Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2007 with funding from
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLICATIONS
AMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGY AND ETHNOLOGY
Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 237-271 November 19, 1910
THE CHUMASH AND COSTANOAN
A. L. KROEBER
THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
XmiVERSITY OF CAIjIFOENIA PUBLICATIONS
DEPAETMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY
The following publications dealing with archaeological and ethnological subjects issued
under the direction of the Department of Anthropology are sent in exchange for the puhli-
cationa of anthropological departments and museums, and for journals devoted to general
anthropology or to archaeology and ethnology. They are for sale at the prices stated, which
include postage or express charges. Exchanges should be directed to The Exchange Depart-
ment, University Library, Berkeley, California, U. S. A. All orders and remittances should
be addressed to the University Press.
Vol. 1. 1. Life and Culture of the Hupa, by Pliny Earle Goddard. Pp. 1-88;
plates 1-30. September, 1903 $1.26
2. Hupa Texts, by Pliny Earle Goddard. Pp. 89-368. March, 1904 _. 3.00
Index, pp. 369-378.
Vol. 2. 1. The Exploration of the Potter Creek Cave, by William J. Sinclair.
Pp. 1-27; plates 1-14. April, 1904 40
2. The Languages of the Coast of California South of San Francisco, by
A. L. Kroeber. Pp. 29-80, with a map. June, 1904 60
3. Types of Indian Culture in California, by A. L. Kroeber. Pp. 81-103.
June, 1904 26
4. Basket Designs of the Indians of Northwestern California, by A. L.
Kroeber. Pp. 105-164; plates 15-21. January, 1905 75
5. The Yokuts Language of South Central California, by A. L. Kroeber.
Pp. 165-377. January, 1907 2.25
Index, pp. 379-393.
Vol. 3. The Morphology of the Hupa Language, by Pliny Earle Goddard.
344 pp. June, 1905 3.50
Vol. 4. 1. The Earliest Historical Relations between Mexico and Japan, from
original documents preserved in Spain and Japan, by Zelia Nuttall.
Pp. 1-47. April, 1906 60
2. Contribution to the Physical Anthropology of California, based on col-
lections in the Department of Anthropology of the University of
California, and in the U. S. National Museum, by Ales Hrdlicka.
Pp. 49-64, with 5 tables; plates 1-10, and map. June, 1906 75
8. The Shoshonean Dialects of California, by A. L. Kroeber. Pp. 65-166.
February, 1907 1-50
4. Indian Myths from South Central California, by A. L. Kroeber. Pp.
167-250. May, 1907 "^^
5. The Washo Language of East Central California and Nevada, by A. L.
Kroeber. Pp. 251-318. September, 1907 75
6. The Religion of the Indians of California, by A. L. Kroeber. Pp. 319-
356. September, 1907 - ^^
Index, pp. 357-374.
Vol 5 1. The Phonology of the Hupa Language; Part I, The Individual Sounds,
by Pliny Earle Goddard. Pp. 1-20, plates 1-8. March, 1907 35
2. Navaho Myths, Prayers and Songs, with Texts and Translations, by
Washington Matthews, edited by Pliny Earle Goddard. Pp. 21-63.
September, 1907 — • '"^^
3. Kato Texts, by Pliny Earle Goddard. Pp. 65-238, plate 9. December,
1909 " ^•°"
4. The Material Culture of the Klamath Lake and Modoc Indians of
Northeastern California and Southern Oregon, by S. A. Barrett.
Pp. 239-292, plates 10-25. June, 1910 75
5. The Chimariko Indians and Language, by Roland B. Dixon. Pp. 293-
380. August, 1910 I-"*'
Index, pp. 381-384.
Vol 6. 1. The Ethno-Geography of the Pomo and Neighboring Indians, by Sam-
uel Alfred Barrett. Pp. 1-332, maps 1-2. February, 1908 3.26
2. The Geography and Dialects of the Miwok Indians, by Samuel Alfred
Barrett. Pp. 333-368, map 8.
3 On the Evidence of the Occupation of Certain Regions by the Miwok
Indians, by A. L. Kroeber. Pp. 369-380. Nos. 2 and 3 in one cover.
February, 1908 ...„ ^"
Index, pp. 381-400.
Vol. 7. 1. The Emeryville Shellmound, by Max Uhle. Pp. 1-106, plates 1-12, with
38 text figures. June, 1907 -• ^'^
2. Recent Investigations bearing upon the Question of the Occurrence of
Neocene Man in the Auriferous Gravels of California, by William
J. Sinclair. Pp. 107-130, plates 13-14. February, 1908 86
3. Pomo Indian Basketry, by S. A. Barrett. Pp. 133-306, plates 15-30,
231 text figures. December, 1908 -• - ^'"°
4. Shellmounds of the San Francisco Bay Region, by N. C. Nelson.
Pp. 309-356, plates 32-34. December, 1909 50
5. The Ellis Landing SheUmound, by N. C. Nelson. Pp. 357-426, plates
36-50. April, 1910 ^^
Index, pp. 427-441.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLICATIONS
AMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGY AND ETHNOLOGY
Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 237-271 November 19, 1910
THE CHUMASH AND COSTANOAN
A. L. KROEBEE.
Dialects and Territory 239
Comparative Vocabularies 242
Grammatical Notes 251
Relationship of Miwok and Costanoan 259
Dialects and Territory 264
Comparative Vocabularies 265
Grammatical Notes 268
Many years ago Father Felipe Arroyo de la Cuesta com-
posed, and Shea in 1861 published, one of the most satisfactory
treatises dealing with an Indian idiom of California, the Gram-
mar of the Mutsun Language, subsequently classified as a
Costanoan dialect. Several years ago the author added notes
on another dialect, that of Monterey, and presented a gram-
matical sketch of the Santa Ynez idiom of the Chumash family.^
1 Languages of the Coast of California South of San Francisco, present
series, II, 29-80, 1904.
238 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 9
Since that time he has recorded two vocabularies, one in the
Costanoan speech at Mission San Jose, the other in the Chumash
dialect of Mission San Buenaventura.
A comparison of these two new sources with the material
previously obtained, enables an insight into the dialectic organ-
ization of the two families. Wherever these uniformly-made
records of two dialects of the same stock corroborate each other,
whether by agreement or by an explainable difference, they
furnish a basis of comparison by which other previously pub-
lished lists may be judged, and some allowance made for their
orthographic variations. In this way some half dozen diverse
vocabularies in each family are made available for comparative
1910] Kroeber: The Chumash and Costanoan Languages. 239
DIALECTS AND TERRITORY.
