<shabon> ... this gets kind of technical ...

[David Lewis]

Dave-
I appreciate the definition you have provided. It is within the boundaries
of anthropological thought. For me, I like to think of Indigenous villages
and settlements and even winter "camps" as also permanent. I just got out
of an archaeology class which was about the archaeological history of the
Northwest Coast. Within that type of analysis, people have left cultural
deposits on the same sites for literally thousands of years, from 11,000
BCE on the upper coast, and from about 9,000 BCE on most other coast sites,
until the present era. To me this must constitute a permanent settlement.
Even if there is a seasonal round, or cycle, to various camps, like winter
camp, fish camp, etc., the area and land was continuously occupied for
longer than all other colonial permanent settlements. To me this argument,
and not necessarily those making the argument right now, but the adherence
to European-style cultural settlements as the only true permanent
settlements needs to be challenged. It might even be called an ethnocentric
theory out of the past. This is a serious fallacy in anthropological theory
which I will challenge whenever it appears. I think the indigenous
perspective needs to be recognized here as manytimes even the colonial
trading centers were placed near or on top of an already well established
pre-historic cultural site.

David

At 08:32 PM 04/03/1999 -0800, you wrote:


> > >>entered CJ via frequent, and perduring, contact between Indians and
> > >>cheechako -- i.e. in and near permanent settlements.
> > >
> > >There were no permanent settlements pre-1858.
> >
> > What is this definition of permanent settlement? Indigenous peoples had
> > permanent settlements. And in Oregon, Jason Lee, and McLaughlin had
> > permanent settlements established before this time. Maybe you mean in BC?
> >
> > David [Lewis]
>
>[Dave Robertson responding:]  What I meant by 'permanent settlements' was
>any permanent settlement, indigenous or not, though mostly the latter
>since I imagine most Interior Salish traditional life to follow a seasonal
>round of migration.  In fact I more or less exclude permanent winter camp
>sites, thinking rather of locations where the indigenous and the outsiders
>would have had those 'frequent, and perduring, contacts':  Around HBC
>forts, for example, and around ['White'] towns.
>
>With regard to the suggested date of 1858 for earliest permanent
>non-Indian settlement, I suspect I will disagree with that.  Kamloops, for
>example, was certainly an HBC hub decades before that.  Fort Colvile goes
>quite a ways back as well.  Fort Camosun (which became Victoria) also
>predates that mark.
>
>But Mike may be referring to the earliest official incorporation of a
>'White' town in BC, about which subject I'm entirely ignorant.
>
>Best,
>Dave R.


 ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
               David Gene Lewis
         P.O. Box 3086
Eugene, OR 97403, USA
Home 541.684.9003  Cell 541.954.2466
Fax 541.346.0668

talapus at kalapuya.com, coyotez at darkwing.uoregon.edu,
http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~coyotez
http://www.kalapuya.com
http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~coyotez

Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community, Oregon
 ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><