American Anthropological Association

Home , Alsea, Clatsop, Lower Chinook, Nez Perce, Sahaptin, Takelma

Supplement to AMERICAN AN'rHROPOLOGIST, Volume 39o. 2

NTTh1BER 47 1937

MEMOIRS OF THE AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON

BY JOEL V. BERREMAN

PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION MENASHA, WIS., U.S.A.

Entered as second class matter at Menasha, Wis. Accorded the special rate of postage provided for in Paragraph 4, Section 429 P. L. & R., authorized August 22, 1922. Issued quarterly during the months o January, April, July, and October. Printed by George Banta Publishing Company, 450 Ahnaip Street, Menasha, Wisconsin. Subscription only by membershipin American Anthropological Association (annual dues $6.00). OFFICERS of the AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

President: NELS C. NELSON, American Museum of Natural History, New York, N.Y.

First Vice-President (1937).' MATTHEW W. STIRLING, Bureau of American Ethnology, Washington, D.C.

Second Vice-President (1937-38): EDWARD SAPIR, Yale University, New Haven, Conn.

Third Vice-President (1937-39): DIAMOND JENNESS, Victoria Memorial Museum, Ottawa, Canada.

Fourth Vice-President (1937-40): JOHN M. COOPER, Catholic University of America, Washington, D.C.

Secretary: FRANK M. SETZLER, United States National Museum, Washington, D.C.

Treasurer: CORNELIUS OSGooD, Peabody Museum, Yale University, New Haven,onn.

Editor: LESLIE SPIER, Yale University, New Haven, Conn.

Associate Editors: M. J. HERSKOVITS, Northwestern University, Evanston, III.; CORNELIUS OSGOOD, Peabody Museum, Yale University, New Haven, Conn.; F. H. H. ROBERTS, JR., Bureau of American Ethnology, Washington, D.C.; FRANK G. SPECK, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.

Executive Committee: The President, Secretary, Treasurer, Editor (ex officio), and HER- BERT J. SPINDEN, Brooklyn Museum, Brooklyn, N.Y.; A. M. TOZZER, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.; JOHN M. COOPER, Catholic University of America, Washington, D.C.

The Memoirs of the American Anthropological Association are printed by the George Banta Publishing Company, 450-454 Ahnaip Street, Menasha, Wisconsin, U.S.A. 1 Issued at irregular intervals. Subscription only by membership in the American Anthropological Association (annual dues, $6.00); includes the MEMOIRS OF THE AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL AssocwrloN as issued and the quarterly issues of the American Anthrolopogist Manuscripts and editorial matter should be sent to the editor, Dr. Leslie Spier Subscriptions and orders for back numbers should be sent to the treasurer, Dr. Cornelius Osgood

'U NUMBER 47 1937

MEMOIRS OF THE AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON

JOEL V. BERREMAN

PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION MENASHA, WIS., U.S.A. LESLIE SPIER, Editor MELVILLE J. HERSKOVITS, CORNELIUS OSGOOD, F. H. H. ROBERTS, JR., AND FRANK SPECK, Associate Editors FOREWORD This paper was first completed in the summer of 1933 at the University of Oregon and submitted to the faculty of the graduate school of that institution as a master's thesis. Since that time it has been revised in part on the basis of some further study undertaken at Stanford University, and a few valuable corrective notes and additions furnished by Melville Jacobs, Leslie Spier, and George Peter Murdock, based on recent unpublished studies. The writer is deeply indebted to Dr L. S. Cressman, under whose ditection the original thesis was prepared, for his advice and criticism as well as for the use of his unpublished material on the distribution of petroglyphs in Oregon. He wishes also to express his gratitude to Dr Melville Jacobs, Dr A. L. Kroeber, and Dr Leslie Spier for reading the manuscript; and to Dr C. N. Reynolds for constant counsel in the revision of the paper and its preparation for publication. Without the recommenda- tion and encouragement of these men the writer should not have had the temerity to offer this paper for publication. J. V. B.

STANFOIm UNIvERsITY March 12, 1937

3 CONTENTS Page FOREWORD 3 INTRODUCTION 7 Nature of the Problem 7 Importance of the Problem 8 Sources of Data 8 Method of Study 10 THE COLUMBIA RIvER AND WILLAMETTE VALLEY TRIBES 13 Chinookan Tribes 13 Clatsop 15 Kathiamet 15 Skilloot 16 Multnomah 16 Willamette Fal]s 17 Clackamas 17 Cascade Indians 18 Hood River 19 Wasco 19 Caapuyan Tribes 20 Tualati 21 Yamhill 21 Luckiamute 21 Mary's River 22 Long Tom Creek 22 Calapuya 22 Yoncalla 23 Santiam 23 Pudding River 23 Clatskanie 24 Summary 24 SOUTHWESTERN OREGON TRIBES 26 Hokan 26 Shasta 26 Karok 27 Takelman 27 Upland Takelma 27 Lowland Takelma 27 Athapascan 28 Galice Creek and Applegate Creek 29 Shasta Costa 29 Upper Coquille 29 Upper Tjmpqua 30 Tolowa 30 Chetco 30 Tututni 31 Summary 33 5 Page NORTH COAST TRIBES 35 Kusan 35 Lower Coquille 36 Coos 36 Siuslawan 36 Lower Umpqua 36 Siuslaw 37 Yakonan 37 Alsea 37 Yaquina 37 Coast Salish 37 Siletz 39 Tillamook 39 Summary 40 EASTERN OREGON BEFORE 1750 41 Salish Tribes 41 Nekutameux 41 Moses-Columbia 41 Sahaptin 42 Nez Percé 42 Kiamath 43 Modoc 43 Cayuse 44 Molalla 44 Other Sahaptin Tribes 46 Shoshonean Stock 47 Northern Paiute 51 Summary 53 TRIBAL MOVEMENTS AND FINAL DISTRIBUTION 55 Tribal Movements 55 Final Distribution 61 Cayuse 61 Umatilla 62 Lohim 62 Warm Springs 62 Wasco 63 Snake 63 Bannock 63 Molalla 63 Summary 64 BIBLIOGRAPHY 65 ILLUSTRATIONS FIGURES

Tribal distribution in Oregon about 1750 14 Final tribal distribution in Oregon about 1840-50 57 6 TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON INTRODUCTION NATURE OF THE PROBLEM purpose of this study is to define in so far as possible the tribal THEdistribution of the aboriginal inhabitants of the state of Oregon previous to the disturbing influences of exploration and settlement by the whites. The problem involved is a complicated one because our knowledge of the native peoples of Oregon is, with few exceptions, notoriously chaotic. This is true in regard to their ethnography as well as the identity of tribal groups and the areas they occupied. The reasons for this lie in the early movements of tribes, particularly in the eastern part of the state, the early extermination of many tribes by epidemics and wars, and the fact that the rich field here offered to the student of archaeology and ethnology has been largely neglected. The movements of tribes in eastern Oregon began before the arrival of the first explorers in the region, probably as early as 1750. These movements seem to have been intimately related to the early spread of the horse as an element of culture, particularly among the Shoshonean tribes of the northern and western plains, who were thus able successfully to invade large areas occupied by neighboring tribes. The consequent movements brought about the early displacement of tribes throughout the greater part of eastern Oregon, and its effects were felt also in the Columbia and Willamette Valleys, creating thereby an endless confusion of tribes and a relatively constant shifting during the period of colonization and exploration. The epidemics referred to began to ravage the country after the first white contacts on the lower Columbia, at least as early as 1800. They were particularly disastrous in the next thirty years, in which time whole tribes seem to have completely disappeared, and the native population was reduced to a small fraction of its former numbers. It hardly need be pointed out that this disaster to the Indians was little less than catas- trophic also for the student who would reconstruct the culture and geographic arrangement of these tribes. By the time any systematic ethnological work was undertaken on the Pacific coast, Oregon presented a most barren field for study as compared with California and western Canada, which have consequently received the major share of attention. Archaeology has been so slightly developed in this region that it has as yet but little to offer. Our problem thus becomes one of gleaning bits of information from

7 8 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [MEMoIRs, 47 many scattered and varied sources, evaluating their reliability, and cor- relating them as far as possible with one another. In spite of some few excellent and valuable ethnographic studies, the record is incomplete and many problems of tribal identity and areas of occupation must remain at present unsolved.

IMPORTANCE OF THE PROBLEM The evidence seems to indicate that the earliest occupation of the American continent was on the northwest coast, and that the direction of early migration was south along that region. Oregon thus falls within the path of these early movements. Moreover, the existence here of numerous distinct and apparently unrelated languages may indicate a relatively long continued and undisturbed occupation of the area by these linguistic stocks. Researches in the archaeology of California and British Columbia, and the little that has recently been done in Oregon, would indicate a culture of considerable antiquity. Oregon, therefore, presents a regrettable gap in our knowledge of the prehistory of the continent. Much of the loss is of course irretrievable, but the field of archaeology is virtually untouched, and promises to yield valuable data bearing upon the problems involved. It seems that such a study as this one is a desirable preliminary step toward a systematic exploitation of the field. Aside from satisfying a certain popular interest in the prehistory of the state, it is hoped that it will contribute to further researches in the field, and through them to the wider problems of anthropology and history.

SOURCES OF DATA There are two types of primary source material bearing upon the problem at hand; the one historical, and the other anthropological. The most valuable of the historical material consists of the journals of Lewis and Clark, of the Wilkes expedition, andsome early fur trade literature. Comparatively little is to be obtained from later travelers, missionaries, and settlers, because of the fragmentary and unreliable nature of their reports, as well as the fact that tribal distribution was largely disturbed before they reached the country. The same may be said in regard to most of the reports of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs. In- adequate as such sources are, they constitute parctically our only information on some parts of the state. The more valuable sources for this study are the anthropological ones. The philological studies of such students as Gatschet, Boas, Frachtenberg, Sapir, Dorsey, and Jacobs have furnished our only accurate information as BERREMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 9 to the linguistic relationships of the tribes in this area. These monographs have contributed numerous statements from native informants themselves as to the original distribution of tribes, and have furnished a check on the authenticity of the reports of early observers. Inasmuch as a linguistic difference between groups is an excellent indication of tribal difference, their delineation of linguistic families and dialectic divisions contributes directly to the problem of the identity and distribution of the tribes themselves. A number of ethnological writings, varying from fragmentary notes to complete monographs, furnish perhaps the most complete and reliable data as to the former distribution and early movements of tribes. Data thus obtained by trained ethnologists from native informants constitute the most reliable sources for a study of this kind. It is unfortunate that more of such researches were not undertaken at an earlier data when more reliable information was available. It should perhaps be added that the Handbook of American Indians,1 with which the readers will be largely familiar, has been useful in many cases. Its early publication and the fragmentary nature of its sources, together with the multiplicity of its contributors, has resulted in some internal contradictions. Some of its data is not in accord with the results of later researches, but it represents a stupendous collection of anthropological and historical material; it furnishes an exhaustive bibliography of early literature; and its contributors had access to numerous unpublished manuscripts in the Bureau of American Ethnology which are not available to the public. For these reasons it has been constantly consulted in the preparation of this paper. Previous studies in the specific problem of tribal distribution in Oregon have been exceedingly fragmentary and few. With the exception of specific studies of single tribes, the only approaches to such a study seem to be those of Gibbs, Lewis, and Spier. Gibbs in 1877 published a paper on Tribes of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon. He confines his study of Oregon tribes to those on the lower Columbia, however, and treats their distribution in a very sketchy manner, being primarily concerned with a description of their culture. Lewis in 1906 published a paper on Tribes of the Columbia Valley and the Coast of Oregon and Washington. This paper is broader in its field, but is concerned primarily with cultural comparisons and tribal movements.

'lodge, Handbook of American Indians North of Mexico. For complete references to authorities cited see bibliography. 10 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [MxMoIRs, 47

On the latter subject he anticipated somewhat the findings of Teit, whose excellent paper on this subject is the standard authority.2 In 1927 Spier published a short article in the Oregon Historical Quar- terly on Tribal Distribution in Southwestern Oregon. This approaches more nearly the field of this thesis. It deals, however, largely with a few specific problems regarding tribal boundaries in the southwestern area, and furnishes but a brief summary of other tribes in the region. It is an excellent paper and has been referred to on several specific problems in the area it covers. John Minto in 1900 published an article on The Condition of the Native Races in Oregon, and Mrs Victor in 1871 wrote on Indians of Oregon. Both of these works are extremely sketchy descriptions, wholly lacking in the anthropologocal viewpoint, and of little scientific value. The same may be said of the brief chapters found in various histories of Oregon.

METHOD OF STUDY In undertaking the study of tribal distribution one is immediately faced with the problem of defining the unit which shall be designated as a tribe. The term as used in this paper will be taken in a very general sense to mean any group of people who looked upon themselves as a separate people, autonomous and distinct from the neighboring groups. The funda- mental element is the psychological one of group consciousness. Such a division is generally indicated by the existence of a common name, a common language or dialect, a common culture, a comparatively well defined and continuous territory, and a tendency to unite for common action as in war.3 Where such common elements are wanting tribal distinctions have usually been drawn, since the psychological element of group consciousness cannot be said to require that all these elements be present. The terms local group and band have been used synonymously to designate tribal subdivisions, and village has been used in its common sense. The reader will be aware that these terms have been variously used in anthropological literature, and in the popular sense tribe has been used to designate amost any band of primitive peoples. One reason for this lies in the great diversity to be found in political and social groupings in dif-

2 Teit, Middle Columbia Salish. The British Association in 1912 accepted the following as a standard definition of tribe: "A group of a simple kind, nomadic or settled in a more or less definite locality, speaking a common dialect, with a rude form of government, and capable of uniting for common action as in warfare" (Freire-Marreco and Myers, Notes and Queries on Anthropology, p. 156). See also Hodge, Handbook of American Indians, Pt. 2, p. 814. BERREMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 11 ferent cultures. When Kroeber4 stated that there were no tribes in Cali- fornia as that term was generally understood, he recognized that the diverse types of social organization do not properly fit into the grooves of our common terminology. So much do their characteristics differ that any but the most general use of the term often does violence to the facts. In the last analysis each cultural group must be studied and described in terms of its own culture patterns. Such a study is beyond the scope of this investigation, and for this reason, as well as from lack of definite and conclusive information on many Oregon peoples the term tribe has been very freely used in this paper. My primary purpose has been only to determine the distribution of the recognized linguistic and ethnic groups. If more intensive study in special areas should prove that some of those I have called separate tribes are but subdivisions of one tribe, or some I have considered but local groups prove to have been independent units; or if, as is obviously true, some of the groups designated are not, strictly speaking, "tribes" at all, it will not materially affect the value of this study. In mapping the distribution of primitive peoples one is continually confronted with uncertainty as to exact boundaries. Indeed, it is probable that they were not exact in many parts of the country, but consisted in- stead of ill defined marginal areas. Uninhabited lands were doubtless extensive in mountainous and desert regions. It is probable that most of these were claimed by the various neighboring tribes as hunting grounds, but when the territory claimed by a tribe is known only from the location of its chief villages, the ownership of these unoccupied lands becomes an unsolved puzzle. In a few cases the cross-word puzzle technique yields fair results, for by determining the area claimed by surrounding tribes the unclaimed land may be attributed to the tribe whose boundary is unknown. Lacking this, or better information, it has been necessary to conjecture in some cases on the basis of the topography of the area. It seems that more often than not a tribe which occupies the lower courses of a river claims its upper drainage basin as hunting territory. Seldom if ever does a stream serve as a tribal boundary. With their well developed water transportation and the importance of fishing as a source of subsistence the streams not only lack any significance as barriers but in many cases are the centers of tribal life.5 In the absence of evidence to

Kroeber, Handbook of the Indians of California, p. 830. 6 In cases where the authorities cited have designateda stream as a boundary, it is probable that they have been loosely transferring a white man's concept to native conditions, where it does not apply. I am indebted to Professor A. L. Kroeber for calling my attention to 12 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [saMoIRs, 47 the contrary it has been assumed that tribal areas consist of such more or less distinct geographic areas. So far as possible the consideration of changes in tribal arrangement caused by direct contact with the whites has been omitted from this study. The same is true of the problems of population and of cultural description. This is not because these subjects are unimportant or un- interesting, but because they constitute separate, though related, problems, each worthy of special investigation. The major part of this paper is concerned with the position of tribes prior to any influences, either direct or indirect, of white man's culture. Wanting a better term we shall designate this the original distribution. No great antiquity is claimed for this arrangement, but it seems to represent a fairly stable condition which had existed for some time prior to about 1750. The matter has been grouped for convenience by geographic areas, in each of which the position of tribal groups and their linguistic relationships have been discussed and their exact boundaries delineated so far as they are known. On points of uncertainty or disagreement the available evidence has been presented and the reasons given for the decisions reached. The final section of the paper will be devoted to a discussion of the tribal movements mentioned above, and to a description of the resultant changes which it brought about in tribal distribution in the areas affected. This represents what has been called the final distribution, representing as it does the areas claimed by the tribes immediately prior to the breakdown of native culture by contact with the whites, extermination, or removal to reservations. Maps have been included representing the original and final distribution of tribal groups and linguistic families (see figs. 1 and 2). this point. In a personal communication he states, "Except perhaps for the Columbia River in its lower courses, I doubt, on the basis of my experience in California and on the Northwest Coast, whether streams ever serve as a boundary. The native point of view seems to be throughout that a group owns a stream with whatever flows into it from both sides." THE COLUMBIA RIVER AND WILLAMETTE VALLEY TRIBES CHINOOKAN TRIBES Upon reaching the Dalles or Narrows of the Columbia River, Lewis and Clark in 1805 encountered an entirely new type of culture anda strange language.' They had entered the territory of what has come to be known as the Chinookan tribes of the Columbia. These tribes constitute a distinct linguistic family. They occupied both sides of the river from the Dalles to the coast, as well as the Willamette Valley below the falls. Their language is cdmposed of two distinct major dialects: Lower Chinook, spoken by only two tribes, the Chinook and the Clatsop at the mouth of the river; and Upper Chinook which was spoken throughout the rest of the area. The latter was divided into three slightly different dialects: Kathlamet, spoken on the lower river, Clackamas spoken about Sauvies Island and the lower Willamette, and Wasco-Wishram at the Dalles.' The tribes on the lower Columbia were the first in Oregon to be influenced by contact with whites, who approached the country first by water. Consequently they were the first to be exposed to the exterminating influences of epidemic diseases. Lewis and Clark noted evidence in 1805 of a recent epidemic of smallpox which had greatly reduced the lower tribes in numbers.' By 1830 the Skilloot nation, whom Lewis and Clark had estimated at 2500 persons, was reduced to a single small village of about 200. Hale reports the lower river tribes reduced to only one tenth their former number by 1841. As a consequence of these early contacts, however, we have a wealth of historical material descriptive of these tribes in the records of the explorers and traders. But we have almost no scientific anthropological literature on the area, and must rely almost entirely on these early records. Unfortunately they are often inadequate and contradictory, and leave much to be desired in the way of exact information. From the evidence available a division of the Chonookan peoples into tribes is very difficult to make with accuracy. The political organization of the area is very imperfectly known, and perhaps was not designed to 'Coues, Lewis and Clark Expedition, pp. 666-72. 2 The terms Upper and Lower Chinook have been variously used; often to designate tribes above and below the mouth of the Willamette. I have used Boas' terminology, since it represents a significant linguistic division, although from the standpoint of geography and convenience any other division would do as well. See Boas, Handbook of American Indian Languages, Pt. 1, p. 563; Boas, Kathlamet Texts, p. 6; Boas, Chinook Texts, p. 5. ' Coues, op. cii., p. 757. Hale, Ethnology and Philology, p. 215.

