This volume addresses the historical and archaeological aspects of the site. This volume commences with a Statement of Significance for the Island of Moose Factory. The Statement of Significance is a central document that guides ongoing site management. It sets out a hierarchy of values, objectives, and messages that guide management priorities and actions.

Additionally, this volume contains a Chronology for the Island as well as a Literature Review and Gap Analysis of the existing historical documentation. The gap analysis reviews the adequacy of existing research to fully develop the interpretive themes for the site as well as identify areas where further research is required.

This volume includes a Stage 1 Archaeological assessment of the Island and a draft proposal for a public archaeology program. A clear rational for the proposed Stage II archaeological testing including the use of ground penetrating radar was not provided. Mitigation of negative impacts to heritage sites is the primary reason for conducting Stage 2 archaeological work as well as defining general limits of particular sites such as the HBC Cemetery for future protection. Another reason to conduct Stage 2 assessment would be for a purely academic purpose and would be undertaken as a public archaeological program. However, as the draft Public Archaeology Program states ‘the key consideration, is the level of acceptance and support that the community has for archaeology’ and goes on to state ‘before any program can effectively be implemented, the people of Moose Factory must be approached for their support. Community support is the cornerstone upon which a successful program must be built’. Clearly the next step is community consultation prior to any mitigates or research based archaeology being undertaken.

The last section of this volume contains an Inventory of known material assets that are held by the community, Ontario Heritage Foundation and a number of archives located across Canada and in the United States.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

iii Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Chapter 1:

SITE HISTORY

Note to Reader:

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-1 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

1. SITE HISTORY

1.1 History: Literature Review & Gap Analysis

Introduction and Methodology

This essay is a review of the published literature on Moose Factory and on related subjects and topics that address Moose Factory and the James Bay Cree in a substantive manner. Its purpose is to inform the interpretation program for Moose Factory by providing an overview of the principal topics treated in the literature, indicating where the existing material is sufficient and where there is a need for further research, offering access points to the literature in order to facilitate that future research, and indicating topics for which the existing research would form an adequate basis for detailed interpretive planning.

The primary author of this literature review is Edmonton-based historian Bob Beal, a specialist in Aboriginal history and the fur trade with particular expertise in the history of the eastern seaboard in the 17th and 18th centuries and in the history of western Canada in the 18th and 19th centuries. Additions and revisions have been made by Commonwealth principal Hal Kalman, working in close consultation with Beal. The research plan was provided by Commonwealth historian Meg Stanley and a review of the material was completed by Dr. John Long of Nipissing University.

References throughout the text are to the bibliography that is appended. Beal developed an initial bibliography by browsing the extensive libraries at the University of Alberta (including the Circumpolar Library, which, in particular, houses much material related to the James Bay area), by following the footnotes of many of those works, by consulting material provided by Commonwealth, and by using his own substantial knowledge of the history and the discipline. Beal’s bibliography is quite comprehensive, but is not complete. Some works were read closely, others skimmed, and time was insufficient to read some others. The original bibliography has been supplemented by Dr. John Long.

The organization and analysis in this literature review is informed by Commonwealth’s ‘Moose Factory Overall Strategy, Architectural & Interpretive Planning Session,’ of 8-9 January 2004. The research and analysis was undertaken in the context of the work being proposed by Commonwealth.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-2 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Statement of Approach and Methodology

Where works are ‘unavailable,’ it means that they were not available in the libraries accessible to Beal in Edmonton. In the rare case where a work is noted as ‘temporarily unavailable,’ it means that they have not been in the libraries during the course of this work. Some of the works are of only minor use, and some are merely contextual. Archival material related to Moose Factory from the collections of the Hudson’s Bay Company Archives in Winnipeg, the Archives of Ontario the National Archives of Canada, the United Church Archives and the General Synod Archives of the Anglican Church are not listed. The holdings of the Archives of Ontario, for example, include records from the Anglican and Methodist churches at Moose Factory, dating from about 1840. The extensive records of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (DIAND), some of which is held at the National Archives of Canada, hold material that would be useful. The DIAND holds treaty lists First Nation membership lists, for example, which might be useful; because of privacy legislation, however, these are not available without explicit authorization from the First Nation.

Historians often work with written or documentary historical evidence. That has been their stock-in-trade. Both Beal and Long have used the extensive records of the Hudson’s Bay Company, for example. Long has also used the records of the Wesleyan Methodist Missionary Society, Church Missionary Society and General Synod Archives of the Anglican Church of Canada, There are, however, inherent problems in relying exclusively on these written resources, and some of the ways of overcoming these problems will be discussed below. Historians also assess the written work of previous historians; this is known as historiography, a topic which is included in this literature review.

Ethnohistory is sometimes described as a sub-discipline of history that marries historical with anthropological methodology. Beals has not been trained as an anthropologist, but in recent years has begun to think of himself, and present himself, as an ethnohistorian. Long has an undergraduate degree in anthropology, and uses ethnography to inform his interpretations of history.

Overview: Types of Sources and Knowledge

Some authors find it necessary to distinguish carefully among history, oral history, and traditional knowledge. If this is not done, one runs the risk of seriously misinterpreting ‘facts about the past’ that come from Aboriginal oral traditions or misjudging Aboriginal oral traditions as unreliable in providing historical knowledge (Vansina 1985, Wilson 1997 and von Gernet 2000).

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-3 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

History is sometimes described as the product of historians’ thought (see Carr 1961.) Oral history, often the result of interviews, can be used as historical evidence in much the same way as a documentary record might be used. Traditional knowledge, though it may well contain elements of oral history, can be considered as qualitatively different.

Oral history is simply people’s remembrances of the past. (In a non-Aboriginal setting, the popular books of Barry Broadfoot spring to mind.) In Euro-Canadian culture, old folks tell stories about the past; some of them might be considered accurate and some of them might be thought of as exaggerated. In North American Aboriginal cultures, oral history can work much the same way, with one major exception. Indian cultures were, and some remain, oral cultures; they often did not have writing. It was therefore more incumbent upon the older generation to tell the younger one what had happened in the past than it was in literate societies. They also had a greater responsibility to be accurate, though definitions of ‘accuracy’ can differ. Aboriginal people carried their libraries in their minds.

Within Aboriginal societies, storytelling was the principal means by which the collective knowledge and wisdom of the societies was disseminated, often informally but also often by designated storytellers. Some elements of the stories may be considered oral history that can be assessed for ‘facts about the past’ for use in history. But the stories can also be considered as traditional knowledge. In her forward to the 1995 edition of the stories of her uncle,

Edward Ahenakew, Christine Wilna Hodgson explained the process, though she used the terms ‘oral history’ and ‘history’ differently than we do:

The Indian way of preserving and passing on knowledge from one generation to the next was through story-telling or oral history. Most stories were told in a circuitous manner. This technique challenged the listener to be both imaginative and alert to the lesson in the tale. Stories invariably started with

Kayas, which in [Plains] Cree means ‘long ago.’ Each retold some aspect of history, teaching traditions, values or mores of the culture. The children’s stories used humour and startling consequences to illustrate a point. (Ahenakew 1995, p.vii)

To use a simple example: The Plains Cree of what is now Saskatchewan tell the story that as a young man Chief Mistaw~sis had been given the name Iron Buffalo. On a hunting expedition, Mistaw~sis found himself caught up in the middle of the stampeding buffalo herd and had fallen off his horse. When the herd passed, his companions were surprised to find that Mistaw~sis had miraculously survived. Someone researching Plains Cree history might wonder if that event actually happened, whether it is an accurate ‘fact about the past.’ But asking that question may not be important, from a Cree viewpoint. It misses the point, the teaching, of the story: if you fall off your horse in the middle of a stampeding buffalo herd, it will be a miracle if you survive. Similarly, the Plains Cree have a tradition that the Creator made the buffalo emerge from under a great lake as a gift to the Cree. When the great

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-4 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

buffalo herds disappeared from the Canadian plains, in 1879, they went back under the lake and remain there. A modern researcher might dismiss that story as not a ‘fact about the past’ but as merely an interesting myth. But the ‘fact about the past’ that the story illustrates, and which the historian can use, is that the Plains Cree believed that the buffalo herds had not vanished, but had merely retreated. At the height of rebellion in 1885, Chief Poundmaker said that if the white man were driven from the country, the buffalo would re-emerge and the Cree would again enjoy plenty.

These examples show how that there are different ways of interpreting historical sources. One extreme, known as historical objectivism or positivism, holds that there is one “true” and unbiased history. At the opposite extreme lies the postmodern view that there are multiple views of history, it is always biased or “constructed” and all interpretations are equally valid. Postmodernists often hold that conventional history has been based on more privileged or more powerful sources. Oral tradition can be held to be unreliable hearsay, or as infallible. van Gernet (2000) argues for “middle ground” where oral traditions are accepted, but examined rigorously and critically.

A preliminary bibliography of traditional ecological knowledge in the Moose River basin – the teaching stories – was prepared by Jamieson Brant in the 1990s for the Ministry of Natural Resources’ Moose River Basin Project (see also Paulmartin & Szick 1997). Some published material contains results of interviews with Cree of James Bay. Those interviews were usually done in order to discover ‘facts about the past.’ They are oral history, though they may also contain some elements of traditional knowledge. Researchers may not always make a distinction between the two. The attempt by Europeans to discover facts about Aboriginal lives and pasts through interviews has a long history. One of the more famous of the early recorded stories is the result of David Thompson’s interviews with Saukamaupee that deals with the Cree discovery of the horse in about 1730 (Thompson 1962). Thompson focussed on ‘facts,’ mainly ignoring traditional knowledge or dismissing it as mere myth.

Traditional knowledge is not intended to recite ‘facts about the past.’ It is designed to teach young people about the ways of life. If an historian takes this approach, s/he can gain insights into how people lived and acted in the past. Preston (2002) is an excellent example of this approach, for he helps us understand the “personal meanings” of stories and events.

Scholars sometimes distinguish between “emic” (culturally-bound or inside) and “etic” (generalized or outside) approaches. The distinctions between history, oral history and traditional knowledge are one way of looking at history, but it must be recognized that these are etic labels. An emic approach would respect “inside” James Bay Cree terminology, such as the basic distinction between atalohkan (atiukan in northern Quebec), sometimes translated in English as myths or legends or sacred stories, and tipachimowin, sometimes translated as stories or news (Ellis 1989, 1995). An emic approach might simply present the Cree story of the great spider, and how first man and first woman were lowered to earth. An etic approach might look for common features in this atalohkan and in Ojibwe earth diver stories, in the northern Quebec Cree story of big skunk and wolverine, or in other origin

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-5 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

stories told around the world. An emic approach might study leadership in traditional cultures; an etic approach might delineate and focus on the specific western James Bay Cree concepts of okimah and okimahkan (Ellis 1960).

Stories can be viewed in a broader context as performances (Vansina 1985), and can include songs or or a shaking tent ceremony (Preston 2002). A printed transcript cannot convey the power of an actual voice. All of the northern Quebec stories told to Preston are now available in Cree on CD. The stories of Cree elder Louis Bird are available in both Cree and English online at www.ourvoices.ca

Niezen (1998) contains a good deal of oral history, particularly regarding the James Bay Cree’s relationships with their ecologies. Flannery (1995) is a brief life history of one Cree woman, recorded at Moose Factory in the 1930s. Flannery’s extensive fieldnotes from Moose Factory, and those of John M. Cooper, are available at the Catholic University of America in Washington, DC. Denton (2001) contains some material from oral traditions, in Cree stories from northern Quebec. Some useful oral history, in the form of interviews and stories, is contained in the various studies by Edward Rogers. The work of James Bay Cree poet Margaret Sam-Cromarty (1992, 1996, 2002) represents oral history and traditional knowledge in a different form. Murdoch (1972) is a short collection of oral history and traditional knowledge prepared for the elementary school at Wemindji on eastern James Bay.

Ahenakew (1995) and Fine Day (1973) may be presented as models for the recording of traditional knowledge. They also contain elements of oral history, but they address the knowledge of the Plains Cree and so have no direct relevance to Moose Factory.

There has been considerable oral history done at Moose Factory that may be very useful. Much of Carol Judd’s work is held at the Archives of Ontario and has not been made available for the present project. John Long has an extensive oral history record which is contained on some of the hundred tapes of oral history from 1980s, copies of which have been donated to the Ojibway-Cree Cultural Centre in Timmins (see Appendix). His writings (1978-2000) often include western James Bay Cree oral history.

In all this, one has also to take account of the differences between European and Indian languages and concepts. For example, in the English language and thinking, a lake is a thing. It just sits there, unless we want to use additional language to describe it. ‘Lake’ translates into Cree as ‘sakahikan’. But that is not what it means. The simple translation misses the Cree concept. ‘Sakahikan’ is a thing making things appear. It could be a place of reflections, or of reflecting, or of bringing forth life. In assessing traditional knowledge, oral history, or even the Hudson’s Bay Company documentary record, one should be as aware as one can be of the Cree worldview and ways of speaking.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-6 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

European vs. Aboriginal Perspectives

Canadian history traditionally has been written from a Euro-Canadian perspective. First Nations have tended to be seen through European eyes as they were encountered by explorers, fur-traders, and missionaries. Classic studies of the fur trade, such as those by Harold Innis, A.S. Morton, and E.E. Rich, take this point of view. (See also the section below on ‘The Fur Trade.’) With respect to James Bay, Daniel Francis and Toby Morantz (1983), in their standard study on the fur trade of James Bay, recognize the Cree perspective, but tend to emphasize the European side. This is seen, for example, in their opening sentence: ‘Eastern James Bay is an inhospitable country.’ Inhospitable to eighteenth-century Europeans, yes, but certainly not to the Cree who have called it ‘home’ for many centuries.

Morantz’s later work places more weight on the Cree point of view. Morantz (1983), for example, is an ethnohistorical study that focuses on the organization and economy of the Cree people. Morantz (2002) utilizes both oral history and written sources. Carol Judd, who conducted research on Moose Factory for the Ontario Heritage Foundation, also tries to emphasize the Cree perspective. Judd deals with what she calls the mixed-blood experience at Moose Factory, particularly in her article, ‘Moose Factory was not Red River’ (Judd, 1983). Anthropologist Edward Rogers conducted fieldwork in northwestern Ontario and in northern Quebec. His works on the Mistassini Cree and Round Lake Ojibwe (Oji-Cree) are excellent (see, e.g., Rogers 1963), but aside from one brief report (Rogers 1966, 1973) he paid little attention to Moose Factory. The chapters by Charles A. Bishop, Rogers and Taylor in Rogers and Smith (1994) are useful overviews but do not deal specifically with Moose Factory.

Even in recent works that are much more sensitive to Aboriginal perspectives, a Eurocentric bias often seeps through. For example, Bishop’s two chapters on the northern Algonquians in Rogers and Smith (1994) survey the history of the northern Cree and Ojibwe from 1550 to 1760 and then from 1760 to 1821. The cut-off dates are based on the British ‘conquest’ of

New France (1760) and the merger of the Hudson’s Bay Company with the North West Company (1821). Similarly, Honigmann (1978) and Preston (1978) have chapters on the western James Bay and eastern James Bay Cree, who they refer to as East Main and West Main Cree, employing terminology used long ago by Hudson’s Bay Company officials. Even in works such as these, Aboriginal peoples are misplaced, implicitly or explicitly, in a European world. In developing interpretation for Moose Factory, it would be wise to avoid this tendency.

Few of the authors listed in the bibliography are Aboriginal, and even fewer are Cree, so the Cree perspective is still largely being interpreted through European-Canadians. Margaret Sam-Cromarty is one of a few Cree writers represented in the literature. Lillian Small (1972) recorded and translated stories at Moose Factory. Similarly, a book of Herbert McLeod’s stories was published (McLeod 1978), and his relatives have his original tapes. A number of

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-7 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

stories were collected by school staff in the 1970s, and may still be available at Ministik School. As already noted, an excellent online Cree oral history source is located at www.ourvoices.ca, part of the Omushkego Oral History Project which features Louis Bird, Cree scholar and storyteller from Peawanuck. Logotheti (1991) interviewed six Moose Factory Crees and analyzed their life histories.

Other aboriginal authors include Nunavit Inuk activist Lucassie Arragutainaq (1995), who contributed to a book on writes about the traditional ecological knowledge of the Hudson Bay Inuit and Cree, but writers such as these remain few in number.

Historiography

Historiography is the study of the writing of history. Few bibliographical or historiographical essays that address topics relevant to our interests have been found. Carlson et al. (2001) provide the point of entry into major writings on Aboriginal history across Canada in the 1990s. Niezen (1998) assessed a considerable amount of literature on the James Bay Cree. Michael Payne’s recent essay (2001) on ‘Fur Trade Historiography’ provides a useful entry into the fur trade literature, and is discussed further below under that topic.

Moose Factory

James Bay and the James Bay Cree do not receive a lot of attention in the literature, in contrast to other Aboriginal and fur trade communities in Canada. For Ontario, scholars and writers have tended to emphasize Aboriginal peoples of southern Ontario and the Great Lakes regions. In general, scholars have paid a great deal of attention to western Aboriginal groups as the fur trade expanded west from Hudson Bay. James Bay tends to fall out of their lines of sight.

Studies of the community of Moose Factory are few in number. Carol Judd’s ‘An Uncommon Heritage’ is an exception (Judd n.d.). It is a good overview, and sometimes detailed, history of Moose Factory, though there is an emphasis on the experiences of the fur traders. Several works by Toby Morantz, already mentioned, are also exceptions. There is some community history in Blythe, Brizinski & Preston (1985). Long’s work on the politics of education in Moose Factory (1986) and on the James Bay Métis (1984) contain some community history. Architects Eric Arthur, Howard Chapman, and Hart Massey wrote an introductory history and appreciation in 1949 (Arthur et al., 1973). A brief historical article was written by anthropologist Walter Kenyon (Kenyon n.d.). With the Ontario Heritage Foundation’s acquisition of a number of properties in Moose Factory in the past generation, the Foundation has undertaken an array of research initiatives. These include the many writings by Carol Judd that are cited in the bibliography, as well as reports on individual buildings (Mendel 1984, Héroux 1990) and a bilingual booklet that provides an overview self-guided tour of Moose Factory Island (Moose Factory 2002).

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-8 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Much research was published in the past generation as a result of the events that led to the James Bay Agreement and the subsequent development of Hydro Québec’s generation sites east of James Bay. A comprehensive compendium is found in James Bay Symposium (1977). The focus of these works, of course, is usually northern Quebec.

Ecology

A wealth of published material, much of it dating from the 1970s and 1980s, deals with the ecology of James Bay. The James Bay Symposium (1977) contains papers on a wide variety of ecological topics, some of which are listed separately in the attached bibliography. The literature addresses everything from geological formations to flora and fauna to water temperatures and tides. To cite some highlights: the Geological Survey of Canada (1998) offers an excellent map of geological formations, while Veillette (1999) addresses the particular and peculiar geographical phenomenon of geological rings. Riley and McKay (1980) take a particularly useful look at vegetation and ‘phytogeography’, as do Dutilly and LePage (1954). Reed et al. (1996) and Wypkema (1997) study the goose, an essential part of

Cree life; Brassard and Audet (1977) discuss caribou, and Grenier and Audet (1977) write about moose. Freeman (1974) addresses the water, Peck (1978: two studies) reports on the tides, and Roderick Morin (1980) on fish. Stewart et al. (1993) take a detailed look at James Bay ecology and provide some historical background. Berkes et al. (1995) include detailed hunting and fishing maps for the 1990s.

Harvey Feit (1973) describes modern resource management based on Aboriginal worldviews in the context of the Waswanipi Cree, southeast of James Bay. Roger Pothier (1975) describes the hunting and trapping lifestyles of the Mistassini people, southeast of James Bay but nearer the St. Lawrence, during the 1950s and 1960s. Rogers (1963) described the Mistassini Cree in the 1950s.

Still unwritten is a larger study that would address the overall ecology, environmental history, and traditional ecological knowledge of the James Bay basin. Clarke (1980) does the first for one small region, and Arragutainaq et al. (1995) provides a very good first step towards the last of the three. Niezen (1998) provides an excellent study of the relationships between the Cree sense of territory and their ecologies.

There is useful published material about historical ecology, such as changes in the populations and patterns of caribou and moose. The literature is weaker when it comes to the Aboriginal people’s use of the resources. Nevertheless, enough material exists – contextual, in parts – to support interpretation of these subjects at Moose Factory.

Three dozen McMaster University TASO publications (see, e.g., George & Preston, 1989) are on deposit at McMaster University’s Mills Memorial Library.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-9 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Community Formation and Location

The Smithsonian Institution’s Handbook of North American Indians - - but no one else -- distinguishes between the West Main Cree (Ontario) and the East Main Cree (Quebec). Bishop (1978) looks at territorial groups before 1821, Honigmann (1978) at the West Main Cree, and Preston (1978) at the East Main Cree. The Moose Cree of Moose Factory are included in the West Main Cree, and the MoCreebec of Moose Factory were historically associated with the East Main Cree. Macqueen (1967) discusses the formation of the MoCreebec community at Moose Factory. Preston (1978) draws strong distinctions between ‘coasters’ and ‘inlanders’, while minimizing cultural differences between them.

Historians are not certain of the origins of the James Bay Cree. ‘It does not seem there was ever a group corresponding to the James Bay Cree of today,’ writes Toby Morantz (1983). David Pentland (1978) wrote: ‘In the seventeenth century the ancestors of the West Main Cree probably occupied almost all of northern Ontario, with extensions into Manitoba and Quebec.’

A more recent work, Lytwyn (2002), establishes that the western James Bay Cree were well established prior to European contact and were instrumental in the survival of traders throughout the HBC trading area during the 18th and 19th centuries.

There are, however, clear language distinctions among the peoples. Honigmann (1978) for the West Main Cree and Preston (1978) for the East Main Cree described the dialects among the peoples. Pentland explained historical terminology in both the Honigmann and Preston articles. The western James Bay Cree called themselves the omushkegowuck, which translates into English as ‘swamp people’ or ‘muskeg people’; they speak the Swampy Cree or n-dialect of Cree, except at Moose Factory where the closely related Moose or l-dialect is spoken. The eastern James Bay Cree speak the East Cree or y-dialect of the Cree- Montagnais-Naskapi language group (see Rogers and Leacock 1978). Cree is an Algonquian language.

Speakers of East Cree and Moose Cree can often understand each other, but speakers of other Cree dialects may have difficulty understanding East Cree. There are also subdialects in the region. It should be noted that the two primary groups who live in Moose Factory, the Moose Cree and the MoCreebec, originally spoke different dialects.

Morantz (1983) indicates that the western James Bay Cree were wary of the eastern Cree, in historical times, and were occasionally hostile to them. Despite the occasional disputes, relations between the two were generally amicable, however, and there was continuing communication and some intermarriage.

To the north and east of the East Cree were the Naskapi; those to the east and southeast were sometimes called the Montagnais and Attikamek peoples (see Rogers and Leacock 1978); today these neighbours are more often referred to as Innu. To the south of the James Bay

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-10 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

region were various Algonquian-speaking groups that may historically have been closely related to the James Bay Cree (see Rogers 1978; Day 1978; Day and Trigger 1978). Neighbours of the western James Bay Cree were the northern Ojibwa. In the historical period, there was considerable communication among all these groups. The Cree of Moose Factory acted as middlemen (Lytwyn 2002; Ray 1974) for furs coming, from the south and west in particular, to posts on James Bay.

The primary literature sources (primarily the Hudson’s Bay Company records) must be combed and carefully analyzed - - as Lytwyn (2002) has done - - to develop, in any very specific way, the identities, relationships among, and movements of the peoples who inhabited and used James Bay before the twentieth century. The 18th-century observations by James Isham (1949) and Andrew Graham (1969), published by the Hudson’s Bay Record Society are useful in this regard. Scott and Morrison (1993) have assembled detailed information on Cree in the Harricanaw River drainage. A fresh, targeted look at post records for Moose Factory and its neighbours in the Hudson’s Bay Company Archives might yield additional information on the origins and ancestors of the Moose Cree.

It might also be useful to do an oral history project among the population of Moose Factory today with regard to self-identity, both historic and modern. This might not only inform site interpretation, but would also further historical investigation.

Toponymy is the study of place names. We have found no published work of this kind for the western James Bay region. Robert Bell of the Geological Survey of Canada with the assistance of fur trader W.K. Broughton developed, in 1895, a ‘draft list of Indian place names in the James Bay and Moose Factory area’; this material is held in the McFarlin Library, University of Tulsa, Oklahoma. We understand that Greg Spence or John Tuner may have useful information on Cree place names in the Moose Factory area. A glance at the map shows that this might be extraordinarily valuable, both for historical analysis and modern interpretation. A good start could be made with a modern map, a good imagination about English pronunciation in the eighteenth century, and a knowledge of the Cree language. This could lead to very worthwhile projects in oral history and traditional knowledge.

James Bay Economies

The ancestors of the Moose Cree were hunter-gatherers who harvested the resources of the lowlands around western James Bay. They most likely spent much of the year in the woods, coming to the shore of the bay during the summer to exploit the marine resources and during waterfowl migrations. Anthropologists (e.g. Honigmann 1978, Preston 1978) and historians (Francis 1983, Morantz 1983, Lytwyn 2002) generally agree with this view, though there is little specific information in the primary sources about James Bay Cree seasonal movements. Lytwyn (2002) and the chart in Flannery (1995) showing the Crees’ seasonal cycle are the best sources on traditional economy. Mushkegowuk Council also has an excellent ‘circle’ poster showing the seasonal cycle.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-11 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

There is no doubt that the establishment of European traders on the Bay modified life in significant ways for the James Bay Cree. But historians have disagreed about the extent of the change in Cree social life and economy. Toby Morantz’s ethnohistorical study (1983) set this record straight:

The examination of the historical records from 1700 to 1850 fails to substantiate earlier claims that the fur trade had brought about radical changes in the James Bay social organizations.

Morantz (1977, 1982) also clarified the ‘trading captain’ system of the Hudson’s Bay Company – a system in which the Company recognized certain individuals from the Cree of the area as heads of trading groups. Historians are sometimes unclear about whether these trading captains were leaders of existing groups, or whether they would create groups specifically for trading purposes (see Judd ‘Uncommon Heritage’).

There is also considerable discussion in the literature concerning the provenance, nature, and extent of family hunting territories. Flannery and Chambers (1986), using John M. Cooper notes from 1927-1934, deal with James Bay family hunting territories. One question is whether the Algonquian people designated family hunting territories before contact with Europeans, following Frank Speck’s speculations about the Mi’kmaq (Speck 1973); or whether the family hunting territory is a creation of the fur trade, responding to the shift from subsistence hunting to trapping to trade with Europeans and creating a new kind of territorial concept among Aboriginal peoples (see Leacock 1973 and Niezen 1998).

Virtually our only sources of knowledge of the James Bay Cree from the last quarter of the seventeenth century to the beginning of the twentieth century are the Hudson’s Bay Company’s extensive records. These, however, sometimes reveal extraordinarily little about the peoples of Hudson and James Bays (e.g. Rich 1954). As already noted, Graham (1969) and Isham (1949) are outstanding exceptions. This is because in the early period the HBC actively discouraged contact with Aboriginal people on James and Hudson Bays, to prevent trading outside the Company system, to keep close control of its employees, and to prevent too much Indian influence on the trade. Beal thinks they adopted a very closed system out of simple fear of the environment and the peoples. This lack of contact is reflected throughout the Company’s published records of the early fur trade period. (Beal has read all the printed records, but has not examined the much more extensive archival records.) In the secondary literature, for example in Francis and Morantz (1983), these points are strongly made.

This situation not only limits study of the primary sources, but it means that secondary material about the fur trade period contains much greater emphasis on the European experience in the trade than one might expect and makes it difficult to access the Cree perspective during the early historical period. Lytwyn (2002) is the best single historical source on the early fur trade in western James Bay; Morantz is excellent for eastern James Bay.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-12 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

In the western Canada, Beal finds the HBC sources to be much more helpful in recreating Indian history and Indian involvement in the trade than in James Bay. That is because in the West, the Company found itself travelling through new, and perhaps hostile, territory. It had to get to know its suppliers and the country. In the early years of the fur trade, critics of the HBC claimed that it ‘sat by the frozen sea’ - limiting its activity to the coasts of James and Hudson Bay. Starting with Henley House in the mid-18th century, of course, the HBC began to set up inland posts. Philip Turnor surveyed the Moose River basin beginning in 1781.

