Reading Assignment

The Original "Free Trade": Exchange of Botanical Products and Associated Plant Knowledge in Northwestern North America

Author(s): Nancy J. Turner and Dawn C. Loewen

Source: Anthropologica , 1998, Vol. 40, No. 1, L'Ethnobiologie / Ethnobiology (1998), pp. 49-70

Published by: Canadian Anthropology Society

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25605872

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms

is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Anthropologica

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

The Original "Free Trade": Exchange of Botanical Products and Associated Plant Knowledge in Northwestern North America

Nancy J. Turner University of Victoria Dawn C. Loewen University of Victoria

Abstract: Long-standing and far-reaching trade networks for culturally important plants are documented for British Colum bia and neighbouring areas from archaeological, historical and ethnographic records, as well as recollections of contemporary Aboriginal people. Plant resources and products manufactured from plants comprised a substantial portion of traditional and contemporary traded goods. Examples include: dried edible seaweed, commonly traded from coastal communities inland; dried soapberries, saskatoon berries and other berries; hazel nuts; cedar-root and cedar-bark baskets; basket materials; and Indian-hemp fibre and twine. In addition to the plant materials, knowledge associated with these resources was exchanged, and trade has had cultural and ecological implications extending well beyond simple subsistence.

Resume: Dans cet article nous presentons les reseaux d'echange, de longue date et de grande portee, de plantes cul turellement importantes de la Colombie britannique et de re gions adjacentes a partir de sources archeologiques, historiques et ethnographiques et de souvenirs d'autochtones contempo rains. Les ressources vegetales et les produits d'origine vege tale formaient une partie substantielle des produits echanges traditionnellement et de fagon contemporaine. Les exemples presentes incluent: les algues marines comestibles sechees, echangees couramment entre les communautes de la cote et celles de l'interieur; les pommes de savon, les petites poires et autres petits fruits seches; les noisettes; les paniers en racine de cedre et en ecorce de cedre; les materiaux pour fabriquer les paniers; et la fibre et le fil du chanvre du Canada. En plus des materiaux d'origine vegetale, des connaissances associees a ces ressources etaient echangees. Lechange eut de nombreux effets culturels et ecologiques et n'etait pas restreint a la sim ple subsistance.

Introduction

Trade between villages was necessary to provide a con tinuous supply of food and accumulate wealth. Goods were exchanged by sharing, bartering, or trading a gift for a gift. Trade included sharing land that had a profu sion of berries or hunting grounds full of game. As there was an abundance of seafood on the coast, and similarly, an excess of meat and berries among the Gitksans, the exchange offered variety in our diets. (Watts, 1997:1)

Indigenous peoples around the world have a cultural heritage that includes extensive and intimate familiar ity with their local environments. Such knowledge is an

essential attribute of societies that not only have sur vived, but have thrived, in close connection with the nat ural world (Inglis, 1993; Williams and Baines, 1993). However, few, if any, natural environments provide a complete and reliable array of resources to a given group of people at a given time. Trade has long been recognized as a means of countering instabilities in resource supply and abundance, and of introducing variety to those resources. Indigenous peoples of North America cer tainly have been well acquainted with the advantages of trade. Archaeological and historical records show that they developed extensive and sophisticated trading net

works and institutions dating back thousands of years. However, the pervasive nature of Indigenous trade, and its many implications both before and after contact have

rarely been explicitly considered. In particular, the importance of exchange of various types of plant resources, technologies and knowledge has received lit tle direct attention.

In this study, we discuss plant exchange, in a broad context, among Indigenous peoples of British Columbia and adjacent areas. General characteristics of this ex change are delineated, as well as its cultural and ecologi cal significance both in the past and today. Information is

Anthropologica XL (1998) 49-70 Exchange of Botanical Products and Plant Knowledge / 49

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

derived from available archaeological, ethnographic and historical data, as well as documented consultations with Aboriginal people in recent decades. Whereas the focus of the article will be on what appears to be "traditional" exchange of plant resources among Indigenous peoples, post-contact and contemporary changes and interactions with non-Native people will be considered as well. How ever, it is important to note that, since most of the evi dence is non-archaeological, it is not always possible to distinguish "pre-contact" and "post-contact" exchange phenomena. It must also be emphasized that the consid eration of "plant exchange," apart from exchange in other resources, is an artificial separation for the pur poses of this work. In reality, all types of trade products were linked inextricably in transactions.

The Nature of Indigenous Plant Exchange What Is Exchange?

Earle (1982: 2) defined exchange as "the spatial distribu tion of materials from hand to hand and from social group

to social group." Indeed, the reciprocal acquisition of material goods is a key aspect of exchange, and the role of plant resources (e.g., food, materials, medicines, man ufactured goods) in this regard will be discussed in greater detail in later sections. However, a broader per spective of exchange will be taken here. In addition to the physical give and take of material goods, technologi cal skills were transferred from person to person, and from group to group, as were names and vocabulary for items, skills and associated concepts in different lan guages and cultures. The transfer of plant materials has a unique facet, because some plant propagules are long lived and therefore plants, far more than animals, may be

readily established in other areas. Thus, "plant ex change" extends beyond cultural transfer to biological transfer or dispersal (as discussed later).

Exchange seldom took the form of a simple gain maximizing transaction among Indigenous peoples.1 Rather, the broader social context was, and is, of key importance. For example, a good deal of nonconsensual transfer of knowledge and goods took place as a result of war and raiding activities. Not only was booty taken, which included many plant materials and products, but slave trade was also common through much of north western North America (Donald, 1997; Suttles, 1990). Undoubtedly, slaves had a significant influence on the dif fusion of language and knowledge to their captors.

On the other extreme much exchange took the form of gifts, or help to those in need, with the understanding that one could expect reciprocation at some point in the

future. This type of interaction was encouraged and sus tained by extensive ties of intermarriage and ceremonial exchange among many groups (cf. Suttles, 1987a, 1987b). Oberg (1973) distinguished between gift exchange, which takes place within a network of social relationships, and barter or trade, in which individuals seek their owm ad vantage through bargaining without regard for any sys tem of relationships that makes them members of a community. Oberg felt that pure barter did not exist for the Tlingit2 before the Europeans came, and similar con clusions have been reached for other groups, such as Drucker's (1951) interpretations of Nuu-Chah-Nulth practices. However, Mitchell and Donald (1988) feel that in fact, an early sophisticated trading system among

Northwest Coast peoples may have existed, with "trad ing" used in the above narrow sense. Some trade trans actions were disguised by means of elaborate rituals as gift offerings (see, for example, John Jewitt's description of Nuu-Chah-Nulth trade rituals in Stewart [1987: 100]). Bartering, while perhaps subtle, also clearly existed in other groups (Decosse, 1980; Sewid-Smith and Dick, in press; see also the quotation at the beginning of the introduction to this article).

The relative contribution of social and economic fac

tors in exchange/trade continues to be a topic of theoreti cal interest. This issue appears to be analogous to the nature vs. nurture "debate," in that both factors are clearly important, and are interrelated in complex ways. The present discussion of plant exchange correspond ingly provides numerous examples of the economic sig nificance of exchange, but the social context can never be ignored. Trade was influenced by, and in turn influenced, social relations, for example, intermarriage, political alliances and peace-keeping. As noted by Decosse (1980: 79), "While the desire for trade goods was responsible for initiating social interactions, it was the latter which sustained the material flow."

Given the interrelatedness of social and economic fac

tors, and the apparent presence of both "gift exchange" and "barter or trade" in peoples of northwestern North America, these terms are not used in the sense of Oberg (1973) in this study. Rather, "exchange" and "trade" are used essentially interchangeably, with the former being a more general term to include transfer of non-physical items. For example, much knowledge and information

would have been transferred from one group to another during the course of trade or other social intercourse.

Extent of Plant Trade There is considerable evidence that established that far

reaching Indigenous trade networks existed in northwest

50 / Nancy J. Turner, Dawn C. Loewen Anthropologica XL (1998)

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Figure 1 Map of Northwestern North America Showing Territories of the Indigenous Groups of the Study Area

Seals: 1:12000000 / \ ^ (

Note: Hesquiaht and Chilkat are subgroups of Nuu-Chah-Nulth and Tlingit, respectively.

ern North America. Archaeological evidence (cited by Mitchell and Donald, 1988; Stewart, 1987) from obsidian, dentalia shells and other mineral materials indicates that

these networks are at least 2 000-3 000 years old, and have extended over distances as great as 1 000 kilometres.

The comments of early explorers and other non-Native visitors to the Northwest also indicate that Native groups

were well acquainted with the concept of trade and were in

frequent contact with one another. For example, Gilbert Sproat, who lived on Vancouver Island in the 1860s, noted:

All the natives are acute, and rather too sharp at bargaining_News about prices, and indeed about anything in which the natives take an interest, travels

quickly to distant places from one tribe to another. If a trading schooner appeared at one point on the shore, and offered higher prices than are usually given, the In dians would know the fact immediately along the whole coast. (Sproat, 1987: 58)

Figure 1 shows the locations of Indigenous groups in the study area, and Figure 2 shows various trade routes that appear to have been commonly used before contact

with Europeans. Moreover, the geographical ramifica tions of exchange often extended much further. For example, many items were successively traded via "mid dlemen"; dentalia from the coast were transferred to locations as far inland as the Great Plains (Stewart,

Anthropologica XL (1998) Exchange of Botanical Products and Plant Knowledge / 51

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

1987). The arrival of horses brought changes in trading patterns, frequency and intensity; some ethnographic sources, such as James Teit's works, explicitly indicate these changes. Establishment of trading posts and other trading facilities by European newcomers also changed traditional patterns in many cases.3

Figure 2 Some Examples of Aboriginal Trade Routes and Main Centres of Trade in Northwestern North America (Compiled from Various Sources)

VAJ BoUnbVdky ^%_ iWLl J/ /k lV ^ *&^.

? 8tlkliit/7faUtai \^#~t!> *i ^ XI ^.1 \ ^ c?iffu?Rct ^ji r^f~ ^nL p^\S9^\m^\^'

(g> K*d?Palli ff" ~* \ I 1 ? OkanigMi FUb lHjl ^ ^^~ * \ 0^ * ? ruDtou. r>* ? /

^ ? CahunhUHaMMi* J C

" Scale: 1: 12 000 000 /

Trade of plant resources almost certainly was con comitantly ancient and widespread, although archaeologi cal evidence is scanty for these perishable items. John Jewitt, who was held captive in the early 1800s at Nootka Sound for several years by Nuu-Chah-Nulth Chief Maquinna, stated in his July 6, 1805 journal entry that dried cakes of salal4 berries were an important trading item among villages, and that three large baskets of "an excellent fruit... Quawnoose" (actually cooked, dried bulbs of blue camas) were brought by "Kla-iz-arts" (Coast Salish) peoples nearly 480 km to the south (Stew art [1987] notes that the distance was actually about half that given by Jewitt).

More recent ethnobotanical surveys document simi larly long-ranging trade routes. For example, some

Kwakwaka'wakw groups once travelled up to 160 km in order to obtain springbank clover rhizomes, silverweed roots, high bush cranberries, crabapples, soapberries, camas bulbs and other items (Turner and Bell, 1973). Also, Annie York indicated that her people, the Nlaka'pamux, obtained wild rice from Plains groups such as the Cree, at least 500 km away (Turner et al., 1990). This trade was probably through intermediaries, and of relatively recent origin. Oberg (1943) notes the Tlingit people travelled south in their large, ocean-going canoes as far as Puget Sound, some 1 400 km away. Presumably such voyages would have been for trade purposes.

