Kitunahan Family
= Kitunaha, Hale in U.S. Expl. Exp., VI, 204, 535, 1846 (between the forks of the Columbia). Gallatin in Trans. Am. Eth. Soc., II, pt. 1, c, 10, 77, 1848 (Flatbow). Berghaus (1851), Physik. Atlas, map 17, 1853. Latham in Trans. Philolog. Soc. Lond., 70, 1856. Latham, Opuscula, 388, 1860. Latham, El. Comp. Phil., 395, 1862 (between 52° and 48° N.L., west of main ridge of Rocky Mountains). Gatschet in Mag. Am. Hist., 170, 1877 (on Kootenay River).
= Coutanies, Hale in U.S. Expl. Exp., VI, 204, 1846 (= Kitunaha).
= Kútanis, Latham, Nat. Hist. Man., 316, 1850 (Kitunaha).
= Kituanaha, Gallatin in Schoolcraft, Ind. Tribes, III, 402, 1853 (Coutaria or Flatbows, north of lat. 49°).
= Kootanies, Buschmann, Spuren der aztek. Sprache, 661, 1859.
= Kutani, Latham, El. Comp. Phil, 395, 1862 (or Kitunaha).
= Cootanie, Latham, El. Comp. Phil., 395, 1862 (synonymous with Kitunaha).
= Kootenai, Gatschet in Mag. Am. Hist., 170, 1877 (defines area occupied). Gatschet in Beach, Ind. Misc., 446, 1877. Bancroft, Nat. Races, III, 565, 1882.
= Kootenuha, Tolmie and Dawson, Comp. Vocabs., 79-87, 1884 (vocabulary of Upper Kootenuha).
= Flatbow, Hale in U.S. Expl. Exp., VI, 204, 1846 (= Kitunaha). Gallatin in Trans. Am. Eth. Soc., II, pt. 1, 10, 77, 1848 (after Hale). Buschmann, Spuren der aztek. Sprache, 661, 1859. Latham, El. Comp. Phil., 395, 1862 (or Kitunaha). Gatschet in Mag. Am. Hist., 170, 1877.
= Flachbogen, Berghaus (1851), Physik. Atlas, map 17, 1852.
X Shushwaps, Keane, App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent. and So. Am.), 460, 474, 1878 (includes Kootenais (Flatbows or Skalzi)).
This family was based upon a tribe variously termed Kitunaha, Kutenay, Cootenai, or Flatbow, living on the Kootenay River, a branch of the Columbia in Oregon.
Mr. Gatschet thinks it is probable that there are two dialects of the language spoken respectively in the extreme northern and southern portions of the territory occupied, but the vocabularies at hand are not sufficient to definitely settle the question.
The area occupied by the Kitunahan tribes is inclosed between the northern fork of the Columbia River, extending on the south along the Cootenay River. By far the greater part of the territory occupied by these tribes is in British Columbia.
The principal divisions or tribes are Cootenai, or Upper Cootenai; Akoklako, or Lower Cootenai; Klanoh-Klatklam, or Flathead Cootenai; Yaketahnoklatakmakanay, or Tobacco Plains Cootenai.
There are about 425 Cootenai at Flathead Agency, Montana, and 539 at Kootenay Agency, British Columbia; total, 964.
= Koluschen, Gallatin in Trans. and Coll. Am. Antiq. Soc., II, 14, 1836 (islands and adjacent coast from 60° to 55° N.L.).
= Koulischen, Gallatin in Trans. and Coll. Am. Antiq. Soc., II, 306, 1836. Gallatin in Trans. Am. Eth. Soc., II, pt. 1, c, 77, 1848, (Koulischen and Sitka languages). Gallatin in Schoolcraft, Ind. Tribes, III, 402, 1853 (Sitka, bet. 52° and 59° lat.).
< Kolooch, Latham in Trans. Philolog. Soc. Lond., II, 31-50, 1846 (tends to merge Kolooch into Esquimaux). Latham in Jour. Eth. Soc. Lond., 1, 163, 1848 (compared with Eskimo language.). Latham, Opuscula, 259, 276, 1860.
