Indigenous Toponymy and Archaeological Landscapes

on Salt Spring Island, British Columbia.

By Christopher Anderson Arnett

“ The native Indians…were responsible for many names which had fluttered on and off the island, lasting a day, a moon-span or a year, each name having a symbolical meaning only to fade away again as have the Indians who gave the fleeting titles.”- Bea Hamilton, “Salt Spring Island” 1969:4

“I don’t know understand what you’re doing here. If you were digging for oil I could agree with you but all this digging around for a bunch of old bones and stones seems crazy to me.” - Unidentified “Albertans,” DeRv 44, Long Harbour. Audio Tape 92, Salt Spring Island Archives.”

Salt Spring Island is the largest and most populated of the Canadian Southern Gulf Islands, with abundant archaeological landscapes, yet little archaeological research has been done compared to adjacent islands where similar landscapes have been the subject of major archaeological investigations (Mitchell,1971, Carlson, Carlson, Burley1989, Matson, Grier,). Except for the 1973 salvage excavation of a Marpole cemetery in Ganges Harbour (McCauley 1973; Roberts 1973; Hall and Haggerty 1981), a shoreline survey (Cassidy and Seymour 1974, Cassidy et al, 1974, 1974 ) and a university field school at Long Harbour (Johnstone,1988, 1989 1991), archaeological field work on Salt Spring island, for the last three decades, has been mainly motivated by real estate development (Lawhead 1979, Wilson 1988a, 1988b, 1994, Brollyetal 1993, Hewer 1999; Wilson et al, 2004, Dewhirst 2007).[1] Analysis of this work and ethnography suggest continuous Indigenous use and occupation of Salt Spring Island from the Early Holocene (8,000 - 6,000 B.P) to the early 20^th century. Little of this information, however, reaches the public realm and despite the fact that the island is centrally located in a region with the largest Indigenous populations in British Columbia, past Indigenous use and occupation of Salt Spring Island is often misunderstood in public discourse and scholarly publications. This paper argues that an awareness of Indigenous toponomy and associated archaeology is an initial step in the de-colonizing of non-Indigenous theories and forms part of a methodology to include Indigenous perspectives of syuth , or “true history” into what Elizabeth Furniss calls “the landscape of Public History.” (Furness,1997/98:7).

The epistemological divide between anthropology and history is evident in contemporary constructions of Salt Spring Island history which characterize Indigenous connections to Salt Spring Island as having been seasonal or transient particularly when the island was first occupied by non-natives in 1859 (Hamilton,1969:5, Flucke, 1952, Sandwell, 2005). Flucke, for example, acknowledged that while “Indians did use the island for hunting and fishing” …”no records or evidence of a previous permanent native occupation exists” (Flucke,1951:182). Historian Ruth Sandwell, while identifying shell middens as evidence of past use of Salt Spring island “by generations of Aboriginal people before the mid-nineteenth ccntury,” writes that “by all accounts, by the time non-Natives arrived, regular (seasonal) occupation of village sites had ceased” (Sandwell,2005:4). When Indigenous people do “return” to Salt Spring Island, they are seen only as one group among several settler ethnic communities effectively ignoring Indigenous presence and precedence (2005:4).

Epidemics and intensified warfare, the byproducts of European contact, had an impact on 1859 demographics but the frontier mythology of seasonal or non-occupation of Salt Spring Island by Indigenous people also originated in European notions of land tenure which refused to acknowledge Indigenous customary rights regarding land use. What appeared, from a European perspective, to be a wandering impermanent existence was in fact part of an ancient, complex system of stewardship, responsibility and sustainable resource practice (Suttles, Turner). The denial of Indigenous land tenure and history was a colonial strategy to justify European occupation of “vacant lands” but the persistence of this view, and the allocation of Indigenous history to ‘ethnography”, maintains a distinction between ‘history’ and ‘prehistory’, “an artificial hiatus” that “separates the pre-colonial from the colonized Indigenous, and shifts agency from the Indigenous to the colonizers”(Wobst,2006:26). The orthodoxy of Indigenous seasonal occupation on Salt Spring Island reproduces itself in current corporate archaeology whereby large, former village locations are interpreted, with minimal data, as “seasonal camps” (Wilson et al, 2004:65).

19^th century European visitors were under no illusion regarding Indigenous presence on Salt Spring Island. In 1860, during the first year of non-native occupation at Shiyahwt (the Ganges Harbour Settlement), certain European settlers complained to the colonial government in Victoria about indigenous houses built on Ganges Harbour in the winter of 1859-60 (Mayne, 1862:163). As Lieutenant Richard Mayne observed: ”…the settlers in reference to this subject, said that the Indians had never been there before, and that they had established a village there for the sole purpose of asserting their claim to compensation for the land” (163). When this was communicated to an Indigenous man he showed the Lieutenant the grave of his father, buried at Shiyahwt “three years ago – long before any white settler came to the place.” Mayne recognized the complexity of Indigenous land tenure and wrote that the island “would, in all probability, be claimed by no less than four tribes”(Mayne, 1862:165). Later, another settler, more observant than his associates, noted the depth of the shell middens and suggested that “Indians were roasting clams here in Ganges Harbour while Moses was writing the Pentateuch on Mt. Sinai” (Wilson 1895:14). The same source also reported that in the 1870’s “it was no strange thing during the months of May and June to see the shores of Ganges Harbour swarming with Indians 500 or more in number…the object of their visit being to dig, roast and preserve the clam-fish(14). European settlement, as Mayne and others correctly observed, did not occur in an empty cultural space but in the midst of ongoing Indigenous use of the land.

By the 1860’s a number of Indigenous women from Vancouver Island and Kuper island, had married Salt Spring island settlers at Hwunenuts, Xwaaqwum and Hwtlelhum, These women and their settler husbands raised families on the island while maintaining connections with the mother’s ancestral communities (Dodds, n.d. Toynbee,1978, Kahn,1999, Arnett,1999, n.d.). The marriages legitimized, for some Indigenous people, occupation of the land by their non-native husbands. Other Indigenous people, who did not marry settlers, were gradually alienated from their former habitations and resources. In April/June 1863 there was armed conflict between the military and police forces of the Colony of Vancouver Island and a group of Hul’qumi’num’ families from Puneluxutth and Hwlumelhtsu (Arnett,1999). Several people were killed, four Indigenous leaders were executed and the village of Hwlumelhtsu on Kuper Island was burned to the ground. Eight or more extended families from the village, who had customary use of the north half of Salt Spring Island, were forced to move from their traditional home.

As the settler population increased and the social and economic changes of the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries took hold, the traditional economy gradually declined as more and more food gathering areas, forests and shoreline, were denied native access through occupation destruction or legislation (Harris,200?y). Although Salt Spring Island was one of the first places in Western Canada where Indigenous lands were occupied by non-natives without formal agreement, Indigenous people from surrounding villages on Vancouver island and the Gulf Islands maintained their connections to the island by continued residence, intermarriage, food-harvesting, working, visiting, and by the recollection of place-names and associated histories (Mayne,1862, Jenness,n.d.8, Barnett,1955, Rozen,,1985, Arnett, 1999, n.d.) This “grey literature” of Indigenous history, often subsumed by the label of ethnography, is an important source of cultural data to balance European versions of history and landscape.

One way to restore an Indigenous perspective to the history of Salt Spring Island and gain a better understanding of the archaeological landscape is to view the land through the eyes of Indigenous toponymy, or place names (Rozen,1985, Harris,2005 Reimer, 2006). Indigenous toponymy derives from an intimate knowledge of local landscapes over a long period of time and contains valuable ethno-linguistic data that can predate the arrival of non-natives especially when the names are associated with Origin Stories, former settlements, and important food and other resource gathering areas. For archaeological landscape analysis, place names incorporate indigenous cultural perspectives of landscape and foreground Indigenous space as a guide for archaeological research design (Reimer, 2006)

Placenames can be indicators of temporality. As placename such as P’q’unup, named for the residue of white shell found there, would not be older than 5,000 years when current shorelines stabilized and regular exploitation of clam beds became established. The name for Mount Maxwell, Hwmetutsum, on the other hand, refers to the role of the mountain in an Origin Story and may be a more ancient place-name. Post-contact Indigenous place names also occur and can be distinguished by etymology and contextual analysis. A good example is Wallace Island in Trincomalli Channel which was named Smimkwetses (“One finger”, “clenched fingers”) in reference to a physical deformity of a non-native settler, Jack Chivers, who once lived there in the late 19^th century (Rozen, 1985:120). Although most place names associated with Origin Stories, resources, and events designate specific permanent places in the landscape others, such as the names of villages, can, in some circumstances, shift with population movements and relocations brought about by natural disasters or other reasons (Rozen,1985). Most place-names, by virtue of their direct historical connection to populations that have lived in the study area for thousands of years, may be assumed to have considerable age in regional chronologies and are associated with archaeological landscapes, or stl’ulnup, “ancient grounds”, places of former Indigenous habitation and activity.

Salt Spring Island is bisected by a linguistic boundary with placenames in the Straits Salish dialect of SENCOTLEN, used by the Saanich, on the south end of the island, while to the north, placenames in the closely related Hul’q’umi’num’ language predominates (Suttles,1990:154). A Saanich elder related what he was told by his elder :

“He said that Saanich names slices Salt Spring right in half. When you get over to the north side of Salt Spring it turns into the Cowichan language. With that, we respect them, we respect it, that’s within their territory”(Arnett,n.d.).

Both Hul’q’umi’num’ and SENCOTLEN speaking elders recognize that their interests in the island are limited to the extent of recorded place-names many of which are shared by the two languages, particularly in the southern portion of the island (Peters, n.d., Elliot, 1990:30-32, Map 2, Cowichan tribes, 2007,Map 2, Arnett, n.d.) where traditional land use overlapped the rigid boundaries of contemporary “tribal” boundaries

Despite the linguistic divide, there are few significant cultural differences between the people and “some kind of social unity is suggested” by an identical system of kinship terminology (Suttles, 1960:304) with customary land use patterns based on extended family connections established through marriage. Indigenous toponymy imbricates linguistic borders as reminders of the interconnected social fabric and a former system of mutually recognized rights and privileges in connection to land.[2]

The social and cultural importance of place-names is explained by Hul’qumi’num’ scholar, Ruby Peter:

“Names were given by the native people to various locations, usually designating summer or winter encampments of various families. So it is that an island would have several names for the various locations on that island. The Hul’q’umi’num’ names would be descriptive. They would describe either what grows there, or how the land is shaped, or what happened to the land form (Peter,n.d.).