On a cultural level, exchange of plant materials took place on widely differing scales: within family and village groups; between villages in the same language group; among different language divisions on the coast and in land; and even between coastal and inland groups (Tbrner, 1979). "Nodes" of trade are indicated on Figure 2; these are locations where large numbers of people, often from a number of different tribes in a gen eral region, would gather to trade, socialize and harvest seasonally abundant resources. For example, the annual spring assembly of Haida, Tsimshian and Nisga'a at the Nass River oolichan fishery was an important occasion for trade (Mitchell and Donald, 1988). The Tahltan and other western Athapaskan groups had a seasonal round characterized by yearly aggregation at summer salmon fishing villages; the summer congregations were a time for ceremonies, feasting and trading (Albright, 1984). An example of a more plant-orientated node was Botanie Valley, near present-day Lytton in Nlaka'pamux territory. Nlaka'pamux people, along with Secwepemc and Stl'atl'imx people, would gather there in summer largely due to the great abundance of a number of different "root" vegetables and berries (Turner et al., 1990). According to Teit (1900), as many as 1 000 people would congregate annually at Botanie. Women would gather plant foods, men would hunt and everyone would trade and socialize. Louie Phillips recalled that Nlaka'pamux women in his community would sometimes bet whole sacks of yellow avalanche lily bulbs on the outcomes of horse races in the valley?an interesting type of exchange mechanism (Turner et al., 1990). Botanie Val ley continued to be an important gathering place well after contact, as indicated by Mary Williams, also Nlaka'pamux:

In the month of August, the people gathered up in Pet?ni. People gathered from all over?Spences

52 / Nancy J. Turner, Dawn C. Loewen Anthropologica XL (1998)

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Bridge, Nicola, and 30 Mile [30 miles north of Lytton on the Fraser River]_The bishop came up there too, and joined in the sports with the people-My, we used to have nice times in those days! Everybody was happy and no one was afraid of anything. Now we are scared when we go up there. At times, good White people would come up and watch the people's races. There would be tents everywhere. (Hanna and Henry, 1996:149)

In the case of coastal/inland trade, the groups of peo

ple travelling to trade were generally smaller, but visits were often temporally extensive. Decosse (1980) dis cussed Athapaskan-Tlingit trade relations and noted that trade expeditions were major undertakings requiring weeks of preparation, including fasting and other rituals. The trade encounters generally lasted from three to six weeks, but a coastal trader occasionally stayed with his inland partner as long as a year; such visits undoubtedly encouraged a great deal of cultural (knowledge and lan guage) transfer in addition to exchange of the goods. During the final festivities of these trade gatherings, the guests would ask their hosts to teach them new songs, and a few days would be spent perfecting these before the guests departed (Decosse, 1980). Similarly, John Jewitt (Stewart, 1987: 99) noted that the Kwakwaka'wakw traders who came to Nootka (Yuquot) "were accustomed to remain a much longer time at Nootka than the other tribes... and on these occasions taught their songs to our savages." Greer (1995) suggested that the stories and songs shared during the trading sessions of precon tact times were valued just as much as the goods ex changed.

Types of Plant Resources Traded

There has been an increasing awareness of the impor tance of plant resources as food, materials and medi cines in hunter-gatherer economies (Hunn, Turner and French, 1998; Lee and Daly, in press). For example, Mitchell and Donald (1988: 301) note that, given the widespread importance of cedar as a material resource, "access to a stand of red or yellow cedar was likely as important as access to a clam bed or herring spawning ground." Therefore, it is not surprising that a wide array of plant resources would also be a fundamental compo nent of exchange. Table 1 provides documented exam ples of plants and plant products known to have been traded among First Peoples of northwestern North America. Over 65 plant species are included, most of which are foodstuffs or materials for use in technology. Additional items are in the form of manufactured goods. Most trade was in processed or preserved products, the

difficulties of transporting fresh plants over long dis tances being obvious. The major types of plant products traded are discussed in greater detail in the following sections.

Plant Foods

Exchange of food resources within groups was, more than with other resources, generally a matter of sharing rather than a formal transaction. As Elmendorf (1960) noted for the Twana, it was proper to be generous with members of one's own village. An example of this type of generosity was noted for the Nlaka'pamux by Turner et al. (1990); people from the Upper territory would bring "Indian celery," a favourite green vegetable more com mon in their area, to their friends in Lower territory when they came down the Fraser Canyon in spring.

Among groups, there was often more formal trade in

food items. This exchange generally diversified the diet rather than supplying a vitally needed foodstuff (Elmen dorf, 1960), although many items were obtained regularly and in quantity. Sweet foods and novelty foods were par ticularly popular; commonly traded plant foods included soapberries, used to make a popular whipped confection known today as "Indian ice cream" (Figure 3); saskatoon berries, often eaten with meat; and camas bulbs, a potato-like food with a sweet flavour when cooked5 (Fig ure 4). A number of plant foods were valued highly; for example, bitterroot (Figure 4) was noted as being "ex pensive stuff" by Annie York, Nlaka'pamux, who said that a 1.5-m string of dried bitterroot would be worth

about one salmon in the early part of the 20th century (Turner et al., 1990). In the late 19th century, James Teit (1900) found that "ten bundles" of bitterroot could be

exchanged for one large, dressed buckskin. Other highly valued food items were edible seaweed, preserved crabapples and highbush cranberries, black huckleber ries, hazelnuts (Figure 5) and green shoots of salmon berry and thimbleberry (Turner, 1995,1997).

Plant Materials

Raw or processed plant products used for basketry, canoe making and other technologies, were also important in trade. The importance of western red cedar, whose wood, inner bark, withes and roots were all important materials, has already been noted, and all these parts in raw or processed form were traded (Figure 6). Indian hemp, a fibre plant, was also widely traded; a good twine made from this fibre is as strong as modern synthetic cordage with 100 kg (200 pounds) or more test weight (Turner, 1979). The value of this plant was indicated by James Teit (1900), who recorded that items for which

Anthropologica XL (1998) Exchange of Botanical Products and Plant Knowledge / 53

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Table 1 Specific Plant Resources (Listed Alphabetically by Common Name) Traded among Indigenous Peoples in British Columbia and Neighbouring Areas in Northwestern North America2

Material/Item Traded Notes

avalanche lily, glacier lily dried bulbs traded, among Interior Salish, and from Tsilhqot'in to Carrier and Nuxalk (Erythronium grandiflorum)

balsamroot (Balsamorhiza sagittata) dried roots traded among Nlaka'pamux and probably Sti'atTimx

beargrass (Xerophyllum tenax) bundled leaves and finished baskets, traded from Olympic Peninsula to Vancouver Island birch, paper (Betula papyrifera) bark, containers, wood traded among Athapaskan and Interior Salish groups and from interior

to coast; birch bark canoes traded among Interior Salish, Ktunaxa and Athapaskan peoples

biscuitroot (Lomatium cous dried roots traded within interior plateau groups, especially from southern to northern plateau and other spp.)

bitterroot (Lewisia rediviva) dried roots commonly traded within and among Interior Salish groups, BC and Washington blueberries (Vaccinium spp.) dried berries traded among Coast Salish; from interior to central coast; within various

interior groups

edible camas (Camassia dried bulbs widely traded from Coast Salish of Vancouver Island to west coast, north coast and leichtlinii, C. quamash) mainland; also among southern Interior Salish, Columbia River and western Washington peoples,

north into Canadian Plateau; bulbs transplanted to some west coast locations

cat-tail (Typha latifolia) mats traded among Interior Salish and southern NW coast peoples and from coast to interior cedar, western red (Thuja plicata) cedarwood dugouts widely traded on NW coast and into interior; cedarwood boxes traded along

NW coast, in general from north to south and from coast to interior; bark and bark baskets, mats, robes, ceremonial articles traded widely among NW coast peoples and from coast to interior; roots and split root baskets traded among Interior Salish and Columbia peoples and from interior to coast

cedar, yellow (Chamaecyparis bark and bark products widely traded along the NW coast and into interior, especially in nootkatensis) Chilkat blankets and robes; wood for bows traded from Coast Salish to interior; wood for

ceremonial articles traded from northern NW coast into interior

celery, Indian (Lomatium seeds traded from southeast Vancouver Island to west coast and northeast coast of Vancouver nudicaule) Island; greens traded among Nlaka'pamux peoples

cherry, bitter (Prunus emarginata) bark traded from groups of southern coast of BC to central coast; bark as basket decoration exchanged among Interior Salish

chocolate lily, "riceroot" dried bulbs traded from Upper to Lower Nlaka'pamux {Fritillaria lanceolata)

choke cherries {Prunus virginiana) dried cherries traded among Interior Salish and coastwards to Fraser Valley cloudberries (Rubus chamaemorus) berries preserved in water traded from Tsimshian to Haida

clover, springbank (Trifolium rhizomes traded from Nuxalk to Oweekeno and Hanaksiala; also within Kwakwaka'wakw wormskioldii) communities

cottonwood (Populus balsamifera dugout canoes traded among Interior Salish peoples; wood traded from Tsimshian to Haida ssp. trichocarpa)

crabapples, Pacific (Malus fresh and preserved fruits in water or oolichan grease widely traded along NW coast and from fusca syn. Pyrus fused) coast to interior

cranberries, bog fresh and preserved fruits in water or oolichan grease widely traded along NW coast and (Vaccinium oxycoccus) probably among interior peoples

cranberries, highbush fresh and preserved fruits in water or oolichan grease widely traded along NW coast and from (Viburnum edule) coast to interior

currants, wild (Ribes spp.) traded (dried?) among Interior Salish peoples desert parsley (Lomatium dried roots traded among Interior Salish peoples macrocarpum)

fungus, paint (JEchinodontium traded from Tlingit to Athapaskan groups tinctorium)

grass, reed-canary (Phalaris traded as basket decoration material, and in finished cedar-root baskets among Interior Salish arundinacea and other spp.) peoples, and from interior to coast in the south

hazelnuts (Corylus cornuta) nuts widely traded among Salishan groups of BC and among Columbia River peoples hemlock, western (TSuga dried inner bark food traded from Tsimshian to Nisga'a; from Haisla and Hanaksiala to other heterophylla) coastal groups

huckleberries (esp. Vaccinium berries widely traded among Salishan peoples of BC and among Columbia River peoples membranaceum)

54 / Nancy J. Turner, Dawn C. Loewen Anthropologica XL (1998)

This content downloaded from �����ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff on Thu, 01 Jan 1976 12:34:56 UTC

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Table 1 (continued)

Material/Item Traded_Notes_ Indian-hemp (Apocynum fibre, twine and woven products widely traded among Interior Salish, and from Plateau

cannabinum) to NW coast; from Coeur d'Alene to Plains tribes kinnikinnick (Arctostaphylos berries traded from Nuxalk to Heiltsuk and Oweekeno, and probably elsewhere in BC;

uva-ursi) dried leaves as tobacco probably also traded

Labrador tea, swamp tea (Ledum spp.) dried leaves traded among various interior peoples

lichen, black tree (Bryoria cooked, dried cakes traded from Interior to Coast Salish fremontii)

lichen, wolf (Letharia vulpina) traded as dyestuff among interior groups and from interior to NW coast

maple, vine (Acer circinatum) wood for bows traded from NW coast to interior, southern BC

maple, Rocky Mountain (Acerglabrum) wood traded from Tsimshian to Haida

mock-orange (Philadelphus lewisii) wood for arrows, needles traded by Upper StTatrimx to Secwepemc

nettle, stinging (Urtica dioica) fibre, twine traded from Hanaksiala and Haisla to Nuxalk and Coast Tsimshian; living plants transplanted from one village to another

onions, wild {Allium cernuum bulbs traded among Nlaka'pamux; not generally eaten by coastal groups but traded in and related species) abundance to Europeans

Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia) bowls traded to the Makah from groups to the south and/or east pine, ponderosa (Pinus ponderosa) dugout canoes traded within Nlaka'pamux rice, wild (Zizania aquatica) traded from "Indians of the Rocky Mountains and Great Plains," especially the Cree, to

Nlaka'pamux (and others?)

salal (Gaultheria shallon) large quantites of dried berries and pressed cakes traded among NW coast peoples salmonberries (Rubus spectabilis) berries traded from Halq'emeylem to Lower Nlaka'pamux; sprouts exchanged locally among

