Protohistoric Canadian Athapaskan Populations: An Ethnohistorical Reconstruction

Protohistoric Canadian Athapaskan Populations: An Ethnohistorical ReconstructionAuthor(s): J. Colin YerburySource: Arctic Anthropology, Vol. 17, No. 2 (1980), pp. 17-33Published by: University of Wisconsin PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40315976 .

Accessed: 17/06/2014 05:54

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of Wisconsin Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ArcticAnthropology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.77.28 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 05:54:09 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uwisc

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40315976?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


PROTOHISTORIC CANADIAN ATHAPASKAN POPULATIONS: AN ETHNOHISTORICAL

RECONSTRUCTION

J. COLIN YERBURY

ABSTRACT

This paper examines ethnohistorical data and their interpretations in an effort to show that the Cree were l8th century invaders of the Athabasca Lake region. Evidence shows that l8th century change was rapid and pronounced with a significant reorientation of Athapaskan and Algonkian man-land relationships. Protohistoric change has broad theoretical implications for models of Canadian Athapaskan indigenous populations.

INTRODUCTION

Prior to the 1970s , a number of excellent studies were made of specific Northern Atha- paskan bands and communities in the western subarctic (Osgood 1933, 1936, 1937, 19^0, 1958, 1959; Honigmann 19U6, 19^9; McKennan 1959, 1965; Helm 1961 ; VanStone 1965; Slobodin 1962; Balikci 1963). Although many of these studies were concerned with the cultural ecology of contemporary Athapaskan bands and communities and with cultural changes resulting from European contact, in general they have not shown how historical research can add sig- nificantly to the analysis of sociocultural and environmental change. Beyond references to historical documents, there is little con- cern to show how these documents can be in- terpreted to reveal stages of sociocultural organization that developed as Indians adapted to postcontact alterations in ecological systems, and to imposed techno-economic and techno-environmental changes resulting from indirect and direct European contact. In general then, these studies have not provided an historical and comparative perspective for the entire postcontact period, although to the extent that they were not concerned to do this, they cannot be faulted.

Since the early 1970s, there has been a growing interest in issues relating to the ethnohi story of the Northern Athapaskans. James VanStone (197*0 and Richard Slobodin (1975) both have suggested lines of future research that include the use of an ethnohistorical approach to take up issues involved in cultural persistence and change. More recent ethnohistorical publications on specific

Northern Athapaskan groups suggest that there are two main theoretical viewpoints influenc- ing subarctic specialists, and that these viewpoints are based on a theoretical di- chotomy involving the interrelated issues of continuity and change.2

The important documentary research of Beryl C. Gillespie (1975, 1976) and James G. E. Smith (1975, 1976b, 1976c, 1978) generally postulates a cultural continuity between precontact and 20th century Chipewyan subsistence and settlement strategies i Both authors attempt to document through the use of archival and published historical data that Chipewyan socioeconomic and sociocultural patterns have largely persisted with only a limited number of new adaptations from the late prehistoric period until recently.3 This viewpoint is in contrast to that of Joan Townsend ( 1970a, 1970b, 1973) on the Tanaina and Shepard Krech, III (1976, 1978a, 1978b) on the Kutchin who, on the basis of historical research, argue for

1I wish to thank the Governor and Committee of the Hudson ! s Bay Company for permission to quote from their Archives.

20ne must be careful not to present the issue as change versus continuity, a problem astutely noted long ago by Marx (1965:92-93). Cultural persistence and cultural change are constantly operating features in the behavior of human systems (see Bee 197*0 •

Smith, in particular, assumes that subarctic Indians have been subjected to more ac- celerated and far-reaching pressures for socioeconomic change over the last few decades than at any other era of their contact history (Rogers and Smith 1973:1*0, a hypothesis also proposed by Helm and Damas (1963), Helm and Leacock (1971), and Helm et al. (1975). The difficulty in developing a hypothesis that postulates more rapid change over the last few decades than at any other time during contact history has been extensively examined by Bishop and Ray (1976).

17 Arctic Anthropology XVII-23 1980



18 Arctic Anthropology XVII- 2

and demonstrate sociopolitical and socioeconomic changes in Tanaina and Kutchin cultural patterns during the postcontact period. Both Townsend and Krech recognize that Euro- pean contact and the fur trade "brought about significant socioeconomic adjustments and de- population; both account also for cultural persistence. While similar types of issues were fervently debated among Algonkian specialists during the 1960s (e.g., Barnouw 196l; Lande s 1937:87-126; Rogers 1962; Hickerson 1962, 1967), only limited exchanges have oc- curred among Northern Athapaskan specialists; as Slobodin (1975:283) observed, we can "boast no parallel to the apparently endless debate on Ojibwa 'atomism* [and] it does reflect a certain lack of intellectual liveliness in our interchanges." This can be attributed in part to the recency of Northern Athapaskan research and in part to the lack of ethnohi stori cai perspectives in studies of cultural change and cultural ecology.

There are three aims in this paper. Firsts fresh data (cf. Yerbury 1976) relating to the culture history of various Canadian Athapaskan dialect groups, especially the Slave, Dogrib, Hare, and Beaver, are presented. The data challenge recent ethnohi stori cai re-evaluations by Gillespie (1975, 1976) and Smith (1976a) of the aboriginal boundaries separating contiguous Algonkian and Athapaskan cultures. Both authors attempt to show through the use of published and archival records that the Algonkian-speaking Cree were aboriginal inhabitants of the Churchill River drainage system as far west as Lake Athabasca rather than late intruders (see Gillespie 1975:352). Smith (1976a: Ul5) suggests that "it was the term Cree (and its variants) that spread west and was applied to Cree groups known by other names or unknown until the relatively late ex- ploration of the Canadian Northwest." Furthermore, both argue that Cree intrusions into Beaver, Slave, Dogrib, and Hare territory were not as extensive as was formerly believed (see fig. 1). For instance, Gillespie (1975: 35M says that if "Cree were l8th century invaders of the Athabasca Lake region, due to fur trade factors, it is, as yet, an invasion without historical or archaeological evidence."

This argument for a lack of a significant reorientation of Athapaskan man-land relationships supports the claim for historic continuity in Cree-Athapaskan cultures, and has theoretical implications for models of precontact Canadian Athapaskan social organization. It

supports both June Helm's (1965) assumption that the environment inhabited by the postcontact Arctic Drainage Slave, Dogrib, and Hare was their precontact habitat, and the hypothesis that since this environment was apparently characterized by inherent, cyclical instability, then the bilateral reckoning of

kinship relationships has remained the most important organizational principle through time (see Krech 1978b for a discussion of this point ) .

In this paper, a re-evaluation of the historic data suggests that, in contrast to Gillespie fs and Smith's interpretations, Al- gonkian movements did bring about the displacement between 1759 and Yj6k of several indigenous Canadian Athapaskan populations from northern sections of the mixed-wood forest zone (south and southwest of Great Slave Lake), into the so-called upper Mackenzie and northwestern transition forest zones (terms after Rowe, 1972; see fig. 2). This interpretation is similar to the inferences of an earlier generation of historians and anthropologists (Morton 1939:11-12; Innis 1930:202-203; Jenness 1932:25**, 28U ; Mandelbaum 1967:6; Secoy Ì953:^2-U3), although the exact period (1759-6Í+) of the displacement has not previously been pinpointed. It is also suggested here, in contrast to Gillespie and Smith, that a major man-land reorientation for the Dogrib and Slave, and for the Hare, who were once located close to the Beaver (Dyen and Aberle 197^:2^9-250), culminated in major sociocultural changes.

Second, in contrast to Helm, it is argued that the precontact environment of the Dogrib, Slave, and Hare was not inherently unstable, and did not occasion cyclical intervals of population decimation through famine (Helm 1965:382). An attempt is made to demonstrate that the mixed-wood forest zone may have been a most suitable area for occupation by not only the Dogrib, Slave, and Hare, but by the Beaver and Sekani also, since the availability of food resources was not paralleled in the contiguous upper Mackenzie and northwestern transition forest zones. Thus, new socioeconomic and ecological adaptations were surely required by protohistoric populations of Slave, Dogrib, and Hare who were forced from this precontact habitat.

