diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/50828-h/50828-h.htm')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/50828-h/50828-h.htm | 18838 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 18838 deletions
diff --git a/old/50828-h/50828-h.htm b/old/50828-h/50828-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index 2337501..0000000 --- a/old/50828-h/50828-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,18838 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" - "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> -<head> -<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" /> -<title>The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Bark Canoes and Skin Boats of North America, by Edwin Tappan Adney and Howard Irving Chapelle</title> - <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" /> - <style type="text/css"> - -body { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - - h1,h2,h3 { - text-align: center; /* all headings centered */ - clear: both; -} - -p { - margin-top: .51em; - text-align: justify; - margin-bottom: .49em; -} - -.p6 {margin-top: 6em;} - -/* Easy Epub/HRs */ - -hr { - width: 33%; - margin-top: 2em; - margin-bottom: 2em; - margin-left: 33.5%; - margin-right: 33.5%; - clear: both; -} - -hr.tb {width: 45%; margin-left: 22.5%; margin-right: 22.5%;} -hr.chap {width: 65%; margin-left: 17.5%; margin-right: 17.5%;} - -ul, ul#index { list-style-type: none; display: inline-block;} -li.ifrst { margin-top: 1em; } -li.indx { margin-top: .5em; } -li.isub1 {text-indent: 1em;} -li.isub2 {text-indent: 2em;} -li {text-align: left;} - -/* Case Study: Tables */ - -table { - margin-left: auto; - margin-right: auto; - text-align: left; - display: inline-block; -} - - .tdr {text-align: right;} - .tdp {text-indent: 1em;} - -th {text-align: center;} - -strong {font-family: Charcoal, sans-serif;} - -caption {font-weight: bold;} - -.pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */ - /* visibility: hidden; */ - position: absolute; - left: 92%; - font-size: smaller; - text-align: right; -} /* page numbers */ - -.blockquot { - margin-left: 5%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - -.hangindent { - text-indent: -5%; - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - -.bbox {border: solid thin; padding: 1em;} - -.center {text-align: center;} - -.right {text-align: right;} - -.smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} - -/* Images */ -.figcenter { - margin: auto; - text-align: center; -} - -.caption, .caption p {font-weight: bold;} - -.figright { - float: right; - clear: right; - margin-left: 1em; - margin-bottom: - 1em; - margin-top: 1em; - margin-right: 0; - padding: 0; - text-align: center; -} -@media handheld -{ - .figright - { - float: none; - text-align: center; - margin-left: 0; - } -} - -/* Footnotes */ -.footnote {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;} - -.footnote .label {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;} - -.fnanchor { - vertical-align: super; - font-size: .8em; - text-decoration: - none; -} - -/* Transcriber's notes */ -#transnote {background-color: #E6E6FA; - color: black; - font-size: smaller; - padding: 0.5em; - margin-bottom: 5em; - font-family: Georgia, Times, "Times New Roman", serif} - -/* Easy Epub/Headings */ - -.ph1, .ph2 { text-align: center; text-indent: 0em; font-weight: bold; } -.ph1 { font-size: xx-large; margin: .67em auto; } -.ph2 { font-size: x-large; margin: .75em auto; } - -.medium {font-size: medium;} -.large {font-size: large;} - -/* Case Study: Title Pages */ - -div#titlepage { - text-align: center; - page-break-before: always; - page-break-after: always; -} -div#titlepage p { - text-align: center; - text-indent: 0em; - font-weight: bold; - line-height: 1.5; - margin-top: 3em; -} - -div.chapter {page-break-before: always;} - -div#halftitle -{ - text-align: center; - page-break-before: always; - page-break-after: always; -} -@media screen -{ - #halftitle - { - margin: 6em 0; - } -} -@media print, handheld -{ - #halftitle - { - page-break-before: always; - page-break-after: always; - margin: 0; - padding-top: 6em; - } -} - -/* Easy Epub/Cover */ - -.covercaption {font-weight: bold; font-size: small;} -@media handheld { - .covercaption { display: none; } -} - -div.tnotes {background-color: #eeeeee; border: 1px solid black; padding: 1em;} -.covernote {visibility: hidden; display: none;} -@media handheld { - .covernote {visibility: visible; display: block;} -} - - hr.full { width: 100%; - margin-top: 3em; - margin-bottom: 0em; - margin-left: auto; - margin-right: auto; - height: 4px; - border-width: 4px 0 0 0; /* remove all borders except the top one */ - border-style: solid; - border-color: #000000; - clear: both; } - </style> -</head> -<body> -<h1>The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Bark Canoes and Skin Boats of North -America, by Edwin Tappan Adney and Howard Irving Chapelle</h1> -<p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States -and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no -restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it -under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this -eBook or online at <a -href="http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you are not -located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws of the -country where you are located before using this ebook.</p> -<p>Title: The Bark Canoes and Skin Boats of North America</p> -<p>Author: Edwin Tappan Adney and Howard Irving Chapelle</p> -<p>Release Date: January 2, 2016 [eBook #50828]</p> -<p>Language: English</p> -<p>Character set encoding: UTF-8</p> -<p>***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE BARK CANOES AND SKIN BOATS OF NORTH AMERICA***</p> -<p> </p> -<h3>E-text prepared by<br /> - Richard Tonsing, Chris Curnow, Joseph Cooper,<br /> - and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team<br /> - (http://www.pgdp.net)</h3> -<p> </p> -<div class="tnotes covernote"> - <p>The cover image was created by the transcriber and is placed in the public domain.</p> -</div> -<p> </p> -<hr class="full" /> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_i" id="Page_i">[Pg i]</a></span></p> -<div id="halftitle"> - -<p class="ph1">SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION<br /> - -UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM</p> - -<div class="figright" style="width: 606px;"> -<img src="images/i001.jpg" width="606" height="606" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p class="center">BULLETIN 230</p> - -<p class="center">WASHINGTON, D. C.</p> - -<p class="center">1964</p></div> -</div> -</div> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_ii" id="Page_ii">[Pg ii]</a><br /><a name="Page_iii" id="Page_iii">[Pg iii]</a></span></p> -<div id="titlepage"> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - -<p class="large">MUSEUM OF HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY</p> - - - - -<h1>The<br /> -Bark Canoes and Skin Boats<br /> -of<br /> -North America</h1> - - -<p class="large"><em>Edwin Tappan Adney</em><br /> -<span class="medium">and</span><br /> -<em>Howard I. Chapelle</em></p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Curator of Transportation</span></p> - -<p>B031222CA</p> - -<p class="large">SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, WASHINGTON, D. C.<br /> -1964 -</p> -</div> - -<p class="p6"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_iv" id="Page_iv">[Pg iv]</a></span></p> - -<p class="ph2"><cite>Publications of the United States National Museum</cite> -</p> - -<p>The scholarly and scientific publications of the United States National Museum include two series, -<cite>Proceedings of the United States National Museum</cite> and <cite>United States National Museum Bulletin</cite>.</p> - -<p>In these series the Museum publishes original articles and monographs dealing with the collections and work -of its constituent museums—The Museum of Natural History and the Museum of History and Technology—setting -forth newly acquired facts in the fields of Anthropology, Biology, History, Geology, and Technology. -Copies of each publication are distributed to libraries, to cultural and scientific organizations, and to specialists -and others interested in the different subjects.</p> - -<p>The <cite>Proceedings</cite>, begun in 1878, are intended for the publication, in separate form, of shorter papers from -the Museum of Natural History. These are gathered in volumes, octavo in size, with the publication date of -each paper recorded in the table of contents of the volume.</p> - -<p>In the <cite>Bulletin</cite> series, the first of which was issued in 1875, appear longer, separate publications consisting -of monographs (occasionally in several parts) and volumes in which are collected works on related subjects. -<cite>Bulletins</cite> are either octavo or quarto in size, depending on the needs of the presentation. Since 1902 papers -relating to the botanical collections of the Museum of Natural History have been published in the <cite>Bulletin</cite> -series under the heading <cite>Contributions from the United States National Herbarium</cite>, and since 1959, in <cite>Bulletins</cite> -titled "Contributions from the Museum of History and Technology," have been gathered shorter papers -relating to the collections and research of that Museum.</p> - -<p>This work, the result of cooperation with the Mariners' Museum, the Stefansson Library, the Museum of -the American Indian, Heye Foundation, and the American Museum of Natural History, forms number 230 -of the <cite>Bulletin</cite> series.</p> - -<p class="right"><span class="smcap">Frank A. Taylor</span></p> - -<p class="right"><em>Director, United States National Museum</em></p> - -<p class="center p6">U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE<br /> -WASHINGTON: 1964</p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p class="center">For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office<br /> -Washington, D.C. 20402—Price $6.75 -</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_v" id="Page_v">[Pg v]</a></span></p> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2><em>Special acknowledgment</em></h2> - - -<p><em>Is here gratefully made to The Mariners' Museum, -Newport News, Virginia, under whose auspices was -prepared and with whose cooperation is here published -the part of this work based on the Adney papers; -also to the late Vilhjalmur Stefansson, for whose</em> -<span class="smcap">Encyclopedia Arctica</span> <em>was written the chapter -on Arctic skin boats.</em></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_vi" id="Page_vi">[Pg vi]</a><br /><a name="Page_vii" id="Page_vii">[Pg vii]</a></span></p> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2><em>Contents</em></h2> - - -<div class="center"> -<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Contents"> - <tr> - <th></th> - <th></th> - <th><em>Page</em></th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td>Introduction</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_1">1</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1.</td> - <td>Early History</td> - <td class="tdr">7</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">2.</td> - <td>Materials and Tools</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_14">14</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">3.</td> - <td>Form and Construction</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_27">27</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Form</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_27">27</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Construction</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_36">36</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">4.</td> - <td>Eastern Maritime Region</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_58">58</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Micmac</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_58">58</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Malecite</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_70">70</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">St. Francis</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_88">88</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Beothuk</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_94">94</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">5.</td> - <td>Central Canada</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_99">99</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Eastern Cree</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_101">101</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Têtes de Boule</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_107">107</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Algonkin</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_113">113</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Ojibway</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_122">122</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Western Cree</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_132">132</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Fur-trade Canoes</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_135">135</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">6.</td> - <td>Northwestern Canada</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_154">154</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Narrow-Bottom Canoe</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_155">155</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Kayak-Form Canoe</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_158">158</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Sturgeon-Nose Canoe</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_168">168</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">7.</td> - <td>Arctic Skin Boats: by <em>Howard I. Chapelle</em></td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_174">174</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">The Umiak</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_181">181</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">The Kayak</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_190">190</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">8.</td> - <td>Temporary Craft</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_212">212</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Bark Canoes</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_212">212</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdp">Skin Boats</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_219">219</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td>Retrospect</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_221">221</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td>Appendix: The Kayak Roll, by <em>John D. Heath</em></td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_223">223</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td>Bibliography</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_231">231</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td>Index</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_235">235</a></td> - </tr> -</table></div> -<div class="chapter"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_viii" id="Page_viii">[Pg viii]</a></span></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2><em>Illustrations</em></h2> - - - -<div class="center"> -<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Illustrations"> - <tr> - <th><em>Figure</em></th> - <th></th> - <th><em>Page</em></th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>Fur-trade canoe on the Missinaibi River, 1901. (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_2">2</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">2</td> - <td>Page from a manuscript of 1771, "Observations on Hudsons Bay," by Alexander Graham, Factor. (In archives of Hudson's Bay Company.)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_9">9</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">3</td> - <td>Canoes from LaHontan's <cite>Nouveaux Voyages ... dans l'Amerique septentrionale</cite>, showing crude representations typical of early writers.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_11">11</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">4</td> - <td>Lines of an old birch-bark canoe, probably Micmac, brought to England in 1749 from New England. (<em>From Admiralty Collection of Draughts, National Maritime Museum, Greenwich.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_12">12</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">5</td> - <td>Ojibway Indian carrying spruce roots, Lac Seul, Ont., 1919. (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_15">15</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">6</td> - <td>Roll of bark for a hunting canoe. Algonkin Reserve, at Golden Lake, Ont., 1927.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_16">16</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">7</td> - <td>Sketch: wood-splitting techniques, cedar and spruce.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_17">17</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">8-19</td> - <td>Sketches of tools: 8, stone axe; 9, stone hammer, wedge, and knife; 10, mauls and driving sticks; 11, stone scraper; 12, bow drill; 13, modern Hudson Bay axe; 14, steel fur-trade tomahawk; 15, steel canoe awls; 16, crooked knives; 17, froe; 18, shaving horse; 19, bucksaw.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_17">17</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">20</td> - <td>Peeling, rolling, and transporting bark. (<em>Sketches by Adney.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_25">25</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">21</td> - <td>Sketch: Building frame for a large canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_26">26</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">22, 23 </td> - <td>Sketches: Effect on canoe bottom of crimping and goring bark.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_30">30</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">24</td> - <td>Sketch: Canoe formed by use of gores and panels.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_31">31</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">25</td> - <td>Gunwale ends nailed and wrapped with spruce roots. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_31">31</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">26</td> - <td>Gunwales and stakes on building bed, plan view. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_32">32</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">27</td> - <td>Photo: Gunwale lashings, examples made by Adney.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_33">33</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">28</td> - <td>Photo: Gunwale-end lashings, examples made by Adney.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_33">33</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">29</td> - <td>Sketch: Splints arranged in various ways to sheath the bottom of a canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_34">34</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">30</td> - <td>End details, including construction of stem-pieces. (<em>Sketches by Adney.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_35">35</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">31</td> - <td>Lines of 2½-fathom St. John River Malecite canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_36">36</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">32</td> - <td>Malecite canoe building, 1910. (Canadian Geological Survey photos.)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_39">39</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">33</td> - <td>First stage of canoe construction: assembled gunwale frame is used to locate stakes temporarily on building bed. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_40">40</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">34</td> - <td>Second stage of canoe construction: bark cover is laid out on the building bed, and the gunwales are in place upon it. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_41">41</a> <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_ix" id="Page_ix">[Pg ix]</a></span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">35</td> - <td>Photo: Malecite canoe builders near Fredericton, N.B., using wooden plank building bed.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_42">42</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">36</td> - <td>Sketch: Two common styles of root stitching used in bark canoes.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_43">43</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">37</td> - <td>Comparison of canoe on the building bed and canoe when first removed from building bed during fifth stage of construction. (<em>Detail sketches by Adney.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_44">44</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">38</td> - <td>Third stage of canoe construction: the bark cover is shaped on the building bed. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_45">45</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">39</td> - <td>Cross section of canoe on building bed during third and fourth stages of construction. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_46">46</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">40</td> - <td>Sketch: Multiple cross section through one side of a canoe on the building bed, at the headboard, middle, first, and second thwarts.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_46">46</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">41</td> - <td>Fourth stage of canoe construction: bark cover has been shaped and all stakes placed. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_47">47</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">42</td> - <td>Fifth stage of canoe construction: canoe is removed from building bed and set on horses to shape ends and complete sewing. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_49">49</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">43</td> - <td>Ribs being dried and shaped for Ojibway canoe. (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_50">50</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">44</td> - <td>Sketch: Details of ribs and method of shaping them in pairs.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_51">51</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">45</td> - <td>Sixth stage of canoe construction: in this stage splints for sheathing (upper left) are fixed in place and held by temporary ribs (lower right) under the gunwales. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_53">53</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">46</td> - <td>General details of birch-bark canoe construction, in a drawing by Adney. (From <cite>Harper's Young People</cite>, supplement, July 29, 1890.)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_54">54</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">47</td> - <td>Gunwale construction and thwart or crossbar fastenings, as shown in a sketch by Adney. (<cite>Harper's Young People</cite>, supplement, July 29, 1890.)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_56">56</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">48</td> - <td>"Peter Joe at Work." Drawing by Adney for his article "How an Indian Birch-Bark Canoe is Made." (<cite>Harper's Young People</cite>, supplement, July 29, 1890.)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_57">57</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">49</td> - <td>Lines of 2-fathom Micmac pack, or woods, canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_59">59</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">50</td> - <td>Lines of 2-fathom Micmac pack, or woods, canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_60">60</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">51</td> - <td>Lines of 2-fathom Micmac pack, or woods, canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_61">61</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">52</td> - <td>Lines of 2½-fathom Micmac big-river canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_62">62</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">53</td> - <td>Lines of 3-fathom Micmac ocean canoe fitted for sailing.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_63">63</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">54</td> - <td>Micmac rough-water canoe, Bathurst, N.B. (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_64">64</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">55</td> - <td>Micmac Woods canoe, built by Malecite Jim Paul at St. Mary's Reserve in 1911. (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_64">64</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">56</td> - <td>Micmac rough-water canoe fitted for sailing. (<em>Photo W. H. Mechling, 1913.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_65">65</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">57</td> - <td>Micmac rough-water canoe, Bay Chaleur. (<em>Photo H. V. Henderson, West Bathurst, N.B.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_66">66</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">58</td> - <td>Micmac rough-water sailing canoe, Bay Chaleur. (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_66">66</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">59</td> - <td>Drawing: Details of Micmac canoes, including mast and sail.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_67">67</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">60</td> - <td>Micmac canoe, Bathurst, N.B. (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_68">68</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">61</td> - <td>Micmac woman gumming seams of canoe, Bathurst, N.B., 1913. (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_69">69</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">62</td> - <td>Lines of 2½-fathom Malecite river canoe, 19th century. Old form with raking ends and much sheer.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_71">71</a><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_x" id="Page_x">[Pg x]</a></span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">63</td> - <td>Lines of old form of Malecite-Abnaki 2½-fathom ocean canoe of the Penobscots in the Peabody Museum, Salem, Mass.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_72">72</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">64</td> - <td>Lines of large 3-fathom ocean canoe of the Passamaquoddy porpoise hunters.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_73">73</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">65</td> - <td>Lines of old form of Passamaquoddy 2½-fathom ocean canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_74">74</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">66</td> - <td>Lines of Malecite racing canoe of 1888, showing <strong>V</strong>-shaped keel piece between sheathing and bark to form deadrise.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_75">75</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">67</td> - <td>Lines of sharp-ended 2½-fathom Passamaquoddy hunting canoe, for use on tidal river.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_76">76</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">68</td> - <td>Lines of Malecite 2½-fathom St. Lawrence River canoe, probably a hybrid model.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_77">77</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">69</td> - <td>Lines of Malecite 2½-fathom river canoe of 1890 from the Rivière du Loup region.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_78">78</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">70</td> - <td>Lines of Modern (1895) 2½-fathom Malecite St. John River canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_79">79</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">71</td> - <td>Drawing: Malecite canoe details, gear, and gunwale decorations.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_80">80</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">72</td> - <td>Drawing: Malecite canoe details, stem profiles, paddles, sail rig, and salmon spear.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_81">81</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">73</td> - <td>Lines and decoration reconstructed from a very old model of a St. John River ancient woods, or pack, canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_81">81</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">74</td> - <td>Lines of last known Passamaquoddy decorated ocean canoe to be built (1898).</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_82">82</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">75</td> - <td>Drawing: Malecite canoe details and decorations.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_83">83</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">76</td> - <td>Sketches: Wulegessis decorations.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_84">84</a>-85</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">77</td> - <td>Photo: End decorations, Passamaquoddy canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_86">86</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">78</td> - <td>Photo: End decorations, Passamaquoddy canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_87">87</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">79</td> - <td>Photo: Passamaquoddy decorated canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_87">87</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">80</td> - <td>Lines of 2-fathom St. Francis canoe of about 1865</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_89">89</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">81</td> - <td>Lines of "14-foot" St. Francis canoe of about 1910</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_90">90</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">82</td> - <td>Lines of 2½-fathom low-ended St. Francis canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_91">91</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">83</td> - <td>Lines of St. Francis-Abnaki canoe for open water, a type that became extinct before 1890. From Adney's drawings of a canoe formerly in the Museum of Natural History.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_92">92</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">84</td> - <td>Photo: Model of a St. Francis-Abnaki canoe under construction.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_93">93</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">85</td> - <td>Photo: St. Francis-Abnaki canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_93">93</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">86</td> - <td>A 15-foot Beothuk canoe of Newfoundland (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_95">95</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">87</td> - <td>Lines based on Adney's reconstruction of 15-foot Beothuk canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_97">97</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">88</td> - <td>Montagnais crooked canoe. (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_100">100</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">89</td> - <td>Birch-bark crooked canoe, Ungava Cree. (<em>Smithsonian Institution photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_101">101</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">90</td> - <td>Lines of 3-fathom Nascapee canoe, eastern Labrador.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_102">102</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">91</td> - <td>Lines of 2-fathom Montagnais canoe of southern Labrador and Quebec.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_102">102</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">92</td> - <td>Lines of 2½-fathom crooked canoe of the Ungava Peninsula.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_103">103</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">93</td> - <td>Lines of hybrid-model 2-fathom Nascapee canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_103">103</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">94</td> - <td>Eastern Cree crooked canoe of rather moderate sheer and rocker. (<em>Canadian Pacific Railway Company photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_104">104</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">95</td> - <td>Photo: Straight and crooked canoes, eastern Cree.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_105">105</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">96</td> - <td>Montagnais canvas-covered crooked canoe under construction. (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_106">106</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">97</td> - <td>Sketch: Fiddlehead of scraped bark on bow and stern of a Montagnais birch-bark canoe at Seven Islands, Que., 1915.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_107">107</a><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xi" id="Page_xi">[Pg xi]</a></span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">98</td> - <td>Sketch: Disk of colored porcupine quills decorating canoe found at Namaquagon, Que., 1898.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_107">107</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">99</td> - <td>Fleet of 51 birch-bark canoes of the Têtes de Boule Indians, assembled at the Hudson's Bay Company post, Grand Lake Victoria, Procession Sunday, August 1895. (<em>Photo, Post-Factor L. A. Christopherson.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_108">108</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">100</td> - <td>Photo: Têtes de Boule canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_109">109</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">101</td> - <td>Photo: Têtes de Boule canoes.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_110">110</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">102</td> - <td>Lines of 1½-fathom Têtes de Boule hunting canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_111">111</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">103</td> - <td>Lines of 2½-fathom Têtes de Boule canoe, with construction details.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_111">111</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">104</td> - <td>Lines of 2-fathom Têtes de Boule hunting canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_112">112</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">105</td> - <td>Photo: Old Algonkin canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_113">113</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">106</td> - <td>Lines of 2½-fathom old model, Ottawa River, Algonkin canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_114">114</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">107</td> - <td>Photo: Models made by Adney of Algonkin and Ojibway stem-pieces.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_115">115</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">108</td> - <td>Lines of light, fast 2-fathom hunting canoe of the old Algonkin model.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_116">116</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">109</td> - <td>Lines of hybrid 2½- and 2-fathom Algonkin canoes.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_117">117</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">110</td> - <td>Lines of 2-fathom Algonkin hunter's canoe, without headboards.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_118">118</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">111</td> - <td>Photo: Algonkin canoe, old type.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_119">119</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">112</td> - <td>Photo: Algonkin "Wabinaki Chiman"</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_120">120</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">113</td> - <td>Algonkin canoe decorations, Golden Lake, Ont.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_121">121</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">114</td> - <td>Lines of 2-fathom Ojibway hunter's canoe, built in 1873</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_123">123</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">115</td> - <td>Lines of 3-fathom Ojibway old model rice-harvesting canoe and 2-fathom hunter's canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_124">124</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">116</td> - <td>Lines of 3-fathom Ojibway freight canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_124">124</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">117</td> - <td>Lines of 2½-fathom Ojibway, old form, canoe and a 16-foot long-nose Cree-Ojibway canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_125">125</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">118</td> - <td>Eastern Ojibway canoe, old form. (<em>Canadian Pacific Railway photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_126">126</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">119</td> - <td>Photo: Ojibway Long-Nose canoe, Rainy Lake District.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_126">126</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">120</td> - <td>Lines of 2-fathom Ojibway hunter's canoe, 1849 and long-nose Minnesota Ojibway rice-harvesting canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_127">127</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">121</td> - <td>Photos: Canoe building, Lac Seul, Canada, 1918</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_128">128</a>-129</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">122</td> - <td>Long Lake Ojibway long-nose canoe. (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_130">130</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">123</td> - <td>Photo: Ojibway 19-foot canoe with 13 Indians aboard (1913)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_131">131</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">124</td> - <td>Lines of 2½-fathom western Cree canoe, Winisk River district, northwest of James Bay.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_133">133</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">125</td> - <td>Lines of a 6-fathom fur-trade canoe of the early 19th century.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_134">134</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">126</td> - <td>Inboard profile of a 6-fathom fur-trade canoe, and details of construction, fitting, and decoration.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_135">135</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">127</td> - <td>Lines of small 3-fathom north canoe of the Têtes de Boule model.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_136">136</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">128</td> - <td>Photo: Models of fur-trade canoes.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_137">137</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">129</td> - <td>"Fur-Trade Maître Canot With Passengers." From an oil painting by Hopkins (<em>Public Archives of Canada photo</em>).</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_138">138</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">130</td> - <td>"Bivouac in Expedition in Hudson's Bay Canoe." From an oil painting by Hopkins (<em>Public Archives of Canada photo</em>).</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_139">139</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">131</td> - <td>Ojibway 3-fathom fur-trade canoe, a cargo-carrying type, marked by cut-under end profiles, that was built as late as 1894.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_139">139</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">132</td> - <td>Lines of a 5-fathom fur-trade canoe, Grand Lake Victoria Post, Hudson's Bay Company.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_140">140</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">133</td> - <td>"Hudson's Bay Canoe Running the Rapids." From an oil painting by Hopkins (<em>Public Archives of Canada photo</em>).</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_141">141</a> <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xii" id="Page_xii">[Pg xii]</a></span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">134</td> - <td>"Repairing the Canoe." From an oil painting by Hopkins (<em>Public Archives of Canada photo</em>).</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_142">142</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">135</td> - <td>Lines of a 4½-fathom Hudson's Bay Company "North Canoe," built by Crees near James Bay, mid-19th century.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_143">143</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">136</td> - <td>Photo: 5-fathom fur-trade canoe from Brunswick House, a Hudson's Bay Company post.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_144">144</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">137</td> - <td>Fur-trade canoes on the Missinaibi River, 1901. (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_145">145</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">138</td> - <td>Photo: Fur-trade canoe brigade from Christopherson's Hudson's Bay Company post, about 1885.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_146">146</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">139</td> - <td>Forest rangers, Lake Timagami, Ontario. (<em>Canadian Pacific Railway Company photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_147">147</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">140</td> - <td>Photo: Models made by Adney of fur-trade canoe stem-pieces.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_149">149</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">141</td> - <td>Photo: Models by Adney of fur-trade canoe stem-pieces.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_151">151</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">142</td> - <td>Portaging a 4½-fathom fur-trade canoe, about 1902, near the head of the Ottawa River. (<em>Canadian Pacific Railway Company photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_152">152</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">143</td> - <td>Decorations, fur-trade canoes (<em>Watercolor sketch by Adney.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_153">153</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">144</td> - <td>Lines of 2-fathom Chipewyan hunter's canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_155">155</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">145</td> - <td>Lines of 2½-fathom Chipewyan and 3-fathom Dogrib cargo, or family, canoes.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_156">156</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">146</td> - <td>Lines of 3-fathom Slavey and 2½-fathom Algonkin-type Athabascan plank-stem canoes.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_157">157</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">147</td> - <td>Lines of Eskimo kayak-form birch-bark canoe from Alaskan Coast.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_159">159</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">148</td> - <td>Lines of Athabascan hunting canoes of the kayak form.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_160">160</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">149</td> - <td>Lines of extinct forms of Loucheux and bateau-form canoes, reconstructed from old models.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_161">161</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">150</td> - <td>Lines of kayak-form canoes of the Alaskan Eskimos and Canadian Athabascan Indians.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_163">163</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">151</td> - <td>Lines of kayak-form canoe of British Columbia and upper Yukon valley.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_164">164</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">152</td> - <td>Construction of kayak-form canoe of the lower Yukon, showing rigid bottom frame. (<em>Smithsonian Institution photo.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_165">165</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">153</td> - <td>Photo: Model of an extinct form of Athabascan type birch-bark canoe, of British Columbia. In Peabody Museum, Harvard University.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_167">167</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">154</td> - <td>Lines of sturgeon-nose bark canoe of the Kutenai and Shuswap.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_169">169</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">155</td> - <td>Ojibway canoe construction. (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photos.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_170">170</a>-171</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">156</td> - <td>Photo: Indians with canoe at Alert Bay, on Cormorant Island, B. C.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_173">173</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">157</td> - <td>Eighteenth-century lines drawing of a kayak, from Labrador or southern Baffin Island.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_175">175</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">158</td> - <td>Western Alaskan umiak with eight women paddling, Cape Prince of Wales, Alaska, 1936. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_177">177</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">159</td> - <td>Western Alaskan umiak being beached, Cape Prince of Wales, Alaska, 1936. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_177">177</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">160</td> - <td>Repairing umiak frame at St. Lawrence Island, Alaska, 1930. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_178">178</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">161</td> - <td>Eskimo woman splitting walrus hide to make umiak cover, St. Lawrence Island, Alaska, 1930. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_178">178</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">162</td> - <td>Fitting split walrus-hide cover to umiak at St. Lawrence Island, Alaska, 1930. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_179">179</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">163</td> - <td>Outboard motor installed on umiak, Cape Prince of Wales, Alaska, 1936. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_179">179</a> <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xiii" id="Page_xiii">[Pg xiii]</a></span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">164</td> - <td>Launching umiak in light surf, Cape Prince of Wales, Alaska, 1936. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_179">179</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">165</td> - <td>Umiaks on racks, in front of village on Little Diomede Island, July 30, 1936. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_181">181</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">166</td> - <td>Umiak covered with split walrus hide, Cape Prince of Wales, Alaska. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_183">183</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">167</td> - <td>Lines of small umiak for walrus hunting, west coast of Alaska. 1888-89</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_184">184</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">168</td> - <td>Umiaks near Cape Prince of Wales, Alaska, showing walrus hide cover and lacing. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_185">185</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">169</td> - <td>Lines of umiak, west coast of Alaska, King Island, 1886</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_186">186</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">170</td> - <td>Making the blind seam: two stages of method used by the Eskimo to join skins together.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_186">186</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">171</td> - <td>Lines of north Alaskan whaling umiak of about 1890</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_187">187</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">172</td> - <td>Lines of Baffin Island umiak, 1885. Drawn from model and detailed measurements of a single boat.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_188">188</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">173</td> - <td>Lines of east Greenland umiak, drawn from measurements taken off by a U.S. Army officer in 1945.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_189">189</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">174</td> - <td>Frame of kayak, Nunivak Island, Alaska. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_191">191</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">175</td> - <td>Frame of kayak at Nunivak Island, Alaska, 1927. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_193">193</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">176</td> - <td>Lines of Koryak kayak, drawn from damaged kayak in the American Museum of Natural History, 1948.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_195">195</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">177</td> - <td>Lines of Kodiak Island kayak, 1885, in U.S. National Museum.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_196">196</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">178</td> - <td>Lines of Aleutian kayak, Unalaska, 1894, in U.S. National Museum.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_196">196</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">179</td> - <td>Lines of kayak from Russian Siberia, 2-hole Aleutian type, in Washington State Historical Society and Museum. Taken off by John Heath, 1962.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_197">197</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">180</td> - <td>Lines of Nunivak Island kayak, Alaska, 1889, in U.S. National Museum.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_198">198</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">181</td> - <td>Lines of King Island kayak, Alaska, 1888, in U.S. National Museum.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_198">198</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">182</td> - <td>Lines of Norton Sound kayak, Alaska, 1889, in U.S. National Museum.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_198">198</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">183</td> - <td>Nunivak Island kayak with picture of mythological water monster Palriayuk painted along gunwale. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_199">199</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">184</td> - <td>Photo: Nunivak Island kayak in U.S. National Museum.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_199">199</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">185</td> - <td>Western Alaskan kayak, Cape Prince of Wales, 1936. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_200">200</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">186</td> - <td>Lines of Kotzebue Sound kayak, in Mariners' Museum.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_201">201</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">187</td> - <td>Lines of Point Barrow kayak, Alaska, 1888, in U.S. National Museum.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_201">201</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">188</td> - <td>Lines of Mackenzie Delta kayak, in Museum of the American Indian.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_201">201</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">189</td> - <td>Photo: Kayak from Point Barrow, Alaska, in U.S. National Museum.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_202">202</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">190</td> - <td>Photo: Cockpit of kayak from Point Barrow.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_202">202</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">191</td> - <td>Lines of kayak in U.S. National Museum.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_203">203</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">192</td> - <td>Lines of kayak from Coronation Gulf, Canada.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_203">203</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">193</td> - <td>Lines of Caribou Eskimo kayak, Canada, in American Museum of Natural History.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_203">203</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">194</td> - <td>Lines of Netsilik Eskimo kayak, King William Island, Canada, in the American Museum of Natural History.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_203">203</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">195</td> - <td>Lines of old kayak from vicinity of Southampton Island, Canada.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_205">205</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">196</td> - <td>Lines of Baffin Island kayak, from Cape Dorset, Canada, in the Museum of the American Indian.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_205">205</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">197</td> - <td>Lines of kayak from north Labrador, Canada, in the Museum of the American Indian.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_207">207</a> <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xiv" id="Page_xiv">[Pg xiv]</a></span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">198</td> - <td>Lines of Labrador kayak, Canada, in the U.S. National Museum.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_207">207</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">199</td> - <td>Lines of north Greenland kayak, in the Museum of the American Indian.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_207">207</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">200</td> - <td>Lines of north Greenland kayak, in the Peabody Museum, Salem, Mass.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_207">207</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">201</td> - <td>Photo: Profile of Greenland kayak from Disko Bay, in the National Museum.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_208">208</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">202</td> - <td>Photo: Deck of Greenland kayak from Disko Bay.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_208">208</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">203</td> - <td>Photo: Cockpit of Greenland kayak from Disko Bay.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_209">209</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">204</td> - <td>Photo: Bow view of Greenland kayak from Disko Bay.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_209">209</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">205</td> - <td>Lines of northwestern Greenland kayak, in the U.S. National Museum.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_210">210</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">206</td> - <td>Lines of southwestern Greenland kayak, 1883, in the U.S. National Museum.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_210">210</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">207</td> - <td>Lines of southwestern Greenland kayak, in the Peabody Museum, Salem, Mass.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_210">210</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">208</td> - <td>Lines of south Greenland kayak, in the American Museum of Natural History.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_211">211</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">209</td> - <td>Lines of Malecite and Iroquois temporary canoes.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_214">214</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">210</td> - <td>Photo: Model of hickory-bark canoe under construction, in the Mariner's Museum.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_217">217</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">211</td> - <td>Sketch: Detail of thwart used in Malecite temporary spruce-bark canoe.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_217">217</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">212</td> - <td>Iroquois temporary elm-bark canoe, after a drawing of 1849.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_218">218</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">213</td> - <td>Large moosehide canoe of upper Gravel River, Mackenzie valley. (<em>Photo, George M. Douglas.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_221">221</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">214</td> - <td>Sketch: Standard Greenland roll.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_224">224</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">215</td> - <td>Sketch: Critical stage of a capsize recovery.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_225">225</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">216</td> - <td>Sketch: Hand positions used with the standard Greenland roll.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_226">226</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">217</td> - <td>Sketch: Kayak rescue, bow-grab method.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_226">226</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">218</td> - <td>Sketch: Kayak rescue, paddle-grab method.</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_226">226</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">219</td> - <td>Preparing for demonstration of Eskimo roll, Igdlorssuit, West Greenland. (<em>Photo by Kenneth Taylor.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_227">227</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">220</td> - <td>Getting aboard kayak. (<em>Photo by Kenneth Taylor.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_228">228</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">221</td> - <td>Fully capsized kayak. (<em>Photo by Kenneth Taylor.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_228">228</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">222</td> - <td>Emerging from roll. (<em>Photo by Kenneth Taylor.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_229">229</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">223</td> - <td>Emerging from roll. (<em>Photo by Kenneth Taylor.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_229">229</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">224</td> - <td>Righting the kayak. (<em>Photo by Kenneth Taylor.</em>)</td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_229">229</a></td> - </tr> -</table></div><p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xv" id="Page_xv">[Pg xv]</a></span></p> - -<p class="ph1"><em>The -Bark Canoes and Skin Boats -of -North America</em> -</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xvi" id="Page_xvi">[Pg xvi]</a><br /><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1">[Pg 1]</a><br /> - -<a name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[Pg 2]</a></span></p> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2>INTRODUCTION</h2> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i018.jpg" width="700" height="567" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 1</p> - -<p class="center"><span class="smcap">Fur-Trade Canoe on the Missinaibi River</span>, 1901. (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[Pg 3]</a></span></p> - -<p>The bark canoes of the North American Indians, -particularly those of birch bark, were among the most -highly developed of manually propelled primitive -watercraft. Built with Stone Age tools from materials -available in the areas of their use, their design, size, and -appearance were varied so as to create boats suitable to -the many and different requirements of their users. -The great skill exhibited in their design and construction -shows that a long period of development must have -taken place before they became known to white men.</p> - -<p>The Indian bark canoes were most efficient watercraft -for use in forest travel; they were capable of -being propelled easily with a single-bladed paddle. -This allowed the paddler, unlike the oarsman, to -face the direction of travel, a necessity in obstructed -or shoal waters and in fast-moving streams. The -canoes, being light, could be carried overland for -long distances, even where trails were rough or nonexistent. -Yet they could carry heavy loads in shallow -water and could be repaired in the forest without -special tools.</p> - -<p>Bark canoes were designed for various conditions: -some for use in rapid streams, some for quiet waters, -some for the open waters of lakes, some for use along -the coast. Most were intended for portage in overland -transportation as well. They were built in a -variety of sizes, from small one-man hunting and -fishing canoes to canoes large enough to carry a ton -of cargo and a crew, or a war-party, or one or more -families moving to new habitations. Some canoes -were designed so that they could be used, turned -bottom up, for shelter ashore.</p> - -<p>The superior qualities of the bark canoes of North -America are indicated by the white man's unqualified -adoption of the craft. Almost as soon as he arrived -in North America, the white man learned to use the -canoe, without alteration, for wilderness travel. -Much later, when the original materials used in -building were no longer readily available, canvas was -substituted for bark, and nails for the lashings and -sewing; but as long as manual propulsion was used, -the basic models of the bark canoes were retained. -Indeed, the models and the proportions used in many -of these old bark canoes are retained in the canoes -used today in the wildernesses of northern Canada -and Alaska, and the same styles may be seen in the -canoes used for pleasure in the summer resorts of -Europe and America. The bark canoe of North -America shares with the Eskimo kayak the distinction -of being one of the few primitive craft of which the -basic models are retained in the boats of civilized man.</p> - -<p>It may seem strange, then, that the literature on -American bark canoes is so limited. Many possible -explanations for this might be offered. One is that -the art of bark canoe building died early, as the -Indians came into contact with the whites, before -there was any attempt fully to record Indian culture. -The bark canoe is fragile compared to the dugout. -The latter might last hundreds of years submerged -in a bog, but the bark canoe will not last more than -a few decades. It is difficult, in fact, to preserve bark -canoes in museums, for as they age and the bark -becomes brittle, they are easily damaged in moving -and handling.</p> - -<p>Some small models made by Indians are preserved, -but, like most models made by primitive men, these -are not to any scale and do not show with equal -accuracy all parts of the canoes they represent. They -are, therefore, of value only when full-sized canoes -of the same type are available for comparison, but -this is too rarely the case with the American Indian -bark canoes. Today the builders who might have -added to our knowledge are long dead.</p> - -<p>It might be said fairly that those who had the best -opportunities to observe, including many whose profession -it was to record the culture of primitive man, -showed little interest in watercraft and have left us -only the most meager descriptions. Even when the -watercraft of the primitive man had obviously played -a large part in his culture, we rarely find a record complete -enough to allow the same accuracy of reproduction -that obtains, say, for his art, his dress, or his pottery. -Once lost, the information on primitive watercraft -cannot, as a rule, be recovered.</p> - -<p>However, as far as the bark canoes of North America -are concerned, there was another factor. The student<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[Pg 4]</a></span> -who became sufficiently interested to begin research -soon discovered that one man was devoting his lifetime -to the study of these craft; that, in a field with -few documentary records and fewer artifacts, he had -had opportunities for detailed examination not open -to younger men; and that it was widely expected that -this man would eventually publish his findings. Hence -many, who might otherwise have carried on some research -and writing, turned to other subjects. Practically, -then, the whole field had been left to Edwin -Tappan Adney.</p> - -<p>Born at Athens, Ohio, in 1868, Edwin Tappan -Adney was the son of Professor H. H. Adney, formerly -a colonel in a volunteer regiment in the Civil -War but then on the faculty of Ohio University. His -mother was Ruth Shaw Adney. Edwin Tappan -Adney did not receive a college education, but he -managed to pursue three years' study of art with The -Art Students' League of New York. Apparently he -was interested in ornithology as well as in art, and -spent much time in New York museums, where he -met Ernest Thompson Seton and other naturalists. -Being unable to afford more study in art school, he -went on what was intended to be a short vacation, in -1887, to Woodstock, New Brunswick. There he became -interested in the woods-life of Peter Joe, a -Malecite Indian who lived in a temporary camp -nearby. This life so interested the 19-year-old Ohioan -that he turned toward the career of an artist-craftsman, -recording outdoor scenes of the wilderness in -pictures.</p> - -<p>He undertook to learn the handicrafts of the Indian, -in order to picture him and his works correctly, and -lengthened his stay. In 1889, Adney and Peter Joe -each built a birch-bark canoe, Adney following and -recording every step the Indian made during construction. -The result Adney published, with sketches, -in <cite>Harper's Young People</cite> magazine, July 29, 1890, and, -in a later version, in <cite>Outing</cite>, May 1900. These, so far -as is known, are the earliest detailed descriptions of a -birch-bark canoe, with instructions for building one. -Daniel Beard considered them the best, and with -Adney's permission used the material in his <cite>Boating -Book for Boys</cite>.</p> - -<p>In 1897, Adney went to the Klondike as an artist -and special correspondent for <cite>Harper's Weekly</cite> and <cite>The -London Chronicle</cite>, to report on the gold-rush. He also -wrote a book on his experience, <cite>Klondike Stampede</cite>, -published in 1900. In 1899 he married Minnie -Bell Sharp, of Woodstock, but by 1900 Adney was -again in the Northwest, this time as special correspondent -for <cite>Colliers</cite> magazine at Nome, Alaska, during -the gold-rush of that year. On his return to New -York, Adney engaged in illustrating outdoor scenes -and also lectured for the Society for the Prevention of -Cruelty to Animals. In 1908 he contributed to a -Harper's Outdoor Book for Boys. From New York he -removed to Montreal and became a citizen of Canada, -entering the Canadian Army as a Lieutenant of Engineers -in 1916. He was assigned to the construction of -training models and was on the staff of the Military -College, mustering out in 1919. He then made his -home in Montreal, engaging in painting and illustrating. -From his early years in Woodstock he had -made a hobby of the study of birch-bark canoes, and -while in Montreal he became honorary consultant to -the Museum of McGill University, dealing with Indian -lore. By 1925 Adney had assembled a great deal -of material and, to clarify his ideas, he began construction -of scale models of each type of canoe, carrying -on a very extensive correspondence with Indians, -factors and other employees (retired and active) of the -Hudson's Bay Company, and with government agents -on the Indian Reservations. He also made a number -of expeditions to interview Indians. Possessing linguistic -ability in Malecite, he was much interested in -all the Indian languages; this helped him in his -canoe studies.</p> - -<p>Owing to personal and financial misfortunes, he -and his wife (then blind) returned in the early 1930's -to her family homestead in Woodstock, where Mrs. -Adney died in 1937. Adney continued his work -under the greatest difficulties, including ill-health, -until his death, October 10, 1950. He did not -succeed in completing his research and had not -organized his collection of papers and notes for -publication when he died.</p> - -<p>Through the farsightedness of Frederick Hill, then -director of The Mariners' Museum, Newport News, -Virginia, Adney had, ten years before his death, -deposited in the museum over a hundred of his models -and a portion of his papers. After his death his son -Glenn Adney cooperated in placing in The Mariners' -Museum the remaining papers dealing with bark -canoes, thus completing the "Adney Collection."</p> - -<p>Frederick Hill's appreciation of the scope and value -of the collection prompted him to seek my assistance -in organizing this material with a view to publication. -Though the Adney papers were apparently complete -and were found, upon careful examination, to -contain an immense amount of valuable information, -they were in a highly chaotic state. At the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[Pg 5]</a></span> -request of The Mariners' Museum, I have assembled -the pertinent papers and have compiled from Adney's -research notes as complete a description as I could -of bark canoes, their history, construction, decoration -and use. I had long been interested in the primitive -watercraft of the Americas, but I was one of those -who had discontinued research on bark canoes upon -learning of Adney's work. The little I had accomplished -dealt almost entirely with the canoes of Alaska -and British Columbia; from these I had turned to -dugouts and to the skin boats of the Eskimo. Therefore -I have faced with much diffidence the task of -assembling and preparing the Adney papers for -publication, particularly since it was not always -clear what Adney had finally decided about certain -matters pertaining to canoes. His notes were seldom -arranged in a sequence that would enable the reader -to decide which, of a number of solutions or opinions -given, were Adney's final ones.</p> - -<p>Adney's interest in canoes, as canoes, was very great, -but his interest in anthropology led him to form many -opinions about pre-Columbian migrations of Indian -tribes and about the significance of the decorations -used in some canoes. His papers contain considerable -discussion of these matters, but they are in -such state that only an ethnologist could edit and -evaluate them. In addition, my own studies lead me -to conclude that the mere examination of watercraft -alone is insufficient evidence upon which to base -opinions as far-reaching as those of Adney. Therefore -I have not attempted to present in this work any of -Adney's theories regarding the origin or ethnological -significance of the canoes discussed. I have followed -the same practice with those Adney papers which -concern Indian language, some of which relate to individual -tribal canoe types and are contained in the -canoe material. (Most of his papers on linguistics -are now in The Peabody Museum, Salem, -Massachusetts.)</p> - -<p>The strength and weaknesses of Adney's work, as -shown in his papers, drawings, and models, seem to -me to be fully apparent. That part dealing with -the eastern Indians, with whom he had long personal -contact, is by far the most voluminous and, perhaps, -the most accurate. The canoes used by Indians -west of the St. Lawrence as far as the western end of -the Great Lakes and northward to the west side of -Hudsons Bay are, with a few exceptions, covered in -somewhat less detail, but the material nonetheless -appears ample for our purpose. The canoes used in -the Canadian Northwest, except those from the -vicinity of Great Slave Lake, and in Alaska were less -well described. It appears that Adney had relatively -little opportunity to examine closely the canoes used -in Alaska, during his visit there in 1900, and that he -later was unable to visit those American museums -having collections that would have helped him with -regard to these areas. As a result, I have found it -desirable to add my own material on these areas, -drawn largely from the collections of American museums -and from my notes on construction details.</p> - -<p>An important part of Adney's work deals with the -large canoes used in the fur trade. Very little beyond -the barest of descriptions has been published and, -with but few exceptions, contemporary paintings and -drawings of these canoes are obviously faulty. Adney -was fortunate enough to have been able to begin his -research on these canoes while there were men alive -who had built and used them. As a result he obtained -information that would have been lost within, -at most, the span of a decade. His interest was doubly -keen, fortunately, for Adney not only was interested -in the canoes as such, he also valued the information -for its aid in painting historical scenes. As a result, -there is hardly a question concerning fur trade canoes, -whether of model, construction, decoration, or use, -that is not answered in his material.</p> - -<p>I have made every effort to preserve the results -of Adney's investigations of the individual types in -accurate drawings or in the descriptions in the text. -It was necessary to redraw and complete most of -Adney's scale drawings of canoes, for they were prepared -for model-building rather than for publication. -Where his drawings were incomplete, they could be -filled in from his scale models and notes. It must be -kept in mind that in drawing plans of primitive craft -the draftsman must inevitably "idealize" the subject -somewhat, since a drawing shows fair curves and -straight lines which the primitive craft do not have -in all cases. Also, the inboard profiles are diagrammatic -rather than precise, because, in the necessary reduction -of the full-size canoe to a drawing, this is the -only way to show its "form" in a manner that can be -interpreted accurately and that can be reproduced -in a model or full size, as desired. It is necessary to -add that, though most of the Adney plans were measured -from full-size canoes, some were reconstructed -from Indian models, builders' information, or other -sources. Thanks to Adney's thorough knowledge of -bark construction, the plans are highly accurate, but -there are still chances for error, and these are discussed -where they occur.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[Pg 6]</a></span></p> - -<p>Although reconstruction of extinct canoe types -is difficult, for the strange canoes of the Beothuk -Indians of Newfoundland Adney appears to have -solved some of the riddles posed by contemporary -descriptions and the few grave models extant (the -latter may have been children's toys). Whether or -not his reconstructed canoe is completely accurate -cannot be determined; at least it conforms reasonably -well to the descriptions and models, and Adney's -thorough knowledge of Indian craftsmanship gives -weight to his opinions and conclusions. This much -can be said: the resulting canoe would be a practical -one and it fulfills very nearly all descriptions of the -type known today.</p> - -<p>Adney's papers and drawings dealing with the construction -of bark canoes are most complete and -valuable. So complete as to be almost a set of "how-to-do-it" -instructions, they cover everything from the -selection of materials and use of tools to the art of -shaping and building the canoe. An understanding -of these building instructions is essential to any sound -examination of the bark canoes of North America, for -they show the limitations of the medium and indicate -what was and what was not reasonable to expect from -the finished product.</p> - -<p>In working on Adney's papers, it became obvious -that this publication could not be limited to birch-bark -canoes, since canoes built of other barks and -even some covered with skins appear in the birch bark -areas. Because of this, and to explain the technical -differences between these and the birch canoes, -skin-covered canoes have been included. I have -also appended a chapter on Eskimo skin boats and -kayaks. This material I had originally prepared for -inclusion in the <cite>Encyclopedia Arctica</cite>, publication of -which was cancelled after one volume had appeared. -As a result, the present work now covers the native -craft, exclusive of dugouts, of all North America -north of Mexico.</p> - -<p>In my opinion the value of the information gathered -by Edwin Tappan Adney is well worth the effort that -has been expended to bring it to its present form, and -any merit that attaches to it belongs largely to Adney -himself, whose long and painstaking research, carried -on under severe personal difficulties, is the foundation -of this study.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[Pg 7]</a></span></p> - -<p class="right"><span class="smcap">Howard Irving Chapelle</span> -<em>Curator of Transportation, -Museum of History and Technology</em></p> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2><em>Chapter One</em><br /> - -EARLY HISTORY</h2> - - -<p>The development of bark canoes in North -America before the arrival of the white men -cannot satisfactorily be traced. Unlike the dugout, -the bark canoe is too perishable to survive -in recognizable form buried in a bog or submerged -in water, so we have little or no visual evidence of -very great age upon which to base sound assumptions.</p> - -<p>Records of bark canoes, contained in the reports -of the early white explorers of North America, are -woefully lacking in detail, but they at least give -grounds for believing that the bark canoes even then -were highly developed, and were the product of a -very long period of existence and improvement prior -to the first appearance of Europeans.</p> - -<p>The Europeans were most impressed by the fact -that the canoes were built of bark reinforced by a -light wooden frame. The speed with which they -could be propelled by the Indians also caused -amazement, as did their light weight and marked -strength, combined with a great load-carrying -capacity in shallow water. It is remarkable, however, -that although bark canoes apparently aroused so -much admiration among Europeans, so little of -accurate and complete information appears in their -writings.</p> - -<p>With two notable exceptions, to be discussed later, -early explorers, churchmen, travellers, and writers -were generally content merely to mention the number -of persons in a canoe. The first published account of -variations in existing forms of the American bark -canoe does not occur until 1724, and the first known -illustration of a bark canoe accurate enough to -indicate its tribal designation appeared only two years -earlier. This fact makes any detailed examination -of the early books dealing with North America quite -unprofitable as far as precise information on bark -canoes is concerned.</p> - -<p>The first known reference by a Frenchman to the -bark canoe is that of Jacques Cartier, who reported -that he saw two bark canoes in 1535; he said the -two carried a total of 17 men. Champlain was the -first to record any definite dimensions of the bark -canoes; he wrote that in 1603 he saw, near what is -now Quebec, bark canoes 8 to 9 paces long and 1½ -paces wide, and he added that they might transport -as much as a pipe of wine yet were light enough to -be carried easily by one man. If a pace is taken as -about 30 inches, then the canoes would have been -between 20 and 23 feet long, between 40 and 50 -inches beam and capable of carrying about half a -ton, English measurements. These were apparently -Algonkin canoes. Champlain was impressed by -the speed of the bark canoes; he reported that his -fully manned longboat was passed by two canoes, -each with two paddlers. As will be seen, he was -perhaps primarily responsible for the rapid adoption -of bark canoes by the early French in Canada.</p> - -<p>The first English reference that has been found is in -the records of Captain George Weymouth's voyage. -He and his crew in 1603 saw bark canoes to the -westward of Penobscot Bay, on what is now the coast -of Maine. The English were impressed, just as -Champlain had been, by the speed with which canoes -having but three or four paddlers could pass his ship's -boat manned with four oarsmen. Weymouth also -speaks admiringly of the fine workmanship shown in -the structure of the canoes.</p> - -<p>When Champlain attacked the Iroquois, on what is -now Lake Champlain, he found that these Indians had -"oak" bark (more probably elm) canoes capable of -carrying 10, 15, and 18 men. This would indicate that -the maximum size of the Iroquois canoes was -about 30 to 33 feet long. The illustrations in his published -account indicate canoes about 30 feet long; but -early illustrations of this kind were too often the product -of the artist's imagination, just as were the delineations -of the animals and plants of North America.</p> - -<p>As an example of what may be deduced from other -early French accounts, Champlain in 1615, with a -companion and 12 Indians, embarked at La Chine in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[Pg 8]</a></span> -two bark canoes for a trip to the Great Lakes. He -stated that the two canoes, with men and baggage -aboard, were over-crowded. Taking one of these -canoes as having 7 men and baggage aboard, it seems -apparent that it was not much larger than the largest -of the canoes Champlain had seen in 1603 on the St. -Lawrence. But in 1672, Louis Joliet and Father -Jacques Marquette traveled in two canoes, carrying -a total of 5 French and 25 Indians—say 14 in one -canoe and 16 in the other. These canoes, then, must -have been at least 28 feet long over the gunwales, exclusive -of the round of the ends, or about 30 feet overall. -The Chevalier Henri de Tonti, one of La Salle's -officers, mentions a canoe carrying 30 men—probably -14 paddlers on each side, a steersman, and a passenger -or officer. Such a capacity might indicate a canoe -about 40 feet over the gunwales, though this seems -very long indeed; it is more probable that the canoe -would be about 36 feet long.</p> - -<p>Another of La Salle's officers, Baron de LaHontan, -gave the first reasonably complete account that has -been found of the size and character of a birch-bark -canoe. This was written at Montreal June 29, 1684. -After stating that he had seen at least a hundred bark -canoes in his journeys, he said that birch-bark canoes -ranged in length from 10 to 28 <em>pieds</em> and were capable -of carrying from 2 to 14 persons. The largest, when -carrying cargo, might be handled by three men and -could carry 2,000 pounds of freight (20 quintals). -These large canoes were safe and never upset. They -were built of bark peeled in the winter; hot water was -thrown on the bark to make it pliable, so that it could -be rolled up after it was removed from the tree. The -canoes were built of more than one piece of bark as -a rule.</p> - -<p>The large canoes, he reports, were 28 <em>pieds</em> long, -4½ <em>pieds</em> wide and 20 <em>pouces</em> deep, top of gunwale to -top of frames on bottom. The last indicates "inside" -measurement; in this the length would be over the -gunwales, not overall, and the beam inside the gunwales, -not extreme. He also says the canoes had a lining -or sheathing of cedar "splints" or plank and, inside -this, cedar ribs or frames. The bark was the -thickness of an <em>écu</em> (this coin, a crown, was a little less -than ⅛ inch thick), the sheathing the thickness of two -<em>écus</em>, and the ribs of three. The ends of the ribs were -pointed and these were seated in holes in the underside -of the gunwales. There were 8 crosspieces -(thwarts) between the gunwales (note: such a canoe -would commonly have 9 thwarts; LaHontan may -have erred here).</p> - -<p>The canoes were convenient, he says, because of -their great lightness and shallow draft, but they were -easily damaged. Hence they had to be loaded and -unloaded afloat and usually required repairs to the -bark covers at the end of each day. They had to be -staked down at night, so that a strong wind might not -damage or blow them away; but this light weight -permitted them to be carried with ease by two men, -one at each end, and this suited them for use on the -rivers of Canada, where rapids and falls made carrying -frequently necessary. These canoes were of no -value on the Lakes, LaHontan states, as they could -not be used in windy weather; though in good weather -they might cross lakes and might go four or five -leagues on open water. The canoes carried small -sails, but these could be used only with fair winds of -moderate force. The paddlers might kneel, sit, or -stand to paddle and pole the canoes. The paddle -blade was 20 <em>pouces</em> long, 6 wide, and 4 <em>lignes</em> thick; -the handle was of the diameter of a pigeon's egg and -three <em>pieds</em> long. The paddlers also had a "setting -pole," to pole the canoes in shoal water. The canoes -were alike at both ends and cost 80 <em>écus</em> (LaHontan's -cost 90), and would last not more than five or six -years. The foregoing is but a condensed extract of -LaHontan's lively account.</p> - -<p>In translating LaHontan's measurements a <em>pied</em> -is taken as 12.79 inches, a <em>pouce</em> as about 1⅛ inches. -The French fathom, or <em>brasse</em>, as used in colonial -Canada, was the length from finger-tip to finger-tip -of the arms outstretched and so varied, but may be -roughly estimated as about 64 inches; this was the -"fathom" used later in classing fur-trade canoes for -length. In English measurements his large canoe -would have been about 30 feet long over the gunwales -and, perhaps, almost 33 feet overall, 57½ inches beam -inside the gunwales, or about 60 inches extreme beam. -The depth inside would be 21 or 21¾ inches bottom -to top of gunwale amidships. LaHontan also described -the elm-bark canoes of the Iroquois as being -large and wide enough to carry 30 paddlers, 15 on a -side, sitting or standing. Here again a canoe about -40 feet long is indicated. He said that these elm-bark -canoes were crude, heavy and slow, with low sides, -so that once he and his men reached an open lake, -he no longer feared pursuit by the Iroquois in these -craft.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[Pg 9]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 461px;"> -<img src="images/i025.jpg" width="461" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 2</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Page From a Manuscript of 1771</span>, "Observations on Hudsons -Bay," by Alexander Graham, Factor, now in the archives of the -Hudson's Bay Company in London. The birch-bark canoe at -the top, the kayak below, and the paddles are obviously drawn -by one not trained to observe as an artist.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[Pg 10]</a></span></p> - -<p>From the slight evidence offered in such records as -these, it appears that the Indians may have had, when -the Europeans first reached Canada, canoes at least -as long as the 5-fathom or 5½-fathom canoe of later -times. It appears also that these dimensions applied -to the canoes of the Great Lakes area and perhaps to -the elm-bark canoes of the Iroquois as well. Probably -there were canoes as short as 10 feet, used as one-man -hunting and fishing boats, and it is plainly evident -that canoes between this length and about 24 feet -were very common. The evidence in La Salle's -time, in the last half of the seventeenth century, must -be taken with some caution, as French influence on -the size of large canoes may have by then come into -play. The comparison between the maximum length -of the Iroquois canoes, inferred from the report of -Champlain, and that suggested by LaHontan, might -indicate this growth.</p> - -<p>Beginning as early as 1660, the colonial government -of Canada issued <em>congés</em> or trading licenses. These -were first granted to the military officers or their -families; later the <em>congés</em> were issued to all approved -traders, and the fees were used for pensions of the -military personnel. Records of these licenses, preserved -from about 1700, show that three men commonly -made up the crew of a trading canoe in the -earliest years, but that by 1725 five men were employed, -by 1737 seven men, and by 1747 seven or -eight men. However, as LaHontan has stated that -in his time three men were sufficient to man a large -canoe with cargo, it is evident that the <em>congés</em> offer -unreliable data and do not necessarily prove that the -size of canoes had increased during this period. The -increase in the crews may have been brought about -by the greater distances travelled, with an increased -number of portages or, perhaps, by heavier items of -cargo.</p> - -<p>The war canoe does not appear in these early -accounts as a special type. According to the traditions -of the eastern Micmac and Malecite Indians, -their war canoes were only large enough to carry -three or four warriors and so must not have exceeded -18 feet in length. These were built for speed, narrow -and with very sharp ends; the bottom was made as -smooth as was possible. Each canoe carried the -insignia of each of its warriors, that is, his personal -mark or sign. A canoe carrying a war leader had -only his personal mark, none for the rest of the crew. -It is possible to regard the large canoes of the Iroquois -as "war canoes" since they were used in the pursuit -of French raiders in LaHontan's time. However, the -Iroquois did not build the canoes primarily for war; -in early times these fierce tribesmen preferred to take -to the warpath in the dead of winter and to raid overland -on snowshoes. In open weather, they used the -rough, short-lived and quickly built elm-bark canoes -to cross streams and lakes or to follow waterways, -discarding them when the immediate purpose was accomplished. -Probably it was the French who really -produced the bark "war canoes," for they appear to -have placed great emphasis on large canoes for use of -the military, as indicated by LaHontan's concern with -the largest canoes of his time. Perhaps large bark -canoes were once used on the Great Lakes for war -parties, but, if so, no mention of a special type has -been found in the early French accounts. The sparse -references suggest that both large and small canoes -were used by the war parties but that no special type -paralleling the characteristics of the Micmac and -Malecite war canoes existed in the West. The huge -dugout war canoe of the Indians of the Northwest -Coast appears to have had no counterpart in size -among the birch or elm bark canoes.</p> - -<p>Except for LaHontan, the early French writers who -refer to the use of sail agree that the canoes were quite -unfitted for sailing. It is extremely doubtful that the -prehistoric Indians using bark canoes were acquainted -with sails, though it is possible that the coastal Indians -might have set up a bush in the bow to utilize a -following wind and thus lighten the labor of paddling. -However, once the Indian saw the usefulness of a sail -demonstrated by white men, he was quick to adopt it; -judging from the LaHontan reference, and the use -of sails in canoes must have become well established in -some areas by 1685.</p> - -<p>One of the most important elements in the history -of the canoe is its early adoption by the French. -Champlain was the first to recommend its use by -white men. He stated that the bark canoe would be -very necessary in trade and exploration, pointing out -that in order to penetrate the back country above the -rapids at Montreal, during the short summer season, -and to come back in time to return to France for the -winter (unless the winter was to be spent in Canada) -the canoe would have to be used. With it the small -and large streams could be navigated safely and the -numerous overland carries could be quickly made. -Also, of course, Indians could be employed as crews -without the need of training them to row. This -general argument in favor of the bark canoe remained -sound after the desirability of going home to France -for the winter had ceased to influence French ideas. -The quick expansion of the French fur trade in the -early seventeenth century opened up the western -country into the Great Lakes area and to the northward. -It was soon discovered that by using canoes on -the ancient canoe route along the Ottawa River -goods could reach the western posts on the Lakes and -be transported north early enough to reach the -northernmost posts before the first freeze-up occurred. -The use of sailing vessels on the Lakes did not enable -this to be accomplished, so that until the railroads -were built in western Canada, the canoe remained the -mode of transport for the fur trade in this area. Even -after the railways were built, canoe traffic remained -important, until well into the first half of the twentieth -century as part of the local system of transportation -in the northwestern country of Canada.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[Pg 11]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 469px;"> -<img src="images/i027.jpg" width="469" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 3</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Canoes From LaHontan's</span> <cite>Nouveaux Voyages ... dans l'Amerique -Septentrionale</cite>, showing crude representations typical of early -writers.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[Pg 12]</a></span></p> - -<p>The unsatisfactory illustrations accompanying early -published accounts have been mentioned. The earliest -recognizable canoe to be shown in an illustration -is the reasonably accurate drawing of a Micmac -canoe that appears in Bacqueville de la Poterie's -book, published in 1722. LaFiteau, another Frenchman, -in 1724 published a book that not only contains -recognizable drawings but points out reasons for -the variation in the appearance of bark canoes:</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p>The Abenacquis, for example, are less high in the sides, -less large, and more flat at the two ends; in a way they are -almost level for their whole extent; because those who travel -on their small rivers are sure to be troubled and struck by -the branches of trees that border and extend over the water. -On the other hand, the Outaouacs [Ottawas] and the nations -of the upper country having to do their navigation on -the St. Lawrence River where there are many falls and -rapids, or especially on the Lakes where there is always a -very considerable swell, must have high ends.</p></div> - -<p>His illustrations show that his low-ended canoes -were of Micmac type but that his high-ended canoes -were not of the Ottawa River or Great Lakes types -but rather of the eastern Malecite of the lower St. -Lawrence valley. This Jesuit missionary also noted -that the canoes were alike at the ends and that the -paddles were of maple and about 5 feet long, with -blades 18 inches long and 6 wide. He observed -that bark canoes were unfitted for sailing.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i028.jpg" width="700" height="486" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 4</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Lines of an Old Birch-Bark Canoe</span>, probably Micmac, brought to -England in 1749 from New England. This canoe was not alike at both -ends, although apparently intended to be so by the builder. (<em>From -Admiralty Collection of Draughts, National Maritime Museum, Greenwich.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The early English settlers of New England and -New York were acquainted with the canoe forms of -eastern Indians such as the Micmac, Malecite, -Abnaki, and the Iroquois. Surviving records, -however, show no detailed description of these -canoes by an English writer and no illustration until -about 1750. At this time a bark canoe, apparently -Micmac, was brought from Portsmouth, New Hampshire, -to England and delivered to Lord Anson -who had it placed in the Boat House of the Chatham -Dockyard. There it was measured and a scale -drawing was made by Admiralty draftsmen; the -drawing is now in the Admiralty Collection of -Draughts, in the National Maritime Museum at -Greenwich. A redrawing of this plan appears opposite. -It probably represents a war -canoe, since a narrow, sharp-ended -canoe is shown. The bottom, neither -flat nor fully round, is a rounded <strong>V</strong>-shape; -this may indicate a canoe -intended for coastal waters. Other -drawings, of a later date, showing -crude plans of canoes, exist in Europe -but none yet found appear as carefully -drawn as the Admiralty plan, a scale -drawing, which seems to be both the -earliest and the most accurate 18th-century -representation of a tribal type -of American Indian bark canoe.</p> - -<p>Due to the rapid development of the -French fur trade, and the attendant -exploration, a great variety of canoe -types must have become known to the -French by 1750, yet little in the way of -drawings and no early scale plans have -been found. This is rather surprising, -not only because the opportunity for<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[Pg 13]</a></span> -observation existed but also because a canoe factory -was actually operated by the French. The memoirs -of Colonel Franquet, Military Engineer-in-Chief for -New France, contain extensive references to this -factory as it existed in 1751.</p> - -<p>The canoe factory was located at Trois Rivières, -just below Montreal, on the St. Lawrence. A -standard large canoe was built, and the rate of -production was then 20 a year. Franquet gives -as the dimensions of the canoes the following (converted -to English measurement): length 36 feet, -beam about 5½ feet, and depth about 33 inches. -Much of his description is not clear, but it seems -evident that the canoe described was very much -like the later <i lang="fr">grand canot</i>, or large canoe, of the fur -trade. The date at which this factory was established -is unknown; it may have existed as early as -1700, as might have been required by the rapid -expansion of the French trade and other activities -in the last half of the previous century. It is apparent -from early comments that the French found the -Indian canoe-builders unreliable, not to say most -uncertain, as a source of supply. The need for -large canoes for military and trade operations had -forced the establishment of such a factory as soon -as Europeans could learn how to build the canoes. -This would, in fact, have been the only possible -solution.</p> - -<p>Of course, it must not be assumed that the bark -canoes were the only watercraft used by the early -French traders. They used plank boats as well, -ranging from scows to flat-bottomed bateaux and -ship's boats, and they also had some early sailing craft -built on the Great Lakes and on the lower St. -Lawrence. The bateau, shaped much like a modern -dory but with a sharp stern, was adopted by the -English settlers as well as the French. In early -colonial times this form of boat was called by the -English a "battoe," or "Schenectady Boat," and later, -an "Albany Boat." It was sharp at both ends, it -usually had straight flaring sides with a flat bottom, -and was commonly built of white pine plank. -Some, however, had rounded sides and lapstrake -planking, as shown by a plan of a bateau of 1776 -in the Admiralty Collection of Draughts. Early -bateaux had about the same range of size as the bark -canoes but later ones were larger.</p> - -<p>After the English gained control of Canada, the -records of the Hudson's Bay Company, and of -individual traders and travellers such as Alexander -Henry, Jr., and Alexander MacKenzie, at the end -of the eighteenth century, give much material on the -fur-trade canoes but little on the small Indian canoes. -In general, these records show that the fur-trade -canoe of the West was commonly 24 feet long inside -the gunwales, exclusive of the curves of bow and stern; -4 feet 9 inches beam; 26 inches deep; and light enough -to be carried by two men, as MacKenzie recorded, -"three or four miles without resting on a good road." -But the development of the fur-trade canoes is best -left for a later chapter.</p> - -<p>The use of the name "canoe" for bark watercraft -does not appear to been taken from a North American -Indian usage. The early French explorers and -travellers called these craft <em>canau</em> (pl. <em>canaux</em>). As -this also meant "canal," the name <em>canot</em> (pl. <em>canots</em>) -was soon substituted. But some early writers preferred -to call the canoe <i lang="fr">ecorse de bouleau</i>, or birch-bark, -and sometimes the name used was merely the generic -<i lang="fr">petit embarcation</i>, or small boat. The early English -term was "canoa," later "canoe." The popular uses -of canoe, canoa, <em>canau</em>, and <em>canot</em> are thought to have -begun early in the sixteenth century as the adaptation -of a Carib Indian word for a dugout canoe.</p> - - -<h3>Summary</h3> - -<p>It will be seen that the early descriptions of the -North American bark canoes are generally lacking -in exact detail. Yet this scanty information strongly -supports the claim that bark canoes were highly -developed and that the only influence white men -exercised upon their design was related to an increase -in size of the large canoes that may have taken place -in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. -The very early recognition of the speed, fine construction, -and general adaptability of the bark canoes to -wilderness travel sustain this view. The two known -instances mentioned of early accurate illustration -emphasize that distinct variations in tribal forms of -canoes existed, and that these were little changed -between early colonial times and a relatively recent -period, despite steadily increasing influence of the -European.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[Pg 14]</a></span></p> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2><em>Chapter Two</em><br /> - -MATERIALS and TOOLS</h2> - - -<p>Bark of the paper birch was the material preferred -by the North American Indians for the construction -of their canoes, although other barks -were used where birch was not available. This -tree (<i lang="la">Betula papyrifera</i> Marsh.), also known as the -canoe birch, is found in good soil, often near streams, -and where growing conditions are favorable it becomes -large, reaching a height of a hundred feet, with -a butt diameter of thirty inches or more. Its range -forms a wide belt across the continent, with the northern -limits in Canada along a line extending westward -from Newfoundland to the southern shores of Hudson -Bay and thence generally northwestward to Great Bear -Lake, the Yukon River, and the Alaskan coast. The -southern limits extend roughly westward from Long -Island to the southern shores of Lake Erie and through -central Michigan to Lake Superior, thence through -Wisconsin, northern Nebraska, and northwesterly -through the Dakotas, northern Montana, and northern -Washington to the Pacific Coast. The trees are -both abundant and large in the eastern portion of the -belt, particularly in Newfoundland, Quebec, the -Maritime Provinces, Ontario, Maine, and New -Hampshire, in contrast to the western areas. Near -the limits of growth to the north and south the trees -are usually small and scattered.</p> - -<p>The leaves are rather small, deep green, and -pointed-oval, and are often heart-shaped at the base. -The edges of the leaves are rather coarsely toothed -along the margin, which is slightly six-notched. The -small limbs are black, sometimes spotted with white, -and the large are white.</p> - -<p>The bark of the tree has an aromatic odor when -freshly peeled, and is chalky white marked with black -splotches on either side of limbs or where branches -have grown at one time. Elsewhere on the bark, -dark, or black, horizontal lines of varying lengths also -appear. The lower part of the tree, to about the -height of winter snows, has bark that is usually -rough, blemished and thin; above this level, to the -height of the lowest large limbs, the bark is often only -slightly blemished and is thick and well formed. The -bark is made up of paper-like layers, their color deepens -with each layer from the chalky white of the exterior -through creamy buff to a light tan on the inner -layer. A gelatinous greenish to yellow rind, or cambium -layer, lies between the bark and the wood of -the trunk; its characteristics are different from those -of the rest of the bark. The horizontal lines that appear -on each successive paper-like layer do not appear -on the rind.</p> - -<p>The thickness of the bark cannot be judged from -the size of a tree and may vary markedly among trees -of the same approximate size in a single grove. The -thickness varies from a little less than one-eighth to -over three-sixteenths inch; bark with a thickness of -one-quarter inch or more is rarely found. For -canoe construction, bark must be over one-eighth inch -thick, tough, and from a naturally straight trunk of -sufficient diameter and length to give reasonably -large pieces. The "eyes" must be small and not so -closely spaced as to allow the bark to split easily in -their vicinity.</p> - -<p>The bark can be peeled readily when the sap is -flowing. In winter, when the exterior of the tree is -frozen, the bark can be removed only when heat is -applied. During a prolonged thaw, however, this -may be accomplished without the application of heat. -Bark peeled from the tree during a winter thaw, and -early in the spring or late in the fall, usually adheres -strongly to the inner rind, which comes away from the -tree with the bark. The act of peeling, however, -puts a strain on the bark, so that only tough, well-made -bark can be removed under these conditions. -This particular characteristic caused Indians in the -east to call bark with the rind adhering "winter -bark," even though it might have been peeled from -a tree during the warm weather of early summer.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[Pg 15]</a></span> -Since in large trees the flow of sap usually starts later -than in small ones, the period in which good bark is -obtainable may extend into late June in some -localities. Upon exposure to air and moisture, -the inner rind first turns orange-red and gradually -darkens with age until in a few years it becomes dark -brown, or sepia. If it is first moistened, the rind can -be scraped off, and this allowed it to be employed in -decoration, enough being left to form designs. -Hence winter bark was prized.</p> - -<p>To the eastern Indians "summer bark" was a poor -grade that readily separated into its paper-like -layers, a characteristic of bark peeled in hot weather, -or of poorly made bark in any season. In the west, -however, high-quality bark was often scarce and, -therefore, the distinction between winter and summer -bark does not seem to have been made. Newfoundland -once had excellent canoe bark, as did the -Maritime Provinces, Maine, New Hampshire, and -Quebec, but the best bark was found back from the -seacoast. Ontario and the country to the immediate -north of Lake Superior are also said to have produced -bark of high quality for canoe building.</p> - -<p>The bark of the paper birch was preferred for canoe -building because it could be obtained in quite large -sheets clear of serious blemishes; because its grain -ran around the tree rather than along the line of -vertical tree growth, so that sheets could be "sewn" -together to obtain length in a canoe; and because the -bark was resinous and not only did not stretch and -shrink as did other barks, but also had some elasticity -when green, or when kept damp. This elasticity, -of course, was lost once the bark was allowed to -become dry through exposure to air and sunshine, -a factor which controlled to some extent the technique -of its employment.</p> - -<p>Many other barks were employed in bark canoe -construction, but in most instances the craft were for -temporary or emergency use and were discarded after -a short time. Such barks as spruce (<i lang="la">Picea</i>), elm -(<i lang="la">Ulmus</i>), chestnut (<i lang="la">Castenea dentata L.