Seven Franciscan missions were founded in territory held
by Indians of Costanoan speech: Soledad, San Carlos near
Monterey, San Juan Bautista, Santa Cruz, Santa Clara near
the present city of San Jose in Santa Clara county, San Jose
near Irvington in Alameda county, and Dolores in San Fran-
cisco. To these were brought, before the close of the Mission
period, probably all the Costanoan Indians then living.
Some record has been made of the prevailing language at
each mission, which was normally the dialect of the immediate
district. Seven forms of Costanoan speech are therefore known
to have existed.
Unfortunately it seems impossible to learn anything as to
such other dialects as there may have been, as to transitional
idioms connecting the "standard" languages of the missions, or
of the territorial extent of each form of speech. It is almost
certain that the seven published vocabularies do not comprise
all varieties of the Costanoan language. Father de la Cuesta's
works refer to differences of speech between the Mutsunes and
the Ansaymes or Ausaimas connected with mission San Juan
Bautista, but furnish only two or three illustrations.^ Nothing
has been published regarding the dialects of northern Alameda
or Contra Costa counties. Finally, while all ethnological maps
have extended the Costanoan territory eastward to the San
Joaquin river, the missions are all situated in the western half
of this area, between the mountains and the sea. Not a Costa-
noan dialect, tribe, or even name is positively known from the
territory between the main watershed of the Coast range and
the San Joaquin river. It appears, indeed, that contrary to
former supposition at least all of the plain of the San Joaquin
valley, and possibly the lower hills on its west, were not in
2 Compare his Vocabulary or Phrase Book of the Mutsun Language,
ed. Shea, New York, 1862, examples 9 and 12.
240 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 9
Costanoan but in Yokuts territory.^ This circumstance would
account for the absolute dearth of references to Costanoan
Indians in this area. Nevertheless there remain sufficiently
extensive tracts which cannot well have been inhabited by any
one but Costanoans, but in regard to which we are, and perhaps
always will be, uninformed. Consequently the present classi-
fication may not be regarded as exhaustive; and it differs
further, to its disadvantage, from such comparative studies as
have been made of Yuki, Porno, Miwok, Yokuts, and Shoshonean,
in that it deals not with areas of speech, but with the speech
of accidentally selected points. In the absence of fuller data,
it is however necessary to operate with those available.
As is usual in California, none of the dialects seem to have
had native names. Mutsun is properly only the name of the
principal village near mission San Juan Bautista. Rumsen
or Rumsien, used for the Costanoan Indians of Monterey, is
probably also only a specific place name misused by the whites.
The five "tribes" at San Francisco — Ahwastes, Olhones, Altah-
mos, Romonans, and Tulomos — are, if Costanoan, only ranch-
erias. Polya, Polye, or Polaya, was given to Dr. Barrett and
the author as the name of the language of San Jose mission;
yet this seems to be nothing but Northeastern Miwok polaiya,
ocean, and is therefore probably the term applied to the resident
natives by the Miwok of the interior after their transportation
to the mission.
The seven known Costanoan dialects are divisible into two,
groups, a northern and a southern. The northern division
comprises San Francisco, San Jose, Santa Clara, and Santa
Cruz, the southern San Juan Bautista, Soledad, and Monterey.
The difference between the two groups may be accentuated by
the fact that the four northern missions are all situated on the
ocean or San Francisco bay, or within a few miles of the water;
while two of the three southern locations are some distance
inland. It is impossible to predict a priori whether such a
topographical distinction will be reflected linguistically, in any
given case, in California. Where the speech of entire areas,
has been ascertained, the following facts have developed. The
3 Present series of publications, VI, 350, 375, 1908.
1910] Kroeber: The Chumash and Costanoan Languages. 241
Yokuts and Miwok correspond absolutely, in their lines of
dialectic cleavage, to the division into level plain and broken hill
country.* The Maidu, however, in a similar situation, do not;"
and similarly among the Pomo several dialects each comprise
parts of two or three distinct topographical areas.*
In the northern division, the dialects of San Jose and Santa
Clara are very closely related — so much so that in view of their
being recorded many years apart by observers using different
orthography, it cannot be stated with certainty whether or not
there is any real difference between them. San Francisco is at
least as similar to these two as is Santa Cruz. Santa Cruz,
geographically the nearest of the northern dialects to San Juan
Bautista, also resembles it most ; but the primary line of division
in the family nevertheless passes between the two, for Santa
Cruz is more similar to Santa Clara than to San Juan, and this
in turn has closer affinities with Soledad and Monterey.
In the southern division the abundance of material on San
Juan as compared with the scant 22 words known from Soledad,^
make comparison more difficult. It must be observed that the
numerals given by de Mofras* as from Soledad belong evidently
to a dialect of the San Juan type, if Hale's Soledad vocabulary
represents the characteristic speech of that place. The Monterey
dialect is peculiar. In its stems it agrees almost invariably
with San Juan, as compared with the northern group; but
many of its words are evidently reduced, especially in their
latter parts. Dropping of vowels is responsible for a common
accumulation of final consonants, a feature confined to this one
Graphically the affinity of the Costanoan dialects can be
S CI S Jo
Southern „ ^ ^
8 J B Sol
4 Present series, II, 309, 1907; VI, 333, 1908.
5 E. B. Dixon, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., XVII, 125, 127, 1905.
« Present series, VI, 123, 1908.
f Gallatin, Hale's Indians, Tr. Am. Ethn. Soc, 11, 125, 1848.
8 II, 401.
242 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 9
The comparative Costanoan vocabulary which is appended
is a collocation of previously published word lists with those
secured by the author in the Monterey and San Jose dialects.
The latter is corroborated by a brief vocabulary obtained by
Dr. Barrett in Marin county. So far as could be judged, the
orthographical peculiarities of each observer have been oblit-
erated and all Avords given in uniform spelling; but only words
represented in two or more dialects have been included.* C
represents a sound akin to English sh; x is the surd fricative
in k position ; q is velar k ; q ', k ', t ', p ' are surd stops produced
with more than usual muscular energy and accompanied by a
glottal stop; y is a voiced fricative in k or q position; X is
velar x; t- is a palatal t; l, surd 1, affricative; o and ii indicate
sounds similar to German o and ii but with less rounding of the
lips, and therefore less distinct quality.
9 The following are the sources: Monterey, the author, supplemented
by A. Taylor in the California Farmer, XIII, 66, April 20, 1860. Soledad,
H. Hale, in Trans. Am. Ethn. Soc, II, 126, 1848. San Juan Bautista,
de la Cuesta, op. cit. Santa Cruz, F. J. Comelias, in Taylor, op. cit., XIII,
58, April 5, 1860, reprinted in Powers, Tribes of California, Contrib.
N. A. Ethn., Ill, 538, 1877. Santa Clara, F. G. Mengarini, in Powers,
ibid. San Jose, the author. San Francisco, in Schoolcraft, II, 494, re-
published in Powers, ibid.