13 V

500SAL S SEANHO N C A N TOESIUS ELMANLARCH NUMBE REDSUBDIVISIONS VA EON A N TILLAMOOK I, SALMONt 5E8ru000 RIVER TILLAMOON TUTUTNI LEWATAMI NEHALEM S4.PISVOL3MIEONOTUNNE2 EUCHREJOSHUA RIVER GREEN(CODiCIl) VS EHWNISOTUNNCTAHNETUVUTUNNE OR EIHJSTENEIE 0 FIG. 1. Tribal distribution in Oregon about 1750. aU) -0 BERREMANI TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 15 fit such a classificatory scheme. The groupsseem to shift about considerably between fishing camps and permanent homes, and frequently navigate the river to some distance to carry on trade with other bands. This makes it well nigh impossible to delineate tribal boundaries with accuracy. More- over, the early literature does not always distinguish between a permanent village, a fishing camp, a band of traders, anda tribe. Many "tribes" are mentioned as consisting of only a few houses. When to these difficulties we add the fact that the tribal arrangement was greatly disturbed, at least in the upper part of this area, by the tribal movements in eastern Oregon to be discussed later in this paper,5 it becomes apparent thatany grouping arrived at will be fraught with much uncertainty. With thiscau- tion, which must unfortunately be made in regard to almost the entire state of Oregon, we may proceed to a discussion of the tribal distribution as nearly as it can be ascertained. The Chinook depended for their permanent food supplyon the salmon runs in the Columbia River and its tributaries, and their settlements were concentrated along the rivers. The exact extent of their claims to hunting grounds back from the river is not known with any degree ofaccuracy. For this reason the southern line of their boundary has been drawn inmost cases rather arbitrarily. Clatsop. The only Lower Chinookan tribe in Oregonwas the Clatsop. They occupied the south bank at the mouth of the Columbia Riveras far upstream as Tongue Point, and the adjacent coast as far south as Tilla- mook Head, where they adjoined the Tillamook. The Chinookproper occupied a corresponding area north of the river. An excellent account of the Clatsop is furnished by Lewis and Clark who spent the winter of 1805-06 in their territory.6 Kathiamet (or Cathiamet). Adjoining the Clatsop on the east was the Kathiamet tribe. They claimed the south bank of the Columbia, from Tongue Point to about opposite Puget's Island. Thiswas the westernmost tribe of the Upper Chinookan dialectic division, anda sub-dialect of that division is known by its name.7 Lewis and Clark furnished considerable evidence concerning this group, stating, however, that it consisted of only about 300 persons, in a single permanent village.8 Opposite themon the Washington side lived the Wahkiacum, of thesame dialectic division. Pages 55 if. below. Coues, op. cit., pp. 717-30; Franchère, Narrative ofa Voyage, pp. 324 if.; Ross, Ad- ventures of the First Settlers, pp. 102 if. See also Powell, Indian Linguistic Families,p. 65; Gatschet, Indian Languages of the Pacific States and Territories,p. 167. Boas, Kathiamet Texts, p. 6. 8 Coues, o. cii., pp. 908, 705, 753. 16 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [memoirs, 47 Skilloot (later known as Cooniacs). The Skilloot occupied both sides of the river from the territory of the Wahkiacum and Kathlamet tosomewhere above the mouth of the Cowlitz River, on which their chief permanent village was situated.9 Lewis and Clark encountered many Skilloot in canoes all along the river, andreported a village of them at the foot of the narrows in Wishram territory.10 Another village said to contain Skilloot was situated a few miles above the mouth of the Willamette River on the south bank of the Columbia, probably the same village called "Neerchokioon" in theShahala group. They noted a difference in dialect from the others seen above the mouth of the Willamette, and noted that the Skilloot had many more articles secured from white traders than did the other tribes.11 Members of this tribe visited them also at Fort Clatsop.12 This would tend to corrob orate Franchere's statement that they livedon both sides of the river and acted as traders between the upper and the lower river tribes.13 Boas obtained the names of three villages of the Skilloot tribe, and states that they spoke the Kathlamet dialect.14 To these the Handbook adds a village at Oak Point known as Cooniac which contained the only survivors of the tribe in 1830.15 Multnomah. Under this heading Lewis and Clark included a large num ber of villages, bands, or tribes on and about what is nowknownas Sauvies Island. These groups were classed together as a single nation or tribe be cause they were similar in culture and language while they differed some what from neighboring tribes in these respects. While not exactly subject to them, all these groups recognized the superiority and influence of the Multnomah. This seems to constitute fairly good evidence on which to class them as a single tribe and they are soconsidered by mostwriters.16

9 Coues, op. cit., p. 910. 10 Ibid., p. 954. 11 Ibid., pp. 692-95. 12 Ibid., p. 741. 13 Franchere, op. cit., p. 243. 14 Boas, Kathlamet Texts, p. 6. 16 This tribe wasfrequently referred to by late writers as the Cooniac or "Ne Cooniacks" from the name of this only remaining village. See Hodge, Handbook of American Indians, Pt. 1, p. 341; Lee and Frost, Ten Years in Oregon, Chap. 8; Coues, Journals of Alexander Henry and David Thompson, p. 812. 16 SeePowell, Indian Linguistic Families, p. 66; Gatschet, Indian Languages ofthe Pacific States and Territories, p. 167; Mooney, Aboriginal Population, p. 16.The latter, in common with some others, call them the Wappatoo. However, the other term has been used here because Wappatoo is alsoused to designate the Tualatin tribe, and Multnomah carries more geographicsignificance at the present time. Lewis and Clark use both names synonymously. berreman] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON calledIn £Lthis "nation"but wereLewisprobablyand Clarkmerenamedvillagesthirteenor local-^eoor more of what theyhem consisted of only one house, and the largest of but fifteen " At least three 0 these seem to be on the north bank of the Columbia, and one, the "Clackstar," is clearly proved by the description in the text-<-£>«* tnor hPnneoSlgrou"the Clatskanie'southand notof ofthetheColumbiaChmookanwhichfamily.probablyThis leavesbelongedeigntto his tr be They dustered on and around Sauvies Island, probably none leL authentically located east of the Willamette.» It appears therefore th t the Multnomlh occupied the south bank of WDWtte SU*&^ the Columbia River from about St. Helens to Portland, as well as Sauvies Island. They probably occupied a corresponding area north of the Co- lnmWMamette Falls (or Clowewalla). There seems abundant evidence of a number of groups around the falls of the Willamette River, but i is un- po'ible to determine their exact position. Lewis and Clark named_ three "tribe,» living at or close below the falls, and stated that they fished at the falls and dug wappatoo roots on the river farther down. These three wer Cushooks and Chahcowahs at the falls and Nemalquinner close be o them - Ahouse belonging to the last group was located on the east bank of the Willamette ten miles from the river's mouth.20 In 1835 the three bands were together at the falls, being greatly re duced in numbers. Here they are frequently mentioned by later observers, as Clowewalla, or Willamette Falls Indians.21 It seems that we are justified in grouping these three bands as a tribe inhabit the area surrounding the falls of the Willamette River and probably some distance below. The fact that all of them ****** falls and that they later constituted a single band seems to indicate a degS^rLe^nd Clark saw only one man of this « w.re told that it was a strong tribe, occupying the valley of the Clackamas Rver and consisting of eleven villages there.22 The Handbook states ha they claimed the east bank of the Willamette from afew miles above its W« CouesThe summaryLewis andgivenClarkby CouesExpedition,(op. cit.)p. 1248.does not agree in al cases with descnpfconsi_ft„_. '„m the text. Compare "Nechacokee" on his page 124S with page 922. i» Coues, op. cit., p. 932. »Co^lurn^of Alexander Henry and David Thomson, pp. 811, 819; Slacum, Letter, p 42; Parker, Journal, pp. 174-78. •» Coues, Lewis and Clark Expedition, p. 932. 18 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [MoIRs, 47 mouth nearly to the falls, and the valley of the Clackamas east to the Cascades.23 It was from this group that the dialectic division consisting of the Multnomah, Clowewalla, and Clackamas received its name. Casccide Indians (Watlala). Under this head have been included all the villages from the mouth of the Willamette to and including the Cascades. This is the "Shahala nation" of Lewis and Clark, most of the villages of which were on the north bank. They recorded only two settlements on the south bank, one eight miles and the other thirteen miles below the mouth of the Sandy River. The first consisted of one house and twenty-four temporary lodges. The lodges, they were informed, were occuped by "rela- tives" of the occupants of the house, whose permanent homes were at the Cascades. They had come there only to hunt. Here were also 200 Skilloots probably on a trip up or down the river to trade.24 The second village was small, and reported as belonging to the "Nechacokee," a band of the "Echeloot nation," which is the term by which they designated the Wasco and Wishram at the Dalles. There is thus a singular lack of settlement south of the Columbia from the Cascades to the mouth of the Willamette. For the region above Trout- dale it is easily explained by the rugged nature of the country, which is more pronounced and extends farther west on the south than on the north bank of the river. Below the mouth of Sandy River, however, the country spreads out to form a broad, fertile, and wooded area extending to the Willamette; yet in this entire area are reported only the two small bands mentioned above, and one house, previously referred to, which was temporarily occupied by Nemaiquinner from the Willamette Falls. It should be noted that the rivers here were not particularly adapted to the native methods of taking fish. Tide water extended to about Trout- dale, and the stream is described as broad and deep. The lower Willa- mette was of a similar nature, while fishing was carried on almost entirely at the rapids and falls where trapping and spearing could be successfully done. Hunting and gathering of roots and fruit would draw the people inland and away from the river banks, and they may thus have escaped the observation of the explorers. Geographically this territory would seem to belong with that of the Multnomah or Clackamas, but the report of the explorers leads one to 23 Hodge, Handbook of American Indians, Pt. 1,P. 302. In historic times part of the upper Clackamas basin was occupied by Molalla and other Sahaptin bands. Gatschet says they were driven from their homes by the Molalla, but it is not certain when this movement occurred. It seems likely that it was part of the late movement of tribes described below, and does not represent their original habitat. See Gatschet, Indian Languages of the Pacific Slates and Territories, p. 167; and pages 55 if. of this paper. 24 Coues, Lewis and Clark Expedition,p. 692; also p. 917. BEaREMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 19 believe that it was claimed as hunting territory by the tribes at the Cas- cades; if indeed it was not a sort of communal range of several tribes for hunting and other food gathering. The latter is suggested by the presence there of an "Echeloot" village (the tribe at the Dalles), a camp of Cas- cades, 200 men of the Skilloot nation, and a temporary house of Nemal- quinner from higher up the Willamette. It may best be considered, however, as primarily the range of the Cascades bands, as was claimed by Lewis and Clark, who also noted scattered settlements of the same "Sha- hala nation" on the adjacent north bank. After the epidemic of 1829 there was only a single band of this entire tribe remaining. They were known as Watlala, which is probably the "Wahclellah" band of Lewis and Clark. They lived at the Cascades, from which circumstance has come their common designation of Cascade Indians.25 Boas does not state in which dialectic division this group falls, but it is classed by Sapir as transitional between that of the Wasco and Wishram above and the Clackamas below.26 Hood River (Smacks/zop). East of the Cascades Lewis and Clark found the south bank of the Columbia deserted except for two villages,one at the mouth of Hood River and the other five miles below. These two they designated as Smackshop, and claimed theywere a tribe of the "Chil- luckittequaw nation" which occupied the north bank almost to the Dalles.27 The scarcity of settlements on the south bank must be attributed in this region to fear of Snake raids, as Lewis and Clark were specifically told by the natives.28 For this reason we may assume that both sideswere more or less equally occupied, before these raids began, by the allied bands of Hood River on the south and White Salmon Indians on the north. These no doubt constituted the "Chilluckittequaws" of Lewis and Clark, and occupied land from above the Cascades tribe to the Wasco and Wishram territory around the Dalles.29 The Smackshop of Lewis and Clark are no doubt the later Hood River band, sometimes erroneously classed with the Cascades tribe. Wasco. Lewis and Clark found the south side of the Columbia at the Dalles deserted, for reasons already stated. It appears, however, that this region was formerly occupied by the Wasco at and immediately below the 25Spier and Sapir, Wishram Eihnography, p. 160. These terms have frequently been used to include the Hood River bands, but Lewis and Clark clearly identified them with the tribe above the Cascades. (See below.) 26Spier and Sapir, op. cii., pp. 159-60. 27Coues, Lewis and Clark Expedition, p. 677; alsop. 1248. 28Coues, op.cit., p. 656. See pages 55 if. of this paper for a discussion of the Snake invasion. 29Spier and Sapir, op. cit., p. 160. 20 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [MoIRs, 47

Dalles. This tribe and the closely related Wishram on the north bank constituted the easternmost tribes of the Chinookan family, and spoke a distinct dialect of Upper Chinook. Land as far east as the Deschutes River is assigned to them by Spier and Sapir,3° but it is evident that this represents their later claims after the withdrawal of the Snake, for Salish tribes were formerly immediately above the Dalles.3' These Salish tribes, the Nekutameux and Moses-Columbia, will be discussed later in this paper (pp. 41 if).

CALAPUYAN TRIBES The tribes of the Willamette Valley above the falls and in the Tualatin country spoke a distinct language known as Calapuyan (or Kalapuyan). One tribe, the Yoncalla, also held a small area in the Umpqua drainage basin. Although a considerable region in this valley was held by Molalla in historic times, it seems probable that they were, prior to 1750, largely east of the Cascades.32 The tribes in this area are even less well known than those on the Columbia for the reason that their rapid and early extermination by dis- ease had rendered the valley almost uninhabited before it was explored and settled by the whites.33 The early travelers and settlers therefore obtained only very slight evidence concerning the original inhabitants and their tribal arrangement. From such sources we obtain numerous statements to the effect that the Calapuyan tribes had once been numerous and powerful, and that they occupied the Willamette Valley. Occasional mention is made of the Yamhill who seem to have visited the lower river at times. But other than this they contribute nothing.34

° Ibid., Mooney, Ghost-Dance Religion, p. 741. ' Spier and Sapir, op. cit., p. 162; also onP. 41 of this paper. 32 See pages 44 45 of this paper for complete discussion of this point. So early and so complete was the extermination that Lee and Frost, who spent ten years in Oregon (1834-1844) and were constantly at the Salem mission in the heart of the Willamette Valley, ridicule Parker for saying that there were many tribes and a numerous people. They state that there never was but one tribe, and that the valley is uninhabited save for a few families on the Yamhill River and a small remnant of Calapuya farther up the valley (Lee and Frost, Tee Years in Oregon, Chap. 7). United States Office of Indian Affairs, Annual Report, 1857, P. 364; Thwaites, Original Journals of Lewis and Clark, Vol. 6, p. 116; Coues, Journals of Alexander Henry and David Thompson, p. 812; Latham, Languages, p. 253; Hale, Ethnology and Philology, p. 217; Ban- croft, Native Races, Vol. 1, P. 309; Lee and Frost, Ten Years in Oregon, Chaps. 7 and 8; Mooney, A boriginal Population, p. 18; Powell, Indian Linguistic Families, p. 81. BxRREMANI TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 21

The single bit of anthropological work that has been done in this area consists of the researches of Gatschet in 1877, largely linguistic, which we have access to through a few short references in his writings and through a few secondary sources, notably the Haiidbook.35 The literature is wholly inadequate and permits only the most uncertain identification of tribes and delineation of their boundaries. Added confusion has resulted from the application of the name Calapuya to the whole group, as well as to a single tribe.36 However, on the basis of what is available the following groupings have been determined There are three Calapuyan dialects, almost unintelligible to one another. They are (1) Tualatin-Yamhill, (2) Yoncalla, and (3) Calapuya proper (spoken by all other tribes in the area) Tualali (or Atfalali). This tribe occupied the Tualatin Plains, the hills around Forest Grove, and the surroundings of Wapatu Lake.38 Twenty- two bands or villages are listed in the Handbooknames obtained by Gatschet in 1877 and embodied in his unpublished manuscript.39 Vain/-u/i (or Yamel). South of the Tualati, on the two branches of Yamhill River, were the Yamhill Indians. They probably also claimed Rickreall Creek and the west bank of the Willamette, as two out of six bands that are located in the Handbook are on that stream, and one is near the present site of Independence.40 Luckiamute (or Lakmiut). In 1890 Gatschet refers to this group as "Lakmiuk or Eugene City Indians." In 1899 he states that they resided on Luckiamute Creek, which would place them just south of the Yam- hill tribe on the west side of the valley. The Handbook adds to the confusion by locating a Luckiamute band or village on the Mohawk River, a north branch of the lower McKenzie. Five of the seven villages there recorded, however, are on the Luckiamute River. For this reason the name

