accompanied by Ishi, the Yahi man who was living at the University since three years earlier and was quite famous. The Call had featured him many times over the years and those articles have a great historical value for the story of the man then considered the last Indian of California. But no reporter for the Call was present on that day as the newspaper ceased publication in 1913 after 23 years of history.
Hearst Museum 15-21019
Unveiling of Indian Monument in Lincoln Park; Ishi in background
California, Alameda County, Shellmound in Alameda
Photo by: Copa de Oro Chapter, Daughters of the American Revolution, 1914
J. J. Rivers left the University in 1895, Ishi died in 1916 and James Griffes in 1919, with them the story of the excavation at the Alameda mound lost all direct witnesses. Articles from the Oakland Tribune twenty years later (mid 1930’s) indicate that nobody could tell exactly where many objects and burials removed from the mound over the years ended up. In fact, it is likely that the Academy excavation was lost in the 1906 earthquake, the Alameda Library called for private collectors to donate their objects but few appeared to be inclined, and even what is left here at the University seems too sparse to reflect the alleged number of items removed in 1892.
Lincoln Park is still there today but the monument was vandalized causing the plaque to be removed in 1981. It was inscribed with a poem written by Mary Cameron Benjamin that tellingly ended with the words Lest we forget - lest we forget.
