class="x-ebookmaker-pageno" title="[Pg 160]"/>

ATHABASCAN BOUNDARIES

In evaluating boundaries I have relied most heavily on the information of Merriam (map 3) and Kroeber (map 1). Merriam's data are contained in a 1:500,000 map of California, together with a descriptive text. The map and the description were made up by Dr. Merriam's daughter, Mrs. Zenaida Merriam Talbot, during the years 1939 to 1946, from information in Merriam's notes and journals, the latter of which are not accessible to this writer. Often, where Merriam's boundaries disagree with those of Kroeber or other authors, Merriam's line will follow a stream, whereas the alternative follows a ridge or drainage diversion. When the evidence is inconclusive, I have usually followed Kroeber's method and chosen the ridge rather than the stream as the boundary. In this area the streams are small and easily crossed during most of the year and therefore would not constitute a barrier sufficient for the divergence of dialects. On the other hand, the hills were visited only briefly for hunting and gathering; the population depended to a great extent on the products of streams for its subsistence, and consequently all the permanent villages were in the lowlands and canyons. For this reason, the ridges rather than the streams would tend to be boundaries. Kroeber has discussed this point more generally (1939, p. 216) and also in greater detail (1925a, p. 160).

EXTERIOR BOUNDARIES

The southern boundary of the Athabascans begins at Usal Creek on the coast and goes eastward for a few miles before swinging south to include the drainages of Hollow Tree Creek and the South Fork of the Eel in Kato territory. It turns north to enclose the headwaters of South Fork and proceeds along the ridge dividing Ten Mile Creek from the main Eel until it reaches the drainage of Blue Rock Creek; it then passes around north of the creek and crosses the Eel near the mouth of the creek. From this point it runs in an easterly direction around the drainage of Hulls Creek.

Kroeber's map in the Handbook shows the southern boundary beginning a few miles south of Usal Creek, but Merriam and Nomland both maintain that the creek itself is the boundary and Gifford (1939, p. 304) says that both Sinkyone and Yuki were spoken in the village situated at the mouth of the creek. The information of all four authors came from either Sally or Tom Bell, wife and husband, who are respectively Shelter Cove Sinkyone and Coast Yuki. I have accepted Merriam's boundary, since it agrees with Nomland's.

Merriam maintains that the western boundary of the Kato runs along the South Fork of the Eel and he is partly supported in this by Barrett (1908, map), whose boundary includes the drainage of South Fork but not the drainage of Hollow Tree Creek. Barrett, however, disavows any certainty on this particular boundary. Kroeber's line, which does include the drainage of Hollow Tree Creek in Kato territory, is supported by a specific statement from Gifford (1939, p. 296) that "Hollow Tree Creek did not belong to the Coast Yuki although they fished there." I have therefore accepted Kroeber's version.

All authorities agree on the southern and eastern boundaries of the Kato as far north as the drainage of Blue Rock Creek. Merriam claims this drainage for the Wailaki, whereas both Kroeber and Foster claim it for the ta'no'm tribelet of the Yuki. It is evident that this territory was disputed, for it was the scene of several of the wars involving the Wailaki, the Kato, and the Yuki (Kroeber, 1925a, p. 165; 1925b). Kroeber obtained a detailed list of place names in this area from a ta'no'm Yuki, whereas Merriam's Wailaki information is only of a most general nature. For this reason I have given the territory to the Yuki.

All the authorities, except Foster, agree on the rest of the southern boundary of the Athabascans. Foster has the Yuki-Wailaki line cross Hulls Creek about five miles from its mouth instead of passing south of its drainage. Both Kroeber and Merriam favor the more southern line, and Goddard (1924, p. 224) says that the Wailaki claimed a fishing spot in the disputed area, so I have accepted this version.

The eastern boundary of the Athabascans runs north along the ridge separating the drainages of the North Fork and Middle Fork of the Eel until it reaches the headwaters of the Mad River. Thence it runs in a northern direction along the ridge that separates the drainage of the Mad River from that of the South Fork of the Trinity until it reaches Grouse Creek, where it turns eastward to cross the South Fork of the Trinity at the mouth of the creek. It continues north on the east side of South Fork, following the crest until it crosses the main Trinity about five miles above its confluence with South Fork, and then follows around the headwaters of Horse Linto Creek and Mill Creek.

Merriam's eastern Athabascan boundary conflicts with the one drawn by Kroeber, Foster, and Goddard in assigning the northern part of the drainage of the Middle Fork of the Eel to the Pitch Wailaki instead of to the Yuki. Merriam is almost certainly wrong here, for Goddard (1924) definitely does not include this area within Wailaki territory and his information in this region appears to have been especially reliable. Moreover, Merriam got his information from natives of the main Eel River, who were evidently not on good terms with their relatives to the east and knew little about them. I have therefore accepted the Kroeber boundary.

The next conflict is to the north of this, where Kroeber's boundary runs up the ridge separating the Mad River from the South Fork of the Trinity, whereas Merriam's runs along South Fork itself in the twenty miles from Yolla Bolly Mountain northwest to Ruth. Essene (1942) agrees with Merriam on this point, but his data add nothing to the argument, since he worked with the same Lassik informant as Merriam. I have accepted Kroeber's version because it is corroborated by both Goddard (1907) and Du Bois (1935, map 1), who agree in assigning the valley of the South Fork of the Trinity to the Wintun.

Kroeber and Merriam agree on the line running north of Ruth as far as a point about fifteen miles south of Grouse Creek, where Merriam's line drifts westward to follow the north-south channel of Grouse Creek for a short distance, whereas Kroeber's line follows due north along the drainage pattern. Essene supports Kroeber, but his informant did not come from this region so her testimony perhaps cannot be relied on heavily. I have accepted Kroeber's line because it follows the drainage pattern.

Kroeber's boundary also conflicts with Merriam's on the east side of South Fork. Kroeber's line runs along the ridge separating South Fork from the main Trinity whereas Merriam's runs along the Trinity itself. The testimony of Dixon on the Chimariko (1910, pp. 295-296) supports Kroeber, so I have accepted the latter's line.

The northern boundary of the Athabascans runs west, parallel to Mill Creek, crossing the Trinity a few miles south of its confluence with the Klamath, and then continues west until it reaches Bald Hills Ridge, which separates Redwood Creek drainage from Klamath River drainage. It continues north along this ridge and then turns east to cross Redwood Creek about ten miles southeast of Orick.

Goddard (1914a, pl. 38) indicates three Athabascan summer camps on the Yurok side of the dividing ridge. This may mean that some Athabascan territory was included in the Klamath drainage, but if so, it would contradict the testimony of the Yurok (Kroeber, 1925a, fig. 1; Waterman, 1920, map 2). However, the land away from the Klamath was little used by the Yurok (Kroeber, 1925a, p. 8), so it may be that this territory was claimed by both groups. I have accepted Kroeber's boundary here. Otherwise there are no conflicts on the northern boundary.

The western boundary of the Athabascans runs due south from Redwood Creek, following