Indigenous Canada:

Looking Forward/Looking Back

Cover Image: Artwork by Leah Dorion

 The University of Alberta acknowledges that we are located on Treaty 6
territory and respects the history, languages, and cultures of the First
Nations, Métis, Inuit, and all First Peoples of Canada, whose presence
continues to enrich our institution.

Copyright © 2015-2022 University of Alberta.

All materials in this course, unless otherwise noted, are the property of the University of Alberta. These
materials may only be used by registered course participants for non-commercial educational purposes,
research, or private study, and the materials may not be copied or used by third-parties, or copied or used
for any other purposes, without the prior written authorization of the University of Alberta. All other rights
are reserved.

2
 Course Introduction

Indigenous Canada comes from an Indigenous perspective and out of respect, we

attempted to use the languages of the people as much as possible, especially when
describing the names of places and explaining meaningful concepts. We have tried to
do the best of our ability to find and use the proper pronunciations. But remember, these
aren't our first languages, so we apologize beforehand for any mistakes in our
enunciations.

Welcome to Indigenous Canada, a twelve lesson MOOC that explores Indigenous

histories and contemporary issues in Canada. My name is Tracy Bear, and I'm from
Montreal Lake First Nation. And I'm Alannah Mandamin-Shawanda, from Wikwemikong
First Nation. And I am Isaac Twinn, from Sawridge First Nation in the Lesser Slave Lake
area. Together, we will be your presenters for this course.

Utilizing an Indigenous perspective, this course explores issues important for

understanding past and current relationships between Indigenous and settler societies.
As a survey course, it is not possible to explain in detail the past and current
relationships between Indigenous and settler societies over a large and varied
geography.

Over the next 12 lessons, we will examine the fur trade and other exchange
relationships, environmental impacts, legal systems and rights, political conflicts and
alliances, Indigenous political activism, and contemporary Indigenous life, art, and
expressions. Together, we will explore key issues facing Indigenous peoples today from
a historical, critical perspective, and teach students how to think critically about national
and local Indigenous-settler relations.

3
Figure 1: Big Bear Trading, 1884; Credit: O.B. Buell/Library and Archives Canada

4
Table of Contents
Course Introduction 3

Module 1 Introduction 2

Section One: Creation Story 4

Stories are Enduring 4

Haudenosaunee Creation Story 5

Section Two: Storytelling 6

A Creation Story 7

Transmitting Knowledge 9

Connection Between Generations 10

Acknowledging Change Over Generations 10

Transmission of Behavior, History, and Culture 10

Transmission of History and Culture 11

Section Three: Indigenous Worldviews 12

Complexity of Worldviews 12

Four Nations' Worldview 13

Indigenous Worldview Commonalities 13

Inuit Understandings 14

Ancestral Naming 15

Nehiyawak Plains Understandings 15

Kanyen'kehà:ka Understandings 16

Tlingit Understandings 18

Tlingit Clans 18

Conclusion 20

References 21

1
2
 Module 1 Introduction

Our first lesson explores different Indigenous worldviews. These distinct perspectives
will help you develop an understanding of the interactions between Indigenous peoples
and settler newcomers. It’s important to recognize that language and the words we use
when talking about Indigenous peoples are not neutral. The classification and naming of
Indigenous peoples has been a key tactic used in colonization.

Three groups of Aboriginal peoples are recognized by the Canadian Constitution:

Indian, Métis, and Inuit. Today, the term First Nations is preferred to the word Indian in
Canada. Aboriginal, Indigenous, and Native are often used interchangeably; however,
certain terms may be applied within specific contexts. In the context of constitutional
rights, the term Aboriginal is appropriate. Non-Indigenous people are referred to as
settlers, and Canada, for example, could be referred to as a settler society. Sometimes
the names of Indigenous groups commonly used are not the same as the names that
people use to refer to themselves. We respect and honor these names by using the
words people use to refer to themselves as much as possible. For example, Cree
people refer to themselves as Nehiyawak; we refer to Cree as Nehiyawak.

So where is Canada? Canada is located in the northern hemisphere and is a large part
of the North American continent. Inhabited for over 40,000 years by Indigenous
peoples, Canada extends from the Atlantic to the Pacific oceans and northward to the
Arctic Ocean. Canada covers almost 10 million square kilometres and is the second-
largest country, by area, in the world. Credible estimates of the population of Canada
and the United States prior to sustained European contact suggest that the total
population was in the range of 1.2 million people to 2.6 million Indigenous people (Royal
Commission on Aboriginal Peoples Report 1996, 20–22; Thornton 2000; see also
Daniels 1992; Hoxie 2016). Throughout this course, we hope to revive a general
understanding of Indigenous people. As you will see, the tremendous diversity of First
Nations, Metis, and Inuit in Canada restricts our ability to share a complete picture.

