1
Drake and Cermeno
in California:
Sixteenth Century
Chinese Ceramics
EDWARD P. VON DER PORTEN
The search for Francis Drake’s California
encampment is about a century old. George
Davidson, the great nineteenth century cartographer, was the first systematic searcher
for the Drake site (Davidson, 1908), and many
others have followed him. This is not the place
to analyze all the research on the Drake story:
in one sense there is too much to study, because so much research has been done through
the years (Wagner, 1926; Heizer, 1947; Aker,
1956, and Oko, 1964, among others); in another
sense there is too little, because a major paper
presenting the twenty years of work by a
research group called the Drake Navigators
Guild has recently been published (Aker, 1970)
and is not yet generally available.
In the briefest possible summation, the results of most researchers’ work, from Davidson
to the Guild, are to identify Drakes Bay as the
site of Drake’s harbor (Davidson, 1908: 107108; Aubrey Neasham, quoted in Aker, 1956:25;
Aker, 1956: 147-148; Oko, 1964: 152, and Martin, 1959: 18, among others) and, more recently, to identify Drake’s Cove as the site of his
careenage and encampment (Aker, 1956; Oko,
1964, and Martin, 1959). There are a few dis-
senting voices which speak for San Francisco
Bay (Starr, 1962, and Power, 1954), San Luis
Obispo (Pate, 1969), and other coastal points
such as Bodega Bay (mentioned, with other
possibilities, in Wagner, 1926: 154-169), but
Drake’s Cove at Drakes Bay is supported by
a mass of evidence, and it is accepted for the
purposes of this paper.
One noteworthy aspect of the work is its
interdisciplinary nature, which has involved
such diverse fields of study as navigation
(throughout Aker, 1956, and Oko, 1964: 143),
botany (Allen, 1971 a), cartography (Aker,
1956: 50-69), ethnology (Heizer, 1947), hydraulics (Aker, 1956: 70-93), zoology (Allen,
1971 b), shipbuilding (Aker, 1956: 118, 123,
124, and Aker, 1965, following p. 71), and
archaeology, Within these fields, other interdisciplinary aspects often develop, with archaeology offering striking examples.
Archaeological research in the Point Reyes
Peninsula was begun after the discovery of
the Plate of Brass. A major purpose of the
first digs, in 1940, was to date the Indian cultures by identifying a sixteenth century level
in the middens through the location of Euro-
HISTORICAL
ARCHAEOLOGY
1972
2
-
1
3
4
HISTORICAL
ARCHAEOLOGY
1972
i
t
I
t
FIC~JFIE
2. T w of Ming porcelain vessels found at Drakes Bay. The $men shapar illustrated, plus a steep-sided
small bowl similar to Tsrpe VI1 and a delicate bowl similar to Type IV but only about 5%" in diameter, are the
only $hapar that hawe been reconrtructed. A possible fluted vase neck is the only identified oessel sherd that
does not conform to these nine shapes, all of which are utili@ wares.
DRAKE AND
pean artifacts from that period (Heizer, 1941:
319-320). Ironically, while sixteenth century
artifacts were found, they were ascribed to
the 1595 wreck of the Manila Galleon Sun
Agustin commanded by Sebastian Rodriguez
Cermeno, not to the Drake expedition (Heizer,
1941: 320, 323-324).In addition, the materials
were scattered at all depths in the middens,
so no physical sixteenth century level could be
located (Von der Porten, 1965: 54-55). Nearly
thirty years were to pass before a physical
datum was established using explorer artifacts,
a group of Spanish-Colonial terra-cotta, fragments, and then it was not so valuable as had
been anticipated because of the many variables and unknowns of the midden such as the
date of the end of the occupation, the rate of
deposit of Indian debris at different periods,
and the disturbing action on the Indian artifacts of burrowing animals. The datum turned
out to be a fixed point in a stratigraphic column with no other fixed points (Von der Porten, 1968: 34-37).