As Saanich elder Dave Elliot observes: “We gave names to all the places that we knew. Every bay, every stream, every village. Every island, every mountain, every lake had a name in our language” (Elliot,1990:16). Another elder, Arvid Charlie, compares the significance of a place name to that of an ancestral name bestowed on a person “because it gives you the history for those that know the history, or why it is called a certain name” (Arnett, n.d.). The descriptive and historical associations of place-names, therefore, have potential in the interpretation of archaeological landscapes particularly where there is a direct historical connection between the Indigenous people and the land.

Many placenames are no longer recalled and we can assume that Hul’q’umi’num’ and SENCOTLEN place-names were more plentiful in the past. Place-name preservation is relative to practice. As elders explain, many names have been forgotten because people have not been on the land participating in the seasonal harvesting of natural resources. When elders, in their modern 21^st century homes, recall the place names of their youth they close their eyes and visualize traveling through the landscape but without being physically present , with no visual clues suggested by the shape of the land , meneiomic abilities are impaired and the recollection of some place names can be elusive. Cultural deposits associated with stl’ulnup (ancient ground) are found along the undulating shoreline in almost every bay and associated point of land on Salt Spring Island indicating places significant to Indigenous people and it is likely that all such locvation were named.. As Walter Grant, the first official non-native settler on Vancouver Island, observed “every little point to which a white man would not dream of giving a name has its separate appellation, and the names, as in Gaelic, generally signify something either connected with the face of the country or with the tribe who inhabit it”(Grant,1857:287-88). As will be shown, the place names that are recalled today correspond both to general areas and to specific archaeological landscapes. For Hul’q’umin’num’ speakers, Shiyahwt, for example, is specifically the archaeological site DeRu 9 where the town of Ganges is now located. As there are more archaeological landscapes than recorded place names it seems likely that all archaeological localities represent places that were formerly named.

For this study the localities of twenty-seven place names, recorded in the late 20^th and early 21^st century from Indigenous elders in the Hul’q’umi’num’ and SENCOTLEN languages (Rozen,1985, Arnett, n.d.) will be examined in relation to known archaeological landscapes. Most place-names will be shown to correspond with clusters of known archaeological sites, some with deep stratigraphy, visible house ridges and other features indicative of long-term use and settlement. Individual archaeological landscapes within a named locality may be related in terms of cultural features suggesting further opportunities for the examination of localized intra-site analysis within the broader socio-economic spheres of the Coast Salish social continuum(Suttles,1990:15, Lepofsky et al, 2007,Reimer,2007).

Place-names pertaining to Salt Spring Island and associated archaeological landscapes (stl’ulnup)will be identified from the north end of the island proceeding south along the east coast to figuratively circumnavigate the island and circumscribe Indigenous toponomy, history and archaeology on the landscape.

P’q’unup

P’q’unup is the name given to any gravelly beach where clams are harvested and processed but the quality of the resource and the visibility of the white shell landscape gave the northweast tip of Salt Spring island a certain toponymical prominence. This place name is also unique in its precise description of an archaeological landscape. As Hul’qumi’num elder, Arvid Charlie, explains, ”It’s called p’q’unup because the beach used to be just white with shells, so it actually seemed white ground. And that was a very important place because many different communities came there to tth’hwas, steam the clams open.”

August Sylvester, of Puneluxutth’, recalls “P’q’unup …that just means ‘white beach,’ p’q’unup, and that’s what they called it and that’s where we dig butter clams, harvest butter clams. There’s real good ones there because they don’t have to filter the mud, they got gravel to live in. That’s where you go for good clams. First and Second Beach, they’re right beside each other.”

‘First beach” just inside Southey Point (Fig. 1) and “Second Beach (Fig.2). 1 km east, are well-known by elders as a clam harvesting and processing area accessed by families from the three villages on Kuper Island and Chemainus River Vancouver Island (Rozen,1985:120, Arnett, n.d.). The availability of good spring water from a hand dug hole behind the estuary, an open dry camping area, and other resources such as sea urchins, ducks and deer gathering made P’q’unup an important part of the indigenous economy.

Temporary camps were established at P’q’unup for shell-fish harvesting and processing. Two elders mentioned the former presence of longhouses. Henry Edwards, who was born in 1919 at Hwlumelhtsu (Lamalchi Bay) on Kuper Island refers to the place as ‘unup (‘ground’) and notes that the area was used primarily by people from the Chemainus River (Westholme) and the three villages on Kuper Island. Kuper Island and was also well-known for its spring-water, sea urchins and duck-hunting:

“ ‘unup There’s no white people there a long time ago. There’s even them people from Westholme?[3] They going down there to camp one day, Westholme goes there, like, in clam season times. That’s a big point there, you know. They’d have quite a few tents there. They used to have that other kind of reed tents. Yeah, they have that a long time ago.. . Nothing but Indians from Kuper Island and Westholme. They all had their tents up there at ‘unup. There was real nice spring water in there but I don’t know what happened to that water. I haven’t seen it for a while. Just when I did that sea urchin. I’d go down to that point where the lighthouse is. Did some of that. Shoot ducks there, once in a while. Used to be lots of those long necks in there, in my days anyhow.”

Arvid Charlie also heard that pq’unup was accessed by families from communities on Vancouver Island and Kuper Island and that remains of former longhouses were evident into the mid-20^th century. “Several communities went there; Cowichan for one, Kuper, for another, and others. Not too long ago some of the posts were still there, late ‘40’s, early ‘50’s. Posts were still there from the longhouses. I don’t know how much later after that they were still there.[There are] reports of them being there at that time.”

The general area of P’q’unup is also the setting for a Puneluxutth’ oral tradition of the story of Tsuhatlutz, a female being who appeared on the beach from the sea and stole children by covering their eyes with pitch and putting them in baskets to eat. After taking the children she stepped from P’q’unup over the water to Vancouver island (Harris,2004::41, Florence James, p.c.,AnyCrocker, p.c.).

P’q’unup is represented archaeologically by four localities, DfRv 4, 5, 36 and possibly 37 (Fig. 1) DfRv 4 , a beach midden ridge of white shell and fire-altered rock (First Beach), covering some 2,550 square meters, was originally built up in front of a small lagoon just southeast of the rocky tip of Southey Point before modern land alteration activities (Fig.2). Surface collected artifacts include chipped basalt projectile points of Locarno/ Marpole vintage, hand hammers and nephrite adzes (Site file). Permanent occupation at different times in the past is suggested by the reported presence of burials and possible historic longhouse features. The burials were uncovered in the early 1970’s when the owner of the property employed bulldozers on the beach “filling in the lagoon behind the midden so that the site is now one large flat area of bull-dozed clam shell”( Hill,n.d.). In the process “Indian burials were disturbed and bones scattered.”

A possible related cultural feature in close proximity is DfRv 37, a thin shell midden 300 m by 40m on the opposite side of the bay west of Southey Point. Earlier surveys are repleat with judgemental observations regarding the perceived value of archaeological landscapes. In the case of DfRv 37 although the site file record makes a claim that there is “nothing exceptional about [the] site” ground-truthing reveals states that the location has commanding views of open water from the south east suggesting its importance as a lookout venue. A triangular basalt point from this location indicates possible occupation and use since Early Marpole (2,000 B.P.) times(Fig.4).

One kilometer south from DfRv 4 on Trincomalli Channel is a similar relatively intact archaeological landscape comprised of DfRv 4 and DfRv 36, two large shell midden ridges (4,000 square meters and 16,000 square meters respectively) fronting spring fed estuaries on either side of a rocky treed point of land (Fig.5). Portions of the midden at DfRv 36 are composed of superimposed layers of fire-altered rock steaming platforms that extend below high tide beneath the beach shingle (Fig. 6). People from Kuper Island accessed this site for clams until the late 20^th century (Hill, n.d.). Surface collected artifacts from DfrV 36 include two leaf-shaped, contracting stem points indicative of Locarno (3,500-1,500 B.P. (Fig.6) and two sandstone anchors comparable to Marpole ear examples excavated at Montague Harbour(Mitchell,1971) were found together on the surface of an exposed platform of fire-altered rock(Fig. 7 ). Several water-worn triangular basalt points, nephrite celts and an unusual piece of worked jade have been surface collected from DfRv 4, suggestive of a Marpole component (2,000, to 1,500/1,100 B.P.).

Hwtl’elhum

Hwtl’elhum, “place of salt” is the Hul’q’umi’num word for the area known today as Fernwood, including St. Mary’s Lake, the largest freshwater lake on the island (Rozen,1985:257-258).The actual saltsprings are situated inland north of present-day Fernwood approximately 1 km from the shoreline and consist of bare, low rounded mounds of oxidized earth which seep salt water (Fig. 8 ). Some elders use the word tlelhum to refer in a general sense to the entire north end of the island. August Sylvester, who visited the area as a youth, with his family to buy or trade wool, recalls: ”Tlelhum, that’s Salt Spring. Tlelhum, that’s the only name I knew this island by. My Grandfather would say, “Nem tst Tlelhum,” (“We’re going to Tlelhum”) and as soon as he says that I know I’m going in that direction.”

Hwtl’elhem was the location of the first organized occupation of the island by non-natives in the July, 1859 (Arnett,1999). On the first offical map of Salt Spring Island prepared by Lieut, Richards of the Royal Navy, the colony was named Saltspring Settlement preserving an English translation of the Hul’q’umi’num place name(Kahn,1999:15). People from Kuper Island, and possibly other areas, came regularly to dig clams on the beach at Hwtl’elhum beaches and to purchase wool, particularly black wool, from island families for Cowichan sweaters well into the mid 20^th century (Arnett, n.d.). Memories of the place recall the wool bartering sessions with island families of indigenous origin, particularly the Sampson family, which ended in the 60’s due to economic and social changes on Salt Spring and in Indigenous communities.

Archaeologically the shoreline above the gravel beach at Hwtl’elhum is a more or less continuous subsurface midden deposit, DfRv 5, approximately 1,320 meters along the shoreline from the vicinity of the present day Fernwood Dock to beyond Hudson Point (Fig. 9). A modern road runs parallel to the beach and has altered the original appearance of the archaeological landscape. A local resident at Fernwood between 1936-39 described “mounds of Sea Shells…anywhere from a few feet to 20 or 30 feet long and piled up sometimes three or four feet above land level, making mounds…”(Arnett,n.d.) Exposed stratified midden is visible at intervals along the shoreline and midden deposits extend an undetermined distance inland. Site file records indicate surface finds of lithics, Locarno-era ground slate points, Marpole era stone carving, and human burials (Hill,n.d.).

A remarkable feature of this area is a relatively undisturbed 70m house ridge located at the north end of the present –day site 30 meters from the edge of a 6 meter highbank above the beach (Fig,10). In 1951, the journalist writer Bruce McKelvie from Victoria dug a hole through the top of the midden ridge with unknown results. Around the time of his excavation a small 20 cm long flat sandstone rock with a carved face and upper torso was recovered by then owner Garnet Young from the roots of a cedar tree growing on the north end corner of the mound. This Marpole-era artifact is pecked and abraded with shallow lines to create a face with large circular eyes and raised pupils, wide open mouth and elaborate necklace of six parallel rectangular spaces (Hill,n.d.).