One way in which the European trading system did make a dramatic change in James Bay Cree economy and social organization was in the creation of the Home Guard Cree (Lytwyn 2002). These were Cree communities that established themselves permanently around the HBC posts, breaking the previous seasonal cycle of life. The Home Guard would provide the HBC with food and furs from the area immediately near the post. Some would also work as labourers for the Company. Some Aboriginals at Moose Factory were Home Guard Cree and some have been called “mixed-bloods” – obviously a Euro-Canadian term. It is difficult to tell from the existing literature to what extent today’s Moose Cree represent the same people who lived and traded at Moose Factory in the early years of the fur trade (Judd ‘Uncommon Heritage’, Judd 1983, Judd 1984; see also Long 1984). Van Kirk, and especially Brown, explain the development of fur trade company families, people of mixed ancestry, in James Bay.

The existence and experience of the Home Guard Cree provides another way in which Eurocentric bias creeps into the secondary literature. John Honigmann wrote that the West

Main Cree relied on the HBC not only for European goods ‘but also even for wild goose meat, which the Company preserved in quantity for the winter to feed its own men and hungry Indians’ (Honigmann 1978). What Honigmann ignored is that the Cree, probably mainly the Home Guard Cree, harvested those geese and the Company merely stored them. To reap the advantages of having the Home Guard Cree stay close to and serve the posts, the Company fed them occasionally in winter. Left to their own devices, the Home Guard Cree might have abandoned the coast, but they would not have starved. Without the Home Guard Cree, it is the white traders who may very well have starved. Toby Morantz makes this argument; see also Ray 1984.

Honigmann’s statement, quoted above, is a variation of the much discussed and now largely discredited ‘dependency thesis,’ which was a strong feature of earlier studies of the fur trade. It was once believed that, after contact with Europeans, Aboriginals became so dependent on Europeans and European technology that they could not live without them or it. Discussion of the dependency thesis in the James Bay context can be found in Gagné (1993), Francis and Morantz (1983), and Ornstein (1997). While many historians are wary of it, the dependency thesis continues to pervade some work, sometimes implicitly. Some scholars have made a point of attacking the dependency thesis. For example, Brian Given (1994) showed that, at least as a hunting tool, the bow-and-arrow was superior to the fur trade gun. The dependency literature is best summarized in Lytwyn (2002).

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-13 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

The dependency thesis and its contradiction provide an excellent opportunity for interpretation at Moose Factory, by challenging deeply embedded assumptions. This raises interesting questions about the meaning of ‘progress’ and ‘technology’, and can provide insightful comparisons between cultures and knowledge in the context of a specific cultural landscape.

It may be possible to reconstruct the economies and movements of the Moose Cree from the fur trade period to the twentieth century, using documents such as the Hudson’s Bay Company archival and printed records. Toby Morantz (1983) and Arthur J. Ray and Donald B. Freeman (1978) have pointed out how this can be done (and also Ray 1974, although not with respect to Moose Factory). Lytwyn (2002) has done some fine work on the early western James Bay Cree; Scott and Morrison (1993) is an excellent example of such an exercise, connecting families today with their ancestors mentioned in historical records.

Additional research would not be an easy job, and would require specialized skills, but it could be important to the community. It would involve considerable ‘reading-between-the- lines’ and applying ethnohistorical methodology to both European and Indian experience. Morantz (1983) writes:

A very important outcome of this study is its demonstration that historical documentation can be utilized in a more objective way than has hitherto been done. One can speak of producing an ethnography using historical methods.

The literature is clear that well into the twentieth century, fur-trapping and trading remained strong features of the economies of Algonquian-speaking peoples generally (see, e.g., Taylor 1983). Have good 20th century data on the East Cree (Feit 1973), on western James Bay Cree generally (George et al. 1992, 1995) and on Attawapiskat (Cummins 2003) in particular, but we have found little published in this regard specifically for Moose Factory (but see Rogers 1966). Moose Cree First Nation, as part of its research into the effects of hydro-electric development in the Moose River basin, prepared extensive maps of harvesting use in the area. Flannery (1995) contains some useful information as a result of her interviews with Ellen Smallboy at Moose Factory in the 1930s. Niezen (1998) also contains useful information as a result of interviews. The economies have changed, of course, particularly with regard to government employment and assistance programs (George and Preston 1987). Blythe, Brizinski and Preston (1985) studied the effects of economic change on women in the Moose Factory area. As far as site interpretation is concerned, there would seem to be no particular difficulties in developing these topics.

Morrison (1992) is a definitive account of the effects of hydro-electric development in the Moose River basin. Moose Cree First Nation has conducted unpublished studies to estimate the harmful effects of hydro-electric development on its population; see Preston and Long (1998) on neighbouring New Post.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-14 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

The Fur Trade

Michael Payne’s recent essay on fur trade historiography provides a useful entry into the Canada-wide fur trade literature (Payne 2001). He begins by describing the work of historians who focussed on the role of the fur trade in Canadian history. Although now relatively old, some of these Eurocentric writings remain standard reference works (e.g. Innis 1970; first published in 1930). It was not until the 1970s that a new generation of historians, including John Foster, Arthur Ray, Jennifer Brown (1980), Sylvia van Kirk (1980), and Frits Pannekoek began to examine the fur trade as a ‘socio-cultural complex in which Indians, mixed-bloods, and whites were intertwined.’ Brown’s book has several references to James Bay.

There is a wealth of material from the Hudson’s Bay Company records, published and archival, that can be used to recreate post life for the European traders on James Bay. Two points of access are E.E. Rich’s publication of the Moose Fort Journals (Rich 1954) and Glyndwr William’s compendium of Hudson Bay material (Williams 1975), both published for the Hudson’s Bay Record Society, as well as much other material published by the Hudson’s Bay Record Society and the Champlain Society. Arthur J. Ray provides a model study with respect to the handling of sources, focussing on western Canada (Ray 1974. Ray and Freeman 1978). The HBC records presumably can also be used to reconstruct Aboriginal history, by pulling out relevant historical facts about the Aboriginal people and by hearing the Indian voice occasionally coming through the white man’s record.

The murder of a Hudson’s Bay Company post manager, his wife and several other Crees, at Hannah Bay in 1832 (Long & Chabot 1999; Long 2000; Chabot 2002) is notable for a number of reasons. The murders seem to have been motivated for a number of reasons, but such violence was so atypical of the fur trade period. There were religious overtones. And a posse of Crees and Europeans hunted down and killed the male perpetrators.

Some archaeological material helps to round out the picture (Judd on the original post at Moose Factory; Julig on early Aboriginal presence in the region). It is not difficult at all to develop the European fur trading experience on Hudson and James Bays. Statistics about the throughput of fur trade posts on James Bay, for example, is found in the Historical Atlas of Canada (Harris, 1987).

What the secondary works generally ignore, however, is putting the Europeans in perspective. How did they live their lives back home? We tend to describe Aboriginal lifestyle and culture as best we can, but we also tend to ignore European lifestyle and culture except as they actually lived at such as North American fur trade posts. Ethnohistorical methodology tends to be applied to historic North Americans but rarely to Europeans. Both primary sources and secondary literature contain accounts of sporadic Aboriginal “hunger” and the occasional harshness of Aboriginal life. What about the slums of London of Paris in the same period, for the sake of comparison? The books avoid making that comparison.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-15 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

There remains an underlying assumption that European life, mainly because of the technology that had developed and the luxury of the lives of the elites, was superior to North American life. And once again, of course, an emic look at hunger can provide a unique Aboriginal perspective (Black-Rogers 1986).

Very few historic sites addresses this issue. One exception is the museum at Ste-Marie- Among-the-Hurons, which includes an effective comparison of European and North American life. This is something that could valuably be done at Moose Factory, rather than just describing life within the fur trade post.

James Bay Social Structures

Anthropologists describe the Cree as an egalitarian band society, which is to say that the (extended) family was its most important institution. Although missionaries introduced a patrilineal system of names (i.e. surnames which refer to the father), the Cree were neither patrilineal nor matrilineal but bilateral, and of course had distinct kinship terms (Honigmann). Preston (1980) provides the East Cree terms for various family forms, while Scott and Morrison (1993) are an excellent source for the Harricanaw River area, including many of the Mocreebec families. See also Flannery (1995) and Niezen (1998).

James Bay Spiritual Practices

Missionaries settled in James Bay in 1840, so traditional religious practices have been impacted by Christianity for some time. Fulford and Bird (2003) describe the profound impacts of Oblate teachings on a Cree student, now an elder who has his own website (www.ourvoices.ca). Long has described the impact of early protestant missionaries on the western James Bay Cree, using both documentary sources and Cree oral tradition. A syncretic religious movement reached western James Bay in the 1840s (Long 1989b), in response to these early missionaries. The distinctive Cree syllabic system of writing was introduced by Wesleyan Methodist missionaries in the 1840s.

Cooper and Flannery, working in the 1930s, documented Cree traditional religious practices in James Bay, as did Preston in the 1960s. There are distinct differences in terminology in northern Ontario and northern Quebec: the kwashaapshigan (shaking tent) and mistapew (attending spirit) and of the northern Quebec Cree are the kosapachikan and mikinak of the western James Bay Cree. On the shaking tent see Preston (2002) and Vincent (1973). Preston (1977, 1978) and also Flannery et al (1988) have described the “windigo” - - actually wiitiko on western James Bay, and atuush on eastern James Bay - - concept among the Cree. Flannery and Chambers (1985) show how traditional East Cree religious categories changed from the 1930s to the 1960s. Nelson (1988) is a very useful study of the nineteenth-century spirituality of the Cree and northern Ojibwa.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-16 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Traditional Cree spiritual practices were closely tied to getting a living by hunting. Taylor (1983) discusses the relationships between spirituality and hunting among the Nemaska Cree, just east and inland from Moose Factory. The Cree of northern Quebec showed respect for the goose by hanging its bones in trees to bring success in future hunts (Preston 1978). They did the same for the bear by placing its skull in a tree (Hongimann 1978). This topic offers significant possibilities in site interpretation, but must be done carefully and respectfully, recognizing the different practices of the eastern and western James Bay Cree.

Hongimann (1978), for the West Main Cree, and Preston (1978), for the East Main Cree, both provide useful summaries of the activities of the churches among the people of James Bay. See also Scanlon (1976) and Batty (1893) for letters and photographs by Anglican Bishop John Horden.

Cooper and Flannery found that traditional religious concepts persisted much later among the eastern James Bay Cree than on western James Bay. Honigmann (1978) and Long (1986) noted the persistence of traditional religious knowledge despite a Christian veneer.

While Christianity is alive and well - - and expressed in a range of denominations - - among the James Bay Cree today, there is also a resurgence of traditional and pan-Indian religious practices. Any analysis of the impacts of Christianity upon the Cree will have to reflect this diversity.

Traditional Cree hunting songs, were largely replaced by hymns – particularly on western James Bay (Preston n.d.). The Cree hand drum, largely displaced on western James Bay, is making a comeback; Norm Wesley of Moose Factory now offers workshops on making a hand drum. The northern Plains powwow drum was introduced in the 1970s. The National Film Board’s Fiddlers of James Bay (1980) shows the connection between fiddle music from the Orkney Islands and “traditional” Cree fiddlers. At Moose Factory, James Cheechoo keeps this music alive. Much work remains to be done on Cree musicology.

Treaty Nine, 1905

In 2003, the Mushkegowuk Council launched its Rupert’s Land Claim, arguing that the transfer of HBC territory to Canada in 1869-70 (and not the treaty) is the basis for their claims against government. Nevertheless, the signing of Treaty No. 9 in 1905 ushered in enormous changes for the Cree of western James Bay.

The primary intent of the numbered Indian treaties, begun in 1871, was to obtain the surrender of Aboriginal land rights and titles to the English sovereign so that the government of Canada would be able to apportion land legally to white settlers and companies. While these treaties contained various gifts and promises which may have seemed designed to make the Indians comfortable, if not competitive, in the white man’s settlement-agricultural economy, their goal was assimilation.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-17 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Treaty Nine was signed in 1905-06 (and in 1908, 1929 and 1930) at several locations in northern Ontario. The Cree at Moose Factory signed in August of 1905. The nature and extent of the Indians’ understanding of the land surrender provisions of the treaty is an open question. As with earlier numbered treaties, Indians were told they could ‘live as usual,’ with additional benefits the treaty would make available. The Treaty Nine provisions are much the same as those of previous numbered treaties, except that the Treaty Nine Indians were not promised nearly as much as were their counterparts in other treaty areas.

John S. Long wrote three introductory booklets on the treaty (1978) and an article on the Métis position in Treaty Nine (Long 1984), and has a continuing interest (Long 1993, 1995c, 1997, 2004). James Morrison (1986) wrote the definitive history of Treaty No. 9 (Morrison 1986). Beal is a leading expert on the process and events of the numbered treaties, though he has not specifically researched Treaty Nine in detail (see, e.g., Beal 1997; Morrison and Beal 1999).

Moose Cree First Nation has conducted unpublished research on the World War II veterans’ land claim at Moose Factory, as well as its claim to lands at Moose Factory seized by the federal government for the hospital, school, RCMP and Indian administration.

Following the signing of Treaty No. 9, the Cree at Moose Factory were at first subject to an annual visit from a federal government representative - the paymaster who distributed treaty annuities of $4 per person (which continues today), and perhaps an RCMP officer. Residential schools became government-subsidized, and one opened at Moose Factory – continuing in use until the 1970s. An Indian Affairs office, staffed by a resident doctor/Indian agent opened c.1926, and RCMP detachment opened at Moose Factory in 1929. While Moose Factory declined, to a degree, with the arrival of the railroad (HBC moved its offices to Winnipeg, and Moosonee became the transportation and trans-shipment centre), it remained the centre for Anglican Church administration and federal government operations.

With the opening of the residential school, and especially following the arrival of a resident Indian agent and the RCMP, the Moose Cree – perhaps more so than the other area First Nations – came under an intensive “tutelage” campaign. Tutelage refers to a web of political controls designed to force assimilation through the arbitrary exercise of power (Dyck 1991). On the cover of Harold Cardinal’s first book (1969), three puppeteers - - representing a missionary, an Indian Affairs official and a teacher - - are shown manipulating the everyday life of Indians in Canada. The title of Cardinal’s next book, Rebirth of Canada’s Indians (1977), signals the onset of a different story, one of resistance and self-determination (see also Tanner 1983). This could be an important theme at Moose Factory, for recent decades have seen dramatic developments at Moose Cree First Nation (and also for MoCreebec). People at Moose Factory recall how Andy Rickard (later Grand Chief of Grand Council Treaty No. 9, now Nishnawbe-Aski Nation), during his brief tenure as Chief of Moose Cree First Nation in the early 1970s, told the local Indian Agent that he was no longer needed at their meetings; prior to this, the agent felt obliged to chair all Council meetings. Later, in the 1980s, when Ernie Sutherland was Chief, the Moose Cree Chief and Council decided not to

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-18 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

run an annual deficit. When the water and sewer project went ahead, the Chief and Council decided to buy the equipment themselves, and keep it to maintain the infrastructure, rather than lease from contractors. Mocreebec serves as an example of self-reliance with neither band nor reserve status.

In the early 1930s, with the arrival of the railway, the Moose Cree were encouraged to settle on their reserve at the French River and become farmers. (The residential school, and the HBC before this, always had a farm operation.) Log cabins were built, potatoes grown, horses and goats were kept.

James Bay Health Care

There is very little in the literature about traditional health care among the James Bay Cree. But it would probably not be very difficult to reconstruct some of the practices, such as the use of medicinal plants and healing, including shamanism. Robert Bell (1886) of the Geological Survey of Canada and Dr. Walton Haydon (1884) provide historical accounts of traditional health care. This has been done for other parts of Canada. For example, David

Mandelbaum (1979) devotes much attention to Plains Cree medicine and healing practices. Laurie Lacey (1999) surveys medicinal plants of Nova Scotia, many of them traditionally used by the Mi’kmaq. There are some mentions in the standard historical literature about health care services provided first by the Hudson’s Bay Company and then the federal Department of Indian Affairs.

There is some material on the hospital at Moose Factory in archival material that we have not reviewed. In very modern times, there have been some valuable studies of health care in the Moose Factory area (see, e.g., Lavallée 1993).

The HBC kept a doctor at Moose Factory for many years. The Letitia Newnham Cottage Hospital at Moose Factory was started by Anglicans in the 1890s. The current hospital recently celebrated its 50th anniversary, and produced a commemorative volume. Missionaries, of course, undermined traditional Cree healers.

James Bay Education

Preston (2002) describes traditional educational practices among the eastern James Bay Cree. While the HBC briefly operated schools in the early 19th century, schooling became a permanent fixture in James Bay after the arrival of missionaries in 1840 (Long 1978a). With the signing of Treaty No. 9, residential schools administered by the federal government provided education. The residential school system was phased out at Moose Factory in the 1970s, but had been integrated with a local school board since 1964. Ontario’s first school board for Indian students was established at Moose Factory in 1956 (Long 1986b).

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-19 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

With respect to residential schools, writers appear to focus on lawsuits and not the educational system. There is a general literature on residential schools (e.g., Miller 1996) and also narrowly focussed studies, such as Jo-Anne Fiske’s dissertation on the education of Carrier women in British Columbia (Fiske 1981). One study that pays attention to traditional and modern attitudes to education is Taylor (1983) for the Nemaska Cree, east and inland from Moose Factory.

Schuurman (1994) conducted research at Moose Factory. She interviewed 25 graduates of the Anglican residential school at Moose Factory about their experience there. Although they had a range of positive and negative experiences, they shared many memories: how hard it was to be separated from their parent(s); all the routines they had to follow; it felt like being in jail; they were separated from siblings into age groups (Junior Boys, etc.); the students found ways to “resist”; there were gangs; punishment was harsh, even cruel; there was abuse. There were long-lasting effects, which are still affecting family life and community life today: the normal Cree life cycle was interrupted; difficulty re-establishing close relations with family members; difficulty opening up emotionally with a spouse, children; mixed feelings about Native identity; difficulty disciplining children and showing them affection; feelings of anger, injustice and loss. Nevertheless, there are, at Moose Factory, many defenders of the residential school system – who argue that they learned a form of self- discipline there, which has helped them to become successful and independent today.

James Bay Architecture

Alanson Skinner was one of the first to describe traditional Cree shelters. Fred Georgekish has produced an excellent book on the architecture of the Wemindji Cree of eastern James Bay, which may be applicable to Moose Factory (Georgekish 1996), but this is an exception. The various volumes in the Handbook of American Architecture address buildings, although from an anthropological rather than an architectural-historical perspective. General studies of Aboriginal architecture (e.g., Nabokov and Easton 1989) and Canadian architecture (e.g., Kalman 1992) adopt architectural-historical method, but say relatively little about the region. Tanner (1979) has described the shaking tent. Susan Preston (2000) has examined oral tradition from eastern James Bay for Cree conceptions of the land.

The Ontario Heritage Foundation acquired a number of buildings at Moose Factory a generation ago. Its researchers have produced a number of unpublished reports on the structures in Centennial Park and on the Hudson’s Bay Company staff house (see Mendel 1984, Héroux 1990, and the other work cited in the section above on Moose Factory), but these document the buildings without placing them in a broader context. The Foundation’s recent popular booklet (Moose Factory 2002) provides thumbnail illustrations and descriptions of these and a few other buildings and places. The introduction to Moose Factory by Eric Arthur et al. (1973) also addresses buildings. Herb Stovel published an article on HBC fur trade construction techniques at Moose Factory. Despite these beginnings, a broader study of the architectural history and cultural landscape of Moose Factory has yet been written.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-20 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Bibliography

Abbe, Ernest C., and Frank J. Gillis. ‘Henry Hudson and the Early Exploration and Mapping of Hudson Bay, 1610-1631.’ In J. Parker, ed., Merchants and Scholars: The History of Exploration and Trade. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1965, pp. 87- 116. [Unavailable.]

Adams, Arthur T., ed. The Explorations of Pierre Esprit Radisson. Minneapolis: Ross and Haines, 1961.

Agreement Co-ordination Committe. Environmental studies, 1973: James Bay territory and surrounding area. Montreal: James Bay Development Corporation, 1973.

Ahenkew, Edward. Voices of the Plains Cree. Ruth M. Buck, ed. Regina: Canadian Plains Research Centre, rev. ed., 1995 [originally published 1973].

Arthur, Eric, Howard Chapman, and Hart Massey. Moose Factory: 1673 to 1973. Toronto: privately published, 1973. [originally published 1949]

Arragutainaq, Lucassie et al. Traditional ecological knowledge of environmental changes in Hudson and James Bays, part II. Ottawa, Ont., Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, Sanikiluaq, NWT; Environmental Committee, Municipality of Sanikiluaq; Ottawa, Ont., Rawson Academy of Aquatic Science, 1995.

Asher, G.M., ed. Henry Hudson the Navigator. London: Hakluyt Society, 1860.

Atkinson, Helen Bobbish and Gordon Magonet, eds. and comps. The James Bay experience: a guide for health professionals working among the Crees of northern Quebec. Quebec: Dép. de santé communautaire, Module du Nord québéçois, 1990.

Baldwin, W.K.W. Plants of the Clay Belt of Northern Ontario and Quebec. Ottawa: National Museum of Canada, 1958.

Barabé, Pierre. Dossier toponymique du Nouveau-Québec.[Québec], Gouvernement du Québec, Commission de toponymie, 1992.

Batty, Beatrice. Forty-Two Years amongst the Indians and Eskimo – Pictures from the Life of the Right Reverend John Horden ... . London: Religious Tract Society, 1893.

Beal, Bob. ‘Treaty Relationships and Treaty Six: Expert Report of Bob Beal.’ Buffalo v. The Queen, Federal Court of Canada, 1997.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-21 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Bell, Charles N. The journal of Henry Kelsey (1691-1692): the first white man to reach the Saskatchewan River from Hudson Bay, and the first to see the buffalo and grizzly bear of the Canadian plains – with notes on some other experiences of the man. Winnipeg, D. Richardson Publications, 1928.

Bell, R. ‘Report of an Exploration of the East Coast of Hudson’s Bay in 1877.’ Annual Report, 1877-78, Ottawa: Geological Survey of Canada, 1879.

Berkes, Fikret. Sacred ecology: traditional ecological knowledge and resource management. Philadelphia, PA, Taylor & Francis, 1999. [Temporarily unavailable.]

Berkes, F. et al. ‘The Persistence of Aboriginal Land Use: Fish and Wildlife Harvest Areas in the Hudson and James Bay Lowland, Ontario.’ Arctic, v. 48, no. 1 (March 1995), pp. 81-93.

Bishop, Charles A. ‘Early Historic Populations in northwestern Ontario: archaeological and ethnohistorical interpretations.’ Paper presented at the Society for American Archaeology, Mexico City, 1970.

Bishop, Charles A. ‘Demography, Ecology and Trade among the Northern Ojibwa and Swampy Cree.’ Western Canadian Journal of Anthropology, v.3, no.1 (1972), pp.58- 71.

Bishop, Charles A. ‘The Emergence of Hunting Territories among the Northern Ojibwa.’ Ethnohistory, v. 9 (1970), pp. 1-15.

Bishop, Charles A. ‘Northern Algonquians, 1550-1760.’ In Aboriginal Ontario: historical perspectives on the First Nations. Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1994.

Bishop, Charles A. ‘Northern Algonquians, 1760-1821.’ In Rogers and Smith, eds, Aboriginal Ontario: historical perspectives on the First Nations. Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1994.

Bishop, Charles A. ‘The northern Chippewa: an enthnohistorical study.’ Ph.D diss., University of New York, 1969. Bishop, Charles A. The Northern Ojibwa and the Fur Trade: An Historical and Ecological Study. Toronto: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1974.

Bishop, Charles A. ‘Territorial Groups Before 1821: Cree and Ojibwa.’ In William C. Sturtevant, ed., Handbook of North American Indians, v. 16. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1978, pp.158-60.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-22 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Bishop, Charles A. and Arthur J. Ray. ‘Ethnohistorical Research in the Central Subarctic: Some Conceptual and Methodological Problems.’ Western Canadian Journal of Anthropology, v. 6, no. 1 (1976), pp. 116-44.

Black-Rogers, Mary. ‘Varieties of 'starving': semantics and survival in the subarctic fur trade, 1750-1850," Ethnohistory, 33, 4 (Fall 1986).

Blasco, Judith Ann. ‘Nitrogen fixation in the muskeg ecosystem of the James Bay lowlands, northern Ontario.’ M.Sc. thesis, University of Guelph, 1975.

Blythe, Jennifer M., Peggy Brizinski & Sarah Preston. I was never idle: Women and work in Moosonee and Moose Factory. Hamilton, McMaster University, 1985.

Bodilly, R.B. The Voyaage of Captain Thomas James for the Discovery of the Northwest Passage, 1631. London: Dent, 1928.

Brassard, J.M. and R. Audet. ‘Historique et répartition des troupeaux de caribous dans la région de la baie James et du centre d’Ungava.’ In Environment – Baie James – Symposium, pp. 595-615. Montréal: Société de développement de la baie James, 1977.

Brelsford, Taylor. ‘Hunters and workers among the Nemaska Cree: the role of ideology in a dependent mode of production.’ M.A. thesis, McGill University, 1983.

Brooks, D. J. ‘Hudson/James Bay oceanographic survey: 1976 field report.’ Burlington, Ont., Oceanographic Operations, Ocean and Aquatic Sciences, Dept. of Environment, 1976.

Brown, Jennifer S.H. Strangers in blood: fur trade company families in Indian country. Vancouver BC: University of British Columbia Press.

Burgesse, J.A. ‘Joliett in James Bay.’ Beaver 277 (Dec.1947), pp. 12-5.

Canada. Parliament. House of Commons. Standing Committee on Environment. ‘Minutes of proceedings and evidence of the Standing Committee on Environment.’ Ottawa, Supply and Services Canada, 1989.

Cardinal, Harold. The unjust society: the tragedy of Canada’s Indians. Edmonton AB: Hurtig, 1969.

Cardinal, Harold. Rebirth of Canada’s Indians. Edmonton AB: Hurtig, 1977.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-23 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Carlson, Keith Thor, Melinda Marie Jetté, and Kenichi Matsui. ‘An Annotated Bibliography of Major Writings in Aboriginal History, 1990-99.’ Canadian Historical Review 82:1, March 2001, pp. 122-71.

Caron, Ivanhoë, ed. Journal de l’expédition du Chevalier de Troyes à la baie d’Hudson, en 1686. Beauceville: l’Eclaireur, 1918.

Carr, Edward Hallet. What is History? The George Macaulay Trevelyan Lectures delivered in the University of Cambridge, January – March 1961. London: Macmillan, 1961.

Carter, Floreen Ellen. Place names of Ontario. London, Ont., Phelps, 1984.

Chabot, Cecil. Merging Amerindian & Euroamerican Understandings of a Shared Past: the 1832 Washaw Conflict. M.A. thesis, Université de Montréal, 2002.

Chappell, Edward. Narrative of a Voyage to Hudson’s Bay in His Majesty’s Ship Rosamund. London: J. Mawman, 1817.

Charlevoix, F.-X. de. Histoire et description générale de la Nouvelle-France ... . 3 vols. Paris: 1744.

Chart of Hudson’s Bay, with an account of the destruction of the company's settlement in that quarter ... . Letters published as supplements to the Gazette de France on Oct. 29, 1782 and Nov. 8, 1782.

Chism, James V. ‘James Bay Archaelogy: Prehistoric and Historic Settlement Patterns.’ In Environment – Baie James – Symposium, pp. 741-50. Montréal: Société de développement de la baie James, 1977.

Christophers, Brett. Positioning the Missionary: John Booth Good and the confluence of cultures in nineteenth-century British Columbia. Vancouver, UBC Press, 1998.

Christy, Miller, ed. The Voyages of Captain Luke Fox of Hull, and Captain Thomas James ... . 2 vols. London, Hakluyt Society, 1894.

Clarke, Karen E. ‘Ecology of a subarctic coastal system, North Point, James Bay, Ontario.’ M.Sc. Thesis, University of Guelph, 1980. Coats, William. The Geography of Hudson’s Bay. London: Hakluyt Society, 1852.

Cree Way Project. Rupert House. 1975. [Unavailable.]

Croal, J. P. Field report, winter oceanography, James Bay 1974. Ottawa: Marine Sciences Directorate, Oceanography Branch, 1974.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-24 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Cummins, Bryan D. Only God can own the land: the Attawapiskat Cree. Toronto: Pearson Education Canada, 2003.

Davies, Kenneth Gordon, ed. Letters from Hudson Bay, 1703-40. London, Hudson’s Bay Record Society, v. 25, 1965.

Day, Gordon M. ‘Nipissing.’ In William C. Sturtevant, ed., Handbook of North American Indians, v. 15. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1978, pp.787-91.

Day, Gordon M., and Bruce G. Trigger. ‘Algonquin.’ In William C. Sturtevant, ed., Handbook of North American Indians, v. 6. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1978, pp. 792-97.