= Koluschians, Prichard, Phys. Hist. Mankind, V, 433, 1847 (follows Gallatin). Scouler (1846) in Jour. Eth. Soc. Lond., I, 231, 1848.
< Kolúch, Latham, Nat. Hist. Man, 294, 1850 (more likely forms a subdivision of Eskimo than a separate class; includes Kenay of Cook’s Inlet, Atna of Copper River, Koltshani, Ugalents, Sitkans, Tungaas, Inkhuluklait, Magimut, Inkalit; Digothi and Nehanni are classed as “doubtful Kolúches”).
= Koloschen, Berghaus (1845), Physik. Atlas, map 17, 1848. Ibid., 1852. Buschmann, Spuren der aztek. Sprache, 680, 1859. Berghaus, Physik. Atlas, map 72, 1887.
= Kolush, Latham, El. Comp. Phil., 401, 1862 (mere mention of family with short vocabulary).
= Kaloshians, Dall in Proc. Am. Ass., 375, 1885 (gives tribes and population).
X Northern, Scouler in Jour. Roy. Geog. Soc. Lond., XI, 218, 1841 (includes Koloshes and Tun Ghasse).
X Haidah, Scouler, ibid, 219, 1841 (same as his Northern).
= Klen-ee-kate, Schoolcraft, Ind. Tribes, V, 489, 1855.
= Klen-e-kate, Kane, Wanderings of an Artist, app., 1859 (a census of N.W. coast tribes classified by language).
= Thlinkithen, Holmberg in Finland Soc., 284, 1856 (fide Buschmann, 676, 1859).
= Thl’nkets, Dall in Proc. Am. Ass., 268, 269, 1869 (divided into Sitka-kwan, Stahkin-kwan, “Yakutats”).
= T’linkets, Dall in Cont. N.A. Eth., I, 36, 1877 (divided into Yăk´ūtăts, Chilkāht’-kwan, Sitka-kwan, Stākhin´-kwān, Kygāh´ni).
= Thlinkeet, Keane, App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent, and So. Am.), 460, 462, 1878 (from Mount St. Elias to Nass River; includes Ugalenzes, Yakutats, Chilkats, Hoodnids, Hoodsinoos, Takoos, Auks, Kakas, Stikines, Eeliknûs, Tungass, Sitkas). Bancroft, Nat. Races, III, 562, 579, 1882.
= Thlinkit, Tolmie and Dawson, Comp. Vocabs., 14, 1884 (vocab. of Skutkwan Sept; also map showing distribution of family). Berghaus, Physik. Atlas, map 72, 1887.
= Tlinkit, Dall in Proc. Am. Ass., 375, 1885 (enumerates tribes and gives population).
Derivation: From the Aleut word kolosh, or more properly, kaluga, meaning “dish,” the allusion being to the dish-shaped lip ornaments.
This family was based by Gallatin upon the Koluschen tribe (the Tshinkitani of Marchand), “who inhabit the islands and the adjacent coast from the sixtieth to the fifty-fifth degree of north latitude.”
In the Koluschan family, Gallatin observes that the remote analogies to the Mexican tongue to be found in several of the northern tribes, as the Kinai, are more marked than in any other.
The boundaries of this family as given by Gallatin are substantially in accordance with our present knowledge of the subject. The southern boundary is somewhat indeterminate owing to the fact, ascertained by the census agents in 1880, that the Haida tribes extend somewhat farther north than was formerly supposed and occupy the southeast half of Prince of Wales Island. About latitude 56°, or the mouth of Portland Canal, indicates the southern limit of the family, and 60°, or near the mouth of Atna River, the northern limit. Until recently they have been supposed to be exclusively an insular and coast people, but Mr. Dawson has made the interesting discovery63 that the Tagish, a tribe living inland on the headwaters of the Lewis River, who have hitherto been supposed to be of Athapascan extraction, belong to the Koluschan family. This tribe, therefore, has crossed the coast range of mountains, which for the most part limits the extension of this people inland and confines them to a narrow coast strip, and have gained a permanent foothold in the interior, where they share the habits of the neighboring Athapascan tribes.