Nuu-Chah-Nulth

saskatoon berries (Amelanchier dried berries and cakes commonly traded among interior peoples, and from interior to coast, alnifolia) especially central and southern coast

seaweed, edible (Porphyra spp.) important item of trade along entire NW coast (especially central and northern) and from coast inland; sold by Saanich, Nuu-Chah-Nulth to oriental buyers from Victoria

silverberry (Elaeagnus commutata) bark, mats and bags traded among Interior Salish, and from Interior to Coast Salish

silverweed (Potentilla spp.) E anserina roots traded from Upper to Lower Nlaka'pamu; Ppacifica roots widely traded among NW coast peoples

soapberries (Shepherdia widely traded as dried cakes, and jarred in water, among many groups in British Columbia, canadensis) especially from interior to coast, from mainland to Haida Gwaii

spring beauty (Claytonia lanceolata) corms commonly traded within and among interior groups

spruce (Picea spp.) gum (Eglauca) traded from Athapaskan groups to the Tlingit for chewing; root baskets, hats (P sitchensis) from Tlingit to Athapaskan groups and from Haida to Tsimshian

thimbleberry (Rubus parviflorus) sprouts exchanged locally among Nuu-Chah-Nulth

"three-square," "sweetgrass" dried leaves traded among Vancouver Island peoples and to Olympic Peninsula (Scirpus americanus)

tiger lily (Lilium columbianum) dried bulbs traded from Interior Salish to Coast

tobacco, native (Nicotiana N. quadrivalvis traded from Haida, Tlingit to Tsimshian; from Metlakatla Tsimshian to Nisga'a; attenuata or N. quadrivalvis) N. attenuata among Interior Salish

tule (Scirpus acutus) tule mats widely traded, especially among Interior Salish wapato (Sagittaria latifolia) tubers widely traded from Lower Fraser Valley and Lower Columbia inland and along the NW

coast

willow-bark twine (Salix spp.) bark twine traded from Lower Stl'atl'imx to Halq'emeylem

yew, western (Taxus brevifolia)_wood and bows commonly traded from NW coast to interior throughout range

a Compiled from the following references and citations within: Albright, 1984; Birchwater et al., 1993; Boas, 1923; Compton, 1993; Darby, 1996; Decosse, 1980; Edwards, 1979; Elmendorf, 1960; Gunther, 1945; Huelsbeck, 1988; Hunn, 1990; Mitchell and Donald, 1988; Norton, Boyd and Hunn, 1983; Oberg, 1973; Olson, 1935, 1954; Palmer, 1975; Ray, 1938; Smith, 1920-23; Sproat, 1987; Steedman, 1930; Stewart, 1987; Suttles, 1951a, 1987a; Swan, 1869; Teit, 1900,1906,1909; Teit and Boas, 1973; Turner, 1978,1979, 1992, 1995, 1996, 1997; Turner and Bell, 1973; Turner and Efrat, 1982; Turner and Ignace, 1993-97; Turner and Kuhnlein, 1983; Turner et al., 1983, 1990; as well as personal communications to NT from Elsie Claxton (1996), Mary Thomas (1993-97); Annie York (1985-89). References cited are restricted to those in which the species traded were identified and Aboriginal groups were specified.

Anthropologica XL (1998) Exchange of Botanical Products and Plant Knowledge / 55

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Figure 3

1K1E1 * ^ ^_l_l_l_l_l_l_l_l_l_H__^Hi@__l

^P^^pF^^jra^^^^^^^^^HP^RH^^^^^r^P^^ ^ ._r. *S11P1111

Soapberries and "Indian ice-cream." Dried and jarred soap berries have been widely traded in British Columbia.

Figure 4

Dried biscuitroot (left), bitterroot (top) and camas bulbs (right) were a common trade item within the Interior Plateau, traded generally from south to north. Camas was widely traded along the coast as well.

Figure 5

^^E^^^^KaMi^EL-. . * iA 11 j.-^? ? ?. ..! * . >tJM*+iU3Mmi .mi i-j?M^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^HttijMB

Baskets of hazelnuts and other foods were a common trade product.

five "packages" of the fibre could be exchanged included one large cedar-root basket, two salmon-skins full of salmon-oil, three sticks of salmon, one large dressed buckskin, one steel trap or one canoe. Basketry "grasses" were also highly valued. Bear-grass, for exam ple, was a major item of export from the Makah and other peoples of the Olympic Peninsula to Vancouver Island; the Ditidaht and Nuu-Chah-Nulth basketweavers sometimes called it "American grass," as contrasted with the more readily available Carex obnupta. As noted later, the leaves of bear-grass are still bought and sold today.

Plant Medicines

Unlike food and material plant resources, medicinal plants and prepared medicines were apparently seldom

Figure 6

Coiled baskets of split red-cedar roots, decorated with bitter cherry bark, and reed canary grass stalks, were a specialty of Lower Nlaka'pamux and Lower Stl'atl'imx basketweavers, and were exchanged with both coastal and interior peoples.

widely traded, although some medicinal plants are widely known and used similarly by many people of different groups. Many Indigenous peoples believed that the effec tiveness of medicines was directly dependent on a high degree of secrecy surrounding them, not only in terms of preparation and administration information, but also of the actual identity of the plant used (Turner and Efrat, 1982; Turner et al., 1983; Turner et al., 1987). In many groups, sophisticated medicinal knowledge was held by a few herbal specialists, who did not share their medicinal recipes with clients, much less with strangers from other

tribes. These recipes also tended to be highly special ized, with the details of preparation of a given medicinal plant unique to individuals or perhaps families in a given cultural setting (Compton, 1993). Such specific knowl

56 / Nancy J. Turner, Dawn C. Loewen Anthropologica XL (1998)

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

edge probably meant that any exchange of medicinal plants would have been equally focussed, occurring among certain individuals and not often characteristic of whole groups. This type of exchange was well remem bered by Mrs. Winnie Atlin for Tagish people:

My mom and Maggie Coudenehha, she used to live in Skagway. She used to know lots, and my mom got a lot of stuff from her.... Like they used to trade, they would talk and stuff about medicines and all that They used to call each other sister. (Greer, 1995:106)

However, properties of numerous medicinal plants used with good results for common maladies became common knowledge within and sometimes across groups. For example, it was widely known to coastal groups that licorice fern rhizome (Polypodium glycyrrhiza) was good to chew for colds and sore throats, and it was known over

most of the Northwest region that cascara bark (Rham nus purshiana) was an effective laxative. Such medicinal plants have differing distributions, and, one would ex pect, chemical and ecological variations that would influ ence their quality, and thus would have been likely candidates for exchange.

An example of a medicinal plant that was probably traded is Indian celery (or Indian consumption plant), which is called by variants of the name q'eXmin by both Salishan and Kwakwaka'wakw peoples along the east coast of Vancouver Island. It is known everywhere for its healing properties for coughs, colds and tuberculosis, and is also used ceremonially as a cleansing fumigant and for purification (cf. Turner and Bell, 1971, 1973). Use of this name in languages of two different families suggests that

the plant itself or knowledge about it was exchanged, quite possibly through trade (but see later section for problems with linguistic evidence).

Other examples of trade of ceremonial and healing plants include the exchange of Canby's lovage (Ligus ticum canbyi),6 an important medicine for Interior Salish

groups and Ktunaxa of British Columbia and Washington, and the occasional exchange of sweet grass (Hierochloe odorata) for ceremonial smudging, although the latter example may be relatively recent (Turner, Bouchard and Kennedy, 1980; Turner et al., 1990). Often, too, medici nal healers would bring their own medicines with them when travelling to a patient some distance away. For example, when Annie York (Nlaka'pamux) was injured near Spuzzum in the Fraser Canyon, her great-aunt, a well-known "Indian doctor," gathered bags of the roots of

poisonous water-hemlock (Cicuta douglasii), and brought them from Spences Bridge by bus to treat her. There are undoubtedly many other examples of this type of

exchange in medicinal practices, but these are seldom recorded. A medical practitioner was often rewarded with gifts of foods or manufactured items that included plant products (cf. Turner et al., 1983).

Plant Exchange as an Integrated Component of Trade in General

Even where plant products were not the primary item of interest in a trade transaction, they were often still an im

portant component. For example, plant materials were used as packaging and containers for a variety of items (Turner, 1996). Red paint brought by the Kwakwaka'

wakw to trade with the Nuu-Chah-Nulth was "carefully kept in close mat bags" (Jewitt in Stewart, 1987: 99), and the Lower Chinook traded dried shellfish strung on two foot sticks of salmonberry wood (Ray, 1938). Also, some trade products were both of plant and animal origin, such as snowshoes and highbush cranberries and Pacific crabapples in oolichan grease (Compton, 1993; Mitchell and Donald, 1988) and herring roe on giant kelp (Macro cystis integrifolia) fronds or western hemlock branches (Compton, 1993). Finally, as noted previously, plant prod ucts were inextricably linked with other types of prod ucts in trade transactions. For example, baskets were traded by Nlaka'pamux people for dried herring eggs, clams and other coastal products (Turner et al., 1990), and ten cakes of saskatoons could be exchanged for one large buckskin (Teit, 1900).

Cultural Aspects of Indigenous Plant Exchange Socio-economic Implications

Perhaps the most obvious and important effect of ex change is that it promotes a more even distribution of the

land's and the peoples' resources, making a greater vari ety of foods, materials and skills available to people than would otherwise be possible (Turner, 1996, 1997; Watts, 1997). The following sections describe several ways in

which this effect can be manifested, with particular atten tion being given to plant resources.

Obtaining Items Not Locally Available

This motivation for trade is familiar to anyone who has ever bought an imported banana or other tropical fruit at

a local supermarket in North America. For Indigenous peoples, its significance was no less obvious. Different ecosystems support different species, many of which are highly desirable and even irreplaceable for human uses. Perhaps the most striking example of trade for this pur pose was the coastal/inland trade in the Northwest.

Anthropologica XL (1998) Exchange of Botanical Products and Plant Knowledge / 57

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Figure 2 shows that there were many such routes, often extending along major river systems (e.g., Fraser, Lil looet, Bella Coola, Skeena, Nass and Stikine) to allow passage through the Coast and Cascade mountain ranges (Turner, 1996). Interior peoples, including the Lower Stl'atrimx, Lower Nlaka'pamux, Ulkatcho Carrier and Tsilhqot'in, traded such items as soapberries, saskatoon berries, avalanche lily bulbs, Indian-hemp, wolf lichen and tanned moose hides. In return, coastal peoples including the Halq'emeylem, Sechelt, Nuxalk and Coast Tsimshian peoples gave such items as fish oil, dentalia shells, edible seaweed, Pacific crabapples and cedar prod ucts. These items were in turn traded by the immediate interior and coastal neighbours to other groups farther inland (e.g., Secwepemc) and farther westward (e.g., Haida). The Nuxalk-Carrier Grease trails are a particu larly well-known example of an ancient coast/inland trade

network, and many of the old trails are still in use today for recreation, hunting and trapping (Birchwater et al., 1993).7 The trails were named for the oolichan grease from the coast that was transported across them in large quantities; however, many other products such as dried meat, soapberries and the cedar boxes containing the grease were also involved in the exchange (ibid.).

Innumerable other trade networks, on various geo graphical scales, operated on the same principle of ex changing surplus local goods for another group's different

surplus products. For the Nlaka'pamux people, for exam ple, there were two major territorial divisions, "Lower" and "Upper," respectively reflecting the different vegeta tional characteristics of the Fraser Canyon area and the Plateau region to the north (Turner et al., 1990). As a result of these ecological differences, an active trade existed between peoples of the two divisions. The Upper people traded such goods as bitterroot, saskatoon berries, soapberries and whitebark pine seeds to the Lower people in exchange for items including hazelnuts, salmon oil, cedar bark and vine maple wood for making bows (Teit, 1900). On the coast, the unusual Mediter ranean-type climate of the southeastern tip of Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands resulted in the existence of

resources unique to that ecosystem, such as camas bulbs. As noted by Sproat (1987: 58):

An active trade existed formerly among the tribes of this nation [Nuu-Chah-Nulth], as also between them and the tribes at the south of the island and on the American shore. The root called camas, for instance,

and swamp rushes for making mats, neither of which could be plentifully produced on the west coast, were sent from the south of the island in exchange for cedar bark baskets, dried halibut, and herring.