Delanglez, Jean. Life and Voyages of Louis Jolliet, 1645-1700. Chicago: Institute of Jesuit History, 1948. [Not examined. Unavailable?]

Delanglez, Jean. ‘The Voyage of Louis Jolliet to Hudson Bay in 1679.’ Mid-America, v. 26 (1944), pp. 245-50. [Unavailable.]

Denton, David. A visit in time: ancient places, archaeology and stories from the elders of Wemindji. Nemaska, QC, Cree Regional Authority, 2001.

Désy, Pierrette. ‘Fort George ou Tsesa-sippi: Contribution à une étude sur la désintégration culturelle d’une communauté indienne de la baie James.’ Ph.D. diss., Université de Paris. [Unavailable.]

Dignard, Norman, et al. Habitats of the northeast coast of James Bay. Ottawa, Canadian Wildlife Service (Occasional Paper no.70), 1991.

Dobbs, Arthur. An Account of the Countries Adjoining to Hudson’s Bay ... . London: J. Robinson, 1744.

Dowling, D. B. Report of an exploration of Ekwan River, Sutton Mill Lakes and part of the west coast of James Bay. S.E. Dawson, King’s Printer, 1904.

Drolet, Charles A. Rapport préliminaire du travail d'été 63' sur l'habitat du castor (Castor canadensis) à la Baie James. Québec, Institut de Géographie, Université Laval, 1964.

Dunning, R.W. Social and Economic Change among the Northern Ojibwa. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1959.

Dutilly, Artheme, Ernest LePage, and Maximillan Duman. Contributions de la Flore du versant occidental de la baie James, Ontario. Washington: The Catholic University of America, 1954.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-25 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Dyck, Noel. What is the Indian problem: tutelage and resistance in Canadian Indian adminstration. St. John’s, Newfoundlan. Institute of Social and Economic Research, Memorial University of Newfoundland, 1991.

Ellis, C. Douglas. A note on okima·hka·n. Anthropological Linguistics (March 1960):1.

Ellis, C.Douglas. Spoken Cree: West Coast of James Bay. Edmonton, Pica Pica Press, 1983.

Ellis, C.Douglas. ‘Now then, still another story. Literature of the Western James Bay Cree: Content and Structure. Winnipeg, University of Manitoba, 1989.

Ellis, C.Douglas. ed. Cree Legends and Narratives from the West Coast of James Bay. Told by Simeon Scott et al. Text and translation, edited with a glossary by C.D. Ellis. Algonquin Text Society, 1995.

Ellis, C.Douglas. Spoken Cree, Level I, West coast of James Bay. Edmonton, University of Alberta Press, 2000.

Ellis, C.Douglas. Spoken Cree, Level II, West coast of James Bay. Edmonton, University of Alberta Press, 2003. [Temporarily unavailable.]

Ellis, Henry. A Voyage to Hudson’s Bay by the Dobbs Galley and California in the Years 1746 and 1749 ... . London: Whiteridge, 1748.

El-Sabh, Mohammed I. Physical oceanographic study in James Bay. Ottawa, Canada Inland Waters Directorate, Québec Region, 1975.

Environmental studies, James Bay territory: 1972-1979 summary report. Ottawa, Société de développement de la Baie James and Environment Canada, 1982.

Environmental studies: James Bay territory. Ottawa, 1972-6.

Feit, Harvey. ‘The Ethno-Ecology of the Waswanipi Cree.’ In B. Cox, ed., Cultural Ecology. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1973.

Feit, Harvey. ‘The Waswanipi of James Bay,’ Canadian Dimension, v. 8, no. 8 (Aug. 1972), pp. 22-25.

Feit, Harvey. ‘Mistassini Hunters of the Boreal Forest.’ M.A. thesis, McGill University, 1969. [Unavailable.]

Feit, Harvey A. et al. La Baie James des amérindiens: bibliographie. Montreal, McGill University, 1972.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-26 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Fine Day. My Cree People. Adolf Hungry Wolf, ed. Invermere, B.C.: Good Medicine Books, 1973.

Fiske, Jo-Anne. ‘And Then We Prayed Again: Carrier Women, Colonization, and Mission Schools.’ Master’s thesis, University of British Columbia, 1981.

Fixico, Donald Lee. The American Indian mind in a linear world: American Indian studies and traditional knowledge. New York: Routledge, 2003. [Temporarily unavailable.]

Flannery, Regina. Ellen Smallboy: Glimpses of a Cree Woman's Life. Montreal, Kingston, McGill-Queen's University Press, 1995.

Flannery, Regina and Chambers, M.E. Each Man has his own friends: the role of dream visitors in traditional East Cree Belief and Practice. Arctic Anthropology 22, 1. 1985

Flannery, Regina et al. Witiko accounts from the James Bay Cree. Arctic Anthropology 18. 1988.

Francis, Daniel. ‘An Historical Chronology of Eastern James Bay, 1610-1870.’ Presented to Québec, Ministère des Affairs culturelles, Direction de l’archéologie, 1976. [Unavailable]

Francis, Daniel. ‘An Historical Chronology of Southeastern Hudson Bay, 1739-1870.’ Presented to Québec, Ministère des Affairs culturelles, Direction de l’archéologie, 1976. [Unavailable.]

Francis, Daniel. A History of the Native Peoples of Quebec, 1760-1867. Ottawa: Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, 1983.

Francis, Daniel. ‘Les relations entre Indiens et Inuit dans l’est de la baie d’Hudson, 1700- 1840.’ Études Inuit, v. 3, no. 2 (1979), pp. 73-83.

Francis, Daniel. ‘Whaling on the Eastmain.’ Beaver 308 (Summer 1977), pp. 14-19.

Francis, Daniel and Toby Morantz. Partners in Furs: A History of the Fur Trade in Eastern James Bay, 1600-1870. Kingston and Montreal, McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1983.

Freeman, G., co-ord. First James Bay Oceanographic Workshop. Burlington, Ont.: Canada Centre for Inland Waters, 1974.

Fulford G. and Bird, L. Who is Breaking the first commandment?: Oblate Teachings and Cree responses in the Hudson Bay Lowlands. Broadview Press. 2003.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-27 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Gagné, Marie-Anik. ‘A Nation Within a Nation: The Dependency Theory and the James Bay Cree.’ M.A. thesis, University of Ottawa, 1993.

Geological Survey of Canada. Annual Report. Ottawa, Geological Survey of Canada, annual reports, new series, vol. XIV, S.E. Dawson, 1905. [Unavailable.]

Geological Survey of Canada. ‘James Bay bedrock geology’ [map]. Ottawa, Geological Survey of Canada, 1998.

George, Peter & Richard J. Preston. TASO retrospective : an assessment of the first phase of the TASO research program, 1982-88. Hamilton: McMaster University, 1989.

George, Peter & Richard J. Preston. ‘Going in between’: the impact of European technology on the work patterns of the West Main Cree of northern Ontario The Journal of Economic History 47 (1987): 447-460.

George, Peter James et al. ‘Aboriginal land use and harvesting in the Moose River Basin: a historical and contemporary analysis.’ Hamilton, McMaster University. (Also in Canadian Review of Sociology and Antropology, Feb. 1995).

George, Peter James et al. Indigenous land use and harvesting among the Cree in western James Bay: a historical and contemporary analysis. Hamilton, Ont.: McMaster University, 1992.

Georgekish, Fred. Iiyiyuu Miichiwaahp-h: Traditional Architecture of the Wemindji Cree. Wemindji, Qué., Cree Nation of Wemindji, 1996.

Given, Brian J. A Most Pernicious Thing: Gun Trading and Native Warfare in the Early Contact Period. Ottawa: Carlton University Press, 1994.

Gnarowski, Michael, ed. I dream of yesterday and tomorrow: a celebration of the James Bay Crees. Kemptville, Ont.: Golden Dog Press, 2002.

Godsell, Philip H. Red hunters of the snows; an account of thirty years’ experience with the primitive Indian and Eskimo tribes of the Canadian north-west and arctic coast, with a brief history of the early contact between white fur traders and the aborigines. London, Hale, 1938.

Goose wings: the music of James Bay. [Toronto?], World Records, [198-?]. [Not examined.]

Graham, Andrew. Andrew Graham's observations on Hudson’s Bay, 1767-91. Glyndwr Williams, ed. London, Hudson’s Bay Record Society, 1969.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-28 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Grenier, P., and R. Audet. ‘Population, distribution et habitat de l’orignal sur le Territoire de la Baie James.’ In James Bay Environment Symposium. Ottawa: Environment Canada, 1977.

Harrington, Fred H. ‘Caribou populations in the James Bay Region.’ Montreal, North Wind Information Services, 1992.

Harris, R. Cole. Historical Atlas of Canada: Volume I, From the Beginning to 1800. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1987.

Hearne, Samuel. Journals of Samuel Hearne and Philip Turnor between the years 1774 and 1792. J. B. Tyrrell, ed. New York, Greenwood Press, 1968.

Henday, Anthony. A year inland, the journal of a Hudson's Bay Company winterer. Barbara Belyea, ed. Waterloo, Ont., Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 2000. [Temporarily unavailable.]

Héroux, Denis. ‘The Joseph Turner House, Built 1863-64.’ Report prepared for the Ontario Heritage Foundation, 1990.

Hoffmann, Hans. ‘Assessment of Cultural Homogeneity Among the James Bay Cree.’ Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1957.

Honigmann, John. ‘West Main Cree.’ In William C. Sturtevant, ed., Handbook of North American Indians, v. 6. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1978, pp. 217-30.

Hood, P.J., ed. Earth Science Symposium on Hudson Bay. Ottawa: Dept. of Energy, Mines, and Resources, 1968.

Hopewell, Sarah. ‘List of Written Documents & Visuals Relating to Moose Factory in the Library of the Property Restoration Unit of the Ontario Heritage Foundation.’ Prepared for the Ontario Heritage Foundation, 1989.

Hunter, J.G. et al. ‘Fisheries Resources of the Lower Reaches and Coastal Regions of Eastmain, La Grande, Roggan and Great Whale Rivers from 1973 to 1975.’ In Environment – Baie James – Symposium. Montreal: Société de développement de la baie James, pp. 299-321.

Innis, Harold A. The Fur Trade in Canada: An Introduction to Canadian Economic History. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1970. [First published 1930.]

Isham, James. Observations on Hudsons Bay, 1743 and Notes and observations on a book entitled ‘A voyage to Hudsons Bay in Dobbs Galley, 1749.’ London, The Champlain Society, 1949.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-29 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

‘James Bay data report.’ Burlington, Ont.: Marine Sciences Directorate, Central Region, Dept. of the Environment, 1973.

James Bay Environment Symposium. Ottawa: Environment Canada, 1977.

Jeness, Diamond. The Indians of Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1977. [First published 1932.]

Johnson, Alice M. Saskatchewan journals and correspondence: Edmonton House, 1795- 1800, Chesterfield House, 1800-1802. London: Hudson’s Bay Record Society, 1967.

Judd, Carol M. ‘Housing the Homeguard at Moose Factory: 1730-1982.’ Canadian Journal of Native Studies, v. 1 (1983), pp. 23-37.

[Judd, Carol M.] ‘Memories of Life at a Fur Trade Post.’ [Provenance and author unclear.]

Judd, Carol M. ‘Moose Factory was not Red River: A comparison of mixed blood experiences.’ 1983. [Provenance unclear.]

Judd, Carol M. ‘Race, Sex, and Social Status: Native People at Moose Factory, Ontario.’ Paper presented to the Ottawa Historical Society, 1980.

Judd, Carol M. ‘Servant Dwellings at Moose Factory, Ontario.’ 1982. [Provenance unclear.]

Judd, Carol M. ‘An Uncommon Heritage: A brief social history of Moose Factory, Ontario.’ [Provenance unclear.]

Judd, Carol M. Sakie, Esquawenoe, and the foundation of a dual-native tradition at Moose Factory. In Shepard Krech ed., The subarctic fur trade: native social and economic adaptations. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1984.

Judd, Carol M. and Arthur J. Ray. ‘Moose Factory’s Maritime Heritage.’ Report prepared for Ontario Ministry of Culture and Recreation, Amisk Heritage Planning and Research, 1982.

Julig, Patrick J. Human use of the Albany River from preceramic times to the late eighteenth century. MA thesis. York University, 1995.

Kalman, Harold. A History of Canadian Architecture. 2 vols. Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1994.

Kelsey, Henry. The Kelsey papers. Regina, Canadian Plains Research Center, 1994.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-30 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Kelsey, Henry. The Kelsey papers. Ottawa, The Public Archives of Canada and The Public Record Office of Northern Ireland, 1929.

Kenney, James F. The career of Henry Kelsey. Ottawa, Royal Society of Canada, 1929.

Kenyon, W.A. ‘The Early Post at Moose Factory.’ [Provenance unclear.]

Kenyon, W. A. The history of James Bay 1610-1686: a study in historical archaeology. Toronto, Royal Ontario Museum, 1986.

Knight, James. The founding of Churchill: being the journal of Captain James Knight, governor-in-chief in Hudson Bay, from the 14th of July to the 13th of September, 1717. James F. Kenney, ed. Toronto: J. M. Dent, 1932.

Lacasse, Roger. Baie James : l'extraordinaire aventure des derniers pionniers canadiens. Paris, Presses de la Cité, 1985.

Lacey, Laurie. Medicine Walk. Halifax: Nimbus, 1999.

Lamontagne, Roland. La Baie James dans l'histoire du Canada. Montréal: Beauchemin, 1974.

Lavallée, Claudette and Elizabeth Robinson, eds. The health of the eastern James Bay Cree: annotated bibliography. Montréal: Northern Quebec Module, Montreal General Hospital, 1993.

Lecock, Eleanor. ‘The Montagnais-Naskapi Band.’ In Bruce Cox, ed., Cultural Ecology. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1973, pp. 81-100.

Lehoux, Denis, and Jacques Rosa. ‘Description des principales unités physiographiques de la région de la baie James.’ Ottawa: Department of the Environment, 1973. [Unavailable.]

Lepage, Ernest. Études sur quelques plantes americaines. Arctic Institute of North America, 1953.

Logotheti, A.R. Six Moose Factory Cree Life Histories: The negotiation of self and maintenance of culture. Masters Thesis, McMaster University, Hamilton. 1991.

Long, John. Voyages and Travels of an Indian Interpreter and Trader. London, 1791.

Long, John S. Education in the James Bay region during the Horden years. Ontario History 70,2 (1978a): 75-89.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-31 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Long, John S. Treaty no. 9, the half-breed question, 1902-1910. Cobalt, Ont., Highway Book Shop, 1978b.

Long, John S. Treaty No. 9: The Indian Petitions, 1889-1927. Cobalt: Highway Book Shop, 1978c.

Long, John S. Treaty no. 9, the negotiations, 1901-1928. Cobalt, Ont., Highway Book Shop, 1978d.

Long, John S. ‘Born and brought up in the country’: the Métis of Treaty No. 9. Final report to Ontario Métis and Non-Status Indian Association, 1979.

Long, John S. Archdeacon Thomas Vincent of Moosonee and the handicap of 'Métis' racial status. The Canadian Journal of Native Studies 3,1 (1983): 95-116.

Long, John S. ‘Treaty No. 9 and fur trade company families: Northeastern Ontario’s halfbreeds, Indians, petitioners and métis.’ Pp. 137-162 in Jacqueline Peterson and Jennifer Brown, eds., The New Peoples: being and becoming métis in North America. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 1984.

Long, John S. Rev. Edwin Watkins: missionary to the Cree: 1852-1857. Pp. 91-117 in Papers of the 16th Algonquian Conference, William Cowan ed. Ottawa ON: Carleton University, 1985a.

Long, John S. The Reverend George Barnley, Wesleyan Methodist, and James Bay's fur trade company families. Ontario History 72 (March 1985b): 43-64.

Long, John S. Shaganash: early protestant missionaries and the adoption of Christianity by the western James Bay Cree, 1840-1893. EdD dissertation. Toronto ON: University of Toronto, 1986a.

Long, John S. The politics of education in Moose Factory, Ontario. Pp. 183-208 in Actes du 17me Congrés des Algonquinistes, William Cowan ed. Ottawa: Carleton University, 1986b.

Long, John S. The Reverend George Barnley and the James Bay Cree. The Canadian Journal of Native Studies 6,2 (1986c): 313-332.

Long, John S. Manitu, power, books and wiitihkow: some factors in the adoption of Christianity by nineteenth century western James Bay Cree. Native Studies Review 3,1 (1987): 1-30.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-32 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Long, John S. Narratives of early encounters between Europeans and the Cree of western James Bay. Ontario History 80,3 (September 1988a): 227-245.

Long, John S. ‘Too many of one kind together’: Norwegians at Moose Factory in the 1850s. A paper presented at the 1st Rupert’s Land Conference, Churchill MB, 1988.

Long, John S. 'No basis for argument'?: the signing of Treaty No. 9 in northern Ontario, 1905-1906. Native Studies Review 5,2 (1989a): 19-54 & 6.2 (1990): 99-102.

Long, John S. The Cree prophets: oral and documentary accounts. Journal of the Canadian Church Historical Society 31,1 (April 1989b): 3-13.

Long, John S. John Horden. Pp. 445-447 in Dictionary of Canadian Biography Volume XII, 1891 to 1900, Frances Halpenny ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1990a.

Long, John S. Schooling in Kashechewan, then and now. Pp. 197-215 in W. Cowan, Ed., Papers of the 21st Algonquian Conference. Ottawa ON: Carleton University, 1990b.

Long, John S. Budd's contemporaries in James Bay: men of 'refined feelings', 'representatives of the whiteman's civilization' and 'real bush Indians'. Journal of the Canadian Church Historical Society 33,1 (1991a): 79-94.

Long, John S. The Anglican Church in western James Bay: Positive influence or destructive force? Pp. 104-112 in The Anglican Church and the World of Western Canada 1820- 1970, Barry Ferguson ed. Regina SK: Canadian Plains Research Centre, 1991b.

Long, John S. Coping with powerful people: Alexander Macdonald and the Albany River Indians. Native Studies Review 8,1 (1992): 1-21.

Long, John S. ‘The government is asking you for your land’: the treaty made in 1905 at Fort Albany according to Cree oral tradition. Technical report to Fort Albany First Nation and Michael Sherry, Barrister and Solicitor, 1993.

Long, John S. Thomas Vincent. Pp. 1060-1061 in Dictionary of Canadian Biography Volume XIII 1901-1909, Ramsay Cook and Jean Hamelin eds. Toronto ON: University of Toronto, 1994.

Long, John S. In search of Mr. Bundin: Henley House 1759 Revisited. Pp. 203-225 in Papers of the 26th Algonquian Conference, David H. Pentland ed. Winnipeg MB: University of Manitoba, 1995a.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-33 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Long, John S. Historical context. Pp. 65-75 in Flannery, R. Ellen Smallboy: glimpses of a Cree woman’s life. Montreal PQ: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1995b.

Long, John S. Treaty making, 1930: who got Winisk?. The Beaver (Feb-March 1995c): 23-31.

Long, John S. Historical context. Pp. 65-75 in Flannery, R. Ellen Smallboy: glimpses of a Cree woman’s life. Montreal PQ: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1995d.

Long, John S. 1994a. Thomas Vincent. Pp. 1060-1061 in Dictionary of Canadian Biography what at Volume XIII 1901-1909, Ramsay Cook and Jean Hamelin eds. Toronto ON: University of Toronto, 1994.

Long, John S. Early visions of development on the Abitibi River: Treaty No. 9 and the people of New Post, 1900-1905. Pp. 21-44 in Reflections on Northern Culture: Visions and Voices, A. W. Plumstead, L. Kruk and A. Blackbourn eds. North Bay ON: Nipissing University, 1997.

Long, John S. An introduction to the Hannah Bay murders of 1832: what happened and some of the reasons why. Pp. 37-56 in Roseanne Fisher ed., From Cobalt to James Bay: preserving our history. Proceedings of the Temiskaming-Abitibi Heritage Association Workshop. Haileybury: Temiskaming Abitibi Heritage Association, 2000.

Long, John S. Visions of nationalism in Treaty No. 9. Ms. August 2004.

Long, John S., and Cecil Chabot. ‘“We always had our own lands”: some Historical Sites Near Wa-sh-ow James Bay Wilderness Centre.’ Report prepared for Moose Cree First Nation, 1999.

Low, A. P. Report on explorations in James’ Bay and country east of Hudson Bay: drained by the Big, Great Whale and Clearwater Rivers. Montreal, W. Foster Brown, 1888. (Annual Report, Geological Survey of Canada, 1887, Part J.) [Unavailable.]

Lundstrom, Linden J. The bay where Hudson did winter. Minneapolis, Associates of the James Ford Bell Library, University of Minnesota, 1980.

Lytwyn, V.P. Muskekowuck Athinuwick: Original People of the Great Swampy Land. Winnipeg, University of Manitoba Press, 2002.

Macqueen, A. C. We Have Always Been Here: Negotiating an Aboriginal Community identity at Moose Factory, Ontario. Master Thesis, Kingston, Queens University, 1992.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-34 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Malouf, Albert. La Baie James indienne; texte intégral du jugement du juge Albert Malouf. Montréal: Editions du jour, 1973.

Mandelbaum, David B. The Plains Cree: An Ethnographic, Historical, and Comparative Study. Regina: Canadian Plains Research Center, 1979. [First published, partly, 1940.]

Marshall, Susan. ‘The Articulation of the Biomedical and the Cree Medical Systems.’ M.A. thesis, McGill University, 1984. [Not examined.]

McDonald, Mirriam, Lucassie Arragutainaq, and Zack Novalinga, comps. Voices from the Bay: Traditional Ecological Knowledge of Inuit and Cree in the Hudson Bay Bioregion, Northern Perspectives, 25:1. Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, Committee of Municipality of Sanikiluaq, 1997.

McLeod, Herbert F. Memories of fur trading days in Moose Factory and vicinity. John S. Long, compiler. Privately printed by Moose Factory Métis Association, 1978.

Meilleur, Edouard. ‘En mission chez les Cris,’ 1923.

Mendel, Radu. ‘Report on the Restoration of Hudson’s Bay Co. Servants houses in Centennial Park, Moose Factory.’ Prepared for the Ontario Heritage Foundation, 1984.

Miller, J.R. Shingwauk’s Vision: A History of Native Residential Schools. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1996.

Moose Factory: An Exploratoin of Frontier History. Toronto: Ontario Heritage Foundation, 2002.

Morantz, Toby. ‘L’organisation sociale des Cris de Rupert House, 1820-1840. Recherches amérindiennes au Québec, v. 6, no. 2 (1976), pp. 56-64.

Morantz, Toby. ‘James Bay Trading Captains of the Eighteenth Century: New Perspectives on Algonquian Social Organization.’ In W. Cowan, ed. Actes du Huitième Congrès des Algonquinistes. Ottawa: Carelton University, 1977, pp. 77-89. [Unavailable.]

Morantz, Toby. ‘The Probability of Family Hunting Territories in Eighteenth Century James Bay: Old Evidence Newly Presented.’ In W. Cowan, ed. Papers of the Ninth Algonquian Conference. Ottawa: Carleton University, 1978, pp. 224-36. [Temporarily unavailable.]

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-35 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Morantz, Toby Elaine. ‘The Fur Trade and the Cree of James Bay.’ In Carol Judd and Arthur Ray, eds. Old Trails and New Directions. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1980, pp. 40-58.

Morantz, Toby Elaine. ‘The impact of the fur trade on eighteenth and nineteenth century Algonquian social organization: an ethnographic-ethnohistoric study of the eastern James Bay Cree from1700-1850.’ Ph.D. diss., University of Toronto, 1981.

Morantz, Toby. ‘Northern Algonquian Concepts of Status and Leadership Reviewed: A Case Study of the Eighteenth Century Trading Captain System.’ Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 1982.

Morantz, Toby Elaine. An ethnohistoric study of eastern James Bay Cree social organization, 1700-1850. Ottawa, National Museums of Canada, Canadian Ethnology Service, Mercury Series no. 88, 1983.

Morantz, Toby. Oral and recorded history in James Bay. Papers of the 15th Algonquian Conference 15 (1984): 171-191.

Morantz, Toby Elaine. The white man's gonna getcha: the colonial challenge to the Crees in Quebec. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2002.

Morin, Léopold. Moosonee Indians’ integration. Moosonee, Ont., 1971.

Morin, Léopold. Le problème indien à la Baie James. Montréal: Rayonnement, 1972.

Morin, Roderick. ‘Ecology of anadromous coregonine fishes in estuaries of eastern James- Hudson Bay.’ M.Sc. thesis, Laval University, 1980.

Morrison, James, and Bob Beal. ‘Shaking the Monarch’s Hand: The Crown and the Early Numbered Treaties, 1867-1880.’ Report for the Treaty Policy and Research Directorate, Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, 1999.

Morrison, James. ‘Treaty Nine (1905-1906): The James Bay Treaty.’ Ottawa: Treaties and Historical Research Centre, Indian and Northern Affairs, 1986.

Morrison, James. Hydro-electric development and the aboriginal peoples of the Moose River basin: a history. Report prepared for the Moose River/James Bay Coalition. 1992.

Morton, Arthur S. A History of the Canadian West to 1870-71: being a history of Rupert’s Land (the Hudson’s Bay Company’s territory) and of the North-West Territory (including the Pacific Slope), 2nd ed. Lewis G. Thomas, ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1973.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-36 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Murdoch, John. The Old Way. Wemindji Indian School, Paint Hills, James Bay, Quebec, 1972.

Mushkegowuk Council. Rupert’s Land protection pledge lawsuit.

Nabokov, Peter, and Robert Easton. Native American Architecture. New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.

National Film Board of Canada. Cree fiddlers of James Bay. 1980.

Niezen, Ronald. Defending the land: Sovereignty and Forest Life in James Bay Cree Society. Boston, Allyn and Bacon, 1998.

North, Robert Carver. Bob North by canoe and portage: a twelve year old boy explores the Albany River and James Bay, Canada. New York, G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1928. [Not examined.]

Nute, Grace Lee. Caesars of the wilderness: Médard Chouart, Sieur des Groseilliers, and Pierre Esprit Radisson, 1618-1710. New York, Arno Press, 1977.

Paul-Émile, Sister. La Baie James: trois cents ans d'histoire militaire, économique, missionaire. Editions Oblates, 1952. [Not examined.]

Paulmartin, Harriet & Stephanie Szick. A review of the EIP catalogue of traditional ecological knowledge on the Moose River Basin.March 1997. Timmins: Ojibway- Cree Cultural Centre.

Payne, Michael. ‘Fur Trade Historiography: Past Conditions, Present Circumstances, and a Hint of Future Prospects.’ In Theodore Binnema, Gerhard Ens, and R.C. Macleod, eds., From Ruperts Land to Canada: Essays in Honour of John E. Foster. Edmonton: University of Alberta Press, 2001.

Peck, G. S. ‘James Bay oceanographic data report.’ Burlington, Ont., Ocean and Aquatic Sciences, Central Region, 1978.

Peck, G.S. ‘James Bay Oceanographic Data Report,’ v. 1, winter 1975 and 1976. Burlington, Ont.: Ocean and Aquatic Sciences, Ontario Region, 1978.

Pentland, David H. 1981a. Synonymy [East Main Cree]. Pp. 205-206 in June Helm, ed., Subarctic, volume 6 of William C. Sturtevant, general ed., Handbook of North American Indians, Washinton: Smithsonian Institution.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-37 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Pentland, David H. 1981b. Synonymy [West Main Cree]. Pp. 227-230 in June Helm, ed., Subarctic, volume 6 of William C. Sturtevant, general ed., Handbook of North American Indians, Washinton: Smithsonian Institution.

Pothier, Roger. Relations Inter-Ethniques et Acculturation à Mistassini. Qué.: Laval, Insitut de géographie, 1975.

Poulin, Brigitte and Gaëtan Lefebvre. ‘Current knowledge of bird species in the region of the proposed Great Whale hydroelectric Project.’ Montréal, Great Whale Public Review Support Office, 1993. [Not examined.]

Preston, Richard J. n.d. Eastern Cree songs and texts.

Preston, Richard J. The wiitiko: Algonquian knowledge and whiteman interest. Pp. 101-106 in William Cowan ed., Papers of the 8th Algonquian Conference. Ottawa: Carleton University, 1977.

Preston, Richard J. Ethnographic reconstruction of witigo. Pp. 61-67 in William Cowan ed., Papers of the 9th Algonquian Conference. Ottawa: Carleton University, 1978.

Preston, Richard J. Cree Narrative, second edition: Expressing the Personal Meaning of Events. Montreal, Kingston: McGill-Queens University Press, 2002.

Preston, Richard J. Cree narrative: expressing the personal meaning of events. Ottawa: National Museum of Canada, 1975.

