Iiriiiii!';\'iimiiiii! '"''™^. 



mm-* 



ular form. The edges were often beveled to a marked 

 thinness. While some builders laid the sheathing 

 edge-to-edge in the bark cover, others overlapped the 

 edges. Nearly all builders feathered the butts and 

 overlapped them slightly. The sheathing was held in 

 position by a number of light temporary ribs while the 

 permanent frames, or ribs, were being installed. It is 

 to be noted that the sheathing was neither lashed nor 

 pegged; it remained fixed in place only through the 

 pressure of the bent ribs and the restraint of the bark 

 skin. 



The e.xact method of fitting the sheathing varied 

 somewhat from area to area, but not in every instance 

 from tribe to tribe. The bottom sheathing used by 

 some eastern Indians was in two lengths. The indi- 

 vidual pieces were tapered toward the stems and the 

 edges butted closely together. The sides were in 

 three lengths, but otherwise similarly fitted. The 

 butts lapped very slightly. In a second method, used 

 to the westward, the sheathing was laid edge-to-edge 

 in two lengths, with the butts slightly lapped. The 

 center members of the bottom, usually five, were 

 parallel-sided, but the outboard ends of those at 

 the turn of the bilges were beveled, or snied, oflf. 

 The members further outboard were in one length, 

 with both ends snied off. The bottom thus appeared 

 as an elongated diamond-form. The topside sheathing 

 was fitted as in the first instance. 



A variation in the second style used three lengths 

 in the centerline sheathing. In still another varia- 



Figure 2/- 



Gunwale Lashings, examples made by Adney 

 I, Elm-bark, Malecite; Q, St. Francis; 3, Algon 

 kin; 4, Malecite. 



Gunwale-End Lashings, examples made by 

 Adney: Athabascan (large), Ojibway (small). 



33 



