- Tcho-ko-yem, Gibbs in Schoolcraft, Ind. Tribes, III, 421,
1853 (mentioned as a band and dialect).
- Moquelumne, Latham in Trans. Philolog. Soc. Lond., 81, 1856
(includes Hale’s Talatui, Tuolumne from Schoolcraft, Mumaltachi,
Mullateco, Apangasi, Lapappu, Siyante or Typoxi, Hawhaw’s band
of Aplaches, San Rafael vocabulary, Tshokoyem vocabulary,
Cocouyem and Yonkiousme Paternosters, Olamentke of Kostromitonov,
Paternosters for Mission de Santa Clara and the Vallee de los
Tulares of Mofras, Paternoster of the Langue Guiloco de la
Mission de San Francisco). Latham, Opuscula, 347, 1860. Latham,
El. Comp. Phil., 414, 1862 (same as above).
- Meewoc, Powers in Overland Monthly, 322, April, 1873
(general account of family with allusions to language). Gatschet
in Mag. Am. Hist., 159, 1877 (gives habitat and bands of
family). Gatschet in Beach, Ind. Misc., 433, 1877.
- Mí-wok, Powers in Cont. N.A. Eth,. III, 346, 1877 (nearly as
- Mutsun, Powell in Cont. N.A. Eth., III, 535, 1877 (vocabs.
of Mi´-wok, Tuolumne, Costano, Tcho-ko-yem, Mutsun, Santa Clara,
Santa Cruz, Chum-te´-ya, Kawéya, San Raphael Mission, Talatui,
Olamentke). Gatschet in Mag. Am. Hist., 157, 1877 (gives habitat
and members of family). Gatschet, in Beach, Ind. Misc., 430,
- Runsiens, Keane, App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent, and So. Am.),
476, 1878 (includes Olhones, Eslenes, Santa Cruz, San Miguel,
Lopillamillos, Mipacmacs, Kulanapos, Yolos, Suisunes, Talluches,
Chowclas, Waches, Talches, Poowells).
Derivation: From the river and hill of same name in Calaveras
County, California; according to Powers the Meewoc name for the
river is Wakalumitoh.
The Talatui mentioned by Hale68
as on the Kassima (Cosunmes) River belong to the above family.
Though this author clearly distinguished the language from any
others with which he was acquainted, he nowhere expressed the
opinion that it is entitled to family rank or gave it a family name.
Talatui is mentioned as a tribe from which he obtained an incomplete
It was not until 1856 that the distinctness of the linguistic family
was fully set forth by Latham. Under the head of Moquelumne, this
author gathers several vocabularies representing different languages
and dialects of the same stock. These are the Talatui of Hale, the
Tuolumne from Schoolcraft, the Sonoma dialects as represented by the
Tshokoyem vocabulary, the Chocuyem and Youkiousme paternosters, and
the Olamentke of Kostromitonov in Bäer’s Beiträge. He also places
here provisionally the paternosters from the
Mission de Santa Clara and the Vallee de los Tulares of Mofras;
also the language Guiloco de la Mission de San Francisco. The
Costano containing the five tribes of the Mission of Dolores, viz.,
the Ahwastes, Olhones or Costanos of the coast, Romonans, Tulomos
and the Altahmos seemed to Latham to differ from the Moquelumnan
language. Concerning them he states “upon the whole, however, the
affinities seem to run in the direction of the languages of the next
93 group, especially in that of the Ruslen.” He adds: “Nevertheless,
for the present I place the Costano by itself, as a transitional
form of speech to the languages spoken north, east, and south of the
Bay of San Francisco.” Recent investigation by Messrs. Curtin and
Henshaw have confirmed the soundness of Latham’s views and, as
stated under head of the Costanoan family, the two groups of
languages are considered to be distinct.
The Moquelumnan family occupies the territory bounded on the north
by the Cosumne River, on the south by the Fresno River, on the east
by the Sierra Nevada, and on the west by the San Joaquin River, with
the exception of a strip on the east bank occupied by the Cholovone.
A part of this family occupies also a territory bounded on the south
by San Francisco Bay and the western half of San Pablo Bay; on the
west by the Pacific Ocean from the Golden Gate to Bodega Head; on
the north by a line running from Bodega Head to the Yukian territory
northeast of Santa Rosa, and on the east by a line running from the
Yukian territory to the northernmost point of San Pablo Bay.
Population.—Comparatively few of
the Indians of this family survive, and these are mostly scattered
in the mountains and away from the routes of travel. As they were
never gathered on reservations, an accurate census has not been
In the detached area north of San Francisco Bay, chiefly in Marin
County, formerly inhabited by the Indians of this family, almost
none remain. There are said to be none living about the mission of
San Rafael, and Mr. Henshaw, in 1888, succeeded in locating only six
at Tomales Bay, where, however, he obtained a very good vocabulary
from a woman.
Indian Linguistic Families of America North of Mexico, 1891