Kroeber: The Chumash and Costanoan Languages.
^ o ^
rt - _
iS sd s
BJ ._ ._
o3 'j; ^ en
-2 & .tJ
» $ -"^ -" '•-
5 S I 5 X § I ^ =g g? 2 I i2
i) tt) ^
(h U U
• C 03
=> '- rt .5
OS tS 3
00 J^ —
flj t^ — C8 t*
P X 4S m
2 p »:.
B « "
1 s -^
.2 03 £
08 J<3 «
a p -w
C ^ S3 03 P
.•S .2 08
^ -S e ^ ,2 a
r^ a P
O *< t!
& 2 S
<5 !:? CO C
■^ ■:i r'^ S >S ^ c 03 >%oo S 5J §a; Ert
^ ® -a
^ pq C
244 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 9
^ -S 9, o cs 5 -s c« -ja P ^ S 2
U M A -^i fh ti i4t>0 u ^ -n ^^ U-t^S 4J.X-WP4.3
M c3 0) cS
plh5 jdiiCL,E:Sfl-S3 C 42^4iJ>!iXJ<jS.S-S.2 &<
Kroeber: The Chumash and Costanoan Languages.
^ S 2
ft & o
^ .2 ^ -S
ci C 3 2
s s 5
gij H 03
CO g ;i3
3 « g » a, S
80 S:? cd ^
^< S «s c P
«« -^ £ ft 53
aj ft C eS «
„ ,, o 3 a cs ft
■*j ^ OS »*» S
krf *" ^^
"S ^ s*
f^ eg <- ^ ^^ pq
i 1a S ca o 2 rt
CQ J O > S oo CQ
O 'W 00
^ J O S O U ^
246 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 9
3 ^ S XI
tj 9 Sort 'nS o-k^7^^
■g rS § -S I ^ s -S -3 5 2
eCoo »£«.b'5?=si3'3sS&,.2-s»-2s3ort =
«? -C .2 £ -S -3 2 . § 2 J . « .i ^. I ^ , 1 -g ^ i
03 .-S ^
Kroeber: The Chumash and Costanoan Languages.
— 83 cj
i g .1 .
« c3 g ^ oj
S ^ 6 S
O 3 o ? - £
g 3 ^ -w a S «
O 3 g .S g g -^
« c S ^ 6 ^ .S
a w eo
M S. s
G« a ^
05 i S*
■ ~ 03 c3
■? a ■?
"fS eS 2 as S2
.i2 5 S S S
S i< ca
a ^ £ <!>
T3 _ 'T S
O 03 § -C iJ h??
O OQ Q h-. E^ ta ^
rfj ^ J3 « J
=: = a-
F 7 m T as
O o 41 o O)
248 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 9
fe i -S -5 ^ i §
^ .5 -S c8 cij -g rt
(-1 i^ O
g § "S -js ^
o o :3 M
d Qt ja Q< -^ .S -^ f^=« !=*
-^ .§■ -s J
cs D 52 2
s fl .S cs s
h "« «
s c to
s 5 ^ jd -jj
fl e9 .rt .rt .9
- ^ F 3 :3 -13 -^
§ el js -« © .2 « £
."S ^ ¥
"= M eS
OS ^ 03
•5 "^ -2
+J & of _S
r! ' n* H (-1
V vi c« .s n 4^ ,^
c § §.9l I.ga3.^
O o -^
o u o
1910] Eroeber: The Chumash and Costanoan Languages. 249
NOTES TO VOCABUIiABIES.
2. Compare Monterey ap-s, an-s, my f., my m., apa-n, ana-n, your f.,
your m., San Juan Bautista ap-sa, my f., with the apna-n and ana-n of
Santa Cruz. These are the only suffixed pronominal elements yet found
in the Costanoan languages, except for the affixes of the imperative.
3. The prefix or proclitic nik-, my, is unparalleled.
4. The ending -m, which appears repeatedly in the vocabulary of this
dialect, is probably not pronominal.
5. Compare San Juan Bautista tapis, crown of head.
6. With we-per compare San Juan Bautista tut-per, lips.
7. Throat, swallower.
8. Also with the meaning of soul, spirit, person, in de la Cuesta, but
liver in other dialects.
9. The original has p for t.
11. "Heat of the sun."
12. Said to mean also earthquake. The initial is dental, not palatal t
13. =tura of other dialects, or an error for tarax, skyt
15. Compare stream.
16. The same as deer.
17. "WUd-dog, field-dog."
18. Either waguises = wawises, or waquises = wakises.
19. Given as wolf.
20. "Wild-deer, wild-meat."
21. Santa Clara wirak, wings.
23. Compare night.
24. Compare blood.
25. Compare the Santa Clara word for green: tcitko-mini.
26. Compare boy.
28. Literally, good.
30. Coast Miwok kene, osa, teleka, one, two, three.
The exceptional habit of the Monterey dialect of shortening
its words is the cause of its frequent accumulations of final
consonants. Such accumulations are not tolerated by the other
dialects, as a glance at the vocabularies reveals. In regard
to initial consonants, Monterey agrees with the other dialects
in possessing only simple sounds and affricatives like tc. As
a group, therefore, the Costanoan languages are to be reckoned
250 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 9
with the majority of California linguistic families in that they
allow only single consonants before, after, or between the vowels
The vocalic system of Costanoan is reducible to the five
sounds u, o, a, e, i, of which both o and e, and u and i, are open
in quality, though the latter perhaps also occur with close value.
The apparatus of consonants is also simple, consisting of the
stops k, t-, t, p and the sounds n, m, h or x, s, c, r, 1, w, y, and
the affricative tc.
T- is very palatal, as in Yokuts and Salinan, and its frequent
orthography tr conveys a fair idea of the quality of its sound.
De la Cuesta has written it thr, also ths, th, and tsh. These
spellings give to his material a much more forbidding and diffi-
cult look than the actual phonetic simplicity of the Costanoan
The four stops have been almost randomly recorded by the
author, both in San Jose and Monterey, as surd or partially
sonant. The perceptible difference is so slight that it seems
probable that there is only one series of essentially surd sounds,
which differ sufficiently from the English surd stops, in being
pronounced with somewhat less breath or some degree of sonancy
— possibly during the explosion — to cause them at times to
assume to English ears a quality approaching that of sonant
stops. Father de la Cuesta seems to have mastered the pho-
netics of the San Juan dialect, but his nationality and orthog-
raphy are unsatisfactory for elucidating this point, as the surd
explosives of Spanish are voiced during part of their formation,
while the corresponding Spanish sonants are largely fricative,
so that if the Costanoan stops are actually intermediate rather
than surd, he would nevertheless have naturally and correctly
represented them by the Spanish surd stop characters.