</i>), hickory -(<i lang="la">Carya</i> spp.), basswood (<i lang="la">Tilia</i> spp.), and cottonwood -(<i lang="la">Populus</i> spp.) are said to have been used in bark canoe -construction in some parts of North America. Birches -other than the paper birch could be used, but most -of them produced bark that was thin and otherwise -poor, and was considered unsuitable for the better -types of canoes. Barks other than birch usually -had rough surfaces that had to be scraped away, in -order to make the material flexible enough for canoe -construction. Spruce bark had some of the good -qualities of the paper birch bark, but to a far less -degree, and was considered at best a mere substitute. -Non-resinous barks, because of their structure could -not be joined together to gain length, and their -characteristic shrinkage and swelling made it virtually -impossible to keep them attached to a solid framework -for any great length of time.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;"> -<img src="images/i031.jpg" width="450" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 5</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Ojibway Indian</span> carrying spruce roots, Lac -Seul, Ont., 1919. (<em>Canadian Geological Survey -photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The material used for "sewing" together pieces of -birch bark was most commonly the root of the black -spruce (<i lang="la">Picea mariana</i> (Mill.) B.S.P.), which grows in -much of the area where the paper birch exists. The -root of this particular spruce is long but of small -diameter; it is tough, durable, and flexible enough -for the purpose. The tree usually grows in soft, -moist ground, so that the long roots are commonly -very close to the surface, where they could easily be<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[Pg 16]</a></span> -dug up with a sharp stick or with the hands. In some -areas of favorable growing conditions, the roots of -the black spruce could be obtained in lengths up to -20 feet, yet with a maximum diameter no larger than -that of a lead pencil.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i032.jpg" width="700" height="544" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 6</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Roll of Bark for a Hunting Canoe.</span> Holding the bark is the intended -builder, Vincent Mikans, then (in 1927), at age 100, the oldest Indian on the -Algonkin Reserve at Golden Lake, Ont.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Other roots could be used in an emergency, such -as those of the other spruces, as well as of the northern -white-cedar (<i lang="la">Thuja occidentalis</i> L.), tamarack (hackmatack -or eastern larch) (<i lang="la">Laris laricina</i> (Du Roi) -K. Koch) and jack pine (<i lang="la">pinus banksiana</i> Lamb.), -the last named being used extensively by some of the -western tribes. Although inferior to the black spruce -for sewing, these and other materials were used for -sewing bark; even rawhide was employed for some -purposes in canoe construction by certain tribes.</p> - -<p>Canoes built of nonresinous barks were usually -lashed, instead of sewn, by thongs of such material -as the inner bark of the northern white cedar, basswood, -elm, or hickory, for the reason stated earlier. -Spruce root was also used for lashings, if readily -available. Since sheets of birch bark were joined -without employing a needle, the sewing actually could -more correctly be termed lacing, rather than stitching. -But for the nonresinous barks, which could stand -little sewing or lacing, perhaps lashing is the better -term.</p> - -<p>Before steel tools became available to the Indians, -the woodwork required in constructing a birch-bark -canoe represented great labor, since stone tools having -poor cutting characteristics were used. Selection<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[Pg 17]</a></span> -of the proper wood was therefore a vital consideration. -In most sections of the bark canoe area, the northern -white cedar was the most sought-for wood for canoe -construction. This timber had the excellent characteristic -of splitting cleanly and readily when dry and -well-seasoned. As a result, the Indian could either -utilize fallen timber of this species, windblown or -torn up in spring floods; with the crude means available -he could fell a suitable tree well in advance of -his needs; or he could girdle the tree so that it would -die and season on the stump and then fell it at his -convenience. If split properly, ribs of white cedar -could be bent and set in shape by the use of hot water. -In many areas the ribs, sheathing, and the gunwale -members of bark canoes were made of this wood, as -were also the headboards and stem pieces.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i033a.jpg" width="700" height="385" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 7</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Black spruce was also employed, as it too would -split well, although only when green. This wood -also required a different direction in splitting than the -white cedar. Ribs of black spruce could be bent and -set in shape when this was done while the wood was -green. In some areas black spruce was used in place -of white cedar for all parts of a bark canoe structure.</p> - -<p>Hard maple (usually either <i lang="la">Acer saccharum</i> Marsh. -or <i lang="la">A. nigrum</i> Michx.), can be split rather easily while -green; this wood was used for the crosspieces or -thwarts that hold the gunwales apart and for paddles. -Larch, particularly western larch (<i lang="la">Larix occidentalis</i> -Nutt.), was used in some areas for canoe members. -White and black ash (<i lang="la">Fraxinus americana</i> L. and <i lang="la">F. -nigra</i> Marsh.), were also used where suitable wood of -these species was available. In the northwest, spruce -and various pines were employed, as was also willow -(<i lang="la">Salix</i>). It should be noted that the use of many -woods in bark canoe construction can be identified -only in the period after steel tools became available; -it must be assumed that the range of selection was -much narrower in prehistoric times.</p> - -<p>To make a bark cover watertight, it is necessary to -coat all seams and to cover all "sewing" with a -waterproof material, of which the most favored by the -Indians was "spruce gum," the resin obtained from -black or white spruce (<i lang="la">Picea mariana</i> or <i lang="la">P. glauca</i> -(Moench) Voss). The resin of the red spruce (<i lang="la">Picea -rubens</i> Sarg.) was not used, so far as has been discovered. -The soft resin was scraped from a fallen -tree or from one damaged in summer. Spruce gum -could be accumulated by stripping a narrow length -of bark from trees early in the spring and then, during -warm weather, gathering the resin that appeared at -the bottoms of the scars thus made. It was melted or -heated in various ways to make it workable and certain -materials were usually added to make it durable -in use.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i033b.jpg" width="700" height="495" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 8</p> -</div> -</div> - -<p>The most important aids to the Indian in canoe -construction were his patience, knowledge of the -working qualities of materials, his manual skill with -the crude cutting, scraping, and boring instruments<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[Pg 18]</a></span> -known to him, and of course fire; time was, perforce, -of less importance. The canoe builder had to learn -by experience and close observation how to work the -material available. The wood-working tools of the -stone age were relatively inefficient, but with care and -skill could be used with remarkable precision and -neatness.</p> - -<p>Felling of trees was accomplished by use of a stone -axe, hatchet, or adze, combined with the use of fire. -The method almost universally employed by primitive -people was followed. The tree was first girdled by -striking it with the stone tool to loosen and raise the -wood fibers and remove the soft green bark. Above -this girdle the trunk was daubed all around with -wet earth, or preferably clay. A large, hot fire was -then built around the base of the tree and, after the -loose fibers were burned away and the wood well -charred, the char was removed by blows from the -stone tool. The process was repeated until the trunk -was cut through enough for the tree to fall. The -fallen trunk could be cut into sections by employing -the same methods, mud being laid on each side of -the "cut" to prevent the fire from spreading along -the trunk. Fire could also be used to cut down poles -and small trees, to cut them into sections, and to -sharpen the ends into points to form crude wedges -or stakes.</p> - -<p>Stone tools were formed by chipping flint, jasper, -or other forms of quartz, such as chalcedony, into -flakes with sharp edges. This was done by striking -the nodule of stone a sharp blow with another stone -held in the hand or mounted in a handle of hide or -wood to form a stone hammer. The flakes were -then shaped by pressing the edges with a horn point—say, -part of a deer antler—to force a chip from the -flake. The chipping tool was sometimes fitted with -a hide or wood handle set at right angles to the tool, -so that its head could be hit with a stone or horn -hammer. The flake being worked upon, if small, -was often held in the hand, which was protected from -the slipping of a chipping tool by a pad of rawhide. -Heat was not used in chipping, and some Indians -took care to keep the flake damp while working it, -occasionally burying the flake for a while in moist -soil. The cutting edge of a stone tool could be ground -by abrasion on a hard piece of granite or on sandstone, -but the final degree of sharpness depended upon the -qualities of the stone being used as a tool. Slate -could be used in tools in spite of its brittleness. In -general, stone tools were unsuitable for chopping or -whittling wood.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 379px;"> -<img src="images/i034.jpg" width="379" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 9</p> -</div> -</div> - -<p>Splitting was done by starting the split at the upper, -or small end, of a balk of timber with a maul and a -stone wedge or the blade of a stone axe, hatchet, or -knife. The stone knives used for this work were not -finished tools with wood handles, but rather, as the -blade was often damaged in use, selected flakes fitted -with hide pads that served as a handle. The tool was -usually driven into the wood with blows from a -wooden club or maul, the brittle stone tool being -protected from damage by a pad of rawhide secured -to the top, or head, of the tool. Once the split was -started, it could be continued by driving more -wedges, or pointed sticks, into the split; this process -was continued until the whole balk was divided. -White cedar was split into quarters by this method and -then the heartwood was split away, the latter being -used for canoe structural members. From short balks -of the length of the longest rib or perhaps a little more, -were split battens equal in thickness to two ribs and in -width also equal to two, so that by splitting one batten -two ways four finished ribs were produced. The -broad faces of the ribs were as nearly parallel to the -bark side of the wood as possible, as the ribs would -bend satisfactorily toward or away from the bark side -only. Black spruce, however, was split in line with -the wood rays, from the heart outward toward the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[Pg 19]</a></span> -bark, so that one of the rib's narrow edges faced the -bark side; only in this direction would the wood split -readily and only when made this way would the ribs -bend without great breakage.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i035a.jpg" width="700" height="660" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 10</p> -</div> -</div> - -<p>Long pieces for sheathing and for the gunwale -members were split from white cedar or black spruce. -The splitting of such long pieces as these required not -only proper selection of clear wood, but also careful -manipulation of wood and tools in the operation. -Splitting of this kind—say, for ribs in the finish cut—was -usually done by first splitting out a batten large -enough to form two members. To split it again, a -stone knife was tapped into the end grain to start the -split at the desired point, which, as has been noted, was -always at the upper end of the stick, not at the root -end. Once the split was opened, it was continued by -use of a sharp-pointed stick and the stone knife; if the -split showed a tendency to run off the grain as it -opened, it could be controlled by bending the batten, -or one of the halves, away from the direction the split -was taking. The first rough split usually served to -show the worker the splitting characteristics of a piece -of wood. This method of finishing frame members in -bark canoes accounts for the uneven surfaces that -often mark some parts, a wavy grain producing a -wave in the surface of the wood when it was finished. -If it were desired to produce a partially split piece of -wood, such as some tribal groups used for the stems, -or in order to allow greater curvature at the ends of -the gunwale, the splitting was stopped at the desired -point and a tight lashing of rawhide or bark was -placed there to form a stop.</p> - -<p>The tapering of frames, gunwales, and thwarts and -the shaping of paddles were accomplished by splitting -away surplus wood along the thin edges and by -abrasion and scraping on all edges. Stone scrapers -were widely employed; shell could be employed in -some areas. Rubbing with an abrasive such as soft -sandstone was used when the wood became thoroughly -dry; hardwood could often be polished by rubbing it -with a large piece of wood, or by use of fine sand held -in a rawhide pad. By these means the sharp edges -could be rounded off and the final shaping accomplished. -Some stone knives could be used to cut -wood slowly, saw fashion, and this process appears to -to have been used to form the thwart ends that -in many canoes were tenoned into the gunwales. -A stone knife used saw fashion would also cut a bent -sapling easily, though slowly. To cut and trim bark -a stone knife was employed; to peel bark from a tree, -a hatchet, axe, or chisel could be used.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 536px;"> -<img src="images/i035b.jpg" width="536" height="291" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 11</p> -</div> -</div> - -<p>Drilling was done by means of a bone awl made from -a splinter of the shank-bone of a deer; the blade -of this awl had a roughly triangular cross-section. -The splinter was held in a wooden handle or in a -rawhide grip. The awl was used not only to make -holes in wood, but also as the punch to make holes for -"sewing" in bark. Large holes were drilled by means -of the bow-drill, in which a stone drill-point was -rotated back and forth by the bow-string. Some -Indians rotated the drill between the palms of their -hands, or by a string with handgrips at each end. -The top of the drill was steadied by a block held in -the worker's mouth, the top rotating in a hole in the -underside of the block. With the bow-drill, however, -the block was held in one hand.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[Pg 20]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i036a.jpg" width="700" height="428" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 12</p> -</div> -</div> - -<p>Peeling the bark from roots and splitting them was -done by use of the thumbnail, a stone knife, or a -clamshell. Biting was also resorted to. The end of -a root could also be split by first pounding it with a -stone, using a log or another stone as an anvil, to -open the fibers at one end. Splitting a root was -usually done by biting to start the split. Once this -was done, half was held in the mouth and the other -half between the thumb and forefinger of the right -hand. Then the two parts were gradually pulled -apart with the right hand, while the thumbnail of -the left was used to guide the split. If the split -showed a tendency to "run off," bending the root -away from the direction of the run while continuing -the splitting usually served to change the course of the -split. If a root was hard to split, the stone knife came -into play instead of the thumbnail. When the split -reached arm's length, the ends were shifted in hand -and mouth and the operation continued.</p> - -<p>The use of hot water as an aid in bending wood was -well known to some tribal groups before the white -man came. Water was placed in a wooden trough, -or in a bark basin, and heated to boiling by dropping -hot stones into it. Some Indians boiled water in -bark utensils by placing them over a fire of hot coals -surrounded by stones and earth so that the flame -could not reach the highly inflammable bark above -the water-level in the dish. Stones were lifted from -the fire with wooden tongs made of green saplings -bent into a <strong>U</strong>-shape or made into a spoon-like outline. -A straight stick and a forked one, used together, -formed another type of tongs. The straight stick -was placed in and under the fork; then, by forcing -the latter under the stone and bringing the end of the -straight stick hard against its top, the stone was held -firmly, pincer-fashion.</p> - -<p>The wood to be bent was first soaked in the boiling -water, or the water was poured over it by means of -a birch-bark or other dipper. When the wood was -thoroughly soaked with boiling water, bending -began, and as it progressed boiling water was almost -continuously poured on the wood. When the wood -had been bent to a desired form, it was secured in -shape by thongs and allowed to cool and dry out, -during which it would take a permanent set. Hard -bends, as in gunwale ends and stem-pieces, were made -by this means, usually after the wood had been split -into a number of laminations in the area of the -greatest bend. When the piece had been boiled -and bent to its required form, the laminations were -secured by wrapping them spirally with a thong -of inner bark (such as basswood), of roots, or of -rawhide.</p> - -<p>Flat stones were used to weigh down bark in order -to flatten it and prevent curling. Picked up about the -canoe-building site, they had one smooth and fairly -flat surface so that no harm came to the bark, and -were of such size and weight as could be handled -easily by the builder. Smooth stones from a stream -appear to have been preferred. In preparation for -building a canoe, the pins, stakes, and poles which -were of only temporary use were cut or burned down -in the manner mentioned and stored ready for use. -Bark containers were made and filled with spruce -gum, and the materials used in making it hard and -durable were gathered. The building site was selected -in the shade, to prevent the bark from becoming hard -and brittle, and on ground that was smooth, clear of -outcroppings of stone, and roots, or other obstructions, -and firm enough to hold the stakes driven into it. The -location was, of course, usually near the water where -the canoe was to be launched.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i036b.jpg" width="700" height="226" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 13</p> -</div> -</div> - -<p>When steel tools became available, the work of the -Indian in cutting and shaping wood became much -easier but it is doubtful that better workmanship -resulted. The steel axe and hatchet made more rapid -and far easier than before the felling and cutting up of -trees, poles, and sticks; they could also be used in -peeling bark. The favored style of axe among Cana<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[Pg 21]</a></span>dian -Indians was what is known as the "Hudson Bay -axe"; it is made as a fairly large or "full-axe," as a -lighter "half-axe," and as a large hatchet, or hand-axe. -The head of the blade is very narrow, the front of the -blade vertical, while the back widens toward the cutting -edge and the latter stands at a slightly acute angle -to the front of the blade. This style of axe seems to -follow the traditional form of the tomahawk and is -popular because it cuts well, yet is lighter to carry -than the other forms of axe. It is also called a "cedar -axe" in some localities. In modern times, Indian -hatchets are of the commercial variety, the "lathing" -form being preferred because it holds somewhat to -the old trade tomahawk in form of blade and weight. -The traditional steel tomahawk, incidentally was an -adaptation of one of the European forms of hatchet, -sold in the early days of the fur trade.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i037a.jpg" width="700" height="253" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 14</p> -</div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 447px;"> -<img src="images/i037b.jpg" width="447" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 15</p> -</div> -</div> - -<p>The "canoe awl" of the fur trade was a steel awl -with a blade triangular or square in cross-section, -and was sometimes made of an old triangular file of -small size. Its blade was locked into a hardwood -handle, and it was a modern version of the old bone -awl of the bark canoe builders, hence its name.</p> - -<p>The plane was also used by modern Indians, but -not in white man's fashion, in which the wood is -held in a vise and smoothed by sliding the tool forward -over the work. The Indian usually fixed the -plane upside down on a bench or timber and slid the -work over the sole, much as would be done with a -power-driven joiner. However, the plane was not -very popular among any of the canoe-building -Indians.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i037c.jpg" width="700" height="296" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 16</p> -</div> -</div> - -<p>The boring tool most favored by the Indians was the -common steel gimlet; if a larger boring tool was desired, -an auger of the required diameter was bought -and fitted with a removable cross-handle rather than -a brace.</p> - -<p>One steel tool having much popularity among canoe-building -Indians was the pioneer's splitting tool -known as the "froe." This was a heavy steel blade, -fifteen to twenty inches long, about two inches wide, -and nearly a quarter inch thick along its back. One -end of the blade ended in a tight loop into which a -heavy hardwood handle, about a foot long, was set -at right angles to the back edge of the blade, so that, -when held in the hand, the blade was cutting edge -down, with the handle upright. The froe was driven -into the end of a balk of timber to be split by blows<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[Pg 22]</a></span> -from a wooden maul on the back of its blade. Once -the split was started, the maul was dropped and the -hand that had held it was placed at the end of the -blade away from the handle. By twisting the blade -with the two hands the split could be forced open. -The froe was a most powerful and efficient splitting -tool when narrow, short plank, or battens, were required. -The balk to be split was usually placed more -or less end-up, as its length permitted, in the crotch -of a felled tree, so as to hold it steady during the splitting. -The pioneer used this tool to make clapboards -and riven shingles; the Indian canoe builder found it -handy for all splitting.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 556px;"> -<img src="images/i038a.jpg" width="556" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 17</p> -</div> -</div> - -<p>Another pioneer tool that became useful to the -Indian canoe builder was the "shaving horse." A -sort of bench and vise, it was used by Indians in a -variety of forms, all based on the same principle of -construction. Usually a seven-foot-long bench made -of a large log flattened on top was supported by two -or four legs, one pair being high enough to raise that -end of the bench several feet off the ground to provide -a seat for the operator. To the top of the bench was -secured a shorter, wedge-shaped piece flattened top -and bottom, with one end beveled and fastened to -the bench and the other held about 12 inches above it -by a support tenoned into the bench about thirty -inches from the high end. Through the bench and -the shorter piece were cut slots, about four feet from -the high end of the bench and aligned to receive an -arm pivoted on the bench and extending from the -ground to above the upper slot. The arm was shaped -to overhang the slot on the front, toward the operator's -end of the bench, and on each side. The lower -portion of the arm was squared to fit the slot, and a -crosspiece was secured to, or through, its lower end.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i038b.jpg" width="700" height="283" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 18</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Shaving Horse.</span></p></div> -</div> - -<p>The worker sat astraddle the high end of the bench, -facing the low end, with his feet on the crosspiece of -the pivoted arm. Placing a piece of wood on top of -the wedge-shaped piece, close to the head of the -pivoted arm, he pushed forward on the crosspiece -with his feet, thus forcing the head down hard upon -the wood, so that it was held as in a vise. The wood -could then be shaved down to a required shape with<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[Pg 23]</a></span> -a drawknife or crooked knife without the necessity -of holding the work. A long piece was canted on -top of the bench so that the finished part would pass -by the body of the worker, and, if it were necessary to -shape the full length, it could be reversed.</p> - -<p>Nails and tacks eventually came into use, though -they were never used in all phases of the construction -of a particular canoe. In the last days of bark canoe -construction, the bark was tacked to the gunwales -and, in areas where a gunwale cap was customarily -employed, the cap was often nailed to the top of the -gunwales.</p> - -<p>The "bucksaw" also came into the hands of the -Indians, but the frame of this saw was too awkward -to carry, so the Indian usually bought only the blade. -With a couple of nails and a bent sapling he could -make a very good frame in the woods, when the saw -was required. The ends of the sapling were slotted -to take the ends of the blade and then drilled crosswise -to the slot, so a nail could be inserted to hold the -ends of blade and sapling together. With the end -of the nail bent over, the frame was locked together -and the tension was given to the blade by the bent -sapling handle.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i039.jpg" width="700" height="289" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 19</p> -</div> -</div> - -<p>The "crooked knife" was the most important and -popular steel tool found among the Indians building -bark canoes. It was made from a flat steel file -with one side worked down to a cutting-edge. The -back of the blade thus formed was usually a little -less than an eighth of an inch thick. The cutting -edge was bevel-form, like that of a drawknife or -chisel, with the back face quite flat. The tang of -the file was fitted into a handle made of a crotched -stick, to one arm of which the tang was attached, -while the other projected at a slightly obtuse angle -away from the back of the blade. The tang was -usually held in place by being bent at its end into a -slight hook and let into the handle, where it was -secured with sinew lashing; wire later came into use -for this lashing. The knife, held with the cutting edge -toward the user, was grasped fingers-up with the -thumb of the holding hand laid along the part of the -handle projecting away from the user. This steadied -the knife in cutting. Unlike a jackknife, the crooked -knife was not used to whittle but to cut toward the -user, and was, in effect, a one-hand drawknife. -This form of knife is so satisfactory that it is to this -day employed instead of a drawknife by many boat-builders -in New Brunswick and Quebec. A variation -in the crooked knife has the tip of the blade turned -upward, on the flat, so that it can be used in hollowing -out a wooden bowl or dish. The blades of crooked -knives seen are usually about five-eighths inch wide -and perhaps five or six inches long. Some are only -slightly beveled along the cutting edge; others show -this feature very markedly.</p> - -<p>Awls, as well as chisels and other stone or bone -blades, often had handles on their sides to allow them -to be held safely when hit with a hammer. Some of -the stone blades and chisels thus took the form of adzes -and could be used like them, but only, of course, to cut -charred or very soft wood. The sharpening of stone -tools followed the same methods used in their original -manufacture and was a slow undertaking.</p> - -<p>To some Indians an efficient wood-cutting chisel was -available in the teeth of the beaver. Each tooth was -nearly a quarter inch wide, so two teeth would give a -cut of nearly half an inch. The usual practice appears -to have been to employ the skull as a handle, though -some beaver tooth chisels had wooden handles. As -used in making tenons in the gunwales, two holes, of -a diameter equal to the desired width, were first -drilled close enough together to make the length of -the desired tenon, after which the intervening wood, -especially if it was white cedar or black spruce, could -be readily split out by means of either a beaver tooth -or narrow stone chisel.</p> - -<p>The maul was merely some form of wooden club; -the most common type was made by cutting away part -of the length of a small balk to form a handle, the -remainder being left to form the head. The swelling -of the trunk of a small tree at the ground, where the -roots form, was also utilized to give weight and bulk to -the head of a maul. It could be hardened by scorching -the head in a fire. Another method of pounding -and driving was to employ a stone held in one hand -or both. Stone hammers were rarely employed, since -the maul or a stone held in the hand would serve the -purpose.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[Pg 24]</a></span></p> - -<p>The birch tree that was to supply the bark was -usually selected far in advance of the time of construction. -By exploring the birch groves, the builder -located a number of trees from which a suitable -quantity of bark of the desired quality could be obtained. -Samples of the bark of each tree were stripped -from the trunk and carefully inspected and tested. -If they separated into layers when bent back and -forth, the bark was poor. If the "eyes" inside the -bark were lumpy, the bark in their vicinity would -split too easily; this was also true if they were too close -together, but if the eyes on the inside of the bark -appeared hollow there was no objection. Bark that -was dead white, or the outer surface of which was -marked by small strips partly peeled away from the -layer below, would be rejected as poor in quality.</p> - -<p>Preferably, bark was stripped from the selected trees -during a prolonged thaw in winter, particularly one -accompanied by rain, or as soon as the sap in the trees -had begun to flow in early spring. If this was not -possible, "winter" bark, as described on page <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, was -used as long as it was obtainable. Only dire necessity -forced the Indian to use bark of a poor quality. Fall -peeling, after the first frosts, was also practiced in -some areas. The work on the tree was done from -stages made of small trees whose branches could be -used in climbing, or from rough ladders constructed -of short rungs lashed to two poles. When steel axes -and hatchets were available the tree could be felled, -provided care was taken to have it fall on poles laid -on the ground to prevent damage to the bark in the -fall and to keep the trunk high enough to allow it to -be peeled. Felling permitted use of hot water to heat -the bark, and thus made peeling possible in colder -weather than would permit stripping a standing tree. -Felling by burning, however, sometimes resulted in -an uncontrolled fall in which the bark could be -damaged.</p> - -<p>Whether stone or steel knives were used, the bark -was cut in the same manner, with the blade held at -an angle to make a slashing cut; holding a sharp knife -upright, so as to cut square to the surface of the bark, -makes the tool stick and jump, and a ragged cut -results. A stone or steel axe blade could also very -readily be used in cutting bark; with such tools, it was -customary to tap the head with a maul to make the -cut. It was necessary to make only the longitudinal -cut on the trunk of the birch tree, as the bark would -split around the tree with the grain at the ends of this -cut. Spruce and other barks, however, required both -vertical and horizontal cuts.</p> - -<p>Once the vertical cut was made to the desired -length, one edge of the bark was carefully pried away -from the wood with the blade of a knife. Then the -removal of the bark could proceed more rapidly. -Instead of starting the bark with a knife blade, some -Indians used a small stick, one end of which was -slightly bent and made into a chisel shape about -three-quarters of an inch wide. This was used to pry -the bark away, not only along the edge of the vertical -cut, but throughout the operation of peeling. Another -tool, useful in obtaining "winter" bark, which was -difficult to strip from the tree, was a piece of dry, -thick birch bark, about a foot square, with one edge -cut in a slight round and beveled to a sharp edge. -The beveled side was inserted beneath the bark -and rocked on its curved cutting edge, thus separating -the bark from the wood with less danger of splitting -the bark. Spruce and other barks were removed -from the tree with the same tools.</p> - -<p>After the bark had been removed from the tree, -it was handled with great care to avoid splitting it -along the grain. Even in quite warm weather, the -bark was usually heated slightly with a bark torch -to make it flexible; sometimes hot water was applied -if the inner rind was not to be used for decoration. -Then the sheets were rolled up tightly in the direction -of growth of the tree. This made a roll convenient -for transporting and also helped to prevent the -bark from curling. If the bark was not to be used -immediately, it was carefully submerged in water -so that it would not dry out before it was fitted to the -canoe. Spruce and other resinous barks, which could -not be stored, were used as soon as possible after -they were stripped from the tree, the rough exterior -surface being removed by scraping.</p> - -<p>Roots for "sewing" were also gathered, split, and -rolled up, then placed in water so they would remain -flexible. Sometimes they were boiled as well, just -before being used.</p> - -<p>The spruce gum was gathered and tempered. Before -metal kettles and frying pans became available -to the Indians, it was heated in a number of ways. -One method was to heat it in a wooden trough with -hot stones. As the spruce gum melted easily, great -temperature was not required. Stone and pottery -containers were also used. Another method was to -boil water in a bark container and drop in the spruce -gum, which melted and floated on top of the water in -such a consistency that it could be skimmed off with a -bark spoon or dipper. Chips and dirt were skimmed -off the hot gum with a strip of bark or a flat stick.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[Pg 25]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 566px;"> -<img src="images/i041.jpg" width="566" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 20</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Peeling, Rolling, and Transporting</span> bark -for use in canoe construction. -(<em>Sketches by Adney.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Tempering, done after the gum was melted, -consisted of adding animal fat and a little finely -powdered charcoal. The mixture was then tested by -dipping a strip of bark into it and then into cold -water. The strip was bent to see if it cracked the -spruce gum; if it did, too much tempering material -had been added and more gum was required. If no -cracking occurred, the gum on the strip was held in -the hand for a few moments to see if it became tacky -or could be rubbed off the strip; if either occurred, -more tempering was needed. The method of -tempering had many variations. One was to remelt -the gum a number of times; this darkened it and made -it harder. Red ochre or vermillion were sometimes -added, often together with charcoal made from the -willow. Instead of spruce gum, in some areas, pine -resin was used, tempered with tallow and sometimes -charcoal. The Indians in the East sometimes used -remelted spruce gum to which a little tallow had been -added, making a light brown or almost transparent -mixture. Most tribal groups used gum that was -black, or nearly so.</p> - -<p>For repair work, when melted spruce gum could -not be procured in the usual manner, hard globules -and flakes of gum scraped from a fallen spruce tree -were used. These could not be easily melted, so they -were first chewed thoroughly until soft; then the gum -was spread over a seam. This type of gum would<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[Pg 26]</a></span> -not stick well unless it were smoothed with a glowing -stick, and hence was used only in emergencies.</p> - -<p>It is believed that before steel tools were available -birch-bark canoes were commonly built of a number -of sheets of bark rather than, as quite often occurred -in later times, of only one or two sheets. The -greater number of sheets in the early canoes resulted -from the difficulty in obtaining large sheets from a -standing tree. Comparison of surviving birch-bark -canoes suggests that those built of a number of sheets -would have contained the better bark, as large sheets -often included bark taken from low on the trunk, and -this, as has been mentioned, is usually of poorer -quality than that higher on the trunk.</p> - -<p>It is known that the early Indians carried on some -trade in bark canoe building materials, as they did -in stone for weapons and tools. Areas in which some -materials were scarce or of poor quality might thus -obtain replacements from more fortunate areas. -Fine quality bark, "sewing" roots, and good spruce -gum had trade value, and these items were sold by -some of the early fur traders. Paint does not appear -to have been used on early canoes, except, in some -instances, on the woodwork. This use occurred -mostly in the East, particularly among the Beothuks -in Newfoundland. Paint was apparently not used -on birch bark until it was introduced by white men -in the fur trade.</p> - - -<h3>Summary</h3> - -<p>It will be seen that the Indian gathered all materials -and prepared them for use with only a few simple -tools, most of which could be manufactured at the -building site and discarded after the work was completed. -The only other tools he usually brought to -the scene were those he normally required in his -everyday existence in the forest. Some instruments -used in canoe building, however, might be preserved; -these were the measuring sticks on which were -marked, by notches, certain measurements to be used -in shaping a canoe. Also, some Indians used a building -frame that shaped the bottom in plan view. -These are best described when the actual building -methods are examined.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i042.jpg" width="700" height="134" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 21</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Building Frame for a Large Canoe.</span> Dotted lines show change in shape is -caused by omitting crossbars or by using short bars in ends. Note lashing at -ends and method of fastening thwart with a thong.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[Pg 27]</a></span></p> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2><em>Chapter Three</em><br /> - -FORM AND CONSTRUCTION</h2> - - -<p>Classification of the types of bark canoes built -by the Indians is not a simple matter. Perhaps the -most practical way is to employ the tribal designation, -such as Cree canoe, Micmac canoe, accepting as -a criterion the distinctive general appearance of the -canoes used by each tribe. It must be emphasized, -however, that this method of classification does not -indicate the model, or "lines," employed. Both the -model and the size of bark canoes were extensively -affected by the requirements of use: lake, coastal, or -river navigation; smooth, rough, or fast-running -water; transportation of a hunter, a family, or cargo; -the conditions and length of portages; and the permanence -of construction desired. Canoes of various -models, sizes, methods of construction, or decoration -might be found within the limits of a single tribal -classification. Also, within a given area, there might -be apparent similarity in model among the canoes of -two or three tribal groups. However, a classification -based on geographical areas has been found to be -impractical, because the movements of tribal groups -in search of new hunting grounds tend to make tribal -boundaries difficult to define.</p> - - -<h3><em>Form</em></h3> - -<p>The canoes of some tribal groups appear to be -hybrids, representing an intermingling of types as a -result of some past contact between tribes. Those of -other groups are of like model, form, and even appearance, -possibly owing to like conditions of employment. -The effects of a similarity in use requirements upon -inventiveness is seen in the applications for modern -patent rights, where two or more applications can -cover almost exactly the same device without the -slightest evidence of contact between the applicants; -there is no logical reason to suppose the same condition -cannot apply to primitive peoples, even though -their processes of invention might be very slow or -relatively rare in occurrence.</p> - -<p>The effects of migration of tribes upon their canoe -forms can only be studied with respect to those comparatively -recent times for which records and observations -are available. From the limited information at -hand it appears that the Indian, when he moved to an -area where use requirements and materials available -for building differed from those to which he had been -accustomed, was often forced to modify the model, -form, size, and construction of his canoe. In some -instances this seems to have resulted in the adoption -of another tribal form.</p> - -<p>The distinctive feature that usually identifies the -tribal classification of a bark canoe is the profile of -the ends, although sometimes the profile of the gunwale, -or sheer, and even of the bottom, is also involved. -The bow and stern of many bark canoes were as near -alike in profile as the method of construction would -permit; nevertheless some types had distinct bow and -and stern forms. Among tribes the form of the ends -of the canoes varied considerably; some were low -and unimpressive, others were high and often graceful.</p> - -<p>Obviously practical reasons can be found for -certain tribal variations. In some areas, the low -ends appear to ensue from the use of the canoe in -open water, where the wind resistance of a high end -would make paddling laborious. In others the low -ends appear to result from the canoe being commonly -employed in small streams where overhanging -branches would obstruct passage. Portage conditions -may likewise have been a factor; low ends would -pass through brush more easily than high. Types -used where rapids were to be run often had ends -higher than the gunwales to prevent the canoe from -shipping water over the bow. The high, distinctive<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[Pg 28]</a></span> -ends of the canoes most used in the fur trade, on the -other hand, were said to have resulted from the necessity -of employing the canoe as a shelter. When the -canoe was turned upside down on the ground, with -one gunwale and the tops of the high ends supporting -it, there was enough headroom under the canoe to -permit its use as a shelter without the addition of any -temporary structure. The desirability of this characteristic -in the fur-trade canoe can be explained by -the fact that the crew travelled as many hours as -possible each day, and rested for only a very short -period, so that rapid erection of shelter lengthened -both the periods of travel and of rest.</p> - -<p>Yet these practical considerations do not always -explain the end-forms found in bark canoes. Canoes -with relatively high ends were used in open waters, -and similar canoes were portaged extensively. Possibly -the Indian's consciousness of tribal distinctions -led him to retain some feature, such as height of the -end-forms, as a means of tribal recognition, even -though practical considerations required its suppression -to some degree.</p> - -<p>The profile of the gunwales also varied a good -deal among tribal types. Most bark canoes, because -of the raised end-forms, showed a short, sharp upsweep -of the sheer close to the bow and stern. Some -showed a marked hump, or upward sweep, amidships -which made the sheer profile follow somewhat the -form of a cupid's bow. Many types had a straight, -or nearly straight, sheer; others had an orthodox -sheer, with the lowest part nearly amidships.</p> - -<p>The bottom profiles of bark canoes showed varying -degrees of curvature. In some the bottom was straight -for most of its length, with a slight rise toward the -ends. In others the bottom showed a marked curvature -over its full length, and in a few the bottom was -practically straight between the points at which the -stems were formed. Some northwestern types had a -slightly hogged bottom, but in these the wooden -framework was unusually flexible, so that the bottom -became straight, or even a little rockered when the -canoe was afloat and manned.</p> - -<p>The practical reasons for these bottom forms are -not clear. For canoes used in rapid streams or in -exposed waters where high winds were to be met -many Indians preferred bottoms that were straight. -Others in these same conditions preferred them rockered -to varying degrees. It is possible that rocker may be -desirable in canoes that must be run ashore end-on -in surf. Of course, a strongly rockered bottom permits -quick turning; this may have been appreciated -by some tribal groups. Still other Indians appear to -have believed that a canoe with a slightly rockered -bottom could be paddled more easily than one having -a perfectly straight bottom.</p> - -<p>The midsections of bark canoes varied somewhat in -form within a single tribal type, because the method -of construction did not give absolute control of the -sectional shape during the building, but, on the whole, -the shape followed tribal custom, being modified -only to meet use requirements. Perhaps the two -most common midsection shapes were the <strong>U</strong>-form, -with the bottom somewhat flattened, and the dish-shape, -having rather straight, flaring sides combined -with a narrow, flat, or nearly flat bottom. Some -eastern canoes showed marked tumble-home in the -topside above the bilge; often they had a wide and -rather flat rounded bottom, with a short, hard turn -in the bilge. A few eastern canoes, used mainly in -open waters along the coast, had bottoms with -deadrise—that is, a shallow <strong>V</strong>-form, the apex of the -<strong>V</strong> being much rounded; the <strong>V</strong>-bottom, of course, -would have aided in steering the canoe in strong -winds. One type of canoe with this rising bottom -had tumble-home topsides, but another, used under -severe conditions, had a midsection that was an -almost perfect <strong>V</strong>, the apex being rounded but with -so little curvature in the arms that no bilge could be -seen.</p> - -<p>Generally speaking, the eastern canoes had a rather -well rounded bottom with a high turn of the bilge -and some tumble-home above, though they might -have a flatter form when built for shallow-water use -or for increased carrying capacity. A canoe built -for speed, however, might be very round on the -bottom, and it might or might not have some tumble-home -in the topside. In the West, a flat bottom with -flaring topsides predominated; fast canoes there had -a very narrow, flat bottom with some flare, the width -of the bottom and the amount of flare being increased -to give greater capacity on a shallow draft. Some -canoes in the Northwest had a skiff-form flat bottom -and flaring sides, with the chine rounded off sharply.</p> - -<p>The form of the sections near the ends of a canoe -are controlled to a great extent by the form of midsection. -In canoes having flat bottoms combined -with flaring sides this form was usually carried to -the ends, where it became a rather sharp <strong>V</strong>, giving -fine lines for speed when the canoe was light, and only -moderately increased resistance when it was loaded. -Among eastern canoes having tumble-home topsides, -the midsection form could be carried to the ends,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[Pg 29]</a></span> -gradually becoming sharper in canoes having "chin" -in the profiles of the ends; in canoes having no chin, -the sections necessarily took a pointed oval form close -to the ends. A few canoes having flaring sides and -chin ends showed a similar change in form. In all, -however, the bow and stern showed a tendency -toward fullness near the waterline.</p> - -<p>Canoes with a strongly <strong>U</strong>-shaped midsection commonly -carried this form to the ends, with increasing -sharpness in the round of the <strong>U</strong>. The <strong>U</strong>-form predominated -in the end-sections of eastern canoes, of -course, though a few showed a <strong>V</strong>-form, as must be -expected. The fairing of the end sections into the -end profiles appears to have controlled this matter. -The outline of the gunwales, in plan view, also influenced -the form of the end-sections and of the level -lines there. Some canoes, when viewed from above, -showed a pinched-in form at the ends, this was caused -by the construction of the gunwales or by the projection -of the end-profile forms beyond the ends of the -true structural gunwale members. Such canoes -would have a very strong hollow in the level lines -projected through their hull-form below the gunwales, -and this could have been accentuated by any strong -chin in the bow and stern shapes. On the other hand, -many canoes showed no hollow, and the level lines -were straight for some distance inboard of the ends, or -were slightly convex. Full, convex level lines will -appear below the waterline in canoes having a strongly -rockered bottom.</p> - -<p>It should be noted that the Indians were aware -that very sharp-ended canoes usually were fast under -paddle; hence they employed this characteristic in -any canoe where high speed was desired. However, -the degree of sharpness in the gunwales and at the -level lines is not always the same at both ends, though -the variation is sometimes too slight to be detected -without careful measurement; it may at times have -been accidental, but in many cases it appears to have -been intentional.</p> - -<p>Some eastern canoes having their greatest width, or -beam, on the gunwales at midlength had finer level -lines aft than forward, apparently to produce trim -by the stern when afloat and manned. This made -them steer well in rough water. Some northwestern -canoes had their greatest beam abaft the midlength, -giving them a long, sharp bow; the run was sometimes -formed by sweeping up the bottom aft to a shallow -stern, as well as by the double-ended form of the -canoe. Despite a general similarity in the form of the -ends, in some canoes the bow was marked by its -greater height, in others, by the manner in which the -bark was lapped at the seams, or by the manner of -decoration. In a few with ends exactly alike the -bow was indicated by the fitting of the thwarts such -as, for example, by placing at the forward end a -particular style of thwart, intended to hold the torch -used in spearing fish at night, or to support a mast -and sail.</p> - -<p>In examining the lines, or model, of a bark canoe, -the limitations imposed upon the builder by the characteristics -of bark must be considered. The degree -of flexibility, the run of the grain, and the toughness -and elasticity of the bark used all influenced the -form of canoes. The marked chin in the ends of -some canoes, for example, resulted from an effort -to offset the tendency of birch bark to split when a -row of stitches lay in the same line of grain. The -curved chin profile allowed the stitching to cross a -number of lines of grain. Sometimes this tendency -was avoided by incorporating battens into the coarse -stitching; this style of sewing was particularly useful -in piecing out birch bark for width in a canoe, where -the sewing had to be in line with the grain. The -Indians also employed alternating short and long -stitching in some form for the same purpose. Spruce -bark, as used in canoes in the extreme North and -Northwest, could be sewn in much the same manner -as birch bark, but with due regard for the longitudinal -grain of the spruce bark.</p> - -<p>The joining of two pieces of bark by root sewing -or lacing, combined with the use of spruce gum to -obtain watertightness, formed a seam that could be -readily damaged by abrasion from launching the -canoe, from pulling it ashore, or from grounding it -accidentally. For this reason, seams below the -waterline were kept at a minimum and were never -placed along the longitudinal centerline of the -bottom, where they would have formed a sharp apex -to both the <strong>V</strong>-shaped midsection and to the deadrise -bottom form. Likewise, a seam was not used in -forming the rocker of the bottom. Though seams had -to be used to join the bark at bow and stern, the -form of the canoe allowed the seams to be greatly -strengthened and protected there.</p> - -<p>The restrictions on form imposed by barks such -as elm, chestnut, and hickory were very great. These -barks, which are not as elastic as birch bark, were -sometimes employed in a single large sheet. The sheets -were not joined for length; canoes of this material -were often formed by crimping, or lap folding, rather -than by cutting out gores and then sewing the edges<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[Pg 30]</a></span> -together. The characteristics of these barks can -readily be demonstrated with a sheet of paper: -such a sheet can be made into a crude canoe-form by -bending it lengthwise and joining the ends, but it -will be obvious that the midsection takes a very -unstable <strong>U</strong>-form. By forcing the ends inward to give -a ram, or chin, effect to bow and stern, a somewhat -flatter bottom can be obtained in the midsection. By -crimping or folding the paper gore-fashion near each -end of the canoe-form at the gunwale edge, some -rocker is created in the bottom and the width of the -gunwales is increased near the ends, giving more -capacity. But without the crimping along the -gunwale, when the midsection form is flattened on -the bottom, the latter tends to hog. Many of these -bark canoes utilized both the rams ends and crimping -to obtain a more useful form. However, while a -sheet of birch bark could be crimped or gored into -a scow-form canoe such as the Asiatic birch-bark -canoe, no example of this form from North America -is known. On this continent all bark canoes were -sharp at both ends, i.e., double-ended, although a -number of North American dugouts were scow-(or -punt-) shaped.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 532px;"> -<img src="images/i046a.jpg" width="532" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 22</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Canoe</span> formed (a) without crimping or goring -sides, showing hogged bottom; and (b) with -ram ends to reduce hogging of bottom.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 528px;"> -<img src="images/i046b.jpg" width="528" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 23</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Canoe</span> formed (a) by crimping sides, showing -rockered bottom line, and (b) by simple gores -in sides. The same effects are obtained by -making bark cover of three pieces: sides and -bottom.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Birch bark gave much more freedom in the selection -of form simply because it could be joined together in -small odd-sized sheets to shape a hull, and because -it was elastic enough to allow some "moulding" by -pressure of the framework employed. Birch bark -could be gored, or slashed, and rejoined without -resort to folding or crimping; thus it permitted a -smooth exterior surface to be achieved. The toughness -of the bark was sufficient to allow some sewing -in line with the grain, to add to the width of a sheet, -if the proper technique were employed (this was also -true to a lesser extent of spruce bark).</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[Pg 31]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i047a.jpg" width="700" height="434" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 24</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Canoe Formed</span> by use of gores and panels.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The framework of most bark canoes depended upon -the gunwale structure to give longitudinal strength -to the hull; for this reason the structure was made -sufficiently large in cross-section to be rather stiff, -or was formed of more than one member. An inner -and outer gunwale construction was employed in -many bark canoes. The inner member was the -strength member and was sometimes square, or -nearly so, in cross-section. In some canoes bark was -brought up on the outside of this gunwale member, -lapped over the top, and lashed over it; in others the -bark was lashed to both inner and outer gunwales. -The outer gunwale, a rectangular-sectioned batten -bent narrow-edge up, was applied like a guard, outside -the bark, and was secured by pegs, by the lashings -of the bark cover, or by widely spaced lashings. On -top of the large inner gunwale and usually extending -outward over the outer gunwale, a thin cap, pegged -or lashed in the same manner as the outer gunwale, -was sometimes added; this was intended to protect -the lashing of the bark to the gunwale rather than to -add longitudinal strength.</p> - -<p>The corners of the inner gunwale, or of the single -gunwale, were all rounded off to prevent them from -cutting the sewing and lashings. The bottom outboard -corner was sometimes rounded off more than -the other, or beveled, in order to form between the -outboard face of the gunwale and the bark a slot into -which the heads of the ribs could be forced. An -alternate method of accomplishing this was to notch -or drill holes in the gunwales for the heads of the ribs.</p> - -<p>The ends of the gunwales were fashioned in various -ways. In some canoes the gunwales were sheered -upward at the ends only slightly, the gunwale ends -being secured to wide end boards in the stems or extended -past them and secured to the stem-pieces. -The apparent sheer in the latter might be formed by -bending the outer gunwale, or outwale, and the cap -(if one existed) to the required curve and then securing -the ends to the stem-piece, or to the end boards, -as the form of end profile dictated. If either the -single gunwale or the outwale or both were sharply -sheered, they were split, to a point near the end -thwart, into two or four or even more laminations; -even the rail cap, which was perhaps half an inch -thick, might be split in the same manner to allow -a sharp upward sweep at the stems. After being -bent, the split members were temporarily wrapped -to hold the laminations together. In no bark canoes -did the ends of the gunwales curve back on themselves -to form a hook just inboard of the bow and -stern, despite the numerous pictures that show this -feature. The gunwale ends sometimes projected -almost perpendicularly upward, slightly above the -top of the bow and stern, so that when the canoe was -upside down its weight came on these rather than on -the sewing of the ends of the craft.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i047b.jpg" width="700" height="474" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 25</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Gunwale Ends</span> nailed and wrapped with -spruce roots. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The gunwale ends in some canoes were fastened -together by means of one or more lashings, often -widely spaced. After being lashed together, a narrow -wedge was sometimes driven between the two gunwales -from inboard to tighten the lashings. The ends -were sometimes beveled on their bearing surfaces so -as to make a neat appearance when joined. The -various ways in which the gunwale ends at stem and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[Pg 32]</a></span> -stern were finished can best be described when individual -types are under examination. Some canoes -had a small piece of bark over the ends of the gunwales -but under the outwales that held it in place. Whether -these pieces were employed to protect the lashing of -the gunwales and adjoining work from the weather, or -whether they were the vestigial remains of a decking -once used, cannot be determined. In the Canadian -Northwest the ends of bark canoes were sometimes -decked with bark for a short distance inboard.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i048.jpg" width="700" height="223" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 26</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Gunwales and Stakes on Building Bed</span>, plan view. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The bark was secured to the gunwales by a continuous -spiral lashing all along the main gunwale or by -separated lashing in series. In the first, the continuous -lashing, where it passed through the bark, might -show regularly spaced separations to avoid the tops of -the ribs. In the second, the lashings were placed -clear of the ribs. There were some slight variations -in the lashings, but these were of minor importance -so far as structural strength is concerned. In all -cases, the bark was brought up to or over the top of -the gunwale before being secured, so that the holes -for the lashing were pierced at some distance from -the edge of the bark to prevent it from splitting.</p> - -<p>The ends of the thwarts were mortised into the gunwales -and also secured by lashings. The number of -thwarts varied with the tribal type, the size, and the -purpose of the canoe. Usually an odd number, from -three to nine, were used, though occasional canoes -had two or four thwarts. Very small canoes for hunting -might have only two or three thwarts, but most -canoes 14 to 20 feet long had five. Canoes intended -for portaging usually had one thwart at midlength to -aid in lifting the canoe for the carry position. The -distance between the thwarts might be determined by -structural design, or might be fixed so as to divide the -cargo space to allow proper trim. The thwarts might -serve as backrests for passengers, but were never used -as seats. There was no standard form for the shape -of the thwarts, which varied not only to some degree -by tribal classification, but even among builders in -single tribe. They were usually thickest and widest -over the centerline of the canoe, tapering outboard -and then spreading again at the gunwales to form a -marked shoulder at the mortise. The lashings to the -gunwales often passed through two or more holes in -this shoulder.</p> - -<p>The ribs, or frames, of most canoes were very closely -spaced and were wide, flat, and thin. They ran in -a single length from gunwale to gunwale. In canoes -having <strong>V</strong>-sections near the ends, the ribs were often -so sharply bent as to be fractured slightly. Across -the bottom they were wide but above the bilge they -tapered in width toward the end, which was either -a rounded point or a beveled or rounded chisel-edge. -The ribs were forced under the gunwales so -that the heads fitted into the bevel, or into notches -or holes at the underside and outboard edge of the -gunwale, between it and the bark cover. By canting -the rib to bring its ends into the proper position and -then forcing it nearly perpendicular, the builder -brought enough pressure on the bark cover to mold -it to the required form. Bulging of the bark at each -frame was prevented by a thin plank sheathing. The -ribs in many Eastern canoes were spaced so that on -the bottom they were separated only by a space equal -to the width of a rib.</p> - -<p>Each piece of sheathing, better described as a -"splint" than as "planking," was commonly of irreg<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">[Pg 33]</a></span>ular -form. The edges were often beveled to a marked -thinness. While some builders laid the sheathing -edge-to-edge in the bark cover, others overlapped the -edges. Nearly all builders feathered the butts and -overlapped them slightly. The sheathing was held in -position by a number of light temporary ribs while the -permanent frames, or ribs, were being installed. It is -to be noted that the sheathing was neither lashed nor -pegged; it remained fixed in place only through the -pressure of the bent ribs and the restraint of the bark -skin.</p> - -<p>The exact method of fitting the sheathing varied -somewhat from area to area, but not in every instance -from tribe to tribe. The bottom sheathing used by -some eastern Indians was in two lengths. The individual -pieces were tapered toward the stems and the -edges butted closely together. The sides were in -three lengths, but otherwise similarly fitted. The -butts lapped very slightly. In a second method, used -to the westward, the sheathing was laid edge-to-edge -in two lengths, with the butts slightly lapped. The -center members of the bottom, usually five, were -parallel-sided, but the outboard ends of those at -the turn of the bilges were beveled, or snied, off. -The members further outboard were in one length, -with both ends snied off. The bottom thus appeared -as an elongated diamond-form. The topside sheathing -was fitted as in the first instance.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 407px;"> -<img src="images/i049a.jpg" width="407" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 27</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Gunwale Lashings</span>, examples made by Adney: -1, Elm-bark, Malecite; 2, St. Francis; 3, Algonkin; -4, Malecite.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i049b.jpg" width="700" height="464" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 28</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Gunwale-End Lashings</span>, examples made by -Adney: Athabascan (large), Ojibway (small).</p></div> -</div> - -<p>A variation in the second style used three lengths -in the centerline sheathing. In still another varia<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">[Pg 34]</a></span>tion -a centerline piece was laid in two lengths without -taper, the next outboard piece was then cut in the -shape of a broad-based triangle, and the rest were -laid in two lengths, with the sides parallel to the sides -of the triangular strake and with their ends snied -off against the centerline pieces. In a fourth style -short pieces, roughly elongate-oval in shape, were -overlapped on all sides and laid irregularly so that -when in place they appeared "thrown in." With this -style, the midship section was laid first and secured -by a temporary rib, then the next toward the ends, -with the butts shoved under the ends of the middle -section. The next series was similarly laid so that -the top member of each butt-lap faced toward the -ends of the hull and was under a rib. The ends -were not cut square across, but were either blunt-pointed -or rounded. Five lengths of sheathing were -often used, and the widths of the individual pieces -of sheathing were rarely the same, so the seams were -not lined up and presented an irregular appearance -in the finished canoe. The sheathing was thin enough -to allow it to take the curve of the bilge easily.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 594px;"> -<img src="images/i050.jpg" width="594" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 29</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Splints Arranged</span> in various ways to sheath -the bottom of a canoe: 1, Micmac, Malecite; -2, Central Cree, Têtes de Boule, etc.; 3, Montagnais; -4, Algonkin, Ojibway, etc.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>If the sheathing was lapped, the overlap was always -slight. In some old canoes a small space was left -between the edges of the sheathing, particularly in the -topsides. In some northwestern bark canoes there -was no sheathing; these used a batten system somewhat -like that in the Eskimo kayak, except that in the -bark canoes the battens were not lashed to the ribs, -being held in place only by pressure. These kayak-like -bark canoes had a bottom framework formed with -chine members; some had a rigid bottom frame of this -type, while others had bottom frames secured only -by rib pressure. The purpose of the sheathing, it -should be noted, was to protect the bark cover from -abrasion from the inside, to prevent the ribs from -bulging the bark, and to back up the bark so as to -resist impacts; but in no case, even when battens -were employed, as in the Northwest, did the sheathing -add to the longitudinal strength of the bark canoe. -The principle of the stressed rib and clamped sheathing, -which is the most marked characteristic in the -construction of the North American Indian bark -canoe, is fundamentally different from that used in the -construction of the Eskimos' skin craft.</p> - -<p>A wide variety of framing methods are exhibited -in the construction of the ends, or stems, of bark -canoes. In the temporary types of the East, the bark -was trimmed to a straight, slightly "ram" form and -secured by sewing over two battens, one outboard on -each side. Birch-bark canoes of the East usually had -an inside stem-piece bent by the lamination method -to the desired profile, the heel being left unsplit; as -usual, the laminations were spirally wrapped, often -with basswood-bark thongs. The stem-piece was -then placed between the bark of the sides, and the bark -and wood were lashed together with an over-and-over -stitch. Sometimes variations of the short-and-long -form of stitch were used here, and some builders also -placed a halved-root batten over the ends of the bark -before lashing to form a stem-band as protection to -the seam. In some canoes the end lashing passed -through holes drilled in the stem-pieces, often with -the turns alternating in some regular manner through -and around the stem-piece.</p> - -<p>The stem-pieces were generally very light, and in -some canoes the head was notched and sharply bent -down and inboard, so that it could be secured to the -ends of the gunwales. Some tribal types had no inner -stem-piece, and the stem profiles were strengthened -merely by the use of two split-root or halved-sapling -battens, one on each side, outside the bark and under -the sewing.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">[Pg 35]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i051.jpg" width="700" height="343" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 30</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">End Details, Including Construction of Stem-Pieces</span> and fitting of bark over them, ending -of gunwale caps at stem heads, and the headboard, with its location. Lamination of the stem -pieces shows fewer laminae than is common. (<em>Sketches by Adney.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Birch-bark canoes to the westward used battens -under the end lashing as well as rather complicated -inside stem-pieces. In some parts of the West and -Northwest, the ends were formed of boards set up on -edge fore-and-aft, the bark being lashed through all, -with the boards projecting slightly outboard of the -ends of the bark cover to form a cutwater.</p> - -<p>To support the inside stem-piece, some form of -headboard was usually fitted near each end after the -sheathing was in place. These were shaped to the -cross-section of the canoe so as to form bulkheads. -In some canoes, these miniature bulkheads stood vertical, -but in others they were curved somewhat to follow -the general curve of the end-profile, and this caused -them to be shaped more like a batten than a bulkhead. -Bent headboards were sometimes stepped so as to rake -outboard. Sometimes the form of the headboard permitted -the gunwale members to be lashed to it, and -often there was a notch for the main gunwale on each -side.</p> - -<p>The headboards were sometimes stepped on the -unsplit heel of the stem-piece; a notch was made in -the bottom of the headboard to allow this. In two -types of canoe in which there was no inner stem-piece, -the headboards were stepped on short keel -pieces, or "frogs," fore-and-aft on the bottom and extending -slightly forward of the end of the sheathing to -reinforce the forefoot. The purpose of the headboard -was to strengthen the stem-piece, and in many cases -it was an integral member of the end structure itself -and helped to maintain its form. The headboard -usually served to support the gunwale ends in some -manner, it stretched the bark smooth near the stems, -and it secured the ends of the sheathing where support -from a rib would have been most difficult to obtain. -Many canoes had the space between the headboard -and the stem-piece stuffed with shavings, moss, or -other dry material to help mold the bark to form -beyond the sheathing in the ends. Some tribal groups -decorated the headboards.</p> - -<p>In a few canoes, the stem-piece was additionally -supported by a short, horizontal member stepped in -the forward face of the headboard and projecting forward -to bear on the after side of the stem-piece. The -latter was sometimes bent back onto itself above this -member to form a loop around the top of the end-profile, -and the gunwale ends or a part of the gunwale -structure were secured to it. This complicated -bending of the stem-piece, in conjunction with use of -a headboard and a brace member, served to stiffen -the end structure sufficiently to meet the requirements -of service.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">[Pg 36]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i052.jpg" width="700" height="429" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 31</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Malecite Canoe of the Type Described in This Chapter.</span> This 2½ fathom St. John -River canoe represents the last Malecite birch-bark model, and usually was fastened with -tacks and nails, rather than with root lashings and pegs as described here.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The use of a bark cover over the gunwale ends has -already been mentioned. In some eastern canoes, -this was placed under the cap and outwale pieces and -extended below the latter in a shallow flap on which -the owner's mark or other decoration might appear; -the flap was in fact a kind of name board. Such flaps -do not appear on the partly decked bark canoes of -the Northwest.</p> - -<p>This general description of the structure of the bark -canoes is sufficient to permit the explanation of the -actual construction of a bark canoe to be more readily -understood, and it also serves to illustrate the close connection -between the method of construction and the -formation of the lines, or model, of bark canoes. From -the description, too, it can be seen that while the -shape of a bark canoe was partially planned during -the construction the control of every part of the -model could not be maintained with the same degree -of precision as in the building of an Eskimo skin boat -or an Indian dugout.</p> - - -<h3><em>Construction</em></h3> - -<p>One aspect of canoe construction, the Indian method -of making measurements, was briefly mentioned -(p. <a href="#Page_8">8</a>) under a discussion of the origin of the measurement -known in French Canada as the <em>brasse</em>. This -was the distance from finger-tip to finger-tip of the -arms outstretched; in the fur trade in English times -it was known as the fathom and it appears to have -been about 64 inches, or less than the nautical -fathom of 6 feet. Other measurements used were the -greatest width of the ball of the thumb, which is very -close to an English inch, and the width of the four -fingers, each finger-breadth being close to three-fourths -of an English inch. The length of the forearm, -usually from the knuckles of the clenched hand to -the elbow, was also employed by some Indians, as a -convenient measurement.</p> - -<p>Measurements in these units might be memorized -and used in building, but many Indians used measur<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">[Pg 37]</a></span>ing -sticks, and these served as "foot-rules." They -were sometimes squared and were painted as well as -notched.</p> - -<p>A Malecite Indian, interviewed in 1925, had three -such sticks for canoe building. One, for the length of -the gunwale frame, was half the total length required; -it was notched to show the distance at which the -ends of the gunwales were lashed and also the position -of the thwarts. Such a stick would be about 7 feet -long for a 16-foot canoe, 8 feet for an 18-foot canoe. -The second stick was notched to show half the length -of each of the thwarts. The third stick had notches -showing the height of the gunwale at each thwart -and at the end, four notches in all for the half-length -of the canoe. This stick measured from the surface -of the building bed, not from a regular base line.</p> - -<p>The method of measuring canoes appears to have -been fairly well standardized, at least in historical -times. As stated earlier, length was commonly taken -over the gunwales only, and did not include the end -profiles, which might extend up to a foot or slightly -more beyond the gunwale ends, bow and stern. -However, in certain old records the overall length is -given, and in various areas other methods of measurement -existed. Where a building frame was used, -the given length of the canoe was the length of this -frame; usually this approximated the length of -the gunwales. The width of a canoe was measured -by the Indian from inside to inside of the main gunwale -members. The extreme beam might be only 2 -or 3 inches greater than the inside measurement of the -gunwales, but if the sides bulged out, the beam might -actually be 6 or more inches greater. The depth -was usually measured from the inside of the ribs to -the top of the gunwale but in building it was measured -from the surface of the building bed to the bottom -of the main gunwales, as noted above in the description -of the measuring sticks.</p> - -<p>Thus it will be seen that the Indian measurements -constituted a statement of dimensions primarily -useful to the builder, for their main purpose was to -fix the proportions rather than establish the actual -length, width, and depth. Today we state the -length of a canoe in terms of extreme overall measurement; -the Indian was inclined to state the length -in building terms, giving dimensions applicable to -the woodwork only, just as the old-time shipbuilder -gave the keel length of a vessel instead of the overall -length on deck.</p> - -<p>The building site was carefully selected. The space -in which the canoe was to be set up had to be smooth, -free of stones and roots or anything that might damage -the bark, and the soil had to be such that stakes -driven into it would stand firmly. A shady place was -preferred, as the bark would not dry there as fast as -in sunlight. Since the construction of a canoe required -both time and the aid of the whole Indian -family, the site had to be close to a suitable place for -camping, where food and water could be obtained. It -is not surprising, therefore, to find canoe building -sites that apparently had been used by generations of -Indians.</p> - -<p>The preparation of the building bed was controlled -by the intended form of the canoe to be built. If the -bottom of the canoe was to be rockered, the cleared -ground was brought to a flat surface for the length -required for setting up the canoe. If the rocker was -to be great, the middle of the bed would be slightly -depressed. If the bottom was to be straight fore-and-aft, -or very nearly so, the bed was crowned from 1½ -to 2 inches higher in the middle than at the ends, so -that the canoe was first set up with a hogged bottom. -Very large canoes such as were used in the fur trade -required as much as 4 inches crown in the building -bed. Other dimensions being equal, the amount of -crown was usually somewhat greater in canoes having -bulging sides than in ones having more upright or -flaring sides. Canoe factories such as were operated -in certain fur-trading posts sometimes had a plank -building bed suitably crowned and drilled for setting -the stakes.</p> - -<p>Two methods of setting up the canoe were used. In -most of the eastern area, the gunwales were put -together and used to establish the plan outline of the -canoe on the building bed. But a building frame was -used for constructing the various narrow-bottom -canoes having flaring sides, and for some other tribal -forms. The frame, made in the same general form as -the gunwales when assembled, but less wide and -sometimes much shorter, could be taken apart easily, -allowing it to be removed after the canoe was built; -hence it could be used to build as many canoes as -desired to the same dimensions as the first, and was -retained by the builder as a tool, or pattern, for future -use.</p> - -<p>The method of construction in which gunwales only -were used in setting up the canoe will be explained -first in order to show the general technique of construction. -Use of the building frame will then be -described. Important deviations from these methods -will be described in later chapters under the individual -tribal types in which they occur.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">[Pg 38]</a></span></p> - -<p>The Malecite canoe, a straight-bottomed craft -about 19 feet long and 36 inches beam, is used as the -example, hence the method of building to be described -is that generally employed in the East, where -variations in construction mainly involve the use or -omission of structural elements.</p> - -<p>The gunwales are the first members to be formed. -In the Malecite canoe these are the inner gunwales, -as the canoe will have outwales and caps. The gunwales -are split from white cedar to produce battens -that will square 1½ inches when shaped. The gunwales -are tapered each way from midlength, where they -are 1½ inches square, to a point 3 inches short of the -ends, where they are ¾ by 1 to 1¼ inches. The edges -of the gunwales are all rounded, and the outboard -bottom edge is beveled almost ½ inch, at 45° to the -bottom of the member. The last 3 inches at each end -is formed like half a blunt arrowhead, as shown in the -sketch of the member on page <a href="#Page_31">31</a>. The gunwales will -be bent, side to side, on the flat as far as the ends are -concerned, so the blunt arrowhead is formed on one -of the wide faces of the ends as shown. The arrowhead -form allows a neat joint when the gunwale ends -are brought together, pegged athwartships, and then -wrapped with a root lashing. In forming and finishing -the gunwales, a good deal of care is required to -get them to bend alike, so that the centerline of the -finished frame will be straight and true.</p> - -<p>To take the ends of the middle thwart, a mortise -¼ by 2 inches is cut in each gunwale member athwartships -at exactly midlength, the length of the mortise -being with the run of the gunwale. In it, the middle -thwart, 33 inches long, is fitted. Made of a ⅞-inch -by 3-inch piece of hard maple, the thwart tapers -slightly in thickness each way from its center to -within 5 inches of the shoulders, which are 30 inches -apart. The thickness at a point 5 inches from the -shoulder is ¾ inch; from there the taper is quick to the -shoulder, which is <sup>5</sup>⁄<sub>16</sub> inch thick, with a drop to -¼ inch in the tenon. The width, 3 inches at the center, -decreases in a graceful curve to within 5 inches of the -shoulder, where it is 2 inches, then increases to about -3 inches at the shoulder. The width of the tenon is, -of course, 2 inches, to fit the mortise hole in the gunwale. -The edges of the outer 5 inches of the thwart -are rounded off or beveled a good deal; inboard they -are only slightly rounded.</p> - -<p>The thwart is carefully fitted to the gunwale -members and the ends are pegged. Some builders -wedged the ends of this thwart from outside the gunwales, -the wedge standing vertical in the thwart so -that the gunwale would not split; however, it is not -certain that wedging was used in prehistoric times, -although it is seen in some existing old canoes. The -pegs used in this canoe are driven from above, into -holes bored through the gunwale and the tenon of -the thwart to lock all firmly together. Three holes -are then bored in the broad shoulders of the thwart -about 1½ inches inboard of gunwale for the root -lashing that is also used.</p> - -<p>The ends of the gunwale members are now brought -together, and to avoid an unfair curve appearing at -the thwart in place, short pieces of split plank or of -sapling, notched to hold them in place, are inserted -between the gunwale members as temporary thwarts -at points about 5 feet on each side of the middle -thwart. After the ends are brought together and the -final fitting is carried out, a peg is driven athwartships -the ends and a single-part root lashing is carefully -wrapped around the assembly.</p> - -<p>Some canoe builders omitted the blunted half-arrowhead -form at the gunwale end. Instead, the -inside faces were tapered to allow the two parts to -bear on one another for some distance. The gunwales -were then pinched together and lashed with one -or more wrappings. Finally, a thin wedge was -sometimes driven from inboard between the two -gunwale ends to tighten the wrappings. The wedges -were usually so carefully fitted as to be difficult to -identify. It is probable that this wedged gunwale -ending represents the prehistoric form, and the -blunted half-arrowhead ending is a result of the use -of steel tools.</p> - -<p>After the ends of the gunwales have been securely -fastened together, the first pair of permanent thwarts -is fitted. These are located 36 inches, center to center, -on each side of the middle thwart, a distance that -determines the centers of the mortises in each gunwale -member. Each thwart, made from a ¾-inch by -3-inch piece, tapers smoothly in thickness from the -¾-inch center to the <sup>5</sup>⁄<sub>16</sub>-inch shoulder. The tenon is -of the same dimensions as that of the middle thwart, -the width takes the same form as that of the middle -thwart, and the edges are similarly beveled and -rounded. The distance between the shoulders, taken -along the centerline, is 22½ inches, and the centerline -length of the thwart 25½ inches. However, -the shoulders and ends of the tenons must be bevelled -to follow the curve of the gunwales hence the extreme -length of the thwart is actually very close to 26 inches. -The worker determines the bevel of the shoulders by -fitting the thwart to the run of the gunwales, the -temporary thwarts being shifted so that the distance -between the gunwales equals that set by the measuring -stick. These two thwarts having been fitted, the -tenons are pegged as before, but in the shoulders only -one lashing hole is bored instead of the three employed -in the middle thwart.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">[Pg 39]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 32</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Malecite Canoe Building</span>, 1910. (<em>Canadian -Geological Survey photos.</em>)</p> -</div> -<img src="images/i055a.jpg" width="700" height="520" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Weighting gunwales on bark -cover on building bed.</p></div> - -<img src="images/i055b.jpg" width="700" height="532" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Resetting stakes.</p></div> - -<img src="images/i055c.jpg" width="700" height="540" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Shaping bark cover and -securing it to stakes.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">[Pg 40]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i056.jpg" width="700" height="252" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 33</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">First Stage of Canoe Construction</span>: assembled gunwale frame is used to locate stakes -temporarily on building bed. Instead of the gunwales, a building frame was used in some -areas. (<em>Sketch by Adney</em>.)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The second pair of thwarts is placed 30 inches, -center to center, from the first pair, one at each -end, and on the basis of this measurement the tenons -are cut as for the others. These two thwarts are made -of ⅝-by 4-inch pieces tapering in thickness each -way from the center to the shoulder, where they -are a scant <sup>5</sup>⁄<sub>16</sub> inch thick, the tenons having the -same dimensions as in the other thwarts. In width -the thwarts are worked to an even 3 inches from -shoulder to shoulder, but in the form of a curve so -that when each thwart is in place its center will be -bowed toward the ends of the canoe, viewed from -above. As in the first pair, the shoulders and ends -are cut to a bevel to fit the gunwale; at the -centerline they each measure 12 inches shoulder-to-shoulder -in a straight line athwartships and 15 inches -end-to-end. Allowing for bevel, the maximum length -is just over 15<sup>5</sup>⁄<sub>16</sub> inches. These thwarts are drilled -for single gunwale lashings and the corner edges -are well rounded from shoulder to shoulder. The -distance from the centerlines of these last thwarts -at the bow and stern to the extreme ends of the -joined gunwales is 33 inches, so the finished gunwale -length is 16 feet.</p> - -<p>After the endmost thwarts are pegged into place, -the temporary stays are removed. At each step of -construction the alignment of the gunwales is checked -by measuring with the measuring sticks and by -sighting, since the shape of the assembled gunwales, -in this case of the inner gunwales, is very important -in determining the sharpness of the completed canoe -and the fairness of its general form.</p> - -<p>The assembled gunwales are now ready to be laid -on the building bed which, for the Malecite canoe, -is 20 feet long, about 3½ feet wide and is raised -about 1½ inches at midlength so that the canoe -bottom will be straight when the craft is in the water. -The gunwale frame having been carefully centered -on this bed, with the middle thwart exactly over the -highest point in the surface of the bed, some scrap -split-planking is laid across the gunwales and the -whole weighted down with a few flat stones. Next, -34 stakes from 30 to 50 inches long are prepared, -each made of a halved length of sapling. Around -the outside of the gunwale frame 26 of these are driven -in pairs opposite one another across the frame, about -24 inches apart and placed so that none is opposite -a thwart, except for the stakes at the extreme ends -of the gunwale frame, which are spaced about a foot -from their nearest neighbors and are face-to-face, -about 1½ inches apart. All the stakes are driven -with the flat face about an inch from the gunwale -frame and parallel to its outside edge. Finally two -more pairs of stakes are driven at each end, the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[Pg 41]</a></span> -first pair about a foot beyond the end of the gunwale -frame and 1½ inches apart, the second about 6 inches -beyond these and similarly spaced. The length -between the outermost stakes, measured over the -gunwale frame, is about 18½ feet. Great care is -taken to line up the last pairs of stakes with the -centerline of the gunwale frame.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i057.jpg" width="700" height="305" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 34</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Second Stage of Canoe Construction</span>: stakes have been removed and laid aside, and the -gunwales shown in first stage have been removed from the building bed. The bark cover is -laid out on the building bed, and the gunwales are in place upon it, weighted down with stones. -(<em>Sketch by Adney</em>.)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>If the canoe is to have a slight rocker near the ends -and is to be straight over the rest of the bottom, -the ends of the gunwale frame will be blocked above -the building bed so that the frame is not hogged on -the bed.</p> - -<p>After the builder is satisfied with the staking, each -stake is carefully pulled up and laid to one side, -off the bed but near its hole. The weights are then -removed from the gunwale frame, which is lifted -from the bed and laid aside, and the bed, if disturbed -is repaired and re-leveled.</p> - -<p>The roll of birch bark is now removed from storage, -perhaps in a nearby pool where it has been placed to -keep it flexible, and unrolled white side up on the -building bed. As the bark dries, it will become more -and more stiff, so it will be necessary to moisten -it frequently during construction to maintain its -flexibility.</p> - -<p>The bark is usually long enough, but often it is not -wide enough. If the bark is too short, it may be -pieced out at this time, or later. If it is not wide -enough it is centered on the bed; the piecing out -will be done later. The gunwale frame is now laid -on the bark, care being taken to place it as nearly -as possible in its former position on the bed.</p> - -<p>The bark outside the frame is then slashed from -the edge to a point close to the end of each thwart, -and also to points along the frame halfway between -the thwarts, so that the edges can be turned up. -While it is being slashed, the bark cover is bent -slightly, so that it is cut under tension. Later, -when the required shape can be determined, these -slashes will be made into gores, the Malecite canoes -having flush seams, not overlaps, in the topsides and -bottom. If a fault is noted along the outer edge of -the bark, a slash may be placed so as to allow the -fault to be cut out in the later goring; irregularity in -the position of the cuts does no great harm to the -progress of building these canoes. The slashes are -usually carried to within an inch of the gunwales on -the bed. It is not customary to slash the bark close -to the end, there the bark can usually be brought up -unbroken, depending upon the form of the end.</p> - -<p>When the bark has been cut as described, it can -be turned up smoothly all around the frame so that -the stake holes can be seen and a few of the stakes can -be replaced. The frame and the bark are then<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[Pg 42]</a></span> -realigned so that all stakes may be replaced in their -holes without difficulty. When the frame and bark -are aligned, the frame is weighted as before and the -bark is turned up all around it, the stakes being firmly -driven, as this is done, in their original holes. The -longest stakes are at the ends of the frame, as the -depth of the hull is to be greatest there. The tops of -each pair of opposite stakes are now tied together with -a thong of basswood or cedar bark, to hold them -rigid and upright.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i058.jpg" width="700" height="523" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 35</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Malecite Canoe Builders Near Fredericton, N.B.</span>, using wooden plank -building bed with stakes set in holes in the platform. This was a late method -of construction, which probably originated in the early French canoe factory -at Trois Rivières, Que.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>After the bark is turned up around the frame, its -lack of width becomes fully apparent. At this stage, -some builders fitted the additional pieces to gain the -necessary width; others did it later. The method of -piecing the bark cover and the sewing technique, -however, is explained here.</p> - -<p>The bark is pieced out with regard to the danger -of abrasion that would occur when the canoe is -moving through obstructions in the water, or when -it is rolled or hauled ashore and unloaded. If the -bark is to be lapped below the waterline, the thickness -of the bark of both pieces in the lap is scraped thin so -a ridge will not be formed athwart the bottom; -here, however, most tribes used edge-to-edge joining. -If there are laps in the topsides, the exposed edge is -toward the stern; if in the midlength, upward toward -the gunwale; and if it is in the end the lap may be -toward the bottom, because this makes it easier to -sew, and because in the ends of the canoe there is less -danger of serious abrasion. Many tribes used edge-to-edge -joining everywhere in the topsides so that the -direction of lapping was not a matter of consideration. -The type of goring, whether by slash and lap or by -cutting out a <strong>V</strong>-shaped gore, will, of course, have -much to do with the selection of the method of sewing -to be used.</p> - -<p>It is to be recalled that in canoe building no needle -was used in sewing the bark; the ends of the root -strands were sharpened and used to thread the strand -through the awl holes. Much of the topside sewing in -a bark canoe was done with small strands made by -splitting small roots in half and then flattening the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[Pg 43]</a></span> -halves by scraping. Large root strands quartered -and prepared in the same manner, or the cores of -these, were sometimes used in heavy sewing or -lashing at the gunwale or in the ends of a canoe.</p> - -<p>As noted previously, root thongs were used well -water-soaked or quite green, for they became very -stiff and rather brittle as they dried out. Once in -place, however, the drying did not seem to destroy -their strength. Rawhide was also used for such -sewing by some tribes.</p> - -<p>The sewing was done by Indian women, if their -help was available, and the forms of stitching used -in canoe building varied greatly. The root sewing at -the ends of the canoes ranged from a simple over-and-over -spiral form to elaborate and decorative styles. -Long-and-short stitching in a sequence that usually -followed some formal pattern was widely used. -Among the patterns were such arrangements as one -long, four short, and one long; or two longs, two or -three shorts, and two longs; or one short, five of -progressively increasing length, and then one short; or -six progressively longer followed by six progressively -shorter. Cross-stitching, employing the two ends of -the sewing root as in the lacing of a shoe was also -common. Sometimes this was combined with a -straight-across double-strand pass to join the ends of -the <strong>X</strong>. The harness stitch, in which both ends of the -sewing root were passed in opposite directions through -the same holes, was often used, as was the 2-thong -in-and-out lacing from each side used in northwestern -canoes having plank stem-pieces.</p> - -<p>If the root strand was too short to complete a seam, -instead of being spliced or knotted the end was tucked -back under the last turns or stitches, on the inside of the -bark cover. In starting, the tail was placed under the -first turn of the stitch, so that it could not be pulled -through. To finish sewing with double-ended strands, -as in the harness stitch, both ends were tucked under -the last turn or two.</p> - -<p>Commonly two or more turns were taken through -a single hole in the bark; this might be done to clear -some obstruction such as a frame head at the gunwale, -or to provide a stronger stitch, or turn, as in the -harness stitch and others, or to allow for greater -spacing between awl holes in the bark. (Since the -awl blade was tapered, the size of the hole it made in -the bark could be regulated by the depth of penetration -of the blade as it was turned in the hole.)</p> - -<p>The length of stitches varied with the need for -strength and watertightness. Long stitches were -about I inch, short stitches from about ⅜ to ½ inch in -length. The run of the grain, of course, was a consideration -in the length of stitch used.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i059.jpg" width="700" height="407" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 36</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Sewing</span>: two common styles of root stitching -used in bark canoes.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The piecing of the side panels was done with a -great variety of sewing styles, according to strength -requirements. The strain put upon the bark in -molding it by rib pressure was greater in the midlength -than in the ends; and the sewing differed -accordingly. The over-and-over spiral, with a batten -under the sewing, was used for sewing in the midlength, -as was back-stitching, a variety of basting -stitch in which a new pass is started about half way -between stitches, thus forming overlapped passes or -turns. Back-stitching was usually done in a direction -slightly diagonal to the line of sewing, so as to cross -the grain of the bark at an angle with each pass. -The double-thong in-and-out stitch, in which each -thong goes through the same hole from opposite -sides, was frequently used. The simple, spiral over-and-over -stitch was used in sewing panels in the ends -of canoes, as was the simple, in-and-out basting stitch -using either a single or double strand.</p> - -<p>When the sides were pieced out edge-to-edge, the -sewing was usually done spirally, over and over a -narrow, thin batten placed outside the bark cover. -This batten might be either a thin split sapling or, -more commonly, a split and thinned piece of root. -If the pieced-out sides were lapped, then the harness -stitch was commonly used. The lap might be some -inches wide to decrease the danger of splitting while -the bark was being punched with the awl, afterward -the surplus was cut away leaving about a half inch of -overlap. On rare occasions the strength of a lapped-edge -seam was increased by the use of a parallel row -of stitching.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[Pg 44]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i060a.jpg" width="700" height="190" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 37</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Comparison of Canoe on the Building Bed</span> (above), with gunwales or building frame weighted -down by stones inside bark cover, and (below) canoe when first removed from building bed -during fifth stage of construction. (<em>Sketches by Adney.</em>)</p></div> - -<img src="images/i060b.jpg" width="700" height="130" alt="" /> -</div> - -<p>In making the canoe watertight, it is to be remembered -that some forms of stitch make the bark lie -up tight all along its edges while others bind only -where the stitch crosses the seam. The in-and-out -stitch, which was used only above the waterline, -cannot be pulled up hard without causing the bark -to pucker and split and cannot be made very watertight -with gum. The over-and-over stitch, in either -a spiral form or square across the seam on the outside -and diagonally on the inside, is very strong; when a -batten is used under the stitches it can be pulled -up hard and allows a very watertight gumming. -When this style of sewing is used without a batten -across the run of the grain, as in the gore seams, it -cannot be pulled up as hard, but will serve. Back-stitching, -which was much used in the topsides, can -be pulled up quite hard and makes a tight seam when -gummed, as do the harness stitch and cross-stitch. -The ends, regardless of the style of sewing used, were -more readily made tight by gumming than the other -seams in a bark canoe.</p> - -<p>Two basic methods, with some slight and unimportant -variations, were used to fasten the bark to the -gunwales. One employed a continuous over-and-over -stitch, the other employed groups of lashings. -On a canoe with the lashing continuous along the -gunwales, the turns were made two or more times -through the same hole on each side of each rib head -to allow space for them. This might also be done -where the lashing was in groups, as described above. -Usually, a measuring stick was used to space the -groups between thwart ends so that each group came -between the rib heads. The groupings could be independent -lashings, or the strand could be carried from -one group to another. If the latter, it was passed -along under the gunwale in a number of in-and-out -stitches or in a single lone stitch either inside or out, -or else it was brought around over the gunwale from -the last full turn. Some tribes use both ends of the -lashing, passing them through the same hole in the -bark from opposite directions below the gunwales; -the ends might be carried in the same manner in a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[Pg 45]</a></span> -long stitch to the next group. In some elm and other -bark canoes employing basswood or cedar-bark -lashings the bark was tied with a single turn at wide -intervals; when roots were used in these, however, -small groupings of stitches were customary. When -group lashings were used with birch bark, the intervals -between groups was usually relatively short, -though in a few canoes the groups and intervals were -of nearly equal length.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i061.jpg" width="700" height="350" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 38</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Third Stage of Canoe Construction</span>: the bark cover is shaped on the building bed. The -gores have been cut; part of the cover is shaped and secured by stakes and battens. "A" shows -battens secured by sticks lashed to stakes. (<em>Sketch by Adney</em>.)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>In an independent group, the ends of the strand -were treated as in whipping, the tail being under the -first turns made and the end tucked back under the -last—usually on the inside of the gunwales. Where -there were inner and outer gunwales the lashing was -always around both, and the tail might be jammed -between them. If a cap was used on the gunwales, -the lashings were always under it. The use of a -knotted turn to start a lashing occurred only in the -old Têtes de Boule canoes.</p> - -<p>On the Malecite canoe, the sides are pieced out -in one to three panels rather than in one long, narrow -panel on each side. The panel for the midlength -requires the greatest strength and is usually lapped -inside the bottom bark. The latter is first trimmed -straight along its edge, and the panel inserted behind -it with a couple of inches of lap. Then the two pieces -of bark are sewn together over a halved-root batten -with an over-and-over stitch. (Other tribes used -some form of the harness stitch, or a similar style, -allowing great strength.) The middle panel does not -extend much beyond the ends of the first pair of -thwarts on each side of the middle. The next panels -toward the ends are lapped outside the bottom bark -and are sewn with the back-stitch. Then, if still -another panel is required at each end, this too is -lapped outside and is sewn in the lap with an in-and-out -stitch. The ends of the panels are usually sewn -with an over-and-over stitch that runs square with -the seam outside and diagonally to it inside the bark. -(The harness stitch was used here by some tribes, as -were many forms of the cross-stitch.) The ends of the -canoe and the gores have already been sewn during -an earlier stage of the building process.</p> - -<p>Once the sides are pieced out, the bark is ready to -be turned up and around the gunwale frame and -clamped perpendicularly. To effect this, small -stakes are made by halving saplings, so that each half -is about a half inch thick. The butt of each half is -cut chisel-shaped, with the bevel on the flat side; the -rounded face is smoothed off, and it may be tapered<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">[Pg 46]</a></span> -toward the head of the stake. Between two of the -slashes a length of bark is now brought up against -the outer stakes; against the bark the small, inside -stake is placed with the round face of the chisel-pointed -butt wedged against the outer face of the -gunwale. The top is then levered against the outside -stake, so that the flat face of each clamps the bark in -place. The top of the inner stake is then bound to -the outer.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 555px;"> -<img src="images/i062a.jpg" width="555" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 39</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Cross Section</span> of canoe on building bed during -third stage of construction (above) and fourth -stage. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>In setting the inside stakes, care is taken that -their points do not pierce the bark. No inside stakes -are required at the ends, as here the outside stakes -are so close together in opposing pairs as to hold the -bark in a sharp fold along the centerline of the cover. -This of course is also true of the stakes beyond the -ends of the gunwales.</p> - -<p>After a few lengths of bark have been thus secured, -they are faired between the stakes by inserting thin -strips of split sapling, or battens of wood or root, -along each side of the bark, under the inside and -outside stakes. These battens are placed about halfway -up the upturned bark. Some builders used long -wooden battens, as this gave a very fair side when -enough lengths were secured upright; others got the -same results with short battens, the ends of which -were overlapped between a pair of stakes on each side.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 600px;"> -<img src="images/i062b.jpg" width="600" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 40</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Multiple Cross Section</span> through one side of a -canoe on the building bed: at the headboard, -middle, first, and second thwarts. Gunwale -is raised and supported on sheering posts set -under thwarts. Crown of the building bed is -shown by varying heights of bottoms of the four -sections.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>When the bark has been turned up and clamped, -the gores may be trimmed to allow it to be sewn with -edge-to-edge seams at each slash. This is usually -done after the sides are faired, by moving the battens -up and down as the cuts are made, then replacing -them in their original position. The gores or slashes, -if overlapped, are not usually sewn at this stage of -construction.</p> - -<p>With the inside stakes in place, the longitudinal -battens secured, and the gores cut or the overlaps -properly arranged, all is ready for sheering the gunwales. -First the weights are removed from the -gunwale frame so that it can be lifted. If the inside -stakes have been properly made and fitted this can -be done without disturbing the sides, though the -ties across each pair of outside stakes may have to -be slacked off somewhat. Before lifting the frame, -some short posts, usually of sapling or of waste from -splitting out the gunwales and thwarts, are cut in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">[Pg 47]</a></span> -lengths determined by the measuring stick or from -memory, one for each end of each thwart, and one -for each end of the gunwale frame. Those under -the middle thwart ends in this canoe are 7½ inches -long, those under the next thwarts out from the -middle will be 9 inches, those under the end thwarts -will be 12 inches, and those at the gunwale ends will -be 17 inches long. These posts, cut with squared -butts, are laid alongside the bed. The gunwale -frame is now lifted and the pair of posts to go under -the middle thwart are stepped on the bark cover, -the gunwale is lowered onto them, and while the -frame and posts are held steady, stones are laid on -a plank over the middle thwart. Next, the ends -of the gunwales are held and lifted so that a pair of -posts can be placed at the thwarts next out from the -middle. More weights are placed over these, the -operation is repeated for the end thwarts and, finally -at the gunwale ends, so that the gunwales now stand -on posts on the bark cover, sprung to the correct -fore-and-aft sheer and steadied by the bearing of -the outside of the gunwale frame on the rounded -faces of the inside stakes. Now the sheer has been -established and the depth of the canoe is approximated.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i063.jpg" width="700" height="264" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 41</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Fourth Stage of Canoe Construction</span>: bark cover has been shaped and all stakes placed. -The gunwales have been raised to sheer height; "A" indicates the sticks which fix the sheer of -the gunwales; "B" indicates blocks placed under ends to form rocker. Side panels are shown -in place, and cover is being sewn to gunwales. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>To protect the bark cover from the thrust of the -weights used to ballast the frame, some builders -inserted small bark or wood shields for padding under -the heels of the posts. By some tribes the posts were -notched on one face, to fit inside the gunwales near -the thwarts, and there were also other ways of -assembling the gunwales themselves.</p> - -<p>It should be apparent that the operations just -described would serve only for canoes in which the -sheer had a gentle, fair sweep. For canoes in which -the sheer turned up sharply at the ends, the gunwale -members might have to be split into laminations -and prebent to the required sheer before being -assembled into the gunwale frame. To accomplish -this, the laminations were scalded with boiling water -until saturated and then the gunwale members were -staked out on the ground or tied with cords to set -the wood in the desired curves as it dried out. The -laminations were then wrapped with cord and the -gunwale was ready to assemble. To produce a -hogged sheer, the gunwales were made of green -spruce and then staked out to season in the form -desired; a hogged sheer was also formed by steaming -or boiling the gunwale members at midlength.</p> - -<p>The canoe, as now erected on the building bed, has -a double-ended, flat-bottomed, wall-sided form. The -gunwales are sprung to the proper breadth and sheer, -and the bark is standing irregularly above them. At -this point, on canoes not having outwales, the bark -cover was laced or lashed to the gunwales. Since the -Malecite canoe has outwales, these are now made and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">[Pg 48]</a></span> -fitted. They consist of two white cedar battens about -19½ feet long, perhaps 1 inch wide, and ½ inch thick. -The face that will be the outboard side is usually -somewhat rounded, as are all the corners, and the -corner that will be on the inside and bottom of each -batten when it is in place is somewhat beveled. The -outwales are placed between the bark and the outside -stakes, the inside stakes being removed one by one as -this is done. The removal of the inside stakes -allows room for the outwale to be inserted in their -place, between the outside stakes and the inner gunwale -face, and it allows the bark to be brought against -the outside face of the inner gunwales. In the process -of fitting the outwales, the battens along the sides may -have to be removed and replaced, or shifted, and the -cross-ties of each pair of outside stakes may require -adjustment. Beginning at midlength, the outwale is -pegged through the bark cover to the inner gunwales -at intervals of 6 to 9 inches. The pegging is not -carried much beyond the end thwarts in any canoe -and could not be in canoes having laminated gunwales -near the ends.</p> - -<p>The Malecite canoe has bark covers over the ends -of the inner gunwales, and these are now fitted so that -they can be passed under the outwales and clamped in -place. The ends of the outwales are forced inside the -stakes at and beyond the ends of the gunwales, assuming -a pinched-in appearance there, and they may -reach a few inches beyond the ends of the bark cover; -they will be cut and shaped to the length of the finished -canoe later.</p> - -<p>The outwale pegs are made by splitting from a balk -of birch, larch, or fir roughly squared dowels about ¼ -inch square and 6 to 9 inches long. Each dowel is -then tapered and rounded each way from the middle -to form two shanks that are between ⅛ and <sup>3</sup>⁄<sub>16</sub> inch in -diameter over 2 to 3 inches of length. The ends may -be sharpened by fire. The dowels are then cut in two, -providing a pair of pegs with large heads. These are -driven in holes drilled through the outwales, bark -cover, and gunwales, and when well home, the protruding -ends are cut off flush. Toward the ends of -the gunwales, the spaces between the pegs increase, -and at the extreme ends, the outwale will be lashed to -the gunwale by widely spaced groupings of root strand. -These are usually temporary, as the final lashing of -the bark to the gunwales will secure the outwales.</p> - -<p>After the outwales are secured in place, the bark -is fastened to the assembled gunwales with group -lashings. In the Malecite canoe being built, these -are independent, each grouping consisting of eight -to ten complete turns of the root strand. The intervals -between, roughly 2 inches, are usually spaced by -means of a special measuring-stick to insure evenness. -Before the lashing is actually begun, however, the -excess bark standing above the gunwales is cut away. -The bark either is trimmed flush with the top of the -gunwale, or enough is left for a flap that will fully -cover the top of the inner gunwale, to be turned down -under the lashing. The latter method, the stronger, -was used by many builders. In making the turns in -the group lashings, two or three turns may be taken -through a single hole in the bark; the Malecites did -this to avoid having the holes too close together. The -result is that the group when seen from outboard -appears as a <strong>W</strong>-form, with only two or three holes in -the bark for an entire group. Care is taken to lay up -the turns over the gunwales neatly, turn against -turn without open spacing or overlaps and crossings.</p> - -<p>When this is completed, the ends of the thwarts -can be lashed, the strand passing through the holes -in the shoulders, around the two gunwale members, -and through one or two holes in the bark cover. The -groupings for the bark cover are spaced so that these -lashings do not overlap them, and thus the lashings -serve a dual purpose.</p> - -<p>Next, the gores are usually sewn and the ends of -the side panels closed. To do this, the temporary -side battens outside the bark are removed. Since -this is a Malecite canoe, the gores are sewn edge-to-edge -with an over-and-over stitch, the strand crossing -the seam square outside and diagonally inside. When -these seams and those remaining in the upper panels -are sewn, the rather stiff bark holds the shape formed -on the building bed to a remarkable degree.</p> - -<p>The canoe can now be raised from the building -bed. To set it up at a most convenient working -height, the weights are first removed from the gunwales -and the remaining stakes are pulled up. The -canoe is then lifted from its bed and turned upside -down over a couple of logs, or crude horses. Traditionally, -logs or sapling were rested across two pairs -of boulders or the logs were tied between two pairs of -trees at convenient distances apart. More recently, -horses, formed by sticking four legs into auger holes -drilled in the bottom of a 4-foot length of timber, -were used. After the canoe is on its supports the -ends are ready to be closed in.</p> - -<p>The stem-pieces customarily used by the Malecite -builder are formed from two clear white cedar billets -a full 36 inches long and in the rough nearly 1½ -inches square. The billets are first shaped so that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">[Pg 49]</a></span> -the outboard face of each stem-piece is about ¾ inch -wide, making it a truncated triangle in cross-section. -Then, along lines parallel to the base of the truncated -triangle, it is split into six laminations which are -carried to within 6 or 7 inches of the end selected to -be the heel of the stem-piece. Just clear of the -laminations a notch is cut into the top side of the heel, -to hold the headboard, as will be seen. The piece is -then treated with boiling water until the laminations -are flexible, and the curve of the stem-piece can be -formed and either pegged out or tied with cords -until it dries in the desired shape. When dry the -laminations are tightly wrapped with basswood bark -cord, leaving the form of the stem-piece a quarter -arc of a circle, with short tangents at each end, as -shown in the illustration (p. <a href="#Page_35">35</a>).</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i065.jpg" width="700" height="252" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 42</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Fifth Stage of Canoe Construction</span>: canoe is removed from building bed and set on horse -in order to shape ends and complete sewing. Bark cover has dried out in a flat-bottomed and -wall-sided form. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Next, the ends of the outwales are cut to a length -determined by the quality of the bark already in -place; if the bark in one end is not very good, it may -be cut away somewhat and the canoe made shorter -by this amount at both ends in finishing. After the -ends of the outwales have been cut, both are notched -on the inside at the extreme ends to take the head of -the stem-piece. The outwales may or may not -project ¼ or ½ inch beyond the stem and the stem -head may project ½ or 1 inch above the top of the -outwales of the canoe; these matters, at the builder's -option, decide the length of the notch and the fitting -of the stem-pieces.</p> - -<p>The stem-piece is now placed between the folded -bark end of the canoe with the heel resting for a -small distance along its length on the bark bottom; -the head must come to the right height above the outwales, -as noted. While one worker holds the stem-piece -in place, another trims away the excess bark at -the end to the profile of the outboard face of the -stem-piece. Thus the profile of each end is cut and the -rake of the ends is established. The bark is next -lashed to the stem-piece. In this canoe it is done -with a spiral over-and-over stitch, a batten made of -a large split root being placed over the edges of the -bark, as the lashing proceeds, to form a stem band. -The turns pass alternately from outboard around the -inboard face of the stem-piece and through it; the -awl inserted in the laminations from one side opens -them enough to allow the strand to be forced through. -Care is taken to pull up the strand very hard each -time. As the outwale is approached, the bark is cut -away at the notching in each so that the outwales -can be brought snugly against the sides of the stem-piece. -Here the strand is brought up one or two -times over the outwales, abaft the stem head, before -the bitter end is tucked, thus locking the outwales to -the stem-piece and the bark. Then a lashing is -placed around the outwales just inboard of the -stem-piece, passing through a hole in the flap of the -end deck-piece of bark and through the side bark. -This lashing holds the outboard end of the deck -piece flap. At the inboard end of the flap, another -lashing is required, but the pinched-in outwales -require additional securing outboard of this point; -hence a lashing is passed just inboard of the middle<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">[Pg 50]</a></span> -of the flap, a little outboard of the ends of the inwales, -and about six inches inboard from this lashing -another is passed through the side bark and around -the gunwale and outwale on each side. These three -lashings hold the outwales snug to the ends of the -gunwales and against the projecting bark ends in the -pinched-in form of projecting outwales.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i066.jpg" width="700" height="397" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 43</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Ribs Being Dried and Shaped for Ojibway Canoe.</span> (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The heels of the stem-pieces rest on the bottom -bark and the sewing is carried down to where the -cutting of the profile makes an end to the seam, the -solid part of the heels extending about 6 to 8 inches -inboard of this. Next, any sewing required on the -bottom is done. When the bark cover has been -given a final inspection on the outside and all sewing -has been completed, the canoe is lifted from its -supports, righted, and set on the bed or on a smooth -grassy place.</p> - -<p>All seams are now payed with gum on the inside of -the bark while this can still be done without interference -from the sheathing or those parts of the structure -remaining to be installed. The Malecites used only -spruce gum tempered with animal fat. The gum, -heated until it is sufficiently soft to pour like heavy -syrup, is spread with a small wooden paddle or spoon, -and is then worked into the seam and smoothed by -rubbing with the thumb dipped in water to prevent -the gum from sticking and burning. It is first worked -into the ends, between the bark and each side of the -stem-pieces, particularly near the heel below the -waterline. When the crevices are filled, a piece of -bark (in later times a piece of cloth was used) wide -enough to cover the gum alongside is well smeared -with warm gum and pressed down along the inside -of the stem-pieces. On each seam, at gores, and on -side panels a thin narrow strip of bark is smeared -with gum and pressed over the seam after the latter -had been well payed. The bark is now carefully -scrutinized for small splits, holes, or thin spots since -these can be easily patched from the inside at this -stage of construction. In fitting bark strips and in -gumming, great care is taken to obtain a flat surface; -the edges of the strips inside are faired to the inside -face of the bark by smearing gum along the edges. -The canoe is now ready to be sheathed and ribbed -out.</p> - -<p>The sheathing for this canoe has been split in -advance out of clear white cedar in splints about 5 -to 9 feet long, 3 to 4¼ inches wide, and ⅛ inch thick.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">[Pg 51]</a></span> -The butts of each piece have been whittled to a feather -edge, the bevel extending back about 2 inches. Also, -some pieces of basket ash have been split out of saplings -for temporary ribs to hold the sheathing in place.</p> - -<p>A total of 50 or more ribs in five lengths, the longest -about 5 feet, have been made up from white cedar -heartwood and bent to the desired shape.</p> - -<p>In deciding the rough lengths of the ribs, the builder -can resort to various methods. He can prebend ribs -in pairs to a number of arbitrarily chosen shapes: -the first set of six pairs to the desired midsection form; -a second set of five pairs to the form of the section -between the middle and first pair of thwarts; a third, -of five pairs, to the section at the first thwarts each -way from the middle; a fourth, of four pairs, to the -section between the end and the first pair of thwarts -each way from the middle; a fifth, of three pairs, -to the section at the end thwarts; and a sixth, of two -or three pairs, for the section at or near the headboards. -This makes from 50 to 52 frames in a canoe -measuring 18 or 19 feet overall.</p> - -<p>Each frame piece is treated with boiling water and -then bent, over the knee or around a tree, to a slightly -greater degree than is needed. While thus bent, -each pair is wrapped lengthwise over the end with a -strip of basswood or cedar bark to hold the ribs in -shape. Sometimes a strut is placed under the bark -strips to maintain the desired form, or a cross-tie of -bark may be employed. The ribs are then allowed -to season in this position.</p> - -<p>Another method, which will be illustrated later -(p. <a href="#Page_53">53</a>), involves placing ribs of green spruce in their -approximate position and forcing them against the -bark. In this method, a number of long battens are -placed over the roughly bent ribs laid loosely inside -the bark cover, and are spread by forcing a series of -short crosspieces, or stays, between them athwartships. -The bark is given a good wetting with boiling water to -make it flexible and elastic, so that the pressure -applied to the battens by the temporary crosspieces -brings the bark to the shape desired for the canoe. -The rough lengths of the ribs are determined by use -of a measuring stick or by measurements made -around the bark with a piece of flexible root or a -batten of basket ash. The ribs, in any case, are made -somewhat longer than required to allow a final fitting -when being placed over the sheathing.</p> - -<p>It can be seen that the exact form the canoe takes -is largely a matter of judgment and of the flexibility -and elasticity of the bark, rather than of precise -molding on a predetermined model, or lines.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i067.jpg" width="700" height="613" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 44</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Details of Ribs</span> and method of shaping them in -pairs in a bark strap or thong so that they take a -"set" while drying out.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>In the Malecite canoe the ribs are wide amidships, -3 or 4 inches, and narrow to 2½ or 2 inches toward the -ends. The thickness is an even ⅜ inch. Most birch-bark -canoes have ribs of even thickness their full -length, but in a few the thickness is tapered slightly -above the turn of the bilge, usually when the tumble-home -is high on the sides and rather great. The -width, as previously explained, is usually carried all -across the bottom; above the bilges there is a moderate -taper.</p> - -<p>The sheathing of the canoe is now first to be put in -place. In the Malecite canoe the center pieces are -the longest; they are tapered each way from their -butts, which overlap about 2 inches amidships. The -ends are made narrow enough to fit readily into the -sharp transverse curve of the bottom and are long -enough to pass under the heels of the stem pieces for -an inch or two. The pieces of sheathing on each side -of the center pieces are fitted in the same manner, and -by the time two or three courses are in place they -must be held in some manner at the ends. This is -accomplished by means of the rough temporary ribs -mentioned earlier. The sheathing is laid edge-to-edge, -with the butts overlapping, and, if there are -not enough long pieces to complete the bottom amidships, -three or four lengths, with overlapped butts, -will be used. As the sheathing progresses, more -temporary ribs will have to be added. At the turn of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">[Pg 52]</a></span> -the bilge, the sheathing will bend transversely as -pressure is applied by the temporary ribs; the bark -must be again wetted so that the angular bilge can -be forced into a roughly rounded form. Particular -care is required in finishing the sheathing below the -gunwale to be certain that the top strake will be close -up against the sewing of the bark at gunwales, but -no particular attempt is made to make the edges -of the sheathing in the topsides maintain edge-to-edge -contact.</p> - -<p>The pressure of the temporary ribs, the heads of -which are forced under the gunwales, and the elasticity -of the bark due to treating it with boiling water -are enough to rough-shape the canoe.</p> - -<p>Before the permanent ribs are placed the sheer is -checked. If it appears to have straightened, the ends -of the gunwales are supported by means of short posts -placed under them, with the heels standing on the -heels of the stem pieces or on the sheathing. Then -some stakes, each having a projecting limb or root, -are cut and are driven into the ground with the limb -hooked over the gunwale to force it down.</p> - -<p>After measurements have been made for the first -rib with a strand of root or an ash batten, it is now cut -to a length slightly more than would permit the rib to -be forced upright when in place. The ends of the -rib are set in place in the bevel, or notch, on the underside -of the gunwales, against the bark cover, and with -the bottom part of the rib standing inboard of the -head. Then, with one end of a short batten placed -against its inboard side, the rib is driven toward the -end of the canoe with blows from a club on the head -of the batten. If the rib drives too easily it is removed -and laid aside; if too hard, it is shortened. It must go -home tightly enough to stretch slightly the bark cover -by bringing pressure to bear on the whole width of the -sheathing. Care is taken, in this operation, to keep -moist not only the bark but also the sewing, particularly -along the gunwales, so that all possible elasticity -is obtained. The ribs are set, one by one, working to -within two or three frames of the midship thwart; -then the other end of the canoe is begun. The last -three or four ribs to be placed are thus amidships. -In every rib driven, the tension is great, but no rib is -driven so that it stands perpendicular to the base. -Those first driven stand with their bottoms nearer the -midship thwart than the ends, and this angle, or slant, -continues to amidships; the ribs in the other end of -the canoe slant in the opposite direction.</p> - -<p>It will be evident that skill is required to estimate -how much pressure the bark will stand before bursting -under the strain of the driven ribs. It is also apparent -that the shape of the canoe is controlled by the shaping -given the ribs in the prebending, for this fixes the -amount of tumble-home and the amount of round, or -rounded-<strong>V</strong>, given to the bottom athwartships. No -fixed rules appear to exist; the eye and judgment of -the builder are his only guides. To show how much -strain is placed on the bark, however, it may be noted -that inspection of two old canoes showed that the -gunwale pegs had been noticeably bent between the -inner and outer gunwales.</p> - -<p>It appears to have been a rather common practice, -after all the ribs had been driven into place, to allow -the canoe to stand a few days and then again to set the -frames (where unevenness appears in the topsides) -with driving batten and maul, the bark cover and the -root sewing or lashings having been again thoroughly -wetted.</p> - -<p>The headboards are now to be made. These are -shaped in the form of an elongate-oval from a wide -splint of white cedar about 4 inches wide at midlength -and ¼ inch thick. The narrow end is first cut -off square or nearly so; the bottom end is notched to -fit in the notch in the heel of the stem-piece and the -top has a small tenon at the centerline that will be -fitted into a hole drilled or gouged in the underside -of the inner gunwales where they join at the ends. -The length of the headboards in the canoe being built -is 15¾ inches over all, and when they have been made -for each end, they are checked as to width and height -to see that they can be fitted. Next, the extreme -ends of the canoe between the stem and the headboards -are stuffed with dry cedar shavings or dry -moss so that the sides stand firm on each side of the -bow outboard of the ends of the sheathing, which -ends rather unevenly, just outboard of where the headboards -will stand. This completed, the headboards -are forced into position by first stepping the heel -notch in the stem-piece notch and then bending the -board by placing one hand against its middle and -pulling the top toward the worker. This shortens the -height of the board enough so the tenon projecting -on its head can be sprung into the small hole under -the inner gunwales, where it becomes rigidly fixed. -Its sprung shape pushes up the gunwales and makes -the side bark of the ends very taut and smooth, while -supporting the gunwale ends.</p> - -<p>Two thin strips about 19 feet long are next split -out of white cedar to form the gunwale caps; these -are ¼ to ⅜ inch thick, and taper each way from about -2 inches wide in the middle to 1 inch wide at the ends.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">[Pg 53]</a></span> -These are laid along the top of the inner gunwales -and fastened down with pegs placed clear of the -gunwale lashings. The ends of the strips are usually -secured by two or three small lashings; the caps thus -formed often stop short of the ends of the inner -gunwale members. If the caps are carried right -out to the stems, as was the practice of some Malecite -builders, the lashings of the outwale are not turned -in until after the caps are in place, in which case -the bark deck pieces, or flaps, are put in just before -the final lashing is made.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i069.jpg" width="700" height="310" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 45</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Sixth Stage of Canoe Construction</span>: canoe has been righted and placed on a grassy or -sandy spot. In this stage splints for sheathing (upper left) are fixed in place and held by -temporary ribs (lower right) under the gunwales. The bark cover has been completely sewn -and the shape of the canoe is set by the temporary ribs. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Next, the canoe is turned upside-down and all seams -are gummed smoothly on the outside. The ends, from -the beginning of the seam to above the waterline, may -be heavily gummed and then covered with a narrow -strip of thin bark, heavily enough smeared with gum -to cause it to adhere over the seam. In more recent -times a piece of gummed cloth was used here. Above -this protective strip, the end seams are filled with -gum so that the outside can be smoothed off flush -on the face of the cutwater between the stitches. All -seams in the side and bottom are gummed smooth -and any holes or patches remaining to be gummed are -taken care of in this final inspection.</p> - -<p>If the canoe is to be decorated (not many types -were) the outside of the bark is moistened and the -rough, reddish winter bark, or inner rind, is scraped -away, leaving only enough to form the desired decorations. -When paints of various colors could be obtained, -these were also employed, but the use of the -inner rind was apparently the older and more common -method of decorating.</p> - -<p>The paddles are made from splints of spruce or -maple, ash, white cedar, or larch. Two forms of -blade were used by the Malecite. The older form is -long and narrow, with the blade wide near the top -and the taper straight along each edge to a narrow, -rounded point. Above the greatest width, the blade -tapers almost straight along the edge, coming into -an oval handle very quickly. At the head, the -handle is widened and it ends squared off, but the -taper toward the handle is straight, not flared as -in modern canoe paddles; there is no swelling. -Paddles of a shape similar to this, some without a -wide handle, were used by other eastern Indians. -The more recent form of Malecite paddle has a -long leaf-shaped, or beaver-tail, blade, much like -that of the modern canoe paddle, except that it ends -in a dull point; the handle is as in the old form but -the head is swelled to form the upper grip. The face -of the blade, in both old and new form, has a noticeable -ridge down the centerline.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">[Pg 54]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i070.jpg" width="700" height="463" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 46</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">General Details of Birch-Bark Canoe Construction</span>, in a drawing by Adney. (From -<cite>Harper's Young People</cite>, supplement, July 29, 1890.)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The eastern style of construction described here -produced what might be called a wide-bottom canoe -with some tumble-home above the turn of the bilge, -but a different method of construction was used to -produce canoes having a narrow bottom and flaring -sides. These canoes were not set up on the building -bed, in the first steps of shaping the hull, with the -gunwale frame on the cover bark. Instead, a special -building frame, mentioned earlier, was used. Each -tribe using the building frame had its own style, -but the variations were confined to minor matters or -to proportion of width to length.</p> - -<p>In general, the building frame is made of two -squared battens, about 1¼ inch square for an 18-foot -canoe. These, sometimes tapered slightly toward -each end, are fitted with crosspieces with halved -notches in each end to fit over the top of the battens. -There may be as many as nine or as few as three of -these crosspieces, with seven apparently a common -number. Where ends of the long battens join they -are beveled slightly on the inside face and notches -are cut on the outside face to take the end lashings. -Each crosspiece end is lashed around the long battens, -a hole being made in each end of the crosspiece -for this purpose. The lashings, commonly bark or -rawhide thongs, are all temporary, as the building -frame has to be dismantled to remove it from the -canoe. Sometimes holes are drilled in the ends of -the crosspieces, or in the long battens, and in them -are stepped the posts used to fix the sheer of the -gunwales.</p> - -<p>The methods of construction, using the building -frame, varied somewhat among the tribes. Since the -gunwale was both longer and wider across than the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">[Pg 55]</a></span> -building frame, the posts for sheering were set with -outboard flare. However, some builders made the -gunwales hogged by staking them out when green, -and then set them above the building frame with -vertical posts. These gunwales would not be fitted -with thwarts nor would the thwart tenons always be -cut at this stage. The bark was lashed to the gunwales -while they were in the hogged position with -the ends secured; the gunwales were then spread by -inserting spreaders, or stays, between them, after -which the thwarts were fitted. This method required -knowledge of just how much hog should be given to -the gunwales, and it must be stated that not all -builders guessed right enough to produce a good-looking -sheer. Judging the hogging required in the -gunwales was complicated by the fact that most of -these canoes had laminated ends in the gunwales at -bow and stern, and a quick upturn there as well. -This method of construction persisted, however, -because the straight sides made easy the sewing of -gores and side panels. In some Alaskan birch-bark -canoes the building frame was, in fact, part of the -hull structure and remained in the canoe. In these, -the building frame was hogged and then flattened by -the ribs in construction so as to smooth the bottom -bark by placing it under tension. In some canoes -the posts for sheering the canoe rested under the -thwarts rather than under the gunwales. In most -canoes the building frame was taken apart and removed -from the canoe when the gunwale structure -was complete and in place, sheered.</p> - -<p>Where large sheets of bark were available, the -setting up with the building frame or gunwale was -made easier than where the bark had to be pieced -out for both length and width. If large pieces of -bark could be obtained there was little or no sewing -on the bottom; only the gores or laps, and the panels, -in the side required attention after the bark had been -lashed to the gunwales. In such instances, the set-up -did not require perpendicular sides, as the sides -could be completed after the canoe was removed from -the building bed and the building frame had been -removed from the hull. There were many minor -variations in the set-up and in the sequence of the -sewing. In view of the slight opportunities that now -exist for examining the old building methods and -construction sequences, it is impossible to be certain -that the one used by a tribe in recent times was that -employed in prehistoric times by their ancestors.</p> - -<p>Instead of a laminated stem-piece, a large root -whittled to the desired cross section was sometimes -used by builders among the Malecites and other -eastern tribes. This was bent into the ends while -green and to it was lashed the bark, so that the stem -dried in place to the desired profile curve. No inner -stem-piece was used by the Micmacs, who formed -the end structure by placing a split-root batten on -each outside face of the bark and passing the lashing -around both. When a plank-on-edge was used to form -the stem-piece, as mentioned earlier, no headboard -was required, as the gunwales ends could be brought -to the plank structure. In canoes having the complicated -stem structure seen in the large fur-trade canoes -and some others, the headboard became an integral -part of the stem structure, rather than an independent -unit, and was placed in the canoe during building -with the stem-pieces.</p> - -<p>There was much variation in the form of gunwale -structure employed in bark canoes. A strip of bark -was added all along the outwale by some tribes, so -that between the gunwale members and for a short -distance below the sewing the bark was doubled; the -bottom of this strip was, in fact, a flap not secured and -thus was much like the flaps at the ends of the Malecite -canoe, but without covering the top of the main gunwales. -The outwale and inwale cross sections of -some canoes were almost round. The use of a single -gunwale member is commonly followed by continuous -lashing of the bark along it. On some northwestern -canoes having continuous lashing, the ends of the -ribs were made in sharp points that could penetrate -between the turns of root sewing, under the gunwales. -The ends of the ribs in some of these were secured -more firmly by tying them to long battens placed -between the ribs and the bark cover just below the -gunwales. The northwestern canoes built in this -manner had double gunwales, an outwale and an -inwale, but no bevel or notch for the rib heads. The -ends of the gunwales, inner and outer, were secured -in many ways. Some, instead of being pegged and -lashed, were simply tied together; others were fastened -by a rather elaborate lashing through the bark and -around the gunwales. Caps were sometimes allowed -to overlap at the ends and were pinned together with -pegs or lashed. In some canoes the outwales were -lashed, rather than pegged, to the inwales, and for -this and for the caps rawhide appears to have once -been widely used. In some canoes the head of the -stem-piece was bent inboard sharply and lashed to -the ends of the inwales or outwales. In many canoes -the gunwales, instead of stopping short of the stem-piece, -ran to it and were lashed there.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56">[Pg 56]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i072.jpg" width="700" height="471" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 47</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Gunwale Construction</span> and -thwart or crossbar fastenings, as -shown in a sketch by Adney. -(From <cite>Harper's Young People</cite>, supplement, -July 29, 1890.)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>At the start of ribbing out a canoe, the first two -or three ribs might not be put at each end until after -the headboards had been fitted, and sometimes a rib -was placed on each side of the middle thwart, apparently -to hold securely the sheathing butted amidships -while the ribbing progressed toward them from -the ends. When a canoe was short and rather wide, -the ribs usually were bent by placing them inside the -faired bark cover before the sheathing was installed, -there to dry and set or to season, depending on whether -they were steamed or green. Prebending the ribs, -as described in the building of a Malecite canoe, -worked well only when the canoe was long, narrow, -and sharp. The spacing of the ribs was done by eye, -not by precise measurement, and was never exactly -the same over the length of the canoe. Ribs near -the ends were usually spaced at greater intervals than -those in the middle third of the length.</p> - -<p>The extension of the bark beyond the ends of the -inner gunwale in an eastern canoe was often about one -foot on each end, but this distance was actually determined -by the length of the bark available and by the -usual reluctance of the builder to add a panel at the -end.</p> - -<p>For the height of the end posts, in sheering the -gunwales, a common Malecite measurement was the -length of the forearm from knuckles of clenched fist -to back of elbow. These posts were often left in place -until the stems were fitted.</p> - -<p>The use of a building frame is known to have -been common in areas where, normally, the gunwale -frame would be employed in the initial steps in building. -In a few instances this occurred when a builder -had a number of canoes of the same size to construct. -It seems probable that the use of the building frame -spread into Eastern areas comparatively recently as -a result of the influence of the fur-trade canoes on -construction methods. The employment of the plank -building bed in the East is known to have occurred -among individual canoe builders late in the nineteenth -century as a result of this influence.</p> - -<p>The use of nails and tacks instead of pegs and -root lashing or sewing in bark canoe construction -became quite widespread early in the nineteenth -century; it is to be seen in many old canoes preserved -in museums. The bark in these is often secured to the -gunwales with carpet or flat-headed tacks, and both -the outwale and the cap are nailed to the inner gunwales -with cut or wire nails. Various combinations -of lashings and nailing can be seen in these canoes, -although such combinations are sometimes the result -of comparatively recent repairs or restorations rather -than evidence of the original construction. No date -can be placed on the introduction of nails into Indian -canoe building, although it may be said that nailing -was used in many eastern areas before 1850.</p> - -<p>Among the many published descriptions of the -method of building bark canoes the earliest give very -incomplete information on the building sequence<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57">[Pg 57]</a></span> -and usually contain obvious errors as to proportions -and materials. (An example is that of Nicolas Denys, -who, sometime between 1632 and 1650, saw bark -canoes being built in what is now New Brunswick -and Cape Breton.) The best descriptions are relatively -recent and, as a result, may describe methods -of construction that are not aboriginal.</p> - -<p>The description given here is based upon notes -made by Adney in 1889-90 and upon inspection of -old canoes from the various tribal areas. It was noted -that, although among canoes of the same approximate -length there was some variation in dimensions -and some variety in end form, the construction -appeared to vary remarkably little, and it is apparent -that the Malecites held very closely to a fixed sequence -in the building process. There was, however, great -variation in detail. The number of gore slashes in -canoes 18 to 19 feet long varied from 10 to 23 on a -side. The number was not always the same on both -sides of a canoe nor were the gores always opposite -one another. Canoes with long, sharp ends often -had a large number of closely spaced gores in the -middle third of the length, with widely spaced gores -toward the ends. Full-ended canoes, on the other -hand, had rather equally spaced gores their full -length. The amount and form of rocker was also a -factor in spacing the gores, and when the rocker was -confined to short distances close to the ends there -would naturally be rather closely spaced gores in -these portions of the sides.</p> - -<p>A number of the building practices remain to be -described, but these will be best understood when the -individual tribal canoe forms are examined. No -written description of building canoes can be understood -without reference to drawings, and to promote -this understanding construction details have been -shown on many of those of individual canoes of each -tribal type.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i073.jpg" width="700" height="405" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 48</p> - -<p>"<span class="smcap">Peter Joe at Work.</span>" Drawing by Adney for his article "How an Indian -Birch-Bark Canoe is Made" (<cite>Harper's Young People</cite>, supplement, July 29, 1890).</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58">[Pg 58]</a></span></p> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2><em>Chapter Four</em><br /> - -EASTERN MARITIME REGION</h2> - - -<p>Study of the tribal forms of bark canoes might -well be started with the canoes of the eastern coastal -Indians, whose craft were the first seen by white men. -These were the canoes of the Indians inhabiting what -are now the Maritime Provinces and part of Quebec, -on the shores of the St. Lawrence River and in Newfoundland, -in Canada, and of the Indians of Maine -and New Hampshire, in New England. Within this -area were the Micmac, the Malecite, and the mixture -of tribal groups known as the Abnaki in modern times, -as well as the Beothuk of Newfoundland. All these -groups were expert canoe builders and it was their -work that first impressed the white men with the -virtues of the birch-bark canoe in forest travel.</p> - - -<h3><em>Micmac</em></h3> - -<p>The Micmac Indians appear to have occupied the -Gaspé Peninsula, most of the north shore of New -Brunswick and nearly all the shores of the Bay of -Fundy as well as all of Nova Scotia, Prince Edward -Island, and Cape Breton. They may have also occupied -much of southern and central New Brunswick -as well, but if so they had been driven from these -sections by the Malecites before the white men came. -The Micmacs were known to the early French invaders -under a variety of names; "Gaspesians," -"Canadiens," "Sourikois," or "Souriquois," while -the English colonists of New England called them -merely "Eastern Indians." The name Micmac is -said to mean "allies" and not known, but this name -was in use early in the 18th century, if not before 1700.</p> - -<p>The Micmac were a hunting people with warlike -characteristics; they aided the Malecite and other -New England Indians in warfare against the early -New England colonists and in later times aided the -French against the English in Nova Scotia and New -Brunswick. These Indians lived in an area where -water transport represented the easiest method of -travel and so they became expert builders and users -of birch-bark canoes, which they employed in hunting, -fishing, general travel, and warfare.</p> - -<p>The area in which they lived produced fine birch -bark and suitable wood for the framework. Through -experience, they had become able to design canoes -for specific purposes and had produced a variety of -models and sizes. The hunting canoe was the smallest, -being usually somewhere between 9 and 14 feet -long, with an occasional canoe as long as 15 feet. -This light craft, known as a "woods canoe" and sometimes -as a "portage canoe," was intended for navigating -very small streams and for portaging. Another -model, the "big-river canoe," somewhat longer than -the woods canoe, was usually between 15 and 20 feet -long. A third model, the "open water canoe," was for -hunting seal and porpoise in salt water and ranged from -about 18 feet to a little over 24 feet in length. The -fourth model, the "war canoe," about which little is -known, appears to have been built in either the "big-river" -or "open-water" form, and to the same length, -but sharper and with less beam so as to be faster.</p> - -<p>The tribal characteristics of the Micmac birch-bark -canoes were to be seen in the form of the midsection, -in certain structural details, and in their generally -sharp, torpedo-shaped lines. The construction was -very light and marked by good workmanship. The -distinctive profiles of bow and stern, which do not -appear in the canoes of other tribes in so radical a -form, were almost circular, fairing from the bottom -around into the sheer in a series of curves. The -break in the profile of the ends at the sheer, a break -that marks in more or less degree, the end profile -of other tribal forms, never occurs in the Micmac -canoe. At most, a slight break in the "streamlined"<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59">[Pg 59]</a></span> -curve might occur at the point where the profile was -started in the bottom, at which point there might be -a short, hard curve.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i075.jpg" width="700" height="434" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 49</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Micmac 2-Fathom Pack, or Woods, Canoe</span> for woods travel with light loads, -used by the Nova Scotia Micmacs.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The form of the sheer line of the Micmac canoes -apparently varied with the model: the woods canoe -had the usual curved sheer with the point of lowest -freeboard about amidships, the big river canoe had -either a nearly straight sheer or one very slightly -hogged, while the open-water canoe had a strongly -hogged sheer in which the midship portion was often -as much as 3 or 4 inches above that just inboard of the -ends. However, there is a possibility that, at one time, -the sheer of all Micmac canoes was more or less -hogged. The little that is known of the war canoes of -colonial times indicate that they had the strongly -hogged sheer that now marks the open-water model, -through it is also known that some of these were -really of the big-river model, which in later times had -usually no more than a vestige of the hogged sheer.</p> - -<p>The hull-forms of the Micmac canoes were marked -in the topsides by a strong tumble-home, carried the -full length of the hull, that gave these canoes more -beam below than at the gunwale. The form of the -midsection varied with the model; the woods canoe -usually had a rather flat bottom athwartships, the -big river canoe a slightly rounded bottom, and the -open water canoe either a well-rounded bottom or -one in the form of a slightly rounded <strong>V</strong>. The fore-and-aft -rocker in the bottom was always moderate, -usually occurring in the last few feet near the ends; -however, many of the canoes were straight along the -bottom. This condition will be again referred to in -discussing the building beds used in this type. The -ends were usually fine-lined; in plan view the gunwales -came into the ends in straight or slightly hollow -lines. The level lines below the gunwales might also -be straight as they came into the ends, but were -commonly somewhat hollow; a few examples show -marked hollowness there. Predominantly, the Micmac -canoes were very sharp in the ends and paddled -swiftly. Early Micmac canoes seem to have been -narrower than more recent examples, which are -usually rather broad as compared to the types used -by some other tribes.</p> - -<p>Structurally, the Micmac canoes were distinguished -by the construction of the ends and by their light<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60">[Pg 60]</a></span> -build throughout. The canoes had no inner framework -to shape the ends; stiffness there was obtained -by placing battens outside the bark, one on each side -of the hull, that ran from the bottom of the cut in the -bark required to shape the ends to somewhat inboard -of the ends of the gunwales at the sheer. These two -battens, as well as a split-root stem-band covering the -raw ends of the cut bark, were held in place by -passing a spiral over-and-over lashing around all -three. Sometimes thicker battens reaching from the -high point of the ends inboard to the end thwarts -were added, in which case the side battens were -stopped at the high point of the ends and there -faired into the thick battens.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i076.jpg" width="700" height="454" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 50</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Micmac 2-Fathom Pack, or Woods, Canoe</span> with Northern Lights decoration -on bow, and seven thwarts.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The gunwale structure was rather light, the maximum -cross section of the main gunwale in large -canoes being rarely in excess of 1¼ inches square. -These members usually tapered slightly toward the -ends of the canoe and had a half-arrowhead form -where they were joined. Old canoes had no guard -or outwale, but some more recent Micmac canoes -have had a short guard along the middle third of the -length. Often there was no bevel to take the rib ends -on the lower outboard corner of the main gunwales, -and the gunwales were not fitted so that their outboard -faces stood vertically. Instead, the tenons in -the gunwales were cut to slant upward from the -inside, so that installation of the thwarts would cause -the outboard face to flare outward at the top. Between -this face and the inside of the bark cover were -forced the beveled ends of the ribs, which were cut -chisel-shape. However, some builders beveled or -rounded the lower outboard corner of the main -gunwale, as described under Malecite canoe building -(p. <a href="#Page_38">38</a>). The bark cover in the Micmac canoe was -always brought up over the gunwales, gored to -prevent unevenness, and folded down on top of them -before being lashed. The gunwale lashing was a -continuous one in which the turns practically touched -one another outboard, though they were sometimes -separated under the gunwale to clear the ribs, which -widened near their ends, so the intervals between -them were very small.</p> - -<p>The other member of the gunwale structure was -the cap; its thickness was usually ¼ to ⅜ inch, reduced -slightly toward the ends. Its inboard face and the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61">[Pg 61]</a></span> -bottom were flat, but the top was somewhat rounded, -with the thickness reduced toward the outboard edge. -The cap was fastened to the main gunwales with -pegs and with short lashing groups near the ends, but -in late examples nails were used. The ends of the -caps were bevelled off on the inboard side, so that -they came together in pointed form. The cap usually -ended near the end of the gunwale but in some canoes, -particularly those that were nail-fastened, the cap -was let into the gunwale (see p. <a href="#Page_50">50</a>) so that the top -was flush with end of the gunwale.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i077.jpg" width="700" height="496" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 51</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Micmac 2-Fathom Pack, or Woods, Canoe</span> with normal sheer and flat bottom.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The ends of the gunwales were supported by headboards -that were bellied outboard to bring tension -vertically on the bark cover. The heel of the board -stood on a short frog, laid on the bottom with the -inboard end touching or slightly lapping over the -endmost rib. The frog supported the heels of the -headboard and also the forefoot of the stem-piece, -which otherwise would have but partial support -from the sewing battens outside the ends at these -points. The headboard was rather oval-shaped and -the top was notched on each side to fit under the -gunwale; the narrow central tenon stood slightly -above the top of the main gunwales when the headboard -was sprung into place and was held in position -by a lashing across the gunwales inboard of the top of -the headboard. The heel was held by the notch in -the frog. Cedar shavings were stuffed into the ends -of the canoe between the stem-piece and the headboard -to mold the ends properly, as no ribs could be inserted -there. All woodwork in these canoes was white cedar, -except the headboards and thwarts, which were -maple, and the stem battens, which were usually -basket ash but sometimes were split spruce roots.</p> - -<p>The more recent Micmac canoes usually had no -more than five thwarts; this number was found even -on small woods canoes. However, old records indicate -that canoes 20 to 28 feet long on the gunwales -were once built with seven thwarts. The shape of the -thwarts varied, apparently in accordance with the -builder's fancy. The most common form was nearly -rectangular in cross-section; in elevation, it was thick -at the hull centerline and tapered smoothly to the -outboard ends; and in plan it was narrowest at the -hull centerline and increased in width toward the -ends, the increase being rather sharp at the shoulders<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62">[Pg 62]</a></span> -of the tenon. In some, the tenon went through the -main gunwales and touched the inside of the bark -cover; in others the ends of the thwarts were pointed -in elevation, square in plan, and were inserted in -shallow, blind tenons on the inboard side of the main -gunwales. A single 3-turn lashing through a hole in -the shoulder and around the main gunwale was used -in every case.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i078.jpg" width="700" height="424" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 51</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Micmac 2-Fathom Pack, or Woods, Canoe</span> with normal sheer and flat bottom.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Sometimes the thwarts just described were straight -(in plan view) on the side toward the middle of the -canoe, and only the middle thwart was alike on both -sides. In others the straight side of the end thwart -and of that next inboard were toward the bow and -stern of the canoe. In still others, the middle thwart -had a rounded barb form in plan, with the barb -located within 6 or 7 inches of the shoulder and pointed -toward the tenon; the next thwarts out on each side of -the middle thwart were shaped like a cupid's bow but -slightly angular and aimed toward the ends of the -canoe, and the end thwarts were of similar plan. In -one known example having such thwarts, there were -two very short thwarts at the ends of the canoe, of the -usual plain form described earlier, each a few inches -inboard of the headboard. Thus this canoe had -seven thwarts in the old fashion.</p> - -<p>The ribs, or frames, were thin, about ¼ or <sup>5</sup>⁄<sub>16</sub> inch -thick, and across the bottom of the canoe they were -often 3 inches wide. In the topsides the ribs were -tapered to about 2 inches in width; when the bottom -and outboard corner of the main gunwales were not -beveled, the rib ends were cut square across on the -wide face and chisel-shaped. When the gunwale -corner was beveled, the ribs were formed with a -sharply tapered dull point at the ends. From the -middle of the canoe to the first thwarts each way from -the middle, the ribs were spaced 1 inch edge-to-edge. -From the first thwarts to the ends, the spacing was -about 1½ inches. Most builders made the ribs narrower -toward the ends; if those in the middle of the -canoe were 3 inches wide, those near the ends might -be 2½. They were shaped and placed as described -for the Malecite canoe in Chapter 3.</p> - -<p>In the construction of a Micmac canoe, the gunwales -were first formed, assembled, and used as a -building frame. If the sheer was to be hogged, this -was done by treating the main gunwales with boiling<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63">[Pg 63]</a></span> -water before assembly and then staking them out to -dry in the required sheer curves. The building bed -was well crowned, usually 2 to 2½ inches because of -the very wide bottom and the tumble-home of these -canoes. Most Micmac canoes appear to have had -only slight fore-and-aft rocker in the bottom; the -bottoms of the seagoing type were often quite straight, -and the other two types had a slight rocker of perhaps -1½ inches, most of it near the ends. When the sheer -was hogged, the amount of hog was probably close to -the amount of crown in the building bed. The ends -of the gunwales, when laid on the bed, were blocked -up to about the desired amount of rocker to be given -the bottom.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i079.jpg" width="700" height="400" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 53</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Micmac 3-Fathom Ocean Canoe Fitted for Sailing.</span> Short outwales or -battens project gunwales to strengthen the ends of the canoe. Some specimens -of this type of canoe had almost no rocker in the bottom.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The bark cover was selected with great care from -the fine stand of paper birch available to the Micmac. -Except in emergencies, only winter bark was used. -The cover was gored six to eight times on each side, -and most of these cuts were grouped amidships, -owing to the sharpness of the ends. The gores were -trimmed edge-to-edge, without overlap, as the -Micmac preferred a smooth surfaced canoe, and the -sewing was the common spiral, over and over. The -width of the bark cover was usually pieced out -amidships on each side (at least in existing models) -by the addition of narrow panels. These may not -have been necessary in the very old canoes, which -appear to have been much narrower than more recent -examples. The horizontal seams of the panels were -straight, or nearly so, and did not follow the sheer. -The closely spaced spiral over-and-over stitch was -sewn over a batten, the lap being toward the gunwale. -As has been said, a continuous over-and-over gunwale -lashing was used. The thwart lashings were through -single holes in the thwart shoulders, three turns -being usual, and two turns around the gunwale on -each side were added, all passing through the bark -cover, of course. The sewing was neat and the -stitches were even.</p> - -<p>The wood lining, or sheathing, of the Micmac -canoe was like that described for the Malecite canoe -in the last chapter. The sheathing was a full ⅛ to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64">[Pg 64]</a></span> -about <sup>3</sup>⁄<sub>16</sub> inch thick. The strakes were laid edge-to-edge -longitudinally, with slightly overlapping butts -amidships, and were tapered toward the ends of the -canoe. The maximum width of any strake at the -butts was about 4 inches.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i080a.jpg" width="700" height="321" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 54</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Micmac Rough-Water Canoe</span>, Bathurst, N.B. (<em>Canadian -Geological Survey photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>In some of the rough-water canoes fitted to sail, a -guard strip running the full length of the canoe and -located some 6 or 7 inches below the gunwale was -placed along both sides to protect the strongly -tumble-home sides from abrasion from the paddles, -particularly when the craft was steered under sail. -These strips, about <sup>5</sup>⁄<sub>16</sub> inch thick and ¾ inch wide, -were butted on each side, a little abaft amidships, -and were held together by a single stitch. The -guards were secured in place by rather widely spaced -stitches around them that passed through the bark -cover and ceiling, between the ribs in the topsides. -At bow and stern, the ends of the guards butted -against the battens outside the bark at the end -profiles and were secured there by a through-all -lashing.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i080b.jpg" width="700" height="358" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 55</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Micmac Woods Canoe</span>, built by Malecite Jim Paul at St. -Mary's Reserve in 1911, under the direction of Joe Pictou, -old canoe builder of Bear River, N.S. Modern nailed type. -(<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The proportions and measurements of the Micmac -canoes appear to have changed between the colonial -period and the late 19th century. From early refer<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65">[Pg 65]</a></span>ences, -it is apparent that the early canoes were much -narrower than later ones, in proportion to length, as -mentioned earlier. An 18-foot rough-water canoe of -the 18th century appears to have had an extreme -beam of between 30 and 34 inches and a gunwale -beam, measured inside the members, of 24 to 28 -inches, the depth amidships being about 18 to 20 -inches. A similar canoe late in the 19th century -would have had an extreme beam of nearly 40 inches, -a beam inside the gunwales of 33 or 34 inches, and a -depth of about 18 inches or less. An early woods -canoe, about 14 feet long overall, appears to have had -an extreme beam of only 29 inches and a beam inside -the gunwales of about 25 or 26 inches. A woods -canoe of 1890 was 15 feet long, 36½ inches extreme -beam, and 30 inches inside the gunwales, with the -depth amidships about 11 inches. A big-river canoe -of this same date was a little over 20 feet in extreme -length, 18 feet over the gunwales, 41 inches extreme -beam, and 34 inches gunwale width inside, with a -depth amidships of about 12½ inches. An 18-foot -big-river canoe of an earlier time was reported as -being 37 inches extreme beam, 30½ inches inside the -gunwales, and 13 inches depth amidships. The maximum -size of the rough-water seagoing canoe, in early -times, may have been as great as 28 feet but with a -narrow beam of roughly 29 or 30 inches over the -gunwales, and say 24 inches inside, with a depth -amidships as much as 20 or 22 inches due to the -strongly hogged sheer there. In modern times, such -canoes were rarely over 21 feet in overall length and -had a maximum beam of about 42 inches, a beam -inside the gunwales of 36 or 37 inches, and a depth -amidships of 16 or 17 inches.</p> - -<p>In early colonial times, and well into the 18th century, -apparently, the Micmac type of canoe was used -as far south as New England, probably having been -brought there by the Micmac war parties aiding the -Malecite and the Kennebec in their wars against the -English. The canoe in the illustration on page <a href="#Page_12">12</a> is -obviously a Micmac canoe and apparently one used -by a war party. As it was brought to England in 1749 -in the ship <em>America</em>, which was built in Portsmouth, -New Hampshire, and probably sailed from there, it -seems highly probable that the canoe had been -obtained nearby, perhaps in eastern Maine.</p> - -<p>The small woods canoe, most commonly about 12 -feet long, appears first to have been used by all the -Micmac. By the middle of the 19th century, however, -this type was to be found only in Nova Scotia, owing to -the movement of most of the tribe toward the north -shore in New Brunswick, where their inland navigation -was confined to large rivers and the coast. -Hence the Micmac in New Brunswick used the big-river -model and the seagoing type. The latter was -last used in the vicinity of the head of Bay Chaleur -and was often called the Restigouche canoe, after the -Micmac village of that name. It was replaced by a -3-board skiff-canoe and finally by a large wooden -canoe of the "Peterborough" type with peaked ends -and lapstrake planking; some of the latter may still -be seen on the Gaspé Peninsula.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i081.jpg" width="700" height="628" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 56</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Micmac Rough-Water Canoe</span> fitted for -sailing. (<em>Photo W. H. Mechling, 1913.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The use of sail in the Micmac canoes cannot be -traced prior to the arrival of the white men. The use -probably resulted from the influence of Europeans, -but it is possible that the prehistoric Indians may -have set up a leafy bush in the bow of their canoes to -act as a sail with favorable winds. The old Nova -Scotia expression "carrying too much bush," meaning -over-canvassing a boat, is thought by some to have -originated from an Indian practice observed there -by the first settlers. In early colonial times, the -Micmac used a simple square sail in their canoes and -this, by the last decade of the 19th century, was -replaced by a spritsail probably inspired by the dory-sail -of the fishermen. The Indian rig was unusual -in several respects. The sheet, for example, was -double-ended; one end was made fast to the clew -of the sail and the other to the head of the sprit, so -that it served also as a vang. The bight was secured<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66">[Pg 66]</a></span> -within reach of the steersman by a half hitch to a -crossbar fixed well aft across the gunwales. The -sail, nearly rectangular and with little or no peak, -was laced to the mast, and the sprit was supported by -a "snotter" lanyard tied low on the mast. A sprit -boom was also carried by some canoes; this was -secured to the clew of the sail and to the mast, a -snotter lanyard being used at the latter position.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i082a.jpg" width="700" height="297" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 57</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Micmac Rough-Water Canoe, Bay Chaleur.</span> (<em>Photo H. V. Henderson, West -Bathurst, N.B.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i082b.jpg" width="700" height="374" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 58</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Micmac Rough-Water Sailing Canoe, Bay Chaleur.</span> -(<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The mast was secured by a thwart pegged, or -nailed, across the gunwale caps. Sometimes, the -thwart was also notched over the caps, so that the -side-thrust caused by the leverage of the mast would -not shear the fastenings. The crossbar for the sheet -was sometimes similarly fastened and fitted, with its -ends projecting outboard of the gunwales. The heel -of the mast was sometimes stepped into a block, -which was usually about 5 inches square and 1½ inches -thick, nailed or pegged to the center bottom board, -or sometimes it was merely stepped into a hole in the -center bottom board. The bottom boards, usually<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67">[Pg 67]</a></span> -three in number were of wide, thin stock and were -clamped in place over the ribs by three or four false -frames driven under the thwarts, just as were the -canoe ribs under the gunwales.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i083.jpg" width="700" height="416" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 59</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Details of Micmac Canoes, Including Mast and Sail.</span></p></div> -</div> - -<p>The canoes could not sail close-hauled, as a rule, -though some Indians learned to use a leeboard in -the form of a short plank hung vertically over the lee -side and secured by a lanyard to a thwart, the board -being shifted in tacking. An alternate was to have a -passenger hold a paddle vertically on the lee side. -There seems to have been no fixed proportions to the -area of sail used; the actual areas appear to have -been somewhere between 50 and 100 square feet, -depending upon the size of the canoe. Joseph -Dadaham, a Micmac, stated in 1925 that he used -"24 yards" in the sail of a "rough-water canoe" 20 -feet long and about 44 inches beam, while one 18 -feet long and about 36 inches extreme beam carried -"16 to 18 yards"; it is obvious that the "yards" are of -narrow sail cloth and not square yards of finished -sail. In the last days of sailing bark canoes, mast -hoops and a halyard block were fitted so that the -sail could be lowered instead of having to be furled -around the mast (to accomplish this the "crew" had -to stand). Dadaham also stated that for his sheet -belay he used a jamb-hitch which could be released -quickly when the canoe was found to be overpowered -by the wind. It appears that during the last era of -these bark canoes the rig had been improved to fit it -for open-water sailing.</p> - -<p>The paddles used by the Micmac appear to have -varied in shape. If the canoe shown in Chapter 1 (p. <a href="#Page_12">12</a>) -was indeed a Micmac canoe as supposed, the paddle -shown there is quite different from the later tribal -forms illustrated above, and it is possible that the -top grips shown in the more modern forms were never -used in prehistoric times, when the pole handle shown -with the old canoe may have been standard.</p> - -<p>The Micmac canoes were decorated by scraping -away part of the inner rind of the birch bark, leaving -portions of it in a formal design. It seems very -probable that the Micmac seldom used this form of -decoration in early times, but later they used it a -great deal in their rough-water canoes, perhaps as a -result of contact with the Malecite. The formal -designs used as decoration by the Micmac did not<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68">[Pg 68]</a></span> -have any particular significance as a totem or religious -symbol; they were used purely as decoration or to -identify the owner. Such forms as the half-moon, a -star in various shapes, or some other figure might be -used by the builder, but these were apparently only -his canoe mark, not a family insignia or his usual -signature, and could be altered at will.</p> - -<p>The usual method of decoration was to place the -canoe mark on both sides of the canoe at the ends and -to have along the gunwales amidships a long narrow -panel of decoration, usually of some simple form. -The panel decorations are said by Micmacs to have -been selected by the builder merely as pleasing -designs. One design used was much like the fleur-de-lis, -another was a series of triangles supposed to -represent camps, still another was the northern lights -design, a series of closely spaced, sloping, parallel -lines (or very narrow panels) that seem to represent -a design much used in the quill decoration for which -the Micmac were noted. Canoes are recorded as -having stylized representations of a salmon, a moose, -a cross, or a very simple star form; these may have -been canoe marks or may once have been a tribal -mark in a certain locality. A series of half-circles -were sometimes used in the gunwale panels, which -were rarely alike on both sides of the canoe, and it is -probable that use was made of other forms that have -not been recorded. Colored quills in northern -lights pattern were used in some model or toy canoes -but not in any surviving example of a full-size canoe. -It is quite possible, however, that such quill-work was -once used in Micmac canoe decoration. Painting of -the bark cover for decorative purposes in Micmac -canoes has not been recorded.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i084.jpg" width="700" height="348" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 60</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Micmac Canoe, Bathurst, N.B.</span> (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Historical references to the canoes of the Micmac -are frequent in the French records of Canada; it -must have been Micmac canoes that Cartier saw in -1534 at Prince Edward Island and in Bay Chaleur. -The most complete description of such canoes is in -the account of Nicolas Denys, who came to the -Micmac country in 1633 and remained there almost -continuously until his death at 90, in 1688. His -travels during this period took him into Maine as -far as the Penobscot and throughout what are now -New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. While his descriptions -are primarily concerned with the Malecite dress, -houses, and hunting and fishing techniques, his notes -on birch-bark canoes seem to indicate very clearly -that he is describing a hogged-sheer Micmac rough-water -canoe. He says, for example, that the length -of these canoes was between 3 and 4½ fathoms, -the fathom being the French <em>brasse</em>, so that they -ranged in length from 16 to 24 feet over the gunwales. -This gunwale length seems reasonable, since Denys -gives the beam as only about 2 English feet, obviously -a gunwale measurement in view of the great tumble-home -in these canoes. That the Micmac rough-water -canoe is the subject of Denys' observations is further -indicated by his statement that the depth was such -that the gunwales came to the armpits of a man -seated on the bottom. This could only be true in a -canoe having a hogged sheer in the lengths given, -and is, in fact, a slight exaggeration unless the man -referred to was of less than average height. The<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69">[Pg 69]</a></span> -depth would be about 22 English inches, great even -for a 24-foot canoe. Denys states that the inside -sheathing of these canoes was split from cedar. He -also states that the splints were about 4 inches wide, -were tapered toward the ends, and ran the full length -of the canoe. It is probable that they were butted -amidships, as in known examples; this, however, -would have been covered by a rib and might not -have been noticed.</p> - -<p>Denys says that the Indians "bent the cedar ribs -in half-circles to form ribs and shaped them in the -fire." Adney believed this meant by use of hot water. -However, this bending could have been done by what -was known in 17th-century shipbuilding practice as -stoving, in which green lumber was roasted over an -open fire until the sap and wood became hot enough -to allow a strong bend to be made without breakage. -Wood thus treated, when cooled and seasoned somewhat, -would hold the set. While it is certain that -later Indians knew how to employ hot water, it does -not follow that all tribes used this method, particularly -in early times.</p> - -<p>Denys also states that the roots of "fir," split into -three or four parts, were used in sewing. He apparently -used "fir" as a general name for an evergreen. -It is probable that the roots used were of the black -spruce. The technique of building he describes -is about the same as that outlined in the last chapter. -He says that the gunwales were round and that -seven beech thwarts were employed, practices that -differ from those in more recent Micmac canoe -building, and he notes the goring of the bark cover. -Denys states the paddles were made of beech (instead -of maple as was perhaps the case) with blades about -6 inches wide and their length that of an arm (about -27 inches), with the handle a little longer than the -blade. He also says that four, five, or six paddlers -might be aboard a canoe and that a sail was often -used. "Formerly of bark," the sail was made of -a well-dressed hide of a young moose. Since it could -carry eight or ten persons, the canoe Denys is referring -to is obviously a large one. In his building description -he does not mention headboards, rail caps, -or the end forms. It may be assumed that he was -then describing a canoe he had seen during construction -but whose building he did not follow step by step.</p> - -<p>De la Poterie, in his book published in 1722, gives -a profile and top view of what must have been a -Micmac canoe. The probable length indicated must -have been about 22 English feet overall and about -32 inches extreme beam; seven thwarts are shown.</p> - -<p>Late in the 19th century there appears to have -been some fusion of Micmac and Malecite methods of -construction, as Malecite built to Micmac forms and -vice versa. This apparently did not produce a hybrid -form so far as appearance was concerned but it did -affect construction, in that inner end-frames were -used and other details of the Micmac design were -altered. The Micmac, having early come into close -contact with the Europeans, were among the first -Indians to employ nails in the construction of bark -canoes, and this resulted in an early decadence in -their building methods. Hence, some examples of -their canoes show what the Indians termed broken -gunwales, in which the ends of the thwarts were not -tenoned into the gunwales, but rather were let flush -into the top by use of a dovetail cut or, less securely, -by a rectangular recess across the gunwale, and were -held in place with a nail through the thwart end and -the gunwale member.</p> - -<p>From scanty references by early writers, it appears -that a spiral over-and-over lashing was originally -used by the Micmac on the ends and gunwales. The -lower edges of the side panels were sewn over-and-over -a split-root batten. In some extant examples -the gores are sewn with a harness stitch; in others a -simple spiral stitch is used. The cross-stitch does not -appear to have been used by the Micmac. The gunwale -caps were certainly pegged and the ends lashed; -the bark cover was folded over the gunwale tops and -clamped by the caps as well as secured by the gunwale -lashings. Tacking the bark cover to the top of the -gunwales, with the cap nailed over all, marks the -later Micmac canoes. The use of nails and tacks -seems to have begun earlier than 1850.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i085.jpg" width="700" height="360" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 61</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Micmac Woman</span> gumming seams of canoe, -Bathurst, N.B., 1913. (<em>Canadian Geological -Survey photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>In spite of decadent construction methods used in -the last Micmac birch-bark canoes, the model re<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70">[Pg 70]</a></span>mained -a very good one in each type. The half-circular -ends, sharp lines, and standard mid-sectional -forms were unaltered; the hogged sheer was retained -in some degree in at least two of the canoe types, the -rough water and the big river, right down to the end of -bark-canoe building by this tribe. The very fine -design and attractive appearance of the Micmac -canoe may have contributed to the early acceptance -by the early explorers and traders of the birch-bark -canoe as the best mode of water transport for forest -travel.</p> - - -<h3><em>Malecite</em></h3> - -<p>Another tribe expert in canoe building and use -was the Malecite. These Indians were known to the -early French explorers as the "Etchimins" or "Tarratines" -(or Tarytines). Many explanations have -been given for the name Malecite. One is that it -was applied to these people by the Micmac and -is from their word meaning "broken talkers," since -the Micmac had difficulty in understanding them. -When the Europeans came, these people inhabited -central and southern New Brunswick and the shore of -Passamaquoddy Bay, with small groups or tribal subdivisions -in the area of the Penobscot to the Kennebec. -These were early affected by the retreat of the New -England Indians before the whites into eastern and -northern Maine and southeastern Quebec. As a -result, the Penobscot and Kennebec Indians became -part of the group later known as Abnaki, while the -Passamaquoddy Indians remained wholly Malecite -and closely attached to those living along the St. John -River in New Brunswick. Like their neighbors the -Micmac, the Malecite were hunters and warlike; -during the colonial period they were usually friendly -to the French and enemies of the English settlers in -their vicinity. It is not certain that the tribe now -called by that name were actually of a single tribal -stock; it is possible that this designation really covers -a loose federation of small tribal groups who eventually -achieved a common language. In addition, -the tribal designation cannot be wholly accurate -because of the fact that much of the original group -living in New England were absorbed in the Abnaki -in the 17th and 18th centuries. Therefore, the Malecite -are considered here to be those Indians formerly -inhabiting valleys of the St. John and the St. Croix -Rivers, and the Passamaquoddy Bay area. The -remaining portions, the Kennebec and Penobscot -Indians, must now be classed as Abnaki, of whom -more later (see p. <a href="#Page_88">88</a>).</p> - -<p>In considering the birch-bark canoes of the Malecite, -it is important to understand that this tribal -form includes not only the types used in more recent -times in New Brunswick and on Passamaquoddy Bay, -but also an overlapping type related to the later -Abnaki models. The old form of Malecite canoe -used on the large rivers and along the coast appears -to have had rather high-peaked ends, with a marked -overhang fore and aft. The end profiles had a -sloping outline, strongly curved into the bottom, and -a rather sharply lifting sheer toward each end. This -form was also to be seen in old canoes from the St. -John River (the lower valley), the Passamaquoddy, -the Penobscot, and the upper St. Lawrence. By late -in the 19th century, however, this style of canoe had -been replaced by canoes having rounded ends, the -profiles being practically quarter-circles and sometimes -with such small radii that a slight tumble-home -appeared near the sheer. The small radius of the end -curves is particularly marked in some of the seagoing -porpoise-hunting canoes of the Passamaquoddy. In -modern forms, the amount of sheer is moderate and -the quick lift in the sheer to the ends is practically -nonexistent. On the St. Lawrence, the radii of the -end curves are very short and the upper part of the -stems stands vertical and straight; the sheer, too, is -usually rather straight. The older type, with high-peaked -ends, was also marked by very sharp lines forward -and aft, and had a midsection with tumble-home -less extreme than in the Micmac canoes. The bottom, -athwartships, was usually somewhat rounded -(in coastal canoes the form might be a rounded <strong>V</strong>) -and the bilges were rather slack, with a reverse -curve above, to form the tumble-home rather close -to the gunwales. The river model probably had -lower ends and less rake than the coastal type, but -surviving examples of both give confusing evidence. -The river canoes usually had a flatter bottom than -the coastal type, the latter having somewhat more -rocker fore-and-aft. The sections near the ends were -rather <strong>V</strong>-shaped in the coastal canoes, <strong>U</strong>-shaped in -the river canoes.</p> - -<p>The old form of small hunting canoe is represented -by but one poor model (see p. <a href="#Page_72">72</a>) in which the ends are -lower and with much less rake than those of the river -type. From this very scant evidence, it seems probable -that the small woods canoes were patterned on the -river canoe in all respects but the profile of the ends.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71">[Pg 71]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i087.jpg" width="700" height="404" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 62</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Malecite 2½-Fathom River Canoe, 19th Century.</span> Old form with raking -ends and much sheer.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>From the early English and French accounts, it is -evident that none of the maritime Indians used very -large or long war canoes, capable of holding many -men. The old war canoes of the Malecite appear to -have been either of the coastal or river types as the -circumstances of their place of building and use -dictated. The slight information available in these -accounts suggests that the war canoe did not differ in -appearance from the other types of Malecite canoes, -and that they were not of greater size. The Malecite -appear to have followed the same practices as the -Micmac, using for war purposes canoes of standard -size and appearance but narrower and built for speed, -since a war party sought to travel rapidly to and -from its objective in order to surprise the enemy and -escape before organized pursuit could be formed. -The Malecite placed four warriors in each canoe, -two to paddle and two to watch and use weapons -while afloat. However, only on rare occasions were -bows and arrows used from canoes afloat; most -fighting was done on land. Each canoe carried the -personal mark of each of the four warriors, apparently -one mark on each flap, or <em>wulegessis</em>, under the gunwales -near the ends. When a war leader was carried -however, only his mark was on his canoe. After a -successful raid, the Malecite used to race for the last -mile or so of the return journey, and the winning -canoe was given, as a distinction, some mark or -picture, often something humorous such as a caricature -of an animal. This practice, however, was not -confined to war canoes; in rather recent times it has -been noted that such pictures were placed on any -canoe that had shown outstanding qualities in racing -competition or in exhibitions of skill.</p> - -<p>When making long canoe trips, the Malecite -followed the widespread Indian practice of using the -canoe as a shelter at night. When a camping place -was reached, the canoe was unloaded, carried ashore, -and turned upside down so that the tops of the ends -and one gunwale rested on the ground. If the ends -were high enough, as in the old Malecite type, one -gunwale was raised off the ground far enough to -permit a man to crawl under. If, as in the Micmac -canoes, the ends were too low to allow this, they -were raised off the ground by short forked sticks, -with the forks resting against the end thwarts and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72">[Pg 72]</a></span> -the upper gunwale and the heels stuck into the earth. -The dunnage (provisions or other cargo) was then -stowed on the ground under the ends of the canoe -and the two men would sleep under a single blanket -with their feet pointed in opposite directions, each -with his head on a pile of dunnage. If there were -too many men aboard to do this, in bad weather a -crude shelter was made by resting some poles on the -upturned bilge and covering them with sheets of -bark; under such a shelter meals could be cooked.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i088.jpg" width="700" height="427" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 63</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Old Form of Malecite-Abnaki 2½—Fathom Ocean Canoe</span> of the Penobscots. -In the Peabody Museum, Salem, Mass.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>As did many of the eastern Indians, the old Malecite -tribesmen built canoes of materials other than -birch bark. When a canoe was required for a temporary -use such as in hunting, it could be made of -spruce bark. (As the designs of such canoes were -rather standardized, they will be dealt with in Chapter -8.) When bark was unobtainable, the Malecite built -canoes covered with moosehide, or, in rare instances, -they built wooden dugouts.</p> - -<p>The old Malecite river canoe shown on page <a href="#Page_71">71</a> -will serve to illustrate a description of the details of -construction that were used. These canoes were -obviously built with their gunwales (which were the -length of the bottom only) serving as a building frame. -The ends of the gunwales were supported by headboards -stepped on the heels of the inner stem-pieces, -and the stems raked outward from their heels. The -gunwale ends were joined to the head of the stem-piece -by the outwales and the gunwale caps. Bark -was used to the ends of the canoe. One side of the -bark cover was cut so that it stood well above the sheer -line from the gunwale end outboard, and the opposite -side was cut to the level of the sheer. The first piece -was then folded over the opposite side and down, so -that it covered both the extreme ends of the gunwales -and the top of the inner stem-piece. Another piece -of bark was then fitted over this fold, and this new -piece formed the flaps below the outwales on each -side, the <em>wulegessis</em>. The outwales ran past the gunwale -ends and were cut off flush with the outboard -face of the stem; the caps ran likewise and covered the -bark over the head of the inner stem piece. The -characteristic sheer of these canoes, where the rise -toward the ends began, showed a quick curve that -faired into a rising straight line at the gunwale and -then continued straight and rising to the stem head.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73">[Pg 73]</a></span> -The <em>wulegessis</em> was therefore quite long. The ends of -the gunwales were not of the half-arrowhead shape, -but were snied off on their inboard sides so that they -met on a rather long bevel; the lashing was slightly -let in to the outboard faces to keep it from slipping -over the gunwale ends. The caps of the gunwales -were similarly reduced in width, where they came -together over the ends of the canoe.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i089.jpg" width="700" height="392" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 64</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Large 3-Fathom Ocean Canoe of the Passamaquoddy</span> porpoise hunters. -These canoes were sometimes fitted to sail or outrigged for rowing. The -last of this type had much lower ends.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The main gunwale members were about 1¼ inches -square amidships, tapering to ¾ inch at the ends. -The lower outboard corner was beveled to take the -ends of the ribs, as shown on page <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, and the lower -inboard corner was also beveled or rounded, but to a -lesser degree. The upper inboard corner, shown -beveled in the drawing of figure 62, was sometimes -slightly rounded, as were the outwales. Amidships -the outwale was about 1 inch deep, and it tapered -toward the ends, where its depth was about ⅝ inch, -the thickness being ½ inch amidships and a scant ⅜ -inch at the ends. On the canoe shown, the cap was -⅜ inch thick, tapering to about <sup>5</sup>⁄<sub>16</sub> inch at the ends, -and 1¾ inches wide amidships, tapering to about ⅝ -or ½ inch where the caps came together at the ends. -The top corners of the cap were beveled in the example.</p> - -<p>The sheathing appears to have been about <sup>3</sup>⁄<sub>16</sub> inch -thick on the average. On the bottom and sides it -was in two lengths, overlapping slightly amidships. -Toward the ends of the canoe the sheathing was tapered, -maximum width of the splints being about 4 -inches amidships.</p> - -<p>The canoe, which was 18 feet 6 inches long overall, -had 46 ribs. These were about 3 inches wide and ⅜ -inch thick from the center to the first thwart outboard -on each side, and 2 inches wide from these -thwarts to the ends, except for the endmost five ribs, -which were roughly 1¾ inches wide. The drawing on -page <a href="#Page_71">71</a> shows the shape of the thwarts. The ends -were tenoned through the gunwales, and there were -three lacing holes in the ends of the middle and first -thwarts and two in the end thwarts. The beam of -the canoe inside the gunwales was 30 inches and outside, -31¼ inches; the tumble-home made the extreme -beam 35½ inches. The canoe was rather flat bottomed -athwartships and quite shallow, the depth amidships -being 10¾ inches.</p> - -<p>The building bed must have had about a 1½ inch -crown at midlength. It is probable that the stem -pieces were not fixed in place until after the gun<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74">[Pg 74]</a></span>wales -had been raised to sheer height. The gunwales -were lashed with the Malecite group lashings, each -of four turns through the bark and spaced at 3 to 3½ -inches apart in the midlength and at 2 inches from -the end thwarts to the headboards. Two auxiliary -lashings were placed over the outwales and caps -outboard of the gunwale ends, one about 6 inches -beyond the ends of the gunwales and the other against -the inboard side of the stem-piece. The end closure -was accomplished by the usual spiral lashing passed -through the laminated stem pieces. The latter were -split (to within about 4 inches of the heel), into six or -more laminae that were closely wrapped with bark -cord. The headboards were bellied toward the ends -to keep the bark cover under tension, and the ends -outboard of the headboards were stuffed with shavings -or moss.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i090.jpg" width="700" height="482" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 65</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Old Form of Passamaquoddy 2½-Fathom Ocean Canoe</span> with characteristic -bottom rocker and sheer. This rather small, fast canoe for coastal hunting -and fishing was common in the 19th century.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>A canoe from the Penobscot River, obtained in 1826 -by the Peabody Museum, Salem, Massachusetts, and -described in <cite>The American Neptune</cite> for October 1948, -shows that the Penobscot built their canoes on the -old Malecite model. The canoe is apparently a -coastal type. It has some round in the bottom -amidships and <strong>V</strong>-sections toward the ends; it is -18 feet 7 inches long overall, 37¼ inches maximum -beam, 15¼ inches deep amidships, and the ends stand -26 to 28 inches above the base line, the bow being -slightly higher and with more rake than the stern. -The rocker takes place within 4 feet of the ends, with -the bottom straight for about 8 feet along the midlength. -The bilges amidship are slack, and the reverse -curve to form the tumble-home starts within -6 inches of the gunwales (see drawing, p. <a href="#Page_72">72</a>.)</p> - -<p>A much later coastal canoe of the Passamaquoddy, -a porpoise-and seal-hunting canoe built in 1873, -will also serve to show the old type (see p. <a href="#Page_73">73</a>). -This style of canoe was usually built in lengths -ranging from 18 to 20 feet overall, the maximum beam -was between 25 and 44 inches, and the beam inside -the gunwales was between 29½ and 36 inches. The -depth amidships ranged from about 18 to 21 inches, -and the height of the ends above the base was from -28 or 30 inches to as much as 45 inches. The ribs -numbered from 42 to 48 and were 3 inches wide and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75">[Pg 75]</a></span> -½ inch thick. The sheathing was from ¼ to ⅜ inch -thick and the rocker of the bottom, from 4 to 6 -inches, took place within the last 4 or 5 feet of the -ends. The midsection showed a well-rounded bottom, -a slack bilge, and the high reverse to form -the tumble-home seen in the old Penobscot canoe at -Salem. These canoes were still being built well -into the 1880's, if not later, and are to be seen in some -old U.S. Fish Commission photographs of porpoise -and seal hunting at Eastport, Maine. Seal-and porpoise-hunting -canoes carried a sail, usually the spritsail -of the dory. While this model probably was little -changed in construction from early times, the surviving -examples and models are of the period when nails -were employed. The drawing on page <a href="#Page_74">74</a> is of a small -coastal hunting canoe of the same class, built in 1875.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i091.jpg" width="700" height="410" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 66</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Malecite Racing Canoe of</span> 1888, showing <strong>V</strong>-shaped keel piece placed -between sheathing and bark to form deadrise.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The reasons for the gradual decline in the building -of canoes of the old style are not known, and the -transition from the high-peaked ends to the more -modern low and rounded ends was not sudden. It -apparently began in some inland areas, particularly -on the St. Lawrence and the St. John Rivers, at least -as early as 1849, and the new trend in appearance -finally reached the coast about 25 years later. In -the period of transition, the high-peaked model -developed toward the St. Francis type, or that of the -modern "Indian" canvas canoe, as well as toward -the low-ended type.</p> - -<p>One of the later developments took place on the -St. John River, in New Brunswick, where two Indians, -Jim Paul and Peter Polchies, both of St. Marys, in -1888 built for a Lt. Col. Herbert Dibble of Woodstock -the racing canoe illustrated above (fig. 66). This -canoe, 19 feet 6½ inches long overall and only 30½ inches -extreme beam, was of a design perhaps not characteristic -of any particular type of Malecite canoe, but -it nevertheless shows two elements that may have -appeared during the period of change in model. -The sides amidships not only are without tumble-home, -they flare outward slightly, but tumble-home -is developed at the first thwart each side of the middle -and continues to the headboards. The bottom shows -a marked <strong>V</strong>-deadrise achieved by an unusual construction -in a birch-bark canoe: the center strake of -the sheathing is shaped in a shallow <strong>V</strong> in cross section, -its width being about 2½ inches amidships and taper<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_76" id="Page_76">[Pg 76]</a></span>ing -each way toward the ends, and its thickness along -the longitudinal centerline being about ⅝ inch and -tapering to about ¼ inch at the edges; the two lengths -of the strake are butted, not lapped, amidships, -though the rest of the sheathing is lapped at the butts -in the usual way and is uniformly ¼ inch thick. In -this manner a ridge that gives a <strong>V</strong>-deadrise is formed -down the centerline of the bottom, though the frames -are bent in a flattened curve from bilge to bilge. -The bottom has very little rocker, the rise being only -1 inch, and this takes place in the last 2 feet inboard -of the heel of the stem piece.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i092.jpg" width="700" height="425" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 67</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Sharp-Ended 2½-Fathom Hunting Canoe</span> for use on tidal river. Built by -the Passamaquoddy Indian Peter Denis, it shows what may be the primitive -construction method of obtaining a <strong>V</strong>-form in hull.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Another feature in this canoe is the end profile; -the curved ends are strongly raked, the curve used -being the same as that in the old Malecite type, but -with the stem-pieces reversed, so that the quick turn -is at the head, near the sheer, rather than at the heel. -As a result, the gunwales come to the ends in a straight, -rising line for the last 16½ inches rather than as a -sudden lift near the ends. The stem-heads stand a -little above the rail caps. The headboards belly -toward the ends and are raked in the same direction.</p> - -<p>The use of a <strong>V</strong>-shaped keel piece in the sheathing -has been found in a St. Francis canoe from the St. -Lawrence country; this may be a rather old practice. -This racing canoe is very lightly built and -much decorated, the date 1888 being worked into -the hull near one end.</p> - -<p>Another canoe having a marked <strong>V</strong>-deadrise was -built sometime between 1890 and 1892 by Nicola -(sometimes called Peter) Denis (sometimes spelled -Dana), a Passamaquoddy, for his son Francis, who -used it at Frenchman's Bay, Maine. The drawing -above (fig. 67) shows a coastal-type hunting canoe, -nailed along the gunwales but sewn elsewhere, and -painted. The craft is 15 feet 9 inches overall and -14 feet 5 inches over the gunwales. The beam amidships -is 32 inches over the gunwales, 29½ inches inside. -The depth amidships is 11 inches, and at the headboards, -14½ inches. The ends are of the low rounded -form; the profile shows a moderate tumble-home -just below the sheer, which is a long fair curve without -any quick lift toward the ends. The construction -is of the usual Malecite type described in Chapter 3.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_77" id="Page_77">[Pg 77]</a></span> -The midsection shows a remarkable amount of <strong>V</strong> -in the bottom without any tumble-home anywhere -in the topsides. The <strong>V</strong>-bottom is rounded at the -apex, where the keel would be; this is done by bending -the ribs very sharply where they cross the centerline -of the hull. A narrow strake of thin sheathing runs -along the centerline of the canoe, and this is bent -athwart-wise to follow the bends in the ribs there. -The canoe had 46 ribs, each 2½ inches wide and <sup>5</sup>⁄<sub>16</sub> -inch thick, tapered slightly from the middle up to the -gunwales. The gunwales, as previously noted, are -nailed and the main gunwale members are of sawed -spruce. The rest of the framework is cedar.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i093.jpg" width="700" height="426" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 68</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Malecite 2½-Fathom St. Lawrence River Canoe</span>, probably a hybrid model. -The high ends show a western influence.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The outside of the canoe was painted red, the -inside was a pale yellow, the gunwales and middle -portions of the thwarts were cobalt blue, the ends -of the thwarts were red. The <em>wulegessis</em> was blue, -and the "canoe mark" was a painted representation of -the spread eagle of the United States Seal, the border -being in black and white and the eagle in black, -yellow, and white, holding a brown branch with -green leaves. The whole panel was outlined in red. -On the side of the canoe, near the stern, was a white -swallowtail pennant on which is lettered "Frenchmans -Bay" in black capital letters. This canoe was used -for fishing and also for porpoise and seal hunting.</p> - -<p>The construction employed to form the <strong>V</strong>-bottom -in a birch-bark canoe can be seen to have been done -in two ways; that described on page <a href="#Page_76">76</a> is undoubtedly -the method used in prehistoric times, since laborious -forming of a <strong>V</strong> keel-piece in the sheathing, using -stone scrapers, would be avoided. The <strong>V</strong>-bottom, it -should be noted, usually appears in canoes used in -open waters, as this form tends to run straight under -paddle, in spite of a side wind, and thus requires the -minimum of steering to hold it on its course. It was -this characteristic, too, that made the <strong>V</strong>-bottom suitable -for the racing canoe on the St. John River, since -stopping the stroke momentarily to steer diminishes -the driving power of the stern paddler.</p> - -<p>The various river canoes of the Malecite, built to -the modern low, rounded-end profiles, or to the short-radii -and straight-line forms, held rather closely to -the same lines, that is, sharp ends with a rather -flat bottom amidships and an easy bilge. Some of -the canoes retained the characteristic tumble-home,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_78" id="Page_78">[Pg 78]</a></span> -but others had nearly vertical sides or the curve of -the bilge was carried so high that it ended at the -gunwales.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i094.jpg" width="700" height="455" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 69</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Malecite 2½-Fathom River Canoe</span> of 1890 from the Rivière du Loup region. -Canoes in this area had straight stems and sharp lines from at least as early as -1857.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>On the St. Lawrence there was apparently a canoe -having rather peaked ends as well as the rather -straight-stemmed, low-ended type. A St. Lawrence -River canoe found in the Chateau de Ramezay and -built sometime before 1867 provides an example of the -rather high-peaked ends. The canoe, as illustrated -on page <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, has a well-rounded bilge working into a -very round tumble-home above and into a rather -flat bottom below, the tumble-home being carried -into the extreme ends, so that the headboards are -rather wide. The ends round up rather quickly and -then continue up to the sheer in a very slight curve, -having a very moderate tumble-home near the sheer. -The latter follows somewhat the characteristic -sheer of the old Malecite canoes, but the straight -portion just inboard of the ends is much shorter, so -that the quick upsweep of the sheer begins nearer the -ends and thus appears somewhat more pronounced.</p> - -<p>The construction is in the usual manner. The -rocker of the bottom is 2 inches. The ribs are wider -amidships than near the ends. The outwale is -rounded on the outboard face so that the cap is -slightly narrower than the thickness of inner gunwale -and outwale combined. The headboard is rather -unusual, however, as it is not bellied but stands -straight and vertical. The lashing at the upper -portion of the stems is the crossed stitch, below it is -spiral. The gunwale groups are made up of six passes -through the bark, and the spaces between groups are -about 2½ inches. The side panels are sewn with -the harness stitch. The canoe is 16 feet long overall -and 14 feet 5 inches inside the gunwales; the extreme -beam amidships is 37 inches and inside the gunwales -32 inches. The depth amidships is about 13 inches -and the height of the ends 25 inches, with 2 inches -of rocker at the headboards. This canoe, retaining -the high ends, marks the transition from the old form -to the new.</p> - -<p>A later canoe built on the St. Lawrence about 1890, -probably near Rivière de Loup, is shown above. -It is 16 feet 11 inches long overall, the beam over the -gunwales is 33½ inches and inside it is 31 inches, the -curve of the bilge being carried up to the gunwales.