A SECONDARY THEME:

In an open-response comment to the preliminary 1985 plans of Petaluma Adobe State Historic Park, Fern M. Southcott, a member of the Native American Advisory Council and Indigenous activist, wrote that the plans were “basically well drafted with the exception of the interpretive portions dealing with Native American Indian people associated with the areas as outlined in the documents. More specifically, the conspicuous absence in either document to the Suisun Indian people formerly affiliated with the area in question.”1 Southcott’s comment, which was sent in April of 1985, was just over a page in length and suggested several additions to the interpretive plans that would incorporate the history and culture of the Suisun tribe–a part of the larger Patwin band–into planned teaching materials. The 1987 General Plan included a response to Southcott’s comment:

There was no intent to ignore the contributions of the Suisun Indian people in the General Plan. The purpose of the General Plan is to provide an overview of the development, management, operation, and interpretation goals for the unit. The primary focus of the Plan and purpose of the State Historic Park is interpretation of Vallejo’s life, the Euro-American history of the area, and the history of the City of Sonoma. Interpretation of the contributions of the Indians would be provided as a secondary theme for this unit.2

No ‘secondary theme’ on the Indigenous workers was drafted. Based on the General Plan, Petaluma Adobe underwent major renovations in 1995 and 1996, including a refurbished museum room and new displays throughout the park. Only a small number of these discussed the presence of Indigenous workers, and they largely failed to accurately represent the role or status of Indigenous laborers at the Adobe. The museum room and most interpretive materials have changed little since the refurbishment, and the narrative continues to focus nearly exclusively on the role and presence of Euro-Americans at Petaluma Adobe and the impact of Rancho Petaluma on regional trade and industry during the early-to-mid nineteenth century.3

Though certainly not as well known in the public memory of California history, especially compared to the nearby Mission San Francisco-Solano and Mission San Rafael-Arćangel, Petaluma Adobe represents an important regional site of memory through which the political and economic growth of California can be viewed. Petaluma Adobe is situated at the intersection of many of the most prominent contemporary political and economic spheres of influence, the Russian-American Company at Fort Ross, Anglo-American settlers from Sutter’s Fort and the greater Central Valley, Mexican military presences at Sonoma and the San Francisco Presidio, and Native American populations throughout the region. Regardless of an existing colonial military presence within the Sonoma Valley, Rancho Petaluma played a not-insignificant part in the continuing colonial development within the region, acting as not only a major industrial hub but also as a ‘must-see’ site for visiting Europeans or Anglo-Americans, enticing migration to the area. Petaluma Adobe is also closely linked to the legacy of the mission program. In addition to the geographic proximity of the Adobe to Mission San Francisco-Solano, the two sites are also linked through the legacy and influence of the Adobe’s original owner, Mariano Guadalupe Vallejo. Together with both other parks in the Sonoma-Petaluma District–Mission San Francisco-Solano and the aptly named Vallejo Home–the Adobe helps create a memory of the region structured around Vallejo.

Petaluma Adobe has similar potential to act as a representative site to educate the public about the nature of Indigenous labor on Mexican, European, and Anglo-American colonial sites, especially missions and ranchos, highlighting the regional diversity of California’s Indigenous population both before and after European colonialism and the ways in which those populations came to work at locations like Petaluma Adobe. One of the largest ranchos of its kind, both in terms of its industrial and economic output and in terms of its Indigenous workforce, the Petaluma Adobe may have had a workforce as large as four thousand laborers during its peak operation.4 The 66,000 acres of rancho land at Petaluma Adobe encompassed land that historically belonged to the Coast Miwok, Wappo, and Pomo tribes.5 Indigenous workers at the Adobe would have likely included members of neighboring tribes, including the Patwin and Ohlone tribes.6 The Adobe is uniquely positioned as a teaching tool to evaluate the legacy of Indigenous labor in California. It was constructed and operated during a historically significant period in California’s history, after the secularization of the missions, which transformed the labor systems of colonial California, displacing Indigenous peoples to newly established ranchos–and before the Gold Rush–which saw a massive increase in Anglo-American settlement within California, totally altering the political, economic, and social landscapes, and wildly increasing the destruction of Indigenous culture.

This paper will argue that the focus and scope of interpretive materials at Petaluma Adobe State Historic Park consistently fails to recognize the role, and in some cases the existence, of Indigenous rancho workers. Because it is visited by members of the public who are often unfamiliar with California history, including fourth-grade students on school tours, the Adobe continues to alter the memory of California’s Mexican period in such a way that often minimizes or omits the presence of Indigenous Americans in California’s history. Additionally, this paper proposes several changes and additions that could be made to the informative materials and interpretive framework used at Petaluma Adobe to more accurately and responsibly represent the history of Rancho Petaluma and the Sonoma County region.

