All Dolled Up: The Encapsulated Past of Cree Dolls CATH OBERHOLTZER Trent University Serendipity often plays a key role in reconstructing social history from the unwritten texts of material culture. In previous research I have drawn upon the tangible evidence of the past as it is encapsulated by the very few extant Cree dolls.1 Significantly, they have provided invaluable compara­ tive documentation of various garments and paraphernalia which existed at certain historic periods, and more significantly, how these items were combined as ensembles. However, any correlation of this information with specific geographic locations for the dolls or for particular comparative garments has continued to be elusive. With one unexpected, but fortuitous, telephone call, a tiny window has opened on the possibility of just such a correlation. In a recent quest to establish a precise geographical location for three very early English dolls dressed in Cree clothing, an American researcher sought my opinion.2 Based solely on her verbal description, which inclu­ ded comparisons with the four other known examples, I could offer only tentative and somewhat vague suggestions. Although I felt that the dolls' clothing must have been made at, or close to, a major coastal trading post, with York Factory, Fort Albany and Moose Factory being likely candi­ dates, there was not sufficient evidence to be more specific. Shortly thereafter, colour photocopies of the front and back views of the male and female figures (but not the baby in the tikanagan) arrived in the mail. While the photographs made it readily apparent that these dolls were indeed remarkably similar both to the pair of dolls held by the Horniman Museum (catalogue numbers 1976.459 and 1976.460) in London and to the other set of two in a private collection (sold at a Christie's auction in London in 1989), I still was unable to offer a more precise location. 1 The term doll used here is intended to encompass the concepts of both plaything and instructional miniature which encourages children's imitation of roles expected of them as adults (cf. Johnson 1983:1, Mooney 1907:51). 2 The dolls are part of the collections held by the Rosalie Whyel Museum of Doll Art in Bellevue, Wash. 226 CATH OBERHOLTZER Figure 1. Miniature Cree family with second replacement baby. Photo­ graph courtesy of the Rosalie Whyel Museum of Doll Art. Photograph by Charles Backus. A subsequent article pertaining to these three dolls (Figures 1, 2, 3), written by Susan Hednck, curator of the Rosalie Whyel Museum of Doll Art, appeared in the doll collectors' magazine Antique Doll World (Hednck 1997). Like all research, it is the unexpected which yields the most, and in this case, the published illustration of the back view of the tikanagan or cradleboard was particularly relevant (Figure 3). Painted red and decorated with a loom-woven band embellished with fringes of unravelled yarn and beads, this miniature cradleboard, with its triangular cutouts in the iconic form of the thunderbird (cf. Light 1972:12), replicates the full-size board (Figure 4) drawn by James Isham at York Factory in the 1740s (Rich 1949:105). This duplication of form and colour of the associated cradle­ board implies, but does not necessarily confirm, that the dolls were outfit­ ted at or near York Factory. Furthermore, as the clothing has been custom fitted to these specific dolls, and as the ensuing discussion of their clothing will reveal, in all probability they do not predate that mid-18th century time period. While precise dating as to when the dolls actually were dressed continues to be highly speculative, it is evident that whoever ALL DOLLED UP 227 Figure 2. Back view of male and female dolls. Photo­ graph courtesy of the Rosalie Whyle Museum of Doll Art. Photograph by Charles Backus. fashioned these diminutive Cree ensembles possessed intimate knowledge of materials, techniques, styles, motifs, and the appropriate combinations of garments and accessories, and was thus someone directly linked with those traditions. Turning to archival paintings for comparative examples, it is evident that although such early artists as Peter Rindisbacher, William Richards, and Robert Hood3 have provided glimpses of various forms of dress, there remains some question as to the authenticity of the combinations of 3 In some instances, including for the same painting (National Archives of Canada C-38951), this artist has also been called "Robin Hood" (cf. Bunyan et al. 1993:71). 