H and x shade into one another and are probably one sound,
as in Yurok and Yana and Yuki. C, more nearly than English
sh, resembles s, as in so many other American languages. R
is trilled with the tip of the tongue, but without violence.
Sound equivalences between such nearly related languages
as the several Costanoan dialects can not be dwelt on with
much emphasis in the present state of knowledge, as some dif-
1910] Kroeber: The Chumash and Costanoan Languages. 251
ferences may be typographical rather than phonetic. A number
are however apparent.
r^l: woman, hair, foot, moon, black, large. San Francisco particu-
larly substitutes 1 for r, but not always.
r = n, y, t- : tobacco, wind, hair, meat.
l = n: coyote, white.
y = tc, t., t: bone, blood, coyote, black.
8 = k, h: beard, today.
k = x: head, ear.
k = w: house, salt, small.
Santa Clara -tc=:San Jose -x = other dialects : forehead, heart.
c = tc = t: bow, thunder, small.
In San Jose, all the consonants occur initially, and all but
tc finally. In consonant combinations in words, r, p, and tc
have not been noted as second member. Further examples may
eliminate these exceptions and reveal all the consonants as avail-
able for any position. All the vowels are found in every part
The personal pronouns in the dialect of San Jose show full
forms similar to those of San Juan Bautista and other dialects,
as contrasted with the reduced ka, me, wa of Monterey. As
in the other known dialects they occur in two forms; one for
the absolute, subjective, and possessive, the other, produced by
the addition of -c to the first syllable of the stem, for the ob-
jective. The objective of the third person ic or c, which presents
the appearance of a formation by analogy, has no known parallel
in the southern dialects.
Subjective and Possessive
The plural of animate nouns and pronouns is formed by the
usual suffix -mak, -kma, -ma: tare-ma, men, aita-mak, women,
muwe-kma, people, waka-mak, they, makin-mak, we.
252 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 9
An ending -c, as in tare-c, man, miti-c, old man, is evidently
the same as the Monterey and San Juan suffix of nouns -s.
Compare aita-kic, woman, atsya-kic, girl. The -c and -kic of
the words for man and woman are lost before the plural suffix.
The general Costanoan locative or inessive suffix -tka occurs :
si-tka, in the water. Another locative ending is -mo, -mu, -m:
no-mo, here; rini-mu ruwai, on the house, "above-on house";
mani-m watic, where are you going? Compare San Juan Bau-
tista patre-me, at the house of the padre.
An adjective ending -wis corresponds to Monterey -st and
San Juan, Santa Cruz, Santa Clara, and San Francisco -min
icne-wic, how is it?
The imperative ends in -i. Compare San Juan -ya, intrans-
itive imperative, and -i, imperative with object of third person.
The future is indicated by -na, while -k seems to denote the
past, and -c is perhaps a present: kiti-na, will see, kiti-k, saw
or sees, wati-c, goes. Compare the Monterey preterite in -ki.
Another ending is -kne, as in nimi-kne, struck.
SAN JUAN BAUTISTA.
The following are the grammatical elements of the Mutsun
dialect, as given by de la Cuesta in Spanish orthography. They
appear to constitute the entire grammatical apparatus of the
-mac, -cma, plural of nouns; -s-mac, plural noun agent
-se, -ne, -e, objective case-ending
-sum, -ium, -um, instrumental case-ending
-tea, -tae, locative case-ending, in, on, at
-me, case-ending, with, at the house of
-tsu, case-ending, in company with
-huas, case-ending, for, to
-tun, case-ending, from
-s, infixed near the end of verbs, plural of object or repetition of
-n, preterite, more remote
1910] Kroeber: The Chumash and Costanoan Languages. 253
-scun, -CUD, preterite, remote
-su, to go to
-na, to go to
-ini, to come to
-miste, to beg to
-stap, -stapse, impersonal, passive, etc.
-gnis, impersonal, passive, etc.
-gne, the same, also participial
-csi, excellently, well, thoroughly
-i, imperative with object of third person
-t, -tit, -mit, imperative with object of first person
-yuts, plural of subject in the imperative
-is, hortatory (?) imperative
-se, -8, added to first word in sentence, interrogative
-na, adverbial numerals
-huas, ordinal numerals
-si, distributive numerals
Two Lord's Prayers in Costanoan have long been known."
A partial translation can be made. It may be added that the
text given by de Mofras from Santa Clara appears rather to
resemble the San Juan Bautista dialect; and that his other,
which is presented as from the Tulare Valley, in other words
Yokuts, is possibly most similar to the dialects of San Jose and
VALLfiE DE LOS TULABES.
Appa macquen erinigmo tasunimae emracat, jinnin eccey macquen
unisinmac macquen quitti 6n6 soteyma erinigmo: sumimac macquen
hamjamti jinnan guara ayei: sunnun macquen quit ti enesunumac ayacma:
aquectsem unisimtac nininti equetmini: jurin4 macquen equetmini em
10 Duflot de Mofras, II, 392.
254 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 9
eket-mini^ ^ xurina
1. Compare San Jose rini-inu, up. For the locative ending compare
San Jose -mo, -mu, -m, and San Juan Bautista -me, at the house of; also,
below, sotei-ma, on earth.
2. The ending -mak occurs on several of the forms that are imperative
tasuni-mak, hallowed be.
unisin-mak, thy will be done.
sumi-mak, give us.
sunu-mak, as we forgive, or, forgive us.
3. Compare im rakat in the Santa Clara prayer. Compare also San
Jose em ama, are you eating? where em replaces mene, you
4. Compare San Juan Bautista "gracat. "
5. Compare Monterey xin, to walk.
6. Unisin- perhaps contains the same stem as Monterey iws, ius, to
7. Sunu-n and sunu-mak, forgive, are not the same as sumi-mak, give,
through a manuscript misreading of nu for mi; but sunu recalls Coast
Miwok suli, pardon, pity, while sumi is paralleled by San Juan Bautista
8. Compare San Jose and San Juan Bautista ama, to eat, Monterey
9. Contains the common Costanoan plural ending -kma, -mak, -ma,
usually confined to animate nouns.
10. The negative is akwe in San Jose, kwe, kue, at Monterey, ekwe at
San Juan Bautista, etc,
11. The ending agrees with the locative case-suffix -tka, -tak, which
appears to be common to all Costanoan dialects, but is of course used
only with nouns. The word may be corrupt. Except for a difference of
two letters, it is identical with unisin-mak above. Possibly -tak should
be read -mak.
12. In San Juan Bautista ekwe is no, not, ekwet-, bad, evil. The ad-
jective ending -mini, -min is known from San Juan Bautista, Santa Cruz,
Santa Clara, and San Francisco.