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_79" id="Page_79">[Pg 79]</a></span> -The bottom is flat for only a short width. The depth -amidships is 11½ inches and the height of the ends is -20 inches, with 1 inch of rocker in the last two feet of -length. The sheer is a long fair sweep without any -quick upward lift near the ends. The headboards -are very narrow and belly only very slightly toward -the ends. The end profile illustrates the short radii -and straight line form that marked many of the last -Malecite birch-bark canoes of the St. Lawrence -Valley. It is possible that the end-form was copied -from the white man's St. Lawrence skiff, which usually -had ends that were straight and nearly vertical, with -a sharp turn into the keel.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i095.jpg" width="700" height="444" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 70</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Modern (1895) Malecite 2½-Fathom St. John River Canoe</span>, with low ends -and moderate sheer, developed late in the 19th century.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Since a Malecite canoe of the form having rounded -low ends was the subject used to describe the construction -of a birch-bark canoe in Chapter 3 (see p. <a href="#Page_36">36</a>), -there is no need to discuss all the details here. There -was some variety in the sewing and lashing used -in Malecite canoes; the combination of cross and -spiral stitches in the ends and the use of a batten and -the over-and-over stitch in the side panels are, of -course, very common in these canoes. The occasional -use of other stitches in the side panels and even in -the gores would probably be normal, since individual -preferences in such details were not controlled by a -narrow tribal practice.</p> - -<p>The Malecite are known to have hauled their -canoes overland in the early spring, before the snow -was entirely gone, by mounting the canoe on two -sleds or toboggans in tandem, binding the canoe to -each. This was done as late as the 1890's for early -spring muskrat hunts. The Malecite also fitted their -river canoes with outside protection when much running -of rapids or "quick water" work was done. This -protection consisted of two sets of battens (see p. <a href="#Page_80">80</a>), -each set being made up of five or six thin splints of -cedar about ⅜ inch thick and 3 inches wide, tapering -to 2 or 1½ inches at one end. These were held together -by four strips of basket ash, bark cord, or rawhide. -Each cord was passed through holes or slits made -edgewise through each splint. The cords were located -so that when the splints were placed on the bottom -of the canoe, the cords could be tied at the thwarts. -The tapered ends of the splints were at the ends of -the canoe; the butts of the two sets being lapped amidships -with the lap toward the stern. This formed a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_80" id="Page_80">[Pg 80]</a></span> -wooden sheathing, outside the bottom, to protect the -bark from rocks and snags or floating ice that might -be met in rapids and small streams. The fitting was -used also by the Micmac and Ojibway; it is not known -whether this was an Indian or European invention. -The French canoemen called it <i lang="fr">barre d'abordage</i> and -the Malecite, <em>P's-ta' k'n</em>; the English woodsmen -called the fitting "canoe shoes."</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i096.jpg" width="700" height="456" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 71</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Malecite Canoe Details, Gear, and Gunwale Decorations.</span></p></div> -</div> - -<p>The Malecite paddle was of various forms, as illustrated -in figures 71 and 72, the predominant form -being very similar to the paddle now used with canvas -"Indian" canoes. The total length of the blade was -usually about 28 to 30 inches; at 10 or 11 inches from -the tip it was about 2½ inches wide. The handle was -about 36 inches long. At just above the blade it -was 1¼ inches wide and 1 inch thick. The handle -was not parallel-sided. Near the top it widened gradually -to about 2¼ inches at 2½ inches from the top; -here the cross-grip was formed. The thickness of the -handle reduced gradually from that given for just -above the top of the blade to about ½ inch at about -5 inches below the cross-grip, and widened again to ⅝ -inch at the point where the cross-grip was formed. -The blade was ridged down its center. The lower -end was rounded and the lower half of the blade was -approximately half an ellipse in shape. The Passamaquoddy -blade had its wide point within 7 inches of -the lower tip, where it was about 6 inches wide. The -handle was about 1⅛ inches in diameter just above -the blade, and then tapered in thickness until it first -became oval and then flat in cross section. The -width remained nearly constant to a point within 12 -to 16 inches of the cross-grip, then gradually widened -to nearly 3 inches at the top. The blade was 33 to -36 inches long and the whole paddle somewhere -between 73 and 76 inches long. The cross-grips were -sometimes round, at other times they were merely -worked off in an oval shape to fit the upper hand. -The usual width of the cross-grip was just under 3 -inches.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81">[Pg 81]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i097a.jpg" width="700" height="417" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 72</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Malecite Canoe Details, Stem Profiles, Paddles, -Sail Rig, and Salmon Spear.</span></p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i097b.jpg" width="700" height="316" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 73</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Lines and Decoration Reconstructed From a Very Old Model</span> of an -ancient woods, or pack, canoe, showing short ends and use of fiddlehead and -fire-steel form of decoration.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_82" id="Page_82">[Pg 82]</a></span></p> - -<p>Formerly, the Malecite placed his personal mark, or -<em>dupskodegun</em>, on the flat of the top of his paddle near -the cross-grip. The mark was incised into the wood -and the incised line was filled with red or black pigment -when available. Sometimes the whole paddle, -including the blade, was covered with incised line -ornamentation. This was usually a vine-and-leaf -pattern, or a combination of small triangles and -curved lines. The Passamaquoddy used designs -suggesting the needlework once seen on fine linens. -Sometimes other designs showing animals, camps, or -canoes were used.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i098.jpg" width="700" height="412" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 74</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Last Known Passamaquoddy Decorated Ocean Canoe</span> to be built. Constructed -in 1898 by Tomah Joseph, Princeton, Maine, on the same model as a -canvas porpoise-hunting canoe.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The Malecite, particularly the Passamaquoddy, -were especially skillful in decorating bark canoes, -as can be seen from the illustrations (pp. <a href="#Page_81">81</a>-87). -Sometimes they used scraped winter bark decoration -just along the gunwales; occasionally the whole canoe -was decorated in this manner above the normal -load waterline as described on page <a href="#Page_87">87</a>. Usually, -however, the bark decoration was confined to a long -panel just below the gunwales and to the ends of the -canoe. The personal "mark" of the owner-builder -would usually be on the flaps near the ends, the -<em>wulegessis</em>, meaning the outside bark of a tree or a -child's diaper, but in canoe nomenclature used to -indicate the protective cover which it formed for the -gunwale-end lashings. Sometimes the Malecite placed -his mark in the gunwale decoration. Sometimes he -placed a picture or a sign on each side of the ends -below the <em>wulegessis</em>, in about the position used for -insignia on the canvas "Indian" canoe.</p> - -<p>The swastika was used by the Passamaquoddy in a -war canoe in colonial times and has been used later. -The Passamaquoddy mark for an exceptional canoe -(such as a war canoe that won the race home) was -often on the <em>wulegessis</em>, and on a relatively modern -canoe this mark, or <em>gogetch</em>, was a picture of "a funny-looking -kind of doll." A common form of decoration -in Passamaquoddy canoes was the fiddlehead curve -which resembles the top of young fern shoots. This -appears in numerous combinations; often double and -back to back, joined with a long bar, or "cross." -This particular combination is known as the "fiddlehead -and cross" or as the "fire steel"; the latter -because of a fancied resemblance of the form to the -shape of the old fire-making steels of colonial times. -A zigzag line appears to represent lightning to most -Indians. A series of half-circles along the gunwales,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_83" id="Page_83">[Pg 83]</a></span> -with the rounded side down and just touching one -another at the top, having a small circle in the center -of each, represents "clouds passing over the moon." -A similar series of half-circles without the center -circles might mean the canoe was launched during a -new moon; the number of half-circles shown would -indicate the month.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i099.jpg" width="700" height="452" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 75</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Malecite Canoe Details and Decorations.</span></p></div> -</div> - -<p>Yet there is not full agreement among Indians -about the meaning of decorative forms; the crooked -or zigzag line might also mean camps or the crooked -score stick used in a Malecite game. The circle -could mean sun or moon or month. A half-moon -form might also be "a woman's earring," or a new -moon. A circle with a very small one inside might be -a "brooch," as well as "money." Right triangles, -in a closely spaced series along the gunwales, apparently -meant "door cloth," or tent door ("what you -lift with your hand"). Shown on pages <a href="#Page_84">84</a> and <a href="#Page_85">85</a> are -some Indian marks on the <em>wulegessis</em>, based upon the -statements of old Malecites or upon their sketches.</p> - -<p>After the Malecite had become Roman Catholic, -a fish on the middle panel of a canoe meant that -it had been launched on Friday. Pictures on a -canoe sometimes indicated a mythological story; -a picture of a rabbit sitting and smoking a pipe on -one side of the canoe and a lynx on the other would be -such a case. In Malecite mythology the rabbit was -the ancestor of the tribe. He was also a great magician. -The lynx was the mortal enemy of the rabbit, -but in the mythological tales he was always overcome -and defeated by the rabbit's magic. Hence, the idea -conveyed is that "though the-lynx is near, the rabbit -sits calmly smoking his pipe and as he knows he can -overcome his enemy," or, in short, "self-confidence."</p> - -<p>The Indian's mark on his canoe or weapons is not -a signature to be read by anyone. The mark may, of -course, be identified as to what it represents, but unless -it is known as the mark used by a certain man it -cannot be "read." Any mark could be used by an -Indian, either because it had some connection with -his activities or habits, or because he "likes it." -The stone tobacco pipe used by Peter Polchies (see -p. <a href="#Page_85">85</a>) as his mark had no known connection with -this Indian's habits or activities. However, his son, -of the same name and well known also as "Doctor -Polchies," took the same mark, but in his case it had -a personal meaning since he was noted locally for -his skill in making stone pipes. Another case was -a Passamaquoddy who at every opportunity used -to pole his canoe in preference to paddling. As a -result he had become known as "Peter of the Pole" -or "Peter Pole" and he then used as a canoe mark -a representation of a setting pole. In submitting -sketches of the marking on the <em>wulegessis</em> of canoes -to old Indians it was seldom possible to learn the -identity of the owner or builder, since the marks were -usually not known to those questioned. In more -recent times, the educated Malecite signed his name -in English on his canoe and thus gave it more permanent -identification.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_84" id="Page_84">[Pg 84]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 76</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Wulegessis Decorations</span></p> -</div> - -<img src="images/i100a.jpg" width="700" height="325" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>"mark of Mitchell Laporte"</p></div> - -<img src="images/i100b.jpg" width="700" height="342" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>"that pot hanging was used by three or four generations—it -was mark on John Lolar's canoe in 1872"</p></div> - -<img src="images/i100c.jpg" width="700" height="322" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>"I made marks like this on wulegessis and sometimes on -middle" (Charlie Bear)</p></div> - -<img src="images/i100d.jpg" width="700" height="338" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>"mark of Noel John Sapier" (tomahawk)</p></div> - -<img src="images/i100e.jpg" width="700" height="330" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>"mark of Noel Polchies" (paddle)</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_85" id="Page_85">[Pg 85]</a></span></p> -</div> - -<img src="images/i101a.jpg" width="700" height="350" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>"mark of old Peter Polchies" (stone pipe)</p></div> - -<img src="images/i101b.jpg" width="700" height="361" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>"mark of Chief Neptune" (Passamaquoddy)</p></div> -<img src="images/i101c.jpg" width="700" height="330" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>"mark of Louis Paul"</p></div> - -<img src="images/i101d.jpg" width="700" height="336" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>"canoe was finished on new moon" (Joe Ellis)</p></div> - -<img src="images/i101e.jpg" width="700" height="332" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>"mark of old Solomon Paul"</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_86" id="Page_86">[Pg 86]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i102.jpg" width="700" height="336" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 77</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">End Decorations, Passamaquoddy Canoe</span> built by Tomah Joseph.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>In duplicating a design, the Malecite apparently -used a pattern, or stencil, which was preserved to -allow duplication over a long period of time. The -stencil was usually cut from birch bark, apparently -an old practice, although whether it was done in -prehistoric times cannot be determined. The long -contact of the Malecites with Europeans is a factor -to be considered in such matters. This is sometimes -shown in picture-writing on a canoe; one, for instance, -showed a white man fishing with rod and line from a -canoe with an Indian guide. On the opposite side -was the representation of an Indian camp beside two -trees, a kettle over the fire and the brave sitting cross-legged -smoking his pipe, indicating, of course, "comfort -and contentment."</p> - -<p>Asking old Indians to identify or give the names -of decorations, Adney recorded statements which -indicate their thought in regard to such matters. -There were used, for example, two forms of the half-moon -or crescent; one was quite open at the points -which plainly indicated a half-moon, but the other -was more nearly closed: -<img src="images/102.png" height="12" alt="" /> -Mrs. Billy Ellis, widow -of Frank Francis, a Malecite, said of them, "Old -Indian earrings, that is only what I can call them. -Also in nose. Wild Indian made them of silver or -moose-bone, I guess he thought he looked nice; it -looked like the devil." Joe Ellis, an old canoe -builder, also called this form "earrings" and when -asked why an Indian would put these on a canoe, -replied "He will think what he will put on here. He -might have seen his wife at bow of canoe, and put -it on [there]." Shown the right-triangle-in-series -design, Mrs. Ellis said "I fergit it but I will remember; -what you lift with your hand, we call it that—camp -door" (referring to the cloth or hide hung over a -camp door, and raised at one corner to enter, so -that the opening is then divided diagonally).</p> - -<p>In a later period, the Malecite usually confined -decoration to the <em>wulegessis</em> and to the pieced-out -bark amidships, the panel formed on each side. The -<em>wulegessis</em> was of various forms; its bottom was sometimes -shaped like a cupid's bow, sometimes it was<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_87" id="Page_87">[Pg 87]</a></span> -rectangular. A common form was one representing -the profile of a canoe. Being of winter bark, it was -red or brown, with the part where the design was -scraped showing white or yellow. The center panel -was also of winter bark, and the design on it showed -a similar contrast in color. Even when the bark cover -was not pieced out, the panel was formed by scraping -all the cover except a panel amidships on each side. -Old models indicate that the early Malecite canoes -may have used decoration all over above the waterline -(see p. <a href="#Page_81">81</a>) far more frequently than has been the -recent custom. The decorations were a fiddlehead -design in a complicated sequence so that it bore a -faint resemblance to the hyanthus in a formal scroll, -but the design apparently had no ceremonial significance; -it was used for the same reason given Adney -for so many forms of bark decoration, "it looked nice."</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i103a.jpg" width="700" height="373" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 78</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">End Decorations, Passamaquoddy Canoe</span> built by Tomah Joseph.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i103b.jpg" width="700" height="190" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 79</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Passamaquoddy Decorated Canoe</span> built by Tomah Joseph.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The drawings and plans on pages <a href="#Page_71">71</a> to 87 will -serve better than words to show these characteristic -designs and decorations. It is doubtful that color, -paint or pigment, was used in decorating the Malecite -bark canoes before the coming of Europeans, but it -was employed occasionally in the last half of the 19th -century. The beauty of the Malecite canoe designs<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_88" id="Page_88">[Pg 88]</a></span> -lay not in the barbaric display of color characteristic -of the large fur-traders' canoes, but in the tasteful -distribution of the scraped winter bark decoration -along the sides of the hull. The workmanship exhibited -by the Malecite in the construction of their -canoes was generally very fine; indeed, they were -perhaps the most finished craftsmen among Indian -canoe-builders.</p> - - -<h3><em>St. Francis</em></h3> - -<p>The tribal composition of the Abnaki Indians is -somewhat uncertain. The group was certainly made -up of a portion of the old Malecite group, the Kennebec -and Penobscot, but later also included the -whole or parts of the refugee Indians of other New -England tribes who were forced to flee before the -advancing white settlers. It is probable that among -the refugees were the Cowassek (Coosuc), Pennacook, -and the Ossipee. There were also some -Maine tribes among these—the Sokoki, Androscoggin, -(Arosaguntacook), Wewenoc, Taconnet, -and Pequawket. It is probable that the tribal -groups from southern and central New England -were mere fragments and that the largest number to -make up the Abnaki were Malecite. The latter in -turn were driven out of their old homes on the lower -Maine coast and drifted northwestward into the old -hunting grounds of the Kennebec and Penobscot, -northwestern Maine and eastern Quebec as far as the -St. Lawrence. The chief settlement was finally on -the St. Francis River in Quebec, hence the Abnaki -were also known as the "St. Francis Indians." These -tribesmen held a deep-seated grudge against the New -Englanders and, by the middle of the 18th century, -they had made themselves thoroughly hated in New -England. Siding with the French, the St. Francis -raided the Connecticut Valley and eastward, taking -white children and women home with them after a -successful raid, and as a result the later St. Francis had -much white blood. They were generally enterprising -and progressive.</p> - -<p>Little is known about the canoes of these Abnaki -during the period of their retreat northwestward. -It is obvious that the Penobscot, at least, used the old -form of the Malecite canoe. What the canoes of the -other tribal groups were like cannot be stated. -However, by the middle of the 19th century the St. -Francis Indians had produced a very fine birch-bark -canoe of distinctive design and excellent workmanship. -These they began to sell to sportsmen, with the result -that the type of canoe became a standard one for -hunting and fishing in Quebec. When other tribal -groups discovered the market for canoes, they were -forced to copy the St. Francis model and appearance -to a very marked degree in order to be assured of -ready sales. It is obvious, from what is now known, -that the St. Francis had adapted some ideas in canoe -building from Indians west of the St. Lawrence, with -whom they had come into close contact. However, -they had also retained much of the building technique -of their Malecite relatives. Hence, the St. -Francis canoes usually represent a blend of building -techniques as well as of models.</p> - -<p>The St. Francis canoe of the last half of the 19th -century had high-peaked ends, with a quick upsweep -of the sheer at bow and stern. The end profile was -almost vertical, with a short radius where it faired -into the bottom. The rocker of the bottom took -place in the last 18 or 24 inches of the ends, the -remaining portion of the bottom being usually -straight. The amount of rocker varied a good deal; -apparently some canoes had only an inch or so while -others had as much as four or five. A few canoes -had a projecting "chin" end-profile; the top portion -where it met the sheer was usually a straight line.</p> - -<p>The midsection was slightly wall-sided, with a -rather quick turn of the bilge. The bottom was -nearly flat across, with very slight rounding until -close to the bilges. The end sections were a <strong>U</strong>-shape -that approached the <strong>V</strong> owing to the very quick turn -at the centerline. The ends of the canoe were very -sharp, coming in practically straight at the gunwale -and at level lines below it. The gunwales were longer -than the bottom and so the St. Francis canoes were -commonly built with a building-frame which was -nearly as wide amidships as the gunwales but shorter -in length.</p> - -<p>At least one St. Francis canoe, built on Lake -Memphremagog, was constructed with a tumble-home -amidships the same as that of some Malecite -canoes. The rocker of the bottom at each end started -at the first thwart on each side of the middle and -gradually increased toward the ends, which faired -into the bottom without any break in the curves. -The end profiles projected with a chin that was full -and round up to the peaked stem heads. The sheer -swept up sharply near the ends to the stem heads.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89">[Pg 89]</a></span> -This particular canoe represented a hybrid design -not developed for sale to sportsmen, and the sole -example, a full-size canoe formerly in The American -Museum of Natural History at New York and measured -by Adney in 1890, is now missing and probably -has been broken up.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i105.jpg" width="700" height="456" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 80</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">St. Francis 2-Fathom Canoe of About 1865</span>, with upright stems. Built for -forest travel, this form ranged in size from 12 feet 6 inches overall and 26½-inch -beam, to 16 feet overall and 34-inch beam.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The St. Francis canoes were usually small, being -commonly between 12 and 16 feet overall; the 15-foot -length usually was preferred by sportsmen. The -width amidships was from 32 to 35 inches and the -depth 12 to 14 inches. The 14-foot canoe usually -had a beam of about 32 inches and was nearly 14 -inches deep; if built for portaging the ends were -somewhat lower than if the canoe was to be used in -open waters. Canoes built for hunting might be as -short as 10 or 11 feet and of only 26 to 28 inches -beam; these were the true woods canoes of the St. -Francis.</p> - -<p>The gunwale structure of the St. Francis canoes -followed Malecite design; it was often of slightly -smaller cross section than that of a Malecite canoe -of equal length, but both outwale and cap were of -somewhat larger cross section. The stem-pieces were -split and laminated in the same manner, but occasionally -the lamination was at the bottom, due to the -hard curve required where the stem faired into the -bottom. Many such canoes had no headboards, the -heavy outwales being carried to the sides of the -stem pieces and secured there to support the main -gunwales. If the headboard was used, it was quite -narrow and was bellied toward the ends of the canoe. -In some St. Francis canoes the bark cover in the -rockered bottom near the ends showed a marked <strong>V</strong>. -In the canoe examined by Adney at the American -Museum of Natural History, the ribs inside toward -the end showed no signs of being "broken," so it is -evident that the <strong>V</strong> was formed either by use of a -shaped keel-piece in the sheathing or by an additional -batten shaped to give this <strong>V</strong>-form under the center -strake. Since the <strong>V</strong> began where the rocker in the -canoe started, in an almost angular break in the -bottom, it is likely that a shaped batten had been<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_90" id="Page_90">[Pg 90]</a></span> -used to form it. He could not verify this, however, -as the area was covered by the frames and sheathing.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i106.jpg" width="700" height="482" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 81</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">St. Francis Canoe of About 1910</span>, with narrow, rockered bottom, a model -popular with guides and sportsmen for forest travel.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The sheathing was in short lengths with rounded -ends which overlapped, and it was laid irregularly in -the "thrown in" style found in many western birch-bark -canoes. The ribs were commonly about 2 inches -wide and nearly ⅜ inch thick, the width tapering -to roughly 1¾ inches under the gunwales. The ends -of the ribs were then sharply reduced in width to a -chisel point about 1 inch wide; the sides of the sharply -reduced taper being beveled, as well as the end. A -15-foot canoe usually had 46 to 50 ribs.</p> - -<p>The thwarts, unlike those of the Micmac and some -Malecite canoes, in which the thwarts were unequally -spaced, were equally spaced according to a builder's -formula. The ends of the thwarts, or crossbars, were -tenoned into the main gunwales and lashed in place -through the three lashing holes in the ends of each -thwart, except the end ones, which usually had but -two. In some small canoes, however, two lashing -holes were placed in all thwart ends. The design of -the St. Francis thwart was as a rule very plain, -gradually increasing in width from the center outwards -to the tenon at the gunwale in plan and -decreasing in thickness in elevation in the same -direction. The ends of the main gunwales were of -the half-arrowhead form, and were covered with a -bark <em>wulegessis</em>, but the flaps below the outwales were -sometimes cut off, or they might be formed in some -graceful outline.</p> - -<p>The bark cover was sometimes in one piece; when -it was pieced out for width, the harness-stitch was -used. In most canoes, the bark along the gunwale -was doubled by adding a long narrow strip, often -left hanging free below the gunwales and stopping -just short of the <em>wulegessis</em>, which it resembled. It -was sometimes decorated. A few St. Francis canoes -with nailed gunwales omitted this doubling piece. -When used, the doubling piece, as well as the end -cover, were folded down on top of the gunwale before -being sewn into place. The decoration of the St. -Francis canoes seems to have been scant and wholly<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_91" id="Page_91">[Pg 91]</a></span> -confined to a narrow band along the gunwale, or to -the doubling pieces. The marking of the <em>wulegessis</em> -had ceased long before Adney investigated this type -of canoe and no living Indian knew of any old marks, -if any ever had been used.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i107.jpg" width="700" height="435" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 82</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Low-Ended St. Francis Canoe</span> with <strong>V</strong>-form end sections made with short, -<strong>V</strong>-shaped keel battens outside the sheathing at each end. Note the unusual -form of headboard, seen in some St. Francis canoes.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The ends were commonly lashed with a spiral or -crossed stitch, but some builders used a series of short-to-long -stitches that made groups generally triangular -in appearance. The gunwale lashing was in groups -about 2½ inches long, each having 5 to 7 turns through -the bark. The groups were about 1½ to 1¼ inches -apart near the ends and about 2 inches apart elsewhere. -The groups were not independent but were -made by bringing the last turn of each group over the -top and inside the main gunwale in a long diagonal -pass so as to come through the bark from the inside -for the first pass of the new group. The caps were -originally pegged, with a few lashings at the ends.</p> - -<p>The ribs were bent green. After the bark cover had -been sewn to the gunwales, the green ribs were fitted -roughly inside the bark, with their ends standing above -the gunwales, and were then forced into the desired -shape and held there, usually by two wide battens -pressed against them by 7 to 10 temporary cross -struts. After being allowed to dry in place, the -ribs were then removed, the sheathing was put into -place, and the ribs, after a final fitting, were driven -into their proper positions. Some builders put in the -ribs by pairs in the shaping stage, one on top of the -other, as this made easier the job of fitting the temporary -battens. The forcing of the ribs to shape also -served to shape the bark cover, and the canoe was -placed on horses during the operation, so that the -shape of the bottom could be observed while the bark -was being moulded. Some builders used very thin -longitudinal battens between the bark and the green -ribs to avoid danger of bursting the bark.</p> - -<p>The canoe was built on a level building bed, in -most instances apparently, with the ends of the building -frame blocked up about an inch. It seems pos<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_92" id="Page_92">[Pg 92]</a></span>sible, -however, that narrow bottom canoes may have -been built with the bed raised 2 or 3 inches in the -middle, rather than employing a narrow building -frame. The construction of the building frame was -the same as among the western Indians and as -described in Chapter 3.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i108.jpg" width="700" height="419" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 83</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">St. Francis-Abnaki Canoe for Open Water</span>, a type that became extinct -before 1890. From Adney's drawings of a canoe formerly in the Museum of -Natural History, New York. Details of Abnaki canoes are also shown.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>In preparing the ribs, a common practice was the -following: Assume, for example, that there are 10 -ribs from the center to the first thwart forward; these -are laid out on the ground edge-to-edge with the rib -under the center thwart to the left and the rib under -the first thwart to the right. On the rib to the left -the middle thwart is laid so that its center coincides -with that of the rib, and the ends of the thwart are -marked on the rib. The same is done to the rib on -the far right, over which the first thwart is laid as the -measure. On each side of the centerline the points -marking the ends of the thwarts are then joined by a -line across the ribs, as they lie together, to mark the -approximate taper of the canoe toward the ends, at -the turn of the bilge. Each rib is taken in turn from -the panel and with it is placed another from the stock -on hand to be set in a matching position on the other -side of the middle thwart, toward the stern; the pair, -placed flat sides together, are then bent over the knee -at, or outside of, the marks or lines. The ribs in the -next portion of the canoe's length are shaped in the -same manner, using the lengths of the first and second -thwarts as guides. Thus, the ribs are given a rough, -preliminary bend before being fitted inside the bark -cover and stayed into place to season. This method -allowed the bilge of the canoe to be rather precisely -determined and formed during the first stages of -construction. At the ends, of course, the ribs are -sharply bent only in the middle. Since the full thwart -length makes a wide bottom, by setting the length of -the rib perhaps a hand's width less than that of the -whole thwart, the narrow bottom is formed.</p> - -<p>The rough length of the ribs was twice the length -of the thwarts nearest them. Hackmatack was used -for thwarts by the St. Francis Indians, rock maple -being considered next best. Cedar was first choice for -ribs, then spruce, and then balsam fir. Longitudinals -were cedar or spruce. All canoe measurements were<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_93" id="Page_93">[Pg 93]</a></span> -made by hand, finger, and arm measurements. -Basket ash strips were often used in transferring -measurements.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i109a.jpg" width="700" height="297" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 84</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Model of a St. Francis-Abnaki Canoe Under Construction</span>, showing -method of moulding ribs inside the assembled bark cover.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>From what has been said, it will be seen that the -construction practice of the St. Francis did not follow -in all details that of their Malecite relatives. The -intrusion of western practices into this group probably -took place some time after the group's final settlement -at St. Francis. As they gradually came into more -intimate relations with their western neighbors and -drifted into western Quebec, beyond the St. Lawrence, -their canoe building technique became influenced by -what they saw to the westward. As would be expected, -the St. Francis Abnaki began early to use nails -in canoe building, but, being expert workmen, they -retained the good features of the old sewn construction -to a marked degree up to the very end of birch-bark -canoe construction in southern Quebec, probably -about 1915. It should perhaps be noted that what -has been discovered about the St. Francis Abnaki -canoes refers necessarily to only the last half of -the 19th century, since no earlier canoe of this group -has been discovered. The changes that took -place between the decline of the Penobscot style of -canoe and that of the later Abnaki remain a matter of -speculation.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i109b.jpg" width="700" height="428" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>s: Figure 85</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">St. Francis-Abnaki Canoe.</span></p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_94" id="Page_94">[Pg 94]</a></span></p> - - -<h3><em>Beothuk</em></h3> - -<p>The fourth group of Indians, classed here as -belonging to the eastern maritime area, are the -Beothuk of Newfoundland. Historically, perhaps, -these Indians should have been discussed first, as they -were probably the first of all North American Indians -to come into contact with the white man. However, -so little is known about their canoes that it has seemed -better to place them last, since practically all that -can be said is the result of reconstruction, speculation, -and logic founded upon rather unsatisfactory evidence. -The tribal origin of the Beothuk has long -been a matter of argument; they are known to have -used red pigment on their weapons, equipment, -clothes, and persons. A prehistoric group that once -inhabited Maine and the Maritime Provinces appears -to have had a similar custom; these are known as the -"Red Paint People," and it may be that the Beothuk -were a survival of this earlier culture. But all that -can be said with certainty is that the Beothuk inhabited -Newfoundland and perhaps some of the Labrador -coast when the white man began to frequent those -parts. The Beothuk made a nuisance of themselves -by stealing gear from the European fishermen, and by -occasionally murdering individuals or small groups of -white men. Late in the 17th century, the French -imported some Micmac warriors and began a war of -extermination against the Beothuk. By the middle of -the 18th century the Newfoundland tribe was reduced -to a few very small groups, and the Beothuk became -extinct early in the 19th century, before careful -investigation of their culture could be made.</p> - -<p>Their canoes were made to a distinctive model quite -different from that of the canoes of other North -American Indians. The descriptions available are far -from complete and, as a result, many important details -are left to speculation. Some parts of the more complete -descriptions are obscure and do not appear to -agree with one another. In spite of these difficulties, -however, some information on the canoes is rather -specific; by using this, together with a knowledge -of the requirements of birch-bark canoe construction, -and by reference to some toy canoes found in 1869 in -the grave of a Beothuk boy, a reasonably accurate -reconstruction of a canoe is possible.</p> - -<p>Captain Richard Whitbourne had come with Sir -Humphrey Gilbert to Newfoundland in 1580 and -revisited the island a number of times afterward. In -1612 he wrote that the Beothuk canoes were shaped -"like the wherries of the River Thames," apparently -referring to the humped sheer of both; in the wherry -the sheer swept up sharply to the height of the oar -tholes, in profile, and flared outward, in cross section.</p> - -<p>John Gay, a member of the Company of Newfoundland -Plantation, wrote in 1612 that Beothuk -canoes were about 20 feet long and 4½ feet wide "in -the middle and aloft," that the ribs were like laths, -and that the birch-bark cover was sewn with roots. -The canoes carried four persons and weighed less than -a hundredweight. They had a short, light staff set in -each end by which the canoes could be lifted ashore. -"In the middle the canoa is higher a great deale, -than at the bowe and quarter." He also says of their -cross section: "They be all bearing from the keel to -portlesse, not with any circular, but with a straight, -line."</p> - -<p>Joann de Laet, writing about 1633, speaks of the -crescent shape of the canoes, of their "sharp keel" -and need of ballast to keep them upright; he also -states that the canoes were not over 20 feet long and -could carry up to five persons.</p> - -<p>The most complete description of the Beothuk canoe -was in the manuscript of Lt. John Cartwright, R.N., -who was on the coast of Newfoundland in 1767-1768 -as Lieutenant of H.B.M. Ship <em>Guernsey</em>. However, -some portions are either in error or the description -was over-simplified. For example, Cartwright says -that the gunwales were formed with a distinct angle -made by joining two lengths of the main gunwale -members at the elevated middle of the sheer. This -hardly seems correct since such a connection would -not produce the rigidity that such structural parts -require, given the methods used by Indians to build -bark canoes. The three grave models show that the -sheer was actually curved along its elevated middle. -It is possible that Cartwright saw a damaged canoe -in which the lashings of the scarf of the gunwales -had slackened so that the line of sheer "broke" there. -Cartwright is perhaps misleading in his description -of the rocker of the keel as being "nearly, if not -exactly, the half of an ellipse, longitudinally divided." -The models show the keel to have been straight along -the length of the canoe and turned up sharply at the -ends to form bow and stern. Cartwright also states -the keel piece was "about the size of the handle of a -common hatchet" amidships, or perhaps 1 inch thick -and 1½ inches wide, and tapered toward the ends, -which were about ¾ inch wide and about equally -thick. The height of the sheer amidships was perhaps -two-thirds the height of the ends.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_95" id="Page_95">[Pg 95]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i111.jpg" width="700" height="266" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 86</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">A 15-Foot Beothuk Canoe of Newfoundland</span> with 42½-inch beam, inside -measurement, turned on side for use as a camp. It gives headroom clearance -of about 3 feet, double that of an 18-foot Malecite canoe with high ends. When -the ends were not high enough to provide maximum clearance, small upright -sticks were lashed to bow and stern. The shape of the gunwales would permit -the canoe to be heeled to an angle (more than 35°) which would swamp a -canoe of ordinary sheer and depth. (<em>Sketch by Adney.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Nearly all observers, Cartwright included, noted -the almost perfect <strong>V</strong>-form cross section of these -canoes, with the apexes rounded off slightly and -the wings slightly curved. From an interpretation -of Cartwright's statements, it appears that after -the bark cover had been laced to the gunwales, the -latter were forced apart to insert the thwarts, as -in some western Indian canoe-building techniques. -The three thwarts are described as being about two -fingers in width and depth. It is stated that the -gunwales were made up of an inner and outer member -and all were scarfed in the middle to taper each -way toward the ends, the outer member serving as -an outwale or guard. Cartwright also states that -the inside of the bark cover was "lined" with "sticks" -2 or 3 inches broad, cut flat and thin. He refers also -to others of the same sort which served as "timbers" -so he is describing both the sheathing and the ribs as -being 2 or 3 inches wide. He does not say how the -thwarts were fitted to the gunwales, how high the -ends were, how the ends of the gunwales were formed, -nor does he give any details of the sewing used. -However, the grave models suggest the form of -sewing probably used and the approximate proportions -of sheer.</p> - -<p>An old settler told James Howley that the Beothuk -canoes could be "folded together like a purse." -Considering the construction required in birch-bark -canoes, this is manifestly impossible; perhaps what -the settler had seen was a canoe in construction with -the bark secured to shaped gunwales, ready for the -latter to be sprung apart by thwarts, as in opening a -purse. Howley also obtained from a man who had -seen Beothuk canoes a sketch which shows a straight -keel and peaked ends, confirmed in all respects by -the grave models or toys.</p> - -<p>The toy canoes so often referred to here were found -by Samuel Coffin in an Indian burial cave on a small -island in Pilley's Tickle, Notre Dame Bay (on the -east coast of Newfoundland), in 1869. Among the -graves in the cave, one of a child, evidently a boy, -was found to contain a wooden image of a boy, toy -bows and arrows, two toy canoes and a fragment of -a third, packages of food, and some red ochre. -With one of the canoes was a fragment of a miniature -paddle. One of the canoes was 32 inches long, -height of ends 8 inches, height of side amidships -6 inches, straight portion of keel 26 inches and beam -7 inches, as shown by Howley.</p> - -<p>In Newfoundland there was very fine birch but no -cedar. There was, however, excellent spruce which -would take the place of cedar. It seems certain, then, -that all the framework of the Beothuk canoes was of -spruce. It seems likely that they were never built of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_96" id="Page_96">[Pg 96]</a></span> -a single sheet of birch but were covered with a number -of sheets sewn together, as in other early Indian -birch-bark canoes. The canoe birch of Newfoundland -grew to a diameter of 2 to 2½ feet at the butt, which -would produce a sheet of birch of 6 to 7 feet width; -the length would be decided by how far up the tree -the Indian could climb to make the upper cut. As -has been stated, the prehistoric Indians seemingly -made little attempt to build birch-bark canoes of -long lengths of bark, preferring to use only the bark -obtainable near the ground and above the height -of the winter snows.</p> - -<p>The form of the Beothuk canoes, particularly the -lack of bilge and the marked <strong>V</strong>-form, has caused -much speculation. One writer assumed that the -form was particularly suited for running rapids. -Actually, the Beothuk appeared to have used canoes -for river travel very rarely, as few rivers in their -country were suited for navigation. Instead, they -seem to have been coast dwellers and to have used -canoes for coastal travel and for voyages from island -to island.</p> - -<p>Their canoes were undoubtedly designed for open-water -navigation, and the <strong>V</strong>-form was particularly -suitable for this. The draft aided in keeping the -canoe on its course with either broadside or quartering -winds, and if the Beothuks knew sail, the hull-form -would have served them well. It is quite -evident that the Beothuk canoes used ballast in the -form of stones or heavy cargo. Stones would have -been placed along the keel piece and covered with -moss and skins. The strongly hogged sheer was -useful in protecting cargo amidships from spray and, -in picking up a seal or porpoise, the canoe could be -sharply heeled without taking in water. The <strong>V</strong> -sections fore and aft were suitable for rough-water -navigation; because of its form and the weight of -ballast, the canoe would pass partly over and through -the wave-top without pounding. If a wave of such -height as to overtop the gunwales just abaft the stem -were met, the strongly flaring sides would give reserve -buoyancy, causing the canoe to lift quickly as the -wave reached up the sides.</p> - -<p>The small sticks in the ends, mentioned by John -Gay, served not only for lifting the canoe but also as -braces to support the canoe at a given angle when -turned over ashore to serve as a shelter. The Beothuk -canoe, because of its form, was not well suited for portaging, -and it must be concluded that little of this was -done. In coastal voyages, the canoe would be unloaded -and brought ashore each night to serve as a shelter.</p> - -<p>It is believed that the gunwale lashing of these -canoes was in groups, as in the Malecite. Howley -questioned an old Micmac who had seen the Beothuk -lashing; he likened it to the continuous lashing used -by his own people, indicating some form of group -wrapping, at least. It is probable that the group -lashings were let into the gunwales by shallow -notching at each group, a common Indian practice -when no rail cap was used, to prevent abrasion from -the paddle or from loading and unloading the canoe. -The lacing of the ends appears to have been in the -common spiral stitch, judging by the grave models. -These, however, show a continuous wrapping at the -gunwales, a common simplification found in Indian -canoe models, representing either group or continuously -wrapped gunwales indiscriminately.</p> - -<p>The paddle of the Beothuks had a long, narrow -blade, probably with a pointed tip and a ridged -surface. The shape is nearly spatulate. The handle -is missing from the grave model but was perhaps of -the usual "hoe-handled" form without a top cross-grip.</p> - -<p>From these descriptions and on the basis of common -Indian techniques in birch-bark canoe construction, -the form and methods of building the Beothuk canoe -can be reconstructed. The drawing on page <a href="#Page_97">97</a> shows -the probable shape and appearance of the finished -canoe. It seems likely that a level building bed was -first prepared. The keel, probably rectangular in -cross section, was then formed of two poles placed -butt-to-butt, worked to shape, and scarfed. The -fastening of the scarf was probably two or more -lashings let into the surface of the wood. These -lashings are assumed to have been of split-root -material but may have been sinew. Possibly to -strengthen the scarfs, pegs were also used, a technique -consistent with the state of Beothuk culture. -The keel probably had its ends split into laminae -to allow the sharp bend required to form the bow -and stern pieces; and it was probably treated with -hot water and staked out to the desired profile. -The main gunwales were similarly made and worked -to the predetermined sheer which, in staking out, was -hogged to a greater degree than was required in the -finished canoe. The ends of the gunwales were -apparently split into laminae to allow the shaping -of the sharp upsweep of the sheer close to bow and -stern. The outwales were probably formed in the -same manner, after which the three thwarts were -made and the material for ribs and sheathing prepared. -The ribs were apparently bent to the desired<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_97" id="Page_97">[Pg 97]</a></span> -shape, using hot water, and were either staked out -or tied to hold them in form until needed.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i113.jpg" width="700" height="468" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 87</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Beothuk Canoe, Approximate Form and Construction</span></p></div> -</div> - -<p>The keel was then laid on the bed and a series -of stakes, perhaps 4½ feet long, were driven into the -bed on each side of the piece in opposing pairs at -intervals of perhaps 2 or 3 feet. The stakes and keel -piece were then removed and the bark cover laid -over the bed. This may have been in two or three -lengths, with the edges overlapped so that the -outside edge of the lap faced away from what was to -be the stern. The keel was then placed on the bark -and weighted down with a few stones or lashed at -the stem heads to the end stakes; then the bark was -folded up on each side of the keel, and the stakes -slipped back into their holes in the bed and driven -solidly into place, perhaps with the tops angled slightly -outward. The heads were then tied together across -the work and battens placed along the stakes and the -outside of the bark to form a "trough" against which -the cover could be held with horizontal inside battens. -These were secured by "inside stakes" lashed to each -outside stake in the manner used in building eastern -Indian canoes (see p. <a href="#Page_45">45</a>). The bark cover now stood -on the bed in a sharp <strong>V</strong> form, with the keel supported -on the bed, the ends of the bark supported by the end -stakes, and both held down by stones along the length -of the keel. An alternative would have been to fix -heavy stakes at the extreme bow and stern of the keel -and to lash the stem-heads firmly to these in order to -hold the keel down on the bark.</p> - -<p>Next the main gunwales, prebent to the required -form, were brought to the building bed and their -ends temporarily lashed to stem and stern. The bark -was brought up to these, trimmed, folded over their -tops, and secured by a few temporary lashings. Then -the outwales were placed outside the bark with their -ends temporarily secured, and a few pegs were driven -through outwale, bark, and main gunwales, or a few -permanent lashings were passed. The bark cover was -next securely lashed to the gunwales and outwales -combined, all along the sheer to a point near the -ends. The excess bark was then trimmed away at -bow and stern and the cover was laced to the end -pieces to form bow and stern. This lacing must -have passed through the laminations of the stem and -stern pieces in the usual manner, avoiding the spiral<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_98" id="Page_98">[Pg 98]</a></span> -lashing that held the laminae together. The ends of -the gunwales and outwales were next permanently -lashed together with root or other material and to the -stem and stern pieces. This done, the gunwales were -spread apart amidships, pressing the stakes outward -still more at the tops. At this point the tenons may -have then been cut in the main gunwales and the -thwarts inserted. This method, incidentally, was -used in building some western Indian bark canoes.</p> - -<p>The usual steps of completing a birch-bark canoe -would then follow—the insertion of sheathing, held -in place by temporary ribs, and then the driving home -of the prebent ribs under the main gunwales, with -their heads in the spaces between the group lashings -along the gunwales and against the lower outboard -corner of the main gunwale member, which was probably -beveled as in the Malecite canoe. The sheathing -may have been in two or three lengths, except -close to the gunwale amidships where one length -would serve. On each side of the keel piece a sheathing -strake was placed which was thick on the edge -against the keel but thin along the outboard edge, -in order to fair the sheathing into the keel piece.</p> - -<p>At some point in this process, the bark cover was -pieced out to make the required width, and gores -were cut in the usual manner. In spreading the -gunwales, the bow and stern would have to be freed -from any stakes, as these would tend to pull inboard -slightly as the gunwales were spread in the process -of shaping the hull. The ribs could have been put -in while green and shaped in the bark cover by use -of battens and cross braces inside, as were those -of the St. Francis canoes.</p> - -<p>The sewing of the bark cover at panels and gores -would take place before the sheathing and ribs were -placed, of course. A 15-foot canoe when completed -would have a girth amidships of about 65 to 68 inches -if the beam at the gunwales were 48 inches, and a -bark cover of this width could be taken from a tree of -roughly 20 inches in diameter. Hence, there may -have been little piecing out of the bark for width. -In the form of the Beothuk canoe as reconstructed -there is nothing that departs from what is possible by -the common Indian canoe-building techniques. The -finished canoe would, in all respects, agree with -most of the descriptions that have been found and -would be a practical craft in all the conditions -under which it would be employed.</p> - -<p>These were the only birch-bark canoes supposed to -have made long runs in the open sea clear of the land. -In them the Beothuk are supposed to have made voyages -to the outlying islands, in which runs in open water -of upward of 60 miles would be necessary, and they -probably crossed from Newfoundland to Labrador.</p> - -<p>The <strong>V</strong>-form used by the Beothuk canoe was the -most extreme of all birch-bark canoe models in -North America, although, as has been mentioned, less -extreme <strong>V</strong>-bottoms were used elsewhere. The Beothuk -canoe may have been a development of some -more ancient form of bark sea canoe also related to the -<strong>V</strong>-bottom canoes of the Passamaquoddy. The most -marked structural characteristic of the Beothuk canoe -was the keel; the only other canoe in which a true -keel was employed was the temporary moosehide -canoes of the Malecite.</p> - -<p>The Beothuk keel piece may have sometimes been -nearly round in section like the keel of the Malecite -moosehide canoe (p. <a href="#Page_214">214</a>). The two garboard strakes -of the sheathing may have been shaped in cross section -to fair the bark cover from the thin sheathing -above to the thick keel and at the same time allow -the ribs to hold the garboards in place. They could, -in fact, be easily made, since a radial split of a small -tree would produce clapboard-like cross sections. -This construction would perhaps comply better with -Cartwright's description of the keel than that shown -in the plan on page <a href="#Page_97">97</a>.</p> - -<p>The sheer of the Beothuk canoe is an exaggerated -form of the gunwale shape of the Micmac rough-water -canoe but this, of course, is no real indication -of any relationship between the two. Indeed, the -probable scarfing of the gunwales of the Beothuk -canoe might be taken as evidence against such a -theory. On the other hand, the elm-bark and other -temporary canoes of the Malecite and Iroquois had -crudely scarfed gunwale members, as did some northwestern -bark canoes.</p> - -<p>Most of the building techniques employed by -Indians throughout North America are illustrated by -these eastern bark canoes, yet marked variation in -construction details existed to the westward, as will -be seen.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_99" id="Page_99">[Pg 99]</a></span></p> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2><em>Chapter Five</em><br /> - -CENTRAL CANADA</h2> - - -<p>The Indians inhabiting central Canada were -expert builders of birch-bark canoes and produced -many distinctive types. The area includes not only -what are now the Provinces of Quebec (including -Labrador), Ontario, Manitoba, and the eastern -part of Saskatchewan, but also the neighboring -northern portions of Michigan, Wisconsin and -Minnesota in the United States. The migrations of -tribal groups within this large area in historical times, -as well as the influence of a long-established fur -trade, have produced many hybrid forms of bark -canoes and, in at least a few instances, the transfer -of a canoe model from one tribal group to another. -It is this that makes it necessary to examine this -area as a single geographic unit, although a wide -variation of tribal forms of bark canoes existed within -its confines.</p> - -<p>The larger portion of the Indians inhabiting this -area were of the great Algonkian family. In the east -during the 18th and 19th centuries, however, some -members of the Iroquois Confederacy were also -found, and in the west, from at least as early as the -beginning of the French fur trade, groups of Sioux, -Dakota, Teton, and Assiniboin. From the fur trade -as well as from normal migratory movements there -was much intermingling of the various tribes, and it -was long the practice in the fur trade, particularly in -the days of the Hudson's Bay Company, to employ -eastern Indians as canoemen and as canoe builders -in the western areas. These apparently introduced -canoe models into sections where they were formerly -unknown; as a result, the tribal classification of bark -canoes within the area under examination cannot be -very precise and the range of each form cannot be -stated accurately. It was in this area, too, that the -historical <i lang="fr">canot du maître</i> (also written <i lang="fr">maître canot</i>), or -great canoe, of the fur trade was developed.</p> - -<p>Most of central Canada, except toward the extreme -north in Quebec and toward the south below the Great -Lakes, is in the area where the canoe birch was plentiful -and of large size. There the numerous inland -waterways, the Great Lakes, and the coastal waters of -James and Hudson Bays make water travel convenient, -and natural conditions require a variety of canoe -models. Hence, when Europeans first appeared in -this area they found already in existence a highly -developed method of canoe transportation. This -they immediately adopted as their own, and in the -long period lasting until very recent times, during -which the development of the northern portion of -this area was slow, the canoe remained the most -important means of forest travel.</p> - -<p>In the northeastern portion of the area, including -the Province of Quebec (with Labrador) from a line -drawn from the head of James Bay eastwardly -through Lake St. John and the Saguenay River -Valley to the St. Lawrence and thence northward -to the treeline in the sub-Arctic, dwelt the eastern -branch of the far-ranging Cree tribe. Those living -on the shores of Hudson and James Bays, along the -west side of the Labrador Peninsula, were known as -the Eastern, Swamp, or Muskeg Cree. To the north, -at the Head of Ungava Bay, around Fort Chimo, and -to the immediate southward, were the Nascapee, or -Nascopie, supposedly related to the Eastern Cree. -In southern Labrador and in Quebec along the north -shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence and for some -distance inland, dwelt another related tribal group -now known as the Montagnais.</p> - -<p>Although the most recent canoe forms employed by -these three Indian groups were very much the same, -this may not have been the case earlier. A common -canoe model in this area was the so-called "crooked -canoe," in which there was a very marked fore-and-aft -rocker to the bottom without a corresponding -amount of sheer; as a result the canoe was much -deeper amidships than near the ends. Another -common model had a rather straight bottom fore<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_100" id="Page_100">[Pg 100]</a></span> -and aft, with some lift near the ends and a corresponding -amount of sheer. Between these was a hybrid -which had some fore-and-aft rocker in the bottom -and a very moderate sheer. Not until the 1870's -was any detailed examination made of the canoes in -this area; then it appeared that the crooked canoe -might be the tribal model of the eastern Cree only, -while the Nascapee employed a straight-bottom -model, but it is possible that the examination was -limited and that Nascapee use of the crooked canoe -was simply not observed. By 1900, however, the -crooked model was in use not only by the eastern -Cree and the Nascapee but also by the Montagnais.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i116.jpg" width="700" height="274" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 88</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Montagnais Crooked Canoe.</span> (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>In the area around Fort Chimo and at the northern -ranges of the eastern Cree and of the Montagnais -the lack of good birch bark made it necessary to make -up the bark cover out of many small pieces. This -not only was laborious but made a rough and rather -unsightly cover. Hence, some of the northern -builders, particularly the Nascapee, substituted spruce -bark, which was available in quite large sheets. -The use of the spruce bark, however, did not cause -any of these people to depart markedly from the model -or the method of constructing birch-bark canoes, -as it did for the Indians in the maritime area.</p> - -<p>At the time (1908) when Adney was carefully observing -the canoes in this area he found that both crooked -and straight-bottom canoes were being used by all -three tribal groups, but with a variation in midsection -form among individual builders. Both types were -built with a midsection that had a wide bottom and -vertical sides, or, as an alternative, a narrow bottom -and flaring sides. The end profile of all these canoes -showed chin. In some crooked canoes the profile was -apparently an arc of a circle, but in most canoes the -form was an irregular curve. The stem met the -gunwale in a marked peak rounded very slightly -at the head, as the result of the method by which the -stem was constructed, but in the hybrid model used -by the Nascapee the ends were low and not much -peaked and the quick upward rise of the sheer near -the ends was lacking. In cross section all these -canoes became <strong>V</strong>-shaped close to the ends, regardless -of the midsection form. For the straight-bottom -canoe and in the hybrid form this resulted in very -sharp level lines, but the very great rocker of the -crooked canoe brought the ends well above the normal -line of flotation, so that this type was quite full-ended -at the level line in spite of the <strong>V</strong>-section.</p> - -<p>It is apparent upon examining the crooked canoe -that there was actually less variation in its form, in -spite of differences in midsection shape, than in that -of the straight-bottom canoe, owing to its very great -depth amidships in proportion to its width. This -proportion made necessary a very moderate flare in -the narrow-bottom midsection and resulted in a -rather wall-sided appearance, even in this model. -The hybrid form, which fell between the extremes of -the crooked canoe and the straight-bottom canoe, -had a narrow-bottomed flaring-sided midsection, and -its relatively moderate depth made obvious the flare in -the topsides and thus created a distinctive model.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_101" id="Page_101">[Pg 101]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i117.jpg" width="700" height="253" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 89</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Birch-Bark Crooked Canoe, Ungava Cree.</span> (<em>Smithsonian Institution photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - - -<h3><em>Eastern Cree</em></h3> - -<p>The construction of canoes of the eastern Cree -and related tribes seems generally like that of the -Micmac craft. Instead of the gunwale method -employed in the Maritime area, a building frame -was used, and as a result the gunwales were longer -than the bottom. In constructing the crooked canoe, -the building frame must be heavily sheered, and -there is evidence that the building bed was depressed -amidships, rather than raised as was usual in the east. -The great amount of rocker in the bottom in this -form of Cree canoe made it necessary to block up the -ends of the building frame to a very great height, and -there was no need to raise the building bed at midlength, -since the rocker extended the full length of -the bottom. The bark cover had to be gored at closely -spaced intervals to allow the rocker to be formed, and -even in the straight-bottom model, the quick rise -of the bottom near the ends required closely spaced -gores there. In the straight-bottom model, however, -the building bed was raised at midlength, as in -eastern canoe-building, and the building frame was -ballasted to a cupid's-bow profile, when on the bed, -so as to achieve the combination of straight bottom -amidships with sharply rising ends.</p> - -<p>The gunwales were formed of the main gunwale -member and a light gunwale cap, no outwale being -employed. They were joined at the ends and, after -hot water had been applied, were staked out with -posts under the ends to obtain the required sheer. -The thwarts were then tenoned into the main gunwales, -though occasionally a canoe was built with -"broken" gunwales, that is, the thwart-ends were let -flush into the top and covered by the caps. Some -builders did not spread the gunwales and place the -thwarts until after the bark cover was lashed at the -sheer; others used the eastern methods of assembling -the gunwale structure prior to securing the bark cover -at sheer. The bark cover was attached to the main -gunwales with a continuous lashing, as in the Micmac -canoes, but the bark was not always brought over the -top of the gunwales. As a result, some canoes had a -batten placed under the lashing, near the edge of the -cover, to prevent the lashing from tearing away. Due -to the lack of good root material, the lashing was often -of rawhide. For all horizontal seams in the side -panels of the bark cover, rawhide sewing over a root -batten was used. The ends of the gunwales were -supported by sprung headboards; in some canoes -these were bellied toward the ends to such a degree -that they almost paralleled the end profiles.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_102" id="Page_102">[Pg 102]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i118a.jpg" width="700" height="429" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 90</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Nascapee 3-Fathom Canoe, Eastern Labrador.</span> Similar canoes, with slight variations in model -and dimensions, were used by all Ungava Indians: the Montagnais and the Eastern, or Swamp, Crees.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i118b.jpg" width="700" height="397" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 91</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Montagnais 2-Fathom Canoe of Southern Labrador and Quebec</span>, showing old decoration -forms. Drawing based on small model of a narrow-bottom canoe built for fast paddling.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_103" id="Page_103">[Pg 103]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i119a.jpg" width="700" height="418" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 92</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Crooked Canoe, 2½-Fathom, of the Ungava Peninsula</span>, used by the Ungava-Cree, Montagnais, -and Nascapee. Also built with a wide bottom and a slight tumble-home in the topsides.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i119b.jpg" width="700" height="471" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 93</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Hybrid Model of the Nascapee-Cree Canoe, 2-Fathom</span>, built of -spruce or birch bark, with details of canoes and paddles.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_104" id="Page_104">[Pg 104]</a></span></p> - -<p>The ends were formed by means of the same technique -used for Micmac canoes; no inside stem-piece -was employed and the bark cover was stiffened by -outside battens covered by the lashing. In the Cree -canoes, however, the stem battens were "broken" -sharply at the sheer to form a slightly rounded peak -where the end met the gunwale caps. The "break" -in the battens was made by bending them very -sharply, so that they were almost fractured. The Cree -practice also differed from that of the Micmac, -although not universally, by passing the lower end of -the stem batten through the bark cover at the point -where the stem met the bottom. The slit thus made -was sealed with gum or, more recently, covered with -cloth impregnated with gum. The stems were lashed -in various ways; the most common was a spiral form -up to the sheer. Near the gunwale caps crossed -stitches or small, closely spaced wrappings were also -employed. The tops of the battens, forming the peak -of the stem, were brought along under the rail caps, -in line with the gunwale lashings inboard, and secured -with a continuous lashing for about 6 inches. In the -northern parts of the area under discussion the stem -lashing was often of rawhide.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i120.jpg" width="700" height="434" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 94</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Eastern Cree Crooked Canoe</span> of rather moderate sheer and rocker. -(<em>Canadian Pacific Railway Company photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Gunwale caps were wider than the gunwales and -thus gave some protection to the lashing there. The -ends of the gunwale caps were heavily tapered to allow -the sharp bends necessary to carry them out on the -stems. They were pegged or nailed to the gunwales, -but at the ends were lashed; usually with two or three -small group lashings over and under the stem battens, -below the caps.</p> - -<p>The most recent canoes had canvas covers instead -of bark. Nails, tacks, and twine for sewing were used; -otherwise they were built as the Indians built birch- -and spruce-bark craft, and not as white men built -canvas canoes and boats.</p> - -<p>The framework of the canoes was usually spruce or -larch. Toward the south and along the St. Lawrence -some white cedar was used, and in the south maple -was sometimes used for thwarts. The ribs of the -canoes inspected by Adney were usually about 3 -inches wide, and a short taper brought them to about -2 inches at the ends, where they were cut square -across. They were spaced about 1 inch apart edge-to-edge -amidships and somewhat further apart toward -the ends of the canoe. The canoes usually had an -odd number of ribs, as the first was placed under the -thwart amidships. The last three ribs at the ends -were "broken" at the centerline to allow them to take -the necessary <strong>V</strong>-section there; but the fourth rib from -each end was only sharply bent. In some canoes the -heel of the very narrow headboard was stepped on<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_105" id="Page_105">[Pg 105]</a></span> -the sheathing against the endmost rib, in others it was -stepped, as in the Micmac canoes, on a frog which -rested against the endmost rib.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i121.jpg" width="700" height="439" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 95</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Straight and Crooked Canoes, Eastern Cree.</span></p></div> -</div> - -<p>In more recent times the sheathing was laid in one -of two ways, according to the preference of the builder, -but the existence of the two styles suggests that each -was once a tribal-group method. One method of -shaping the bottom sheathing was to employ a center, -or keelson, piece in two lengths, the butts being overlapped -amidships, parallel-sided except toward the -stems, where it was tapered to fit the <strong>V</strong>-sections -rather closely. The next strake outboard was short -and was in the form of a shallow triangle with its -base along the middle portion of the first strakes and -about one-third the length of the bottom. Its apex -was under the middle thwart. The next strake outboard -was in two lengths lapped amidships, parallel -sided along the arms of the triangular strake, and -snied off at the ends to fit along the sides of the first -strake. Another strake outboard of this was similar -in form and position, but longer. Thus seven strake -widths would complete the bottom sheathing. The -side sheathing was narrow and slightly tapered; each -strake in two lengths overlapped slightly amidships. -The ends of the topside sheathing ran well into the -ends, in most canoes, where they apparently served -as stiffening. The second method of sheathing -employed parallel-sided strakes throughout, laid side -by side on the bottom, with the ends snied off to fit -the form of the bark bottom. The existence of a model -canoe made about 1850 (see p. <a href="#Page_91">91</a>) supports the -theory that the first method was originally the Montagnais -tribal construction and that the more primitive -second method was probably Cree or Nascapee.</p> - -<p>The ribs were preformed and fitted to the canoe -after drying out. They were bent to the desired shape -in pairs and tied with a thong across the ends to hold -their shape while drying. Some builders inserted a -strut inside the bent ribs, parallel to the thong, protecting -the surface of the inner rib by a pad of bark -placed under each end of the strut. The pair of ribs -might also be wrapped with a bark cord to help hold -them together. To aid in handling, one pair of ribs -might be nested inside another. As in eastern canoes<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_106" id="Page_106">[Pg 106]</a></span> -the ribs under the gunwales were driven into place. -At the ends they were canted toward the center, so -that in the straight-bottom models they stood nearly -perpendicular to the rocker of the bottom there; in -the crooked canoe the ribs were all somewhat canted -in this manner.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i122.jpg" width="700" height="291" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 96</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Montagnais Canvas-Covered Crooked Canoe</span> under construction. -(<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The paddles used in this area were made with -parallel-sided blades, the end of the blade being -almost circular. The handle might be fitted with -a wide grip at the head or it might be pole-ended. -It is impossible to say how early sails were used to -propel canoes, but it is probable they were introduced -by the fur traders. Square sails were being used on -the coastal canoes at the time the earliest reference -was made to these canoes, in the 1870's.</p> - -<p>Little is known about the decorations employed by -the eastern Cree. The Montagnais birch-bark model -canoe of about 1850 (see p. <a href="#Page_91">91</a>) has three small circles -placed in a triangular position on the bow and a -band along the bottom of the side panels. The circles -and the bands are in red paint, but may have been -intended to represent the dark inner rind left after -scraping the winter bark cover. The use of decoration -in this area after 1850 has not been noted in any -available reference.</p> - -<p>As a rule, the straight-bottom canoes were small, -commonly between 12 and 18 feet overall, and the -most popular size was 14 to 16 feet overall. A -canoe of this size was usually employed as a hunters' -canoe for forest travel, though it might be used -occasionally along the coasts. These canoes were light -and, in this respect, resembled the Micmac models -shown in Chapter 4.</p> - -<p>The original purpose of the crooked canoe is in -question. Those travelers who saw this canoe in -use on the Hudson Bay side of the Labrador Peninsula -believed that it was designed for use in rough, -exposed water. While it would be a desirable form -for beach work in surf, the high ends would make -paddling against strong winds very difficult. On the -other hand the Montagnais used the crooked canoe -for river navigation, particularly where rapids were -to be run, and for this work it appears to have been -well adapted. The crooked canoe was commonly -built larger than the straight-bottom model, between -16 and 20 feet in length overall, and was a vessel of -burden rather than a hunting canoe. Canoes up to 28 -feet in length have been mentioned by travelers in -this area but investigation indicates strongly that these -were not the tribal form but the <i lang="fr">canot du nord</i>, or -north canoe of the Hudson's Bay Company traders.</p> - -<p>Along the southern borders of their territory and -to the westward the eastern Cree often built and used -canoes modeled on those of their neighbors, the -Têtes de Boule and the Ojibway. Hence the tribal -classification does not hold good in these localities. -Also, the eastern Cree were employed by the Hudson's -Bay Company as builders of forms of the <i lang="fr">maître canot</i> -and <i lang="fr">canot du nord</i> that are unlike their typical tribal -model.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_107" id="Page_107">[Pg 107]</a></span></p> - - -<h3><em>Têtes de Boule</em></h3> - -<p>The Têtes de Boule, particularly the western bands, -were skilled canoe builders and had long been employed -by the Hudson's Bay Company in the construction -of large fur-trade canoes. Apparently made -up of bands of Indians inhabiting lower Quebec, -in the basin of the St. Maurice River and on the -Height of Land, these bands had come down to the -lower Ottawa River to trade with the local Algonkin -tribe there in early times. They were known to the -Algonkins, who had had some contact with civilization, -as "wild Indians." They also came into -close trading relations with the French colonists, as -the Ottawa River was the early French canoe route -between Montreal and Lake Superior. Because they -cut their hair short, unlike the other Indians, these -northern bands were nicknamed "Bull Heads," or -"Round Heads," by the French traders, and the -tribesmen soon came to accept this rather than their -own designation of "White Fish People" as the tribal -name. In more recent times, the name has been -applied to groups of Indians living in western Quebec -Province, near Lake Barrière and Grand Lake Victoria, -but these do not consider themselves related -to the St. Maurice bands.</p> - -<p>It seems apparent that the canoe models of all -these groups had been altered as a result of long -contact with other tribal groups. Although the St. -Maurice and the western bands were apparently not -of the same tribal stock, their relations with the -Algonkin may have brought about the use of a -standard model by all.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i123a.jpg" width="700" height="555" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 97</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Fiddlehead of Scraped Bark</span> on bow and -stern of a Montagnais birch-bark canoe at -Seven Islands, Que., 1915.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i123b.jpg" width="700" height="628" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 98</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Disk of Colored Porcupine Quills</span> decorating -canoe found at Namaquagon, Que., -1898. Within the 4-inch disk may have been -an 8-pointed star.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The Têtes de Boule lived in an area where very -superior materials for birch-bark canoe construction -were plentiful. This, with the need for canoes imposed -by the numerous waterways and the demand -for canoes from white traders, made many of the -tribesmen expert builders. Their small canoes, ranging -from the 8-to 12-foot hunter's canoes to the 14-to -16-foot family canoes, were very similar in profile -to the canoes of the St. Francis Abnaki. The Têtes -de Boule canoes, however, were commonly narrower -on the bottom, and in their construction a building -frame was always used. The Têtes de Boule model -was straight along the bottom for better than half -the length and then rose rather quickly toward the -ends. Similarly, the sheer was moderate amidships -and increased toward the ends. The stems showed -a chin and were much peaked at the gunwale ends. -Most commonly the midsection had a flat bottom -athwartships and a well-rounded bilge, giving the -topsides, near the gunwale, a very slight outward -flare. Some Têtes de Boule canoes had rather <strong>V</strong>-section -ends in which the endmost rib was "broken" -at the centerline. As a result the lines were sharp -and the canoes paddled very easily.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_108" id="Page_108">[Pg 108]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i124.jpg" width="700" height="317" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 99</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">A Fleet of 51 Birch-Bark Canoes</span> of the Têtes de Boule Indians, assembled -at the Hudson's Bay Company post, Grand Lake Victoria, Procession Sunday, -August 1895. (<em>Photo, Post-Factor L. A. Christopherson.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>For construction of the Têtes de Boule canoe, which -was marked by good structural design and neat workmanship, -the building bed was slightly raised at midlength, -as was the general practice of the St. Francis -builders. The building frame was usually about 6 -inches less in width amidships, inside to inside, than -were the gunwales, and from 15 to 18 inches shorter. -The building frame was made quite sharp toward the -ends so that, viewed from above, it rather approached -a diamond form; this produced the very sharp lines -that are to be seen in many examples of the Têtes de -Boule canoes. The building frame was of course -removed from the canoe as soon as the gunwales were -in place and the bark cover lashed to them.</p> - -<p>The gunwale structure, comprised of main gunwale -members, caps, and outwales, was the same as in the -Malecite canoes. The main gunwales were rectangular -in cross-section, some being almost square, with -the lower outboard corner bevelled off. Compared -to those of eastern canoes of equal length, the main -gunwales were unusually light; their depth and width -rarely exceeded 1 inch, and in very small hunter's -canoes these were often only about ¾ inch. Toward -the ends, they tapered to ½ inch, or even slightly -less. The ends of the main gunwales, usually of -the common half-arrowhead form, were held together -by rawhide or root thongs passed back and forth -through horizontal holes in the members. After -being thus lashed together, they were securely -wrapped with thongs which usually went over gunwales -and outwales and through the bark cover.</p> - -<p>The gunwale caps, also light, were usually between -¼ and ½ inch thick and from 1 to 1½ inches wide. At -the ends they were tapered in width and thickness, -often to <sup>3</sup>⁄<sub>16</sub> by ½ inch, so as to follow the quickly rising -sheer there. The ends of the gunwales, caps, and outwales -required hot-water treatment to obtain the -required curve of the sheer. The caps were pegged to -the gunwales and were secured at each end with two -or three groups of lashings which passed around the -outwales as well, and through the bark cover.</p> - -<p>The outwales were likewise light battens between -¼ and ½ inch thick and from ¾ to 1¼ inches deep, the -depth near the ends being tapered to ⅜ to ¾ inch so as -to sheer correctly.</p> - -<p>The bark cover had four or five vertical gores on -each side of the middle thwart, the gore nearest each -stem being commonly well inboard of the end thwarts. -The side panels were usually deep amidships and -narrowed toward the ends. A root batten was used -under the stitching of the longitudinal seams of the -side panels, which were sewn with a harness-maker's<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_109" id="Page_109">[Pg 109]</a></span> -stitch. The top edge of the bark cover was brought -over the top of the main gunwales, as in the Malecite -canoes, and was secured by group wrappings passing -over the gunwales and outwales, under the caps. -These groups were not independent, the root thong -being carried from group to group outside the bark in -a long pass under the outwales. The groups of seven -to nine turns were roughly an inch apart in many -small canoes, and perhaps 1½ inches in the large craft. -In the last birch-bark canoes in which no nails or -tacks were used, wrappings of root thongs began with -a stop knot, but this does not appear to have been -the earlier practice.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i125.jpg" width="700" height="272" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 100</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Têtes de Boule Canoe.</span></p></div> -</div> - -<p>The Têtes de Boule canoes had inside stem-pieces -split, according to the size of the canoe, in four to six -laminations and lashed with a bark or root thong -in an open spiral in some canoes but close-wrapped in -others. The stem-piece was as in the Malecite canoes, -except that it ended under the rail cap, and did not -pass through it as in the Eastern canoes; the heel was -notched to receive the heel of the headboard. The -bark was usually lashed through the stem, as in the -Malecite construction. However, in some Têtes de -Boule canoes, the stem close to the heel was not -laminated and the bark was lashed to the solid part -by an in-and-out stitch passing through closely spaced -holes drilled in the stem piece. Above this, the lashing -was the usual spiral which, in at least a few instances, -was passed through the bark just inboard of the stem -piece. Near the top of the stem the lashings sometimes -were rather widely spaced and passed inboard -of the stem-pieces; at other times, however, these -lashings were more closely spaced and passed through -the stem.</p> - -<p>Ordinarily, at the ends of the canoe no <em>wulegessis</em>, or -covers of bark, were used under the gunwale caps, -although in one example examined a small cover had -been inserted over the gunwale ends and under the -caps, it did not extend below the outwales to form a -<em>wulegessis</em>. In some canoes the bark cover was pieced -up at the peak of the stems by a panel whose bottom -faired into the bottom of the side panels.</p> - -<p>A variety of methods was used to fit the gunwale -caps at the ends of the canoe. Some builders carried -the cap out beyond the gunwale ends, flat, over the -edges of the bark cover and the top face of the outwale, -but others tilted the cap outboard and downward. -The ends of the caps came flush with the face -of the stems. In an apparently late variation, the -gunwales, instead of ending in the half-arrowhead, -were snied off the inside and a triangular block was -inserted between the ends. The gunwales were then -pegged or nailed to the block and the whole secured -with a root wrapping around them, before the outwales -were in place. The first turn began by passing -the root through a hole in the block near its inboard -end, with a stop knot in the root.</p> - -<p>The ends of the gunwales were supported by a -narrow headboard sharply bellied toward the end of -the canoe. The top of the headboard was notched to -stand under the main gunwales; the center portion -often was carried high and ended with a cylindrical<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_110" id="Page_110">[Pg 110]</a></span> -top that was slightly swelled like the handle of a gouge -or chisel. The heel was sometimes held in the stem-piece -notch with a root lashing.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i126.jpg" width="700" height="320" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 101</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Têtes de Boule Canoes.</span></p></div> -</div> - -<p>The thwarts, spaced equal distances apart, were -tenoned into the gunwales as in the old Malecite -canoes, and were secured with a peg and lashing -through the two holes in the thwart ends. The -middle thwart was usually formed with a shoulder, -viewed in plan, that started 6 or 7 inches inboard of -the inside face of the main gunwale. In form, this -thwart usually swelled outward in a straight line from -the tenon shoulder, then reduced in a curved line to -about the width of the tenon tongue and, finally, -increased again in a right-angle cut to the greatest -width. From here it was reduced again in a long -curve to the canoe's center line. The other thwarts -usually had simple ends, wide at the tenon shoulder -and reduced in a long curve to a narrow center. In -elevation, all the thwarts were thin outboard and -thick at the centerline of the canoe. The cross -section of the center thwart at the centerline was -square or nearly so, the first thwart on each side was -rectangular in cross section at the center, and the end -thwarts were similar, but very thin.</p> - -<p>The sheathing of the Têtes de Boule canoes was thin, -particularly at the ends of the strakes. The bottom -was laid with a parallel-sided center strake going -in first. This strake was in two lengths in a small -canoe and three lengths in a large, the butts overlapping -slightly. The rest of the strakes in the bottom -were tapered toward the ends of the canoe. At the -extremities of the canoe, the narrow ends of the strakes -were very thin and overlapped along their edges, the -bottom sheathing, when in place, thus following the -diamond form of the building frame. The topside -sheathing was laid up in short lengths with overlapping -butts and edges in an irregular plan, those -strakes along the bilges being longer than above. -Toward the ends of the canoe these strakes were -slightly tapered and the edges were very thin. The -sheathing ended irregularly, outboard of the headboards, -in narrow butts as in most eastern canoes.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_111" id="Page_111">[Pg 111]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i127a.jpg" width="700" height="450" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 102</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Têtes de Boule Hunting Canoe, 1½-Fathom</span>, with typical construction details and a paddle.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i127b.jpg" width="700" height="424" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 103</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Têtes de Boule Canoe, 2½-Fathom</span>, with some construction details.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_112" id="Page_112">[Pg 112]</a></span></p> - -<p>The ribs, like the rest of the structure, were very -light, usually ¼ to ⅜ inch thick and from about -1¼ to 1¾ inches wide, depending upon the size of the -canoe. A few examples had ribs 2 inches wide, and -still fewer had ribs up to 2½ inches wide. The spacing -was usually close, somewhat more than an inch edge -to edge amidships and a little more between the end -thwarts and the headboards. The spacing amidships -would average perhaps 3¼ inches, center to center. -The ends of the ribs, in the last 2 or 3 inches, were -reduced in width very sharply in a hollow, curved -taper to ½ to ¾ inch wide, and were usually beveled -on the inside edge. The thickness was also reduced -by a cut on the inside, so that the ends were chisel-pointed -with a short bevel on the inboard side. -The rib ends were forced between the main gunwales -and the bark cover, coming home in the bevel of -the lower outboard edge of the main gunwales between -the group lashings of the bark cover as in the -Malecite canoes. The ribs were not prebent but -were placed in the canoe when green, treated with -hot water, and then allowed to dry into place. In preparing -the rib, it was first bent over the knee. It was -the custom of some builders to place under the building -frame the ribs that were to go near the ends of -the canoe, and to mark the point where they would be -bent. Sometimes the endmost ribs that were to be -"broken" at the centerline to form the <strong>V</strong>-section were -split edgewise. A piece of the inner lamina was then -cut out to one side of the center so that the inner -laminae would lie flat against each other, and to -prevent the inner half from buckling the rib was -wrapped with a thong to one side of the "break."</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i128.jpg" width="700" height="449" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 104</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Têtes de Boule Hunting Canoe, 2-Fathom</span>, with wide bottom, showing -structural details.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>It does not appear to have been the common practice -of the Têtes de Boule to decorate their small -canoes, though when building for white men they -would decorate if the buyer requested it.</p> - -<p>The paddles used by the Têtes de Boule were somewhat -like those of the eastern Cree but the blade was -slightly wider near the tip than near the handle. The -top grip was formed wide and thin, the taper from the -lower grip to the upper one often being very long. -The paddles were usually of white birch, but maple -was used in a few of the examples examined.</p> - -<p>The gunwales, outwales, and caps of the Têtes de -Boule canoes were usually of spruce; the ribs and stem -pieces, white cedar; the thwarts, white birch; the -headboards, white cedar in all but one of the canoes -inspected (in this, birch had been used). Jack pine -was used also for thwarts, and cedar was sometimes -used for the gunwale members; as would be expected, -the builders used the materials that were at hand -near the building sites.</p> - -<p>Têtes de Boule fur-trade canoes, like those of the -eastern Cree, appear to have had no relationship -to the smaller tribal types, since they were constructed -under supervision of white men. They will be discussed -as a group on page <a href="#Page_135">135</a>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_113" id="Page_113">[Pg 113]</a></span></p> - - -<h3><em>Algonkin</em></h3> - -<p>The Algonkins were a tribe residing on the Ottawa -River and its tributaries, in what are now the provinces -of Quebec and Ontario, when the French first -met them. They appear to have been a large and -powerful tribe and were apparently competent -builders and users of birch-bark canoes. They were -not the same tribe as the Ottawa, who controlled the -Lake Huron end of the canoe route between Montreal -and Lake Superior, by way of the Ottawa River. -These Ottawa were related to the Ojibway tribe and -received their name from the French, who gave the -name <em>Outaouais</em>, or "Ottaway," to all Indians, except -the Hurons, who came from the west by way of the -Ottawa. The Algonkins, because of their location, -were much influenced by the French fur trade. -Early in the 18th century they intermingled with -certain Iroquois whom they allowed to settle with -them, near Montreal, at the Lake of Two Mountains, -later Oka. Thence they gradually spread out and -lost tribal unity, until only small groups were left. -These lived on the Golden Lake Algonkin Reserve, -Bonshere River, Ontario; at Oka, Quebec; and elsewhere -in western Quebec and eastern Ontario. It is -possible that they were the first to build fur-trade -canoes for the French, but evidence to support such a -claim with any certainty is lacking.</p> - -<p>Due to intermixing with other tribal groups and to -the influence of the fur trade, in which they were long -employed as canoe men and builders, the Algonkins -no longer used a single tribal model of canoe. However, -one of their models, which had high ends -resembling those of the large fur-trade canoe, may -have been the tribal type from which the fur-trade -canoe was developed, as will be seen.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i129.jpg" width="700" height="285" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 105</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Old Algonkin Canoe.</span></p></div> -</div> - -<p>The high-ended model, the oldest form known to -have been used by this tribe, was narrow-bottomed, -with flaring sides. The canoes seen were built with -careful workmanship and in the old manner, without -iron fastenings. They were light and easily paddled, -yet would carry a heavy load. The ends were sharp at -the line of flotation. The bottom was straight to a -point near the ends, where it lifted somewhat. The -sheer was rather straight over the middle portion of -the canoe, then lifted slightly until close to the -stem, where it rose sharply, becoming almost perpendicular -at the ends of the rail caps. The midsection -was slightly rounded across the bottom, with a well-rounded -bilge and a gently flaring topside. The cross-section -became <strong>V</strong>-shaped close to the headboards. -The most marked feature in the appearance of this -canoe was the profile of the ends. The stem line, -beginning with a slight angle where it joined the -bottom, bent outward in a gentle curve, reaching the -perpendicular at a point a little more than half the -height of the end, and from there it tumbled home -slightly. In most of the canoes examined the top of -the stem then rounded inboard in a quick, hard curve, -usually almost half a circle, so that the stem was -turned downward as it joined the outwale and gun<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_114" id="Page_114">[Pg 114]</a></span>wale -cap. In a variation of this stem form, the top of -the stem was cut off almost square, forming a straight -line that ran parallel to the rise of the bottom below -the stems to the point where it would meet the upturned -outwale and cap. The ends of the outwales -and caps were thus 3 or 4 inches inboard of the -extremities. This form of stem, particularly when -to top was rounded in a half-circle, approached the -basic form of the ends of the fur-trade canoe.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i130.jpg" width="700" height="458" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 106</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Old Model, Ottawa River, Algonkin Canoe</span>, combining capacity with -easy paddling qualities.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>All the examples of this form of canoe that were -examined were small, from 14 to a little over 16 feet -in length overall, but this is not proof that larger -canoes of this type had not existed earlier.</p> - -<p>The later and more common form of Algonkin -canoe was the <em>wabinaki chiman</em>. A corruption of -Abnaki, <em>wabinaki</em> to the later Algonkin meant the -Malecite as well as the St. Francis Indians. The -<em>wabinaki chiman</em> was built in lengths from 12 to 18 feet.</p> - -<p>Iroquois living in the Algonkin territory during -the period built this form of canoe as well as the older, -high-ended form. The <em>wabinaki chiman</em> was very -much like the St. Francis and Malecite canoes in -appearance, but it was not an exact copy. The -Algonkin version was commonly a narrow-bottom -canoe with flaring topsides. There was some variation -in the end profiles; most had the rather high, -peaked ends of the St. Francis canoe. The sheer was -rather straight until near the end, where it rose rapidly -to the stem. The stem was rounded and was faired -into the bottom. The top of the stem was often -rather straight and tumbled home slightly, but on -some it raked outward, much as did the stem of some -Malecite canoes.</p> - -<p>Another form of Algonkin canoe had a low sheer -with only a slight lift toward the ends. In this canoe -the stem might have a short, hard curve at the heel -and an upper portion that was quite straight and -slightly tumbled home; or the full height might be -well rounded, with a slight tumble-home near the -stem head.</p> - -<p>In appearance these canoes were very like the -straight-stem Malecite models. The <em>wabinaki chiman</em><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_115" id="Page_115">[Pg 115]</a></span> -was unquestionably copied from the eastern canoes -that came into popularity among the Algonkin late -in the 19th century, when white sportsmen were demanding -canoes of the St. Francis and Malecite -models. However, the Algonkin canoes differed -somewhat from the eastern canoes not only in model -but also in methods of construction.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 690px;"> -<img src="images/i131.jpg" width="690" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 107</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Algonkin and Ojibway Stem-Pieces</span>, models of old forms made by Adney: -1, 2, 3, Ojibway; 4, 5, 6, 7, Algonkin.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Algonkins used the same construction methods in -both their canoe models, though the framework was -not alike in all respects. The building frame was<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_116" id="Page_116">[Pg 116]</a></span> -always used. For a 2-or 2½-fathom canoe this was -made of two strips of cedar, 1½ inches wide and ¾ -inch deep, that were bent edgewise, notched, and tied -together at the ends with thongs of the inner bark of -the basswood. These strips were held apart in the -required shape by cedar crosspieces 1 inch wide and -1¾ inches deep, with the ends notched ¾ inch deep -(the depth of the longitudinals) and the tops well -rounded. The crosspieces, five in all, were fastened -to the longitudinals with thongs passing through holes -in the ends. The middle one was about 19½ inches -between the inside faces of the longitudinals, those -on each side of it were about 15½ inches long by -similar measure, and the end ones were nearly 6 -inches long and were located a foot or so from the -extremities of the longitudinals. The outside width -of the building frame amidships would thus be about -22½ or 23 inches.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i132.jpg" width="700" height="406" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 108</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Light, Fast 2-Fathom Hunting Canoe</span> of the old Algonkin model.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The building bed was level, with a 6-inch-wide -board, some 6 to 8 feet in length, sunk into the earth -flush with the surface to insure a true line for the -bottom. The outside stakes were of the usual sort -described in building the Malecite canoe (pp. <a href="#Page_40">40</a>-41). -The wedge-shaped inside stakes, or clamp pieces, -were 1½ inches wide, 1 inch thick, and 20 to 25 inches -long. The posts for setting the height of the gunwales -at the ends and at the crosspieces were not cut off -square at the top as for the Malecite canoe, but were -notched on the outside to take the gunwales. The -heights of the posts were graduated, of course, to form -the required sheer in the gunwales. Like the canoes -of the Têtes de Boule, these of the Algonkin were -generally less deep amidships than the general run of -eastern canoes.</p> - -<p>Building procedure was as follows: The gunwales -were made, bent, and the ends fastened, but instead of -being mortised and fitted with thwarts, they were -spread by temporary crosspieces, or "spalls," made -of a splint, or plank-on-edge, with the lower edge -notched in two places to take the gunwale members. -Sometimes the spalls were lashed, pegged or nailed to -the gunwales as well. The stakes were set along the -building frame and these were generally driven -sloping, so that their heads stood outboard of the -points. They were then pulled and laid aside, the -building frame was removed, and the bark cover -placed on the building bed. After the building -frame has been reset in its original position and the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_117" id="Page_117">[Pg 117]</a></span> -bark cover turned up along the sides, the stakes were -again driven in their holes. The cover was then -pieced out with side panels as necessary and gored, -and longitudinal strips of wood were set in place -by means of the clamp pieces, about as in Malecite -construction. The gunwales were then placed on -the posts, which had been set to the required sheer, -and the bark trimmed and fitted to them. The -old method was to lash the bark to the main gunwale -members and to peg on the outwales at intervals -of about a foot. In earlier times most builders -inserted along the gunwales an extra reinforcing -strip of bark extending a little below the outwales, -as in the St. Francis canoes, but in the nailed-and-tacked -bark canoes built during the decadent period -this was sometimes omitted.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i133.jpg" width="700" height="448" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 109</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Hybrid Algonkin Canoes</span>: Eastern 2½ fathom (above) and northeastern -2-fathom adaptation, with sketches of stems used in each.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Mortises for the thwarts were next cut and the -middle thwart was forced into place, after the spall -there had been removed. This required that the -gunwales be spread slightly, thus increasing the -amount of sheer somewhat. Much judgment was -needed to do this correctly. The increase in the -sheer lifted the ends slightly and put some rocker in -the bottom toward the ends. The building frame was -lifted out before the rest of the thwarts were placed; -usually it was taken apart in the process. In forming -the ends of the bark cover, the two sides were held -together by a clothespin-like device made of two -short, flat sticks lashed together.</p> - -<p>Increasing the beam at the gunwales by fitting -the thwarts after the bark cover had been secured to -the gunwales not only increased the sheer but decreased -the depth of the canoe amidships as established -by the posts placed under the gunwales in setting up. -In order to retain the required sheer and the desired -depth of side, the gunwales had been sheered up at the -ends while being shaped, and had also been treated -with hot water and hogged upward amidships by -being staked out to dry into shape. The spreading of -the gunwales tended to lift the ends of the bottom line, -a condition that was controlled in two ways: the -usual one apparently was to employ, in combination<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_118" id="Page_118">[Pg 118]</a></span> -with a level bed, a building frame slightly wider than -was desired for the finished bottom; the second way -was to follow Malecite procedure and elevate slightly -the middle of the building bed while employing a -building frame the width of the finished bottom. -The Algonkin procedure of spreading the gunwales -during construction was that employed in the northwest -and in the building of the fur-trade canoes, as -will be seen. The amount of spread to be given the -gunwales also affected the angle, or slope, at which -the side stakes were driven on the building bed. -Even so, some builders who spread the gunwales -a good deal would set the stakes almost vertically, -instead of at a slant, as this made sewing the side -panels easier, particularly in large canoes and in -canoes whose covers were made up of a large number -of small pieces of bark.