See the several items by Gatschet in the bibliography and Hodge, Handbook of Ameri- can Indians. 36 See lodge, op. cit., Pt. 1, p. 187. This information in regard to dialectic subdivisions was kindly furnished the writer by Melville Jacobs from his unpublished field notes. Gatschet (The Kalapuya People, p. 212) mentions only the Calapuya proper and the Yoncalla. 38 Gatschet, The Kalapuya People, p. 213; Indian Languages of the Pacific Slates, p. 143. Wappatu Lake is also called Gaston Lake. This tribe is almost invariably called Wappatu or Wappatu Lake at present on the Grand Ronde reservation. 3 Hodge, Handbook of the American Indians, Pt. 1,p. 108. See also Powell, Indian Linguistic Families, and Mooney, Aboriginal Population, for lists of Calapuyan tribes. 40 Hodge, op. cit., Vol. 2,p. 987; Gatschet, Indian Languages of thePacific States, p.256; Coues, Journals of Alexander Henry and David Thompson, p. 812; see also note 33 above. 22 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [MEMOIRs, 47 has been arbitrarily confined to peoples of that area.41 The other two were elsewhere referred to as Calapuyan villages. Mary's River (Chapanafti). This band has been sometimes classed as a subdivision of the Luckiamute, but has been listed separately by most writers and was so listed on the reservation. They occupied the valley of Mary's River in the neighborhood of Corvallis.42 Long Tom Creek (Chelamela). Nothing is known as to the relationship of this band. They occupied the banks of Long Tom Creek, a west tributary of the Willamette next south of Mary's River, in what Gatschet describes as territory of the Calapuya proper. They were probably a band of that tribe, although listed separately in the Handbook. They are not named as a separate tribe in any of the other sources available.43 Calapuya (or Kalapuya). The area occupied by the Calapuya proper is unknown, and the data on the subject very confusing. In 1899 Gatschet stated that it lay north of the Calapuya Mountains and west of the Willa- mette River. This would be north of Cottage Grove, and probably included the Long Tom Creek Chelamela.44 Frachtenberg in the Handbook, however, basing his information on Gatschet's unpublished manuscripts, locates one band of this group at Brownsville, and one "east of the upper Willamette river." Three others are listed in the neighborhood of Eugene.45 There is no mention of the entire McKenzie watershed except the so-called Luckiamute village on the Mohawk mentioned above. Brownsville is on the Calapuya River, an east tributary of the Willamette in Linn County. It seems clear that the Eugene area was territory of the Calapuya proper, perhaps their center, since several villages were concentrated near there. It is possible that the Mohawk band said to be Luckiamute was also Calapuyan, as Gatschet at first classed all the Eugene villages as Luckiamute, later, however, making a distinction between them. It therefore appears that the Calapuya were on both sides of the Willa- mette, with villages as far north as Calapuya River in Linn County. In the absence of any record of other tribes in the area, I have assigned them the east side of the river from Albany to about as far south as Cottage Grove, including the McKenzie and Calapuya Rivers; and the west side

Gatschet, The Kalapuya People,p. 213; Indian Languages of the Pacific States, p. 256; Hodge, Handbook of American Indians, Pt. 1,p. 754. 42 lodge, op. cii., Pt. 1,p. 244; Gatschet, The Kalapuya People, p. 213. Gatschet calls them "Pineifu, or Marysville Kalapuyas." The writer has noted that they are always called Pineifu on the Grand Ronde reservation. ' Hodge, op. cii., Pt. 1,p. 242. " Gatschet, The Kalapuya People, p. 213. Hodge, op. cii., Pt. 1, pp. 50, 187. BERxEMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 23 north of the Calapuya Mountains to, and probably including, the Chela- mela of Long Tom Creek. This carries them to the Yoncalla on the south and the Santiam on the north. These boundaries are admittedly con- ectural.6 Vonctilla (Ayankeld). South of the Calapuya area, and occupying territory "toward the sources of the Willamette River," as well as part of the Umpqua drainage, lived the Yoncalla, who called themselves Ayankeld. They spoke a dialect differing somewhat from the rest of the Calapuyan groups, and probably were a clearly distinct tribe.47 Their area in the TJmpqua watershed consisted of the upper courses of Elk and Calapuya Rivers in Douglas County.48 The exact extent of their territory on the Willa- mette is not known. Santiam (Ahalpam). This tribe lived north of the area we have assigned to the Calapuya, on the two forks of the Santiam River. They were called Ahalpam by their Tualatin neighbors, a term meaning "uplanders." The upper courses of the streams were in historic times held by the Molalla, who probably intruded from east of the Cascades, but it is probable that the early habitat of the Santiam extended to the mountains.49 Pudding River (Ahanlchuyuck). The watershed of Pudding River, an eastern tributary of the Willamette, and the area between this stream and the Willamette River known as French Prairie, were property of the Pud- ding River Indians, or the Ahantchuyuck. It is probable that they originally also occupied the Molalla Creek, which joins Pudding River near its mouth. This stream at a later date was occupied by Molalla from the east.5°

' Minto states that the chief of the Calapuya who signed the treaty ceding all the east side of the Willamette Valley to the United States lived originally at the present site of Jefferson. This is on the Santiam. The evidence hardly seems to warrant including all this area under that tribe (Minto, Condition, p. 307). The treaty signed by the Willamette Valley tribes in 1855 includes the name Mohawk as a tribe. Whether there is any connection between this group and the small northern tributary of the McKenzie River of that name, I am unable to say. I have found no reference to the name in other sources. See United States Statutes at Large, Vol. 10, 1855, p. 1143. Gatschet, The Kalapuya People, p. 212. 48 lodge, Handbook of American Indians, Pt. 2,p. 1000. See also Latham, Languages, p. 245; Bancroft, Native Races, Vol. 3, p. 630. 1 Gatschet, Indian Languages of the Pacific States, p. 256; lodge, op. cit., Pt. 2, p. 461. It should be noted that Boas included the entire east side of the valley south of the Pud- ding River bands as Santiam territory, but I find no warrant for it in the available literature (Boas, Coiled Basketry, map). ° Gatschet, op. cit.,p. 256; lodge, op. cit., Pt. 1, p. 930. 24 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [ixMoIxs, 47

CLATSKANIE Of an entirely different linguistic stock, the Athapascan, were the Clatskanies or "Tlatskanai," who lived on the headwaters of the numerous small streams which flow west to the coast and north and east to the Columbia. This consisted of a mountainous region separated from the lower Columbia by Chinookan tribes, and bordering on the Tillamook and the Tualati tribes also. The linguistic family to which this tribe belonged will be described in the chapter on southwestern Oregon, as most of the Athapascan tribes of Oregon were in that region. Our knowledge concerning this tribe is very limited, consisting of only brief references by a number of early explorers, a few of which will be mentioned. Lewis and Clark reported a band on Scappoose Creek which they called the "Clackstar;" and stated that their range extended to the head of Tillamook River. They were reported to carry on considerable trade with the Tillamook, and Coues adds that they were hunters and traders in contrast to the Chinookan fishermen.5' A band of this tribe was observed on streams flowing into Young's Bay by Lee and Frost.52 The Henry-Thompson journals reported them south of the Columbia near Oak Point,53 and they are similarly reported by Hale.54 Gibbs55 was informed that they were formerly with the small band of Athapascans north of the river, but on the failure of game there, crossed over to their later habitat, but Powell discredits the story.56 From the similarity of these accounts it cannot be doubted that they refer to the same tribe, and it would appear that they roamed over a considerable area. Their hostility to whites and early extinction has precluded further knowledge concerning them.57

SUMMARY The Columbia River below the Dalles and the Willamette Valley below the falls were occupied by Chonookan speaking tribes. Two chief dialects were spoken, Upper and Lower Chinook. The former included three slightly ' Coues, Lewis and Clark Expedition, pp. 915, 931. ' Lee and Frost, Ten Years in Oregon, Chap. 8. ' Coues, Journals of Alexander Henry and David Thompson, p. 794. Hale, Ethnology and Philology, p. 204; also Gatschet, Indian Languages of the Pacific States, p. 166. Gibbs, Report on the Indian Tribes, p. 428. 56 Powell, Indian Linguistic Families,p. 53. The United States Office of Indian Affairs (Annual Report, 1857, p. 357) reported only eight survivors in 1857. Their hostile nature is reported in Hodge, Handbook of American Indians, Pt. 2, p. 763. BERREMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 25 differingsub-dialects:Kathiamet, Clackamas, and Wasco-Wishram. Tribes of this group consist of Clatsop, Kathiamet, Skilloot, Multnomah, Clowewalla or Willamette Falls, Clackamas, Cascades or Watlala, Hood River, and Wasco, some of which also held territory north of the river. The Willamette Valley above the falls was occupied by Calapuyan tribes, constituting also a distinct linguistic family. There were three dialects in this group: Tualati-Yamhill, Yoncalla, and Calapuya proper. There were eight groups in this area probably classifiable as tribes. They were Tualati, Yamhill, Luckiamute, Mary's River, Calapuya (probably including Long Tom Creek band), Yoncalla, Santiam, and Pudding River. The Clatskanie, an Athapascan tribe, lived in the mountains northwest of the Tualati. There is little anthropological literature on any of these tribes. Many historical records are available on the Chinookan tribes, but little of even that type of material on the Calapuyans. Consequently our knowledge of these groups is extremely limited, and many areas cannot be determined with certainty. SOUTHWESTERN OREGON TRIBES In beginning a paper on the tribal distribution in this area a few years ago, Dr Spier said Our knowledge of the ethnic geography of southern Oregon west of the Cas- cades is notoriously chaotic. This is due largely to the dislocation and rapid de- struction of the Rogue River tribes in the wars of the 'fifties, but in part to the then prevalent habit of referring to these Indians indiscriminately as "Rogue Rivers." Add the absence of sharply defined physiographic provinces and the reason for the confusion is obvious.' The reader will now be aware that southwestern Oregon differs little from many other parts of the state in this respect. This area, prior to 1750, contained two major linguistic stocks besides the Hokan, which was found only in a small region on the California border. The two are Takelman and Athapascan. HOKAN This language was spoken by a number of California tribes, the northern- most of which were the Shasta and the Karok, both of which probably claimed some territory north of the Oregon line. Shasla. The northern extent of Shastan territory is a matter of uncertainty. It has sometimes been claimed to include considerable area on the Rogue River watershed, and at other times to extend only to the summit of the Siskiyous.' Since the Shasta and Takelma were constantly at war, this may well have been disputed territory which changed hands at various times as the fortunes of war gave the raiding bands of one or the other the advantage. The evidence seems to be against permanent and extensive settlements of Shasta in the Jacksonville and Table Rock region. Takelma informants were explicit in claiming this territory, and it is certainly far from the permanent and principal habitat of the Shasta, even if they did hunt on the north slopes of the Siskiyous. Moreover, Kiamath informants stated that the Takelma were their western neighbors and they seem to have had trading relations with them, as well as to have exchanged occasional raids. This would not be probable were there strong bands of hostile Shastas intervening. It has seemed therefore more logical to place the Shasta boundary at the summit of the Siskiyous, which is probably as far north as they con-

Spier, Tribal Distribution, p. 358. 2 Kroeber (Handbook of the Indians of California, p. 2'5) extends Shasta territory to Mount McLaughlin, and includes Stewart River and Little Butte Creek, tributaries of the Rogue. Spier (op. cit., p. 364) is certain they did not occupy land north of the Siskiyous. Sapir (Notes on the Takelina, p. 253) considers that it was probably a disputed territory.

26 BERREMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 27

sistently occupied. This places only the Jenny Creek drainage in Shasta territory. Karok. The Karok, another Hokan speaking tribe of the lower Kia- math River, probably also claimed avery small area in Oregon on the headwaters of a small stream or two of the north Klamath basin, as shown on the map.3 TAKELMAN The upper and middle Rogue River was occupied by two divisions of the Takelma. They spoke a language which has not been shown to be genetically related to any other (called Takelman), andare most often designated as Upland and Lowland Takelma. The twogroups spoke different dialects but their languageswere mutually intelligible. The tribal identity of these groups is distinguishable witha fair degree of certainty, but their areas are poorly defined. Upland Takelma. The Upland Takelma lived on both sides of Bear Creek and on the Rogue River in the Jacksonville and Table Rock region. They extended east to the summit of the Cascades to borderon Kiamath territory.4 In historic times they were not fartherup the Rogue River than Prospect, the upper reaches being occupied by the intrusive Molalla. It seems probable that they occupied the entire watershed before the Mo- lalla came in, but there is no evidence of this except its geographic position. On the southwest they bordered on the Shasta,as discussed above. They seem to have extended down the Rogue River valley somewhere below the mouth of Bear Creek. The area between Table Rock and Grants Pass may have been marginal between them and the Lowland tribe.5 The Upland Takelma are differentiated from the Lowland Takelma not only by dialectic differences but also cultural ones. They are said moreover to be constantly raiding their lowland neighbors for slaves which they traded to the Klamath. For thesereasons it seems that a distinct tribal identity for them is indicated. Lowland Takelma. Below them on the middle Rogue River were the Lowland Takelma. They claimed the upper courses of Cow Creek, a southern tributary of the Umpqua, the middle Rogue River, and south to include a little territory in California on the headwaters of the Illinois River and Applegate Creek. On the east they were bounded by the Upland Takelma territory described above.6 On the west they were bounded by Kroeber, op. cii., p. 100, map; Spier, op. cii.,p. 365. Spier, op. cii., p. 360; Klamaih Eihnograp/zy, fig. 1 (map),p. 9. Sapir, op. cii., p. 252; Spier, op. cii., p.364. 6 Sapir, op. cii., p. 251. 28 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [ssxMolas, 47 territory of the Shasta Costa tribe, but the exact position of this boundary is a matter of uncertainty. The Shasta Costa settlements centered around the mouth of the Illinois River, probably occupying the lower courses of that stream. They have sometimes been called Illinois River Indians. The upper courses were probably Takelma territory, as Dorsey locates one of their villages there. The same authority stated that the Takelma occupied only the south bank of the Rogue River, while the entire north bank above the Illinois was claimed by the Shasta Costa.7 Sapir, however, obtained evidence to the contrary, and by reason of the greater complete- ness of his study, which was undertaken with a fuller knowledge of the languages and culture of the area, his data is deemed the more reliable. His informants claimed for the Takelma both banks of the Rogue River as far downstream as Leaf Creek.8 He has definite evidence of their villages on Cow Creek and Jump-off Joe Creek, which are north of the Rogue, and hence in contradiction to Dorsey's information. Moreover, the Shasta Costa informants always spoke of the Takelma as being upstream from them.9 He considers it probable that on the south side of the river they extend farther downstream, perhaps nearly to the mouth of the Illinois, which circumstance might have led to Dorsey's conclusions.10 Within the Lowland Takelma territory were two isolated bands of Athapascan speaking peoples discussed below. ATHAPASCAN This linguistic stock has a wider distribution than any other in North America. Its northern division, often designated as Déné or Tinneh, extended over a large part of northern Canada, with the exception of the Pacific coast tribes. A considerable area in Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and northern Mexico contains the southern division. The Pacific division, in which the Oregon tribes fall, consists of a number of bands in southwestern Oregon and northwestern California, as well as two isolated groups near the mouth of the Columbia, one in Oregon and the other in Washington. The Athapascan tribes of southwestern Oregon occupied the upper courses of the Umpqua and Coquille Rivers and the Rogue River below the Takelma, as well as the coast as far north as the Kusan tribe on the lower Coquille. In this area may be

