The saddest time of my life’: relocating the Ahiarmiut from Ennadai Lake (1950–1958

Polar Record 46 (237): 113–135 (2010). c© Cambridge University Press 2009. doi:10.1017/S0032247409008390 113

‘The saddest time of my life’: relocating the Ahiarmiutfrom Ennadai Lake (1950–1958)Frederic LaugrandDepartment of Anthropology and Centre Interuniversitaire d’Etudes et de RecherchesAutochtones, Laval University, Ste-Foy, G1K 7P4, Quebec, Canada([email protected])

Jarich OostenFaculty of Social Sciences, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, 2333 Ak Leiden, Netherlands

David SerkoakNunavut Sivuniksavut, 368 Dalhousie St., Ottawa, ON K1N 7G3, Ontario, Canada

Received September 2008

ABSTRACT. In 1950–1958 Ahiarmiut were relocated, in three stages from Ennadai Lake to Nueltin Lake, fromEnnadai Lake to Henik Lake and from Henik Lake to Arviat (Eskimo Point). This paper presents the results of aworkshop conducted with elders and youths in Arviat, in May 2006, on these events. The participants in the workshopwere Job and Eva Muqyunnik, Mary Anautalik, John Aulatjut, Silas Ilungijajuk, Geena Aulatjut from Arviat, AndrewAlikashuak, from Whale Cove, and Mary Whitmore from Churchill. The workshop was set up from an anthropologicalperspective and focused on Ahiarmiut perspectives of the first three relocations. Comparing archival and oral materials,the paper confronts the strategies, choices and decisions of the administration of the Canadian federal governmentwith the experiences and views of the Ahiarmiut participants. The paper explores the causes of the failure of therelocations, notably the discrepancies between the values of the administration and those of the Ahiarmiut as well asthe lack of communication between those parties. The paper concludes that there is no convincing evidence of anyagreement between the Ahiarmiut and the administration so the relocation effectively became a deportation causinggreat economic and cultural distress as well as loss of life to the Ahiarmiut.

Contents

Introduction 113The relocations 114The Nueltin Lake relocation, 1950 116The preparation of the Henik Lake

relocation 1954–1956 118The relocations to Henik Lake 1957 and to

Eskimo Point (Arviat) 1958 122Discussion 128Acknowledgements 131References 131

Introduction

Today, the relocations of the Ahiarmiut from EnnadaiLake between 1950 and 1958 are considered to be a failurethat caused great distress to the native population. Testerand Kulchyski (1994) and Marcus (1995) have examinedthoroughly the policies of the Canadian administrationand documented the main events in the relocations. Bythe term ‘administration’ we refer to the most importantagencies acting on behalf of the federal government,notably the Department of Indian and Northern Resources(DIANR) and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police(RCMP). Even if there existed considerable differencesbetween and within these various agencies, all sharedcommon values with respect to the necessity to assumeresponsibility for the well being of the native people.

But the perspectives of the Ahiarmiut themselves werenever discussed in any detail. So far, little attention hasbeen paid to the lasting effects of these relocations on theAhiarmiut population. In 2003 we organised a workshopwith Ahiarmiut elders on ‘Survival and Angakkuuniq’in Arviat (Nunavut). In the course of this workshopthe Ahiarmiut elders Job and Eva Muqyunnik, Lukeand Mary Anautalik reflected on the events that almostfifty years ago had disrupted their lives and that stillaffected them. The four Ahiarmiut participants in theworkshop asked us whether we would be prepared toorganise a further workshop at Ennadai Lake on theirfirst relocations. Such a workshop in situ would enablethem to return to their homeland and come to terms withthe events of the past. Moreover, it would provide themwith an opportunity to transfer their knowledge and loveof the land to their families and descendants, a processthat had already started in 1985 during a first trip toEnnadai Lake (see Belsey 1985a, 1985b, 1985c). Weagreed to look for funding to organise such a workshopin situ, at Ennadai Lake. As the costs of such a workshopwould be high we agreed with the Sivullinuut society inArviat to apply to the department of Culture, Language,Elders and Youth of the Nunavut Government (CLEY) aswell as to the Social Sciences and Humanities ResearchCouncil of Canada (SSHRC) for funding. The Sivullinuutsociety was successful in obtaining the funding, but asthey were not sure whether the additional funding wouldbe forwarded, they decided to spend the money on a

114 LAUGRAND, OOSTEN, AND SERKOAK

workshop on another project. Once we had succeeded inobtaining funding for the Ennadai workshop, the CLEYmoney was no longer available, and the SSHRC grant wasinsufficient to cover the costs of transporting the elders byplane from Arviat to Ennadai Lake. Thus it proved to beimpossible to realise the workshop in situ. Therefore, theAhiarmiut elders agreed to hold the workshop in Arviatfrom 1 May to 5 May 2006.