Kroeher: The Chumash and Costanoan Languages.
MISSION SANTA CLARA.
Appa maerene m^ saura saraahtiga elecpuhmen imragat, sacan
macrene mensaraah assueiy nouman ourun macari pireca nunia ban
saraathtiga poluma macrene souhaii naltis anat macrene neena, ia annanit
macrene nieena, ia annanit macrene macrec 4quetr maccari noumabau
macre annan, nou marote jassemper macrene in eckoue tamouniri innam
tattahn^, icatrarca oniet macrene equets naccaritkoun och k J^sus.
apa makrene me
Father our thou
elekpux-men* im rakat
(sacred) thy name,
sarax asuei numan^
rule (=8ky), which
naltis ana-t*' makrene^
makrene makrek ekwet-*
us our evils
makre ana-n nu" marote^"
forgive those who
in ekwe tamuniri
onie-t makrene ekwet
deliver-thou-us us erll,
come to us
1. San Juan Bautista tsahora = tsaura, to exist, be locally, used with
animate nouns; Monterey tcawar.
2. -men seems to be the suffix -min, -mini.
3. San Juan Bautista numan, who, which, that, ille qui, relative, not
interrogative. The same stem appears in numaban, as, below.
4. For San Juan Bautista regular pire-tka.
5. Monterey, pulum, acorn-bread.
6. As in the preceding prayer, the words give (bread) and forgive
(sins) are similar. Give, in San Juan Bautista, is ara or xumi, here ana.
The San Juan ending for the imperative of the second person with object
of the first, is -t, -mit, -tit; compare ana-nit and onie-t below.
7. The repetition in the printed text of the four words beginning with
macrene is a copyist's error.
8. See the preceding text for a note on the use of this stem with the
meanings of not and bad in San Juan Bautista.
256 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and EtJin. [Vol. 9
9. Monterey and San Juan Bautista nu-pe, that, those, San Jose nu-xu,
10. San Jose mat-o, who. San Juan has ate for who, and Monterey
amp. Compare however the stem rote, to be somewhere, in these two
dialects: Monterey anrot, where is it?
MONTEREY. ORIGIN OF THE WORLD."
tat-ikima'tcan (Pico Blanco)
to Pico Blanco.
ko'ro ne'ku ta'nai wa'tin
feet. Now then
(para la Sierra de Gavilan)
Ne'ku wa'c kaii
Then him told
him he-sent coyote:
e'xe ma'tcan a'iiwis ro'tei^*
Coyote had-looked there.
" May your mother die ! '
' For- her
kae mu'ic ti'us
me please flowers.'
11 By the author. For a free translation see present series IV, 199,
13 Followed, as recorded, by ka u'uwin, I flew, fled, ran.
1* The passage given in present series II, 79, 1904, follows here.
15 Into the waves; the native word had been forgotten.
Kroeber: The Chumash and Costanoan Languages.
an ku ka
"Where will-be my
me a mxai
258 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 9
mam a'mxai a'ru ka
19(^).i9 A dance song:
uxar-at kai pire, on-cliff dancing (of-the-) world
19 (^). A dance song: 20
urin puncipin tot-nin, deer
20('). Song of a blind man: 21
piina watena tot-i, there goes meat
1^ The people complain that the acorns are bitter. Coyote replies to
leach them, but the informant had forgotten the native word.
18 For a song from a coyote myth, see present series IV, 202, 1907.
19 Numbers refer to catalogued phonograph records in the Anthropo-
logical Museum of the University.
20 A woman sees a successful hunter with the deer he has killed, and
although he is already married, she wishes him for a husband. Deer is
21 Played by him on his flute. A girl was attracted, came to him, and
became his wife.
1910] Kroeher: The Chutnash and Costanoan Languages. 259
20('). Dancing song:
comak kaenep lupaki22
21 (^). A woman's love song:
ha-me ka rut-ano, you I mean,
ha-purps tcokolate, hat chocolate-eolored.28
ara patcaxtiyee xawan, now hits wife
was yeyexem, her pelican
Hunting song: 25
kuniixt wa-wuus wat isxeno, stopped its-nose . . .
16 (^). Dance song.26
ka istun xaluyaxe, I dream jump
ka mas ictunine, I you dream-of
RELATIONSHIP OF MIWOK AND COSTANOAN.
In 1856 Latham-^ tentatively separated certain of the dialects
subsequently classified as Costanoan and Miwok. In the earliest
linguistic map of California, in Powers' Tribes of California
in 1877, Powell still grouped together as Mutsun the languages
then known. Fourteen years later, however, in his Indian
Linguistic Families, Powell divided the same dialects into two
families, which he designated Moquelumnan and Costanoan.
This separation has been generally accepted, though only with
reserve on the part of some students, inasmuch as there are
several obvious lexical resemblances between the two groups of
languages, as in. the words for two, I, and you.
22 The words, which" were given by the informant as mak enep lupak,
which perhaps coincides with their usual spoken form, are said to refer to
a woman's white face-paint.
23 The words are given as sung. When spoken, hame ka rut<ano would
be mec ka rut-in or me ka rut-. Hayeno may mean to come — compare the
vocabulary, — but sounds like a meaningless refrain.
24 A charm to bring a man home. Fog was away, and to cause him to
return he was told that the pelican was beating his wife.
26 The hunter sings this in order that the deer's nostrils may be unable
to smell him.
26 Sung by the rat to the three animals mentioned, who danced. The
ending -akai seems to be expletive.
2T Trans. Philol. Soc. London, 81, 1856.
260 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 9
Since the structure of the Miwok dialects has recently begun
to be ascertained, and as Dr. Barrett's studies have systematized
our lexical knowledge of them, more reliable comparisons than
heretofore are now possible with Costanoan.
Some fifty resemblances have been determined between
Miwok and Costanoan, these being in part lexical and in part
grammatical. As the number of stem-words available for com-
parison is less than two hundred in each family, and as the
structure of neither is very thoroughly known, this series of
similarities is fairly significant.
hiti, hinti, tinii
hint'O, inta, intsis
-i, -tc, -t.
-se, -c, -ne, -e
-sum, -um, -eyum
-me, -mo, -m
-tka, -tak, -ta
-kma, -mak, -kam
-ce, -caka, etc.