An interesting variation on this theme was a special type of exchange in which access to a resource (often a food resource) was shared. It was surprisingly common for one group to allow another access to its resources at a time of abundance, even if these resources were also items of trade. For example, Turner and Kuhnlein (1983) noted that the Ditidaht not only traded for camas, but also dug their own bulbs in Salish territory with permis sion of the Straits and Halq'emeylem people. Similarly, the Katzie (Halq'emeylem) of the Fraser Valley granted permission to people from up and down the Fraser to harvest wapato or gather cranberries on the bogs (Sut tles, 1951a). According to Teit (1906: 232), the Lower Stl'atl'imx, when trading with the Sechelt, Squamish and Comox Coast Salish at Jervis Inlet or Howe Sound, "were allowed to pick berries, and to hunt and fish, as much as they liked." Finally, Compton (1993) stated that the Hanaksiala did not always have to obtain edible sea weed by trade. They had long-standing ties with the Southern and Coastal Tsimshian people, with whom they shared the use of an edible seaweed and halibut camp. Conversely, these Tsimshian people made oolichan grease with the Hanaksiala at another camp.

This "access sharing" took place within communi ties as well as among more extensive cultural groups. On the coast and in the interior, resource areas such as prime berry patches, "root" vegetable patches or stands of western red cedar could be owned by certain high class individuals or families (Turner, 1996, 1997; Turner and Efrat, 1982). In some cases bountiful areas were apparently readily shared (Watts, 1997); in other cases, respect for private property meant that people did not even think about using others' land for harvesting, even with permission (Chief Adam Dick, Kwakwaka'wakw, personal communication to NT, 1996). Ownership prac tices varied considerably, and still need further investiga tion to determine how they were applied within groups, at particular localities and for specific resources.

In some instances, the form of compensation for harvesting in others' territories is obvious, such as the reciprocal access to resources in the Hanaksiala/ Tsimshian case. In others, the benefits are not as clear. This situation supports Decosse's (1980) contention that it is necessary to take a broad perspective of potential benefits in an exchange situation (see also Mauss, 1990). Perhaps hosting other groups encouraged those groups to take the time and effort to travel to one's door, so to

speak, with desired trade goods. Also, as noted by Sut tles (1951a: 27) for the Katzie, even though no immedi ate compensation was exacted, "A host at one time and place is potentially a guest at another." As mentioned,

58 / Nancy J. Turner, Dawn C. Loewen Anthropologica XL (1998)

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

the social context is of the utmost importance. Generos ity helped maintain strong social alliances, which had benefits not only in a political sense, but also for immedi ate survival. Albright (1984) pointed out for the Tahltan that if resource populations suffered a decline in one area, strong social alliances allowed families to hunt, and probably gather, with groups in other areas for a while. Generosity was like an insurance policy and could have not only beneficial, but even life-saving, consequences at a later date.

After European contact, some new plant resources were incorporated into Indigenous trading schemes. Per haps the most notable example is the potato, which, after its initial introduction, was distributed by Indigenous peoples among themselves and was cultivated in many localities before Europeans appeared (Mackie, 1984; Sut tles, 1951b). Mackie (1984: 102) cites an independent trader on the west coast in the 1850s, William Eddy Ban field, who recorded that, "An Indian trail connects one with the other [Cowichan with Ditidaht], and consider able intertraffic exists. The Cowichan bring potatoes across, to exchange for halibut and whale oil"8 (Mackie's bracketed note). Similarly, Compton (1993) reports that the Nuxalk brought carrots, turnips and other introduced

cultivated vegetables and dried salmon to Kitlope and Kemano in exchange for dried oolichans and oolichan grease.

Obtaining Items That Were Difficult to Access or of Inferior Quality Locally

In some cases, a plant species exists within a group's ter ritory, but may be difficult to access. For example, the plant may be distributed sporadically and/or exist in inconvenient locations. Annie York (Nlaka'pamux) said of silverweed roots, "That's kind of hard to get here. You've got to go way up where these ponds [are] or go up to the Hudson Bay trail to get it. But it's... not much here" (Turner et al., 1990: 263). Thus, the Lower Nlaka'pamux generally acquired their silverweed roots via trade from Upper peoples. Alternatively, access to a resource might be difficult only for certain individuals in a group. Another Nlaka'pamux woman, Bernadette Antoine, re called that her granny valued two different kinds of saskatoons, and used them in different ways. One was more difficult for her to gather herself, presumably due to the sort of habitat it favoured, and she would therefore

often trade for berries of that variety (ibid.).

Alternatively, a species may be found within a group's territory, but the plants are of inferior quality (in terms of human use) than those in another territory. For example, the Makah of north coastal Washington

traded for cedar products such as canoes and house planks with their Vancouver Island Nuu-Chah-Nulth relatives, and in turn traded these products farther south to other groups of coastal Washington. James Swan (1869: 4, 35), who lived with the Makah during the mid-1800s, stated:

The houses of the Makahs are built of boards and

planks, split from the cedar. These are principally made by the Indians of Vancouver Island, and procured by barter with them. There is very little cedar about Cape Flattery, and such as is found is small and of infe rior quality.... The largest and best canoes are made by the Clyoquots and Nitinats [Clayoquots and Diti dahts] on Vancouver Island; the cedar trees being of a quality greatly superior to that found on or near Cape Flattery. Canoes of the medium and small sizes are made by the Makahs from cedar procured a short dis tance up the Strait or on the Tsuess River.

Similarly, in the interior Plateau region, the critically important fibre plant Indian-hemp was widely traded in spite of its wide (though scattered) distribution in that region. It was known that there were great local varia tions in quality and abundance of Indian-hemp. According to Turner et al. (1990; Turner and Ignace, 1993-97), the best Indian-hemp was traded to areas where it either did not grow, or was of too low quality to be used.9 Annie York (Nlaka'pamux) noted:

Oh, you get them from upcountry. You trade. We have the milkweed [Indian-hemp] here [at Spuzzum], but not many.... Ours are short_You get it from up country, some of them are as tall as that [about 1.5 m] and some of them are as thick as my thumb_The people there, they gather them, bulk like this, and then they bring that down here_(Turner et al., 1990: 161)

After European contact, many native plant resources also became significant items of trade to Europeans, who did not have the knowledge of the local environ ment and/or the time to collect locally available subsis tence items. For example, early explorers in what is now Washington relied heavily on supplies of wapato acquired from local peoples (see accounts cited in Darby, 1996). Some of these native plant resources were new items of trade for the local peoples. For example, Captain Cook and his men required "grass" (species unknown) to feed the goats and sheep on their ships. Grass was not traditionally traded, but when the local people noticed the men's interest in it they began to charge for it (Turner, 1978). Similarly, it appears that

Anthropologica XL (1998) Exchange of Botanical Products and Plant Knowledge / 59

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

wild onions were not much used by Nuu-Chah-Nulth people, but they were harvested and sold to non Natives on visiting ships when the demand for them was discovered (ibid.). More recently, some Ditidaht, and probably other people, harvested cascara bark (Rhamnus purshiana) to sell to drug companies; in the 1930s and 1940s it sold for about 20 cents per pound (Turner et al., 1983). Elsie Claxton (Straits Salish, per sonal communication to NT, January 1997) recalled that edible seaweed was routinely gathered by her family and other Saanich families and sold to Chinese buyers around the Gulf Islands (see also Williams, 1979).

Access to Products of Specialized Skills

Another advantage of trade was that it extended the ben efits of some groups' expertise with certain technologies. That is, a finished product could be a highly valued trade item, even if the raw material for making it were common among groups. Examples of such products include red cedar root baskets from Spuzzum (Lower Nlaka'pamux) and Pemberton (Lower Stl'atl'imx); yellow-cedar/moun tain-goat wool Chilkat blankets; Haida red-cedar kerfed boxes and canoes; Nuu-Chah-Nulth canoes; and Nuu Chah-Nulth and Kwakwaka'wakw yellow-cedar bark robes. Such products were widely renowned for their quality and/or artistic merit, and often found their way far from their origins.

In addition, such skills could be important within a group. Teit (1900) noted that not all Upper Nlaka'pamux peoples made dugout canoes from ponderosa pine or Cot tonwood, and those specialists who did traded them to others in the group. This type of skill specialization could operate on an even more individualistic level. For exam ple, according to Annie York (Turner et al., 1990), some women at Spuzzum traded baskets and mats for buck skins, salmon and other products of hunting and fishing, especially if a woman were a widow with no husband to provide these things for her.

After European contact, finished products such as baskets and carvings were frequently sold to non-Native immigrants, traders or tourists, providing a source of income for some of the many people whose traditional

means of subsistence had been disrupted. Margaret Lester (Stl'atl'imx) remembered that her grandmother used to take her baskets to farms in the Pemberton Val

ley to exchange for clothing, potatoes, fat, beef or "any thing we could get" (Turner et al., 1987).10 Within the last century many Indigenous women have supported their families almost entirely by selling baskets to non

Natives, often for very little remuneration (ibid.; Turner,

1996).

Overcoming "Scheduling Conflicts"

A final benefit of trade was one that operated within groups. There were inevitable trade-offs in terms of time

spent on various harvesting and processing activities and trade allowed people to specialize temporally and share the fruits of their labours. For example, Turner (1992) notes, for the Stl'atl'imx, that those families who spent more time fishing could exchange extra fish for berries from those who spent extra time berry picking on the mountain slopes. Of course, for some activities there would be advantages to having as many people as possi ble accumulating a given resource, but it seems likely that in at least some situations a division of labour was

advantageous. Indeed, the traditional division of labour into male hunters and female gatherers is one manifesta tion of this principle.

Exchange of Technologies and Knowledge

In addition to trade of physical goods, there was signifi cant interchange of intangible plant-related resources, such as a specific basketry technique, knowledge of how to use a certain plant medicinally or a story regarding a plant's place in traditional history.11 Unfortunately, deter mining with certainty whether such similarities among cultures originated through exchange is problematic, because there are at least three distinct ways in which commonalities among groups can develop:

(1) Transfer of information from one group to another,

through connections of trade, intermarriage, slaves or other relationships. This possibility is, of course, the phe nomenon of interest for the present study.

(2) Common origins of the knowledge from a common ancestral group. Thus, for example, desert parsley (Jj)ma tium macrocarpum) was important to the Nlaka'pamux, Stl'atl'imx and Secwepemc, and has similar names and sim ilar presence in the traditional narratives of these closely related Interior Salish groups (Turner et al., 1990). It is difficult, or perhaps impossible, to determine whether these similarities reflect the common proto-Interior Salishan origins of these groups, or whether knowledge of the plant was transferred from one to the others at some point after the groups diverged. Turner, Ignace and Compton (1997) note that interaction through trade or marriage among the Interior Salish groups was frequent, and thus the general similarity of these cultures is likely the result of both common origins and subsequent inter action.

(3) Convergence due to similarities in the environ ment or in plant characteristics. For example, a semi subterranean winter dwelling is common to many groups

60 / Nancy J. Turner, Dawn C. Loewen Anthropologica XL (1998)

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

who live under continental climate regimes, because, as may have been independently discovered many times, such a dwelling is an effective way to provide shelter from severe winter temperatures and winds. Similarly, summer shelters with wood frames and rush matting are also common to many of the world's peoples. Alterna tively, many different groups may use a particular wood, such as vine maple or western yew, for carved items and implements because the properties of the wood that

make it favourable for this purpose become evident to many groups independently. Properties of medicinal plants may also be independently empirically deter mined; possible examples are scouring rush (Equisetum hiemale) and pipsissewa (Chimaphila umbellata), which were used as gynecological aids in childbirth by groups as disparate as the Menominee of the Great Lakes area and the Nlaka'pamux of present-day British Columbia (ibid.). Even stories may evolve convergently; for exam ple, intelligent and scavanging animals such as a coyotes or ravens would be likely candidates for a "Trickster" type of character in any culture.