In the following years, the purposes of the
excavations shifted to attempts to separate
Drake and Cermeno artifacts from each other
(Von der Porten, 1965: 62-66), and to efforts
to investigate the Indian cultures more thoroughly (Treganza, 1968). These efforts were
always parallel to each other, for every dig
provided both historic and aboriginal materials. The historians' effort to separate the two
expeditions' materials proved to be as difficult
a task as the archaeologists' effort to establish
a datum level. The interpretatibn of the Indian
materials is being handled by anthropologists
(Treganza, 1968), and is beyond the limits of
this study.
At the same time, what started as a minor
effort has turned into a major one: the interpretation of the individual explorer artifacts
for whatever information they can yield on
any subject.
The largest group of artifacts is composed
of blue-on-white porcelain sherds. When the
sherds were first found in &e 1940 excavation,
it was assumed that such artifacts were well
known in Oriental art circles as they were,
-
cI"0
5
in a way-but it became evident later that
the sherd collection could furnish as much
information to the art historians as the art
historians could furnish the archaeologists,
altogether a very beneficial arrangement. The
reason the group is so valuable is not the
rarity of the specimens, as most of the sherds
are of common trade wares, but because it is
accurately dated to the period 1579 to 1595,
or a little earlier if the date of manufacture
is calculated.'
The sherds give insights into many fields.
They show that the porcelains carried in one
or two shipments in @e first quarter century
of the Manila Galleon porcelain trade (It began in 1573.Schurz, 1939: 27,70)were utility
wares, almost entirely composed of rice bowls,
plates, large and small low bowls, and very
large, heavy, deep bowls (Von der Porten,
1968: 10-22).They were apparently stacked
with similar vessels one inside the other and
a minimum of padding. The wrapped stacks
may have come from the manufacturing city,
Ching-te Chen, without being opened and
rewrapped at any stage of their travels. The
final packing into chests was probably done
either at a Chinese coastal city prior to its
shipment by junk to Manila, or at Manila
itself. Probably at that stage of the packing,
any odd lots or single vessels that were in
stock from any source in the western Pacific
trades were added to fill out the chests, thus
accounting for the fact that there are only
six unusually shaped vessels (a tiny cup, three
flaring-rim dishes, a fiat dish, and a possible
fluted vase neck) and only two provincially
made Swatow ware large bowls out of 230
identified specimens (Von der Porten, 1968:
9-11,20-22, and Appendix 3).
While the shapes are simple and utilitarian,
the decoration is quite varied. It includes careless, crude floral designs, notably on the rice
bowls; and, at the other extreme, delicate
moulded plates with minutely detailed, intricate designs which often include deer and
birds in woodland scenes. Probably the Chinese were not sure of their new "barbarian"
customers' tastes, so they loaded mixed wares
The importance of the porcelain group haa been emphasized in personal correspondence and In vi& to the
by Mr. Rene Yvon d'Argence', Director of the Avery Brunduge Foundation, M.H. de Young M e m o r h l
Museum, Sun Francisco; Sir Ha- M . Gamer, K.B.E., C.B., Honorary Curator of the FitzwfUlam Museum,
Cambridge, England; Dr. john A. Pope, Director of the Freer G a b of Art, Smithsonfan I d f u r i o n ; Dr.
Michael Sullivan, Professor of Art, Stanford Unfversity, and 0
t
h Oriental art historians.
1.
dtap
6
HISTORICAL
ARCHAEOLOGY1972
a
b
0 1 2 3 4 5 cenftneters
d
1
e
FIGURE3. Type I , Large Bowls - Sixteenth Century: “a”, Interior - Rim to Base, “b”, Exterior - Rim to
Base, “c”, Rim Interior with Medallion, “d”, Base Interior with Crackled Glaze and Foliage, “e”, Base Interior
with Deer and Foliage.