Dorsey, Gentile System, pp. 234-35. 8J am unable to identify this stream. It must be Howard Creek or in that neighborhood, as Dorsey (bc. cit.) says it is the next below Galice Creek on the south side of the river. Sapir, Notes on the Takelma, p. 253. 10 Essentially Sapir's arrangement has been used here, although it seems quite unlikely that the Rogue River should have served as a tribal boundary. See note 5 (p. 11) of this paper. BERREMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 29 distinguished at least six distinct tribal groupings besides two isolated bands in Takelma territory. One of these has seven fairly distinct subdivisions which perhaps deserve separate tribal rank. The dialect spoken on the Umpqua is almost unintelligible to other Athapascan tribes, and the Coquille and Galice Creek tribes speak fairly distinct dialects. Others of the area are said to vary slightly, shading into one another from north to south.'1 Galice Creek and Applegate Creek. Wholly within the Lower Takelman territory were two isolated Athapascan bands who probably deserve classification as a single tribe. They were the Galice Creek band, designated by Dorsey as Taltuctuntude, and the Applegate band, designated as Dakubetede." The two bands were not contiguous in territory, but they spoke the same dialect, which was quite distinct from other groups. Their actual relationship to each other is not known, but their linguistic similarity may indicate that it was close. The Handbook conjectures that they were intruders among the Takelma.'3 Shasta Costa. The next below the Takelma on the Rogue River was the Shasta Costa, an Athapascan tribe.'4 The eastern boundary and extent of this tribe has already been discussed. Their chief settlements seem to have been about the mouth of the Illinois River. Mooney lists Illinois Indians as another name for this tribe." It is probable that they occupied the lower courses of that stream, both sides of the Rogue for some distance above its confluence with the Illinois, and the north bank somewhat farther. The western boundary of this tribe is also not definitely known but it probably extended little below the mouth of the Illinois River, as Schumacher states that a hunting tribe, the Mekaneten, occupied the river nearly up to the Shasta Costa villages at this point.'6 Dorsey lists thirty-three Shasta Costa villages in this area, which would indicate a considerable population.'7 Upper Coquille (Mishikhwutmetunne). Practically all that is known of this tribe is the information obtained by Dorsey in 1890. He obtained 1 On Athapascan family see Boas, Handbook of American Indian Languages, Pt. 1,pp. 85-158; also Powell, Indian Linguistic Families, p. 51 et seq. 12 These names are simply place names, meaning people living on a certain creek, and hence may not have tribal significance. See Dorsey, Gentile System, p. 235; Sapir, Notes on the Takelmce, p. 253. "Hodge, Handbook of American Indians, Pt. 1, p. 380; Sapir, bc. cit. 14 Shasta Costa is our modern spelling of their own tribal name. The Handbook gives it as Shista Kwusta (Hodge, op. cit., Pt. 1, p. 236). 15 Mooney, Aboriginal Population,p. 17; Schumacher, Researches, p. 28. 16 See this paper, p. 32; also Schumacher, op. cit.,p. 29. 17 Dorsey, Gentile System,p. 234. 30 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [aE1AoIRs, 47 names of thirty-two villages on the upper Coquille River, the farthest downstream being located a short distance below the present site of Co- quille. Other references were made to them by Frachtenberg, and in several Reports of Indian Affairs where they are usually called Coquille Indians.'8 Their neighbors on the lower Coquille were of a separate linguistic stock, the Kusan.'° The Coquille spoke a distinct dialect of the Athapascan language. Upper Ump qua. The upper IJmpqua basin above the present site of Scottsburg was largely claimed by an Athapascan tribe with a very distinct dialect, and usually designated simply as the Umpqua. On the upper courses of Cow Creek, a southern tributary of the Umpqua, they were bounded by the Takelma. The Elk and Calapuya Rivers in their north drainage basin were occupied by the Yoncalla of the upper Willamette Valley. Below them, extending upstream some distance beyond the present site of Scottsburg were the Kuitsh, a Siuslawan tribe. Their position and identity as a tribe are indicated by their divergent dialect and the frequent mention of them as such in a number of sources.'° Tolowa. Turning to the Athapascan tribes on the coast, we find that the southernmost of these which held territory in Oregon was the Tolowa. The area occupied by this tribe was largely in California, on the drainage of Smith River and the adjacent ocean frontage. This would include a small area in Oregon on the headwaters of the north fork of Smith River. The northern boundary on the coast was close to the Oregon line.2' Chetco (Cheti). Adjoining the Tolowa on the north was the closely related Athapascan tribe who called themselves Cheti (now spelled Chetco). They occupied the Chetco River, living mainly along its lower fourteen miles. It is probable that they also occupied Winchuck River, as Kroeber '8Dorsey, op. cit., p. 230; Frachtenberg, in Boas, Handbook of American Indian Lan-. guages, Pt. 2, p. 305; United States Office of Indian Affairs, Annual Report, 1861, pp. 162, 221; ibid., 1884, p. 263. ' Dorsey (op. cit., p. 230) locates one Coquille village on the coast at the mouth of Flores Creek, but his informant stated that these people had moved there from a former site. As this lies in the territory of another group, the Kwatami, it appears that the move was probably a late one, and does not indicate that the original habitat of the Coquille extended that far. 20 They are mentioned in this area by Hale, Ethnology and Philology, p. 204; Sapir, Notes on the Takelma, p. 253; Boas, Handbook of American Indian Languages, Pt. 2, p. 441; Dorsey, op. cit., p. 231. See also note 13. The name Umpqua has been used by Parker and others to refer to all southern Oregon tribes, and by others to refer to all on the Umpqua River, but it is properly applied to this tribe only, and is their own tribal name. See p. 36, note 9, also. ' Kroeber, Handbook of Indians of California,pp. 223, 125. BERREMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 31 places the boundary between them and the Tolowa just about at the Oregon-California border. Nine villages are named by Dorseyon Chetco Creek and on "Maqwut" which may be Winchuck River.22 Their northern boundary on the coastwas probably at Cape Ferrelo, as that is given as the southern boundary of the next group north. Tulutnj. This is a collective term which the Handbook of American Indians applies to the bands occupying the coast from the Lower Coquille on the north to the Chetco on the south, and extending up the Rogue River nearly to the mouth of the Illinois. This is probably thesame name as that Dorsey records as "Tuqwetatunne." This term he says was given by his informants as applying to the inhabitants of this region, but the word simply means "all the people," and he considers it devoid of significance. He was further informed that the groups included in this term frequently warred with each other and had "scarcelyany feeling of national pride or unity."23 He therefore concluded that they could not be classed as a single tribe or nation. Schumacher deignates six groups in the area south of Sisters Rocks, for which he gives quite definite territorial limits, but makes no mention of their relationship.24 North of Sisters Rocks the Handbook places, the Kwatami as a division of the Tututni, basing this classification on Parrish's data in the Indian Affairs Reports, andon manuscripts not available at present.25 This divides the region intoseven quite definite areas. Their status as a single tribe or as autonomous units must be considered an open question. Powell, however, lists most of themas separate tribes, as does also Mooney.26 Due to the uncertainty and lack of definite information the matter cannot be conclusively determined at present.21 The areas of all the groups have been indicatedon the maps.

22 Dorsey (op. cii.,p. 236) did not identify this stream. It was said to be on the south side of Chetco which might imply a tributary, but Chetco Creek hasno large southern tributaries. It is probable that informants referred to Winchuck River, which is also in Chetco territory. See also Kroeber, op. cii., p. 125; lodge, Handbook of American Indians, Pt. 1,p. 249. 23 Dorsey, Gentile System,p. 232. 24 Schumacher, Researches,p. 28. 25 lodge, Handbook of American Indians, Pt. 1,p. 746; Pt. 2, p. 857. 26 Powell, Indian Linguistic Families,p. 55; Mooney, Aboriginal Population, p. 17. The Jedediah Smith expedition passed through this region in 1828. See Dale, Ashley- Smith Explorations, p. 260 ei seq. 27 It is probable that this isone of those cases where the social organization was not designed to, fit neatly into the white man's concept of a "tribe." If wemay assume here an organization similar to that of the lower Klamath tribes, to which they seem to have been culturally tributary, their basic social unit was one of kinship and the local group or village. Other than that there was absolutely no trace of political life, no socialor political organization, no chiefs nor governmental authority. In sucha case the term "tribe" can only be used 32 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION IrEMoIRS, 47

These seven groups were located as follows: Kwataini or Sixes. This group occupied territory on the coast from about four miles south of Bandon south to Humbug Mountain, and claimed the drainage basins of the streams in this region to the summit of the Coast Range. Their chief is said to have lived on Sixes River.28 Euchre Creek (Yukichetunne). Adjoining the Kwatami on the south were the Euchre Creek Indians, occupying the coast and probablythe drainage about Euchre Creek, from Sisters Rocks south to some point between the mouth of Euchre Creek and that of the Rogue River.29 Tututunne. This is probably the tribe or group from which comes the name Tututni used to designate this entire group. They occupied both banks of the Rogue River from shortly above Lobster Creek down to the Chemetunne, who occupied both sides of its mouth. Schumacher locates their chief "rancheria" five miles up the river on the north side, and states that rocks at the mouth of Lobster Creek were a favorite fishing place.3° Mikonotunne. From the Tututunne to the Shasta Costa territory about twelve miles of the river was claimed by a hunting band, the Miko- notunne. It is not known how much country back from the river they claimed as hunting grounds. They may have ranged the upper courses of Lobster Creek, but its mouth was Tututunne territory.3' Chemetunne (Joshua tribe). The mouth of the Rogue River, below the Tututunne was occupied by a band or tribe known on the reservation as Joshuas.32 They are reported in this region by Frachtenberg and Schu- macher, the latter furnishing the information that they claimed the coast in a very general sense. The reader is referredagain to the discussion of this point in the intro- ductory chapter of this paper. For description of the social organization of the lower Klamath tribes see Kroeber, Handbook of Indians of California. 20Hodgeç Handbook of American Indians, Pt. 1, p. 746; Dorsey, Gentile System, p. 232. 29Schumacher, Researches, p. 28. Dorsey (bc. cit.) names a number of villages in this region. 30 Schumacher, Ice. cit. - lodge (op. cit., Pt. 2, p. 858) reports such a band ten miles up the Rogue River. His authority is Gairdner, which source is not available to me. 31Schumacher (op. cit., p. 29) calls them Mekaneten. Parrish states that these people claimed about twelve miles of the river, and bordered on the Shasta Costa (United States Office of Indian Affairs, Annual Report, 1854, quoted in lodge, op. cit., Pt. 1, p. 861). See also Dorsey, Gentile System, p. 233, 32The Handbook of American Indians (Pt. 1, p. 243) says that Joshua is a corruption of their tribal name Ya'shu. BERREMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 33 south nearly to Cape Sebastian and north to the Euchre Creek territory. Dorsey furnishes the names of seven villages on Hunter's Creek which belonged to the same band.33 Pistol River (Chetleshin). This group occupied the drainage of Pistol River and the coast between Cape Sebastian and Mack's Arch, which is about a mile south of Crook's Point. Their main village was on Pistol River, where Schumacher counted fifty house pits. Several other villages were located in the area, which gives the impression of a considerable early population.34 Khwaishtunnetunne. This is Schumacher's "Khustenete," which occupied the coast from Mack's Arch to "Whale's Head," eight miles south. Their main village was on a small stream, probably Whale Creek. They therefore adjoined the Chetco tribe on the south.35 It is unfortunate that so little is known concerning this coast region. A reading of Schumacher's report on the shell heaps and other village sites on the coast gives the impression that there was once a considerable population there. Jedediah Smith, probably the first explorer in this region, reported a numerous population on the coast in 1821, though it is probable that even by that time they had been greatly reduced in numbers by the epidemics.3The little settled nature of this area at the present time and abundance of evidence of a large aboriginal population should make this a rich and relatively undisturbed field for archaeological investigation.

SUMMARY Southwestern Oregon was occupied chiefly by two great linguistic divisions, the Takelman and the Athapascan. The former was unique in this area and consisted of two tribes, the Upland and Lowland Takelma, who occupied the upper and middle Rogue River. The Athapascans are

° Frachtenberg (Shasta and Athapascan Myths, p. 224) calls them Tacametine. Schu- macher, Researches, p. 31; Dorsey, op. cit., p. 236. ' Schumacher, op. cit., p. 31; Dorsey, bc. cii. The data here is somewhat confusing. Whale's Head is a rough point on the coast at about eight miles south of Mack's Arch. Shell heaps indicate settlements of some size just at the north side of it, as well as several small settlements at the mouth of Whale Head Creek just south of it. It is impossible to determine the exact boundary, but the territory between Whale Head Creek and Cape Ferrelo is rugged and shows no evidence now of former occupation. The villages on both sides of Whale's Head have been arbitrarily assigned to the Khuste- nete. Remains of two other village sites are found on the coast between these and Mack's Arch. See also Schumacher, op. cit., p. 33. See Dale, Ashley-Smith Explorations, p. 260 et seq. 34 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [MorRs, 47 part of the Pacific division of a widely spread linguistic family. Different dialects were spoken on the upper Umpqua, upper Coquille, and Galice and Applegate Creeks, and it appears that lesser dialectic differences existed between other tribes. Of this family seven tribes have been located: Shasta Costa, Upper Coquille, Upper Umpqua, and Galice and Applegate Creek tribe in the interior; and Tolowa, Chetco, and Tututni on the coast. The last is composed of seven more or less distinct bands whose tribal relations are unknown. The Shasta and Karok of California, of the Hokan linguistic stock, had some area near the state line, and the Calapuyan Yoncalla held a little of the Umpqua drainage basin. NORTH COAST TRIBES In this section it is proposed to treat the peoples occupying the Pacific coast of Oregon and the west slope of the Coast Range north of, and including, the Kusan tribes on Coos Bay and River and the Lower Coquille. It is probable that the Lower Coquille belong with the southwestern tribes treated above in some cultural aspects, but because of their linguistic and geographic relationships I have preferred to treat them in this section. The division here made is a cultural as well as a linguistic one. The Kusan language, spoken in the lower Coquille and Coos Bay country, is distinct from the Athapascan south and east of there on the upper courses of the Coquille and Tjmpqua Rivers and on the coast. Here in 1828, Jedediah Smith found some who spoke the Chinook jargon then current at the mouth of the Columbia, and noted a number of trade articles of European make.' These factors indicate that lines of communication and cultural influence had reached these peoples from the north. This coast region includes four distinct linguistic families: the Kusan, Siuslawan, Yakonan, and Coast Salish. We shall proceed northward, treat- ing each of these in the order they occur on the coast. Besides the early researches of Dorsey, we have a little linguistic material on most of the tribes in this area, and brief notes on their culture and positions by Frachtenberg and Boas. These, with a few notes from his unpublished material furnished the writer by Melville Jacobs, constitute almost our only sources on this region. KUSAN The Kusan linguistic stock was composed of two dialects which were almost unintelligible to each other. Miluk was spoken on the lower Co- quille and the southern arm of Coos Bay, Hanis in the remaining parts of the bay region.2 This linguistic division is the only definite reason we have for classifying the two groups as separate "tribes," though they are generally so designated in the literature. Jacobs reports that there is no conclusive evidence of cultural differentiation between them, other than a gradual shading off from one local group to another along the coast. Here also a definite tribal organization seems lacking.3 1 Dale, Ashley-Smith Exploration, p. 266. 2 Frachtenberg states that the Hanis was composed of a number of dialects, but Jacobs' recent researches indicate that these differences are nothing more than slight village provincialisms. See Frachtenberg, Coos Texts; Boas, Handbook of American Indian Languages, Pt. 2, p. 305. Brief observations on the tribes of this region are given by Jedediah Smith who was the first explorer to enter this region (see Dale, bc. cit.). 35 36 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [MEMOIRS, 47

Lower Coquille. The Lower Coquille, speaking the Miluk dialect of Kusan, occupied the Coquille River up to a short distance below the present site of Coquille. Dorsey reported villages of the Athapascan tribe on the upper river at the site of Coquille, and a village of the lower tribe on each side of the river at its mouth. Jacobs reports their dialect also spoken "north along the coast coves, deep into South Slough of Coos Bay, and north along the bay nearly to Empire."4 Coos (Ka Koosh). The Coos Bay region and the drainage basin of the Coos River were occupied by the Coos tribe. They were bordered by the Siuslaw on the north, the Kalapuyan tribe of Yoncalla on the east, and by the Coquille and Lower Coquille on the south. Their northern boundary on the coast was probably in the vicinity of Ten Mile Lake, as the Lower Umpqua considered that their southern boundary. Their language was a distinct dialect of the Kusan stock referred to as Hanis.5 SIUSLA WAN On the Lower lJmpqua we encounter another linguistic family known as Siuslawan. This stock embraces two closely related dialects, spoken on the lower lJmpqua and the Siuslaw Rivers. This was formerly considered by Dorsey and Powell to belong to the Yakonan stock, which it joins on the north,6 but the researches of Frachtenberg have proved it to be sufficiently distinct to be classed as a separate linguistic family.7 Lower Umpqua (Kuilsh). The Lower Umpqua claimed territory on the sea coast from Five Mile Lake on the north to Ten Mile Lake on the south, and up the Umpqua River some distance above Scottsburg. Dorsey named twenty-one villages here, which would indicate a considerable population.8 This impression is substantiated by the journal of the Jedediah Smith expedition of 1828. These explorers observed many Indians in this region. It is reported that sixty or seventy came into camp at one time, and that they called themselves "Ompquah."9 Dorsey, Gentile System, p. 231; see also note 2 above. Quotation is from notes furnished by Melville Jacobs. Other sources cited do not mention the extension of Miluk speaking groups along the bay. Boas, Handbook of American Indian Languages, Pt. 2, pp. 305, 441. 6 Dorsey, op. cit., p. 230; Powell, Indian Linguistic Families,p. 134. Frachtenberg, in Boas, op. cit., Pt. 2, p. 437. 8 Boas, op. cit., Pt. 2,p. 441; Dorsey, op. cit., p. 230; Hodge, Handbook of American In- dians, Pt. 1, p. 732. "Dale, op. cit., p. 266 et seq. Unfortunately at this place four miles up the river, the expedition was massacred and the journal ends. The early extermination of tribes on the Umpqua River is indicated by the fact that Jason Lee, who visited the river in 1840 to arrange for the establishment of a mission among BERxEMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 37

Siuslaw. The Siuslaw proper occupied the watershed of the river of that name and some adjacent coast. According to Frachtenberg their southern boundary was in the neighborhood of Five Mile Lake. On the north they "bordered on the Yahach [Yachats] river," while their villages extended up stream as far as Mapleton.'° He makes no mention of the upper drainage, but he includes it in this linguistic area, and Dorsey has located several villages far towards its source." It is apparent therefore that it was claimed by this tribe. YAKONAN The northern neighbors of the Siuslaw were the Alsea, who, together with the Yaquina north of them, constitute another distinct linguistic family known as the Yakonan. The two tribes spoke a very similar language, differing only in a few provincialisms.2 Alsea. The Alsea occupied the entire Alsea River drainage basin as well as that of Elkhorn Creek. Their most southern village was at the present site of Yachats, where they apparently adjoined Siuslaw territory. Their farthest northern village was at Seal Rocks. Farrand'3 says they lived mostly on the lower rivers and near the coast, which seems to be true of many of the coast tribes, but their claims to hunting territory probably extended to the summit of the mountains. Dorsey named twenty villages of this tribe. Yaquina. The closely related Yaquina lived on the Yaquina River and Bay and the adjacent coast. Their northern extent is not indicated, but Boas has located it in the neighborhood of Otter Rock.'4 Dorsey named fifty-six Yaquina villages, which were largely concentrated on the river below Elk City.'5 COAST SALISH The coast north of the Yakonan tribes and extending to the Clatsop at the mouth of the Columbia was occupied by Salish speaking peoples.

them, reported "only a few miserable fish-eaters at the mouth of the river, who were as savage as the bears, their neighbors." He reported unfavorably on the mission project. (See Lee and Frost, Ten Years in Oregon, Chap. 8.) '° Boas, op. cit., Pt. 2, p. 441. 1 Dorsey, op. cit., p. 230. 12 Dorsey, Gentile System, p. 229; Gatschet, Indian Languages of the Pacific States, p. 256. 3 Farrand, Notes on the Alsea,p. 241; see also Frachtenberg, A isea Texts am!Myths, on Alsea. 14 Boas, Coiled Basbetry, map. 1 Dorsey, bc. cit. 38 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [arEMoiRs, 47