Finally, the relevance of these conclusions for current arguments that stress bilateral and bilocal forms of organization among Mackenzie

drainage Athapaskans is briefly considered.

PROTOHISTORIC BOUNDARIES AND FUR TRADE RIVALRIES

Following the Treaty of Utrecht between the French and the English in 1713, the Hudson's

Bay Company attained undisputed control of its

Bayside posts. York Fort or Factory became the residence of James Knight and, as Gover-

nor, he desired to recover from the French the whole of the "Land and Territories Isles and forts Seas Bayes Rivers Creeks and Lakes Lying and being in the Streights and Bay of Hudson"



;\ ;';.;.''•«: !'c:ui.' .'i. \"'-é .' r>u¿ i'-T'i A: i ::•:.'': .:>• .-' 'o: ;< l::_: '.cnr. ] j



20 Arctic Anthropology XVI 1-2



lerbury: Protohistoric Canadian Athapaskan Populations 21

(Rich 1958:1+31). It was, however, company policy to exploit the fur-bearing grounds of northern Canada without European penetration into the vast hinterland beyond Hudson Bay. This strategy operated on the premise that the company would have a regular shipment and sufficient stock of trade goods at the posts and the Indians would travel annually from the in- terior to the company posts to trade (Rich 1958:1*31*).

This early historic trade system engendered the development of Indian specialists who served as trading middlemen (Ray 197^; Bishop and Ray 1976; Ray and Freeman 1978). The Cree, who occupied a large territory near the southwestern shores of Hudson Bay in the prehistoric period, were in an advantageous position to establish themselves in what became a flourishing exchange network. The employment of the Cree as middlemen had pronounced ef- fects on intertribal relations and led during the initial fur trade expansion period to in- tense hostilities among tribal groups vying for middleman status and control of the trade routes and access to the trading posts. These events had repercussions that were intermit- tently felt as far west as Lake Athabasca.

The mixed- wood boreal forest in the vicinity of Lake Athabasca and the Upper Peace and Slave Rivers was the exclusive prehistoric habitat of the Dogrib, Slave, and Beaver peoples who spoke differing languages of the Athapaskan complex (Petitot 1883:61*9-650; Lamb 1970:171*, 238). The recent dialectological work of Dyen and Aberle (197I*: 21*9-251 ) suggests that the Hare may have been displaced from a location near the Beaver Indians. Armed with guns and seeking furs, the Cree drove the Athapaskan Chipewyan out of the headwaters of the Churchill River between I69I* and 17ll+, and began to penetrate Athapaskan territory near Lake Athabasca and the Atha- basca River in about 171U-15 (Morton 1939:12; Ray 197^:19; Mandelbaum 1967:6; Secoy 1953:^2- 1*3). Governor James Knight was informed on 27 June 1715 by some Cree "Home Guard" Indians, local trappers and post provioners, "abt the Great River it runs into the Sea on the Back of this Country & they tells us there is a Certain Gum or pitch that runs down the river in Such abundance that they cannot land but at certain places & that it is very broad and flows as much water" (HBC B. 239/a/l, fo. 1*3). These first recorded details about the tar sands, the area, and its inhabitants, led Knight to initiate a Cree expedition under the leadership of an Indian named Captain Swan "to make peace with those Indians bordering on the Western Seas" (HBC B. 239/d/7, fo. 7). A party of about 25 canoes was sent in 1715 on a peace-seeking mission to the Athapaskan peoples who occupied the area between the source of the Churchill River and the "Western

Seas," in other words, Lake Athabasca and Great Slave Lake.

The appointment of "Captains" like Swan was an instrument developed by Governor Knight to initiate trade and peace among the various In- dian groups. The Hudson's Bay Company traded directly with leaders who, in turn, would trade with their people. The trading chiefs attracted to them "bands" or "gangs" of Indi- ans who were both trappers and trading middlemen. The leaders and their followers brought in the fur returns of their region during the late spring and early summer.

The trading chiefs were always treated with distinction, receiving special attention by the governor in his residence as well as the customary presents of tobacco, spirits, and clothing. The trading goods they secured and the presents they received gave them a special status when they returned to their region. This strategy on the part of Knight eventually led to comparative peace that had not prevailed for almost a decade in the trading hinterland beyond the Bay. For the trading leader, peace would offer a profitable state of affairs.

The Swan and his party did not return to York Factory until 1* June 1717 . According to Knight, the Swan "as I made mention of formerly in my Journnal that I had Sent to the West Seas to Endeavor to make a Peace with all the Indi- ans Quite through he went from hence ab^ this time 2 years wth 25 Canoes in his Compy and has done what he went abtff (HBC B. 239/a/3, fo. 5I*). The Swan brought a young lad about "l6 years Old of them Indians as he had made a peace with" (HBC B. 239/a/3, fo. 5*0 . The In- dians with whom the Swan made peace were, no doubt, Athapaskan-speaking peoples. Knight observed that "those Indians as Capt. Swan went & made peace with wcn is the Northern In- dians friends" (HBC 239/a/3, io. 78). He la- mented the fact that these natives were not supplied with guns and other necessities for defense against the Cree. The Athapaskans, probably Beaver, Hare, or Slave, were promised trade goods, especially guns. Swan and the Athapaskans were reported to have treated "one another very Civilly & Like friends & feasted Sung Danced & Smoked the friendly Pipe wtn Great Rejoycing" (HBC B. 239/a/3, fo. 5*0. After hearing the report, Knight arranged that Swan's party be outfitted for another journey to the area where a great peace gathering had been arranged for their return (HBC B. 239/d/ 9, fo. 70d).

This time the peace expedition encountered unexpected difficulties. In the winter of 1717-18, a party of Cree fell upon a party of Chipewyan and "destroyed them all & not only them but another party thay came athwart except some Boys whom they brought here two of which I have traded being about twelve years Old vizt one for a gun the Other for a Blanket &



22 Arctic Anthropology XVII-2

four ground Braz Tobac" (HBC B. 239/aA, fo. 2H). The "boys were secured "by Henry Kelsey, the new governor, in anticipation that they would be a means of making peace between the Cree and their neighbors. The boys were not Chipewyan since a Northern Indian reported that their language was closely related, and the two cultures had friendly relationships (HBC B. 239/aA, fo. 2k). Needless to say, the marauding ventures of the Cree had wide- spread repercussions.

In a letter to Knight on 13 July 1718, Kelsey wrote of the appearance of an Indian, Tom!s father's brother, from Captain Swan's party, who related that the Swan had made peace with some "Strange" Indians. They tented together all winter and were beginning to make canoes for the return trip to the Bay, "at which time they heard of Cunnawakthic haveg killd Some of their Country men" and the Strangers ran away (HBC B. 239/aA, fo. 30 ). Kelsey had a long discourse with the Cree per- petrators to whom he gave Brazil tobacco and other presents in order that they should stop warring. In addition, he also threatened to withdraw the trade from these Indian leaders if their people broke the peace.

The Swan did not reappear at the fort until 12 June 1719 - two years after he had set out. Henry Kelsey noted in his York journal that the "Indian nam'd Swan the peace maker was in ... & says he winter fd with those Indians beyond Churchill att the River whose Streams run to the Westward . . . & So he brought a sample of that Gum or pitch that flows out of the Banks of that River" (HBC B. 239/a/5, fo. 52). The Athapaskans were apprehensive about coming back to Hudson Bay with Captain Swan, but after some persuasion, "they did till they come in the borders of this peoples [Cree] Country but all the persuasion he could use he could not gett them any further" (HBC B. 239/a/ 5, fo. 52). Swan was told that if he did not bring these Indians down the next trip, Kelsey would not "Give away Goods for Nothing" (HBC B. 239/a/5, fo. 52). The failure of Swan to bring Northern Athapaskan "Strangers" down to York Factory was determined, in part, by the events of the previous year.

By 1720, Cree-Northern Athapaskan hostilities had subsided. The Swan had successfully made peace "with those Indians att the head of Churchill River" and lived with them another whole winter (HBC B. 239/a/6, fo. 21). Unlike earlier Cree expansion into Chipewyan terri-

tory in which there had "been above 6000 Men besides Women and Children Killed in those parts" (HBC B. 239/a/2, fo. 28), the expansion of Cree fur trade networks and trapping and

trading areas westward to Athabasca country after 1717 was a relatively peaceful process until 172^-27 (see Yerbury 1976).