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i134.jpg" width="700" height="437" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 110</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Algonkin, 2-Fathom Hunter's Canoe</span>, without headboards. Details of building -frame, stakes or posts, gauge, and stem.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The gunwales of the Algonkin canoes were made up -of three members—main gunwales, outwales, and -caps. The main gunwales, usually of cedar, were -rectangular in cross section and bent on the flat. The -lower outboard corner was bevelled off to take the rib -ends, as in the Malecite canoes. The gunwales were -rather light ranging in the examples found from about -1 inch square to 1 by 1⅝ inches, the ends being tapered -to a lesser size. The outwales were light battens, -rectangular in cross-section, about as deep as the -main gunwales and about two-thirds their thickness -or less; they tapered in depth toward the ends to -⅜ or ½ inch in order to follow the sheer, while the -thickness might be constant or only slightly reduced. -The caps, which were pegged to the gunwales, were -also light and were about equal to the combined -width of the main gunwales and outwales and had -a depth of about ⅜ to ½ inch amidships. At the ends -they were tapered in both width and depth, becoming -½ inch wide and ⅜ inch deep. The amount of taper -in the ends of the gunwale members depended upon -the form of sheer; the Algonkin practice in the old -form of canoe was to sheer the outwales and caps to -the top of the stem, while the gunwales sheered less -and met the sides of the stem piece at a lower point,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_119" id="Page_119">[Pg 119]</a></span> -as in the drawing (p. <a href="#Page_116">116</a>). In the <em>wabinaki chiman</em>, -however, the gunwales and other members, as a rule, -all followed the sheer of the ends of the canoe.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i135.jpg" width="700" height="177" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 111</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Algonkin Canoe, Old Type.</span></p></div> -</div> - -<p>The Algonkins used inside stem-pieces in both -models, but the stem-piece of the old high-ended -canoe was quite different from that of the <em>wabinaki -chiman</em>, for it was built to give a profile in which the -top of the high stem ended in a line straight across to -the sheer. The piece consisted of a crooked stick, -without lamination, worked out of a thin board, ⅜ -to ½ inch thick. It was shaped to the desired profile -inside and out, and was slightly sharpened, or sometimes -rabbeted and sharpened, toward the outboard -face. The headboard was mounted on this stem-piece -by means of the usual notch but was not -bellied; instead it stood approximately vertical and -a short strut was tenoned into both the headboard -and the inside face of the stem at a point about half -the height of the stem. Sometimes two struts were -used, side by side, with the outboard ends lashed at -the sides of the stem. Thus the stem-pieces and headboards -were placed as a single unit, not independently -as in eastern canoes. The gunwale ends were -lashed to the sides of the stem-piece, between the strut -and the stem-head, at a height determined by the -sheering of the main gunwale members. The outwales -and caps did not touch the stem-piece, ending with -a nearly vertical upward sweep, a few inches inboard. -The ends of the outwales and caps were always higher -than the top of the stem-piece so that, when the canoe -was turned upside down, the bark cover over the stem-head -was kept off the ground and thus preserved from -damage. The top of the stem-piece was held rigid -not only by the strut to the headboard but also by the -ends of the main gunwale members lashed to it a -little higher up. The headboard was in the form of -a rounded <strong>V</strong> that was widest at midheight, at the -gunwales, which were let into its sides.</p> - -<p>When the stem-head was rounded in the style of the -fur-trade canoe, the stem-piece except near the heel -was split into very thin laminations about <sup>1</sup>⁄<sub>16</sub> inch, -or a little more, thick. The carefully selected cedar -of which these were made was treated with boiling -water, then bent to profile; the head was sharply bent -over and down, inside the stem, then sharply up again -so the end stood at about right angles to the face of -the stem at midheight. The headboard was mounted -as previously described, except that the end of the -stem-piece was inserted into a hole in the headboard -just above the strut. The laminations of the stem-piece -were wrapped in the normal manner and the -lashing was often brought around the strut as well, -up against the outboard face of the headboard. -The whole structure was thus made rigid and very -strong. As in the other form, the main gunwale -members did not follow the sheer near the ends of -canoe but were secured at a point lower down on -the sides of the stem-piece. In the round-head form, -however, the outwale and cap ends were fastened on -the after face of the stem-head where the laminations -were curved downward as illustrated in the drawing -(p. <a href="#Page_116">116</a>).</p> - -<p>The headboards for both models were thicker than -those in the eastern canoes; this aided in holding -the stem line in form. Tension on the bark cover -was obtained by making the cover <strong>V</strong>-formed toward -the ends and then spreading the sides of the <strong>V</strong> with -the headboard, thus bringing pressure on the strakes -of the sheathing and forcing the sides outward in a -slight curve.</p> - -<p>The stem-pieces of the <em>wabinaki chiman</em> were either -cut out of a thin board or laminated. In the straight-stem -form, only the forefoot part was laminated, and -no headboard was used. Ordinarily, however, the -rigid headboard with a single strut was used. The -head of the stem-piece was carried through the rail<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_120" id="Page_120">[Pg 120]</a></span> -caps and showed above them; the ends of the caps -and main gunwales were notched to permit this, but -neither these nor the cap extended outboard of the -face of the stem.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i136.jpg" width="700" height="361" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 112</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Algonkin "Wabinaki Chiman."</span></p></div> -</div> - -<p>The bark cover was lashed to the gunwales with -group lashings in which the thong was carried from -group to group by a long stitch outside the cover, -under the outwale. The turns in each group were -passed through five or six holes in the cover and reinforcing -piece, two turns of the thong going through -each hole. The connecting stitch between groups, -which were usually about 1½ inches apart, usually -passed from the last hole in a group to the second hole -in the next. Some builders laid a wooden measuring -stick along the gunwales to space the lashings; -this was perhaps the practice of many tribal groups.</p> - -<p>The lashing of the ends of the cover was passed -through the stem pieces; when the latter were not -laminated, holes through the soft, thin cedar were -made by a sharp awl and an in-and-out or harness -stitch was quite commonly used. On laminated stem -pieces the form of lashing varied; in the <em>wabinaki -chiman</em> it was commonly some combination of spiral -and crossed turns; in the old form of high-ended canoe -multiple turns through a single hole (usually at the -top of the stem-head) were also used in combination -with closely spaced long-and-short turns in triangular -groups near the top of the stem profile. Below, in -the forefoot, spiral or crossed stitches were used. The -ends of the outwales were lashed together with a -close wrapping of turns in contact where they turned -upward sharply, and the caps were secured there by -two or more group lashings. The head of the headboard -was lashed to each gunwale by passing the -thong through holes each side of the headboard; these -lashings were in a long group and were passed around -gunwale and outwale before the caps were in place. -With plank stem-pieces the ends of the bark cover -were slightly inboard of the cutwater line, sometimes -protected by a rabbet.</p> - -<p>The side panels were sewn on with in-and-out -stitches, back stitches, or a double line of either. The -gores were sewn spirally in the usual manner or were -stitched with a closely spaced lacing.</p> - -<p>Some of the old Algonkin canoes examined had what -appeared to be a <em>wulegessis</em> just outboard of the headboards. -No marking was found on these and they -were too far aft to protect the ends of the gunwales. -The bark was carried across the gunwales, under the -caps, and hung down a little below the outwales. On -top, it reached from the headboard out to the lashings -of the outwales, forming between the headboards -and the lashings a short deck that may have been -intended to keep dirt and water out of the ends of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_121" id="Page_121">[Pg 121]</a></span> -canoe. Sometimes a modern <em>wabinaki chiman</em> has a -<em>wulegessis</em>, copying the Eastern practice but without -markings.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 667px;"> -<img src="images/i137a.jpg" width="667" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 113</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Algonkin Canoe Decorations</span> by Tommy Sersin (or Serzia), -Golden Lake, Ont., showing four sides of stems of one canoe. -Indian shown has the eastern headdress rather than that of the -Plains Indian. Moose, bear, beaver, and goose are shown. -(<em>Sketches by Adney.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The thwarts were of various designs; a common one -had parallel sides in plan. The old canoes had thwarts -much like those of the Têtes de Boule. The end -lashings of these were usually passed through three -holes in the thwart ends, but some had only two holes.</p> - -<p>Sheathing was laid somewhat as in the Têtes-de-Boule -canoe, with overlapping edges and butts. The -end sheathing was short and was laid first; the centerline -strake was parallel-sided to a point near the sharp -end of the canoe. The strakes on each side of it were -tapered and were laid with their wide ends toward -the middle of the canoe and with the sides and narrow -end lapped. In the middle of the canoe the strakes<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_122" id="Page_122">[Pg 122]</a></span> -were parallel-sided and their butts were on top of -those of the strakes in the end of the canoe. The -sheathing was carried up to within about three inches -of the gunwales. The edges were not thinned or -feathered as much as were those in the Têtes de Boule -canoe.</p> - -<p>Ribs were of cedar from 2 to 3 inches wide, closely -spaced and, as usual, without taper until near the ends, -which were formed with a narrow chisel edge as in the -Têtes-de-Boule canoe. The ribs were first roughly -bent, using the building frame as a general guide for -length, in order to obtain a somewhat dish-shaped -cross section; by this means the width of the bottom -could be established to the builder's satisfaction.</p> - -<p>The foregoing description of building methods and -construction is based largely upon what is known of -the old canoes. In later times the Algonkin copied -the eastern canoes and their procedure altered. Not -only did they copy extensively the appearance of the -St. Francis and Malecite canoes, but they built some -canoes much like those of the Têtes de Boule and -Ojibway. As a result, it has become difficult to -determine what their tribal practices were.</p> - -<p>Their paddles were of the same design as those of -the Têtes de Boule, round-pointed and with the blade -parallel-sided for most of its length. In portaging, -the Algonkin, like many forest Indians, placed a pair -of paddles a foot or so apart fore-and-aft over the -middle thwart and those on each side of it. These -were lashed in place with the ends of a band of hide -or the inner bark of a tree like the basswood or elm. -This band had been first passed around the ends of the -middle thwart, outside the shoulders, and hitched with -ends long enough to secure the paddles in place. -The shoulder on the middle, thwart, a few inches inside -the gunwales, was placed there for just this purpose, -not as a mere decoration, so that the line could -not slide in along the thwart. The canoe was then -lifted and turned over by raising one end, or by -lifting the whole canoe, and was placed on the carrier's -shoulders, so that the paddle handles were on -his shoulders. This brought the middle thwart to -just behind the carrier's head. The loop of the bark -or hide cord was then placed around the forehead of -the carrier in order to keep the canoe from slipping -backward. In this fashion one man could carry a -canoe for miles if the canoe were small—and all woods, -or portage, canoes were small and light. The headband -was known to white men as a "tump line." The -Indians used it to carry not only canoes but other -heavy or awkward loads (see p. <a href="#Page_25">25</a>).</p> - -<p>There is no certainty about the decorations of -Algonkin canoes. Some of the older Indians claimed -that the old form of canoe was often decorated with -figures formed by scraping the winter bark; usually -these depicted the game the owner hunted. Five-pointed -stars, fish, and circular forms are known to -have been used on the <em>wabinaki chiman</em>, but it is not -known whether these were really Algonkin decorations -or merely something that had been copied -"because it looked good."</p> - -<p>The Algonkin called the large fur canoes <em>nabiska</em>, -a name which the Têtes de Boule rendered as <em>rabeska</em>. -The word may be a corruption of the Cree word for -"strong." At any rate, the name <em>rabeska</em> (sometimes -pronounced ra-bas-ha), rather than the French -maître canot, was long applied by white men in the -fur trade to the large canoes built in the Ottawa -River Valley for their business. In late years the -rabeska was a "large" 2½-fathom high-ended birch-bark -canoe, but originally it meant a fur-trade canoe, -with the characteristic ends, of from 3 fathoms upward -in length.</p> - - -<h3><em>Ojibway</em></h3> - -<p>The Indian bands that were called "<em>Outaouais</em>" by -the early French do not appear to have been an -independent tribe, as has been mentioned, but were -largely made up of Ojibway from the Great Lakes -region. Perhaps some Têtes de Boule were among -these bands before these people were given their nickname. -The Ojibway were a powerful tribal group, -made up of far-ranging bands, located all around -Lake Superior and to the northwest as far as Lake -Winnipeg. They had been in the process of taking -over the western end of Lake Superior when the -earliest French explorers reached that area; they -pushed the Sioux from these forest lands into the -plains area, joining with the western Cree in this -movement. In the process they seem to have absorbed -both some Sioux and some Cree bands. -Within the Ojibway tribal group, later called Chippewa -or Chippeway by the English and Americans, -the bands had local names, or were given nicknames, -such as the Menominee, Saltreaux, Pillagers, etc. -All the important bands within the tribal group were -expert canoemen and builders. As far as can be -discovered now, the Ojibway added to their own tribal -types the models of canoes they encountered in their<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_123" id="Page_123">[Pg 123]</a></span> -expansion westward. It has long been true that the -Ojibway canoe can be one of at least three forms, -depending upon which area of their territory is being -discussed.</p> - -<p>What is believed to be their old tribal form was a -high-ended canoe in all respects very much like the -high-ended Algonkin type. This was the model used -by the Lake Nipigon Ojibway, north of Lake Superior -in Ontario, and by those of the same tribe that once -lived near Saginaw, Michigan, as well as by the -Menominee of Wisconsin. At the late period, from -the middle of the 19th century onward, for which -information was available or in which investigation -was possible, it appears that the Ojibway canoes of -this high-ended model were built in larger sizes than -contemporary Algonkin canoes of like design. The -Ojibway canoes had the same end structure as these; -the early examples found had "chin" in the end profiles -and the tumble-home of the stem was straight, -or nearly so, between the large curve of the forefoot -and the very short hard curve at the stem head. The -Ojibway used the same inner stem-piece, laminated -and brought downward abaft the stem-head and -then inboard so that the end fitted into a slot in the -headboard a little above its midheight, at which -point was fitted a strut from the headboard to the -back of the stem-piece. The midsection of the -Ojibway canoe was very much like that of the -Algonkin; it had a narrow bottom somewhat rounded -athwartships, a well-rounded bilge, and flaring -topsides.</p> - -<p>A small Ojibway portage canoe built in the middle -of the 19th century had an end profile somewhat -different from that described above; the ends were -well rounded and had a heavy chin, the stem was -carried into the tumble-home with a full rounded -curve all the way to the stem-head, where the stem -piece was bent in and downward very sharply and -then inboard sharply again, so that the end pierced -the vertical headboard at sheer height. The <strong>S</strong>-curve -was so located that the main gunwales could be -lashed to the stem piece at the point where they -paralleled it well below the stem head. In these -canoes the Ojibway followed Algonkin practice in -ending the gunwales; there was, therefore, no strut. -Where this canoe was built is uncertain.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i139.jpg" width="700" height="421" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 114</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Ojibway 2-Fathom Hunter's Canoe</span>, used by the eastern tribal groups. -Probably the ancient model.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_124" id="Page_124">[Pg 124]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i140a.jpg" width="700" height="435" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 115</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Examples of the Old Model Ojibway 3-Fathom</span> rice-harvesting canoe (above), and -2-fathom hunter's canoe, showing the easy paddling form used.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i140b.jpg" width="700" height="438" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 116</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Ojibway 3-Fathom Freight Canoe From Lake Timagami</span>, apparently a hybrid based on canvas canoes.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_125" id="Page_125">[Pg 125]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i141.jpg" width="700" height="424" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 117</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">The Old Form of Ojibway 2½-Fathom Canoe</span> of the eastern groups (above), -and the long-nose Cree-Ojibway canoe of the western groups.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>At Lake Timagami, north of Georgian Bay in -Ontario, the Ojibway used a low-ended canoe with -a remarkably straight tumble-home stem profile; the -forefoot had a very short radius ending at the bottom -line with a knuckle, and the stem-head stood slightly -above the gunwale caps. The stem-piece was made -from a thin plank cut to profile; thus no lamination -was necessary. The headboard stood straight, falling -inboard slightly at the head. The midsection was -dish-shaped, with a flat bottom athwartships and -strongly flaring sides, the turn of the bilge being rather -abrupt. The ends were strongly <strong>V</strong>-shaped in cross-section; -a number of the frames there being "broken" -at the centerline of the bottom. A canoe of this design -was seen by Adney at North Bay, Ontario, in 1925, -indicating that the design may have been used in -some degree outside the Lake area in later years.</p> - -<p>The most common Ojibway model used to the -northwest and west of Lake Superior was the so-called -"long-nose" form, a rather straight-sheered canoe. -The bottom, near the ends, had a slight rocker, and -the sheer turned up very sharply there, becoming -almost perpendicular at the extremities, yet the ends -were not proportionally very high. The end-profile -came up from the bottom very full and round, then -fell sharply inboard in a slightly rounded sweep to -join the upturned sheer well inboard. The midsection -was somewhat dish-shaped, but with well-rounded -bilges, so that the flare of the topsides was rounded -and not very apparent to the casual observer. The -end section developed into a tumble-home form, so -that a section through the top of the headboard -was rather oval. As a result, these canoes appeared -rather clumsy and unfair in their lines, but this -apparently did not harm their paddling qualities or -seaworthiness.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_126" id="Page_126">[Pg 126]</a></span></p> -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i142a.jpg" width="700" height="342" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 118</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Eastern Ojibway Canoe, Old Form.</span> (<em>Canadian Pacific Railway photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i142b.jpg" width="700" height="446" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 119</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Ojibway Long-Nose Canoe, Rainy Lake District.</span></p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_127" id="Page_127">[Pg 127]</a></span></p> - -<p>These canoes had narrow headboards that were -sharply bellied, somewhat like those in the crooked -canoes, and the belly was sufficient to allow the heel -of the end-board to pass under the bottom sheathing -and inside the bark cover so that two end ribs served -to hold the heel in place. The inside stem-piece was -often no more than a light stick or rod bent to profile, -with the head split and brought over the gunwale ends -and down inside, between them. Each half of the -split was then lashed to its neighboring gunwale -member. A strip of bark was often placed over the -end of the bark cover and carried down the face of the -stem, under the sewing. The rail caps were then -brought up over the tops of the gunwales and overlapped -the top portion of the stem piece. The heel -of the stem-piece was bevelled off on the inboard side -so that it could be wedged under the headboard, inside -the bark cover. These headboards, it should be -noted, were no more than a thin, narrow batten, and -in some canoes the head of this batten was lashed -under the gunwale ends instead of coming up between -them inboard, as usual. A variation in the fitting of -the stem head was found in a canoe at Long Lake, -Ontario; the stem head, instead of being split, was -lashed between the gunwale ends and thus was brought -inboard level with the top of the gunwales.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i143.jpg" width="700" height="435" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 120</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Small Ojibway Canoes of the Two Tribal Forms</span> showing (above) early -trend toward the long nose form, and the final Ojibway-Cree hybrid form -combining flaring sides amidships with tumble-home sections at ends.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The cross section of the main gunwales was round -or nearly so in nearly all long-nose canoes, and often a -gunwale cap was fitted. The bark cover was secured -to the gunwales by a continuous lashing, but in at -least one example, from Minnesota, the gunwale -wrappings were in groups over an outwale after the -regular fashion to the eastward. The ends of the -thwarts were wedge-or chisel-shaped and instead of -being tenoned were forced into splits in the round -gunwales. Many canoes had bark covers at the gunwale -ends and vestiges of the <em>wulegessis</em> were to be seen.</p> - -<p>All Ojibway canoes were built with a building frame, -the bed being slightly higher at midlength than at the -ends. The stakes were driven nearly perpendicular, -instead of with heads slanted outward. It is apparent -from observed examples that some canoes were built -by the same procedure as the Algonkin, but that not -all the long-nose canoes were built by spreading the -gunwales; some were built using the methods of the -St. Francis.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_128" id="Page_128">[Pg 128]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 121</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Ojibway Canoe Building, -Lac Seul, 1918.</span></p> - -<p>(See pp. <a href="#Page_170">170</a>-171 for more -photos of Ojibway canoe -building.)</p></div> - -<img src="images/i144a.jpg" width="700" height="424" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Preparing a building site or -bed; building frame in place.</p></div> - -<img src="images/i144b.jpg" width="700" height="407" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Bark set up; bark staked out -on building bed.</p></div> - -<img src="images/i144c.jpg" width="700" height="417" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Bark cover being sewn on building -bed.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_129" id="Page_129">[Pg 129]</a></span></p></div> - -<img src="images/i145a.jpg" width="700" height="406" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Gunwales being lashed.</p></div> - -<img src="images/i145b.jpg" width="700" height="412" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Securing gunwales.</p></div> - -<img src="images/i145c.jpg" width="700" height="420" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Pitch being applied to seams.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_130" id="Page_130">[Pg 130]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i146.jpg" width="700" height="240" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 122</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Long Lake Ojibway Long-Nose Canoe.</span> (<em>Canadian Geological Survey photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The lashing in the high-ended Ojibway canoes was -about the same as that in the Algonkin canoes, but in -the long-nose type the workmanship was often coarse. -On many of the latter the stems were lashed by use of -small groups in which two turns were taken through -each of two closely spaced holes in the bark and the -connection between the groups was made by a long -spiral around the outside of the stem. This pattern -was carried down from the stem-head to about the -level of the midship sheer height; from there down -around the forefoot the lashing consisted of a simple -spiral. Another style was to use widely spaced groups -made up of two or three turns through a pair of facing -holes in the bark, one on each side and inboard of the -stem. The turn went around the stem, and the last -connected with the next pair of holes below. A few -canoes of this style used closely spaced wrapping, as -in the high-ended canoes.</p> - -<p>The long-nose Ojibway canoe is surprisingly -primitive by comparison with the graceful and well-finished -high-ended model built after the Algonkin -style. Adney believed that the long-nose type originated -with the Sioux Dakotas, before the combined -Ojibway and Cree movement forced them out of the -forest lands to the west of Lake Superior. He considered -it possible that both the Ojibway and Cree -adapted the Dakota model, modifying it somewhat to -their methods of construction. It is true that the -western Cree built a long-nose canoe, but it had less -chin than the Ojibway model. On the other hand, -the Ojibway prebent ribs in pairs like the eastern -Cree, and used spreaders in the end ribs while drying -them, in exactly the same manner. A picture taken -in 1916 shows the gunwales of a Cree long-nose canoe -being set; it was laid on the ground and weighted -along the midlength by stones laid on boards placed -across the longitudinals. The ends had been sheered -up and were supported at each end by a thong made -fast to the gunwale end and then brought over a post, -or strut, a few feet inboard and made fast to the -middle thwart.</p> - -<p>It is unnecessary to detail the construction of the -Ojibway canoes, as they employed a building-frame, -as the drawings on pages <a href="#Page_123">123</a> to 127 show plainly enough -the pertinent details of fitting and construction. It is -important to observe that the wide variation in model -and in construction details of the Ojibway canoes -produced a variety of building procedures that in the -main were like those of the Algonkin and Cree. -Hence the older tribal method of construction cannot -now be stated with any accuracy.</p> - -<p>The paddle forms used by the Ojibway groups -varied somewhat. Most were made with parallel-sided -blades and oval tips. The hand grip at the top -of the handle was rectangular and was large in comparison -to the grip of the eastern Cree paddles. A -few variations have been noticed; the blade of one was -widest at the top, the tip was almost squared off, and -the upper hand grip was much as in the factory paddle -of today. This paddle, from an unknown locality, -was used in 1849.</p> - -<p>As in the case of the Algonkin, the eastern Ojibway -built fur-trade canoes under supervision. Though -these canoes differed somewhat from those built by -the Algonkins, it is now impossible to say whether<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_131" id="Page_131">[Pg 131]</a></span> -or not there was any real relationship between them -and the small, high-ended "old-form" canoe. Likewise, -the Ojibway built a version of the <em>wabinaki chiman</em> -which seems to have influenced some types of their -own, such as, for instance, the straight-stem Lake -Temagami canoe.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i147.jpg" width="700" height="537" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 123</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Nineteen-Foot Ojibway Canoe</span> with thirteen Indians aboard (1913).</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_132" id="Page_132">[Pg 132]</a></span></p> - - -<h3><em>Western Cree</em></h3> - -<p>The western portion of the great Cree tribe appear -to have occupied the western shore of James Bay and -to have moved gradually northwestward in historical -times. Their territory included the northern portion -of Ontario and northern Manitoba north of Lake -Winnipeg, and as early as 1800 they had entered -northwestern Alberta. The line of division between -the canoes of the eastern and western Cree cannot be -strictly determined, but it is roughly the Missinaibi -River, which, with the Abitibi River, empties into -the head of James Bay at the old post of Moose -Factory. The southern range of the Cree model -was only a little way south of the head of James Bay, -irregularly westward in line with Lake St. Joseph to -Lake Winnipeg. To the west, the Cree type of canoe -gradually spread until it met the canoe forms of the -Athabascan in the Northwest Territories, in the -vicinity of Lake Athabaska in northwestern Saskatchewan.</p> - -<p>The canoes of the western Cree, as has been noted, -strongly resembled the long-nose Ojibway model -except that they had less pronounced chin. But -unlike those of the eastern Cree, their canoes employed -an inside stem-piece that was sometimes a laminated -piece and sometimes a piece of spruce root. The -stem head was commonly bent sharply and secured -between the gunwale ends at the point where the two -longitudinals were fastened together, much as in some -Ojibway long-nose canoes. The Cree canoe had -basically the same dish-shaped midsection, but it had -very full, round bilges and the flare was so curved in -the topside that it was even less apparent than in the -Ojibway model. The shorter chin of the Cree canoe -also made tumble-home in the end sections unnecessary, -and cross section near the headboards was -given the form of a slightly rounded <strong>U</strong>.</p> - -<p>The bottom had very little rocker at the ends, -being straight for practically the whole length. The -stem-piece if laminated (often in only two or three -laminations) came up from the bottom in a fair round -forefoot and then tumbled in by a gentle curve to the -stem-head, where it was bent sharply to pass down -between the gunwale ends as previously noted. But -if the stem-piece was of spruce root, the profile was -often somewhat irregular and the chin was more -pronounced. In a common style the stem came fair -out of the bottom in a quick hard curve, then curved -outward slightly until the height of the least freeboard -amidships was reached, at which height another hard -turn began the tumble-home in a gentle sweep to the -stem-head, where there was a very hard turn downward. -The stem-head was often split, as in some -Ojibway canoes, so that it came over the joined ends -of the main gunwales and the two halves were then -lashed to the inside faces of the gunwales.</p> - -<p>Birch bark was often poor or scarce in the territory -of the western Cree, as in that of their eastern brothers. -As a substitute, they employed spruce bark and in -general seem to have achieved better results, for -their spruce-bark canoes had a neater appearance. -If the canoe was built when or where root material -was difficult to obtain, the western Cree used rawhide -for sewing the bark cover. When the stems -were lashed with rawhide, a stem-band of bark under -the lashing was common.</p> - -<p>The gunwales were round in cross section and were -often spliced amidships. The bark cover was lashed -to these with a continuous lashing, no caps or outwales -being employed. As in the Ojibway long-nose -canoe, the headboards were very narrow and much -bellied. These canoes were built with four or five -thwarts; the 4-thwart type was used for gathering -wild rice, as was the Ojibway type, while the 5-thwart -canoe was the portage model. The thwarts were -sometimes mortised into the gunwales, but some -builders made the thwart ends chisel-pointed and -drove them into short splits in the gunwales before -lashing them, one or two holes being drilled in the -thwart ends to take the lashing thongs. When the -thwarts were tenoned into the gunwales, the builders -of course made the inside of the gunwales flat.</p> - -<p>When spruce bark was employed, its greater stiffness -made it possible to space the ribs as much as -10 inches on centers, but with birch the spacing was -about 1 inch, edge to edge. The sheathing was in -short splints and the inside of the canoe was "shingled" -or covered irregularly without regard to lining off -the strakes, a practice sometimes observed in Ojibway -long-nose canoes. The much-bellied and narrow -headboards were fitted as in the long-nose canoe, and -the heel was secured under a piece of sheathing and -held by it and the first two ribs.</p> - -<p>Western Cree canoes were built with a building -frame, and the bed was raised in the middle. The -sewing varied. The ends were lashed with combinations -of close-wrapped turns, crossed turns, grouped, -and spiral turns; the lashing commonly went around -the inside stem piece rather than through it. Side<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_133" id="Page_133">[Pg 133]</a></span> -panels were sewn with in-and-out stitches or back -stitches, and the gores with the usual spiral. Gumming -as a rule was done with clear spruce gum tempered -by repeated meltings.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i149.jpg" width="700" height="429" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 124</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Western Cree 2½-Fathom Canoe</span>, Winisk River District, northwest of James -Bay. Built of either birch or spruce bark. Inside root stem piece, round -gunwales, and much-bellied headboard are typical.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The woodwork varied with the building site; some -builders could use much cedar, but spruce was most -common and the thwarts were usually of birch. When -spruce bark was used it was never employed in a single -large sheet, since it would have been impossible to -mold it to the required shape. Hence the bark cover -was pieced up, whether birch or spruce, as an aid in -molding the form. Before the spruce bark was sewed -and gummed, the edges of the pieces had to be thinned -to make a neat joint. Furthermore, in the continuous -lashing it was desirable to take two or three turns -through one hole in the bark cover to avoid weakening -the material with closely spaced holes.</p> - -<p>The western Cree paddles had parallel-sided blades -with rounded tips; the handle sometimes had a ball-shaped -top grip and sometimes it was pole-ended. -The blade did not have a ridge on its face near the -handle. Old Cree paddles were often decorated with -red pigment bands, markings in the shape of crosses, -squares in series, and dots on the blades; the top -grip might also be painted.</p> - -<p>Many tribal groups in the western portion of the -area have been mentioned—Teton, Sioux, Assiniboine, -Illinois, Huron, and many others—but no -record of their canoe forms has survived and the -assigning of any model to them is pure speculation. -The fur trade alone brought about a period of tribal -movement among the Indians long enough to erase -many tribal distinctions in canoes and to cause types -to move great distances.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_134" id="Page_134">[Pg 134]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i150.jpg" width="700" height="316" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 125</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">An Old 6-Fathom Fur-Trade Canoe</span>, or "rabeska," used on the Montreal-Great Lakes run. -Also called the Iroquois canoe, it approximates the canoes built for the French, at the Trois -Rivières, Que., factory and is of the style used by the North West and Hudson's Bay Companies.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_135" id="Page_135">[Pg 135]</a></span></p> - - -<h3><em>Fur-Trade Canoes</em></h3> - -<p>Of all birch-bark canoe forms, the most famous -were the <i lang="fr">canots du maître</i>, or <i lang="fr">maître canots</i> (also called -north canoes, great canoes, or <em>rabeskas</em>), of the great -fur companies of Canada. These large canoes were -developed early, as we have seen in the French -colonial records, and remained a vital part of the fur -trade until well toward the very end of the 19th -century—two hundred years of use and development -at the very least. A comprehensive history of the -Canadian and American fur trade is yet to be written; -when one appears it will show that the fur trade could -not have existed on a large scale without the great -<i lang="fr">maître canot</i> of birch bark. It will also have to show -that the early exploration of the north country was -largely made possible by this carrier. In fact, the -great canoes of the Canadian fur trade must be -looked upon as the national watercraft type, historically, -of Canada and far more representative of the -great years of national expansion than the wagon, -truck, locomotive, or steamship.</p> - -<p>Little has survived concerning the form and construction -of the early French-colonial fur-trade canoes. -Circumstantial evidence leads to the conclusion -that the model was a development, an enlargement -perhaps, of the Algonkin form of high-ended canoe as -described on pages <a href="#Page_113">113</a> to 116. The early French came -into contact with these tribesmen before they met -the Great Lakes Ojibway, the other builders of the -high-ended model. It is known that the Indians -first supplied large canoes to the French governmental -and church authorities and that when this source of -canoes proved insufficient, the canoe factory at -Trois Rivières was set up and a standard size (probably -a standard model as well) came into existence. As -the fur trade expanded, large canoes may well have -been built elsewhere by the early French; we know at -least that building spread westward and northward -after Canada became a British possession.</p> - -<p>In the rise of the great canoe of the fur trade, the -basic model was no doubt maintained through the -method of training its builders. The first French -engaged in bark-canoe building learned the techniques, -let us say, from the original Indian builders, -the Algonkin. As building moved westward, the -first men sent to the new posts to build canoes apparently -came from the French-operated canoe -factory. It would be reasonable to expect that as -building increased in the west, local modifications -would be patterned on canoes from around the building -post, but that the basic model would remain. This -may account for the departures from the true Ojibway-Algonkin -canoes seen in the <i lang="fr">maître canots</i>.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i151.jpg" width="700" height="311" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 126</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Inboard Profile of a 6-Fathom Fur-Trade Canoe</span>, and details of construction, -fitting, and decoration.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_136" id="Page_136">[Pg 136]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i152.jpg" width="700" height="371" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 127</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Small 3-Fathom North Canoe</span> of the Têtes de Boule -model. Built in the 19th century for fast travel, this -Hudson's Bay Company canoe was also called nadowé -chiman, or Iroquois canoe.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>In model, all the fur-trade canoes had narrow -bottoms, flaring topsides, and sharp ends. The flaring -sides were rather straight in section and the bottom -nearly flat athwartships. The bottom had a moderate -rocker very close to the ends. In nearly all of these -canoes, the main gunwales were sheered up only -slightly at the ends and were secured to the sides -of the inner stem-piece; the outwales and caps, -however, were strongly sheered up to the top of the -stem. The curvature and form of the ends, in later -years at least, varied with the place of building.</p> - -<p>After the English took control of Canada and the -fur trade, a large number of Iroquois removed into -Quebec and were employed by the English fur traders -as canoemen and as canoe builders. Though the -aboriginal Iroquois were not birch-bark canoe -builders, they apparently became so after they reached -Canada, for the fur-trade canoes built on the Ottawa -River and tributaries by the Algonkins and their -neighbors became known after 1820 as <em>nadowé chiman</em> -or <em>adowe chiman</em>, names which mean Iroquois canoe. -These "Iroquois canoes," however, were not a -standard form. Those built by the Algonkin had -relatively upright stem profiles, giving them a rather -long bottom, and the outwales and caps stood almost -vertical at the stem-heads; in contrast, the "Iroquois -canoes" built by the Têtes de Boule had a proportionally -shorter bottom than those of the Algonkin, -because the end profiles were cut under more at the -forefoot. Also, the outwales and caps of the Têtes de -Boule canoes were not sheered quite as much as were -those of the Algonkin.</p> - -<p>It is supposed that the Têtes de Boule were taught -to build this model by Iroquois, who had replaced -the French builders subsequent to the closing of the -canoe factory at Trois Rivières, sometime about 1820. -After the English took possession of Canada in 1763, -the old canoe factory had been maintained by the -Montreal traders (the "North West Company"), and -it was not until these traders were absorbed by the -Hudson's Bay Company that canoe manufacture at -Trois Rivières finally came to a halt, although it is -probable that the production of canoes there had -become limited by shortages of bark and other suitable -materials. However, the North West Company had -built the large trading canoes elsewhere, for many of -its posts had found it necessary to construct canoes -locally, and when the Hudson's Bay Company finally -took over the fur trade it continued the policy of -building the canoes at various posts where material -and builders could be found. This policy appears to -have produced in the fur-trade canoe model a third -variant in which the high ends were much rounded at -the stem head; this was the form built by the Ojibway -and Cree (see p. <a href="#Page_139">139</a>). It must be noted, however, -that the variation in the three forms of fur-trade canoe -was expressed almost entirely in the form and framing -of the ends; the lines were all about the same, though<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_137" id="Page_137">[Pg 137]</a></span> -small variations in sheer, rocker, and midsection -must have existed.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i153.jpg" width="700" height="512" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 128</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Models of Fur-Trade Canoes</span>, top to bottom: 2½-fathom Ottawa River -Algonkin canoe, Hudson's Bay Company express canoe, 3½-fathom Têtes de -Boule "Iroquois" canoe, 3¾-fathom Lake Timagami canoe, 5-fathom fur-trade -canoe of early type, and 5-fathom Hudson's Bay Company canoe built in -northwestern Quebec Province.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Although no regulations appear to have been set -up by the fur companies to govern the size, model, -construction or finish of these canoes, custom and -the requirements of usage appear to have been satisfactory -guides, having been established by practical -experience. As a result, the length of canoes varied -and the classification by "fathoms" or feet must be -accepted as no more than approximate.</p> - -<p>The form of the canoe was determined by the use to -which it was to be put, in trade or in travel. Fur-trade -accounts often mention the "light canoe," or -<i lang="fr">canot léger</i>, often misspelled in various ways in early -English accounts, and this class of canoe was always -mentioned where speed was necessary. Commonly, -the light canoe was merely a trade canoe lightly -burdened. Due to the narrow bottom of these canoes, -they became long and narrow on the waterline when -not heavily loaded and so could be paddled very -rapidly. It is true, however, that some "express -canoes" were built for fast paddling. These were -merely the common trade models with less beam than -usual at gunwale and across the bottom. Some posts -made a specialty of building such canoes, often handsomely -painted, for the use of officials of the company, -or of the church or government, during "inspection" -trips. Not all of the highly finished canoes were of -the narrow form, however, as some were built wide -for capacity rather than for high speed.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_138" id="Page_138">[Pg 138]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i154.jpg" width="700" height="341" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 129</p> - -<p>"<span class="smcap">Fur-Trade Maître Canot With Passengers.</span>" From an oil painting by -Hopkins (<em>Public Archives of Canada photo</em>).</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The fur traders used not only the so-called fur-trade -canoes, of course, but they employed various Indian -types when small canoes were required. And in -the construction of the high-ended fur-trade models, -they did not limit themselves to canoes of relatively -great length. Each "canoe road" forming the main -lines of travel in the old fur-trade had requirements -that affected the size of the canoes employed on it. -The largest size of fur-trade canoe, the standard -5½-fathom (bottom length), was employed only -on the Montreal-Great Lakes route, in the days -before this run was taken over by bateaux, schooners, -sloops, and later, by steamers. At the western end of -this route, a smaller 4-or 4½-fathom canoe came -into use. The latter was used on the long run into -the northwest. Even smaller canoes were often -employed by the northern posts; the 3-or 3½-fathom -sizes were popular where the canoe routes were -very difficult to operate. For use on some of the -large northern lakes, the large canoes of the Montreal-Great -Lakes run were introduced. Fur coming east -from the Athabasca might thus be transported in -canoes of varying size along the way.</p> - -<p>In judging the size of the canoe mentioned in a fur-trader's -journal, it is often very difficult to be certain -whether the measurement he is employing is bottom -or gunwale length. In the largest canoes, however, -the 5½-fathom bottom-length was the 6-fathom gunwale -length, and the use of either usually, but not -always, indicates the method of measurement. This -is not the case in the small canoe however, where the -matter must too often be left to guesswork. To give -the reader a more precise idea of the sizes of the -canoes last employed in the fur trade, the following -will serve. The <i lang="fr">maître canot</i> of the Montreal-Great -Lakes run was commonly about 36 feet overall, or -about 32 feet 9 inches over the gunwales, and a little -over 32 feet on the bottom. The beam at gunwale -was roughly 66 inches (inside the gunwales) or about -68-70 inches extreme beam. The width of the building -frame that formed the bottom would be somewhere -around 42 inches. The depth amidships, from bottom -to top of gunwale might be approximately 30-32 -inches and the height of the stems roughly 54 inches. -These dimensions might be best described as average, -since canoes with gunwale length given as 6 fathoms -were built a number of inches wider or narrower, -and deeper or shallower. The earlier fur-trade -canoes of the French and of the North West Company, -for example, were apparently narrower than the -above.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_139" id="Page_139">[Pg 139]</a></span></p> -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i155a.jpg" width="700" height="345" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 130</p> - -<p>"<span class="smcap">Bivouac in Expedition in Hudson's Bay Canoe.</span>" From an oil painting by -Hopkins (<em>Public Archives of Canada photo</em>).</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i155b.jpg" width="700" height="353" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 131</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Ojibway 3-Fathom Fur-Trade Canoe</span>, a cargo-carrying type, marked by -cut-under end profiles, that was built as late as 1894.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_140" id="Page_140">[Pg 140]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i156.jpg" width="700" height="340" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 132</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">This Type of 5-Fathom Fur-Trade Canoe</span> was built at L. A. Christopherson's -Hudson's Bay Company posts at Grand Lake Victoria, Lake Barrière, and Lake -Abitibi. Called the Ottawa River canoe by fur-traders, it was used for fast -travel and shows the upright stems of the northwest Quebec Algonkin.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_141" id="Page_141">[Pg 141]</a></span></p> - -<p>The 5-fathom size that replaced the larger canoe -at the close of the bark-canoe period was about 31 -feet long over the gunwales or 30 feet 8 inches in a -straight line from tip of upturned rail cap at one -stem to the other. The beam inside the gunwales -was 60 inches. The width of the building frame -would be between 40 and 45 inches, and the frame -when formed would be about 26 feet 8 inches long. -The depth of the canoe amidships, from bottom to -top of gunwale, was approximate 30 inches and the -height of the stems about 50 inches. The overall -length of such a canoe was about 34 feet 4 inches. -An express canoe of this size would be about 56 inches -beam inside the gunwales or even somewhat less, and -the depth amidships about 28 inches or a little less.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i157.jpg" width="700" height="416" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 133</p> - -<p>"<span class="smcap">Hudson's Bay Canoe Running the Rapids.</span>" From an oil painting by -Hopkins (<em>Public Archives of Canada photo</em>).</p></div> -</div> - -<p>A 4-fathom canoe measured 26 feet 8 inches over -the tips of the upturned rail caps, and 29 feet 11 inches -overall. The beam amidships was 57 inches inside -the gunwales and the depth amidships to top of gunwales -was 26 inches; the height of the stem was 53 -inches.</p> - -<p>A 3-fathom canoe was 19 feet 2 inches overall, -16 feet 8 inches over the ends of the gunwale caps, -42 inches beam amidships inside of gunwales, the -depth of the canoe from bottom to top of gunwale -amidships was 19 inches, and the height of the ends -was 38 inches. The building frame for this canoe -was 15 feet 8 inches long and 27 inches wide.</p> - -<p>The canoes falling between the even-fathom measurements -were often of about the same dimensions -as the even-fathom size next below; a 3½-fathom -canoe would have nearly the same breadth and depth -as a 3-fathom; only the length was increased. The -half-fathom rarely measured that—a canoe rated as -3½ fathom was actually only 20 feet 5 inches overall. -One express canoe rated 3½ fathoms measured 20 feet -1 inch overall, 18 feet 3 inches over the gunwale caps, -44 inches beam inside gunwales amidships, and 21 -inches deep, bottom to top of gunwale cap. The -height of the ends was 39 inches. This example will -serve to indicate how inexact the fathom classification -really was. It should also be noted that the height -of the ends varied a good deal in any given range of -length, as this dimension was determined not by the -length of the canoe but by the judgment and taste -of the builder and his tribal form of end. Generally, -however, small canoes had relatively higher ends than<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_142" id="Page_142">[Pg 142]</a></span> -large canoes, in proportion to length, because, as will -be remembered, one function of the end was to hold -the upended canoe far enough off the ground to -permit the user to seek shelter under it.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i158.jpg" width="700" height="419" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 134</p> - -<p>"<span class="smcap">Repairing the Canoe.</span>" From an oil painting by Hopkins (<em>Public Archives -of Canada photo</em>).</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Extremes of dimension appear to have been rare in -fur-trade canoes; none whose length overall exceeded -37 feet have been found in the records, and the maximum -beam reported in a <i lang="fr">maître canot</i> was 80 inches. -When canvas replaced birch bark in the fur-trade -canoes, the high-ended models disappeared; the -canvas freight canoes were commonly of the white -man's type having low-peaked ends, or a modified -Peterborough type.</p> - -<p>Before discussing the methods of construction, the -loading and equipment of the fur-trade canoes should -be described from contemporary fur trade accounts. -The goods carried in these canoes were packed into -easily handled bundles, or packages, of from 90 to -100 pounds weight. Wines and liquor were carried -in 9-gallon kegs, the most awkward of all cargo to -portage. In some cases the furs were packed into -80-or 90-pound bundles in the Northwest, and were -repacked into 100-pound bundles before being -placed on the large canoes of the Montreal-Great -Lakes route, but bundles lighter than 90 pounds were -made up for the shipment of small quantities of -individual goods to isolated posts. The bundles, or -packs, of furs were formed under screw presses so -that 500 mink skins, for example, were made into a -package 24 inches long, 21 inches wide and 15 inches -deep, weighing very close to 90 pounds. Buffalo -hides formed a larger pack, of course. In the canoe, -packs were covered by a <em>parala</em>, a heavy, oiled red-canvas -tarpaulin.</p> - -<p>Boxes called <em>cassettes</em> were carried; these were 28 -inches long and 16 inches in width and depth, made -of ¾-inch seasoned pine dovetailed and iron-strapped, -with the lid tightly fitted. The top, and sometimes -the bottom too, was bevelled along the edges. The -lids were fitted with hasps and padlocks and the boxes -were as watertight as possible. Each box was painted -and marked; in these were placed cash and other<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_143" id="Page_143">[Pg 143]</a></span> -valuables. Also carried was a travelling case—a lined -box for medicine, refreshments for the officers, and -what would be needed quickly on the road.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i159.jpg" width="700" height="364" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 135</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Hudson's Bay Company 4½-Fathom North Canoe</span>, of the -type built by Crees at posts near James Bay in the middle of the -19th century, for cargo-carrying.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Provisions such as meat, sugar, flour, etc. were -carried in tins and were stowed in baskets which were -usually of the form known to woodsmen as pack-baskets. -Baskets also served to carry cooking utensils -and other loose articles. Bedrolls consisted of blankets -or robes, made up in a tarpaulin or oilskin groundsheet -and were used in the canoe as pads or seats. -The voyageur's term for the canoe equipment—paddles, -setting poles, sail, mast, and yard, and the -rigging and hauling lines—was <em>agrès</em>, or <em>agrets</em>.</p> - -<p>The term <em>pacton</em> was applied to packs made up -ready for portage; they were ordinarily made up of -two or more packages, so the weight carried was at -the very least 180 pounds. No self-respecting -voyageur would carry less, as it would be disgraceful -to be so weak. The <em>pacton</em> was carried by means of a -<em>collier</em>, or tump-line similar to that used to portage -canoes (see p. <a href="#Page_122">122</a>). It was made of three pieces -of stout leather. The middle piece was of stout -tanned leather about 4 inches wide and 18 inches -long, tapered toward each end, to which were sewn -pliant straps 2 or 2½ inches wide and 10 feet long. -These were usually slightly tapered toward the free -ends. The middle portion of this piece of gear was of -thick enough leather to be quite stiff, but the straps -were very flexible. Sometimes the middle portion and -2 or 3 feet of the end straps were in one piece with -extensions sewn to the latter. The <em>pacton</em> was lifted -and placed so that it rested in the small of the carrier's -back, with its weight borne by the hips. The ends of -the <em>collier</em> were tied to the <em>pacton</em> so as to hold it in place, -with the broad central band around the carrier's -forehead. On top of the <em>pacton</em> was placed a loose -package, <em>cassette</em>, or perhaps a keg. The total load -amounted to 270 pounds on the average if the trail -was good; the maximum on record is 630 pounds. -With his body leaning forward to support the load, -the carrier sprang forward in a quick trot, using -short, quick paces, and moved at about 5 miles an -hour over a good trail. A carrier was expected to -make more than one trip over the portage, as a rule.</p> - -<p>The traditional picture of the fur-trade voyageur -as a happy, carefree adventurer was hardly a true one, -at least in the 19th century. With poor food hastily -prepared, back-breaking loads, and continual exposure, -his lot was a very hard one at best. The -monstrous packs usually brought physical injury and -the working life of a packer was very short. In the -early days, and during the time of the North West -Company, the canoemen were allowed to do some -private trading to add to their wages, but when the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_144" id="Page_144">[Pg 144]</a></span> -Hudson's Bay Company took over this was not allowed -and discipline became far more harsh. As a result, -the French Canadians deserted the trade, to be replaced -with Indians and half-breeds. The paddling -race against time, to reach the destination before the -fall freeze, was labor comparable to that of a galley -slave, but in a very harsh climate. Altogether, if -the brutal truth is accepted, the life of the canoeman -was far more hardship than romance.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i160.jpg" width="700" height="487" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 136</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Five-Fathom Fur-Trade Canoe From Brunswick House</span>, one of the Hudson's -Bay Company posts.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The cargo of a fur-trade canoe was not placed -directly on the bottom; light cedar or spruce poles -were first laid in the bottom of the canoe and then -the cargo loaded aboard. The poles prevented -damage to the canoe by any undue concentration of -weight. The weight of cargo carried varied with the -size of the canoe and with the conditions of the canoe -route. The canoes were usually loaded deeply, except -in the case of the light express canoe, in which the -cargo was reduced for sake of rapid travelling.</p> - -<p>An account written in 1800 by Alexander Henry -the younger gives the following list of cargo in a trade -canoe on the run to Red River in the Northwest, -where canoes under 4½ fathoms were generally used: -General trade merchandise, 5 bales; tobacco, 1 bale -and 2 rolls; kettles, 1 bale or basket; guns, 1 case; -hardware, 1 case; lead shot, 2 bags; flour, 1 bag; -sugar, 1 keg; gunpowder, 2 kegs; wine, 10 kegs. This -totaled 28 pieces: in addition the crew had 4 bales -(1 for each paddler) of private property, 4 bags of -corn of 1½ bushels each, and ½ keg of "grease," -plus bedrolls and the canoe gear. The trade goods -carried to the posts included such items as canoe awls, -axes, shot, gunpowder, gun tools, brass wire, flints -(or, later, percussion caps), lead, beads, brooches, -blankets, combs, coats, fire-steels, finger rings, guns, -spruce gum, garters, birch bark, powder-horns or -cartridge boxes, hats, kettles and pans, knives, fish -line, hooks, net twine, looking glasses, needles, ribbons,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_145" id="Page_145">[Pg 145]</a></span> -rum, brandy, wine, blue and red broadcloth, tomahawks -or hatchets, tobacco, pipes, thread, vermillion -and paint, and false hair.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i161.jpg" width="700" height="395" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 137</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Fur-Trade Canoes on the Missinaibi River</span>, 1901. (<em>Canadian Geological -Survey photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The tarpaulins used to cover the cargo were 8 by -10 feet, hemmed and fitted with grommets around the -edges for lashings. The cloth was treated with ochre, -oil, and wax to give it a dull red color and to waterproof -it. One of the tarpaulins usually served as the -sail. The fur bales were each sacked, that is, wrapped -in a canvas cover that was sewed on and stenciled -with identification and ownership marks.</p> - -<p>The cargo manifests were not always the same. -Compare the previous list with this cargo, with which -two light canoes were each loaded: 3 <em>cassettes</em>, 1 -travelling case, 2 baskets, 1 bag of bread, 1 bag of -biscuits, 2 kegs of spirits, 2 kegs of porter, 1 tin of beef, -1 bag of pemmican for officers and 2 for the crew, 2 -tents for officers, cooking utensils, canoe equipment, -and 1 <em>pacton</em> for each of the 9 men in each canoe.</p> - -<p>The rate of travel varied a good deal, depending -upon the condition of the waterway and of the men. -Perhaps, as an average, 50 miles a day would be the -common expectation during a 3-month run into the -northwest. Traveling fast with good conditions, an -express canoe might average as much as 75 or 80 miles -a day, but this was exceptional.</p> - -<p>The number of men required to man a fur-trade -canoe varied with the use required of the canoe, with -its load, and its size. There were rare occasions in -which a <i lang="fr">maître canot</i> had 17 paddlers and a steersman, -but normally such a canoe was manned by between 7 -and 15 men, depending upon how much space aboard -was required by cargo or passengers and upon the -difficulties of the route. An express canoe, traveling -light and at high speed, was manned by 4 to 6 paddlers, -one of whom acted as steersman or stern -paddler, and one as the equally important bowman -in river work.</p> - -<p>The most valuable information on the construction -methods of fur trade canoes was obtained in 1925 from -the late L. A. Christopherson, a retired Hudson's Bay -Company official. He had joined the Company in -1874 and retired in 1919, after 45 years service, 38 of -which he had spent in western Quebec at the posts on<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_146" id="Page_146">[Pg 146]</a></span> -Lake Barrière and on Grand Victoria. These were -canoe-building posts, and Christopherson had supervised -the construction of both the 5-and 4½-fathom -trade canoes. His posts had built the nearly vertical-ended -<em>nadowé chiman</em>, the Iroquois, or Ottawa River, -type of Algonkin canoe. The actual building was -done by Indians, but the work was directed by the -Company men.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i162.jpg" width="700" height="270" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 138</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Fur-Trade Canoe Brigade, Christopherson's Hudson's Bay Company Post</span>, -about 1885. Christopherson in white shirt and flat cap, sitting with hands -clasped. Five-fathom canoes, Ottawa River type.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>In the building the eye and judgment of the builder -were the only guides, aided by the occasional use of a -measuring stick, and Christopherson made it abundantly -clear that the Company had no rules or regulations -that he knew of, regarding the size, model, and -construction of the canoes, nor any standards for -decoration. The model and appearance of the canoes -were determined by the preferences of the builders -and the size by the needs of the posts. For example, -the 5-fathom canoe had been built at the Grand -Victoria post until it was decided there that a 4½-fathom -canoe would serve. The decoration, if any, -was apparently according to "the custom of the post."</p> - -<p>The method of construction described by Christopherson -seems to be largely that of the Algonkin, -modified slightly by Ojibway practices. The canoes -were built on a plank building bed made of 2-or -2½-inch thick spruce; its middle was higher than -the ends, as were the earthen beds used in the east, -and holes were bored in it to take the stakes. A -stake was placed near the end of each thwart and one -between, along the sides of the canoe. The individual -builders had their preferences as to the method of -setting stakes; some set them vertically while others -bored the bed so that the stakes stood with their -heads pointed outward. A post might have two or -more building beds, one for each size, or model.</p> - -<p>Canoes were always built by means of a building -frame. This was made with four or five crosspieces -that determined the fullness or fineness of the bottom -of the canoe toward the ends. By altering the lengths -of the end crosspieces, the degree of fullness in the -lines of the finished canoe could be predetermined. -As a result the bed, which was usually about 18 inches -wider than the building frame, might have the shape -of its frame marked on it twice, with two sets of -holes for stakes. Otherwise, the alteration in the -building frame would require a special bed to be -used. In addition to the alteration in the ends of -the building frame, there could also be variations -in its width amidships. Christopherson's posts commonly -built canoes intended for fast travel, so most -of them were narrower in beam at the gunwale and -across the bottom than were the fur-trade canoes -of the period, and the building frame was likewise -narrower.</p> - -<p>The length of the building frame used in these -canoes was the same as the bottom length, or a little -longer than the distance between the two headboards -of the finished canoe. Thus, in a 5-fathom canoe the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_147" id="Page_147">[Pg 147]</a></span> -bottom length would be 30 feet, and in a 4½-fathom -canoe, 27 feet; the beds would be some 6 feet longer -than these lengths.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i163.jpg" width="700" height="444" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 139.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Forest Rangers, Lake Timagami, Ontario.</span> (<em>Canadian Pacific Railway -Company photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>As the canoes at Christopherson's were built for -speed and rarely measured more than 48 inches beam -between the gunwale members, the building frame -was about 32 inches wide amidships, or approximately -two-thirds the beam inside the gunwales in a 5-fathom -canoe. The beam of his 4½-fathom canoes was less, -say 42 inches inside the gunwales and 27 or 28 inches -across the building frame, with a depth, bottom to -top of rail cap, of between 19 and 21 inches. A -5-fathom canoe of this narrow model would carry -nearly 2½ short tons with a crew of six, while the -smaller model would carry nearly 2 tons. However, -the capacity of a wide canoe was much greater. A -6-fathom canoe, the <em>Rob Roy</em>, built by another post -about 1876 to bring in the bishop for the consecration -of a church at the Lake Temiscaming post, was -described by Christopherson as being about 6 feet -beam on the gunwales. Considered a fine example -of a freight canoe, the <em>Rob Roy</em> was afterwards loaded -with 75 bags of flour, totaling 3½ tons deadweight, -and carried as well a crew of seven and their provisions -and gear.</p> - -<p>The bark cover was commonly in two lengths on the -bottom of the canoe, summer bark being used. The -post maintained a supply of bark for canoe building -and sheets 4 fathoms in length and 1 in breadth were -not uncommon. Such sheets would have been ample -for the cover of a small canoe but would not be -expended so needlessly; hence, the canoes, large or -small, had two lengths of bark in their bottoms. The -lap was toward the stern. In what appears to have -been a local characteristic of the canoes built at -Christopherson's posts, the bows were indicated by -making the thwarts toward that end slightly longer -than those toward the stern, so that the forebody was -fuller at sheer than the afterbody; the canoe master -could thus instantly see which end was the bow<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_148" id="Page_148">[Pg 148]</a></span> -without having to examine the bottom or the bark -cover.</p> - -<p>The two pieces of bark sewn together were placed -on the building bed and the building frame placed on -it and weighted down, in the usual manner. The -stakes were then set in the holes in the bed and the -bark secured to them with the usual inside stakes, as -well as with the clothespin-like clamps used by the -Algonkin and other Indian canoe builders. The end -stakes were set in a peculiar manner: a short pair -were set with their heads sloping inboard, for use -later to support the sheering of the outwales, and a -long pair were set raking sharply outboard to help -support the bark required for the high ends. As the -bark cover was made up, pieces were worked into the -ends to allow the high ends to be made. The side -panels often seen on the eastern Indian bark canoe -were used, and the bark doubled at the gunwales. -The doubling pieces were put on about 6 inches wide -and trimmed off after the outwales were in place. -The pieces were widest amidships, and when trimmed -would extend about two inches or a little more below -the outwales, narrowing somewhat toward the ends. -Longitudinal battens to fair the bark along the sides -were placed as usual in canoe building.</p> - -<p>The main gunwales were originally made of white -cedar, but when this became scarce at the posts, -whipsawed spruce was used instead. The gunwales -were rectangular in cross section, with the outer -lower corner beveled off. The cross section of the -inner gunwale member was smaller, in proportion, -than the outwale, compared to a small eastern Indian -canoe. The gunwales were bent "on the flat" in -plan, and were sheered "edge bent." The tenons for -the thwart ends were cut slanting, so that when the -gunwales were made up they stood at a flare outward -toward the top edge. The gunwales had much taper -toward the ends as it was usual to work in some sheer -in these members. The canoes built at Christopherson's -posts, unlike some other trade canoes, had a -good deal of sheer at the ends, as the main gunwales -rose nearly to the top of the stem.</p> - -<p>The manner of forming the gunwales varied somewhat. -If the stakes around the building frame had -been set to stand vertically, it was necessary to assemble -the gunwales with temporary crosspieces, or -false thwarts, each shorter by several inches than -would be the finished thwart in their place, or twice -the amount of flare desired. After the gunwale -assembly had been set above the building frame on the -usual posts to determine its height above the building -bed, the bark cover would be lashed to each gunwale -member. This done, each crosspiece would be removed -in turn and replaced with its corresponding -thwart. By this means the gunwales would be spread -and, in the process, lowered in proportion to the change -in beam. This would usually make too much sheer. -Therefore, if the gunwales were to be spread as a result -of the side stakes standing vertically, they had to be -formed with some reverse sheer amidships. This was -done as usual, by first treating each member with hot -water and then weighting it on a long plank, or unused -building bed, over a block placed under it at midlength. -The height of the block would determine the -amount the sheer was "humped" in the middle, -usually only an inch or so. The gunwale ends were -also treated with hot water and sometimes were split -horizontally to get the required sheer there; they -were then bent up and held, while drying and setting, -by a long cord that was stretched between them and -placed under tension by means of a strut, about 4 feet -long, placed under the cord at midlength and stepped -on the gunwale member being bent. However, if -the side stakes were set sloping outward, it was unnecessary -to hump the sheer amidships.</p> - -<p>The reason why many builders preferred to set the -stakes on the bed vertically was that it made easy the -goring and the sewing of the bark cover side panels; -if the bark available for the cover required little -sewing, the sloping stakes might be preferred. It -appears, however, that the usual procedure was to set -the stakes vertically and to spread the gunwales, -since good bark was usually available. A good deal -of judgment was required to estimate the amount of -hump or reverse to be worked into the gunwale -members; too much would leave a hump in the sheer -of the finished canoe and not enough would cause -too much dip amidships. Before being bent to sheer, -the gunwale members were worked smooth with a -plane or with scrapers made of glass or steel. The -building frame was taken apart and removed from -the canoe after most of the thwarts were in place.</p> - -<p>The ribs Christopherson called "timbers" and the -sheathing, "lathing." The ribs, commonly of cedar, -were usually ¼ to ⅜ inch thick, and were 2½ to 3¼ -inches wide in most canoes, with a long taper so -that near the ends the width was about half that at -the middle, and at the ends they tapered almost to a -point. Some large canoes had ribs 4 inches wide -at the centerline, amidships, but these appear to have -been unusual. The ribs were placed on the building -frame at their proposed position and the width of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_149" id="Page_149">[Pg 149]</a></span> -frame at that point was marked on each. After being -cut to about the required length and tapered, the -ribs were then treated with hot water, and were then -usually bent over the knee in pairs, the marks determining -where the bending was to be done. In a -freight canoe the ribs amidships would be nearly flat -across the bottom but in a fast canoe they would be -slightly rounded. The parts of the rib nearest the -ends were not bent, and thus the rib would appear -dish-shaped when in form. Each pair while drying -was sometimes held by cords tied across the ends, or -the ribs might be inserted in about their proper -location in the unfinished canoe and held in place by -battens and struts until they took their final set. The -ribs at the extreme ends were often "sprung" or -"broken" at the centerline to get the <strong>V</strong>-section required -there, particularly in a sharp-ended express canoe.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i165.jpg" width="700" height="503" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 140</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Fur-Trade Canoe Stem-Pieces</span>, models made by Adney: 1, Algonkin type; -2, Iroquois type, Ottawa River, old French; 3, Christopherson's canoes.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The sheathing was about ¼-inch thick and was laid -according to the tribal practice of the builder; -Christopherson appears to have followed the Algonkin -practices generally in this as in other building matters -at his posts.</p> - -<p>Whereas Malecite practice was to lash the bark -cover to both inwale and outwale, in the western type -of canoe the cover was lashed to the main gunwale -first, owing to the spread gunwales, and the outwale -was then pegged to the gunwale and also lashed, the -ends being wrapped with figure-eight turns. All gunwale -lashing in fur-trade canoes was in groups. -Because of the sheer at the ends, the outwales were -split horizontally into four or more laminae, and the -splitting extended almost to the end-thwart positions. -In a few canoes outwales were omitted or were short -and did not extend beyond the end thwarts, but this<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_150" id="Page_150">[Pg 150]</a></span> -practice was relatively uncommon. The outwales -were usually rectangular in cross section and much -tapered toward the ends.</p> - -<p>The rail caps were also rectangular in cross section, -but often they had the outboard upper edge rounded -off or beveled. The caps were pegged at 1-foot intervals -to the main gunwales, but at the ends they -could only be lashed to the outwale, as both outwales -and caps were so sharply upswept at the ends -that they stood almost vertically. The ends were -squared off and stood a little above the top of the stems, -so that when the canoe was placed upside down as a -shelter for the paddlers and packers it rested upon -these members rather than on the sewing of the bark -cover on the tops of the stems, as was usual with all -the high-ended Algonkin and Ojibway canoes.</p> - -<p>The stem-pieces and headboards were assembled -into single units, as shown on pages <a href="#Page_149">149</a> and <a href="#Page_151">151</a>, -before being installed during construction. The stem-pieces -were of white cedar, about four fingers deep -fore-and-aft and laminated, and about ¾ to 1¼ inches -wide, depending upon the size of the canoe and the -judgment of the builder. In Christopherson's area -the stem-piece was relatively short, the head coming -up and around and ending at a point far enough under -the rail-cap ends for it to be securely lashed to these -members and to the outwale ends. It was bent by use -of hot water and the laminae were secured by wrapping -the stem piece with fine twine. The stem was -stiffened by stepping the headboard on its heel in the -usual manner, and the two were held in the required -position by two horizontal struts, the outboard ends -of which were lashed to the sides of the stem piece -well up above the heel; the inboard ends were pegged -at the sides of the headboard, in notches, or were -passed through the headboards in slots and the strut -ends secured with wedges athwartships on the inboard -face of the headboard. The result was a rigid and -strong end-frame. More complicated bending was -employed at some posts, where the building of fur-trade -canoes followed Algonkin or Ojibway practices. -In these, as has been mentioned, the stem-pieces were -brought down and around under the stem-head to the -back or inboard edge of the stem-piece and lashed, -then brought inboard horizontally to end in a hole in -the headboard, between struts placed as in the Christopherson-built -canoes. Another method was to -bring the stem-piece around the stem head and down -and around outboard to the inboard face of the stem, -where the end was split and each half lashed to the -sides of the stem-piece. In this case there was a -lashing between stem-piece and the headboard, placed -where the reverse was made, inboard and below the -top of the stem, well up on the headboard. The heel -of the headboard and stem-piece were pegged -together.</p> - -<p>Struts were not required with this construction, -described earlier (on p. <a href="#Page_123">123</a>) as the Ojibway method. -In bending the stem-piece, the reverse curve around -the stem-head was formed over a short strut that was -removed when the stem-piece was dried and set to -shape. As a variety of forms were used in shaping these -stem-pieces, it was the ingenuity of the builder that -decided just how the end of the stem-piece was best -secured and how the whole was to be braced. These -details will be better understood by reference to the -plans and illustrations on pages <a href="#Page_134">134</a> to 151.</p> - -<p>The headboards were not sprung or bellied, but -stood nearly vertical in the canoes. The inboard -face was often decorated; in the old French canoes -and in those of the North West Company, the board -was carved or painted to represent a human figure, -<i lang="fr">le petit homme</i>, which was often made in the likeness -of a voyageur in his best clothes. In some canoes, only -a human head was used, or the top of the headboard, -or "button," was decorated with a rayed compass -drawn in colors.</p> - -<p>The thwarts were usually rather heavy amidships -and were made in various forms to suit the taste of -the builder. They were commonly of maple, but -Christopherson's canoes had spruce or tamarack -thwarts, the latter being his preference. These -thwarts were not intended to be used as seats, though -the sternman, or steersman, often sat on the aftermost -one. The paddlers often used seats in the large -canoes; these were planks slung from each end by -cords made fast to the gunwales. These cords allowed -the height of the seats to be adjusted; the paddlers -usually knelt on the bottom of the canoe with hips -supported by the seat. The seats were usually slung -before the thwarts, except amidships, where the space -was taken up by passengers or cargo.</p> - -<p>The factors often took great pride in the appearance -of the canoes from their posts and many, like -Christopherson, had the craft gaily painted in a -rather barbaric fashion. Christopherson's canoes did -not use any of the circular decoration forms; his -canoes usually had painted on them, he recalled, -such names as <em>Duchess</em>, <em>Sir John A. MacDonald</em>, <em>Express</em>, -<em>Arrow</em>, and <em>Ivanhoe</em>. The ends were often painted -white, with the figures or letters on this background. -The Company flag was often painted on the stern<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_151" id="Page_151">[Pg 151]</a></span> -with the initials of the Company, H.B.C., said to -mean "Here Before Christ" by disrespectful clerks. -Many posts used such figures as the jackfish, loon, -deer, wolf, or bear, on the bow. The rayed circular -devices appear to have been long popular and were -said to have been introduced by the French. There -is no record of any device being officially required -in any district but the <em>cassettes</em> of certain districts were -marked with distinctive devices at one time; Norway -House used a deer's head with antlers, Saskatchewan -two buffalo, Cumberland a bear, Red River a grasshopper, -and Manitoba a crocus.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i167.jpg" width="700" height="469" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 141</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Fur-Trade Canoe Stem-Pieces</span>, models made by Adney: 1, Têtes de Boule -type; 2, Ojibway form; 3, old Algonkin form.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>During Christopherson's long service he knew the -canoes built in his vicinity at such nearby building -posts as Lake Abitibi, Lake Waswanipi, and Kipewa, -in western Quebec; and Lake Timagami (Bear -Island), Matachewan on Montreal River, Matagama -(west of Sudbury), and Missinaibi, in nearby -Ontario. These were but a few of the building posts, -of course, for canoes were built at numerous posts to -the west and northward.</p> - -<p>When portaged, the large canoes might be carried -right side up or upside down, the former being more -usual method. The <i lang="fr">canot du nord</i> was often light -enough to be carried by two paddlers, one under each -end, with the canoe right side up and steadied by -a cord tied to the offside gunwale and held in the -carrier's hand. The <i lang="fr">maître canot</i> required four men -to carry it. Various methods were used. One was to -lash carrying sticks across the gunwales near the ends -and to carry the canoe right side up with a man on the -end of each stick. Another way was for the men to -distribute themselves along the bottom of the canoe, -near the ends, and to use steadying cords. Or the -canoe might be carried upside down with the men -carrying it by placing one shoulder under the gunwales<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_152" id="Page_152">[Pg 152]</a></span> -at convenient places. When a bad place in the -portage was reached, the whole crew might have to -turn to. The method of portaging had to meet the -physical limitation of the portage path and the matter -was not so much one of standard procedure as of improvisation -of the moment.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i168.jpg" width="700" height="394" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 142</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Portaging a 4½-Fathom Fur-Trade Canoe, About 1902</span>, near the head of -the Ottawa River. Shows an unusually large number of carriers; four would -be the normal number. (<em>Canadian Pacific Railway Company photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The voyageur was particular about his paddle; -no man in his right mind would use a blade wider than -between 4½ and 5 inches, for anything wider would -exhaust him in a short distance. The paddle reached -to about the users' chin, when he stood with the tip -of the paddle on the ground in front of him. Longer -paddles, about 6 feet long, were used by the bow and -stern men, the two most skillful voyageurs in the canoe -and the highest paid. These men had, also, spare -paddles whose total length was 8 feet or more; these -were used in running rapids only. The paddles -were of hardwood, white or yellow birch or maple, -as hardwood paddles could be made thin in the blade -and small in the handle without loss of strength, -whereas softwood paddles could not. The blades -were sometimes painted white, the tips in some color -such as red, blue, green or black, but other color -combinations were often used.</p> - -<p>In Christopherson's service, sail was rarely used, -as the canoemen were unskilled in handling it and -loss had resulted. In early times, however, it appears -to have been much used on the Great Lakes routes -by the French and the North West Company. A -single square-sail was the only rig employed; the -canoes could not be worked to windward under -fore-and-aft sails.</p> - -<p>During the great seasonal movements the trade -canoes moved in fleets called brigades, the usual -brigade in early times being three or four canoes, -but later, when the needs of the individual posts -had grown, the brigade could be of any necessary -number of canoes to carry in the required supplies -and goods or to bring out the season's catch of furs. -The leader of the brigade was the <em>conducteur</em> or <em>guide</em>; -sometimes he was the post's factor. In French times -the <i lang="fr">maître canot</i> would be loaded with 60 pieces, or -packs, to the total of about 3 short tons and half a ton -of provisions, and eight men, each with an allowance -of 40 pounds for gear, so that the whole weight in the -canoe would be something over 4 short tons. An -example of such a canoe measured, inside the gunwales, -5½ fathoms long and 4½ feet beam. The usual<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_153" id="Page_153">[Pg 153]</a></span> -brigade of four of these canoes would thus carry -roughly 12 short tons of goods.</p> - -<p>The Company would send one brigade after another, -at close intervals of time, until the whole -seasonal movement was in progress. Those brigades -going the greatest distance were started first. Although -cargoes left the coast from early spring on to -late summer, the great canoe movement took place -towards the fall. Canoe travel north and northwestward -from the Great Lakes had to be carefully -timed, as goods had to be accumulated at the base -posts on the Lakes and the brigades placed in movement -at the last safe date which would permit them -to reach their destination before the first hard freeze-up. -The base posts were those where the run of the -<i lang="fr">maître canot</i> ended and that of the <i lang="fr">canot du nord</i> began, -the places where reloading for the individual trading -posts in the Northland was necessary. The late -start was usually desirable in order to await the -arrival at the base posts of all the goods required, for -movements of freight were uncertain before the days -of railroads and steamers.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i169.jpg" width="700" height="349" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 143</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Decorations: Fur-trade Canoes.</span> (<em>Watercolor sketch by Adney.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, before -the whole canoe trade fell under the control of the -Hudson's Bay Company, it was the custom to distribute -8 gallons of rum to each canoe for consumption -during the run, and it was also the custom for all -hands to see how much of this they could drink before -starting out. This grandiose undertaking usually -began as soon as the local priest, who gave his blessing -to the canoemen, had left the scene. The magnificent -drunk lasted one day and the next morning the crew -had to be underway. The first day's run, old accounts -repeatedly show, not only was short but was often -beset by difficulties.</p> - -<p>The era of the bark trading canoe did not close -with a dramatic change. Its ending was a long, slow -process. By the last decade of the 19th century the -bark trading canoe had disappeared from most of -the old routes, and even in the Northwest it had been -almost wholly displaced by York boats, scows, -bateaux, and canvas or wooden canoes of white-man -construction. By the beginning of the first World -War, the <i lang="fr">maître canots</i> and <i lang="fr">canots du nord</i> were finished, -except as curiosities—hardly even as these, for not -one was preserved in a museum.</p> - -<p>Indeed, so complete was the disappearance of the -fur-trade canoe that any attempt to record its design, -construction, and fitting would have been almost -hopeless, had it not been for the notes, sketches, and -statements of such men as L. A. Christopherson, -aided by a few models and pictures, and for the -memories of a few Indian builders who had worked -on the canoes.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_154" id="Page_154">[Pg 154]</a></span></p> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2><em>Chapter Six</em><br /> - -NORTHWESTERN CANADA</h2> - - -<p>Indians of the Northwest Territories and the -Province of British Columbia in Canada, and the -States of Alaska and Washington, built bark canoes -that may be divided into three basic models.</p> - -<p>The first may be called the "kayak" model, a flat-bottom, -narrow canoe having nearly straight flaring -sides and either a chine or a very quick turn of the -bilge. These bark canoes were low-sided and were -usually partly decked. A number of tribal groups -built canoes of this model, the variation being relatively -minor. The rake and form of the ends varied -somewhat as did the amount of decking; there were -also some slight variations in structure and method of -construction. While these bark canoes had some -superficial resemblance in general proportions to the -Eskimo kayaks, it is necessary to point out that they -did not, particularly in Alaska, have the same hull -form as the seagoing kayaks in that area. In fact, the -single-chine form of the Alaskan version of this canoe -appears only in the kayaks of northern Greenland -and Baffin Island. The Alaskan seagoing skin -kayaks are all multi-chine forms that approximate a -"round-bottom" hull. It has been thought that the -flat-bottom seagoing kayak form may have existed in -the Canadian Northwest, at the mouth of the Mackenzie; -a kayak so identified is in the collections of the -U.S. National Museum (see p. <a href="#Page_202">202</a>), but there is now -doubt among authorities as to the correctness of this -identification. As will be shown later, it seems probable -that it has been improperly assigned to the Mackenzie -delta and is, in fact, an eastern Eskimo model.</p> - -<p>The second model used in the Northwest area was -a narrow-bottom flaring-sided bark canoe with -elevated ends, having, perhaps, a faint resemblance -to the Algonkin-Cree canoes of the old type. Here -too there was some variation among the canoes of -tribal groups, mostly in the shape and construction -of the ends and in the fitting of the gunwales. Most -of the canoes of this type had stem-pieces formed of a -plank-on-edge, but in a few examples the stem-pieces -were bent. This model was built by the same tribal -groups in Canada that built the kayak form, the explanation -being that the kayak form was the hunting -while the second model was commonly the family or -cargo canoe. In Alaska, however, only the kayak-form -was used and the family, or cargo, canoe was -merely an enlargement of it.</p> - -<p>The third model may be called the "sturgeon-nose" -type; in this the ends were formed with a long, pointed -"ram" carried well outboard below the waterline as -an extension of the bottom line of the canoe. Primitive -in both model and construction, it was built in a -rather limited area in British Columbia and in the -State of Washington. The last canoes built on this -form were canvas-covered; in earlier times spruce or -pine bark was usually employed.</p> - -<p>The birch in most of the Northwest is a small tree -and the bark is of poor quality for canoe building; -hence, in many areas spruce bark was commonly -employed in its place; a single tribal group might build -its canoes of either, depending upon what was available -near the building site. However, near the Alaska -coast, where kayak-form bark canoes were used and -good birch was usually not available, some tribes used -seal or other skins as a substitute. In the framework -spruce and fir were most commonly employed, but -occasionally cedar was available and was used.</p> - -<p>The canoe-building Indians in northwestern Canada -were mostly of the Athabascan family and included -the Chipewyan or "Chipewans," the Slave or -"Slavey" (= Etchareottine), the Beaver (= Tsattine), -the Dogrib (= Thlingchadinne), the Tanana (= Tenankutchin), -the Loucheux, the Hare (= Kawchodinne), -and others. Some of these tribal groups built -not only bark canoes but also dugouts. There were -also some Eskimo people who built bark canoes for -river service, as well as skin canoes, on the same model -as the bark kayak-form.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_155" id="Page_155">[Pg 155]</a></span></p> - -<p>In the vicinities of Lake Athabasca and Great -Slave Lake, the Chipewyan employed not only their -own models of canoes but also that of the western -Cree. The latter had invaded Chipewyan territory -before the arrival of the first white men in the Northwest -and undoubtedly had influenced canoe-building -technique during the long period of the fur trade that -followed. It is therefore not possible to say where -the influence of Chipewyan building techniques -ends and that of the Cree and the eastern Indians, -as introduced through the fur-trade canoes, begins. -This raises the question whether the high-ended -Athabascan canoe is itself the result of influence. -One may infer from Samuel Hearne's description of -his travels in this area, in his <cite>Journey ... to the -Northern Ocean</cite>,<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> that only the kayak-form then -existed, for this type is the only one he describes, -and he describes it in great detail. However, Alexander -Mackenzie, in an entry in his journal for June 23, -1789, refers to the "large canoe" in a manner indicating -that it was a local type. It may well be that -then, as later, the kayak-form and cargo canoe existed -side by side, or it may be that Mackenzie was referring -to a large kayak-form canoe like the family canoe -of the Alaska Yukon Indians. Perhaps the reason -that Hearne did not mention the "large canoe" -is that the people he met on his way to the Coppermine -River, and on his way back by way of Lake -Athabasca to Hudson Bay, did not then use canoes -of the second model.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> See bibliography.</p></div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i171.jpg" width="700" height="609" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 144</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Chipewyan 2-Fathom</span> hunter's canoe -(top), with bent stem piece, and Athabascan -2½-fathom canoe with plank -stem piece. Plank and bent stem pieces -were both employed in Athabascan -canoes. Spruce or birch bark were used -without alteration of the design or basic -construction methods.</p></div> -</div> - - -<h3><em>Narrow-Bottom Canoe</em></h3> - -<p>Because the variations in the second model, the -Algonkin-Ojibway type, are relatively slight, it will -be easiest to describe this first. The canoe is known -to have been built extensively by the Chipewyan, -Dogrib, and Slave. The sizes most common were 16 -to 22 feet over the gunwales, with a beam of between -36 and 48 inches. The sheer was usually rather -straight, the sharp upward turn to the end taking -place very close to the gunwale ends. Most of the -bottom was straight; the rocker, if existing, occurred -close to the ends of the canoe and was moderate. -The midsection was dish-shaped and nearly flat -across the bottom, with a rather slack, well-rounded -bilge and almost straight flaring sides, the amount of -flare being usually great. The bottom apparently -was never dead flat athwartships, for in all known -examples it was somewhat rounded. Near the ends -the sections were in the shape of a <strong>V</strong> with apex -rounded; the form of the ends was sharp and without -hollow either at the gunwale or at the level lines. -The ends of the canoes were never lofty and many -had end profiles that were very long fore-and-aft and -showed a marked angularity. Inwales and outwales -formed the gunwale structure; some canoes also had -gunwale caps which stopped well short of the end -profiles. The ends of the inwales were carried to the -stem-pieces; they were sharply tapered and curved to -sheer, and were elaborately cross-wrapped to secure -them there. The end profiles were formed of a thin -plank-on-edge in most canoes, but some had stem-pieces -split into laminae in the usual fashion and bent. -In all cases headboards were employed; the heads -were forced under the inwale ends and against the -inside face of the stem-piece. The gunwale lashings -were in groups, although some canoes exist in which -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_156" id="Page_156">[Pg 156]</a></span>the outwale was omitted and the lashing was continuous; -these canoes usually had laminated bent stem-pieces -and their stem lashing was identical with that -of the Algonkin-Ojibway fur-trade canoes. This -departure, it is reasonable to assume, was the result -of outside influence on the Athabascan technique. -When the stem-piece was of thin plank, the bark was -usually fastened to it by multiple turns of two thongs -passed, one from each side, through the bark and -through holes bored in the stem.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i172.jpg" width="700" height="429" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 145</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Athabascan Cargo or Family Canoes With Bent Stem Pieces</span>, Chipewyan -2½-fathom (top) and Dogrib 3-fathom. These canoes were covered with -spruce or birch bark.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The end profile varied with the tribe of the builder. -Chipewyan canoes had a very long end profile -fore-and-aft; the heel was angular, and the outline -of the stem then swept forward in an easy curve to -a height about two-thirds the depth of the canoe -amidships, then began to tumble in a little, the curve -becoming gradually sharper until the head was -reached. The stem-head in its fore-and-aft length -was almost one third the height of the ends and was -roughly parallel to the bottom of the canoe directly -beneath it. Because of the rocker of the bottom, -the after end of the head was thus lower than the fore -end. The sheer was faired up to the after end of the -head in a short, quick curve. Usually the outwales -were cut off short of this point, but in some canoes they -were brought up along with the inwales to the stem-head. -Wedges were used in making up the gunwale-end -lashings in both the Chipewyan and Dogrib -canoes; these served to tighten the lashings and -formed a sort of breasthook. In a few examples of the -Athabascan type, the stem-pieces were of cedar root -without lamination; this use of the roots enabled -the angular form of the plank-on-edge stems to be -retained. It cannot be determined whether the root -stem-pieces were part of the old Athabascan technique -or were an importation from the western Cree. -The lashing in these canoes followed the forms used -in the fur-trade canoes—long-and-short turns in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_157" id="Page_157">[Pg 157]</a></span> -groups generally triangular in shape, with a spiral -turn between groups.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i173.jpg" width="700" height="462" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 146</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Plank-Stem Canoes of Hybrid Forms, 3-Fathom</span> Slavey (top) and 2½-fathom -Algonkin-type Athabascan, probably the results of the influence of fur-trade -canoe-building.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The canoes of the Dogrib were practically identical -with those of the Chipewyan except that the end profiles -were usually slightly deeper fore-and-aft; also -the Dogrib canoes were perhaps more often of birch -bark, judging from the remaining canoes and models. -The form of the ends in the Dogrib canoes was such -that they often appeared higher than they really were, -as the stem-heads stood some distance above the ends -of the sheer, an effect which was heightened by the -small fore-and-aft depth of the stem-heads.</p> - -<p>The large canoes of the Slave had the same hull -characteristics as the others but differed in end profiles -and did not have rail caps. In the Slave canoe, -the ends were formed of thin plank and in profile were -almost upright and slightly curved. The stem line -came out from the bottom in a sharp, almost angular -curve and ascended with a slight sweep to a point -about level with the gunwale amidships (in some, to -within a few inches of the stem-head); from there a -tumble-home carried it to the stem-head, which was -short fore-and-aft and slightly crowned, the inboard -end dropping vertically downward inside the gunwales. -The headboards were under the gunwale -ends. Inwales and outwales were both carried to -the stems but the end lashings were quite short. -There were no rail caps. The bark cover was lashed -to the stem with an in-and-out stitch from side to side -through holes in the plank. The sheer was brought -up nearly to the top of the stem in a rather long, easy -sweep beginning inboard at the endmost thwart.</p> - -<p>The gunwale members in all these Athabascan -canoes were quite light compared with their Eastern -counterparts. A reinforcing strip of bark was placed -under the outwales so as to hang down below them -some four inches or so amidships and less toward the -ends; this was sometimes decorated with a painted -zigzag stripe or with widely spaced circles. The end -lashings of the gunwales were protected by short bark<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_158" id="Page_158">[Pg 158]</a></span> -deck pieces inserted under the caps. The edges of -these deck pieces were trimmed flush with the outboard -edges of the caps, so that no <em>wulegessis</em> resulted.</p> - -<p>In spruce-bark canoes, because the bark was stiff -the ribs were spaced 6 to 8 inches, whereas in birch-bark -canoes the ribs were spaced about as usual, -1 to 2 inches edge to edge. In the Dogrib and Slave -canoes the ribs were without taper; in the Chipewyan -there was usually a slight taper from the bottom to -the gunwale end. The ends of the ribs were forced -under the gunwales in the usual manner employed -in the east, the gunwales being rectangular in cross-section, -with the lower outboard corner beveled.</p> - -<p>The thwarts were all parallel-sided, but tapered -toward the ends, in elevation. The thwart ends were -tenoned into the inner gunwale and usually had -two holes in each end for the lashings.</p> - -<p>In the bark cover the horizontal sewing was often -over root battens. In many canoes rawhide was -used in much of the lashing and sewing, and in the -last-built bark canoes the end lashings of the gunwales -were often protected by a decking formed of a small -triangular sheet of metal, obtained from a large can -and crimped along its edges so as to clamp the bark -and main gunwales. When this metal deck-piece -was used, the cap and outwale ended against the -inboard edge of it.</p> - -<p>For use in open water these canoes were often -fitted with a blanket square-sail. The sapling serving -as a temporary mast stood in a hole in the second -thwart, and was stepped on a block, or board, pegged -or lashed to the ribs.</p> - -<p>The sheathing of all canoes of this class was of the -same form—wide, short strakes amidships, narrower -short strakes afore and abaft. The midship strakes -were often quite short and their ends were over the -longer end strakes. The end strakes were, of course, -tapered toward the stems. The placing of the strakes -was often irregular, with the result that the butts -were somewhat staggered. Some canoes had four -strakes to the length, but three appears to have been -most common.