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.
Ordinarily, at the ends of the canoe no _wulegessis_, 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
_wulegessis_. 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.
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.
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 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.
[Illustration: Figure 101
TÊTES DE BOULE CANOES.]
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.
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.
[Illustration: Figure 102
TÊTES DE BOULE HUNTING CANOE, 1½-FATHOM, with typical construction
details and a paddle.]
[Illustration: Figure 103
TÊTES DE BOULE CANOE, 2½-FATHOM, with some construction details.]
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 ~V~-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."
[Illustration: Figure 104
TÊTES DE BOULE HUNTING CANOE, 2-FATHOM, with wide bottom, showing
structural details.]
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.
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.
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.
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 135.
_Algonkin_
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 _Outaouais_, 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.
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.
[Illustration: Figure 105
OLD ALGONKIN CANOE.]
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 ~V~-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 gunwale 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.
[Illustration: Figure 106
OLD MODEL, OTTAWA RIVER, ALGONKIN CANOE, combining capacity with easy
paddling qualities.]
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.
The later and more common form of Algonkin canoe was the _wabinaki
chiman_. A corruption of Abnaki, _wabinaki_ to the later Algonkin meant
the Malecite as well as the St. Francis Indians. The _wabinaki chiman_
was built in lengths from 12 to 18 feet.
Iroquois living in the Algonkin territory during the period built this
form of canoe as well as the older, high-ended form. The _wabinaki
chiman_ 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.
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.
In appearance these canoes were very like the straight-stem Malecite
models. The _wabinaki chiman_ 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.
[Illustration: Figure 107
ALGONKIN AND OJIBWAY STEM-PIECES, models of old forms made by Adney: 1,
2, 3, Ojibway; 4, 5, 6, 7, Algonkin.]
Algonkins used the same construction methods in both their canoe
models, though the framework was not alike in all respects. The
building frame was 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.
[Illustration: Figure 108
LIGHT, FAST 2-FATHOM HUNTING CANOE of the old Algonkin model.]
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. 40-41). 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.
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 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.
[Illustration: Figure 109
HYBRID ALGONKIN CANOES: Eastern 2½ fathom (above) and northeastern
2-fathom adaptation, with sketches of stems used in each.]
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.
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 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.
[Illustration: Figure 110
ALGONKIN, 2-FATHOM HUNTER'S CANOE, without headboards. Details of
building frame, stakes or posts, gauge, and stem.]
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, as in the drawing (p. 116). In the
_wabinaki chiman_, however, the gunwales and other members, as a rule,
all followed the sheer of the ends of the canoe.
[Illustration: Figure 111
ALGONKIN CANOE, OLD TYPE.]
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 _wabinaki chiman_, 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 ~V~ that was widest at
midheight, at the gunwales, which were let into its sides.
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 ¹⁄₁₆ 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. 116).
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 ~V~-formed toward the
ends and then spreading the sides of the ~V~ with the headboard, thus
bringing pressure on the strakes of the sheathing and forcing the sides
outward in a slight curve.