On 18 June 1723 a "Strange Indian "that

Never see no Europeans" arrived at Fort Churchill with a Cree trading band (HBC B. k2/ a/3, fo. 28). The Athapaskan "Stranger" was "Show'd our Goods to and Gave them [Cree party of six canoes] some small presents, telling them withall to bring Canoes of those Strange Natives next Spring, the Language of those Strangers being very Much like our Northern Indians that Comes here to trade" (HBC B. k2/ a/3, fo. 28). Although the company hoped for continued fur trade expansion, its attempt to induce the Northern Strangers to bypass their Cree middlemen and to establish direct trade with Churchill resulted in the resumption of warfare between the Cree and the Canadian Athapaskans.

The Cree were at war with the Chipewyan in the winter of 1725. For instance, an incoming "Gang" of IOU Northern Indian men reported to Richard Norton on 13 June 1725 "that the Southern Upland [Cree] Indians had been to Warrs in their Country Last winter & has Distroyd a Vast quantity of their Country men" (HBC B. l+2/a/5). Several of the Chipewyan men and their families had been plundered of most of their season's furs (HBC B. l+2/a/5, passim). According to Arthur Dobbs {Yjk^ikk)^ thirty Cree warriors made war against "the Attvmoe'piquais 3 Tete Plat¿ or Ptascotez de Ckiens [Dogrib] , a Nation living Northward on the Western Ocean of America" in about the year 1727.

The trade in martens and small furs was disappointing throughout this period of conflict, and great efforts were made by Norton to reinvigorate trade. Incoming Cree and Chipewyan parties were counselled in the way of peace (HBC B. U2/a/6, fo. 29; B. U2/a/7, fo. 20). For example, in the second week of June 1727, 1+3 canoes of Cree and a gang of 80 Chipewyan men arrived and were treated with formality. "After having had Some Distcuss with them [Chipewyan] & the Uplanders [Cree] forwarning their Warring they traded and went away" (HBC B. U2/a/T, fo. 20). It appears that by 1728, intertribal warfare had ceased, and the number of Northern Indian traders steadily increased from 1728 throughout the next three decades. The Northern Indian Strangers, the Beaver and Slave, continued to trade through Cree middlemen until about 1760.

Archival data suggest that by 1760, the

Athapaskans in the Peace River region and the area north of Lake Athabasca were again at-

tempting to bypass their Cree middlemen in an

organized effort to establish direct trading relationships at Fort Churchill, the "Fountain Head of Trade" (HBC B. U2/a/55, fo. U5; B. k2/ a/53, fo. kk). Ferdinand Jacobs noted details on this event during 176l, and correctly anti-

cipated that the Cree would protect their middleman role jealously. In his words (HBC B. U2/a/55, fo. U5):



Yerbury: Protohistoric Canadian Athapaskan Populations 23

NB It is to be observed that three Indian men and two women of a different Tribe that Never, see a European nor any of the Com- pany s settlements before Came here to trade with the Said Northern Indians, with whom I Traded Largely, and Appointed one of them Leader of his Tribe, and gave him & the Others Handsome Presents upon Promise of bring more of their Tribe down with furrs to Trade aliso Sent a Young Northern Indian man [Matonabbee] who is a Proficent in the Languages with them, well fitted Out, to keep Pace with the Southern Indians & them, as they used to Trade with the Southern In- dians who may Now be jealous that those Strangers have got to the Fountain Head of Trade .

It seems that the Cree, under the leadership of the "Old Rogue Caw-win-ne-cut-tow," inter- fered with the attempts of Jacobs and the Athapaskans to foster direct trade with the Hudson's Bay posts (HBC B. fc2/b/8, fo. 5). Notice of these events reached Jacobs in the summer of 1762 (HBC B. U2/a/56, fo. U2):

at Noon 32 Northern Indians Came here with whome I immediately Traded, "Eight of those Indians Never see a European, and are part of those Indians I have been Endeavouring to bring to Trade at this Factory, they had a Pretty many Goods, they also Confirm what the Leader of the Beaver [Cree] Indians has been Gui[l]ty of Killing Part of their Tribe, the Father of the man that, I made a Leader Last Year was one of them the Beaver River Indians Killed, by which Means this Factory has Suffered in the Trade by the Loss of those Indians that was Kild, and Driving the Remainder, So Farr off that they Could not Come to Trade, as well as the Loss of those Indians that Kild them by Diserting this Factory, being afraid to Come.

Controlling the trade of powder, ammunition and guns, the Cree middlemen had an upper hand over their Athapaskan neighbours, whom they eventually drove into the northwestern transition boreal forest, the Mackenzie drainage system, and the Upper Peace River. Relocated in an area where they were protected by their relative isolation, these Athapaskan populations were forced to rely on resources that, in general, were less abundant and lucrative than their former habitat with its large wood bison herds.

The journals, letters, and accounts of Ferdinand Jacobs provide significant details on intertribal fur trade competition. In the summer of 1762 at least two large parties of Cree were at war. In a letter dated 23 August 1762, Jacobs complained to Humphrey Marten, governor of York Factory, about Churchill's greatly diminished trade returns from the Lake

Athabasca natives and the intertribal conflict and hostilities (HBC B. l*2/b/8, fo. 5).

I have been unexpectedly disappointed in Our Trade, by Not One Cannoe of ye Athuppiscaw Indians Coining down to Trade, this year being gone to War, And that Old Rogue Caw+win+ne+cut-tow, who with his Gang was with you this Summer ... I Say that Old Rogue & some of his Tribe has Kild at two Different Times, Several of those Nor- thern Indians whom, I have been Endeavoring to bring down to this Factory to Trade, which Intemidated the rest So much that only Eight of them Came here this Sum-r. The Cree or "Athuppiscaw" Indians came

down to Churchill during 1763-61+, "they not Returning. as yet from War" (HBC B. U2/a/60, fo. 62). Warfare continued unabated through the 176U-65 season although Moses Norton was informed that a great many Cree were coming in the next season (HBC B. i+2/b/ll, fo. l). Either the successful mediation of Matonabbee, Reame 's renowned guide and companion, as ambassador of peace between the Cree and Atha- paskans, or the success of Cree depredations upon the Athapaskans, allowed 18 canoes of Cree Indians to resume their trade in 1766 (HBC B. l*2/aM, fo. Mi). Historical evidence suggests that the Cree retained exclusive control over their middleman position and the former territory of the Canadian Athapaskans until after the Montreal traders had established themselves in the Athabasca region during the 1770s and 178Os (see Ray and Free- man 1978). The journals and diaries of the early explorers and fur traders provide additional details on protohistoric Cree- Athapaskan fur trade rivalries and their consequences.

Sir Alexander Mackenzie's journals provide details on the intensive trade rivalries and the displacement of protohistoric Athapaskan populations south of Great Slave Lake. On his journey down the Mackenzie River in 1789, he noted that the Cree had frequently sent war parties against the Slave who occupied the shores and islands of Great Slave Lake (Lamb 1970:17*0:

I was surprised to find that the greater part of the wood with which it was formerly covered [Old Fort Island: Lamb 1970:17Un], had been cut down within twelve or fifteen years, and that the remaining stumps were become altogether rotten. On making in- quiry concerning the cause of their extra- ordinary circumstance, the English Chief informed me, that several winters ago, many of the Slave Indians inhabited the islands that were scattered over the bay, as the surrounding waters abounded with fish throughout the year, but that they had been driven away by the Khisteneaux [Cree] who continually made war upon them.




He also noted signs of Cree encampments and Slave lookout posts, which were situated on high hilltops in the area for defensive purposes (Lamb 1970 :l8l). More information on fur trade rivalries and displacements is found in his journal account for 13 October 1792 (Lamb 1970:238).

