During the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the policies and laws of both the United States and Canada stressed the need to convert aboriginal people to Christianity and suppressing native religious practices by making them illegal. One of the cultural traditions of the First Nations on the Pacific Northwest Coast that was particularly offensive to missionaries and government officials was the potlatch.
The shaded area on the Maryhill Museum of Art map shown above shows the Northwest Coast culture area.
Background: The Potlatch
The traditional potlatch was basically a ceremony: a series of songs, dances, and rituals. At the same time, it was an expression of social stratification. The Christian missionaries opposed it only in part because it was an expression of non-Christian aboriginal religion: the primary opposition to it came from the fact that it involved giving away wealth. This was a concept which seemed detrimental to many Europeans whose cultures equated the acquisition of personal wealth with success. One of the Christian traits which missionaries and government officials felt was important for Indians to acquire was greed and pride in private ownership of goods.
The word “potlatch” is the English version of the Nootkan word “p’alshit’” which means “to give.” Material wealth is important among the Indian nations of this area, but by giving things away at the potlatch, families and individuals gain status. The potlatch functioned as a means for passing around among the members the surplus wealth of the society; the only thing that changed was the status of the individuals. Some people feel that the potlatch was the functional equivalent of taxation in modern society. Vast amounts of goods and wealth were distributed through the potlatch.
In the potlatch, a high-ranking person and his family gives away wealth and, in this way, they reassert their high rank. Traditionally, the lavish giving of presents was held in winter when all the food had been gathered in. The gift-giving was accompanied by songs, dances, and drama dealing with the grandeur of the host’s family and ancestry.
Traditionally, only a chief could hold a potlatch. During the potlatch, the chief’s privileges—names, songs, stories, and dances “owned” by him—would be recited. The guests would tacitly confirm the social relationships and history which was told.
Potlatches were traditionally held to mark births, naming, puberty, weddings, and deaths. For a potlatch, the family would amass wealth and then give it away to all who came to witness the rite of passage. Without the validation of a potlatch the privileges of a change in social status were considered to be unearned and therefore could not be exercised. All of the names, ranks, privileges, and honors of the family inheritance were meaningless without the formal ritual of hospitality and the acceptance of gifts by the guests.
The guests at a potlatch saw and experienced the social business of the event, such as the inheritance of a name. They mentally recorded and validated that which had happened. In addition, the food served at the potlatch came from all of the territories of the house and by consuming this food the guests acknowledged the house’s right to these lands and resources. Not only was food important, but there were also eating contests. The large bowls holding the food were family heirlooms which were named. In his book People of the Totem: The Indians of the Pacific Northwest, Norman Bancroft-Hunt reports:
“Sometimes bowls with tremendous dimensions, or even canoes full of food, were placed before a team from the opposing clan.”
The challenge, of course, was to eat all of the food.
Shown above is the Dzunuk’wa Feast Dish made by Kwakwaka’wakw artist Yakuglas Charlie James (1875-1938), This dish is on display at the Portland Art Museum.
Another view of the the Dzunuk’wa Feast Dish
The potlatch was a public statement of a person’s rank and importance; by accepting the gifts, the guests acknowledged the rights of the host. Norman Bancroft-Hunt writes:
“All of the guests received something, even if it was only a strip torn from a blanket as a token that they had witnesses the event. Consensus of opinion decided whether the potlatch had been successful, so everyone kept a careful note of what each person received and compared the values with those given away in the past.”
The goods given away at a potlatch include money, canoes, flour, kettles, dishes, Hudson’s Bay blankets, sewing machines, tables, slaves, and coppers. Gifts were distributed according to rank. Everyone who attended the potlatch was given something, but commoners received only tokens. The chiefs and nobles would receive the most, and traditionally, the chiefs upon returning home would distribute what they had received to the members of their house, town, and tribe.
Outlawing the Potlatch
The potlatch was attacked by Canadian authorities as being wasteful and destructive of moral and economic initiative. The Canadian government felt that it stood in the way of development and modernization. In 1883, the Superintendent General of Indian Affairs John A. Macdonald defined the potlatch as
“the useless and degrading custom in vogue among the Indians … at which an immense amount of personal property is squandered in gifts by one Band to another, and at which much valuable time is lost.”
In 1884, the Canadian government formally outlawed the potlatch. From a Native perspective, this meant that they could not celebrate the birth or naming of their children as required by traditional law, nor could they end their mourning after death.
The following year, the Canadian government amended the law against the potlatch to outlaw Native participation in the ceremony. The law stated:
“Every Indian or other person who engages in or assists in celebrating the Indian festival known as the ‘Potlatch’ or in the Indian dance known as the “tamanawas” is guilty of a misdemenour, and shall be liable to imprisonment.”
The missionaries stressed that the potlatch was a “degrading practice” which was a barrier to the “civilizing” of the Indians. Norman Bancroft-Hunt writes:
“European concepts of property ownership and investment were diametrically opposed to the principles which underlay the potlatch, and white colonists were unable to tolerate this questioning of their attitudes. The potlatch ban incorporated in the Indian Act was fully in effect in the early 1900s when government agents were operating on the reserves and attempting to break up any distribution of goods.”
Suppressing the Potlatch in 1921
In British Columbia, Nimpkish (Kwakwaka’wakw) chief Daniel Cranmer sponsored a potlatch—reported to be the largest ever given up to that time—in order to repay his wife’s family as part of the marriage settlement. The potlatch was held at Village Island, a remote spot away from government interference. In spite of the secrecy, the local Indian agent learned about the potlatch.
The local Indian agent decided to prosecute those who participated in the ceremony and was able to obtain 45 convictions. Twenty-three people, including ranking chiefs and women, were sent to prison. Twenty-two received suspended sentences in return for agreeing to hand over their potlatch regalia. As a result, 750 ceremonial objects were turned over to the government. Norman Bancroft-Hunt writes:
“Boat-loads of ceremonial goods were confiscated from them and others and cheques were presented to the owners in ‘payment’ for this, although some of these were defiantly torn up in the faces of the government officials.”
In his introduction to the book Listening to Our Ancestors: The Art of Native Life Along the North Pacific Coast, Chief Robert Joseph writes:
“To be charged with crimes as speaking, dancing, and giving or receiving gifts appeared to the Kwakwaka’waka to be an utter contravention of natural law.”
With regard to the confiscated potlatch ceremonial items, the local Indian agent put them on display in the parish hall at Alert Bay and charged an admission. The items were then sold to collectors and museums. Some of the items were shipped to the National Museum in Ottawa and some were sold to a collector for the Museum of the American Indian in New York.
Potlatching declined as a result of this persecution. Art professor Ronald Hawker, in an article in American Indian Art, reports:
“The potlatch was pushed underground after the Cranmer convictions.”
People continued to potlatch, but they either held them in remote villages away from government eyes or they disguised the potlatch as a Christmas or wedding exchange. Norman Bancroft-Hunt writes:
“Attempts at a revival in 1944 were a failure since people were still afraid to express open defiance of the agents. When the potlatch ban was repealed in 1951 serious damage had been caused to tribal identities and social stratification.”
Indians 101
Twice each week this series explores American Indian topics. More about the First Nations of the Northwest Coast from this series—
Indians 101: The Northwest Coast Culture Area
Indians 101: Northwest Coast House Panels (Photo Diary)
Indians 201: Totem Poles
Indians 101: Northwest Coast Canoes
Indians 101: Tlingit Migrations
Indians 101: Northwest Coast Masks (Photo Diary)
Indians 101: Northwest Coast Hats in the Portland Art Museum (Photo Diary)
Indians 101: Kwakiutl supernatural beings