A collection of artifacts from the vicinity of the Sampson family farm which originally extended along the south side of Fernwood road include two ground slate lanceolate points (Fig. 11). Fig.11a has a distinctive medial ridge along the longitudinal axis a similar to points found in the Locarno component at False narrows on Gabriola Island (Burley,1988:83-4, Fig. 24a). The other is a ground and faceted hexagonal cross section point more typical of Locarno assemblages. Marpole era artifacts are represented by drilled stone disc beads, and a triangular slate point type. At the south end of the site a long time resident recovered two unusual trapezoid sandstone anchors “in the vicinity of the Fernwood dock”(Fig.12). The size of these anchors and their discovery at a good landing area suggests that they may be canoe anchors.

S’yuhuye’mun

Continuing along the shoreline, southeast of Hwtle’lhum , is a forested former island with one end attached to Salt Spring Island by a tombolo largely composed of midden deposits over a meter in depth with a long white sand beach on the Trincomalli Channel side (Fig.13). Fresh water creeks flow into the shallow protected harbour created by this geographic “hook” creating an area rich in intertidal zone resources.

S’yuhuye’mun, the Hul’q’umi’num’ name for the Walker’s Hook area has the connotation of “a place to get caught up,” a name which may refer to an episode in a creation story or to its function as an excellent camping ground and rendezvous point for people from Kuper Island and other places making the seasonal food and resource gathering rounds(Arnett,n.d.). “Walker’s Hook is our campground,” says Puneluxutth’ elder August Sylvester, “Mid-summer we’d come here and wait for the tides.” Each family had its preferred location along the beach. The resemblance of the topography to a fishing hook is recalled in a story where the thunderbird uses a hook to catch a whale that was dropped on the other side of the island at DfRv 6, north of Parminter Point (Florence James , p.c.).

August Sylvester recalls landing at Walker’s Hook with his grandfather, Basil Charlie, “to look for the leaves,” medicinal plants such as white willow, that grow I inland marshy areas, to make a special tea. On other occasions people visited to net ducks in the bay and to hunt deer (particularly on the narrow forested peninsula of the “hook”), collect wild blackberries and dig clams(Arnett,n.d.). Indigenous people recall good relationships and visits, in the 30’s and 40’s with black settlers and their wives at S’yuhuye’mun, One man, (Whims?) may have lived with an Indigenous woman. Plums, alcohol and “rent money” are sometimes mentioned. The bay at Walker’s Hook was a frequent stopping point for Indigenous workers in the commercial clam industry up to the mid -20^th century

In 2003 the tumbolo was leased to a commercial fish hatchery which began to develop the land with wells and trenches with archaeological monitoring(Wilson et al, 2004). During this work human burials were encountered and Puneluxutth’ elders with the support of the Hul’qumi’num’ Treaty Group sought to prevent further disturbance.

Five localities DfRu 2, 6, 50, 51 and 27 in the archaeological landscape are associated with the general vicinity of S’yuhuye’mun (Fig, 14). The tumbolo at Walker’s Hook, DfRv 2, is one of the largest archaeological landscapes in the southern Gulf Islands covering an area of 450 m by 80 m. with deposits up to and over 1 meter in depth. The tumbolo appears to be almost completely composed of shell and black soil midden deposits which extend below the high water mark. In 2001 shoreline erosion revealed a profile of a feature that may represent a habitation floor with postholes parallel to the beach(Fig. 15). This feature, now gone, revealed two approximately 20 cm diameter posts spaced at 50 cm intervals similar to The post holes intrude from dark midden into compacted broken shell and may represent side wall posts used to secure the horizontal planks of a longhouse.

Three burials, two adults in flexed position and facing west, and one “tightly flexed “ child burial facing east , along with the partial remains of eight other individuals, were uncovered during excavation of a narrow 329 meter pipe-line trench through the centre of the tumbolo (Wilson et al, 2004) . Bones from one burial were C14 dated between 1320-1450 AD, a date slightly later than the pre- 1200 time period of flexed midden burials which suggests possible contamination of the sample (Wilson et al, 2004). Recovered artifacts included flaked and ground lithics, including a leaf-shaped biface, a 15 kg pecked stone anchor, bone and antler implements, and a t-shaped shell labret (Fig. 16) suggesting a three thousand year span(Wilson et al, 2004). Faunal remains included sea and land mammals, clams, birds and fish, and an abundance of herring which led the team of monitoring archaeologists to conclude that DeRu 2 was ‘a seasonal camp”(Wilson et al, 2004:65). Herring appears seasonally in late winter through early spring but the presence of herring remains is not necessarily indicative of seasonal occupation only.

Artifacts collected from the beach over the years include ground and faceted slate points, basalt contracting stem points, possible earspool, elk horn wedges, deer bone awls, indicative of Locarno and Marpole age and a flat triangular ground slate point suggesting later Marpole or Strait of Georgia periods (2,400-200 B.P) (Hill, n.d., Eldridge,2004).

DfRu 50 and DfRu 51 are two areas of shell midden located midway on opposite sides of the bay enclosed by the “hook.” DfRu 50 is located in a low elevation “saddle” along the forested peninsula with a deposit shell, black soil and fire-altered cracked rock covering an area of 60 m x 20 m and possibly up to a 50 cm or more in depth. Two low boulder cairns are present inland with some boulders partially embedded in the ground. Across the tidal flat south of the creek that enters the bay are cultural deposits of disturbed thin deposits of black soil and fragmented shell which cover an area 150 m x 20 m (DfRu 51) . A 7 cm basalt leaf-shaped point from DfRu 51 may be is indicative of an early, pre-Locarno Beach component (Fig.17).

Inland archaeological features including an Indigenous trail system, connected to local springs and archaeological sites DfRu 6 and DfRu 27. These places represent an inland focus to activities at Walker’s Hook beyond the obvious resources of the shoreline as suggested by the ethnographic use of the area by August Jack’s Grandfather. The trail system south of Walker’s Hook was identified as Indigenous by the Caldwell family who pre-empted the property in 1887. Classified as DfRu 6, the place it is a not a particular archaeological site but a network of trails and springs between S’yuhuye’mun (Walker’s Hook) and Stsat’x (Long Harbour) with some small shell midden deposits and occasional artifacts found in the vicinity of the springs (Fig. 18). Artifacts collected over the years by the Caldwell family include a 1.7 cm polished stone pendant, a stone bowl, greenstone adzes, flat-topped stone hammer, and 82 chipped projectile points and 24 ground slate inclusive of all periods from Locarno (3,500 B.P) to the historic period(Hill,n.d.).

At the mouth of the bay, on open ravine leads through the forest to an inland marshy area on present-day Bon Acres Farm, where lithics “are widespread throughout the ploughed area” south of Le Page Road and constitute DeRru 27(Hill, n.d)). One contracting stem point and two broken leaf-shaped points were located “next to an area which was a marshy swamp now drained for pasture... alongside a trail to the shore near Walker’s Hook “(Hill, n.d.).

The association of cultural material in the vicinity of inland water sources suggest the use of temporary inland camps to access hunting and collecting places. The indigenous trail from S’yuhuye’mun to Stsa’tx (Long Harbour) which connects with five springs is an archaeological feature possibly used since Locarno times and suggests that similar routes may be identified elsewhere on Salt Spring Island.

Stsa’tx

Stsa’tx , “halibut,” is the Hul’q’umi’num’ word for Long Harbour, a narrow linear 5 km inlet on the north east side of the island(Fig.18). Stsa’tx is named for the resource and a physical feature, a large natural image of a halibut visible on the north side at the entrance to the harbour (Andy Crocker, p.c.). Small beaches with cultural deposits occur along the rocky shoreline leading inland to a stream fed estuary at the head of the harbour. Hul’qumi’num and Saanich people recall the importance of seasonal food gathering activities at Stsa’tx including sea mammal hunting, herring roe collection, duck hunting lingcod, clams and halibut (Rozen, 1985, Arnett,n.d.). Arvid Charlie was told ‘that at certain times the sts’atx or the halibut would go in there. They’d go to the shallows. From what I’m told, they’re normally a deep water fish, but at certain times they go into the shallows. You can spear them.”

During the early 20^th century, seasonal migrations to the hop farms of Washington State, Hul’qumi’num’ speaking people stopped at Long Harbour and Ganges Harbour to procure local resources particularly clams, to supplement store bought supplies (Arnett,n.d.). Later, Stsa’tx became a popular place to dig che’ch-puni , the Japanese, or Manila clam, for commercial sale after it was introduced to these waters in the first half of the 20^th century.

Eleven archaeological locales occur along the shoreline of Long Harbour. Four shell and black soil midden locales are located on small, protected beaches along the rocky south exposure of the Maracaibo peninsula. The inner more shallow harbour features large clam beds and cultural material on both sides of the inlet Cultural deposits range in size from small thin, scattered deposits of black soil and broken shell (DfRu 49,85,86, and 87) to the largest cultural deposit at Sts’atx ( DfRu 10) with almost a kilometer of oextending almost a kilometer along the south facing shoreline of tew inner harbour(Fig.19). The latter location and DfRu 44, 47,and 48 show evidence of deep cultural deposits (Hill, n.d. , Johnstone,1991).

Archaeological excavations at DfRu 44, a 5850 square meter spit of land and midden separating a freshwater marsh from the sea, in a bay across from DeFru 10, revealed evidence of changing use and occupation over the past four thousand years (Johnstone,1991). Initial seasonal use was followed by evidence of large permanent dwellings and burials. This Locarno Beach component (3,970 to 2230 B.P) is characterized by flaked debitage, projectile points, a slate adze and small soapstone carving By circa 500 AD the site was again only seasonally occupied for specific activities such as clamming, herring and other food harvesting activities into the historic period (Johnstone,1991).

The undated middle component contains cultural material similar to Late Marpole assemblages on Pender Island and Whalen Farm with unilaterally barbed harpoons and bone bi-points, obsidian microblades and a grooved maul fragment. (Johnstone,1991) A fragment of a scallop shell pendant with an incised design was also recovered from this level (Fig. 19). The uppermost level reflects occasional camping associated with commercial clam harvesting or other activities.

The archeological record from DfRu 44, which includes 47 species of fauna including halibut, the ancient name for the place, indicates a wide variety of resources harvested for over 3,000 years over into the mid 20^th century(Johson,1991).

A former canoe skid where the Long Harbour ferry terminal is located permitted quick access over a narrow isthmus from Long harbour to adjacent Wellbury Bay. According to Musqueam elder Bob Guerin (p.c.) this area was deliberately filled in and built-up with shell midden The skid portion of the site, now covered by late 20^th century fill, was part of the DfRu 5 landscape which includes the 60 m by 40 m shell and black soil midden behind the beach at the head of Wellbury Bay. A burial was discovered by a resident “20’ from the beach (in midden) under a large maple tree near the house”(Hill, n.d.). The burial, discovered while gardening, has been left in situ. Seven large drilled slate beads, a turquoise “trade bead” and three chipped basalt points, one with contracting stem and one, larger and leaf-shaped, have also been found by residents (Hill,n.d.).

Midway along the north side of Wellbury Bay is a shell midden (DfRu 42) measuring 60 meters by 15 meters and up to .5 meter deep in beach gravels with some black soil. A burial was recovered from under a large arbutus tree and bone submitted for C14 dating revealed a date of 1060 + - 80 which may be in error by a maximum of 100 years too old (Site file).

SYOWT/Shiya’hwt

Ganges Harbour, (Fig. 20), at the geographic centre of the island, was utilized by Indigenous people from Nanaimo to Saanich who accessed its extensive shoreline and inland areas for a wide variety of food resources (Rozen,1985, Mayne,1862, Arnett,n.d.). As Henry Edwards explains:

“People from all over would go there to harvest seafood. Families had cabins built all along the shore –each one had its own smokehouse for clams, herring,ducks seal. People from Lamalchi [Hwlumelhtsu], Penelakut [Puneluxutth] Valdez, Saanich people, all went to Shiya’hwt.”

People from villages on Kuper Island and Valdez congregated at Ganges in early spring to rake herring and collect the spawn (Rozen, 1985, Arnett,n.d.) Lingcod fishing, sea-mammal hunting (seal, sealion and porpoise) and a wide variety of beach resources particularly clams attracted many people. In the 1870’s as many as 500 Indigenous people would congregate on the beaches at head of the harbour to harvest and process clams (Wilson, 1895).

The word used to refer to for Ganges Harbour is SYOWT/Shiyahwt which is interpreted differently by SENCOTLEN and Hul’qumi’num’ speakers. A SENCOTLEN speaker said, “SY0WT, that’s an old name. You can really tell by the way it sounds. Old name.” SENCOTLEN speakers have a deep ancestral connection to SYOWT calling it “the first Saanich home base” or “one of the oldest, old old places”(Arnett,n.d.). Among SENCOTLEN-speakers the place name seems to refer specifically to the sand spit midden DfRu 1 at Walter Bay. One elder was told by his elder that SYOWT was”…that sand spit. Just as you’re going down into Ganges. It’s a sand spit. He said that was originally, the Saanich base”(Arnett,n.d.). The place was a well-known Indigenous campground in the late 19^th century(Wilson, 1895) and into the mid 20^th century(Arnett, n.d.) A Saanich ancestor XWCE’MATX had a house here before moving to Tsawout with other Salt Spring Island Saanich in the early 19^th century when there was danger of attack by northern indigenous people (Suttles,1950:26,277). Elder cultural historian Dave Elliot called SYOWT “the Saanich home base” and translated the name as “place of caution” possibly in reference to the open exposed setting and its vulnerability to inclement weather and human raiders. According to another Saanich elder, ”SYOWT is ‘caution’ and T is ‘he’, ‘she’ or ‘it.’ It’s a great place for the southeast wind to be barreling in there and also quite open to Northern people there”(Arnett, n.d.).

The word Shiya’hwt refers in a general way to the harbour but Hul’q’umi’num speakers also use it to refer specifically to the site of present-day village of Ganges (Arnett,n.d.). Although Hul’q’umi’num’ speakers know the place-name they seem to be less familiar with its etymological meaning (Arnett,n.d.). Rozen says, ”possibly ‘hollow place,’(1985:243). Ernie Rice recalled another place name for Ganges Harbour Ni’hw’aluqw, (“at ’cover head’?) and stated that it was a SENCOTLEN word derived from Shtl’hwa’luqw meaning “cover head”(Arnett,n.d.).

Shiya’hwt is best-known to the Hwulmelhtsu people of Kuper Island as one end of a canoe skid from the head of Booth Canal to Ganges Harbour(Fig.21). Henry Edwards learned the story from his father Eddy Edwards:

”When they can, when they’re in a hurry, they go to that bay across from Crofton? Booth Bay? They drag their canoe right over to Ganges. They had skids.That little creek goes right over to Ganges. It takes them about two hours and they’re going in that Shiya’hwt instead of going around about five or six hours…But if they can go through in that canal there and they taking about two hours and they’re already in Shiya’hwt “(Arnett,n.d).

The archaeological landscape of Ganges Harbour includes 16 identified locales sites with at least six potential former habitation landscapes (DfRu 1, 9, 3,4, 42 and 30) (fig.) A northern portion of DfRu 4 , an archaeological landscape extending 540 metrs and 40 meters inland lwas the subject of an archaeological salvage operation in March 1974 when 22 burials representing 32 individuals were excavated from a Marpole period cemetery on private property overlooking the bay in front of Churchill Beach (Roberts, Hall and Haggarty). The cemetery, which contained high status individuals buried with prestige grave goods, may be associated with a deep house ridge midden, typical of Marpole features, along the beach towards the south end of the site. On the rocky point, a stone bowl is abraded into the bedrock, a feature related to family owned food processing location (Akerman in Arnett,n.d.) and found in several locations on Salt Spring Island (see, DfRu 9, DeRu 43and DfRv 5).

Another potential habitation site and burial place is DfRu 9 , identified by Hul’qumi’num elders as the original Shiyahwt, which extends 640 meters (and up to 40 meters inland) from the base of Ganges hill along the clam-shell spit that joined the rocky islets where Mouat’s, Ganges and the Grace Point Development are now located. An early non-native settler recalled that “when Mouat’s Boarding House was built many bones were found when they dug the foundations” (Tolson,n.d.). Artifacts were also recovered when Mouat’s store across the road was being built including a cm x cm dark slate oblong bowl highly polished(Sue Mouat, p.c.,Hill, n.d.). Present day Ganges Creek, which cuts through DfRu 9, was most likely one end of the canoe skid to Booth Canal. A burial was discovered by a resident digging a pipeline through the cultural deposits in the early 1950’s (Hill,n.d.). The beach has fire-altered rock and a sandstone bedrock bowl, a feature of family-owned food processing site, is in the creek bed. Local collectors have recovered nephrite celts and a nipple topped stone hammer from the beach (Fig. 23).

A third potential habitation site covering an estimated 230 meters by 115 meters at the head of Ganges Harbour is DfRu 3 on the site of the present-day Harbour House Hotel and adjacent townhouses. Much of the midden on the west portion is described as “largely destroyed” over years of land development. Previous owners of the property preserve a family story about Fred Crofton uncovering a large number of burials during construction of the tennis courts in the early 20^th century. In 1988, the flexed burial of an adolescent male was accidentally discovered and excavated “from a shell midden deposit” at DfRu 3 (Simonsen, 1988) Nephrite adzes, round stone bowls, stone hammer fragments, and ground slate points have been recovered from the adjacent beach (Hill, n.d.).

The archaeological landscape Walter Bay and its adjacent spit, DfRu 1 , is “quite deep and important” extending 1200 meters along the shoreline and up to 40 meters inland and may have been the site of more permanent past settlement (Hill, n.d. Site file). Sandstone abraders, ground slate blades, bone implements, chipped basalt contracting stem points, small nephrite celts, a carved bone pendant and a large sandstone ceremonial stone bowl (Fig.25) have been recovered over the years from the spit and inland representing diagnostic Locarno, Marpole and later artifacts (Hill,n.d.). A cobble tool of indeterminate date was also surface-collected. (Fig. 24). The area was well known for butter clams (Arnett, n.d.) and south of the peninsula, at extreme low tide, are rock alignments that may be the remnants of clam gardens.

South of DfRu 1 is another potential habitation site DfRu 42 on the west side of Ganges Harbour consisting of a “heavy concentrations of shells” extending 340 meters along the shoreline and up to 30 meters inland (Hill.n.d.,Site file). One human burial with a possible associated dog skeleton was recovered from the locale in 1965(Hill,n.d.) Reidents also recovered a leaf-shaped gound slate point with medial ridge (Fig.) and an unusual sandstone hammer, broken with signs of re-use (fig. ), The latter object was reportedly found “close to an old cedar stump (poss. 200 yr. old” (Hill,n.d.). The ridged pattern of the handle is similar to hammers reported from the cenral coast (Grant Keddie,p.c.).

A sixth large shell and black soil midden DfRu 30, cover an area of 880 meters by 25, is located inside an enclosed bay (Parson’s Beach) on the east side of Ganges Harbour. It is recorded in the site file as “large, deep and important.” Burials have been reported (Site file) but excepting the collection of small nephrite celts, broken basalt chipped points, and a metal part of a trade musket indicating historic use (Fig.26) the place is little known archaeologically and is in the process of being destroyed by shoreline land development.

In addition to these possible habitation areas there are smaller sized middens with less stratigraphy such as DfRu 38 on the northeast side of Ganges Harbour with five deposits from west to east measuring approximately 60 x 30 meters, 100 x 20 meters, 60 x 15 meters, 60 x 20 meters and 70 x 30 extending along 500 meters of shoreline (DfRu 38 Site file).

The canoe skid between Shiyahwt and Chanuus (Booth Canal) is a unique feature and probably followed the course of Okano Creek up to what is now the Hydro Station on Atkins Road, then followed a marshy area parallel to Rainbow Road before heading down the original course of Ganges Creek to tidewater at DfRu 9 (Fig.21). Henry Edwards recalls exploring the Booth Canal portion in the 30’s and finding traces of the original skids. One small lithic assemblage from a level area above Orakano creek near the entrance to Booth Canal exhibit diagnostic Locarno/Marpole attributes indicating possible components from (at least 3,500 B.P.) (Fig.27).

‘ESW

The collective name for the small islands inside Ganges Harbour is ‘ESW referring to former sea mammal hunting in Ganges Harbour. The name meant it was a “come in and seal” kind of place, I guess,” recalls Sencotlen speaker Ray Sam. Two small shell and black soil middens, DfRu 40 and 41 (40 x 30 meters), on Goat Island and Third Sister respectively.

Beddis Beach DeRu 21 and Cusheon Creek are distinctive archaeological landscapes that originally had Indigenous names which are no longer recalled(Ernie Rice, p.c.). Indigenous people continued to access this area after it was occupied by the Beddis family in 1884 DeRu 21 is a large southeast facing shell and blacksoil midden measuring 1,000 x 40m encompassing two rocky headlands with clam shell beaches (Fig. 28). This large site is located just north of the outfall of Cusheon Creek and its large alluvial clam beds. Prior to disturbance the southeast facing Beddis beach was fronted by “a dike –like ridge 6-10’ high along the shore”(Hill,n.d.). Burials have been located at Beddis Beach and inland behind the northern-most white shell beach. Lithics from the beach include nephrite celts, flat-topped hammers, , basalt chipped contracting stem and traingular points, and elk horn wedges, indicating ongoing use since Locarno Beach times (Hill,n.d.)

Ts’usnu’um

Ts’usnu’um is the name given to the low elevation peninsula which makes up the south east corner of Salt Spring Island (Fig. 29). Saanich elders identify this as a “Cowichan word” meaning “being hit by the tide”… The tide hits right on that point being hit by the current”(Arnett,n.d.). The name refers specifically to the geographical feature Beaver Point and to the entire southeast peninsula of Salt Spring island. Regarding the locality of Ts’usnu’um Saanich elders state “that its not really spoken of. Usually the places that we’re not supposed to be going near or whatever, it was never really spoken of. We don’t talk about it”(Arnett,n.d.). This statement infers that the place in question is a burial location or otherwise imbued with xa’xa (taboo, restricted ,sacred). Possible burial cairns have been identified at Ts’usnu’um. A circular petroform may also be associated with secret Saanich practice.

Rozen’s Hul’q’umi’num and SENCOTLEN speaking consultants informed him that Ts’usnu’um “was probably used as a camping site by the Cowichan on their way to the mainland in the summer”(1985:243). According to Arvid Charlie “the reason we went there was because of the good spring water(Arnett,n.d.). Ts’usnu’um was also known as a place where individuals with “a specialized ability” hunted the six-gilled shark, kw’uts’un’ulhtsu ,“around March” using “a harpoon with bladder float”(Arnett,n.d.). The shark was hunted for oil and the skin was used for sandpaper. The place name is remembered in Arvid Charlies’s family in association with a female relative who drowned there years ago one spring while collecting lhuq’us, edible seaweed(Arnett,n.d.). He related another tragedy associated with Ts’usnu’um to demonstrate the connections between story and place:

”Another story within my family, in the not too distant past, eighty years, a hundred yers ago, two siblings were out in a canoe and a gale came up. They weren’t able to get to shore in time and they drowned there. So these stories are in our family and back up the name of that place. It fits in with the stories that go with that place. So, in a way, talking about these stories confirm the name of the place.”

Ts’usnu’um also resonates in the memory of elders as the longtime farming residence of Johnny Pappenberger (Siinusustun,died 1967) and Mary Anne Pielle (Q’ut’q’it died 1959) who lived at Beaver Point on land pre-empted by Johnny’s German father, George Pappenberger. George Pappenberger was married by 1862 to an Indigenous Hul’qumi’num’ woman, Mary,from “Cowichan” and it was possibly through her that George Pappenberger gained his rights to the land according to snuy’wuy’ulh(cultural teachings). Siinusustun’s wife Q’ut’q’it was the granddaughter of a famous Puneluxutth’ leader Xulqulustun. One elder suggested that their marriage was a recognition of her family’s rights to this area of Salt Spring island.(Arnett,n.d.). [4]

The archaeological landscape of Ts’usnu’um could extend from Cusheon Cove around Beaver Point to the Indian reserve on Fulford Harbour (Fig. 30). This large, possibly arbitrary, grouping reflects the geography of the area and includes at least 20 recorded locales including shoreline shell and black soil middens, a canoe landing north of Beaver Point, possible burial cairns and a large inland lithic scatter concentrated around a small stream. The latter feature, DeRu 24 , is a large area (40 hectares ) modified since 1871 by farming activity which has yielded 395 chipped and ground lithics throughout years of ploughing (Hill, n.d.)). Most lithics were concentrated toward the north edge of the present day farm fields along a small watercourse fed by a spring. Sketches from local collections reveal a large selection of Locarno and possibly Marpole phase faceted slate points (Hill,n.d.).

Cusheon Cove, DeRu 20, is a deep sheltered bay on the northeast side of the Beaver Point penisnsula with access to interior areas of Ts’usnu’um. The 350 meter perimeter of the cove and adjacent shoreline was significantly disturbed by the operations of the Bullman Sawmill in the early 20^th century(Kahn,1999). Nephrite, adze blades, leaf-shaped chipped points, grinding stones, stone hammers, and at least four tri-grooved stone weights have been surface collected (Hill,n.d.).

Further along the northeast shoreline of Ts’usnu’um is a bay with a clam shell and black soil midden DeRu 19 divided into two sections , the eastern part being 60 x 15 m and the western part, 80 x 15 meters in area. Reported rock alignments on the beach, visible at low tide and directly in front of the midden, suggest a canoe landing. A nephrite adze or chisel was found on the rocky point south of this midden and scattered shell and black soil is visible on the rock point on the south side of the small bay. More shell midden and black soil is found along the southern point where one, and possibly, two burial cairns, DeFru 53 and 54 are located.

Another potential village site, DeRu 22, measuring 460 by 30 + meters is found on the south shore of Ts’usnu’um at the entrance to Fulford Harbour across from Ts’umeqwus (Russell Island). The western topography of the site consists of two points with deposits of crushed shell and black soil. The eastern portion from the head of a creek-fed the bay has the deepest stratified deposits up to and over 2 meters in a level area facing a sandy beach. Burials were discovered inland with road construction and reburied with assistance of Saanich elders. Diagnostic artifacts include a large Locarno era faceted slate point (Fig. 31), smaller hexagonal ground slate points, triangular chipped basalt points, stone bowls, tool-sharpening rocks, bone tools, bone leister points, elk and antler wedges indicative of Locarno, Marpole and later occupations(Hill.n.d.).

A circle of large rocks measuring 3m x 3m on the prominent point of land between DeRu 22 and King Cove, found 38 meters above sea level, and accessed from the shore by a small shellmidden locale (DeRu 143) at the base of the bluff, suggest alignments sometimes mentioned in the accounts of spiritual training of Saanich young men (Jenness, 1935-37, Arnett, n.d.). Jenness points out similar formations t were also found inland on Salt Spring island on rocky bluffs (Jeness,1934-35) and above the present-day Indian Reserve Number 5 (see below)..

TEM,ACES/ Ts’umeqwus

The name for Russell Island, at the entrance to Fulford Harbour, has various transcriptions in the two languages but appears to be derived from the word for “skull” (stth’ma’qw in Hul’q’umi’num’) or third generation removed great grandparent or great grandchild(sts’a’muqw)(Quw’utsun Syuw’enst Lelum,2007:90). The association of the word skull and great grandparent refers to the facial features of a very old person with the skin tightly drawn over the bone structure(Andy Crocker,p.c.). Saanich and Hul’qumi’num elders recognize the association of the place with bones (Arnett,n.d.). A Saanich elder explains, “TEM,ACES is the name of that island. That’s where NEN lived [a great aunt] ,ACES is “your body changed” to a ..”bone remains of a body” something like that. Probably it’s a burial ground. The name has something to do with bones, that Russel island,” Hul’quni’num elder, Henry Edwards, who dug clams for many years in Fulford harbour, described Russell Island as “the Saanich part.”

Two archaeological landscapes, both designated DeRu 66, are visible on the island and consist of cultural deposits of unknown size and depth at the southeast point and midway along the island facing north towards the Salt Spring Island.

.

Hwu’ne’nuts/WENANEC

In the SENCOTLEN language, WE’NA’NEC, the name for Fulford Harbour is, in part, descriptive and refers to the former estuary at the mouth of Fulford Creek which, as Ray Sam explains, was “kind of, sort of placed back like…way, way back” at the head of the harbour (Fig.32). For other SENCOTLEN speakers, the word WE’NA’NEC refers to the entire bay but also specifically to Indian Reserve No.5. where the name was recorded as “Koo-nah –nich” in an 1876-77 census of residents.(Ref). SENCOTLEN historians consider WE’NE’NEC as “a real ancient name” and associate the place with the Transformer story where Deer waits for Xeel’s so that he can kill him with two sharp knives he is making. Xeel’s appears and sticks the knives on either side of deer’s head and sticking two arrow shafts in his hind quarters to give him stiff legs (Arnett,n.d.). “I always get the feelng,” one elder said, “that the first deer that came into being was over at WE’NA’NEC…Lots of deer in We.na.nec at that reserve there. Everybody hunts there.”

Among Hul’q’umi’num speakers, the name Hwu’ne’nuts can elicit suppressed laughter among which suggests that it has some slang connotations in addition to its use as a place name. “Hwu’ne’nuts![laughter] The reason I laugh is there’s so many different ways of saying it. The most common one is “dropped bottom”, or something like that. Hwu’ne’nuts , the end of the word is definitely referring to ‘a bottom’ (Arnett,n.d.). Saanich elder Dave Elliot translated the word as “Move your Butt over”, while other Hul’qumi’num’ elders suggested the translation “lowering rear end”(Rozen,1985:243). The present day Indian reserve No. 5 is registered under the name of the Tsawout First Nation but the traditional tenure of the Hwu’ne’nuts/WE’NA’NEC acknowledges Hul’qumi’num and Saanich interests (Rozen,1985:243,Arnett,n.d.) Both groups accessed the area for herring in the spring and lingcod, halibut, salmon fishing, clamming, ducks seals and sea-lions during the summer months sharing “a seasonally occupied village of the Saanich and Cowichan at the south east entrance to Fulford harbour” (Rozen,1985:243). People continued to access WE’NA’NAC and its environs for deer hunting, duck hunting, and other resources up into the mid 20^th century(reimer,1976:7-8). As one elder recalled, ”There’s seal there. Deer there, grouse, crab, real good place for crab, used to be, clams, lots of clams, a few cohoe, do they still have that creek there?” The late Alan Greenway recalled a ring of rock on one of the rock ledges of Reginald hill and possibly used as a lookout or for spiritual purposes (Arnett,n.d.)

Referring to the traditional ownership of WE’NA’NEC (Indian reserve No.5) Saanich elder Ray Sam states:

“Well, the families that I know of…my great grandfather told me this –I was small and made to listen to the names: It was Henry Williams from Duncan, Alby Charlie, another person, Ken Williams is the sole survivor now, in Duncan, Isaac Jack, and these people that I’m talking about were all related, close related. Simon Tommy, my granduncle that raised me as an infant, and there was two old ladies down below [in Tsawout] Susiil and Thalalhuwut. Those were the owners but it just petered out. [interest in Fulford Harbour], that they didn’t really want to bother about it you know. That’s far as I know about the ownerships of that. Now its Tsawout Reserve, or whatever, not reserve, land you know, that’s what I know about Fulford (Arnett,n.d.).

Elders interviewed by Wayne Suttles in the first half of the 20^th century recalled two villages in Fulford Harbour; WEn’NA’NEC, said to be “on the south shore of Fulford harbour” and Kwtha’then “on the north” (Suttles, 1950:26). The people from these and other SENCOTLEN-speaking settlements on Salt Spring left the island for Tsawout in the early half of the 19^th century under the leadership of LUSCIM(Luschiim) during a period of violent confrontations between local indigenous people and northern people.

The late Bob Akerman, whose grandmother Tuha’wiye sometimes took him to visit “Chief Charlie,” maintained that was a Saanich traditional proprietorship which included all of Fulford Harbour inland to a creek that flows down from Mount Bruce and crosses the Burgoyne Valley. According to him, Hul’q’umi’num speaking people could only access the area by permission and the same protocol existed for Saanich access to sites beyond the creek (Arnett,n.d.).

In 1874 a surveyor, Ashdown Green visited WE’NA’NEC and noted “an old Indian Ranch, the carved posts of which are till standing.” Saanich people were living at WE’NA’NEC in 1876-1877 when Federal Government employees identified a man named “Lil kwi yun” who was living there with seven other men and eight women”(Indian Reserve Commission,1876-77).

By the early 20^th century a couple from Qumiyaken on the Cowichan River, Teluxutstun and his wife Syupyapulwut lived at Hwu’ne’nuts, in a small house east of the longhouse which stood on the level ground composed of black soil and shell midden above the beach (Fig.33 ). Also called Tonette Charlie, and known to local residents as “Chief Charlie,” Medicine Man Charlie” or “Chief Charlie Zalt Zalt,” Teluxutstun and his wife were often visited by local Hul’q’umi’num speaking indigenous women married to white settlers (Arnett, n.d., Dodds, n.d.).They apparently also hosted “longhouse dancing”(Arnett,n.d.). After their disappearance in the 1920’s, the longhouse was dismantled and the nearby cabin fell into ruin (Bervan, 1936) . Indian Reserve No.5 is managed under the Indian Act by the Tsawout tribe and is the only designated reserve on Salt Spring island.

The archaeological landscape of Hwun’ne’nuts/WE’NA’NEC, like that of Ganges Harbour, is extensive and features a diversity of interconnected locales including four possible former village sites, De Ru 18, De Ru 12 and possibly DeRu 40 and 43 , inland shell middens, ( DeRu 44, De Ru 166,) lookout (DeRu 54), stone circle alignment, (DeRu 43,) bedrock bowl,(DeRu 63), and rock art (DeRu 43).

DeRu 18 is the location of a large shell, fire-altered rock and black soil midden extending almost 30 meters inland 620 meters along the shoreline at the head of Fulford Harbour on the west side from the mouth of Fulford Creek to past the Drummond park playground. The late Bob Akerman recalled the presence of four or five rectangular house depressions, one located inland at the present parking lot. Depth of deposits are believed to be almost 2 meters “at maximum” although Bob Akerman who worked on the park development claimed that the midden is “eight feet deep”(Akerman, p.c.). Burials, (“hundreds of skeletons” according to one source, some in flexed position) have been found in the past by previous owners (Drummond) of the property . Local collections from DeRu 18 include nephrite adzes, nipple and flat topped hammers, elk horn wedges, Locarno –era chipped contracting stem, biface basalt points, a large leaf-shaped obsidian point, perforated stone sinkers, elbow pipes, a labret and an earspool of “white marble-textured stone”(Hill,n.d.). A unique artifact recovered by the late Bob Akerman is a perforated copper disk with incised designs (Fig. 34).

The head of Fulford harbour has other cultural features presumably associated with the larger DeRu 18 habitation site. Three of these features, DeRu 56, 166, and 44, are cultural deposits found inland from the shoreline. Above the head of the harbour, northwest of St. Paul’s Catholic church, at approximately 112 meter elevation, is a small 2500 square meter “extremely thin” shell midden (DeRu 56) on a rocky bluff with excellent views of the harbour prior to recent tree growth(fig.32). The late Bob Akerman was told that the place was ”formerly a lookout for the Indians who lived at Fulford harbour” (Hill, n.d.). DeRu 166 is a 300 square meter shell and black soil midden located approximately 250 meters inland from DeRu 18 at the east end of a grass coverd airfield. A larger (9900 square meter) inland midden of black and dark brown organic soil with shell, burned bone and fire-altered rock is located less than 1/2 km east of DeRu 18 at an elevation of 60 meters and approximately the same distance inland as DeRu 166 (ie 250 meters). This locality (DeRu 44) has been largely destroyed by a gravel pit operation. Private collectors have recovered a plain stone bowl and a seated figure bowl (Fig. 35). Endangered portions of the site were partially excavated in 1988 by I.R. Wilson Consultants Ltd who recorded a midden depth of 80 cm (Wilson,1988). Excavations recovered 14 worked antler fragments, a chipped slate biface, a weather vane scallop, two bone points, a black basalt biface tip, a triangular basalt biface and 159 pieces of debitage, primarily black basalt and white quartz. A stone club was also recovered by an island resident (Fig. 36).

Approximately 1/2 km east of DeRu 18, along the shoreline is a point of land formed by large sandstone boulders modified in the mid 20^th century into a log dump and booming area. In 1963 three carved sandstone boulders (petroglyphs) were bulldozed from he intertidal zone at extreme low-tide by a local resident (Hill and Hill, 1978:86). Two of the boulders, one with “crescent moon” motifs sold to an American citizen (Gordon Cudmore,p.c.), have gone missing. The largest remaining boulder has a pecked cortex with prominent facial features interpreted by some Saanich elders as a seal (Fig. 37).

On the northeast side of the head of Fulford Harbour is a shell and black soil midden, (DeRu 63) 4000 square meters in area southeast of St. Paul’s church, possibly incorporating some of the church property, A noteworthy feature of DeRu 63 is the presence of an a stone bowl abraded into a bedrock outcrop 3 meters above the beach (Fig. 38).

Remnants of cultural deposits measuring approximately 480 meters and 20 meters inland are found along the shoreline in the bay west of, and including, present-day Fulford Village (DeRu 40). The landscape is very much altered by modern construction but intact 2 deposits at the western boundary reveal deposits of fragmented burnt and whole shell, and fire-altered rock up to two meters in depth. Artifacts recovered from the area include a large Charles Phase (?) 10 cm triangular convex obsidian point with flat based stem found by a local resident digging a waterline “50 ‘ uphill from gas pump”(Hill, n.d.). An unusual whalebone club 22 cm long by 4 cm wide with a handle featuring carved facial features was recovered in association with “human bones’” in a “Dept. of Highways excavation, just 20’ in front of the door of Nan’s Coffee Bar [now Rock Salt Restaurant]” in December 1971 (Hill, n.d.). Other artifacts found in the same vicinity include abrading stones, a Marpole –era ground slate knife, a bone point, and nine bone fragments including deer and bird bone.

DeRu 41 designates cultural deposits extending 620 meters along the east shore of Fulford Harbour from the head of the small bay immediately east of Fulford Village encompassing “4 separate deposits” with shellmidden and reported burials and human remains (Hill, n.d.) Also noteworthy is the presence of a a cultural feature consisting of an alignment of three rock circles, two of which are made of rough stones approximately 2 meters in diameter with a third circle less than a meter in diameter lining a pit with brown earth fill (Hill.n.d.). These features are 2.5 meters apart and are found approximately eight meters above high tide on a “fairly steep hillside.” 19 meters south “along the steep rocky hillside is another rough stone circular arrangement in a filled crevasse, with the diameter of the circle about 5’…a possible grave site. ” According to site file information “all have been partially or wholly disturbed” (Hill, n.d.).

DeRu 43 is the archaeological landscape of China Bay. Cultural deposits are found along the bay and are particularly concentrated at the western end where there are two mounds approximately 15 meters by twenty meters in area each consisting of stratified shell and black soil. The western mound is cut by an old logging road (Fig.39). A three meter deep profile of stratified deposits of alternating crushed shell and black soil deposits alternating with sterile soil of periodic landslides is evident (Fig. 39). A noteworthy feature is a three meter long by 1 meter high feature of large fire-blackened rocks and soil at the base of these deposits. The urgency of ground-truthing previously recorded archaeological landscapes is well-demonstrated by this locality which, despite its obvious size and depth of deposits, is only noted in the site file records as “quite small, shallow and apparently not in danger. Further work not needed.”

The archaeological landscape of present-day Indian reserve No. 5 (DeRu 12) extends for 1000 meters along the shore and 30 meters or more inland. A late 19^th century style longhouse and adjacent cabin occupied the level ground at the southernmost point of the reserve up until the 1920’s (Fig. 40). Crab apple trees formerly grew in the vicinity of the longhouse and a large hand dug well is behind the 19th /early 20^th century house site. The two offshore rock islets were used as a burial ground. The latter was discovered in 1897 by children of the Hamilton family who “discovered the two rocks just off the Indian reserve at the harbour entrance. They found the rocks loaded with Indian skulls, all buried under piled up rocks and they called this “Skull Island” Hamilton,1967:130-131). Human remains have also been discovered in the DeRu 12 midden (Site File). Surface collected artifacts include a basalt triangular contracting stem point similar to Montague Harbour 1 specimen (See Mitchel,1971:Fig.33b), abrading stones, hammer stones, a drill and four round blue trade beads (Hill,n.d.). Midden exposure up to one meter and more is visible along the shoreline and potential house ridges, possibly in two rows, are evident in the forest.

P’ukwuluqw

This place name describes the waters between DeRu 12 and DeRu 44 and refers to when the “tide is out, and all is foaming, and all you see is the head of the reef” appearing to float on the water, a figurative description for three rocks reefs, one of them now marked by a light, west of the burial islets off the present-day Indian Reserve No.5 (Arnett, n.d.).

TALEN

This Saanich name for Isabella Point on the south entrance to Fulford harbour means “salt” in Sencotlen. This particular place name is recalled in relation to an incident involving a Saanich couple and their nighttime encounter with provincial game wardens here in the 1920’s (Arnett,n.d.). The couple were noted for their pit-lamp hunting expertise and one night headed for Salt Spring Island: “Somewheres about three in the morning they landed there and he said to his wife,”We’d better go ashore here and he mentioned the name of the place, salt, and they went ashore and got a fire going…”(Arnett,n.d.). There are no other sources for this particular place-name and the context of the story suggest that the man, when he mentioned the name TALEN may have been referring to the island as a whole – something Hul’q’umi’num speakers were doing on the far side of the island where Tl’elhum (salt) wqs being used to designate the whole north end. This interpretation is suggested as well by the recent use of the name and uncertainty about its relationship to Isabella Point. Alternatively, the name could be older and specific to Isabella Point. As a SENCOTLEN-speaking elder, whose family holds the story, explained, “That took place maybe eighty years ago. I always wondered if that TALEN was related to Salt Spring but I have no idea. The two names just come together there..I don’t know” (Arnett, n.d.).