228 CATH OBERHOLTZER Figure 3. Back view of cradle board with first replace­ ment baby. Photograph courtesy of the Rosalie Whyel Museum of Doll Art. Photograph by Charles Backus. garments illustrated in their works.4 In a parallel manner, we must also raise concerns about the validity of the dolls' assembled items. However, based on comparisons with the other dolls in this genre, I am accepting the "package" at face value, at least until further information arises. Further comparisons with photographs and actual examples of clothing and paraphernalia in museum collections coupled with written descriptions by early observers and documentary information about the wooden dolls yield 4 Based on close examination of numerous Rindisbacher works, Laura Peers (personal communication, 1994) suggests that several of the accessories appear in more than one situation. ALL DOLLED UP 229 a degree of authenticity to the date and location for the dressing of the dolls by an unidentified Cree woman (or women). THE ENGLISH DOLLS The miniature mannequins modelling the Cree clothing have been identified as being of English manufacture made during the late Georgian period, circa 1790-1820 (Hedrick 1997:17).5 Certainly these particular peg-jointed wooden dolls with their narrow-waisted and broad-hipped shape reflect the forms typical of that period (cf. Anonymous 1993:93; Campione 1992:76-81; Langley and Dixon 1992:98-100; Whyel and Hedrick 1997:5). These lathe-turned dolls, covered with gesso6 and then painted, their fine-featured faces highlighted with rosy cheeks, red lips, and pupil-less glass eyes, with lashes indicated by a fine elliptical line of tiny painted black dots, further attest to late Georgian origins (Anonymous 1993:93; Whyel and Hedrick 1997:5). Wigs ofhuman hair nailed in place and hands with fingers carved like the tines of a fork add further credence to the attributed dates for this Cree couple. Regrettably, the wax-over composition7 baby doll fastened into the accompanying tikanagan is a later replacement of dubious quality, and can be ignored for the present time.8 The original infant was in all probability similar to the gessoed and painted wooden one laced into the tikanagan of the Christie set (Hedrick 1997:20). THE DOLLS' CREE CLOTHING As the singular example in this genre of dolls, the diminutive male encapsulates the most (Figures 1,2). No other single source has yielded as much information about male clothing of the early 19th century as this doll does. Standing approximately 41 cm tall, this male figure illustrates a well- 5 After examining the Horniman dolls, a doll expert informed the museum that their two dolls were English, daring from the 1770-90 period (Feder 1984:52). The similarities between the two sets evokes questions about the dating. 6 Gesso is ground plaster of Paris prepared as paint. In this instance, the gesso becomes an intermediate layer covering the wood and underlying the paint. 7 A form made of composition (a very strong mixture of wood pulp, paper pulp, or flour and glue) is dipped into melted wax. The resulting surface tends to become crazed and cracked (Sturge 1986). 8 Since my initial discussion of the dolls, the composition doll has been replaced by one deemed to be "more appropriate". Although both these replacements are part of the social history of curated items, both are to be ignored for the present. 230 CATH OBERHOLTZER dressed hunter of the subarctic region. His ensemble consists of a caribou hide coat with painted designs enhanced by quilled and ravelled yam epaulettes, a beaded and fringed belt, a breechclout, thigh-length leggings held in place with loom-woven beaded and fringed garters, and a round- bottomed beaded bag slung across his chest. His feet are shod in high- cuffed moccasins tied firmly around the ankle. Unique are his beaded red cloth "eared" cap, the single elaborate beaded hair cover hanging down the centre of his back to below his waist (Figure 2; partially hidden by hood), and the heavy woolen cloth lining (or undercoat) for his painted hide coat. Consideration of the individual parts of his outfit, and comparison of each with extant examples of full-size items, establishes both parallels and differences. For instance, his hair cover seems to have no parallels as there are no known examples or illustrations with the exception of an 1861 drawing of a Montagnais or Naskapi man in Labrador who appears to have a single, ornamented hair cover hanging down his back.9 In the early written descriptions, no readily available source makes reference to this particular form of ornamentation. For example, James Isham, chief factor at York Factory in the early 1740s, records that it was "only the women, who ties itt [their hair] in Knots & platts itt in Different form's" whereas a man rarely wore "the hair of his head at full Length, some Clipping itt short, others Cutting only one side short and Leaving the other side Long" (Rich 1949:79-80). A few years later, Charles Swaine (Theodorus Swaine Drage), the clerk of the California, wintering over at York Factory during the winter of 1746-47, notes that: Some [men] wear round their Heads Fillets as narrow as tape, made of green or red Worsted, with two Borders of Beads, with which they tie up their Hair and the two Ends of the Fillet hang down upon the left Shoulder..