These tribes are representatives of a large linguistic family, which, divided into coast and interior dialectic divisions, was spoken in most of Washington, northern Idaho, western Montana, and British Columbia.'6 This group of peoples, consisting chiefly of the Tillamook, are the southernmost representatives of the Coast Salish. They are cut off from their northern kinsmen by the Chinookan tribes of the lower Columbia. Per- haps they migrated south through Chinookan territory, or they may represent the southern limit of a once continuous occupation of the coast by Salish tribes who were divided at an early date by a westward movement of Chinookan tribes. The Coast Salish in Oregon all spoke a similar dialect, with the exception of the Siletz whose language differed from the Tillamook proper.' Whether all the Salish speaking peoples in this area are rightly considered as belonging to one tribe seems to be doubtful. Lewis and Clark visited the Tillamook during their winter at Fort Clatsop and obtained from Indians on the Columbia the names and positions of coast tribes as far south as the Umpqua. They stated that the Tillamook lived as far north as Whale Creek, thirty-five miles south of Point Adams, and extended thirty-five miles south of that place. They are said to have lived on three streams and two creeks besides Tillamook River, all of which emptied into Tillamook Bay. South of the Tillamook and speaking the same language, but as distinct tribes, they named the "Lucktons" and the "Kahunkle," neither of which has been identified since. Next to these they named the "Lickawis" which has been identified as the Ya- quina.'8 This is admittedly hearsay evidence obtained from the natives, but it indicates that the natives on the Columbia looked upon some of the Salish tribes to the south as distinct from the Tillamook. Dorsey reported in 1890 that he heard of several small tribes who lived south of the Tillamook, of which he saw Salmon River and Nestucca Indians on the reservation. He was also specifically told that the Siletz tribe had lived on Siletz River, but was then extinct.'9 The Handbook calls the Nestucca a Tillamook band but classes the Salmon River, Siletz, and Nehalem as separate Salishan tribes.'0 Mooney 16 Boas, Coiled Basketry, map; also Boas, Classification of Languages. 17 Boas, Traditions of the Tillamook,p. 23. 18 Coues, Lewis and Clark Expedition,p. 758. 19 Dorsey, Gentile Organization,p. 227. '° See lodge, Handbook of American Indians, under these various names. The Handbook (Pt. 2, p. 1) further places a Yakonan band in about the neighborhood of Devil's Lake. These were called Naasumetunne. Lacking any other evidence of it I am inclined to consider it an error. BERREMANI TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 39 lists Tillamook, Nestucca, Salmon River, and Siletz as Salishan tribes, and Powell lists only Tillamook and Nestucca.2' Boas furnishes no inf or- mation in his two articles on the Tillamook, except that of the dialectic difference between the Siletz and other groups.22 This chaotic and contradictory evidence regarding the tribal divisions of this area seems to be due, as in the case of the Kusan and Athapascan peoples, to the fact that there is really no tribal organization in the native culture. It seems probable that the frequency with which the Siletz are mentioned separately in the literature and their dialectic difference may justify classifying them as a separate "tribe" as that term has been defined in this paper. The Salmon River, Nehalem, Nestucca, and Tillamook Bay regions constitute distinguishable geographic areas, and Dr Jacobs states that the groups in these localities were markedly different in culture. He notesalso slight provincial differences in speech between some of the bands, though their language was essentially a single dialect.23 It has not been stated whether there was a common name for each of these divisions in the native language. Without any pretense of finality they have, been here treated as subdivisions of the Tillamook "tribe." Silelz. This was a small tribe on the river of the same name immediately north of the Yaquina, whose territory they adjoined in the neighborhood of Otter Rock. Their northern extent is not known, but was probably not far from the mouth of the river. Tillamook. The Tillamook occupied the entire west slope of the Coast Range from the northern boundary of the Siletz to the Clatsop territory at Tillamook Head. This includes several geographic areas: (1) Salmon River basin, (2) Nestucca River basin, (3) Tillamook Bay and its tributaries, (4) Nehalem River basin. These regions were occupied by bands differing slightly in provincialisms of speech, and rather markedly in cultue. They have been spoken of by some of our sources as separate tribes.

21 Mooney, Aboriginal Population, p. 17; Powell, Indian Linguistic Families, p. 104. 22 Boas, Notes on the Tillamook; Traditions of the Tillainook, p. 23. 23 This information was furnished by Melville Jacobs from his recent field notes. He is emphatic in his denial of the possibility of classifying these people as tribes at all. He states, "All one has a right to say is that river villages, speaking a number of Tillamook-Siletz provincialisms, occupied or possessed this territory. They were neither one 'tribe' nor two 'tribes' nor many 'tribes.' The groups differed markedly in culture as far as we can tell, and had no feeling of political cohesion whatever. Each village was autonomous." The reader is again referred to the discussion of the term "tribe" in the introduction to this paper (pp. 10-11). 40 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [MoIRs, 47

SUMMARY The Oregon coast from the Coquille River to the Clatsop tribe at the mouth of the Columbia was originally occupied by peoples speaking four distinct languages and numerous dialects. The Kusan group included the Lower Coquille and the Coos, each speaking a different dialect. North of them were the Lower TJmpqua and the Siuslaw, speaking closely related dialects of the Siuslawan language. The Alsea and Yaquina were of the Yakonan stock. Between these and the Clatsop were the Siletz and the Tillamook tribes speaking different dialects of Coast Salish. The Tilla- mook consisted of a number of moreor less distinct subdivisions. EASTERN OREGON BEFORE 1750 Oregon east of the mountains has contained, within the period covered by this paper, representatives of at least four distinct linguistic stocks: Salishan, Chinookan, Sahaptin, and Shoshonean. The last two were the most wide spread in this area and were principals in the late tribal movements there. Because of these movements, which occurred in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the distribution of tribes in historic times differed considerably from that prior to 1750. These movements will be fully discussed in the last chapter of this paper. The function of the present chapter is to determine the tribal distribution before these movements began. The Chinookan tribes east of the Cascades consisted of the Wasco at the Dalles and the Hood River tribe west of them. Because of their treatment in an earlier part of this paper they will not receive further mention here.1 SALISH TRIBES The Salishan tribes of this area were representatives of the interior division of that stock, of which the Tillamook represented the coast divi- Si011.2 Before 1750 there were two of these tribes south of the Columbia, the Nekutameux and the Moses-Columbia. Nekulameux. Our only evidence as to the existence of this tribe is indirect and traditional. Most of this consists of information collected by Teit from Indian informants of the surrounding tribes, who gave various accounts of their territory and movements. All, however, agreed on their existence as a separate tribe, their habitat being near and above the Dalles.3 The former habitation of this locality by Salish tribes is further indicated by the archaeological researches of Strong and his associates who found evidence of cultures similar to that of Interior Salish peoples at all lower levels.4 Moses-Columbia. Above the Nekutameux the territory of the Columbia tribe, later known as the Moses-Columbia,5 included the south bank of the Columbia River and the plateau east of that river to the land occupied by the Nez Percé.6 1 See p. 19 above. 2 The Coast Salish were represented in Oregon by the Siletz and Tillamook, treated elsewhere in this paper, the general distribution of the Salish stock being there described (pp.37 if.). Teit, Middle Columbia Salish, p. 96; see also Spier and Sapir, Wis/iram Ethnography, p. 161. Strong et al., Archaeology of the Dalles-Deschutes Region, p. 114. So named from a chief known as Moses. 6 Teit, op. cit., p. 93; see also Mooney, Ghost-Dance Religion,p. 734. 41 42 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [razMoIRs, 47

SAHAPTIN This linguistic stock has been shown by Jacobs to be the most extensive in Oregon, where it embraces a number of dialectic divisions formerly classed as distinct linguistic stocks.7 Its original distribution extended over the greater part of eastern Oregon and included Nez Percé areain Idaho and Washington as well as the Modoc in northern California. Northern Sahaptin included four closely related dialects: Northwestern Sahaptin and Walula-Palus of Washington, and Umatilla and Warm Springs of Oregon. The Nez Percé was a remotely related division of the stock. The Molalla and Cayuse constituted what has been known as Waiilatpuan, now shown to be of the Sahaptin stock. The southern Sahap- tin language was spoken by the Kiamath and Modoc and has been known as Lutuamian.8 It is possible to determine the position of mostof the tribes of this stock, prior to 1750, in main outline, but exact boundaries for some are unknown. The Nez Percé, Klamath, and Modoc did not change location in the period covered by this paper, and hence their territories can be accurately located. For this reason they will be described first in this section. Nez Percé. This was a large tribe, quite distinct linguistically, who were little affected by the Snake invasion. Spinden describes their holdings in Oregon as extending south as far as latitude 450 On the southwest the boundary line circled the drainage basins of the Imnaha and Wallowa Rivers, and crossing the Grand Ronde, ran north along the crest of the Blue Mountains to a point on the Snake River near the mouth of Tukanon Creek. The bulk of their territory was, however, in Idaho.9 Subdivisions or bands of the Nez Percé are said to have centered about one or more villages and generally included several fishing camps. These constituted local groups over each of which a single chief, usually a war chief, held some power. Spiriden lists five of these local groups in Oregon, as follows:'0 1. Imnamathe Imnaha River band.

Jacobs, Sketch of Northern Sahaptin Grammar, p. 94, map. 8 Spinden, Nez Percé Indians, p. 141, It is probable that Spinden had ii mind only the northern division of the Sahaptin when he described them as closely allied, speaking very similar dialects, engaging in frequent intertribal festivals, and being frequently allied in war. The classification of Lutuamian as a Sahaptin branch is assumed by Jacobs and suggested by others. The writer is not aware of any published demonstration of this relationship. Spinden, op. cit., p. 173. See also Mooney, Ghost-Dance Religion, p. 744. This was the Chapunnish of Lewis and Clark. They called themselves Sahaptin and are sometimes known as the Sahaptin proper. It is from this term that the linguistic family derived its name. '° Spinden, op. cit., p. 174. BERkEMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 43

WaiwamaWallowa River band. Inantoinuon Joseph Creek. Koiknimapuabove Joseph Creek on the north side of the Grand Ronde River. Isawisnemepunear Zindels on the Grand Ronde River." Klamath. The Kiamath have been amply described by Spier in his excellent monograph, from which is derived most of the following information concerning them.'2 Their western boundary was the Cascade Mountains, beyond which, however, they claimed small areas northwest of Mount Pitt (McLoughlin) and southwest of Crater Lake. The southern boundary skirts the Kiamath Valley downstream as far as Spencer Creek near the California-Oregon line. To the east they occupied the drainage of Sprague River, Sycan River and Marsh, and on the north they extended to Yamsay Mountain and the Deschutes In this area Spier designates five subdivisions, which because of their semi-autonomous nature he calls "tribelets." These divisions are as follows:'4 Klamath Marsh-Williamson River group: on the southern margin of Klamath Marsh and Lower Williamson and Sprague Rivers (43 villages). Agency Lake group: on Agency Lake and the northern arm of Kla- math Lake (one village). Lower Williamson River group: close to the mouth of Williamson River (5 villages). Pelican Bay group: Pelican Bay district on the west side of Klamath Lake, Four Mile Creek, and the marsh north of the lake (9 villages). Klamath Falls group: along Klamath Lake south of Modoc Point (18 villages). These subdivisions often had feuds and wars between themselves, in which they destroyed each others' property and enslaved women and children. They occupy more or less exclusive territories, and they are designated by different names. Their identity rests solely on these elements of group consciousness, as there is no political mechanism whatever within the groups. In spite of these divisions, however, the Klamath were a unit in language and culture and clearly looked upon themselves as a single tribe. Modoc. This is chiefly a Californian tribe directly south of the KIa-

1j Zindels is perhaps in Washington. I have not been able to identify it. 12 Spier, Kiamath Ethuography. ' Spier, op. cit.,p. 8. 14 Spier, op. cit., p. 21. He also names 62 villages which I have not included (op. cit., p. 10ff.). 44 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION IMEMOIRS, 47 math and speaking a similar dialect of the Lutuamian division of the Sahaptin stock. According to Spier they occupied Tule Lake, Lost River drainage, and Lower Klamath Lake, parts of which areas extend into Oregon. The specific boundary within the present state of Oregon passed from Big Flat in California northeast to Keno; thence northeast to the Hot Springs, three miles north of Klamath Falls; east to the southern shore of Swan Lake; southeast to Bald Mountain; southeast to Dog Lake; southeast to the peninsula on the west shore of Goose Lake, which is again in California. The Modoc had four permanent winter settlements: Tule Lake, Lower Klamath Lake, Upper Lost River (above Olene), and Lower Lost River. The latter two are in Oregon. The outlying territory was used as a hunting range in the summer only. Among the Modoc, too, definite tribal organization appears to have been lacking, but the groups seem to have had a clear conception of the identity of the Modoc as a tribal unit.'5 As to the distribution of other Sahaptin tribes before 1750, we are largely dependent on the researches of Teit, mentioned above. Some further data has been furnished by Spier and Sapir, and by Strong. Previous to Teit's work many of his general conclusions were advanced by Lewis, and the early archaeological work of Smith in the Yakima Valley furnishes some corroborating evidence.'6 These sources will be referred to throughout this section. Teit's information concerning their original habitats was obtained entirely from native informants. Because of the indefinite nature of their testimony the boundaries must be looked upon as approximations only. According to the available evidence the distribution before 1750 was somewhat as follows. Cayuse. South of the Salish tribes on the Columbia were the Cayuse and Molalla. The Cayuse are said to have lived around the headwaters of the streams which flow north into the Columbia and east into the Snake River, from the Deschutes region to the Nez Percé territory. Their headquarters are reported to have been on the Grand Ronde River in what is now Union County.'7 Molcilla. The Molalla were west and northwest of the Cayuse in the middle Deschutes and Warm Springs country, and west in the mountains.

"This specific information on the Modoc was kindly furnished by Professor Leslie Spier from his unpublished field notes. It is substantially in accord with the data given in the following sources: Spier, Klamalh Elhnography, p. 9; Kelly, Surprise Valley Paiute, p. 72; Kroeber, Handbook of Indians of California, p..3l8, map. 16See bibliography under these names, and specific references below. "Teit, Middle Columbia Salish, p. 101. BERREMANI TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 45

Teit thinks it likely that they also occupiedsome area west of the mountains as far as the present site of Oregon City, where theywere at a later date; but on this point his informants were not in agreement. Theywere likewise not in agreement as to the southern extent of Molalla territory on the Deschutes River; some stating that it extended along the mountains as far south as the Kiamath boundary.'8 These two points may be considered matters of uncertainty, buton the basis of occasional references concerning other boundaries west of the Cascades, it seems more likely that the Molalla occupied theirarea there only at a later date and because of thepressure of Snake raids. This is also stated by Spier and Sapir.'9 Gatschet states that the tribalname of the Santiam was Ahalpam, which means "uplanders," and that they had been driven out of their upland homes by the Molalla, who intruded from the east.2° The same authority states that the Clackamaswere driven from their homes by the same movement.2' TheHaidbookstates that the Molalla drove some former inhabitants out of the valley of Molalla Creek tooccupy their land, but when first known to the whites they occupied only the mountainous areas between Mount Hood and Mount Scott, and the west slopes of the mountains.22 Hale, in1841,mapped Molalla only in the high mountain slopes from Mount Hood to the Kiamath country.23 This is essentially the area assigned them by Powell, who hada number of early sources at his disposal.24 Boas has extended their territory west to Oregon City, but his map represents the distribution before1800,and considerable westward movement had occurred before that date.25 Moreover, had they occupied any of the lower Willamette Valley in1805we should expect some mention of the fact by Lewis and Clark, who obtained data concerning this region from native informants along the Columbia. Ac- cordingly it seems probable that their early habitat did not includemore than the eastern mountain slopes prior to1750,and that their chief occupation of the Willamette Valley area occurred only after that date. This conclusion seems to be everywhere accepted concerning the southern band on the Rogue and Umpqua Rivers.

18 Ibid. 'Spier and Sapir, Wishram Ethnography, p. 162. 20 Gatschet, Indian Languages of the Pacific States,p. 256. 21 Gatschet, Indian Languages of the Pacific States and Territories,p. 167. lodge, Handbook of American Indians, Pt. 1,p. 930. The only Mount Scott I can identify is east of Crater lake. This would be a strange landmark to use in that area, and is pretty far south. Possibly some other mountain was known as Scott. 23 Hale, Ethnology and Philology,p. 214, map. 24 Powell, Indian Linguistic Families,p. 127. 25 Boas, Coiled Basketry, map. 46 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [MMoneS, 47

It also seems likely that their former area extended continuously as far south as the Klamath region. With such a distribution it would readily assume the position as mapped by Hale upon being pressed by Snake raids from the east, and a wedge of the invaders might well have divided the Molalla into northern and southern bands. This appears to be a satis- factory explanation of the anomalous position of the southern band in southwestern Oregon, and avoids the necessity of assuming a long southern journey along the mountains from the region occupied by the northern band as has generally been assumed.26 Accordingly, it has been concluded that prior to 1750 the Molalla occupied the greater part of the Deschutes River region and the eastern mountain slopes. Other Sahaptiii Tribes. No attempt will be made to identify the tribes and tribal arrangement of the Sahaptin speaking peoples who occupied central eastern Oregon at that time. They will be designated only as Other Sahaptin Tribes. From then have come the tribes who in historic times constituted the Sahaptin speaking peoples of Washington and the Uma- tilla and Warm Springs bands in Oregon. Their original habitat was probably south, of the Cayuse, and south and east of the Molalla as mentioned above. They bordered on the Kla- math, and extended to the Nez Percé and the Snake River on the east and northeast.27 Since the Nez Percé, Klamath, and Modoc, as well as the Molalla and Cayuse, have been identified as Sahaptin in speech, we have a large continuous area throughout central eastern Oregon which may be looked upon as the early home of Sahaptin peoples. This hypothesis agrees very well with the fact, apparently well established, that both the Klamath and the Nez Percé have occupied their historic habitats for a long period of time. The southern boundary of the Sahaptin group under immediate discussion was not stated by Teit's informants It would seem from evidence presented later in this paper that their boundary line extended from the Kiamath area east to the lower Owyhee River, passing north of Silver, Summer, Harney, and Maiheur Lakes. The evidence for this lies in the identification of this as the northern boundary of the Paiute of southeastern Oregon and the cultural differentiation indicated in the neighborhood of this line.28

26 This point is further discussed in the chapter on tribal movements (see pp. 55 if.). 27 Teit, Middle Columbia Salish,p. 101; see also Lewis, Tribesof Ike Columbia Valley, p. 196. 28 More fully discussed below (seepp. 52-53). BERRLMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 47

Of the condition of these Sahaptin peoples when they inhabited their original territory we have no knowledge. It might with someappearance of logic be assumed that those who moved out first lived farthest north and west, since the movement seems to have taken place down the Des- chutes River, and the pressure of raiding parties which occasioned the migrations came from the east. It may also be suggested that the absence of traditions as to former tribal relationships indicates that the later tribal groupings were essentially the same as the ones which existed in the former habitat. But such suggestions seem so conjectural as to be largely devoid of scientific value, for the actual course of historic events is byno means always the one which looks most logical in retrospect.