DRAKE
AND CERMENO
7
b
a
C
d
tI
0 I 2 3 4 5 centimeters
f
FIGURE4. Type 11, Tiny C u p - Wan-li: “a”, Interim, “h”, Exterior with Overlapping Petals. Type V I , Lou;
Dish - Swatow Ware: “c”, Interior with Crane, Flying Bird, Rock and Foliage. Type 111, Flaring Rim Dishes
-Swatow Ware: “d”, Base Exterior Showing Crude Finish of Swatow Ware, “e”, Base Interior with Phoenix
and Foliage, “f”, Base and Cavetto Interior with Foliage, “g”, Rim Interim with Foliage.
8
HISTORICAL
ARCHAEOLOGY
1972
b
a
C
d
e
f
FIGURE
5. Type N,Low B o w l s - Sixteenth Century: “a”, Exterior with Branch, “b”, Interior with Cloud
Collars, “e”, Base Interior with Goldfish Pond, “d”,Base Interior with Goldfish Pond, “e”, Base Interior with
Deer and Tree in Landscape, “f”, Base Interior with Landscape, “g”, Base Interior with Foliage.
DRAKE
AND CERMENO
b
a
d
9
C
e
f
i
h
k
i
0 I
2 3 4 s csntimetars
FIGURE 6. Type V , Phtes- Wan-li, White Caoetto Sub-Type: “a”, Rim Interior with Rocks and Foliage,
“b”, Rim Interior with Duck W e e d , ‘dc’’,Rtm Exterior with Bird on Cuiietto, “d”, Rim Interior with Peacock,
“e”, Rim lnterior with Duck, “f”, Rim Interior with Duck Weed a n d Water Plant, “g”, Rim Interior with
Rocks and Foliage, “h”, Rim Interior with Rocks und Foliage, “i”, Rim Exterior with Foliage and Flowers, “i”,
Beaded-Pendant-Rim Sub-Type, “k”, Base and Cavetto lnterim u i t h Rocks and Foliage in Landscape.
HISTORICAL
ARCHAEOLOGY
1972
10
i
a
b
C
d
e
J
f
0 I 2 3 4 5 centimeters
FIGURE 7. Type V , Plates -Wan-li, White Cavetto Sub-Type: “a”, Base and Cavetto Interior with Water
Plants, “h”, Base and Cavetto Exterior with Bird on Branch, ‘‘c” and “d”, Base Interior with Deer in Landscape, “er’, Base Interior with Cloud Scrolls and Tree, “f”, Base Interior with Rocks and Pine Branches, “g”,
Base and Cauetto Interior with Bird and Egg.
DRAKE
AND CERMENO
11
b
a
c
t
e
C
-t
d
FIGURE
8. Type V, Plates - Wan-li, Paneled Rim Stili-Types: “a”, Rim and Caaetto Interior with Moulded
and Shaded Paneling, “h”, Rim and Caoetto Interior. Single-Line Panel Sub-Type, “c”, Rim to Base Interior,
“d”, Rim to Base Exterior, “e”, Rim and Cavetto Exterior, “f”, Rim and Cavetto Interior with Butteffly, “g”,
Rim and Cavetto Interior.
12
HISTORICAL
ARCHAEOLOGY
1972
b
a
0 I 2 3 4 5 cant
C
d
FIGURE
9. Type Va, Small Low Bowls - Wan-li: “a”, Base Interior with Dragonfly and Spider W e b , “b”,
Base Interior with Duck Next to Pond, “c”, Base Interior with Pond, “ d , Base Interior with Landscape.
DRAKE
AND CERMENO
13
b
a
e
d
C
h
u i
2 3 4 :
i
f
c6 ni im aier s
FIGURE 10. Type VII, Small Bowls - Sixteenth Century (Generally): “u”, Exterior with Spray of Foliage The Common Type, “b”, Exterior with Landscape, “E”, Exterior with Precious Object, “d”,Exterior with Flying
Beast, “e”, Exterim with Phoenix, “f”, Base Interior with Foliage, “g”, Base Exterior with Good Luck Characters, “h”, Rim Interior with Diamond-Diaper Pattern, “i”, Exterior with Bamboo Shoots.