On the 13th [Oct. 1792], at noon, we came to the Peace Point: from which, . . . the river derives its name; it was the spot where the Knisteneaux [Cree] and Beaver In- dians settled their dispute; . . . When this country was formerly invaded by the Knisteneaux, they found the Beayer Indians inhabiting the land about Portage la Loche [Methy Portage], and the adjoining tribe were those whom they call Slaves. They drove both these tribes before them; when the latter proceeded down the river from the Lake of the Hills [Athabasca] , in con- sequence of which that part of it obtained the name Slave River. The former proceeded up the river; and when the Knisteneaux made peace with them [l76l or later], this place was settled to be the boundary.

Mackenzie is not the only historical source (cf. Gillespie 1975:353). The I806 Great Bear Lake journal of the North West Company trader Alexander McKenzie, a nephew of the explorer, described the Cree invasions. McKenzie wrote (BCPA, A-B-U0-ML93):

The Slaves (say) Dog rib Indians is about 250 men and boys. They were formerly on the Borders of Slave Lake but were driven hence by the Crees.

In l807, another North West Company trader, Willard Ferdinand Wentzel, recorded Cree en- croachments against "Beaver Indians," who most likely were migrant groups of Slave. He wrote of these inhabitants of the Mackenzie River as being:

a branch of the tribe of the Beaver Indians of Peace River from whom they had been formerly separated and then driven this way by their inveterate enemies the Crees who, previous to the introduction of European arms into this quarter, were continually waging war against them. These wars exter- minated great numbers of them, so that they were at length reduced from a numerous tribe to but about 200 men (Mas son i960, vol. 1:85).

Wentzel fs descriptions are reinforced by George Keith who wrote in l807 (Masson i960, vol. 2:68):

The Natives of this establishment call themselves "Beaver Indians," a name which they claim descendants from the Beaver Indians of Peace River, from whom they were

seperated [sic] some ages ago, when

attacked by enemies. The terror caused by this sudden attack induced them to fly for safety to the northwestward.

And, According to them, the population has increased since the establishment of McKenzie fs River [Fort] by the whites, who have protected them from the inroads of other tribes, which previously killed numbers of them.

The Oblate Missionary, Emile Petitot, also commented on this sequence of events (l883: 6U9-65O):

Lake Athabasca, the Slave River, and the shores of the Great Slave Lake were the exclusive territory of another tribe of Tinney to whom the epithet of Slaves was given . . . The Indians using the Algonquin tongue, such as the Crees, . . . carried on a pitiless war against the Athabascan Tinney or Slaves, who . . . gave up their territory to enemies, and fell back on Great Slave Lake, pursued by the Crees, who made great slaughter among them . . . From that time, this portion of the Tinney fam- ily never ventured south, but remained in the cold lands and swampy forests of the north, where they became split up and settled under the names of Dog-ribs, Hareskins, Highlanders, Slaves &c.

Similar patterns of warfare were also seen among the Beaver and Sekani Indians . The Beaver or Tsattine ("dwellers among the beavers") apparently inhabited the area about Athabasca River and Lesser Slave Lake north to Athabasca Lake and east to Methy Portage (Coues l897:510n; Lamb 1970:238). They were driven from this area at the same time that the Slave were driven north of Great Slave Lake, and they were forced to occupy the north bank of the Peace River, which they named Tsades or the river of the beavers (Petitot 1888:292). Smallpox in the Athabasca country in 178l weakened the Crees1 hold on the area, easing Beaver expansion by the l800s along the Peace River from below Fort Vermilion to the Rocky Mountains, up the Liard River to the north, and south of Lesser Slave Lake.1*

^The smallpox epidemic was communicated to the Athabasca Cree during 1781-82. For ex-

ample, Samuel Hearne was told in May 178U by four incoming Northern Indians that the famous Northern leader Matonabbee and most "of the prinsaple Northern Indians are all dead together with that valuable tribe of Southern [Cree] Indians called the Athapuscow Indians" (HBC B. U2/a/lO3, fo. 25). The epidemic proved disastrous to the Indians. This is reflected in the low fur returns. The Mon- treal Pedlars on the Athabasca River in 1782- 83 brought out only seven packages of beaver



Yerbury: Protohistorio Canadian Athapaskan Populations 25

This territorial displacement and expansion were at the expense of their congeners, the Sekani ("dwellers on the rocks").

The Sekani or Rocky Mountain Indians (Lamb 1970:2^9-250) were originally on the Upper Peace River. The Beaver, armed with guns, and themselves displaced by the Cree, drove the Sekani across the Rocky Mountains. The displacement of the Sekani is recorded in Alex- ander Mackenzie's Peace River journal for 10 January 1793 (Lamb 1970:21*9-250):

Among the people who were now here, there were two Rocky Mountain Indians, who de- clared, that the people to whom we had given that denomination, are by no means entitled to it, and that their country has ever been in the vicinity of our present situation Peace river. They said, in support of their assertion, that these people were entirely ignorant of those parts which are adjacent to the mountain, as well as the navigation of the river; t'hat the Beaver Indians had encroached upon them, and would soon force them to retire to the foot of these mountains. They represented themselves as the only real natives of that then with me.

Prior to 1780, the Sekani Indians obtained European trade items through Cree middlemen. By 1793, the Sekani and Beaver Indians were both anxious for direct exchange with white traders. The need to end their economic dependency upon Cree middlemen and their desire to obtain guns for defensive purposes were met by the establishment of North West Company post« in their territory. These posts were later, to serve a twofold purpose, as trade centres for the Sekani and Beaver and as way- stations for the New Caledonia brigades. The abandonment of various posts while the North West Company dominated the region between 1788 and l8l8 was accompanied by continuous Sekani complaints of having to cross Béaver territory for trading purposes.

Simon Fraser's first. journal at Rocky Moun- tain Portage, 12 April to 18 July I806, pro- vides details of warfare between the Sekani and Beaver Indians resulting -from competition for fur-bearing grounds , or due to the plunder- ing of the Sekani by the Beaver. This may have caused a significant reduction in the Sekani population. Fraser noted (Lamb I960: 178):

In the evening [9 May I806] called all the Indians to the door, to know how many there are of them, which we found to be forty

men, thirty women and seventy nine boys, girls and children, and their is another band near at hand not yet arrived, and there are several gone to work the Beaver which form in all of these seen here about 60 men, kO women and upward of 100 boys, girls and children. Formerly they say they were much more numerous, but the Bea- ver Indians war excursions continually de- mini shed them, and the greatest loss generally fall to the share of the women, which added to the number the Beaver and Rocky Mountain Indians [Western Beaver Indians] continually took from them, may account for the unequal proportion there is between the men and women.

Daniel Harmon's diary for the years 1810-19, when he was the superintendent of New Caledonia (British Columbia) for the North West Company, also indicates that the trapping of beaver may have caused considerable displacement of native populations between Rocky Mountain Portage and Stuart Lake. He recorded in his diary of 22 October l8l0 that his party soon were to:

Over take. a Band of Indians, who a few Days since left the Fort to go and hunt the Bea- ver on the other side of the Mountain. They call themselves Sicannies [Sekani] but it is supposed that formerly they belonged and were a part of the Beaver Indian Tribe - who on some quarrel separated themselves from their Countrymen by leaving their lands to come higher up the River & who are now as I am informed a pretty numerous Clan or Tribe (Lamb 1957:131).

Here, again, is additional historical evidence that increased warfare, trapping, and trade were concurrent with Cree territorial expansion during the protohistoric period. Often this expansion took the form of a chain reaction. As the Cree expanded at the expense of the Beaver, the Beaver put pressure on the Sekani. Thus, the presence of the Cree had a pronounced effect on all these Athapaskan populations. The demands of the fur trade drew all these peoples into a situation of intensive competition.

Warfare was a major preoccupation of the Cree in the Athabasca Lake region between 1759 and I76Í+ , and it involved Cree usurpation of Canadian Athapaskan fur and large-game areas, besides inflicting casualties upon these indi- geneous peoples. The Cree were l8th century invaders of the Athabasca Lake region. Many Athapaskans were displaced and forced to occupy the upper Mackenzie riverine and the northwestern transition boreal forest zones, which they had not hitherto used for subsistence and trapping pursuits. The environmental poverty of these zones produced deprivation, disease, frequent starvation, and,

(Morton 1939:33*0, while the returns at Churchill in 1T83-8U were but 1019 made beaver (HBC B. l+2/a/lO3). In contrast, the returns for the 1780-81 season at Churchill were 13,291 made beaver (HBC B. k2/à/6o).




later, forced dependency upon trading posts for survival . 5

LINGUISTIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE

Use of the direct historical approach alone is not sufficient to account for the culture history of the Canadian Athapaskan groups under discussion. It is necessary to combine the study of archival and published materials with data from linguistic and archaeological investigations.