SHOSHONEAN STOCK The Shoshonean linguistic stock consisted of many dialects spoken throughout a large area in Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, Montana, Utah, Nevada, Oregon, California, and adjoining states.29 The literaturecon- cerning this linguistic family and its component dialects and tribal divisions is extremely confusiong, andour knowledge on the subject is cor- respondingly limited. Observing this situation, Kroeber remarked in 1906, What the exact territory and relations of such bodies of people as the Shoshone, Ute, Bannock, Paiute, and Paviotso were, and what the names for themselves of these bodies and their subdivisions were, can only be determined by systematic field work. Comparison and summarization of the scattered literature, in which the same tribe is called by different names, and the same name is applied to entirely distinct tribes, all without any reference to exact linguistic basison which the classification must probably in most cases rest, will not materially unravel the confusion in which our knowledge of the Shoshonean familynowj530 This statement may serve to explain the absence ofany extensive review in this paper of the conflicting evidence. In 1909, however, Kroeber furnished the classification of linguistic groups of this stock on which is based the following identification of the Shoshonean peoples of southeastern Oregon.3' He divided it into four major branches, one of which, the Plateau branch, contains three principal subdivisions. These are Shoshoni-Comanche, Mono-Paviotso, and Ute- Chemehuevi. The second of these divisions, the Mono-Paviotso, consists of tribes generally known as Mono, Paviotsoor Paiute, and Walpapi or Snake. To these he adds the Bannock, stating that their languagewas ee Eodge, Handbook of American Indians, Pt. 1, for map by Powell. Kroeber, Shoshonean Dialects, p. 104. 31Kroeber, Bannock and Shoshone Languages. 48 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION rzarones, 47 practically identical with the other three, whereupon he proposes that this language be known as Mono-Bannock.32 The linguistic evidence thus groups together the Mono of central California, the Paviotso(which he says is properly used to refer only to the Nevada tribes), theSnake or Walpapi of eastern Oregon, the Bannock in southern Idaho and Wyoming, and the bands in the extreme northeastern part of California which he proposes to call Northern Paiute.33 Since there is no evidence of any linguistic distinctions between the groups included in the Mono-Bannock division, any reasons forclassing them as separate tribal groups must be based on geographic grounds only as a matter of convenience, or upon tribal organization or othercultural distinctions. Kroeber implies a differentiation when he names them as components of his larger linguistic division. Principally on the basis of cultural evidence, it seems to be possible to identify the original Mono- Bannock peoples of southeastern Oregon with the Northern Paiute of northeastern California, and to show that the Snake or Walpapi, of central eastern Oregon in historic times, were late intruders from the east. If this can be satisfactorily established, it will indicate that Kroeber'sdesignation of eastern Oregon Shoshoneans as Snakes will hold only for the more northern group, and that only subsequent to about 1800. This point was clearly implied by Spier when he stated that the eastern neighbors of the Klamath were Shoshoneans whom the Klamath designated by a single term, no distinctions being made. He states that these are "known to us variously as Northern Paiute (Paviotso) and Snake. TheSnake proper and Bannock may not have been in Oregon prior to the acquisition of the horse."34 This is exactly the conclusion indicated by our data. In support of this hypothesis it will be well to point out first the evidence which identifies these groups with Kroeber's Northern Paiute. Some evidence will then be cited to show that they took no part in the movements of the Snakes in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries and must be considered culturally and tribally distinct from them. Powell and Ingalls reported in 1873 that there were yet about 500 Indians in the region about Malheur Lake who were closely allied to the Paviotso or Paiute of western Nevada and northern California. The same report classes together as Western Shoshone thirty-one tribes ofsouth- western Idaho, central Nevada, and southeastern Oregon.35 This would

32Ibid., p. 267. "Kroeber, Handbook of the Indians of California, pp. 581-82. Spier, Kiamath Ethnography, p. 4. ' United States Office of Indian Affairs, Annual Report, 1873, p. 61. B1RREMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 49 seem to identify those in the Maiheur Lake region with the Northern Paiute and distinguish them from the so-called Western Shoshone, also of eastern Oregon. Mooney placed the Snake in central Oregon, with the Bannockeast of them on the Snake River, and stated that the southern Shoshonean peoples in Oregon were classed with those of northern California and called "Diggers." The northern ones he statedwere more warlike than those in the south, and some of them joined with the Bannock in the wars of 1878.36 The recent work of Kelly among the Paiute of northern California includes in the area in her Surprise Valley Paiuteor Gidutikadu the region of Warner Valley, Crump and Hart Lakes, the watershed of Deep Creek, and part of Goose Lake, all north of the Oregon boundary. Her informants located other Paiute bands or tribes in Oregonon Summer and Silver Lakes, Maiheur Lake, the Paisley region, and east of Steens Moun- tains.37 It will be noted that the location of the Malheur bandagrees with the report of Powell and Ingalls referred to above. This seems sufficient evidence for classing the early inhabitants of eastern Oregon as Northern Paiute. This would imply that theywere distinct from the Snake who lived north of them in historic times. Sucha distinction is also substantiated by cultural evidence and the latercourse of historic events. The earliest explorers in southeastern Oregon, chiefly Ogden and Fré- mont, frequently described the Indians they met. Farnham recorded that there were peoples in eastern Oregon whom he called"Diggers," or "Snake Root Diggers," who woreno clothes at all, subsisted on roots, lizards, and snails, hybernated in the winters like moles and squirrels, and differed from the Shoshonean Snake.38 Ogden in 1825 reported Indiansas extremely numerous on Maiheur Lake. These he describesas follows:39 It is incredible the number of Indians in this quarter. We cannotgo ten yards without finding them. Huts generally of grass of a size to hold sixor eight persons. No Indian nation so numerous in all North America. I include both Upper and Lower Snakes, the latter as wild as deer, fit subjects for the missionary who could twist them to any form he pleased.... They lead a most wandering life. An old woman camped with us the other night. From the severe weather last year her people were reduced for want of food to subsiston the bodies of relations and

36Mooney, Ghost-Dance Religion,p. 1048, map. ' Kelly, Surprise Valley Paiute, pp. 71-72. 38 Thwaites, Farn/zam's Travels, Vol. 28,p. 312. "Ogden, Journals, Vol. 11, p. 208. 50 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [rEMoIRs, 47

children. Many a day they pass without food and without a murmur. Had they arms and ammunition they might resort to buffalo, but without [i.e., outside] this region the war tribes would soon destroy them. In this quotation it will be noted a distinction is made between "Upper" and "Lower" Snakes; those at the Maiheur being classed as Lower, and differing from those of the north in some respects. Their lack of arms, and the statement that they would be readily killed by the "war tribes" if they should leave their own region, certainly differentiates them from the Snake of the north who, it will be shown, drove the entire Sahaptin, Salish, and Chinookan population out of most of eastern Oregon prior to the time that this journal was written. They were probably some of the war tribes to which he refers. Frdmont in 1843 gave a very similar description of Indians in the region of Summer and Abert Lakes.4° Though he speaks of them as of the Snake nation, his description of their culture is like that of Ogden above, more characteristic of the Paiute to the south. He further remarks on their timidity, stating that they abandoned their camps at his approach. This again does not accord with the warlike Snake farther north. Kelly also characterizes the Northern Paiute as a peaceful people, lacking traditions of extensive wars or migrations. Such evidence is admittedly inconclusive, but it creates the impresson that there was a cultural distinction between the groups under discussion. Moreover, it seems that the Paiute of this region did not possess the horse until a comparatively late date, which would further differentiate them from the Snake, who were the first to obtain the horse and introduced it into the state of Oregon by their invasion of the area. Neither Ogden nor Frémont mentioned horses in this region, though they were constantly annoyed by attempts on the part of the natives tO steal theirs. Had they possessed horses it seems likely that mention would have been made of it, as Ogden frequently comments upon the appearance of horses farther north on the Snake River and in the lower Owyhee country, and states that upon his first visit to the Klamath in 1826 he

40 "We found they belonged to the Snake nation, speaking the language of that people. Eight or ten appeared to live together under the same little shelter; and they seemed to have no other subsistence than the roots or seeds they might have stored up, and the hares they are very skillful in killing Their skins furnish them a little scanty covering. Herding together among bushes, and crouching almost naked over a little sage fire, using their instinct only to procure food, these may be considered among human beings, the nearest approach to the mere animal creation. We have reason to believe that they have never before seen the face of a white man" (Frémont, Narrative, p. 224). BERREMANI TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 51 found them to have but one horse.41 Moreover, on his trips through southeastern Oregon he was almost always faced with starvation, being frequently compelled to kill some of his own horses for food. His horses became weak and many died of starvation and exhaustion, andit would appear that had the natives possessed any he would at least haveattempted to obtain some by purchase or other means. The fact that the Klamath had few horses at this late date makes it appear likely that they were not plentiful among their Paiuteneighbors with whom they traded and exchanged raids. Hale states that the Shoshoneans called "Diggers" had no horses in 1841.42 The above evidence tends to corroborate the testimony of Kelly's informants, who stated that they obtained their first horses from Warm Springs Indians, but that the Paiute at Burns had obtained some from the Bannock to the northeast.43 The Warm Springs Indians had no horses until they obtained them from the invading Snake, and the Bannock were not in Oregon until a comparatively late date, for northeast of Burns was originally Sahaptin territory. It will moreover be shown in the next chapter that there is ample evidence of pressure exerted on the Shoshonean tribes of the western plains, which together with the possession of horses, amply accounts for their movement into eastern Oregon, while both these factors are absent in the case of the Paiute under discussion. The failure of Paiute bands to participate in these great movements, their lack of close cultural contacts indicated by their tardiness in obtain- ing horses, and the other distinctions mentioned above, seem to indicate a lack of cultural and political unity with the Snake, and to warrant their classification as a separate tribal group. Accordingly it may be considered as evident that these Oregon Shoshonean peoples belonged tothe Nor- thern Paiute named by Kroeber and studied recently by Kelly, and that they were therefore of a tribal unit distinct from the Snake. Northern Pa jute. Having determined the identity of these Shoshonean speaking peoples, we may proceed to outline their tribal boundaries and their subdivisions. On the basis of Kroeber's delineation of tribes of the Mono-Bannock group, it must be presumed that the Northern Paiute held territory in northern California. The closely related Paviotso of western Nevada may also belong in this tribe, as they are generally so classified

41 Ogden, Journals, Vol. 11, p. 210. 42 Hale, Ethnology and Philology, p. 219. " Kelly, Surprise Valley Painte, p. 151. 52 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [MoIRs, 47 and Kelly's informants named four Paiute bands in Nevada.44 Concerning the Oregon bands she obtained the following names and locations: Gidutikadu (or Groundhog-eaters): in Warner Valley and the surrounding regions as above indicated. Duhutcyatikadu (Deer-eaters): on Summer and Silver Lakes. Wadatikadu (Seed-eaters): in the Burns and Maiheur districts. Tubuiuitikadu (Berry-eaters): east of Steens Mountains. Paisley Paiute (name not remembered by informant though Paisley was known as Soho): in the Paisley district. A word may be said regarding the nature of these bands and their political status. Kroeber describes such Paiute groups as closely approach- ing the status of separate tribes. He states that each group was headed by a chief with considerable influence, and claimed possession of a more or less well defined range. Further than this there existed no political organization.45 Loud describes them as local kinship groups and refers to them, as does also Kelly, as bands.46 The difference may be largely one of definition, as all authorities agree in speaking of the Northern Paiute as a distinguishable unit and there is considerable evidence that they referred to themselves as such. They may therefore be properly classed as but bands of the larger tribe. The easternmost band located by Kelly was east of Steens Mountains. This indefinite location is little help in locating their eastern boundary, but as the upper Owyhee is an extremely barren and formidable region, it is probable that it was largely uninhabited and hence constituted a marginal area which served as a boundary. On the west the Paiute bordered on the Kiamath and Modoc. Their northern boundary is indicated by the position of the bands named above and the one on Malheur Lake named by Powell and Ingalls, which agrees with Kelly's information for that region. This constitutes the only direct evidence concerning the northern extent of Paiute territory, and since it was obtained rather late, some doubt may arise as to whether it also represents their original habitat. It would mark the boundary line as extending from northern Klamath territory east to the lower Owyhee, passing north of Silver, Summer, Harney, and Malheur Lakes. The only further evidence whith may indicate considerable antiquity for this boundary is a line of cultural differentiation which corresponds

Kelly, op. cii., p. 72. Kroeber, Handbook of the Indians of California, p. 831. 46 Loud and Harrington, Lovelock Cave,p. 152. BERREMAN TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 53 very closely to it. Dr Cressman's recent studies47 in regard to the distribution of petroglyphs in Oregon has shown paintings to be plentiful in central Oregon and the Kiamath area and among the Nez Percé.48 Since all these areas were occupied originally by Sahaptin speaking peoples we may consider it likely that further study will show this to have been a common trait in their culture. On the other hand petroglyphs or rock writings made of an abraded design are found extensively south of a line corresponding almost exactly with the tribal boundary of the Northern Paiute described above. The only point where the two are not strictly in accord is in the immediate vicinity of Malheur Lake and the area between there and Burns. No petroglyphs have been found in this locality, which Kelly's informants claimed as Paiute territory, whereas a few paintings are found immediately south of the lake. In view of the excellent correlation found elsewhere along the boundary, and the abundance of petroglyphs to the south and paintings to the north of this line, it would appear to represent a dividing line of some antiquity between these two distinct tribal, linguistic, and cultural groups. Further investigation of a similar nature may furnish valuable information concerning the original Sahaptin and Paiute habitats. The divergence of the Paiute boundary from the line here indicated in the Malheur region, together with the scarcity of any writings in the region, may indicate that it was a marginal area, occupied only at a relatively late date by the Northern Paiute. Along this line and south of it as far as Warner Valley occasional paintings are found, but they are invariably superimposed upon abraded designs. This probably represents a borrowing of the painting technique from tribes to the north, and does not necessarily imply an invasion of Sahaptin peoples. It therefore seems that prior to 1730 the Northern Paiute bordered directly on the region occupied by the Sahaptin speaking tribes of central Oregon, and were the only Shoshonean tribe in Oregon at that time.

SUMMARY The original distribution of tribes in Oregon east of the Cascade Moun- tains has been described in this chapter. There were in this region four

Cressman, Indien Writings; also unpublished material kindly placed at the disposal of the writer by Dr Cressman. 48 Spinden, Nez Percé Indians, p. 231. The pecking technique for making petroglyphs was also known to the Nez Percé. 54 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION tMEMOIRS, 47 distinct linguistic stocks represented, none of which were confined to the area. These were the Chinookan, Salishan, Sahaptin, and Shoshonean. The Chinookan tribes were the Wasco at the Dalles and the Hood River between them and the Cascades. The Salishan consisted of the Nekutameux and the Moses-Columbia south of the Columbia River above the Dalles. The Sahaptin stock was made up of probably four chief dialectic divisions: the Nez Percé, composed of that tribe only; the Waiilatpuan, spoken by the Molalla and Cayuse; the Lutuamian of the Kiamath and Modoc, and a dialect later known as Northern Sahaptin, which at that time was spoken by the peoples who now comprise the Warm Springs and TJmatilla tribes and the Sahaptin bands of Washington. These have been designated in their original habitat as Other Sahaptin Tribes. The arrangement of these Sahaptin tribes prior to 1750 was shown to consist of the Nez Percé in the extreme northeast, the Cayuse south and west of them, the Molalla on the Deschutes, and the other Sahaptin tribes south of these in central eastern Oregon. The Klamath and Modoc were in the extreme southwestern part of the region. The area in the extreme southeast was occupied by Shoshonean peoples belonging to the Mono-Bannock subdivision of the Plateau branch of this linguistic stock. They were shown to belong to the Northern Paiute tribe, extending also into California and Nevada, and to be distinct from the Snake and Bannock in tribal identity. They constituted the only Sho- shonean tribe holding territory in Oregon in 1750. TRIBAL MOVEMENTS AND FINAL DISTRIBUTION TRIBAL MOVEMENTS In this section is is proposed to treat briefly of those rather extensive movements of tribes which took place, largely east of the Cascades, after 1750 and prior to any extensive direct contact with white settlers and traders. The movements involved are not primarily those due to the settlement of this area by immigrants, nor to the depopulation of tribes by dis- ease, but rather to those indirect cultural influences which preceded the westward advance of the whites. Chief among these influences were those connected with the spread of the horse in North America. This subject has been extensively treated by Wissler,1 and can only be briefly touched on here. According to his evidence, the northern Shoshonean tribes were most instrumental in the distribution of the horse on the northern plains and in the west. The potentiality of the horse in causing tribal movements lies in the greater mobility which it gives to the tribe possessing it. When this is coupled with a nomadic culture, among a warlike people who have long obtained part of their subsistence and wealth by raids on their neighbors, far reaching results may be observed. Their raids can be carried on with much greater success because of the suddenness of approach and rapidity of retreat, and it also becomes possible to extend these raids over a larger area. In the hands of the Shoshonean speaking tribes the results were of this nature, and a series of movements took place which radically altered the position of many tribes in the area with which this paper is concerned. It should not be inferred that this was the only factor influencing the tribal movements discussed below. The encroachment of settlements on the tribal lands east of the Rockies was causing pressure farther west by the recession of tribes before this advance and their encroachment in turn on the territory of their western neighbors. As early as 1800 trading vessels began to enter the Columbia, and perhaps even before that time epidemics began to rage throughout the coast and Columbia tribes of western Oregon and Washington. By 1830 many tribes of the region had already become extinct or nearly so. While the tribes east of the mountains were less affected by this than those on the coast, yet they came in for some share in the disaster. They were moreover in- directly influenced by the fact that the depopulated areas in the Columbia and Willamette Valleys furnished a refuge where they met a minimum of resistance, when pressure from the east became severe. The result in the early nineteenth century was an endless confusion and telescoping of Wissler, Influence of lie Horse.

