Archaeological Potential Along the Lower Mackenzie River, N.W.T.

Summary and Discussion

We have seen that the a variety of resource species are seasonally available in a wide range of different habitats within the immediate valley of the Mackenzie River. Environmental reconstructions suggest that this has been the case for at least the past 5000 years (Ritchie 1984:99). Further, the present appearance of the landscape had been achieved as early as 9000 years ago (Hughes 1969:7-10).

Although our data are only preliminary, they nonetheless demonstrate the former exploitation of a broad range of ecological and locational contexts. Moreover, our survey results attest to the prehistoric use of the shores of the Mackenzie River, even if we are not presently in a position to adequately discuss the time scale involved at most sites. At this point, however, we can safely conclude that there is no relationship between site elevation and age.

For the moment, the oldest radiocarbon dates available from the lower Mackenzie River sites are on the order of 1400 BP (dates from MiTr-1 MiTq-1a). David Pokotylo recently recovered a side-notched projectile point from the Vihtr'iitshik siliceous argillite quarry site (MiTi-1), located at the mouth of Thunder River. He believes this point relates to a loosely-defined so-called Middle Prehistoric occupation (Pokotylo and Brisland 1993:25-26), estimated to span the period from 2000 to 6000 BP (Morrison 1987:52). If this is indeed the case, we should foresee a much longer human use of the Mackenzie River proper than the presently available radiometric data indicate.

Excavations undertaken in 1992 and again in 1993, at the Tsiigehtchic (MiTr-1) site of Arctic Red River, demonstrate repeated, intensive summer to fall occupations for at least the last thirteen centuries (Nolin 1993). Even though the site commands a highly strategic point along at the confluence of two major waterways, it was not the only attractive location along the shores of the Mackenzie River. In fact, other sites appear to have been repeatedly used, particularly as fishing stations. Given its great abundance in the Mackenzie River during summer and fall, fish has likely for a very long time been an important resource for local inhabitants. The recovery of fish remains in association with lithic artifacts at a few sites seems to substantiate this proposition (e.g. MiTq-1a, MiTq-2).

Slobodin pointed out that "the large local group remains characteristic for summer fishing, because the best fishing sites are limited in number and area, and also because summer continues to be the season for major group recreation and leisure activity (Slobodin 1962:81). Along the Mackenzie River, these places are most often located at the mouth of tributary streams and near eddies where fish rest for a few weeks while awaiting proper spawning conditions (Chang-Kue and Jessop 1991).

The surveys which we have carried out along the lower Mackenzie River could not be described as intensive, extensive or complete. Yet they did clearly demonstrate the existence of both prehistoric and historic sites, often in buried, stratified contexts. Given the success which was achieved, as well as the actual amount of time devoted to the surveys, we believe the results constitute the tip of the iceberg, and that a more systematic and sustained effort would yield significant results.

Archaeological remains which would allow the reconstruction of the region's culture-history, and add new details to our understanding of the former use of this corridor, do exist. Additional surveys and excavations would provide this much needed information, and also allow us to discuss relations with the archaeology of the interior regions. Perhaps then it would be possible to address a series of more specific questions, such as the existence of the "Nakotch ô ondjig Kuttchin" (Petitot 1876:28), purportedly occupying the corridor of the Mackenzie River below the territory of the Hare. First reported by Petitot in the latter half of the nineteenth century, Osgood (1934) found no mention of them a half century later. According to Krech the differences between the "Nakotch ô-ondjig Kuttchin" and their neighbours immediately north of them, the "Kwitcha-Kuttchin", were more than territorial, but also linguitic (1979:112, 113).