Petaluma Adobe Historic Park is located between the towns of Petaluma and Sonoma, approximately thirty-five miles north of San Francisco. Today, the site encompasses just over forty acres of State Parks land, only a fraction of the sixty-six thousand acres that once comprised the largest rancho in Northern California. Petaluma Adobe was a cattle ranch and farm, growing wheat, oats, corn, beans, and barley, as well as tomatoes and peppers. Other animals were raised at the Adobe, including sheep for wool, which the Indigenous workers wove . Vallejo wrote in 1889 that he “made blankets enough for over two thousand Indians, also carpets, and a coarse material, used by them for their wearing apparel.”7 The quotation can be found on a panel in the Adobe’s weaving room and is the only reference to Indigenous workers. Like the other ranchos established in California in the early nineteenth century, the main source of income at Petaluma Adobe was the hide and tallow trade. In addition to the growing desire for leather in clothing (mainly shoes), leather was used as an integral part of expanding industrialization, most factories required belts to move pulleys or shafts in some capacity, and as regions like New England further industrialized, demand grew. By the early-to-mid nineteenth century, cattle hides had colloquially become known as ‘California banknotes.’ Alongside leather for belts, factories used tallow as a lubricant for engines and other machines. Additionally, tallow was used to grease rifle cartridges and was made into soap and candles.

Vallejo initially appealed for the land that would become Petaluma Adobe in 1833, shortly after he was placed in charge of the secularization of Mission San Francisco-Solano and was given command of all Mexican forces in the Sonoma Valley region. A year later, Vallejo’s appeal for land was approved, and he was granted forty-four thousand acres on which to begin his rancho. The land would later be expanded to the final sixty-six thousand in 1843. At its peak, the rancho land was bordered by the Petaluma River to the west and Sonoma Creek to the east, extending as far south as San Pablo Bay. In 1835, Governor José Figeroa appointed Vallejo Comandante and the Director of Colonization of the Northern Frontier. Construction on Petaluma Adobe likely finished in 1836, after which Vallejo appointed Miguel Alvarado as the rancho’s majordomo. Alvarado oversaw the workers and managed the rancho while Vallejo was at his home in Sonoma or away for any number of reasons. By the time General Vallejo was granted the initial forty-four thousand acres of rancho land in 1834, California was undergoing a series of massive changes. Perhaps most importantly, the Mexican government officially began to secularize all missions in 1833. The missions had been sites of major agricultural production, growing a large portion of the food for Spanish colonial sites, particularly presidios. During Spanish rule, the Crown restricted non-Spanish trade in California, attempting to maintain a monopoly in the region. Additionally, because Spanish supply ships from Mexico City were infrequent, the Spanish military presence in Alta California developed an increasing reliance on the missions to grow or make the food, tools, and clothing required to maintain a colony.8 By the beginning of the nineteenth century, the missions had quickly become the foundation upon which Spanish control rested.

Meanwhile, halfway around the world, the imperial aspirations of Napoleon Bonaparte led to the 1807 invasion of Spain and the installation of Napoleon’s older brother Joseph Bonaparte to the Spanish throne. Among a variety of other factors, internal divisions in Spain and a weakened Spanish presence in Mexico would lead to the Mexican War of Independence, severing Mexico from Spanish rule and further separating Alta California from both European control and the direct oversight of Mexico City. Dependence on the missions remained strong following Mexico’s independence, though Mexican leadership hoped to sever their reliance upon the Franciscans.9 In order to develop regional self-reliance, the Mexican government began the secularization of missions. It also promoted the development of ranchos to both diversify food production and move away from the reliance on the mission system.10

Unfortunately for Vallejo and other rancho owners, the hide and tallow trade, which had grown into a very lucrative business, had begun to decline by the late 1840s.11 This decline, compounded with the beginning of the Gold Rush in 1849, marked a drastic drop in the financial stability of Petaluma Adobe. Beginning in 1850, Vallejo repeatedly attempted to rent the Adobe before eventually selling it in 1857.12 The site was passed from owner to owner before the land directly surrounding the main adobe structure was purchased in 1910 by the Native Sons of the Golden West (NSGW).13 The Native Sons is a fraternal organization with the expressed goal of preserving California’s historic sites, though their role in perpetuating a general mythologized romanticism of the history of California is worth exploring and critiquing elsewhere. The NSGW. maintained ownership of the land until 1950, when the site was sold to the State of California.

When it was originally constructed, Petaluma Adobe was composed of two U-shaped halves forming a complete quadrangle, with a central courtyard overlooked by the wide second-floor balconies distinctive of Monterey-style architecture.14 A main entrance gate was constructed on the south side of the courtyard. Thick adobe walls ensured that the structure could provide sufficient protection in the case of attack, though the building was never intended for use as a proper military fort or outpost. There is some uncertainty about whether the eastern half of the Adobe was ever fully completed. The partial structure has long since disintegrated due to a combination of natural deterioration and a range of human impacts. Some portions of the original foundation are exposed and roped off, but the structure has otherwise completely deteriorated. Though none of the auxiliary structures built during the operation of Rancho Petaluma remain, archeological evidence and first-hand accounts describe adobe corrals located near the main building. According to some maps, two decently-sized adobe buildings might have been constructed nearby, but no foundations have been found.15 While the specific locations of most nearby Indigenous habitations are uncertain, some sites have been more or less confirmed, including the likely remains of a site located along Adobe Creek, next to the current parking lot.16

The still-standing western half of the Adobe consists of ten rooms, five on each floor. Though there is some uncertainty on the specific purposes of each room, the lower floor rooms would have been used as work or storage spaces to facilitate the operation of the rancho. With the exception of a small lower-floor staff office, all rooms are accessible in some way or another to visitors touring the site. Petaluma Adobe is a house museum, which means that rooms are furnished to appear as though the site is still in operation. After the Petaluma Adobe General Plan was released with comments and responses in 1987, planning began on individual exhibits for each room of the Adobe. Work officially began on the Adobe update and renovation in 1995, which saw the addition of new or revised signage and panels within the museum room, as well as the installation of a cabinet to display a select number of artifacts. The layout and appearance of some lower-floor rooms were rearranged to facilitate guest flow better and create more distinct exhibits.

