An Eastern Micmac Domain of Islands CHARLES A. MARTIJN Ministere des Affaires cullurelles, Quebec Introduction The Micmac Indians of Eastern Canada inhabit a region that borders the lower half of the Gulf of St. Lawrence.1 Their homeland includes portions of the Gaspe Peninsula and New Brunswick, all of Prince Edward Island and mainland Nova Scotia, as well as Cape Breton and parts of southern Newfoundland. Although the boundaries of this traditional territory cannot be determined with any precision because of fluctuations through time, it may have covered as much as 121,760 square kilometres, or about the size of Tunisia. An overview of Micmac culture and society is provided by Hoffman (1955), Nietfeld (1981), Passchier (1985) and Wallis and Wallis (1955). An extensive coastline permitted easy access to aquatic fauna — sea- mammals, fish, waterfowl and invertebrates — which are abundant in the gulf of St. Lawrence area. As a result, the Micmac were probably the most maritime-adapted of all Algonquian groups. Nevertheless, for survival dur­ ing the winter months they had to depend to a much greater extent on land animals such as moose, caribou, deer and beaver. Some scholars have depicted them as spending up to 10 months of the year obtaining 90% of their food requirements from coastal zones and the sea (Hoffman 1955:230- 236; Nietfeld 1981:360-363). Recent reviews of archaeological and ethno­ historical data, however, indicate a greater use of terrestrial fauna than has hitherto been acknowledged, and point to the need for a more intensive consideration of regional variation in available resources and subsistence strategies (Nash and Miller 1987; see also Burley 1981 and Clermont 1986). My sincere thanks are extended to Moira T. McCaffrey for her invaluable suggestions and editing assistance. I am also indebted to Ingeborg Marshall Ralph T Pastore and John Reid for commenting on a preliminary version of this paper which was first read at the 7th Atlantic Canada Studies Conference held in Edmburgh, Scotland ln May 1988. The accompanying map is the work of GiUes 208 AN EASTERN MICMAC DOMAIN OF ISLANDS 209 Figure 1: Atlantic Canada 210 CHARLES A. MARTIJN The Micmac can be ranked among the most skillful Amerindian seafar­ ers in Northeastern North America as attested to by their lengthy voyages across open water. They constructed at least 4 types of birchbark canoes which served for different purposes, namely, travelling along small inland streams, on larger rivers, on the sea or while going to war (Adney and Chapelle 1964:58-70; Marshall 1986). The Micmac sea canoe ranged in size from 5.5 to 8.5 metres and had considerable "rocker" (i.e., slanting upcurved ends) which facilitated cutting through waves and also permitted easier manoeuvring in surf when running ashore end-on. The sides were "hogged", that is to say, curved upward at the center. This design offered some protection from spray and allowed for safer heeling over when heavy objects such as seals were hauled aboard from the water. No reliable figures are available regarding Micmac population size at contact time. Estimates vary considerably and have ranged from as low as 3500 to as high as 50,000 (cf. Hoffman 1955:229-236; Miller 1976, 1982; Nietfeld 1981:390-393; and comments by Clermont 1986:13). Politically, the Micmac did not constitute a formal tribal entity but were divided into a number of autonomous bands which shared a common language and cul­ ture, and interacted on a regular basis. A band might number up to several hundred individuals. During the spring to autumn period band members congregated at traditional coastal locations where food supplies were plen­ tiful. At the onset of winter they split up into smaller groups composed of one or more families which moved to inland hunting grounds, although in some regions parts of the coastal zone continued to be exploited. Summer bands were led by chiefs chosen from among influential family heads who had received recognition for their leadership abilities and who best embodied cultural values. In some instances they and their immediate kin groups may have had special ties to specific summer locations. Here they were joined by other families who formed a more flexible part of the band membership and attached or detached themselves each year according to circumstances. Micmac chiefs only exercised limited authority, however, and their main roles were apparently to coordinate the exploitation of re­ sources, to arbitrate disputes among band members, to maintain alliances with other bands, and to attend to war measures whenever necessary (Niet­ feld 1981:471-552; Passchier 1985). According to native oral tradition, the land of the Micmac was divided into 7 districts, each one of which included several bands (Nietfeld 1981:417- 422). The easternmost of these regions was Onamag or Cape Breton Island. Although southern Newfoundland is designated by the name Ktaqamkuk, it does not appear to have been accorded a separate status and fell within the sphere of the Cape Breton district. Despite the