[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Repin, to Baranov on September 24, 1805), the fort evidently fell on33 August 20, 1805 (Tikhmenev 1863:2:Append.196 197).34 The documents also contain evidence of the number of Russians at the35 Yakutat fort and settlement.The rac board of directors report to Emperor36 Alexander I says that there had been 22 Russians with faithful islanders, that37 is, Aleuts, Kodiak, and Chugach, in the Yakutat fort and settlement (avpri,38 f.Gl.arkhiv II-3, 1805 1824 gg., op.34, d.7, l.2).According to Khlebnikov s39 information, there had been only 12 Russian promyshlenniki led by LarionovHistory of Tlingit Relations in Russian America 141 1 in the fort (Khlebnikov 1835:102).30 The most reliable source, in this author s2 view, is Rezanov, who used colonial statistics.He reported that in 1805 in Yaku-3 tat, under the leadership of Larionov, there were 15 Russian promyshlenniki,49 settlers with families, a clerk, a blacksmith, and a mechanic.In addition, 205kaiury and 15 kaiurki lived at the fort (avpr, f.Gl.arkhiv 1 7, 1802 g., d.1,6papka no.35, l.154).7The available Russian sources say almost nothing about the Indians reasons8for attacking Yakutat.The rac board of directors in St.Petersburg persistently9tried to shift the guilt entirely onto the Boston men who had sold guns to10the Indians (Narochnitskii 1963 1985:Ser.II, t.I, s.379).In addition, they em-11phasized the Indians warlike nature and their inclination toward fighting and12[142], (5cruelty (Narochnitskii 1963 1985:Ser.I, t.IV, s.242).The Natives savagery 13and the enlightened Americans selling arms to them were the rac s favorite14complaints to the government, and justification for their failure to expandLines: 5115the empire s area to include the whole Northwest Coast.However, contacts16 between the Boston men and the Yakutat people during this period have13.5pt17not been confirmed by the sources.The reasons for the Yakutat uprising likely 18lay somewhere else.To discover these reasons, Tlingit oral traditions collectedNormal19by De Laguna (1972:1:233 236, 259 261) are helpful.These legends lead one to* PgEnds:20conclude that many factors caused the Indian uprising.Chief among them was21the fact that the Russians did not permit the Indians to use their traditional22[142], (5fishing grounds.According to legends, the Russians constructed fish dams in23Tawal Creek that obstructed the passage of fish into the lake upstream.And,24in fact, Russian sources mention two fish dams near the Russian colony in25Yakutat (or gbl, f.204, k.32, ed.khr.no.4, l.15ob.; or gpb, Sb.Q.IV.311, l.2617).A shortage of fish evidently led to hunger among the Indians, which was27also mentioned in their legends.In addition, when the Indians traveled along28the river they had to portage by dragging their heavy canoes, since the Russians29opened the dams for free only when the chief passed, whereas they charged a30sea otter s skin for ordinary Indians seeking to pass through.31Another central reason for the Indian revolt was that the rac s employees put32the Indians children in school (sending the children amanaty to a school on33Kodiak Island that had been organized by Shelikhov) and used them as slave 34labor there to perform light work for the company between classes in Russian35and Orthodoxy.From the Natives point of view, this was slavery.36In Yakutat, as had been the case in Sitka, some Russian promyshlenniki37treated the local inhabitants roughly, taking their women and using the Indians3839 for unpaid work.On top of all this, the Russians did not pay the Yakutat people142 History of Tlingit Relations in Russian America 1 for the land ceded to them for the colony, even though they had promised to2 do so.3 The immediate cause for the Indian uprising, according to one of the leg-4 ends, was a Russian threat to kill a Native of the Tlakaik Teikweidí clan because5 he took nails from a wrecked boat on the shore (De Laguna 1972:1:259 260).6 Russian sources do not detail the Indians destruction of Yakutat.According7 to Tlingit legends, the fort was seized when almost all the Russians had gone8 out to catch fish.The few Russians who had remained in the fort were killed9 by the Indians, having no chance to resist.After this, the Indians fell upon10 the promyshlenniki returning from fishing and killed all of them as well (De11 Laguna 1972:1:232 234, 260 261).The legends go on to say that in this uprising12 the Indians used their classic tactic of suddenly attacking an entirely unsuspect-[143], (53)13 ing adversary.Having seized the fort, the Indians plundered and burned it.Five14 light cannons and five pudy of gunpowder fell into their hands, as did someLines: 52415 other property belonging to the Russian promyshlenniki and colonists.Some16 of the items have been preserved among the Yakutat to this day as family relics, 17 including a copper cannon, sheathed sword, and copper kettle that the Indians 0.0pt Pg 18 say belonged to the commandant of the Russian fort (De Laguna 1972:1:261).Normal Pag19 It is not clear in the sources who instigated or participated in the YakutatPgEnds: TEX20 uprising.I.Repin informed Baranov that Russians in Yakutat had been killed21 by kaiury and some Yakutat people (Tikhmenev 1863:2:Append.195).Rezanov22 wrote that the kaiury committed this act, having possibly been bribed by[143], (53)23 the Koloshi living at Akoi (Tikhmenev 1863:2:Append.278).Baranov also24 supposed that the fort was seized by kaiury, whom the Akoi people instructed 25 (or gbl, f.204, k.32, ed.khr.no.6, l.3ob.).The rac board of directors26 reported to the emperor that the attack in Yakutat was committed by the27 unpeaceful people who lived around this place, that is, the Yakutat people28 (avpr, f.Gl.arkhiv, II-3, op.34, d.7, l.2).29 Comparing the various data, one could conclude that some of the Yakutat30 people participated in seizing the fort according to legends, these people were31 the Tlakaik Teikweidí (De Laguna 1972:1:233 236, 259 261).31 It was evidently32 from this clan that the Russians had recruited the kaiury, since they were afraid33 to employ people from the powerful Kuashkkwáan clan for company work.34 These kaiury may have supported their kinsmen in the uprising against the35 Russians.Khlebnikov reported that several Koloshi of both sexes, seemingly36 faithful to the company, who were employed for work and service lived in the37 fort (Khlebnikov 1835:102).Legends report that the Tlakaik Teikweidí were led38 by a certain Tanuk who was supported by only a few of the Kuashkkwáan clan,39 since their chief did not want war with the Russians (De Laguna 1972:1:260).History of Tlingit Relations in Russian America 143 1 More specifically, it was Toion Fedor who did not want war with the Russians,2 being himself loyal to Baranov.3 The number of Russians lost at Yakutat and the number who escaped are4 unclear.Rezanov wrote that of 40 people at Yakutat in 1805, only 8 men,5 2 women, and 3 boys managed to escape (Tikhmenev 1863:2:Append.278).6 According to the rac board of directors, 14 Russians perished and with them7 many islanders (evidently Kodiak and Chugach), while only four promysh-8 lenniki, four settlers with two women and three children escaped, being taken9 captive by the Ugalakmiut (Eyak) (avpr, f.Gl.arkhiv II-3, 1805 1824 gg., op.10 34, d.7, l.2).They were later evidently released by the Indians or returned11 for ransom
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]