But just as tattoos were grounded in Indigenous beliefs and cultural values, they were also grounded in personal experiences, genealogies, and encounters with the supernatural. For example, some body marks were understood to promote one’s fertility or attract prey animals,12 while others revealed tribal origins. Still more were thought to provide physical or spiritual protection from enemies, evil spirits and other unseen beings, amongst other attributes.13 The spiritual forces that embodied these kinds of tattoos were not necessarily related to the form or actual symbol placed upon the skin. Instead, the magical properties were often infused in the tattoo pigments, the tattoo instruments, or they were channeled into the design by the tattooer, who among some tribes was a priest or shaman.14 In such cases, the efficacy of these tattoos typically arose from helper, ancestral, and other spirits or deities that were petitioned by the tattooer to lend their otherworldly powers. It is important to note here that Native North Americans rarely perceived traditional tattooing as an art form, and for these reasons I will largely avoid the term “tattoo artist” altogether in this book. However, I do recognize that tattooing was occasionally used for beautification and that certain tattooists were very proud of their artistic creations. Alice Yaavgaghsiq (Aghwalngiq), the last living tattooer of St. Lawrence Island, Alaska, 9 | Sallirmiut woman of Southampton Island, Hudson Bay, 1903-1904. Photographer Albert P. Low. Her facial tattoos were overpainted for photography. Library and Archives Canada, 2804.
“approached her works the way a sculptor evaluates a piece of marble.”15 For example, Yaavgaghsiq considered the intersection of facial lines and a woman’s facial bone structure, and then envisioned ways to complement them with her skin-stitched tattoos. Speaking to Anchorage Daily News reporter Mike Dunham in 1997, she tapped her chest and said: “My designs came from my heart.”16
An Etymological Comment on Culture Groups and Indigenous Peoples Over the centuries, various terms have been used in ethnology to identify the Indigenous peoples of North America. Because these words were imposed upon tribal groups from the outside, they are oftentimes incorrect and/or offensive and have little to do with what Native people call themselves today. These designations – often the result of incorrect pronunciations or misunderstandings – crept into the literature because an explorer, a trader, a missionary, a government agent, or an anthropologist found the term (or terms) definitive and useful. For example, Inuit (“the people”) replaces “Eskimo” (“eaters of raw flesh”)17 in many regions of Arctic Canada, whereas Yupiit (“real people”) and Inupiat (“real people”) replace “Inuit” in many regions of Arctic Alaska. In the Aleutian Archipelago, the Russian term “Aleut” (unknown derivation) has been replaced by Unangan (“coastal people”). Obviously, the Indigenous selfdesignations noted above are not derogatory, alienating, or judgmental. Rather, they are inclusive and describe a culture group’s position in a community today as well as before contact with missionaries, anthropologists, and other outsiders. Another longstanding ethnological tradition is the usage of the “culture area” concept. This classificatory method was developed in the late nineteenth century to conveniently organize Native societies of North America, according to specific geographical regions where similarities in environment, subsistence, culture, and language were shown to exist. Although I realize that there are problems with the culture area concept, it does provide a convenient framework for exploring the history of Indigenous tattooing in North America and will be used to some degree in this book. As will be shown, numerous
16