Like most similar house museums, visitors are encouraged to tour the Adobe building and learn about the history of Petaluma Adobe through a variety of interpretive vectors, which were planned and proposed in the 1985 Adobe Plan. In addition to informational boards in each room, visitors are given a free self-guided tour pamphlet and have the option to get a different State Parks-published pamphlet about the Adobe, which is also free but is shorter and more general in its focus.17 Visitors enter the Adobe through the museum room, which extends out from the southwest corner of the building. As the name suggests, the museum room provides visitors with a basic history of the site, focusing primarily on the role of vaqueros, the industrial output of the rancho, and regional politics, particularly regarding the relationship between the Mexican colonial government and European, Anglo-American, and Indigenous outposts, towns, or villages.

The Adobe’s entry museum room serves as an introduction to the Adobe, both literally as the first room visitors enter, but also interpretively, as the room serves as the first interpretive vector. The museum room measures approximately fifteen feet by forty-five feet and three of the walls are nearly completely covered in panels and signage or display cases. In contrast to all other visitor-accessible rooms, the museum is not furnished to appear period-appropriate. In the corner opposite the visitor entrance is a desk and shelving intended as a gift shop, though due to a number of circumstances, primarily the COVID-19 pandemic, and related staffing shortages, it is closed as of November 2022. The museum room has one front entrance door and an exit that leads visitors into the next room, through which they can exit into the courtyard.

Directly to the left after the entry door is Panel #2, which consists of a brief, two-sentence explanation of the Indigenous tribes that live(d) in the Sonoma Valley, doing little more than naming the tribes who lived nearby–Coast Miwok, Wappo, and Pomo–and establishing the fact that Indigenous people did, in fact, live in California prior to European colonization (see fig. 1). Though this panel does name the tribes that lived on or around the land before (and after) the Adobe was built, the lack of any additional information and the next panel’s rapid shift to the colonial powers in the region immediately removes any focus on pre-colonial Indigenous culture and tradition. The panel seems like a last-minute performative addition that both minimizes the historical presence of Indigenous people within the region and creates a sense that there is no longer an Indigenous presence in the San Francisco and Sonoma Valley region.

Figure 1: Board about Indigenous tribes in the Sonoma Valley region.

(Photo taken by the author).

Following the intended visitor flow, the two panels to the right of Panel #2 focus on the movement and spread of colonial powers into California. The first of these two panels is titled “A MEETING OF EMPIRES” and features a world map with western North America centrally located. Arrows indicate the movement of the Spanish, Mexican, Russian, and American empires into California. Below the larger world map, a smaller regional map pinpoints the major forts or regional headquarters of these empires, and text briefly explains the role of these empires within the region. Panel #4 features a map of California, with the locations of Spanish (and later Mexican) missions, presidios, and pueblos marked with three distinct symbols. Mexican and Spanish land grants are denoted with a darker color than the rest of the map. However due to a combination of a now-outdated design and faded ink, it appears as a darker region that follows the coastline, and the map’s key seems to label land grants as a third, medium-darkness shade. Text on the panel explains the spread of colonial sites and the role of each.

Though there are a few other small display cases, two with model figures to represent clothing styles of the time and one with sheep’s wool, the museum room has one full-size display cabinet with artifacts related to the hide and tallow trade. The back panel of the case describes the economic significance of the hide and tallow trade and the role of the Mexican and Spanish governments in its growth in the region. The inclusion of a large display case within the museum room is a smart exhibit design choice and could potentially be used to display artifacts found during archeological digs on-site or nearby. Shards of ceramic pottery and buttons recovered from archeological digs reflect the significant presence of both regional and inter-continental trade, as well as the role of European trade goods to Indigenous communities as an element of culture-contact and colonialism. Currently, the hide and tallow display case contains an assortment of ceramics, buttons, fabrics, tableware, utensils, and metal buckles, among others. The inclusion of Chinese ceramics, though largely unaddressed, points to the importance of Chinese-European trade to California. Unfortunately, the display case does not include individual descriptions of each item in the case, missing a rare opportunity to provide visitors with context about each item’s significance to the Adobe. Additionally, some of the objects are items that most laypeople are unacquainted with, meaning they are not able to identify the relation of these objects to the Adobe and leave as unfamiliar with their purpose as when they arrived. The case, for example, includes parts of a porcelain tea set (see fig. 2).

Figure 2: English-made Sponde porcelain in hide and tallow artifact case at the Petaluma Adobe.

(Photo taken by the author).

While the porcelain items currently in the case are on loan from the Silverado Parks District and are not original to Petaluma Adobe, fragments of similar Spode pottery were found during multiple digs on and around Petaluma Adobe, confirming the presence of similar items during the period of focus. The intended purposes of the ceramics can be implied, but their importance in relation to the Adobe is lost. Items A, B, and C in fig. 2 are parts of an Italian-style Spode pottery set made in England in 1816.18 The presence of English-made ceramics during the early-to-mid nineteenth century could be used to highlight the impact of trade upon both Euro-American settlers and Indigenous Americans, as the aforementioned archeological digs located pottery fragments at known or suspected Indigenous living sites around the Adobe.