HISTORICAL
ARCHAEOLOGY
1972
14
C
d
f
e
i
cl
J
h
0 I 2 3 4 5 centimeters
FIGURE
11. Type V I I a , Small B o w l s - Wan-li: “‘a’’,Exterior with Deer and Foliage, “b”, Interior with Folinge,
“e”, Base Interior with Foliage, “d”, Exterior with Flying Horse ocer Waves, “e”, Interior with Cloud Collar
around Flower, “f”, Exterior with Beaded Pendant, “p”, Interior with Beaded Pendant, “h”, Exterior with
Foliage, “i”, Exterior with Flying Horse, “i”, Lower Exterior with Lotus Petals.
DRAKE
AND CERMENO
15
f
i
’rr
I
h
I
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
s
FIGURE12. Indian-Modified Porcelain: “a”, Type V a Bowl Base Chipped Around Edge, “b”, Chipped-Edge
Bead Blanks, “c”, Chipped and Grmtnd-Edge Bead Blanks, One with lnconiplete Perforation, “d”, Pendant
Made f r o m “Beaded Pendant” Fragment of Largr Plate, “e”, Chipped and Ground-Edge Pendant, “f”, Bowl
Base Chipped Around Edge to Form Scraper, “g”, S m a l l Scraper, “h”,Small Scraper or Large Bead Blank, “i”,
Bow1 Foot Ring Chipped to Forrn Scraper, “i”, Beaked Scraper Made from Bowl Base.
16
HISTORICAL
ARCHAEOLOGY
1972
on their junks. It is even possible to speculate,
in the case of the common rice bowls, that a
single, particularly attractive bowl was placed
where it could easily be seen, at the bottom of
a stack of ordinary bowls, to give the impression of a full stack of high-quality bowls when
a stack was partially unwrapped for a prospective purchaser. The ratio of about 80% ordinary bowls to 20% fancy ones supports such
a hypothesis (Von der Porten, 1968: 10-20).
Turning from Oriental art and Spanish trade
to the recipients of the porcelains, the Coast
Miwok Indians, the results of the porcelain
analysis become useful to the anthropologists.
The impact of these exotic goods on the Indians was apparently small. The porcelains were
not traded to inland villages, for instance.
Some sherds were deliberately shattered, possibly to “release the spirit” of the sherds but
equally possibly to reduce their sizes so beads,
pendants, or scrapers could be made from them.
Bead-making was a failure because the porcelain glaze was too smooth and hard to be
drilled, but some persistence was shown, as
eleven bead blanks have been recovered so far
(Figure 12 b and c). One was drilled on one
side, presumably where a flaw in the glaze
allowed the chalcedony drill to bite, but clam
shell disc beads were always biconically drilled, and, when the porcelain bead blank could
not be drilled from the other side, it was thrown
away - an interesting comment on habits of
thought because the blank could have been
drilled through from one side. These porcelain
bead blanks also create a useful time marker
by helping to confirm the existence of the clam
shell disc bead industry at the end of the sixteenth century.
Pendants were made by chipping and grinding, while scrapers were made by chipping
sherds to form cutting edges. One sturdy,
round scraper type was made by chipping the
foot ring of a rice bowl which had earlier been
sheared off above the foot and surf tumbled.
The most remarkable piece of worked porcelain is a small, delicate low bowl which had
its rim and cavetto carefully chipped off to
leave a flat disc containing a duck in a pond
scene (Figure 12 a). What this disc meant is
unknown, as there is no known ethnographic
parallel, but some idea of beauty is a possibility (Von der Porten, 1968: 28-31).
A variety of pottery and porcelain sherds
FIGURE
13. S e t 0 Ware Cup: A Japanese Sake Cup, 6
Centimeters in Diameter, with Crackled, WithredLeaf-Colored Glaze - The Only Zntact Porcelain from
the Point Reyes Peninsula.
throws light on the Pacific trades’ utility ware
distribution patterns. Large vessels that were
probably wine and water jars came from an
unidentified Spanish-American kiln or kilns,
from China, and from Indo-China. A tiny, intact sake cup is from Seto, Japan (Figure 13).