Preston, Richard J. East Cree notions of social grouping. Pp. 40-48 in William Cowan ed., Papers of the 11th Algonquian Conference. Ottawa: Carleton University, 1980.

Preston, Richard J. ‘The development of self-control in the eastern Cree life cycle.’ [Not examined.]

Preston, Richard J. ‘East Main Cree.’ In William C. Sturtevant, ed., Handbook of North American Indians, v. 6. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1978, pp. 196-207.

Preston, Richard J. James Bay Cree Culture, Malnutrition, Infectious and Degenerative Diseases. Pp. 374-384 in Papers of the 32nd Algonquian Conference, 2001.

Preston, Richard J. & John S. Long. Apportioning responsibility for cumulative changes: A Cree community in northeastern Ontario. Pp. 264-275 in Papers of the 29th Algonquian Conference, David H. Pentland ed. Manitoba: University of Manitoba, 1998.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-38 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Preston, Susan Margaret. 2000. Meaning and representation: landscape in the oral tradition of the Eastern James Bay Cree. MLA thesis, University of Guelph.

Québec. Commission de toponymie. Répertoire géographique du Québec. Québec, Éditeur officiel, 1979. [Not examined]

Racicot, Frank C. ‘The frost drying method of preparing beaver pelts.’ Ontario?, Northern Ontario Region, Indian Affairs Branch, 19–.

Radisson, Pierre-Esprit. Journal, 1682-1683: les débuts de la Nouvelle France. Montréal: Stanké, 1979.

Radisson, Pierre-Esprit. Voyages of Peter Esprit Radisson: being and account of his travels and experiences among the North American Indians from 1652 to 1684. New York, Peter Smith, 1943.

Ray, Arthur. Periodic shortages, native welfare, and the Hudson’s Bay Company 1670-1930. In Shepard Krech ed., The subarctic fur trade: native social and economic adaptations. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1984

Ray, Arthur J. ‘Indians as Consumers in the Eighteenth Century.’ In Judd and Ray, eds., Old Trails and New Directions, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1980, pp. 255-71.

Ray, Arthur J. Indians in the Fur Trade: Their Role as Hunters, Trappers and Middlemen in the Lands Southwest of Hudson Bay, 1660-1870. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1974.

Ray, Arthur J. and Donald B. Freeman. ‘Give Us Good Measure’: An Economic Analysis of Relations between the Indians and the Hudson’s Bay Company before 1763. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1978.

Rayburn, Alan. Place names of Ontario. Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 1997. [Not examined.]

Reed, Austin et al. Goose use of the coastal habitats of northeastern James Bay. Ottawa, Canadian Wildlife Service, Occasional Paper no. 92, 1996.

Reeves, Randall R.and Edward Mitchell. History of white whale (Delphinapterus leucas) exploitation in eastern Hudson Bay and James Bay. Ottawa: Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans, 1987.

Rich, E. E. Hudson's Bay Company, 1670-1870. 3 vols. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1960.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-39 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Rich, E.E., ed. Hudson's Bay copy booke of letters, commissions, instructions outward, 1688- 1696. London, Hudson’s Bay Record Society, v. 20, 1957.

Rich, E.E., ed. Minutes. 1671-1684. London, Champlain Society, 3 vols. 1942-46.

Rich, E.E., ed. Moose Fort Journals, 1783-85. London: Hudson’s Bay Record Society, v. 17, 1954.

Riley, J.L., and S.M. McKay. The Vegetation and Phytogeography of Coastal Southwestern James Bay. Toronto: Royal Ontario Museum, 1980.

Robinson, H. M. The remarkable activities of the gentlemen adventurers of the great Hudson's Bay Company during the years 1670-1879. Ashland, Oregon Book Society, 1977.

Robson, Joseph. An account of six years residence in Hudson's-Bay, from 1733 to 1736, and 1744 to 1747: containing a variety of facts, observations and discoveries, tending to shew, I the vast importance of the countries about Hudson's-Bay to Great Britain ... II. the interested view of the Hudson's-Bay Company ... , to which is added an appendix, containing, I. a short history of the discovery of Hudson's-Bay ... the whole illustrated by a draught of Churchill-River, and plans of York-Fort, and Prince. London: T. Jeffreys, 1759.

Rogers, Edward S. ‘A cursory examination of the fur returns from three Indian bands of northern Ontario, 1950-1964.’ Toronto: Department of Lands and Forests, 1966.

Rogers, Edward S. The Hunting Group – Hunting Territory Complex among the Mistassini Indians. Ottawa: National Museum of Man, Bulletin 195, 1963.

Rogers, Edward S. The Material Culture of the Mistassini. Ottawa: National Museum of Man, Bulletin 218, 1967.

Rogers, Edward S. ‘Northern Algonquians and the Hudson’s Bay Company.’ In Edward S. Rogers and Donald B. Smith, eds. Aboriginal Ontario: historical perspectives on the First Nations. Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1994.

Rogers, Edward S. The Quest for Food and Furs: The Mistassini Cree, 1953-54. Ottawa: National Museum of Man, Ethnology 5, 1973.

Rogers, Edward S. ‘Southeastern Ojibwa.’ In William C. Sturtevant, ed., Handbook of North American Indians, v. 15. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1978.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-40 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Rogers, Edward S., and Eleanor Leacock. ‘Montagnais-Naskapi.’ In William C. Sturtevant, ed., Handbook of North American Indians, v. 6. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1978, pp. 169-89.

Rogers, Edward S., and Donald B. Smith, eds. Aboriginal Ontario: historical perspectives on the First Nations. Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1994.

Rousseau, Jacques. ‘Les voyages du Père Albanel au lac Mistassini et à la baie James.’ Revue d’historoire de l’Amérique française, v. 4 (1950), pp. 556-86. [Not examined.]

Rousseau, Madeleine and Jacques Rousseau. ‘La crainte des Iroquois chez les Mistassins.’ Revue d’histoire de l’Amérique française v. 2 (1948), pp. 13-26. [Not examined.]

Russell, Alexander Jamieson. The Red River country, Hudson's Bay and North-West Territories considered in relation to Canada: with the last two reports of S.J. Dawson, Esquire, C.E., on the line of route between Lake Superior and the Red River settlement. Montreal : G.E. Desbarats, 1870.

Russell, Richard H. ‘The food habits of polar bears of James Bay and southwest Hudson Bay in summer and autumn.’ Arctic, 28:2, June 1975.

Saindon, Emile. En missionnant; essai sur les missions des pères Oblats de Marie Immaculée à la Baie James. Ottawa, Impr. du Droit, 1928. [Not examined.]

Sam-Cromarty, Margaret. James Bay memoirs: a Cree woman's ode to her homeland. Lakefield, Ont.: Waapoone, 1992.

Sam-Cromarty, Margaret. Légendes et poémes indiens – Indian legends and poems. Val- d’Or, PQ: D’ici et d’allieurs, 1996.

Sam-Cromarty, Margaret. Souvenirs de la baie James – James Bay memoirs. Hull, Qué., Lettreplus, 2002.

Scanlon, James, ed. Letters from James Bay [Bishop John Horden]. Cobalt, Ont., Highway Book Shop, 1976.

Schuurman, Lisa. Fenced in: Horden Hall residential school at Moose Factory. M.A. Thesis, Hamilton, McMaster University. 1994.

Scott, Colin H., and Harvey Feit. Income Security for Cree Hunters: ecological, social and economic effects, Montreal: Conseil québeçoise de la recherche sociale, 1992. [Temporarily unavailable.]

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-41 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Scott, Colin H., and Morrison J. The Quebec Cree claim in the Hannah Bay/Harricanaw River drainage in Ontario: Report of the Ontario Claim Research. Prepared for the Grand Council of the Crees of Quebec with the cooperation of the Crees of Waskaganish, The Mocreebec Association, La Sarre and Amos. 1993.

Shepard Krech III The Ecological Indian, Myth and History. New York, W.W. Norton & Company, 1999.

Simpson, George. Fur trade and empire: George Simpson’s journal; entitled: remarks connected with the fur trade in the course of a voyage from York Factory to Fort George and back to York Factory 1824-1825; with related documents. Frederick Merk, ed. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press, 1968.

Small, Lillian. Indian stories from James Bay. Cobalt ON: Highway Book Shop,1972.

Société d'énergie de la Baie James. Connaissance du milieu des territoires de la Baie James et du Nouveau-Québec. [Montréal, Société d’énergie de la Baie James, 1978.]

Speck, Frank. ‘The Family Hunting Band as the basis of Algonkian Social Organization.’ In Bruce Cox, ed., Cultural Ecology. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1973, pp. 58-75. [First published 1915.]

Stewart, D.B. et al. Marine natural areas of Canadian significance in the James Bay marine region. Winnipeg, Arctic Biological Consultants, 1993.

Tanner, Adrian. Bringing Home Animals: Religious Ideology and Mode of Production of the Mistassini Cree. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1979; St. John’s, Memorial University, 1979.

Tanner, Adrian. Editor. The Politics of Indianness: case studies of native ethnopolitics in Canada. St. John’s Newfoundland: Institute of Social and Economic Research, Queens College, Memorial University of Newfoundland, 1983.

Taylor, J. Garth. ‘Northern Algonquians and the Frontiers of “New Ontario”.’ In Edward S. Rogers and Donald B. Smith, eds. Aboriginal Ontario: historical perspectives on the First Nations. Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1994.

Thompson, David. David Thompson’s narrative, 1784-1812. Richard Glover, ed. Toronto: Champlain Society, 1962.

Thorman, George E. ‘An Early Map of James Bay.’ Beaver 291 (Spring, 1961), pp. 18-22.

Thwaites, Reuben Gold, ed. The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents. [First published 1896-1902]

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-42 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Traditional ecological knowledge of environmental changes in Hudson and James Bays, part II. Ottawa, Ont., Canadian Arctic Resources Committee; Sanikiluaq, NWT, Environmental Committee, Municipality of Sanikiluaq; Ottawa, Ont., Rawson Academy of Aquatic Science, 1995.

Traversy, Normand. ‘Étude du castor à la baie James.’ In Environment – Baie James – Symposium. Montréal: Société de développement de la baie James, pp. 569-94.

Tyrrell, Joseph Burr. ‘Arrivals and departures of ships, Moose Factory, Hudson Bay.’ Ontario Historical Society Papers and records, v. 14.

Tyrrell, Joseph Burr, ed. Documents Relating to the Early History of Hudson Bay. Toronto: Champlain Society, 1931.

Umfreville, Edward. The present state of Hudson's Bay: containing a full description of that settlement, and the adjacent country, and likewise of the fur trade, with hints for its improvement, &c. &c., to which are added, remarks and observations made in the inland parts, during a residence of nearly four years, a specimen of five Indian languages, and a journal of a journey from Montreal to New York. London, Charles Stalker, 1790.

Van Kirk, Sylvia. Many tender ties: women in fur trade society, 1670-1870. Winnipeg MB: Watson & Dwyer, 1980.

Vansina, Jan. Oral Traditions as History. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1985.

Veillette, J. J. ‘The enigmatic rings of the James Bay lowland: a probable geological origin.’ Ottawa: Geological Survey of Canada, 1999.

Villeneuve, Larry. ‘The historical background of Indian reserves and settlements in the province of Quebec.’ Ottawa: Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, 1984.

Vincent, Sylvie. ‘Structure de rituel: le tente tremblante et le concept de Mista’pe’w,’ Recherches Amérindiennes au Québec, 3:11-12, 1973.

Voorhis, Ernest. Historic Forts and Trading Posts of the French Regime and of the English Fur Trading Companies. Ottawa: Department of the Interior, 1930.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-43 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

von Gernet, Alexander. 2000. What my elders taught me: oral traditions as evidence in Aboriginal litigation. Pp. 103-129 in Owen Lippert ed., Beyond the Nass Valley: national implications of the Supreme Court’s Delgamuukw decision. Vancouver: The Fraser Institute.

Wallace, W.S., ed. Documents Relating to the North West Company. Toronto: Champlain Society, 1934.

Weinstein, Martin S. What the Land Provides: Report of the Fort George Resource Use and Subsistence Economy Study. Montreal: Grand Council of the Crees, 1976.

White, James. Place-names in Quebec. [Ottawa, Government Print Bureau?], 1910. [Not examined.]

Williams, Glyndwr. ‘Captain Coats and Explorations along the East Main.’ Beaver 294 (Winter 1963), pp. 4-13.

Williams, Glyndwr, ed. Hudson’s Bay Miscellany. London: Hudson’s Bay Record Society, v. 30, 1975.

Willson, Beckles. ‘Early days at York Factory.’ Canadian Magazine, v. 13, May 1899.

Willson, Beckles. The great company (1667-1871) being a history of the honourable company of merchants-adventurers trading into Hudson's Bay, compiled from the company's archives, from diplomatic documents and state papers of France and England, from the narratives of factors and traders, and from many accounts and memoirs. 2 vols. London: Smith, Elder, 1900.

Wilson, Angela Cavender. ‘Power of the Spoken Word: Native Oral Traditions in American Indian History.’ In Donald L. Fixio, ed. Rethinking American Indian History. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1997.

Wolfart, H. Chistoph, and Janet F. Carroll. Meet Cree: A guide to the Cree language. Edmonton: University of Alberta Press, 1981.

Wypkema, Ronald Conrad. ‘The importance of James Bay staging areas to lesser snow geese.’ M.Sc. thesis, University of Western Ontario, 1997.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-44 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

APPENDIX CATALOG OF JOHN LONGS’ AUDIOTAPES

Copies of these tapes were donated to the Ojibway-Cree Cultural Centre in Timmins

# Narrator Date Recorded Affiliation Language of Tape 1 John Carpenter June 1980 Moose Factory Cree (orig. Ojibway) English 2-4 Isaiah Salt June 1983 Cree (Waskaganish)) English 11-13 Willie Moore 20 March 1984 Cree English 14-15 Fred Moore 29 March 1984 Cree English 16-18 Redfern Louttit 2 April 1984 Cree English 19-20 George Solomon (& 26 April 1984 Cree Cree text) 21-22 James Wesley April 1984 Cree Cree 23-25 translation of 21-22 26 April 1984 English 26-28 James Wesley 28 April 1984 Cree (N. Wesley’s tape) English translation 29 Michael Patrick 28 April 1984 Cree (N. Wesley’s tape) English translation 30 Simeon Metat 28 April 1984 Cree (N. Wesley’s tape) English translation 31-33 Raphael Wabano (& 30 April 1984 Cree (N. Wesley’s tape) Cree text) 36-38 Madeline Wesley 21 May 1984 Moose Factory Cree Cree Jemima Quachegan 39-43 Willie Wesley 26 May 1984 Moose Factory Cree Cree Abraham Richard 44-45 Rubina McLeod 26 May 1984 Cree English 46-49 Willie Sutherland Sr. 28 May 1984 Cree Cree 50-52 Thomas Cheechoo 2 June 1984 Cree Cree 53-54 William Moore 4 June 1984 Cree English 55 Alfred Carpenter (& 12 June 1984 Cree Cree text) 56-58 Bert Morrison Sr. 14 June 1984 Cree English 59-60 Rubina McLeod 17 June 1984 Cree English 61 Charles Miller 20 June 1984 Cree English 62-64 Oliver Dick Sr. 24 June 1984 Moose Factory Cree Cree 65-68 Bill Turner 25 June 1984 Cree English Willie Chilton 69-71 Fred Moore 2 July 1984 Cree English 72-73 John Blackned 6 July 1984 Cree (Waskaganish) Cree 74 Redfern Louttit 12 July 1984 Cree English

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-45 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

75 APANO General 15 July 1984 “Metis/Non-Status” English Assembly 76 Alfred Carpenter 18 July 1984 Cree English 79-81 James Wesley 27-28 July Cree Cree 1984 82 George Solomon 8 August 1984 Cree Cree 83 Alfred Carpenter 21 August Cree Cree George Solomon 1984 86 Cheechoo Family 1984 release Commercial recording – copyrighted English 89 Fred Moore 27 Dec. 1984 Cree English 90-91 Winnie Spencer 6 January 1985 Cree English James Cheechoo 92 Cree Language 14 Feb. 1985 Cree Cree and English Workshop 93-94 Louis Bird 23 Feb. 1985 Cree English 95-96 James Wesley 26 March 1985 Cree Cree 97-98 Louis Bird 2 April 1985 Cree English Norman Wesley 99-100 Rubina McLeod 23 June 1985 Cree English 101 Fred Moore 23 June 1985 Cree English

1.2 Moose Factory Island Chronology

Pre- 1600 For thousands of years the Cree set up seasonal camps at the mouth of the Moose River to hunt Canada Geese in their semi annual migrations. 1610 Henry Hudson makes his second voyage in search of the Northwest Passage. October, Hudson reaches Hanna Bay (Michaelmasse) at the southern end of James Bay. November, Hudson hauls the ship aground at Nottaway Bay (Rupert Bay). 1611 June 22, Hudson’s crew mutinies and sets Hudson and a number of the other crewmembers adrift. 1668 Eaglet and Nonsuch dispatched from London to Hudson Bay. Eaglet forced back to England due to storms in the north Atlantic. Nonsuch continues to James Bay and over winters at the mouth of the Rupert River. 1669 The Nonsuch returns to England in October with a load of furs. 1670 Hudson’s Bay Company established when a charter was obtained from Charles II.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-46 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

1671 Radisson went from Rupert River to “Moose Cebee” (Moose River). Radisson returned later that year and traded with natives. 1672 HBC resolved to build fort at Moosse Cebee (Moose Factory). Bayly appointed overseas governor and builds a small house on Hayes Island (Moose Factory Island) and starts trading with the natives. 1673 1674 Trading party sent to Moose Factory. Bayly decides Moose or Fort Mousipi will become principal fort at bottom of bay. HBC builds the first fort at Moose Factory in the vicinity of Point of Pull. Moose Factory becomes primary HBC Post in James Bay. 1675 Moose Factory established under Bayly who becomes 1st. Chief Factor. 1676 1677 1678 Thomas Moore develops a map of the western shore of James Bay. First map to locate Moose Factory (Hayes Island). 1679 1680 Governor John Nixon 2nd Chief Factor. Moose Factory was to become the principal post, Fort Albany and Rupert House (Fort Charles) maintained and new posts established at the Nelson and Severn Rivers. 1681 Charlton Island depot constructed. The warehouse was two and one half storeys high and twenty feet square. 1682 Henry Sergeant Chief Factor at Moose Factory. Albany supersedes Moose Factory as the main post in James Bay. 1683 1684 Nelson and Severn River Posts established. 1685 Moose Factory captured by French expedition from Montreal led by Chevalier de Troyes. Moose Fort described as constructed of thick palisades of 17-18’ height that form four walls 130’ long. Inside the palisade is one large building 3 storeys in height. In 1679 bastions were added at the corners of the palisade. Built in the vicinity of Point of Pull. 1686 1687 1688 1689 1690 1691 1692 1693 Moose Fort retaken by British, then recaptured by French later that year. 1694 1696 Moose Fort retaken by British and burnt to the ground. 1713 Moose Fort returned to British under the Treaty of Utrecht. 1727 Cree party of 6 canoes arrived at Albany expressing desire for HBC to re-establish settlement at Moose Factory Island so they could be near their hunting grounds.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-47 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

1730 Second Fort established by the Hudson Bay Company 1 mile southeast of original Fort location. Construction commences on second fort. A new sloop, named the Moose River Sloop 1, was built and stationed at Moose Factory. Thomas Render in charge of post. 1731 J. Jewer in charge of post. 1732 Flankered factory that was under construction was occupied. Cookhouse, powder house and living quarters completed. New sloop, named the Moose River Sloop 2 was launched and sailed for Moose Factory from England. W. Bevan in charge of post. 1733 Cemetery set aside with the passing of William Corigil. Thomas Gregory was buried in the cemetery. Brewing place erected. 1734 First boat, a punt, constructed by the shipwright. Smith’s shop under construction. 1735 First Factory building completed and burnt to the ground five days after completion when the powder magazine blew up, only the Blacksmith shop outside the fort survived. Smith’s shop occupied by staff. 1736 May 12: The first rebuilt flanker was completed on what would become known as the Old Factory. This implies that the second flankered factory was constructed on the site of the burnt structure. Three flankers built containing a storeroom, trading room, and a cellar (Magazine?) as well as a cook room was completed. 1737 Blacksmith shop rebuilt. Rd. Staunton in charge of post. 1739 Governor and Committee direct George Howy (Sloop master) to produce a detailed map of the lower Moose River. 1740 G. Howy completes a map of the entrance of the Moose River. 1741 Jas. Duffield in charge of post. 1742 Charcoal kiln constructed. 1743 First sloop, the Phoenix, built by shipwrights Howy and Light was launched July 21. Ships carpenter constructs a small skiff (or wooden canoe) and a small boat for the Phoenix. A storehouse for boat rigging was constructed. Bake and brew houses under construction on west side of outer gate. A draught of the Magazine for Powder at Moose Fort completed by George Howy who supervised construction in 1746. ; HBC Archive. Inner and outer kitchen gardens planted. 1744 George Howy in charge of the post. 1745 Influential Indian leader (Sakie) buried on the island. Body placed in gun chest and buried, his wife who died one year later was buried beside him. 1746 The Phoenix was in a poor leaky condition. Powder Magazine constructed, supervised by G. Howy. Magazine was located in a pit dug in the centre of the Factory. 1747 John Potts in charge of post. John Potts had men dig a cellar for pitch and tar. A trench 40’ long, 14’ wide and 7’ deep some 70 yards from the factory. Potts orders the removal of two buildings outside the palisades. Cook room moved from the Factory and a new structure 56 yards east of the factory was constructed. Palisades constructed to encircle the tar and Cook room. 1748 Potts establishes a farm to supply food for the fort. Robert Pilgrim takes charge of post.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-48 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

1749 1750 Robert Temple in charge of post. One of the flankers of the Factory was torn down and a larger flanker built to accommodate the men. Master’s House flanker enlarged. 1751 Thomas White in charge of post. 1752 1753 A boathouse 32’ by 14 feet was constructed. 1755 New sloop constructed in England arrives at Moose Factory. 1756 Henry Pollexfen Senior in charge of post. Improves defensive capabilities of Factory. Heightens breastwork (parapet). Cow barn erected. 1757 Defensive improvements continue, Pollexfen orders the lining of the more vulnerable buildings with 8”x8” vertical posts set on the interior walls. New Cook room and Smith’s shop constructed outside the Factory palisade. 1758 The sloop 'Eastmain' was repaired at Moose Factory, which had become the principal site where HBC ships were repaired and over wintered. 1759 1760 Henry Pollexfen Junior takes charge of the post. Master house flanker rebuilt. 1761 1762 John Favell in charge of post. Flankered Factory building completed. 1763 Larger Boat House with folding doors and upper storage areas built. 1764 New cook room and smith’s shop near completion. 1765 1766 1767 Lower Boat House constructed closer to the river. 1768 1769 Christopher Goston in charge of post. 1770 John Garbut in charge of post. Boat House burned down. The records are not specific as to which of the three boathouses burned. Materials for the construction of a new sloop began to be collected. HBC Governors decide to set up inland posts to interdict trade between the Canadian traders and the Indians. 1771 New steam kiln constructed for the shipwright. 1772 Eusebius B. Kitchin in charge of post. 1773 1774 John Thomas hired by the HBC to survey The Abitibi River. 1775 1776 New shallop launched. Leaked heavily after launch. Provisioned the goose hunters at Hannah Bay as well as unloaded the annual supply ship. Edward Jarvis HBC surveyor travels the Moose River to Mitchipicoten on Lake Superior. 1777 Individual traders from Moose Factory began to venture up river with trade goods. Kitchin (Chief Factor) employs natives to transport goods up river in canoes, and has another native group construct canoes for the Company. Half way house at Wapiscogamy (Brunswick House) established in October. 1778 Inland posts at Missinaibi Lake and Wapiscogamy (Brunswick House) established. Men over wintered at Meesackamee Lake however, abandoned the post in the fall of 1779.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-49 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

1779 Edward Jarvis in charge of post. Philip Turnor hired as surveyor to HBC. Spent three years at York Factory on Hudson Bay. 1780 1781 Turnor relocated to Moose Factory to survey the region inland along the Moose River and locate the three inland posts. HBC employees number 28 men. 1782 First Bateau christened the ‘Expedition’ constructed and launched in July. John Thomas becomes chief Factor. 1783 The occupations of the 40 men at Moose Factory included 11 sloopers, 16 common labourers, 1 armourer, a bricklayer, a cooper, a carpenter, a shipwright, a surgeon and two tailors. Cook room moved to the flankered factory for defensive reasons. West flanker (Men’s) dismantled and reconstructed with a cellar. 1784 Shallop constructed in 1775 put ashore at Moose Factory for repairs. No one was available at the Factory to undertake the repairs. HBC employees number 41 men. Moose Factory staffs Hannah Bay with two employees, Abitibi with five employees and Wapiscogamy (Brunswick House) with four employees. 1784 Men sawing plank for a new ‘sloop’. 1785 New boat building shed and saw house erected. 1787 New shallop launched and the old shallop dismantled. Philip Turnor returns to England. HBC employees number 47 men. 1788 Three cattle sheds constructed between 1786 and 1792. 1789 George Donald in charge of post. Northeast shed in the Factory compound torn down and rebuilt.