One illustration of some of the difficulties in distin

guishing between these possibilities is found in the work of Teit. He lists numerous examples of similarities in technology among various interior groups: "nearly all the

kinds of fish-traps used by the Carrier and Shuswap [Secwepemc] were also utilized by the Chilcotin [Tsil hqot'in]. Fish-spears... had two or three prongs, like those commonly used by the Shuswap ..." (Teit, 1909: 779); "Roots are dug and cooked [by the Tsilhqot'in] in the same manner as among the Shuswap_The princi pal fruits gathered were service-berries [saskatoons] and soap-berries, both of which were cured in the same man ner as among the Shuswap" (ibid.: 780). The "common origins" explanation is possible, but perhaps unlikely in these examples, because the Carrier and Tsilhqot'in are Athapaskan peoples while the Secwepemc are Salishan. Independent convergence is also possible, but unlikely since the groups are physically close together and proba bly communicated frequently, and the techniques noted are relatively specialized. However, even if exchange is established as the definite reason for these similarities, the direction of exchange is not clear,12 without additional evidence suggesting that one group borrowed the tech nology from another.

One type of such additional evidence (i.e., linguistic evidence) is discussed in the next section. There are also

other lines of evidence to suggest transfer and direction ality. In some cases, oral traditions have preserved this information. For example, according to Decosse (1980), oral traditions of the Tlingit and Athapaskan peoples

state that the latter obtained from the former technologi cal knowledge for construction of fish weirs and other tools, which greatly improved the latter's living stan dards.

In other cases, directionality can be inferred from the refinement of the technology itself. A technology

may have been highly developed by one group, and im perfectly imitated by others. For example, the Nuxalk learned from the Carrier and Tsilhqot'in how to make birch-bark baskets and canoes, but they never became as skilled as their teachers (Turner, 1979; Compton, 1993). Some ethnologists suggest that the technique of making twined baskets was learned by the Coast Salish from the Kwakwaka'wakw and Nuu-Chah-Nulth; originally the Salish on the Coast were thought to have made only coiled baskets like their Interior Salish relatives (Turner, 1979).

Perhaps the most easily interpreted situations are those that have occurred relatively recently, so that the information is clearly in a state of early diffusion. For example, Annie York (Turner et al., 1990) had a tremen dous understanding of Halq'emeylem botany, perhaps almost as much as she had about her own people's (Nlaka'pamux) plant uses. Her knowledge included de tailed information about Halq'emeylem foods and medi cines, as well as some information regarding medicines of the Okanagan and even "Alberta Indians." Perhaps current similarities in some technologies among groups began in a similar fashion, with certain individuals of

Group A becoming well acquainted with Group B's knowledge (perhaps as a result of living near them) and that knowledge would then gradually diffuse throughout Group A.

Undoubtedly, as with direct trading of goods, the amount of such interchange rose substantially after con tact, due first to the influence of the fur trade. The effect

was sometimes dramatic. Albright (1984: 16) noted, "Intensified trading activities between the Tlingit and Tahltan brought about increased intermarriage between the two groups, the use of Tlingit as the language of trade and the adoption of many aspects of Tlingit social customs and organization including displays of wealth and status." More recently, the greater mobility of Indigenous peoples for work and other reasons13 also led

to increased exchange. Many Indigenous people in British Columbia, particularly those living in the vicinity of the lower mainland, worked as crop harvesters in the Fraser Valley and in the Tacoma and Yakima areas of Washington. People from various cultural groups met in this way and exchanged botanical and other types of information, about basketry (Turner and Efrat, 1982),

Anthropologica XL (1998) Exchange of Botanical Products and Plant Knowledge / 61

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

new foods like soapberry "lemonade," and even new medicines, such as the use of oceanspray fruits for diar rhoea (Elsie Claxton, Straits Salish and Violet Williams, Halq'emeylem, personal communication to NT, 1991). This situation is certainly continuing today among con temporary basketweavers, such as members of the Cali fornia Indian Basketweavers' Association, who routinely share specialized knowledge about materials and tech niques.

Much exchange of plant knowledge also took place between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people. In the case of Indigenous peoples learning from newcomers, the information concerned either introduced species or native species. For example, the Nlaka'pamux, and no doubt other peoples, learned to cook the introduced dan delion (Taraxacum officinale) as greens, to make wine from dandelion flower heads and to use the cooked tap roots medicinally for jaundice and liver problems and the latex to eliminate warts (Turner et al., 1990). Also, after Japanese people living on the coast began to salt and pickle stipes of the native bull kelp (Nereocystis luet keana), this practice became common among some coastal Indigenous peoples (Compton, 1993). For new comers learning from Indigenous peoples, the transfer of knowledge about native plant resources was at times critically important. For example, David Douglas (1914: 63,171) recorded during his travels in present-day Wash ington that a man named Jacques Finlay and his family

were subsisting on "... a sort of cake made of Lichen jubatum, Linn. [Bryoria fremontii, black tree lichen], and a few roots of Scilla esculenta [Camassia quamash, camas] and of Lewisia rediviva [bitterroot]." Douglas also described the special preparation techniques used for the camas and lichen, including pit-cooking. These prac tices, undoubtedly learned from the local Indigenous peo ple, were critical in releasing the nutrients of these foods (Kuhnlein and Turner, 1991).

Linguistic Implications Clearly, trade necessitated and resulted from communi cation among groups, and at least partial multilingualism was probably common. However, people not only learned other languages, but also adopted elements of those lan guages, both words and translations, into their native tongue (e.g., Gunther, 1945).14 Plant-related elements were part of the interchange, which could be extensive. For example, Nuxalk, a Salishan language, has more bo tanical terms in common with its neighbouring North

Wakashan languages than with other Salishan languages, and at least some of these borrowings may be attributed to trade or some other type of cultural relations (Turner,

1973). Similarly, Gottesfeld (1994) lists eight plants or plant parts (fireweed [Epilobium angustifolium], spread ing dogbane [Apocynum androsaefolium], cedar, cedar bark, pine cambium, yellow pond lily [Nuphar polysepa lum], bog cranberry and wild pin cherry [Prunus pensyl vanica]) whose names are shared between the Gitksan (Tsimshian language family) and Wet'suwet'en (Atha paskan) languages, and suggests that several of these (the first four or five in the list) are Gitksan in origin.

In some cases, deciphering the origins of similarities among languages is problematic for the same reasons described in the previous section. For example, some words may reflect ancient roots in the ancestral language of closely related groups. Silverweed may be a case in point; its name is a variant of xilxel in a number of Inte rior Salish languages. Alternatively, different words may have the same meaning in different languages not be cause of a translation borrowing, but because there is a convergence, or some inherent similarity that suggests the meaning. For example, the name for Empetrum nigrum translates as "crowberry" in a number of lan guages, probably because the berries are black and crows eat them, and various names for puffball mushrooms (Lycoperdon, Calvatia and Bovista spp.) relate to ghosts, corpses or other supernatural phenomena (Burk and Fitzgerald, 1981), perhaps because of the fungus' ethe real appearance.

The complexities in linguistic analysis are well illus trated by an example discussed by Compton (1993). The (Wakashan) Hanaksiala and Haisla have a Salishan name for kinnikinnick berries, which may have been obtained through trade with the (Salishan) Nuxalk. However, Compton feels it is more likely that the name reflects the cultural origins of the Hanaksiala/Haisla among the Oweekeno, who were known to obtain the plant through trade with the Nuxalk, and who have a Nuxalk name for it.

In spite of the complexities, however, linguistic anal ysis of plant terms can often give interesting and impor tant insights into the existence and directionality of exchange. To illustrate, the Nuxalk use Wakashan names for edible seaweed and giant kelp, species which do not occur in Nuxalk territory and thus were probably acquired by trade (Compton, 1993). Also, it is known that the Nlaka'pamux obtained camas by trade, but such trade could have taken place with peoples from the British Columbia coast, or from the interior of Washington, or both. Trade with Washington peoples is more likely, at least as the original and/or more important source, since at least one of the names for camas is linguistically re lated to those in other Interior Salish languages (Turner

62 / Nancy J. Turner, Dawn C. Loewen Anthropologica XL (1998)

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

and Kuhnlein, 1983; Tbrner et al., 1990). Similarly, the Oweekeno probably obtained camas through a Kwakwaka'wakw intermediary rather than directly from the Coast Salish, since the Oowekyala name is cognate with the Kwak'wala name but not with the Salishan name

(Compton 1993). Linguistic patterns also help elucidate transfers of

knowledge. The name used by Ditidaht people for Cottonwood is not analyzable in the Ditidaht language, but is analyzable in Hesquiaht. Like the Hesquiaht, the Ditidaht make a salve of cottonwood buds in deer fat, and it is likely that if the name was transferred from the Hesquiaht to the Ditidaht, the use was as well (Turner et al., 1983). Another interesting situation involves the Hanaksiala/Haisla use of edible seaweed (Compton 1993). Not only is the name for this species said to come from the Coast Tsimshian, but a Tsimshian story con cerning knowledge of its use was given to one consultant by his grandfather, who translated the story from Tsimshian into Hanaksiala. Compton believes that this information suggests a Tsimshianic origin of edible sea

weed use among the Hanaksiala. Compton (1993) pro vides a number of important insights into the transference of plant names between various North Wakashan and neighbouring groups.

A variation on this theme was described by Hess (n.d.). Sometimes, if the speakers of one language excel in a particular technique or craft, their neighbours may borrow their words relating to that activity or artifact. For example, the Straits Salish are exceptional reef netters, and their name for that activity is derived from the name for willow, because these branches are used to an chor the nets. The Northern Lushootseed, whose territory is adjacent to the Straits', have a name for willow which is very similar to the Straits name. However, the Southern Lushootseed name for willow is completely different. This example also illustrates the importance of borders in demonstrating clear instances of diffusion. Turner et al. (1987) note that there are communities on the Stl'atl'imx/

Secwepemc, Stl'atrimx/Nlaka'pamux, Nlaka'pamux/Oka nagan and Stl'atrimx/Halq'emeylem borders that are func tionally bilingual, and plant names and ethnobotanical tra ditions in the communities reflect these mixtures.

Finally, linguistic analysis of plant names can suggest

broad patterns of past movement and interchange among different cultural groups. In a preliminary analysis of one Wakashan language (Ditidaht) and two Salishan lan guages (Straits and Lushootseed), Hess (n.d.) found that a number of plant names were borrowed by the Ditidaht from the Salish peoples.15 Hess suggests that if this pat tern is found to hold for the majority of borrowed plant

names, it may indicate the possibility of Ditidaht expan sion at the expense of Salish territory, assuming a rela tively stable distribution of the plants in question.

A complex situation was also identified in a compara tive study of Interior Salishan tree names (Turner, Ig nace and Compton, 1997). Even though the Secwepemc language is most closely related linguistically to the Stl'atl'imx and Nlaka'pamux languages, fewer tree names are cognate among these three languages than among Secwepemc, Okanagan, Flathead, Moses-Columbian and Coeur d'Alene. This fact may give insight into the pat tern of movements of these groups away from the proto

Salishan homeland, as the Secwepemc and the four southeastern Salish groups all, over hundreds or thou sands of years, had to traverse the Interior Dry Belt, where certain tree species such as western red cedar were absent. However, some trees have names shared among Secwepemc, Nlaka'pamux and Stl'atl'imx, while those of other trees with similar distributions are not.

Turner, Ignace and Compton (1997) conclude that trade networks were probably involved in the development of these linguistic anomalies.

