Part 2

11. otweg D P. 227. These three villages were "referred to" but their location not pointed out by Waterman's informants. He suggests they may have been suburbs of _rekwoi_. Kroeber shows _otwego_ as an intermittently occupied village on his map and calls it somewhat doubtful as a separate village on p. 10. _kestitsa_ and _pegwolaw_ he calls suburbs.

It is clear that a constellation of villages was located here aboriginally, centered around _rekwoi_. Waterman in his list assigns 25 houses to _rekwoi_, 9 to _welkwa_ and none to the others. Regardless of their status of independence or permanency there are too many of these remembered sites to be ignored. Consequently 3 houses each are assigned to Waterman's two best authenticated sites, _tsekwei_ and _tmri_, and to Merriam's sites _awmennok_ and _kere_.

12. osegen C P. 234. A "small town." Informants recalled 3 houses and 2 sweathouses.

13. hopaw C P. 234. "The small pox raged here in the early days and practically broke up the village." This may be a clue to the status of the sites around _rekwoi_. If so, all modern informants may be too low in their estimates of houses in the area.

14. wokel C No question.

15. trwr C See no. 16.

16. ahlawsl C P. 235. According to Waterman this was a camp site. There were very old house pits dating from a time before the memory of informants at _trwr_. They had been all washed away in Waterman's time. Kroeber (p. 10) states that _trwr_ was a camp site with no permanent houses.

On the other hand Merriam in his village list says: _Terwer_ was "a village on north side of Klamath at Terwer Creek (old Klamath reservation); said to be 6 or 7 miles above present Requa." It was mentioned by Taylor in 1860. Regarding _ahlawsl_ Merriam says that it was on the north bank close to _terwer_ and may be regarded as the lower part of the latter village. It was called _alaaca_ by Stevens in 1868. The existence of the combined town may hence be regarded as highly probable if not certain. In view of its apparent size 8 houses may be assigned to it.

17. yaktar P Merriam says that this was "a village on south bank Klamath River at mouth of McGarvey Creek. Waterman gives _yoxwtr-wroi_ as name of McGarvey Creek but says nothing as to a village at its mouth."

18. saal C P. 235. An "important town" with 7 to 8 houses. Waterman, however, shows only 5 on his list.

19. turip C P. 235. A "town" lying on a flat. According to Waterman it was one of two sites but he could get no information on the second site because of local hostility. Some informants said _turip_ itself had 8 houses and 3 sweathouses. On Randall's map (see Waterman, pp. 205 ff.) there is shown a town, called _koppa_, on the same flat as _turip_. This is not likely to be an error for _saal_, because the latter is across the river, but is very likely Waterman's second site. Waterman on p. 206 gives 6 houses for _turip_ but in view of the second probable village I recommend increasing this to 8 and thus agree with Waterman's informants. Kroeber does not mention this matter.

20. stowen P P. 207. This is a "well known place" with Indians living there now, although they are not the descendants of the ancient population. However Waterman also says, on p. 235, that "the site is well known and may have been a settlement in former times." Furthermore, it is on the survey map Randall made in 1866. This map appears to have been accurately drawn and creates a strong presumption that the village was in existence in early times. It is reasonable to assign 3 houses to the site.

21. rliiken-pets C See no. 23.

22. howego P See no. 23.

23. tawchter P There is some confusion about these three places. Kroeber shows (map, p. 9) _rliiken-pets_ as a place occupied intermittently, but does not mention _howego_ or _tawchter_. The first (_rliiken-pets_) is stated by Waterman to have been the "site of a small settlement" where informants recalled 2 houses and a sweathouse. In the summer the people went to _howego_ to camp and fish. On p. 237 _howego_ is described as a "flat" with no houses mentioned, but on p. 207 Waterman says: "_howego_ ... is a well known place ... but was not described to me as a town. Apparently there is an old town site there ... whose existence I did not hear of when on the spot." Further evidence lies in the fact that the place is shown on the map by Randall (p. 206) under the name of _Herwahgah_.

Merriam lists _rliiken-pets_ as _oleeken_ and says that it is a "former village ... about 3 miles below Blue Creek ... named from Oleeken Bar, at the upper end of which it is located." On his "Geographic List" of Yurok villages he describes _Hawwagah_ as an "old camp" but on his later list entitled "Polikan (Yurok) Tribes, Bands and Settlements" he has interpolated in ink "former village." _Tawchter_ he describes as a "village on north bank of Klamath right across from _Hawwagah_."