1790 John Thomas in charge of post. Southwest shed in the Factory compound torn down and rebuilt. Plan of Albany and Moose Rivers completed. Philip Turnor surveyor. 1791 New cook room under construction. 1792 HBC employees at Moose Factory number 60 men. Chief’s flanker torn down and rebuilt. 1793 Warehouse flanker torn down and rebuilt. Powder Magazine rebuilt. 1794 1795 1796 Still house burns. 1797 Still house constructed. 1800 George Gladman in charge of post. Canadian fur traders build a small post on Hayes (sic) Island within sight of Moose Factory. 1801 John Thomas in charge of post. New cook room constructed. 1802 1803 1804 1805 Coal shed constructed. 1806 Canadian fur traders abandon post on Hayes Island. 1807 John Mannall in charge of post. Canoe house constructed. 1808 John Thomas in charge of post.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-50 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

1809 Formal education system was set up upon the arrival of a schoolteacher. A schoolhouse constructed which was intended to prepare local mixed blood and Indian children for a career with HBC. In the first year there were 8 children and half were girls. 1810 HBC re-organized and retrenched its field administration. Moose Factory became the headquarters of the newly formed Southern Department. Warehouse constructed on Middleborough Island. 1811 Sawmill constructed upriver on Sawpit Island. Permanent dwelling houses were attached to the sawmill on Sawpit Island and the warehouse on Midleborough Island. London board of directors decide to expand farming activities in order to supply the needs of all posts on the Bay. 1812 1813 John Mannall in charge of post. 1814 Thomas Vincent in charge of post. 1815 Joseph Beioley in charge of post. 1816 Thomas Vincent in charge of post. 1817 Joseph Beioley in charge of post. George Moore constructs a dwelling house for himself. 1818 1819 Thomas Vincent Chief Factor in charge of post. 1821 A ship of 60 tons was built at Moose Factory from materials salvaged from he schooner ‘Mainwaring’ that was broken up in 1819-20. 1822 HBC employees at Moose Factory numbered 71 people. Two small dwelling houses constructed one of which was constructed for Charles Beads. 1823 New ‘Men’s’ House under construction. 1824 Joseph Beioley Chief Factor in charge of post. New log Magazine under construction in warehouse complex. 1825 Jacob Corrigal Chief Factor in charge of post. New powder magazine completed. 1826 Alexander Christie Senior Chief Factor in charge of post. Work begun on another sailing ship. Warehouse on Middleborough Island destroyed during spring break-up. Decision made by factor to construct a new warehousing complex approximately 400 yards to the east of fort, General store constructed. New ‘Men’s House’ completed and occupied. 1827 1828 Sailing ship begun in 1826 is launched and christened the ‘Beaver’. Potato vault constructed. 1829 Cooper shop replaced or repaired. 1830 John George McTavish Chief Factor in charge of post. New dairy barn constructed. HBC employees number 31 people of which 14 are natives. 1831 Summer restriction on trapping beavers was no longer sufficient as a means of conservation; a complete embargo was placed on beaver trapping year round. Sawpit moved to the area of the warehouse complex.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-51 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

1832 Hannah Bay massacre resulted in part from the embargo on trapping beavers whether for fur or food, with the latter being one of the traditional and stable food sources. Two additional storage buildings located within the warehouse complex were completed. A chart of the entrance of the Moose River completed by Benjamin Bell: HBC archives. 1833 Factor’s (Mess) House under construction. Dr. John Rae (Doctor, explorer) arrives in Moose Factory. 1834 Factor’s (Mess) House completed. 1835 George Keith Chief Factor in charge of post. Fourth warehouse under construction. 1836 Fourth warehouse completed. 1837 1838 Joseph Beioley Chief Factor in charge of post. 1839 1840 George Barnley, Wesleyan Methodist Missionary Society arrives in Moose Factory. 1841 Alexander Christie, Chief Factor in charge of post. 1842 Two natives from Fort Severn arrive at Moose Factory with a sample of James Evan’s syllabic system. First church completed. 1843 Robert Seaborn Miles Chief Factor in charge of post. Men’s house under construction. Ten Indians belonging to the post of Moose Factory die of famine while in their winter grounds. Old school house torn down and a new schoolhouse constructed. New barn erected. 1844 Largest schooner yet made at Moose Factory launched and christened ‘Lady Frances Simpson’. Philip Turnor shipwright supervised the construction. Construction of Mission House and Wesleyan Church commenced. New two storey ‘Men’s’ dwelling completed, old men’s house becomes a coopers shop. 1845 Wood collected for the construction of a Catholic chapel to be located in the vicinity of Point of Pull. The chapel was never constructed. John Glass Malloch, lawyer, judge and farmer in Perth, Ontario travels to Moose Factory via the Abitibi River 1846 Mission house completed in December and George Barnley and wife move in. A small provision shed and oven were constructed nearby. 1847 George Barnley abruptly leaves Moose Factory. 1848 1849 Old Forge torn down. New fur store under construction. Construction of new Blacksmith Shop commenced. 1850 Officer’s Dwelling (Clerk’s and Officer’s Quarters) now called the Staff House was constructed. 1850 HBC employees number 37 employees of which 13 were natives. 1851 Blacksmith shop completed (relocated to Centennial Park in 1966). 1852 Factor’s (Mess) House under extensive renovations. Old Ice House demolished. 1853 New Ice House constructed. House for reception of Indians under construction. 1854 House for reception of Indians completed. Outbuilding (Kitchen) added to Factor’s House, linked by a covered porch.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-52 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

1855 Bishop David Anderson of Red River travels to Moose Factory with Thomas Vincent III who acted as schoolmaster and apprentices under John Horden. New Carpenters Shop under construction. New bake house constructed. 1856 Carpenter’s shop completed. A solid wood building set on a stone foundation measuring 25’ by 60’. The foundation of the Anglican Church was completed. 1857 John McKenzie Chief Factor in charge of post. A new oven was built ‘and surrounded by a wooden structure’ as a bake house. 1858 Work on the construction of the Anglican Church resumes. 1859 Portions of the Anglican Church, which was under construction, float away during the spring flood. Robert Kennicott working for the Smithsonian Institution leads an expedition to the arctic and passes through Moose Factory. Kennicott principal inspiration for Bernard Rogan Ross and James Cotter who began photographing Moose Factory circa 1865. 1860 Work continues on the construction of the Anglican Church. 1861 Work on Anglican Church continues. 1862 James Anderson becomes Chief Factor. Work on Anglican Church continues. 1863 Thomas Vincent III walks some 800 miles on snowshoe from Fort Albany to Red River to be ordained a priest in the Church of England. Chart of Mr. Thomas Vincent’s journey from Albany to Henley & Capenocoggamy … to New Brunswick & Moose Factory. HBC archives. 1864 Joseph Turner HBC interpreter retires and a house is constructed for him by the HBC. 1865 St. Thomas Anglican Church completed. Old Wesleyan church possibly converted to a schoolhouse. 1866 New Powder Magazine constructed near site of earlier magazine Old Powder Magazine converted to an Ice House or produce store. 1867 Foundation for new ‘Men’s House’ started. 1868 New ‘Men’s House’ under construction. Canada purchases Rupert’s Land. Ontario boundary moved north and west to a provisional boundary in 1874. 1869 Men’s House under construction. Extensive alterations to the ‘Mess House’ (Factor’s House). Hip roof and encircling veranda removed. New gable roof structure installed. 1870 James Stewart Clouston becomes Chief Factor. Construction of ‘Men’s House’ completed. Foundation for new store excavated at the southwest corner of the Old Factory. Schoolhouse erected on Mission grounds. Ships chain store added to warehouse complex. 1871 Construction of new Store continues. The construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway to the south begins to attract labour away from the HBC operation in Moose Factory. 1872 James and Hudson Bay portions of Rupert’s Land were constituted the Diocese of Moosonee. 1873 George Simpson McTavish becomes Chief Factor. 1874 Alexander McDonald becomes Chief Factor. 1875 Samuel K. Parson becomes Chief Trader. Robert Bell of the Geological Survey of Canada completes a map of the canoe route from Lake Superior to James Bay; NAC.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-53 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

1876 Samuel K. Parson becomes Chief Factor. New ‘Store’ completed. Building constructed of timber and measured 45’ by 100’ and was three stories in height. Edmund James Peck passes through Moose Factory on his way to Little Whale River. 1877 1878 Edmund Peck resides in Moose Factory for one year while he became ordained. 1879 James L. Cotter becomes Chief Factor. Statutes of Ontario, 1879 (42Vic.).c.2. Southern James Bay becomes a district of Northern Ontario, part of Nipissing district. 1880 George McLeod house built, now known as the Herbert McLeod house. 1881 1882 Photographic portraits of the survivors of the Hannah Bay Massacre are taken by Dr. Walton Haydon and forwarded to the Smithsonian Institution. Steam saw and engineer arrive from England. Whooping cough epidemic. 1883 Steam saw mill in operation. 1884 B. Borron, a stipendary magistrate for the Nippsissing District visits Moose Factory on a fact finding mission. New chancel added to St. Thomas Anglican Church. 1885 New Chancel consecrated. 1886 Moose Factory Island ceded to the Hudson’s Bay Company 1887 1888 Albany River becomes the northern boundary of the province of Ontario. New schoolhouse constructed on Mission Grounds. 1889 Joseph Fortescue becomes Chief Factor. Post suffering from an abnormal scarcity of all kinds of animals, the beaver declined the most. Mr. Barrow submits report on the Indians of the Southern Department; Report recommendations include: develop an employment scheme for poor women; Moose Factory be made a free port until connected by railway to Canada; reduce reliance of economy on HBC; establish a good school at Moose Factory; set up a small hospital; set up treaty payments. 1890 W. Ogilvie completes a survey of the southeast shore of the Moose River from Moose Factory to the mouth of the river as it enters James Bay. 1891 Jervois Newnham arrives in Moose Factory. 1892 William Kelk Broughton becomes Chief Factor. 1893 Jervois Newnham consecrated the second Bishop of Moosonee. Bishop John Horden dies and is buried at Moose Factory. Major repairs to the ‘Staff House’ completed; repairs to floor beams and a foundation wall that had given way. 1894 The flooring and beams in the Powder Magazine are replaced. New flour and cargo store constructed in warehouse complex. 1895 Robert Bell of the Geological survey of Canadian and W. K Broughton to develop place names in the James Bay area. 1896 Rope store repaired and moved into the warehouse complex. 1897 1898 HBC plan of Moose Factory showing buildings and other features on the Island. 1899 New Mission house under construction. Old mission house moved to higher ground to become the first hospital (Letita Newnham Cottage Hospital).

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-54 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

1900 Measles epidemic and pneumonia claim 60 lives due to overcrowding and unsanitary conditions. Population of the community was 571 or which 193 were company employees and or members of their families. Fur famine due to seasonal cycles of fur bearing animals and over hunting. Thomas Vincent retires from the Church of England. 1901 1902 George MacKenzie becomes Chief Factor. Charlton Island depot reconstructed to reduce the number of employees involved in the transhipment of goods between posts. The building measured 50’ by 100’ with a pier extending 90’ from the shoreline. Additionally the Moose River channel was silting up and becoming more difficult to navigate due to isostatic rebound. Polson shipyards in Toronto contracted to construct a steam vessel for service on James Bay. The ship was launched in 1902 and christened the ‘Inenew’. Steamship C.C. Chipman was constructed of salvaged materials and launched in July. 1903 French trading company Revillon Freres set up posts in James Bay region running an establishment in Moosonee. The ‘Inenew’ arrives at Charlton Island. A new slipway was constructed down stream from ‘Point of Pull’. Schooner ‘Lady Head’ wrecked at Gasket Shoal. 1904 Jervois Newnham retires and George Holmes is consecrated Bishop of Moosonee. 1905 Frederick Mark elected chief of Moose Cree reserve. Treaty 9 came into effect with each native included in the treaty being paid $4.00 annually.

1906 Thomas Vincent dies at Albany. 1907 Dr. Milne becomes Chief Factor. Dock facilities at Point of Pull updated. Three small buildings for cargo storage and coal are constructed at Point of Pull. 1908 Smaller steam ship designed in England and shipped over in frame for assembly in Moose Factory. Boat launched in 1909 and christened the ‘Mooswa’. The ship proved to be ill suited for the work assigned to her and was used primarily in the western Hudson Bay. 1909 1910 Robert Flaherty working as a prospector for a small mining syndicate above Lake Huron visits Moose Factory. 1911 1912 George Mowat in charge of HBC post. Statutes of Ontario, 1912 (2 Geo.V).c.21. Timiskaming district formed of northern portions of Nipissing district. New sawmill constructed in the area of the warehouse complex. 1914 W. McAlpine in charge of post. Sales shop moved from the Staff House to the Store/Sales Shop. Mission house constructed in the late 1890’s burns to the ground. 1915 Planning for the construction of a sailing vessel (schooner) the ‘Fort George’ was begun. Schooner built largely of salvaged materials from other boats. Kitchen behind Factor’s House moved to the west and occupied by the NCMP as offices. 1915 Olaus Murie field naturalist working for the Carnegie Museum at Pittsburgh as curator of mammals visits Moose Factory and takes a series of photographs in Moose Factory. Murie undertook two expeditions to Hudson’s Bay in 1914 – 1915.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-55 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

1916 Construction of the schooner ‘Fort George’ continues under the direction of T. C. Moore. 1917 Fort George launched. 1918 1919 The schooner ‘Fort Charles’ constructed of new material was launched in June. 1920 New offices constructed between the Staff House and Store. 1921 J. B. Niel in charge of post. First plane piloted by Captain Maxwell lands in Moose Factory. 1922 The Chief Factor, James Ray tries to persuade the Company to maintain the boat works at Moose Factory. Statutes of Ontario, 1922 (12 Geo.V).C.4 creates the Cochrane district. 1926 HBC absorbed competitor, Revillon Freres. 1926 Ham Sackabuckiskum house built near the mission. 1926 Indian Affairs office established on the island staffed by a resident doctor and Indian agent, L. T. Burwash. 1927 1928 George Fowlie in charge of post. 1929 Steamship ‘Inenew’ deemed not seaworthy and orders to break her up were given. 1929 Royal Canadian Mounted Police establish a station on Moose Factory Island. The mess hall behind the ‘Factor’s Residence’ was relocated to parcel of land now occupied by the Nishnawbe-Aski police force. The building burnt in the 1930’s. James Bay Agency established to administer the affairs of the Treaty 9 bands of northern Ontario. 1930 R. M. Duncan in charge of post. Coming of railway ended isolation and accelerated and clearly acted as major catalyst for change. Transhipment facility set up at Moosonee to be adjacent to the rail yard, which brought in most of the supplies that were to be transhipped to settlements along the James Bay coast. 1931 W. T. Watt in charge of post. Moose Factory ceased to operate as a transhipment centre and the HBC district offices were removed to Winnipeg. Timiskaming and Northern Ontario Railway completed to Moosonee. Colonel Charles Lindbergh and his wife land in Moose Factory on their way to the orient. 1932 N. A. Wilding in charge of post. 1933 W. R. Cargill in charge of post. 1936 Charlton Island depot closed. 1937 Chapleau Agency created by the provincial government to administer bands recently taken into Treaty 9. (Brunswick House, Missanabie, Chapleau, Mattagami, and Flying Post bands). 1938 W. T. Watt in charge of post. 1940 People of Treaty No. 9 agree to reside on reserves where they are to receive services from the Government of Canada. 1942 William Cobb in charge of post. 1943 C. C. Foreman in charge of post.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-56 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

1944 R. M. Duncan in charge of post. Hubert Mildred Young begins teaching the residential school. Photographs and textual documents located in the Archives of Ontario. 1948 Moose Factory Indian Reserve 1 established on the Island. 1950 Federal hospital constructed to treat tuberculosis. McKone Barclay first medical superintendent and medical doctor to the Inuit in Northern Quebec. Amateur film and an amateur photographer. Archives of Ontario. 1951 W. A. Buhr in charge of post. 1952 1953 1954 Horden Hall constructed. 1955 Factor’s (Mess) House torn down. New school constructed with Federal funds. 1956 J. J. Wood in charge of post. General store constructed in the 1870’s is demolished and salvaged logs are used to repair the St. Thomas Anglican Church. 1957 1958 1959 HBC Store constructed in 1870 is demolished. 1960 Since 1960’s tourism has contributed significantly to the island’s economic base. 1966 Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development created.

1967 Road grader uncovers traces of two burials with associated grave goods on what was the RCMP headquarters and presently used by the Nishnawbe-Aski police service. Centennial Park created and the Blacksmith Shop is moved to its present location. 1968 K.A. Dawson of Lakehead University searches for the original fort with no luck. 1969 James Bay District Office established. Office responsible for Moose Factory between the years 1969 through 1989. 1972 Three unmarked graves found on Lot 79 in the Cree encampment area. 1973 Grand Council Treaty No. 9 established a regional council of 42 First Nations in the western portion of James Bay. 1977 Nishnawbe-Aski Declaration. 1981 Nishnawbe Aski Nation established. 1984 First executive council of the Nishnawbe Aski Nation elected. Grand Council Treaty No. 9 ceases to exist. Ontario Heritage foundation moves the Turner, McLeod and Sackabuckiskum houses to Centennial Park. 1987 Mocreebec becomes the 43rd band to join Nishnawbe Aski Nation. Three un-marked burial sites uncovered in the area of the HBC Graveyard, Nishnawbe Aski Police station and to the south of Lot 79 where three burial sites were identified in 1972.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

1-57 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Chapter 2:

SITE INVENTORY

& EVALUATION

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-1 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

2. SITE INVENTORY AND EVALUATION

2.1 Archaeological Assessment: Stage 1

2.1.1 Introduction

In the late winter of 2003, the Moose Factory Tourism Association (MFTA) retained the services of a study team headed by Commonwealth Historic Resources Management (CHRM) Limited to prepare a community managed master planning study for the Fur Trader Village at Moose Factory. As part of the Commonwealth study team, Cultural Resource Management (CRM) Group Limited was tasked with the archaeological components of the study. As originally envisioned, the master plan was intended to create a management tool to direct the re-development and conservation of the historic Fur Trade Village at Moose Factory. Specifically, the objectives were to “establish the first Aboriginal developed, owned and operated interpretative Fur Trade site in Canada, and to share our Cree stories with our community and guests from around the world” (MFTA 2001). However as the project got underway, the MFTA and the Historic Sites Working Group decided to shift the focus from the Fur Trade Village and the Hudson Bay to more aggressively tell the story of the Cree at Moose Factory (CHRM 2004).

While the detailed focus of the study has changed, the importance of undertaking an archaeological background study remains a strong element of the master planning study. The objectives of the archaeological overview are two-fold. Firstly, to review the historical and archaeological literature relative to the island; and secondly, to design an archaeological potential model which would identify areas of particular archaeological potential or sensitivity.

The following report has been prepared by CRM Group for review by the MFTA and the Ontario Ministry of Culture. The purpose of the report is to address the objectives identified above and to recommend general strategies for the management of significant archaeological resources and/or sensitive cultural features.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-2 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

2.1.2 Background

The following discussion details the environmental and cultural setting of Moose Factory Island together with previous archaeological investigations undertaken on the island. It provides a framework for the identification of archaeological potential within the island.

Environmental Setting

Moose Factory Island is located in the lower reaches of the Moose River estuary (Figure 1). The island is approximately three miles long by two miles wide and constitutes an area of approximately 1300 acres. According to historian Carol Judd, “Not all of the Moose Factory Island is considered habitable” (Judd 1980: 50). In her assessment of past land use, she notes that a large portion of the island is “made up of swampy muskeg covered with brushwood” (Judd 1980: 50).

A number of environmental factors such as water courses, soil types, physiographic features and vegetation have influenced settlement patterns and contribute to the archaeological potential of the area.

Water Sources Moose Factory Island is centrally situated in the Moose River, approximately 13 miles up river from James Bay. Although the salt waters of James Bay do not penetrate as far up river as Moose Factory Island, “the tidal influence is felt as a change in water level (1 to 2 m) and a complete reversal of fluvial current direction.” (Poehlman: 1)

The Moose River would have served as a source of potable water and as a transportation corridor for Cree living on Moose Factory Island during both the Pre-Contact period, as well as during the early Hudson Bay era.

Soils Moose Factory Island is situated within the Hudson Bay Lowlands, an area characterized by flat and poorly drained topography, which maintains a slight slope north and east toward the shorelines of Hudson and James bays. The underlying bedrock, composed of Paleozoic sandstones, shales, limestones and dolomites, is overlain by relatively thick deposits of marine clay sediments.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-3 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Vegetation The study area is situated in the Sphagnum - Black Spruce Section of the Lichen Woodland Forest Province of the Boreal Division of the Circumpolar Domain (McAndrews and Manville: 43). This ecological region is dominated by fens (sedges and peatmoss), bogs (black spruce, shrub birch, alders and peat) and salt marsh (glasswort and grasses). Forests adjacent to the Moose River yield white spruce, balsam fir, aspen balsam poplar and white birch.

Vegetation on Moose Factory Island is dominated by grass, moss and alders with areas of open black spruce forest.

History of Moose Factory Island

The history of Moose Factory Island prior to the arrival of Europeans is not well understood. As indicated by Judd in her 1980 land use study of Moose Factory Island, “It is not presently known whether Indians lived permanently on the shores of James Bay, and specifically on Moose Factory Island, before the arrival of Europeans.” (Judd 1980b: 48). That she would even raise the question of ‘permanent’ settlement suggests a lack understanding or appreciation for the nomadic settlement pattern adopted by hunter/gatherer populations. Consequently the concept of permanent settlement should be replaced with one of seasonal migration through a broad and diverse territory that offered different resources during different seasons of the year.

Given its position of prominence within the Moose River system, it is quite likely that Cree peoples occupied Moose Factory Island on a seasonal basis long before the arrival of Europeans. The fact that Radisson and Governor Charles Bayly visited the Moose River in 1671 to trade with the “People of that place” (Arthur et al 1973: 8) is a clear indication that a seasonal Cree population inhabited the environs of the Moose River. Physical evidence of pre-European occupation of Moose Factory Island is notably absent. To date, there are no known reports of pre-contact Cree artifacts being uncovered on the island.

The post-contact history of Moose Factory Island has been well detailed elsewhere (Judd 1980b; Judd & Ray 1982) so will not be replicated here. However, it is beneficial to provide a historical framework within which to understand the evolution of the Moose Factory fort/post. The following information is condensed from the histories written by Judd (Judd 1980b) and Kenyon (Kenyon 1975). Moose Factory I, II and III are historical divisions created by Judd.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-4 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Moose Factory: The First Post After Radisson and Governor Charles Bayly’s visit to the Moose River in 1671, the HBC chose Hay’s Island (Moose Factory Island) in the Moose River for the site of its second post in the watershed of Hudson and James bays. Built in 1673, the small post was built about a mile from the western end of the island. Although there has been considerable debate as to its location, Judd places the site in the area of Point of Pull (Judd 1980b; Appendix A). The post was occupied from 1673 until 1686 when it was attacked and captured by a French force led by the Chevalier de Troyes.

The only known contemporary description of Moose Fort was provided by the Chevalier de Troyes following his 1686 capture of the fort. According to the Chevalier de Troyes: “it is in the form of a square, thirty paces from the bank of a river, on a little height of land, surrounded by a stockade seventeen or eighteen feet in height and flanked by four bastions, lined within by stout planks, with an earth terrace about a foot thick.” (Judd 1980b: 52).

Control of the fort and access to the fur trade on the bays was hotly contested by both the French and British until the 1713 signing of the Treaty of Utrecht which returned all territorial claims on the bays to the British.

Moose Factory: The Second Fort The original Moose Fort site appears to have been largely abandoned between 1686 and 1730, when a second post was built about a mile up river (Judd 1980b: 53). Based on various measurements gleaned from the HBC records, Judd places the second fort at Moose Factory “near the present Anglican Church, or immediately to the west of the present Hudson’s Bay Company staff house.” (Judd 1980b: 72). The HBC records appear to contradict Judd’s assessment of the location of second fort as HBC records (1736, May 12th) state “The first rebuilt flanker was completed” which implies that the fort was rebuilt on the ruins of the burnt fort constructed during the period 1730-1735.

As no overall description or plan of the post has survived, its general configuration has also been compiled from daily journal entries (Judd 1980b: 72-73). Based on the fragmentary evidence, it appears that the factory consisted of four flankers (bastions) and four sheds connected by curtain walls. The flankers were two stories high with interior staircases. Brick or stone stoves and brick chimneys were built in at least two of the flankers. Over the first few years of construction, the documents also reference the construction of a brick oven and a ‘powder house’, the excavation of a cellar, along with the erection of a ‘brewing place’, a palisade and a lime kiln. The location of these various structures is not known.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-5 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Disaster struck the post on December 26, 1735 when fire swept through the post destroying everything but the smith’s shop and the sloop (Judd 1980b: 76-77). The post was rebuilt apparently on the same location and was not considered to be completely finished until 1762 (Judd 1980b: 84).

The Post at Moose Factory transitioned from a defensive to a more commercial posture in 1762 due to the diminished military threat and a change of command. With the change in command came an apparent switch in focus from defence to general operation and maintenance of the post (Judd 1980b:85). The momentum of construction and repairs continued through the late 18th and early 19th centuries. By mid-19th century the pace of construction had slowed and buildings often fell into disrepair before being rebuilt or replaced. Judd’s documentation of the period brings forward fascinating details of structural development, labour unrest and changing priorities.

The earliest surviving plans of the post, dating between 1891 and 1928, depict Moose Factory as an amalgamation of workshops, storehouses and residences, surrounded by gardens, potato fields and hay fields (Judd 1980b: 100). All activities and structures were evidently focussed along the eastern shore between the southern dyke and the Point of Pull. It is this same area that is the focus of the current study.

Previous Archaeological Investigations

A search of the provincial archaeological site database maintained by OMC indicates that there are only two registered archaeological sites on Moose Factory Island and none on the adjacent mainland. The two island sites are identified in the table below.

Table 2.1: Registered Archaeological Sites Located on Moose Factory Island

Borden Site Name Culture/Date Site Type Researcher No.

EhHd-1 Moose Factory 17th to 20th Fur trade post T. Conway Hudson’s Bay Co. Century 1978 R. Lueger 1984

EhHd-3 Moose Factory 18th to 19th Cemetery R. Lueger 1987 Cree Cemetery Century R. Lueger 1988

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-6 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

The earliest archaeological investigations undertaken on Moose Factory Island are credited to K.C.A. Dawson, an archaeologist teaching at Lakehead University in Thunder Bay (Dawson n.d.). In 1968, Dawson conducted an unsuccessful survey focussing on the southeast corner of the island in search of the elusive 1673 Moose Fort. The search for the early fort was continued a few years later by Walter Kenyon of the Royal Ontario Museum. His informal survey also failed to identify the location of the fort, but did prompt him to publish a brief summary of the fort’s early history (Kenyon 1975).

In 1978, Thor Conway, Northeastern Regional Archaeologist for the Ontario Ministry of Culture and Recreation (now OMC), conducted archaeological testing of the HBC Staff House. Based on Conway’s recommendations (Conway 1979), the Ontario Heritage Foundation commissioned archaeologist Richard Lueger to conduct intensive archaeological investigation of the Staff House in preparation for restoration of the crumbling masonry foundation. Lueger’s work in 1979 focussed on the strategic testing of the cellar and exterior perimeter of the foundation. The 1979 testing revealed details on the original excavation and use of the cellar, as well as exterior access to the cellar and main floor of the Staff House. Within the basement, Lueger exposed the remains of two features - a well and an earlier root cellar. The artifact assemblage recovered from deposits relating to the Staff House suggest a mid-19th century construction date which correlates with historian Carol Judd’s date of 1848- 1850 (Lueger 1980: 72).

Lueger’s 1979 testing generated a number of recommendations for further work (Lueger 1980: iii), which he carried out in 1980 (Lueger 1981a), again commissioned by the Ontario Heritage Foundation. The primary objective of the 1980 salvage excavation was Athe excavation of a trench around the Staff House to permit adequate recovery of information before the consolidation of the building’s foundations@ (Lueger 1981a: 1). During the course of the field program, Lueger was also directed to complete excavation of the well (Feature 2) and root cellar (Feature 3) partially excavated in 1979. By the end of the 1980 field season, Lueger and his crew had completed excavation of a perimeter trench to facilitate repairs to the foundation. However, a number of unanswered questions prompted Lueger to recommend a cautious approach to any proposed development or alteration of the OHF property surrounding the Staff House (Lueger 1981a: i & ii). With regard to the Staff House itself, Lueger recommended that, apart from the ongoing protection of the root cellar, no further archaeological work be undertaken within the cellar (Lueger 1981a: i & ii).

During the 1980 field season, Lueger also directed an archaeological survey of Moose Factory Island in conjunction with Amisk Heritage Planning and Research on behalf of the Ontario Ministry of Culture and Recreation (Lueger 1981b). The goals set for the 1980 survey were culturally and geographically diverse (Lueger 1981b: 144). The survey was

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-7 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

intended to assess archaeological potential within the following areas: the proposed route of new water and sewer installations; the presumed site of the 1673 Moose Fort; the site of the 1762-1871 HBC factory; the sites of various 19th century HBC buildings; the Cree encampment; and the sites of HBC servants’ dwellings. Unfortunately, the proposed program could not be fully addressed by the field team in the time available. The greatest effort was expended on the search for the 1673 Moose Fort and the 1762-1871 HBC Factory. The goals set for the proposed water and sewer installations and the search for the various 19th century HBC buildings were partially accomplished. However, assessment of the Cree camp sites and the HBC servants’ dwellings was not attempted.

Lueger’s search for the 1673 Moose Fort focussed on the Point of Pull area along the eastern shore of Moose Factory Island (Operation 10). Despite the absence of evidence suggesting significant shoreline erosion, Lueger suggests that the site of the original HBC fort had eroded into the Moose River (Lueger 1981b: 170). He recommended that “no further effort should be made to locate the site of the 1673 Moose Fort...” (Lueger 1981b: 138).

Testing of the 1762-1871 HBC factory site (Operation 8) proved much more successful. Although Lueger postulates that most of the central area of the post along with the southwest and southeast bastions are completely lost, he does recognize the potential survival of the south curtain wall and northwest and northeast bastions. Further testing would be required to verify the extent and quality of preservation.

In the areas of the former bakehouse (Operation 9) and the shops and stables (Operation 12), Lueger discovered a mix of heavily disturbed contexts and the footings/cellars of 19th century buildings. Based on the physical remains of various structures within the two areas, it was recommended that salvage excavation be undertaken in advance of any redevelopment within those areas. Lueger did not feel that the areas of disturbance warranted further archaeological investigation.

Lueger’s testing of the late 19th century warehouse complex (Operation 13) which surrounded the powderhouse (powder magazine) indicated little evidence of activities prior to the late 19th century. He suggests that “this part of Moose Factory would likely provide us with little beyond precise locations for the buildings and some information on construction techniques” (Lueger 1981b: 184).

In closing his report, Lueger warns of the potential for discovering additional historic period Cree burials in the area of St. Thomas Anglican Church. Given the discoveries of burials at various locations along Front Street, he felt that caution should be exercised if major excavation works were proposed for the area (Lueger 1981b: 184).

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-8 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Subsequent to the major studies undertaken in 1979 and 1980, Lueger directed several smaller monitoring and salvage projects at Moose Factory. In 1984, he conducted a brief archaeological reconnaissance of six building lots toward the southern tip of the island (Lueger 1985a), as well as monitoring limited construction activities within Centennial Park (Lueger 1985b). Reconnaissance of the building lots was prompted by the concern that some of the lots were located in close proximity to burials accidentally exposed in 1967 and 1972 (Rogers et al). After reviewing historical documentation pertaining to the early land use of the lots and conducting a visual inspection, Lueger determined that most of the lots had not been developed prior to the mid-20th century. Due to their proximity to the burial sites, several of the lots (Lots 81, 84 & 88) were tested through the manual excavation of test units and/or trenches. The artifacts recovered as a result of testing were of late 19th to early 20th century origin, and of no real archaeological significance (Lueger 1985a: 1). The archaeological monitoring of construction within Centennial Park was limited to the excavation of nine shallow concrete foundation piers and two short utility trenches. Monitoring failed to reveal any “significant new information about the history or... about the architecture of Moose Factory....” (Lueger 1985b: 4).