While many of the other panels and signs in the museum room could benefit from a refurbishment or update to improve their design, the information on each generally succeeds in its goals. Other than slightly altering wording, little needs to be changed. However, the final panel should be changed, as its visual design, focus, and language are outdated. This final panel is by far the largest within the museum room and focuses on the role and importance of vaqueros in California, the romanticization of cowboy culture, and the transformation of the vaquero into the cowboy (see fig. 3).

Figure 3: Cowboy-focused board in the museum room at the Petaluma Adobe.

(Photo taken by the author)

The panel’s header reads, “THE INDIANS ARE THE COWBOYS,” assumedly as a play on the ‘Cowboys vs. Indians’ stereotype. This panel does briefly address the significance of Indigenous vaqueros on ranchos throughout California and, on multiple occasions, mentions that many modern cowboys are Indigenous. Below the header, a block of text discusses the agricultural and industrial importance of the mission system as a significant food provider for Spanish and later Mexican settlements.

The most perplexing portion of this board is a block of text in the lower left-hand corner (see fig. 4). Due to the intended flow of visitors, this serves as a conclusion to information on the cowboy-focused board and even partially as a conclusion to the museum room as a whole, “Cattle ranching continues to be an important economic force in California today, and so do cowboys who work the ranches. The California Indian too still exists, and some of them are working cowboys. The Indian is still a vaquero!”

Figure 4: Close-up on the cowboy-focused board in the museum room.

(Photo taken by the author)

If nothing else, these last few sentences contribute significantly to a general feeling of outdatedness that pervades the entire museum room and the rest of the Adobe. In addition to the information boards in the museum room, the other accessible room includes one board attached to an interior fence (to prevent visitors from altering the layout of rooms or taking items). These boards are smaller than those in the museum room and feature related quotations from Vallejo and his contemporaries on life at the Adobe. Unfortunately, while useful and informative to some extent, the quotations feature outdated and/or offensive terms like “savage” to describe the Native Americans. Because significant numbers of schoolchildren visit Petaluma Adobe, displays with offensive or derogatory language without a disclaimer might contribute to perpetuating or normalizing harmful terminology.Another set of interpretive vectors at the Adobe is school tours. During the school year, local or regional students, usually fourth-graders (nine to ten-year-olds) studying California history, visit Petaluma Adobe. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Adobe offered ELPs (Environmental Living Programs), during which students dressed in period attire, participated in activities like candle-making and basket-weaving, ate historic food, and spent the night in the Adobe itself. Due to a number of factors, including the COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing deterioration of the building, as well as an increase in bat populations at the site, the Adobe now offers ESPs (Environmental Studies Programs), which are single-day visits. ELP or ESP events are led by one or more Park Interpretive Specialists (shortened for ease of reading to interpreters), who are responsible for teaching visiting students and leading activities. Before leading school visits, interpreters create an individual lesson plan following a set of district guidelines and must have their plan approved by a supervisor. Due to their more personalized nature, lesson plans may vary in breadth and focus depending on the interpreter. Additionally, the malleability of the lesson plans and addition of personal perspectives tend to reflect the presence of pre-colonial Indigenous communities more accurately than the static exhibits. Park Interpretive Specialists are more willing to discuss the role of Indigenous laborers.

The colonial history of California is inextricably linked with the forced or coerced incorporation of Indigenous communities into unfair labor systems that composed the colonial presence in the region. Potentially the most famous of these unfair labor structures is the Franciscan Mission system, which reached the San Francisco Bay Area in 1776 with the establishment of Mission San Carlos. Mission Santa Clara and Mission San José would be constructed shortly after, further strengthening the Spanish presence in the region. By the early years of the nineteenth century, the Spanish colonial and military presence depended nearly completely on the Franciscan missions to produce the food, clothing, and other essentials used throughout California by Spanish forces.19 In turn, the missions depended on Indigenous labor. To maintain control of Indigenous workers and to expand their workforce, Franciscan Missionaries often relied upon the capture of Indigenous Californians during military campaigns or suspicion of cattle theft.20

Prior to European colonization, the Indigenous population within the San Francisco and Sonoma Valley region was composed of small tribal communities that each held territory eight to twelve miles across, on average.21 These communities were made up of intermarried families that lived in small villages consisting of, on average, sixty to ninety people.22 Larger villages, according to early Spanish reports, rarely grew past two hundred and fifty, though some Spanish explorers noted one of the largest villages in the region had a population of slightly over four hundred.23 Throughout the region, Indigenous diets consisted mainly of fish, game, and a variety of gathered seeds, fruit, root vegetables, and nuts. Of course, specific food items varied slightly depending on environmental differences. Coastal tribes like the Pomo or Coast Miwok incorporated seaweed into their diet, for example.24 Traditionally, women were responsible for gathering plant foods like blackberries, acorns, or chia, whereas men were tasked with hunting and fishing. Acorns were a staple food for many Indigenous cultures across the entire continent and were processed and ground to make flour. Although acorns represented an important element of the Indigenous diet for many California tribes, the processing of raw acorns was a relatively long process that required freshly-gathered acorns to be ground and soaked in water to remove tannic acids, which made the acorns bitter and could cause ulcers in the mouth and stomach.25 Most villages and tribes had well-established locations for acorn gathering, which would be maintained in a variety of ways throughout the year. In addition to being a location for gathering acorns, maintained sites operated as locations to ground acorns for easier transportation and so they could be properly leached. If a site featured a large rock, it was used year-over-year as a milling platform; otherwise, mortars were left buried throughout the year to be used during harvest season. Mortars, likely for use in grinding acorn flour, though they were used for many other purposes as well, have been found on and around Petaluma Adobe State Historic park, including near the current parking lot.26