The weight of the evidence favors certainly two and probably three villages. Waterman ascribes (p. 207) 2 houses to _rliiken-pets_, to which may be added another 2 for _tawchter_. Across the river _howego_ may also have had 4 houses.

24. rnr C P. 237. Waterman says this town was being abandoned before the coming of the whites but it is shown on Kroeber's map (p. 9) and also on Randall's map of 1866. Hence it must have persisted for at least twenty years after the white invasion.

25. nagil C See no. 28.

26. ayol C See no. 28.

27. awpaw P See no. 28.

28. torah P Pp. 238 and 207. Informants of Waterman recalled 4 houses at _nagil_, settled by the great-grandmother of Weitschpek Frank. The latter was a man of approximately forty years of age when Waterman saw him in 1909. Hence, allowing twenty-five years per generation and assuming that the ancestor was twenty-five years old when the place was founded, it must have been settled definitely prior to 1850.

Regarding _ayol_, which Kroeber shows (map, p. 9) as a standard town, Waterman says it was a "small settlement." He thinks the place was early abandoned and resettled more recently. However Merriam refers to it as a "village--opposite mouth of Ahpah Creek" and identifies it with the _jehehak_ on Randall's map.

Merriam refers to _awpaw_ as a "village on south bank Klamath at mouth of Ah Pah Creek, opposite and straight west of _oyawsl_ (_ayol_)." He also says that _torah_ was an "old village on west side of Klamath, close to _nigehl_, opposite mouth of Blue Creek." It is also on Randall's map.

From the evidence of Randall and Merriam it appears probable that there were no less than four villages at this point on the river. Waterman gives 4 houses of _nagil_ and 2 for _ayol_. The other two villages may be tentatively assigned 3 each.

29. srpr C P. 238. At one time of some importance. Contained 3 houses "in memory of people now living and had been larger than that." Destroyed by flood in 1862.

30. tekta C P. 239. Kroeber states (p. 10) that _tekta_ had been occupied recently but did not seem to be an old site. This is directly contradicted by Waterman who calls it "an old town site." The name was frequently mentioned by his informants. Moreover he knew of a very old woman who was married from there as a girl and who "belongs" in _tekta_.

31. otsal D P. 240. "A former village site," now destroyed. "The present Indians know nothing about a town here."

32. woxkero C See no. 34.

33. woxtek C See no. 34.

34. qootep C P. 240. There is no question concerning the aboriginal existence of these towns. Confusion among modern informants has been due to population shifts caused by the flood of 1862, which damaged _qootep_.

35. pekwan C P. 243. An "important place."

36. yoxtr C P. 244. No question.

37. sregon C P. 244. Waterman says: "Everyone agrees that it has not been there very long." Some informants said it was settled by people from _woxtek_ or _pekwan_. But Waterman says: "... it may have been built before either of the other places." The town is on Randall's map and is mentioned in the 1852 census. Moreover Kroeber says (p. 10) that it "... enjoyed a reputation for belligerence and wealth." Its existence can therefore not be doubted.

38. kexkem P P. 245. A site with house pits. The traces of habitation were "quite clear." But Waterman could get "no reference to the people." Kroeber considers (p. 8) that it was inhabited only from time to time. However Merriam lists a village called _leggoonaw_ which was "on south bank of Klamath between Mettah and Serragon." This appears to be the exact location of Waterman's _kexkem_ and it may well have been the same village. Its existence is thus probable and 3 houses may be ascribed to it.

39. wererger P Merriam mentions this as a "village on north bank Klamath River, across from Mettah and a little above it." At this spot Waterman shows on his map no. 11 an "old village site" (his key no. 117). Hence the existence of the village is probable.

40. meta C P. 245. No question.

41. keperor P P. 245. Numerous house pits but informants never saw the houses. "The inhabitants all died at once and so the site has never been used since." A reasonable conclusion is that a village existed but that the people died of disease of epidemic character. (Cf. no. 13.)

42. nohtskum C P. 246. A town with only house pits remaining but of undoubted existence.