| Auk. | Sitka. |
| Chilcat. | Stahkin. |
| Hanega. | Tagish. |
| Hoodsunu. | Taku. |
| Hunah. | Tongas. |
| Kek. | Yakutat. |
The following figures are from the census of 1880.64 The total population of the tribes of this family, exclusive of the Tagish, is 6,437, distributed as follows:
| Auk | 640 | |
| Chilcat | 988 | |
| Hanega (including Kouyon and Klanak) | 587 | |
| Hoodsunu | 666 | |
| Hunah | 908 | |
| Kek | 568 | |
| Sitka | 721 | |
| Stahkin | 317 | |
| Taku | 269 | |
| Tongas | 273 | |
| Yakutat | 500 |
X Kula-napo, Gibbs in Schoolcraft, Ind. Tribes, III, 431, 1853 (the name of one of the Clear Lake bands).
> Mendocino (?), Latham in Trans. Philolog. Soc. Lond., 77, 1856 (name suggested for Choweshak, Batemdaikai, Kulanapo, Yukai, Khwaklamayu languages). Latham, Opuscula, 343, 1860. Latham, El. Comp. Phil., 410, 1863 (as above).
> Pomo, Powers in Overland Monthly, IX, 498, Dec., 1873 (general description of habitat and of family). Powers in Cont. N.A. Eth., III, 146, 1877. Powell, ibid., 491 (vocabularies of Gal-li-no-mé-ro, Yo-kai´-a, Ba-tem-da-kaii, Chau-i-shek, Yu-kai, Ku-la-na-po, H’hana, Venaambakaiia, Ka´-bi-na-pek, Chwachamaju). Gatschet in Mag. Am. Hist., 16, 1877 (gives habitat and enumerates tribes of family). Gatschet in Beach, Ind. Misc., 436, 1877. Keane, App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent, and So. Am.), 476, 1878 (includes Castel Pomos, Ki, Cahto, Choam, Chadela, Matomey Ki, Usal or Calamet, Shebalne Pomos, Gallinomeros, Sanels, Socoas, Lamas, Comachos).
< Pomo, Bancroft, Nat. Races, III, 566, 1882 (includes Ukiah, Gallinomero, Masallamagoon, Gualala, Matole, Kulanapo, Sanél, Yonios, Choweshak, Batemdakaie, Chocuyem, Olamentke, Kainamare, Chwachamaju. Of these, Chocuyem and Olamentke are Moquelumnan).
The name applied to this family was first employed by Gibbs in 1853, as above cited. He states that it is the “name of one of the Clear Lake bands,” adding that “the language is spoken by all the tribes occupying the large valley.” The distinctness of the language is now generally admitted.
The main territory of the Kulanapan family is bounded on the west by the Pacific Ocean, on the east by the Yukian and Copehan territories, on the north by the watershed of the Russian River, and on the south by a line drawn from Bodega Head to the southwest corner of the Yukian territory, near Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, California. Several tribes of this family, viz, the Kastel Pomo, Kai Pomo, and Kato Pomo, are located in the valley between the South Fork of Eel River and the main river, and on the headwaters of the South Fork, extending thence in a narrow strip to the ocean. In this situation they were entirely cut off from the main body by the intrusive Yuki tribes, and pressed upon from the north by the warlike Wailakki, who are said to have imposed their language and many of their customs upon them and as well doubtless to have extensively intermarried with them.
Balló Kaì Pomo, “Oat Valley People.”
Batemdikáyi.
Búldam Pomo (Rio Grande or Big River).
Chawishek.
Choam Chadila Pomo (Capello).
Chwachamajù.
Dápishul Pomo (Redwood Cañon).
Eastern People (Clear Lake about Lakeport).
Erío (mouth of Russian River).
Erússi (Fort Ross).
Gallinoméro (Russian River Valley below Cloverdale and in Dry Creek Valley).
Grualála (northwest corner of Sonoma County).