A small grey jar, an An-p’ing Hu, represents a
type often exported to Formosa from South
China (Figure 14). A small, low bowl is Spanish American (Von der Porten, 1968: 32-45)
(Figure 15). The Manila Galleon trade, then,
fit into complex trades already existing in the
western Pacific, and added some new elements
to them.
Many people representing many fields were
needed in these studies, sometimes to identify
objects, but often to provide the information
that made it possible to understand the artifacts’ background and therefore to know what
to look for in them. Some objects, however,
defy everyone. Metal objects are the worst.
A copper or brass cone 2%“long, and a small
metal bar with a pin in the middle have been
intensively studied, to no avail (Von der Porten, 1965: 47-49) (Figure 14).
Interesting and useful as the artifact studies
were, the research kept coming back to the
basic historic question: what could the artifacts tell about the Drake and Cermeno expeditions to Drakes Bay?
DRAKE
AND CERMENO
17
a
I
b
0 I 2 3 4 5 centimetsrs
FIGURE
14. Miscellaneous Materials: a ” , An-p’ing H u , A Grey Jar from South China-Base and Exterior,
Left; Base and Interior, Right, “b”, Square-Shanked Iron Spike and Flat Iron Object with Pin in Center of
One Side.
ia
HISTQRICALAR~~AEOLOGY
1972
r
]
e
I
0
1.
2
.
fd,
FIGURE15. Terra-Cotto Bowl. Many sherds of thts
m u terra-cotta bowl were found, whtch permitted its
reconstruction. I t b probably from a Spanbh-Amertcan
source.
The most famous object of all, the Plate
of Brass, has proved to be a disappointment
as an artifact. It helps to support the Drakes
Bay location for Drake’s camp because it was
found near the bay and because it had been
fastened to a massive post, a necessity at treeless Drakes Bay. However, it is a small, easily
portable object that was found on the surface
of the ground. Such a lone find is nearly meaningless in the nature of archaeological evidence
(Bolton, 1937;Fink, 1938; Ellison, 1943; Chickering, 1937,and Von der Porten, 1965: 12-18,
among others).
The source of some of the porcelains did
prove to be identifiable, however. Sherds from
eight vessels that had been surf tumbled before they were broken were found. By a process of elimination, all probable sources except
the Sun Agustin wreck could be written off for
these porcelains, making them the first artifacts associated with a specific expedition since
the Plate of Brass a quarter century before
(Von der Porten, 1968: 24-25).Of the 97 sherds
that were abraded after they were broken,
many can be assumed to be from the Sun Agwtin wreck, but the degree of probability is
somewhat reduced, as many circumstances
could have led to their abrasion (Von der Porten, 1968: 25-28}.
Iron ship spikes, the most common sixteenth
century artifacts after the porcelains, tell nothing by themselves because a small craft Drake
left at the bay and the Sun Agustin used the
same type of spike. However, the Sun Agustin
anchorage is known, her wreck site can be
calculated, and the drift of wreckage after
a storm can be estimated fairly well. Where
much wreckage, and therefore many spikes,
would be expected, such as the north shore of
Limantour Estero, they appear-except in one
place, on the sandspit where the Spanish camp
is believed to have been located. There, the
Spaniards gathered the wreckage to build into
the small craft that eventuallv took them to
Mexico (Von der Porten, 1965; 34-40,63,and
Aker, 1965: 22-23,35-39,and Figures 4, 5, 8).
This spike distribution suggested that a study
of the distribution of sixteenth century artifacts might prove valuable, and so it has.
The gaIleon wreck is represented by the
spike concentration in the Indian middens on
the north shore of Limatour Estero, and by
the eight probable shipwreck porcelains, some
of the other abraded porcelains, and three
surf-tumbled Spanish-American terra cottas,
all found in the Limantour Spit Indian sites
(Von der Porten, 1968: 33-34,38, 48).
