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. 80), 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 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 _barre d'abordage_ and the Malecite, _P's-ta' k'n_; the
English woodsmen called the fitting "canoe shoes."
[Illustration: Figure 71
MALECITE CANOE DETAILS, GEAR, AND GUNWALE DECORATIONS.]
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.
[Illustration: Figure 72
MALECITE CANOE DETAILS, STEM PROFILES, PADDLES, SAIL RIG, AND SALMON
SPEAR.]
[Illustration: Figure 73
LINES AND DECORATION RECONSTRUCTED FROM A VERY OLD MODEL of an ancient
woods, or pack, canoe, showing short ends and use of fiddlehead and
fire-steel form of decoration.]
Formerly, the Malecite placed his personal mark, or _dupskodegun_,
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.
[Illustration: Figure 74
LAST KNOWN PASSAMAQUODDY DECORATED OCEAN CANOE to be built. Constructed
in 1898 by Tomah Joseph, Princeton, Maine, on the same model as a
canvas porpoise-hunting canoe.]
The Malecite, particularly the Passamaquoddy, were especially skillful
in decorating bark canoes, as can be seen from the illustrations (pp.
81-87). 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 87. 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
_wulegessis_, 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 _wulegessis_, in about the
position used for insignia on the canvas "Indian" canoe.
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 _wulegessis_, and on a relatively modern canoe this mark,
or _gogetch_, 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, 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.
[Illustration: Figure 75
MALECITE CANOE DETAILS AND DECORATIONS.]
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 84 and 85 are some
Indian marks on the _wulegessis_, based upon the statements of old
Malecites or upon their sketches.
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."
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.
85) 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 _wulegessis_ 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.
[Illustration: Figure 76
WULEGESSIS DECORATIONS
"mark of Mitchell Laporte"
"that pot hanging was used by three or four generations--it was mark on
John Lolar's canoe in 1872"
"I made marks like this on wulegessis and sometimes on middle" (Charlie
Bear)
"mark of Noel John Sapier" (tomahawk)
"mark of Noel Polchies" (paddle)
"mark of old Peter Polchies" (stone pipe)
"mark of Chief Neptune" (Passamaquoddy)
"mark of Louis Paul"
"canoe was finished on new moon" (Joe Ellis)
"mark of old Solomon Paul"]
[Illustration: Figure 77
END DECORATIONS, PASSAMAQUODDY CANOE built by Tomah Joseph.]
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."
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: [Illustration] 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).
In a later period, the Malecite usually confined decoration to the
_wulegessis_ and to the pieced-out bark amidships, the panel formed
on each side. The _wulegessis_ was of various forms; its bottom was
sometimes shaped like a cupid's bow, sometimes it was 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. 81) 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."
[Illustration: Figure 78
END DECORATIONS, PASSAMAQUODDY CANOE built by Tomah Joseph.]
[Illustration: Figure 79
PASSAMAQUODDY DECORATED CANOE built by Tomah Joseph.]
The drawings and plans on pages 71 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 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.
_St. Francis_
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.
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.
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.
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 ~U~-shape that
approached the ~V~ 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.
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. 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.
[Illustration: Figure 80
ST. FRANCIS 2-FATHOM CANOE OF ABOUT 1865, 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.]
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.
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 ~V~. 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 ~V~ was formed either by use of a shaped
keel-piece in the sheathing or by an additional batten shaped to give
this ~V~-form under the center strake. Since the ~V~ 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 used to form it. He could
not verify this, however, as the area was covered by the frames and
sheathing.
[Illustration: Figure 81
ST. FRANCIS CANOE OF ABOUT 1910, with narrow, rockered bottom, a model
popular with guides and sportsmen for forest travel.]
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.
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
_wulegessis_, but the flaps below the outwales were sometimes cut off,
or they might be formed in some graceful outline.
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 _wulegessis_,
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 confined to a
narrow band along the gunwale, or to the doubling pieces. The marking
of the _wulegessis_ 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.
[Illustration: Figure 82
LOW-ENDED ST. FRANCIS CANOE with ~V~-form end sections made with short,
~V~-shaped keel battens outside the sheathing at each end. Note the
unusual form of headboard, seen in some St. Francis canoes.]
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.
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.
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 possible, 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.
[Illustration: Figure 83
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, New York. Details of Abnaki canoes are also shown.]