-s, -skun, etc.
eku, uku, tisso
kono, soloku, tanuka
tai, tayis, cawe
29 Eecorded in Southern Sierra Miwok and San Juan Bautista Costanoan
Eroeber: The Chumash and Costanoan Languages.
oti-ko, oyo-ko, osa
kolo, koyo, ko
wea, woi, wali
sut, suntu, huntu
The greatest obstacle to a final answer to the problem as to
whether or not this material is sufficient to establish kinship
between the two groups, is the difficulty of making a distinction
between elements that one language has borrowed from the other,
and those that they hold in common as the heirloom of original
unity. As Dr. R. B. Dixon has said,^" when confronted by a
similar problem between Chimariko and Shasta, the general
status and extent of borrowing between the unrelated families in
California must be better understood before even a considerable
body of similar words can be either accepted or rejected as
positive evidence of relationship. It is obvious that words have
been transmitted in many directions, but it is not known how
extensive the process has been.^^
80 Present series, V, 337, 1910.
31 A somewhat similar case is provided by a series of similarities be-
tween Yokuts and Maidu, in which the terms of cardinal direction, the
numerals from one to three, and the words for head, mouth, breast,
person, sun, dance, and probably others, are almost alike. These resem-
blances may be due to borrowing, particularly if any considerable pro-
portion of them prove to extend to other families.
262 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 9
In favor of relationship is the equivalence of k and s in a
number of words, and 1 and r, or 1 and n, in others. On the
other hand even such correspondences are of course not proof
of kinship, as a language lacking r or a certain type of k might
well alter these sounds to 1 and s in borrowing words from an-
other stock of speech.
Probably the strongest evidence in favor of kinship is fur-
nished by the grammatical elements enumerated, and by the
general structural resemblance between the two groups of lan-
guages. They agree in possessing a closely similar phonetic
basis; a prohibition of combinations of consonants in stems, or
initially in words ; a paucity of reduplication ; a similar number
and kind of suflBxes of case and number in nouns and pronouns ;
the complete absence, so far as known, of instrumental, spatial,
and adverbial affixes from verbs; and a general lack of prefixes.
The most important difference between the languages is in
the grammatical usage of the pronominal elements. Costanoan
is almost entirely analytic in this regard, while the majority
of Miwok dialects are elaborately synthetic, both in noun and
verb. What is more, the affixed pronominal forms of Miwok
are for the most part entirely different from the independent
pronouns that are common to Miwok and Costanoan. But the
gap is bridged by the coast dialects of Miwok, which lack nearly
all the synthetic pronominal series that are so conspicuous in
the interior dialects, and affix the pronominal elements so loosely
that they are more properly proclitics, as in Costanoan. If
Miwok and Costanoan constitute but one family, the interior
Miwok languages therefore probably represent a more primitive
stage of synthetic structure, which has already largely broken
down in the coast Miwok dialects, and has been replaced by an
almost entirely analytic one in Costanoan.
A definite answer as to the genetic relationship of the two
groups can therefore perhaps not yet be given, though the
evidence will probably make a favorable rather than a negative
impression. The most appropriate designation for the new
and larger family, if it be recognized as a true unit, appears
to be Miwok, which alone, of the names already in usage, is a
native term denoting human beings. Mutsun and Moquelumnan
1910] Kroeber: The Chumash and Coatanoan Languages. 263
signify specific localities, and Costanoan labors under the double
disadvantage of being Spanish — corrupted at that — and of
geographic inappropriateness for a group extending to the
In any event, even if the fact of a larger family is accepted,
the Miwok and Costanoan groups must continue to be regarded
as the primary divisions of this family. The most diverse
Miwok dialects appear to be more similar to one another lexically
than to any Costanoan idiom, and vice versa. This circumstance
should have historical bearing because the Costanoan territory
is on the whole situated between the coast and interior Miwok
264 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 9
DIALECTS AND TERRITORY.
The Chumash languages are more difficult than the Costa-
noan, and it is less feasible in this family to reconstruct forms
given in an imperfect or inconsistent orthography. Five mis-
sions were founded in Chumash territory: San Buenaventura,
Santa Barbara, Santa Ynez, La Purisima, and San Luis Obispo,
the first two being on the coast, the three western ones a short
distance inland. Data are available on the dialects of all of
these missions except La Purisima. In addition there were the
dialects of the northern Santa Barbara islands (represented by
a vocabulary from Santa Cruz), which not only were Chumash
but have given this name to the family. The islanders received
no missions of their own, but were brought to the mainland.
The known Chumash dialects fall clearly into three divisions.
One group comprises the district of San Luis Obispo. Another
embraces the islands, so far as these were Chumash and not
Shoshonean. All the remaining territory within the limits of
the family was included in what may be called the principal or
central group. Within this division San Buenaventura, Santa
Barbara, and Santa Ynez show variation. Other dialects^- very
likely existed also, but have not been recorded. The Santa
Barbara idiom is more similar to Santa Ynez than to San Buena-
ventura; where one of the three differs from the other, San
Buenaventura is exceptional three times out of four. The
island dialect, assuming it to have been comparatively uniform,
so that the Santa Cruz material may be taken as representative
of all the islands, shows no special affinity to any one of the
dialects of the Central division. The same seems true of San
Luis Obispo, but this idiom would seem to be more specialized
than the island dialect. Graphically the relations may be
S L O Id
32 See, for instance, present series, IV, 138, 1907.
Kroeber: The Chumash and Costanoan Languages.
The table is derived from the following sources: San Luis
Obispo, Hale;^^ Santa Ynez, the author and Taylor;^* Santa
Barbara, Hale,^^ Loew,^'^ and Portola;^" San Buenaventura, the
author; Santa Cruz Island, Timmeno.^^
San Luis Obispc
• (Santa Ynes
S.Buenaventura Santa Cruz Id.
Woman 's breast
33 Trans. Am. Ethn. Soc, II, 126, 1848, from Coulter, in Journ. Roy.
Geogr. Soc. London.
34 California Farmer, XIII, 82, May 4, 1860, republished in Powers,
Tribes of California, op. cit. 561.
35 Collected by O. Loew, published by A. S. Gatschet, in F. W. Putnam,
Wheeler Survey, VII, 424, 1879.
36 Given in Powers, loc. cit.
37 Published by Taylor, loc, cit., republished in Powers, loc. cit.
266 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 9
San Luis Obispo Santa Ynez
•fl Santa Cruz Id.
: The Chumash
and Costanoan Languages.
San Luis Obispo Saiita Ynes
S.Buenaventtira Santa Cruz.
kai, ite, he
268 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 9
NOTES TO VOCABULAEIES.
1. Southern California Shoshonean.
2. "Young woman."
3. Compare boat.
4. Yokuts yax, water-snake.
5. Serrano Shoshonean haukup, Esselen pek.
KEY TO THE DIALECT GKOUPS.
The brief San Luis Obispo vocabulary shows one consistent
peculiarity. All its terms except four or five, besides the nu-
merals and body-part words with possessive prefix, begin with
t- or tc-. Thus t-awa, moon, in other dialects awai; t-o, water,
as compared with o; ts-limi, stream, versus ulam. Even adjec-
tives are not excluded : ts-owis, bad, ts-exu, much, elsewhere uhu.