55 56 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION IMxMoIRs, 47

tribes which has made doubly difficult the determination of their previous habitats. It is possible, therefore, to determine the movements chiefly occasioned by the introduction of the horse, because these began earlier than movements resulting from decimation of the tribes, and affected chiefly an area relatively immune to the earliest of the more direct influences of settlement. But the influence of the horse and the resultant movements can in no way be considered as entirely independent of these other disturbing influences. With these considerations in mind we shall proceed to outline briefly the movements indicated, and then to delineate the final areas claimed and occupied by the various tribes before their extinction or removal to reservations. This distribution has been shown in the accompanying map. It may be remarked that it is impossible to speak of this distribution as representing one which existed at any given date. It is probable that it never existed throughout the state as here shown at any given time, because some eastern Oregon tribes had probably not settled upon the areas which they finally occupied before 1830 or 1840, by which time many lower Columbia, Willamette Valley, and Coast tribes had become practically or wholly extinct. For this reason the term "final distribution" has been adopted to indicate the area last claimed by each tribe before the final breakdown of native culture upon extinction, removal, or combina- tion of tribal groups. In this chapter only those areas will be discussed in which the final distribution differed materially from that of the early eighteenth century described previously in this paper. For knowledge of these migrations we are largely dependent upon the researches of Teit mentioned above, but the general outline of the movements had been apparent to earlier students of the field also.2 As Teit's treatment is very explicit and readily available to those interested, it will be treated rather briefly here. With it have been correlated some data from other sources. Probably as early as 1740 the northern Shoshonean tribes had acquired horses and were carrying on extensive raiding expeditions against the Blackfoot and other Plains tribes.3 For a time these were successful, due to the fact that the tribes whose territory was being invaded did not possess horses. Within a few years, and certainly by 1751, the Blackfoot had themselves acquired the horse, and also fire-arms which the Shoshonean tribes did not possess. Thereafter the fortunes of war were reversed and 2 Teit, Middle Columbia Salish, pp. 98 if. See alsop. 44 of this paper. Wissler, Influence of the Horse, p. 24; also p. 13. LINGUISTIC STOCKS ATVA PA SCAN T] SUSAN SAHAPTIN - [ TA K ELM A N NIJMBKREDSUBDIVISIONS TILL AMOOI<-&3 TILLAM000NESALEM TUTUTNI 2.EUCORES. AlSO CREEK NO rOAMS SIVES RIVER 7.4.S.JOSOUA& PISTOl.TVTUTUNNSK010IS5504NETVNNE RIVER ,5EIETARMI-' OR EKUSTENETE FIG. 2. Final tribal distribution in Oregon about 1840-50. 58 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [arxMolRs, 47 the Blackfoot became the successful aggressors, driving the Shoshoneans before them far south and west. The exact position and movements of the various Shoshonean tribes has not been determined with certainty, being obscured by the indiscrimi- nate use of the names Snake, Shoshone, Paiute, and others by early writers to refer to any of these Shoshonean tribes. The original position usually assigned the Bannock is the upper Salmon River region in southeastern Idaho and Wyoming.4 The Walpapi or Snake probably lived to the west, between the Bannock and the Snake River, where they bordered on Sahap- tin tribes. This is supported by their dialectic identity with both the Ban- nock and the Northern Paiute,5 and by the fact that their later position in eastern Oregon was west of the Bannock. With this arrangement of tribes, the pressure exerted by the Blackfoot on the Shoshone of the northern plains was passed on to the Snake, who were pushed into the interior of eastern Oregon. The Bannock, following close behind them, may also have invaded the state as far west as the Blue Mountains. These movements brought the Snake into early conflict with the Nez Percé. This tribe seems to have successfully resisted their attacks, for their tribal boundaries did not change materially during this period. Lewis and Clark, however, noted that they were at war with the Snake in 1805. The Sahaptin speaking tribes of central eastern Oregon were apparently first to be encroached upon. They were driven west and north, migrating down the Deschutes River between the Molalla and Cayuse tribes.6 The first two bands to cross the Columbia settled in Washington and later became known as the Yakima and Klickitat. Following them other Sahaptin speaking bands came by the same route and settled along the Columbia on both sides from the Dalles to the John Day River, some even perhaps settling with Chinookan tribes west of this area. This movement displaced the Salish bands on the Columbia, at which time we lose sight of the Salish speaking Nekutameux above the Dalles, and the Columbia tribe withdrew to the upper courses of that river. During or soon after these migrations the Molalla were pressed west into and probably entirely over the Cas- cades, where they eventually settled in two widely separated bands. One settled on the upper Santiam and Clackamas Rivers and iii the mountainous region around Mount Hood and Mount Jefferson. Probably still later they occupied the valley of the small stream known as the Molalla, as far

Hodge, Handbook of American Indians, Pt. 1, P. 129; Boas, Coiled Basketry, map. See p. 48 of this paper. 6 Teit, op. cit., p. 98. BERxEMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 59 west as Oregon City. The other band pushed south to occupy the hèadwaters of the Rogue and Umpqua Rivers and the adjacent mountain slopes. Their anomalous position here, so far from the northern band of their kinsmen, deserves a word of further explanation. It has generally been conjectured that the Molalla were pushed into the mountains to the north, and that for some unknown reason this southern band broke away from the northern group, wandered south along the mountains, keeping up high enough to avoid being molested by powerful Willamette Valley tribes, and finally setted in this relatively uninhabited region where they have been found in historic times.7 It seems probable that the original Molalla area east of the Cascades extended farther south than has generally been assumed, possibly reaching to the northern Klamath boundary, as some of Teit's informants stated. The pressure of the Snake from the east could thus very easily have split the Molalla into two bands, either before or after their retreat into the, mountains. There appears some evidence that the Snake entered the Wil- lamette Valley at this time also. Some such hypothesis avoids postulating for the southern band of Molalla west of the Cascades a trek of such great distance, through mountain areas, and past hostile tribes from th territory farther north, which movement seems incomprehensible without some definite pressure or motivation. The former Molalla territory in the Deschutes and Warm Springs country was occupied for a time by other Sahaptin bands from the south and east. The Cayuse at the same time were pushing north down the Umatilla to the Columbia, and from there moved east to the head of the Walla Walla River. Still further encroachments on the part of the Snake drove the Sahaptin tribes entirely out of the country south of the Columbia below the Walla Walla River. It appears that some of them took refuge north of the river, while others are said to have pushed west along the boundaries of the Upper Chinookan tribes, reaching as far west possibly as Oregon City. This was the high-water mark of Snake invasions, and appears to have been reached sometime between 1800 and 1820.8 Lewis and Clark in 1805 and 1806 observed the absence of settlements on the south bank of the Columbia above Hood River, but did not note the confusion of Sahap- tin and Chinookan bands on the river which appears in the later literature. It is probable that at that date the intrusive Sahaptin bands were in the

Spier, Tribal Distribution, p. 360; see also Spier, Kiasnatli Ethnography, p. 4. Spier and Sapir, Wishram Ethnography, p. 160. 60 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION kEMoiRs, 47 mountains south of the river, and upon further contacts with the Chinookan tribes, or upon the rapid decrease of these tribes, took up their residence along the river also. Here they were sometimes called the Waiyampam or Wascopam.9 Thus, at the height of their westward invasion the Snake and Bannock seem to have occupied the whole of eastern Oregon with the exception of the lands of the Nez Percé to the northeast, the Kiamath to the southwest, and the Paiute in the southeastern part of the state. These three tribes seem to have been largely unaffected by the movements described above. It is also reported that Snake bands at this time appeared in the Willamette Valley, although their identity may have been confused with Sahaptin speaking bands who were frequently encountered by early explorers. Lewis and Clark were told of three bands of Shoshones on the Willamette, one of which was said to winter on that river, but to spend their summers on the Deschutes, John Day, Umatilla, and Walla Walla Rivers.10 This must, however, be considered as uncertain, for the explorers obtained their information from Indians on the Columbia, and we may recall that Ross reports "Shoshones" as a term used by the Columbia River tribes to refer to any inlanders.1' The Henry-Thompson journals report a band of "Scietogas" in the Willamette Valley, who were said to have dwelt west of the Nez Percé. This name has been sometimes considered that of a Snake band, but the description he gives of the party leaves their identity uncertain.'2 At any rate the residence of Snake in the Willamette Valley is prob- lematical, their habitat there unidentified, and at best but temporarily occupied. It would seem, however, to be a convenient hypothesis to sur- mise that bands of Snake may have followed the Molalla into the mountains; for an entering wedge in the region of the McKenzie River and upper Willamette would explain the division of the Molalla into the widely separated nothern and southern bands, as well as the absence of any information as to Calapuyan occupation of the McKenzie River. It is not likely that the entire area east of the Cascades was actively occupied by Snake bands, but at least their raiding parties kept it largely empty of other inhabitants. For some time in the early nineteenth century a large part of the Deschutes region seems to have been largely unoccupied, 'Ibid., p. 162. 10 Coues, Lewis and Clark Expedition,pp. 660, 671; Thwaites, Original Journals,Vol. 4, p. 280; Vol. 6, p. 118. 1 Ross, Adventures of the First Settlers, p. 102. 12 Coues, Journals of Alexander Henry and David Thompson, p. 818. BE11RMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 61 and it was in this period that the extensive trading expeditions of the Kia- math to the Dalles began, or at least became more frequent.13 Sometime in the early nineteenth century it seems that the fortunes of war turned against the Snake raiders, probably for the same reasons as those affecting it in Blackfoot country. The result was a return of the Sahaptin speaking peoples south of the Columbia River, where they reoccupied some of their former territory. This movement was, however, never complete; so that the final distribution of tribes remained quite different from that of 1750. Nor did the Cayuse reoccupy much of their former habitat. At least a part of the Molalla appear to have returned. They occupied for a time a small section of the Deschutes in the neighborhood of Tygh and Warm Springs Rivers and the area between there and the Cascades. In about 1820 these were displaced by the Tenino or Warm Springs in their southern thrust to regain territory.14 Other Sahaptin speaking peoples, however, regained the valleys of the Deschutes, John Day, Umatilla, and Grand Ronde Rivers, where in 1855 they were recognized as owners of the entire country from the Cascades to the Blue Mountains, with the exception, probably, of a small region on Willow Creek. Here a small band of Snakes, known as the Lohim, maintained its position until after 1870. FINAL DISTRIBUTION For evidence on the final distribution of tribes affected by the migrations described above, a number of works have been relied on, chief among which may be mentioned an excellent chapter by Mooney, the map of Sahaptin peoples prepared by Jacobs, and some discussion found in Teit and in Spier and Sapir. These sources agree in essential points, and seem far more reliable than the scattered historical records. On the basis of such evidence the following arrangement has been determined. Cayuse. The Cayuse occupied at this time the rough country at the 13 Teit, Middle Columbia Salish,p. 102. Spier (Klamath Elhnography, p. 39) speaks of these trading expeditions as being associated with slave trade and horses, both of which were late traits in Kiamath culture. 14 George Peter Murdock has kindly furnished from his recent field notes the information that Molalla were in this region in 1820 when they were displaced by the Tenino. Elsewhere I have found no evidence that they occupied this territory at so late a date. It is possible that they were never displaced by the Snake; but in view of their ready retreat before the earlier Snake invasions and the evidence presented above as to the extent of Snake occupation, it seems more probable that this Molalla territory represents a return of some Molalla from the mountain regions when the Snake began to withdraw. 16 Mooney, Ghost-Dance Religion,p. 743. 62 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [MEMoIRs, 47 heads of the Umatilla, Grand Ronde, and Walla Walla Rivers.16 Hale says their headquarters in 1841 were on the upper Walla Walla River, where they lived in close connection with the Nez Percé, whose language they usually spoke in preference to their own.17 Umatilla. The lower Umatilla River and the adjacent south bank of the Columbia was claimed by the Umatilla, according to Mooney.'8 Jacobs extends their territory almost to the John Day River and includes Willow Creek, where Mooney locates a small remnant of Snake. Murdock's recent information indicates that the present site of Arlington was a trading place between lJmatilla and Tenino, which leads him to place the boundary at that point. The Umatilla have been sometimes identified closely with the Walla Walla, but their language is sufficiently distinct to class them as a separate tribe.'9 Lolzim. This is the Snake band mentioned above, said to have been still living on Willow Creek in 1870, when they numbered 114. Their exact boundaries are not mentioned, and it seems that they were never recognized by the United States government nor officially removed to a reservation. 20 Warm Springs (or Tenino). Under this head Jacobs has mapped the entire area of the Deschutes and all except the very headwaters of the John Day River, but in his text he mentioned "Warmsprings, Tenino, John Day, and other tribes of northern Oregon" as belonging to one division of northern Sahaptin stock.2' Spier and Sapir discuss the tribal division here, but have arrived at no definite classification.22 Mooney names and locates in this area five groups which he calls tribes, all of which, however, spoke the same dialect.23 Murdock identifies four pairs of villages; one of each pair being the summer and the other the permanent winter settlement of each of four local groups. Of these one pair was near the mouth of the John Day River, and probably corresponds to Mooney's John Day "tribe." Four villages were between the mouth of the Deschutes and the Wasco territory, and would seem to corresopnd to Mooney's Deschutes tribe. Two

16 Ibid., p. 743. ' Hale, Ethnology and Philology, p. 214. 18 Mooney, op. cit., p. 742. 19 Jacobs, Sketch of Northern Sahaplin Grammar, p.95, map; see also Ray, Native Villages, p. 103. It is noted that this recent study extends the IJmatillaterritory to include much of the John Day River and places the boundary west of its mouth. 20 Mooney, Ghost-Dance Religion, p. 743. 21 Jacobs, op. cii., p. 95. 20 Spier and Sapir, Wishram Etknography, p. 162. 23 Mooney, op. cit., p. 742. nERREMAN] TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 63 were in the neighborhood of the Tygh River, a western tributary of the Deschutes, and correspond to Mooney's Tygh.24 In addition to these Mooney lists the Warm Springs proper (or "Til- quni") between Tygh Valley and Warm Springs River, and the Tenino (or "Melilema") on the middle Deschutes. The latter, he states,was the most important Sahaptin tribe of this region. It was they who drove the Snake out of the country which later became the Warm Springsreserva- tion. This country, however, they did not occupy until placed there by the government in 1855.25 Murdock states that the groups he identified were "basically village dwellers, closely united politically, and considered themselvesone people." It is probable that this applies to all the Warm Springs Sahaptin, and that the subdivisions are essentially localgroups. In the absence of further data they have been so considered here. Wasco. It seems that after a temporary absence the Wasco returned to their former territory south of the Columbia at the Dalles, and extended this to the mouth of the Deschutes. It is also said that they claimed the south bank as far as the John Day River, butnever occupied it. As Mooney and Murdock claimed the mouth of the Deschutesas the chief home of the Deschutes band, the Wasco claims beyond that pointseem doubtful. Snake (or Walpapi). The interior of eastern Oregon, south and east of the tribes just described and north of the Paiute and Klamath,was never retrieved from the Shoshonean tribes, who continued tooccupy it until their removal to reservations. The interioras far east as the present eastern boundary of Grant and Harney Countieswas occupied by the Snake. They extended south to approximately the original northern boundary of the Paiute, perhaps not into the Burns-Malheur Lake region.26 Bannock. That there were Bannock in Oregon is indicated by both Mooney and Hale.27 They were linguistically similar to the Snake but seem to have been tribally distinct. They too were intruders from the east, and occupied some territory in Baker and Malheur Counties. Molalla. The position occupied by the Molalla in their final distribution consisted of two widely separated areas. The northern band occupied land around Mount Hood and Mount Jefferson, an undefined area west of this region on the upper Santiam, and the drainage basin of Molalla Creek

24 George Peter Murdock, from private correspondence basedon recent unpublished research. 25 Mooney, Ghost-Dance Religion,p. 741 et seq. 26 Ibid., plate 88 (map),p. 716. 27 Hale, Ethnology and Philology,map, p. 197. 64 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [uMoIRs, 47 west as far as Oregon City. The resultant change in the territories of the tribes formerly inhabiting this area consisted of the displacement of San- tiam from the upper courses of that stream, and the probable withdrawal of Pudding River bands from Molalla Creek. The southern band occupied an area, also undefined, on the headwaters of the TJmpqua and Rogue Rivers. Spier states that they occupied the Rogue River as far down as Prospect and possibly to Trail Creek. The presence of this group there was positively affirmed byhis Kiamath informants, and corroborated by the testimony of Joel Palmer, who traveled in this country in 1853.28 This region was probably largely uninhabited at the time of their migration, but may have been claimed previously as hunting territory by the Upper Umpqua and the Upland Takelma. The same may be said of the mountainous area occupied by thenorthern band, but the upper Santiam and Molalla Creek were probably inhabited. All other tribes of Oregon seem to have changed their early habitat little if at all until their extinction or removal to reservations.