3
However, we hope you will see this course as just one of the first steps of your journey
to understanding Indigenous peoples.

Figure 2: Indigenous languages across North America; Credit: Ish ishwar

Did you know? The name “Canada” comes from a St. Lawrence Iroquoian or
Haudenosaunee word “Kanata,” which means village or community (Elliott 1888).

4
 Section One: Creation Story

“If the legends fall silent, who will teach the children of our ways?”

Chief Dan George (1974)

Figure 3: A talking circle; Credit: Leah Dorion

Stories are Enduring

Stories are powerful pedagogical tools that help learners understand their history and
the environment in which they live (Iseke and Brennus 2011; Kovach 2010). The
teachings from stories allow listeners to come to their own decisions and conclusions.
They help demonstrate that there are many different ways of looking at problems and
solutions to those problems (Iseke and Brennus 2011). Storytelling has been, and
continues to be, a central part of our identity as people, and as nations (Belanger 2010;
Iseke and Brennus 2011; Johnston 1999; King 2003).

We can generally distinguish between two types of Indigenous storytelling (Kovach

2010). The first type are personal stories that include observations, accounts of places,

5
and experiences. This type of story evolves over time and is based on the needs and
relevancy to the population (Johnston 1999; Kovach 2010). The second type are
creation or teaching stories, sometimes called myths or legends. Many of these stories,
which are spiritual in nature, remain unchanged over time (Kovach 2010).

Haudenosaunee Creation Story

The Sky Woman creation story is one that many Indigenous nations in what we now call
Eastern Canada and the US share. This story has also become meaningful to many
Indigenous peoples across what we now call North America. Hence, where the term
“Turtle Island” comes from when describing North America. But it is the central creation
story for peoples of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, which includes the
Kanyen'kehà:ka or Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, Seneca, and Tyendinaga.

There are many ways to tell this particular story, and some versions of this story can
take weeks, or even years, to tell. For now, I will give you a slightly shortened version.

A long time ago and before Turtle Island was formed, there
was an island that floated in the sky and this is where the Sky
people lived. One day Sky Woman was hungry and went out
to look for something to eat, she hoped she would find berries
or plants that would suit her craving. She found a good tree
and began digging around to find some roots. This tree was a
good tree, in fact, it was very special, it was called the Tree of
Life.

As Sky Woman was digging, she noticed that the hole under
the Tree of Life opened up into a vast open space. She was
warned by the animals around her to stop digging. This was Figure 4: Turtle with Sky Woman
creation ceremony; Artwork by Leah
not a place to find food, and if she kept digging, she was Dorion; Credit: Leah Dorion

certain to fall through the hole.

6
But Sky Woman was extremely hungry, she did not know this at the time but she was
pregnant with twins. Her hunger did not allow her to listen to the animals’ warnings and she
kept digging. Soon the hole was big enough for her to fit through. She was so mesmerized
by the swirling darkness and shimmering lights that as she leaned in to take a better look,
she fell through the hole.

Down, down, down Sky Woman fell into this other world. The water creatures in this other
world looked up at the hole in their sky and saw Sky Woman falling down towards them. The
creatures worried that her fall might upset the balance of water in their world, so they decided
it would be wise to catch her. A heated discussion ensued about who would catch this
strange falling woman and how they would catch her.

In the end, the geese were chosen to catch her fall. The geese joined wings and caught Sky
Woman in a soft feathery net. Now that that had the catching part taken care of, the
creatures realized that Sky Woman needed a place to go or she would drown. She was not a
water creature, nor could she fly.

Everyone decided that she needed a spot to stand, and that the best thing for her would be
land. So, one of the smallest water creatures dove down into the vast waters and came back
with a bit of earth. The turtle offered to have the earth placed on top of her back and when it
was, it grew bigger and bigger until it became the whole world. Sky Woman then had her twin
boys and they went about the business of creating everything in the world we know today.

7
 Section Two: Storytelling

A Creation Story

The following is a creation story of the Nehiyawak, who are also known as the Cree.

