The Aboriginal Population of the North Coast of California Part 2

39. wererger P Merriam mentions this as a "village on north bank Klamath River, across from Mettah and a little above it." At this spot Waterman shows on his map no. 11 an "old village site" (his key no. 117).

Hence the existence of the village is probable.

40. meta C P. 245. No question.

41. keperor P P. 245. Numerous house pits but informants never saw the houses. "The inhabitants all died at once and so the site has never been used since." A reasonable conclusion is that a village existed but that the people died of disease of epidemic character. (Cf. no. 13.)

42. nohtsk.u.m C P. 246. A town with only house pits remaining but of undoubted existence.

43. weiqem P A site with 7 or 8 pits. Informants could not remember any houses. Some said it was a camp site but they had an elaborate legend to explain the house pits. The site is at the mouth of Roach Creek on the south bank of the river and hence a spot where one would normally expect a town to be located. Moreover the number of house pits is in excess of what would be antic.i.p.ated for a mere camp site.

44. himel C P. 247. This was a town, but the informants could barely remember the houses. Waterman could not determine why the inhabitants had disappeared. Kroeber mentions the village as one which may have been inhabited intermittently or temporarily (p. 8) and shows it thus on his map. However, he refers to it as a distinct town on p. 10 and lists it jointly with _murek_ on p. 18. It doubtless disappeared early as a separate ent.i.ty.

45. murek C P. 247. No question.

46. saa C P. 248. No question.

47. kepel C P. 248. No question.

48. waase C P. 249. A "fairly large town." The people were rich.

49. merip C P. 250. A small place with only one house name known. Its existence, however is confirmed by Merriam.

50. aukweya P See no. 53.

51. qenekpul P See no. 53.

52. tsetskwi C See no. 53.

53. qenek C Some question exists concerning these four villages. Kroeber nowhere mentions _aukweya_, but shows _qenekpul_ and _tsetskwi_ as temporary or briefly occupied towns and _qenek_ as a permanent town. Waterman says that _aukweya_ was a "settlement, three houses and a sweathouse." There had been no houses for many years and the pits were washed out.

_qenekpul_ was important mythologically and was said to have been built by an old Indian from _turip_ but there is no record of house pits or early habitations.

_tsetskwi_ was a settlement with 3 houses and a sweathouse. In the youth of one informant there had been at least one family head living there, who was very old. Merriam lists all four sites as villages.

There seems to be no serious question concerning the former existence of _tsetskwi_ and _qenek_. It is highly probable that the other two sites were inhabited at the middle of the nineteenth century. Waterman in his list ascribes a total of 10 houses to the group, a reasonable figure (p. 206, see also pp.

251-252).

54. wahsek C P. 254. No question.

55. weitspus C P. 257. No question.

56. rlrgr C P. 258. "... always a small place" but several of its families were rich. On Kroeber's map.

57. pekwutul C P. 258. "... slightly larger than _rlrgr_"

but had some wealthy citizens. On Kroeber's map.

58. loolego C P. 258. Shown on Kroeber's map as a standard town. Waterman says that 30 years before his visit, _i.e._, in 1879, 2 pits and a sweathouse were to be seen there.

_loolego_ "... must at one time have been considerably larger for these people made up one of four parties who carried on the public spectacles in the deer skin ceremony at _weitspus_. They could not have done this had they not been rather numerous.... They were obviously influential people." This condition must have obtained long before 1879 when only house pits were known. The site was destroyed by mining in the 1880's.

59. aiqoo C P. 259. Waterman says: "... at least two houses and a sweathouse stood here."

Kroeber (p. 10) considers _aiqoo_ as a subdivision of _otsepor_ but Merriam lists it as a separate village, under the name _Ikocho_.

60. otsepor C In 1909 when Waterman saw it the village had merely three house pits. But an informant "... well remembers when several families ... lived here. They had fine large houses."

61. espaw C P. 261. No question as to existence.

Informants remember 4 houses but Waterman thinks that "in aboriginal times the number must have been much larger".

62. otmekwor D P. 262. There are 5 house pits but Waterman thinks this is a true archaeological site, the inhabitants having moved across to _oreqw_ several generations ago. On Kroeber's map as not a permanent settlement.

63. oreqw C P. 262. No question.

64. oraw D P. 262. Waterman, Kroeber, and Merriam all agree that this was a camp site.

65. sigwets C P. 262. "... a suburb of _oreqw_. At least two houses and a sweathouse stood here and I think originally there may have been more." In view of Waterman's positive a.s.sertion the existence of the village may be admitted.

66. hrgwrw C P. 265. "One informant said there were seven houses and two sweathouses."

67. tsahpekw C P. 265. "Eleven house names were obtained."

68. tsotskwi C P. 265. "An important Indian village stood here, but has not been inhabited since more than a generation ago.... One informant remembered having seen twelve houses and two sweathouses here."

69. paar C See no. 75.

70. osloqw C See no. 75.

71. kekem P See no. 75.

72. maats C See no. 75.

73. opyuweg C See no. 75.

74. pinpa D See no. 75.

75. oketo P Pp. 265-266. These villages were located on Big Lagoon. The latter "... was a center of population. At least six inhabited sites were to be found about its sh.o.r.es...." At the same time Waterman admits that his notes were scanty and contradictory. "Undoubtedly the list of place names which I obtained in this locality could easily be expanded threefold...." "Enormous numbers of water birds still frequent the lagoon and must have been an important resource for the natives."

The villages of _paar_, _osloqw_, _maats_ and _opyuweg_ are shown on Kroeber's map (p. 9) as standard towns although _kekem_ is mentioned as probably transitory and _pinpa_ is not mentioned at all. Waterman states that _paar_ was a town of considerable size. With respect to _osloqw_ he says: "A very aged informant had never seen houses here but her predecessors had." This indicates an early and rapid disintegration of the village complex in the locality. The existence of both _maats_ and _opyuweg_ at the time of white settlement is conceded by both Waterman and Kroeber. Waterman thinks that _pinpa_ was simply a suburb of _opyuweg_ since he could obtain no house names here.

_oketo_ is given by Waterman as the name, in Yurok, of Big Lagoon. It is listed by Kroeber however (p. 11) as a village (both as _oketo_ and _chwaltaike_, its Hupa name). Merriam says that _oketo_ is the "... Polikla name for Nererner village at Big Lagoon." Its existence therefore is highly probable.

If Waterman is correct in his opinion that there were originally six villages around Big Lagoon, then all those mentioned, except _pinpa_, may be included. For the first five Waterman gives a total of 35 houses, or 7 houses per village. If the same ratio is used, 7 houses may be a.s.signed to _oketo_, making in all 42.

76. olem P P. 267. Waterman considers this a camp site but Merriam in his list of Yurok villages states it as "... Nererner name for their village at Patrick's Point." To a.s.sign 3 houses is probably adequate.

77. tsurai C P. 271. No question.

78. srepor C P. 272. Some informants told Waterman that there were 4 houses and a sweathouse. On permanency of habitation he has no information. Kroeber on his map shows the site as a transitory village (p. 9) but on p. 113 he mentions Little River "... at whose mouth stood the Yurok town of Metskwo (_srepor_)." Merriam also mentions Matskaw, a "village at mouth of Little River, on north side ..." Its aboriginal existence may therefore be taken as at least highly probable.

TABLE 2

_Numbers of Houses_