43. weiqem P A site with 7 or 8 pits. Informants could not remember any houses. Some said it was a camp site but they had an elaborate legend to explain the house pits. The site is at the mouth of Roach Creek on the south bank of the river and hence a spot where one would normally expect a town to be located. Moreover the number of house pits is in excess of what would be anticipated for a mere camp site.

44. himel C P. 247. This was a town, but the informants could barely remember the houses. Waterman could not determine why the inhabitants had disappeared. Kroeber mentions the village as one which may have been inhabited intermittently or temporarily (p. 8) and shows it thus on his map. However, he refers to it as a distinct town on p. 10 and lists it jointly with _murek_ on p. 18. It doubtless disappeared early as a separate entity.

45. murek C P. 247. No question.

46. saa C P. 248. No question.

47. kepel C P. 248. No question.

48. waase C P. 249. A "fairly large town." The people were rich.

49. merip C P. 250. A small place with only one house name known. Its existence, however is confirmed by Merriam.

50. aukweya P See no. 53.

51. qenekpul P See no. 53.

52. tsetskwi C See no. 53.

53. qenek C Some question exists concerning these four villages. Kroeber nowhere mentions _aukweya_, but shows _qenekpul_ and _tsetskwi_ as temporary or briefly occupied towns and _qenek_ as a permanent town. Waterman says that _aukweya_ was a "settlement, three houses and a sweathouse." There had been no houses for many years and the pits were washed out. _qenekpul_ was important mythologically and was said to have been built by an old Indian from _turip_ but there is no record of house pits or early habitations. _tsetskwi_ was a settlement with 3 houses and a sweathouse. In the youth of one informant there had been at least one family head living there, who was very old. Merriam lists all four sites as villages.

There seems to be no serious question concerning the former existence of _tsetskwi_ and _qenek_. It is highly probable that the other two sites were inhabited at the middle of the nineteenth century. Waterman in his list ascribes a total of 10 houses to the group, a reasonable figure (p. 206, see also pp. 251-252).

54. wahsek C P. 254. No question.

55. weitspus C P. 257. No question.

56. rlrgr C P. 258. "... always a small place" but several of its families were rich. On Kroeber's map.

57. pekwutul C P. 258. "... slightly larger than _rlrgr_" but had some wealthy citizens. On Kroeber's map.

58. loolego C P. 258. Shown on Kroeber's map as a standard town. Waterman says that 30 years before his visit, _i.e._, in 1879, 2 pits and a sweathouse were to be seen there. _loolego_ "... must at one time have been considerably larger for these people made up one of four parties who carried on the public spectacles in the deer skin ceremony at _weitspus_. They could not have done this had they not been rather numerous.... They were obviously influential people." This condition must have obtained long before 1879 when only house pits were known. The site was destroyed by mining in the 1880's.

59. aiqoo C P. 259. Waterman says: "... at least two houses and a sweathouse stood here." Kroeber (p. 10) considers _aiqoo_ as a subdivision of _otsepor_ but Merriam lists it as a separate village, under the name _Ikocho_.

60. otsepor C In 1909 when Waterman saw it the village had merely three house pits. But an informant "... well remembers when several families ... lived here. They had fine large houses."

61. espaw C P. 261. No question as to existence. Informants remember 4 houses but Waterman thinks that "in aboriginal times the number must have been much larger".

62. otmekwor D P. 262. There are 5 house pits but Waterman thinks this is a true archaeological site, the inhabitants having moved across to _oreqw_ several generations ago. On Kroeber's map as not a permanent settlement.

63. oreqw C P. 262. No question.

64. oraw D P. 262. Waterman, Kroeber, and Merriam all agree that this was a camp site.

65. sigwets C P. 262. "... a suburb of _oreqw_. At least two houses and a sweathouse stood here and I think originally there may have been more." In view of Waterman's positive assertion the existence of the village may be admitted.

66. hrgwrw C P. 265. "One informant said there were seven houses and two sweathouses."

67. tsahpekw C P. 265. "Eleven house names were obtained."

68. tsotskwi C P. 265. "An important Indian village stood here, but has not been inhabited since more than a generation ago.... One informant remembered having seen twelve houses and two sweathouses here."

69. paar C See no. 75.

70. osloqw C See no. 75.

71. kekem P See no. 75.

72. maats C See no. 75.

73. opyuweg C See no. 75.

74. pinpa D See no. 75.