In the summer of 1987, Lueger returned to the island to undertake the salvage excavation of historic Cree burials exposed as a result of new sewer line installation along Front Road (Lueger 1987). Burials were recovered in the following locations: along the roadway adjacent to Lot 79 where at least three bodies had been exposed in c. 1972; along the roadside between St. Thomas Church and the police station where two bodies had been exposed in 1967 (Rogers et al); and, along the eastern perimeter of the Old Hudson Bay Cemetery. The presence of burials at various locations along the eastern shore of the island is an indication that burials should be anticipated almost anywhere along this shore.

There has been no further archaeological investigation undertaken on the island since Lueger’s salvage excavations of 1987.

2.1.3 Archaeological Potential

A preliminary field reconnaissance of Moose Factory Island was conducted in late October, 2003, during a three day visit to the island. The reconnaissance was conducted by W. Bruce Stewart, in the company of other Commonwealth team members and local informants.

After completing a general tour of the island, attention focussed on the eastern shore between the southern levy and the Point of Pull - the area of the island, which had seen the greatest

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-9 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

intensity of settlement over the past 330 years. On the basis of visual inspection alone, it was difficult to identify areas of significant disturbance. However, while viewing the landscape, references were occasionally made to one or more of the archaeological and historical documents which reported the levelling of the certain topographical features and the infilling of structural remains by either manual or mechanical means. Such modifications to the landscape can compromise archaeological site survival, let alone site integrity.

Several areas of disturbance were identified in Lueger’s report on his 1980 Survey of Moose Factory (Lueger 1981b). On the basis of information provided by local residents, much of the general area between the Northern Store and the old cemetery (Operation 12) had been levelled by bulldozer c.1967 (Lueger 1981b: 172). During an interview with the dozer operator, Lueger learned that soil had been scraped from the higher ground to the north in order to infill depressions located adjacent to the river. Lueger cites further disturbance of the area in 1979 and 1980 during the placement of various buried pipes. Although not clearly delineated, it is assumed that sewer work undertaken in 1987 also had an impact on the area.

Local informants also advised Lueger that the area of Centennial Park (Operation 13) had also been levelled by bulldozer during the c.1967 development of the park. Excavation within the park led Lueger to conclude that, “the disturbance has been so bad that it is unlikely that further excavations would produce worthwhile results” (Lueger 1981b: 184). The effects of soil stripping within Centennial Park were further demonstrated as a result of Lueger’s monitoring of limited construction activities in the park during the summer of 1984. Monitoring in the area of the Turner and McLeod houses indicated that there was only a few centimetres of humic soil – “scarcely enough to support healthy potatoes” - in what had historically been a potato field (Lueger 1985a: 2).

In his search for the 1673 Moose Fort, Lueger investigated various areas inland from the Point of Pull (Operation 10). Ground disturbance was reported or observed in two areas: where bulldozing is reported to have impacted the ground surface in the area of the log cabins (just north of the craft centre?); and where mounds of refuse indicate bulldozing associated with the old Moose Factory dump.

During the course of the field reconnaissance, further evidence of earth-moving-activities was observed across the street from St. Thomas Anglican Church and in the area of the Innew Slipway at Point of Pull. Undoubtedly, there are other areas of disturbance that could be identified along the eastern shoreline and elsewhere on the island that would have severely impacted or destroyed archaeological evidence of early Cree and/or European settlement. However, it must be recognized that the extent of disturbance has not been clearly defined in any of these areas. Furthermore, areas that may have been stripped may still contain deeply

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-10 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

buried resources or even burials, which escaped the destruction of the bulldozer. As an example, sewer trenching along Front Street to the east of the old Hudson’s Bay cemetery in 1987 exposed the remains of an early burial. Although this area might have been considered disturbed as a result of road construction, it nevertheless held intact remains of a human burial.

Considering the archaeological and cultural sensitivity of the eastern shore of Moose Factory Island, great caution should be exercised in the identification and clearance of ‘disturbed’ areas.

On the basis of the environmental, cultural and historical factors reviewed under the terms of the Stage 1: Archaeological Overview and in light of the Draft Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists currently being reviewed, CRM Group has identified significant areas of high archaeological potential throughout Moose Factory Island (Figure 2). The two most significant factors contributing to the identification of archaeological potential are proximity to water and proximity to known archaeological features. Any land within 400 metres of a water source or an archaeological feature would be considered high potential. On this basis of proximity to water alone, all but the very centre of the island would be considered to exhibit high archaeological potential. The abundance of historical and archaeological features identified along the eastern shore merely increases the potential of the area.

2.1.4 Recommendations

On the basis of the environmental, cultural and historical factors discussed previously and in light of the Draft Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists currently being reviewed, CRM Group has determined that significant areas of Moose Factory Island exhibit high archaeological potential. The general area of high archaeological potential is depicted on the accompanying plan of the island (Figure 2).

Given the level of archaeological potential and the sensitivity of impacting burials, CRM Group makes the following recommendations for Stage 2: Assessment in conjunction with activities identified in the draft document titled Moose Factory Overall Strategy, Architectural & Interpretative Planning Session:

1. Given the high archaeological sensitivity attributed to the eastern shore of Moose Factory Island, it is recommended that the potential for archaeological impact be evaluated in conjunction with any activity which disturbs the ground surface.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-11 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

A review of the draft document identified a number of general landscaping initiatives for the area of Centennial Park including: construction of structural outlines of HBC buildings, the palisade, etc; construction of boardwalks; and, plantings, as well as major structural projects including: repair to the foundation of St. Thomas Anglican Church; delineation of the HBC Cemetery; construction of replica buildings. While not all of these activities will pose a significant threat to archaeological resources, the risk should be assessed.

2. Given the location of St. Thomas Anglican Church relative to early historic Cree burials found along Front Street, it is strongly recommended that an archaeological assessment be conducted well in advance of any move to repair the building’s foundation. Preliminary discussions suggest that the building is to be picked up and moved from its current location so that a new foundation and partial basement can be constructed on the site. The recommended assessment would include a non-intrusive survey using ground penetrating radar (GPR) to ascertain whether or not burials would be encountered around the perimeter of the existing foundation. Archaeological excavation of burials or archaeological features would proceed as required. Once the building has been removed from its foundation, the process would be repeated for the interior of the structure.

3. Given the accidental discovery of a burial outside the boundaries of the HBC cemetery during sewer construction is 1987, it is strongly recommended that an archaeological assessment be conducted in conjunction with the delineation of the cemetery plot. The recommended assessment would include a non-intrusive survey using ground penetrating radar (GPR) to ascertain whether or not additional burials are located outside the property boundaries as currently defined. The same technology could be used to locate missing grave sites and stones within the cemetery.

4. Given the interest in locating and interpreting the seasonal Cree encampment and the early HBC posts, it is recommended that a comprehensive archaeological survey be initiated to identify, delineate and investigate features associated with various aspects of pre-20th Cree and HBC life on Moose Factory Island. The survey would address a range of archaeological issues that could contribute to the interpretation of Cree and HBC history on the island. In addition, the survey could be designed in such as way as to integrate public education and tourism into the research goals. (See draft Public Archaeology Program in Appendix).

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-12 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

5. Given the number of 18th and 19th Century Cree burials which have been accidentally impacted during various construction projects along Front Street, it is recommended that discussions be held with community elders and municipal leaders to determine a suitable course of action to minimize the potential for future impacts.

6. Given the sensitivity of conducting archaeological investigations that could involve the exposure of human remains, it is recommended that the community be consulted regarding the role that archaeology could or should play in the interpretation of Cree history.

2.1.5 Reference

Arthur, Eric, Howard Chapman & Hart Massey 1973 Moose Factory 1673 to 1973. Originally printed in 1949. Reprinted in 1957 & 1973. University of Toronto Press, Toronto.

CHRM (Commonwealth Histroric Resource Management Ltd.) 2002 Moose Factory Overall Strategy, Architectural & Interpretive Planning Session January 8th & 9th, 2004 - Draft. Document on File with the Moose Factory Tourism Association, Moose Factory.

Conway, Thor 1979 An Archaeological Testing Strategy for the Hudson=s Bay Company Staff House at Moose Factory. Manuscript on File Ontario Ministry of Culture, Toronto.

Dawson, K.C.A. n.d. An Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Moose Fort Fur Trade Post of 1673 at the Moose or Prince Rupert West River, James Bay, Ontario. Manuscript on File Ontario Ministry of Culture, Toronto.

Judd, Carol 1980a Moose Factory Staff House Report. Manuscript on File Ontario Heritage Foundation, Toronto.

1980b Preliminary Land Use Report, Moose Factory Community Heritage Project. Manuscript on File Ontario Heritage Foundation, Toronto.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-13 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Judd, Carol & Arthur J. Ray 1982 Moose Factory=s Maritime History. Manuscript on File Ontario Ministry of Culture, Toronto.

Kenyon, Walter A. 1975 AThe Early Post at Moose Factory@, Rotunda Vol 8(2); pp. 14-21.

Lueger, Richard 1980 Excavations at the Moose Factory Staff House, 1979. Part I: Structures and Stratigraphy; Part II: The Assemblage. Manuscript on File Ontario Heritage Foundation., Toronto 1981a Excavations at the Moose Factory Staff House, 1980. Manuscript on File Ontario Heritage Foundation, Toronto.

1981b Survey of Moose Factory Manuscript on File Ontario Ministry of Culture, Toronto.

1985a Archaeological Monitoring , Centennial Park, Moose Factory, 1984. Manuscript on File Ontario Ministry of Culture, Toronto.

1985b A Reconnaissance of Six Lots, Moose Factory Island, Ontario, 1984. Manuscript on File with Canada Mortgage and Housing.

1987 An Historical Cree Cemetery on Moose Factory Island (EhHd-3): Salvage Excavations, 1987. Manuscript on File Ontario Ministry of Culture, Toronto.

MFTA (Moose Factory Tourism Association) 2001 Terms of Reference for the Community Managed Master Planning Study Project for the Fur Trade Village at Moose Factory. Document on File with the Moose Factory Tourism Association, Moose Factory.

Poehlman, T. 1996 Bar Sedimentation at the Head of the Estuary of the Moose River, Northern Ontario. Abstract from M.Sc. Thesis, University of Guelph. Published on World Wide Web at http://www.uoguelph.ca/~pmartini/ Theses/Poehlman_T_1996.htm.

Rogers, Edward, Donald Webster & James Anderson

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-14 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

PLATE 1: View East across Cree Encampment at South End of Moose Factory Island. (October 2003.)

PLATE 2: View Northeast along Front Street with Historic Cree Cemetery in Centre Frame. (October 2003)

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-15 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

PLATE 3: View Northeast across Front Street to St. Thomas Church. (October 2003)

PLATE 4: View from Northern Store Northeast to the HBC Cemetery and Centennial Park. (October 2003)

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-16 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

PLATE 5: View from HBC Cemetery Southwest toward the Northern Store. (October 2003)

PLATE 6: View Northeast of Buildings relocated to Centennial Park with Powder Magazine in Background. (October 2003)

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-17 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

2.2 Collections Assessment

Material Assets, Repatriation, Inventory, Security and Storage

Material assets are modest numerically, but their obvious provenance to the site, and its people, are a powerful connection that should not be underestimated in program development.

Inventory of assets (both on and off the Island) should be a high priority; including objects, buildings, images, oral histories, and should perhaps start with an inventory of inventories

Buildings:

Level 1 Resources: HBC Staff House, 1847-1850; Powder Magazine, 1866; St. Thomas Anglican Church, 1860-1864, Chancel 1885;

Level 2 Resources: Blacksmith Shop, 1849-1851; Turner House, 1863-1864; McLeod House, 1880’s; Sackabuckiskum House, 1926;

Level 3 Resources: Centennial Museum, n.d.;

Landscape:

Level 1 Resources: HBC Cemetery, pre-1800-????; Indian Cemetery Pre-Mission Era, location unknown, 1800 – 1864; St. Thomas Anglican Church Cemetery & grounds, 1864; Front Street Alignment, 1730-Present; Point of Pull, (Fort Garry), 1730; Embankment Cut for Boat Pull to Boat works, circa 1773 – 1930; Embankment Cut for General Launch Warehouse Complex, 1826 – 1930; Indian Encampment, pre 1800 – 1970’s; Landscape to the south, east and west of the HBC Staff House, 1730;

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-18 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Level 2 Resources: Veterans Road, 1920’s – Present; Horden Street Alignment, circa 1860’s; Catholic Cemetery, 19?? – 19??;

Archaeological Resources:

Level 2 Resources: Veterans Road, 1920’s – Present; Horden Street Alignment, circa 1860’s; Catholic Cemetery, 19?? – 19??;

Artefact Collections

On-site: Moose Factory & Moosonee (See Appendix 1)

HBC Staff House Collection, Moose Factory, Ontario: Collection of donated and abandoned items left by the Hudson’s Bay Company when the Museum that was housed in the 1867 Store was demolished in the 1950’s. Artefacts have not been inventoried and catalogued so the extent of the collection is not known. See Appendix 1A

HBC Blacksmith Shop Collection, Moose Factory, Ontario: Collection of blacksmithing tools and other items removed from the Blacksmith Shop in the early 1980’s. The collection consists of 260 plus objects of 19th and 20th century vintage. Some are complete, some broken, some manufactured at Moose Factory many were imported. See Appendix 1B.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-19 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Centennial Museum Collection, Moose Factory, Ontario: Collection of artefacts assembled to flesh out the interpretive exhibits. No details are available on the provenance or history of the artefacts incorporated in the displays. See Appendix 1C.

St. Thomas Church Collection, Moose Factory, Ontario: Collections consists of: a lectern fall of beaded moose hide with a design of rising mallards and embroidered Caribou hide alter cloth and bible markers all made in the 1920’s; a second hand beaded alter cloth is presently missing; Organ donated by the Ladies of Dublin in 1867; Stained glass windows imported from England between 1855 and 1885; Stained glass windows donated by the Diocese of Toronto and Montreal; Stained glass windows removed from the chapel of Horden Hall; Marble memorial plaques imported from England; 3 sanctuary chairs imported from England; oak pulpit and painted stone font imported from England; bronze crosses, flower pots, collection plates and candle sticks.

Moose Factory Historical Society Collection, Moose Factory, Ontario: Collection consists of approximately 60 photographs collected from community members in the 1980’s. The collection depicts individual and group portraits of natives; recreational activities, canoeing, boating, dog sledding; Anglican Mission school and residential school photographs; buildings and interiors. See Appendix 1D.

Revillon Frere House, Moosonee, Ontario: Collection in Moosonee. Status of the collection is unknown.

Anglican Diocese of Moosonee, Moosonee, Ontario: Contains Diocese records including births, marriages, deaths, baptismal and other church records.

Off Site (See Appendix 1)

Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario. The Dawson Collection: Archaeological Artefacts collected in the 1960’s. Artefacts in the holdings of Archaeology Department, Lakehead University. Items consist of a small collection of approximately 27 artefacts ranging from clay pipes to woodworking tools. See Appendix 1E.

The Hudson’s Bay Company Collection: Items in museum display formerly housed in the demolished store at Moose Factory. Owned by HBC and held in trust by Parks Canada at Lower Fort Garry, Manitoba. Artefacts in the collection are limited to 15 items which range from framing tools to oil lamps. See Appendix 1F.

North West Company Collection: Extent of collection unknown; brass cannon on carriage.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-20 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Royal Ontario Museum Collection: Artefacts consist of a collection of blacksmithing tools unearthed on Charlton Island by W. A. Kenyon. Thomas Kildale left the collection of tools on Charlton Island in 1681 when he was repairing the rudder of the Diligence; Kildale was reimbursed in 1682 for tools he left in the Bay the previous year. Collection consists of 6 items; iron spike, 3 cold chisels, caulking iron and iron hoe. See Appendix 1G.

Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Materials collected by Olaus Murie in the first quarter of the 20th century. Extent and type of collection unknown.

Ontario Heritage Foundation, Toronto, Ontario: Archaeological material collected in the 1980’s from stage 2 archaeological excavations conducted by R. Lueger. See Appendix 1F.

Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.: Collection consists of ethnological material/artefacts collected by John M. Cooper; ethnological material forwarded by the HBC employees in Moose Factory to Robert Kennicott; plants, birds and other material forwarded to Kennicott by HBC employees. The scope and extent of the artefact and natural history specimen collection contained in the various archives of the Smithsonian Institution is unknown.

Archival Collections

Off Site:

National Archives of Canada: Collections of photographs, maps and plans, textual records as well as moving images taken by various people starting in the 1860’s. Archival materials related to Moose Factory are contained within the following fonds or collections. See Appendix 2.

Photographic & Visual Collection: (See Appendix 2A)

Canada Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development Collection. Part of R216-185-E: Collection of photographs (47 b&w) documenting various aspects of life and construction in various Northern Indian communities between 1947 and 1957. Material relating to Moose Factory includes construction of the Clerk’s residence, construction of above ground water pipe system, welfare houses, men’s hostel, the hospital, machine shop, carpenter shop and the basement of the Community Hall.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-21 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Canada Indian and Northern Affairs Collection. Part of R216-0-0-E: Collection consists of 500 photographs and negatives as well as 684 transparencies collected circa 1970. Views of American tourists hunting and preparing goose for transport to the states at a Cree Indian Goose Camp.

Langlois-Lefroy Collection: Limited number (less than 5) of early photographs circa 1865-1870 ascribed to James Cotter. Photographs depict the native camp at the western end of Moose Factory Island. Photographs are duplicated in the Montreal Book Auction collection.

Bernard Rogan Ross Collection: Photographer joined the Hudsons’s Bay Company in 1843. Served in Moose Factory from 1863 and retired in 1871. The collection consists of five (5) photographs of Moose Factory. A considerable number of photographs attributed to Ross are located in various archives including the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C.

R7666-0-8-E. Sir Sanford Fleming fonds. Record subset Fort Garry to Jasper House: Collection of 42 early photographs of which 13 depict Moose Factory ascribed to B. R. Ross and James Cotter. Contains some of the earliest photographs of Moose Factory. Photos date between 1865 and 1870. Fonds consist of photographs documenting the survey of 1871 for the construction of Canadian Pacific Railway from Fort Garry to Jasper House.

Jervois Arthur Newnham collection: Anglican Missionary in Moose Factory from 1890 through 1904. Became second Bishop of Moosonee Diocese in 1893.Collection contains 152 b&w photographs depicting views of Moose Factory.

National Filmboard of Canada Collection: Fonds consist of 5 photographs taken in January 1946. Subject matter includes a fox in a trap, harpooning of a seal, a photo of Johnny Carpenter a Cree trapper as well as a photo of the Cpl. Davies who was in charge of the RCMP detachment at Moose Factory.

Olaus Johan Murie Fonds: Olaus Murie was a biologist and Field Naturalist and Curator of Mammals for the Carnegie Museum at Pittsburgh. Fond contains 183 b&w photographs taken by Olaus and Margaret Murie in 1914 and 1915 when Murie led two expeditions to Hudson’s Bay.

Margaret E. Murie collection: Fonds consist of a number of b&w photographs depicting native activities and communities during 1914 and 1915. Collection consists of less than 10 photographs of Moose Factory.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-22 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Robert and Frances Flaherty Collection: Fonds consist of a collection 12 photographs taken between 1910 and 1916. Flaherty worked as a prospector for a small mining syndicate between 1907 and 1910. In 1910 he met Sir William Mackenzie who employed Flaherty to do some prospecting in James and Hudson’s Bay areas. Flaherty returned in the 1920’s to film ‘Nanook of the North’. Photographs depict the post as well as a good selection of images that depict native activities such as sports and amusements.

John Flanders Fonds: Contemporary photographer. Collection of approximately 4,000 photographs depicting the daily life of Cree Indians in communities in northern Ontario and Quebec including Moose Factory and Moosonee. Material pre-dates 1974.

Robert Bell Collection: Robert Bell was a geologist employed by the Geological Survey of Canada. Bell visited Moose Factory in the late 1860’s and 1870’s and showed considerable interest in native customs, traditions, and medicinal use of plants as well as the geological aspects of the area. Fonds contain a limited (1) number of photographs of Moose Factory. Material dates from 1868 through 1929. The Geological Survey of Canada Collections also contains photographs credited to R. Bell and dated 1895.

Geological Survey of Canada Collection: Collection of photographs taken by R. Bell during his survey work in northern Ontario. Limited number of photographs (less than 5) of Moose Factory primarily views from the Moose River to the post. Material dates from 1895.

Barclay McKone Fonds: Fonds consist of moving images and 74 photographs and colour slides. McKone was a medical doctor stationed at the hospital in Moose Factory. Fonds consist of films shot in northern Quebec while doing a medical survey for tuberculosis symptoms. Photographs include tuberculosis patients at Moose Factory Hospital as well as moving images of community activities. Material dates from 1950 through 1959.

R1562-0-X-e. Andrew Howard Miller Fonds. Record Series Photographs: Collection of 639 photographs taken between 1900 and 1949. Limited number of photographs of Moose Factory taken between 1921 and 1931.

Frontier College Fonds: Fonds contain approximately 7,548 photographs dating from 1899 through 1960. Photographic material depicts college activities in Moose Factory, Moosonee and Moose River.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-23 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Canadian Baptist Archives: Fonds contain 125 b&w photographs and 10 postcard prints. Material depicts cities and small towns in northern Ontario including Moose Factory. Subject matter includes schools, classrooms and agricultural scenes. Material dates from 1890 – 1945.

RG 85. Indian and Northern Affairs, Departmental Library Albums. Series records, Album 4, Arctic & Album 5 Arctic: Fonds consist of 867 b&w photographs depicting L. T. Burwash’s work for the Department of the Interior in the North dating between 1926 and 1931. Photographs of Moose Factory depict the native camp, Cree houses, schools and HBC buildings in Moose Factory.

Kenneth E. Kidd collection: Fonds contain 185 b&w photographs depicting scenes in a number of communities in Canada including Moose Factory. The collections date from the period 1850 – 1950. Archive material was not reviewed.

Montreal Book Auctions collection: Fonds consists of 7 b&w photographs depicting the native camp at Moose Factory. A number of the photographs are also included in Langlois-Lefroy collection.

Elizabeth Jane Lyon collection: Fonds consist of 525 photographs and colour slides taken in several northern and western communities where Lyon worked as a nurse during the 1950’s. Photographs were taken in Moose Factory during the period 1957 – 1958. Views depict public events, view of buildings and building interiors.

Not identified collection: Fond consists of slides depicting medical services in Canada. Included are photos of hospitals, nursing stations, home nursing, emergency services and northern native health problems. Slides depict medical services in Moose Factory as well as a number of other northern Ontario communities.

Canada Health and Welfare Canada collection: Fonds include 3 photographs of the Hospital in Moose Factory taken after the hospital was completed in 1950.

Canada Dept. of National Health and Welfare collection: Fonds consists of one (1) aerial view of the Moose Factory Hospital taken by J.S. Willis in 1956.

Canada Dept. of the Interior collection: Fonds consists of two (2) b&w photographs

***

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-24 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Graphic & Documentary Art Collection: (See Appendix 2B)

Lelitia Fraser collection: Fonds consists of one pen and ink drawing entitled ‘Bishop’s 600 Mile Snowshoe walk from Moose Factory to Toronto in 1901’. The work is by the daughter of J. Newnham for Mrs F. P. Sherwood’s 1943 biography of J. Newnham ‘By Water and the Word’.

W. Trask collection: Fonds consists of two lithographic prints entitled ‘Moose Factory 1854’. Originals were completed by Samuel Smith and consisted of two watercolour and pencil drawings of the fort in Moose Factory. Originals are located in the archives of the Toronto Public Library.

Interbranch Mint Collection. Object: Fond consists of a Tri-centennial commemorative medal minted in 1973 to commemorate 300 years of continuing occupation of Moose Factory.

The Canoe ‘Elk’ off Moose Factory (North West Territories): Wood engraving on paper, dated May 24, 1879. Publisher the Graphic, London.

Loyd Scott Collection: Fonds consists of Scott’s 1948 sketchbook of pencil sketches pertaining to 18th and 19th century uniforms and historical locations in Canada.

***

Map & Plan Collection: (See Appendix 2C)

Patten, Thaddeus James: Plan of the Moose Factory Cree’s Indian Reserve at Chapleau Ontario, T.J. Patten, O.L.S., Little Current, May 31, 1907.

Dobie, James S.: Plan of Indian Reserve near Moose Factory in the Province of Ontario. Thessalon, Ontario. April 13, 1913.

Ogilvie, William: Survey of the southeast shore of Moose River from Moose Factory to the mouth of river. W. Ogilvie, D.L. Surveyor. Ottawa, May 1891.

Bell Robert: Map of the Canoe Route from Lake Superior to James Bay.

Turnor Philip: Eight plans of Turnor’s survey of the James and Hudson’s Bay coastlines. Plans were produced during the period 1778 to the early 1790’s. Plan of Albany and Moose Rivers, 1790. National Map Collection, H 3/1101.

Captain Thomas James: Route to James Bay, 1632. National Map Collection, H31101, 1632.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-25 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Thomas Moore: Map of the western shore of James Bay circa 1673-78. Earliest map to locate Moose Factory. National Map Collection, H3/1101, 1671-78.

Jolliet: Map of James Bay and New France, 1684. First map to show inland trading routes from the bay. National Map Collection. H3-1101, 1684. Map of Hudson and James bays, 1699. National Map Collection. PH 1101, 1699 – 123-8-5.

Seignelay: Map of New France, 1687. Only map providing a sketch of layout of the first fort at Moose Factory presumably based on de Troyes expedition. National Map Collection. H3/1101, 1687.

Anonymous Undated French Map: Map of Hudson’s and James Bays. Possibly dates to 1715. National Map Collection. PH 1101, ND, 123-9-1 Map of Hudson Bay. Charlton Island depot is shown, date circa 1681-86. National Map Collection. PH 1101 (1699-1714).

Vion, B. Laire: Map of Hudson Bay. National Map Collection. PH 1101, 1697 123-8-3.

Heruelien: Map of Hudson Bay, undated. Circa 1699-1714. National Map Collection. PH 1101, N.D. 123-8-9.

Carte Angloise de la Baye de Hudson, 1719: National Map Collection. H3/1101, 1719.

Bellin: Map of Hudson and James bays, 1744. National Map Collection. H3/1101, 1744. Map of Hudson and James bays, 1755. National Map Collection. PH 1101, 1755 123- 8-13.

Laperouse Expedition: Map from Laperouse Expedition, 1782. National Map Collection. Ph 1101, 1782 123-8-15.

Bishop: Map of James Bay, 1865. National Map Collection. H3/1101, 1865.

Anonymous and Undated (1800): Map of western James Bay. National Map Collection. H3/1101, (1800).

Burwash, L.T.: Map of economic development of James Bay area, 1905-27. National Map Collection. H3/1101, 1927 (28).

***

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-26 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Film, Video & Sound Collection: (See Appendix 2D)

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Television. National News Library, Newsmagazine. Item Number 12119: Fond consists of 1955 News Magazine production. Footage of Indian residential school in Moose Factory, Ontario.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Item number 36252: Fond consists of one undated film titled ‘Career in Scarlet – Outtakes – RCMP Moose Factory’.

Cunningham John. Item number 38589: Fond consists of a National Film Board production titled ‘Fur Country’ completed in 1944. The historic post of Moose Factory on James Bay is the setting where the camera follows Indian trapper George McLeod as he goes out from the post to visit his trap lines. McLeod traps mink and beaver, skilfully skinning the animals and drying the pelts. Back at the post he sells his furs to the HBC trader. Film length 21 minutes.

Societe Radio-Canada, Television. Item number 60869: Fond consists of one film produced in 1977. Topics include a visit to Tent City and its residents. Footage is primarily of Moosonee.

Williams Massey. Item number 100780: Fond consists of a film (77mm) record of a May 1930 to October 1931 prospecting expedition to the Ungava region. The film includes a small portion shot in Moose Factory where the expedition then travelled to Eastmain, Quebec.

Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation. Item number 118154: Fond consists of one 1920 newsreel titled ‘Fox News No. 4’. The film documents Hudson Bay Fur Packers on a 250-mile dog team journey to the Railway over hazardous trails. Silent with English sub-titles.