It would appear that this prefix is a proclitic article, such as
ma is in the Santa Ynez dialect.^^ The Salinan language, to
which the San Luis Obispo dialect was adjacent, though so far
as known unrelated, presents the almost identical circumstance
that the majority of nouns commence with t-, tc-, or s-.^®
The pronominal forms, which are identical whether subjec-
tive or possessive, but quite distinct and suffixed instead of
prefixed when objective, appear as follows :
88 Present series of publications, II, 36, 1904.
38 Ibid., 46.
1910] Eroeber: The Chumash and Costanoan Languages. 269
p-, pas-, pate-
ic-, tea-, tc-
The San Buenaventura dual and plural forms occur in kis-
iskom, we two, and ki-masox, we three.
The objective suJBfixes determined in Santa Ynez are -it, -lit,
me, -in, -lin, -win, you, -u, us, and -un, -wun, them. The only
parallels are in the prayer below.
A past suffix -wac or -woe is shared at least by Santa Barbara
with Santa Ynez.
The plural of nouns is regularly formed by reduplication
in Santa Ynez, Santa Barbara, and Santa Cruz Island. The
process may be assumed to be characteristic of all dialects of
A noun-forming prefix al- appears in Santa Barbara al-kcan,
dead; in San Buenaventura aL-owo, white, aL-cocoi, black, al-
ukstai, red, and possibly in alaxiiwiil, coyote; in Santa Cruz
Island ala-pupu, white, alo-kopok, dead; perhaps in la-stepin,
black, and al-apamai, body; and in al-amiin, man — compare
Santa Ynez amun, body. San Luis Obispo Lmono, man, has
perhaps the same composition.
A number of Island verbs are given with the prefix na-.
It seems that the Chumash dialects are comparatively uni-
form in grammar in spite of their considerable lexical
Textual material is almost wanting except for a Lord's
Prayer given by Duflot de Mofras*" as in the language of
Santa Ynez. This reappears with but slight variations in Ca-
*o n, 393.
270 University of California Fublications in Am. Arch, and Etlin. [Vol. 9
balleria y Collell's History of the City of Santa Barbara,*^ where
it is given in connection with notes on the language of Siujtu,
Yuctu, or Yuchtu village near that town. Both texts leave much
to be desired, showing obvious misreadings and words arbitrarily
connected and divided; but a partial translation is possible.
DUFLOT DE MOFRAS.
Dios caquicoco upalequen alapa quiaenicho opte: paquininigug quique
eccuet upalacs huatahuc itimisshup caneche alapa. Ulamahu ilahula-
lisahue. Picsiyug equepe ginsucutaniyug uquiyagmagin canechequique
quisagin sucutanagun utiyagmayiyug peuxhoyug quie utic lex ulechop
santequiug ilautechop. Amen.
Dios cascoco upalequen Alaipai quia-enicho opte: paquini juch quique
etchuet upalag cataug itimi tiup caneche Alaipai. Ulamugo ila ulalisagua
piquiyup queupe guinsncuaniyup uqui amsq canequi que quisagiu
sucutanajun uti-agmyiup oyup quie uti leg uleyop stequiyup il auteyup.
our-o'wing- ( them ? )
kie® utik lex uletcop
41 Santa Barbara, 1S92.
1910] Kroeber: The Chumash and Costanoan Languages. 271
1. liiliikon, in,
2. -ug or -gug appears throughout this text for the first person plural
objective. Spanish g is a voiced fricative, and Chumash possesses such
a sound in k or q position.
3. Caballeria y Collell gives, for Santa Barbara, a "dative" prepo-
sition il, a "genetive" or "ablative" ul. Compare il-autetcop.
4. -sa- is perhaps the future. Compare Gatschet in Wheeler Survey
VII, 485, k-caa cuun, I shall eat, ke k-caa cian, I shall not buy.
5. Possibly pwo, not, though ini- is the negative element of verbs.
6. Either kie, for kike, kiku, us, or kia, this.
Caballeria also gives the Acts of Faith, Hope, and Charity.
The late Mr. L. G. Yates included in his valuable paper on
Charmstones*^ the words and translation of a Chumash song in
the dialect of San Buenaventura:
kajoiwawille lelenimustu mesipposh sumusil
I shall tell ; uneasy heart charmstone
kateushwen laliolio Iwennew
I have not sad I
Another Chumash song occurs in a Yokuts myth:*'
kapix, you(?) came
tata, mother's brother
caxcaniwac, you will die (sic; probably: have died)
salialama, perhaps refrain, compare laliolio in the last song.
Transmitted March 29, 1910.
42 Ann. Eep. Smiths. Inst, for 1886, 296, 1889.
■*3 Present series, IV, 242, 1907. The dialect represented is most likely
to be that of the mountains to the north of San Buenaventura. If so,
it does not differ greatly from the idiom of San Buenaventura, Santa
Barbara, and Santa Ynez. The tradition is localized in Chumash terri-
tory, and may be of Chumash origin.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLICATIONS - (CONTINUED)
Vol. 8. 1. A Mission Record of the Callforma Indians, from a Manuscript in the
Bancroft Library, by A. L. Kroeber. Pp. 1-27. May, 1908 26
2. The Ethnography of the Cahoilla Indians, by A. L. Kroeber. Pp. 29-
68, plates 1-15. JiUy, 1908 76
3. The Religion of the Luiseilo and DieguefLo Indians of Southern Cali-
fornia, by Constance Goddard Dubois. Pp. 69-186, plates 16-19.
June, 1908 1.26
4. The Culture of the Lxiisefio Indians, by Philip Stedman Sparkman.
Pp. 187-234, plate 20. August, 1908 _ 50
5. Notes on Shoshonean Dialects of Southern California, by A. L. Kroe-
ber. Pp. 235-269. September, 1909 36
6. The Religious Practices of the Dieguefio Indians, by T. T. Waterman.
Pp. 271-358, plates 21-28. March, 1910 80
Vol. 9. 1. Yana Texts, by Edward Sapir, together with Tana Myths collected by
Roland B. Dixon. Pp. 1-235. February, 1910 2.50
2. The Chumash and Costanoan Languages, by A. L. Kroeber. Pp. 237-
271, November, 1910 35
Volumes now completed:
Volume 1. 1903-1904. 378 pages and 30 plates _ _ „ ?4.25
Volume 2. 1904-1907. 393 pages and 21 plates 3.50
Volume 3. 1905. The Morphology of the Hupa Language. 344 pages 3.50
Volume 4. 1906-1907. 374 pages, with 5 tables, 10 plates, and map 3.60
Volume 5. 1907-1910. 384 pages, with 25 plates 3.50
Volume 6. 1908. 400 pages, with 3 maps 3.60
Volimie 7. 1907-1910. 441 pages and 50 plates 3.50
GRAECO-ROMAN ARCHAEOLOGY. (Large Octavo.) (Published by the Oxford Univer-
Vol. 1. The Tebtunis Papyri, Part 1. 1902. Edited by Bernard P. Grenfell,
Arthur S. Hunt, and J. Gilbart Smyly. ziz -f 674 pages, with 9 plates.