The Indigenous historical populations of the San Francisco Bay Area and the Sonoma Valley have been divided into larger tribal groups based on both regional proximity and linguistic overlap. The Suisun tribe (or tribelet), which Fern Southcott specifically mentioned in her comment on the 1985 general plan, is considered a part of the Patwin tribe. Because a large portion of the workers at Petaluma Adobe had moved (or had been moved) to live on or near a mission, there is some uncertainty regarding the identities of specific Indigenous nations that comprised the Adobe workforce, save for a few outlying examples, like the Suisunes, who likely composed a significant portion of Adobe workers due to treaties between Vallejo and the Suisun chief, Solano.

By the time the first permanent colonial site in the region, Mission San Francisco de Asís, was constructed in 1776, the Indigenous populations of the San Francisco Bay Area and the Sonoma Valley had experienced occasional contact with European explorers and traders arriving on the California coast. In 1579, Coast Miwok paddlers rowed to meet Sir Francis Drake as he reached what is now known as Drake’s Bay.27 Contact between Indigenous communities and European explorers usually included the exchange of gifts and occasionally food. European seafarers described the Indigenous populations they interacted with in journals or letters. Most accounts convey a sense of patronizing positivity from the author, creating an interesting contrast with the equally negative descriptions of Indigenous culture as violent and savage that would be prominent later. Contact between an Indigenous community and the crew of Sir Francis Drake’s Golden Hind was documented by Francis Fletcher and later published in The World Encompassed:

…which when the people of the country perceived us doing, as men set on fire to war in defense of their country, in great haste and companies, with such weapons as they had, they came down to us, and yet with no hostile meaning or intent to hurt us: standing, when they drew near, as men ravished in their minds, with the sight of such things as they never had seen or heard of before that time: their errand being rather with submission and fear to worship us as Gods, then to have any war with us as with mortal men.28

Later reports from Drake and other sailors echo similar sentiments, regularly assuming that Indigenous Californians viewed them as gods or in some way godlike. This patriarchal mindset would grow and remain predominant well into the mission period. Missionaries–many of whom were literally titled Father–described Indigenous neophytes as their children. Tied to this belief of patriarchal control was the expectation of obedience. Father Junipero Serra argued that “the spiritual fathers should be able to punish their sons, the Indians, with blows.”29 This attitude came to define the relationship between Franciscan Missionaries and the Indigenous populations of the region.

The lives of Indigenous workers at Petaluma Adobe and similar sites have been explored by a number of scholars who have made great use of archeological evidence to interpret the conditions in which Indigenous laborers lived. Stephen Silliman led the most recent dig and the following series of reports during the early 2000s, which was well-documented in scholarly articles as well as both a doctoral dissertation and a subsequent book entitled Lost Laborers in Colonial California, which has been cited to great effect throughout this paper. Silliman suggests that Indigenous laborers would have begun working at Petaluma Adobe in four ways: indebtedness, capture by force, military and political alliance, and active social incorporation.30 The first and most prominent reason for working at Petaluma Adobe was indebtedness, ex-neophytes from nearby missions, primarily Mission San Francisco-Solano and Mission San Rafel-Arćangel. Ex-neophytes who were given a small number of cattle following secularization ‘invested’ it with Vallejo at Rancho Petaluma, who allowed the cattle to graze on the rancho lands in exchange for work in herding and butchering cattle.31

Additionally, Indigenous laborers were captured in military campaigns or arrested under suspicion of stealing cattle and put to work at Petaluma Adobe.32 Both large and small-scale military campaigns against Indigenous communities surrounding Sonoma and Petaluma Adobe resulted in the capture of Indigenous people who were subsequently put to work. Beginning in 1835, Vallejo, with the assistance of other rancho owners, led military campaigns into the northern frontier, mainly the Mendicino and Lake County regions.33 Military campaigns like these would become a backbone of Indigenous ‘recruitment’ onto ranchos until the 1850s when few un-decimated indigenous communities remained, and rancho owners began to rely upon legislation that criminalized Indigenous unemployment.34 Raids on single villages often were justified by claims that members of the village were horse or cattle thieves, though those claims may be suspect, and these raids often resulted in the capture of entire villages. Due to increases in the frequency of raids often aligning with labor shortages on ranchos like Petaluma Adobe, raids were very likely motivated by the desire to expand dwindling worker populations. In 1843, a Swedish visitor to the Sonoma region Gustav M. Waserutz af Sandels, described the frequency of Californio raids on Indigenous villages.35

These barbarous incursions into the Indian territory are often made from mere wantonness or result from the Indian being cheated out of their lands or the reward for their labor. As a consequence, they retaliate by stealing cattle: never, as far as I could learn, by committing murder...[T]he officers receive as remuneration for heading these expeditions the prisoners that fall into their hands -, so, whenever a ranch requires laborers, you hear of some Indian outrage, followed by the taking of prisoners by the Californians.36

Vallejo was no stranger to raids on Indigenous communities, as a majority of his military career had been spent fighting Indigenous rebels along the frontier, and Sandels’ account of Californio raids, is certainly not the only quotation of its kind. Sherburne F. Cook, a prominent researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, wrote in 1976 that “...the practice of sending out expeditions armed to catch fugitive laborers or procure more aborigines was universal.”37

The third reason Indigenous laborers came to work at Petaluma Adobe was as a result of labor treaties between Indigenous tribes and the Mexican government of Alta California or with Vallejo himself. The most prominent and well-recorded of these was Vallejo’s treaty and close relationship with Chief Solano of the Suisun tribe whom Fern Southcott mentioned in her comment on the Petaluma Adobe General Plan. Solano was baptized at Mission San Francisco-Solano in 1810.38 A military alliance between Solano and Vallejo likely resulted in a large number of Suisun laborers beginning work at Petaluma Adobe to fulfill the conditions of the treaty.39 This treaty and others like it gave Vallejo a significant measure of diplomatic and military power within the region in regard to Mexican-Indigenous relations.

