What a Basket Holds

What a Basket Holds
Faith Whiting
January 4, 2002
For: Dr. Nancy Turner, Directed Studies Supervisor
And Meagan Kus of the White Rock Museum
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract…………………………………………………………………………… 2
Introduction: Basketry in British Columbia……………………………………… 3
Trees Used in Basketry…………………………………………………………… 6
Grasses, Sedges and Other Materials……………………………………………… 9
Systems of Management of Basketry Materials: The Sexual Division of Labour… 13
An Analysis of a Collection: The White Rock Museum…………………………. 19
Conclusions: Conservation Problems and the Future of Basketry……………… 22
Figure 1: A Map of the Linguistic Divisions of British Columbia’s First Nations. 26
Figure 2: Major Language Families: Northwest Basket Makers Map…………..
27
Table 1: First Nations Languages in British Columbia………………………….. 28
Table 2: Plant Materials used in Basketry in British Columbia…………………. 29
Figure 3: Nlaka’pamux and Stl’atl’imx Coiled Cedar-root basketry ...................
31
Figure 4: Plaited Cedar Bark Basket of Tsimshian Origin....................................
32
Figure 5: Magnified View of Plaited Cedar Bark..................................................
33
Figure 6: Magnified View of Cherry Bark and Reed Canary Grass......................
33
Figure 7: Birch Bark Berry Basket......................................................................... 34
Figure 8: Identifying Basket Sedge........................................................................ 35
Figure 9: Identifying Bear-grass............................................................................
36
Figure 10: Twined Spruce Root Basket of Tlingit Origin...................................... 37
Works Cited………………………………………………………………………. 38
Appendix A: Botany of Basketry Plants……………………………………….... 40
Appendix B: Microscopic Sketches of Basketry Plants………………………...... 50
2
Abstract
The art of basketry has played a significant role in the lives of indigenous people in
British Columbia for centuries. Today, by studying this art, we can understand a more accurate
historical and cultural account of the First Nations people in this area. We can also hope to
better understand the incredible craftsmanship and the knowledge of the land and resources that
is embodied in each basket, in order to conserve this knowledge for future generations. The
current documentation of plant materials used in basketry, in museum collections, tends to be
poor as there has been a lack of knowledge present in order to identify and study these materials.
This particular study attempts to identify some of the main basketry materials employed in
British Columbian basketry, as well as outline some of the systems by which they were managed
and processed. This information was applied to a collection of baskets donated to the White
Rock Museum. Background research was also taken from observations of the basketry
collection at the UBC Museum of Anthropology, as well as the Royal British Columbia
Museum. The grouping of British Columbia’s First Nation’s people was done on a linguistical
basis and in conjunction with the system used by the UBC Museum of Anthropology (Figures 1
and 2; Table 1). Information on basketry materials was drawn from published literature and the
actual determination of plants used was done by microscopic observations, aided by digital
photography. From this it was possible to determine the materials a basket was composed of.
This information, combined with an analysis of pattern and style, allowed for a basket to be
better placed regionally and historically.
3
Acknowledgements
I would like to extend my sincere gratitude firstly to the First Nations people of British
Columbia for allowing me the opportunity to explore such a rich and valuable culture in order to
better understand my own roots and history. I would like to thank Dr. Nancy Turner for being a
fountain of knowledge and support for this study. To Megan Kus and the staff of the White
Rock Museum for all of their efforts in collaborating this project and their help along the way.
For CURA for making available funds for such research to take place. Lastly, to my research
partner Karen Petkau, I could not have proceeded thus far without you along side me. My
heartfelt thanks. May basketry continue to amaze and astound us always.
Introduction: Basketry in British Columbia
The origin of basketry, according to Tlingit mythology, connects an earthly people to an
immortal world. The story is told, that a mortal woman had fallen in love with and married the
sun, and had many children with him. There came a time, however, when she began to miss her
earthly home. One day as she was weaving roots together, the sun took them from her and
enlarged her weave to form a basket large enough to hold her and her children, and lowered them
to the earth (as told in Walker 1999: recorded by Frances Paul 1944). From this account of the
first basket made, it is evident that basketry has historically been present for a long time. It
clearly carries traditional and cultural importance as it is engrained in mythology.
According to archaeological evidence, baskets are among the oldest form of manufacture
by humans (Dodds-Schlick 1994). Among Pacific Northwest peoples (Figures 1 and 2; Table 1)
baskets provided the main form of storage, and were used for transportation of goods, as well as,
for cooking and bathing purposes. The weaving of baskets can be said to represent the evolution
4
of cultural knowledge and craftsmanship. Unique styles of weaving based on the materials
available regionally, were developed and perfected over time, by separate native cultures across
British Columbia. The Interior Salish people (the Stl’atl’imx or Lillooet and the Nlaka’pamux or
Thompson), for example, were known for their expertise in coiled cedar-root baskets, whereas,
the coastal Nuu-chah-nulth (Nootka), and Makah people were associated with fine twined trinket
baskets made of Basket Sedge and Bear-grass. The Haida of Haida Gwaii, and theTlingit people
of Alaska were renowned for their spruce root twining.
The variation that appears both culturally and regionally in basketry denotes unique and
separate lineages surrounding the evolution of this art. However, basketry was heavily impacted
by the colonization of the Pacific Northwest. Major shifts occurred between 1775 and 1875,
when European influence began to show itself in techniques and materials. During the late 19th
and early 20th centuries, there was a clear degeneration of the craft as people were relocated to
reservations and European goods began to replace the need for baskets on a utilitarian basis
(Turnbaugh and Turnbaugh 1986). At this time there was a significant switch to basketry for
ornamental and collection purposes. Many of the collectors of this time are responsible for the
incredible collections present in museums today.
James Teit, in his journeys of the Pacific Northwest around the time of the early 1900’s,
conducted detailed studies of basketry in the people he dwelt among, which were chiefly the
Thompson (Nlaka’pamux) and the Lillooet (Stl’atl’imx) cultures. He indicated from
observations that large round baskets were used for holding water and as kettles for boiling food
in. This was done by way of dropping stones heated in a fire into the basket, making the liquid
boil. Nut-shaped baskets were used for holding dried berries and occasionally water. Basinshaped baskets were used as tubs and bowls for washing. Birch-bark baskets were used for
5
picking berries. Oval baskets with a spout and a wide rim were used for making fish oil (Teit
1900). Similarly, there were also a variety of small baskets crafted to hold trinkets, as well as a
range of basketry used for ceremonial feasting.
Turner (1996:4), in her extensive studies on the ethnobotanical knowledge of British
Columbia’s First Nations people, suggests that “over 40 different species of native plants are, or
have been, used in basketry in north-western North America.” Thus, the systems of knowledge in
place in traditional societies regarding such materials were great. Indeed, it was written by
Mason, in his accounts of Native plant materials for basketry, and in the colonialist language of
the time, “is it not marvellous to think that unlettered savages should know so much botany?”
(Mason 1902:197). Mason obviously admired the skill and craftsmanship involved in
basketmaking, as well as awed at the work required. He muses,
How did the savages find out that the roots of certain plants hid away under the earth were the best possible
material for this function? And for another use the stem of a plant had to be found, perhaps miles away, so
that in the makeup of a single example leagues would have to be travelled and much discrimination used.
Unless the utmost care is exercised the fact will be overlooked that often three or four kinds of wood will
be used in the monotonous work of the weft. One is best for the bottom, another is light and tough for the
body, a third is best for the flexible top. This in addition to the employment of half a dozen others for
designs, for warp or foundation, or for decorative purposes (Mason 1902:198).
Thus, the topic of basketry materials is an encompassing one, especially in attempts to
study the materials of an entire province dotted with very different ecosystems, within which
evolved different styles of basketry. For the purpose of this study, the focus was limited to the
most commonly used plants in British Columbia, and the ones that appeared in the White Rock
Museum collection of baskets. These are outlined in Table 2. This study is by no means a
complete account of basketry materials. Indeed, as basketry varied greatly among the first
peoples of British Columbia and all had such a distinct and beautiful style of the art, this paper
can not attempt to explain the styles of all groups, but rather attempts to overview them, with a
focus on various tribes in relation to certain styles of basketry.
6
Trees Used in Basketry
The First Nations of British Columbia’s coast place great importance on the cedar tree.
The Western Red-cedar (Thuja plicata) has been termed the “cornerstone of Northwest Coast
Indian culture,” (Pojar and MacKinnon 1994:42). Western Red-cedar, and to a lesser extent,
Yellow-cedar (Chamaecyparis nootkatensis), were sources of roots and bark used not only for
basketry but also for clothing, shelter, transportation and tools. The bark of both trees was
gathered by making a horizontal cut in the bark about a metre up from the ground. A large
wedge pried up the bark and it was pulled up and out. The preparation of Yellow-cedar took
more work because it had to be boiled and soaked and pounded until soft. It was preferred to
Red-cedar bark in some uses, due to its softness. However, Red-cedar was exceptional in its root
quality.
In the harvesting of the roots, it is noted that, “If the red cedar roots are harvested from a
place that is too rocky, the roots will be too crooked to use. If the soil contains too much clay,
the roots will not pull out easily. If the tree has too many branches, the roots themselves will be
short and branching. The best sites are moist, sandy river sides, where the trees are tall, straight,
well-spaced and not too bushy,” (Turner 1992:1,2). The roots selected to be harvested were the
farthest from the tree, as these were the straightest and most pliable. The roots were dug using a
digging stick. They were heated over coals to prevent darkening , the bark was removed and
they were split and dried (Turner 1998). Haeberlin et. al, (1928) observed the preparation of
roots among the Thompson (Nlaka’pamux) people, as being split and re-split with a knife or awl
until they were approximately 2 mm in width and 0.5 mm thick. The roots are dried for six
months or even a year so that maximum shrinkage will occur before the basket is made. If the
roots are not sufficiently dried, gaps will appear in the basket as it ages (Fortney 2001). The
7
roots were bundled for storage and soaked before use to make them more pliable. It is thought
that cedar roots may have been developed as choice basketry materials, due to their moldresistant properties. Similarly, some basketry materials, such as Indian Hemp (Apocynum
cannabinum), have been studied with respect to insect repellent properties (Dodds-Schlick
1994).
The roots of Sitka Spruce (Picea sitchensis), Engelmann Spruce (Picea engelmannii) and
White Spruce (Picea glauca) were used to make twined hats and baskets. Turner (1998) writes
that Aboriginal people of British Columbia did not strongly distinguish between the species of
spruce. Occupants of the southern part of the province tended to use Engelmann Spruce,
whereas northern and interior peoples used White Spruce. The roots were harvested from sandy
ground in early summer and cooked briefly, peeled, split and bundled for later use (Pojar and
MacKinnon 1994). The Tlingit people relied on Sitka Spruce as the basis of their basketry, as
cedar was generally only available to the Southern Tlingit. The Tlingit, in fact, classified the
spruce tree into three categories based on the size and external appearance of the trunk. The
most desirable is the shay-kee, or mature tree, which measured one to two feet in diameter. The
roots of this tree had “greater pliability, better colour, more uniformity of texture and greater
length free of shoots and roughness,” (Paul 1991: 13). The Haida also wove baskets primarily of
plain twined spruce. Indeed, the Haida Spruce root hat is famous in British Columbian basketry.
The bark of the Spruce species was also used to make bark containers similar to those made of
birch bark (Turner 1998). The coiled root basketry of the Tsilhqot’in peoples were constructed
mainly of spruce roots, as opposed to cedar roots.
The bark of the Bitter Cherry tree (Prunus emarginata), and its close relative Pin Cherry
(Prunus pensylvanica), in the interior of British Columbia, was commonly used for the purpose
8
of imbrication of coiled cedar basketry. Bitter Cherry is a shrub or small tree reaching 2-15 m
tall. It grows in moist forests and along streams at low to middle elevations (Pojar and
MacKinnon 1994). Cherry bark was either employed in its natural colour of deep red, or was
dyed black through the process of oxidation. This was done by burying the bark in wet humus
soil for a period of a few months. In current times cherry bark has been dyed by placing it into a
can with rusty nails. Cherry bark was processed to make it soft by pounding it or rubbing it over
the edge of a board or tree (Turner 1998).
The Paper Birch tree (Betula papyrifera), was used commonly by interior groups, and the
bark, was “as important to the native peoples inland from the Northwest Coast as the western
redcedar was to the coastal peoples,” (Pojar and MacKinnon 1994:47). Birch-bark was removed
from the tree in large sheets and used to construct folded baskets for berry-picking. The bark
was commonly harvested in the late spring and early summer, when the sap was running, as it
was the easiest to remove at this time (Turner 1998). These baskets were of various shapes and
the edges were stitched with split spruce, poplar, cedar, or Saskatoon roots. Occasionally, the
rim was also reinforced with a hoop of spilt willow twigs (Teit 1900), Saskatoon wood
(Amelanchier alnifolia) or Water Birch (Betula occidentalis), (Turner 1998). Designs were
occasionally etched onto the surface of the basket for decoration.
The bark from the Rocky Mountain Maple tree (Acer glabrum), was also used to weave
bark baskets by the Gitxsan, Nisga’a, and Nuu-chah-nulth peoples. It was abundant in the
southern interior, as well as the southern coast of Vancouver Island to the Rocky Mountains.
The bark was used either in its natural light shade, or dyed black (Turner 1998). Strips of Maple
bark were also used as decorative materials in the bags and baskets of the Tsimshian and Gitxsan
peoples.
9
Grasses, Sedges and Other Materials
The use of sedges, grasses and Bear-grass (a member of the lily family) allow for a
fineness and evenness of stitching in the weave of baskets. As with the preparation of tree
materials, perhaps the most intensive part of crafting grass-based baskets is in the collection and
preparation of the materials. Fortney (2001), suggests that if materials are not prepared with care
and are uneven in thickness, they will split and break. She found that this was often observed
with baskets that have stems of Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea) in them. Similarly,
Peri and Patterson (1993), note that it is stressed by the Pomo people of California, that an
essential part of learning the art of basketry is learning the art of root collection.
To properly envisage the amount of work involved in processing basketry materials it
must be maintained that baskets, especially those made of more that one material, required
extensive preparation. Turner (1992), alludes to this when she says “for the Interior Salish splitcedar-root coiled baskets, women go to open wetlands for Reed Canary Grass, to forest edges
and moist thickets for Bitter Cherry bark, and to shaded woods near the river for cedar roots and
cedar splints.” Coville (1902:214), elaborates on this idea when he describes the harvest of
materials, “this embraces intimate acquaintance with the places where just the right substances
abound, knowledge of the times when each element is ripe, methods of growing, harvesting, and
conveying involved, as well as the tools and apparatus used in gathering. In their rough state
much of the materials would be as unfit for the use as quarry clay would be for the potter or
crude ore for the metallurgist.”
The processing is similar across sedges and grasses (and Bear-grass), used in basketry.
Grasses were generally picked in June or early July. Haeberlin, Teit and Roberts (1928)
10
observed grasses being dried in the sun and put in smoke above a fire. Next, they were washed
in water, dried again and the outer skin removed. The stalks were cut in regular lengths and
bundled. They were then soaked before use. To make materials appear whiter they were
bleached in the sun. To avoid over-bleaching, the materials were placed in the shade. Frances
Paul (1991: 16) remembers that “formerly, when basketry was a major industry, the festoons of
drying grass, hung around the house-fronts or over canoes, were a common sight in the summer
villages.”
Bear-grass (Xerophyllum tenax) and Basket Sedge (Carex obnupta), were both
commonly used to construct the trinket baskets of the Nuu-chah-nulth, which they termed pukoo, or pukwu baskets. Bear-grass, however only appears in the province in the south-eastern
corner. On the coast it occurs only on the Olympic peninsula of Washington. Thus, the Nuuchah-nulth had a more readily available source of Basket Sedge and used Bear-grass only when
it was obtained through trade. Carex obnupta, on the other hand, is one of the most widely
distributed lowland sedges in the province. Bear-grass was not only more difficult to obtain, but
it was noted to be “tougher and narrower and harder to prepare and doesn’t go as far in the
weaving,” (Gogol 1980:8). As well, cuts in the hands and fingers often resulted from the
handling of its serrated edges, which are troublesome when the spine of the blade is being
removed (Dodds-Schlick 1994). However, some weavers note its exceptional durability and
strength (Thompson and Marr 1983).
In more recent times Raphia (Raphia farnifera) leaves have been used in the weaving of
pukwu baskets by both the Nuu-chah-nulth and Makah peoples because it can be easily bought at
stores. Raphia is not native to the province but is a palm fibre, abundantly sold in stores as a
11
craft material. Microscopically, Raphia appears smooth and relatively free of grain lines. It has
a soft shine and is pale yellow in colour (Figure 1B).
Traditionally, the Makah pukwu baskets differed from those of the Nuu-chah-nulth
(Nootka) ones in that the Makah generally used cedar bark as a weft and employed a plaited
cedar bark start. The Nuu-chah-nulth people used Three Corner Grass (Schoenoplectus
olneyi),as a warp (Gogol 1981). S. olneyi, known as Toh-toh to the Nuu-chah-nulth people, is
also often termed “American Bulrush” or “Sweetgrass.” It grows in tidal flats, as well as in wet
meadows, ditches and marshes. It is gathered between July and early August. To process
“Sweetgrass,” the outer layer was traditionally removed using a mussel shell or deer’s leg bone
and running it along each strand with the thumb positioned beneath (Thompson and Marr 1983).
Decorative materials were of a wide range. It is even noted that after colonization, the
Thompson used strips of black dress to adorn their baskets (Haeberlin et al 1928). Tule
(Schoenoplectus acutus), most commonly used for mat-making, can also be found in the
imbrication of some baskets, particularly those of the Nuu-chah-nulth people. The stems of Tule
appear shiny and golden in colour, and when magnified, the veins appear fine, even and close
together (Figure 2B). Coville (1902) documents Tule (which he refers to as the species Scirpus
lacustris), as the principal basket material of the Klamath and Modoc Indians of Oregon. He
recounts that “narrow strips from the surface of the stem are twisted into long threads and these
used for their finer twined baskets, giving a great variety of green and brown shades or, when
dyed, a black. For coarser baskets whole or split stems are commonly employed, without
twisting,” (Coville 1902:211).
Cattail (Typha latifolia) was also a material used for imbrication. Microscopically, the
surface of a Cattail stem appears deeply grooved and golden brown in colour (Figure 3B).
12
Cattail found near salt water was said to be the strongest for basketry purposes (Thompson and
Marr 1983). It was typically gathered in the fall, and was processed by trimming the lower edge
of the leaf and dried in the sun (Ross 1994). Cattail appeared “lusterless, slightly ashy white” in
colour (Coville 1902:212). Cattails were often chosen for young girls to use when weaving their
first baskets (Thompson and Marr 1983).
Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea) was used for imbrication on coiled cedar root
baskets by some of the Interior Salish and Halkomelem people. The stems of this grass were
best picked while young and before the flowers had emerged (Turner 1992). Reed Canary Grass
has a long culm, and is smooth and glossy and cream-coloured in appearance (Figure 4B). It can
be differentiated from Cattail because of its sheen, according to Mount Currie basketmaker Anna
Billy (in Fortney 2001). It is seldom dyed because it is naturally attractive (Teit and Steedman
1930). To keep Reed Canary Grass white it must be dried in the shade. Occasionally, as a
substitute for this grass in the imbrication of Interior Salish basketry, the culms of giant wildrye
(Elymus cinereus) were used (Teit and Steedman 1930).
Common Reed Grass (Phragmites australis), was used for the same purposes as Reed
Canary Grass, by the Nlaka’pamux and Stl’atl’imx people. Both plants were used to imbricate
split cedar-root baskets. Common Reed Grass is a naturally creamy white colour that was
sometimes dyed yellow. It can be found in the southern half of the Province from Vancouver
Island to the Okanagan (Turner 1998).
The long, trailing roots of Marsh Horsetail (Equisetum palustris), were used by the
Tlingit for decorative overlays, to provide a material that was naturally black, and which was
thought to be the most lasting black colour attainable (Paul 1991). Paul (1991) suggests that the
species used by the Tlingit was E. palustris, however, Pojar and MacKinnon (1994), include E.
13
hyemale, (commonly Souring-rush), as used for this purpose by the Tlingit. Not only were the
rhizomes used, but the skin from the horsetail genus was also used as an imbrication material in
coiled basketry (Thompson and Marr 1991).
Occasionally, the stems of Maidenhair fern (Adiantum pedatum), were favoured as a
material for ornamentation because of their shiny black appearance. Like horsetail rhizomes,
Maidenhair fern stems were known for retaining their colour longer than any dyed material (Paul
1991). It was most frequently used by Washington groups (Pojar and MacKinnon 1994),
however, use by the Tlingit people of Maidenhair fern for ornamentation, was recorded by
Coville (1902). The best time to gather Maidenhair stem is late May through the first part of
August (Oritz 1991). If gathered too early the stems are too soft and if gathered too late they are
too brittle. Maidenhair fern could also be used to yield a blackish purple dye (Ross 1994).
Plant materials were often coloured using a variety of techniques. The colour of grasses
could be manipulated by rubbing the grass on abalone shells to brighten the tone (Ross 1994).
Cedar bark could be dyed using a concoction of young Red Alder bark (Alnus rubra) mixed with
urine to yield a range of red to black colours (Ross 1994). Red was obtained by the Tlingit
people from sea-urchin juice, nettle and hemlock bark, while yellow was obtained from the
lichen Letharia vulpina (Turnbaugh and Turnbaugh 1986). The blue-green colour of the Tlingit,
termed kheshk after the crested Steller’s jay, was attained by boiling hemlock bark (Tsuga
genus), in urine to which copper oxide had been added (Paul 1991).
Systems of Management of Basketry Materials: The Sexual Division of Labour
In the Interior plateau region of British Columbia, between the Rocky Mountains and the
Cascade Mountains, it was noted that there existed a sexual division of labour wherein the men
14
of a society fished or hunted, while the women gathered and processed plant materials and
animal foods. Indeed, a woman gathered plants throughout the growing season, from early
spring to late fall. If she was ambitious, she would gather excess for trade and ceremony
(Ackerman 1995). Ackerman (1995) is careful to note that the work of both genders was judged
of equal importance. The same trends were noted in the study of women’s roles in Tlingit
society. Wherein, women were the chief gatherers and processors of plant materials, and “wood
carving was the realm of the male artists.. basket weaving and blanket making was the realm of
female artists,” (Klein 1995: 34).
It was generally custom of Northwest Coast tribes to allot rights to exploit resource
districts through family lineages. The Tsimshian, Haida and Tlingit women gathered the
resources they needed from their husband’s properties, while aiding their own lineages by
working their family’s properties (Garfield 1950). Thus, although tracts of basket materials such
as sedges were often considered common property, some materials were maintained through
family lineages, as well as was information about the best places to harvest and the best tracts to
exploit.
The digging of roots was considered an important task to most groups. In “Ethnobotany
of the Thompson Indians of British Columbia,” Teit and Steedman (1930), suggest that the
Thompson calendar was based on moons, which shine during seasons when roots are ready to be
dug. Although this may apply to roots used as food, those used in basketry were also of great
importance, and the gathering of such roots was a valued time, mainly for the women of the
culture. In the writings on his research compiled from his North Pacific expedition, Teit, (1900),
when refering to the process of basketmaking says that, “only women and girls occupy
15
themselves with this work.” Thus, although men helped with the heavy work involved in
material collection, traditionally basketry has been a woman’s craft.
The fact that basketry was considered women’s work has had effects on the way that it
has been documented and viewed thorough time. It is rare that the name of a basket maker
would have been recorded along with a basket at the time of collection. Thus, there is little or no
information available on individual weavers, which, in turn, directs the study of basketry to focus
on regionality. Tribal art has often been referred to as the anonymous products of the people,
and not the individual artisan. This has been attributed to a biased focus of anthropologists on
technology and technological development (Hammond and Jablow 1973). Thus, historically, artforms traditionally carried out by men in native communities such as carving and totem pole
manufacture, were more likely to have had the name of an individual artist recorded.
Of the few recorded weavers, one of the most famous is Isabella Edenshaw. During her
time, she was well-known as an exceptional basketmaker, but her name was rarely recorded by
collectors. Because significant information is available today on the style and weaving of Mrs.
Edenshaw, it has become possible to attribute basketry items to her. These are presented by
Laforet (1985), in Isabella Edenshaw’s Basketry. The Edenshaw’s present an interesting case for
the sexual division of labour as Isabella was a renowned weaver, and her husband Charles, an
Eagle chief at Kiusta, was a talented painter who would decorate her work. Andrea LaForet
(1985) suggests that Haida spruce root hats represent a conjunction point in Northwest material
culture between men and women’s art.
Basketry was so entwined in female Aboriginal culture that it held a role in the ascension
of a young girl into womanhood. In documentation of basketry in the Puget Sound region, it was
noted that when a young girl began menstruating (her t’aq’wicad period), she was removed to a
16
hut located away from the village for a period of one to eight months. During this time an
elderly female tended the girl and often instructed her in basketmaking. Thus, basketmaking was
symbolically linked with a transition into womanhood and held great importance as a woman’s
craft (Thompson and Marr 1983). Similarly, it is recorded that a young women desiring superior
talent in basketry sought a spirit power by ritual fasting, bathing and a vision quest (Thompson
and Marr 1983). Because basketmaking revolved around the female gender, women had a clear
role not only as gatherers and weavers, but also as managers and stewards of ecosystems for the
purpose of ensuring a healthy supply of materials.
This spiritual connection that existed between the basketmaker and her materials was the
primary foundation of an ethic based on respect for the materials and their harvest. There was a
need for great ecological knowledge pertaining to these plants and management systems that
ensured supplies. Women, thus, also held the role as chief botanists in the traditional society.
Although, there is little record of actual management systems of basketry plants in British
Columbia, Oritz (1991), suggests that similar materials were managed by the Pomo Indians of
California, by way of collection restrictions, judicious harvesting systems, soil cultivation,
controlled burning, as well as selective harvesting. There is evidence to suggest that these
methods were also employed by the First Nations of British Columbia to manage their materials.
Management was of utmost importance as a “use ensures abundance” ethic was adopted. If an
area that contained valuable resources was not used, it was considered to be abandoned (Garfield
1950).
Selective harvesting practices are in line with the traditional ethic of First Nations people
of British Columbia not to take more from the land than is necessary. Thus, collecting
restrictions would ensure that supplies and particular tracts would be secure for all time, and
17
overharvesting would not eliminate materials. Evidence of these practices among the Pomo of
Califorina include the division of sedges into “tracts” and “beds”. Tracts were divided into ‘river
root tracts’ and ‘coastal root tracts’. Within these tracts there are further divisions into ‘sand
root’ beds, ‘dirt root’ beds, and heavy clay beds. Sand root beds are the most preferred as they
yield the whitest roots (Peri and Patterson 1976:178). Because of the existence of preferred
tracts, informal claims may have been made, and the existence of prime tracts kept secret. Thus,
as mentioned earlier, this knowledge may have been passed along through family lineages in
British Columbia.
Knowing the proper time in a plant’s life cycle is also a key component to judicious
harvesting (Oritz 1991). Often changes in nearby plants were used as indicators to the readiness
for harvest. Thus, “when the red elderberries were ripe it was time to gather sweetgrass,”
(Schoenoplectus olneyi), (Thompson and Marr 1983: 19). In British Columbia bark for baskets
was generally gathered in late spring and early summer when the sap was running, whereas
sedges and grasses were collected in late summer and early fall when the plants were mature
(Turner 1998). These were general guidelines, however, each plant was unique within an
ecosystem and knowledge of the best time to harvest in it’s lifecycle was essential to both
pliability and workability of the plant and sustainable harvesting systems.
Knowing where to harvest materials also contributed to systems of management as these
places would have been used and benefited from this. Frances Paul, a Tlingit basketmaker
suggests that “the best places to find the grasses are near the water or in the shade of trees for
here they grow more rank, with longer sections between the joints,” (1991:16). By way of using
a particular tract of plant material properly, the tract is managed for high quality yield. For those
plants producing underground rhizomes, managing a tract aids the root quality by what is
18
essentially a weeding process. The removal of debris and crowded plants allows for soil
conditions that favour long and straight rhizomes. The soil is affected by increased aeration,
stimulation of new roots and water condensation, nutrients are better mixed and drainage is
improved, while the soil is loosened (Oritz 1991).
Controlled burning promotes the growth of new, pliable and straight shoots. It returns
nutrients to the soil and interrupts succession to favour the growth of particular plants. Burning
also eliminates unhealthy plants and reduces pests, while allowing for optimal light to reach the
plants (Peri and Patterson 1993). Bear grass is a plant that colonizes easily following fire and
may have been managed this way in eastern British Columbia, as it was in California, Oregon
and Washington.
Thus, the conception that materials were merely gathered randomly from nature is
misleading. These materials were essential to the existence and economy of First Nations people
and there needed to be a predictable and accountable supply. Techniques were employed to
ensure this, centered on a general ethic of respect for the land and an understanding that taking
more than was necessary would be detrimental to the supply. Walker (1999), suggests that “the
long-term sustainability of the resources needed by the basketmaker is part of a complex
traditional land and resource management system that spans many generations, past and future,”
and indeed, “knowledge about materials –when to gather them, where to find them, how to work
with them, requires ‘knowing’ about the environment in a profound way, through direct
experience built up over time.” Thus physical, ethical and spiritual methods of management
were incorporated to ensure a healthy supply of materials was in place, as well as to create
sustainable systems based on use.
19
An Analysis of a Collection: The White Rock Museum
The White Rock Museum was bequeathed an elaborate collection of baskets by Mrs.
Irene Maccaud Nelson following her death in 1978. Mrs. Maccaud Nelson was born the
daughter of an Anglican missionary in 1897. She was an avid collector of native artifacts and
although little is known of how she acquired her basketry collection, it shows a large extent of
baskets encompassing a wide range of styles that were employed across British Columbia. Her
collection also includes baskets from a range of time periods, based on wear, damage and
obvious ageing of some of the baskets present. Her collection is invaluable in the study of
basketry and much information can be gained from the investigation of such a collaboration.
A majority of the collection are coiled cedar-root baskets from an Interior Salish,
Halkomelem, or Sto:lo origin. Figure 3 shows some representatives of this type of basketry.
Coiled basketry differs from a twined technique in that coiled baskets are manufactured by
sewing roots over a foundation of splints or fibers. Twining involves the weaving of materials.
The Interior Salish people (the Nlaka’pamux and Stl’atl’imx), and the Mainland Halkomelem,
(who are Coast Salish people), were the leading manufacturers of coiled basketry in British
Columbia. It is believed that the direction of diffusion of this art form was from the “interior
toward the sea,” (Haeberlin et. al 1928). Haeberlin, Teit and Roberts (1928), observed that all of
the coiled basketry of the Interior region was fashioned of cedar roots. There were baskets that
were known to be made of spruce roots. However, these were not considered to be as finely
made. Coiled cedar-root baskets can be attributed to the Interior Salish and Halkomelem people
based on the style of weave, as well as the designs displayed. Cedar root is easily identified
visually. A cedar root appears smooth and shiny and there is an absence of any veins that
20
characterize sedges and grasses. Cedar root is typically used for the foundation of the baskets
and the root is employed in a coiled manner.
Of the Interior Salish group, there are general differences between the basketry of the
Nlaka’pamux (Thompson) and Stl’atl’imx (Lillooet) people. The Nlaka’pamux people tended to
craft baskets that were of excellent craftsmanship. Haeberlin et. al (1928) suggest that the good
climate, plentiful food and time for leisure allowed them adequate time to develop their art. The
larger “burden-baskets” were used traditionally for carrying things on the back. The really large
ones could be used to bathe in. Stl’atl’imx baskets are often characterized by the upper half of
the basket being almost entirely covered with grass stem imbrication. The Stl’atl’imx were also
known for a type of false embroidery where a continuous strip of grass stem is passed alternately
under and over stitches (Teit 1900). It is the inner stem of the grass that appears on the outside
of the basket for the purpose of imbrication.
Although it is the root that is used in coiled baskets, cedar bark is often plaited and
appears somewhat differently. Figure 4 shows a plaited cedar bark basket with a geometrical
design pattern. Figure 5 illustrates a magnified view of plaited cedar bark basketry. The fibrous
inner bark of red cedar appears dark in colour and is soft and pliable to the touch. Almost all
Northwest Coast cultures plaited cedar bark to construct clothes, mats and baskets (Baird 1976).
This form of weaving was observed among the Kwakwaka’wakw people in the late 1800’s
(Boas, 1909). The basket shown in Figure 4 is likely of Tsimshian origin based on comparison
of the design present to similar baskets of known origin (Turnbaugh and Turnbaugh 1986) .
Not so easily identified to the naked eye are the materials that are used for imbrication
purposes in coiled basketry. Imbrication is a method of overlay used solely in connection with
coiled basketry. It allows for beautiful patterns, designs and legends to be encompassed in a
21
basket. These, combined with the materials used, are often indicative of the region the baskets
were manufactured in, and much can be inferred about a basket based on the imbrication
materials. For example, Bear-grass grows on the Olympic Peninsula and not on Vancouver
Island. Thus, it is important to note the extensive trade that occurred in basketry materials, and
therefore, many other factors must be applied in this type of deduction, including style of weave
and pattern.
Cherry bark is a common and easily identified imbrication material used in the collection.
In its natural form it appears deep red in colour. It has a smooth surface and is rather thick in
appearance. Among basketry materials it is unique in appearance and is not easily confused.
Figure 6 shows a digital photograph of a magnified sample of cherry bark. The grass that is
present is likely the stem of Reed Canary Grass based on comparison with microscopic samples
(Figure 4B) .
The collection also includes some birch bark basketry, which can be easily identified.
Birch bark baskets were commonly made and used by Stl’atl’imx, Secwepemc and Nlaka’pamux
people. These baskets were very similar in size and shape between regions. Birch bark baskets
were used for picking berries, cooking and storing food, and were decorated around the rim with
cherry bark interwoven with cedar root stitching, or by embedding designs on the outer surface
of the basket. Figure 7 shows a birch bark basket from the Maccaud collection.
On the Coast of British Columbia, the twining technique of basket manufacture prevailed.
Gogol (1980:4) writes that “twined basketry in its variations is together with checkerwork
plaiting the oldest form of basketry among the Coast Salish and Nootkan (Nuu-chah-nulth)
tribes.” There are also a number of pukwu baskets in the collection. These particular baskets
present a challenge in material identification because Bear-grass is by nature very difficult to
22
distinguish from Basket Sedge to the naked eye; both of these materials are used as weft in this
style of basket. Indeed, initially these were difficult to distinguish microscopically based on the
blade alone. When the two species are not woven into a basket, one can often distinguish the
“toothed” edges present on Bear-grass. However, these edges are removed in the processing of
the plant for the purpose of weaving. Because the inner blade is what is visible on the outside of
the basket it was determined that, when magnified, the inner stem of Bear-grass appears shiny
and uniform in smoothness (Figures 9 and 5B). The veins are not as well-defined and thick as
they appear when observing Basket Sedge magnified (Figures 8 and 6B). This difference allows
for a distinction to be made between the two materials. This distinction is useful and can be
valuably employed in the documentation of baskets in museum collections to provide more
correct plant identification and more correct context.
Spruce roots were often used for twining baskets by the Haida and Tlingit people of the
Northwest Coast. The Maccaud collection has several examples of this type of basketry,
including a twined Sitka spruce root hat of Haida origin. Figure 10 shows a twined spruce root
basket of Tlingit origin. This particular basket contains aniline dyes. It can be attributed to a
Tlingit weaver based on pattern.
Conclusions: Conservation Problems and the Future of Basketry
The history of basketweaving in the Pacific Northwest is, indeed, a history of the people
of this region. A basket is not merely a container for storage, but a container that embodies the
beliefs and values that a people share regarding their land within its framework. It holds
centuries of knowledge and cultural ethics passed from one generation to the next. The story of
the First People of British Columbia can be told within the changing patterns, shapes and
23
materials used to construct their baskets. This story, however, is in danger of being altered in
present times, for the story that is being told today is one of threatened loss.
In an interview with Mabel Taylor, a west-coast basketweaver, Dyler (1981) relates that
“fewer and fewer baskets are being woven each year due to the fact that most of the weavers are
elderly and there are relatively few of them left. Some of the young girls are learning to weave
but are easily discouraged by the hard task of gathering and processing the grasses as well as the
time involved in weaving baskets.” The changes to basketry that were initiated with the
European colonization of British Columbia, are continuing. Baskets do not hold the utilitarian
significance within present societies that they once did, and less and less time is being focused
on such an art. With each successive generation, basketry is threatened with the loss of valuable
information and knowledge.
Nettie Jackson, Klikitat basketmaker of Washington expressed concern over the loss of
important traditional knowledge with regards to basketry. She stated, “I am pleased to share my
feelings about basketry. It is a reward in itself to be able to do this. There are many cultural
values that are gone because of the ignorance of not sharing. I regret that there are a lot of things
lost because somewhere along the generation line my people thought it was no longer
important,” (Dodds-Schlick 1994:199). Thus, she stresses the importance of collecting, studying
and documenting not only valuable information about the weaving itself, but also the feelings
and values that are a part of the process. She suggests that the importance of sharing between
cultures is essential to the preservation of basketry as an art. By doing so, cultural preservation
and respect may be embodied in the process.
Basketry has not only faced threats from the loss of cultural knowledge, but basketmakers
of current times are facing other threats that are limiting their ability to continue weaving. Many
24
of these concerns are in the increased difficulty of the gathering materials. Basketweavers are
often excluded from their traditional places of gathering sedges and grasses and other materials.
They are faced with an increase in travel expenses to find good materials, as well as the
destruction of their traditional grounds, including the logging ot cedar stands. It has also been
noted that there has been a problem with weavers experiencing adverse health effects due to the
application of pesticides to materials. This is especially dangerous as the nature of the craft
usually involves handling the materials as well as basketweavers using their mouths to work and
hold the materials. It is clear that the adverse ecological effects of continued environmental
degradation of the natural world coincide closely with the loss of traditional art and knowledge.
Such correlations must be seriously considered and the protection of basketry materials and
traditional gathering places must be protected.
The study of basketry must continue academically as well as in the traditional cultural
setting. The proper assessment and documentation of current museum collections is imperative
to ensure that the correct information is available to study and evaluate the historical implications
of basketry. From the study and public displays of such collections there can be an increase in
education as to the history of First Nations people, a respect of their art and technology, as well
as an appreciation for their management systems and values concerning the natural world.
Nothing could be more imperative in a time of major environmental degradation and loss.
However, equally important is the loss of cultural identity. Basketry must be viewed as an art
that is alive and that needs to be kept alive. An artform that encompasses so many aspects of a
culture can be a tool to aid in the understanding and preservation of a culture. If it were to be
lost, along with it would go valuable knowledge of living in harmony with the systems of the
earth.
25
Indeed, Turnbaugh and Turnbaugh (1986), suggest that basketry may presently be in the
process of a revival. Evidence of this lies with the development of such groups as the Northwest
Native American Basketweavers Association, which operates out of Washington and works to
promote basketry, attempting to revitalize the art and expose concerns surrounding the
preservation of such knowledge and practices. Such a revival is imperative at this point in time,
when we are faced with the loss of perhaps the last generations of traditional basketweavers.
The revival is essential to educate First Nations youth in their traditions in order to instil pride in
their heritage. The revival is essential in order to educate those of European and other cultural
descents in the beauty and richness of the culture of the Aboriginal people of this land in order to
facilitate a relationship of respect and understanding. Perhaps, the place of basketry in today’s
world is not so much one of utilitarian use, but also of political and social and environmental
themes. Basketry has historically embodied great meaning and value, today it can do the same in
a different time and place.
26
Figure 1. A map showing the division of the province of British Columbia by linguistic
grouping (adopted from Turner 1998).
27
Figure 2. A map showing a division of the province of British Columbia by major language
families. The divisions shown are the major categories that basketry styles are referred in
conjunction with, in B.C., (adopted from Lamb 1972).
28
Table 1. The divisions of the First Nations People of British Columbia by Language (adopted
from Turner 1998).
29
Table 2. Plant materials used for basketry purposes by First Nations people of British Columbia.
Scientific Name
Common Name(s)
Distribution in British Columbia
Method of plant use in basketry
Carex obnupta
Basket Sedge, Swamp
Grass, Swamp Hay, Slough
Sedge
west of Coast and Cascade
ranges, from Haida Gwaii to
Vancouver Island and adjacent
mainland
twined to make puk-oo baskets of
Nuu-chah-nulth and Makah
people
Xerophyllum
tenax
Bear-grass, Squaw Grass,
Squaw grass, Soap-grass,
Quip-quip, Deer-grass,
Basket-grass, American
grass, Pine Lily
southeastern part of province and
Olympic Peninsula of
Washington
twined to make pukwu baskets of
Nuu-chah-nulth and Makah
people
Typha latifolia
Cattail
occurs throughout province
except on central and northern
coasts
occasionally used as an
imbrication material
Schoenoplectus
olneyi
American Bulrush, Three
Square Grass, Sweetgrass,
Toh-toh, Three Corner
Grass
Tule, Hard-stemmed
Bulrush, Roundstem
Bulrush, Rush, Bulrush
common at low elevations
throughout province
a foundation for puk-oo baskets,
occasionally used for imbrication
widespread over the province
Nuu-chah-nulth made baskets of
Tule, occasionally used for
imbrication
Phalaris
arundinacea
Reed Canary Grass
across the province, more
common in southern regions
imbrication material for coiled
basketry
Phragmites
australis
Common Reed Grass
southern half of the province;
rare
imbrication material for coiled
basketry
Equisetum
palustris
Marsh horsetail
southern half of the province
rhizomes and stems used in
decoration
Elymus cinereus
Giant Wildrye, Creeping
Wildrye
common in interior B.C.
imbrication material for coiled
basketry
Adiantum
pedatum
Maidenhair Fern
along the westcoast of B.C., from
Vancouver Island to Alaska
decorative overlay for twined
baskets
Letharia vulpina
Wolf Moss
on tree branches in open sites at
low elevations
dye
Tsuga genus
Hemlock
western Hemlock along coast of
B.C., and in interior west of
Rocky Mtns, Mountain Hemlock
at high elevations
dye
Schoenoplectus
acutus
30
Table 2. (Continued) Plant materials used for basketry purposes by First Nations people of
British Columbia.
Alnus rubra
Red Alder, Oregon Alder
west of the Cascade Mountains,
along coast, sporadically in
interior
dye
Thuja plicata
Western Red Cedar
along the Coast from Vancouver
Island to Alaska
roots were used in coiled
basketry, wood was used to make
slat foundation, bark was plaited
to make baskets
Prunus
emarginata and
Prunus
pensylvanica
Bitter Cherry and Pin
Cherry
abundant across southern part of
the province
bark was commonly used to
imbricate coiled basketry
Chamaecyparis
nootkanensis
Yellow Cedar
used for the same purposes as red
cedar, valued for its inner bark
Picea sitchensis
Sitka Spruce
coastal sub-alpine forests, west of
Cascade and Coast mountains
between 600-900 m in elevation
common on Haida Gwaii and
west coast of Vancouver Is.
Picea glauca
White Spruce
widespread in northern interior
forests
roots used in twined basketry,
Spruce bark baskets
Picea
engelmannii
Engelmann Spruce
east of Coast and Cascade
Mountains to the Rockies
roots used in twined basketry
Betula
papyrifera
Paper Birch
common in interior and some
areas of coastal mainland, rare on
Vancouver Is, and not found on
Haida Gwaii
birch bark basketry
Acer glabrum
Rocky Mountain Maple
southern coast of Vancouver
Island to the Rocky Mountains
and northward to Alaska,
widespread in southern interior
baskets and bags of maple bark
woven by Gitxsan, Nisga’a,
Tsimsian, and Nuu-chah-nulth
peoples
Amelanchier
alnifolia
Saskatoon Berry
common throughout the
province, widespread in southern
interior
used to make rims of birch bark
baskets
Betula
occidentalis
Water Birch
common in interior and some
areas of coastal mainland
used to make rims of birch bark
baskets
roots used in twined basketry of
the Tlingit and Haida
31
Figure 3. Coiled cedar-root basketry likely of Nlaka’pamux, Stl’atl’imx or Sto:lo origin. The
imbrication that appears is Bitter Cherry bark (Prunus emarginata), both in its natural red and
dyed black colours, as well as a grass material, which is likely Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris
arundinacea). These baskets are from the Maccaud collection of the White Rock Museum,
White Rock, B.C.
32
Figure 4. A plaited Western Red-cedar (Thuja plicata) bark basket from the Maccaud collection
of basketry of the White Rock Museum, White Rock, B.C. This basket is likely of Tsimshian
origin based on the geometric style present.
33
Figure 5. Digital photographic image of a plaited Western Red-cedar bark (Thuja plicata) basket
bottom.
Figure 6. Digital photographic image of a basket showing imbrication using both naturally
shaded Bitter Cherry bark (Prunus emarginata), which is a deep reddish colour, and Cherry bark
dyed black. The material that appears between the two colours of Cherry bark is likely Reed
Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea), based on comparison with a magnified specimen.
34
Figure 7. A basket constructed from the bark of the Paper Birch tree (Betula papyrifera). The
stitching probably is of red-cedar root (Thuja plicata), with a wooden rim possibly of Saskatoon
wood (Amelanchier alnifolia). This basket belongs to the Maccaud collection of the White Rock
Museum, White Rock, B.C. Its cultural origin is unknown.
35
a)
c)
b)
d)
Figure 8. Digital photographic images of Basket Sedge (Carex obnupta). The images are
magnified to show the strong venation that appears in the blade of this sedge relative to that of
Bear-grass (Xerophyllum tenax). It also appears somewhat “duller” in appearance, although
shade of colour varies and is not considered a good indicator of species. Image a) shows the
inner stem of a sample of Basket Sedge. Images b), c) and d) show Basket Sedge twined into
pukwu baskets.
36
a)
b)
c)
d)
Figure 9. Digital photographic images of Bear-grass (Xerophyllum tenax). The images
are magnified to show the reduced venation in the appearance of the blade surface
relative to baskets constructed with Basket Sedge (Carex obnupta). Image b) shows the
inner part of a blade of bear grass. Images a), c) and d) show Bear-grass twined into
pukwu baskets.
37
Figure 10. A twined spruce root basket as it appears in the Maccaud collection of the White
Rock Museum, White Rock, B.C. This basket is likely of Tlingit origin based on pattern. Thus,
it is likely constructed of Sitka Spruce (Picea sitchensis). Aniline dyes were used to colour the
decorative materials.
38
WORKS CITED
Ackerman, L. 1995. “Complementary but Equal: Gender Status in the Plateau.” In L.F. Klein
and L.A. Ackerman (eds), Women and Power in Native North America. University of
Oklahoma Press. Pages 75-100.
Angove, D., and B. Bancroft, 1983. A Guide to Some Common Plants of the Southern Interior
of British Columbia. Province of British Columbia Ministry of Forests. Land
Management Handbook No. 7.
Baird, G. 1976. Northwest Indian Basketry. Washington State American Revolution
Bicentennial Commission, Washington.
Boas, F. 1909. The Kwakiutl of Vancouver Island. American Museum of Natural History
Memoir No. 8: pages 307-515.
Coville, F. 1902. “Plants Used in Basketry.” In O.T. Mason. Aboriginal Indian Basketry.
Annual Report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution June 1902. The
Rio Grande Press, New Mexico.
Dodds-Schlick, M.D. 1994. Columbia River Basketry: Gift of the Ancestors, Gift of the Earth.
University of Washington Press, Seattle and London.
Dyler, H. 1981. “Mabel Taylor – West Coast Basketweaver.” American Indian Basketry
Magazine. Portland, Oregon, No. 4: Pages 12-23.
Fortney, S. 2001. “Identifying Sto:lo Basketry: Exploring Different Ways of Knowing Material
Culture.” The University of British Columbia Master of Arts Thesis.
Garfield, V.E. 1950. “The Tsimshian and Their Neighbours.” The Tsimshian Indians and Their
Arts. University of Washington Press, Seattle.
Gogol, J.M. 1980. “The Twined Basketry of Western Washington and Vancouver Island.”
American Indian Basketry Magazine. Portland, Oregon. Vol. 1(3): pages 4-11.
Haeberlin, H.K., J.A. Teit and H.H. Roberts. 1928. “Coiled Basketry in British Columbia and
Surrounding Region.” 41st Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology.
Government Printing Office
Hammond, D., and A. Jablow. 1973. Women: their Economic Role in Traditional Societies.
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., Reading, Massachusetts.
Klein, L.F. 1995. “Mother as Clanswoman: Rank and Gender in Tlingit Society.” In L.F. Klein
and L.A. Ackerman (eds), Women and Power in Native North America. University of
Oklahoma Press. Pages 28-45.
Laforet, A. 1985. Isabella Edenshaw’s Basketry. National Museum of Man.
Lamb, F.W. 1972. Indian Baskets of North America. Riverside Museum Press, U.S.A.
Mason, O.T. 1902. Aboriginal Indian Basketry. Annual Report of the Board of Regents of the
Smithsonian Institution June 1902. The Rio Grande Press, New Mexico.
Oritz, B. 1991. “Contemporary California Indian Basketweavers and the Environment.” In T.C.
Blackburn and K. Anderson (eds). Before the Wilderness. Ballena Press, Menlo Park,
California. Pages 194-211.
Paul, F. 1991. Spruce Root Basketry of the Alaska Tlingit. Sheldon Jackson Museum, Sitka
Alaska.
Peri, D.W. and S.M. Patterson. 1976. “The Basket is in the Roots, That’s Where it Begins.” In
T.C. Blackburn and K. Anderson (eds). Before the Wilderness. Ballena Press, Menlo
Park, California. Pages 175-193.
39
Ross, A.S. 1994. The Art of Northwest Coast Tourist Basketry: 1890-1910. University of
Victoria, B.C.
Teit, J.A. 1900. The Thompson Indians of British Columbia. The Jesup North Pacific
Expedition. Memoir of the American Museum of Natural History, New York. Vol.
1(IV).
Teit, J.A. and Steedman. 1930. Ethnobotany of the Thompson Indians of British Columbia.
45th B.A.E. Annual Report, Washington, DC.
Thompson, N. and C Marr. 1983. Crow’s Shells: Artistic Basketry of Puget Sound. Dushuyay
Publications, Seattle, Washington.
Turnbaugh, S.P and W. A. Turnbaugh. 1986. Indian Baskets. Schiffer Publishing Ltd.,
West Chester Pennsylvania
Turner, N.J. 1998. Plant Technology of First Peoples in British Columbia. Royal British
Columbia Museum Handbook: UBC Press, Vancouver, B.C.
Turner, Nancy J. 1996. "Dans une Hotte". L'importance de la vannerie das l'économie des
peuples chasseurs-pêcheurs-cueilleurs du Nord-Ouest de l'Amérique du Nord; ("'Into a
Basket Carried on the Back': Importance of Basketry in Foraging/Hunting/Fishing
Economies in Northwestern North America.") Anthropologie et Sociétiés. Special Issue
on Contemporary Ecological Anthropology. Theories, Methods and Research Fields.
Montréal,Québec, 20 (3): 55-84.
Turner, N.J. 1992. “Just When the Wild Roses Bloom”: The Legacy of a Lillooet Basket
Weaver. TEK Talk: A Newsletter of Traditional Ecological Knowledge. UNESCO,
World Congress for Education and Communication on Environment and Development,
Vol. 1(2): 2-5.
Pojar, J. and A. MacKinnon, (eds). 1994. Plants of Coastal British Columbia, Including
Washington, Oregon and Alaska. Lone Pine Publishing, Vancouver and Edmonton.
MacKinnon, A., J. Pojar and R. Coupe, (eds). 1992 Plants of Northern British Columbia. Lone
Pine Publishing, Vancouver and Edmonton.
Walker, M. 1999. “Basketry and biodiversity in the Pacific Northwest.” In United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP. Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity.
Intermediate Technology Publications, Nairobi, Kenya.
40
APPENDIX A
BOTANICAL APPENDIX OF BRITISH COLUMBIAN BASKETRY PLANTS
Carex obnupta
Common Names
Basket Sedge, Basket Grass, Swamp Grass, Tall Basket Sedge, Swamp Hay, Slough Sedge
Sedges in General
The Sedge or Cyperaceae family is one of larger families in the plant kingdom. It includes about
90 genera. Over 150 species are known in British Columbia, of these, 130 are Carex. Sedges
generally occur in moist or wet places. They are grass-like, perennial plants. The flower of the
sedge is formed into spikelets of a wide diversity (Taylor 1974). Sedges have fibrous roots and
resemble grasses. They are pollinated by wind. The male and female staminate and female
pistillate grow on different parts of the same spike (Turner 1998).
Botanical Description
C. obnupta is a large sedge that grows densely in patches. The blades are coarse and V-shaped
in cross-section. Individual flowers are wind-pollinated. The flowers are in cylindrical spikelets
of four to eight in number. It has long rhizomes (Turner 1998). The leaves are coarse and
shorter than stems. It is similar in appearance to Lyngby's sedge.
Habitat and Distribution in British Columbia
Sedges grow in moist places, such as forest swamps, wet meadows, and marshes and along
stream banks. C. obnupta is also common in meadows and clearings. It is common at low
elevations (Pojar and MacKinnon 1994). C. obnupta occurs on Haida Gwaii, as well as along
the entire West Coast (west of the Coast and Cascade Mountains) from Haida Gwaii to
Washington, including all of Vancouver Island. Slough sedge is one of the most common sedges
in the Western part of B.C. (Turner 1998).
Uses
Slough sedge was the most commonly used sedge on the coast. It was used in twined basketry,
to make the puk-oo baskets of the Nuu-chah-nulth people as well as other Coast Salish peoples
and the Makah. Generally, only the female, or vegetative plants were harvested. Clusters of
leaves were pulled up and cut off just below ground level. The outer leaves were peeled off and
the inner ones were split in half by running a thumbnail down the blade (Turner 1998).
41
Xerophyllum tenax
Common Names
Bear-grass, Squaw grass, Soap-grass, Quip-quip, Deer-grass, Basket-grass, American grass, Pine
Lily
Lilies in General
The family Liliaceae all have their flowers arranged with their parts in multiples of three.
Xerophyllum is the only lily with hard, evergreen leaves, all other lilies are herbaceous (Taylor
1974). Liliaceae are mostly of perennial herbs from rhizomes, bulbs or fleshy roots. The
parallel-veined leaves are all basal or whorled along the stem (Pojar and MacKinnon 1994).
Botanical Description
Bear grass is a perennial evergreen herb. Its linear leaves rise from a short, wood rhizome. The
leaves are grass-like, and tough. The flowers are white, tiny and saucer-shaped (Pojar and
MacKinnon 1994). Colonies bloom in 5-7 year cycles. Vegetative reproduction is by offshoots
of rhizome. Bear-grass is frost tolerant and also has the ability to sprout from rhizomes
following fire. In fact, Bear-grass leaves produced the first year after a fire are preferred for
basketweavers because they are stronger, thinner and more pliable (US DAFS 2001).
Habitat and Distribution in British Columbia
Bear-grass is understory dominant in cool Western spruce-fir forests. It commonly grows with
huckleberries (Vaccinium sp.), Grouse Whortleberry (Vaccinium scoparium) and sedges (US
DAFS 2001). In coastal mountains it is found in steep sites on well-drained soils on rocky
topography (2001). It is generally found in open areas and open to fairly dense forests from
subalpine to near sea level (Pojar and MacKinnon). Bear-grass is limited to the southeastern part
of the province, as well as the Olympic Penninsula of Washington.
Uses
The First Nations of Washington and British Columbia, in particular the Nuu-chah-nulth, Coast
Salish, Squamish, Sechelt, Nlaka’pamux, Okanagan and Ktunaxa people (except for the Ktunaxa
people, it was obtained by trade), used bear-grass for the weft in twined basketry, as well as for
imbrication (Turner 1998).
42
Schoenoplectus olneyi
Common Names
American Bulrush, Three Square Grass, Sweetgrass, Three Corner Grass, Toh-toh
Botanical Description
S. americanus is a perennial sedge growing from long, stout rhizomes. Its stems are in small
groups or singly. It is 15-100 cm tall. Its leaves are shorter than its stems and spikelets are in a
tight cluster of 1-7. They appear as though they are a continuation of the stem (Pojar and
MacKinnon 1994).
Habitat and Distribution in British Columbia
American Bulrush grows in wet meadows and along shores and in ditches. It is common at low
elevations. It is found on the West coast of British Columbia from Vancouver Island to the
Olympic Penninsula. It is found in all parts of Vancouver Island (Pojar and MacKinnon 1994).
Uses
The Nuu-chah-nulth people used American Bulrush as a foundation for their puk-oo baskets. It
was also used occasionally for the purpose of imbrication
Schoenoplectus acutus
Common Names
Hard-stemmed Bulrush, Roundstem Bulrush, Bulrush, Rush, Tule
Botanical Description
The leaves of Tule are all located near the base of the stem. They are poorly developed. Its
fruits are egg-shaped and approximately 2mm long. Brown spikelets appear as an extension of
the stem (Pojar and MacKinnon 1993).
Habitat and Distribution in British Columbia
S. Acutus grows along muddy shores and in marshes at low elevations. It is abundant in the
Southern coastal parts of British Columbia. Tule is widespread over the province.
Uses
Tule was used to make mats by the Coast and Interior Salish people of British Columbia. It was
also used by the Nuu-chah-nulth, Kwakwaka’wakw, Carrier and Ktunaxa people. Tule mats
were used for roofs, and walls of shelters, door covers, rugs, mattresses, for drying berries on and
cutting meat on. The Nuu-chah-nulth people made baskets out of Tule, and it was occasionally
used as an imbrication material.
43
Typha latifolia
Common Name
Cattail
Botanical Description
Cat-tail is a tall perennial herb that grows from thick rhizomes. Its leaves can be up to three
metres tall. They are grass-like, alternate, flat, long and narrow (Pojar and MacKinnon 1994).
There are two zones of flowers; the female zone consists of pistils embedded in bushy bracts that
mature into the familiar brown cigar-like structure. The male flowers are yellowish and coneshaped. They cluster above the female flowers (Hebda 1995).
Habitat and Distribution in British Columbia
T. latifolia grows in marshes, lakes, ditches and estuaries, generally in slow-flowing or quiet
water (Pojar and MacKinnon 1994). Some of British Columbia’s most “luxuriant” cat-tails grow
in the channels of the Fraser River estuary (Hebda 1995). Cattail provides food and habitat for
many marsh-dwelling species, including wrens, muskrats, waterfowls and blackbirds (Pojar and
MacKinnon 1994). T. latifolia occurs in the lower half of Vancouver Island as well as on the
Coast of the mainland of British Columbia from the lower half of Vancouver Island to
Washington (Pojar and MacKinnon 1994). It occurs throughout the province except the central
and northern coasts.
Uses
First Nations people of British Columbia used cat-tail in mat making, as well as in basketmaking. Cloaks and head-dresses were also constructed from the leaves. The seed-down was
used to stuff pillows and mattresses. The rootstocks and pollen of the plant were eaten (Hebda
1995).
Phalaris arundinacea
Common Name
Reed Canary Grass
Botanical Description
Reed Canary Grass has long rhizomes and hollow stems. It has wide and flattened leaves, as
well as 3 flowered spikelets. The leaves are slightly hairy in appearance.
Habitat and Distribution in British Columbia
Reed Canary Grass grows in wet places and in disturbed areas (clearings, ditches, etc.), along
streambanks and the edges of wetlands, at low to mid elevations (Pojar and MacKinnon 1994).
P. arundinacea occurs across the province, more commonly in the southern regions.
Uses
Reed Canary Grass was used for imbrication of coiled basketry by the Upper Sto:lo, the Lower
Stl’atl’imx and other Salish groups. Stems were gathered in May and early June (when the wild
44
roses bloom). They were dried in the sun to bleach them. The Okanagan people wove mates and
hats from Reed Canary Grass, as well as bound fish weirs with it (Turner 1998).
Phragmites australis
Common Name
Common Reed Grass
Botanical Description
Common Reed Grass is characterized by loose sheaths, and leaves aligned on one side of stem.
It also has large and feathery inflorescence. Common Reed Grass is a reed-like perennial that
spreads by way of rhizomes (Pojar and MacKinnon 1994).
Habitat and Distribution in British Columbia
Common Reed Grass is found in marshes, wetlands and ditches in the southern half of the
province.
Uses
Common Reed Grass was used for imbrication of coiled cedar root baskets, similar to the way
Reed Canary Grass was used.
Equisetum genus
Common Name
Horsetails
In General
Horsetails have hollow stems that contain silica, which makes them irritating to the touch. They
have rhizomes and contain spores in cones on top of the stems.
Botanical Description
E. hymenale has stems that are identical to each other. They are unbranched, evergreen and
hollow. The rhizomes of both E. hymenale and E. palustris are creeping, slender and black
(Pojar and MacKinnon 1994).
Habitat and Distribution in British Columbia
Horsetails are common in wet areas, particularly along streams and rivers, marshes and bogs and
in disturbed areas. They can be found across the province.
Uses
The roots and bark of horsetail were used by the Tlingit as decorative overlay. E. palustris and
E. hyemale are the two species that are recorded in literature to have been used.
45
Adiantum pedatum
Common Name
Maidenhair fern
In General
Ferns are vascular plants that reproduce using spores. They must have abundant moisture and
are found in moist sites.
Botanical Description
Dark-purplish to black stems. The leaf stalk is divided into two and then divided again. Leaflets
are fan-shaped
Habitat and Distribution in British Columbia
Maidenhair fern grows in shady sites on cliffs and rocky substrates and around waterfalls.
Uses
Oritz (1991), suggest that the stems of maidenhair fern were gathered in late May to early
August (if gathered too early, break from lack of firmness, if too late they become too brittle).
These stems were used in imbrication of baskets, particularly by the Tlingit people.
Thuja plicata
Common Names
Western Red Cedar
Botanical Description
Branches droop slightly and upturn at the end. The branchlets are flattened and horizontal. The
cone is 8-10 mm long (Angrove and Bancroft 1983).
Habitat and Distribution in British Columbia
Moist to wet soils, in shaded forests at low to medium elevations.
Uses
The roots of the red cedar were used to make the coiled cedar root style of basketry perfected by
the Interior Salish. The wood of cedar was used to make the splint foundation of coiled baskets.
Cedar bark was prepared until pliable and plaited to make bark baskets.
46
Prunus emarginata and Prunus pensylvanica
Common Names
Bitter Cherry (P. emarginata), Pin Cherry (P. pensylvanica)
Botanical Description
P. emarginata is a shrub or a small tree, from 2-15 metres tall. Its leaves are egg-shaped and
oblong. Its flowers are flat topped and in clusters of 5-8. Its fruit is red to almost black and is
bitter to the taste (Angrove and Bancroft 1983).
Habitat and Distribution in British Columbia
P. emarginata grows in moist forests and along streams. It is one of the first trees to grow in
logged areas.
Uses
P. emarginata was commonly used as an imbrication element in the basketry of British
Columbia’s First Peoples. It was pulled off of the tree in horizontal sheets and was used in its
natural red colour, or dyed black by burying it in the mud of a swamp or soaked in a can with
rusty nails (Turner 1998). The Secwempec, Carrier, and other interior groups used the bark of
Pin Cherry in the same manner as that of Bitter Cherry.
Chamaecyparis nootkatensis
Common Name
Yellow Cedar
Botanical Description
The Yellow Cedar tree grows to 50 m tall. It has a slightly twisted trunk and flattened branches
that hang vertically. The bark is greyish and differs from that of the red cedar in that it doesn’t
tear off in long strips (Pojar and MacKinnon 1994).
Habitat and Distribution in British Columbia
Yellow Cedar is found west of the Coast and Cascade Mountains from Vancouver Island to
Alaska (Turner 1998).
Uses
Yellow Cedar was used in basketry in the same ways that red cedar was, only to a lesser extent.
The roots were used to construct coiled baskets. The inner bark was used in plaiting. The
yellow cedar was valued for the softness of its inner bark (Otke 1993).
47
Amelanchier alnifolia
Common Names
Saskatoon Berry, Service Berry, June Berry, Shad-bush
Botanical Description
Saskatoon Berry is a deciduous shrub (1-7 m tall). It has rounded leaves and red or grayish bark.
It has white flowers that bloom in April and May.
Habitat and Distribution in British Columbia
Saskatoon berry is commonly found throughout the province and is widespread in the southern
interior.
Uses
The wood of the Saskatoon Berry shrub was used as a rim for baskets made of birch bark.
Picea genus
Common Names
Sitka Spruce (P. sitchensis), Engelmann Spruce (P. engelmannii), White Spruce (P. glauca)
Botanical Description
Engelmann spruce grows up to 50 m tall. Its bark brownish-red. White Spruce grows only to 25
m tall and has silvery-brown bark, both have bluish-green needles. Sitka Spruce grows up to 70
m tall and has grey bark. It has hanging branches (Turner 1998).
Habitat and Distribution and in British Columbia
Engelmann Spruce is found east of the Coast and Cascade mountains to the Rockies, at
elevations less than 900 m. White Spruce is found in the interior. Sitka Spruce occurs on Haida
Gwaii and the west coast of Vancouver Island (Turner 1998).
Uses
The roots of spruce were used to twine baskets and hats, particularly by the Haida and Tlingit
people. Aboriginal people generally didn’t distinguish between the few species of spruce in B.C.
(Turner 1998). The people of the southern part of the province tended to use Engelmann Spruce,
whereas those in the north and interior used White Spruce. The Tlingit people commonly used
the roots of Sitka Spruce (Coville 1902).
48
Betula papyrifera and Betula occidentalis
Common Name
Paper Birch (B. papyrifera), Water Birch (B. occidentalis)
Botanical Description
Paper Birch is a small tree (up to 30 m tall), with white peeling bark. It has alternate deciduous
leaves oval in shape (Pojar and MacKinnon 1994). The leaves of the Water Birch have shorter
stalks and are not as sharply pointed. Its bark does not separate into layers easily (Turner 1998).
Habitat and Distribution in British Columbia
The Paper Birch and the Water Birch are common in the interior of B.C. and on the coast of the
mainland. They grows in open woods and along streams (Turner 1998)
Uses
The Paper Birch tree was used by many First Nations groups, especially interior peoples to
manufacture folded birch bark baskets for berry picking, cooking and storage. Also used to
construct baby cradles. The Water Birch was used to make rims for baskets made of Paper
Birch.
Acer glabrum
Common Names
Rocky Mountain Maple, Douglas Maple, Mountain Maple
Botanical Description
A. glabrum is a small tree or shrub (1-10 m tall). It has reddish-purple to grey bark. It has tiny
yellow flowers that grow in clusters. The leaves appear palmately veined and are approximately
10 cm across. The fruits grow in pairs (Turner 1998).
Habitat and Distribution in British Columbia
Rocky Mountain Maple is commonly found from the southern coast of Vancouver Island to the
Rocky Mountains. It is widespread in the southern interior and is not found on Haida Gwaii.
Uses
Rocky Mountain Maple was used by the Gitxsan, Tsimshian, Nisga’a and Nuu-chah-nulth people
to weave baskets and bags. Its bark was also used as a decorative material for baskets. It was
used in its natural state or dyed black.
49
WORKS CITED IN APPENDIX A
Angove, D., and B. Bancroft, 1983. A Guide to Some Common Plants of the Southern Interior
of British Columbia. Province of British Columbia Ministry of Forests. Land
Management Handbook No. 7.
Coville, F. 1972. “Plants Used in Basketry.” In O.T. Mason. Aboriginal Indian Basketry.
Annual Report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution June 1902. The
Rio Grande Press, New Mexico.
Hebda, R. 1995. “Cat-tail.” Orig. published in Coastal Grower, Victoria, B.C. Royal B.C.
Museum Web Site. http://rbcm.gov.bc.ca/nh_papers/nativeplants/typhalat.html.
(Faith Whiting, accessed November 15, 2001).
Pojar, J. and A. MacKinnon, (eds). 1994. Plants of Coastal British Columbia, Including
Washington, Oregon and Alaska. Lone Pine Publishing, Vancouver and Edmonton.
MacKinnon, A., J. Pojar and R. Coupe, (eds). 1992 Plants of Northern British Columbia. Lone
Pine Publishing, Vancouver and Edmonton.
Oritz, B. 1991. “Contemporary California Indian Basketweavers and the Environment.” In T.C.
Blackburn and K. Anderson (eds.). Before the Wilderness. Ballena Press, Menlo Park,
California. Pages 194-211.
Taylor, T.M.C. 1974. The Lily Family of British Columbia. British Columbia Provincial
Museum, Victoria, B.C.
Taylor, T.M.C. 1974. The Sedge Family. British Columbia Provincial Museum, Victoria, B.C.
Turner, N.J. 1998. Plant Technology of First Peoples in British Columbia. Royal British
Columbia Museum Handbook: UBC Press, Vancouver, B.C.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (US DAFS), Rocky Mountain Research Station,
Fire Sciences Laboratory. 2001. Fire Effects Information System.
http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis (Faith Whiting, accessed November 10, 2001).
50
APPENDIX B: MICROSCOPIC SKETCHES OF PLANTS USED IN BASKETRY IN
BRITISH COLUMBIA
Figure 1B. A Raphia stem (Raphia farnifera) as viewed under a dissection microscope and
magnified approximately 16x. The surface appeared smooth and relatively free of grain lines or
“grooves.” It appeared to have a soft shine and was pale yellow in colour.
51
Figure 2B. A stem of Tule (Schoenoplectus acutus) as viewed under a dissection microscope
and magnified approximately 14x. The surface of the stem appeared shiny and golden in colour.
52
Figure 3B. A Cattail leaf (Typha latifolia) as viewed under a dissection microscope and
magnified approximately 13x. The surface appeared deeply grooved and a golden brown in
colour.
53
Figure 4B. The inner clum of Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea) as viewed under a
dissection microscope and magnified approximately 16x. The surface appeared to have a scaly
covering. It was a dull, pale yellowish-brown in colour.
54
Figure 5B. An inner (top) leaf of Bear-grass (Xerophyllum tenax) as viewed under a dissection
microscope and magnified approximately 17x. The surface appeared flat and shiny and
relatively smooth. The edges appeared “toothed" and jagged.
55
Figure 6B. The underside leaf of Basket Sedge (Carex obnupta) as viewed under a dissection
microscope and magnified approximately 18x. The surface appeared to have well-defined and
relatively thick grains. It had a slight sheen, but was dull when compared to Bear-grass
(Xerophyllum tenax) or Tule (Schoenoplectus acutus).
56