</p> - -<p>The large canoe was employed on the large lakes -of the Mackenzie region; smaller canoes of the same -general form, 14 to 16 feet in length and 30 to 40 -inches in beam, were used on the large rivers and -streams. In the smaller canoes of this class, the flare -of the topsides was often less than in the larger -craft. The Cree in this area, particularly to the south -of Great Slave Lake, also employed the Athabascan -form. This class of canoe, in general, appears to have -been strongly affected by outside influence; consequently -this description must be understood to cover -existing canoes and models, not pure Athabascan -canoe building.</p> - -<p>The usual construction methods were employed in -building this class of canoe; the stakes around the -building frame were set vertically, and when the bark -cover was lashed to the gunwale members (inwale -and outwale together) the gunwales were spread and -the thwarts inserted in their tenons. Skill was required -in preshaping the gunwale members, which, -as in the fur-trade canoes, had to be arched in sheer -amidships to allow for the change in sheer caused -by spreading the gunwales in construction. The -building bed was also arched at midlength to allow -for the lifting of the ends that occurred in spreading -the gunwales with the bark cover attached.</p> - -<p>A typical large Chipewyan canoe of this class was -21 feet 4 inches in overall length, 43 inches beam -and 14 inches in depth amidships. A smaller Dogrib -canoe of the same class was 14 feet 7 inches in overall -length, 31¼ inches beam, and 11½ inches in depth. -However, these smaller canoes appear to have been -relatively uncommon, and the average large canoe -was about 20 feet long.</p> - - -<h3><em>Kayak-Form Canoe</em></h3> - -<p>The kayak-form canoe was widely employed in the -Northwest and was highly developed in both model -and construction. It was essentially a portage and -hunting craft, ranging in length from 12 to 18 feet and -in beam from about 24 to 27 inches, with a depth -between 9 and 12 inches. In areas where the kayak -form was used as a family and cargo canoe, the length -would be as great as 20 or 25 feet and the beam might -reach 30 inches. Except in the family or cargo canoe, -which had none, there was usually some decking at -the ends, most of it forward. Some tribal groups built -the kayak form with its greatest beam at midlength, -but the most common form had its greatest beam -abaft midlength and its greatest depth there likewise. -Many of the kayak forms had unlike end profiles, so -that there was a distinct bow in appearance as well -as in fact.</p> - -<p>There was much variety in end profile, and the -canoes of each tribal group were usually identifiable -by this means. The kayak-form bark canoes of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_159" id="Page_159">[Pg 159]</a></span> -lower Yukon and neighboring streams had a short -overhang, formed in a curved rake and alike or very -nearly so, at bow and stern. On the upper Yukon -and adjoining streams the canoes had much rake at -both ends, the rake being straight from the bottom -outward for some distance, then curving rather -markedly. The bow rake was usually greatest, but -the stern might be higher by one or two inches. The -bottom was without rocker, being straight or even -slightly hogged in most of these canoes. The sheer -was straight to the point where the rake began, then -rose in a easy sweep to the ends. The end decks on -the upper Yukon canoes were short, those on lower -Yukon canoes were much longer; on the latter the -bow deck was nearly a third the length of the canoe, -on the former about a fifth. In the Mackenzie Basin, -the kayak-form canoes had a moderate rake, curved -in profile, at bow and stern and a rather low stem-head; -the depth at the stern was noticeably greater -than at the bow, and the deck forward was commonly -a little less than a fourth the length of the canoe. -In these canoes the greatest beam in most cases -was abaft midlength, and this was also true of the -lower Yukon canoes. On the upper Yukon and -in some of these canoes on the lower Mackenzie, the -greatest beam was amidships and the depth at bow -and stern were equal.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i175.jpg" width="700" height="284" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 147</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Eskimo Kayak-Form Birch-Bark Canoe From Alaskan Coast</span>, with long -foredeck batten-sewn to the gunwales, no afterdeck, and rigid bottom frame.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The variation in depth at bow and stern in some of -the kayak-form canoes seems to have been related to -the position of the greatest beam; when the beam was -abaft the midlength, the greatest depth was aft, whereas -when the greatest beam was amidships, the depth -at the ends was equal. With the beam abaft midlength, -the weight of the paddler trimmed the canoe -by the stern somewhat, hence greater depth aft than -forward was necessary to make the canoe run easily -and turn readily in smooth water. In the sea kayaks -of the eastern Eskimo, on the other hand, the depth -and the draft were greatest forward, to bring them -head to the sea when paddling ceased. The Alaskan -sea kayaks were commonly of equal draft at bow and -stern or might have a slightly greater draft aft than -forward.</p> - -<p>A third variation of the kayak form existed in -British Columbia in early times, and apparently was -employed by the Beaver, Nahane, and Sekani. It -was an undecked bateau-shaped canoe having a -fair sheer in a long sweep from end to end, the stem -profiles were nearly straight, the ends were raked -rather strongly, and the bow was somewhat higher -than the stern. The beam was greatest slightly abaft -midlength. It is estimated that canoes of this type, -which has long been extinct and now can only be -reconstructed from a model, were about 14 feet 8 -inches long and 30 to 36 inches in beam, and probably -were built of both spruce and birch.</p> - -<p>The gunwales of the kayak-form canoes were formed -by inwales and outwales; no caps were employed. In -the Alaskan types and in the extinct British Columbia -bateau variation, the gunwale lashings were contin<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_160" id="Page_160">[Pg 160]</a></span>uous, -but in the Mackenzie models the lashings were -in groups. Inwales and outwales in all the kayak -forms ran to the stem-pieces, which were plank-on-edge -of a thickness that varied according to tribal -practice. No headboards were employed. The gunwale -members were rectangular in cross-section and -were bent square with the flare of the sides. The -ends sometimes were swelled and rounded, and in the -bateau variation the gunwales, in cross section, -appear to have been rounded. Six thwarts appear -in most of the kayak forms but the Loucheux model -had five and the bateau variation seems to have had -but three.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i176.jpg" width="700" height="350" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 148</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Athabascan Hunting Canoes of the Kayak Form</span>, showing characteristic -hull shape. These canoes were light, handy, and fast.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Reinforcing bark was placed under the outwales in -all Mackenzie Basin canoes, but not in the Alaskan or -in the bateau variation. The ribs in all these canoes -were small, usually about ½ inch square, and widely -spaced, about 9 to 14 inches on centers. No ribs were -placed in the rake of the ends. The ends of the ribs -were chisel-pointed and were forced between the inwale -and outwale, against the inside of the bark cover. -In some canoes, however, the ribs near the ends of the -canoe were forced into short splits on the underside -of the inwale. The thwart ends might also be forced -into short splits on the inside face of the inwales or -might be tenoned there; in any case a single lashing -was used at the thwart ends. Thwarts were parallel-sided -in plan and slightly tapered toward the ends -in elevation; no shoulders were used. In the bateau -variation, a heavy thwart was placed directly under -the middle thwart with its ends against the side -battens, apparently to act as a spreader. Each end -was notched over the side battens and was held by -two lashings to the bottom crosspiece below it. This -structure was probably made necessary by the fragile -construction of this form of canoe. In all kayak -forms there was no complete sheathing—the one, two, -or three narrow battens to a side above the chine -were held in place only by the sprung ribs (without -lashings); in the bateau form, however, the side -batten was lashed to each frame after the manner of -of an Eskimo sea kayak.</p> - -<p>The characteristic detail in the structure of the bark -kayak-canoe, including the bateau variation, was the -bottom framing. It was variously formed, according -to tribal designation. The bottom framing was made -up of five or six longitudinal battens (four in one -extinct form of canoe). In the Yukon canoes six -rectangular battens, all of about the same cross section, -were used with the narrow edge outboard. These -battens were held rigidly to form by thin crosspieces, -or splints, about ¼ by 1 inch forced athwartships -through short splits in the battens and pegged at the -ends on the chine battens. The ends of the four inner -longitudinals were cut off on the snye to bear on the -inside face of the chine battens (in some instances -they were cut short of this). The chine ends were beveled -together or lashed to the sides of the stem-pieces.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_161" id="Page_161">[Pg 161]</a></span> -But in the Mackenzie form of canoe, the longitudinals -had no cross-members and, like the side battens, were -held in place by the pressure of the sprung ribs -against the bark cover. There was a difference in the -form of midsection: in the Yukon canoes the bottom -athwartships was flat, but in the Mackenzie canoes -there had to be some rounding there. At least one -exception existed in the Mackenzie Basin, where the -Loucheux canoe was formed on the Yukon bottom. -Another is to be seen in an old model of an extinct -Athabascan kayak form, which has only four longitudinals -and chine members that are very wide and -rounded only on the outboard face. Between the -chine battens are two light rectangular battens. -These are all held together by a few splints and by -lashings which pass around each individual batten, -thus serving both as lashing and spreader. This -canoe has what is apparently a very narrow bottom -compared to known types. In some of the Eskimo-built -birch kayak forms, the separators between the -bottom battens were rectangular blocks held in place -by a thong threaded through two holes in each batten -and block, to make a round turn, and tied at one chine.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i177.jpg" width="700" height="323" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 149</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Extinct Forms of Canoes Reconstructed From Old Models</span>, showing variations -in the bottom frame construction and the effects of hull form. Dimensions -are estimated from the sizes of canoes in the area of each example.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>In some bateau variations of the kayak-form canoe, -the longitudinals were secured by crosspieces, the ends -of which were tenoned into the inside faces of the -chine battens. The three inner battens were below -the cross pieces. As a result, their bottoms were slightly -below the bottom of the chine members, so that -in this canoe two chine lines show through the bark -cover on each side of the canoe.</p> - -<p>From tribe to tribe the method of building the -kayak-form canoe varied somewhat, but generally -the following procedure was employed. On a smooth, -level piece of ground the form of the canoe was staked -out in the usual manner, using a building frame, -with the stakes sloped outward at the top to match the -desired flare of the sides.</p> - -<p>Stem and stern posts were shaped of cedar by charring -and scraping. The gunwales were made in the -same manner and were then lashed at the desired -heights on the stakes. Next, the bark cover was -formed, usually of two or more sheets sewn together. -This was placed inside the stakes and the building -frame was forced down on it and weighted with stones. -The ends were then trimmed and the sides were gored, -sewn, and trimmed to fit the gunwales, to which the -bark was laced. The stem and the stern post were -then placed and lashed to the gunwales and secured -to the bark by lashing, in some instances through -holes in the posts. The bark at this stage was usually -quite dry and stiff and the gunwales could be freed -from the side stakes.</p> - -<p>The bottom frame, assembled before other construction -had started, was hogged; the middle was -placed on a log or block and the ends weighted. Hot<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_162" id="Page_162">[Pg 162]</a></span> -water was often applied to set the bottom frame.</p> - -<p>Next, the bark cover was thoroughly wetted with -boiling water to make it pliable and elastic. The -building frame and stones were now removed, the -bottom frame was substituted, and its ends fastened -or engaged to the heels of the stem and stern posts. -The bottom frame was then forced flat and held there -by stones. This stretched the bottom bark longitudinally, -and increased the sheer slightly toward bow -and stern. The hogged bottom frame was known as -a "sliding bottom" by some Indians.</p> - -<p>The transverse frames, or ribs, had been prebent -in the usual manner before assembly began; a few -of these were now put in place, the ends being forced -under the gunwales between their outer faces and the -bark, or into a groove on the underside of the gunwale. -This stretched the bark transversely and vertically. -Once the bark had been forced into form by this -method, the remaining ribs were added, and these -now held the hogged bottom down so that the weights -or stones could be removed. The canoe was then -turned over, the seams gummed, and any tears or -rents repaired.</p> - -<p>This method of building usually produced a slight -hogging in both bottom and in the sheer amidships, -but when the canoe was afloat and loaded the light, -flexible construction caused the hogging to disappear. -The kayak-form canoes of the Dènè tribe appear to -be the most highly developed of all in this type.</p> - -<p>The decks of many of the kayak-form canoes were -made of a triangular sheet of bark cut with the grain -of the bark running athwartships, so that it could be -held in place by the curl of its edges, which clamped -under the outwales, as well as by three lashings. -The edges were curled by passing a glowing brand -along them. One lashing was around the stem-head -and two were at the inboard end of the deck, around -inwale and outwale. If the inboard end of the deck -was not on a thwart it was stiffened by a batten -lashed on top of the deck athwartship, at the deck -end, to serve as an exterior deck beam and breakwater -in one. If the deck end was on a thwart, a batten -might be pegged athwartship on top of the deck; -sometimes this batten was rolled in a sheet of bark -first. Another method was to use a small sheet of -bark tightly rolled, with its free edge tucked under -the deck end and secured at the ends of the roll by -the deck-gunwale lashings there. Some canoes had -their decks lashed over battens for a short distance -along the gunwales. In some Mackenzie Basin kayak -forms, the end of the deck at the stem-head was -protected by a small paddle-or leaf-shaped piece of -bark placed under the lashing there and shaped to -reach a little over onto the stem piece so as to seal -the seam.</p> - -<p>The fitting of the bark cover of the kayak-form -canoes was not the same in all types. In the Mackenzie -canoes the bottom, which might be in three, four, -or five pieces sewn together, was alike on both sides; -to it the side pieces were sewn at, or just above, the -chines. The sides were made up of deep panels, five -to nine to a side. There were no horizontal seams -other than the one near the chines.</p> - -<p>In some Yukon canoes, however, the bottom sheet -was often made of three pieces and covered not only -the bottom but also a portion, such as the after -two-thirds, of one side. The forward portion of that -side would then be covered by a single large panel or -perhaps two, so that the horizontal seam on that side -would run from the stem aft to the inboard end of the -foredeck and would be just above the chine. On -the opposite side a sheet would cover the bottom there -and the bow topside from the stem aft for a short way. -Deep panels would then cover the rest of that side to -the stern, so that the horizontal seam there began -forward at the sheer, some feet abaft the bow, and -swept downward in a gentle curve to near the chine -and then ran aft to the stern in a long sheered line -just above the turn of the bilge, rising slightly as it -neared the stern. Hence the foremost of the panels -on that side was nearly triangular and the others -were nearly rectangular. Inside, at the chine, was -placed a reinforcing strip of bark wide enough to -reach 3 inches beyond both sides of each chine -longitudinal and running the length of the bottom; -or if a seam near the chine permitted, the side and -bottom pieces were overlapped. As has been noted, -in the Yukon canoes a reinforcing piece at the outwale -was not used, but was in the Mackenzie canoes; -it extended down the side about 3 inches below the -underside of the outwale amidships and ran to the -ends of the canoe, or nearly so, tapering with the -outwales to a width of about 1½ inches at bow and -stern. In these canoes much of the lashing at stem -and stern was double-thong; the longitudinal sewing -was often over a batten in the usual spiral stitch, and -a simple spiral stitch was also used to join the panels, -although in-and-out stitching might also be seen in -some canoes.</p> - -<p>In many of the kayak-form canoes two ribs often -stood noticeably close together amidships, and the -rest stood parallel to the rake of the end on their side,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_163" id="Page_163">[Pg 163]</a></span> -respectively, of the middle ribs. However, not all -these canoes had such double ribs; some were framed -out in the usual manner, with the ribs widely spaced -and canted toward their respective ends of the hull, -away from the midship of the canoe.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i179.jpg" width="700" height="370" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 150</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Kayak-Form Canoes of the Alaskan Eskimos</span> and Canadian -Athabascan Indians: chine form of Eskimo birch-bark canoe -(above) and the dish-sectioned form of the Canadian Athabascans.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>In most of these canoes the paddler sat on a sheet -of bark secured on the bottom; this was held in place -by one or two false ribs having their ends under the -inner gunwales and their middle forced down against -the bark on the bottom framework. In place of -bark, some Eskimo builders of the type used thin -splints of wood laced together by two or three lines -of double-thong stitching athwartships, which was -passed through two holes in each splint. This might -be loose or held in place by a false frame.</p> - -<p>The paddle was single-bladed and the same as that -used with the second class of Mackenzie Basin -canoe (fig. 151). The blade was parallel-sided with -the point formed in a short straight-sided <strong>V</strong>-form; -The blade of Yukon paddles was often taper-sided -toward the point, which was a rounded <strong>V</strong>. Other -variations in blade form existed, however, and the -narrow leaf-shaped blade was used in some areas in -Alaska. In the Mackenzie paddles the handle ended -in a knob, but in Alaskan versions it ended in a -cross-grip like those of paddles used with some -Alaskan sea kayaks. The Eskimo double-blade paddle -was used with the kayak-form canoe by some paddlers; -Hearne mentions its use.</p> - -<p>Some of the kayak-form canoes were decorated; in -Alaska this decoration often took the form of a line of -colored beads sewn along each side of the afterdeck -at the gunwale, or it consisted of a few oval panels -of red, blue, or black paint along the sides or centerline -of the afterdeck. In some Mackenzie kayak forms -the decks were painted in various designs; a rather -common one seems to have been two or more bands -of paint around the deck edges, along the gunwales, -ending at bow and stern with a full round sweep. -Painted disk designs appeared on some of the large -Algonkin-Ojibway canoes of the second type.</p> - -<p>A number of kayak forms became extinct before -any accurate, detailed records of their shape and -construction had been made; models of some of -these canoes exist but are not to scale and are untrustworthy -as to detail, since they are often simplified. -One model of the extinct British Columbia bateau -form, for example, showed but three longitudinals -in the bottom, though the probable size of the canoe -undoubtedly would have required a greater number. -On the other hand, the model may have represented -a spruce-bark canoe constructed for temporary use, -in which case a simplified construction might have -been employed. One can only speculate which it -was. Models of some kayak-form Yukon canoes show -the decks lashed to the gunwales with a very coarse -spiral stitch not recorded for any of the observed -full-size canoes; thus it may be a model-maker's<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_164" id="Page_164">[Pg 164]</a></span> -method of securing the decking firmly rather than -an actual practice used on full-size canoes.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i180.jpg" width="700" height="301" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 151</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Kayak-Form Canoe of British Columbia</span> and upper Yukon valley. Shows -hogged bottom, usual in the type with a rigid bottom frame, which becomes -straight or cambered when canoe is afloat and manned. Original in the -Museum of the American Indian, New York.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>It now remains only to give short descriptions -of the various kayak-form canoes that have been -observed.</p> - -<p>The ends of the Eskimo-built canoes of the lower -Yukon had a short rake, the heel of the end profile -breaking out of the bottom line at a slight angle -and sweeping upward and outward in a gentle curve, -often becoming almost straight near the stem head. -The bow and stern were nearly the same height, -the bow being a little higher, about half the midship -depth above the sheer amidships. The sheer at -each end was almost dead straight until within a few -inches of the end; thence it swept up sharply with -the inner gunwale ends, broadened, resting on the -inboard side of the stem piece. The extreme ends -of the inner gunwales were thus at the extreme stem-head. -The stem-pieces were of plank, the cutwater -portion outside the bark cover being sharpened the -full height of the stems. These lower Yukon canoes -had three side battens above the chine piece, but -not all ran the full length in one piece; some were -in two, in which case the ends merely ran past one -another for a few rib-spaces and were neither butted -nor lapped. The forward deck extended nearly one-third -the canoe's length and had a batten across -the inboard deck-end; the after deck reached to the -after thwart. Adney's model of such a canoe shows -the after deck lashed to the gunwales with spiral -turns over a batten along the deck edges and finished -toward the stern with chain stitching, but no such -arrangement was seen in any full-sized canoe.</p> - -<p>The form of these Eskimo-built canoes was nearly -that of a double-ended flat-bottom skiff; the bottom -being flat athwartships and without rocker fore-and-aft. -The sides flared and were nearly straight. The -turn of the bilge was quite sharp, the chine having a -very short radius. In plan, the canoe showed no -hollow in the ends, which were convex both at gunwale -and on the bottom frame. In some of the -full-sized canoes inspected there appeared to be a -slight hog ranging from ¼ to ⅜ inch in the bottom, -but there was no evidence to suggest that this was a -result of the drying and shrinkage of the canoe structure -with age. Hearne's drawing of a kayak-form -canoe shows an impossible amount of hog in the -bottom, and he indicates that some hog was intentional -in building. This would disappear when the -canoe was loaded afloat owing to the light and -flexible structure, and it is evident that the builders -usually sought to have the bottom slightly hogged.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_165" id="Page_165">[Pg 165]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i181.jpg" width="700" height="409" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 152</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Construction of Kayak-Form Canoe</span> of the lower Yukon, showing rigid -bottom frame. (<em>Smithsonian Institution photo.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The kayak-form canoes of the lower Yukon and -neighboring streams all appear to have been small -canoes "tailored" to their owner's weight and height: -14 to 15 feet in overall length, 2 to 2¼ feet wide, -and 10 to 12 inches deep. The bottom frame was -from 12 to 14 inches wide amidships.</p> - -<p>The kayak-form canoes of the upper Yukon Valley -and those used in northern British Columbia and in -Yukon Territory had ends with a long rake that came -up in a straight line from an angular break at the -bottom line to the height of the sheer amidships or -thereabouts; there a gradual upward curve continued -to the stem-head. The stern was 2 inches or so higher -than the bow, and the rake of the latter was usually -about an equal distance longer than that of the stern. -The sheer was nearly straight, with only about 2 inches -of sag from the heel of the stem to that of the stern. -Beyond the heels, the sheer lifted in a fair sweep, -becoming sharper toward the ends, where the broadened -inwales were secured on top of the stem and -stern pieces. There was no rocker in the bottom, -and some examples showed as much as ⅜ inch of hog -amidships. The bottom was flat athwartships and -the almost straight sides flared a good deal. The turn -of the bilge was on a very small radius and in some -canoes appeared angular. The bow deck was usually -just under one-fifth the length of the canoe. Most of -the canoes did not have a stern deck, at least on the -Yukon headwaters, but on those that did, it was about -one-ninth the length of the canoe. The greatest beam -was abaft amidships and the canoe was usually about -1½ inches deeper at the heel of the sternpost than at -the heel of the stem. In plan, the ends (at gunwale -and bottom frame) were convex; the gunwale ends -alone might appear slightly hollow close to the posts -in some examples. The canoes in Alaska and British -Columbia and at the headwaters of the Yukon had a -rigid bottom structure, with the splint spreaders -usually numbering five.</p> - -<p>The 1-man hunting canoes were commonly 18 to 19 -feet long, 24 to 27 inches beam, and usually 10 to 11 -inches deep amidships. The single example of a family -or cargo kayak-form that has been measured from -this area was 20 feet 1 inch overall and 30¼ inches -beam over the gunwales. It was 18 inches wide on the -bottom frame, 13 inches deep amidships, 14 inches<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_166" id="Page_166">[Pg 166]</a></span> -deep at heel of stem, and 16 inches at heel of stem-post. -Height of the stem was 29 inches, of the stern 30½ -inches, the after rake was 38 inches, and the fore rake -40½ inches. The canoe had no decks and was rather -sharp-ended.</p> - -<p>The kayak-form canoe of the Athabascan Loucheux -had a rigid bottom-frame; the bottom was flat -athwartships and it had no fore-and-aft rocker. The -sides were flaring and slightly curved. Both ends -were alike, and the canoe was unusual in having only -five thwarts, with one amidships. The stem was -short in rake and curved; the stem profile came out of -the bottom line in a fair, quick curve which became -vertical at a height of little more than two-thirds the -depth amidships of the canoe. The height of the -stem was almost twice the midship depth. Between -the end thwarts the sheer was straight, thence it -swept upward in a gradually sharpening curve to the -inboard stems; the inwale ends stood vertical on the -face of the stem, with their ends brought to the top of -the stem-head. The stem-pieces were of unusually -thick plank, with the head broadened and the cutwater -part outside the bark cover sharpened until -near the head, where it gradually became as wide as -inboard. The gunwales were lashed with continuous -turns, as in the Alaskan canoes. In plan, the gunwales -and bottom frame were full-ended and convex. -These canoes were decked equally at both ends. The -deck extended inboard far enough to just cover the -end thwart, to which, in the example seen, it was -lashed with four simple in-and-out passes of rawhide -thong. The chine-pieces of the bottom were lashed -to the sides of the stem-pieces. The covering was -birch bark. Two battens on each side were employed -with the usual six longitudinals in the bottom frame. -These canoes were well-built and their ends resemble -those of the seagoing kayaks used at the mouth of the -Mackenzie, but these for at least the last 70 years of -their use were round-bottomed. The Loucheux -canoes were small, usually about 15 feet long, 30 -inches wide, and about 12 inches deep amidships.</p> - -<p>The Chipewyan kayak-form canoe was of loose-batten -bottom frame construction, with its beam -well aft of amidships. Its bottom was slightly rounded -athwartships, with a slight rocker fore-and-aft; the -sides flared outward and were nearly straight; and -the turn of the bilge was almost angular. The bow -and stern were of the same general shape; the end -profile came out of the bottom line with a quick hard -curve and then fell outboard in a long sweep that -gradually straightened near the head. The rakes were -short, however, and the stem was noticeably lower -than the stern, the difference being as much as 6 -inches in some canoes. The sheer was nearly straight -to the end thwarts and thence it curved up in an -easy sweep to the ends of the canoe. The canoes were -markedly deeper at the stern than at the bow; the -difference being as much as 1½ inches in some -examples.</p> - -<p>This kayak-form was very sharp-ended; the gunwales -in plan often showed a slight hollow and the -chine members came to the posts in an almost straight -<strong>V</strong>. As a result, the end ribs were often intentionally -"broken" to form a narrow-based, angular <strong>U</strong>. In -some Eskimo-built kayak forms, a similar result in -hull section was obtained in the endmost frames by -stepping short struts in splits, or tenons, on top of -the chine members and on the underside of the main -gunwales. This construction was occasionally found -in some of the lower Yukon kayak forms. The -Chipewyan kayak forms were decked at both ends. -The fore deck was slightly more than one-fourth the -length of the canoe and extended inboard to the second -thwart; the after deck was about one-tenth, and -came inboard to the end thwart. No breakwater -batten or bark was employed. There were two battens -on the sides, above the bilges.</p> - -<p>The gunwale wrappings were in groups. The bark -cover was not folded over the top of the inner gunwale -but, as usual in the Northwest canoes, was trimmed -evenly with the top of the inwale and outwale. Reinforcing -bark along the gunwales extended downward -about 1½ inches below the bottom of the outwales -amidships and about 1 inch at the ends. Of the -bottom longitudinals, the keel and chine-pieces were -roughly rectangular in cross-section, laid on the flat, -and the intermediate two battens were round; the -ends of the keel piece were merely butted against -the stems, no lashing being used. The stem piece -was thick plank and was sharpened outside the bark -cover to form a cutwater. The stem lashing was of -the usual two-thong form, and a batten was used -in the longitudinal seams of the bark cover. The -thwarts, six in number, were tenoned through both -inwale and outwale and pegged between them. No -thwart lashings were used. The decks often were -not lashed into place, being held only by the curling -of the edges of the bark sheets.</p> - -<p>This canoe was a very good one; it was light and -was fitted to the owner's build. In size it would be -between 12 and 14 feet long and 20 and 24 inches -wide over the gunwales, and the width of bottom<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_167" id="Page_167">[Pg 167]</a></span> -over the chine members amidships would be 11 to 12 -inches. The greatest beam would occur 7 to 8¼ -feet abaft the stem. The depth at heel of stem would -be 8½ to 9½ inches and at heel of stern, 10 to 11 inches. -The amount of bottom rocker would be between ¾ -and 1 inch, with its low point about amidships. The -cover was usually birch bark, but sometimes spruce -bark was used.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i183.jpg" width="700" height="523" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 153</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Model of an Extinct Form of Birch-Bark Canoe</span>, Athabascan type, of -British Columbia. In Peabody Museum, Harvard University, Cambridge, -Mass.; entered in the museum catalog as of 1849.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Another kayak-form canoe of unknown tribal designation -from the Mackenzie Basin was 13 feet 3 -inches long, 27 inches beam over the gunwales, 8½ -inches deep amidships, 8¾ inches deep at heel of stem, -10 inches deep at the aftermost thwart, and with -about ⅜ inch of rocker in the forebody, none in the -afterbody. The greatest beam occurred 7 feet 2 inches -from the stem. The width amidships of the bottom -framework of loose longitudinals was 13 inches. The -length of the rake foreward was 12 inches and aft, -12 inches. The fore deck extended inboard to the -second thwart, where a roll of bark formed a breakwater. -The after deck extended inboard to the -aftermost thwart. Between the end thwarts the sheer -was practically straight; at the ends it rose gently, -becoming almost a straight line as it came to the stem -and stern, and without the usual upward hook in the -ends of the gunwales.</p> - -<p>This was a very light and well-built canoe with a -birch-bark cover, a slightly rounded bottom athwartships, -slack bilge, and flaring sides showing some curve -in cross-section. The ends were rather sharp, the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_168" id="Page_168">[Pg 168]</a></span> -gunwales coming in to them almost straight, in plan, -as did the chine members. The stem and stern -pieces were of wide plank sharpened along their outboard -edge outside the bark cover, for their whole -height, to form cutwaters. The stem and stern profiles -were about the same as those of the Chipewyan -canoes.</p> - -<p>An old model in the Peabody Museum of an undecked -kayak-form canoe of Athabascan construction -represents a high-ended canoe having ends with -a slight rake and a straight cutwater. This form of -canoe has long been extinct, and no description of an -actual canoe of the form exists. Judging by the model -it had a very narrow flat-bottom and rounded flaring -sides.</p> - -<p>The extinct bateau variant has already been -described (pp. <a href="#Page_159">159</a>-161); it might be considered a -primitive form of the kayak-form bark canoes, were -it not that no intermediate type, between the bateau -and the later and highly developed bark kayak-form, -has been found; as a result, any such statement can -be no more than speculation.</p> - - -<h3><em>Sturgeon-Nose Canoe</em></h3> - -<p>In southern British Columbia and in northern -Washington, the ram-ended or sturgeon-nose canoes -were built. These were the canoes of the Kutenai, also -spelled "Kootenay," and of the Salish tribal groups. -Used on rivers and lakes, they were constructed of -the bark of birch, spruce, fir, white pine, or balsam, -whichever was available at the building site. Wherever -possible a panel of birch bark was worked in -along the whole length of the gunwales. The hull -form of these canoes varied somewhat, perhaps by -decision of the builder, or perhaps by local tribal -custom. The ends were formed with a marked "ram," -the stem profiles running down and out to the "nose" -in a straight or nearly straight line. In some examples -the stem profiles were in a hollow curve, starting -down from the gunwales rather steeply and then -curving outward more gently to the nose. Most -examples had a bottom that was straight or slightly -hogged, while those with the hollow curve in the ram -often had a slight rocker. It is believed that the -intention was always to have the bottom straight but -that in construction the center of the canoe lifted -somewhat, thus showing a slight hog in the bottom -line. The effects of loading and use on the light and -flexible structure of these canoes would cause the -bottom to rocker and the outboard ends to lift, thus -causing the hollow in the ram profiles. These effects -of loading are confirmed by tests with models of this -form of canoe.</p> - -<p>The midsection was usually quite round, almost -<strong>U</strong>-shaped, on the bottom, but some canoes showed the -bottom slightly flattened and the sides flared out -somewhat. Toward the ends, the <strong>U</strong>-shape became -marked, and near the gunwale ends the sides of the <strong>U</strong> -fell inboard slightly as they came to the gunwales, -the bottom of the <strong>U</strong> having a hard turn. In plan, -the gunwales approached the stems without hollow, -being nearly straight or even slightly convex. The -ram was long and sharp in its lower level lines and -this, with the form of midsection, made this model a -fast-paddling canoe, though rather unstable. Most -of these canoes had but one thwart, placed at midlength, -but some have been found with three thwarts -and a thong tie across the gunwales, close to the stems, -as well.</p> - -<p>No stem-pieces were used; the bark ends were closed -by two outside battens, one on each side, whose heads -were carried some 3 inches above the gunwales. A -cutwater batten was placed over the edges of the -bark between the battens, and the three were lashed -together, with the bark, by a coarse spiral wrapping -or by group ties. The bark cover was not sheathed -inside; instead, six battens, ⅜ by 1½ inches, were -placed on each side of the keel piece, which measured -about ½ by 3 inches and tapered toward the ends. -The battens, widely spaced, ran well into the ram -ends, and were held in place, like sheathing, by the -pressure of the ribs. The ribs, spaced 8 to 12 inches -on centers, were often split saplings; sometimes they -were shaped to approximately ¼ by ¾ inch. The -batten nearest the gunwale on each side was lashed -to every rib. In some canoes the heads of the ribs -were brought up between the inwale and outwale, -inside the bark cover, with their ends against the -cap. The stitching of the longitudinal seam of the -topside panel was passed around these frames and -so helped to secure them. In one example, the ribs -were passed through the bark cover just below the -horizontal seam of the topside panel; there a turn of -the stitching was passed around each rib; then -the rib was brought inboard again in the seam by -being passed between the edges of the bark cover -and the panel. In many canoes there were no ribs -in the ram ends, but this was not universal practice;<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_169" id="Page_169">[Pg 169]</a></span> -small light ribs were sometimes placed there, with -their heads caught in the closure lashing of the end.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i185.jpg" width="700" height="397" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 154</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Bark Canoe of the Kutenai and Shuswap</span>, about average in size and proportion. -Original in the Museum of the American Indian, New York.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The canoes had 3-part gunwales consisting of inwale, -outwale, and cap, but in many the arrangement of -these was such that this nomenclature is misleading. -In the latter construction, a lower inwale was used, as -in the above drawing; rather small in cross section, -it was almost square, with rounded edges. The rib -ends, after passing through slits in the bark cover -below the lower inwale, continued upward past it, -outside the bark cover. Above the lower inwale and -inside the bark cover was a larger upper inwale; -this was flat on the outboard and bottom sides, the -top and inboard sides being rounded into one another. -The outwale, roughly rectangular in cross section, -clamped the bark cover and heads of the ribs between -it and the upper inwale. The ribs and bark were -trimmed off flush with the tops of the outwale and upper -inwale. The thwart amidships was caught, at the -ends, between the lower and upper inwales. The gunwale -members and bark cover were secured by group -lashings of small extent and rather widely spaced.</p> - -<p>The methods of fitting the thwarts differed in this -class of canoe, and it cannot be determined with certainty -whether this variation was tribal or the choice -of the individual builder. In canoes having the lower -inwale arrangement there was but one thwart amidships. -As has been said, its ends were caught between -the upper and lower inwales. Directly beneath it -was a rib whose head was not brought up outside -the bark cover but, after being secured to the uppermost -sheathing batten, was brought around inboard -in a quick hard turn and secured along the underside -of the thwart with a close spiral lashing. Under this -rib at the topmost batten was secured a short false -rib head by forcing the beveled foot of the false rib -between the batten and the true rib, after lashing; -the head of the false rib was then brought up through -and outside the bark cover in the customary manner, -or it might be forced under the lower inwale, inside -the bark cover. In this construction, the endmost -ribs were at the gunwale ends, and the heads of these -were lashed to the stem battens outside the gunwale -ends, on the outside of the bark cover.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_170" id="Page_170">[Pg 170]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 155</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Ojibway Canoe Construction.</span> -(See pp. <a href="#Page_122">122</a>-131.)</p> -<p>(<em>Canadian Geological Survey -photos.</em>)</p></div> - -<img src="images/i186a.jpg" width="700" height="408" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Peeling bark.</p></div> - -<img src="images/i186b.jpg" width="700" height="415" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Staking out bark.</p></div> - -<img src="images/i186c.jpg" width="700" height="413" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Assembling bark over on building -site.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_171" id="Page_171">[Pg 171]</a></span></p> -</div> - -<img src="images/i187a.jpg" width="700" height="408" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Making root thongs.</p></div> - -<img src="images/i187b.jpg" width="700" height="405" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Setting ribs inside bark cover -with a mallet.</p></div> - -<img src="images/i187c.jpg" width="700" height="410" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Fitting gunwale caps on new -canoe.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_172" id="Page_172">[Pg 172]</a></span></p> - -<p>In canoes having the usual gunwales of inwale, -outwale, and cap, the inwale and outwale were -roughly rectangular, with their top sides horizontal, -and the cap, very small and light, was flat on the -bottom and rounded on top. In this construction, -the rib heads usually were clamped between the inwale -and outwale, inside the bark cover.</p> - -<p>The ribs of the ends were lighter than those of the -main body and more closely spaced, say 2 or 3 inches -apart. These began about 8 or 9 inches inboard of -the gunwale ends; the heads did not reach the gunwales, -but instead were caught in the horizontal seam -of the side panel and then cut off. Usually three ribs -were so fitted. The rest of the end ribs, usually eight -in number, either had their heads caught in the stem -lashings or were made up as hoops with the heads -overlapped and lashed together, the ribs being placed -so that the overlap came to one side or the other of the -canoe. Each hoop was usually caught by a turn in -the end-closure lashing.</p> - -<p>To strengthen the ram, the lower ends of the three -stem battens were lashed to the extremities of the -inside keel-piece, which was brought through the -bark cover at this point. The opening resulting from -this was sealed with gum or pitch. Minor variations -in construction have been noted in the canoes exhibited -in museums; in one, for example, only every -fourth rib was caught in the topside panel stitching.</p> - -<p>In canoes having the usual arrangement of gunwale -members, with the cap over the ends of the ribs, the -ends of the thwart were sometimes carried some 6 to 8 -inches beyond the gunwales, at each end, and much -reduced in thickness by cutting away about half the -depth of the thwart. This part was then wrapped -tightly around the inwale, brought inboard along the -underside of the thwart, and there lashed. Examples -show that the amount of end brought inboard under -the thwart varied with the builder. It should be -added that the thwarts were usually no more than -barked saplings and were obviously installed in the -canoe when green and treated with hot water so they -would not break when wrapped around the inwales. -In canoes having three thwarts, all were fitted in this -manner, but often the thwarts on each side of the -middle were also wrapped in a long spiral with a -thong whose ends were tied to each gunwale. In 3-thwart -canoes, there was commonly a cross tie, -located roughly 12 inches from the gunwale ends and -consisting of three or more turns of cord, or thong, -around the gunwale members on each side and -athwartships, secured by turns of the ends around -the cross tie. In one canoe there was a thwart amidships -and one at one end, about halfway between the -middle thwart and the gunwale ends; at the other end -were two cross ties, one replacing the thwart and -another a foot inboard of the ends of the gunwales. -In this canoe the ribs at the gunwale ends were hoops -and there were only three hoop ribs in the ram ends.</p> - -<p>One canoe, from Stevens County, Washington, -had a peculiar double framing. The sheathing -battens, instead of being on the inside of the bark -cover, rested on light ribs, spaced about 6 inches apart, -that ran only far enough up the sides to have their -ends caught in the stitching at the bottom of the topside -birch-bark panel along the gunwales. The longitudinal -battens were placed inside these, with the -batten nearest the gunwale lashed to the light ribs. -Inside these battens and spaced about a foot apart -was another set of ribs whose heads were secured -between the inwale and outwale inside the bark cover; -each of these inside ribs was also lashed to the uppermost -batten. Only the keel batten was under the -small ribs. The thwart ends were wrapped around -the main gunwale members, and the stem battens -were secured to the birch topside panels by but one -group lashing, near the gunwales. The bottom cover -was stiff pine bark.</p> - -<p>The topside panel of birch bark was placed in these -canoes so that its grain was horizontal instead of the -usual vertical. Presumably this was done as a maintenance -solution: the panel was much easier to repair -or replace than the bottom bark; and by having the -panel placed in this weak mode, it would split before -the bottom bark if too much pressure were brought on -the framework in loading.</p> - -<p>These canoes paddled well in strong winds and in -smooth water, and worked quietly in the marshes -where they were much used. Canvas canoes of the -same model replaced the bark canoes, indicating that -the model was suitable for its locality and use. These -sturgeon-nose canoes were so different from other -North American bark canoes that they have been the -subject of much speculation, particularly since ram-ended -canoes, though of different construction, existed -in Asia.</p> - -<p>The size of the Kutenai-Salish sturgeon-nose canoes -varied; the most common size appears to have been -between 14 and 20 feet over the ends of the rams, -24 to 28 inches beam, and with a depth ranging -from 12 to 13 inches amidships and from 14½ to 17½ -inches at the ends of the gunwales. However, records -exist that show rather large canoes were built on this<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_173" id="Page_173">[Pg 173]</a></span> -model, 24 feet over the rams, 48 inches beam and 24 -inches depth.</p> - -<p>The building methods of this type of canoe have -never been reported. Probably some kind of a rough -building frame was used. Perhaps this was comprised -of a couple of the battens and the keel piece, weighted -with stones. The building bed was probably level. -The main gunwale members were apparently made up -temporarily and the bark cover shaped and staked out. -From that point the work may have followed the usual -canoe-building practices except that the ends could -not be closed until the framing there was complete, -otherwise it would have been impossible to fasten the -small ribs in the rams. The structure of these canoes -appears to have been almost entirely cedar, except -for the bark and lacings which, in some instances, -were partly some bark fiber as well as roots. In -general, the construction of this class of canoe did not -match in quality that of the other bark canoes of the -Northwest.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i189.jpg" width="700" height="458" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 156</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Indians with Canoe</span> at Alert Bay, on Cormorant -Island, B.C.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_174" id="Page_174">[Pg 174]</a></span></p> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2><em>Chapter Seven</em><br /> - -ARCTIC SKIN BOATS<br /> - -<em>Howard I. Chapelle</em></h2> - - -<p>Among the three primitive watercraft of -North America (the others being the dugout and the -bark canoe of the American Indians), the Arctic skin -boats of the Eskimos are remarkable for effective -design and construction obtained under conditions -in which building materials are both scarce and -limited in selection. The Arctic skin boat is almost -entirely to be found in the North American Arctic -from Bering Sea to the East Coast of Greenland. -In Russian Siberia, only in a small area of the eastern -Arctic lands adjacent to the North American continent -are any employed.</p> - -<p>These craft, an important and necessary factor in -the hunting lives of most Eskimo tribal groups, have -long attracted the attention of explorers and ethnologists, -and many specimens have been deposited -in American and European museums. Like bark -canoes, they have unfortunately proved difficult to -preserve under conditions of museum exhibit. As a result, -examples of once numerous types have become so -damaged that they no longer give an accurate -impression of their original form and appearance, -and some have so deteriorated that they have had to -be destroyed. Among the latter may have been -examples of types long since out of use. One such -type was represented by a single kayak, now destroyed; -as a result this form has become extinct, and only a -poor scale model remains to give a highly unsatisfactory -representation of it.</p> - -<p>In 1946 the late Vilhjalmur Stefansson, who was -then projecting his <cite>Encyclopedia Arctica</cite>, asked me to -prepare for it a technical article on the Arctic skin -boat. The decision of the sponsors to discontinue -the publication, after the first volume had appeared, -prevented appearance of the article, but in 1958, -through the kindness of Dr. Stefansson, it was returned -to the author for publication by the U.S. -National Museum. I have since revised and added -to it, after receiving criticisms and suggestions from -Henry B. Collins, of the Smithsonian's Bureau of -American Ethnology, from John Heath, and from -other authorities.<a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> For their aid to him the author takes this occasion to extend -particular thanks. He also thanks his Smithsonian Institution -colleagues in the Division of Ethnology, U.S. National Museum; -members of the staffs of The American Museum of Natural -History and The Museum of the American Indian in New -York, of the Peabody Museum at Harvard, and of the Stefansson -Library at Dartmouth; and the Washington State Historical -Society and Museum, and others in the Northwest who gave -both aid and encouragement.</p></div> - -<p>The object of the study, as will be seen, was to -measure the skin boats and to make scale drawings -that would permit the construction of a replica -exact in details of appearance, form, construction, -and also in working behavior. Special regard was -given to the diversity of types with respect to hull -form and construction methods; but questions of -ethnic trends, tribal migrations, and such matters, -being outside the scope of the study, were not considered. -Wherever possible, full-size craft were used -as the source, but where only fragments existed, -these had to be supplemented by reference to and -interpretation of models of the same type.</p> - -<p>In spite of the difficulty of locating skin boats of -some Arctic areas, examples of most of those mentioned -by explorers since 1875 have been found and -recorded, so that, as far as possible, every distinctive -tribal type of Arctic skin boat which in 1946 was -represented by museum exhibits in the eastern -United States is represented in plans here.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_175" id="Page_175">[Pg 175]</a></span></p> -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i191.jpg" width="700" height="354" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 157</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Eighteenth-Century Lines Drawing</span> of a kayak, from Labrador or southern -Baffin Island (according to Dr. Kaj Birket-Smith of the Danish National -Museum). Note the long stem that is characteristic of present day kayaks from -Labrador. The lettering apparently reads:</p> - - -<div class="center"> -<ul><li>From Strait's S<sup>nt</sup>. David</li> -<li>A Canoe—N.B. The sections are 2 feet asunder from forward</li> -<li>Length 21'-6"</li> -<li>Breadth 2'-1½"</li> -<li>Depth 0'-8¼"</li> -</ul></div> - -<p>(<em>Courtesy National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, England.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>With the material available it was not possible, -of course, to explore all the individual types and forms -in full; hence, the geographical range of a type can -be stated only approximately, owing to the overlapping -of tribal groups and the almost constant -migratory movement of the Eskimo. Originally the -2-and 3-cockpit kayaks of Russian colonial Alaska -had been omitted as being probably the results of -Russian influence. John Heath, however, believing -attention should be given to this type, has very kindly -prepared for me a fine draught of such a kayak, or -"baidarka" (other spellings of this name are common); -this is shown on page <a href="#Page_197">197</a>.</p> - -<p>Although the scale drawings accurately represent -the form and details of construction, they necessarily -idealize somewhat the primitive boat design. Also, -in showing the hull-form, the usual method of projecting -the "lines" of the hull was discarded as -unsuitable. Instead structural features have been -emphasized, with the result that "round"-bottom -kayaks appear as multi-chine hulls, as they properly -are. In view of the fluid state of design in Eskimo -craft it is obvious that the examples shown represent -the stage of development at the given date, though -the alteration in most designs has been so gradual that -the representation could serve to illustrate with -reasonable accuracy a tribal or area type for a decade -or more.</p> - -<p>The Eskimos have produced two types of skin boats -that have proved remarkably efficient craft for -small-boat navigation in Arctic waters: an open -boat ranging from about 15 to approximately 60 -feet in length for carrying cargo and passengers for -long distances, and a small decked canoe developed -exclusively for hunting. With few exceptions these -Arctic skin boats are wholly seagoing craft.</p> - -<p>The open boat, called the umiak, is propelled by -paddles or oars or sail or, in recent years, by an -outboard gasoline engine, or it may be towed. While -fundamentally a cargo carrier the umiak has been -employed by some Eskimo in whaling and in walrus -hunting. For these purposes a faster and more -developed design is used than that used only to -carry families, household goods, and cargo in the -constant Eskimo search for new hunting grounds.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_176" id="Page_176">[Pg 176]</a></span> -To a far greater degree than any other boat of -similar size, this Eskimo boat is characterized by -great strength combined with lightness.</p> - -<p>The decked hunting canoe, the kayak, is propelled -by paddle alone when used for hunting and fishing, -but is occasionally towed by the umiak when the -owner travels. The kayak is perhaps the most efficient -example of a primitive hunting boat; it can be propelled -at high speed by its paddler and maneuvered -with ease. These hunting kayaks are commonly -built to hold but one person, though one group of -Eskimo built the kayaks to carry two or three. The -kayak, remarkable for its seaworthiness, lightness and -strength, has been perhaps one of the most important -tools in the Eskimo fight for existence. Few tribes -have been unacquainted with its use. Because of its -employment, the kayak often has to be designed to -meet very particular requirements and so there is -greater variation in its form and dimensions than in -the umiak.</p> - -<p>Seagoing skin boats have not been common outside -the Arctic in historical times. In fact only the -European Celts are known with certainty to have -used such craft. The Irish, in particular, employed -large seagoing skin boats as late as the reign of -Queen Elizabeth of England; a drawing of one preserved -in the Pepysian Library was reproduced in the -<cite>Mariner's Mirror</cite> (vol. 8, 1922, facing p. 200). Although -there can be little doubt that large seagoing -skin craft had been more widely used in prehistoric -times, the perishable nature of the skin covering and -the light framework probably account for the lack -of any archeological remains that would indicate its -range. The availability of the materials required in -its construction, however, suggest that its use could -have been very widespread. The long voyages made -by the Irish, in the dawning of recorded history, -could well have made its design and construction -known to others.</p> - -<p>There are still many skin boats in use by primitive -people and even a few survivals in Europe, but with -the exception of the Irish "curragh," these craft are -designed for inland waters and are either rather -dish-shaped, or oval in plan, like half a walnut shell. -In design they are related to the coracle of ancient -Britain rather than to a seagoing skin boat of the -Irish or Eskimo type. Both the Irish curragh and -the British coracle, now, of course, are covered with -canvas rather than hide.</p> - -<p>Traditions of long voyages by the ancient Irish in -the skin-covered curragh make it apparent that such -voyages were relatively common, and the design -and construction of existing models of the curragh -and umiak indicate that these voyages could have -been made with reasonable safety. Compared to the -dugout canoe, the skin boat was far lighter and -roomier in proportion to length and so could carry -a far greater load and still retain enough freeboard -to be safe. The size of the early skin boats cannot -be established with certainty; the modern Irish -curragh is probably debased in this respect, but -early explorers of Greenland reported umiaks nearly -60 feet in length and there is no structural reason -why the curragh could not have been as large or -even larger.</p> - -<p>Compared with the curragh, the umiak is lighter, -stronger, and more resistant to shock. The curragh -was built with closely spaced bent frames and longitudinal -stringers to support the skin cover, whereas -the umiak has very widely spaced frames and few -longitudinals, giving the skin cover little support. -The difference in construction is undoubtedly a result -of the type of covering used, for the curragh was -covered with cattle hides, which were less strong -than the seal or walrus skins used by the Eskimo. -The strong and elastic skin cover of the umiak and -the lack of a rigid structural support gives this boat -an advantage in withstanding the shocks of beaching -or of working in floating ice; and because of its relatively -light framework and the method of securing -the structural members, its frame is far more flexible -than that of the curragh, adding to this ability.</p> - -<p>The skin cover of the curragh was made watertight -by rubbing the hides with animal fat, and the sewn -seams were payed with tallow. The Eskimo soak -the skin cover of the umiak with animal oil and pay -the seams with blubber or animal fat. Both treatments -produced a cover initially watertight but -requiring drying and reoiling to remain so. Under -most climatic conditions in the North Atlantic or -Pacific the oiled skins remain watertight from four -days to a week. This period can be lengthened by -various methods; skin boats travelling in company -can be dried out in turn by unloading one and placing -it aboard a companion craft. There is evidence -of other methods of treating the skin covering; -waterproofing it with melted tallow, for example, -or with a vegetable gum or a resin such as pitch, would -enable it to remain watertight for a much longer time, -though such treatments would make the covering -less elastic. Pitch was also used at one time in curragh -building, and it would be unwise to assume that the -oil treatment used by the Eskimo was their only -method of producing watertight skin covers in the -period before they were first observed by Europeans.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_177" id="Page_177">[Pg 177]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i193a.jpg" width="700" height="546" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 158</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Western Alaskan Umiak</span> -with eight women paddling, -Cape Prince of Wales, Alaska, -1936. (<em>Photo by Henry -B. Collins.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i193b.jpg" width="700" height="544" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 159</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Western Alaskan Umiak</span> -being beached, Cape Prince -of Wales, Alaska, 1936. -(<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_178" id="Page_178">[Pg 178]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i194a.jpg" width="700" height="355" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 160</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Repairing Umiak Frame</span> at St. Lawrence Island, Alaska, 1930. -(<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 676px;"> -<img src="images/i194b.jpg" width="676" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 161</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Eskimo Woman Splitting Walrus Hide</span> to -make umiak cover, St. Lawrence Island, -Alaska, 1930. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The fundamental difference between the construction -of the curragh and that of the umiak lies in the -type of longitudinal strength members and the transverse -framing used. The curragh, like the birch-bark -canoe, depended entirely upon its gunwales for -longitudinal strength, whereas the umiak has a strong -keel, or, properly, a keelson since the keel was inside -the skin cover. The curragh used longitudinal -battens to support the skin cover. The umiak, on -the other hand, has in its chine timbers rather strong -longitudinal members that give additional strength -to the bottom. Its transverse frames, unlike those of -the curragh which were continuous from gunwale to -gunwale, are in three sections, two side pieces and a -floor, or bottom, member and the frame members -are joined to gunwale, chines and keelson by lashings -of sinew, whalebone, or hide, a method that, together -with three-part frames, gives great flexibility to the -framework. The frame of the early curragh may have -been lashed, but because of the other fundamental -differences in design and construction it was less -flexible than that of the umiak.</p> - -<p>The basic features of the umiak frame are not -found in the kayak, the structure of which in most -types approaches that of the curragh. The gunwale -is the strength member in the kayak, and some types -have a rather extensive longitudinal batten system -as well. In only a few types of kayak is the keelson -an important strength member, and even here the -gunwales are of primary importance. The hypothesis -has been offered that this indicates a different parentage -for the kayak than for the umiak, and that the -umiak represents the earlier type, it being argued that -this type of boat was the one more required in migratory -periods, and so would be first developed. Such -theories should be accepted with caution, however, -as the fundamentally different use requirements for -the two types of craft might readily explain the variation -in their principles of construction. Hunting -would also have been necessary during migrations, -as existence depended upon food; the earlier appearance -of the umiak cannot be assumed on such -limited grounds.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_179" id="Page_179">[Pg 179]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i195a.jpg" width="700" height="478" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 162</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Fitting Split Walrus-Hide Cover</span> to -umiak at St. Lawrence Island, Alaska, -1930. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i195b.jpg" width="700" height="380" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 163</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Outboard Motor Installed on Umiak</span>, -Cape Prince of Wales, Alaska, 1936. -(<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i195c.jpg" width="700" height="373" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 164</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Launching Umiak in Light Surf</span>, with -crew of 12 men. (Note outboard motor -attached), Cape Prince of Wales, Alaska, -1936. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_180" id="Page_180">[Pg 180]</a></span></p> - -<p>Eskimo skin boats possess remarkable advantages -for their employment and conditions of use. Their -hulls are light in weight, simple to build, and relatively -easy to repair, yet they are highly shock resistant. -They can carry large loads, yet are fast, they are -capable of being propelled by more than one means, -and they are exceptionally seaworthy.</p> - -<p>Floating ice is considered a major hazard to craft -of all sizes, but the umiak, for example, can resist the -shocks of ramming the ice to a degree beyond the -tensile strength of the skin covering, by reason of the -method of attaching the skin cover to the framework -of the hull, and to some extent the form of the boat -itself. The skin cover of the umiak is not rigidly -attached to the frame in a number of places, but -rather is a complete unit secured only at the gunwales -and to the heads of stem and stern. This permits the -skin cover to be greatly distorted by a blow, so that -the elasticity of the material at point of impact is -assisted by the movement of the whole skin cover on -the frame. Also, the frame itself is flexible and allows -distortion and recovery not only within the limits of -the elasticity of the wooden frame but also by the -movement of the lashed joints in the transverse frames. -Some kayaks have similar characteristics, though -their small size and the light weight of both boat and -loading make its resistance to shock of far less importance -than that of the umiak.</p> - -<p>Light weight is a highly desirable characteristic for -small craft in the Arctic, since it permits the boat without -the aid of skids or other mechanical contrivances -to be removed from the water and carried over obstructions, -and to be transported either by sledge or -by manual portage over long distances. Lightness -is obtained in the Eskimo skin boats by the small -number and small size of the wooden structural members -used in their construction. The resulting light -weight hull permits heavy loading in proportion to -the size of the boat, and it allows building with a -minimum of material, in a country where such materials -as wood are scarce and hard to obtain.</p> - -<p>For all small craft in Arctic waters, where distances -between sources of supply may be great and the time -that the water is open to navigation is relatively -short, speed is an important and desirable attribute -that permits movement with a minimum of effort. -The exigencies of Arctic travel make it further desirable -that small craft be capable of propulsion under paddle, -oars, sail, or low-powered gasoline motors. The -umiak, because of its form and weight, can be modified -to meet this requirement without loss of other -desirable attributes, and to a slightly lesser degree, -the same may be said of the kayak.</p> - -<p>Simplicity in construction and repair are also -basic requirements in the Arctic, where an emergency -may make it necessary to repair or rebuild a damaged -boat out of materials available nearby with the minimum -of tools and under adverse weather conditions. -The Eskimo has produced a boat construction that, -as will be seen from the descriptions that follow, to a -high degree meets this requirement.</p> - -<p>Exceptional seaworthiness is required, as most -Arctic waters are subject to violent storms; the Arctic -skin boats have been developed with forms and -proportions to meet this condition. In this matter, -the light and flexible hull structure gives a special -advantage. The kayak, in its highest state of evolution -and in skillful hands is perhaps the most seaworthy of -all primitive small craft. The umiak is a close second, -but of the two, the kayak is safer under all conditions -of Arctic travel.</p> - -<p>The load-carrying capacity of skin boats has been -mentioned. The Eskimo umiak is notable in this -respect, exceeding the curragh and even craft produced -by modern civilization. The umiak possesses -this advantage because of its very light hull -weight in combination with a nearly flat bottom -and flaring sides. The resulting hull-form allows -heavy loading with relatively little increase in draft, -as the flaring sides cause the displacement to increase -rapidly with the slightest increase in draft. -Though a similar form exists in the lumberman's -drive boat, the greater hull weight of this type makes -it inferior to the umiak. Light draft when loaded -has very definite advantages in the Arctic, for it -allows loading and unloading on the beach or afloat, -and allows the boat to be beached at points where -this would not be possible with a deeper hull. The -light draft also makes the umiak easy to propel -manually.</p> - -<p>The imperative need for very efficient watercraft -has made the Eskimo seek improvements, and -as his needs altered, so have his skin boats. Con<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_181" id="Page_181">[Pg 181]</a></span>sequently -the designs of these craft have gone through -numerous changes since the first of the types were -placed in American museums. It is noticeable that, -among other changes, the amount of freeboard of -umiaks has been altered as their owners met new -conditions imposed by longer voyages, heavier -cargo, and the outboard motor. The high-sided -umiak, while suited for heavy loads and very seaworthy, -was almost impossible to paddle or even row -against a strong gale. When this condition had -to be met, the freeboard and flare were reduced to -minimize the windage. In recent years umiaks have -appeared with round bottoms to give greater speed -under paddle, the resulting boat being an enlarged -kayak in construction. These changes to meet -differing use requirements are not necessarily basic -improvements, for they result in the sacrifice of some -of the other qualities of the type. Nevertheless, -they indicate the fluid state of primitive boat design -in the Arctic, a condition that has been accentuated -in most areas by the increasing influence of white -men, their boats and their motors.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i197.jpg" width="700" height="420" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 165</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Umiaks on Racks</span>, in front of village on Little Diomede Island, July 30, 1936. -(<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - - -<h3><em>The Umiak</em></h3> - -<p>The umiak was undoubtedly more widely employed -by the Eskimo before the coming of the white -man than existing records indicate. It was a type -of boat most necessary for family migration by sea, -and with it the early Eskimos could establish themselves -on islands far from the mainland and could -cross large bodies of water. From some areas where -early explorers mention having seen the type, the -umiak has disappeared; this suggests the possibility -that tribes now unacquainted with the umiak had -at some time in the past reached a location where -such a boat was no longer necessary.</p> - -<p>The umiak was common in open waters and was -found from Kodiak Island through the Aleutians and -north and eastward along the west and north coast of -Alaska to the mouth of the Mackenzie River. On the -Siberian coast, opposite Alaska and for a short distance -westward, the umiak was also employed. From the -Mackenzie eastward to Hudson Bay the umiak has<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_182" id="Page_182">[Pg 182]</a></span> -not been employed in recent times, though it is highly -probable that it was used in the migrations that -populated this part of the Arctic coast with Eskimo. -Early explorers found umiaks in use along the northwestern -coast of Hudson Bay and Foxe Basin; the -umiak disappeared from these areas during the last -century, but its use continued in Hudson Strait and -in Greenland, where it became highly developed.</p> - -<p>Among the various tribes of Eskimo known to -have employed the umiak in the last century, the -form of the hull varied a good deal, as did its -dimensions. In general its form was something like -that of the lumberman's "drive boat," except that -most umiaks had a slight <strong>V</strong>-bottom and were quite -different from it in the shape of the bow and stern. -The size of the umiak does not seem to have been -established by a set of measurements as distinct as -that used in the building of kayaks, but rather as -the result of utilizing material available locally, with -due regard to the intended use of the craft for relatively -heavy transport. Such matters as the flare of the -sides, rake and shape of bow and stern, and width -varied from tribe to tribe. The Asiatic and Alaskan -umiaks were usually rather sharp-ended, with little -spread to the gunwales at bow and stern; one of the -Asiatic types has the gunwales brought round in a -full curve at the ends of the boat. In the East the -umiaks have rather upright bows and sterns and the -gunwales are often rather wide apart to form square -ends to the hull. Some of the western umiaks were -navigated with paddles only; with others, before the -appearance of the Russians in the area, both oar and -sail may have been used. In the East the umiaks -were being paddled, rowed, and sailed when white -men reached the Arctic in the 17th century.</p> - -<p>The Greenland umiak frame is much heavier and -more rigid than the Alaskan. In comparing eastern -and western umiaks the frame of the eastern umiak -seems to be somewhat better finished, but the models -of the western umiak are undoubtedly the better. -The eastern umiak is not intended for use in hunting -but is primarily a cargo carrier; its use has been -confined to women and its chief employment is moving -the family and household effects from one hunting -ground to another. While it is highly probable that -this condition is the result of the disappearance of -whaling in this region, the use of the umiak as a hunting -boat ceased so long ago that the eastern umiak -model may have degenerated to a great degree. It -has been otherwise in the western Arctic where the -use of the umiak in hunting has continued and the -boats have been managed, to a very great extent, by -the men. As a result, the boats are held in greater -respect by their builders and the better models have -survived. The tribal distinctions between the western -umiaks are therefore more marked than in the east; including -Siberia, at least three basic models and a very -large variety of tribal variations, are to be found, as can -be proved by existing models. In the east only two basic -and distinct umiak models are known to have existed, -the Baffin Island type used on both the north side -and on the Labrador side of Hudson Strait, and -the Greenland type. In the latter, there were slight -tribal distinctions it is true, but these were minor.</p> - -<p>The Asiatic umiaks may be classed into two types, -the Koryak type of Eastern Siberia and the Chukchi -model of the Siberian side of Bering Strait. The -Koryak umiaks illustrated by Jochelson show a -highly developed boat, rather lightly framed compared -to boats on the American side. In profile the -bow has a long raking curve and the stern much less; -as a result the bottom is rather short compared to the -length over the gunwales. Viewed in plan, the gunwales -are rounded in at bow and stern to form almost -a semicircle. At the bow the gunwales are bent around -a horizontal headboard tenoned over the stem head -but at the stern there is no headboard. The sheer is -moderate and very graceful. The flare of the sides -is great and there appears to be a little <strong>V</strong> in the bottom -transversely. There is also a slight fore-and-aft -rocker in the bottom. The construction is similar to -that of the Alaskan umiaks except that the Koryak -umiaks have double-chine stringers and also a double -riser, or longitudinal stringer, halfway up the sides. -The riser is not backed with a continuous stringer, as -is the chine; instead three short rods are lashed inside -the side frame members. The side stringers do not -reach bow and stern. The four thwarts are located -well aft, and between the first and second thwarts is a -larger space than between the others, for cargo. The -boats are rowed, two oarsmen to a thwart. The -cover was formerly walrus hides split and scraped -thin but more recently the skin of the bearded seal -has come into use. A rectangular sail of deer skin -is sometimes lashed to a yard and set on a tripod mast -about amidships. Two legs of the mast are secured -to the gunwale on one side, the remaining leg is -lashed to the opposite gunwale. Judging by the -drawing made by Jochelson<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> this umiak is perhaps -the most graceful of all those known today.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> Reproduced in <span class="smcap">James Hornell</span>, <cite>Water Transport</cite> (Cambridge: -University Press, 1946), p. 160.</p></div> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_183" id="Page_183">[Pg 183]</a></span></p> -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i199.jpg" width="700" height="255" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 166</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Umiak Covered With Split Walrus Hide</span>, Cape Prince of Wales, Alaska. -The framework can be seen through the translucent hide cover. (<em>Photo by -Henry B. Collins.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The Asiatic Chukchi umiak is somewhat similar to -that used on the American coast but with less beam -in proportion to its length and less flare to the sides. -The skin cover is of bearded seal. Bogoras measured -an example and found her 35 feet 9 inches long, -4 feet 6 inches wide amidships, 2 feet 6 inches wide -on the bottom over the chines. (An Alaskan umiak -measured 34 feet 9 inches long, 8 feet 2 inches wide -at gunwales and 2 feet 8 inches over the chines.) -The Chukchi also use a very small hunting umiak, -15 to 18 feet long and having two or three thwarts, -much like the small hunting umiaks once used in the -Aleutians. The larger Chukchi umiaks have rectangular -sails set on a pole mast; some boats carry a -square topsail. The sails are lashed to their yards -and the lower sail, or "course," is controlled by sheets -and braces. The topsail, when used, has braces -only. The sails were formerly of reindeer skins, but -now drill is used. These umiaks were formerly paddled, -as indicated by their narrow beam, but since -the advent of the white man oars have come into use, -and it is quite certain that the topsail also is the result -of white man's influence, if not the whole rig.</p> - -<p>In stormy weather some of these umiaks and also -some of those in Alaska employ weather cloths, 18 or -20 inches high above the gunwales, raised on short -stanchions lashed to the hull frames. The ends of -the stanchions are inserted in slits in the top of the -weather cloth, and in fair weather the cloths are -folded down inside the gunwale out of the way. Also -in some of these Asiatic and Alaskan umiaks, inflated -floats, of seal skin, are lashed to the gunwales to -prevent capsizing in a heavy sea.</p> - -<p>The Alaskan umiaks varied much in size but are -rather similar in form. The small hunting umiaks -used by the Aleuts are about 18 feet long, while the -large cargo carrying umiaks range up to about 40 feet -long, so far as available records show. They are -marked by heavily flared sides and often have a -rather strong sheer; a few, however, are rather -straight on the gunwales. Nearly all existing models -and boats were built since 1880; and no information -is now available on the forms and dimensions of earlier -craft.</p> - -<p>On page <a href="#Page_184">184</a> is a drawing of a small umiak, used in -walrus hunting, from the Alaskan coast in the neighborhood -of the Aleutians. In the U.S. National -Museum are the remains of a similar boat obtained -in 1888 from Northern Alaska. This type of small -umiak is also employed in fishing and is rather -widely used as a passage boat for short voyages along -shore. These craft, propelled by paddles, are primarily -fast, handy hunting canoes rather than boats -for migration or cargo-carrying. For this reason -they are quite sharp-ended and shallow. The construction -of this example will serve to illustrate the -methods common to this type.</p> - -<p>The umiak shown is 20 feet 8½ inches over the -headboards, 4 feet 9½ inches extreme beam and -17⅜ inches depth—apparently an average-sized boat -of her class. The width of the bottom over the chine<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_184" id="Page_184">[Pg 184]</a></span> -members is 2 feet 7 inches. The keelson is rectangular -in section and in two pieces, hooked-scarphed together; -each piece is shaped out of the trunk of a -small tree with the root knees employed to form the -bow and stern posts. The floor timbers are quite -heavy and support the chine members by having -the floor ends tenoned into the chine pieces. At bow -and stern the chines are joined to the keelson in a -notched scarph; at these places the keelson is sided -rather wide to give good bearing. It is evident -that this portion of the boat's structure is the first -built and forms a rigid bottom to the hull. The floor -timbers are lashed to the keelson by lacings of sinew, -whalebone, or hide, passed through holes bored in -both, as indicated in the plan. The ends of the -floors are pegged where they tenon into the chines -and the ends of the chines are pegged to the keelson, -but this was evidently not a universal practice, as -there are models showing lashings at floor ends and -at chine ends. The headboards are carved out of -blocks in a <strong>T</strong>-shape and are stepped on top of the -stem and stern posts and lashed. The fit is extremely -accurate. The bow headboard is narrower athwartship -than the stern headboard. The detail of the -hook scarph in the drawing shows a method of -lashing that is widely used.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i200.jpg" width="700" height="341" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 167</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Small Umiak for Walrus Hunting</span>, west coast of Alaska, 1888-89. Reconstructed -from damaged umiak formerly in U.S. National Museum, and from -models.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Because of the manner in which the keelson is -cambered and the floor fitted, the bottom of the -covered hull shows in cross section a slight <strong>V</strong>, reducing -toward the bow and stern, that is typical of the -Alaskan umiak. The amount of deadrise seems to -have been determined by the manner of fitting the -floor timbers and it helps the boat to run straight -under paddle and oars. In present day umiaks the -amount of <strong>V</strong> in the bottom is slight; too much would -make the boat difficult to sledge overland without -employing chocks to steady the hull. Perhaps in the -past, where sledging was not required, the deadrise -was greater, as indicated by some old models.</p> - -<p>After the chines and floor are fitted to the keelson, -the frames at the thwarts are made and set up at the -desired flare and height, being held in place by -temporary spreaders lashed or braced. These are -sometimes stiffened by thongs from frame head to -keelson at each pair, to steady the frame while the -gunwale is being bent. As the lengths of the thwarts -are controlled by the fairing of the gunwales, the -thwarts are not fitted until after the latter are in -place. As shown in the figure above, the gunwales -are round poles, slightly flattened on the lower side -at the headboards, where they are secured by lash<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_185" id="Page_185">[Pg 185]</a></span>ings. -In building, the gunwales are shaped and -secured by lashing them to those side frames selected -to shape the hull. The lashings that secure the side -frames to both gunwale and chine are passed through -holes in each member and are hove taut by means -of a short lever with a hole bored in it to take the end -of the lashing, which is also wrapped around the -lever to give temporary purchase. The side frames -have saddle notches to bear on the chine and gunwale. -All lashings in the frame, it will be noted, pass -through holes bored in the members and in some -cases the lashings are let in, so that the sinew is flush -with the surfaces of the members, to prevent the -lashing from being damaged by chafing.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i201.jpg" width="700" height="464" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 168</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Umiaks Near Cape Prince of Wales, Alaska</span>, showing walrus-hide cover and -lacing. Frame lashings are walrus-hide thongs. (<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>With the gunwales faired, the remaining frames are -then put in position and lashed to the gunwales and -chines. An outside batten is run along each side -and lashed by turns of sinew over the batten and -around the side frames, with the lashings let into each -member to prevent slipping and chafing. The -batten is lashed at bow and stern in some umiaks, but -in many it is stopped just short of coming home on -the posts. Next, the short frames at bow and stern -are put in place and the risers secured inside the side -frames, then, with the thwarts fitted and lashed to -the risers, and the ends of the gunwales are lashed -together at bow and stern, the boat is ready to be -covered. When ready to cover, the frame is stiffened -by diagonal thong ties, each of which has one end -secured by turns around the gunwale, with the other -end passed through holes in the keelson and secured. -These are commonly found in western umiaks; -the small umiak has but one pair placed amidships. -The timber used in such craft is fir, spruce, and willow, -and is usually driftwood obtained at river-mouth.</p> - -<p>When this umiak was examined, the skin cover -was in such a condition that the number of hides -used could not be determined, but it probably is comprised -of three sea-lion skins sewn together. New -skin covers are made by removing the hair and fat -from the skins and then sewing them together by the -method illustrated on page <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, to obtain proper<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_186" id="Page_186">[Pg 186]</a></span> -dimensions. Green skins are generally preferred, -since they stretch into shape better than partly or -wholly cured ones. Once stretched to shape and -cured, the cover can be readily removed and replaced, -without resewing. In fitting a new skin cover the -skins are first thoroughly soaked in seawater. The -cover is then stretched over the frame and worked -taut by lacings. It is wide enough to reach from -gunwale to gunwale and a little down inside the boat -on each side, and is laced to the rising batten with -turns of rope spaced 3 to 5 inches apart amidships -and closer together in the ends of the hull. At the -headboards the cover is laced around the gunwales -and through holes in the headboards, two independent -lacings of two turns each being used on each side. -At the extreme bow and stern the cover is laced to -the gunwale lashings. Where the cover will not -stretch smooth in fitting, gores appear to have been -cut out and the skin resewn. After being laced, -the cover is allowed to shrink until it becomes smooth -and tight, then it is heavily oiled and the seams rubbed -with tallow or blubber. This treatment is repeated -at regular intervals. While the boat is in service -care is taken to dry out the skin cover once a day, -if possible.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i202a.jpg" width="700" height="249" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 169</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Umiak, West Coast of Alaska</span>, King Island, 1886. Taken off umiak at -Mariner's Museum.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i202b.jpg" width="700" height="435" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 170</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Making the Blind Seam</span>: two stages of method -used by the Eskimo to join skins together. The -edge of the skins are placed flesh side to flesh -side with one overlapping the other about 2 -inches. Then, by means of a thin needle and -slender sinew, the skins are sewn together, with -an over-and-over stitch, care being taken not -to penetrate through the lower skin. When this -is completed the skins are opened out and the -second seam made on the grain side to complete -a double seam without penetration of -either skin. The width of the seam varies -somewhat.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The sequence of construction described is not -followed universally; sometimes spreaders are fixed -between the gunwales, which are then sheered by -thongs to the keelson, after which the side frames are -put in and the side and rising battens, and finally the -thwarts, are added. Judging by the numerous models -seen, the small hunting umiaks varied a good deal in -the rake and sweep of the bow and stern, even in the -same village. These hunting umiaks worked with -kayaks in Aleutian walrus and sea-lion hunting; a -practice that seems to have once been common along<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_187" id="Page_187">[Pg 187]</a></span> -the Western Alaskan coast and among the islands.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i203.jpg" width="700" height="255" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 171</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">North Alaskan Whaling Umiak</span> of about 1890. Drawn from damaged -frame, formerly in a private collection, now destroyed.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The drawing on page <a href="#Page_186">186</a> represents a large Alaskan -umiak from King Island. Two boats of this model, -but with modern metal fastenings, are in the Mariners' -Museum, Newport News, Virginia, but the -drawing shows the methods of fastenings used in 1886. -The plan is of a burdensome model, such as is used for -travel or other heavy cargo work. The boat is 34 -feet 2½ inches over the gunwales, 8 feet ½ inch -extreme beam, 2 feet 3⅜ inches deep and 2 feet 10 -inches beam on the bottom over the chines. The -construction follows the general plan of the small -umiak just described, except that another method of -fitting the floor timbers to the chines is employed. -Due to the size and use of the umiak, two side battens -are employed with a single riser. The thwarts are -not notched over the frames, but instead fall between -them. As diagonal thong braces from gunwale to -keelson would be ineffective in this situation, two sets -of wooden braces that resist not only tension but also -compression are used to take the thrust off the thwart -lashings. These brace-frames are staggered slightly -to allow room to fit them at the keelson. The drawing, -which requires no additional explanation, shows -the plan of construction and the important lashings, -and the method of fitting oars with thong thole loops.</p> - -<p>Boats such as these carried a square sail lashed to a -yard, the mast being stepped in a block on the keelson. -No mast thwart is used; instead stays and shrouds of -hide rope supported the mast, a method that made it -easy to step or unstep the mast in a seaway. Early -umiaks in this area are said to have had mat sails; -later ones used sails of skin and drill. Modern umiaks -of this class often have rudders hung on iron pintles -and gudgeons and the floors fastened to the keelson -with iron bolts or screws. The scarphs are also bolted, -but the remaining fastenings are lashings in the old -style, to obtain flexibility in the frame.</p> - -<p>A North Alaskan whaling umiak, supposed to have -been built about 1890, is represented in the drawing -of figure 171. The remains of the boat were sufficient -to permit reconstruction of the frame. This umiak is -about the size of, and in profile greatly resembles, a -New Bedford whaleboat. However, the model is -that of the umiak, rather sharp-ended and strongly -sheered. The boat is 29 feet 4¾ inches over the -headboards, 5 feet 10½ inches extreme beam, and 2 -feet 1¾ inches deep. Umiaks of this model were -used at Point Barrow and vicinity in offshore whaling, -and were also used for travel and cargo carrying. -Paddles were used in whaling, but in more recent -times sail, oars, and outboard engines have been employed. -The boats of this class appear to have been -marked by a very graceful profile and strongly -raking ends. Despite the resemblances of this type -of umiak to the whaleboat, it is highly doubtful that -its model was influenced by the white man's boat. -In fact, it might just as well be claimed that since the -whaleboat appears to have been first employed in the -early Greenland whale fishery, the latter had been -influenced by the umiaks found in that area. However, -one might also point to the fact that the model of -the early European whaleboat is much like that of -a Viking boat, from which will be seen the danger in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_188" id="Page_188">[Pg 188]</a></span> -accepting chance similarities in form or detail as -evidence of relationship, particularly when it is not -impossible that similarities in use and other requirements -have produced similar boat types, the users -never having come into contact.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i204.jpg" width="700" height="235" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 172</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Baffin Island Umiak.</span> Drawn from model and detailed measurements of a -single boat.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The whaling umiak has been much used in the -western Arctic by explorers and Arctic travellers, -who regarded highly its lightness and strength, -and its ability to be easily driven. It is much wider -than the Chukchi umiak and has far more flare. -From a study of models and numerous photographs -it can be said that the amount of fore-and-aft camber -in the bottom varies greatly between individual -umiaks, some of which are almost straight on the -bottom. The light framework and elastic construction -often cause these umiaks to camber a good deal -when heavily loaded; when sledged, they are sometimes -fitted amidships with a support for a line -from bow to stern, that forms a "hogging-brace," -to prevent the boat from losing its camber. It is -also apparent that there is no standard practice in -fitting floors to the chines; Murdock<a name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> shows a rough -sketch that indicates the floor ends are often tenoned -into the chines, as in the small umiak. Tree-nailing -of the floors and chines, and the keelson, is -common, and sometimes both treenails and lashings -are used in scarphs. In some umiaks both the -single side batten and the riser are at the same height, -but only the riser has its ends secured to the posts, -the side battens being cut short and their ends lashed -to the riser a few inches inside the posts.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_4"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> See bibliography.</p></div> - -<p>The skin cover of the north Alaskan whaling umiak -is made of bearded seal or of walrus hide, which has -to be split, because of its weight. Occasionally -polar-bear skins are used. Lashings of the frame -are of whalebone, sinew, and hide. The skins are -treated with seal oil and caribou fat, and when -the whaling umiak is taken ashore it is usually -stored on a stage to keep dogs from destroying the -skin cover. In travelling, however, it is sometimes -propped upside down on one edge and used as a -shelter. In winter the skin is removed and stored; -when it is necessary to be replaced on the frame, the -skin cover is soaked in sea water for three to five -days, after which it is laced on in the usual manner, -dried, and then thoroughly oiled. Low, rather -wide sledges are sometimes built to carry the umiak -overland, or on the ice, but often the regular sledge -is used. The boats cannot be sledged against a -strong gale because of their windage.</p> - -<p>The north Alaskan umiak is usually propelled by -paddles, like the Chukchi umiak. These paddles -range in length from about 50 to 76 inches, -and as a rule have a rather long narrow blade, -though a short and wide blade is occasionally found, -particularly at Kotzebue Sound and Point Hope. -Oars for the Alaskan umiaks range in length from -6 feet 3 inches to 8 feet 6 inches, and also have rather -long narrow blades, 3 to 4 inches wide.</p> - -<p>The three examples of Alaskan umiaks serve to -show the features that are most common in the area. -However, models in the U.S. National Museum -suggest that there was a greater variety of form and -appearance in the past. One model shows the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_189" id="Page_189">[Pg 189]</a></span>gunwale ends lengthened by pieces shaped very much -like the projecting gunwales of the Malay prah. -Some show extreme rake at the bow like that of -the Koryak umiak but without the rounded gunwale -ends. It is impossible to estimate how far the -western Alaska umiak model has been affected by -the early Russian traders in this area, but it is -quite certain that the use of oars can be traced to -this influence. The full-sized umiaks, and models -and photographs, from the Bering Strait area give -no real clues to the possible parentage or direction -of spread of the Alaskan umiak types. Occasional -details in fittings or construction, such as the gunwale -extensions mentioned, seem to duplicate details -in primitive Asiatic craft, but the evidence is too -scanty to allow a hypothesis based on design and construction -alone.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i205.jpg" width="700" height="245" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 173</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">East Greenland Umiak</span>, drawn from measurements taken off by a U.S. Army -officer in 1945.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>No models or photographs have been found of the -extinct types of umiaks once used in the northern -part of Hudson Bay and the sketches of early explorers -are too crude to allow useful discussion. -From such slight evidence it is impossible to say -whether the umiaks in this area were of the western -or eastern type.</p> - -<p>The drawing of a Baffin Island umiak on page <a href="#Page_188">188</a> -is based on measured dimensions of a single boat and -upon a small model in the U.S. National Museum. -This model conforms in most respects with the -drawings and sketches made by Boas.<a name="FNanchor_5_5" id="FNanchor_5_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> The umiak -is a small one, 24 feet 7¼ inches long, 5 feet 8⅜ inches -extreme beam, 3 feet 10 inches wide over the chines, -and 1 foot 10½ inches deep. These measurements -show that the bottom of this type of umiak is wider -than that of western types. The bottom is flat, and -sheer and camber are both slight. The stem and -stern are practically upright and are not formed of -knees; rather, they are made by fitting the post into -the keelson with an open tenon. Instead of the -carved block headboards seen in the Alaskan umiaks, -the Baffin Island boat has very wide headboards, and -these are tenoned over the posts as in the Asiatic -Koryak umiaks. The details of the rest of the framing -are not dissimilar from those of the Alaskan umiaks, -except that the Baffin Island umiak does not employ -any short frames in the end of the hull. The framework -is rather heavy and the square-ended appearance -of this class of umiak makes it appear more clumsy -than is actually the case. The side battens and risers -stop short of the posts, and the risers used in this -umiak are notched into the side frames, whereas in -the Alaskan umiak only the lashings of the riser are -let into the frames. The Baffin Island umiaks carry -a square sail lashed to a yard, and the mast is placed -right up in the eyes of the boat. Boas shows that -some of these umiaks have rudders hung on metal -pintles and gudgeons, a result of the influence of the -white traders, whalers, and sealers who had operated -in these waters long before Boas made his investigations. -The umiak is rowed in the usual manner, -using thong loops as tholes, and is usually steered -with an oar or long paddle.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_5_5" id="Footnote_5_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_5"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> See bibliography.</p></div> - -<p>The ends of the gunwales of the Baffin Island -umiak are cut off a little inside the forward edges of -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_190" id="Page_190">[Pg 190]</a></span>the headboards, making this the only American type -that does not have projecting gunwales at bow and -stern. The projection of the gunwales undoubtedly -serve a practical purpose in lifting the boat out of -water, but obviously this is of minor importance. -Probably the real reason for these projections is that -they originally made building easier by providing -space for a retaining lashing when the gunwales were -being bent. As the headboards became wider and -the spring of the gunwales, in plain view, became less -acute, less strain was put on the lashings of the gunwales -at the headboards, but by then the projecting -gunwales and their retaining lashings were being -utilized in lashing on the skin covering at bow and -stern. Thus, beginning as a practical solution of a -building problem, the projecting gunwales may have -eventually become a traditional tribal feature of the -umiak in many localities.</p> - -<p>The drawing of an eastern Greenland umiak on -page <a href="#Page_189">189</a> was made from measurements taken off -during World War II and checked against dimensions, -photos, and descriptions of boats from the -same territory. In general design and in construction -this umiak differs little from umiaks of the southwest -coast of the same island. The eastern Greenland -boats are, on the average, much smaller than those -on the southwest coast due to the more severe ice -conditions met in the east. Some of the Greenland -umiaks have flat bottoms like the Baffin Island boats, -but the <strong>V</strong>-bottom appears to be more common. The -chief characteristics of the Greenland umiaks are the -slight rake in the bow and stern, the moderate sheer -and camber, and the conservative flare of the sides. -The drawing shows the important structural details -seen in most of the Greenland umiaks. The floor -timbers are on edge instead of on the flat as in Alaskan -boats and this seems to be characteristic of all eastern -umiak construction, as is the arching of the underside -of the floors. Another common structural detail -is the passing of the risers through the side frames; -in some, however, the risers lie in deep notches fashioned -in the inside of the frames. The eastern -Greenland umiaks generally have rather wide headboards -and somewhat more projection to the gunwales. -Like the Baffin Island umiaks, the side battens and -risers of the Greenland boats are cut short of the -posts, but the ends of these members are commonly -supported by frames placed very far fore and aft, -and often these frames form brace-supports to the -headboard, as in the drawing. The headboards -of these umiaks are always tenoned over the top of -the posts. Some of the Greenland umiaks have -curved side frames which cause the side battens to -form knuckles in the skin cover. The eastern Greenland -umiaks rarely if ever carry sail, but this is -common on the western and southwestern coasts, -where a square-sail on a yard is popular, with the mast -usually well forward. Hans Egede in 1729<a name="FNanchor_6_6" id="FNanchor_6_6"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> found -Greenland umiaks fitted with sails of seal intestines -and also saw boats about 10 fathoms (60 feet) long; -another early writer, Crantz<a href="#Footnote_6_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> states that umiaks were -commonly 36, 48, and even 54 feet long. In the -larger umiaks two side battens were employed. The -thongs and brace-frames seen in many Alaskan umiaks -do not seem to have been used in eastern waters, -the use of bracing-frames from stem or stern post to -the gunwales probably serving the purpose, but it is -noticeable that pictures of Greenland umiaks preserved -in some European museums show that the -hulls have a tendency to twist not seen in Alaskan -boats. The old Greenland umiaks were built with -lashed joints combined with pegging, or treenailing. -In recent times the use of pegging has increased and -iron fastenings are now quite common. Rigid -fastenings of the peg and metal types are used only -in scarphs and in securing the chines and keelson to -the floors timbers, as in the modern Alaskan umiaks.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_6_6" id="Footnote_6_6"></a><a href="#FNanchor_6_6"><span class="label">[6]</span></a> See bibliography.