The Indian sites on Limantour Spit contain
a variety of materials which appear to be associated with the Spanish camp site. This site is
not located yet archaeologically, but it has been
located on eastern Limantour Spit by documentary research (Aker, 1965: 30-31,4-42).
This artifact grouping includes large quantities
of bitumen (Von der Porten, 1965: 57-59,and
Treganza, 1968: 73-74), five unabraded Spanish-American terra cottas, the Asian water jars,
and other ceramics - all in combination with
the scarcity of spikes which suggests Spanish utilization of wreckage (Von der Porten,
1968: 47).
About three miles away, on the western shore
of Drakes Estero, a midden has produced an
unusual group of artifacts. These include the
copper cone, the iron bar with its pivot pin,
a wool cloth fragment, and “clinkers,” as welI
as the more common bitumen, spikes, and porcelains. This concentration of objects so far
from the Cermeno campsite yet three-quarters
of a mile northwest of Drake’s Cove supports
the cove as the site of Drake’s careenage (Von
der Porten, 1968: 48-49, and Von der Porten,
DRAKE
AND CERMENO
19
a
0 I 2 3 4 5 centimeters
b
c
FIGURE16. Modified Porcelain: “a”, Percussion-Shattered Large Bowl Fragment, “b”, Sherd Surf-Abraded
Before Breakage - On Exterior Only, “c”, Shmh Surf-Abraded After Breakage.
HISTORICAL
AR~HAEOLOGY1972
FIGURE
17. Large Terra-cotta Vessel. The fragments from this ahipwzeck-damged and woter-abrcrded vessel
provrcEed a physical 1600e20 datum in an Indian midden. Most of the s h e d lay at the same level in the midden, undisturbed by small animals bemuse t h are so large and heaoy.
1965: 47-48, 51-59). The three-quarters of a
mile distance was given by Drake’s chronicler,
and the site is located on a quiet inner waterway where sounds carry from the village to the
cove, another requirement of the documents
(Penzer, 1926: 55).
A Cermeno expedition document suggests
that the archaeologists have failed to find an
artifact type: it mentions that the Indians
”had bows and arrows, and we could find no
other kind of iron . , . ,” (Wagner, 1924: 13)
suggesting that they did have iron arrowheads,
a logical gift from Englishmen who still used
the long bow (Von der Porten, 1965: 60-61).
DRAKE
AND CERMENO
21
Where are the camps themselves? The probable remains of Drake's ditch-and-parapet fort
at Drake's Cove have been found in the form
of a stone layer much disturbed by storms.
More work in that area would be valuable but
it would have to be a very large-scale excavation (Aker, 1956: 135-146). Cermeno's camp
and his cache of wreck cargo (Father Antonio
de la Ascension in Wagner, 1929: 249, and
Aker, 1965: 37-38), have not been found. They
probably lie buried under the stable dunes of
Limantour Spit.
Historic archaeology at Drakes Ray promises
many discoveries for the future, but what they
may be, and what interdisciplinary approaches
may be needed for their interpretation, can
not be predicted.
FIGURE18. Wan-li Plate: A Small Version of the Type
V Plate with Beaded Pendant Design -Not from the
Point Reyes Peninsula.
-
0 1 2 3 4 5 centimeters
FIGURE20. Wan-li Bowl: A Type V u Low Bowl-
Not from the Point Reyes Peninsula. CREDITS:
Photographs were taken by Mr. James Datta, San Francisco State College, and printed b y M r . Don Cabral,
S o n o m a State College.
FIGURE 19. sixteenth Century Bowl: The Most Common Porceluin Type and Decoration, The Type VI1
Bowl, Has Two Sprays of Foliage on the Exterior,
with and without a Bird - Not from the Point Reyes
Peninsula.
REFERENCES
AKER, RAYMOND, M.P. DILLJNGHAM,
ANI)
ROBERTPARKINSON
1956 “Nova Albion Rediscovered,” Point
Reyes, Drake Navigators Guild, duplicated m.