National Film Board of Canada. Item number 160245: Fond consists of one 1945 film titled ‘Canadian Work and Wealth No. 7, New Homes for Beavers’. The film documents government conservation measures to preserve and restock areas where the animal was extinct. The animals are transported by water and rail to Moose Factory and from there are taken by canoe to streams in the far north. . Carey S. Lewis. Item number 179335: Fonds consists of one video tape (1976) on the Telemedicine Experiment led by Dr. Lewis S. Carey of the University of Western Ontario to improve medical services to native communities in Northern Ontario. Illustrates a diagnostic consultations transmitted from University Hospital in London and Moose Factory General Hospital and a nursing station on James Bay.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-27 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

United States, National Archives and Records Administration. Item number 188274: Fond consists of a 1955 Universal Newsreel of an Indian School in Far North (Moose Factory). Film documents Church of England Native School; children reading, writing and arithmetic. Shots include children at play, boys playing hockey, woodworking shop class, shot of church steeple bell ringing and children attending church service. Film length 84 seconds.

McKone, Dr. Barclay. Item numbers 207080, 207082, 207083: Fonds consist of three films shot in Moose Factory titled ‘Moose Factory, Moosonee, and Patients at Indian Hospital 20 minutes; Posts at James and Hudson’s Bays. Ice Break-up in 1952 at Moose Factory, 22 minutes; Christmas Party for all Kids at Moose Factory, 11 minutes.

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Television. Kines from Parc, Toronto. Item number 223101: Fond consists of 1969 television public affairs program with host Patrick Watson featuring interviews and reports. From reports on the unrest among the Moose Band Indians in the James Bay area resulting from the death of Minnie Cheechoo, and the colonial attitude of the director of the local hospital.

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Television. CBOT Two Inch video inventory. Item number 276164: Fond consists of 1977 television production titled ‘Focus. North of Ottawa, Part Two’. Documents trip on Polar Bear Express. Part two deals with the train ride and features interviews with Cree bands about problems facing by the northern native communities.30 minutes.

Therrrien, Ross J. Item number 327443: Fond consists of one circa 1920’s silent film titled ‘T.N.C.: No. 1’. Illustrates life along ONR and in Moose Factory, Ontario. Routine activities in winter and summer are shown; boating visits with Indians, schools, aerials of Moose River and a work train.

National Film Board of Canada. Item number 336432: Fond consists of on 1958 film titled ‘Screen Magazine, No. 5, Off to School. To school by boat, documents Indian children in Moose Factory in a modern residential school.

Arkle, Percy Wilkins. Item number 339439: Fond consists of a silent home movie titled Percy Wilkins Arkle Collection, No. 4. Produced in 1943 the film footage documents a study of the dental conditions of the Indians on the great bay. Three minutes in length.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-28 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Oral History: See Appendix 2E.

McNeil Bill. Item number 166214: Oral interview produced in 1985 titled ‘Voice of the Pioneer, Wyborn, Jeff – Interview’. Wyborn was a bush pilot who worked throughout northern Ontario. Discusses transporting Indian and Eskimo tuberculosis patients to the hospital in Moose Factory.

Stone, Raymond. Item number 276014: Fond consists of an oral interview with Jo Lofthouse about his life in Moose Factory, Ontario in the 1950’s produced in 1974.

***

Textual Records in the National Archives of Canada: (See Appendix 2F)

Newnham Family fonds: Fonds consist of genealogical charts showing the ancestors and descendants of the Reverend George William Newhnam and his son Jervois Arthur Newnham.

May Louise Jackman fonds: Fonds consists of May Jackman’s account, written for her grandchildren, of her childhood at Moose Factory. The collection provides an unusual child’s-eye view of late nineteenth century conditions at the Anglican mission school at Moose Factory.

Olaus Johan Murie Fonds: Olaus Murie was a biologist and Field Naturalist and Curator of Mammals for the Carnegie Museum at Pittsburgh. Fonds consist of 15 cm. of textual records as well as 183 b&w photographs taken by Olaus and Margaret Murie in 1914 and 1915 when Murie led two expeditions to the Hudson Bay. Textual material includes: MG30-B102 – Hudson Bay expedition diary, On the Shores of Hudson Bay and Labrador-Ungava expedition.

Jervois Arthur Newnham fonds: Anglican Missionary in Moose Factory from 1890 through 1904.Became second Bishop of Moosonee Diocese in 1893.Collection contains 8cm of textual records as well as 152 b&w photographs depicting views of Moose Factory. Textual material includes two volumes of Bishop Newnham’s diary dated 1892-1898 as well as a small notebook of sermons and jottings dated 1888.

William Cowan fonds: Fonds consist of 8cm of textual records. Cowan was a surgeon and fur trader in the service of the HBC during the period 1852 – 1871. Fond consists of diaries kept while serving at Fort Garry, Moose Factory and York Factory.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-29 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

John George McTavish’s Will: Fond consists of the will of J. McTavish drawn up in the form of a letter to Sir George Simpson, 1846. McTavish was the Chief Factor in Moose Factory from 1873 – 1874.

Samuel Taylor fonds: Fond consists of diaries kept at Moose Factory from 1849 through 1857. Taylor joined the HBC in 1836. Material dates from 1849 – 1867.

Moss Collection: Fonds consists of ‘Journal of Transactions and Occurrences at Matawaamingue, 1838-1839, attributed to Richard Hardisty, 50 pages; invoice book of furs forwarded to Moose Factory, 1823-1827; inventory for Kenogamissi River, 1828, with and account of furs sent to Moose Factory from there, dated 1829.

Fort Michipicoten fonds: Fonds consists of 10 pages of textual records created between 1856 and 1877. Fond consists of letters received by chief traders McKenzie, Watt and Bell from agents in Moose Factory and New Brunswick House discussing company business.

Hudson’s Bay Company. Ships’ Logs, Books and Papers, Ships’ movements book: Fonds consists of textural records created between 1719 and 1929. Records of the disposition and movement of the company’s ships including a list of dates of arrivals and departures to and from Moose Factory.

Hudson Bay Company. Headquarters Records, London inward correspondence from Hudson’s Bay Company posts: Fonds consists of textual records created between 1701–1914. Material includes correspondence, reports, accounts and other records from various posts to the headquarters. Records for the Moose Factory post are contained in reel HBC 150, volume 43 dated 1772-1773

Hudson’s Bay Company. Post Records, Moose Factory: Fonds consists of textual material created between 1730 and 1925. Material includes post journals, 1730 – 1904. Correspondence books, 1768 – 1908. Correspondence Inward, 1746 – 1864. Account books, 1730 – 1883. Reports on district, 1814 – 1829. Lists of servants, 1803 – 1815. Abstracts of Servants Accounts, 1821 – 1871.Ditrict Fur Returns, 1825 – 1871. Minutes of Council, 1822 – 1875. Miscellaneous Items, 1810 – 1925. Post journals, 1730 – 1735.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-30 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

MG 20-E12. Hudson’s Bay Company. Private Manuscripts, Finlayson, Duncan. Record Series Journals: Fonds consist of textual records (journals) of Finlayson while traveling to Moose Factory between 1831 and 1838

R216-185-5-E. Indian and Inuit Affairs Program sous-fonds. James Bay District Office: Fond consists of records of the James Bay District Office which was responsible for communities and reserves, including Moose Factory between 1969 and 1989. Series consists of R216-319-0-E, General Operational Records; R216- 320-7-E, Paylists; and R216-321-9-E, Central Registry files.

R216-185-5-E. Indian and Inuit Affairs Program sous-fonds. Chapleau Agency: Fond consists of records of the Chapleau Agency, which was created to administer bands recently taken into Treaty 9. Records date from 1937 – 1970. According to band history cards there were three bands of Cree at Moose Factory. Series consists of R216-409 -1-E Central Registry Files; R216-410-8-E, General Operational Records; R216-411X-E, Outgoing correspondence; R216-412-1-E, Incoming correspondence; R216-413-3-E, Paylists; R216-414-5-E, Registers of membership, births, and deaths.

R216-185-5-E. Indian and Inuit Affairs Program sous-fonds. James Bay Agency: Fond consists of records of the James Bay Agency that was created in 1929, to administer the affairs of Treaty 9 bands. Officer in charge was to act as Indian Agent and physician. Records date from 1959 – 1970.

R7836-0-1-E. Mary Howard Shearwood fonds. Record Series, Jervois Arthur Newnham: Fond consists of textual records consisting of essays on religious matters and several sermons.

RG10. Government of Canada Files. Indian Affairs: Fonds consists of 306 records of pensioned individuals who served in the First World War as well as other material related to the James Bay Agency and the James Bay District offices. Subject matter includes; Construction of houses for the doctor and the agent at Moose Factory, 1941-1949; Principles report on the Moose Factory Island Day School, 1958-1964; Treaty No. 9, Separation Allowance, Pension, Treaty Money of the Late Private Walter Job, 1919-1930;James Bay District, Utilities and Municipal Services at Moose Factory, 1954-1961;

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-31 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Soldiers of the First World War (1914-1918): Fonds consists of the records of individuals who served in the First World War. Searchable database based on Surname, Given Name and or regiment number. A list of pensioners from the Moose Factory area can be found in the Government of Canada Files, RG10, Indian Affairs.

Federal Census of 1871 (Ontario Index): Database contains names of households in the Province of Ontario as they were recorded in April 1871. Information contained in the files include name, age, country or province of birth, occupation, ethnic origin and religious denomination.

Census of Canada, 1901: Access to digitized images of the original census returns, which record age, nationality, religion, profession, income, education for every resident of Canada on March 31st, 1901.

Archives of Ontario: Collection of photographs, textual material, audio recordings and video taken by various people starting in the 1860’s. Some duplication of photographs between the Ontario Archives and the National Archives of Canada; Photographs of Moose Factory are contained within the followings fonds or collections. See Appendix 3.

Photographic & Visual Collection: See Appendix 3A

Fonds C281. Archives of Ontario documentary art collection. William Trask Collection: Fond contains one early lithograph (1854) view of Moose Factory. William Trask artist.

RG 13-13. Ontario Government Record Series: Central Registry of the Department of Mines. Fond consists of records of the Ontario Department of Mines and the Department of Mines and Northern Affairs collected between 1913 through 1972. Portion of fonds relating to Moose Factory consist of a series of photographs.

Fonds F 2179. Captain Traill Smith Photograph Collection: Collection consists of photographs acquired by Captain Traill Smith of South Africa while on a visit to Moose Factory. Many of the photographs in the collection were taken by B.R. Ross and C. Horetzky both amateur photographers and employees of the Hudson’s Bay Company. Fond consists of five record series, three of which contain material relating to Moose Factory. F 2179 1; Portrait photographs from Northern Ontario: F 2179 2; Moose Factory Photographs: F2179-4; Photographs of northern Ontario.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-32 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Fonds C 275. Duncan Campbell Scott Collection: Fond consists of photographs created by Duncan Campbell Scott during his tenure as a civil servant for the department of Indian Affairs for the Federal Government. The Fonds are arranged in three series. The photographs in Series 1 depict the customs and traditions of native peoples. Series 2 depicts the photographs of the James Bay Indian. Series 3 are views of northern Ontario.

RG 65-35. Ontario Government Record Series. Tourism Promotion Photographs: Department of Travel and Publicity, Publicity Department Collection; Tourism promotion photographs taken between 1945 and 1989. Fond consists of 65,000 photographs and 52 centimeters of textual records.

Fond C 330. John McFie Fonds: The collection consists of 778 photographs taken between 1949 and 1980 by John Macfie while he worked for the Department of Lands and Forests in Northern Ontario. The fond consists of 13 record series Series C 330-13 Miscellaneous Photographs of Northern Ontario. Fond consists of 205 photographs.

Fonds F 771. John Glass Malloch Fonds: Fond consists of the personal journal of John Glass Mallock (1841-1845, n.d.) a lawyer and judge from Perth in Lanark County. The fond is reported to have 9 photographs (n.d.) of Moose Factory and the Abitibi River area. Photographs were not viewed.

Fonds F 4369. Mildred Young Hubert Fonds: The fond contains photographs taken by Hubbert during her years teaching in Northern Ontario and the Yukon. The fond consists of 2 series of records. Series 1 contains 992 photographs in Moose Factory and a number of other locations in Northern Ontario as well as the Yukon. Series 2 consists of 5 audiocassettes of Mildred reading her autobiography. See appendix 7.

Fonds C 170. James R. Nason Fonds: Fonds consists of 36 photographs of Moose Factory and its surroundings during the period of Nason’s stay between 1876 and 1882. Photographs show portraits of area residents including a number of formal portraits of children and adults in regular clothing and in costume. J. Nason was an accountant and a meteorological officer for the Hudson’s Bay Company in Moose Factory, Ontario between 1875 and 1882.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-33 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

RG 2-71. Ontario Government Record Series. Photographs of the Audio Visual Education Branch: Series consists of photographs used by the Audio-Visual Education Branch of the Ontario Department of Education as visual aids in schools. Photographs were originally taken between 1910 and 1940. Photographs cover a wide range of subjects including historic sites in Ontario, native people, health, school, transportation as well as other topics. Fond contains photographs of the Mission buildings and a flower garden.

Film, Video & Sound Collection: See Appendix 3B.

RG 17-3. Archives of Ontario oral history interviews: Fonds consists of one audio reel (80 minutes) titled ‘Wood, J.J. “Woody”’. The oral history interview is with former Post Manager of the HBC post in Moose Factory, Ontario, 1954-1976.

F 4369. Mildred Young Hubert fonds: Fonds contain 5 audiocassettes documenting her reading of her autobiography.

F 2121. George Charity Fonds: Fonds contain 4 audio reels created in 1978 of Charity describing his experiences flying in South Porcupine, Moosonee and Hudson’s Bay areas.

Textual Records in the Archives of Ontario: See Appendix 3C.

Fonds F 977. Ontario Genealogical Society’s Cemetery Recordings Collection: Fonds consists of 147 reels of microfilm (textual records) and 188 MB of textual records (includes photographs and maps). The records collection consists of transcriptions from individual cemetery records or tombstones. Records relating to Moosonee and Moose Factory are contained in the records within the Cochrane District.

Fonds F 1015. Alexander Fraser Fonds: Fond material relating to Moose Factory consists of Alexander Fraser’s notes and diary while on a trip to Moose Factory. Fraser was interested in Gaelic history and visited Moose Factory due to its long- standing connection with the Scottish Islands where the HBC recruited a number of employees. The fond was created in the period 1882 – 1936.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-34 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Fonds F 431. Fur Trade Collection: Collection is an artificial collection of mostly unrelated documents relating to the fur trade in Ontario. Within the collection are several sub-groups that include; The Hudson’s Bay Collection; The Northwest Company Collection and a Miscellaneous Collection. Items from the Hudson Bay Collection that relate directly to Moose Factory include: Invoice of goods sent from Moose Factory for Kenogamissi district, 1843;Statement of Account of various individuals with Moose Factory Sale Shop, 1883; Invoice of Sundries supplied from Moose Factory for Kenogamissi River District, outfit, 1884;Statement of account of various individuals with Moose Factory Sales Shop, 1884-1885; A printed reproduction of a Hudson’s Bay Company fur auction catalogue of 1828, issued to commemorate the first auction to be held at their new house on Garruick Hill Street, London, 1928.

Fonds F 978. Church Records Collection: Fonds consist of church records including original manuscripts, minutes, annual reports, church registers, birth records, military records. Entries are listed alphabetically under Moose Factory, Anglican Mission; Moose Factory Methodist Mission; Moose Factory St. Thomas The Apostle Anglican Church; Moosonee, Diocese of (Anglican).

RG 1 – 273. Ontario Government Record Crown Lands surveys and correspondence: Sub Series RG 1-273-5 contains records relating to the allocation of land for Indian reserves in northern Ontario including Treaty No. 9.

F 2121. George Charity Fonds: Consists of the personal and business records of pilot, George Charity. Fonds also contain four audio reels created ca. 1978 of his experiences flying in South Porcupine, Moosonee and Hudson’s Bay

F 430. James Laurence Cotter Fonds: Fonds consist of Cotters records created during his employment with the Hudson’s Bay Company. Fonds include Cotter’s personal copy letter book and loose correspondence, 1883-1889. Fonds also contain a Cotter genealogical chart. Letter book dated 1875-1886.

F 432. Gladman Family Fonds: George Gladman Senior was a Chief Trader for the Hudson’s Bay company during the period 1765-1821. Entered the service of the Hudson’s Bay Company in 1781 and served at Micawbanish (New Brunswick), Moose Factory and Eastmain. Fond consists of originals and transcribed copies of the records of the Gladman family. Fonds include a copy of G. Gladman Seniors commission of appointment as Chief Factor. Fonds also contain a Gladman family tree as well as biographies of George Gladman Senior and Thomas Vincent, a Governor of the Hudson Bay Company.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-35 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Glenbow Archives, Calgary, Alberta: Collections consists of three fonds: Northern Ontario Photographer Fonds; James Sutherland Fonds; Philip Godsell Fonds. See Appendix 4.

Photographic & Visual Collection Glenbow Archives: See Appendix 4A.

Northern Ontario Photographer Fonds: Fonds consists of 65 photographs taken circa 1907. The photographer appears to be a professional working for the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway or a government agency.

Philip H. Godsell Fonds: Fonds consists of a limited number of photographs of Moose Factory taken post 1860. Subject matter is limited to photographs of Robert Bell expedition with the Geological Survey of Canada to explore the James Bay region.

Textual Records in the Glenbow Archives: See Appendix 4B.

James Sutherland Fonds: Fond consists of letters and correspondence during his service with the HBC during the period 1798 – 1827. Inventory records for Moose Factory are part of the fond.

Musee McCord Museum, Montreal, Quebec: Collection consists of approximately 15 photographs of Moose Factory dating from 1870 through 1926 ascribed to Dr. William Bell Malloch, James Cotter and Captain George E. Mack. Some interesting photographs most of which are not found in the other archives. See Appendix 5.

The American Catholic History Research Centre and University Archives, Mullen Library, The Catholic University of America, Washington, D.C. Cooper, John Mongomery, Collection 1898 - 1962: Fonds consists of anthropologists/ethnologists John M. Cooper’s and Regina Flannery’s field notes and correspondence between the period 1898 – 1962. Cooper first visited Moose Factory in 1927 and returned in 1932, 1933 and 1934. Cooper’s notes include interviews with John Dick and Sinclair Trapper concerning traditional hunting grounds and lifestyle as well as notes on the Hannah Bay Massacre.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-36 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

McFarlin Library, Department of Special Collections, The University of Tulsa, Tulsa, Oklahoma. The Robert Bell Papers: Collection consists of Robert Bells (Geological Survey of Canada) papers which include autograph notes pertaining to the cultural practices of Ojibway and Cree Indians; a transcription of an Indian Legend; autograph lists of place names with their English equivalent; a list of artifacts belonging to Bell and exhibited at the Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia, 1876.Correspondence with W.K. Broughton Chief Factor of Moose Factory post between 1892 and 1893; draft list of Indian place names in the James Bay, Moose Factory area dated September 1895.

Robert & Frances Flaherty Study Centre, The School of Theology at Claremont, California: Photographs taken by Flaherty and his wife in Moose Factory and other locations in James and Hudson’s Bay. A number of good photographs depicting life in the north. Majority of photographs can be sourced in the National Archives of Canada. Extent and type of materials located in Claremont is not known.

Toronto Public Library Archive: Collection consists of two early watercolours of Moose Factory completed in 1857 by Samuel Smith, a surgeon employed by the HBC. The watercolours are contained within the following fond: TRL Canadian Historical Picture Collection. See Appendix 6.

National Air Photo Library, Ottawa, Ontario: The archive contains aerial photographs of the Moose Factory area beginning in 1953. Aerial surveys vary in scale from 1:6000 to 1:12,000. The following is a list of aerial photographs with dates: 1953, A13898; 1954, A14207; 1960, A17099; 1969, A21189; 1973, A23195; 1978, A24980 & A25011; 1983, A26251;

Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. National Anthropological Archives: The collections are a mixture of graphic (photographic) and textual material as well as specimens of birds, plants and other material forwarded to Robert Kennicott by Hudson’s Bay employees in Moose Factory including B. R. Ross, James S. Clouston and J. MacKenzie between 1858 and 1869. Collection also consists of ethnological material forwarded to the Smithsonian by the Catholic University of America, which held the collection of ethnologist John M. Cooper. See Appendix 7. Photographic Material: Collection consists of seven (7) photographs taken by Walton Haydon (HBC Doctor) in 1883 in Moose Factory. The collection consists of: Portrait of Dick Butterfly, Only Survivor of the Hannah Bay Massacre; Portrait of Kataminina; Portrait of Young Woman; Portrait of Charley Chechu; Portrait of Woman from Albany? Wearing floral Appliqué Headgear; Portrait of Pussico; Portrait of Pussico’s Wife.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-37 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Textual Records:

Smithsonian Institution. Record Unit 7221. Bernard Rogan Ross Notebook, circa 1860-1861: Notebook contains catalogue lists of collections made by B. R. Ross for the Smithsonian Institution, the Royal Industrial Museum of Scotland, and the Geological Museum of Canada.

Smithsonian Institution. Record Unit 561. Assistant Secretary in charge of the United States National Museum, Correspondence and Memoranda, 1858 – 1869 and undated: Collection of ethnographic and natural history material from the Arctic, gathered by officers of the Hudson’s Bay Company. Records consist of correspondence with the Smithsonian documenting collecting activities of HBC employees on behalf of the Institution. Correspondents include James S. Clouston, 1860-1861, 1863; J. MacKenzie, 1860-1864; Bernard Rogan Ross, 1858-1869; Bernard Rogan Ross, fragments and undated. All correspondents were Chief Factors for the HBC at Moose Factory.

Hudson’s Bay Company Archives, Archives of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba: The collection consists of HBC records which have for the most part been copied and are contained within the collections of the National Archives of Canada as well as the Archives of Ontario as well as in the National Archives, London, England. The collection of photographs and maps and plans are for the most part the only items that have not been copied and forwarded to the archives noted above. The collections of essays and articles on Moose Factory in the Beaver Magazine can be found at the Hudson’s Bay History Foundation Archive. For a listing or articles and essays contained within the Beaver Magazine see HBC, Hudson’s Bay History Foundation. See Appendix 8.

Maps and Plans Contained in the HBC Archive

G. Howy: Map of the entrance of the Moose River. Map was completed by G. Howy in 1740 and is the only detailed map of the river before the Geological Survey of Canada began mapping the region in the late 1860’s. Hudson’s Bay Company Archives G1/117.

Thomas Vincent: Cart of Mr. Vincent’s Journey, Albany to Henley & Capenocoggamy … to New Brunswick & Moose Factory Ontario. Dated 1815. Hudson’s Bay Company Archives. G.1/39.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-38 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Unknown: A draught of the Magazine for Powder at Moose Fort…; ON. Hudson’s Bay Company Archives. Circa 1740’s, Attributed to G. Howy, who supervised the construction of the Powder Magazine after the second fort burnt shortly after completion in 1735.Howy supervised construction in 1746. Hudson’s Bay Company Archives, G.1/101.

Unknown: Sketch of buildings at Moose Factory, ON. Post 1883? Hudson’s Bay Company Archives, G.1/102.

Benjamin Bell: Chart, entrance of the Moose River, ON. 1832. Hudson’s Bay Company Archives, G.1/117.

Post Managers: Series of plans including insurance plans, which include the following files; HBC Fur Trade District, Plans of Posts, 1898. Hudson’s Bay Company Archives, 17M1 G.1/1,2. HBC Book of Plans for Insurances. 1898. G.7/3,4. HBC Canada Fur Trade Posts Plans. 1884-1932. 17M2, G.7/5 fo. 1A to fo. 250; 17M3, G.7/5 fo. 251 t o fo. 440b; 17M4, 1884 – 1937, G.7/5 fo. 441a to G.7/6 fo. 109; Post plans are also contained within the following record series: 17M5, 1886 – 1937; 17M6, 1886 – 1937;, 1921 – 1939; 17M7, 1921 – 1939, 1921 – 1937; 17M8, 1921 – 1937; 17M9, 1921 – 1939, 1921 – 1935; 17M10, 1920 – 1937, 1884 – 1940; 17M11, 1920 – 1927; 17M12, 1880 – 1944.

HBC, Hudson’s Bay History Foundation: Collection consists of photographs and articles post 1921 that appeared in the Beaver Magazine. Articles and photo essays include:

February, 1921, Remarkable trip by U.S.A. Airmen, New York to Moose Factory;

January, 1921, Airplane visits Moose Factory.

July, 1922. Article about George Ray. Photo with daughter Kasba.

Fall, 1922. Photo of HBC motion picture expedition leaving Moose Factory for the Abitibi.

May, 1923. Setting a trap near Moose Factory.

November, 1923. Colonel Henry Cockshutt and party visit Moose Factory.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-39 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

December, 1928, Venerable buildings at Moose Factory.

Spring, 1929. Farewell to Moose Factory poem by J. S. Cotter.

March, 1931. Saint Georges day at Moose Factory.

January, 1932. About William McLeod of Moose Factory.

March, 1932. Standard Oil Company tests gas and oil products under severe winter conditions.

Spring, 1933. Governor General visits Moose Factory.

January, 1933. Moose Factory, a dream romance. Fifteen deaths from an epidemic of influenza.

September, 1933, The Governor General Visits Moose Factory;

February, 1934. Demise of William Moore at Moose Factory.

March, 1934. Annual Moose Factory to Moosonee dog derby 3, January. Fort Garry tea for Moose Factory being unloaded from the R.M.S. Nascopie at the Charlton Island Depot. Article and photo about oldest couple in Moose Factory, Mr. & Mrs. Smallboy.

December, 1934. Moose Factory fur traders: R. Thompson, T.W. Babbage, W. H. Houston, N. A. Wilding. Moose Factory photographs. Deerskin with HBC coat of arms worked in silk, made in Moose Factory, and given to the governor (HBC?) (Patrick Ashley Cooper) in August 1934. RCMP policemen, Const. L.W. Hopkins and Corporal E.S. Covell at Moose Factory.

Spring 1936, HBC Newsreel: Ross & Anderson, HBC traders halting for a meal on route from Moose Factory to Rupert’s House. Out. 267, No. 2, (S’36). Miss E. Atkinson, nurse at the Anglican mission at Moose Factory, Ontario. Out. 267, No. 2, (S’36).

December, 1936. HBC Newsreel. Photo of ice-break up in Moose Factory.

March, 1938, Boat Building at Moose Factory, 1911: T. C. Moore, William McLeod, Harvey Smallboy, and G.T. Moore.

March, 1940. Story about well known guide Freddy Gunner.

December, 1940. Sled dogs resting at Moose Factory.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-40 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

December, 1942. Christmas at Moose Factory.

March, 1944. Recruiting at Moose Factory, World War 1, 1914-1918.

January, 1945. Village smithy.

January, 1946. Joseph Cheechoo and Philip Morrison sit by and ancient fur press by one of the rusted cannons. Children play on the riverbank; one has a doll in Indian moss bag.

1946, June. Moose Factory Today & Yesterday, Picture of lectern fall in the Anglican Church made of Moose hide beaded with a design of rising mallards.

December, 1949. Forty below at Moose Factory. HBC James Bay supply ship, Fort Charles, in winter quarters.

December, 1950. Christmas at Moose Factory. Reverend Bilodeau in the Roman Catholic mission, Moose Factory. Clerk at Hudson’s Bay post Oliver Chum, loading trapper’s sled while post manager keeps tally. Young Indian mothers in the Roman Catholic mission, Moose Factory, Ontario.

Spring, 1957. Sacred to the memory. The old gravestones at Moose Factory.

Spring, 1962. Trapper’s wife Moose Factory, Ontario.

Summer, 1967. Watercolour by William Richards titled ‘East View of Moose Factory’.

Summer, 1968. Old HBC coasting vessel is moved from Moosonee to Moose Factory. 1973, Autumn. Moose Factory, Ontario. Photo essay. Photo of HBC Governor with Moose Band chief Robert Vincent. Out. 304, No.2, (Autumn ’73).

April May 1986. Armourer John Miles at Moose Fort.

Ontario Heritage Foundation, Toronto, Ontario: Collection of photographs (historic & recent) collected from various archives. Collection of historic photographs collected from the community to support restoration work undertaken on the Staff House and the three residential (home guard) buildings moved to Centennial Park in the mid 1980’s. Collection of photographs of building condition, restoration and archaeological work undertaken from 1980 on.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-41 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Other Collections (Textual):

Off Site:

Anglican Church of Canada, General Synod Archives: Collection contains correspondence and church records for the Dioceses of Moosonee. Extent and contents of the collection are unknown.

Anglican Diocese of Ontario Archives, Kingston, Ontario: Archive for records of the Diocese of Ontario, including parish registers from 1780 to present.

Carnegie Museum of Natural History: Olaus Johan Murie Field Naturalist and Curator of Mammals for the Museum between 1914 – 1917. Murie led an expedition to Hudson’s Bay in 1914-1915. Content and scope of the collection unknown. See the National Archives of Canada fond.