</p></div> - - -<h3><em>The Kayak</em></h3> - -<p>The Eskimo hunting boat, the kayak, is more -widely employed in the Arctic than the umiak, and -its variations in model, construction, and appearance -are more distinct and numerous. The kayak is a -long, usually narrow, decked canoe and is commonly -very well finished. In Alaska a few undecked skin-covered -canoes, used in rivers, are built on kayak -proportions, but the model of these is quite different -from that of the Alaskan sea-kayaks; the river canoes -are <strong>V</strong> or flat bottomed, much like the Greenland -kayaks. A similar kayak-type canoe, flat bottomed -but birch-bark covered, is used by the Yukon Indians. -Undoubtedly a number of such types once existed but -most of these became extinct before any attempt -was made to preserve models or canoes in museums.</p> - -<p>Few Eskimo tribes are without kayaks, only those -living inland or where the sea is rarely open are -unacquainted with these hunting craft. In very -recent times some tribes have ceased to use kayaks, -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_191" id="Page_191">[Pg 191]</a></span>employing purchased canoes instead. The kayaks -of the Asiatic Eskimos, and those from the Mackenzie -to Hudson Bay, are now crudely built and of -inferior design. Both the Greenland and the Alaskan -kayaks are highly developed. The Greenland kayaks -are undoubtedly given more intricate equipment -in the way of weapons and accessories than the -Alaskan craft, but it would be difficult to decide -which is superior in construction and design.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i207.jpg" width="700" height="334" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 174</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Frame of Kayak</span>, Nunivak Island, Alaska, with young owner beneath. -(<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The basic models used in Eskimo kayaks are the -multi-chine, the <strong>V</strong>-bottom and the flat bottom. The -multi-chine models, except for the river kayak-canoe -just mentioned, which probably should be classed as -a true open canoe rather than a kayak, are employed -throughout Alaskan waters. The geographic boundaries -of each basic hull form are rather ill-defined. -The multi-chine kayak appears as far eastward as -the northwest coast of Hudson's Bay. In this area, -however, a <strong>V</strong>-bottom kayak, now extinct, seems to -have been in use on Southampton Island. A flat-bottom -kayak, with the chines snied off much like a -Japanese sampan, is in use in Hudson Strait, along -the shores of Baffin Island and Labrador; a flat-bottom -kayak shaped like a sharpie is used on the -northwest coast of northern Greenland; and a -<strong>V</strong>-bottom hull is employed on the eastern, southwest, -and south coasts of Greenland.</p> - -<div class="bbox">According to the Danish classification of the coasts of -Greenland, "Polar" is north of Cape York, "Northern" -is above Disko Island, "Central" is from Frederikshaab -to north of Disko Bay, "Southern" is from -Julianhaab to Cape Farvell, and "East" is Angmagsalik -and vicinity.</div> - -<p>There are variations in each of the basic models, of -course, as the tribal designs used vary a good deal. -On the whole, the kayak is very carefully built to -meet the local conditions of hunting, sea, and land -or ice portaging. As a result, some types are far -more seaworthy than others and the weight of hull -varies a great deal, even within a basic model. The -appearance of all the kayaks models, by tribal -classifications, show the influence of tradition and, in -many cases display, in either shape or decoration, a -tribal totem or mark.</p> - -<p>The basic requirements in nearly all kayaks are -the same; to paddle rapidly and easily, to work -against strong wind and tide or heavy head sea, to be -maneuverable, and to be light enough to be readily -lifted from the water and carried. The low freeboard -required makes decking a necessity. In -general, the kayak is designed to carry one paddler,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_192" id="Page_192">[Pg 192]</a></span> -but in Alaska are kayaks that can carry two or three -paddlers, each in a manhole or cockpit, or a paddler -and one or two passengers. It is generally conceded -that the kayak built to carry three in this fashion -is the result of Russian influence. Nunivak Island -kayaks had large manholes that carried two people -back-to-back. Where it is desirable to portage the -kayak over ice or land for a great distance the boat -is very light and is capable of being carried like a -large basket, by inserting one arm under the decking -at the manhole or cockpit, but where such a requirement -is not an important factor, the kayaks are often -rather large and heavy. In the majority of types, -the degree of seaworthiness obtained is very great. -Some types are built very narrow and sharp-ended; -these usually require a skillful paddler. Others are -wide and more stable, requiring less skill to use. In -areas where severe weather is commonly met, the -kayaks are usually very strong and well-designed. -Where ice or other conditions do not allow a heavy -sea to make up, the kayaks are often light, narrow -and very low sided—more like racing shells than -working canoes. Most Alaskan kayaks come stern -to the wind when paddling stops, but most of the -eastern craft come head to the wind. Nearly every -type has been developed by long periods of trial and -error, to produce the greatest efficiency in meeting -the conditions of use in a given locality. This has -made the kayak a more complicated and more -developed instrument of the chase than is to be -found in any other form of hunting canoe, due in -part, perhaps, to the great craftsmanship of the -Eskimo.</p> - -<p>The construction of the kayak follows a basic plan. -In all kayaks the gunwales are the main strength -members, longitudinally. A few designs employ, in -addition, a stiff keel member, but most have rather -slender and light longitudinal batten systems having -little longitudinal strength value, but which in combination -with very light frames, give transverse -support to the skin cover. Even in the flat-bottom -models, the kayaks, unlike the umiaks, depend -entirely upon the gunwales for longitudinal strength. -The frames are bent and in one piece from gunwale -to gunwale in all but a few flat-bottom kayaks, of -the sampan cross section; these employ bent frames. -The longitudinal batten systems show great variety. -The eastern kayaks of the flat-bottom and <strong>V</strong>-bottom -models have three longitudinal battens (including the -keel or keelson) in addition to the heavy and often -deep gunwale members; these are supported at bow -and stern either by stem and stern post of shaped -plank on edge as in the Greenland <strong>V</strong>-bottom kayaks, -or by light extensions of the keelson and small end-blocks -as in the northern Greenland, Baffin Island, -and Labrador types. The multi-chine types of the -western Arctic have from seven to eleven longitudinals -(including the keelson) in addition to the gunwales. -In some of these kayaks there are no stem and stern -posts, the battens and keelson coming together at a -blunt point in small head blocks; but many types have -rather intricate stem-pieces, carved from blocks of -wood, and plank-on-edge stern posts. The Asiatic kayaks, -curiously enough, exhibit the construction of both -eastern and western Arctic kayaks, the crude, small -Koryak kayak having a 3-batten <strong>V</strong>-bottom, while the -Chukchi kayak is built like the kayaks on the east side -of the Bering Strait. The decking of kayaks is of very -light construction; usually there are two heavy thwarts -to support the manhole and from one to three light -thwarts afore and abaft these. The Alaskan kayaks -from Kotzebue Sound southward have ridged decks -supported by fore-and-aft ridge-battens from the -ends of the hull to the manhole. Elsewhere the deck -of the kayak is flat athwartship except at the manhole, -where there is some crown or ridging to increase the -depth inside the boat, particularly forward of the -manhole. In the majority of these kayaks short -fore-and-aft battens are laid on the thwarts forward -of the manhole to support the skin cover in its sweep -upward to the manhole. The transverse frames do -not come into contact with the skin cover, to avoid -transverse ridges being formed in it; and the longitudinal -battens which support the skin cover form -longitudinal ridges, or chines, in it.</p> - -<p>The timber used in the Eskimo kayak building is -usually driftwood. Fir and pine, spruce or willow -are available in much of the Arctic for longitudinals. -Bent frames are commonly of willow. Scarphing in -the framework of kayaks was far less common than in -umiaks; the scarphs when found are only in the gunwales. -All scarphs are of the hooked type and are -usually quite short (the hooked scarph is the best one -when the fastenings are lashings). Sinew is generally -used in all lashings and for sewing material. The -heads of frames are commonly tenoned into the -underside of the gunwales and are then either lashed -or pegged with treenails of wood or bone to hold -them in place. In the joining of frames and longitudinals, -the lashings are commonly individual, but -in some types of kayak continuous lashings (connections -in series using one length of sinew) are<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_193" id="Page_193">[Pg 193]</a></span> -occasionally found. Where possible, the lashings are -turned in so that the turns cross right and left. In -some parts of the framework two pieces of timber -are "sewn" together; holes are bored along the edges -to be joined and a lacing run in with continuous -over-and-over turns. These laced joints are common -in the stems of the Alaskan kayaks. Gunwales and -battens are most commonly lashed through holes -bored in them and in the bow and stern members. -Care is taken that all lashings are flush on the outside, -so that the skin cover is smooth and chafing will -be avoided. Bone knobs at stem and stern heads -are used in the Coronation Gulf kayaks in the west -and in many Greenland models. Bone stem bands -are more widely employed, however, being in use -at Kodiak and Nunivak Islands, in the Aleutians, at -Norton Sound in Alaska, and in Greenland and Baffin -Island in the east. It is probable that these bands -were once in wider use than thus indicated. Strips of -bone are also used to prevent chafing at gunwale in -paddling and for strengthening scarphs in the manhole -rim.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i209.jpg" width="700" height="343" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 175</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Frame of Kayak at Nunivak Island</span>, Alaska, 1927. <em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em></p></div> -</div> - -<p>It will be noted that all Eskimo skin boats have a -complete framing system, which is first erected and -then fitted with the skin cover. This is a method of -construction very different from that of the birch-bark -canoes of the Indians living to the southward of -the American Eskimo. The birch-bark canoe is -built by forcing a framing system into an assembled -cover and holding it in place there by a rigid gunwale -structure, to which the bark cover is lashed. -This basic structure is used even in the Alaskan -area, where there are birch-bark canoes that in hull -form and proportions strongly resemble the flat-bottom -kayak. The basic difference between the two -craft is illustrated by the fact that whereas the removal -of the skin cover of the kayak leaves the frame intact, -the removal of the bark cover of the kayak-like -birch-bark canoes would result in the collapse of -the framework, except for the gunwale-thwart -structure or, in a few, the chine-floor structure. -Because of this basic difference the superficial resemblance -of some Indian bark canoes to kayaks -has no meaningful relationship to the possibility of -the influence of the kayak on the bark canoe, or -vice-versa. Some Indian tribes have in fact built -skin-covered canoes, as will be seen in chapter 8, but -the framework and structural system used is always -that of the bark canoe, never that of the Eskimo -skin boat. Nor is there evidence that the Eskimo -ever used the bark canoe frame-structure in their -kayaks or umiaks. Hence, in spite of contact between -these peoples, the watercraft of each remains -basically different in structural design.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_194" id="Page_194">[Pg 194]</a></span></p> - -<p>The almost universal method of constructing the -kayak is first to shape and fasten together the gunwales -and thwarts, with stem and stern pieces fitted as -required, then to fit and place a few transverse -frames to control the shape of the craft. Next the -longitudinals are fitted and, finally, the remaining -transverse frames are put in place. In some types -the manhole rim is now fitted but in others the manhole -rim is put on after the skin cover is in place, as -some kayaks (the Alaskan) have the skin cover placed -over the manhole rim and others have it passed -under. The skin cover is stretched and sewn over -the frame and is rarely secured to it by lashings -except at the manhole. Due to the shape of bow and -stern, in some types, difficult and tedious sewing is -required to stretch the skins over the ends of the hull. -Much of the sewing is completed after the skins are -stretched over the hull and held by temporary lacings. -The blind seam is used but in many kayaks the lap -is very short, about ⅜ inch being common.</p> - -<p>The covering most widely used in Alaskan kayaks -was the bearded seal skin and with the Aleuts the -skin of the sea lion was the most popular. Throughout -the eastern Arctic seal skin was the preferred covering -though caribou skin was occasionally used by the -caribou Eskimos in the central Arctic. The heavy, -thick hides were first piled and "sweated," until the -hair became loose then the skins were scraped until -they were clean. They were thin and light and -could be air dried and stored until ready for use. -The skins had to be well soaked before being stretched -over the frame of a kayak or umiak. When dried out -on the boat frame they were oiled in the usual manner. -It is claimed by the Eskimos that walrus skin, though -strong, is not as good as the bearded seal or the -sea-lion skin for boat covers, as the latter two held the -oil longer and did not become water soaked as -quickly as the walrus hide.</p> - -<p>The paddler's seat in most kayaks consists of a portion -of heavy skin with fur attached. Sometimes this is -supported by a few short, thin battens laced loosely -together. These, and the fur seat sometimes are -as long as the paddler's legs. No back rest is known -to be used. The seat, and any batten supports, are -loosely fitted and are not part of the permanent kayak -structure.</p> - -<p>The kayak is usually entered by floating the boat -near a stone or low bank and stepping into it with one -foot, which has first been carefully wiped. With the -body steadied by placing the paddle upright on the -shore, or outside the kayak, the other foot is then -wiped and placed in the boat. The paddler then -slides downward and works his legs under the deck -until he is seated with his hips jammed into the manhole -rim. Getting out of a kayak is almost the reverse -of this process. Great care is exercised to avoid -getting dirt into a kayak, as it might chafe the hide -cover. Hence the care in wiping the feet before -entering. The practice of entering the boat ashore -and throwing man and kayak into the water, undoubtedly -very rare, is said to have been practiced -not only at King Island but in some parts of Greenland. -Both Alaskan and Greenland hunters often -lashed two kayaks together, in order to rest in rough -weather. Many kayakers using the narrow models -laid the paddle athwartships across the deck to -help steady the kayak when resting or throwing -a weapon; this is basically the same as holding -the sculls of a racing shell in the water, to -steady the boat. Lashing two kayaks side by side, or -parallel with spacing rods, was commonly done to -enable the craft to ferry persons or cargo across -streams. Some Alaskan Eskimo thus converted -kayaks into catamarans and then fitted a mast and -sail, but such an arrangement was never used in -rough water.</p> - -<p>The methods used by a paddler to right a capsized -kayak, without aid and while he was still in the -cockpit, have aroused the interest of many canoeists. -It was used by the King Islanders, some of the Aleuts, -and the Greenlanders, who at times, it is said, would -deliberately capsize their kayak to avoid the blow of a -heavy breaking sea, then right it when the sea had -passed. The Eskimo are reported to be gradually -losing this skill, but in late years European and -American kayakers have learned this method, called -the "kayak roll," of righting a decked canoe with -paddler in place. It follows in general the Greenland -method. In the Appendix (p. <a href="#Page_223">223</a>) is an -illustrated description of the kayak roll, supplied by -John Heath.</p> - -<p>Traditionally, the weapons used by kayakers were -darts and harpoons, the bow not being employed, -since wetting would damage the weapon. Various -forms were used, and many were thrown with the -"throwing-stick" to increase the range and force. An -inflated bladder or skin was often carried to buoy the -harpoon line and tire the game. Bolas and knives -were also carried. All eastern kayaks appear to have -been propelled with the double-blade paddle, but -folklore suggests that the single-blade kayak paddle<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_195" id="Page_195">[Pg 195]</a></span> -may have once been used. Greenland kayaks have -been reported as carrying a small square sail, but this -was actually a hunting screen, or camouflage, to hide -the paddler and cause the seal to mistake the canoe -for a cake of ice. It was a 19th-century addition, as -was a fin attached to the kayak to counteract the -effect of the screen in a beam wind. Any effect it had -as a sail in a kayak was unintentional, of course: it -was dismounted in strong winds or when not required -for hunting.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i211.jpg" width="700" height="220" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 176</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Koryak Kayak</span>, drawn from damaged kayak in the American Museum of -Natural History, 1948.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Shown above is the plan of an Asiatic Koryak -kayak. This type, used in the Sea of Okhotsk and on -the Siberian coast of Bering Sea, is the only distinctive -Asiatic type; the Chukchi of the Siberian side of -Bering Strait uses a kayak that is on the same model -as the one found at Norton Sound, in Alaska. The -Chukchi kayak differs only in the ends, which are -wholly functional and without the handgrips that -distinguish the Alaskan type. There is also a crude -Chukchi river kayak, covered with reindeer skin, -but its design is not represented in an American -museum.</p> - -<p>The Koryak kayak is a hunting boat well designed -for use in protected waters, but is rather weakly built. -In general form it is much like the hunting and fowling -skiffs formerly used in America. The plan idealizes -the kayak somewhat, for the boat is crude in finish. -The only example available for study, in the American -Museum of Natural History, is in poor condition. -The hull is short, wide and shallow, rather <strong>V</strong> in cross -section, and there is a slight camber in the deck. The -length of the Koryak kayak rarely exceeds 10 feet, the -beam is from 24 to 26 inches, and the depth between 8 -and 9½ inches. The manhole rim is of large diameter, -high and without rake. The gunwales, although rather -slight, are the strength members. The keelson, a thin, -flat batten, forms the stem and stern posts; it is -stiffened amidships by a short batten lashed inside the -frames. The chine battens are also slight and do not -reach the stem and stern. The frames are widely -spaced and are wide and thin, in one piece from gunwale -to gunwale. There are but two thwarts; -these are strong and support the manhole rim, -showing inside the cockpit. Two thin longitudinal -battens afore and abaft the manhole, support the -deck, in addition to a light centerline ridge-batten. -On the kayak illustrated the outboard battens appear -to have had additional support at one time from two -pairs of stanchions standing on frames at the chines, -with their heads secured to the deck battens; a pair -being placed before and abaft the manhole. A small -plank seat appears to have been used and the boat was -propelled by two short one-hand paddles, secured to -the manhole rim by lanyards made of thongs; these -would be only efficient in smooth water. The cover -is made from bearded seal skins and passes under the -manhole rim being sewn to the rim on the inside at -the top, by coarse sewing passed through holes bored -in the manhole rim. There are two thong lifting -handles or loops, one at bow and stern. This kayak is -the most primitive of all types and the smallest as well. -The Koryaks are not daring canoemen and do not -venture into rough water. Nevertheless, this type of -kayak is said to be fast and highly maneuverable.</p> - -<p>Compared to the Koryak, the Alaskan kayak is -tremendously advanced. The Aleuts are daring and -accomplished kayakers, and their craft are among -the finest in the Arctic. The Kodiak Island kayak<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_196" id="Page_196">[Pg 196]</a></span> -of 1885, shown above, represents one type used in -this area and that from Unalaska, shown below, -the other. The Kodiak boat is rather short and -wide, measuring 15 feet 1 inch in length, 29 inches -beam and 14 inches depth to ridge batten of the -deck just forward of the manhole. The boat has the -humped sheer found in many Alaskan kayaks and -is intended for use in stormy waters. Its large -manhole, also a feature of the Nunivak Island -kayak, permits two persons to be carried, one facing -forward to paddle and the passenger facing aft, -or the space can be used to carry cargo. The drawing -shows the construction and requires no detailed -explanation. Kayaks from the Aleutian Islands -eastward to Kodiak use rod battens; only the -gunwales and keelson are rectangular in section. -The frames are thin flat strips bent in one piece -from gunwale to gunwale. The ridge-batten of the -deck is laminated, in two pieces. The deck beams -and thwarts are notched into the ridge-batten and -lashed. The bow piece is carved from a block, -and the longitudinals are lashed to it, each in a -carefully fitted notch. The sternpost is formed of -a plank. The skin cover passes over the manhole -rim and a line passed outside the rim holds the skin -down enough to form a breakwater. The skin -cover is sewn to the inside lower edge of the rim, -thus covering it almost completely.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i212a.jpg" width="700" height="258" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 177</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Kodiak Island Kayak</span>, 1885, in U.S. National Museum (USNM 76285). The -identification of this kayak has been questioned by Henry B. Collins and John -Heath, but it may represent an old form out of use in the twentieth century.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i212b.jpg" width="700" height="196" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 178</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Aleutian Kayak</span>, Unalaska, 1894, in U.S. National Museum (USNM 76282).</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The Unalaska kayak of 1894 (below) is a better -known type. This design is used throughout the -Aleutians and on the adjacent mainland as far east -as Prince William Sound. It was also employed in -the Pribilof Islands and at St. Matthew, having been -used by Aleuts engaged in sealing expeditions there. -All kayaks of this type do not have the same bow and -stern profiles as the example; some have the bifid<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_197" id="Page_197">[Pg 197]</a></span> -bow built with the portion above the slit arched -upward higher than the outer stem-piece and so -more prominent; there are also minor variations in -the stern. The shape of the hull, however, is consistently -maintained throughout the area in which -this type is used. Though the deck is ridged, it is -relatively low compared to that of the Kodiak kayak, -and the thwarts supporting the manhole are heavily -arched and in one piece from gunwale to gunwale. -The construction is like that of the Kodiak kayak, -but the gunwales and upper longitudinal battens, -instead of meeting the stern post, end on a crosspiece -well inside the stern to give the effect of a transom -stern. However, some Aleut kayaks have the -normal sharp stern after the fashion of the Kodiak -kayak, but without the projecting tail or handgrip, -and nearly all have two thwarts between the after -manhole thwart and the stern and three forward -of the fore manhole thwart. The skin cover passes -over the manhole rim as in the Kodiak type. The -bow block is sometimes built up of two blocks sewn -or laced together. Strengthening pieces of light -plank are sometimes fitted from the bow block aft; -these are laced to the top inside edge of the gunwales -and pinned to the stem block to form long -breast-hooks. In some kayaks with the square stern, -only the gunwale is supported by the crosspiece on -the stern, the two battens on each side being supported -by the last frame only, about 6 inches inboard -of the crosspiece.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i213.jpg" width="700" height="166" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 179</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Kayak From Russian Siberia</span>, 2-hole Aleutian type, in Washington State -Historical Society and Museum. Taken off by John Heath, 1962.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>This type of kayak is the only one known to have -been built with more than one manhole. The -two-hole kayak is an Aleut development used in -whaling and sea-otter hunting, so far as is known; -the paddler sits in the after manhole. Measurements -of a two-hole kayak in the United States -National Museum show it to be 20 feet 7¼ inches -long, 23 inches beam, and 9½ inches deep to top of -gunwale. The manholes are about 46 inches apart -edge to edge and the foremost is about 8 feet from -the bow.</p> - -<p>The three-holer, commonly believed to have been -introduced by the Russians, was used by Russian -officers, inspectors, and traders in their explorations -and travels on the Alaskan coast. One of these -boats measures 24 feet 8⅜ inches long, 30 inches -beam, and 10½ inches deep to top of gunwale. The -center manhole is commonly larger in diameter than -the other two and is used for either a passenger or -cargo. The fore edge of the fore manhole is 8 feet -to 8½ feet from the bow and the other manholes are -from 4 to 4½ feet apart edge to edge. A large -example of this class of kayak measures 28 feet -1½ inches long, 38½ inches beam and 12 inches -deep to top of gunwale. Probably none exceed 30 -feet in length. Both the single-and the double-blade -paddle are used by the Aleuts, but the double blade -is preferred in hunting. The paddle blades are -rather narrow and leaf-shaped, with pointed tips.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_198" id="Page_198">[Pg 198]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i214a.jpg" width="700" height="211" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 180</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Nunivak Island Kayak, Alaska,</span> 1889, in U.S. National Museum (USNM -160345), showing painted decoration of the mythological water monster -Palriayuk.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i214b.jpg" width="700" height="200" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 181</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">King Island Kayak</span>, Alaska, 1888, in U.S. National Museum (USNM -160326), collected by Capt. M. A. Healy, U.S. Revenue Steamer <em>Bear</em>.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i214c.jpg" width="700" height="191" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 182</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Norton Sound Kayak</span>, Alaska, 1889, U.S. National Museum (USNM 160175).</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_199" id="Page_199">[Pg 199]</a></span></p> - -<p>The plan of a kayak from Nunivak Island (about -due north of Unalaska and roughly halfway to St. -Lawrence Island) is shown on page <a href="#Page_198">198</a> (fig. 180). -This type of kayak is obviously related to that of Kodiak -Island, for it has approximately the same lines and -proportions. Only the profiles of bow and stern exhibit -marked differences. Perhaps the most striking feature -of the Nunivak kayak is its bow, which might represent -a seal's head; a hole through the whole bow -structure forms the eyes and also serves functionally -as a lifting handle. The stern profile is simpler -than that used in the Kodiak kayaks. The example -shows the mythological water monster Palriayuk, a -painted totem that once distinguished the Nunivak -kayaks; missionary influence has long since erased -such decorations from Alaskan kayaks. Whereas the -Kodiak kayak has eleven battens (including the -keelson) in its frame, the Nunivak kayak has nine, -and all the longitudinals in it are rectangular in -section. Differences in dimensions of Nunivak and -Kodiak kayaks are remarkably slight, the greatest -length reported for either type is about 15 feet 9 inches -and the greatest beam is about 32 inches. Both -types have a large manhole and carry a passenger -back-to-back with the paddler. The single-bladed -paddle is used. The kayak is sometimes transported -over ice by means of a short sledge, by one man, but -it is otherwise rather heavy to portage. Highly regarded -by all who have had contact with it, this is -generally considered one of the safest and most -useful of the Alaskan kayaks.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i215a.jpg" width="700" height="322" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 183</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Nunivak Island Kayak</span> with picture of mythological water monster Palriayuk -painted along gunwale. (Photo by Henry B. Collins.)</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i215b.jpg" width="700" height="187" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 184</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Nunivak Island Kayak</span> in U.S. National Museum (USNM 76283) with cover -partly removed to show framework. Collected by Ivan Petroff, March 30, -1894.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>King Island, at the entrance to Bering Strait, is -the home of the kayak shown on page <a href="#Page_198">198</a> (fig. 181). -The King Islanders are noted as skillful kayakers and -their kayak generally follows the Nunivak pattern, -but is narrower and more <strong>V</strong>-shaped in cross section, -and the stem and stern are also distinctly different. -The King Island craft has a bold upturned stem -ending in a small birdlike head, with a small hole -through it to represent eyes and to serve for a lifting -grip; the stern is low and without the projections -seen in the Nunivak type. The fitting of the cockpit -rim of the U.S. National Museum kayak is unusual; -the rim is not supported by thwarts but rather is -made part of the skin cover and therefore can be -moved. This seemed to be intentional, for there is -no evidence of broken or missing members, but -John Heath considers this not typical. A watertight -jacket with the skirt laced to the manhole rim -is worn by the kayaker to prevent swamping. This -practice was common among Eskimo working in -stormy waters. A warm-weather alternate was a -wide waistband, with its top supported by straps<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_200" id="Page_200">[Pg 200]</a></span> -over the shoulders and the bottom laced to the -manhole.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i216.jpg" width="700" height="384" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 185</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Western Alaskan Kayak</span>, Cape Prince of Wales, 1936. -(<em>Photo by Henry B. Collins.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>A somewhat similar but slightly smaller kayak was -used at Cape Espenberg; in these the upturned bow -ended in a simple point. The sterns were alike in -both types. The Cape Espenberg kayak had a -fixed cockpit rim however, as in the Nunivak type. -Both types employed the single-bladed paddle.</p> - -<p>A little to the South, in Norton Sound, the long -narrow kayak shown on page <a href="#Page_198">198</a> (fig. 182) is popular. -These are somewhat like the Nunivak kayaks in cross -section but with far less beam. They have a slight -reverse, or humped, sheer and are very sharp ended. -The peculiar handgrips at bow and stern are characteristic, -though the shape and size of the grips vary -among the villages; the style shown is that of St. -Michaels. A single-bladed paddle is used. This -type is very fast under paddle, but requires a skillful -user in rough water. The Norton Sound kayaks -are very well finished and strongly built.</p> - -<p>From Kotzebue Sound, at Cape Krusenstern, -along the north coast of Alaska to near the Mackenzie -Delta, the kayaks are very low in the water, long, -narrow, and spindle-shaped at the ends. They are -distinguished by a very strong rake in the manhole -rim, with an accompanying prominent swell in the -deck forward of the manhole. They are built with -seven longitudinal battens (including the keelson) in -addition to the gunwales. In several examples seen, -the latter are sometimes slightly channelled on the -inside, but this may have been the result of shrinkage -in the pith of the timber used and not intentional. -These kayaks are very light and easily carried. Both -single-and double-blade paddles are employed; the -single blade is usually used in travelling.</p> - -<p>On page <a href="#Page_201">201</a> are shown a kayak from Cape Krusenstern -(fig. 186) and one from Point Barrow (fig. 187). -It is reported that these types have now gone out of -use. In these boats no stem or stern posts exist, these -usually being replaced by small end blocks. The only -important difference in the two types shown is in the -style of crowning the deck, which is ridged in the Cape -Krusenstern kayak but more rounded in the Point -Barrow kayak. In spite of their narrow beam and -obviously unstable form, these kayaks are said to -have been used by rather unskillful paddlers. In -general, they were not employed in rough weather -but were seaworthy in skillful hands.</p> - -<p>Though the North Alaska type of kayak, as illustrated -by the Point Barrow model (fig. 187), may be -said to represent the structural design of kayaks to the -eastward as far as Foxe Basin, the Mackenzie Delta -kayaks are on an entirely different model. Due to -migration of numerous groups of Eskimo to this area -in the last seventy years, the design of kayaks here -has undergone a great change. In figure 188 appears -the plan of a modern Mackenzie Delta kayak.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_201" id="Page_201">[Pg 201]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i217a.jpg" width="700" height="196" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 186</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Kotzebue Sound Kayak</span> (Cape Krusenstern), Alaska, formerly in U.S. -National Museum, now in Mariner's Museum.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i217b.jpg" width="700" height="185" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 187</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Point Barrow Kayak</span>, Alaska, 1888, in U.S. National Museum (USNM -57773).</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i217c.jpg" width="700" height="197" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 188</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Mackenzie Delta Kayak</span>, in Museum of the American Indian, Heye -Foundation.</p></div> -</div><p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_202" id="Page_202">[Pg 202]</a></span> -The design is marked by a very narrow flat bottom -or a wide keel combined with the <strong>V</strong>-bottom. These -boats are well-built and are light and graceful. The -wide keel is formed by a thick plank keelson which -narrows at bow and stern and is bent up to form the -stem and stern. The chine pieces run fore and aft -and are lashed to the stem and stern thus formed. -The gunwales are about ¾ by 1⅛ inches. The frames -are about ¼ by ⅝ inch bent in a strongly <strong>U</strong>-shaped -form, with their ends tenoned into the bottom of the -gunwales. The keelson is only about ⅜ inch thick -and the chines are rather wide thin battens; about -<sup>5</sup>⁄<sub>16</sub> by 1¼ inch. Some kayaks have an additional -batten in the sides above the chines. The deck is -slightly ridged for nearly the length of the boat. The -stem and stern are carried up above the sheer to form -prominent posts; some builders carry them higher -than shown. The construction is neat and light and -the boat is very easily paddled. Its narrow beam -makes it somewhat treacherous, however, in unskilled -hands. A double-bladed paddle is generally used -with this kayak. While the form appears to vary -little among individuals of this class, the construction -varies, particularly in the number and dimensions of -the longitudinals. Frames are spaced rather consistently -5 to 6 inches apart.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i218a.jpg" width="700" height="133" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 189</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Kayak From Point Barrow</span>, Alaska, in U.S. National Museum (USNM -57773). Collected by Capt. M. A. Healy, U.S. Revenue Steamer <em>Bear</em>, 1888. -(<em>Smithsonian photo</em> MNH-399-A.)</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 401px;"> -<img src="images/i218b.jpg" width="401" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 190</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Cockpit of Kayak</span> from Point Barrow (USNM -57773), showing method of lashing skin cover -to manhole. (<em>Smithsonian photo</em> MNH-399.)</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_203" id="Page_203">[Pg 203]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i219a.jpg" width="700" height="189" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 191</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Kayak in U.S. National Museum</span> (USNM 160325) cataloged as from Mackenzie -River area, 1885, but apparently an eastern kayak of unidentified origin.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i219b.jpg" width="700" height="164" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 192</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Coronation Gulf Kayak</span>, Canada, partially reconstructed from a damaged -privately owned kayak (now destroyed).</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i219c.jpg" width="700" height="166" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 193</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Caribou Eskimo Kayak</span>, Canada, in American Museum of Natural History.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i219d.jpg" width="700" height="192" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 194</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Netsilik Eskimo Kayak</span>, King William Island, Canada, in the American -Museum of Natural History.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_204" id="Page_204">[Pg 204]</a></span></p> - -<p>The foregoing design differs greatly in every respect -from the example in figure 191, collected by the -U.S. Fish Commission in 1885 and identified as a -Mackenzie River kayak. It is a large heavy boat -compared to the one just described. The model of -this old kayak, and the construction too, is on the -eastern pattern, such as is used in Hudson Strait. -The strongly upturned stern and less rising bow -resembles the old Greenland kayaks. The <strong>V</strong>-bottom -and 3-batten construction combined with heavy -deep gunwales is not to be found in any of the known -Alaskan kayaks. There is unfortunately no record -of the exact location where this kayak was found, -nor any information on the builders; if it is from the -Mackenzie, the type now appears to be wholly -extinct and there has been nothing in recent times -in the vicinity faintly resembling it. The kayak is a -well-built, safe, strong boat; the high stern would aid -it in coming head to sea and wind when paddling -stopped; and it resembles, more than most, the early -explorers' drawings of Arctic kayaks. The very high -ends indicate that it was not used where high winds -are common, despite the otherwise seaworthy design -and construction, and regardless of the documentation, -it now seems certain that this kayak came from somewhere -in the eastern Arctic.</p> - -<p>To the eastward of the Mackenzie, the kayaks are -narrow, spindle-shaped and very low sided, in the -manner of the northern Alaskan boats. The drawing -of figure 192 was made from the remains of a kayak -from Coronation Gulf and to insure accuracy was -compared with photographs and measurements of -some Copper Eskimo kayaks. This kayak is characterized -by a rather marked reverse sheer and a -strongly raked manhole rim. The deck forward of -the manhole sweeps up very sharply, but with a -different profile than is seen on the north coast of -Alaska; the deck of these eastern kayaks sweeps up -in a very short hollow curve instead of the long convex -sweep popular in Alaska. The ends of the hull -finish in small bone buttons; the skin cover passes -under the manhole rim, as in the Cape Krusenstern -and Point Barrow types. A two-bladed paddle is -commonly used. The hull design is more stable -than that at Point Barrow and the ends are somewhat -fuller, giving the boat a rather parallel sided appearance; -it has longitudinal battens from the bottom of -the hull, one the keelson; the gunwales are channelled -on the inside and are very light and neatly made. -The frames are split willows, round on the inside.</p> - -<p>The Caribou Eskimo kayak preserved in the American -Museum of Natural History is the best example of -the type found. The drawing of figure 193 shows the -features of this particular type; the construction is -about the same as that of the Point Barrow kayak -but is much lighter and weaker. The peculiar projecting -stem is formed of a stem block, scarphed to -the gunwales; to it the beak piece is attached with a -lashing. The sharply turned-up stern is formed in a -similar manner by two pieces joined together at -the tip and lashed to the stern block; this stern -construction is similar to that of the eastern Arctic -kayak shown in figure 192. Both caribou hides and -seal skins are used to cover the Caribou Eskimo kayak. -The seams are rubbed with fish oil and ochre, a -method also used extensively along the north coast -of Alaska to paint the framework of both kayaks -and umiaks.</p> - -<p>The Netsilik Eskimo kayak is related to the Caribou, -but is less stable and has different bow and stern -profiles. The example shown in the drawing of -figure 194 requires little discussion; the cover is of seal -skin. These kayaks are used only in hunting caribou -at stream crossings and are not employed in sealing. -The very narrow bottom and narrow beam make -this the most dangerous of all kayaks in the hands -of a paddler unaccustomed to such craft. Neither -the Caribou nor the Netsilik kayaks are very seaworthy -and their construction is inferior. They are -characterized by rather heavy gunwales but the other -members of their structures are very slight.</p> - -<p>No examples remain of the old kayaks once used on -the Gulf of Boothia, at Fury and Hecla Strait, and -on the west side of Foxe Basin. Early explorers in -this area found kayaks, but the types used have been -long extinct. One kayak, supposed to have been -built at Southampton Island, had been preserved by -a private collector, but when measured was in a -damaged state. Shown in figure 195, it does not conform -with the old description of kayaks from the Melville -Peninsula but does agree reasonably well with -the Boas model of a kayak from Repulse Bay in the -U.S. National Museum (USNM 68126). On this -basis it would appear that in Boas' time this form of -kayak was also used on the east side of the Melville -Peninsula. The design resembles to some extent the -kayaks from the southwest coast of Greenland, -but the stern is like that used in some Labrador -craft. This old kayak was very light and sharp, -rather slightly built, but very graceful in model -so far as could be determined from the remains of -the craft. The foredeck camber is ridged and -carried rather far forward. If the identification of -this kayak should be correct, it is apparent that the -eastern model of the kayak once extended as far -west as the west side of Foxe Basin.</p> - -<p>The kayak of lower Baffin Island, in figure 196, -is flat-bottomed, long, and rather heavy. The -gunwale members are very deep and the keelson and -chine battens are quite heavy. This type has a -slight side-batten between chine and gunwale—in -all, five longitudinal members besides the gunwales—hence -this example is the sole exception to the -3-batten construction that may be said to mark the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_205" id="Page_205">[Pg 205]</a></span> -eastern kayaks. The Baffin Island kayak is rather -roughly built and the two examples found had many -frames cracked at the chines. However, this kayak -has many excellent features, being easily paddled, -very stable, and seaworthy. The double-blade paddle -used is like that of the Labrador kayak, very long -with narrow blades. When the paddler is seated, -these kayaks, like many of their eastern sisters, draw -more water forward than the illustration would -indicate (it should be remembered that the trim of -the kayaks in the water is not indicated by the base -lines used in the plans). The deeper draft at the bow, -which allows the kayak to hold her course into the -wind and to come head to the wind when at rest, -gives a long easy run in the bottom toward the stern. -The slight rocker in the bottom shown in the drawing -is thus misleading. The stem is formed by the extension -of the keelson, producing the "clipper-bow" -seen in many eastern boats. The stern is shaped by -a stern block of simple form into which the gunwales, -keelson and chines are notched. The batten -between chine and gunwale stops a little short of -both bow and stern.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i221a.jpg" width="700" height="166" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 195</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Old Kayak From Vicinity of Southampton Island</span>, Canada. Plan made -from a much damaged kayak, now destroyed, once privately owned.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>A somewhat similar kayak is used on the Labrador -side of Hudson Strait but, as shown in figure 197 -on page <a href="#Page_207">207</a>, the appearance of the craft is distinctive. -The kayak is flat-bottomed, with the snied-off chines -seen in the Baffin Island boat, giving a cross section -form like that of many Japanese sampans. The 3-batten -system is used in construction, and the gunwales -are very heavy and deep, standing vertical in -the sides of the boat. The sheer is slightly reversed -and there is little rocker in the bottom. One of the -most obvious features of the Labrador kayak is the -long "grab" bow, which is formed by a batten -attached to the end of the keelson. The stern is -formed with a very small block inside the gunwales, -and to this the keelson is laced or pegged. It will be -noticed that the rake of the manhole is very moderate. -These kayaks are heavy and strong, paddle well, -particularly so against wind and sea. Shown in the -drawing is the type of long-and narrow-bladed -paddle used.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i221b.jpg" width="700" height="146" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 196</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Baffin Island Kayak</span>, from Cape Dorset, Canada, in the Museum of the -American Indian, Heye Foundation.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>This example illustrates better than the Baffin -Island kayak the combination of deep forefoot and -the greatest beam well abaft the midlength that marks -many eastern models. When paddled, the craft<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_206" id="Page_206">[Pg 206]</a></span> -always trims so that the kayak draws most water at -the fore end of the keelson and the bottom of the -stern is usually just awash. This makes the bottom -sweep up from the forefoot in a very slight gradual -curve to the stern, when the boat is afloat. As a result, -the kayak may be said to be of the "double-wedge" -form that has been popular in fast low-powered -motor boats, since having the beam far aft gives -to the bow a wedge shape in plan, while the deep -forefoot and shallow stern produce an opposite wedge -in profile. It would appear that this form had been -found by trial and error to produce a fast, easily -paddled rough-water kayak in an otherwise heavy -hull. The North Labrador kayaks are the largest in -the Arctic for a single person; some are reported as -long as 26 feet. The long-and narrow-bladed paddle -may be explained by the fact that the Eskimo never -produced a "feathered" double paddle, with blades -set at right angles to one another. To paddle against -strong winds, he developed a blade that was very -long and very narrow for a double-paddle, and -therefore offered less resistance to the wind, yet -could be dipped deep so that little propulsion effect -was lost.</p> - -<p>The kayak used on the northeast coast of Labrador, -shown in figure 198, differs slightly from that of -Hudson Strait. The northeast-coast kayak has a -very slight <strong>V</strong>-bottom and a strong concave sheer with -relatively great rocker in the bottom. While the craft -trims by the bow afloat, the rocker probably makes it -more maneuverable than the Hudson Strait kayak, -though less easily paddled against strong winds. The -<strong>V</strong>-bottom is formed by using a keelson that is heavier -and deeper than the chines. The latter are thin, -wide battens, on the flat. The <strong>V</strong>-bottom appears to -help the boat run straight under paddle and may be -said to counteract, to some extent at least, the effect -of the strongly rockered bottom.</p> - -<p>The Polar coast of Greenland is the home of sharpie-model -kayaks having flat bottoms and flaring sides; -the kayaks in figures 199 and 200 are representative -of those used in the extreme north. These have -"clipper" bows, with sterns of varying depth and shape, -concave sheer and varying degrees of rocker in the -bottom. Most have their greatest beam well aft and -draw more water forward, as do the Labrador and -Baffin Island types. The chief characteristic of the -construction of this type is that the transverse frames -are in three parts, somewhat as in the umiak. However, -these kayaks depart from umiak construction in -having the frame heads rigidly tenoned into the -gunwales. This is done to give the structure a -measure of transverse rigidity which would otherwise -be lacking, since light battens are used for the -keelson, stem, and chines. Figure 199 shows the details -of the construction used.</p> - -<p>These kayaks are highly developed craft—stable, -fast, and seaworthy—and the construction is light -yet strong enough to withstand the severe abuse -sometimes given them. The cap on the fore part of -the manhole is a paddle holder, for resting the paddle -across the deck. Some Eskimos used this as a thole, -and when tired, "rowed" the kayak with the paddle, -to maintain control. It will be noted that oval or -circular manholes are seldom found in the eastern -types of kayaks already described; <strong>U</strong>-shaped manholes, -or bent-rim manholes approaching this form, appear -in those very stable types which do not require to be -righted at sea by the paddler and in which the watertight -paddling jacket or waistband is not used.</p> - -<p>Farther south, on the northern coast of Greenland, -and apparently also on the opposite coast -of Baffin Island, a modified design of kayak is used. -This type, illustrated in figure 205, shows relationship -to both the flat-bottom kayak of northern -Greenland and to the northeastern Labrador type. -In this model the "clipper" bow is retained but the -stern and cross section resemble those of the Labrador -kayaks. The construction, however, is fundamentally -that employed in northern Greenland. -As in the Labrador type, the deadrise in the bottom -is formed by using in the keelson members that -are deeper than those in the chine. The gunwales -do not flare as in the Greenland model, but stand -vertical in the side flaring slightly at bow and extreme -stern. The frame heads are rather loosely -tenoned and are commonly secured to the gunwales -with lashings. Transverse stiffness is obtained -in this model by employing a rather heavy, rigid -keelson fixed to the stern block, and by a tripod -arrangement forward consisting of the stem batten -and a pair of transverse frames placed at the junction -of stem and keelson with their heads firmly lashed -and tenoned into the gunwales. The construction, -though strong, is rather rough compared to that of -other Greenland types. The manhole rim in this -type is not bent, but is made up of short straight -pieces, as shown in the drawing; and the double-bladed -paddle shown resembles that used in Labrador. -This is a rather heavy kayak of very good -qualities but not as maneuverable as some of the -flat-bottom kayaks found farther north.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_207" id="Page_207">[Pg 207]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i223a.jpg" width="700" height="140" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 197</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Kayak From North Labrador</span>, Canada, in the Museum of the American -Indian, Heye Foundation.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i223b.jpg" width="700" height="166" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 198</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Labrador Kayak</span>, Canada, in the U.S. National Museum (USNM 251693).</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i223c.jpg" width="700" height="208" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 199</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">North Greenland Kayak</span>, in the Museum of the American Indian, Heye -Foundation.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i223d.jpg" width="700" height="157" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 200</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">North Greenland Kayak</span>, in the Peabody Museum, Salem, Mass. Taken -off by the late Norman L. Skene, 1921.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_208" id="Page_208">[Pg 208]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i224a.jpg" width="700" height="152" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 201</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Profile of Greenland Kayak</span> from Disko Bay, in the National -Museum (USNM 72564). Collected by Maj. Wm. M. -Beebe, Jr., 1882. (<em>Smithsonian photo 15726-D.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Ross found that the Greenland Eskimos north of -Cape York had ceased to use kayaks in 1818. Not -until about 1860 was the kayak reintroduced here, -by Eskimos from Pond Inlet, north Baffin Island, -who walked over the sea ice. This fact probably -accounts for the various sharpie and modified sharpie -forms used along the northern and Polar coasts of -Greenland.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i224b.jpg" width="700" height="140" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 202</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Deck of Greenland Kayak</span> from Disko Bay (USNM -72564). (<em>Smithsonian photo 15726-C.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The model of the kayak used on much of the central -and southern coasts of Greenland has changed rather -extensively since 1883, and this change has apparently -affected the kayaks used on the east coast as well. -In this part of the Arctic, the Eskimo are notable -kayakers and the boat is not only well designed -but also carries highly developed equipment and -weapons for its work. The basic model used is a -graceful <strong>V</strong>-bottom one, with raking ends and rather -strong sheer. In the old boats represented by the -drawings of figures 206 and 207, the sheer is strong at -bow and stern, but this form has been gradually -going out of favor. The kayaks are narrow but -their shape gives them much stability. Pegged to -the bow and stern are plates of bone to protect -them from ice; in rare cases these bone stem bands, -or bang plates, are lashed in place. The first drawing -shows the construction used: light strong gunwales -and a 3-batten longitudinal system with bent transverse -frames. The keelson and chines—light, rectangular -in section and placed on edge—are shaped -slightly to fair the sealskin covering. The cover -passes under the manhole rim. Bow and stern are -made of plank on edge, shaped to the required -profile. The gunwales are strongly tapered in depth -fore and aft. Eight to twelve thwarts, or deck -beams, are used in addition to the two heavy thwarts -supporting the manhole; usually there is one more -forward of the manhole than there is aft, and all -are very light scantlings. The thwart forward of -the manhole stands slightly inside the cockpit and is -strongly arched; the after one is clear of the cockpit -opening and has very little arch. Two light, short -battens, or carlins, 24 to 36 inches long support the -deck, where it sweeps up to the raked manhole, and -usually there are two abaft the manhole as well. -Lashings are used as fastenings except at the ends -of the hull, where pegs secure the keelson to the -stem and stern; at this point, on some kayaks examined, -sinew lashings are also found. The whole -framework is strong, light, and neatly made. In -a few instances the gunwales do not flare with the -sides the whole length and, thus, near the stern, a -knuckle is formed in the skin cover, as in figure 207, -opposite. The exact amount of flare and deadrise -varies village to village. The old kayaks used in -eastern Greenland had more rake in the bow than -the examples illustrated, and also were marked by a -sheer almost straight from the bow to within a foot -or so of the stern, where it turned up sharply to a -high stern, as in the drawing (fig. 191, p. <a href="#Page_203">203</a>.) These -kayaks also had less flare and deadrise than most of -the southwestern Greenland models. The amount -of rocker in the keelson varies a good deal, that -shown in figure 206, opposite, appears to have been -about the maximum; a straight keelson does not -seem ever to have been used. The manholes are -fitted to allow use of the watertight paddling jacket; -the projecting rim shown at the after-side of the -manhole in the drawing is primarily to strengthen -the manhole rim, but may also serve to prevent the -drawstring holding the skirt of the jacket to the -rim from slipping over the top. This old form of -Greenland kayak, which has been widely described -and much admired, was a fast and handy hunting -boat; but it has become obsolete in most areas, -and seems to have gone out of use more rapidly on -the east coast than the west, where the type represented -in the drawing was built as late as 1959 -at Umanak Fjord.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_209" id="Page_209">[Pg 209]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 298px;"> -<img src="images/i225a.jpg" width="298" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 203</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Cockpit</span> of Greenland kayak from Disko Bay. -(USNM 72564). (<em>Smithsonian photo 15726.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 331px;"> -<img src="images/i225b.jpg" width="331" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 204</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Bow View</span> of Greenland kayak from Disko -Bay (USNM 72564). (<em>Smithsonian photo -15726-A.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_210" id="Page_210">[Pg 210]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i226a.jpg" width="700" height="204" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 205</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Northwestern Greenland Kayak</span>, in the U.S. National Museum (USNM -160388).</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i226b.jpg" width="700" height="198" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 206</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Southwestern Greenland Kayak</span>, 1883, in the U.S. National Museum -(USNM 160328).</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i226c.jpg" width="700" height="181" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 207</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Southwestern Greenland Kayak</span>, in the Peabody Museum, Salem, Mass. -Taken off by the late Norman L. Skene, 1921.</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_211" id="Page_211">[Pg 211]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i227.jpg" width="700" height="166" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 208</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">South Greenland Kayak</span>, in the American Museum of Natural History.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Since the 1880's it has been gradually replaced by -the type shown above. The modern version has -the same construction as the old but, as can be seen, -the model has undergone much alteration. The rake -of the bow and stern have become much greater; -the sheer is now almost straight. The flare of the -sides has been increased and the deadrise in the -bottom has been reduced. The new model is undoubtedly -an improvement over the old type, being -faster (particularly against a headwind) and quicker -turning. However, it would probably be found to -be somewhat harder than the old model to right -when capsized. And although the new model is -more stable than the old, it is not suited for unskilled -users; a few American soldiers drowned during World -War II through rashly venturing into rough water -before becoming practiced in the use of these kayaks.</p> - -<p>The intricate arrangement of deck lashings shown -are required to hold weapons and accessories. -Just ahead of the paddler a stand or tray on low legs -holds the coiled harpoon line; and under the deck -lashings are held such weapons as the lance, darts, -and harpoons. Toggles of bone or ivory, often carved, -are used to tighten and adjust these lines. The -Greenland kayaks carry deck fittings and gear that -are far better developed than those seen in any of the -western types.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_212" id="Page_212">[Pg 212]</a></span></p> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2><em>Chapter Eight</em><br /> - -TEMPORARY CRAFT</h2> - - -<p>Use of temporary craft seems to have been -confined to the Indians, who for the most part built -them of bark, although some tribes used skins. However, -very little in the way of information exists on -the forms used by the individual tribes, for early -travelers did not always have opportunities to see -these emergency craft, and when they did they -rarely took the trouble to record their construction -and design.</p> - - -<h3><em>Bark Canoes</em></h3> - -<p>There is ample evidence to support the belief that -a great many of the tribes building birch-bark canoes -also used temporary canoes of other barks such as -spruce and elm, as has been mentioned in earlier -chapters. Invariably, the qualities of these other -barks, particularly spruce, were such that their use -was often somewhat more laborious and the results -less satisfactory than with birch; but the necessities -of travel and the availability of materials were controlling -factors, and with care spruce bark could be -used to build a canoe almost as good as one of birch -bark. The forms of these canoes do not appear to -have been as standardized as the tribal forms of the -better-built bark canoes; rather, the model of the -temporary canoe was entirely a matter to be decided -by the individual builder on the basis of the importance -of the temporary canoe to his needs, the -limitation on time allowed for construction, and the -material available.</p> - -<p>The reasons for using substitute material are fairly -obvious. In forest travel it was not always possible -or practical to portage a canoe for a long distance -simply to make a short water passage somewhere -along the route. War parties and hunters, therefore, -often found it necessary to build a temporary canoe, -one that could be utilized for a limited water passage -and then abandoned. Since such a limited use did -not warrant expenditure of much time or labor on -construction, the canoe was prepared quickly from -readily available material and in order to meet these -requirements many Indian tribes developed canoe -forms and building techniques somewhat different -from the more elaborate construction using birch or -spruce bark.</p> - -<p>It is obvious that much time and work could be -avoided by use of a single large sheet of bark that -was reasonably flexible and strong. But many of -the barks meeting this specification had a coarse -longitudinal grain that split easily, so forming a -canoe by cutting gores was out of the question. This -difficulty was avoided by folding, or "crimping," -the bark cover along the gunwales at two or more -places on each side of the canoe; this permitted the -bottom to be flattened athwartships and the keel -line to be rockered, both desirable in a canoe.</p> - -<p>The problem of closing the ends also had to be -solved. This was done by clamping the ends of the -bark between two battens and, perhaps, a bark cord -as well, and then lashing together the battens, bark -ends, and cord with wrappings of root thongs. Cord -made from the inner bark of the basswood and other -trees could also be used for this purpose. The ends -of the canoe could then be made watertight by a -liberal application of gum or tallow, while grass, -shavings, moss, or inner bark mixed with gum or -even clay could be used to fill the larger openings -that might appear in hurried construction.</p> - -<p>Obviously, a simple wood structure was required -by the specifications. Therefore, the gunwales were -usually made of saplings with their butts roughly -secured together or spliced. This allowed length to -be obtained without the necessity of working down -large poles to usable dimensions, a laborious and -time-consuming undertaking with primitive tools.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_213" id="Page_213">[Pg 213]</a></span> -The thwarts were commonly of saplings with the -ends cut away so that the thin remainder could be -wrapped around the main gunwales and lashed underneath -the thwarts inboard. Ribs were usually of -split saplings, but there is some evidence that in very -hurriedly built canoes the whole small sapling was -used. The kind of sheathing employed in these -canoes during the pre-Columbian era is a mystery. It -would be quite unlikely that time was taken to split -splints such as were used in the late elm-and spruce-bark -canoes, when steel tools were available. The -writers believe that for small canoes it may have -been the practice to use a second sheet of stiff bark -inside the first and extending only through the middle -two-thirds of the length, across the bottom and up -above the bilge but short of the gunwales. This, -with the ribs and a few poles lashed to each rib along -the bottom, would have given sufficient longitudinal -strength and a stiff enough bottom for practical use. -However, in large canoes of the type reputedly employed -by Iroquois warriors, a stronger construction -seems necessary, and these canoes may have had a -number of split or whole poles lashed to the ribs -along the bottom.</p> - -<p>With small variations in details, the general construction -outlined above was employed by many North -American Indians for building temporary canoes -for emergency use. In at least one case, however, -it was also used in canoes of somewhat more permanent -status within the boundaries of the powerful -Iroquois Confederation. On large bodies of water -within their territory, the Iroquois used dugouts, but -for navigating streams and for use in raiding their -enemies they employed bark canoes. While some -birch bark was available there, it was probably -widely scattered; therefore these great warriors used -elm or other bark for their canoe building.</p> - -<p>Early French accounts show that the Iroquois -built bark canoes of greater size than ordinary; -Champlain wrote that their canoes were of oak -bark and were large enough to carry up to 18 warriors; -later French accounts, as we shall see, indicate -that the Iroquois used even larger canoes than these. -Champlain may have been in error about the Iroquois -use of oak bark, as suggested earlier (p. <a href="#Page_7">7</a>), for -experiments have shown that the inner bark of this -tree is too thin and weak for the purpose; the canoes -Champlain saw may have been built of white or red -elm bark. The barks of the butternut, hickory, -white pine, and chestnut might also have been -employed, as they were usually suitable.</p> - -<p>It was noted by the early French writers that -the Iroquois built their bark canoes very rapidly -when these craft were required by a war party in -order to attack their enemies or to escape pursuit. -In one case at least the canoes for a war party were -apparently built in a single day. This was accomplished, -it seems, by the excellent organization of -their war parties, in which every man was assigned -a duty, even in making canoes.</p> - -<p>When it was deemed necessary to build a canoe, -certain warriors were to search out and obtain the -necessary materials in the order required for construction. -To do this effectively, they had to know -the materials in order of their suitability for a given -purpose, for the most desirable material might not -be available at the building site. Other warriors -prepared the materials for construction, scraping the -bark, making thongs, and rough-shaping the wood. -Others built the canoe, cutting and sewing the bark, -and shaping and lashing the woodwork. These -duties, too, required intimate knowledge of the -different materials that could be used in canoe -construction. It would be natural, of course, to find -that the methods used to construct a temporary -craft for a war-party would also be employed at -home by the hunter or fisherman, even when a -rather more permanent canoe was desired. These -were smaller craft and easily built. Only when a -long-lasting watercraft was desired would the bark -canoe be unsatisfactory; then the dugout could be -built. The early French observers agree that though -the Iroquois occasionally used birch-bark canoes, -these were acquired from their neighbors by barter or -capture and were not built by the tribesmen of the -Confederation.</p> - -<p>The details of the construction of elm canoes (and -of other bark than birch) by the Iroquois are speculative, -since no bark canoe of their construction has -been preserved. This reconstruction of their methods -is, therefore, based upon the incomplete accounts of -early writers and upon what has been discovered -about the construction of spruce-and elm-bark -temporary canoes by other Eastern Indians.</p> - -<p>In view of what has been reported, it must be kept -in mind that the construction was hasty and that -a minimum of labor and time was employed; hence, -the appearance of the elm-bark canoe of an Iroquois -war-party had none of the gracefulness that is supposed -to mark the traditional war canoe of the Indians. -The ends are known to have been "square," that is, -straight in profile, and the freeboard low. The use<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_214" id="Page_214">[Pg 214]</a></span> -of saplings for the gunwales would cause an uneven -sheer, and its amount must have been small; the high, -graceful ends seen in some birch-bark canoes did not -exist in the Iroquois model. The rocker of the bottom -profile was not a fair curve, but was angular, made -of straight lines breaking under the folds, or "crimps," -in the bark cover at the gunwales. The amount of -bark in each crimp and the location of the crimps -fore-and-aft would determine the shape of the bottom -profile and the amount of rocker, as well as the flatness -of the bottom athwartships in the midbody. It -appears that two crimps to the side were employed -in most of these canoes, but perhaps more, say four -to a side, might have been employed in a very large -canoe. The tendency in forming these canoes must -have been toward an almost semicircular midsection, -a condition which would have produced an unstable -craft if not checked.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i230.jpg" width="700" height="434" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 209</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Malecite and Iroquois Temporary Canoes.</span> The Iroquois 3-fathom elm-bark -canoe, below, is designed to carry ten to twelve warriors.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The early French writers agree that the canoes of -Iroquois war parties were sluggish under paddle. -This was due to the fact that the hull form of these -canoes was not good for speed, and also because the -bulges at the bottom of the crimps caused them to -be markedly unfair at and near the waterline. This -handicap in their canoes may have been an inducement -for the Iroquois to waylay their victims at -portages when the travellers were usually spread -out and easily cut down while burdened with goods. -The Algonkin tribes countered by moving in very -large numbers when within striking distance of -Iroquois raiders. Hence there were very few recorded -instances of battles in canoes; these took place only -when sudden meetings occurred without preparation -on either side, such as when war parties surprised -canoemen in narrow waters. The shortcomings of -their canoes did not seriously affect the deadliness -of the Iroquois warriors, for their usual practice -was to raid in winter, when they could travel rapidly -on snowshoes and surprise their enemies in winter -camps wholly unprepared for defense, a most pleasing -prospect for the attacking warrior.</p> - -<p>It would be a mistake, however, to assume that -these factors made the Iroquois poor canoemen; the -French repeatedly stated that they were capable in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_215" id="Page_215">[Pg 215]</a></span> -handling their craft and ran rapids with great daring -and skill, showing that the apparently crude and -weak elm-bark canoes were far better craft than they -first appeared.</p> - -<p>The theory that the Iroquois type of canoe was very -like the emergency or temporary elm-and spruce-bark -canoes of neighboring tribes is supported by some -statements of the early French writers, as well as by a -comparison of the rather incomplete descriptions of -Iroquois canoes by later travellers with what is known -about the spruce and other temporary bark canoes -used in more recent times by the eastern Indians. -M. Bacqueville de la Poterie, writing of the adventures -of Nicholas Perrot in the years 1665 to 1670, -tells of an instance in which Perrot's Potawatomi -mistook the emergency canoes of some Outaouais -(Ottawa) for Iroquois canoes.</p> - -<p>LaHontan (1700) gives some general information as -well as specific opinions on the speed and seaworthiness -of Iroquois canoes, saying that—</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p>the canoes with which the Iroquois provide themselves are -so unwieldy and large that they do not approach the speed -of those which are made of birch bark. They are made of -elm bark, which is naturally heavy and the shape they give -them is awkward; they are so long and so broad that thirty -men can row in them, two-by-two, seated or standing, fifteen -to each rank, but the freeboard is so low that when any little -wind arises they are sensible enough not to navigate the -lakes [in them].</p></div> - -<p>LaFiteau, writing before 1724, stated definitely that -the Iroquois did not build any birch-bark canoes, but -obtained them from their neighbors, and that the -Iroquois elm-bark canoes were very coarsely built of -a single large sheet of bark, crimped along the gunwales, -with the ends secured between battens of split -saplings. He noticed that the gunwales, ribs, and -thwarts were of "tree branches," implying that the -bark was not removed from them. The most detailed -description was by a Swedish traveller, Professor Pher -Kalm, who gave extensive information on the construction -of an elm-bark canoe in 1749; this account -is particularly useful when interpreted in relation to -the spruce-and elm-bark canoes of the eastern Indians. -It is upon the basis of Kalm's account that the procedures -used to build an Iroquois war canoe have been -reconstructed.</p> - -<p>The bark most favored by the Iroquois was that of -the white elm. Next most favored was red elm, and -then other barks—certain of the hickories and chestnut -are mentioned in various early references. It was -necessary to find a tree of sufficient girth and height -to the first limbs to give a sound and fairly smooth -bark sheet in the length and breadth required. If -possible the bark was stripped from the standing tree; -even after steel tools were available, felling was avoided -for fear of harming the bark. Great care had to be -taken in the operation, to avoid splitting or making -holes in the bark, and often two or more trees had to -be stripped before a good sheet of bark was obtained. -In warm weather the bark could be removed without -much difficulty, but in the spring and fall it might be -necessary to apply heat; this was apparently done by -means of torches or by the application of hot water -to the tree trunk.</p> - -<p>When the bark was removed from the tree, the -rough outer bark was scraped away; if the builder -was hurried this scraping was confined to the areas -to be sewn or folded. The bark was then laid on a -cleared piece of ground, the building bed, with the -outside of the bark up, so that it would be inside the -finished boat. The building bed does not appear to -have required much preparation; apparently not -raised at midlength, it was merely a plot of reasonably -smooth ground, located in the shade of a large tree if -building was to be done in summer.</p> - -<p>It is not wholly clear from the descriptions whether -the gunwales were shaped before or after being secured -to the bark. However, extensive experiments in -building model canoes show very plainly that it would -be easiest to assemble the main gunwale frame and -use it in building, after the fashion of eastern birch-bark -canoe construction. With the main gunwales -assembled, the stakes would be placed on the bed, -the bark replaced, the frame laid on it and weighted, -and the stakes then redriven in the usual way and their -heads lashed together in pairs.</p> - -<p>Each gunwale was formed either of two small saplings -or of split poles, with the butts scarfed at the -canoe's midlength. The canoe of an Iroquois war -party would probably have gunwales of split saplings -so that inwale and outwale for half the length of one -side of the canoe would be from a single pole; this -would allow the flat sides to be placed opposite one -another, on each side of the edge of the bark, to -form a firm gunwale structure. However, when a -rather permanent craft was being built, the poles -might be split twice, or quartered, to give pieces to -make half of the gunwales of a canoe; these too might -be worked nearly round before assembly.</p> - -<p>That the gunwale joints were scarfed is reasonably -certain. The elm-bark canoes of the St. Francis<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_216" id="Page_216">[Pg 216]</a></span> -Indians are known only from a model, as are the -spruce-bark hunters' canoes of the Malecite, but the -testimony of old St. Francis and Malecite builders -support the evidence of the models; therefore it is -probable that the use of scarfed gunwales was common -in these canoes, and, hence, also in the canoes of the -Iroquois, who dwelt nearby. The manner of scarfing -is not certain. Probably the butts were snied off so -that the lap would be flat face, as was usual in the -Malecite spruce-bark canoes of this same class. The -butts were secured together by lashings—apparently -let into shallow grooves around the members. In a -very hastily built canoe the butts might be merely -lapped for a short distance, one butt above the other, -and lashed; this, of course, would make a jog in the -sheer, but do no harm, as the jog would occur in -both inwale and outwale, and the bark would lay up -between these and be trimmed to suit.</p> - -<p>The thwarts were described in old accounts as -very small saplings, or tree branches, with their ends -sharply reduced in thickness so that they were thin -and pliable enough to be bent around the gunwales -and brought inboard under the thwart, as done by -some Kutenai in the West (see p. <a href="#Page_169">169</a>). The thwart -ends might be lashed or, as in some eastern spruce-bark -canoes, brought up through a hole in the thwarts -to the top where it could be jammed or lashed. -In the Iroquois canoe it seems probable that the -thwart ends passed around the main gunwales -only and were secured under the thwarts for, as -noted, the evidence strongly suggests that the main -gunwale members were preassembled, a procedure -that requires the thwarts to be in place. In the small -hunters' canoes, however, some eastern builders -apparently put in a temporary spreader in place of -a single thwart until the canoe was completed to the -point where the outwales were in place, then the -thwarts were added, the ends passing over and -around both inwale and outwale and through the -bark cover below, to the underside of the thwart.</p> - -<p>One requirement in building these canoes was to -crimp the edges of the bark at the gunwales in such -manner that the bottom of the canoe would be -rockered and at the same time would be moulded -athwartships. First steps in the process were to set -into the building bed two heavy stakes on each side -of the stems, a little inboard of the ends, and to tie -the heads of each pair together with a heavy bark -cord or a rawhide thong. Then a sling was made, -the bight of which went under the bottom of the bark -cover near its ends, and the ends of the sling were -made fast to the heads of the stakes. By taking up -on these slings, the ends of the bark cover were -sharply lifted and then the folding of the bark along -the gunwales could be easily accomplished, as they -then formed naturally, without strain. The crimps -were commonly located a fourth to a fifth the length -of the canoe inboard of the ends, about where the -end thwarts would be located. In small hunters' -canoes the end thwarts were often replaced by twisted -cords across the gunwales, but in the large Iroquois -canoes there were probably five or seven or perhaps -as many as nine thwarts according to length.</p> - -<p>The ends of the gunwales were simply lashed -together with cords or thongs in shallow grooves to -prevent slipping. They were raised by a small inside -post, its heel placed on the bark near the stem and -its head brought under the gunwales, so that it -served the purpose of a headboard in sheering the -gunwales.</p> - -<p>The procedure in building to this point, then, -appeared to follow the general plan used in birch-bark -construction. Next, the stakes were redriven in the -bed around the gunwale frame, which was weighted -on the bark with stones, and the sides of the bark cover -were brought upright. Apparently only a few stakes -were considered necessary—three or four to a side -and two pairs of end stakes to raise the stems. The -gunwale frame was then lifted to the required height -of side and lashed temporarily to the side stakes, the -ends of the bark cover were creased to form bow and -stern, and the headboard posts were inserted to support -the ends of the inwales and to sheer the canoe. -Before this, of course, the ends of the bark cover had -been raised by means of the slings to the end stakes.</p> - -<p>The outwales of split saplings were now put into -place, with the edges of the bark cover lashed between -the flat surfaces of the inwale and outwale, the gunwales -having been assembled with the flat face of the -longitudinal members outboard. The lashings were -in small groups spaced 5 to 7 inches apart so as not to -split the bark, and these not only secured the bark -in place but also held the inwales and outwales -tightly together, to clamp the edges of the bark cover. -At the thwarts, the outwales were notched on their -inboard face to allow them to come up against the -bark pressed against the face of the inwales (in some -eastern canoes the bark cover was notched at the -thwart ends to lay up smoothly there, and this may -have also been done in the Iroquois canoes). In -placing the outwales, the crimps were carefully formed -and held by the clamping action of the inwale and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_217" id="Page_217">[Pg 217]</a></span> -outwale, and reinforced by a lashing through the -crimp or by two lashings close to the sides of the fold. -The fold of the bark forced the outwale away from -the inwale, and although this was counteracted to -some extent by the lashings, the gunwales were unfair -at these points. The crimps were formed so that the -maximum fold in the bark took place at the gunwales; -below this the fold tapered away to nothing, ending -low in the side with an irregular bulge in the bark. -Such a bulge could only be avoided by goring, -which is impractical with elm, pine, chestnut, or -hickory barks.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i233a.jpg" width="700" height="417" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 210</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Hickory-Bark Canoe Under Construction</span>, showing the sling with which -the ends are elevated and the crimp which takes up the slack in the sides of the -bark. Excess bark above the gunwales to be trimmed off. Completed model -in The Mariners' Museum, Newport News, Va.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i233b.jpg" width="700" height="99" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 211</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Detail of Thwart</span> used in Malecite temporary -spruce-bark canoe.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>The ends of the canoe were closed, as has been -mentioned, by use of split-sapling battens on the outside -of the bark. The Iroquois and some other -builders also employed at the stems a thong or a -twisted cord made of the inner bark of some such tree -as the basswood; this was wrapped around the ends of -the bark cover abreast the headboard posts inside the -canoe, so that the lashing stood vertically. Then the -split battens were placed on each side of the bark -cover, just outboard of the cord, and the whole was -secured by a coarse spiral lashing of root or rawhide, -which passed inboard of the cord lashing and the -headboard post, as well as around them and the split -battens outside of the bark cover. Some builders -apparently added a split-root batten over the edges of -the bark cover, as a sort of stem-band; this was secured -by the turns of the stem closure lashing, which passed -around them as well as the edges of the bark and the -split side battens. It can be seen that this closure -formed a strong stem structure. Watertightness was -insured by merely forcing clay into the stems from the -inside, or by forcing in a wad of the pounded inner -bark of a dead red elm which would swell when damp.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_218" id="Page_218">[Pg 218]</a></span> -Still other methods included the use of grass or moss -impregnated with warm tallow from the cooking pot. -If available, the stems would be liberally smeared with -spruce or other gum, of course.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i234.jpg" width="700" height="203" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 212</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Iroquois Elm-Bark Canoe</span>, after a drawing of 1849, equipped with paddles -for a crew of six, with owners' personal marks on blades. Length of canoe 25 -feet, with capacity for a war party of a dozen or more men. Note supporting -piece of cord tied in with the end battens. Far gunwales are improperly -sketched.</p></div> -</div> - -<p>While the ribs were customarily tree branches or -small saplings, in some canoes the saplings were split -and bent so their flat face was against the bark. In -the East, hunters' canoes were often given the lath-like -ribs of the birch-bark canoes, for when steel tools -became available such ribs were easily made during -the winter for use in the spring, when the temporary -canoe would be needed.</p> - -<p>According to the early reports, the ribs were placed -some 6 to 10 inches apart in the bark cover, with the -heads forced under the inwales against the bark, and -were supported there by the outwales as well. No -mention is made of any sheathing; Kalm refers to a -piece of bark and some saplings or tree branches laid -over the ribs to protect the bottom inboard. In the -large Iroquois canoes it would have been possible and -practical to employ a piece of bark inside the main -bark cover, as noted on page <a href="#Page_213">213</a>; this inside piece -needed to be only long enough to reach to the end -thwarts, or abreast the crimps, and wide enough to -cover the bottom and bilges up to 3 or 4 inches short -of the inwales. With the ribs over this inner sheet, a -stiff bottom would result. In a long canoe, split poles -could be laid lengthwise inside the bottom of the -canoe and fastened there by lashing them to a few -ribs; these would serve to protect the bottom in loading -and to stiffen the bark cover. However, in a -small canoe the stiffness of elm bark when the rough -outside layer was not fully scraped off would make -sheathing of any kind unnecessary, and the bark mat -inside the ribs, mentioned by Kalm, would be sufficient.</p> - -<p>The difficulty in reconstructing the building methods -of the large Iroquois canoes on the same basis is that -Kalm's description is of a rather small canoe; the -information on the temporary canoes of the eastern -Indians also deals with short craft. It is evident, -however, that poles were not usually placed between -the bark and the ribs, as in temporary skin canoes -built by Indians. It is also apparent that splints were -not used by the Iroquois for sheathing large canoes.</p> - -<p>The ends of the outwales in the Iroquois canoes -seem to have been secured by snying them off on the -outside face and holding these thin ends by the cord -around the ends, as well as by the closure battens -of the stems. In some eastern canoes, notably the -elm-bark canoes of the St. Francis, the outwale ends -projected slightly outboard of the stems and were -lashed across them by a simple athwartship lashing -which passed through the bark cover and under and -over the lashing at the inwale ends.</p> - -<p>In a drawing of an Iroquois canoe made about -1849, the cord around the stems is shown together -with the outside stem battens and lashing; the ends of -the outwales are apparently under the cord and perhaps -under the stem battens. The stem batten is in -one piece sharply bent under the stems in <strong>U</strong>-form. -The end lashing shown seems to be in groups and the -bottom, for a little distance inboard of the stems, -is also shown as lashed. Three thwarts are shown.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_219" id="Page_219">[Pg 219]</a></span> -It may be that this drawing was made not from a full-size -canoe but from a model, for the proportions are -obviously incorrect. This possibility casts some -doubt on the picture as evidence of the building -practices, for in Indian-built models simplified -construction details not used in actual canoe building -are often found.</p> - -<p>According to early accounts and the statements of -eastern Indians, these emergency canoes were often -heavy and unsuitable for portaging. By 1750, at -least, the Iroquois were using blanket square-sails in -their elm-bark canoes.</p> - - -<h3><em>Skin Boats</em></h3> - -<p>Among the other forms of temporary or emergency -canoes used by North American Indians, the most -widespread was some form of skin boat. These -would not require description here were it not for the -fact that the Indian skin boats were usually built by -bark-canoe methods of construction rather than by -methods such as used by the Eskimo. To build their -skin boats—kayaks and umiaks—the Eskimo first constructed -a complete framework, and this was then -covered with skins sewn to fit. This process of building -required a rigid framework capable of not only -standing without a skin covering but also of giving -both longitudinal and transverse strength sufficient -to withstand loading, without the slightest support -from the skin covering. Hence, the framework of the -Eskimo craft was made with the members rigidly -lashed and pegged together. The majority of Indian -skin canoes, however, required the covering to hold -the framework together, as in a birch-bark canoe. -An example is the Malecite skin-covered hunters' -canoe. According to available information, the -Malecite hunter would leave two or three moose -skins on stretchers for use in building a skin canoe in -the early spring. Sometimes the hair was removed -from the hides and sometimes it was not. Spare -time during the winter hunt might be spent in preparing -the wooden framework, but if this were not -done the delay would not be very great.</p> - -<p>The gunwale frame was first made of four small -sapling poles roughly scarfed at the butts. From a -small sapling a middle thwart was made in the -manner of the elm-bark canoe thwarts, the ends -tapered enough to allow them to be wrapped around -the gunwales and secured under the thwart by lashings. -The ends of the gunwales were merely crossed -and lashed. Where end thwarts would be placed, -it was usual to use a cross tie made of twisted rawhide -or cords of bark fiber. Holes were then drilled at -intervals in the underside of the gunwale to take the -heads of the ribs. Stem-pieces about 3 feet long were -prepared of short saplings and bent to the desired -profile; one builder used a full-length keel-piece, -instead of the short stem-pieces. The ribs were -usually of small saplings that could be bent green -without the use of hot water. For sheathing a number -of small saplings were also gathered, and from them -were made poles in lengths about equal to three-quarters, -or a little more, of the intended length of -the canoe, which would be determined by the size -of the skins available. The average canoe was about -12½ feet long, roughly 40 inches beam, and 14 to -19 inches in depth.</p> - -<p>The skins were sewn together lengthwise, lapped -about 6 inches or a little less, and secured by a double -row of stitching. If the hair had not been removed, it -had to be scraped away along the sewn edges. In -such a case the hair would usually be on the outside -of the finished canoe. Also, before work was started on -assembling a canoe, the skins were worked pliable, -and tallow and gum were accumulated.</p> - -<p>When an emergency canoe was ready to be -assembled a smooth place was prepared; either an -open bit of ground or the floor of the hunter's hut, -if large enough, might be used. The outlines of -the gunwales were fixed by a few stakes temporarily -driven around it and then pulled up. The skins -were then laid on the bed and the gunwale frame -placed on them and weighted with stones. Then -the skins were left to dry for awhile until they became -somewhat stiff; the proper condition was indicated -by the curling of the edges.</p> - -<p>When the skin was sufficiently stiff, the gunwale -frame was lifted and temporarily secured to the stakes -redriven in the bed, the sides of the skin were turned -up, the skin was gored, and sometimes the ends of -the gunwales were sheered up slightly at the end -stakes; this latter was not always done, for in some -canoes the sheer was quite flat.</p> - -<p>The skins were now trimmed to the sheer of the -gunwales and the edges lashed to these members with -rawhide, the gores also having been sewn. Next the -stem-pieces were put into place and the stem heads -lashed inside the apex formed by the ends of the -gunwales. Some ribs were then bent and forced<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_220" id="Page_220">[Pg 220]</a></span> -down on the stiff skin cover, the rib ends being worked -into the holes prepared for them on the underside -of the gunwales. These ribs usually stood approximately -square to the curve, or rocker, of the bottom. -Now the skin could be trimmed to the stem profiles -and sewn. The stitching was usually done so as to -be outside the stem-pieces, with an occasional turn -going around inside them to help hold the structure -in place. Some builders first put in the stems temporarily -and then trimmed the skins to match; after -this was done the stem-pieces were removed to allow -easy sewing. When they were replaced and secured -permanently, a few more stitches were added along -the stems to secure the woodwork.</p> - -<p>The next step was to sheath the canoe inside with -the small poles; these were placed a few inches apart -transversely and their ends worked under the most -inboard of the ribs on the stem-pieces, then held in -place, while the necessary adjustments were made, by -a few temporary ribs. Then the ribs were forced into -place, one by one, each prebent to the desired section, -just as in birch-bark canoe construction. In this final -shaping, the skin cover might have to be wetted again -to soften the material and to allow stretching. The -seams were then payed with gum or tallow, and the -canoe was ready for launching.</p> - -<p>The description is for canoes of minimum finish; -builders often used split and shaped gunwales, split -ribs, and splint sheathing if these could be prepared -during the winter. The construction of a skin canoe -was not a specialized process in which a hunter consistently -built this one type; the selection was determined -by natural conditions. If he were to come out -of the woods too early in the spring to make the -construction of a spruce-bark canoe easy, then he -would resort to skin construction; the statements of -old Malecite hunters leads to the conclusion that as -emergency craft they used spruce-bark canoes most -often.</p> - -<p>Perhaps the most primitive of the skin boats built -by the North American Indian was the so-called -bull-boat of the Plains Indians. These were not -canoes but coracles—bowl-shaped and suitable only -for use on streams, where ferrying would be the main -requirement. The boats were covered with buffalo-hides -and their framework was usually made of the -willow shoots found along the streams. The framework -followed, to some extent at least, the basketwork -principle, a circular gunwale or rim being used. The -ribs were set in two groups, half at right angles to the -other half in very irregular fashion. This construction -formed a sort of rough grating in the bottom. The -ribs were lashed together with rawhide and apparently -the craft was built up on the skin as were the Malecite -skin canoes. Battens in circular form were used on -the sides to fair the cover. The form of the bull-boat -varied somewhat among individual builders; sometimes -it assumed almost a dish shape with shallow -flaring sides, but more commonly the sides were -nearly upright; the bottom was always flat, or -nearly so. These bull-boats appear always to have -been small. Judging by the examples preserved, a -bull-boat 5 feet over the rim or gunwale, or made of -more than one skin, was extremely rare, and most -examples are nearer 4 feet and built on a single skin. -Many were too small to carry a person; these were -intended to be loaded with cargo to be kept dry and -towed by a swimmer. When they were large enough -to be paddled, the paddler worked over the "bow," -as in a coracle. Probably all the Plains Indians -living near streams once used the bull-boat, but -existing records show only the Mandan, Omaha, -Kansas, Hidatsa, and Assiniboin to have used it. -The Blackfoot (Siksika) and Dakota are said to -have used some kind of a skin boat in which their -tepee poles were employed as a temporary frame, -but nothing is recorded of their form.</p> - -<p>The use of spruce bark as a building material in -the Northwest and throughout the extreme northern -range of the birch-bark canoe has been discussed in -earlier chapters (pp. <a href="#Page_155">155</a> to 158). In these areas, the -emergency canoe was usually built of caribou skin. -On the Alaskan coast seal skin may also have been -used, but generally it was used for the permanent -kayak-type canoe and not for a hastily built temporary -craft. The caribou-skin canoe was also built as a -permanent type, in either kayak form or somewhat on -the model of the spruce-or birch-bark canoe of the -area. However, although references to temporary -craft covered with caribou skin exist in early accounts -of the fur trade, there is no record of their form or -details of their construction. Early in the present -century some of the Indians of the Mackenzie River -country built skin canoes much like the modern canvas-covered -freight canoes. Also, some of these skin -canoes were built so that they resembled York boats -or the whaleboats of the white man. No observer has -described the methods used to construct the emergency -canoe of the Northwest; we do not know -whether they resemble those used in the Indian bark -canoe or in the Eskimo skin boat.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_221" id="Page_221">[Pg 221]</a></span></p> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2><em>Retrospect</em></h2> - - -<p>In view of the inclusion of skin boats in this discussion -of bark canoes, it may be well to emphasize -again the fact that the North American Indian's -method of constructing bark canoes and of temporary -skin canoes was on an entirely different principle -than that used by the Eskimo in building their skin -boats. This is even true of the kayak-form bark -canoes of the Northwest, despite their superficial similarity -in design and proportions to the Eskimo skin -kayak.</p> - -<p>As has been stated, the Eskimo construction required -a rigid frame, with all members fastened together -with lashings and pegs, the skin cover being -merely the watertight envelope and not a strength -member. This system of construction marks primitive -skin-boat design in most parts of the world. The -Indian bark construction, on the other hand, did -not have a rigid frame, and all but a few of the -structural members were held in place by pressure -alone: the sheathing was held against the bark cover -by pressure of the ribs; the stem-pieces, in most cases, -were held in place by pressure of the ribs, gunwale -sheering, or headboards. In fact without the bark -cover in place, the greater part of the wooden structure -of the bark canoe would collapse. Not only -was the bark cover the fundamental basis of construction, -it was to a great extent a strength member, -though by clever design the loading of the bark was -minimized.</p> - -<p>This fundamental difference in construction must -be recognized in comparisons of Eskimo and North -American Indian watercraft. Here, too, it might be -observed that one should view with skepticism any -claim that widespread similarity of certain structural -practices is evidence of some ancient connection between -types of canoes. In most cases these similarities -were imposed by the working characteristics of the -materials employed. Similarly, limitations in materials -available for construction have their effect upon -building techniques.</p> - -<p>The practice of employing pressure members in -bark-canoe construction, particularly where birch -bark was employed, was the result of the need to -stretch this material by gentle and widespread pressure, -whereas the skin cover could be stretched by -the concentrated pull of stitching alone, or by force -applied in a small area. Bark canoes built in areas -where skin-kayak construction is carried on nearby -show a greater rigidity of structure. Thus, in the -lower Yukon Valley in Alaska the bottom frame of -the canoes built there was a rigidly constructed unit, -even though the side longitudinals were held in place -by rib pressure alone. And it is reasonable to -theorize that the Malecite, who through habit still -employed bark-canoe construction practices in building -their skin craft, would have eventually come to -the Eskimo method of construction had conditions -required them to use skins exclusively.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i237.jpg" width="700" height="260" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 213</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Large Moose-hide Canoe</span> of upper Gravel River, Mackenzie -valley. (<em>Photo, George M. Douglas.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_222" id="Page_222">[Pg 222]</a><br /><a name="Page_223" id="Page_223">[Pg 223]</a></span></p> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2><em>Appendix</em><br /> - -<span style="margin-right: 67%">The Kayak Roll</span> -<span style="margin-left: 67%"><em>John D. Heath</em></span></h2> - - -<p>The most extraordinary feat of kayak handling -is the ability to right the craft after a capsize. This -maneuver, called "rolling," is usually practiced by -capsizing on one side and recovering on the other. -Under emergency conditions, a kayaker will recover -on whichever side is more convenient. When rolling, -a kayaker wears a waterproof jacket having long -sleeves and a hood. The waist, face, and wrist -openings are fitted with drawstrings, so that when -the waist opening is fitted over the cockpit rim, the -kayak and kayaker become a waterproof unit. -Thus equipped, the kayak is the most seaworthy -craft of its size, this quality being limited only by the -skill and stamina of the kayaker.</p> - -<p>The art of kayak rolling was highly developed in -Alaska and Greenland. Eskimos in both of these -regions depended upon seal hunting by kayak as a -major part of their economy, hence the ability to -roll was an important means of survival. Very little -detailed information exists regarding Alaskan kayakers, -but the Greenlanders have been the object of -intensive study by ethnographers and explorers. -The earliest detailed record of rolling was that of -David Crantz, a European missionary, who in 1767 -enumerated ten methods of rolling in his <cite>History of -Greenland</cite>.<a name="FNanchor_7_7" id="FNanchor_7_7"></a><a href="#Footnote_7_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> His description follows.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_7_7" id="Footnote_7_7"></a><a href="#FNanchor_7_7"><span class="label">[7]</span></a> See bibliography.</p></div> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p>1. The Greenlander lays himself first on one side, then -on the other, with his body flat upon the water, (to imitate -the case of one who is nearly, but not quite overset) and -keeps the balance with his <em>pautik</em> or oar, so that he raises -himself again.</p> - -<p>2. He overturns himself quite, so that his head hangs -perpendicular underwater; in this dreadful posture he -gives himself a swing with a stroke of his paddle, and raises -himself aloft again on which side he will.