The participants in the workshop were all Ahiar-miut living in different communities. Eva Muqyunnik,Job Muqyunnik, Mary Anautalik, John Aulatjut, SilasIlungiyajuk, Geena Aulatjut lived in Arviat. AndrewAlikashuak came from Whale Cove, and Mary Whitmorefrom Churchill. Annie Seewoe and Luke Anautalik fromArviat were invited but were unfortunately unable toparticipate because of their physical condition. DavidSerkoak from Iqaluit was also invited but could notcome because of obligations in Cambridge Bay. FredericLaugrand and Jarich Oosten acted as facilitators of theworkshop and Atuat (Mary Thompson) from Arviat tookcare of the coordination and organisation of the workshopas well as the interpretation. She also provided us withopportunities to interview non Ahiarmiut elders such asJames and Helen Konek.

The facilitators had first studied the relevant docu-ments that were available in the RCMP, Army and DIANRarchives in Ottawa. Some of these documents are used inthis paper and in order to avoid mistakes we have retainedthe original spelling of the Inuit names as they appearin the various sources. The workshop was set up in ananthropological perspective focusing on the Ennadai Lakerelocation and Ahiarmiut culture and history. During aweek, all sessions were audiotaped and videotaped. Weagreed with the members of the workshop to make theresults of the workshop first available to David Serkoakand the participants in the workshop. This paper presentsa historical overview of the results of the archival researchas well as testimonies of Ahiarmiut elders. It points outcongruent points and discrepancies between the viewsof the administration and those of the Ahiarmiut. Itwas not always easy to match the archival dates to therecollections of the elders. The Ahiarmiut elders havevivid recollections of their experiences, but little interestin the dates. Our attempts to date their experiences alwaysled to intensive discussions between the elders themselvesand the results were often inconclusive.

The relocations

The literature on the Ahiarmiut relocations consistsmainly of a few chapters in Tamarniit by Frank Testerand Peter Kulchyski (1994) and a few chapters inRelocating Eden, by Alan Marcus (1995). This literaturecan be supplemented with extensive archival material,and more documents may become available in the future.Neither books nor archival sources give much scope tothe Ahiarmiut perspectives. These studies focus on tworelocations: the relocation to Nueltin Lake in 1950 and the

relocation to Henik Lake in 1957. The Ahiarmiut point outthat there were more relocations as the Ahiarmiut wererelocated to Arviat from Henik Lake and from Arviat toWhale Cove and Rankin Inlet. In this paper we will mainlyfocus on the first three relocations: from Ennadai Lake toNueltin Lake, from Ennadai Lake to Henik Lake and fromHenik Lake to Arviat (Eskimo Point) (Fig. 1).

Caribou and Ahiarmiut cultural and historical tradi-tions are not yet well documented in the ethnography.

In the early 1920s the fifth Thule expedition visitedthe area. One of the goals of the expedition was toassess the origins of the Eskimos and test Steensby’shypothesis that the Inuit had originated on the BarrenGrounds in the Kivalliq. Kaj Birket-Smith (1929: 168),one of the members of the expedition, studied the originsof the Caribou Inuit that were considered at this timeas the most primitive Inuit group. Birket-Smith thoughtthey originated from the Padlei area and representedthe original inland caribou hunting Inuit. Marcus (1995:128) suggested that the Ahiarmiut had migrated from thecoast to the inland in the middle of the 19th century, butunfortunately he does not provide sources to corroboratehis argument. Csonka (1992: 17) also refers to a collectivemove but he remains cautious. He quotes Burch’s theoryaccording to which Ahiarmiut may have come from thewestern Arctic during the 18th century. As the historyof the Ahiarmiut group is complex, a discussion of theseissues is beyond the scope of this paper. Some historicaldata are given by Hearne (1958), Tyrrell (1894, 1897,1975), Turquetil (1904, 1907, 1912a, 1912b, 1926, 1986–1987), Mallet (2000), Gabus (1940, 1940–1941, 1944),Michea (1949, 1952), Steenhoven (1957, 1958, 1962) andHarper (1964) but the most complete reference remainsthe ethnohistorical contribution made by Csonka (1995).

