The Aboriginal Population of the North Coast of California Part 3

The figures in the first column are for village sites as listed in table 1. Sources: R, Randall's map; 1. Waterman's list (1920. p. 206); t. Waterman's text (1920); M. Merriam's village lists; p, an estimate.

_Kroeber_, _Kroeber_, _House_ _"modern_ _1852_ _No._ _Source_ _Count_ _memories"_ _census_

1 l 7 2 t 4 3 l 25 } } 4 l 9 } 23+} 22+ 5 tp 3 6 tp 3 7 Mp 3 8 Mp 3 12 l 4 13 l 4 9 6 14 l 3 2 2 15 Mp 8 17 Mp 3 18 l 5 5 2 19 t 8 8+ 14 20 Rp 3 21 lp 4 22 Rp 4 24 l 3 25 t 4 26 t 2 27 Mp 3 28 Mp 3 29 l 3 3 4 30 tp 3 32 l 4 } } 33 l 13 } 13 } 7 34 l 22 18 24 35 l 24 17+ 20 36 l 4 4 3 37 l 5 6 7 38 Mp 3 39 Mp 3 40 l 6 7 6 41 tp 5 42 l 3 4 4 43 tp 6 44 l 4 } } 45 l 11 } 21 } 14 45 l 8 } } 47 l 4 } 14 } 6 48 l 6 49 l 5 50 l 3 51 l 1 52 l 2 53 l 4 54 l 6 55 l 17 56 l 6 57 l 5 58 l 4 59 l 2 60 l 3 61 l 7 63 l 7 65 t 2 66 l 5 67 l 10 68 l 5 69 tp 5 70 tp 3 71 t 4 72 l 5 73 l 18 75 Mp 7 76 Mp 3 77 l 14 78 t 4

THE WIYOT

There are three primary ethnographic sources for the population of the Wiyot. The first is the extensive monograph by Loud (1918), the second a short paper by Nomland and Kroeber (1936), and the third the village lists of Merriam.

Loud based his data on interviews with numerous informants together with a rather cursory visual inspection of the region. He shows nearly two hundred sites of all kinds on his map and differentiates by means of conventional symbols between what he calls "archaeological" and "modern village" sites. By the latter he means settlements which were occupied at approximately the time of the American invasion of 1850. In his text he discusses descriptively a few of the more important of the "modern village" sites but for most of the smaller places he furnishes no information other than inclusion on his map. His coverage is fairly good for the valley of the Mad River and for Humboldt Bay but his treatment of the valley of the Eel River is nearly worthless.

Recognizing this deficiency in Loud's data, Nomland and Kroeber secured the services of an informant who was born in 1860 in this area and had lived there all his life. They were thus able to obtain a very complete list of sites, together with a fairly accurate house count for each of them. This list is therefore as reliable as we shall ever be able to get and, unless we wish to discard this type of information completely, we must accept it as essentially correct.

For the Mad River and Humboldt Bay areas the recently acquired village lists of Merriam form an admirable supplement to Loud's compilation.

Merriam went over the ground personally and checked carefully Loud's sites. He was thus able to clarify many of the obscurities in the data furnished by the earlier investigator. Where points of discrepancy arise between the two authors therefore, more reliance may be placed upon Merriam.

The family number is taken by Kroeber (1925. p. 116) as the same as for the Yurok, i.e., 7.5. Loud obtained estimates for both house number and population for three villages. Site 45 gave 13.5 persons per house, site 67 gave 9, and site 112 gave 5. The average is slightly over 9, a figure which has no further significance than to indicate that the Yurok value of 7.5 may be applied safely to the Wiyot.

With respect to Kroeber's principle of a one-third reduction in the number of houses the same considerations apply as with the Yurok data.

There is nothing to indicate in the work of either Loud or Nomland and Kroeber that informants were not thinking in terms of inhabited houses rather than total deserted houses or house pits. Indeed we have in Loud's text three specific instances (nos. 7, 67, and Y) where the informant not only stated that the houses were occupied in the early days but also gave the names of the persons living in all of them. It is difficult to reconcile a one-third reduction with such data.

In table 3 (pp. 94-96, herein) are given a few notes, gleaned mainly from Loud and supplemented from Merriam's list, which are of interest in determining the existence and population of certain villages. All villages are included the existence of which in approximately 1850 Loud regards as reasonably certain. To these are added several of Loud's doubtful sites, the validity of which has been confirmed by Merriam, plus five villages missed by Loud but discovered by Merriam. The house counts for those towns confirmed or discovered by Merriam have had to be estimated. The number has been taken rather uniformly as 2 or 3 in order to maintain as conservative a standard as possible. For 22 of the larger and better known sites Loud's informants gave an average of 6.5 houses. Hence an average of 3 for those whose names and locations only were known seems in no way excessive.

In table 4 (p. 97, herein) are shown the best estimates for the Mad River and Humboldt Bay areas from Loud and Merriam and for the Eel River valley from Nomland and Kroeber. The total is 440. At 7.5 persons per house this means a population of 3,300 inhabitants for the Wiyot.

The corresponding figure given by Kroeber in the Handbook (p. 116) is "perhaps 800 or not over 1,000." Loud states on page 302: "If asked to give an extreme figure for the native population ... the writer would say 1,500, and consider any higher figure pure folly." The present writer, however, stands by the figure of approximately 3,300, insofar as the estimate is based on ethnographic material.