Kabinapek (western part of Clear Lake basin).
Kaimé (above Healdsburgh).
Kai Pomo (between Eel River and South Fork).
Kastel Pomo (between Eel River and South Fork).
Kato Pomo, “Lake People.”
Komácho (Anderson and Rancheria Valleys).
Kulá Kai Pomo (Sherwood Valley).
Kulanapo.
Láma (Russian River Valley).
Misálamagūn or Musakakūn (above Healdsburgh).
Mitoám Kai Pomo, “Wooded Valley People” (Little Lake).
Poam Pomo.
Senel (Russian River Valley).
Shódo Kaí Pomo (Coyote Valley).
Síako (Russian River Valley).
Sokóa (Russian River Valley).
Yokáya Pomo, “Lower Valley People” (Ukiah City).
Yusâl (or Kámalel) Pomo, “Ocean People” (on coast and along Yusal Creek).
= Kúsa, Gatschet in Mag. Am. Hist., 257, 1883.
Derivation: Milhau, in a manuscript letter to Gibbs (Bureau of Ethnology), states that “Coos in the Rogue River dialect is said to mean lake, lagoon or inland bay.”
The “Kaus or Kwokwoos” tribe is merely mentioned by Hale as living on a river of the same name between the Umqua and the Clamet.65 Lewis and Clarke66 also mention them in the same location as the Cookkoo-oose. The tribe was referred to also under the name Kaus by Latham,67 who did not attempt its classification, having in fact no material for the purpose.
Mr. Gatschet, as above, distinguishes the language as forming a distinct stock. It is spoken on the coast of middle Oregon, on Coos River and Bay, and at the mouth of Coquille River, Oregon.
Anasitch.
Melukitz.
Mulluk or Lower Coquille.
Nacu?.
Most of the survivors of this family are gathered upon the Siletz Reservation, Oregon, but their number can not be stated as the agency returns are not given by tribes.
= Lutuami, Hale in U.S. Expl. Exp., VI, 199, 569, 1846 (headwaters Klamath River and lake). Gallatin in Trans. Am. Eth. Soc., II, pt. 1, c, 17, 77, 1848 (follows Hale). Latham, Nat. Hist. Man, 325, 1850 (headwaters Clamet River). Berghaus (1851), Physik. Atlas, map 17, 1852. Latham in Proc. Philolog. Soc. Lond., VI, 82, 1854. Latham in Trans. Philolog. Soc. Lond., 74, 1856. Latham, Opuscula, 300, 310, 1860. Latham, El. Comp. Phil., 407, 1862.
= Luturim, Gallatin in Schoolcraft, Ind. Tribes, III, 402, 1853 (misprint for Lutuami; based on Clamets language).
= Lutumani, Latham, Opuscula, 341, 1860 (misprint for Lutuami).
= Tlamatl, Hale in U.S. Expl. Exp., VI, 218, 569, 1846 (alternative of Lutuami). Berghaus (1851), Physik. Atlas, map 17, 1852.
= Clamets, Hale in U.S. Expl. Exp., VI, 218, 569, 1846 (alternative of Lutuami).
= Klamath, Gatschet in Mag. Am. Hist., 164, 1877. Gatschet in Beach. Ind. Misc., 439, 1877. Gatschet in Am. Antiq., 81-84, 1878 (general remarks upon family).
< Klamath, Keane, App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent. and So. Am.), 460, 475, 1878 (a geographic group rather than a linguistic family; includes, in addition to the Klamath proper or Lutuami, the Yacons, Modocs, Copahs, Shastas, Palaiks, Wintoons, Eurocs, Cahrocs, Lototens, Weeyots, Wishosks, Wallies, Tolewahs, Patawats, Yukas, “and others between Eel River and Humboldt Bay.” The list thus includes several distinct families). Bancroft, Nat. Races, III, 565, 640, 1882 (includes Lutuami or Klamath, Modoc and Copah, the latter belonging to the Copehan family).
= Klamath Indians of Southwestern Oregon, Gatschet in Cont, N.A. Eth., II, pt. 1, XXXIII, 1890.