Estimates of the population of Indigenous laborers during the height of Petaluma Adobe’s operation vary somewhat, as only one complete list of workers has been located. However, it only contains 135 names, a number far lower than later estimates by Vallejo and contemporary visitors to the site.40 William Heath Davis, a prominent merchant and trader, described the Indigenous workforce in Seventy-five years in California; “he [Vallejo] employed several hundred men to plow, sow and harrow the vast fields he had under cultivation. [...] The General also employed uncivilized Indians, known as “gentiles,” as assistant plowmen and harvesters.” 41 Whether Davis’s count of ‘several hundred’ included the ‘gentiles’ is unclear, as there may have been a distinction made between ex-neophytes workers and those who were non-missionized. Davis also estimates that Vallejo “... had to house and feed six hundred vaqueros and laborers.”42 Vallejo’s quotation regarding wool production at Petaluma Adobe estimates that enough blankets were made for “over 2000 Indians,” increasing the estimate by a significant amount.43 If an estimate is given, many scholars describe the Indigenous workforce to be between six hundred and two thousand workers, which accounts for seasonal fluctuations, as more workers were needed during the matanza (slaughter) season. This is also the estimate used by California State Parks interpreters during school or public tours. Damon B. Akins and William J. Bauer Jr. estimate in We Are the Land that the number of laborers was higher, between two to four thousand people during the Adobe’s peak operation, though why this estimate is significantly higher than most is unclear, as no direct source is provided.44 The number of workers at Petaluma Adobe would have likely reached its highest between 1834 and 1838, dropping off drastically due to a large-scale smallpox pandemic that decimated the Indigenous population of the Sonoma Valley.45 Vallejo and Chief Solano, one of the few Indigenous Californians deemed ‘important’ enough to receive a smallpox vaccine, noted that the population of the Southern Patwin tribe dropped from forty thousand to just over two hundred in the pandemic of 1838.46 It is likely after this pandemic that the frequency of raids on Indigenous villages increased significantly as rancho owners hoped to return the number of Indigenous laborers to pre-pandemic heights.

As has been mentioned previously, Indigenous workers at Petaluma Adobe would have both arrived at the Adobe through a variety of means and would have represented a diverse range of Indigenous communities from across the Sonoma Valley and San Francisco Bay Area. Comparative archeological analysis of El Polín Spring at the San Francisco Presidio, the nearby Mission Dolores (also in San Francisco), and Petaluma Adobe highlights differences in lithic (stone) artifacts found at each of the sites. Debitage (stone flakes knocked off a core when making stone tools) and partial or complete tools found at El Polín Spring are mostly chert or siltstone, neither of which is ideal for the creation of stone tools.47 Both chert and the varieties of siltstone found at El Polín Spring are endemic to the region, highlighting a lack of traditional trade and a more stagnant flow of new Indigenous workers from beyond the immediate region. Digs at Mission Dolores returned a much smaller assortment of stone tools, very few of which were made of local stone. Some obsidian tools were present, however, indicating Spanish forces and Missionaries likely ‘recruited’ Indigenous laborers from beyond the immediate region, who likely brought partially completed obsidian tools with them. Archeologists also found a number of tools made from fragments of glass bottles, suggesting Indigenous laborers were unable to leave the immediate vicinity of the mission and relied upon glass as an inferior alternative to obsidian. This may also highlight the tendency of the Franciscans to pay Indigenous workers with alcohol. In contrast to both El Polín Spring and Mission Dolores, debitage and tool fragments found at Petaluma Adobe reflect a surprising range of materials, suggesting a wider variety of Indigenous laborers bringing tools or stone from a greater range.48 Chert and siltstone remain present in midden piles, but minerals such as felsite or quartz were found as well.49 Additionally, obsidian and glass both remain prominent.

Since a significant focus of the interpretation at Petaluma Adobe today is the ways in which people would have lived on the site, implicitly focusing on Mexican laborers who lived inside the Adobe itself, it is important that the poorer conditions of Indigenous workers are recognized as well. Archeological evidence can further provide insight into working and living conditions for Indigenous workers at Petaluma Adobe, particularly into their diets. Most records describe payment for Indigenous workers taking the form of food and clothes, as well as potentially beads or alcohol, based on archeological findings. Beef, of course, was the main aspect of workers’ diets, but according to records from visitors, workers were given the “worst bollock’s worst joints.”50 Miguel Alvarado, the Adobe’s majordomo, wrote to Vallejo in 1848, saying:

Sir, Pietro the Indian says that you have given them nothing and that for that reason they are not happy here. They do not say that to me, but from others who do not belong here I learn that people from here say it, and that [at] other ranchos they are paid something, and for that reason they want to go to work at other ranchos.51

Indigenous workers likely supplemented their diets with more traditional food items, including deer, rabbits, numerous kinds of fish, and a variety of birds, including ducks and geese.52 Additionally, workers would have eaten wheat, corn, and barley, which were grown at the Adobe and likely composed a portion of food payment. Acorns remained a core aspect of the workers’ diets, as evidenced by their frequency in midden piles.