Vol. 2. The Tebtunis Papyri, Part 2. 1907. Edited by Bernard P. Grenfell,
Arthur S. Hunt, and Edgar J. Goodspeed. xv + 485 pages, with 2 col-
lotype plates and a map 16.00
Vol. 3. The Tebtunis Papyri, Part 3. (In preparation.)
EGYPTIAN ARCHAEOLOGY. (Quarto.)
Vol. 1. The Hearst Medical Papyrus. Edited by G. A. Reisner.
Hieratic text in 17 fac-simtle plates in collotype, with introduction and vocabu-
lary, pages 48, 1905. (J. C. Hinrichs, Leipzig, 25 marks.)
Vol. 2. Early Dynastic Cemeteries of Naga-ed-Der, Part I, by George A. Reisner.
xil -f 160 pages, with 80 plates and 211 text figures. 1908. (J. C. Hin-
richs, Leipzig, 75 marks.)
Vol. 3. The Early Dynastic Cemeteries at Naga-ed-Der, Part II, by A. 0. Mace.
xi + 88 pages, with 60 plates and 123 text figures. 1909. (J. C. Hin-
richs, Leipzig, 50 marks.)
Vol. 4. The Predynastic Cemetery at Naga-ed-Der. The Anatomical Material, by
Elliott Smith. (In preparation.)
Vol. 6. The Cemetery of the Second and Third Dynasties at Naga-ed-Der, by A. 0.
Mace. (In press.)
Vol. 6. The Cemetery of the Third and Fourth Dynasties at Naga-ed-Der, by G. A.
Reisner. (In preparation.)
Vol. 7. The Coptic Cemeteries of Naga-ed-Der, by A. O. Mace. (In preparation.)
The Book of the Life of the Ancient Mexicans, containing an account of their rites
and superstitions; an anonymous Hispano- American manuscript preserved in
the Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Florence, Italy. Reproduced in fac-simile,
with introduction, translation, and commentary, by Zelia Nuttall.
Part I. Preface, Introduction, and 80 fac-simile plates in colors. 1903.
Part n. Translation and Commentary. (In press.)
Price for the two parts J26.00
Fac-simile of a Map of the City and Valley of Mexico, by Alonzo de Santa Cruz,
Cosmographer of Philip II of Spain. Explanatory text by Zelia Nuttall. Map
in 7 sheets, 17 X 20 inches. (In preparation.)
The Department of Anthropology, Its History and Plan, 1905. Sent free on appli-
cation to the Department, or to the University Press.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLICATIONS- (CONTINUED)
Note.— The University of California Publications are offered in exchange for the publi-
cations of learned societies and institutions, universities and libraries. Complete lists of all
the publications of the University will be sent upon request. For sample copies, lists of
publications or other information, address the Manager of the University Press, Berkeley,
California, U. S. A. All matter sent in exchange should be addressed to The Exchange
Department, University Library, Berkeley, California, U. S. A.
ASTRONOMY.— W. W. Campbell, Editor. (Lick Observatory, Mt. Hamilton, Cal.)
Publications of the Lick Observatory.- Volumes I-V, Vm, and X completed. Volumes
VII and IX in progress.
BOTANY.- W. A. Setchell, Editor. Price per volume $3.50. Volumes I (pp. 418), II (pp.
354), and in (pp. 400), completed. Volume IV (in progress).
CLASSICAL PHILOLOGY.— Edward B. Clapp, William A. Merrill, Herbert O. Nutting,
Editors. Price per volume $2.00. Volume I (pp. 270) completed. Volume n (in
ECONOMICS.— A. 0. Miller, Editor.
EDUCATION.— Edited by the Department of Education. Price per volume $2.50.
ENGHNEERING.— Edited under the direction of the Engineering Departments. This series
will contain contributions from the Colleges of Mechanics, Mining, and Civil Engi-
neering. Volume I (in progress) .
GEOLOGY.— Bulletin of the Department of Geology. Andrew 0. Lawson, Editor, rnce
per volume $3.50. Volumes I (pp. 428), II (pp. 450), III (475), and IV (462), com-
pleted. Volume V (in progress).
MODERN PHILOLOGY.— Volume I in progress.
PATHOLOGY.— Alonzo Englebert Taylor, Editor. Price per volume, $2.50. Volmne I (pp.
PHILOSOPHY.— G. H. Howison, Editor. Volume I (pp. 262), completed. Volume n (in
progress). Price per volume $2.00.
PHYSIOLOGY — S. S^ Maxwell, Editor. Price per volume $2.00. Volume I (pp. 217) com-
pleted. Volume II (pp. 215) completed. Volume III (in progress).
PSYCHOLOGY. — George M. Stratton, Editor. Vol I (in progress).
ZOOLOGY. — ^W. E, Bitter and C. A. Kofoid, Editors. Price per volume $3.50. Volumes
I (pp. 317), n (pp. 382), in (pp. 383), and IV (pp. 400), completed. Volumes V
and VI in progress. Commencing with Volume II, this series contains Contribu-
tions from the Laboratory of the Marine Biological Association of San Diego.
MEMOIRS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. (Quarto.)
. Vol. 1. 1. Triassic Ichthyosauria, with special reference to the American Forms,
by John C. Merriam. Pp. 1-196, plates 1-18; 154 text figures. Sep-
tember, 1908 $3.00
2. The Silva of California, by W. L. Jepson. (In press.)
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA CHRONICLE.— An official record of University life,
issued quarterly, edited by a committee of the Faculty. Price, $1.00 per year. Cur-
rent volume No. xn.
ADMINISTRATIVE BULLETINS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA.— Edited by
the Recorder of the Faculties, Includes thc^ Register, the President's Report, the
Secretary's Report, and other official announcements.
Address all orders or requests for information concerning the above publications to The
University Press, Berkeley, California.
European agent for the series in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Classical Phil-
ology, Education, Modem Philology, Philosophy, and Semitic Philology, Otto Harrassowitz,
Leipzig. For the series in Botany, Geology, Pathology, Physiology, Zoology and also Amer-
ican Archaeology and Ethnology, R. Friedlaender & Sohn, Berlin.