Derivation: From a Pit River word meaning “lake.”
The tribes of this family appear from time immemorial to have occupied Little and Upper Klamath Lakes, Klamath Marsh, and Sprague River, Oregon. Some of the Modoc have been removed to the Indian Territory, where 84 now reside; others are in Sprague River Valley.
The language is a homogeneous one and, according to Mr. Gatschet who has made a special study of it, has no real dialects, the two divisions of the family, Klamath and Modoc, speaking an almost identical language.
The Klamaths’ own name is É-ukshikni, “Klamath Lake people.” The Modoc are termed by the Klamath Módokni, “Southern people.”
Klamath.
Modoc.
There were 769 Klamath and Modoc on the Klamath Reservation in 1889. Since then they have slightly decreased.
> Mariposa, Latham in Trans. Philolog. Soc. Lond., 84, 1856 (Coconoons language, Mariposa County). Latham, Opuscula, 350, 1860. Latham, El. Comp. Philology, 416, 1862 (Coconoons of Mercede River).
= Yo´-kuts, Powers in Cont. N.A. Eth., III, 369, 1877. Powell, ibid., 570 (vocabularies of Yo´-kuts, Wi´-chi-kik, Tin´-lin-neh, King’s River, Coconoons, Calaveras County).
= Yocut, Gatschet in Mag. Am. Hist., 158, 1877 (mentions Taches, Chewenee, Watooga, Chookchancies, Coconoons and others). Gatschet in Beach, Ind. Misc., 432, 1877.
Derivation: A Spanish word meaning “butterfly,” applied to a county in California and subsequently taken for the family name.
Latham mentions the remnants of three distinct bands of the Coconoon, each with its own language, in the north of Mariposa County. These are classed together under the above name. More recently the tribes speaking languages allied to the Coconūn have been treated of under the family name Yokut. As, however, the stock was established by Latham on a sound basis, his name is here restored.
Geographic Distribution
The territory of the Mariposan family is quite irregular in outline. On the north it is bounded by the Fresno River up to the point of its junction with the San Joaquin; thence by a line running to the northeast corner of the Salinan territory in San Benito County, California; on the west by a line running from San Benito to Mount Pinos. From the middle of the western shore of Tulare Lake to the ridge at Mount Pinos on the south, the Mariposan area is merely a narrow strip in and along the foothills. Occupying one-half of the western and all the southern shore of Tulare Lake, and bounded on the north by a line running from the southeast corner of Tulare Lake due east to the first great spur of the Sierra Nevada range is the territory of the intrusive Shoshoni. On the east the secondary range of the Sierra Nevada forms the Mariposan boundary.
In addition to the above a small strip of territory on the eastern bank of the San Joaquin is occupied by the Cholovone division of the Mariposan family, between the Tuolumne and the point where the San Joaquin turns to the west before entering Suisun Bay.
| Ayapaì (Tule River). | Ochíngita (Tule River). |
| Chainímaini (lower King’s River). | Pitkachì (extinct; San Joaquin River below Millerton). |
| Chukaímina (Squaw Valley). | Pohállin Tinleh (near Kern lake). |
| Chūk’chansi (San Joaquin River above Millerton). | Sawákhtu (Tule River, south fork). |
| Ćhunut (Kaweah River at the lake). | Táchi (Kingston). |
| Coconūn´ (Merced River). | Télumni (Kaweah River below Visalia). |
| Ititcha (King’s River). | Tínlinneh (Fort Tejon). |
| Kassovo (Day Creek). | Tisèchu (upper King’s River). |
| Kau-í-a (Kaweah River; foothills). | Wíchikik (King’s River). |
| Kiawétni (Tule River at Porterville). | Wikchúmni (Kaweah River; foothills). |
| Mayáyu (Tule River, south fork). | Wíksachi (upper Kaweah Valley). |
| Notoánaiti (on the lake). | Yúkol (Kaweah River plains). |
There are 145 of the Indians of this family now attached to the Mission Agency, California.