Notes

FROM CARD: "CEDAR BARK DYED RED ILLUS. IN USNM AR, 1888, PL. 18, FIG. 67-9, P. 270." FROM OLD 19TH OR EARLY 20TH CENTURY EXHIBIT LABEL WITH CARD: "NECKLACE.---ROPE OF TWISTED CEDAR BARK, DYED RED, MADE INTO A COLLAR, WITH ENDS BOUND TOGETHER AND FRAYED OUT. USED IN DANCING BY SITKA INDIANS. LENGTH, 23 INS. DIAM. OF ROPE, 1 1/4 INS. FT. WRANGEL, ALASKA, 1875. 20,910. COLLECTED BY J. G. SWAN." FROM OLD 19TH OR EARLY 20TH CENTURY EXHIBIT LABEL WITH CARD E20849: "HEADDRESSES.---MADE OF CEDAR BARK ROPE, STAINED RED WITH THE JUICE OF THE ALDER. WORN IN THE WINTER CEREMONIAL DANCES OF THE KWAKIUTL AND OTHER SOUTHERN COAST INDIANS. HOODSINOO INDIANS (KOLUSCHAN FAMILY), ADMIRALTY ISLAND, ALASKA. 20,849, 20,910. COLLECTED BY JAMES G. SWAN. THIS STYLE IS BORROWED BY THE NORTHERN INDIANS AND WORN BY THEM IN THEIR CEREMONIALS, BUT NOT WITH THE SAME SIGNIFICANCE AS IN THE SOUTH."Anthropology catalogue ledger book identifies E20849, 20850 and 20910 as original number 70, and lists as Koutznow [i.e. Hutsnuwu Tlingit], Admiralty Island, Alaska. List in accession file identifies no people or locality for original # 70. The old exhibit labels for E20910 have conflicting locality information, with one saying Admiralty Island, and the other Fort Wrangell. The catalogue card originally said Admiralty Island, but Fort Wrangell has been added later, presumably because of exhibit label? For now, locality in database has been listed as Admiralty Island. Note: Anthropology catalogue ledger book lists a former number of 20910 for both 72701 and 72702 and says "Reentered to avoid confusion of nos." 72701 and 2 are listed as Fort Wrangell.