Recent dialectological studies made by Dyen and Aberle ( 197*0 and by Howren (1975), and based on the distribution of innovations, con- clude that the present geographical locations of individual Canadian Athapaskan groups are not concordant with their position in the linguistic matrices and dendrograms . Interestingly , archaeological sequences (Noble 1975 :76l) for the prehistoric ancestors of the Eastern Chipewyan (A.D. 66o), and for the historic Slave (A.D. 1760-modern era), Dogrib (A.D. 1850-modern era), and Hare (date unknown) In- dians have little time depth. These linguistic and archaeological data lend support to the interpretation that these Athapaskans were severely disarranged by contact conditions. For instance, the geographical position of the Hare does not correspond with their position in Dyenfs and Aberle !s matrices (197^:21*9). The distribution of specific kinship innovations supports the suggestion that the precontact Hare were displaced from an area close to the precontact Beaver (197** ' 250). This is borne out by the archival records. The journal of John McLeod (HBC B. 200/a/5, fo. 20) clearly indicates that the Hare were in the area of the Peace, Hay, and Rabbitskin Rivers sometime during the l8th century.6

There is no archaeological data on the Hare (Noble 1975:766). Thus the inferences drawn from linguistic and archival data are similar.

There is a greater linguistic homogeneity of kinship innovations among the Tahltan, Southern Tutchone, Kaska-Ross River Tutchone, and Slave than there is between the Slave and the other Canadian groups, although the dif- ferences are small (Dyen and Aberle 197^:251). This is not surprising since the l807 North West Company letters of Wentzel (Masson i960, vol. 1:85) and Keith (Masson i960, vol. 2:68) suggest that the Slave and Beaver were lin- guistically close. From an archaeological standpoint, the late Slave prehistoric complex has little time depth. The Julian site (JcRw- 13/1) on Fisherman Lake (Millar 1968:130) has been radiocarbon-dated at A.D. 1760 (1-3192). This site is included within the late prehistoric Spence River complex with nine other components southwest of Great Slave Lake, although if the date is correct, it would clearly fall within our protohi storie period. Slave artifact inventory indicates a reliance on fishing as a subsistence base. The camp- sites, which are located near fishing grounds, contain unilaterally barbed harpoons, rib-bone awls, bone picks, drills, net sinkers, wedges, abraders, pebble hammer st one s , linear and cir- cular bifacially chipped Chi-Thos and other lithic tools (Noble 1975:766). There is continuity between the late prehistoric, protohistoric, and early historic archaeological assemblages throughout the area. The establishment of the Slave in the territory southwest of Great Slave Lake from Hay River west to Fort Liard and northward to Fort Simpson during the period 1760 to the present (Noble 1975) is in essential agreement with my ethnohistorical conclusions that the Slave were displaced into the region during the protohistoric period.

The Dogrib were excluded from Dyen!s and Aberle !s ( 197*+: 239) work because of lack of sufficient data. More recently, Howren (1975: 58O) has attempted to show the close unity of Bear Lake, Hare, and Dogrib dialects. Ethno- historical evidence does suggest that the Hare and Dogrib were in close proximity to each other and that they began their migration northward at the same time. The Bear Lake trading post band or the Satudene Indians emerged only as a distinct sociocultural entity during the fur trade period. Dogrib contacts with the fur traders and the Cree would appear to date to the late 17th century. However, no great archaeological time depth is

presently available for this group. Noble (1975:767) has defined only two periods: the modern era, which is established as post-1900, and the historic Fort Rae phase dated between 1850 and 1900. He (1975:770) has also

hypothesized that the Dogrib had a western or

5In the early 1820s, the Indians in the vicinity of Fort Simpson were beginning to barter furs for provisions rather than leaving their trapping grounds for subsistence areas. The traders were often compelled to grant the Indians a supply of meat to prevent "them from flying to the fishing Lakes - in order to secure a Fall Hunt of Beaver - otherwise they would not make any" (HBC B. 200/a/l, fo. 56). Indians associated with the fort in 1823-2** often managed to manipulate the different traders within the district. Wentzel observed that "the rate at which food is sold to them shows there has been some mismanagement in this, many articles being sold the same price as the Chipewyans" (HBC B. 200/a/3, fo. ll).

6McLeod observed that "Near Riviere du Paux Lievre - this River takes its name from a party of this Tribe of Indians having been destroyed at a Lentuce Pinacle [exact location undeter- mined] by a party of the Athabasca Cree."



Yerbury: Protohistorie Canadian Athapaskan Populations 27

northwestern origin beyond Lac la Martre, and that they did not push into the northwestern area of Great Slave Lake much before 1770. The historical data suggest that Noble's pro- posal is only partially correct. The Dogrib were forced into the bush region west and north of Lac la Martre by the Cree, and only returned to the northwestern area of Great Slave Lake with the cessation of Cree intrusions during the protohistorie period. There are no linguistic or archaeological data to refute this ethnohi storica! inference.

The Sekani and Sarsi share enough linguistic innovations to suggest extensive contact in the past. Although the Sekani and Sarsi are separated by the Beaver, Dyen and Aberle (197*+: 251) indicate that the precontact Sekani were probably located immediately north of the Sarsi. Their inferences clearly show that the Beavers1 early location was farther to the east than after contact. Historical data support this inference by describing the Bea- ver as occupants of the area about Athabasca River north to Athabasca Lake and east to Methy Portage (HBC B. 239/a/5, fo. 52; Garvin 1927:2i+0; Coues l897:51On). James Wright's (1975:137) archaeological evidence indicates that there were two major cultural traditions in the Lake Athabasca region. The western portion of the lake had a northern plains tradition oriented toward bison hunting while the eastern portion had a boreal forest derived tradition oriented toward caribou hunting. Wright (1975:9) hypothesizes that the eastern "portion was occupied by the Athabascan- speaking peoples who historically are the Chipewyan while the western portion of the lake was occupied by another group; possibly Athabascan speaking Beavers." In contrast to Wright, it is suggested here that the western portion was occupied by the Beaver, Hare, Dog- rib, Slave, Sekani, and Sarsi.

The Sarsi were the only Canadian group that continued to hunt bison after Cree intrusions. They were probably located adjacent to the Sekani. This would fit the conditions for the distributions suggested by Dyen and Aberle (197^:251).

Although the linguistic and archaeological records are incomplete, they accord remarkably well with the historical evidence and interpretations presented here. Dyen's and Aberle fs conclusions based on their linguistic matrices and maps of innovations, and the shallowness of the archaeological sequences support the inference that Cree expansion, based primarily on trader competition over furs, involved significant accretions of Cana- dian Athapaskan territory as well as large- scale displacements of the indigenous population by force.

New economic and ecological adaptations must have been necessary as the Athapaskan

populations were displaced. To gain some insight into these adaptations, it is necessary to reconstruct the more important aspects of the ecological base of the prehistoric and early protohistorie territory.

PRECONTACT ECOLOGICAL ADAPTATIONS

The territory occupied by the Slave, Dogrib, Hare, Beaver, and Sekani during the prehistoric and most of the protohistorie period included, for most of these groups, a type of biotic area distinctly different from that which they occupied during the historic period (see fig. 2). We can assume that there were significant man-land reorient at ions during the mid-l8th century, and that the precontact Slave, Dogrib, Hare, Beaver, and Sekani would have occupied the northern extension of the mixed wood boreal forest region. The prehistoric occupation of this biotic zone would have offered these groups a different array of food resources than is commonly assumed by subarctic specialists (Helm 1965:381-383).