Ecological Implications of Plant Exchange Clearly the presence and abundance of plant resources available in each Indigenous group's territory affected which resources were used or exchanged and in what quantities. However, the converse of this statement?to what extent did Indigenous peoples influence the distri bution and abundance of native plant species??has too infrequently been considered in the anthropological and biological literature. Likely, people did accidentally and/ or intentionally disperse plants to new locations and con sequently increased their range, or increased the number

of locations occupied by a plant species in a given area (i.e., increases in frequency/abundance). There are vol umes of evidence regarding such impacts, both deliberate and accidental, by Europeans (e.g., Crosby, 1986) and the effects of non-human animal dispersers are similarly well considered. However, there has been a tendency to view pre-contact worlds as "pristine wilderness" untouched by human hands (Blackburn and Anderson, 1993; Dene van, 1992), which may help explain the limited attention paid to Indigenous peoples' impacts on plant populations.

While a few studies have suggested instances of pre contact human plant dispersal in eastern North America (cf. Black, 1994; Day, 1953; Gilmore, 1931), few compara ble reports have been made in the northwest. A notable

exception is a work by Wilson et al. (1988) regarding bit terroot. This important root vegetable and item of ex change was until recently thought to be restricted in its

Anthropologica XL (1998) Exchange of Botanical Products and Plant Knowledge / 63

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Canadian distribution to British Columbia. However, dis

junct populations were discovered in western Alberta in 1985, and were initially attributed to wind dispersal (Kuijt and Michener, 1985, cited by Wilson et al., 1988).

Wilson et al. suggest three other reasonable hypotheses: relictual distribution, which developed as a result of cli mate change; intentional cultural dispersal by transplant ing, since Indigenous groups in the area showed a familiarity with cultivation of other species such as to bacco; and accidental dispersal of the seeds or roots of bitterroot by groups (such as the Ktunaxa) who regularly crossed the continental divide. The authors suggest other species with disjunct distributions that could be similarly explained, including blue camas, yellow angelica (Angelica dawsonii), Oregon-grape (Berberis aquifolium ssp. repens) and western sweet cicely (Osmorhiza occi dentalis). White the authors do not support conclusively any of the three hypotheses, their conclusions in terms of the potential importance of cultural dispersal are sig nificant:

Localized, disjunct occurrences of plants that were eco nomically important [for] native groups therefore can not be assessed fully without consideration of the pos sibility of cultural dispersal. Adventitious plantings of such species beyond their normal range would make economic sense in providing local supplies to supple ment or even supplant long-distance trade, and to pro vide "wayside stops" along seasonal migration routes. Native use and trade would also have resulted in occa

sional accidental plantings. Such considerations are of extreme importance to archaeologists and phytogeog raphers because of the low level of visibility of plant gathering cultural systems in the archaeological record. (Wilson et al., 1988: 518)

The disjunctions noted in Wilson et al.'s work, along with those described from the east, are generally small popu lations, which may imply that the ecological impacts of such dispersal are generally minor. However, the fact that such disjunctions are isolated, and located near areas of human habitation or migration, is what makes human influence a recognizable possibility (Black, 1994). Other,

more extensive, populations may have begun initially as similar small disjunctions. This is speculation, but the potential exists for significant impacts on the ranges of species. Also, if a subpopulation becomes well estab lished, with the disjunction maintained, the possibility of

genetic differentiation is high. In some cases the effect may not be so obvious. As

noted by Black (ibid.), people can increase the abundance of a species within or adjacent to its natural distribution.

Also, people may encourage the growth of plants that have been dispersed by more usual means. Black gives the example of a wild strawberry patch tended by a Cree

man in an otherwise unfavourable boreal habitat. The

plant could have been established originally by means of a bird, but the man provided it with a favourable place to grow and thrive. The existence of an unusual low-eleva tion population of yellow avalanche lily near Neskonlith Lake in southcentral British Columbia may be another example. This species is more commonly found at sub alpine elevations in BC. It is possible that bulbs or seeds were accidentally brought by animals or humans or pur posefully brought by people to the more easily accessible Neskonlith meadows long ago, and that the practices of regular digging, burning and cultivation16 in the area over

time encouraged the remarkable abundant growth evi dent there today.

The ethnographic and ethnobotanical literature pro vide examples of species that were said to have been transplanted, and particular locations where this oc curred. Some transplantations involved traded species, which were thus brought in from another group's terri tory, whereas others involved economically important local species that were simply transplanted closer to vil lages. In both cases, the desire for a convenient source of an important resource was probably a prime motivation. A possible example is camas, a bulb generally acquired by the Nuu-Chah-Nulth through trade from the Salishan peoples of southern Vancouver Island, but which accord ing to Hesquiaht people was introduced and planted around Hesquiaht village about 100 years ago. Cat-tails, too, were said to have been transplanted into Hesquiaht territory (Turner and Efrat, 1982). Springbank clover was reportedly established at a site in the Kitlope Valley (Hanaksiala territory) by a Nuxalk woman, Margaret Siwallace (Chief Ken Hall, Haisla relative of Margaret Siwallace, personal communication to NT, 1994). Also, one ethnographic account suggests that peoples of the Puget Sound region transplanted wapato, an important root vegetable, from one area to another (Haeberlin and Gunther, 1930). Meilleur (1979) speculated on a means by which a species of tobacco (Nicotiana quadrivalvis, a different species from that grown and used in southern British Columbia, N. attenuata) came to be cultivated by Haida and Tlingit peoples some 1 600 km north of the species' normal range. He suggests that the plant was initially cultivated and traded along an east-west corridor in the vicinity of The Dalles on the Columbia River, then

was carried up along the eastern border of the Rockies and over to Athapaskan or Gitksan territories, which were served by Tlingit trading parties.

64 / Nancy J. Turner, Dawn C. Loewen Anthropologica XL (1998)

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Transplantations of stinging nettle, an important fibre plant commonly found associated with areas of human habitation (Turner, 1978),17 provide examples of both intra- and intergroup exchange. Compton's (1993) consultant Gordon Robertson stated that the Hanaksiala

and Haisla people planted stinging nettle around their vil lages so that it would always be at hand for making twine. Compton (1993: 295) notes further that people visiting from the central coast communities of Kimsquit, Bella Coola and Metlakatla "when they came to trade for food items with the Hanaksiala, took stinging nettles back with them."

These types of transplants may have become much more common following the influence of European horti cultural techniques.18 It may be possible, with long-lived species, to date individual plants or populations thought to have been deliberately transplanted. However, in gen eral it is difficult to determine with any certainty the extent of pre-contact human impacts on the distribution and abundance of plant species. Oral traditions may not retain such incidents over countless generations. Also, because the most basic biology of many plant species is still poorly understood, there is often no basis for pursu ing such higher-level questions as how a species got to be where it is (Dr. Geraldine Allen, plant taxonomist, University of Victoria, personal communication to DL, 1996). Nevertheless, the examples of possible types of translocations discussed should be sufficient to encour

age greater consideration of potential past human im pacts on plant ecology. This is particularly true in cases where the species' range appears anomalous in some way, as in cases of disjunctions. As Gordon Day (1953: 343) commented, "a knowledge of local archaeology and his tory should be a part of the ecologist's equipment." The reverse is, of course, true for anthropologists.

Recent Indigenous Plant Exchange Contact with Europeans and other non-Natives brought an increased frequency and intensity of exchange, includ ing traditional plant resources and knowledge. This in crease probably reached its peak around the beginning of the 20th century (Turner and Efrat, 1982). With an ever

greater reliance by Indigenous peoples on introduced foods, materials and medicines, and an increasing domi nance of European language, currency and other aspects of culture, many types of traditional plant-related ex change dwindled.

However, a number of traditional plant resources continued to be valued exchange items despite the gen eral decline in native plant use and trade. For example, Ida Jones recalled that when she was young, Ditidaht

people used to trade dried fish and other items for camas from the Salish people in Victoria (Turner et al, 1983). Many traditionally valued resources were also bought with money rather than other subsistence items. Elsie Claxton, Straits Salish from Tsawout, noted that West Coast (Nuu-Chah-Nulth) peoples really liked camas bulbs, and that, "a long time ago," they would pay five to ten dollars for a 50-pound potato sack of the cooked bulbs (personal communication to NT, October 1996). The same quantity of potatoes would have cost perhaps two dollars at that time. Also, Annie York and Alice Paul remembered that, in the early 1900s, Nlaka'pamux women used to sell soapberries and other traditional foods at the camps of Native hop pickers in the Fraser Valley (Turner and Efrat, 1982; Turner et al., 1990).

More recently, Compton (1993) noted that along the coast in 1989, a pint jar of soapberries was worth $25 CDN and a quart jar $50 CDN. Also, according to Turner and Efrat (1982), bear-grass leaves were still being pur chased by Hesquiaht basketmakers from people in Wash ington, for about $1.00 per 2.5 cm (1 inch) bundle.19

Many goods are now exchanged privately among friends and relatives from different areas; for example, Mary Thomas, who is Secwepemc, obtains bitterroot from friends in Okanagan territory (personal communication to NT, 1995, 1996). She also described an example of "sharing of access" to resources that has occurred in her lifetime. Her uncle was married to a Ktunaxa woman, and they and some other Ktunaxa people would travel to Salmon Arm, in Secwepemc territory, by train during the summer. They would stay about a month and harvest

"everything that the Secwepemc people used," including berries, root vegetables and salmon. In return, they brought dried elk meat, which their Secwepemc friends were not able to acquire locally.

Transplanting and transporting of plants and plant propagules from one place to another is also a common practice today. For example, Kwakwaka'wakw Heredi tary Chief Adam Dick (personal communication to NT, 1996) recalled transplanting rooted stems of highbush cranberry from the bog meadows at Kingcome Inlet to his own backyard, to provide a good source of berries for

his family's use. Secwepemc plant specialist Mary Thomas has transplanted a number of important wild root vegetables, including the living bitterroot brought by friends, into her own garden. Recently, at a Nuxalk pot latch in Bella Coola, visiting Heiltsuk chiefs were pre sented with live Cottonwood trees as gifts. These were planted in Bella Bella, and are growing vigourously there today (Evelyn Windsor, Heiltsuk, personal communica tion to NT, 1996).

Anthropologica XL (1998) Exchange of Botanical Products and Plant Knowledge / 65

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

As these last examples imply, social aspects of Indigenous exchange have remained strong. For exam ple, a recent report focussing on the Carrier people noted that, despite considerable post-contact cultural change, many fundamental patterns of traditional culture

persist, such as traditional methods of redistribution by reciprocal giving, and sharing to ensure that everyone has food to eat. The report concluded that participation in

this exchange system, in which kinship ties were still the

basis of association, confirmed a person's rightful place in the community (Archeo Tech Associates, 1993).

Plant-related exchange with non-Natives also contin ues today. Indigenous artisans continue to sell their bas kets, carvings (especially masks and totem poles) and other crafts as artwork, and prices now more accurately reflect the skill and effort involved. Exchange of knowl edge takes place as well. Ethnobotanists continue to learn about traditional uses of plants, and are also paying greater attention to traditional methods of landscape and resource management. There are also non-Native indi viduals who seek traditional knowledge as a means of ex ploiting potential profits generated, for example, by medicinal plants. Fortunately, there is an increasing awareness that the intellectual property rights of Indige nous peoples need to be respected, and acceptable forms of compensation developed. More realistic arrangements for reimbursing people for their knowledge, as well as for

their time and the botanical goods they produce are essential.

Conclusions The exchange of plant materials, including foodstuffs, materials and manufactured products, was an important facet of complex exchange networks encompassing many northwestern Indigenous peoples. Trade was important in increasing the diversity of foods and materials avail able to people, in obtaining products of higher quality than would be available locally, in exchanging items of specialized crafting, or in overcoming scheduling con flicts. Furthermore, plant exchange was not only influ enced by the broader cultural context, but in turn affected that context through impacts on a group's lan guage and collective knowledge. These economic and other cultural implications of plant exchange continued to exist after contact, and are still apparent to some extent today. Finally, plant exchange may have had significant extra-cultural consequences, in terms of effects on the ecology of the plants themselves, including both abun dance and distribution.