Kayas, meaning, a long time ago, all the creatures that walked, flew, crawled and
slithered lived peacefully together on Turtle Island. Turtle Island was named because
North America sits on the back of a giant turtle. The swimming ones swam around in the
deep blue ocean. All was well, and the Creator smiled to see such harmony.

This story has a character named Wisacejak (wee-sak-ee-jack) who is a being that the
Nehiyawak have many stories about. Wisacejak has no gender and often gets into
trouble through his trickster antics.

Now, the Creator had given powers to take care of the first people, and to make sure
everyone lived in harmony. But Wisacejak became lazy and the great peace and
friendship did not last. The creatures of Turtle Island began to disrespect each other,
there was much fighting and killing. The Creator warned Wisacejak that if he did not obey
the Creator and keep Turtle Island clean and peaceful, he would take all Wisacejak’s
power away. The Creator would take away the land, the forests, mountains, everything.
Still Wisacejak did not believe the Creator’s words and the fighting became so prevalent
that Turtle Island became red with blood.

Then it began to rain. The Creator decided to begin anew, to take everything away and
wash the ground clean. The flooding did not harm the swimming creatures of course, but
as the water rose higher and higher, all other creatures were drowned. In a world entirely
filled by water, there were only four survivors.

Wisacejak, Beaver, Otter, and Muskrat sat together on a large tree floating in the middle
of the ocean. Wisacejak was inconsolable, he wept at his stupidity and his laziness. He
wept at the thought of all those lost lives. Beaver, Otter, and Muskrat looked sadly at

8
Wisacejak and asked if there was anything that they could do. At these kind words,
Wisacejak took courage and he began to think of a plan.

He knew that if he could get a little bit of the old earth from underneath the water, that he
could use what was left of his power to make a little island to live on. Fortunately for
Wisacejak, he was sitting in the company of three incredible swimmers. He asked Otter if
she could dive down to bring up a bit of the old earth from beneath the water. Otter was a
strong swimmer and dived down deep. When she came up gasping for breath, her paws
were empty of any dirt.

Next, Wisacejak asked Beaver if he could dive down and bring up a piece of earth.
Beaver was a great swimmer also, with a flat strong tail to help him swim. Beaver dove
down deep and was gone a long time. He stayed down so long that he came back almost
lifeless and still his paws were empty.

Wisacejak had lost all hope. His two best swimmers had nearly died trying to get the old
earth and had failed. A small voice spoke up, “I can get some earth for you Wisacejak,”
said Muskrat. At this comment, Beaver and Otter broke out into hysterical laughter. “You,
Muskrat?” they said, “How can one so little and small, do what we could not?”

As Beaver and Otter laughed at Muskrat, Wisacejak bent down and picked Muskrat up in
his two hands, he looked into her little brown eyes and said, “Do you really think that you
can do this, Muskrat?” Looking over at her laughing companions, Muskrat mustered up all
of her courage, and said, “Watch me.”

Muskrat dove into the water and stayed down for a long time, when she came up
Wisacejak looked in her paws, but no earth was to be found. “Muskrat!” Wisacejak
exclaimed, “I can smell earth on your paws, you are very close, very close!” Sensing
Wisacejak’s excitement and hope, Muskrat took a deep breath and dove back into the
water. Wisacejak, Beaver, and Otter watched the water for signs of Muskrat, but there
was nothing. A long time passed and Beaver and Otter began to mourn for their friend.
They regretted laughing at Muskrat.

9
 Wisacejak stared at the surface of the water and at last he saw some bubbles coming up.
Up from the bottom of the ocean, Muskrat swam. She barely had the strength to make it
back to the log. Wisacejak had to reach way down and scoop up little Muskrat’s nearly
lifeless body. Almost dead, Muskrat opened her paws to reveal a tiny piece of the old
earth.

Immediately, Wisacejak took the earth and blew his power into it, expanding it and
creating an island. Some say that the Creator took pity on Wisacejak and his friends and
made all things again, others say Wisacejak used the log and some bones to recreate
everything again.

One thing is for sure, Wisacejak never enjoyed the same powers again, for the Creator
limited him to tricks of flattery and deceit. After that, Wisacejak became a famous
trickster, leading others into mischief and mayhem.

But those are stories for another time.