The most important additional and abundant food resource found within their precontact habitat was the major North American herd of wood buffalo (Bison bison Athabascae Rhoads). The greater portion of the mixed wood boreal forest zone is included within the present-day Wood Buffalo National Park, which still has the largest free-roaming bison herd in the world (Park 1969:35)* Because the wood bison, which occupy a habitat that differs considerably from that of the Plains bison {Bison bison bison) , have different behavioral char- acteristics, and because the size of this major herd of American ,bison was reduced to about 550 animals by 1889 (Hornaday 1887:525), they have not been considered by subarctic Athapaskan specialists as a primary source of food for the precontact Canadian Athapaskan Indians,

Unlike the Plains bison, a grazing animal, the wood bison was a browser, rather than a grazer, and subsisted or foraged on several species of grass, including broom, vanilla, June, meadow, sedge, and feather (Rorabacher 1970:11; Park 1969:68). The bison foraged for grasses amid a heavy forest growth of black and white spruce, trembling aspen, jack and lodgepole pine, and poplar (ibid; see also fig. 2), as far north as Great Slave Lake (Hornaday l887:38U-385) . From recent studies of wood bison behavior, it appears that this animal exploited large areas of open land with their park-like structure of jack and lodgepole pine and rocky hillsides as well as the open muskegs, river deltas, and upland meadows, and plains (Park 1969:68). The seasonal movements of herds would have allowed the Athapas- kan Indian a year-round subsistence base in




this region. If the herds moved at all, it was for only a short distance to new food resources (Soper 19^1: 3^7).

Being a "browsing animal, the wood bison would tend not to overgraze its habitat. Park observed that some herds covered distances of from twenty to 100 miles while others traveled only five to ten miles if they moved at all. The movement was easterly during the winter (l969:60-6l). Herds today are considerably smaller than those in this region during the late prehistoric, protohistoric , and early historic periods. Before the decimation of the wood bison by Cree and Beaver Indians and white hunters during the late l8th and the first half of the 19th centuries (Rich 1938: 379-380), the larger herds may have placed greater demands on foraging areas, causing movement over longer distances. Nevertheless, it is important to reassert that the Canadian Athapaskans had the largest of the land animals of North America available to them in their precontact territory. By 1820-21, however, the herds had already begun to diminish. Sir George Simpson noted in his Athabasca journal that the herds in the vicinity of Fort Chipewyan were rarely found within six to eight days1 journey of the fort, having been overhunted by both Indians and traders (Rich 1938:379-380).

The moose (Alces alces andersoni) ranged throughout the mixed wood zone browsing on a wide variety of plants such as mosses, sedges, grasses, and herbs (Kelsall and Telfer 1975: 120-121). Since few of these plants are available during the winter, the important winter foods are willows, aspen, birch, and balsam fir (McTaggart Cowan and Guiget 1965: 378). Lodgepole pine in the western section and jackpine in the eastern section of the zone were most likely eaten when other food was scarce or unavailable during winters with heavy snowfall (ibid.). Their presence in this area was noted in Sir Alexander Mac- kenzie's description of the resources south of Great Slave Lake. His journal for 9 June 1789 noted,

The Indians tell me that at a very little distance on both sides the River [Slave] are very extensive Plains, where there are vast Herds of Buffaloes, and that the Moose Deer and the largest kind of Rain Deer keep in the Wood close by the River (Lamb 1970: 167-168).

The population density of the moose is difficult to determine using historical data. Nevertheless, Mackenzie's remarks would suggest that the moose was a valuable food resource, in this area. To the north, in the area surrounding Fort Norman and along the Liard River, moose (Alces alces gigas an<J Alces alces andersoni) constituted a significant part of the Indians1 annual provisions.

North of the mixed wood zone, traders hired Indian hunters to secure moose meat for making pemmican. It is possible that this animal may have been hunted out in the mixed wood zone sometime before 1821.

The caribou (Rangifer tarandus), mentioned in Mackenzie's journal, exploited the area north and northeast of the mixed wood zone. Probably the Dogrib, Slave, and perhaps, the Beaver had access to the Beverly population of barren-ground caribou, although it is usually assumed by subarctic specialists that the Chipewyan had exclusive access to this particular herd (Smith 1978:76). Since historical sources tend to support this assumption and the caribou exploit an area outside the mixed wood zone, they are not discussed in this section. It should be mentioned that the Osborn caribou {Rangifer tarandus o sborni) may have inhabited the mountain area along the south- east sections of the Liard River. The Sekani, the most westerly of the Canadian Athapaskan groups, then, could have exploited this resource before contact. The eastern limit of their range is unknown (McTaggart Cowen and Guiget 1965:33).

Small game was abundant and included fur mammals such as the muskrat, beaver, lynx, red fox, fisher, marten, black-footed ferret, mink, raccoon, weasel, wolverine and hare. In all, some k6 species of mammals were available. Additionally, the lakes and marshes of the Peace, Slave, and Athabasca deltas are one of the most important areas for migratory waterfowl in all of North America and receive waterfowl from each of the four major flyways.

This important traditional resting, breed- ing, and moulting sanctuary has a present-day seasonal influx of 22 species of ducks and five species of geese, plus swans, pelicans, grebes, gulls, shorebirds, and whooping cranes. Gallinaceous or scratching birds were also dispersed throughout the mixed wood zone. These included Richardson's blue grouse, an eastern race of spruce grouse, Franklin' grouse, ruffed grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, and three species of ptarmigan (Guiget 1970). Like the hare, most of the gallinaceous birds are apparently subject to ten-year population cycles. They increase to vast numbers over a period of seven to ten years and then decline abruptly, so that a region once harboring coveys becomes devoid of a species. Human populations relying upon species that show such cyclical variability would find themselves in a precarious position, not unlike other animal predators. However, this was not the case for the precontact Canadian Athapas- kans, since, besides wood bison and moose, fish and small game were also an abundant resource. All the lakes, sloughs, river chan-

nels, and backwaters of the area provided either winter habitat or spawning areas for



Yerbury: Protohistorio Canadian Athapaskan Populations %9

pike, walleye (pickerel), cisco (tullibee), lake trout, inconnu, whitefish, and various other species. Lake Athabasca and Great Slave Lake were later utilized by fur traders for their rich fish resources.

Seasonal or regular fluctuations in the mixed wood zone would have had a more predict- able effect on the availability of precontact food resources. During the late spring and summer there must have been a relative abundance of resources. Fish and waterfowl were plentiful along the lakes and rivers throughout the area. The wood buffalo was available in areas with stands of aspen or balsam poplar opening into upland prairies (Park 1969:68). The herds tended to be more gregarious following the calving period during late April and May. Cows gravitated from the main herd to more secluded spots such as ravines or areas of tall grasses to calve (Park 1969:70). After this seasonal activity terminated, small bands of bison tended to coalesce into larger herds for rutting. This period extended from June through September with rutting occurring mainly during early August (Park 1969:77). Although the bison was readily available for precontact hunters, this animal displayed restless, belligerent, unpredictable, and dan- gerous behavior during this particular period (Park 1969:77).

Food recources were equally abundant in the later summer and early autumn. The fall fish- eries declined in productivity during late October and early November while the migratory waterfowl returned southward. The condition of the bison was at its peak during the autumn months. In this season, during the historic period, European and Indian hunters killed this animal to make pemmican. Bison hides were also in their prime from about the middle of October until mid-December (Park 1969:110). It is probable that the precontact Hare, Dog- rib, Slave, Sekani, and Beaver made extensive use of this resource during the autumn. Al- though December, January, and February were difficult months for Indian populations outside the mixed wood zone, the wood bison were readily available within it. These animals were more sedentary during the winter than in any other season. It appears that this sub- species of bison does not move around much in winter, remaining in one location for months at a time. Bison tend to stay in the larger meadows and plains (Park 1969:116-117). Be- sides the bison, moose were also available.

Thus, the winter season cannot be looked upon as a lean period for precontact Indian populations inhabiting this area. In short, the mixed wood zone must have been the most suitable area for occupation by Canadian Athapaskan populations in the precontact period since the availability of food resources was not paralleled in some of the

contiguous biotic zones. Food was relatively easily obtained throughout all seasons. The ecological niche of the prehistoric Canadian Athapascans would have been a generalized one with a. broad width because of its rich subsistence variety (Hardesty 1977:115). Petitotfs suggestion ( 1883:6^9-650) that this area was the precontact habitat of the Hare, Dogrib, and Slave deserves second thoughts. Further- more, it is likely that in the late prehistoric period these Athapaskan populations were larger in size and higher in density than has been generally assumed by Helm (1965:382),7 because their biotic zone had a greater carry- ing capacity.