The Ahiarmiut have been an inland people for at leastseveral generations and their cultural traditions show thatthey were perfectly adapted to the inland life and do notindicate that they may have been a coastal people. Csonkasuggests that the Ahiarmiut may have been reduced fromabout 450 people before the 1920’s to about sixty peoplein the 1940’s. This is consistent with patterns of popu-lation decrease described elsewhere among Inuit groups.However, in assessing the decrease of the population somecaution is advised. Notions of decline were spread amongInuit (who assumed their ancestors were more numerousand more powerful) and white people who assumed thatthe decline and finally even the complete disappearance ofInuit under the impact of civilisation was unavoidable (seeOosten and others 2006). Despite the various starvationsthey had to face during the 19th century, Csonka (1992:17) indicates that the Ahiarmiut population probablyincreased considerably until the beginning of the 20th cen-tury. Apparently, this process only ceased between 1915and 1925, when a series of starvations affected the CaribouInuit (see Burch 1986: 129; Csonka 1992: 18–19).

These groups always had to deal with hardships.Csonka (1995) shows that Ahiarmiut like many northAmerican Indians never interacted as harmoniously with

‘THE SADDEST TIME OF MY LIFE’: RELOCATING THE AHIARMIUT FROM ENNADAI LAKE (1950–1958) 115

Fig. 1. Map of the area in which the relocations took place (from Tester and Kulchyski1994).

their environment as is commonly believed. Periods ofabundance alternated with periods of scarcity of game andsometimes even starvation. Csonka quotes a policemanbased in Eskimo Point who stated in 1926, just aftera starvation period: ‘Inuit did not appear to treat thestarvation question seriously. . . . to speak of starvationto them appeared to be by no means a matter of greatimportance’ (quoted by Csonka 1992: 19). White people,were often puzzled by the capacity of Inuit to endureperiods of starvation. In the 19th as well as in the 20thcentury, outside observers always tended to perceive Inuitto be in a state of need. In the archival sources weused for this paper, such a perception is continuouslyexpressed. The main arguments proposed in the archivalsources and documents for the relocations are formulatedin economic terms. Many sources assume that the huntingopportunities at Ennadai Lake were insufficient and thattherefore the Ahiarmiut had to be relocated to an area thatprovided better opportunities. However, the relocationsto Nueltin Lake and Henik Lake both proved to becomplete failures. The Ahiarmiut themselves maintain

that Ennadai Lake was an excellent hunting area and failedto understand why they were relocated. The Departmentof Northern Affairs and National Resources (DNANR)and the RCMP argued that the Ahiarmiut were becomingincreasingly dependent on outside assistance. Varioustrading agencies had been present in the area, but inmost cases the amount of trade seems to have beeninsufficient to maintain a permanent trading post. Thetrading post of Revillon Freres at Ennadai Lake wasabandoned in the early 1930’s (see Mallet 2000) and theHudson’s Bay Company trading post at Nueltin Lake wasabandoned in 1941 (Tester and Kulchyski 1993: 208).Even if considerable trade with individual trappers andtraders (see Csonka 1995) continued, the administrationassumed that the Inuit would soon disappear with theclosing of these trading posts. This idea strengthenedtheir conviction of the need to move the Ahiarmiut fromEnnadai Lake at a time when the army began to use thatplace as a radio station.

In 1949, the Canadian Army Signal Corps built theradio station at Ennadai Lake (Marcus 1995: 129). The


Fig. 2. The Nueltin lake relocation, 1950. Owlijoot’s camp and his tent. Photographtaken by G. van den Steenhoven.

Ahiarmiut elders describe the building of the radio stationas an enjoyable time and appreciated trade with thepersonnel of the radio station. At the time Inuit wereincreasingly using western technology and dependedon trade for guns, ammunition, tea, tobacco and othergoods. Oral sources suggest that Inuit usually wereable to have a good life at Ennadai Lake, but therewere occasional periods of starvation and relief. Reliefsupplies, notably buffalo meat, were sent in 1948 and1949. Various factors appear to have contributed to thedecision to relocate the Ahiarmiut. The administrationrepeatedly expressed its fear that the Inuit would becomedependent on relief. In the 1940’s the dominant view inthe administration was that Inuit would lose their capacityto survive independently if they came into close contactwith white communities for too long. The decision toremove the Ahiarmiut from Ennadai Lake was thereforean unavoidable consequence of the foundation the radiostation. The Ahiarmiut themselves (Figs. 2, 3) wereunaware of these implications and were not informed ofthem by the administration.