SUMMARY It has been shown that the tribal arrangement, particularly of eastern Oregon, was disturbed in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries by the invasion of this area by Snake and Bannock from the east. This movement was caused largely by the coming of the horse into the culture of the northern and western Plains tribes, with the increased mobility which this new trait afforded. The result of this movement was the displacement of most of the Sahaptin tribes of the region, who were driven north and west across the Columbia River and the Cascade Mountains. A later movement brought about the return of some of these peoples, who then reoccupied part of their original areas from which they drove out the Snake bands. The final distribution consisted of Sahaptin tribes on the TJmatilla, Grand Ronde, John Day, and Deschutes Rivers; the Molalla in two bands west of the Cascade Mountains; the Nez Percé, Klamath, Modoc,and Northern Paiute in their original habitats; and the balance of eastern Oregon occupied by the Snake and the Bannock tribes. Other tribes of Oregon were little affected by this movement. This was the final distribution of the various tribes before the breakdown of native culture. 28 Spier, Tribal Distribution, p. 360; Spier, Kiamath Ethnography, p. 9. BIBLIOGRAPHY The following abbreviations are used: AA American Anthropologist ARBAE Annual Report, Bureau of American Ethnology BBAE Bulletin, Bureau of American Ethnology JAFL Journal of American Folk-Lore UCPAAEUniversity of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology UWPA University of Washington Publications in Anthropology

BANCROFT, HUBERT Howx. The Native Races of the Pacific States of North America(San Francisco, 1882, Vols. 1-3). BARRETT, S. A. Material Culture of the Kiamath Lake and Modoc Indians (UCPAAE,Vol. 5, pp. 239-92, 1910). BOAS, FRANZ. Chinook Texts (BBAE, No. 20, 1894). Classification of Languages of the North Pacific Coast (Memoirs, International Congress of Anthropology, 1893, pp. 339-46, Chicago, 1894). Handbook of American Indian Languages (BBAE, No. 40, Part 1, 1911; Part 2, 1922). Kathlarnet Texts (BBAE, No. 26, 1901). Notes on the Tillamook (UCPAAE, Vol. 20,pp. 3-16, 1923). Report on Northwest Tribes of Canada (Report, British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1890, pp. 553-715; 1891,pp. 407-49). Social Organization and Secret Societies of the Kwakiutl (Report, UnitedStates National Museum, 1895, pp. 315-738). Traditions of the Tillamook (JAFL, Vol. 21,pp. 23-38, 133-50, 1893). BOAS, FRANZ (ed). Coiled Basketry in British Columbia and SurroundingRegion, by H. K. Haeberlin, James A. Teit, and Helen H. Roberts (41st ARBAE,pp. 119-484, 1928). CLARK, R. C. History of the Willamette Valley, Oregon (Chicago, 1927). COIJES, ELLIOTT. History of the Lewis and Clark Expedition (4 vols., New York, 1893). CouEs, ELLIOTT (ed). New Light on the Early History of the Greater Northwest. TheManuscript Journals of Alexander Henry... and of David Thompson ..., 1799-1814, etc. (3 vols., New York, 1897, Vol. 2). CRESSMAN, L. S. Aboriginal Burials in Southwestern Oregon (AA, Vol.35, pp. 116-30, 1933). Final Report on the Gold Hill Burial Site (University of Oregon Publications, Vol. 4, No. 3: Studies in Anthropology, Vol. 1, Bulletin 1, 1933). Indian Writings; Record of Ancient Times (Portland Oregonian, June 18, 1933). DALE, H. C. (ed). The Ashley-Smith Explorations and the Discoveryf a Central Route to the Pacific, 1822-1829 (Cleveland, 1918). DORSEY, J. OWEN. The Gentile System of the Siletz Tribes (JAFL, Vol. 3,pp. 227-37, 1890). FAIRNIJAM, T. J. Life, Adventures, and Travel in California and Oregon (NewYork, 1849). See also Thwaites. FARRAND, LIVINGSTON. Notes on the Alsea Indians of Oregon (AA, Vol. 3,pp. 239-47, 1901). FRACHTENBERG, LEO J. Alsea Texts and Myths (BBAE, No. 67, 1920). Coos Texts (Columbia University Contributions to Anthropology, Vol. 1, 1913). Lower Umpqua Texts (Columbia University Contributions to Anthropology, Vol.4, 1914). Shasta and Athapascan Myths from Oregon (JAFL, Vol. 28,pp. 207-42, 1915). FRANCHfRE, GABRIEL. Narrative of the Voyage to the Northwest Coast of Americain the Years 1811, 1812, 1813, and 1814, etc. (in R. G. Thwaites, Early Western Travels, Vol. 6, Cleveland, 1904).

65 66 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION [MEMOIRS, 47

FREIRE-MARRECO, B., AND J. L. MYRES (eds.). Notes and Queries onAnthropology (4th ed., London, 1912). FR4MONT, JOhN C. Narrative of an Exploring Expedition to Oregon andCalifornia in 1843-44 (London, 1846). GATSCIIET, A. S. Indian Languages of the Pacific States (Magazine ofAmerican History, Vol. 8, April, 1882). Indian Languages of the Pacific States and Territories (Magazine ofAmerican History, Vol. 1, pp. 145-70, 1877). The Kalapuya People (JAFL, Vol. 12, pp. 212-14, 1899). The Klamath Indians of Southwestern Oregon (Contributions to NorthAmerican Eth- nology, Vol. 2, Pts. 1 and 2, Washington, 1890). Oregonian Folklore (JAFL, Vol. 4, pp. 139-43, 1893). GIBBS, GEORGE. Report. .. on the IndianTribes of the Territory of Washington (Reports of Explorations and Surveys to Ascertain the Most Practicable andEconomical Route for a Railroad from the Mississippi to the Pacific Ocean, Vol. 1,Washington, 1855). Tribes of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon (Contributions toNorth American Ethnology, Vol. 1, pp. 157-241, Washington, 1877). HALE, HoRATIo. Ethnology and Philology (United States ExploringExpedition ... under Command of Charles Wilkes, Vol. 6, Philadelphia, 1846). Indians of Northwest America, with an Introduction by AlbertGallatin (Transactions, American Ethnological Society, Vol. 2, pp. 1-30, New York, 1848). HODGE, F. W. (ed.). Handbook of American Indians North of Mexico (BBAE,No. 30, Part 1, 1907; Part 2, 1910). JACOBS, MELVILLE. Sketch of Northern Sahaptin Grammar (UWPA, Vol. 4,No. 2, 1931). KELLY, ISABEL T. Ethnography of the Surprise Valley Paiute (UCPAAE,Vol. 31, pp. 67- 209, 1932). KROEBER, A. L. Bannock and Shoshone Languages (AA, Vol. 11, pp.266-77, 1909). Handbook of the Indians of California (BBAE, No. 78, 1925). Shoshonean Dialects of California (UCPAAE, Vol. 4, pp. 65-165, 1907). LATHAM, R. G. Languages of the Oregon Territory (in his Opuscula,London, 1860, pp. 249-65). LEE, DANIEL, AND J. H. FROST. Ten Years in Oregon, 1834-1 844(published in serial form in Portland Oregonian, Oct. 11, 1903 to Jan. 10, 1904). LEWIS, ALBERT BUELL. Tribes of the Columbia Valley and the Coastof Oregon and Washington (Memoirs, American Anthropological Association, Vol. 1, Part 2,1906). LOUD, LLEWELLYN L., AND M. R. HARRINGTON. Lovelock Cave (UCPAAE,Vol. 25, pp. 1-183, 1929). LOwIE, ROBERT H. The Northern Shoshone (Anthropological Papers,American Museum of Natural History, Vol. 2, pp. 165-206, 1909). MINT0, JOHN. Condition of the Native Races in Oregon (Oregon HistoricalQuarterly, Vol. 1, pp. 296-315, 1900). MOONEY, JAMES. Aboriginal Population of America North of Mexico(Smithsonian Miscella- neous Collections, Vol. 80, No. 7, 1928). The Ghost-Dance Religion and the Sioux Outbreak of 1890 (14th ARBAE,Part 2, 1896). OGDEN, PETER SKEENE (T. C. ELLIOTT, ad.). Journals (OregonHistorical Quarterly, Vol. 10, 1909; Vol. 11, 1910). PARKER, SAMUEL. Journal of an Exploring Tour beyond the RockyMountains, etc. (New York, 1844). POWELL, J. W. Indian Linguistic Families of America North ofMexico (7th ARBAE, pp. 1-148, 1891). BERREMANI TRIBAL DISTRIBUTION IN OREGON 67

RAY, VERNE F. Native Villages and Groupings of the Columbia Basin (Pacific Northwest Quarterly, Vol. 27, pp. 99-152, 1936). Ross, ALEXANDER. Adventures of the First Settlers on the Oregon or Columbia River, 1810-1813 (in R. G. Thwaites, Early Western Travels, Vol. 7, Cleveland, 1904). SM'IR, EDWARD. Languages and Mythology of the Upper Chinook (AA, Vol. 9, pp. 533-44, 1907). Notes on the Takelma Indians of Southwestern Oregon (AA, Vol. 9, pp. 251-75, 1907). Religious Ideas of the Takelma Indians (JAFL, Vol. 20, pp. 33-49, 1907). ScHUMACHER, PAUL. Notes on Kjokkenmoddings on the Northwest Coast of North America (Annual Report, Smithsonian Institution, 1873, pp. 354-62, 1874). Researches in the Kjokkenmoddings and Graves of a Former Population of the Coasts of Oregon (United States Geological and Geographic Survey of the Territories, Bul. 3, No. 1, pp. 27-35, 1877). SLACUM. Letter (House Report 101, 25th Congress, 3rd Session, p. 42, 1839). SMITH, HARLAN I. Archaeology of the Yakima Valley (Anthropological Papers, American Museum of Natural History, Vol. 6, pp. 1-171, 1910). SMITH, CHARLES W. Pacific Northwest Americana. A Checklist of Books and Pamphlets on the History of the Pacific Northwest (New York, 1921). SPIER, LESLIE. Kiamath Ethnography (UCPAAE, Vol. 30, 1930). Tribal Distribution in Southwestern Oregon (Oregon Historical Quarterly, Vol. 28, pp. 358-65, 1927). SPIER, LESLIE, AND EDWARD Su'ra. Wishram Ethnography (UWPA, Vol. 3, No. 3, 1930). SPINDEN, HERBERT J. The Nez Percé Indians (Memoirs. American Anthropological Associa- tion, Vol. 2, Part 3, 1908). STANLEY. Portraits of North American Indians (Smithsonian Miscellaneous Documents, Vol. 2, Part 3, pp. 1-76, 1852, Washington, 1862). STRONG, W. DUNCAN, W. EGBERT SCHENCK, AND JuLIAN H. STEWARD. Archaeology of the Dalles-Deschutes Region (UCPAAE, Vol. 29, No. 1, 1930). SwAN, J. G. The Northwest Coast; or Three Years' Residence in Washington Territory (New York, 1857). TEIT, JAMES H. The Middle Columbia Salish (UWPA, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1928). THWAITES, REUBEN GOLD. Farnham's Travels (in Early Western Travels, 1748-1846, etc., Vols. 28 and 29, Cleveland, 1904). Original Journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, 1804-1806 (7 vols., atlas, New York, 1905). UNITED STATES OFFICE OF INDIAN AFFAIRS. Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs (Washington, published annually after 1825). United States Statutes at Large (Vol. 10, Washington, 1855). VICTOR, FRANCES FULLER. The Oregon Indians (Overland Monthly, Vol. 7, pp. 344-52, 425- 33, San Francisco, 1871). WILKES, CHARLES. Narrative of the United States Exploring Expedition. During the Years 1838, 1839, 1840, 1841, 1842 (5 vols., atlas, Philadelphia, 1845). WISSLER, CLARK. Influence of the Horse in the Development of Plains Culture (AA, Vol. 16, pp. 1-25, 1914). WORK, JoJIN (W. C. LEWIS AND PAUL C. PHILLIPS, eds.). The Journal of John Work, with a Bibliography of the Fur Trade in the Northwest (Cleveland, 1923). WYETH, NATHANIAL. Journal of Nathanial Wyeth's Expedition of 1832 (in F. W. Young, ed., Sources of Oregon History, Vol. 1, Pts. 3-9, Eugene, Oregon, 1899). LIST OF MEMOIRS OF THE AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

Volumes 1-6 are sold only as complete volumes, at the following prices: Vol. 1 (except Part 2), $3.65; Vol. 2, $5.20; Vol. 3, $4.50; Vol. 4, $3.75; Vol. 5, $2.00; Vol.6, $4.00.

VOL. 1, PART 1.Materials for the Physical Anthropology of the Eastern European Jews. FISHBERG. PAST 2.Tribes of the Colt.'mbia Valley and thu Coast of Watbingion and Ore- gon. Lnwis. PART 3HlstorIcal jottings on Am but in Asia. LAUFER. PAnr 4.The Numerical Proportions of the Sexes ss Birth. Niaiot. PART 5.Ethnographic and Lingiditic Notes on the Paez Indians of Tierra Adqn:ro auca,olomhia. na PART 6.The Cheyenne Indiaru. MooNlre. Sheich of the Cheyenne Grammar. Pn-rrBL

VOL. 2, PArr 1.Weather Words of Polynesia. CHURCHILL. PART 2.The Creek Indians of Taskigi Town. SPECK. PART 3.The Nez Percé Indians. SPINDEN. PART 4.An Hidatsa Shrine and the Beliefs Respecting It. Pn'I'ER AND WILsoN. PART 5.The Ethno-Botany of the Gosizste Indians of Utah. CHAMBERUN. PArr 6.Pottery of the Pajarito Plateau and of some Adjacent Regions in New Mexico. KIDDER.

VOL. 3, NUMBER 1.The Idea of Fertilization in the Cultureof the Pueblo Indians. HAEBERLIN. NUMBER 2.The Indians of Cuzco and the A/iurimac. Fasuus. NUMBER 3.Moccasins and their Relation to Arctic Footwear. HATT. NUMBER 4.Bánaro Society. Social Organization and Kinship System ofa Tribe in the Interior of New Guinea. THUENWALD.

VOL. 4, NUMBER 1.Matrilineal Kinship and the Question of Its Priority. HARTLAND. NUMBER 2.The Reindeer and Its Domestication. LAUFER. NUMBER 3.Notes on Zuñi. Part I. PARSONS. NUMBER 4.Notes on Zuñi. Part Ii. PARSONS.

VOL. 5, NUMBER 1.A Further Study of Prehistoric Small House Ruins in the San Juan Watershed. PUDDEN. NUMBER 2.An Early Account of the Choctaw indians. SWANTON. NUMBER 3.Notes on Some Bushman implements. VAN RIPPEN. NUMBER 4.The Little-Known Small House Ruins in the Coconino Forest. M. R. F. AND H. S. COLTON.

VoL. 6, NUMBER 1.The Functions of Wampum Among the Eastern Algonkian.SPECK. NUMBER 2.Notes on Reindeer Noma4ism. HATr. NUMBER 3.Notes on Cochiti, New Mexico. DUMAREST. NUMBER 4.Penobscot Shamanism. SPECK.

(Continued on fourth page of cover.) LIST OF MEMOIRS (Continued) After the completion of Volume 6 it was decided to issue future parts as separate Memoirs, assigning to them serial numbers and considering the twenty-eight papers com- prised in the six volumes already published as Numbers 1 to 28. Memoirs issued subse- quently are the following: NUMBER 29.The Concept of the Guardian Spirit in North America. BY RUTH FULTON BENEDICT. (Out of print.) NUMBER 30.The Blood Sacrifice Complex. B E. M. L0EB. (Out of print.) NUMBER 31.The Scalp Ceremonial of Zufli. BY ELSIE CLEWS PARSONS. (Out of print.) NUMBER 32.A Pueblo Indian Journal. EDITED BY ELSIE CLEWS PARSoNs. 123 pages. Price $1.50. NUMBER 33.The Social and Ceremonial Organization of Cochiti. BY ESTHER ScHIPF GOLDFRANK. 129 pages. Price $1.50. NUMBER 34.Archaeological Explorations on the Middle Chinlee, 1925. B NOEL MOESS. 42 pages, 8 plates. Price 60 cents. NUMBER 35.The Northern and Southern Affiliations of Antillean Culture. BY CHAItLOTrE D. GOWER. 60 pages. Price 75 cents. NUMBER 36.The Social Organization of the Tewa of New Mexico. BY ELSIE CLaWS PARsoNs. 309 pages, 42 plates. Price $3.75. NUMBER 37.New Stone Age Pottery from the Prehistoric Site at Hsi-Yin.Tsun, Shansi, China. B SSU YUNG LJ.ANG. 78 pages, 18 plates. Price $1.00. NUMBER 38.The Pueblo of San Felijie. BY LESLIE A. WanTE. 70 pages, 3 plates. Price 75 cents. NUMBER 39.Hopi and Zufli Ceremonialism. BY ELSIE CLaWS PARSONS. 108 pages. Price $1.10. NUMBER 40.The Gold Tribe, "Fishskin Tatars" of the Lower Sun gari. BY OWEN LATTI- MORE. 77 pages, 3 figs. Price 80 cents. NUMBER 41.An Outline of Dahomean Religious Belief. BY MELVILLE J. HERSKOVITS AND FRANCES S. HERSKOVITS. 77 pages. Price 85 cents. NUMBER 42.W'alapai Ethnography. EDITED BY A. L. KROEBER. 294 pages, 16 plates, 18 figs., 3 maps. Price $3.25. NUMBER 43.The Pueblo of Santo Domingo, New Mexico. BY LESLIE A. WHITE. 210 pages, 8 plates, 53 figs. Price $2.25. NUMBER 44.Hopi of the Second Mesa. BY ERNEST AND PEARL BEAGLEROLE. 65 pages. Price 75 cents. NUMBER 45.Kinship Systems and the Forms of Marriage. BY BERNARD WILLARD AGIN- SKY. 102 pages, 13 figs. Price $1.00. NUMBER 46.The Autobiography of a Papago Woman. BY Rum UNDERHILL. 64 pages, Price 75 cents. NUMBER 47.Tribal Distribution in Oregon. By JOEL V. BERREMAN. 67 pages, 2 maps. Price 75 cents.

General index of all publications of the American Anthropological Association through 1928, $2.00.