As it currently exists, Petaluma Adobe represents a rich source of historical knowledge. Unfortunately, the current interpretive framework lacks any significant focus on the role and presence of the Sonoma Valley and San Francisco Bay Area regions. In addition to bringing to light the ways in which Petaluma Adobe fails to recognize the scope of the Indigenous presence both before and during the operation of Rancho Petaluma, the goal of this essay is to propose improvements and alterations to the Adobe’s current interpretive methods in the hopes that they might improve the site as a whole.

Most of the issues critiqued in this essay stem from a general lack of information about the Indigenous presence within the region, which can be remedied relatively easily. Firstly, the scope of Indigenous groups discussed in any materials should be expanded to include the Patwin and Ohlone tribes who historically did not live on the land that would become Petaluma Adobe but very likely would have composed a significant portion of the Indigenous laborers who lived and worked on and around the Adobe during its operation. As Fern Southcott identified, Vallejo had a close diplomatic relationship with Chief Solano and the Suisun tribe, who were a part of the Patwin band. Authors like Milliken, Atkins, and Bauer suggest that contemporary Indigenous communities would have identified smaller tribal nations,53 ie. Suisun as opposed to Patwin, and the use of smaller tribal names in conjunction with modern political and anthropological names that refer to larger language-unified groups would better represent the political and cultural diversity of the Sonoma Valley and San Francisco Bay Area region.54 Though it can be difficult to tell which pre-Adobe groups composed the Indigenous workforce (besides, the Suisun, whose presence is well-recorded.), identifying the nations who lived on the land before a colonial presence is possible. A list of tribal groups in the Sonoma Valley and San Francisco Bay Area region can be found in Milliken’s A Time of Little Choice, as it is too long to list here.

In addition to more accurately identifying the Indigenous nations relevant to Petaluma Adobe, a revision of the narrative at the Petaluma Adobe requires a greater focus on the traditional lifestyle and cultures of those communities. Currently, only the State Parks visitor’s pamphlet includes any information about culture, tradition, or diet and is limited to just the Coast Miwok. Focusing on traditional diet, in particular, might be an ideal way to interest local and regional fourth graders, who are likely familiar with at least some of the staples of Indigenous diets. If a complete refurbishment or reorganization of the museum room is not possible, both the hide and tallow case and the cowboy-focused panel could easily be consolidated or rearranged to focus on Indigenous history and culture. Though it already focuses somewhat on Indigenous labor, the large cowboy-focused panel should be reworked to discuss the abuse of Indigenous labor at the Adobe. While considering a partial target audience of fourth-graders, the panel should identify that Indigenous labor at Petaluma Adobe and other ranchos was often forced or coerced and should recognize that laborers were paid with poor-quality food and clothing. In discussing payments in food, there is an opportunity to identify the ways Indigenous laborers supplemented their diets with more foods and the ways laborers made use of materials like glass to make traditional tools.

The hide and tallow case could be improved in a variety of ways, ranging from a more significant shift in focus, or the inclusion of labels for current items in the case. If they are accessible to the State Parks Department, the inclusion of Indigenous artifacts in the case could act as a physical reminder of the Indigenous presence in the region. Additionally, lithic artifacts like knives or arrowheads might pique the interest of fourth-graders and would offer an opportunity to teach about artifact collection laws. Regardless of what items are included in the case, there should be an emphasis placed on historical context to ensure visitors are able to learn what items are in the case and how they relate to the Adobe at large.

In addition to the museum room’s panels, the boards in each room could significantly benefit from a series of alterations. Ideally, the boards could be improved by adding the information currently on the park’s self-guided tour pamphlet, which would bypass the need for such a packet, and would streamline the tour experience. Visitors to the Adobe walk through both the museum room and the weaving room before they pay admission and receive a tour pamphlet. Since they have already seen two rooms, visitors either begin their tour with location #3 (the courtyard) or backtrack to #2 (the weaving room). Condensing the self-guided tour packet and the boards in each room would significantly enhance visitor flow and allow guests to read all available interpretive materials without missing portions. Regardless of whether it is kept as a hand-out pamphlet or incorporated into stationary boards, the self-guided tour pamphlet should be slightly rewritten and expanded upon. As is, the pamphlet includes a number of minor grammatical errors, and the phrasing of some sentences sounds stilted or confusing. Additionally, as was previously mentioned, some boards contain quotations that include offensive or derogatory language. If those quotations are to remain, they would benefit from a disclaimer that emphasizes the historical relevance of the quotation and recognizes that derogatory terminology is used. Many of the quotations provide a unique first-hand account of life at the Adobe and largely advance the Adobe’s interpretive goals. In fact, some panels would be improved with the addition of new quotations. Finally, although space in the museum room is sparse, the inclusion of a map of pre-colonial indigenous territory would serve as an excellent companion to the expanded material on the Indigenous population in the region and would engage fourth graders with an interesting visual. The map could be made into an interactive exhibit by adding additional transparent overlay maps with colonial sites and modern towns and cities.