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION

Historical data, primarily direct testimony, selected from both archival and published ma- terial indicate that warfare was a major preoccupation of the Cree in the Athabasca Lake region between 1759 and I76U. The Cree invaders usurped Canadian Athapaskan fur and large game areas, besides inflicting casualties upon these peoples during the l8th century.

Although both Gillespie (1975:35*0 and Helm (I978:l6l) have written that there is no sound evidence of Cree intrusions into Athapaskan territory during the mid l8th century, the independent observations and remarks of Ferdinand Jacobs, Samuel Hearne (1971:35^-357), Sir Alexander Mackenzie, Alexander McKenzie (the former's nephew), Willard Ferdinand Wentzel, George Keith, and Emile Petitot establish what can be called a "framework of facts" (Pitt 1972:U6); each personal observa- tion or oral testimony can be doubted by it- self, but not all of them together. The data suggest that the Cree intruded into Athapaskan- held territory during the mid l8th century, and thus challenge Smith's (1976a: Ul5) and Gillespie fs (1975:351-352) arguments that the Cree were the aboriginal inhabitants, of the Churchill River drainage system as far west as Lake Athabasca.

Population displacements forced these Cana- dian Athapaskans to occupy the upper Mackenzie riverine and the northwestern transition boreal forest zones, which they had not hither- to used for subsistence and trapping pursuits. (Small groups of the so-called Nahanny appear to have occupied these zones, and they were forced to occupy the previously uninhabited mountainous areas.) The environmental poverty of these zones produced deprivation, disease, frequent starvation, and later, forced

7Helm (1965:382) does not give estimates of aboriginal population, but merely asserts that Dene populations were small in size and low in density.




dependency upon the trading post for survival. Mid-l8th century warfare and population

displacements have important implications with respect to claims of cultural continuity and models of precontact Canadian Athapaskan social organization. Helm (1965:382) has argued that the precontact environment of the Dogrib, Hare, and Slave was inherently unstable, resulting in their population experiencing cyclical decimation through famine. The bilateral reckoning of descent was, thus, the most adaptive organization in response to these environmental conditions. Historical evidence indicates that there were major man-land re- orientations and that the Hare, Dogrib, and Slave were displaced from a more favorable ecological zone into areas poorly endowed with resources. The combination of man-land re- orientations stemming from warfare, depopula- tion, and adaptations to the demands of the fur trade over time may have led to new social arrangements. Consequently, the bilateral systems known to modern ethnographers may have been a product of postcontact conditions.

Although reliable population estimates of aboriginal Canadian Athapaskan groups are difficult to make, it is clear that the resource potential of their aboriginal territory could have supported relatively large aggregates of people. It is also possible that these more favorable conditions were conducive to aboriginal matriorganization.

Since the subject of Canadian Athapaskan social organization has remained controversial, it has been the primary task of this paper to demonstrate the historical changes experienced by the Canadian Athapaskans in order to set the stage for evaluating the various recon- structions of their social organization. Those who wish to debate the conclusions presented in this paper must do so in terms of essentially the same source materials.

REFERENCES

Balikci, Asen 1963 Vimta Kutchin Social Change.

Northern Coordination Research Centre 63(3). Ottawa.

Barnouw, Victor 196l Chippewa Social Atomism. American

Anthropologist 53:1006-1013.

Bee, Robert L. 197 U Patterns and Processes. New York:

Free Press.

Bishop, Charles A., and Arthur J. Ray 1976 Ethnohistorical Research in the

Central Subarctic: Some Concep- tual and Methodological Problems.

Western Canadian Journal of Anthropology 6:ll6-lUU.

Coues, Elliott 1897 New Light on the Early History of

the Greater Northwest^ vol. 2. Minneapolis: Ross 8s Haines.

Dobbs, Arthur 17 1+5 An Account of the Countries Ad-

joining to Hudson's Bay in the Northwest Part of America. London.

Dyen, Isidore, and David F. Aberle 197^ Lexical Reconstruction: The Case

of the Proto-Athapaskan Kinship System. London: Cambridge Uni- versity Press.

Garvin, John W. 1927 Voyages From Montreal on the River

St. Lawrence Through the Continent of North America to the Frozen and Pacific Oceans in the Years 1789 and 1793 by Alexander Mackenzie s Esq. Chicago.

Gillespie, Beryl C. 1975 Territorial Expansion of the

Chipewyan in the l8th Century. In Proceedings: Northern Athapas- kan Conference > 1971 , vol. 2:350- 388. Edited by A. McFadyen Clark. National Museum of Man, Mercury Series. Ottawa.

1976 Changes in Territory and Technol- ogy of the Chipewyan. Arctic Anthropology 13:6-11.

Guiget, C. J. 1970 The Birds of British Columbia.

Victoria: Provincial Museum.

Hardesty, Donald 1977 Ecological Anthropology. New York:

John Wiley & Sons.

Hearne, Samuel 1971 A Journey From Prince of Wales rs

Fort in Hudson's Bay to the Nor- thern Ocean. Edmonton: M. G. Hurtig.

Helm, June 1961 The Lynx Point People: The Dynam-

ics of a Northern Athapaskan Band. Bull. National Museum of Canada, 176. Ottawa.

1965 Bilaterality in the Socio- Territorial Organization of the Arctic Drainage Dene. Ethnology h: 316-385.

1978 On Responsible Scholarship on




Culture Contact in the Mackenzie Basin. Current Anthropology 19 (l): 160-162.

, and David Damas 1963 The Contact-Traditional Organiza-

tion of the Canadian North: the Upper Mackenzie "bush" Athapaskans and the Igluligmiut. Anthropol- ogica 5:9-21.

, and Eleanor Leacock 1971 The Hunting Tribes of Subarctic

Canada. In Leacock, Eleanor and Nancy Lurie , eds . , North American Indians in Historical Perspective, pp. 3J+3-371* . New York: Random House.

, Terry Alliband, Terry Birk, Virginia Lawson, Suzanne Reisner, Craig Sturtevant, Stanley Witkowski

1975 The Contact History of the Sub- arctic Athapaskans: An Overview. In Proceedings : Northern Athapas- kan Conference, 1971 , vol. 1:302- 3^6. Edited by A. McFadyen Clark. National Museum of Man, Mercury Series, no. 27. Ottawa.

Hickerson, Harold 1962 The Southwestern Chippewa. Ameri-

can Anthropological Association, vol. 6k , memoir 92.

19d7 Some Implications of the Theory of the Particularity, or "Atomism," of Northern Algonkians. Current Anthropology 8:313-3^3.

Honigmann, John 19^6 Ethnography and Acculturation of

the Fort Nelson Slave. Yale Uni- versity Publications in Anthropol- ogy, 33.

19^9 Culture and Ethos in Kaska Society. Ibid., kO.

Hornaday, W. J. I887 The Extermination of the American

Bison. U.S. National Museum Annual Report. 1889.

Howren, Robert 1975 Some Isoglosses in Mackenzie-

Drainage Athapaskan: First Steps toward a Subgrouping. In Proceed- ings: Northern Athapaskan Confer- ence, 1971, vol. 2:577-615. Edited by A. McFadyen Clark. National Museum of Man, Mercury Series, no. 27. Ottawa.

Hudson's Bay Company Archives, Winnipeg, Manitoba.

HBC B. l*2/a/3, Fort Churchill Journal, 1722-23.