Just southwest of Isabella point overlooking Satellite Channel is a possible lookout site identified by a 120 x 50 meters shallow shell midden and lithic scatter. DeRu 62 located on high ground 4 meters above the water at the head of the bay. Further west is DeRu 25, a 225 m by 60 m midden of shell, black soil and fire-cracked rock along the beach at Isabella Point across from Isabella Islet and previous observations indicate that the “site is large and could be quite old” with midden deposits that could cover “3.3 acres” (Site file). A rectangular cultural depression (house feature?) ,burials and a gunflint are also reported (Hill,n.d.).

Ts’uween/S,CUAN

In the Hul’q’umi’num’ language, Ts’uween is a descriptive term for “land [mountain] goes right down to the water” and refers to the steep shoreline of Salt Spring Island along Satellite Channel including present-day Mount Tuam. According to Hul’qumi’num elder, Arvid Charlie, “Tsu’ween…some say it’s the whole south-facing side-hill of Mount Tuam. Some sa its Cape Keppel, along the beach. Seems like the older versions mean the whole south-facing slope.” The SENCOTLEN version of the word , S,CUAN, also references the topography of Salt Spring island’s mountainous south end and refers to the Cape Keppel area including Tuam Mountain (Elliot, 1990:31). “S, CUAN talks about ‘ends’ and if you look at the mountain from one direction there’s two, there’s a mountain on each end” (Arnett,n.d.). The mountain is famous as the setting for episodes of the Sxeleken story where an ostracized youth is given incredible powers by Sh-hwahwas (Thunderbird) only to misuse them and eventually cause his own destruction(Hilltout, 1978:142-146, Jenness,n.d.,Rozen,1985:136-137,Boas,2001, Arnett, 2007). His house stood at the summit of Mount Tuam overlooking the Saanich Peninsula and the Cowichan Delta. According to some Saanich and Hul’qumi’num people, the name Sxeleken also refers to a place on top of the mountaint (Rozen,1985) possibly in relation to the remnants of a beach) of clam-shell and sand brought to the mountain by Sxeleken’s slaves and said to be still visible in the late 19^th century (Hill-tout,1978:144).

According to Saanich and Cowichan elders, “there was an incredible diversity of food getting activities in this area until the turn of the century”(Rozen.1985:136). In the spring herring spawn was collected and herring raked in various locations by Hul’quminum while both Saanich and Hul’qumi’num people fished or hunted lingcod, halibut, clams, giant red sea urchins, seals and sealions (Rozen,1985:136) Elders had detailed knowledge of the steep shoreline and passed on this knowledge to the young. Arvid Charlie recalls his grandfather pointing out a place “west of Cape Keppel” where two creeks and a short cliff indicated a fresh water spring.

The archaeological landscape of Ts’uween includes 17 cultural deposits of shell and black soil middens located in practically every possible landing particularly at the moths of small creeks, from DeRu 61 east of Cape Kepple to DfRu 44 at the entrance of Sansum Narrows (Fig.).

Qw’atth’a’qw/KOTEK

The Hul’q’umi’num’ and SENCOTLEN name for Musgrave Rock is Qw’atth’a’qw’ /KOTEK, (“excrement on head”) a descriptive word referring to the thick deposit of bird excrement (Rozen,1985:135). No known associated archaeology but the presence of large numbers of seagulls and other birds and the proximity to significant food gathering areas suggest that it was an important seagull egg gathering place during spring..

Q’i’q’uw’utum

There is some discrepancy regarding the actual location of Q’iq’uwutum “little drummer” but it is thought to be in the vicinity of the “wharf area” at Bold Bluff. Q’iq’uwutum is a Hul’q’umi’num’ word that means “little drummer” or “little drumming” and refers to “a little drumming sound” that can be heard in the locality (Rozen,1985:135). Commenting on what an elder had told him about the experience, Arvid Charlie says; “He doesn’t know if it was something spiritual or if it was something underwater. So, who knows? But he was camped on a nice, quiet night and here was this…he didn’t know if it was people or if it was underwater. He didn’t know where it was coming from, q’iq’uwtum (little drumming).”

At this location is a small well-defined bay with a shell midden measuring 300m along the shoreline and 100 meters inland DeRv 3 . The landscape has been much altered but there is some evidence that the midden “may have been quite deep at one time”(Site file).

S-hwuhwaus’elu

This Hul’q’umin’num name translates as “thunderbird cave” and refers to a cave at Bold Bluffs where “the sound of thunder could often be heard emanating” (Rozen,1985:135). “Thunderbird Caves” are known in other places on Vancouver Island and are associated with secrecy as an elder explains, ”There’s quite a few different places with that name. That’s still kinda, ’should we talk about it, or shouldn’t we?’..They’re special places” (Arnett,,n.d.).

Hwmet’utsum

Hwmet’utsum, the Hul’q’umi’num’ name for Mount Maxwell translates as “bent over place” and references the role of the mountain in an Hul’qumi’num Origin story where the mountain bent over to allow Smuqwuts, a powerful ancestral man at Point Roberts, to hurl a giant slingstone to disable a cannibal monster, Sheshuqum, who lived on Vancouver Island at Octupus Point (Rozen,1985:132-133, Turner, 1992, Thom,)[5]

From various vantage points the mountain appears to be “bent over” reminding people of its important role in the story (Fig). The mountain, because of its connection to this story, was an important landscape for spiritual training particularly on the southern side where a talus slope of enormous boulders with associated rock shelters and passages extends from the base of the summit down the forested slopes to Burgoyne Bay. The late Bob Akerman describes the training of his grandmother, T’awaxwiye’:

“As instructed, she bathed in Burgoyne Bay and walked up to the caves on Mount Maxwell where she waited.After four days alone I thecave without any food, she became very weak and ungry.That night she dreamed of her friend the big black wolf. He showed her a song and dance that she never forgot (Akerman,2005,23).

Archaeological evidence of spiritual activities is difficult to ascertain in the Mount Maxwell landscape but, as Bob Akerman explained, the numerous rock shelters and underground passages found in the talus slope above Burgoyne bay were the locus of spiritual training (Fig) A potential location of a spiritual training place was discovered by a local resident who explored a narrow rock passage in the large talus slope that led to an interior space where he found a decayed cedar bark mat ‘bed’ with a small pile of ash near one end “like a night light” (Jim Akerman, p.c.) In the immediate vicinity was an alignment of unusual small stones that may be associated.

Slhukw’lhukw’us

The top of Mount Maxwell was used by for spiritual training. Slhukw’lhukw’us is the name for the summit of Mount Maxwell (Baynes Peak) and, as Hul’qumi’num elder Arvid Charlie explains, refers to the following activity:

“Slhukw’lukw’us, Baynes Peak, Mount Maxwell, was where certain individuals lay there pretending they were dead and putting something, dead fish, deer guts, right across their tummy, or somewhere on their chest, and make like they are dead, and maybe like their guts awere running out or something, and an eagle, seeing this and watching for a long time, and the guy had to keep really still for who knows how long, four days, two days. And if he kept absolutely still that eagle will come in to just eat him up….If he kept absolutely still he’d be able to catch that eagle. If he moved, flinched in any way, that eagle would flap away. That’s why its called Slhukw’lhukw’us. Lhawk is “fly.” Lhukwus, “fly away place” something like that. So if you moved or you twitched, the eagle was gone. Lhawk’ away, flap away. That’s a short version”(Arnett, n.d.). Near the summit a small 5 mm drilled clam shell bead was found by another local resident on a ledge above the sheer cliff.

Xwaaqw’um

Xwaaqw’um is “merganser duck place” in Hul’q’umi’num’ and was named ,it seems, for the merganser duck netted and speared here with other waterfowl during the summer and autumn months (Rozen,1985:134). Xwaaqw’um’ was also a good place to hunt sea mammals, rake herring and collect spawn in spring and to dig for clams. A large sandstone bowl near the shoreline was owned by the family of Tosiclum and used to process salal berries. (Akerman, p.c.) Another resource was a large ochre rock located inland at Furness Road which was accessed for paint. The presence of extensive Garry Oak habitat in the Burgoyne Valley and on the slopes of Mount Maxwell suggests the former importance of camas harvesting and processing. By the mid 19^th century the area was looked after by a family from Lhumlhumluts village on the Cowichan delta who maintained dwellings there and accessed a coho fishery in the creek(Arnett,n.d.). In the 1860’s the head of this familiy, Tosiclum arranged for three of his daughters (or nieces) to marry three European settlers, Maxwell, Traige and Gyves legitimizing their right to occupy the land.

At least nineteen archaeological landscapes are associated with Xwaaqw’um (fig). indicating the significance of this area to Hul’q’umi’num speaking people .

The south shore of Burgoyne Bay has four localities DeRv 170, 165, 163 and DeRv 52, One, DeRv 52, a small 3m by 2m shell midden, is located on a rock ledge 3 meters above high water, and may represent a lookout site and temporary camp overlooking Sansum Narrows at the south entrance to Burgoyne Bay. The other localities along the inside of the northfacing shore are small cultural deposits of shell midden and black soil

The largest cultural deposit at Xwaaqw’um is found at the head of the bay, DeRv 5, a shell, black soil and fire-altered rock midden extending 514 meters from just southeast of the present government to the opposite side. A significant portion of this midden is located on a ridge 15 meters above the beach on a highbank before descending south east in the vicinity of two creeks. An early access roads was cut though the main part of the midden revealing significant (1 meter or more) deposits of black soil and fragmented clam, and an unusual rock wall that may be of indigenous origin. Between the creeks above the beach was a large sandstone boulder with abraded bowl since moved to the grounds of the Akerman Museum. According to Bob Akerman, this bowl was owned by the family of Tosiclum and used to mash salal berries which were then dried in flats prior to storage. DeRv 52 was the site of the seasonal camp used by Lhumlumuluts people from the Cowichin delta during the early 19^th century (Arnett,n.d.).

Artifacts from DeRv 5 include a large flat-topped stone hammer found a short distance up the southernmost creek and now in the possession of the Akerman famly, and a small leaf-shaped projectile point found near the base of midden deposits south of the northernmost creek which cuts through the centre of the site (Fig).

The south-facing north shore of Xwaaqw’um features eleven archaeological locales DeRv 34,35,36,37,38,39,40 , shell midden and black soil deposits ranging in size from 450 square meters (DeRv 40) to 3000 square meters (DeRv 35). All are located along the steep north shore of Burgoyne bay on points of land associated with small bays and may represent former camp sites used to access local seasonal resources. The southernmost camps are located directly beneath the Garry oak forests which may have been accessed to cultivate camas.. Midden depths vary from shallow to almost a meter (DeRv 37. DeRv 39 , 40) and show evidence of leveled areas for habitation.

Ta’tumul

The Hul’q’umi’num’ name for the stretch of water between Maxwell Point and Erskin is which translates as “cooler than lukewarm” in reference to the warmer waters of Tamul proper (outer Booth Bay). Nine archaeological landscapes are found along the opposite shoreline of Vancouver island but only two recorded locales, DeRv 8, a 210 x 20 meter shell midden and a smaller, 75 meter by 30 meter cultural deposit 35(31? ) on the Salt Spring Island side.,? is located on the steep shoreline six to seven meters above the high tide on DfRv 31two flat areas 240 meters by 20 meters. Site file comments indicate that DfRv 31? “may be a fortress or refuge of some sort since it is fairly protected, very small, near a layer of shell midden”(Site file).

Tatmul

This Hul’q’umi’num’ word means “luke warm” and refers to the waters at the entrance to Booth Bay and perhaps Booth Bay itself (Rozen,1985). Some elders use Tatmul to refer to Mount Erskine, as well (Florence James, p.c.).

There are three major archaeological landscapes, DfRu 19 , DfRu 17 and DfRu 1, associated with Tatmul. A shell, fire-altered rock and black soil midden DfRv 19, of indeterminate size and much altered by road construction, is found at the mouth of Maxwell Creek at what is now Bader’s Beach. Maxwell Creek allows easy access to inland areas of Salt Spring Island such as Lake Maxwell and other resource-gathering areas. Indigenous people accessed the interior “Cranberry” region of Salt Spring via Maxwell Creek into the mid-20^th century to visit the Stepaniuk farm in search of sheep’s wool for Cowichan sweaters.

DfRv 17 is a sloping shale pebble beach in front of a 160 m x 20m shell midden at Rainbow Beach Resort across from what may have been the largest site, DfRv 1, which is located on both sides of the entrance to Booth Canal. The north section extends for approximately 400 meters along the shore and 25 meters inland and forms a spit at the entrance to the canal up to 80 cm in depth. Visible cultural stratigraphy is lower on the smaller (75 x 5 meter) south midden. Inside Booth Canal on the north shore is a smaller, much-disturbed, 1000 square meter shell midden.

Collections at DfRv 1 over the years by local residents exhibit a range of diagnostic chipped and groundstone projectile points from Locarno and possibly earlier periods. Local collections also include a stone “pigment mortar,” single-barbed bone ponts, elk horn wedges, nephrite adzes and flat topped stone hammers(Site file).

Stle’lan /Chaanus/ Sh-tsunustun

Another name for Booth canal is Stle’lan, possible a diminutive version of Stulan (Vesuivius Bay further north ).

Chaanus is a name given to Booth Canal by some Hul’q’umi’num’ speakers but its exact meaning has yet to be determined. Another name for Booth Canal Sh-tsunustun describes the “canoe skid” that lay between the head of Booth Canal and Shiyaxwt (Ganges Harbour). Henry Edwards from Hwlumelhtsu on Kuper Island describes it:

“When they can, when they’re in a hurry, they go to that Booth Bay. They drag their canoe right over to Ganges. They had skids. That little creek goes right over to Ganges, It takes them about two hours and they’re going in that Shiyahwt instead of going around the island about five or six hours, rowing to Walkers Hook and they camp there and go around again rowing. But if they can go through in that canal there, they taking about two hours and they’re already in Shiyahwt.”

The name Sh-tsunustun refers to the logs laid down to enable the canoe to skid over difficult portions.

The landscape along the canoe skid has changed over the years particularly on the Booth Canal side where ponds, drainage ditches and landscaping have altered the original appearance of Okano Creek. A hypothetical route is shown in Fig. based on aerial photographs, interviews, and ground investigation. Lithics, found by current (2009) residents of the property on a flat area overlooking the Booth Canal portion of Okano Creek, include a basalt, chipped contracting stem triangular point comparable to Montague Harbour 1 (Locarno) assemblage (Compare Fig, Mitchell,1971:Fig. 31c) A basalt chipped leaf-shaped point and a larger point may date to comparable or earler periods (Fig).

Stulan

The origin of the name Stulan is uncertain but it is well-recognized as the Hul’q’umi’num name for Vesuvius Bay. It is said to be the site of fish traps. In the late 19^th century a sandstone quarry operated south of the bay which was visited by people from Hwlumelhtsu to purchase liquor. This area, particularly Dock Bay, north of Vesuvius Bay, was used to access inland areas such as St. Mary’s Lake where, in the late summer, “Cowichan people” would harvest tules to weave mats(Lucy Stewart, Ivan Mouat, p.c.). The petroglyph rock at the north end of the Stlu’lan is associated with an Origin Story and represents a whale (qwunus) dropped by Thunderbird (S-hwahwas) (Florence James, p.c).

Archaeological landscapes in the vicinity of Stulan are hypothesized to extend from Vesuvius Bay north to Parminter Point (which may have had a separate toponomy) and inland to Channel Ridge. This area includes the highest concentration of known rock art landscapes on Salt Spring Island including a pictograph(DfRv 77) and three petroglyphs , one DfRv 6, on the shoreline, and two (DfRv 117 and DfRv 120) located inland at approximately 200 meter above sea level. As well there are five identified general activity shell midden areas (DfRv 8, 29,30,22) on the coast and DfRv 110 and 119 in the vicinityof the inland petroglyphs.

DfRv 8 is a shell and black soil midden extending 117 m along the head of Vesuvius Bay and 35 m inland. Burials have been reported and local collectors have found a quarztite lithic, a “carved sandstone object with two anthropomorphic faces incised on it” and a “green stone pestle” on the point of land at the west side of the bay(Site file). North of Vesuvius Bay near the tip of Dock Point, is a an eight meter inclined sandstone cliff-face with red-ochre rock pictographs (DfRv 77) (Fig.) On the north side at the head of the small bay inside Dock Point is a small (270 square meter ) shell and black soil midden ( DfRv 22)with observed lithics.

Just south of Parminter Point, the next point of land north of Dock Point, is a small bay with a 520 square meter shell midden (DfRv 30). Just inside Parminter Point at the heads of the second and third small bays to the east of the point is a “quite shallow” shell midden (DfRv 22) with scattered lithics (Site file). .5 km north of Parminter point is a small bay with clam beach and a small point of land with fragmented shell and black soil midden. On the shoreline of this point are three horizontal large stones the end one being a carved head (petroglyph). It has been suggested that the stones represent an original standing figure since toppled but oral tradition asserts that the figure represents a whale (see above).

At an elevation between 240 and 260 meters inland on a saddle between two hills (Channel ridge) are two inland shell midden deposits of 20 cm 2

No placenames have been recorded on the west side of Salt Spring Island from Stulan to the north end of the island despite the historic use of the area by families from Hwlumelhtsu on Kuper Island. Known presence of archaeological sites include i DfRv a deep stratified midden at Maple Beach, Idol Island (DfRv) a known burial site, and X shell and black soil middens. The lack of place names may be a legacy of the 1863 colonial war that resulted in the destruction of the Hwlumelhtsu village on Kuper Island and the dispersal of the families who traditionally used this area.

Conclusion

Salt Spring Island is located in an area of British Columbia with one of the highest densities, past and present, of Indigenous populations on the Northwest Coast. (Duff,1964, Burley, 1989, Mitchell.1990, Matson and Coupland 1995). The island has the largest population of the Gulf islands and it seems likely, based on the number of place names and the archaeological evidence, that a similar situation was true in pre contact times. The variable size and components of these arcaheological landscapes, though poorly studied, reflect the diversity and intensity of past resource gathering activities and occupation.

Indigenous place-names demonstrate conclusively that Indigenous memory of former use and occupation of Salt Spring Island continues despite the frontier mythology that Indigenous people were “just visiting” when observed over the past 150 years by non-native settlers. Comparison of 27 placenames with archaeological landscapes on Salt spring island show remarkable contiguity. Seven place names Hwtl’elhum, S’yuhuye’mun, Stsa’tx, SYOWT/Shiyahwt, WE”NA”NEC/Hwu’ne’nuts, TALEN Tsu’ween and Xwaaqwum are all associated with one or more significant archaeological deposits suggestive of former village sites. Further archaeological work can only enhance our understanding of the archaeological landscape and its relationship to toponomy. The recognition of Indigenous toponomy is a strategy to encourage indigenous perspectives and eventually theory into contemporary archaeology methodology to give researchers better context for their constructions of Indigenous use and occupation from ancient times to the present.

Bibliography

Arnett, Christopher Anderson Interviews with Saanich, Cowichan and Kuper Island elderts. 199-2007. Manuscript in possession of author.

Hall and haggerty

Hamilton, Bea

.

---

[1] A limited amount of archaeological work occurs through the occasional discovery of human remains (Skinner 1984; Simonsen 1988) and by Indigenous motivated research in Provincial Parks (McLay). More recently the discovery of human remains has involved the participation of local residents and elders in reburial ceremonies on private and public lands.

A large number of surface collected artifacts have been found by local residents over the years and, thanks to the careful documentation of Hill (n.d.) and others, can be documented with regard to provenience allowing, by comparison with other assemblages, hypothetical time periods to be associated with specific archaeological landscapes.

[2] Within this complex system there was however an opportunity for social groups to establish themselves more permanently in areas over time by historical opportunity or circumstance. This may have occurred on the southern half of Salt Spring Island where a permanent SENCOTLEN speaking population left their villages at SYOWT, WE.NA.NEC and possibly other areas prior to 1843 to better defensive position at TSAWAUTX on the west side of the Saanich Peninsula. Within twenty years the Saanich districts on Salt Spring Island were occupied by Hwunitum (non-native Eurpoean ancestry) many of whom married Hul’qumi’num women who with their families strengthened the Hul’q’umi’num presence at Fulford Harbour and Beaver Point.

[3] Xulel-thw (Halalt, Chemainus River) Vancouver Island.

[4] Mary is identified in one family record is identified as “a Cowichan Probably a Modeste (Pappenburger files, SSA). Another states that she was “Songhees, Esquimalt.” Most sources say “Cowichan.”Pappenberger’s pre-emption adjoined that of Theodore Traige whose wife Musiqwiaht was a cousin or sister of tuha’wiye (Mary Gyves ) and Mary Maxwell, both apparently from the Cowichan River Lhumlhumlets, on Vancouver Island..

[5] One aspect of the the story of Sheshuq’um is the allegory of overcoming the destructive forces of the universe in this instance personified as a whirlpool. Johnathao Raban has described them as

versions of tumult in society, which threaten ” to overturn the fragile canoe of the family or the village, are embodied and given names as famously destructive whirlpools. One can read the stories as parables of poor judgment in the navigation of life and as dreadful warnings of the likely consequence of tangling with turbulence(Raban,200?).