The Aboriginal Population of the North Coast of California — John Shaqi
The Aboriginal Population of the North Coast of CaliforniaCook, Sherburne Friend
History
The Aboriginal Population of the North Coast of California
Cook, Sherburne Friend
Indians of North America -- California; Indians of North America -- Statistics
On his detailed maps Waterman shows the location of the houses in 19
villages. Presumably he checked these houses carefully with informants,
for in many instances he appends the house names, although as a rule
only the pits remained when he saw the sites. There are in all 210
houses, whereas in his list on page 206 for the same towns he gives 192
houses. The total population projected from the maps would then be
3,380.
In a similar manner Waterman's list may be compared with Kroeber's list
from informants and from the 1852 census. For the pertinent towns the
numbers are: Waterman, 163 houses; Kroeber's informants, 154; the 1852
census 141. Projecting to the full list in table 2 (p. 91, herein) the
population values are respectively 2,918 and 2,671. Of all the
extrapolations the most significant is that from the 1852 census for it
demonstrates that _at that date_ the Yurok population could not have
fallen far short of 2,500, a figure set by Kroeber as the absolute
maximum for _aboriginal times_. In 1852 the tribe had already suffered
materially from the disturbance caused by white settlement and hence
must not have represented the full pre-settlement value. The average of
all five estimates is 3,124.
Kroeber states unequivocally that he cannot concede to the Yurok a
population greater than 2,500. Yet the best ethnographic data we
possess, much of it assembled by Kroeber himself, indicate a population
of 3,100 to 3,200. The key to the controversy seems to lie in Kroeber's
decision that house sites and pits must be reduced by a factor of
one-third in order to compute population. His conclusions are summed up
in the following paragraph (1925, p. 18):
The Yurok recognize that a village normally contained more named
house sites than inhabited houses. Families died out, consolidated,
or moved away. The pit of their dwelling remained and its name
would also survive for a generation or two. If allowance is made
for parts of villages washed out by floods and possibly by mining,
or dwellings already abandoned when the Americans came and totally
forgotten 60 years later, the number of houses sites on these 30
miles of river may be set at 200 or more in place of 173. In other
words there were _two houses to each three recognized house sites_
among the Yurok in native times.
Let us now consider the following points.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account