Analysis of the development of various botanical technologies and linguistic anomalies can reveal much

about the origins and interrelationships of the peoples themselves. Yet many questions remain, such as: "Why were some resources/technologies/names exchanged, but not others?"; "What influences did traditional pat terns of use and ownership play in plant abundance and distribution?"; and "To what extent was trading a social or an economic phenomenon, and was it desired, or required, for peoples' survival and well-being?" While many mysteries will undoubtedly persist, rewards for investigating such questions are equally certain.

Appendix 1: Current and Previously Used Names for Aboriginal Groups Discussed in Text (Not a Complete Listing)

Contemporary Name Previously Used or Alternate Name/s Ditidaht Nitinaht Gitksan Gitxsan, Gitk'san Halq'emeylem Halkomelem, Cowichan, Sto:lo, or

Stalo (includes Katzie) Heiltsuk Bella Bella, Northern Kwakiutl Kitasoo Southern Tsimshian Ktunaxa Kootenay (or Kootenai or Kutenai) Kwakwaka'wakw Kwakiutl, Southern Kwakiutl, Kwagiulth Lushootseed Puget Sound Salish, including Duwamish,

Green River, Lower Skagit (Swinomish), Nisqually (Skokomish), Puyallup, Skykomish, Snohomish, Snuqualmie, Squaxin, Suquamish, Upper Skagit

Nisga'a Nishga, Niska, Nisga Nlaka'pamux Thompson Nuu-Chah-Nulth Nootka, Westcoast (sometimes

includes Ditidaht) Nuxalk (-mc) Bella Coola Secwepemc Shuswap Stl'atl'imx Lillooet Straits Salish includes Lummi, Samish, Clallam or

Klallam, Saanich, Songish Taidnapam (Sahaptin) Upper Cowlitz Tsilhqot'in Chilcotin Tvana Skokomish

Acknowledgments We are grateful for the valuable contributions of Aborigi nal elders and other cultural specialists cited or quoted in this study: Dolly Watts (Gitksan); Dora Wedge, Winnie Atlin (Tagish); Bernadette Antoine, Louie Phillips, Mary Williams, Annie York (Nlaka'pamux); Margaret Lester (StTati'imx); Mary Thomas (Secwepemc); Alice Paul (Hesquiaht); Elsie Claxton (Straits Salish); Violet Williams (Halq'emeylem); Chief Ken Hall, Gordon Robertson (Haisla, Hanaksiala); Evelyn Windsor (Heilt suk); Dr. Margaret Siwallace (Nuxalk); Chief Adam Dick (Kwakwaka'wakw). A number of individuals contributed

66 / Nancy J. Turner, Dawn C. Loewen Anthropologica XL (1998)

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

useful information by means of an ethnobiology list server: David Bainbridge, Lyn Dearborn, Maria Emery, Sybille Haeussler, Anna Hopkins, Sarah Mason, Dave Ruppert and Janna Weiss.

We also acknowledge the contributions of ethnobiol ogist Dr. Brian Compton, and plant taxonomist Dr. Geral dine Allen. The editorial advice and criticism of Dr. Daniel Clement and three anonymous reviewers is grate fully acknowledged. Technical assistance was kindly pro vided by Colin Laroque. Research for this project was funded in part by Social Sciences and Humanities Re search Council grants to N. Turner.

Address information for Nancy J. Turner. School of Environmental Studies, University of Victoria, BC V8W 2Y2. Phone: (250) 721-6124; Fax: (250) 721-8985; E-mail: [email protected]

Address information for Dawn C. Loewen: School of Environmental Studies, University of Victoria, BC V8W 2Y2. Phone: (250) 721-6124; Fax: (250) 721-8985.

Notes 1 Malinowski (1922) described this effectively for Melanesian

peoples. In the Pacific Northwest, the practice of potlatch ing provides an example of equally complex exchange.

2 Names used in the text are those thought to be currently pre ferred by the various Indigenous groups themselves. A list of commonly used synonyms is found in Appendix 1, and a map of the groups in the region of interest is shown in Figure 1.

3 For example, Teit (1909) stated that the Tsilhqot'in tradi tionally traded little with the Carrier, but that this changed after the establishment of trading-posts in Carrier country in the early 19th century.

4 Scientific names for plant species are given in Table 1, unless otherwise noted.

5 Gunther (1945) stated that except for choice varieties of dried salmon, there was no food item more widely traded by

Washington peoples than camas. The importance of camas was also noted by Ronan (1932: 301), who noted "that when the Flatheads went to trade with the Blackfeet they could get more in exchange for a few bags of camas than for any thing else: [and] that they often got a buffalo robe for a few handsful of it."

6 Ligusticum canbyi has a scattered and infrequent distribu tion in relatively inaccessible habitats, therefore it is per haps not surprising that it could have been an item of trade.

7 Part of this trail system was travelled by Alexander Mackenzie, which resulted in its being designated the "Alexander Mackenzie Heritage Trail." While this designa tion in some sense recognizes the importance of the trail, or one part of it, Birch water et al. (1993) point out that it does not acknowledge the venerable history and significance of the trail system for the Nuxalk-Carrier peoples.

8 The potato trade was highly significant to the Europeans as well. Mackie (1984) notes that colonists in the Victoria area

in the mid-1800s acquired most of their two staples, pota toes and salmon, from Indigenous peoples such as the Cowichan.

9 It is also possible that Indian hemp was a common item of trade simply because it was constantly in demand. Teit and Boas (1973: 255) stated: "Indian hemp, Indian-hemp twine, and dressed skins, chiefly deerskins, were staples, and although almost equally common to all the tribes of the interior, were in demand almost constantly because they

were so much required for manufactures and clothing. All commodities could be bought with them."

10 Teit (1906: 207) similarly noted of the Stl'atl'imx that "At the present day coiled [cedar-root] baskets are manufac tured in great numbers by the Lillooet River and Pemberton bands, who sell them to the whites and to the Indian tribes of the coast-"

11 The work of Claude Levi-Strauss (1966, 1969) is notable in demonstrating the complex linkages, borrowings and con versions that occur among the stories and traditions of dif ferent peoples.

12 Teit appears to imply that, for example, fish prongs were modeled by the Tsilhqot'in after Secwepemc design. How ever, in most instances Teit probably means his compar isons simply as a shorthand, to avoid reiterating de scriptions he has already made in detail for other groups, and directionality of transfer, or transfer per se, is not implied.

13 These "other reasons" included, ironically, participating in non-Native cultural activities. For example, Sliammon (Comox Salish) women from around Powell River credit Secwepemc women of Kamloops for teaching them the art of making coiled cedar-root baskets, as a result of interac tions at prayer meetings in Kamloops around the turn of the century (Kennedy and Bouchard, 1983).

14 In the period of intensified trade after contact, the necessity for communication among many different groups including non-Natives led to the development of Chinook jargon. A number of Chinook jargon terms became so widely used that the original names in many languages were forgotten (Turner and Kuhnlein, 1983).

15 It is interesting that the opposite pattern was noted previ ously for groups of these language families further north; i.e., the Salishan Nuxalk language borrowed extensively

from the North Wakashan languages. For example, the name for licorice fern in various Coast Salish languages, variants on the Halq'emeylem name tl'esiip, is apparently derived from the Ditidaht, tl'aa7asiip, since it is analyzable in the latter language, as "tendency to grow on the ground" (Turner et al., 1983).

16 See Turner (1992) for a discussion of potential positive impacts of Indigenous harvesting and management prac tices on plant populations.

17 Stinging nettle also simply could have been encouraged where it grew, as it has a weedy tendency which would make it likely to thrive in disturbed areas.

18 The phenomenally rapid and widespread acceptance of the potato suggests that Indigenous peoples mastered gardening techniques with impressive alacrity, and/or they were previ ously familiar with analogous techniques. Thus, "gardening" types of activities may have been more common in pre-con tact times than is generally assumed (Suttles, 1951b).

Anthropologica XL (1998) Exchange of Botanical Products and Plant Knowledge / 67

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

19 However, it is felt that this "grass" is not as long or as good quality as formerly (1\irner and Efrat, 1982).

References Cited Albright, S.L.

1984 Tahltan Ethnoarchaeology, Burnaby, Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Publication No. 15.

Archeo Tech Associates 1993 An Aboriginal Sustenance Impact Assessment of the

Quesnel River Gold Development Project, Near Ques nel, BC, prepared for Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, Victoria, BC.

Birchwater, S., with Ulkatcho and Nuxalk Elders 1993 Ulkatcho Stories of the Grease Trail, Anahim Lake,

Ulkatcho Culture Curriculum Committee.

Black, M J. 1994 [1978] Plant Dispersal by Native North Americans in

the Canadian Subarctic, The Nature and Status of Eth nobotany, R.I. Ford (ed.), 2nd ed., Anthropological Papers No. 67, Ann Arbor, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan: 255-262.

Blackburn, T.C., and K. Anderson (eds.) 1993 Before the Wilderness: Environmental Management by

Native Californians, Menlo Park, CA: Ballena Press. Boas, E

1923 Bella Bella Notes, Boas Collection of American Indian Linguistics, Film 372, Reel 1, American Philosophical Society Library: Philadelphia.

Burk, W.R., and T.K. Fitzgerald 1981 Puffball Usages Among North American Indians, McR

vainea, 5(1): 14-17. Compton, B.D.

1993 Upper North Wakashan and Southern Tsimshian Eth nobotany: The Knowledge and Usage of Plants and Fungi among the Oweekeno, Hanaksiala (Kitlope and Kemano), Haisla (Kitamaat) and Kitasoo Peoples of the Central and North Coasts of British Columbia, unpub lished PhD dissertation, University of British Columbia.

Crosby, A.W. 1986 Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of

Europe, 900-1900, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Darby, M.C. 1996 Wapato for the People: An Ecological Approach to

Understanding the Native American Use of Sagittaria latifolia on the Lower Columbia River, unpublished MA thesis, Portland State University.

Day, G.M. 1953 The Indian as an Ecological Factor in the Northeastern

Forest, Ecology, 34:329-346. Decosse, S.S.

1980 Athapaskan-Tlingit Trade Relations: The Case for Bal anced Reciprocity, unpublished MA thesis, University of Victoria.

Denevan, W.M. 1992 The Pristine Myth: The Landscape of the Americas in

1492, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 82(3): 369-385.

Donald, L. 1997 Aboriginal Slavery on the Northwest Coast of North

America, Berkeley: University of California Press. Douglas, D.

1914 fournal Kept by David Douglas During His Travels in North America 1823-1827, London: William Wesley & Son.

Drucker, P. 1951 The Northern and Central Nootkan Tribes, Bulletin

144, Smithsonian Institution Bureau of American Eth nology, Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.

Earle, T.K. 1982 Prehistoric Economies and the Archaeology of

Exchange, Contexts for Prehistoric Exchange, J.E. Eric son and T.K. Earle (eds.), New York: Academic Press: 1-12.

Edwards, G.T. 1979 Indian Spaghetti, The Beaver, Autumn 1979: 4-11.

Elmendorf, WW 1960 The Structure of Tvana Culture, Research Studies

27(3) Supplement, Pullman: Washington State Univer sity.

Gilmore, M.R. 1931 Dispersal by Indians as a Factor in the Extension of

Discontinuous Distribution of Certain Species of Native Plants, Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts and Letters, 13: 89-94.

Gottesfeld, L.MJ. 1994 Wet'suwet'en Ethnobotany: Traditional Plant Uses,

fournal of Ethnobiology, 14(2): 185-210. Greer, S.

1995 Skookum Stories on the Chilkoot/Dyea Trail, Carcross Tagish First Nation, Parks Canada, Yukon Region.

Gunther, E. 1945 Ethnobotany of Western Washington, Seattle: Univer

sity of Washington Press. Haeberlin, H., and E. Gunther

1930 The Indians of Puget Sound, University of Washington Publications in Anthropology, 4(1): 1-84.

Hanna, D., and M. Henry (eds.) 1996 Our Tellings: Interior Salish Stories of the Nlha7kdpmx

People, Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press. Hess, T.

n.d. Borrowed Words and B.C. Prehistory, unpublished manuscript, University of Victoria.