It was suggested in connection with the Yurok that this tribe was already undergoing some reduction in population at the time of the first entry of Americans en ma.s.se in 1850 and that the best memory of informants in the decade 1900-1910 could not give us the truly aboriginal picture. For the Wiyot the evidence is still more impressive. None of Loud's white informants could go back of 1850 and one gets the impression that his Indian informants could do little better. John Sherman, the informant of Nomland and Kroeber, was born in 1860, subsequent to ten years of ma.s.sacre and disintegration of native society. This state of affairs is reflected in many statements in Loud's text. (See also table 3, pp. 94-96, herein.) For instance several strikingly large and recent graveyards are mentioned, a statement which can refer only to the period of 1850 or immediately before. Site 22, according to tradition, had once possessed a large population, and site 23 was said to have been a "regular rancheria" one hundred years previously (that is, previous to 1918). Nevertheless the population of these towns could not be included in the present estimate because no informant living in this century could remember houses there. Site 68 had been declining prior to 1850, the inhabitants either dying or moving elsewhere. The tremendous destruction of population _after_ 1850 is everywhere evident in Loud's account and it is not too much to suppose that the confusion of the period is reflected in too _low_ values given by modern informants. If this is true, then it is quite possible that the estimate given here of 3,300 Wiyot is actually considerably lower than the true aboriginal population, rather than higher.

_WIYOT ... 3,300_

TABLE 3

_Wiyot Sites listed by Loud (1918)_

Notes and comment with respect to some of Loud's sites. Page numbers unless otherwise specified refer to Loud (1918). The notation "Merriam"

indicates that the site was checked and accepted by Merriam, who included it in his village list of the Wiyot. The letter A signifies that Merriam had obtained an Athapascan name for the site, thus confirming its existence as an ent.i.ty known to the neighboring tribes in pre-American times.

_Loud's Sites_ _Comment_

Site 3 Merriam

Site 4 Merriam (A)

Site 5 Merriam (A)

Site 6 Merriam (A)

Site 7 P. 259. There were 11 houses, all occupied, the names of the families known to Loud's informant.

Site 8 Merriam

Sites H, I, J, 9 P. 262. These are located in the former Big Bend of the Mad River. A pioneer told Loud that there had once been 20 houses in the area. Another informant said that site I had been "one of the largest villages" and "... had a large graveyard." Site 9 was said by Curtis (Nomland and Kroeber, p. 44) to have had 5 houses. Loud's informant gave it 5 or 6. Hence the estimate of the pioneer appears quite reasonable. Merriam lists all four sites with their Wiyot and Athapascan names.

Sites D through G These sites extend along Mad River and around K through X the sh.o.r.es of Blue Lake. Loud gives no AA through AK specific data concerning them and some are individually doubtful. However, Loud says that the houses were scattered along both banks of the river and the sh.o.r.es of the lake. "That is, about every mile there was an Indian house or two."

Although Loud was not very accurate in the location of the sites, it is quite probable that scattered homes existed in at least the ratio of one dwelling to each site mentioned.

Hence it is reasonable to ascribe a minimum of at least one house per site. This would yield a total of 29 houses.

Loud's data were checked and revised by Merriam, who appears to have done a more careful piece of work on this area than Loud.

Merriam confirms and gives Wiyot and Athapascan names for Loud's villages E, G, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, AA, AB, AC, and AG, or 20 villages in all. The minimum number of houses which can be ascribed to a "village" is 2. On the other hand several of the 20 sites must have contained more than the minimum and therefore it would be legitimate to set the average at 3. This would mean a total of 60 houses for the entire area covered by these villages.

Site Y P. 265. The site had 4 houses, all occupied, the names of the occupants known to Loud's informant. Merriam (A).

Site Z P. 274. This town was destroyed by the Chilula just prior to 1850. The whites found 30 to 40 fresh graves. Merriam says it was the "chief village in vicinity of Blue Lake at time of Chilula attack."

Site 14 P. 272. Stated by Loud to be a camping place but called a village by Merriam. Status doubtful.

Site 17 Merriam.

Site 19 Merriam.

Site 22 P. 274. "... according to tradition once had a large population." Loud thinks it was uninhabited by 1850 but Merriam lists it as a village. Estimate 4 houses.

Site 23 P. 274. "... said to be a regular rancheria one hundred years ago." Nomland and Kroeber (p. 42) say it has been uninhabited in modern times and Merriam considers it an archaeological site.

Site 31 P. 272. A summer camp according to Loud but a village according to Merriam. Allow 2 houses.

Site 33 P. 265. "This village was referred to as a 'regular rancheria' when the whites first came, a statement which is confirmed by the number of skeletons that have been found here with white man's articles buried with them."

Listed by Merriam. Estimate 8 houses.

Site 34 P. 265. Loud found no houses and only 2 house pits. However in 1890 there were 20 graves which were visited by relatives. Listed by Merriam. Estimate 4 houses.

Site 36 Stated by Merriam to be an archaeological site.

Site 39 Merriam. Estimate 2 houses.

Site AL P. 273. According to an informant there were several houses in 1856 with one occupied.

Listed by Merriam. Estimate 4 houses.

Site 45 P. 272. According to an informant there were 2 houses and 25 to 30 inhabitants in 1852.

Deserted in 1860.

Site 48 Merriam. Estimate 2 houses.

Site 58 P. 268. The site was known to pioneers, who said it had 8 to 10 houses in 1858. Listed by Merriam. Estimate 9 houses.