depth would be about 22 English inches, great even 

 for a 24-foot canoe. Denys states that the inside 

 sheathing of these canoes was split from cedar. He 

 also states that the splints were about 4 inches wide, 

 were tapered toward the ends, and ran the full length 

 of the canoe. It is probable that they were butted 

 amidships, as in known examples; this, however, 

 would have been covered by a rib and might not 

 have been noticed. 



Denys says that the Indians "bent the cedar ribs 

 in half-circles to form ribs and shaped them in the 

 fire." Adney believed this meant by use of hot water. 

 However, this bending could have been done by what 

 was known in 17th-century shipbuilding practice as 

 stoving, in which green lumber was roasted over an 

 open fire until the sap and wood became hot enough 

 to allow a strong bend to be made without breakage. 

 Wood thus treated, when cooled and seasoned some- 

 what, would hold the set. While it is certain that 

 later Indians knew how to employ hot water, it does 

 not follow that all tribes used this method, partic- 

 ularly in early times. 



Denys also states that the roots of "fir," split into 

 three or four parts, were used in sewing. He ap- 

 parently used "fir" as a general name for an evergreen. 

 It is probable that the roots used were of the black 

 spruce. The technique of building he describes 

 is about the same as that outlined in the last chapter. 

 He says that the gunwales were round and that 

 seven beech thwarts were employed, practices that 

 differ from those in more recent Micmac canoe 

 building, and he notes the goring of the bark cover. 

 Denys states the paddles were made of beech (instead 

 of maple as was perhaps the case) with blades about 

 6 inches wide and their length that of an arm (about 

 27 inches), with the handle a little longer than the 

 blade. He also says that four, five, or six paddlers 

 might be aboard a canoe and that a sail was often 

 used. "Formerly of bark," the sail was made of 

 a well-dressed hide of a young moose. Since it could 

 carry eight or ten persons, the canoe Denys is referring 

 to is obviously a large one. In his building descrip- 

 tion he does not mention headboards, rail caps, 

 or the end forms. It may be assumed that he was 

 then describing a canoe he had seen during construc- 

 tion but whose building he did not follow step by step. 



De la Poterie, in his book published in 1722, gives 

 a profile and top view of what must have been a 

 Micmac canoe. The probable length indicated must 

 have been about 22 English feet overall and about 

 32 inches extreme beam; seven thwarts are shown. 



Late in the 19th century there appears to have 

 been some fusion of Micmac and Malecite methods of 

 construction, as Malecite built to Micmac forms and 

 vice versa. This apparently did not produce a hybrid 

 form so far as appearance was concerned but it did 

 affect construction, in that inner end-frames were 

 used and other details of the Micmac design were 

 altered. The Micmac, having early come into close 

 contact with the Europeans, were among the first 

 Indians to employ nails in the construction of bark 

 canoes, and this resulted in an early decadence in 

 their building methods. Hence, some examples of 

 their canoes show what the Indians termed broken 

 gunwales, in which the ends of the thwarts were not 

 tenoned into the gunwales, but rather were let flush 

 into the top by use of a dovetail cut or, less securely, 

 by a rectangular recess across the gunwale, and were 

 held in place with a nail through the thwart end and 

 the gunwale member. 



From scanty references by early writers, it appears 

 that a spiral over-and-over lashing was originally 

 used by the Micmac on the ends and gunwales. The 

 lower edges of the side panels were sewn over-and- 

 over a split-root batten. In some extant examples 

 the gores are sewn with a harness stitch; in others a 

 simple spiral stich is used. The cross-stich does not 

 appear to have been used by the Micmac. The gun- 

 wale caps were certainly pegged and the ends lashed; 

 the bark cover was folded over the gunwale tops and 

 clamped by the caps as well as secured by the gunwale 

 lashings. Tacking the bark cover to the top of the 

 gunwales, with the cap nailed over all, marks the 

 later Micmac canoes. The use of nails and tacks 

 seems to have begun earlier than 1850. 



In spite of decadent construction methods used in 

 the last Micmac i)irch-l)ark canoes, the model re- 



MicMAC Woman gumming seams of canoe, 

 Bathurst, N.B., 1913. {Canadian Geological 

 Survey photo.) 



69 