fact that Cape Breton Island, southern Newfoundland the AN EASTERN MICMAC DOMAIN OF ISLANDS 211 Magdalen archipelago and the islands of Saint-Pierre and Miquelon are all separated from one another by wide stretches of open water, they seem to have constituted a single territorial range exploited by Eastern Micmac seafarers throughout much of the historic period.2 Whether such also held true for prehistoric times remains to be determined. For a more precise understanding of this pattern it is necessary to consider the adaptive strategies that were employed, such as the concurrent, seasonal, rotational or opportunistic uses made of the different areas within this insular domain. In addition, a more detailed examination must be undertaken of the various temporal factors that influenced the choice of these adaptive strategies, namely, availability of food resources, the supply of furbearing animals, technological innovations, political events, trading opportunities, population pressure and the need for spiritual ministration. It should be cautioned that an insufficient appreciation of native sub­ sistence patterns, a narrow use of the term "Cape Breton Micmac", and a preoccupation with contemporary political boundaries are apt to becloud our comprehension of the past. A case in point is the question of Micmac land-use and occupancy of southern Newfoundland. The decision of the Federal Government in 1973 to deal with outstanding native land claims throughout Canada led the Newfoundland Micmac to begin gathering ev­ idence in support of their title (Kennedy 1987).3 According to their oral tradition, an early permanent Micmac population in Newfoundland, re­ ferred to as the Sagewedjdkik or Ancients, had inhabited the southern and western parts of this island prior to the 18th century and had merged with later Micmac immigrants from Cape Breton Island (Speck 1922:27, 123— 124; see also Anger 1983:36-37). The Provincial Government of Newfoundland and Labrador subscribes to a different viewpoint which echoes a widely held popular belief (Jones 1982). The Beothuk are considered to be the original inhabitants of the island. The Micmac are depicted as relatively recent arrivals from the Maritime Provinces, brought in as mercenaries by the French during the 2 Since Prince Edward Island falls more within the Central Micmac sphere of activity, it has been excluded from consideration in this present discussion. Nonetheless, there are indications of links between P.E.I, and the Magdalens dur­ ing prehistoric and historic times (McCaffrey 1986:128-129 and personal com­ munication; Martijn 1986a:189), as well as with Cape Breton Island (McCaffrey 1986:153; McGee 1974:86; NAC 1726:123). 3The principal studies commissioned by Newfoundland Micmac organizations are Anger (1983; 1988), Byers Casgrain (1982), Federation of Newfoundland In­ dians (1979a, 1979b), Morisset and Giard (1978), and Usher (1980). Independent scholarly contributions have also been made by Bartels (1979a, 1979b), Marshall (1988), Pastore (1977, 1978a, 1978b), and Tanner (1982). The position adopted by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is expounded by Jones (1982). 212 CHARLES A. MARTIJN 18th century to help combat the English, and for some unspecified reason, to exterminate the Beothuk. Any other crossings made by the Micmac are construed as merely sporadic and transitory incursions connected with fur-trapping activities. The idea of a continuous Micmac presence prior to colonial settlement is rejected and they are judged not to possess any valid aboriginal title to Newfoundland. In presenting the case for the existence of an Eastern Micmac domain of islands during earlier times, the present discussion will rely not only on direct documentary sources, but will also resort to arguments based on indirect, or presumptive, evidence. Prehistoric Period The question of a prehistoric Micmac presence in Newfoundland remains in suspense due to the fact that only limited fieldwork has been carried out in the southern part of that island. For a list of pertinent archaeological reports see Marshall (1988:53). Similarly, although a few prehistoric finds are known from the Saint-Pierre and Miquelon Islands, indicating a Dorset Eskimo as well as an Amerindian (Little Passage Complex) presence, these collections have yet to be analyzed and more intensive surveys need to be undertaken (Andree Lebailly personal communication; Ralph Pastore personal communication.) Certain commentators have expressed doubts about Amerindians reg­ ularly undertaking the dangerous crossing of the Cabot Strait in birchbark canoes during prehistoric times. They suggest that this practice only be­ came common after the Micmac had begun to acquire shallops from Euro­ pean fishermen (Harp 1964:152; Jones 1982:94; Jukes 1842, 1:151; Pastore 1977:1-2, 1978a:10). The risks incurred during the course of such voyages should certainly not be minimized. A distance of 105 kilometres had to be covered, the same width as that of the Bering Strait which separates Siberia from Alaska.