With a number of relatively minor changes, Petaluma Adobe would better represent the history of the Sonoma Valley-San Francisco Bay Area region, especially as it relates to Indigenous history. In light of the recent and ongoing reassessment of the narratives taught at historic sites like the California missions, it is important that Petaluma Adobe adapts to best act as an accurate and responsible source of history and remains a relevant teaching tool during the coming decades.

Petaluma Adobe State Historic Park General Plan, (Sacramento, CA: California Department of Parks and Recreation, March 1987), 73.
Petaluma Adobe, 78.
This thesis will use the phrases “Petaluma Adobe” and “Rancho Petaluma” interchangeably to avoid repetition. Generally speaking, Petaluma Adobe is the more modern name for the site, whereas Rancho Petaluma is the term used by Vallejo and his contemporaries.
Damon B. Akins and William J. Bauer Jr, We Are The Land, (Oakland, CA: University of California Press, 2021), 113.
Stephen W. Silliman, Lost Laborers in Colonial California, (Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona Press, 2004), 63.
Akins and Bauer Jr., We Are The Land, xii.
Mariano Guadalupe Vallejo, Letter to N. L. Denman, 1889, “The Old Adobe. A Letter from General M. G. Vallejo,” San Francisco: Duncan H. Olmstead.
Steven W. Hackel, “Land, Labor, and Production: The Colonial Economy of Spanish and Mexican California.” California History 76, no. 2/3 (1997): 111–46.
Hackel, “Land, Labor, and Production,” 111–46.
Akins and Bauer Jr, We Are The Land, 102.
William J. Barger, “The Merchants of Los Angeles: Economics and Commerce in Mexican California” Southern California Quarterly 82, no. 2 (2000): 144.
Stephen W. Silliman, “Colonial worlds, indigenous practices: The Archaeology of Labor on a 19th-century California Rancho” (Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 2000), 46.
Note: the ‘native’ in Native Sons of the Golden West does not refer to Indigenous Californians but to white Americans born in California.
Silliman, “Colonial Worlds," 66.
Silliman, Lost Laborers, 54.
Ibid., 83.
Petaluma Adobe State Historic Park, (Sacramento, CA: California State Parks, 2008, rev. 2018).
Petaluma Adobe Artifact Inventory, (California State Parks, Bay Area District, June 2002), item 219.1.3.
Akins and Bauer Jr., We Are The Land, 102.
Robin C. Thomas, "It Is Their Intention to Drive the Indians out of the Valley, Should They Continue in Their Refusal to Work-- ": Enslavement, Patriarchy, and Resistance in Mendocino County, 1850-1870. (Rohnert Park, CA, 2005).
Randall Milliken, A Time of Little Choice, (Menlo Park, CA: Ballena Press, 1995), 21.
Milliken, A Time of Little Choice, 21.
Ibid, 19.
Silliman, Lost Laborers, 41.
Akins and Bauer Jr., We Are The Land, 19.
Silliman, Lost Laborers, 102.
Akins and Bauer Jr., We Are The Land, 39.
Sir Francis Drake and Francis Fletcher, The World Encompassed, London, N. Bovrne, 1628, Pdf. https://www.loc.gov/item/80513766/.
Ramón A. Gutiérrez and Richard J. Orsi, ed., Contested Eden: California before the Gold Rush, (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1998).
Silliman, Lost Laborers, 55.
Akins and Bauer Jr., We Are The Land.
Silliman, Lost Laborers, 56.
Robin C. Thomas, "It Is Their Intention."
Ibid.
Silliman, Lost Laborers, 56.
Samuel C. Upham and Sandels G M Waseurtz af, Visit of the King's Orphan to California in 1842-3 from Upham's Notes and San Jose Pioneer, 1842-1843. Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley.
Sherburne F. Cook, The Conflict Between the Californian Indian and White Civilization,. (Berkeley, CA:University of California Press,1976), 475.
Akins and Bauer Jr., We Are The Land, 113.
Silliman, Lost Laborers, 57.
Ibid, 58.
William Heath Davis, and Douglas S Watson. Seventy-five years in California. San Francisco, J. Howell, 1929,. Pdf. https://www.loc.gov/item/29012612/.
Davis and Watson, Seventy-five years in California.
Vallejo, Letter to N. L. Denman.
Akins and Bauer Jr., We Are The Land, 113.
Thomas, "It Is Their Intention," 25.
Silliman, Lost Laborers, 60.
Kathleen L. Hull, and Barbara L. Voss, “Native Californians at the Presidio of San Francisco: Analysis of Lithic Specimens from EI Polín Spring,” International Journal of Historical Archaeology 20, no. 2 (2016): 281. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26174260.
Hull and Voss, “Native Californians at the Presidio,” 282.
Silliman, Lost Laborers, 115.
George Simpson, An Overland Journey Round the World, during the Years 1841 and 1842, (Philadelphia, PA: Lea and Blanchard, 1847).
Miguel Alvarado, Letter to Mariano G. Vallejo, from Petaluma. February 29, 1848. In Documentos Para La Historia De California XII:334, compiled by Mariano G. Vallejo, 1874. Unpublished manuscript in the Bancroft Library.\, University of California, Berkeley.
Silliman, Lost Laborers, 162.
Milliken uses the term ‘triblets’ to refer to these smaller tribal communities. While it is descriptive, the term is contested somewhat, and as such was not used in this essay.
Milliken, A Time of Little Choice.