handling their craft and ran rapids with great daring 

 and skill, showing that the apparently crude and 

 weak elm-bark canoes were far better craft than they 

 first appeared. 



The theory that the Iroquois type of canoe was very 

 like the emergency or temporary elm- and spruce-bark 

 canoes of neighboring tribes is supported by some 

 statements of the early French writers, as well as by a 

 comparison of the rather incomplete descriptions of 

 Iroquois canoes by later travellers with what is known 

 about the spruce and other temporary bark canoes 

 used in more recent times by the eastern Indians. 

 M. Bacqueville de la Poterie, writing of the adven- 

 tures of Nicholas Perrot in the years 1665 to 1670, 

 tells of an instance in which Perrot's Potawatomi 

 mistook the emergency canoes of some Outaouais 

 (Ottawa) for Iroquois canoes. 



LaHontan (1700) gives some general information as 

 well as specific opinions on the speed and seaworthi- 

 ness of Iroquois canoes, saying that — 



the canoes with which the Iroquois provide themselves are 

 so unwieldy and large that they do not approach the speed 

 of those which are made of birch bark. They are made of 

 elm bark, which is naturally heavy and the shape they give 

 them is awkward; they are so long and so broad that thirty 

 men can row in them, two-by-two, seated or standing, fifteen 

 to each rank, but the freeboard is so low that when any little 

 wind arises they are sensible enough not to navigate the 

 lakes [in them]. 



LaFiteau, writing before 1724, stated definitely that 

 the Iroquois did not build any birch-bark canoes, but 

 obtained them from their neighbors, and that the 

 Iroquois elm-bark canoes were very coarsely built of 

 a single large sheet of bark, crimped along the gun- 

 wales, with the ends secured between battens of split 

 saplings. He noticed that the gunwales, ribs, and 

 thwarts were of "tree branches," implying that the 

 bark was not removed from them. The most detailed 

 description was by a Swedish traveller. Professor Pher 

 Kalm, who gave extensive information on the con- 

 struction of an elm-bark canoe in 1749; this account 

 is particularly useful when interpreted in relation to 

 the spruce- and elm-bark canoes of the eastern Indians. 

 It is upon the basis of Kalm's account that the pro- 

 cedures used to build an Iroquois war canoe have been 

 reconstructed. 



The bark most favored by the Iroquois was that of 

 the white elm. Next most favored was red elm, and 

 then other barks — certain of the hickories and chest- 

 nut are mentioned in various early references. It was 



necessary to find a tree of sullicient girth and height 

 to the first limbs to give a sound and fairly smooth 

 bark sheet in the length and breadth required. If 

 possible the bark was stripped from the standing tree; 

 even after steel tools were available, felling was avoid- 

 ed for fear of harming the bark. Great care had to be 

 taken in the operation, to avoid splitting or making 

 holes in the bark, and often two or more trees had to 

 be stripped before a good sheet of bark was obtained. 

 In warm weather the bark could be removed without 

 much difficulty, but in the spring and fall it might be 

 necessary to apply heat; this was apparently done by 

 means of torches or by the application of hot water 

 to the tree trunk. 



When the bark was removed from the tree, the 

 rough outer bark was scraped away; if the builder 

 was hurried this scraping was confined to the areas 

 to be sewn or folded. The bark was then laid on a 

 cleared piece of ground, the building bed, with the 

 outside of the bark up, so that it would be inside the 

 finished boat. The building bed does not appear to 

 have required much preparation; apparently not 

 raised at midlength, it was merely a plot of reasonably 

 smooth ground, located in the shade of a large tree if 

 building was to be done in summer. 



It is not wholly clear from the descriptions whether 

 the gunwales were shaped before or after being secured 

 to the bark. However, extensive experiments in 

 building model canoes show very plainly that it would 

 be easiest to assemble the main gunwale frame and 

 use it in building, after the fashion of eastern birch- 

 bark canoe construction. With the main gunwales 

 assembled, the stakes would be placed on the bed, 

 the bark replaced, the frame laid on it and weighted, 

 and the stakes then redriven in the usual w-ay and their 

 heads lashed together in pairs. 



Each gunwale was formed either of two small sap- 

 lings or of split poles, with the butts scarfed at the 

 canoe's midlength. The canoe of an Iroquois war 

 party would probably have gunwales of split saplings 

 so that inwaie and outwale for half the length of one 

 side of the canoe would be from a single pole; this 

 would allow the flat sides to be placed opposite one 

 another, on each side of the edge of the bark, to 

 form a firm gunwale structure. However, when a 

 rather permanent craft was being built, the poles 

 might be split twice, or quartered, to give pieces to 

 make half of the gunwales of a canoe; these too might 

 be worked nearly round before assembly. 



That the gunwale joints were scarfed is reasonably 

 certain. The elm-bark canoes of the St. Francis 



215 