Thunder Bay Historical Museum Society, Thunder Bay, Ontario: Collection consists of North West Company Records dating from 1806 through 1809 as well as Hudson’s Bay Company records between 1823 and 1971.

London University London, England. School of Oriental and African Studies Library. (Wesleyan) Methodist Missionary Society/Methodist Church Overseas Division: Collection consists of records of the Wesleyan Methodist Missionary Society which operated a mission in Moose Factory from 1840 – 1847.

Other Collections (Photographic):

Josephine (Moore) Harvey’s Photograph Collection: Collection contains hundreds of photographs (b&w) taken by Josephine Harvey (Moore). Photos chronicle her life in various outposts of the Hudson’s Bay Company. The collection of photo’s date from circa 1920 on. The collection documents buildings and landscapes as well as schooners and shipping activity at Moose Factory. Portions of the collection are posted on the web. Josephine Moore requested in her will that the photo collection be made available for anyone to view. See Appendix 9.

John Long Photograph Collection: Collection consists of a couple of hundred b&w photos taken in various communities along James Bay including Moose Factory and Moosonee. The collection has not been catalogued and documented at this point. A number of photographs in the collection can be identified as images of Moose Factory. Images of Moose Factory and Moosonee include agricultural scenes, train station, schooners, treaty payments, views of children hunting with bow and arrow, view of the Mission including the school as well as group pictures of the mission school. See Appendix 10.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-42 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Other Collections (Artefacts Clothing):

Off Site:

Museum of Civilization: Limited collection of clothing and headgear. Clothing consists of a ‘Man’s Peaked Cap, Swampy Cree, Collected in Moose Factory?, Date made: 1840 – 1865; Swampy Cree Sheath, First collected by the Earl of Warwick. Dating from the 18th century. Location collected unknown; Mittens, Eastern Woods Cree type, Date made 1810 – 1830. Location collected unknown. See Appendix 11.

Royal British Museum, London, England: Sir Hans Sloane natural history collection. Two items from Hudson’s Bay are found in the Sloane collection, neither artefact directly attributed to Moose Factory: Model tikinagan, or cradle. Cree before AD 1743. Collected by John Potts, surgeon under James Isham, for the Hudson’s Bay Company at York Factory, Manitoba, in about 1743. Cradle formed of a board with a skin covering; Human Scalp stretched on a wooden hoop. Possibly from Hudson Bay, 18th Century AD. May be the scalp in Hans Sloane’s London Collection described as “Indian scalp from Hudson’s Bay Adorn’d [with] bird and Porcupine quills.’ See Appendix 12.

Royal Industrial Museum of Scotland, Edinbourgh Scotland: Collection consists of material collected and forwarded by Bernard Rogan Ross. Scope and type of material unknown.

Smithsonian Institution: Collection contains some ethnological material forwarded to Kennicott by Bernard Rogan Ross and possibly, plant samples collected and forwarded by Walton Haydon who was an HBC doctor in Moose Factory. An article ‘Medicinal Plants used by the Cree Indians, Hudson’s Bay Territory’ published in the American Journal of Pharmacy, Volume 56, #12, December, 1884. The material was originally housed in the Museum of the Pharmaceutical Society, location unknown.

J. M Coopers Artefact Collection, Smithsonian Institution: Collection consists of artefacts collected by Cooper in 1932, 1933 and 1934. A list of artefacts is contained within the J. M. Cooper Field Notes. See Appendix 13. Artefacts are a diverse collection of material including: legs of a caribou fetus tied to a baby’s cradle to bring good luck in hunting caribou later; model rabbit skin blanket weaving frame; 4 types of moccasins; model of a lynx deadfall; fox whistle; model spoon; model beaver net; model sinew backed bow; birch bark dish; snow goose decoy; snow goggles and a diverse range of other artefacts collected from various individuals in Moose Factory including the Smallboys and Blackned’s.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-43 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Oral Histories:

1934 Anthropologist John M. Cooper interviewed Cree elders John Dick and Sinclair Trapper concerning the traditional hunting grounds and lifestyle. Cooper was also interested in the Hanna Bay Massacre. Material is contained in Cooper’s field notes

1965 – 1969 Anthropologist/Ethnologist Richard Preston interviewed John Blackned. Content: Derived meanings related to conjuring power, attitudes associated with hunting, personal symbolisms expressed in songs, and the relationships of individual autonomy, self-control, and cultural uniformity. National Museum of Man, Mercury Series, Canadian Ethnology Service, Paper No. 30. ‘Cree Narrative: Expressing the personal meanings of events.

1978 Memories of Fur Trading Days in Moose Factory and Vicinity by Herbert F. McLeod.

1980 Interviews of a number of elders undertaken in the early 1980’s to assist in the interpretation and exhibit development of three residential buildings relocated to Centennial Park in the mid 1980’s. Interviews undertaken by Carol Judd (historian), Hugh O’Brien (Architectural Technologist) and Brenda Small (Moose Factory Resident). A condensed version of the oral interviews is contained in a report titled, “Memories of Life at a Fur Trade Post”, n.d., author unknown. See Appendix 5.

1999 Oral interviews of two elders Brodie Echum and Sinclair Trapper undertaken by John Long for research related to the Hanna Bay Massacre.

John S. Long CATALOG OF JAMES BAY CREE AND METIS AUDIOTAPES

Copies of these tapes were donated to the Ojibway-Cree Cultural Centre in Timmins.

# Narrator Date Affiliation Language Recorded of Tape

1 John Carpenter June 1980 Moose Factory Cree (orig. Ojibway) English

2-4 Isaiah Salt June 1983 Eastern Cree English

11-13 Willie Moore 20 March 1984 Metis (Cree) English

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-44 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

14-15 Fred Moore 29 March 1984 Metis (Cree) English

16-18 Redfern Louttit 2 April 1984 Eastern Cree (originally W. James English Bay) 19-20 George Solomon (& 26 April 1984 W. James Bay Cree Cree text) 21-22 James Wesley April 1984 W. James Bay Cree Cree

23-25 translation of 21-22 26 April 1984

26-28 James Wesley 28 April 1984 W. James Bay Cree (N. Wesley’s translation tape) 29 Michael Patrick 28 April 1984 W. James Bay Cree (N. Wesley’s translation tape) 30 Simeon Metat 28 April 1984 W. James Bay Cree (N. Wesley’s translation tape) 31-33 Raphael Wabano (& 30 April 1984 W. James Bay Cree (N. Wesley’s Cree text) tape) 36-38 Madeline Wesley 21 May 1984 W. James Bay & Moose Factory Cree Cree Jemima Quachegan

39-43 Willie Wesley 26 May 1984 W. James Bay & Moose Factory Cree Cree Abraham Richard

44-45 Rubina McLeod 26 May 1984 Metis (Cree) English

46-49 Willie Sutherland Sr. 28 May 1984 Moose Factory Cree Cree

50-52 Thomas Cheechoo 2 June 1984 Moose Factory Cree Cree

53-54 William Moore 4 June 1984 Metis (Cree) English

55 Alfred Carpenter (& 12 June 1984 W. James Bay Cree Cree text) 56-58 Bert Morrison Sr. 14 June 1984 Metis (Cree) English

59-60 Rubina McLeod 17 June 1984 Metis (Cree) English

61 Charles Miller 20 June 1984 Metis (Cree) English

62-64 Oliver Dick Sr. 24 June 1984 Moose Factory Cree Cree

65-68 Bill Turner 25 June 1984 Metis (Cree) English Willie Chilton

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-45 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

69-71 Fred Moore 2 July 1984 Metis (Cree) English

72-73 John Blackned 6 July 1984 Eastern Cree Cree

74 Redfern Louttit 12 July 1984 Eastern Cree (originally W. James English Bay)

75 APANO General 15 July 1984 Metis/Non-Status English Assembly

76 Alfred Carpenter 18 July 1984 W. James Bay Cree English

79-81 James Wesley 27-28 July W. James Bay Cree Cree 1984 82 George Solomon 8 August 1984 W. James Bay Cree Cree

83 Alfred Carpenter 21 August W. James Bay Cree Cree George Solomon 1984

86 Cheechoo Family 1984 release Moose Factory and Eastern Cree English

89 Fred Moore 27 Dec. 1984 Metis (Cree) English

90-91 Winnie Spencer 6 January 1985 Eastern and Moose Factory Cree English James Cheechoo

92 Cree Language 14 Feb. 1985 Moose Factory and Hearst Cree Cree and English Workshop

93-94 Louis Bird 23 Feb. 1985 W. James Bay Cree English

95-96 James Wesley 26 March 1985 W. James Bay Cree Cree

97-98 Louis Bird 2 April 1985 W. James Bay & Moose Factory Cree English Norman Wesley

99-100 Rubina McLeod 23 June 1985 Metis (Cree) English

101 Fred Moore 23 June 1985 Metis (Cree) English

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

2-46 Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Chapter 3:

COMMEMORATIVE

INTEGRITY

STATEMENT

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

3-1

Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

3. COMMEMORATIVE INTEGRITY STATEMENT

3.1 Commemorative Intent: Reasons for the Site’s National Importance

Introduction

The Moose Factory Tourism Association proposes to make Moose Factory a nature and cultural island destination and suggests that Moose Factory Tourism association coordinate a regional effort to adopt an approach aimed at conserving natural, cultural and historical resources while encouraging recreation activities and resource development. The proposed orientation for each theme is as follows:

1. Environment: Conservation of significant ecosystems and natural environment.

2. Recreation: Encourage recreational experiences within a preserved natural environment.

3. Regional Integration: Moose Factory Gateway as a part of the James Bay region.

4. Heritage: Conservation of cultural landscape, archaeological resources and architectural heritage relating to the region including repatriation of artefacts.

5. Management: A coordinated management structure.

6. Symbol and Communication: A Canadian Gateway to history, culture and nature.

This conservation management strategy developed within the context of this Master Plan reflects the intent to foster commitment for a cultural landscape with each of these themes. It represents a proposal currently under discussion and not a formal commitment.

Heritage Values

The organization of this section follows to some extent that of the Commemorative Integrity Statement prepared by Parks Canada for national historic sites. It sets out a hierarchy of values, objectives, and messages that guide management priorities and actions.

Moose Factory Island and specifically the Hudson Bay Fort have been commemorated as a national historic site and shares many of the same kinds of values associated with them. It is recommended that the Moose Factory Tourism Association take a management approach that parallels Parks Canada’s management of national historic sites under its cultural resources management policy; hence the relevance of the Commemorative Integrity Statement and its methodology, and the reason why it is being used as a model for this chapter of the report.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

3-2

Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Formal Heritage Status

The Island of Moose Factory as well as buildings associated with the second Hudson’s Bay Company post were designated in 1957 as being of national historic significance. Additionally, a plaque commemorating Phillip Turnor, the Hudson’s Bay Company surveyor who explored the Athabasca, is designated as a person of national historic significance. The HBC Staff House although owned by the Ontario Heritage Foundation is not designated.

Historic and Geographic Context of Moose Factory Island

Moose Factory Island: Pre-European

The history of Moose Factory Island prior to the arrival of Europeans is not well understood. As indicated by Judd in her 1980 land use study of Moose Factory Island, “It is not presently known whether Indians lived permanently on the shores of James Bay, and specifically on Moose Factory Island, before the arrival of Europeans.” (Judd 1980b: 48). That she would even raise the question of ‘permanent’ settlement suggests a lack understanding or appreciation for the nomadic settlement pattern adopted by hunter/gatherer populations. Consequently the concept of permanent settlement should be replaced with one of seasonal migration through a broad and diverse territory which offered different resources during different seasons of the year.

Moose Factory Island: The First Fort

After Radisson and Governor Charles Bayly’s visit to the Moose River in 1671, the HBC chose Hay’s Island (Moose Factory Island) in the Moose River for the site of its second post in the watershed of Hudson and James bays. Built in 1673, the small post was built about a mile from the western end of the island. Although there has been considerable debate as to its

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

3-3

Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

location, Judd places the site in the area of Point of Pull (Judd 1980b; Appendix A). The post was occupied from 1673 until 1686 when it was attacked and captured by a French force led by the Chevalier de Troyes.

Moose Factory: The Second Fort

The original Moose Fort site appears to have been largely abandoned between 1686 and 1730, when a second post was built about a mile up river (Judd 1980b: 53). Based on various measurements gleaned from the HBC records, Judd places Moose Factory II “near the present Anglican Church, or immediately to the west of the present Hudson’s Bay Company staff house.” (Judd 1980b: 72). However, it is quite clear from the Hudson’s Bay Company records that the fort that was constructed on the remains of the flankered 1730 fort foundations.

With the change in command came an apparent switch in focus from defence to general operation and maintenance of the post (Judd 1980b:85). The momentum of construction and repairs continued through the late 18th and early 19th centuries. By mid-19th century the pace of construction had slowed and buildings often fell into disrepair before being rebuilt or replaced. Judd’s documentation of the period brings forward fascinating details of structural development, labour unrest and changing priorities.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

3-4

Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Commemorative Significance as Management Tool

The Statement of Commemorative Significance – the reasons for designation or commemoration – is a conceptual Framework that serves as a management and planning tool by helping to focus the site’s planning and decision –making issues. It is a method of assessing a site in terms of its core heritage values and the probable impact of management options on these values and the individual heritage resources. Achieving Commemorative Integrity or heritage Integrity The ‘Statement of Significance’ is a new tool developed by Parks Canada for entries to the Canadian Register of Historic Places (CRHP), a component of the new Historic Places Initiative (HPI). It is intended to describe historic places of all kinds: structures, buildings, districts, landscapes, and archaeological sites.

The Statement of Significance has three components:

• Description of Historic Place o This paints a picture of this historic place in one or two sentences, describing very generally what the recognition applies to, the principal resources, and the general nature of the historic place. It includes reference to what may have been designated or formally recognized by an authority.

• Heritage Value o This section describes the core heritage values of the historic place. It may refer to the aesthetic, historic, scientific, educational, cultural, social, or spiritual importance for past, present, or future generations.

• Character-Defining Elements o This section identifies, in point form, the principal features of the historic place, such as the materials, forms, spatial configurations, uses, and cultural associations or meanings that must be protected in order to preserve its heritage value.

In the CRHP database, the first field is restricted to 2,000 characters, and the other two to 4,000 characters each. The total length is therefore no more than three pages. They are intended to be succinct and readable by a general audience.

This draft Statement of Significance is proposed for discussion and revision by the Moose Factory client group and stakeholders.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

3-5

Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Historic Place

We have presented alternative descriptions of the Historic Place for discussion.

Alternative 1

The historic place consists of Moose Factory Island, a low-lying, treed-and-grassy island in the tidewater delta of the Moose River, near its outlet into James Bay, and opposite the town of Moosonee; and it includes nearby Charles Island, Sawpit Island, and the small Flats Island. The historic place comprises all natural and man-made landscape features, buildings, structures, current and traditional uses, and cultural associations.

Alternative 2

The historic place consists of the Moose River delta, including the river and adjacent lands from a point in line with the southern boundary of Moose Factory I.R. 68 to the mouth of the river. This includes, but is not restricted to, Moose Factory Island, the town of Moosonee, the Moose River and its islands, and Moose Factory I.R. 68. Ship Sands Island at the mouth of the Moose River which was used as a safe harbour for the larger ships being offloaded to Moose Factory. There are two ‘ships holes’ still evident on the Island. Charlton Island (transhipment station) for Moose Factory as well as East Main and Rupert House are also important components of the Hudson Bay Story.

There is a logic in selecting either of the alternatives. Alternative 1 is very manageable and has clearly defined limits and will avoid the potential of intruding on the jurisdiction of other agencies or individuals. Alternative 2 is more easily defined as a cultural landscape encompassing most of the components set out in the preamble to this chapter. We are recommending Alternative I – not because we believe it to be the best but because it is the most likely to be accepted by all of the parties participating in this assessment. As such this draft statement of heritage value refers to Alternative No. 1 – the historic place as Moose Factory Island and the adjacent islands. It will require adjustment if another historic place is selected.

Heritage Value

The historic place has heritage value as being: Part of the land of the Omushkegowuk people for millennia; As the site of an important Hudson’s Bay Company trading post for nearly three centuries; For having been a meeting place between Cree and European people; For its associations with the activities of missionaries and explorers;

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

3-6

Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

As the political, economic, and social focus of the southern James Bay region for two centuries; and For being Canada’s oldest surviving English-speaking community.

The Omushkegowuk (dwellers of the muskeg), a distinctive Cree group, have lived, hunted, and traded in this region for thousands of years, leaving the landscape with intangible and tangible records of their rich cultural heritage. Over the millennia the historic place has witnessed the many social, economic, cultural, and spiritual activities of the Omushkegowuk people, and perhaps their ancestral group(s), and resounds with their traditions, stories, and spirituality.

Traditional Cree burial sites located primarily in the south-western portion of the Island north and south of Front Street. The continuation of the traditional Cree lifestyle as it relates to living off the land.

European values were overlaid and partially integrated with those of First Nations following the establishment of fur-trading posts by the Hudson’s Bay Company, first at the mouth of the Rupert River in 1668, and then on Hayes Island in the Moose River in 1673, and finally on Moose Factory Island in 1730. As an important trading post in the Hudson’s Bay drainage, Moose Factory (originally called Moose Fort) witnessed many events and interactions between First Nations and Europeans, and also among different European groups, many of which contributed directly to the formation of the Canadian nation. Moose Factory was the epicentre of struggles between English and French for dominance in the fur trade, including having been captured, recaptured, and burned on various occasions.

The activity of Christian missionaries in Moose Factory since the middle of the nineteenth century, including Bishop John Horden and others, has impacted in many different ways upon the Cree people, not only in Moose Factory and James Bay, but also to a much wider population because of the propagation of Cree syllabics by missionaries based in Moose Factory. Bishop John Horden’s collaboration with John Peck in developing the Inuit syllabics.

As a result of the policies of the Hudson’s Bay Company and the activities of the Moose Cree, Moose Factory became the primary political, economic, and social focus of the southern James Bay region. For nearly two centuries, Moose Factory has been an important meeting place for both Cree and Europeans, and has provided a variety of social, health, and educational services to the wider region, including developing a hospital that has served, and continues to serve, a broad area. The economic importance of Moose Factory has declined since the arrival of the railway to Moosonee in 1931, and the consequent reduction in importance of water transportation from Hudson and James Bays.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

3-7

Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Moose Factory continues to have significance as a meeting place, being the headquarters of the Mushkegowuk Tribal Council, providing a home to the MoCreebec and the European- Canadians who have migrated here during the past century, and being a destination for visitors who come from all over Canada and around the world.

The Significance of Moose Factory

Parks Canada defines a cultural landscape as ‘any geographic area the has been modified, influenced or given special cultural meaning by people’ ( Parks Canada Operational policies 1994). Cultural Landscapes are classified as designed, organically evolved, and/or associative. For the purpose of commemorative significance, Moose Factory Island is a cultural landscape which, exhibits characteristics predominately of an organically evolved landscape.

Character-Defining Elements

• Moose River and its tributaries. Transportation corridor.

• Road system on Moose Factory Island. Front Street, Pehdabun Road, Horden Street, and Veterans Road.

• Buildings in Centennial Park, including: o Joseph Turner House o William McLeod House o Ham Sackabuckiskum House o Hudson’s Bay Company Blacksmith’s Shop o Hudson’s Bay Company Powder Magazine

• Hudson’s Bay Company Staff House and associated landscape to the east, west and south of the building.

• HBC yard within the area now occupied by the North West Quick Mart.

• Hudson’s Bay Company Cemetery, including its burial markers and the picket fence.

• Cree encampment area south of Front Street extending from Hospital Drive easterly to the Staff House.

• St. Thomas Anglican Church and its Cemetery and artefacts, including its burial markers

• Catholic cemetery located adjacent to GG’s Convenience Store.

• Point of Pull (Fort Garry) where the first Hudson’s Bay Company post is reputed to have been located.

• Remnants of wharf and docking structures located along the south-eastern shore of the Island.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

3-8

Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

• Archaeological sites and artefacts associated with the sites identified on the Island.

• Moose Cree First Nation Reserve.

• Cree Culture Interpretive Centre and its collections

• Historic Hospital. Only the second hospital remains on the Island.

• Weneeybayko General Hospital

• Ministick Public School

• Roman Catholic Church

• Pentecostal Church

• Cree Gospel Chapel

• Cree New Life Church

• Historic artifacts in the landscape, including capstan, cast iron cannon, bronze cannons, and fur press.

• Former boat landing facing Sawpit Island

• Remaining cuts in the shoreline where boats were pulled up for repairs and winter storage.

• Undeveloped land in northern portion of the Island, including the nature trails

• Channel between Charles and Sawpit Islands

• Access to Flats Island

• Boat landing in the village

• Tidewater Provincial Park on Charles Island

• Long-time continuous occupation by Moose Cree

3.2 Commemorative Integrity

Moose Factory is significant as a distinctive cultural landscape. It exemplifies and represents the traditional hunting fishing trapping and trading of the Cree Nation that traditionally occupied these lands. The evolved built elements of the landscape and buildings on Moose Factory Island document the coming together of two distinct cultures.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

3-9

Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Given its position of prominence within the Moose River system, it is evident Cree peoples occupied Moose Factory Island on a seasonal basis long before the arrival of Europeans. The fact that Radisson and Governor Charles Bayly visited the Moose River in 1671 to trade with the “People of that place” (Arthur et al 1973: 8) is a clear indication that a seasonal Cree population inhabited the environs of the Moose River.

The Island and the records both oral and written document the Cree occupation and use of the Islands for multiple generations.

The Island symbolizes the nucleus of the role of the Cree played in accommodating the Hudson Bay Company and the fur industry into their traditional life style

Moose Factory Island from 1730, is significant as an important trading post in the Hudson’s Bay drainage. Moose Factory (originally called Moose Fort) witnessed many events and interactions between First Nations and Europeans, and also among different European groups, many of which contributed directly to the formation of the Canadian nation.

Moose Factory was the epicentre of struggles between English and French for dominance in the fur trade, including having been captured, recaptured, and burned on various occasions.

Moose Factory is commemorated for its role as the major location supply centre in trade in North America both pre and post European settlement.

Moose Factory’s strategic location was integral to access all water transportation into the heart of Canada.

As a result of the activities of the Moose Cree, and the policies of the Hudson’s Bay Company, Moose Factory became the primary political, economic, and social focus of the southern James Bay region.

For nearly two centuries, Moose Factory has been an important meeting place for both Cree and Europeans, and has provided a variety of social, health, and educational services to the wider region, including developing a hospital that has served, and continues to serve, a broad area.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

3-10

Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

The surviving structures at Moose Factory represent significant examples of early fur trade architecture, missionary and medicinal, and educational services provided by both colonial and Canadian government.

Communication of Reasons for Commemorative Value.

The messages of Significance make the public aware of the reasons why Moose Factory Island is recognized as an important cultural resource. It is essential that effective means of communicating these messages are established in order that as many people as possible understand that:

Proposed Interpretive Nodes and Themes

1. Theme: Welcome and Orientation

2. Theme: Health and Medicine

3. Theme: Moving with the Seasons

4. Theme: Education

5. Theme: Spirituality

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

3-11

Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

6. Theme: Trade History

7. Theme: Cree Culture with Elders

8. Theme: Transportation

9. Theme: The Moose Cree First Nation

10. Theme: The Moose Cree Community

11. Theme: Physical Geography and Geology

12. Theme: Traditional Ecological Knowledge

13. Theme: Eco-Tourism in the Area

14. Theme: The Cree World and MoCreebec

Conservation Strategy

The development of a conservation strategy for the buildings is complicated by ownership issues. The MFTA manages the buildings within Centennial Park which is owned by the Northwest Company. Centennial Park in turn is leased to the Ontario Northland Railway. The Powder Magazine and Blacksmith Shop are owned by the Northwest Company. The Turner, McLeod and Sackabuckiskum Houses (Chattels) are owned by the Ontario Heritage Foundation and set on property owned by the Northwest Company. The Staff House is owned by the Ontario Heritage Foundation as is the property that the building sits on. Saint Thomas Anglican Church is owned by the Anglican Diocese of Moosonee.

It is recommended that the overall conservation strategy for the Powder Magazine and Blacksmith Shop be preservation. The Ontario Heritage Foundation restored the Blacksmith Shop to the 1934 period of significance. Preservation is a program of maintenance and intervention designed to prevent further deterioration of the heritage fabric and to keep a building or resource ‘as is’ – that is to respect the present form, material and integrity. Emphasis is placed on the conservation of existing material.

It is recommended that the overall conservation strategy for the Turner, McLeod and Sackabuckiskum Houses be preservation of the exterior. Preservation is a program of maintenance and intervention designed to prevent further deterioration of the heritage fabric and to keep a building or resource ‘as is’ – that is to respect the present form, material and integrity. Emphasis is placed on the conservation of existing material. Adaptive reuse of the interiors to provide accommodation with interpretation to the periods of significance as detailed in the OHF development proposal: Turner House 1864: Sackabuckiskum House 1926 and the McLeod House (1880’s) 1981.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

3-12

Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

It is recommended that he overall conservation strategy for the Saint Thomas Anglican Church be preservation. Preservation is a program of maintenance and intervention designed to prevent further deterioration of the heritage fabric and to keep a building or resource ‘as is’ – that is to respect the present form, material and integrity. Emphasis is placed on the conservation of existing material. A full basement is proposed for the structure however, this will have little impact on the external appearance of the structure.

It is recommended that he overall conservation strategy for the Staff House be preservation. Preservation is a program of maintenance and intervention designed to prevent further deterioration of the heritage fabric and to keep a building or resource ‘as is’ – that is to respect the present form, material and integrity. Emphasis is placed on the conservation of existing material. The building will be fitted up for accommodation, a Museum and Tea Room all of which have historically been located in the building.

Development proposals include the construction of a Boat Works; a reproduction of the original building circa 1926. Hudson’s Bay Company records are adequate for the design development phase. Additionally a small Bake Oven modeled on historical precedents will be constructed and located adjacent to the Staff House.

Conservation practise differentiates between levels of intervention that can be applied to heritage resources. The most pertinent Levels of Intervention for a project of this nature are:

Preservation is a program of maintenance and intervention designed to prevent further deterioration of the heritage fabric and to keep a building or resource “as is” - that is, to respect the present form, material, and integrity. Emphasis is placed on the conservation of existing material. The process should include an ongoing maintenance program.

Restoration is the process of returning a property to the appearance of an earlier time by removing later material and by replacing missing elements and details. There are two variations to this approach, the first one more moderate and the second more extreme. Both have in common the criterion of authenticity – that is, respect for the value of the fabric as a document of the past. The process should include an ongoing maintenance program. Composite Restoration is a form of restoration in which all significant architectural or other features from all historical periods are left intact. The process becomes one of revealing the continuity of the history of the resource. Newer material that is judged to be of little or no value may be removed if this will expose intact historical features of greater value. Missing elements may be replaced, but only when this does not obscure the historic fabric. This approach requires concerted effort at research and documentation. Period Restoration is the process of returning a setting to its appearance at an earlier time. This is an exacting form of restoration that, in most cases, is undertaken only when a compelling case for it can be made on the basis of exceptional architectural or historical importance of the state to which the setting is to be restored, or when removal of later additions will reveal the unity of the original work.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

3-13

Moose Factory Historical and Archaeological Assessment

Rehabilitation is the process of returning a property to a useable state through repair or alteration. Rehabilitation makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features that are significant to the property’s historic, architectural, and cultural values. Rehabilitation can be further defined as either continued-use or adaptive re-use, depending on the reasons for and the nature of the intervention. The process should include an ongoing maintenance program. Continued-Use Rehabilitation is the process of improving a building, which continues to be used for its original purpose. Changes can range from minimal to extensive, depending on the condition of the building, the needs of the owners and users, and the economics of the project. Changes can include upgrading to meet building and life-safety codes, installation of new electrical and mechanical systems, and upgrading to improve access for the handicapped and for energy-conservation measures. Adaptive Re-use Rehabilitation is the process of converting a building to a new use when it has outlived its previous function. In addition to the interventions described for Continued- Use Rehabilitation, some modifications to the building may also be required to accommodate the new programmatic, spatial and circulation needs.

Reconstruction is the process of reproducing previously existing historic features that no longer exist. The new construction exhibits the shape, material and detailing (and often construction methods) of the resource as it once appeared. Authenticity is dependent upon the amount of historical and pictorial evidence available for the original resource. There should be a minimum of conjecture, and great care should be taken to avoid confusion with an authentic historic element.

Renovation is an intervention that makes extensive changes and/or alterations to an existing building internally and externally, in order to renew the structure. These changes are often made in response to the need for more space, or for the need to repair, make general improvements, or address new uses. Renovations may be made in harmony with the existing building, although conservation of heritage fabric is not the first priority of the intervention. The process should include an ongoing maintenance program.

Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited

3-14