MARTIN,No’& B.
1959 The Drake Naoigafors Guild and the
Quest for Portus Nooae Albionis, Point
Reyes, Drake Navigators Guild.
OKO, ADOLPH
s.
1964 “Francis Drake and Nova Albion,”
California Historical Society Quarterly,
h,
RAYMOND
XLIII:2 (June 1964), 135-158.
1965 The C m e n o Expedition at Drakes
Bay-1595, Point Reyes, Drake NavigaPATE, ROBERT
W., AND ELLEN
tors Guild.
1969 “Drake’s Treasure,” Western Treasures, (January l-), 14-21.
1970 Report of Findings Relating to Zdentification of Sir Francis Drake’s EncampPENZER,N. M., ed.
ment at Point Reyes National Seashore,
1926 The World Encompassed and A d o Point Reyes, Drake Navigators Guild.
gous Contemporay Docum&, London,
The Argonaut Press.
ALLEN, ROBERTW.
1971 Identification of *an herbe much like
Po-,
ROBERTH.
our lectuce. . . . ,” Point Reyes, Drake
1954 “Portus Novae Albionis RediscoverNavigators Guild.
ed?” Pacific Discovery, VII:3 (May-June
1954), 10-12.
AILEN, ROBERT
w., AND ROBERT
w. PARKINSON
1971 Ihntificution of the Nooa Albion
SCHVRZ, WILLIAML.
Conie, Point Reyes, Drake Navigators
1939 The Manila Galleon, New York, E. P.
Guild.
Dutton & Company, Inc.
BOLTON,
HFZIBEFIT
E., AND DOUGLAS
S. WATSON STARR,WALTERA.
1937 Drake’s Plate of Bras, San Francisco,
1962 “Drake Landed in San Francisco Bay
California Historical Society.
in 1579. The Testimony of the Plate of
Brass,” California Historical Society QuarCHICKERING, ALLAN L.
terly, XLI:3 (September 1962), Adden1937 “Some Notes With Regard to Drake’s
dum, 1-29.
Plate of Brass,” California Historical Society Quarterly, XVI: 3 (September 1937),
TREGANZA,
A. E.,AND T. F. KING,eds.
275-281.
1968 Archaeological Studies in Point Reyes
National Seashore 1959-1968, San FranDAVIDSON,
GEORGE
cisco State College, n.d
1908 Francis Drake on the Northwest Coast
of America in the Year 1579, Transactions
VON DER PORTEN,EDWARD
P.
and Proceedings of the Geographical So1965 Drake-Cermeno: An Analysis of Arciety of the Pacific, Vol. V, Series 11.
tifacts, Point Reyes, Drake Navigators
Guild.
ELLISON,JOSEPH
W.
1943 T r u e or False?“ The Saturday Eve1968 The Pmcehins and Terra Cottas of
ning Post, CCXV: 40 (April 3, 1943), 32,
Drakes Bay, Point Reyes, Drake Naviga35-36.
tors Guild.
FINK,
COLING., AND E. P. POLUSHKIN
WAGNER,
HENRYR., ed.
1938 Drake’s Plate o f Brass Authenticu1924 “The Voyage to California of Sebasted, San Francisco, California Historical
tian Rodriguez Cermeno in 1595.” Cdifornia Historical Society Quarterly, 1II:l
Society.
(April 1924), 3-24.
HE”,
ROBWT F.
1926 Sir Francis Drake’s Voyage Around
1941 “Archaeological Evidence of Sebastian
the World, San Francisco, John Howell,
Rodriguez Cermeno’s California Visit in
1926.
1595,” California Historical Society Qwr1929 Spanish Voyages to the Northwest
terly, xX:4 (December 1941), 315-328.
Coast of America in the Sixteenth Cen1947 Francis Drake and the California Zntury, San Francisco, California Historical
dianr, Berkeley and Los Angeles, UniverSociety.
sity of California Press.