HBC B. l+2/a/5-7, ibid., 172U-27 HBC B. l*2/a/53, ibid., 1759-60 HBC B. U2/a/55-56, ibid., 1760-62 HBC B. U2/a/60, ibid., I763-6U HBC B. U2/a/62, ibid., 176^-65 HBC B. 1+2/aM, ibid., 1765-66 B. l*2/a/lO3, ibid., 1783-8U HBC B. l+2/b/8, Fort Churchill Copy Letter

Book, 1761-62 HBC B. 1+2/b/ll, ibid., 1761|-65 HBC. B. 200/a/l,Fort Simpson Journal, 1822-23 HBC B. 200/a/3, ibid., 1823-21* HBC B. 200/a/5, ibid., 182U-25 HBC B. 239/a/l-6, York Factory Journal,

171^-19 HBC B. 239M/7, York Factory Accounts,

171^-15 HBC B. 239M/9, ibid., 1716-17

Innis, Harold 1930 The Fur Trade In Canada. New

Haven: Yale University Press.

Jenness, Diamond 1932 The Indians of Canada. Ottawa:

National Museum of Canada.

Kelsall, J. P. and E. S. Telfer 1975 Biogeography of Moose with Parti-

cular Reference to Western North America. In Aloes: Moose Ecology, J. Bédard, ed. Quebec: Presses de 1 'Università Laval.

Krech, Shepard, III 1976 The Fur Trade and the Eastern

Kutchin, 18OO-I86O. Ethnohistory 23(3):213-235.

1978a On the Aboriginal Population of the Kutchin. Arctic Anthropology 15(1): 89-lOU.

1978b Disease, Starvation, and Northern Athapaskan Social Organization. American Ethnologist 5(1*): 710-732.

Lamb, W. Kaye 1957 Sixteen Years in the Indian

Country: The Journal of Daniel Williams Harmon, 1800-1816. Toronto : Macmillan .

i960 Simon Fraser, Letters and Journals, 1806-1808. Toronto: Macmillan.

1970 The Journals and Letters of Sir Alexander Mackenzie. London: Cambridge University Press.

Landes, Ruth 1937 The Ojibwa of Canada. In Coopera- • tion and Competition among Primi-

tive People , Margaret Mead, ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.




Mandelbaum, David G. 1967 Anthropology and People: The

World of the Plains Cree. Univer- sity of Saskatchewan, University Lectures, no. 2.

Marx, Karl 1965 Pre-Capitalist Economic Formations,

E. J. Hobsbawm ed. New York: International Publishers.

Masson, L. R. i960 Les Bourgeois de la Compagnie du

Nord-Quest, 2 vols. New York: Antiquarian Press.

McKennan, Robert A. 1959 The Upper Tanana Indians. Yale

University Publications in Anthro- pology, no. 55. New Haven: Yale University Press.

1965 The Chandalar Kutchin. Arctic Institute of North America, Techni- cal Paper 17. Montreal: Arctic Institute of North America.

McKenzie, Alexander l8O5-O6 Journal of Great Bear Lake.

Archives of British Columbia. Victoria.

McTaggart Cowan, Ian, and Charles J. Guiget 1965 The Mammola of British Columbia.

Victoria: British Columbia Pro- vincial Museum.

Millar, James 1968 Archaeology of Fisherman Lake,

Western District of Mackenzie , N.W.T. Ph.D. dissertation, Uni- versity of Calgary. Calgary, Alberta.

Morton, Arthur S. 1939 A History of the Canadian West to

1870-71. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Noble, William 1975 Application of the Direct Historic

Approach in Central District of Mackenzie, N.W.T. In Proceedings: Northern Athapaskan Conference, 1971, vol. 2:759-785. Edited by A. McFadyen Clark. National Mu- seum of Man, Mercury Series, no. 27.' Ottawa.

Osgood, Cornelius 1933 Tanaina Culture. American Anthro-

pologist 35:695-717. 1936 Contributions to the Jttnnograpny

of the Kutchin. Yale University

Publications in Anthropology lU. New Haven: Yale University Press.

1937 The Ethnography of the Tanaina. Ibid., 16.

1940 IngaHk Materval Culture. Ibid., 22.

1958 Ingalik Social Culture. Ibid. , 53. 1959 IngaUk Mental Culture. Ibid., 56.

Park, Edward 1969 The World of Bison. Philadelphia:

Lippincott .

Petitot, Emile F. S. 1883 On the Athabasca District of the

Canadian Northwest Territory. Proceedings of the Royal Geographi- cal Society. London.

1888 En Route pour la Mer Glaciale. Paris: Letouzey et Ané, Éditeurs.

Pitt, David C. 1972 Using Historical Sources in Anthro-

pology and Sociology. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Ray, Arthur J. 197U Indians in the Fur Trade. Toronto:

University of Toronto.

, and Donald Freeman 1978 "Give Us Goo4 Measure": An Eco-

nomic Analysis of Relations Be- tween the Indians and the Hudson's Bay Company before 176 3. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Rich, E. E. , ed. 1938 Journal of Occurrences in the

Athabasca Department by George Simpson, 1820 and 1821 and Report. Toronto: Champlain Society.

1958 The Hudson's Bay Company, 1670- 1870, vol. 1. London: The Hud- son's Bay Record Society, vol. 21.

Rorabacher, J. Albert 1970 The American Bison in Transition.

Saint Cloud: North Star Press.

Rogers, Edward S. 1962 The Round Lake Ojibwa. Royal

Ontario Museum, Art and Archaeol- ogy Division, Occasional Paper 5. Toronto: University of Toronto.

, and James G. E. Smith 1973 Cultural Ecology of the Shield

Subarctic. Paper read at the Ninth International Congress of

Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences. Chicago.




Rowe, J. Stan 1972 Forest Regions of Canada. Depart-

ment of the Environment , Canadian Forestry Service, pub. 1300. Ot- tawa: Information Canada.

Secoy, Frank 1953 Changing Military Patterns on the

Great Plains , 17th Century through early 19th Century. Monographs of the American Ethnological Society. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

Slobodin, Richard 1962 Band Organization of the Peel Riv-

er Kutchin. National Museum of Canada Bull. 179. Ottawa.

1975 Canadian Subarctic Athapaskans in the Literature to 1965. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropol- ogy 12(3): 278-289.

Smith, James G. E. 1975 The Ecological Basis of Chipewyan

Socio-Territorial Organization. In Proceedings: Northern Athapaskan Conference, 1971, vol. 2:389-1+51. Edited by A. McFadyen Clark. Na- tional Museum of Man, Mercury Series, no. 27. Ottawa.

1976a On the Territorial Distribution of the Western Woods Cree. Papers of the Seventh Algonquian Conference , 1975. Edited by William Cowan. Ottawa: Carleton University.

1976b Local Band Organization of the Caribou Eater Chipewyan. Arctic Anthropology 13(l):12-2t.

1976c Local Band Organization of the Caribou-Eater Chipewyan in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries. Western Canadian Jour- nal of Anthropology 6(1 ): 72-90.

1978 Economic Uncertainty in an "Origi- nal Affluent Society" : Caribou and Caribou Eater Chipewyan Adaptive Strategies. Arctic Antkropoloqii 15(1): 68-88.

Soper, J. Dewey 19^1 History, Range, and Home Life of

the Northern Bison. Ottawa: De- partment of Mines and Resources Ecological Monograph 2(1*).

Town send, Joan 1970a The Tanaina of Southwestern Alaska:

An Historical Synopsis. Western Canadian Journal of Anthropology 2(l):2-l6.

1970b Tanaina Ethnohistory: An Example of a Method for the Study of Cultural Change. In Ethnohistory in Southwestern Alaska and the Southern Yukon, pp. 71-102. Edited by Margaret Lantis. Lex- ington: The University Press of Kentucky.

1973 Ethnoarchaeology in Nineteenth Century Southern and Western Alaska: An Interpretive Model. Ethnohis- tory 20(U):393-Ul2.

VanStone, James W. 1965 The Changing Culture of the Snow-

drift Chipewyan. Ottawa: Nation- al Museum of Canada, Bull. 209.

19lh Athapaskan Adaptations. Chicago: Aldine .

Wright, James 1975 The Prehistory of Lake Athabasca:

An Initial Statement. National Museum of Man, Mercury Series, no. 29. Ottawa.

Yerbury, J. Colin 1976 The Post-contact Chipewyan: Trade

Rivalries and Changing Territorial Boundaries. Ethnohistory 23(3): 237-263.

Simon Fraser University Burnaby, B.C.



Documents

Protohistoric Canadian Athapaskan Populations: An Ethnohistorical Reconstruction