Transmitting Knowledge

Through stories and storytelling, Indigenous societies transmit essential knowledge

critical to survival, and provide a cultural framework for promoting happy, healthy
communities (Kovach 2010). In this way, stories hold a lot of power. Think about it:
stories can elicit strong emotions from humans; they can make us cry and laugh; feel
anger, relief, empathy, and love (Johnston 1999). Human beings enjoy telling stories as
much as they enjoy listening to them. Wherever and whenever people meet and gather,
you can bet there are stories being told. Outsiders tend to see these stories as legends,
fiction, folklore, myths, or fairy tales. For Indigenous people, these stories function in
essential and thoughtful ways (Kovach 2010). They work to instruct and educate on how
to behave properly. They also act as guides for how to live and engage with the world.
Each nation has a creation story and its own distinct oral tradition. There are four
general components of storytelling for Indigenous people.

10
Connection Between Generations
First, stories connect the past to the present and to
future generations (Dumbrill and Green 2008). There
are many versions of the Wisacejak creation story, but
the meaning remains the same as it is told from great-
grandmothers to their great-grandchildren. Stories are
gifts to be shared and handed down generation to
generation. Aa a Nehiyaw’iskwew, or Cree woman, can
be reassured that while she may not have met her
great-great-grandmother, the Wisacejak story
transcends time and connects her to her ancestors. This
means that a story I hear from my grandmother is the
same one that she heard from her grandmother and so
Figure 5: First Nations Woman
on and so on. These stories allow us to communicate Demonstrates Drum; Credit: Mark Klotz
with future generations in the same way our ancestors
communicated with us (Iseke and Brennus 2011). See how powerful stories can be?

Acknowledging Change Over Generations

Secondly, while sacred stories may not have changed much over time, the personal,
everyday stories do change. They integrate new information and new knowledge (Iseke
and Brennus 2011). They may evolve with the changing surroundings, food source
supply and movement, landscape reconfiguration, and new encounters with foreign
populations. It is important to know that even though Indigenous stories may be
thousands of years old, some of the stories change to bring the past forward to the
present. They change and evolve based on the needs of the population.

Transmission of Behavior, History, and Culture

The next thing to remember about stories is that while stories may sometimes be
entertaining, they are also messages instructing people how to live and behave.
Indigenous storytelling operates as a moral guide and a socializing mechanism (Iseke
and Brennus 2011). Stories teach the next generation how to behave and reinforce

11
roles and responsibilities. We find many examples of this in the story of Wisacejak.
Muskrat’s heroic action of diving for earth demonstrates a lesson of perseverance and
courage, while Wisacejak’s laziness in keeping a peaceful community shows the
consequences of being irresponsible.

Transmission of History and Culture

Finally, storytelling is a way to transmit the history of the land and cultural knowledge to
the next generation. Many creation stories include specific geographical boundaries
such as rivers, lakes, and mountains to define the territorial lines. For example, in the
previous narrative, Nehiyawak described how Wisacejak made the land come to be. In
some Wisacejak creation stories, features of the landscape to describe the traditional
territories of the Nehiyawak are included. The natural surroundings of the land become
the history book.

We said that stories have power, and they embody complex worldviews associated with
a particular Indigenous culture. For instance, Nehiyawak, or Cree, storytellers will only
tell you the Wisacejak stories in the wintertime. Their worldview and belief systems are
illustrated by this fact. Nehiyawak storytellers believe that because so many creatures
and spirits hibernate and sleep in the winter, it is safer to tell certain stories. Invoking
this trickster’s name, Wisacejak, in the summer is just asking for trouble.

12
 Section Three: Indigenous Worldviews

Figure 6: Artwork by Leah Dorion; Credit: Leah Dorion

Complexity of Worldviews

It's difficult to fully explain the concept of worldview, including Indigenous worldviews,
because they are so diverse and complex, and there are a multitude of ways to
understand the world. Despite this diversity, there are some similarities we can find
amongst the many Indigenous worldviews. Indigenous ways of knowing are based on
the idea that individuals are trained to understand their environment according to
teachings found in stories. These teachings are developed specifically to describe the
collective lived experiences and date back thousands of years (Settee 2011).

The collective experience is made up of thousands of individual experiences, and these

experiences come directly from the land and help shape the codes of conduct for
Indigenous societies. A key principle is to live in balance and maintain peaceful internal
and external relations. This is linked to the understanding that we are all connected to
each other (Settee 2011). The hierarchical structure of Western worldviews that places
humans on top of the pyramid does not exist. The interdependency with all things

13
promotes a sense of responsibility and accountability. The people would respond to the
ecological rhythms and patterns of the land in order to live in harmony (Settee 2011).