Huelsbeck, D.R. 1988 The Surplus Economy of the Central Northwest

Coast, Prehistoric Economies of the Pacific Northwest Coast, B.L. Isaac (ed.), Research in Economic Anthro pology Supplement 3, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press: 149-177.

Hunn, E.S., with James Selam and family 1990 Nch'i-Wana: "The Big River," Mid-Columbia Indians

and Their Land, Seattle: University of Washington Press.

68 / Nancy J. Turner, Dawn C. Loewen Anthropologica XL (1998)

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Hunn, E.S., NJ. Tlirner and D.H. French 1998 Ethnobiology and Subsistence, chap. 36, Handbook of

North American Indians, W.C. Sturtevant (gen. ed.), Vol. 12, Plateau, D.E. Walker (ed.), Washington, DC: Smith sonian Institution: 525-545.

Inglis,J.T.(ed.) 1993 Traditional Ecological Knowledge, Concepts and Cases,

Ottawa: International Program on Traditional Ecological Knowledge and International Development Research Centre, Canadian Museum of Nature.

Kennedy, D., and R. Bouchard 1983 Sliammon Life; Sliammon Lands, Vancouver: Talon

books. Kuhnlein, H.V, and NJ. Turner

1991 Traditional Plant Foods of Canadian Indigenous Peo ples: Nutrition, Botany and Use, Philadelphia: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers.

Kuijt, J., and G.R. Michener 1985 First Record of the Bitterroot, Lewisia rediviva, in

Alberta, Canadian Field-Naturalist, 99(2): 264-266. Lee, R.B., and R. Daly (eds.)

In press The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Hunters and Gather ers, Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.

Levi-Strauss, C. 1966 The Savage Mind, anonymous translation, Chicago:

University of Chicago Press. Originally published in 1962 as La Fenste Sauvage, Paris: Librairie Plon.

1969 The Raw and the Cooked: Introduction to a Science of Mythology: I, J. and D. Weightman (trans.), New York: Harper & Row. Originally published in 1964 as Le Cru et le Cuit, Paris: Librairie Plon.

Mackie, R.S. 1984 Colonial Land, Indian Labour and Company Capital:

The Economy of Vancouver Island, 1849-1858, unpub lished MA thesis, University of Victoria.

Malinowski, B. 1922 Argonauts of the Western Pacific, London: Routledge &

Kegan Paul. Mauss, M.

1990 The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies, W.D. Halls (trans.), London: Rout ledge. Originally published in LAnnie Sociologique, 1923-24.

Meilleur, B.A. 1979 Speculations on the Diffusion of Nicotiana quadrivalvis

Pursh to the Queen Charlotte Islands and Adjacent Alaskan Mainland, Syesis, 12:101-104.

Mitchell, D., and L. Donald 1988 Archaeology and the Study of Northwest Coast

Economies, Prehistoric Economies of the Pacific North west Coast, B.L. Isaac (ed.), Research in Economic Anthropology Supplement 3, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press: 293-351.

Norton, H.H., R. Boyd and E.S. Hunn 1983 The Klickitat Trail of South-Central Washington: A

Reconstruction of Seasonally Used Resource Sites, Reconstruction of the Southern Northwest Coast, R.E. Greengo (ed.), Seattle: Thomas Burke Memorial Museum, University of Washington: 121-152.

Oberg, K. 1943 A Comparison of Three Systems of Primitive Econom

ic Organization, American Anthropologist, 45: 572-587. 1973 The Social Economy of the Tlingit Indians, Seattle:

University of Washington Press. Olson, R.L.

1935 Owikeno Field Notes, University Archives, The Ban croft Library, University of California, Berkeley.

1954 Social Life of the Owikeno Kwakiutl, University of California Anthropological Records, 14(3): 213-260.

Palmer, G.B. 1975 Cultural Ecology in the Canadian Plateau: Pre-Contact

to the Early Contact Period in the Territory of the Southern Shuswap Indians of British Columbia, North west Anthropological Research Notes, 9(2): 199-245.

Ray,V 1938 Lower Chinook Ethnographic Notes, University of

Washington Publications in Anthropology, 7(2): 29-165. Ronan, M.

1932 Memoirs of a Frontier's Woman, Mary C. Ronan, unpublished MA thesis, University of Montana.

Sewid-Smith, D., and Dick, A. In press The Sacred Cedar Tree of the Kwakwaka'wakw Peo

ple, Interview with NJ. Turner, Background Book for Alocoa Foundation Hall of Native Americans, M. Bol (ed.), Pittsburgh, PA: The Carnegie Museum of Natural History.

Smith, H.I. 1920-23 The Uses of Plants by the Carrier Indians of

British Columbia, 2 vols., unpublished manuscript, Ottawa: National Museum of Canada.

Sproat, G.M. 1987 The Nootka: Scenes and Studies of Savage Life, C. Lil

lard (ed.), Victoria: Sono Nis Press. Originally published as G.M. Sproat, 1868, Scenes and Studies of Savage Life, London: Smith/Elder.

Steedman, E.V (ed.) 1930 The Ethnobotany of the Thompson Indians of British

Columbia, based on field notes of James A. Teit, Wash ington, DC: Bureau of American Ethnology, 30th Annual Report, 1908-9: 33-102.

Stewart, H. (ed.) 1987 The Adventures and Sufferings of John R. fewitt: Cap

tive of Chief Maquinna, annotated and illustrated by Hilary Stewart, Vancouver: Douglas & Mclntyre. Origi nally published as J.R. Jewitt, 1824, The Adventures and Sufferings offohn R. fewitt, Edinburgh: Arch. Constable &Co.

Suttles, W.

1951a Katzie Ethnographic Notes, Anthropology in British Columbia, Memoirs 2 and 3.

1951b The Early Diffusion of the Potato among the Coast Sal ish, Southwestern fournal of Anthropology, 7(3): 272-288.

1987a Affinal Ties, Subsistence and Prestige among the Coast Salish, Coast Salish Essays, Vancouver, BC: Talon books, and Seattle: University of Washington Press: 15-25. Originally published in 1960, American Anthropol ogist, 62: 296-305.

Anthropologica XL (1998) Exchange of Botanical Products and Plant Knowledge / 69

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

1987b Coping with Abundance: Subsistence on the Northwest Coast, Coast Salish Essays, Vancouver, BC: Talonbooks, and Seattle: University of Washington Press: 45-63.

Suttles, W. (ed.) 1990 Handbook of North American Indians, W.C. Sturtevant

(gen. ed.), Vol. 7, Northwest Coast, Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.

Swan, J. 1869 The Indians of Cape Flattery, Smithsonian Contribu

tions to Knowledge No. 220, Vol. 16, Article 8, Washing ton, DC: Smithsonian Institution: 1-108.

Teit,J.A. 1900 The Thompson Indians of British Columbia, Jesup

North Pacific Expedition, Memoir Vol. 1, Part 4, New York: American Museum of Natural History.

1906 The Lillooet Indians, Jesup North Pacific Expedition, Memoir Vol. 2, Part 5, New York: American Museum of Natural History.

1909 The Shuswap, Jesup North Pacific Expedition, Memoir Vol. 2, Part 7, New York: American Museum of Natural History.

Teit, J.A., and E Boas 1973 The Salishan Tribes of the Western Plateaus, Extract

from 45th B.A.E. Annual Report 1927-28, Seattle: Shorey Book Store.

Turner, NJ. 1973 The Ethnobotany of the Bella Coola Indians of British

Columbia, Syesis, 6:193-220. 1978 Plants of the Nootka Sound Indians as Recorded by Cap

tain Cook, Nutka: Captain Cook and the Spanish Explor ers on the Coast, B.S. Efrat and WJ. Langlois (eds.), Victoria: Provincial Archives of British Columbia: 78-87.

1979 Plants in British Columbia Indian Technology, Hand book No. 38, Victoria: Royal British Columbia Museum.

1992 Plant Resources of the StVdtVimx (Fraser River Lil looet) People: A Window into the Past, A Complex Cul ture of the British Columbia Plateau, B. Hayden (ed.), Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press: 405-469.

1995 Food Plants of Coastal First Peoples, Victoria: Royal British Columbia Museum, and Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.

1996 ?Dans une hotte*. Limportance de la vannerie dans l'economie des peuples chasseurs-pecheurs-cueilleurs du Nord-Ouest de 1'Amerique du Nord, Anthropologie et Socittis, 20(33): 55-84.

1997 Food Plants of Interior First Peoples, Victoria: Royal British Columbia Museum, and Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.

Tlirner, N.J., and M.A.M. Bell 1971 The Ethnobotany of the Coast Salish Indians of Van

couver Island, Economic Botany, 25(1): 63-104; 25(3): 335-339.

1973 The Ethnobotany of the Southern Kwakiutl Indians of British Columbia, Economic Botany, 27(3): 257-310.

Turner, N.J., R. Bouchard and D.I.D. Kennedy 1980 The Ethnobotany of the Okanagan-Colville Indians of

British Columbia and Washington, Occasional Paper No. 21, Victoria: British Columbia Provincial Museum.

Turner, N.J., R. Bouchard, D. Kennedy and J. Van Eijk 1987 Ethnobotany of the Stl'atl'imx (Lillooet) Indians of

British Columbia, unpublished manuscript, Victoria: Royal British Columbia Museum.

Turner, N.J., and B.S. Efrat 1982 Ethnobotany of the Hesquiat Indians of Vancouver

Island, Cultural Recovery Paper No. 2, Victoria: British Columbia Provincial Museum.

Turner, N.J., and M.B. Ignace (eds.) 1993-97 Unpublished notes on Secwepemc Ethnobotany,

Kamloops: Secwepemc Cultural Education Institute. Turner, N.J., M.B. Ignace and B.D. Compton

1997 Secwepemc (Shuswap)Tree Names: Key to the Past? Studies in Salish Linguistics, E. Czaykowska-Higgins and M.D. Kinkade (eds.), Germany: Mouton de Gruyter: 387-417.

Turner, N.J., and H.V. Kuhnlein 1983 Camas (Camassia spp.) and Riceroot (Fritillaria spp.):

T\vo Liliaceous "Root" Foods of the Northwest Coast

Indians, Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 13:199-219. Turner, N.J., J. Thomas, B.E Carlson and R.T. Ogilvie

1983 Ethnobotany of the Nitinaht Indians of Vancouver Island, Occasional Paper Series, No. 24, Victoria: Royal British Columbia Museum.

Turner, N.J., L.C. Thompson, M.T. Thompson and A.Z. York 1990 Thompson Ethnobotany: Knowledge and Usage

of Plants by the Thompson Indians of British Columbia, Memoir No. 3, Victoria: Royal British Columbia Museum.

Watts, D. 1997 Trading for Food Among the North Coastal First

Nations, Good Cheer/Bon Temps (Cuisine Canada: The Canadian Culinary Alliance), 3(1): 1.

Williams, M.D. 1979 The Harvesting of "Slukus" (Porphyra perforata) by

the Straits Salish Indians of Vancouver Island, Syesis, 12: 63-68.

Williams, N.M., and G. Baines (eds.) 1993 Traditional Ecological Knowledge: Wisdom for Sustain

able Development, Canberra: Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Australian National University.

Wilson, M.C., L.V Hills, B.O.K. Reeves and S.A. Aaberg 1988 Bitterroot, Lewisia rediviva, in Southwestern Alberta:

Cultural versus Natural Dispersal, Canadian Field Naturalist, 102(3): 515-522.

70 / Nancy J. Turner, Dawn C. Loewen Anthropologica XL (1998)

This content downloaded from ������������142.104.240.194 on Tue, 02 Feb 2021 14:50:04 UTC������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms