Stó:lÇ - Coast Salish
Historical Atlas. Carlson, Keith (ed.). Seattle: University of Washington Press,
Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre Press, and Chilliwack: Stó:lÇ Heritage Trust,
2001. 208 pages.
BRIAN THOM
McGill University
A Stó:lÇ - Coast Salish Historical Atlas is a landmark
publication which uses the format of an atlas to describe the persistence of a
native community’s relationship to (and their historic alienation from) their
traditional lands. The Altas is a large, richly coloured and illustrated
book authored by a team of researchers working for the Stó:lÇ Nation, a First
Nations political organization in British Columbia, Canada. Fourteen different authors participated in
authoring the project, though the majority of the texts come from historian
Carlson and archaeologist Schaepe, who were authors in fourteen and eleven of
the forty-six chapters respectively. The
other authors bring anthropological, biological, environmental, historical, and
First Nations perspectives to the work.
The chapters of the book fall generally under six broad thematic
categories: Stó:lÇ culture history
(14 chapters), Stó:lÇ culture and place (13 chapters), Stó:lÇ physical geography
(6 chapters), Stó:lÇ culture and space (5 chapters), Stó:lÇ spatial knowledge
(5 chapters), and Stó:lÇ social organization (4 chapters). These themes reflect the broad perspective on
Stó:lÇ relationships to
landscape that the Atlas takes, though clearly the main emphasis is on
exploring historical relations to land and the idea that culture shapes and is
shaped by place.
By far the longest and most detailed chapter in the book is the
compendium of over 700 Halkomelem place names for the lower Fraser River
area. Such a compilation of Halkomelem
place names reveals an encyclopaedic knowledge of toponomy and history. However in presenting the names the author
McHalsie withdraws from current scholarship on the importance of the stories
attached to place names as a devise for moral teaching. The place names list is instead directed at
proving Aboriginal title to the land.
However, in striving for this political goal, McHalsie has muddled his
inventory of names. For the up-river
areas, where the communities which belong to the Stó:lÇ Nation largely reside, the
maps and tables of names and meanings give a good detailed record. Closer to the mouth of the Fraser River,
where a different dialect of Halkomelem is spoken, and several First Nations
have competing land claims, the information presented is less reliable. McHalsie has had difficulty in transposing
previously-documented place names into the up-river dialect, and provides no
citations for what the original sources of the information are. This is a disappointing treatment of the rich
Stó:lÇ place name
tradition.
In several chapters which deal with themes of historic Stó:lÇ society, the
authors have had trouble describing Stó:lÇ socio-political organization.
Carlson presents Stó:lÇ communities as a series of ‘towns’, ‘villages’,
‘hamlets’, which are organized as ‘tribes’ along watersheds. This description departs from the generally
accepted model presented in the ethnographic record of local groups of people
descended from a common ancestor living in permanent winter villages and
travelling to various family-owned resource sites throughout the year. Carlson confuses ‘tribes’ with micro-dialect
groups that have identified been in linguistic studies and in other places
inflates small resource gathering camps and communities (esp. those in the
Fraser Canyon) to a ‘tribal’ status.
This treatment of relatively well-known material may also have
troublesome consequences if it is used to provide context in on-going disputes
over aboriginal title and rights (which is one of the stated goals of the Atlas).
Many of the other chapters in the Atlas are interesting and
unique contributions to the literature on Coast Salish history and
culture. In one, one Stó:lÇ families affinal
kin connections are mapped out over real space, showing the centrality of
kinship to understanding contemporary and historic relationships with Coast
Salish territory. There are a series of original
and well supported chapters discussing the difficulties of interpreting
historic Coast Salish population demographics, a topic much debated in current
ethno-history scholarship. The chapter
on contemporary fishing disputes within the community provides the books’ most
vivid description of contemporary Stó:lÇ life and the historical
context for understanding it from the communities’ point of view. Disappointing is the companion chapter of the
now-infamous conflicts between Stó:lÇ and non-Native commercial fishermen, where some catch
statistics are provided, but no real discussion or analysis of the complex and
interesting power relations that are at play around the Fraser River salmon
fishery.
The Atlas contains an underlying critique of interpretive
anthropology and descriptive ethnography.
To paraphrase, by using history, Carlson seeks to ‘let the facts speak
for themselves’ (p. 2). One should be
critical of ethnography because ‘anthropologists mainly pursue their own
interests, not those of the natives’ (p. 134).
The Atlas argues that the discipline of ‘history’ is the most
appropriate frame for cross-cultural understanding. However, the presumed objectivity of saying
‘let the facts speak for themselves’ ignores the social and political context
in which those facts are presented. In
rejecting the kinds of anthropological scholarship which pays attention to the
narrative forms and discourses of indigenous peoples, Carlson’s work becomes
removed from the words and the discursive frame of Stó:lÇ people’s everyday
practice, and is rather firmly entrenched in a well-established narrative frame
of western history about Indigenous places and events. Aside from the two Stó:lÇ authors who
participated in the project, little actual Stó:lÇ voice and narriative can be
found in the Atlas, with Carlson paraphrasing oral traditions and
synthesizing Stó:lÇ world view.
This reviewer is not sure that such a perspective meets that Atlas’ stated
goals of bridging cultural ways of knowing, and decolonizing ways of thinking
about the world.
The reasons for the publication of a book like this one are
compelling. Aboriginal land claims are
currently unresolved in British Columbia, and are the subject of much public
debate. In the forward to the book Grand
Chief Steven Point provides a passionate discussion of the need for Aboriginal
peoples to bridge the gap between Native and non-Native ways of seeing the
world as a part of reconciling the vast social inequalities which continue to
exist between the two communities.
Public policy makers and land use planners are continually challenged by
First Nations communities to consider historic and contemporary connections to
the land in their decision making, but have little useful information available
to them. Also, First Nations communities
have frequently expressed the desire to have published accurate and detailed
information about their culture and history in their own voice, as written
forms have at least as large an educational role as the formerly dominant oral
ones. The Atlas’ social
significance as an important voice in informing a wide and diverse reading
audience is exemplified by the several weeks that it held a spot in the top 10
in sales as reported by British Columbia Book Publishers Association.
While the Atlas is impressive in its scope and presentation, I believe it is plagued by simplified and sometimes unsupported assertions about Stó:lÇ cultural history and social organization. It has frequent problems in handling the Halkomelem language material. It will certainly be a problematic construction of identity for those down-river non-Stó:lÇ First Nations whose territories are claimed and discussed (often inaccurately). A key weakness in this project is in the lack of footnoting and citation of sources used to argue their perspective. Carlson excuses this by saying such devices are “intrusive” and instead presents a select bibliography at the end of each chapter. Just as there are no footnotes or citations, there is no biography about the backgrounds of authors in the book. This was clearly not an oversight, but a claim of ‘authority’, with the book being published from the offices of the Stó:lÇ Nation to speak for the Stó:lÇ people. In an age of indigenous land claims (a context which this book is specifically produced within), it would have been prudent to have approached the details of all this material more carefully.