Four Nations' Worldview

While there may be some commonalities between Indigenous worldviews, remember

that there are great complexities and rich diversities within each nation. Sharing all the
worldviews of every Indigenous nation does not fall within the scope of this lesson. That
would probably take us years. However, we will talk briefly about four different
worldviews: Inuit, Nehiyawak, Kanien:keha’ka or Mohawk, and Tlingit. First, we will
discuss some commonalities between Indigenous nations. Then, we will take a brief
look at some of the ways in which each of these nations—the Inuit, Nehiyawak,
Kanien:keha’ka, and Tlingit—understand their place in the world and how these
worldviews rationalize thoughts and actions.

Indigenous Worldview Commonalities

First and foremost, Indigenous worldviews often have the philosophy of
interconnectedness and belonging. This is the understanding that we are all related.
Our discussion on storytelling established that Indigenous worldviews include the
understanding that we are connected to each other and to all life on earth . The phrase
“all my relations” demonstrates that this relies on a respect for all living things. The
governing principles of peace and harmony are highly valued, and each person is
expected to have accountability for their actions and words. Caring about the wellbeing
of others is vital to one’s position in the community (Settee 2011).

Secondly, there is a unity through collaboration. With the foundation that we are all
related, the group then becomes accountable for each of their actions. Each child,
youth, adult, and elder has a role and a responsibility to each other and to the
community ensuring that there is peace and harmony. Thriving groups functions well
when everyone works towards a common goal (Settee 2011).

Thirdly, there is a distinct relationship with the land extending to environmental

stewardship. The idea that land is a commodity to be exploited or owned could not be

14
conceived. Land is only borrowed from future generations. While Indigenous peoples
utilize the land in many ways through agriculture, forestry, hunting, fishing, gathering
and living, there is a responsibility connected to these resources. This understanding of
stewardship is based on the belief that land is the heart of creation. Land is not merely a
supplier for resources, but an environment to be cared for and looked after for the next
generations.

We will take a brief look at four distinct nations—the Inuit, Nehiyawak, Kanien:keha’ka,
and the Tlingit—and discover that their unique worldviews are often reflected by the
land and territory that they occupy. The physical landscape influences the values and
paradigms of each nation’s worldviews.

Inuit Understandings
The Inuit thrive in the Northern region of the globe. The term Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, or
IQ, is used to explain Inuit philosophies and worldview. It means “that which Inuit have
always known to be true” (Tagalik 2010, 1).

Although the Nunavut government has formally

adopted this wording to describe Inuit
worldview, it is important to realize that the Inuit
occupy a large span of the circumpolar North;
circumstances which necessitate variations in
the culture.

In Canada the four Inuit regions—Inuvialuit

Settlement Region, Nunavut, Nunatsiavut, and
Nunavik—are called Inuit Nunangat. The Arctic Figure 7: Taktu cleaning fat from seal skin with an
ulu; Credit: Rosemary Gilliat/National Film Board
environment, which includes vast shelves of of Canada. Photothèque. Library and Archives
Canada
seasonal ice and marine waters, shapes Inuit
worldviews (Freeman 1985). Therefore, a traditional homeland territory that includes
sea ice and other marine water is vital to Inuit worldview.

15
Thriving in the harsh Arctic climate, Inuit people relied heavily upon each other for
survival. Each person had value and contributed to the community (Tagalik 2010). This
reliance established codes of ethics and behaviours, or Maligait. Maligait has many
meanings and translations, but to Inuit people it means “things that had to be done,” and
includes four main principles:

1. Work for the common good

2. Respect all living things
3. Preserve harmony and balance
4. Plan and prepare for the future

Ancestral Naming
The kinship practice of ancestral naming is an age-old practice amongst the Inuit. When
a child is born, the elders of the family would gather to decide on the name of the baby.
Often the name would be a relative who passed on, or someone who made a significant
contribution to the community. All of the characteristics of that ancestor, including the
strengths and skills, are imbued onto the child. From the naming day forward, the child
is expected to act in the manner of their respected namesake. In this way, each
member of society would be enveloped in a system of accountability and responsibility
to their community (Owlijoot and Flaherty 2014). As with the Nehiyawak, the Inuit placed
a lot of value on kinship. For the Inuit, ancestral naming created strong bonds between
the Sauniriit, the person who receives the name, and the person from which the name
comes from. This tradition strengthened kinship ties within the community and
encouraged people to uphold the four expectations of the community: to work for the
common good, respect all living things, preserve harmony and balance, and plan and
prepare for the future.