</p> - -<p>These are the most common cases of misfortune, which -frequently occur in storms and high waves; but they still -suppose that the Greenlander retains the advantage of -his <em>pautik</em> in his hand, and is disentangled from the seal-leather -strap. But it may easily happen in the seal-fishery, -that the man becomes entangled with the string, so that he -either cannot rightly use the <em>pautik</em>, or that he loses it -entirely. Therefore they must be prepared for this -casualty. With this view</p> - -<p>3. They run one end of the <em>pautik</em> under one of the cross-strings -of the kajak, (to imitate its being entangled) overset, -and scrabble up again by means of the artful motion -of the other end of the <em>pautik</em>.</p> - -<p>4. They hold one end of it in their mouth, and yet move -the other end with their hand, so as to rear themselves -upright again.</p> - -<p>5. They lay the <em>pautik</em> behind their neck, and hold it there -with both hands, or,</p> - -<p>6. Hold it fast behind their back; so overturn, and by -stirring it with both their hands behind them, without -bringing it before, rise and recover.</p> - -<p>7. They lay it across one shoulder, take hold of it with -one hand before, and the other behind their back, and -thus emerge from the deep.</p> - -<p>These exercises are of service in cases where the <em>pautik</em> is -entangled with the string; but because they may also -quite lose it, in which the greatest danger lies, therefore,</p> - -<p>8. Another exercise is, to run the <em>pautik</em> through the water -under the kajak, hold it fast on both sides with their face -lying on the kajak, in this position overturn, and rise again -by moving the oar <i lang="la">secundum artem</i> on the top of the water -from beneath. This is of service when they lose the oar -during the oversetting, and yet see it swimming over them, -to learn to manage it with both hands from below.</p> - -<p>9. They let the oar go, turn themselves head down, reach -their hand after it, and from the surface pull it down to -them, and so rebound up.</p> - -<p>10. But if they can't possibly reach it, they take either -the hand-board off from the harpoon, or a knife, and try -by the force of these, or even splashing the water with the -palm of their hand, to swing themselves above water; -but this seldom succeeds.</p></div> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_224" id="Page_224">[Pg 224]</a></span></p> -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i240a.jpg" width="700" height="311" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 214</p> - -<p>THE STANDARD GREENLAND ROLL</p> - -<p>The solid lines represent the starting position for a clockwise roll (disregard the phantom -lines until later). The paddle is held blade-on-edge along the starboard gunwale, with one -end near the right hip, and the other end toward the bow. The kayaker leans forward and -faces slightly to starboard. His left forearm is against, or near, the foredeck, and his left -hand reaches across the starboard gunwale to grasp the paddle near, but short of, the middle. -The right hand holds the paddle near the end, about even with the hip. The palms of both -hands pass over the paddle, so that the knuckles are outboard. The kayaker takes a deep -breath, leans to starboard and capsizes.</p> - -<p>(Now turn the page upside down)</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i240b.jpg" width="700" height="311" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 214</p> - -<p>The same lines which represented the starting position now represent a fish-eye view of -the fully capsized position. The phantom lines represent the upright position, or goal. -To right himself, the kayaker—</p> - -<p>(1) Flicks his wrists to swing his knuckles toward his face, thus causing the outboard -edge of the paddle to assume a slight planing angle (not shown) with the water surface. -The remaining steps constitute one continuous movement, to be done as quickly as -possible.</p> - -<p>(2) With his hips and right hand serving as pivot points, he sweeps his forward paddle -blade, and his torso, outward in a 90-degree planing arc on the water surface, as shown -from position (1) to (3), while pulling down on his left hand and pushing up on his right, -thus lifting himself to the surface.</p> - -<p>(3) Completes the roll by flicking his wrists to flatten the blade angle, then sharply increasing -his opposing hand pressures, thus raising himself in a chinning attitude as the -paddle blade sinks and is drawn inward. The roll is now completed.</p></div> -</div><p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_225" id="Page_225">[Pg 225]</a></span> -Since Crantz's time, various authors have described -kayak rolling. At least 30 methods of rolling have -been known in Greenland. There are possibly many -more, because the variations and combinations are -numerous.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i242.jpg" width="700" height="225" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 215</p> - -<p>THE CRITICAL STAGE OF A CAPSIZE RECOVERY</p> - -<p>The start (solid lines) and finish (phantom lines) of a planing sweep are shown head-on. -Success is almost certain if the kayaker has surfaced by the time he has completed the 90-degree -sweep. Some minor refinements of rolling are apparent. The left forearm is shown -right against the foredeck (a convenient means of orientation), the leading shoulder is nearer -the surface (to gain lift when the torso is swung outward), and the hips right the kayak as far -as possible while the torso is still partly submerged (to avoid having to lift torso and kayak at -the same time).</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Although kayaking as a sport first became popular in -the 1860's, it was not until the 1920's that the value of -learning to roll began to be fully realized by the -recreational kayaker. Interest has grown steadily -since that time, and rolling instruction has been -included as a regular part of many club training -courses. A preliminary step in mastering the roll -consists of using the paddle to prevent a capsize, by -turning the blade parallel to the water surface and -pressing down sharply on the side toward which the -kayak is capsizing, while exerting an upward -pressure with the other hand. This produces a -rotary movement which restores the kayak to an -even keel. Recreational canoeists call this maneuver -a "paddle brace."</p> - -<p>Most kayak rolls are based upon one or more of -three basic movements. These are the paddle brace, -the "sculling" stroke, from which lift is obtained by -moving the paddle back and forth through a small -arc with the leading edge of the blade at a slight -planing angle, and the "sweep," from which lift -is obtained by sweeping the blade through a large -arc at a slight planing angle. The method of rolling -shown in the sketches is the standard Greenland -roll, so called because it is the most common roll -encountered in Greenland. A slightly modified -version of this roll is called by recreational canoeists -the Pawlata roll in honor of the European who -introduced it to them. Many skillful kayakers could -not roll, and sometimes a highly skilled roller would -fail to recover. Such men could be rescued by their -companions by either of two common methods. One -method was executed by placing the bow of the -rescue craft within reach of the capsized paddler's -hand, so that he could pull himself up by a one-handed -chinning motion. The other method was -executed by bringing the rescue kayak alongside -the capsized kayak so that the two craft were parallel -and about two feet apart. The rescuer then laid<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_226" id="Page_226">[Pg 226]</a></span> -his paddle across both craft and holding it with one -hand, reached down and grabbed the capsized -paddler's arm. He then pulled him up between the -two kayaks. This method enabled an enfeebled or -unconscious kayaker to be rescued.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 591px;"> -<img src="images/i243a.jpg" width="591" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 216</p> - -<p>Hand positions used with the standard roll:</p> - -<p>(1) The extended paddle position is the -common method, and it gives maximum -leverage. It is similar to the "Pawlata -Roll" position used by recreational -kayakers.</p> - -<p>(2) The normal paddling position is more -convenient, but gives less leverage. This -is called the "Screw Stroke" position.</p> - -<p>(3-6) Difficult trick positions demonstrated -by Enoch Nielsen of Igdlorssuit, West -Greenland, to Kenneth Taylor, a Scottish -canoeist, in 1959.</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i243b.jpg" width="700" height="427" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 217</p> - -<p>Kayak rescue, bow-grab method</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i243c.jpg" width="700" height="568" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 218</p> - -<p>Kayak rescue, paddle-grab method</p></div> -</div> - -<p>Both of the above methods of rescue were completed -with the capsized victim still in his craft. This prevented -his kayak from swamping and also protected -him from exposure, since his waterproof kayak -jacket remained tied to the cockpit hoop. Little -detailed information has been recorded on the -methods of rolling known outside of Greenland, but -there are many photographs of Bering Strait kayakers -rolling with the single bladed paddle. A study of -Alaskan rolling methods is now in progress, and it -is hoped that much information can be recovered -and preserved.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_227" id="Page_227">[Pg 227]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 536px;"> -<img src="images/i244.jpg" width="536" height="700" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 219</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Preparing for Demonstration.</span> Jonas Malakiasen puts on -his tuvilik (a waterproof kayak jacket, pronounced in English -"tooey-leek"). When it is fastened tightly about his face, -wrists, and the cockpit hoop, he can capsize without getting -water in the kayak. Igdlorssuit, West Greenland, summer -1959. (<em>Photo by Kenneth Taylor.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_228" id="Page_228">[Pg 228]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i245a.jpg" width="700" height="465" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 220</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Getting Aboard.</span> Enoch Nielsen, best kayak roller in the village of -Igdlorssuit, West Greenland, wriggles into his kayak on the beach before -embarking on a kayak rolling exhibition. Note that he is leaving the -harpoon line stand and gun bag in place. (<em>Photo by Kenneth Taylor.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i245b.jpg" width="700" height="417" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 221</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Pausing on Surface.</span> Kayaker -supports himself on the -surface of the water by a sculling -stroke before starting the -roll. Note that Enoch Nielsen's -body is twisted so that -his shoulders are parallel with -the surface, thus submerging as -much of the body as possible in -order to gain buoyancy. (<em>Photo -by Kenneth Taylor.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_229" id="Page_229">[Pg 229]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i246a.jpg" width="700" height="412" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 222</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Fully Capsized</span>, view from -forward quarter, looking aft. -Enoch Nielsen prepares to roll -up by the standard method. -Note the planing angle of -his paddle blade as he prepares -for the next step, the planing -sweep of the blade across the -surface. (<em>Photo by Kenneth -Taylor.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i246b.jpg" width="700" height="416" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 223</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Emerging From Roll</span>, view -from forward quarter, looking -aft. From the position of -Enoch Nielsen's hands, this -appears to be the standard roll. -He has just completed the -planing sweep and is halfway -up. The inboard hand is a -pivot point for the sweep and a -fulcrum for the lift. (<em>Photo by -Kenneth Taylor.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 700px;"> -<img src="images/i246c.jpg" width="700" height="417" alt="" /> -<div class="caption"><p>Figure 224</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Righting the Kayak.</span> Enoch -Nielsen emerges from roll with -a final downward thrust of the -paddle blade. (<em>Photo by Kenneth -Taylor.</em>)</p></div> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_230" id="Page_230">[Pg 230]</a><br /><a name="Page_231" id="Page_231">[Pg 231]</a></span></p> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2><em>Bibliography</em></h2> - - -<div class="hangindent"> - -<p><span class="smcap">Adney, Edwin Tappan.</span> <cite>Klondike stampede.</cite> New York: Harper & Bros., 1900.</p> - -<p>----. How an Indian birch-bark canoe is made. <cite>Harper's Young People</cite> (July 29, -1890). Supplement.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Beard, Daniel Carter.</span> <cite>Boatbuilding and boating.</cite> New York: C. Scribner's Sons, -1911. (Chapter 6, pages 48-61, is a revision of Adney's articles on canoe -building.)</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Beauchamp, William M.</span> Aboriginal use of wood in New York. (New York -State Museum Bulletin 89.) Albany, 1905, pp. 139-149.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Birket-Smith, Kai.</span> <cite>Ethnography of the Egedesminde district.</cite> (Vol. 66 of Meddelelser -om Grønland, 1879-1931.) Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel, 19?</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Boas, Franz.</span> <cite>The Central Eskimo.</cite> (Pp. 409-669 in U.S. Bureau of American Ethnology, -Sixth Annual Report, 1884-85.) Washington: Smithsonian Institution, -1888.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Bogoras, Vladimir.</span> <cite>The Chukchi.</cite> New York: G. E. Stechert, 1904-09. [Also as -Memoir of the American Museum of Natural History, vol. 11; and as publications -of the Jesup North Pacific Expedition, vol. 7, issued in three parts.]</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Cartier, Jacques.</span> <cite>$1</cite>ite> (Canadian Archivist Publications -No. 11.) Transl. H. P. Biggar. 1914. (Another edition: Ottawa: F. A. -Acland, 1924.)</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Cartwright, Captain George.</span> <cite>Captain Cartwright and his Labrador journal.</cite> Edit. -Charles W. Townsend. Boston: D. Estes & Co., 1911.</p> - -<p>----. <cite>A journal of transaction and events, during a residence of nearly sixteen years on the -coast of Labrador</cite> ... 3 vols. Newark, England: Allin and Ridge, 1792.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Champlain, Samuel de.</span> <cite>Les Voyages de la nouvelle France.</cite> Paris: C. Collet, 1632.</p> - -<p>----. Oeuvres de Champlain. 5 vol. in 6. Quebec: G. E. Desbarats, 1870.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Crantz, David.</span> <cite>The history of Greenland.</cite> Ed. and transl. [of part] John Gambold. -2 vols. London: Moravian Brethren Society, 1767.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Dawson, George Mercer.</span> Notes on the Shuswap people of British Columbia. -<cite>Proceedings and Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada for the year 1891</cite> (Montreal, -1892), vol. 9, sec. 2, pp. 3-44.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Denys, Nicolas.</span> <cite>The description and natural history of the coasts of North America.</cite> -Transl. and edit. W. F. Ganong. Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1908.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Dunbar, Seymour.</span> <cite>A history of travel in America.</cite> 2 vols. New York: Tudor Publishing -Co., 1937.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Durham, Bill.</span> <cite>Canoes and kayaks of Western America.</cite> Seattle: Copper Canoe -Press, 1960.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_232" id="Page_232">[Pg 232]</a></span></p> - -<p><cite>Early narratives of the Northwest, 1634-1699.</cite> Edit. L. P. Kellogg. New York: C. -Scribner's Sons, 1917.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Eckstrom</span>, [Mrs.] <span class="smcap">Fannie Hardy.</span> <cite>The handicrafts of the modern Indians of Maine.</cite> -(Lafayette National Park Museum Bulletin.) Bar Harbor, 1932.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Egede, Hans.</span> <cite>A description of Greenland.</cite> Transl. from the Danish. London: C. -Hitch, 1745.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Elliott, Henry Wood.</span> <cite>The Seal Islands of Alaska.</cite> Washington (Government -Printing Office), 1881.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Franquet</span>, Col. Voyages et mémoires sur le Canada, par Franquet. <cite>Institut -canadien de Québec</cite>, Annuaire (1889), pp. 29-129.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Godsell, Phillip H.</span> The Ojibwa Indian. <cite>Canadian Geographical Journal.</cite> (January -1932).</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Hadlock, Wendell S.</span> and <span class="smcap">Dodge, Ernest S.</span> A canoe from the Penobscot -River. <cite>American Neptune</cite> (October 1948), vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 289-301. (Detailed -description of early birch-bark canoe, with lines and numerous drawings of -construction details.)</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Hearne, Samuel.</span> <cite>A journey from Prince of Wales fort in Hudson's Bay to the Northern -Ocean, 1769, 1770, 1771, 1772.</cite> Dublin: P. Byrne and J. Rice, 1796.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Henry, Alexander</span>, Jr. <cite>New light on the early history of the greater Northwest. The -manuscript journals of Alexander Henry ... and of David Thompson ... 1799-1814.</cite> -Ed. Elliott Coues. New York: F. P. Harper, 1897.</p> - -<p>----. <cite>Travels and adventures in Canada and the Indian territories.</cite> Ed. James Bain. -Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1901.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Hoffman, Walter James.</span> <cite>The Menomini Indians.</cite> Part 1, (pp. 3-328 of U.S. Bureau -of American Ethnology: 14th Annual Report, pt. 1, 1892-93.) Washington: -Smithsonian Institution, 1896.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Holm, Gustav Frederik.</span> <cite>The Ammassalik Eskimo, contributions to the ethnology of -the East Greenland natives.</cite> Vol. 1. Ed. William Thalbitzer. Copenhagen: -B. Luno, 1914. [Also as vols. 39-40, Meddelelser on Grønland.]</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Hornell, James.</span> <cite>British Coracles and Irish Curraghs.</cite> London: Society for Nautical -Research, 1938.</p> - -<p>----. <cite>Water transport, origins & early evolution.</cite> Cambridge: The Cambridge -University Press, 1946.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Howley, James Patrick.</span> <cite>The Beothucks, or red Indians.</cite> Cambridge: Cambridge -University Press, 1915. (A very complete study.)</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Jenness, Diamond.</span> <cite>The Indians of Canada.</cite> (Bulletin 65, Anthropological Series -No. 15, National Museum of Canada.) 5th ed. 1960.</p> - -<p><cite>The Jesuit relations and allied documents, 1610-1791.</cite> Ed. R. G. Thwaites. Cleveland: -Burrows Bros. Co., 1896-1901.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Jochelson, Waldemar [Vladimir].</span> <cite>The Koryak.</cite> New York: G. E. Stechert, -1908. [Also as Memoir of the American Museum of Natural History, vol. 9; -and as Publications of the Jesup North Pacific Expedition, vol. 6, published in -two parts, 1905-08.]</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Kalm, Pehr.</span> <cite>Travels into North America.</cite> Transl. John R. Forster. 2 vols. London, -1770-71.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Kroeber, Alfred Louis.</span> The Eskimo of Smith Sound. <cite>Bulletin of the American -Museum of Natural History</cite> (Feb. 19, 1900), vol. 12, art. 21, pp. 265-327.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">LaFiteau, Joseph François.</span> <cite>Moeurs des sauvages Ameriquains.</cite> Paris: Saugrain, 1724.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">LaHontan, Louis Armand, Baron de.</span> <cite>Nouveaux voyages de M. le baron de LaHontan, -dans l'Amerique septentrionale.</cite> La Haye: Chez les Frères l'Honore, 1703.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_233" id="Page_233">[Pg 233]</a></span></p> - -<p><span class="smcap">LeClerq</span>, Father <span class="smcap">Chrétien.</span> <cite>Nouvelle relation de la Gaspesie.</cite> Paris, 1691.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Lyon, George Francis.</span> <cite>The private journal of Captain Lyon of N. M. S. "Hecla."</cite> -Boston: Wells and Lilly, 1824.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Mackenzie</span>, Sir <span class="smcap">Alexander.</span> <cite>Voyages from Montreal, ... to the frozen and Pacific -Oceans; ... 1789 and 1793.</cite> 2 vols. From York: New Amsterdam Book Co., -1903.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Mason, Otis T.</span> and <span class="smcap">Hill, Meriden S.</span> <cite>Pointed bark canoes of the Kutenai and Amur.</cite> -(Pp. 523-537 of Report of U.S. National Museum for 1899.) Washington: -Smithsonian Institution, 1901.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Mitman, Carl Weaver.</span> <cite>Catalogue of the watercraft collection in the United States -National Museum.</cite> (U.S. National Museum Bulletin 127.) Washington: Smithsonian -Institution, 1923.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Morgan, Lewis Henry.</span> <cite>League of the Ho-De-No-Sau-Nee, or Iroquois.</cite> New York: -M. H. Newman & Co., 1851.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Murdoch, John.</span> <cite>Ethnological results of the Point Barrow expedition.</cite> (Pp. 3-441 of -U.S. Bureau of American Ethnology, 9th Annual Report, 1887-88.) Washington: -Smithsonian Institution, 1892.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Murray, Alexander Hunter.</span> <cite>Journal of the Yukon, 1847-48.</cite> Ottawa (Government -Printing Bureau), 1910.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Nansen, Friotjof.</span> <cite>The first crossing of Greenland.</cite> 2 vols. Transl. Nubert M. Gepp. -London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1870.</p> - -<p>----. <cite>The Norwegian north polar expedition, 1893-1896.</cite> 6 vols. London: Longmans, -Green and Co., 1900-06.</p> - -<p>----. <cite>In northern mists.</cite> Transl. Arthur G. Chater. 2 vols. New York: Frederick -A. Stokes Co., 1911.</p> - -<p>----. <cite>Farthest north.</cite> 2 vols. New York: Harper Brothers, 1897.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Nelson, Edward William.</span> <cite>The Eskimo about Behring Strait.</cite> (Pp. 3-518 of U.S. -Bureau of American Ethnology, 18th Annual Report, 1896-97.) Washington: -Smithsonian Institution, 1899.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Paris, Edmond.</span> <cite>Essai sur la construction navale des peuples extra-européens.</cite> Paris: A. -Bertrand, [n.d.].</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Parry</span>, Sir <span class="smcap">William Edward.</span> <cite>Journal of a second voyage for the discovery of a northwest -passage.</cite> London: J. Murray, 1824.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Patterson</span>, Rev. <span class="smcap">George.</span> The Beothiks or red Indians of Newfoundland. <cite>Proceedings -and transactions of the Royal Society of Canada for the year 1891</cite> (Montreal, -1892), vol. 9, p. 137.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Poterie, Claude Charles Le Roy Bacqueville de la.</span> <cite>Historie de l'Amerique -septentrionale</cite> ... 2 vols. Paris, 1722.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Richardson</span>, Sir <span class="smcap">John.</span> <cite>Arctic searching expedition: A journal of a boat voyage ... in -search of discovery ships ... of Sir John Franklin.</cite> London: Longman, Brown, -Green, and Longmans, 1851.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Ritzenhalter, Robert Eugene.</span> The building of a Chippeway Indian birch-bark -canoe. <cite>Bulletin of the Public Museum of the City of Milwaukee</cite> (November 1950), -vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 53-90. (The modern method of building.)</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Rosier, James.</span> <cite>A true relation of the most prosperous voyage made this present year, 1605, by -Captain George Waymouth in the land of Virginia.</cite> Londini; 1605.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Ross, Alexander.</span> <cite>The fur hunters of the Far West.</cite> London: Smith, Elder and Co., -1855.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Schoolcraft, Henry Rowe.</span> <cite>Information respecting the history conditions and prospects -of the Indian tribes of the United States.</cite> 6 vols. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Grambo, -1852-57.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_234" id="Page_234">[Pg 234]</a></span></p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Schoolcraft, Henry Rowe.</span> <cite>The Indian tribes of the United States.</cite> 2 vols. Philadelphia: -J. B. Lippincott & Co., 1884.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Skinner, Alanson Buck.</span> Notes on the eastern Cree and northern Saulteaux. -(<cite>Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History</cite>, vol. 9, pt. 1). -New York, 1911.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Snell, George F.,</span> Jr. Pine country Hiawatha. <cite>Sports Afield</cite> (August 1945), vol. 120, -no. 2. (Describes modern Ojibway canoe building.)</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Stefansson, Vilhjalmur.</span> <cite>My life with the Eskimo.</cite> New York: The Macmillan -Company, 1913.</p> - -<p>----. <cite>Ultima Thule.</cite> New York: Macmillan Company, 1940.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Turner, Lucien McShaw.</span> <cite>Ethnology of the Ungava District: Hudson Bay Territory.</cite> -Edit. John Murdoch. (Pp. 159-350 of U.S. Bureau of American Ethnology, -11th Annual Report.) Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1894.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Warren, William Whipple.</span> <cite>History of the Ojibways.</cite> St. Paul: Minnesota Historical -Society Collections, 1885. Vol. 5, pp. 21-394.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Whitbourne</span>, Sir <span class="smcap">Richard.</span> <cite>Westward hoe for Avalon in the new-found-land.</cite> Edit. and -illus. T. Whitburn. London: S. Low and Marston, 1870.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Willoughby, Charles Clark.</span> <cite>Antiquities of the New England Indians.</cite> Cambridge, -Mass.: Peabody Museum of American Archaeology, Harvard Univ., 1935.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Wissler, Clark.</span> <cite>Indians of the United States.</cite> New York: Doubleday, Doran & Co., -1940.</p> - -<p><cite>Wood: A manual for its use in wooden ships.</cite> Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, -1945.</p> - -<p><cite>Wood handbook.</cite> Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1955. (Basic information -on wood as a material for construction.)</p></div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_235" id="Page_235">[Pg 235]</a></span></p> -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - - - -<h2>Index</h2> - - -<ul id="index"><li class="ifrst">Abitibi, Lake, Post (Hudson's Bay Company), <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li>Abitibi River, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li>Abnaki (Indians), <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> -<li class="isub1">canoe, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>-89;</li> -<li class="isub2">dimensions, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>-115</li> - -<li>Admiralty Collection of Draughts, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> - -<li>Adney, Edwin Tappan, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>-5, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">papers, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">parents, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">wife, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">work and career, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>-5</li> - -<li>Adney, Glenn (son of E. T. A.), <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li>Adney, H. H. (father of E. T. A.), <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li>Adney, Minnie Bell Sharp (wife of E. T. A.), <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li>Adney, Ruth Shaw (mother of E. T. A.), <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li>Adney papers, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a></li> - -<li>Alaska, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li>Alaskan canoe, <a href="#Page_55">55</a></li> - -<li>Alaskan kayak, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li> - -<li>Alaskan umiak, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a> ff.</li> - -<li>Albany boat, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> - -<li>Alberta, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li>Aleutian Islands, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a> ff.</li> - -<li>Aleutian kayak, <a href="#Page_195">195</a> ff.</li> - -<li>Algonkian Family, <a href="#Page_99">99</a></li> - -<li>Algonkin (Indians), <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">canoe, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>-122</li> - -<li><em>America</em> (44-gun ship, RN), <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> - -<li><em>American Neptune</em> (periodical), <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> - -<li>American Museum of Natural History, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>Androscoggin (Indians), <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li>Anson, Lord, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> - -<li>Art Students' League of New York, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li>ash, white, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">black, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">splitting qualities, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> - -<li>Asiatic kayak, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> - -<li>Assiniboine (Indian tribe), <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li>Athabaska, Lake, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> - -<li>Athabascan Indians, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> - -<li>awl, bone, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">steel (canoe), <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> - -<li>axe, steel, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">cedar, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">Baffin Island, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">umiak, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_204">204</a> ff.</li> - -<li>baidarka (Russian kayak), <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> - -<li>bang plate, <a href="#Page_208">208</a></li> - -<li>bark, basswood, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li> -<li class="isub1">birch, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">description, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>-15;</li> -<li class="isub2">selection and preparation, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>-26;</li> -<li class="isub2">handling, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>-31;</li> -<li class="isub2">use in building canoes, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>-51</li> -<li class="isub1">butternut, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li> -<li class="isub1">chestnut, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li> -<li class="isub1">cottonwood, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li> -<li class="isub1">elm, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a> ff.</li> -<li class="isub1">hickory, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> -<li class="isub1">spruce, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> -<li class="isub1">white pine, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li> - -<li>bark cover, piecing, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Beothuk, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Western Cree, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> - -<li>Barrière, Lake, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> - -<li>basket (pack), in fur trade, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li> - -<li>basswood, bark, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li> - -<li>bateau, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> - -<li>bateau-shape canoe, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>-161</li> - -<li>batten (in skin boat construction), <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a> ff., <a href="#Page_195">195</a> ff., <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a> ff., <a href="#Page_208">208</a></li> - -<li>Beard, Daniel, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li>Beaver (Indians), <a href="#Page_154">154</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form canoe, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> - -<li>Beothuk (Indian tribe), <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>-98</li> -<li class="isub1">canoe, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">dimensions, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">form, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">keel, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">reconstruction of, <a href="#Page_96">96</a> ff.</li> - -<li>Bering Sea, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> - -<li>Bering Strait, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> - -<li>bifid bow, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a></li> - -<li>big river canoe, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> - -<li>birch bark, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">description, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>-15;</li> -<li class="isub1">selection and preparation, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>-26;</li> -<li class="isub1">handling, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>-31;</li> -<li class="isub1">use in building canoes, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>-51</li> - -<li>bladder, skin (float), <a href="#Page_194">194</a></li> - -<li>Boas, Franz, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>boat, Arctic skin, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>-212;</li> -<li class="isub1">Viking, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">temporary skin, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>-220;</li> -<li class="isub1">bull, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> - -<li>Bogoras, Vladimir, <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> - -<li>bola (hunting), <a href="#Page_194">194</a> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_236" id="Page_236">[Pg 236]</a></span></li> -<li>bone fittings, kayak, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> - -<li>Bonshere River, Ontario, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> - -<li>bottom-frame, kayak-form canoe, <a href="#Page_160">160</a> ff.</li> - -<li>bow drill, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> - -<li>breakwater, canoe, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li> - -<li>British Columbia, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form canoe, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sturgeon-nose canoe, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> - -<li>bucksaw, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li>building bed, locating, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">preparation of, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">stakes, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a> ff., <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">repair to, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of plank, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Malecite, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Francis, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Beothuk, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Eastern Cree, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Ojibway, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Western Cree, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">narrow-bottom, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sturgeon-nose, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">temporary canoe, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> - -<li>building frame, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">Eastern Cree, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Ojibway, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Western Cree, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">narrow-bottom, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sturgeon-nose, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> - -<li>bull-boat, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> - -<li>butternut bark, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">camber (rocker of bottom), <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a> (see also rocker)</li> - -<li>canoe, birch bark, Adney on, <a href="#Page_4">4</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub2">scale models of, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">plans of, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">speed of, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">origin of name, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">requirements for, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">types, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">forms discussed, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>-36 ff., <a href="#Page_59">59</a> (see also under tribal types);</li> -<li class="isub2">tribal classification, <a href="#Page_27">27</a> ff. (see under tribal names);</li> -<li class="isub2">effects of bark characteristics on, <a href="#Page_29">29</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub2">construction discussed, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>-57 (see also under tribal types);</li> -<li class="isub2">compared with Eskimo skin boat, <a href="#Page_193">193</a></li> -<li class="isub1">elm bark, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> -<li class="isub1">hickory bark, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> -<li class="isub1">skin, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>-221;</li> -<li class="isub2">moosehide, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">temporary, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>-221</li> -<li class="isub1">spruce bark, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> -<li class="isub1">temporary, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>-221</li> - -<li>canoe awl, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> - -<li>canoe birch (see under bark)</li> - -<li>canoe brigade, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> - -<li>canoe building, Trois Rivières factory, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for fur trade, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a> ff.; <a href="#Page_148">148</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">at Hudson's Bay Company Posts, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li>canoe ends, details of construction, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Malecite, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Chipewyan, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Dogrib, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">slave, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sturgeon-nose, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> - -<li>canoe loading, fur-trade, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li> - -<li>canoe portaging, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> - -<li>canoe roads, <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li> - -<li>canoe sails (see sails)</li> - -<li>canoe shoes, Malecite, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li> - -<li>canoe types,</li> -<li class="isub1">Abnaki, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>-89</li> -<li class="isub1">Alaskan, <a href="#Page_55">55</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>-122</li> -<li class="isub1">Beaver, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Beothuk, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>-98</li> -<li class="isub1">Big River, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isub1">bateau-shape, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>-161</li> -<li class="isub1">British Columbia, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Chipewyan, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>-158</li> -<li class="isub1">Cree, Central, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">Eastern, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>-106;</li> -<li class="isub2">Western, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>-134, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> -<li class="isub1">crooked, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Dogrib, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>-158</li> -<li class="isub1">express, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade (see under fur-trade)</li> -<li class="isub1">hunting (Micmac), <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form (see under kayak-form)</li> -<li class="isub1">light, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> -<li class="isub1">long nose, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Loucheux, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Mackenzie Basin, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Montagnais, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Malecite, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>-57, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>-93, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_221">221</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>-69</li> -<li class="isub1">Nahane, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> -<li class="isub1">narrow-bottom, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>-158</li> -<li class="isub1">Northwest, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>-157 (narrow-bottom);</li> -<li class="isub2"><a href="#Page_158">158</a>-168 (kayak-form)</li> -<li class="isub1">Ojibway, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>-131</li> -<li class="isub1">one-piece, <a href="#Page_212">212</a></li> -<li class="isub1">open-water, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Passamaquoddy, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Peterborough, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isub1">porpoise hunting, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> -<li class="isub1">portage, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Restigouche, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isub1">river (Malecite), <a href="#Page_70">70</a>-79</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Francis, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>-93, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li> -<li class="isub1">skiff-canoe, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Slave, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>-158</li> -<li class="isub1">straight-bottom, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> -<li class="isub1">sturgeon-nose, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>-173</li> -<li class="isub1">temporary, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>-219</li> -<li class="isub1">Têtes de Boule, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>-112, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> -<li class="isub1">V-bottom, <a href="#Page_74">74</a> ff., <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> -<li class="isub1">war, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> -<li class="isub1">wide-bottom, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> -<li class="isub1">woods, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Western Cree, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>-134, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Yukon River, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> - -<li><em>canot</em> (canoe), <a href="#Page_13">13</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><i lang="fr">du maître</i> (see fur-trade canoe), <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><i lang="fr">du nord</i> (see fur-trade canoe), <a href="#Page_151">151</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><em>léger</em> (see light canoe), <a href="#Page_137">137</a></li> - -<li>Cape York, <a href="#Page_208">208</a></li> - -<li>Carib Indians, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> - -<li>Caribou Eskimo kayak, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>caribou-skin boat, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> - -<li>Cartier, Jacques, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> - -<li>Cartwright, Lieut. John, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> - -<li>cedar, northern white, roots, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">splitting qualities, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li> - -<li>Celts, <a href="#Page_176">176</a> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_237" id="Page_237">[Pg 237]</a></span></li> -<li>Champlain, Samuel de, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li> - -<li>Champlain, Lake, <a href="#Page_7">7</a></li> - -<li>Chatham dockyard, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> - -<li>chestnut bark, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li> - -<li>chine, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a></li> - -<li>Chippewa (Chippeway; Indian tribe), <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> - -<li>Chipewyan (Indian tribe), <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> -<li class="isub1">canoe, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>-158;</li> -<li class="isub2">ends, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">spreading gunwales, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">dimensions, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> - -<li>chisel, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li>Christopherson, L. A. (Hudson's Bay Company Factor), <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on fur-trade canoe construction, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li>Chukchi umiak, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> - -<li>cockpit, kayak, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a> ff., <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> - -<li>Coffin, Samuel, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> - -<li>Collins, Henry B. (Bureau of American Ethnology), <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> - -<li><cite>Colliers</cite> (magazine), <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li>construction methods, Malecite, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>-57, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>-74;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>-64;</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Francis, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>-93;</li> -<li class="isub1">Beothuk, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>-98;</li> -<li class="isub1">Eastern Cree, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>-106;</li> -<li class="isub1">Têtes de Boule, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>-112;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>-122;</li> -<li class="isub1">Ojibway, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">Western Cree, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>-151;</li> -<li class="isub1">narrow-bottom, <a href="#Page_155">155</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_160">160</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">sturgeon-nose, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>-172;</li> -<li class="isub1">umiak, <a href="#Page_176">176</a> ff., <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>-187;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>-194;</li> -<li class="isub1">temporary canoes, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>-218;</li> -<li class="isub1">temporary skin boats, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>-220</li> - -<li>Copper Eskimo kayak, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>Coppermine River, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> - -<li>coracle, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> - -<li>Coronation Gulf, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>Coronation Gulf kayak, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>cottonwood bark, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li> - -<li>Cowassek (Coosuc; Indian tribe), <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li>Crantz, David (missionary), <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_223">223</a></li> - -<li>Cree Indians, central, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">eastern, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>-106;</li> -<li class="isub1">western, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>-134, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> - -<li>crew, fur-trade canoe, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> - -<li>crimping bark (in canoe building), <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> - -<li>crooked canoe, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> - -<li>crooked knife (tool), <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li>curragh, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">waterproofing skins for, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">compared with umiak and kayak, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> - -<li>Coosuc (Indian tribe), <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">dart (for hunting), <a href="#Page_194">194</a></li> - -<li>deck, kayak-form canoe, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a> ff., <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> - -<li>decorations, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Malecite, <a href="#Page_82">82</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Francis, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Têtes de Boule, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> - -<li>Dènè (Indian tribe), <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> - -<li>Denys, Nicolas, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li> - -<li>Dibble, Lt. Col. Herbert, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> - -<li>dimensions, canoe (see under tribal type); old canoes, <a href="#Page_7">7</a> ff.</li> - -<li>Dogrib Indians, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">canoe, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>-158</li> - -<li>drill (tool), <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li> - -<li>dugout, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">eastern canoe construction, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> - -<li>Eastern Cree Indians, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>-106</li> -<li class="isub1">canoe, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>-106;</li> -<li class="isub2">dimensions, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> - -<li>Eastport (Maine), <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> - -<li>Egede, Hans (missionary), <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> - -<li>elm bark, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> - -<li><cite>Encyclopedia Arctica</cite>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a></li> - -<li>ends (canoe), <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a> ff., <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> - -<li>engine, outboard gasoline, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> - -<li>Eskimo, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> - -<li>Eskimo roll, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_223">223</a>-227</li> - -<li>Eskimo skin boat (see kayak, umiak)</li> - -<li>Espenberg, Cape, kayak, <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li> - -<li>express canoe, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">Fort Chimo, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> - -<li>Foxe Basin, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>frames (ribs), <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">number of, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">making and bending, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fitting, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">temporary, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Malecite, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Francis, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Eastern Cree, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Têtes de Boule, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Ojibway, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Western Cree, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">narrow-bottom, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">sturgeon-nose, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">umiak, <a href="#Page_184">184</a> ff., <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a> ff., <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a> ff., <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rough construction of, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for temporary bark canoe, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for temporary skin canoe, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> - -<li>Franquet, Colonel (French military engineer-in-chief), <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> - -<li>froe (steel tool), <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> - -<li>"frog" (headboard support), <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a></li> - -<li>fur trade, canoe cargoes in, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">handling furs, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">pack loads, <a href="#Page_142">142</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">bundles and boxes, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">brigades, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li> - -<li>fur-trade canoe, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a> ff., <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>-153, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">described, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">names applied to, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">forms and categories, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">dimensions of, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">construction methods, <a href="#Page_146">146</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">gunwales, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sheathing, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">stem-pieces, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">headboards, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">paint, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li>Fury Strait, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">Gay, John, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> - -<li>Gilbert, Sir Humphrey, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> - -<li>gimlet (tool), <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> - -<li>Golden Lake Algonkin Reserve (Canada), <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> - -<li>gores (bark canoes), <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">spacing, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Eastern Cree, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Têtes de Boule, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in umiak, skin cover, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> - -<li>Grand Victoria Lake, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> - -<li>great canoe (see fur-trade canoe), <a href="#Page_135">135</a> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_238" id="Page_238">[Pg 238]</a></span></li> -<li>Great Lakes, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> - -<li>Great Slave Lake, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> - -<li>Greenland, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a></li> - -<li>Greenland kayak, <a href="#Page_190">190</a> ff., <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1"><a href="#Page_206">206</a> (northern coast, Polar coast), <a href="#Page_208">208</a> (southern coast), <a href="#Page_211">211</a> (modern)</li> - -<li>Greenland roll, <a href="#Page_223">223</a> ff.</li> - -<li>Greenland umiak, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> - -<li>Gulf of Boothia, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>gum, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">spruce, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tempering, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">repairs with, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">paying seams with, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a></li> - -<li>gunwale, making, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">profile of, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">plan view of, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">forms of, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">ends of, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">inner, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">outer, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a> ff., <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">lashing, <a href="#Page_31">31</a> ff., <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a> (see also under lashing);</li> -<li class="isub1">securing bark to, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">setting up, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">use as building frame, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">size of, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">variations in construction of, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">hogged, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Malecite, <a href="#Page_72">72</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Francis, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Beothuk, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Eastern Cree, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Têtes de Boule, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">spreading, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Ojibway, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Western Cree, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">narrow-bottom, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">sturgeon-nose, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">umiak, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a> ff., <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_192">192</a> ff., <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">temporary canoe, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> - -<li>gunwale cap, making and fitting, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Malecite, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Eastern Cree, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Têtes de Boule, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">narrow-bottom, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sturgeon-nose, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">handgrip, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li> - -<li>Hare (Indian tribe), <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> - -<li><cite>Harper's Weekly</cite>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li><cite>Harper's Young People Magazine</cite>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li>harpoon (hunting weapon), <a href="#Page_194">194</a></li> - -<li>headboard, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">support, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">making and fitting, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Malecite, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Francis, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Eastern Cree, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Têtes de Boule, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Ojibway, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">narrow-bottom, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">umiak, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">post used as, <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> - -<li>Hearne, Samuel (explorer), <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> - -<li>Heath, John, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_223">223</a></li> - -<li>Hecla Strait, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>Henry, Jr., Alexander, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> - -<li>hickory bark, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li> - -<li>Hill, Frederick (Director, Mariners' Museum), <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li>hogged bottom (center upcurved lengthwise), <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> - -<li>hogged gunwale, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a></li> - -<li>hogging brace, umiak, <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> - -<li>hot water, use of in bending wood, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a></li> - -<li>Howley, James Patrick, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> - -<li>Hudson Bay, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a></li> - -<li>Hudson Strait, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a></li> - -<li>Hudson's Bay Company, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li>hunting canoe, Micmac, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> - -<li>hunting screen, kayak, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> - -<li>Huron Indians, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li>Huron, Lake, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">Indian migrations, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a> (see also under tribal names)</li> - -<li>ice, skin-boats in, <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li> - -<li>Illinois Indians, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li>Irish, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">curragh, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> - -<li>"Iroquois canoe," in fur trade, <a href="#Page_136">136</a> (see fur-trade canoe)</li> - -<li>Iroquois Indians, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li> -<li class="isub1">canoe (temporary), <a href="#Page_213">213</a>-219</li> - - -<li class="indx">jack pine roots (for canoe lashings), <a href="#Page_16">16</a></li> - -<li>jacket, watertight, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> - -<li>James Bay, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li>Japanese sampan, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> - -<li>Jochelson, Waldemar, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li>Joliet, Louis, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">kayak, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>-211;</li> -<li class="isub1">multi-chine hull, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">cockpit, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a> ff., <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">deck, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a> ff., <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">structure, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">keelson, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">gunwales, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a> ff., <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">geographic distribution, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">v-bottom, <a href="#Page_190">190</a> ff., <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">risers, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">flat bottom, <a href="#Page_190">190</a> ff., <a href="#Page_204">204</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">Alaskan, <a href="#Page_190">190</a> ff., <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">distribution, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">design, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">handling and use, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">portaging, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">construction, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>-194;</li> -<li class="isub1">keel, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">frames, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a> ff., <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a> ff., <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">bone fittings, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">seat, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">skin cover, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">paddle, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">as catamaran, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">righting, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_223">223</a>-227;</li> -<li class="isub1">hunting screen, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">thwarts, <a href="#Page_195">195</a> ff., <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Koryak, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Kodiak Island, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">breakwater, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">decorations, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Aleutian, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Unalaska, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">two-passenger, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">three-passenger, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Nunivak Island, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">King Island, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Cape Krusenstern, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Cape Espenberg, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Point Barrow, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Norton Sound, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Mackenzie Delta, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Kotzebue Sound, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sheer, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a> ff., <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Copper Eskimo, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Coronation Gulf, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Caribou, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Netsilik, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Baffin Island, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Labrador, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rocker (camber) of bottom, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Greenland, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">flare, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rake of ends, <a href="#Page_208">208</a></li> - -<li>kayak-form canoe, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>-168;</li> -<li class="isub1">Sekani, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Nahane, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">bateau-shaped, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rake of ends, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Loucheux, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">bottom frame of, <a href="#Page_160">160</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">paddler's seat, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">hunting, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">British Columbia, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">family, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">keel, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Chipewyan, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> - -<li>keel, Beothuk canoe, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form canoe, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> - -<li>keelson, umiak, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>; -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_239" id="Page_239">[Pg 239]</a></span></li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> - -<li>keg (in fur trade), <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> - -<li>Kennebec Indians, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> - -<li>King Island kayak, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li> - -<li>King Island umiak, <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> - -<li>Kipewa Post (Hudson's Bay Company), <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li>knife, stone, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">crooked, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li>Kodiak Island, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> - -<li>Kodiak Island kayak, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> - -<li>Koryak umiak, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> - -<li>Koryak kayak, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> - -<li>Kotzebue Sound, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li> - -<li>Krusenstern, Cape, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>Krusenstern kayak, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>Kutenai (Kootenay) Indians, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">Labrador, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a></li> - -<li>Labrador kayak, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a></li> - -<li>Laet, Joann de, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> - -<li>LaFiteau, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> - -<li>LaHontan, Baron de, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> - -<li>larch, splitting qualities, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> - -<li>La Salle, Robert Cavalier de, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> - -<li>lashing, canoe gunwale, <a href="#Page_31">31</a> ff., <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Têtes de Boule, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">narrow-bottom, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>-166;</li> -<li class="isub1">sturgeon-nose, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> - -<li>lashing skin cover, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a> (see also sewing, stitching)</li> - -<li>lathing (see sheathing)</li> - -<li>light (express) canoe, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> - -<li><cite>London Chronicle</cite>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li>long-nose canoe, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li>longitudinal strength (see gunwale, keelson chine, keel, stringers, etc.)</li> - -<li>Loucheux Indians, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form canoe, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">MacKenzie, Alexander, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> - -<li>MacKenzie Basin canoe, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> - -<li>Mackenzie River, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a></li> - -<li>Mackenzie River kayak, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li><i lang="fr">maître canot</i> (see fur-trade canoe), <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li> - -<li>Malecite Indians, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">composition of tribe, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">canoe, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sheathing, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">construction, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>-57;</li> -<li class="isub1">bark covers over gunwale ends, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">described, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>-88;</li> -<li class="isub1">ends, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of spruce bark, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">temporary (skin), <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_221">221</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">dimensions of, <a href="#Page_73">73</a> ff., <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li> - -<li>Manitoba, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li>maple, hard, splitting qualities, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> - -<li>Marquette, Father Jacques, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> - -<li>Mariners' Museum (Newport News, Va.), <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> - -<li>mast, Micmac, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tripod, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li>Matachewan Post (Hudson's Bay Company), <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li>Matagama Post (Hudson's Bay Company), <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li>maul, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li>McGill University Museum, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li>measurement, of canoes, early, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">units of (French), <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Indian, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li> - -<li>Melville Peninsula, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>Memphremagog, Lake, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li>Menominee Indians, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> - -<li>Micmac Indians, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li> -<li class="isub1">canoe, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">sheathing, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">described, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>-69;</li> -<li class="isub2">ends, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">form, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">construction, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">range, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> - -<li>migrations, Indian, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">effect on canoes, <a href="#Page_27">27</a></li> - -<li>Missinaibi River, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li>Missinaibi Post (Hudson's Bay Company), <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li>Mohigan Indians, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li>Montagnais Indian canoe, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> - -<li>Montreal, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> - -<li>Moose Factory (Hudson's Bay Company Post), <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li>moosehide canoe, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> - -<li>multi-chine hull, kayak, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">nabiska (rabeska; see fur-trade canoe), <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> - -<li><em>nadowé chiman</em> (see fur-trade canoe), <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li> - -<li>Nahane Indian kayak-form canoe, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> - -<li>nail, in canoe construction, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a></li> - -<li>narrow-bottom canoe, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>-158;</li> -<li class="isub1">Northwest, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">spruce bark, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> - -<li>Nascapee Indians, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> - -<li>National Maritime Museum (Greenwich, England), <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> - -<li>Netsilik kayak, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>New Bedford whaleboat, <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> - -<li>Nipigon, Lake, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> - -<li>North Alaskan whaling umiak, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> - -<li>North Bay (Ontario), <a href="#Page_125">125</a></li> - -<li>north canoe (see fur-trade canoe), <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> - -<li>North West Company, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> - -<li>North West narrow-bottom canoe (see narrow-bottom), <a href="#Page_155">155</a>-157</li> - -<li>Norton Sound kayak, <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li> - -<li>Nunivak Island kayak, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">Oar, umiak, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a> ff.</li> - -<li>Ojibway Indians, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> -<li class="isub1">canoe, sheathing, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">construction, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>-131, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li> - -<li>Oka, Lake, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> - -<li>one-piece bark canoe, <a href="#Page_212">212</a></li> - -<li>open-water canoe, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sails, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">dimensions, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> - -<li>Ossipee Indians, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li>Ottawa River, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> - -<li><cite>Outing Magazine</cite>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li>outwale (see gunwale)</li> - -<li>owner's mark, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li> - -<li>overhang, in ends of kayak-form canoe, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">paddle, material and manufacture, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Malecite, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Beothuk, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Eastern Cree, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Têtes de Boules, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Ojibway, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Western Cree, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">umiak, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_195">195</a> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_240" id="Page_240">[Pg 240]</a></span></li> -<li>paddle guard, Micmac, <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li> - -<li>paddler's seat, kayak-form canoe, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_194">194</a></li> - -<li>paint (on canoes), Malecite, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li>Passamaquoddy Indians, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> -<li class="isub1">canoe, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> - -<li>Peabody Museum (Salem, Mass.), <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> - -<li>peg, outwale, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">keel, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> - -<li>Peterborough canoe, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> - -<li>Pennacook Indians, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li>Penobscot Bay, <a href="#Page_7">7</a></li> - -<li>Penobscot Indians, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> - -<li>Pepysian Library, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> - -<li>Pequawket Indians, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li>Perrot, Nicholas, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> - -<li>Pillagers (Indian tribe), <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> - -<li>pine, white, bark, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li> - -<li>plane, smoothing (tool), <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> - -<li>planking (see sheathing)</li> - -<li>Plains Indians, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> - -<li>Point Barrow (village), <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> - -<li>Point Barrow kayak, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>Point Hope (village), <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> - -<li>Pond Inlet, <a href="#Page_206">206</a></li> - -<li>porpoise-hunting canoe, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> - -<li>portage canoe, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a> (Ojibway)</li> - -<li>portaging, canoe, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Umiak, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> - -<li>Poterie, Bacqueville de la, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> - -<li>prah, Malay, <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> - -<li>Pribilof Islands, <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li> - -<li>Prince William Sound, <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">quill decoration, Micmac, <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">rabeska (see fur-trade canoe), <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> - -<li>rake of ends, kayak-form canoe, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">umiak, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_208">208</a></li> - -<li>ram-form, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> - -<li>Ramezay, chateau de, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li>rawhide, sewing with, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a> (see sewing; stitching; lashing)</li> - -<li>Red Paint People (Indian tribe), <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> - -<li>Repulse Bay, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>Restigouche canoe, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> - -<li>ribs (see frames)</li> - -<li>risers, umiak, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a> ff.,</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> - -<li>river canoe, Malecite, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>-79</li> - -<li>Rivière du Loup, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li>rocker (camber; convex lengthwise curve of keel), <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">effect of gores on, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>:</li> -<li class="isub1">Labrador, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Eastern Cree, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Ojibway, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Western Cree, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Northwest, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">umiak, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">elm-bark canoe, <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li> - -<li>roots, for sewing, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">varieties used, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">splitting and peeling, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> - -<li>Ross, Sir James Clark, <a href="#Page_208">208</a></li> - -<li>rudder, umiak, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> - -<li>Russian influence on skin boat design, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">Saginaw (Michigan), <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> - -<li>Saguenay River, <a href="#Page_99">99</a></li> - -<li>sails, canoe, Micmac, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">Passamaquoddy, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">Malecite, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">Eastern Cree, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">narrow-bottom, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">blanket (Iroquois), <a href="#Page_219">219</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">umiak, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> -<li class="isub1">umiak, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> - -<li>St. Croix River, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> - -<li>St. Francis Abnaki Indians, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> -<li class="isub1">canoe, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>-93;</li> -<li class="isub2">dimensions, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li> - -<li>St. John Lake, <a href="#Page_99">99</a></li> - -<li>St. John River, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> - -<li>St. Joseph Lake, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li>St. Lawrence Island, <a href="#Page_197">197</a></li> - -<li>St. Lawrence River, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li>St. Matthew (Alaska), <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li> - -<li>St. Maurice River, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> - -<li>St. Michaels kayak, <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li> - -<li>Salish Indians, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li>Saltreaux (Indian tribe), <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> - -<li>sampan, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> - -<li>scale-model canoe, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> - -<li>Schenectady boat, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> - -<li>scow, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> - -<li>scraper (tool), <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li> - -<li>sea otter hunting, <a href="#Page_197">197</a></li> - -<li>seal, bearded, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> - -<li>Sekani Indians, kayak-form canoe, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> - -<li>setting up canoe (on building bed), <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li> - -<li>Seton, Ernest Thompson, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li>sewing (stitching, lashing), <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on building bed, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Malecite, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Francis Abnaki, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Eastern Cree, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Têtes de Boule, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rawhide, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">narrow-bottom, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sturgeon-nose, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">skin cover, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">temporary canoe, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> - -<li>Sharp, Minnie Bell (Mrs. Edwin Tappan Adney), <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li>Sharpie (boat type), <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a></li> - -<li>shaving horse (tool), <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> - -<li>sheathing, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fitting of, <a href="#Page_32">32</a> ff., <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Malecite, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Francis, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Eastern Cree, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Têtes de Boule, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">narrow-bottom, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sturgeon-nose, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">temporary canoe, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> - -<li>sheer (rise in lengthwise line of gunwale), <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">hogged, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Malecite, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Beothuk, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Northwest, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">umiak, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a> ff., <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_241" id="Page_241">[Pg 241]</a></span></li> -<li>shelter, Malecite canoe as, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a></li> - -<li>Sioux (Dakotas), <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li> - -<li>skiff-canoe (3-board), <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> - -<li>skin boat arctic, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>-211;</li> -<li class="isub1">seagoing, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">voyages, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">shape and size, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in ice, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">loading, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">umiak, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>-189;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>-211;</li> -<li class="isub1">compared with bark canoe, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_221">221</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">temporary, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_221">221</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">caribou skin, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> - -<li>skin cover, umiak, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_192">192</a> ff., <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for temporary canoe, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> - -<li>skin canoe, temporary, construction of, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>-221</li> - -<li>Siberia, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li>Slave Indians, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">canoe, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>-158</li> - -<li>sledge, for transporting umiak, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for transporting Nunivak Island kayak, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> - -<li>Sokoki Indians, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li>Southampton Island, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>Spars, Micmac, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li> - -<li>Spruce, black, bark, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">roots for sewing, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">splitting qualities, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">in kayaks, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> -<li class="isub1">red, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> - -<li>spruce-bark canoe, Malecite, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Western Cree, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">narrow-bottom, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> - -<li>spruce gum, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">preparation, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">tempering, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li> - -<li>stakes, building bed, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a> ff., <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> - -<li>stanchion, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> - -<li>Stefansson, Vilhjalmur, v, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> - -<li>stem-piece, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">construction, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">root as, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">Micmac, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">Eastern Cree, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">Têtes de Boule, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ojibway, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">plank, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Western Cree, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">narrow-bottom, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">sturgeon-nose, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">temporary skin canoe, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> - -<li>stitching bark cover, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">temporary canoe, <a href="#Page_220">220</a> (see also sewing, lashing)</li> - -<li>stone tools, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>-20;</li> -<li class="isub1">use of, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">cutting edge, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li> - -<li>straight-bottom canoe, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> - -<li>Strut (headboard brace), <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a></li> - -<li>sturgeon-nose canoe, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>-173;</li> -<li class="isub1">British Columbia, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">ends, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">size, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> - -<li>Superior, Lake, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">Taconnet Indians, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li>tamarack (hackmatack), in canoe construction, <a href="#Page_16">16</a></li> - -<li>Tanana Indians, <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> - -<li>tapering wooden members, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a></li> - -<li>tarpaulin (in fur trade), <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li> - -<li>Temiscaming, Lake, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li> - -<li>temporary canoe, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>-219</li> - -<li>Têtes de Boule Indians, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> -<li class="isub1">canoe, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>-112, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">sheathing, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">described, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>-112;</li> -<li class="isub2">dimensions, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">construction, <a href="#Page_108">108</a> ff., <a href="#Page_112">112</a></li> - -<li>Teton Indians, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li> - -<li>thong braces, umiak, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> - -<li>throwing stick, <a href="#Page_194">194</a></li> - -<li>thwarts, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fitting of ends, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">location, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">supporting on building bed, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Francis, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Eastern Cree, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Têtes de Boule, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Ojibway, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Western Cree, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">fur-trade, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">narrow-bottom, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sturgeon-nose, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">umiak, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_195">195</a> ff., <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rough construction of, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">temporary skin canoe, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> - -<li>Timagami (Ontario), Lake, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li>tomahawk, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> - -<li>tongs, wooden, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> - -<li>topsail, umiak, <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> - -<li>Tonti, Chevalier Henri de, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> - -<li>tools, primitive, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>-20;</li> -<li class="isub1">modern, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>-24</li> - -<li>tree felling, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li> - -<li>treenail, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> - -<li>Trois Rivières, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> - -<li>tumble-home (incurving of upper sides of canoe), Micmac, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Malecite, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li>tump line, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li> - -<li>Two Mountains, Lake of, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">Umiak, Eskimo, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>-190;</li> -<li class="isub1">qualities, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">use, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">design, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>-183;</li> -<li class="isub1">compared with curragh, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">skin cover, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">construction, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>-187, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">oars and paddles, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">headboards, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">flare of sides, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sheer, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rake of ends, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rocker of bottom (camber), <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">thwarts, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">risers, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">v-bottom, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">gunwales, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a> ff., <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Alaskan, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a> ff.;</li> -<li class="isub1">Chukchi (Asiatic), <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Koryak, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Greenland, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">frames (ribs), <a href="#Page_184">184</a> ff., <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">keelson, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">thong brace, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">rudder, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">whaling, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">King Island, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">hogging brace, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">portaging, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Baffin Island, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> - -<li>Unalaska kayak, <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li> - -<li>United States Fish Commission, <a href="#Page_202">202</a></li> - -<li>United States National Museum, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - - -<li class="indx"><strong>V</strong>-bottom canoe, Malecite, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">St. Francis, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">Beothuk, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">Têtes de Boule, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>;</li> -<li class="isub2">Algonkin, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> -<li class="isub1">kayak, <a href="#Page_190">190</a> ff., <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> -<li class="isub1">umiak, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> - -<li><strong>V</strong>-Form (see <strong>V</strong>-bottom)</li> - -<li>Viking boat, <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> - -<li>voyageur, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">loads carried by, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">number required for a canoe, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">paddle requirement, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">wabinaki chiman (Algonkin canoe), <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li> - -<li>walrus skin, for umiak, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">for kayak, <a href="#Page_194">194</a></li> - -<li>war canoe, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Micmac, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>; -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_242" id="Page_242">[Pg 242]</a></span></li> -<li class="isub1">Malecite, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> - -<li>war party, Malecite, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">traveling, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">Iroquois, <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li> - -<li>Waswanipi, Lake, Post (Hudson's Bay Company), <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li>water, Indian methods of boiling, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> - -<li>weapons, for kayaks, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> - -<li>weather cloth, <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> - -<li>wedge, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> - -<li>Western Cree Indians, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">canoe, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>-134, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> - -<li>Wewenoc Indians, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li>Weymouth, Captain George, <a href="#Page_7">7</a></li> - -<li>whaleboat, <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> - -<li>whaling umiak, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> - -<li>Whitbourne, Captain Richard, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> - -<li>White Fish People (Indian tribe), <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> - -<li>wide-bottom canoe, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> - -<li>willow, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> - -<li>Winnipeg, Lake, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li>wood (for kayaks), <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li>wood bending, by hot water, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">over a fire, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li> - -<li>wood splitting, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li> - -<li>woods canoe, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> - -<li>Woodstock, New Brunswick, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> - -<li>wulegessis, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a></li> - - -<li class="indx">York boat, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> - -<li>Yukon Indians, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> - -<li>Yukon River canoe, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">kayak-form, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> -</ul> - -<p class="right p6">U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1973 O—491-230</p> - -<div class="chapter"></div> -<hr class="chap" /> -<p> </p> -<p> </p> -<div id="transnote"> - -<h2>TRANSCRIBER'S NOTE</h2> - -<p>Silently corrected simple spelling, grammar, and typographical errors.</p> - -<p>Retained anachronistic and non-standard spellings as printed.</p> - -</div> - -<p> </p> -<hr class="full" /> -<p>***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE BARK CANOES AND SKIN BOATS OF NORTH AMERICA***</p> -<p>******* This file should be named 50828-h.htm or 50828-h.zip *******</p> -<p>This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:<br /> -<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/5/0/8/2/50828">http://www.gutenberg.org/5/0/8/2/50828</a></p> -<p> -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed.</p> - -<p>Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. -</p> - -<h2>START: FULL LICENSE<br /> -<br /> -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE<br /> -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</h2> - -<p>To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license.</p> - -<h3>Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works</h3> - -<p>1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8.</p> - -<p>1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.</p> - -<p>1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others.</p> - -<p>1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States.</p> - -<p>1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:</p> - -<p>1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed:</p> - -<blockquote><p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United - States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost - no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use - it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with - this eBook or online - at <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you - are not located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws - of the country where you are located before using this - ebook.</p></blockquote> - -<p>1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.</p> - -<p>1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work.</p> - -<p>1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.</p> - -<p>1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License.</p> - -<p>1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.</p> - -<p>1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.</p> - -<p>1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that</p> - -<ul> -<li>You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation."</li> - -<li>You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works.</li> - -<li>You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work.</li> - -<li>You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.</li> -</ul> - -<p>1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.</p> - -<p>1.F.</p> - -<p>1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment.</p> - -<p>1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE.</p> - -<p>1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem.</p> - -<p>1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.</p> - -<p>1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions.</p> - -<p>1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. </p> - -<h3>Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm</h3> - -<p>Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life.</p> - -<p>Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org.</p> - -<h3>Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation</h3> - -<p>The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.</p> - -<p>The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact</p> - -<p>For additional contact information:</p> - -<p> Dr. Gregory B. Newby<br /> - Chief Executive and Director<br /> - gbnewby@pglaf.org</p> - -<h3>Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation</h3> - -<p>Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS.</p> - -<p>The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/donate">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a>.</p> - -<p>While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate.</p> - -<p>International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.</p> - -<p>Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate</p> - -<h3>Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.</h3> - -<p>Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support.</p> - -<p>Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition.</p> - -<p>Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org</p> - -<p>This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.</p> - -</body> -</html> - |