Nehiyawak Plains Understandings

Nehiyawak, meaning “the people”, are the largest population of any Aboriginal group in
Canada. Nehiyawak traditional territories extended into BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan,
Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, and parts of the United States. Like many Indigenous
peoples, Nehiyawak are intricately connected with place, as they are with each other.

16
For example, a Nehiyawak worldview embodies the words “all my relations” and is not
just limited to their family or their community, but extends to every nation, every person
(Settee 2011).

Because Nehiyawak travelled over vast

distances in largely mobile culture, it was
important to know who your relatives
were. As such, whenever greeting each
other, Nehiyawak often asked, “tânte
ohci kiya?” Separately, the word tânte
means “where,” ohci means “from,” and
kiya means “you.” Put together, one
might understand the words as “where
are you from?” But taken within a cultural
Figure 8: Nehiyawak traditional territory; Credit: Onlea
context, and considering the value
placed on Wahkohtowin kinship, it means “belly button.” So, what role does the belly
button play in this? Well, “tânte ohci kiya,” within the Nehiyawak worldview, means that
your belly button is literally the connection between you and your mother. It is the
connection you share with all of your ancestors: your grandmother and all your great
greats. Your metaphorical umbilical cord connects you to thousands of relatives. So,
when you are asked, “tânte ohci kiya?”, it’s not where are you from; but more like, who
are you from?

The Nehiyawak of the Plains believe that each Nehiyaw are given gifts from the Creator
when they are born: the physical gift of the body, the emotional, mental, and spiritual. In
this way, the Nehiyawak term “all my relations” can be seen as a way to live in the
world.

Kanyen'kehà:ka Understandings
People of the Place of Flint, as the Kanyen'kehà:ka call themselves, who are one of the
five branches of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, are also known as the Mohawk
Nation (Bonvillain 2001). Along with their creation story of Sky Woman, the

17
Kanyen'kehà:ka of Kahnawa:ke also utilize the concepts of the Seventh Generation, the
Great Law of Peace, and the Two Row Wampum Treaty as the basis for forming their
values and beliefs.

While Kanyen'kehà:ka worldviews do share some commonalities with other Indigenous

peoples, their extensive agricultural work with the land has had a great influence on
their worldviews. For instance, Kanyen'kehà:ka women were responsible for and tended
large plots of land for planting,
cultivating, and harvesting (Bonvillain
2001). This distinct connection exists
between the women’s strong leadership
in this provider role and the development
of a matrilineal clan system.
Kanyen'kehà:ka lived in longhouses and
were housed in three clans, the bear, the
wolf, and the turtle. These clan systems Figure 9: Kanien:keha'ka territory; Credit: Onlea
formed the basis of Kanyen'kehà:ka
kinship (Bonvillain 2001). This kinship system is crucial to the ways in which
Kanyen'kehà:ka see the world today. These kinship groups were linked together
through marriage alliances. The woman, her husband, and daughters would live in her
family's longhouse, along with her daughter’s families and any unmarried sons. This
system would ensure fair distribution and control of farmland and responsibilities
(Bonvillain 2001).

Older respected women were called clan mothers and often held critical roles in their
clans due to the Kanyen'kehà:ka’s story of creation of Sky Woman. Women were seen
as having direct links to the fertility of the land and as such were responsible for the
caretaking of the land (Bonvillain 2001). As well, clan mothers were responsible for
selecting and installing clan chiefs.

This balance of power between the two genders ensured strong ties of kinship and
community. This particular worldview about roles and responsibilities structured

18
everyday life and functioned to create a peaceful and thriving existence for the
Kanyen'kehà:ka.

Tlingit Understandings
The Northwest Coast Indigenous nations
share similar traits, practices, and
worldviews. Even so, this area is brimming
with diversity just in the variation in
languages. It’s amazing. There are 45
different Indigenous languages in this small
region alone (Bonvillain 2001). The Tlingit
are one of the many nations living along the
Pacific coastline, and within the Tlingit there Figure 10: Tlingit territory; Credit: Onlea

are 21 geopolitical groups or Ḵwáan

(Thornton and the Institute Sealaska Heritage 2008).

Unlike the Inuit and Nehiyawak, the Tlingit do not have village councils or confederacies
to manage governmental affairs. Instead, like the Kanien:keha’ka, they have a well-
developed clan system (Bonvillain 2001). Like with the other Indigenous nations, it was
the land and the environmental dynamics that influenced the formation of Tlingit ways of
seeing the world (Bonvillain 2001). For example, potlatches (or gift-giving feasts) were
utilized as a method for redistributing resources amongst community members and
served well as a method for governance.

Tlingit Clans
Due to the abundance of resources and the temperate climate, the Tlingit often made
and accumulated great stores of food and material items such as Chilkaat robes, button
blankets, vests, and masks. The potlatch ceremony redistributed resources sharing this
material wealth (Belanger 2010; Bonvillain 2001). General governing matters were
determined by the chiefs and high-ranking community members who often held
elaborate potlatches for the social and economic relations. Potlatches were held for

19
many reasons (Bonvillain 2001). For instance, a family celebrating a new chief, or a
naming ceremony, would host the potlatch. They would be expected to feed everyone
who attended, as well as give valuable gifts to each participant. This led to a
redistribution of wealth. Accepting a gift meant that attendees would be responsible for
recognizing and acknowledging the meaning behind the celebration. This way,
everyone had a warm home, clothing, and food to eat.

The 21 Ḵwáans of the Tlingit have distinct clan systems consisting of moieties, or sides.
These are the Raven, and the Eagle, or Wolf, depending on location (Assembly of
Alaska Native Educators 2000). Connections to the land are demonstrated through the
designs created on clothing articles, such as the Chilkaat robes and button blankets.
These designs, owned by each moiety, reflect the landscape to which they belong. In
this way, the land becomes a crucial part of identity and social being, as the designs
reinforce the belonging to a clan (Martindale 2009). Today, the clan moieties remain the
same, but residing in traditional clan houses is not readily practiced everywhere. The
Tlingit worldviews are still meaningful, as they remain spiritually and culturally linked
with the land and the sea.

20
 Conclusion

Figure 11. National Aboriginal Day 2014; Credit: University of the Fraser Valley

As we have seen through thousands of years of inhabiting North America, Indigenous

nations have many different ways of looking at the world. For Indigenous peoples,
storytelling is used to pass on lessons. We have learned that the environment plays a
large role in worldview. Kinship systems, such as clans and moieties, also shape a
group’s worldview. The differences and distinctiveness of groups, such as the Inuit,
Nehiyawak, Kanyen'kehà:ka, and the Tlingit must be borne in mind when using
classifying terms such as Indigenous or Aboriginal. These worldviews would be
challenged to the brink of annihilation once newcomers started to arrive.

21
 Credits
● Cover Image: Artwork by Leah Dorion; Credit: Leah Dorion; URL: http://www.leahdorion.ca/index.html
● Figure 1. Big Bear Trading, 1884; Credit: O.B. Buell/Library and Archives Canada/PA-118768; Restrictions on
use: Nil; Copyright: Expired; URL: http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/portrait-
portal/Pages/arprofile.aspx?ArchivalRecordKey=3159944
● Figure 2. Indigenous languages across North America; Credit: Ish ishwar; License: CC BY 2.0
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/); URL:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Langs_N.Amer.png;
● Figure 3. A talking circle; Artwork by Leah Dorion; Credit: Leah Dorion; URL:
http://www.leahdorion.ca/index.html
● Figure 4. Turtle with Sky Woman creation ceremony; Artwork by Leah Dorion; Credit: Leah Dorion; URL:
http://www.leahdorion.ca/index.html
● Figure 5. First Nations Woman Demonstrates Drum; Credit: Mark Klotz; License: CC BY 2.0
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/); URL: https://www.flickr.com/photos/markklotz/15669082918/
● Figure 6. Artwork by Leah Dorion; Credit: Leah Dorion; URL: http://www.leahdorion.ca/index.html
● Figure 7. Taktu cleaning fat from seal skin with an ulu; Credit: Rosemary Gilliat/National Film Board of
Canada. Photothèque. Library and Archives Canada, PA-146506; Restrictions on use: Nil; Copyright: Expired;
URL:http://collectionscanada.gc.ca/pam_archives/index.php?fuseaction=genitem.displayItem&lang=eng&rec_
nbr=3211014
● Figure 8. Nehiyawak traditional territory; Credit: Onlea; URL: http://www.onlea.org/
● Figure 9. Kanien:keha;ka territory; Credit: Onlea; URL: http://www.onlea.org/
● Figure 10. Tlingit territory; Credit: Onlea; URL: http://www.onlea.org/
● Figure 11. National Aboriginal Day 2014; Credit: University of the Fraser Valley; License: CC BY 2.0
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/); URL:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ufv/14448020024/in/photolist-o1HSZw-o1GH25-nJjHR7-nJjT35-o1weUZ-
uZB2tF-nJjskP-o3AoEg-nJjxUp-uXgE1G-o3AKFK-o1HfDL-nYLsz7-ci9bnb-o1w2zZ-nJjKmU-nJjYbw-nJjBFJ-
n1HZSC-o1P3ze-u3ydxE-o1vPc2-o1GktW-95iJuo-u3KbGx-c6RQ1h-c6RS9m-cxbfQd-c6RPJQ-gmSvHy-
bUtmwr-c6RRW7-uZ5mzA-eXj12u-95iJeW-cQJu4Y-c6Ryds-A8zQK-c6RVp1-py7pNE-9CZh24-9D3cJs-
7acMEF-piE2g2-c6RSkq-bHfKar-9CZh4a-86ubRf-c6RKZY-86r6Mg

References

Assembly of Alaska Native Educators. 2000. Guidelines for Respecting Cultural

Knowledge (pp. 1–31). Fairbanks, AK: Alaska Native Knowledge Network.
http://ankn.uaf.edu/publications/Knowledge.pdf.

Belanger, Yale Deron. 2010. Ways of Knowing: An Introduction to Native Studies in

Canada. Toronto: Nelson Education.

Bonvillain, Nancy. 2001. Native Nations Cultures and Histories of Native North America.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Daniels, John D. 1992. “The Indian Population of North America in 1492.” The William
and Mary Quarterly 49 (2): 298–320. doi:10.2307/2947274.

Dumbrill, Gary C., and Jacquie Green. 2008. "Indigenous Knowledge in the Social Work
Academy." Social Work Education 27 (5): 489–503.

22
Elliott, A. Marshall. 1888. “Origin of the Name ‘Canada’.” Modern Language Notes 3 (6):
164–73. doi:10.2307/2918432.

Freeman, Minnie Aodla. 1985. “Inuit.” In The Canadian Encyclopedia, Historica Canada.
Article published June 9, 2010. http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca
/en/article/inuit/.

George, Dan. 1974. My Heart Soars. Toronto: Hancock House.

Hoxie, Frederick E. 2016. The Oxford Handbook of American Indian History. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.

Iseke, Judy, and B. M. J. K. Brennus. 2011. “Learning Life Lessons from Indigenous
Storytelling with Tom McCallum.” In Indigenous Philosophies and Critical
Education, edited by George Sefa Dei, 245–61. New York: Peter Lang
Publishing.

Johnston, Basil. 1999. “How Do We Learn Language? What Do We Learn?” In Talking

on the Page: Editing Aboriginal Oral Texts, edited by Murray Laura J. and Rice
Keren, 43–51. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

King, Thomas. 2003. The Truth about Stories: A Native Narrative. Toronto: House of
Anansi Press.

Kovach, Margaret. 2010. Indigenous Methodologies: Characteristics, Conversations and

Contexts. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Martindale, Andrew. 2009. “Entanglement and Tinkering: Structural History in the

Archaeology of the Northern Tsimshian.” Journal of Social Archaeology 9 (1):
59–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469605308099371.

Owlijoot, Pelagie, and Louise Flaherty. 2014. Inuit Kinship and Naming Customs. Iqaluit,
NU: Inhabit Media.

Settee, Priscilla. 2011 “Chapter Twenty-Eight: Indigenous Knowledge: Multiple

Approaches.” In Indigenous Philosophies and Critical Education: A Reader,
edited by George Jerry Sefa Dei, 434–50. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Tagalik, Shirley. 2010. Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit: The Role of Indigenous Knowledge in

Supporting Wellness in Inuit Communities in Nunavut. National Collaborating
Centre for Aboriginal Health. Retrieved from http://www.nccah-
ccnsa.ca/docs/fact%20sheets/child%20and%20youth/Inuit%20IQ%20EN%20we
b.pdf.

Thornton, Russell. 2000. “Population History of Native North Americans.” In A

Population History of North America, edited by Michael R. Haines and Richard H.
Steckel, 9–50. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

23
Thornton, Thomas F., and Institute Sealaska Heritage. 2008. Being and Place Among
the Tlingit. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.

24