The Nueltin Lake relocation, 1950

The relocation to Nueltin Lake was badly prepared andexecuted as was made clear by the director of NorthernAffairs, Ben G. Sivertz, in a memorandum to the deputyminister dated 9 March 1959.

A seemingly fortunate solution appeared on the scene.Sigurdson and Martin, of Churchill, proposed to es-tablish a commercial fishery under the title of NueltinLake Fish Products at Nueltin Lake, approximately50 to 75 miles from Ennadai Lake. Even thoughthere was not a concentration of Eskimos at the lake,the company advised that ‘[t]he lake was capable of

Fig. 3. A group of Ahiarmiut. At left is Elisapee Nutaralukwith her son Tommy Owlajoot. In the centre is Mary QahuqMiki with her son David Serkoak on her back and herother son Silas Ilungijajuk in front. On the far right is MaryAnautalik with her son John. Photograph taken by G. vanden Steenhoven.

providing a livelihood for every Eskimo from BakerLake southwards’. It was prepared to hire Eskimos forputting up buildings, then have them participate in thefishing operation under the direction of experiencedfishermen who would teach them how to fish andfillet. The operation would earn cash and food forthe Ennadai Lake people. The relocation proposal wasmet with favour by the Department of Fisheries, theRCMP and the Northwest Territories Administration,Department of Resources and Development (Sivertz1959a).In the early summer of 1950, 47 Eskimos were

airlifted from Ennadai Lake to Nueltin Lake as arrangedby the Department of Resources and Development. ByChristmas they had all wandered back to their old huntinggrounds at the radio station. The project had failed andfor good reasons.


The company had run into financial problems, trans-portation difficulties and lacked facilities for storingfish while awaiting shipment to Churchill. Theyconcluded that they could not operate economicallyand closed down operations before the end of thesummer. Secondly the government’s plans on paper,had omitted the inclusion of an interpreter to explainto the Eskimos why they were being moved, thework that the company had expected of them, andthe overall benefits to themselves in the company ofthe commercial fishery. This unfortunate omission wasour fault and a considerable factor in the project’sfailure. It was reported that one Eskimo said theywere being moved because they were without foodand the white man was going to fish for them. Furtherfactors were that this people had traditionally beencaribou hunters and they missed the hunting to whichthey were accustomed. Bush was not as favourable astundra, fish was no food substitute for caribou (Sivertz1959a).The participants in the workshop recalled that their

possessions at Ennadai Lake were destroyed and that theywere transported without any provision to Nueltin Lake.They were transported to an island in the lake whereonly trees provided some cover. They had no food andno adequate equipment. Job Muqyunnik recalls:

I am going to tell you now about the saddest time of mylife. It was around May in 1949. The Qallunaat came tothe weather station there at Ennadai Lake. They had alarge vehicle up there. This bulldozer came to our tent.The driver told us to leave our tent so we went out. Hewent back to his vehicle and drove over our tent, backand forth. He broke everything we had. He drove overthem and destroyed everything. That was the hardesttime of my life because we didn’t have anything tosurvive with anymore. There was a yellow two-engineplane. The person who destroyed our tent told us toget on the plane. Louis Voisey was our interpreter.He couldn’t do anything to help so I am not going toaccuse him or anything like that. He told us to get onthe plane. This man had a stick and he would do thisto each one of us. Without saying anything he directedus to the plane. We couldn’t speak his language. Thiswas the first time we saw this Qallunaaq. We didn’tknow their boss. He was saying something. He saidthat we were garbage. That’s all I remember. He saidthat everything was garbage. He took us to the islandby plane. He found the biggest island in that area. Wehad nothing, not even a cup or a knife, nothing. Noaxe, nothing at all. He dropped us at this island. Wespent a long time at that island. There were a wholebunch of us. There were us men, and our wives. Theystarted to cry, knowing that they might not survive. Wespent eight months walking around that island. Thenwe went back to Ennadai Lake on foot (Muqyunnik,J. 2003).Frank Cunningham, director of Northern Affairs and

National Resources at the time, reports in a memorandum

dated 31 August 1954 to the deputy minister thatequipment and instruction were inadequate.

It was difficult to know how to urge and instruct theEskimo to do things that would alleviate the famine,for example new fishnets were sent to the Eskimolast year. These are now reported to be torn anduseless. In addition, the fish are said to be deep in thelake. There would seem little doubt that materials formending nets, instruction in the work and long linesto reach to the bottom of the lake would have enabledthe Eskimos to continue to catch fish (Cunningham1954b).The Ahiarmiut elders related that they were not

allowed to take any of their belongings with themand that they were not provided with any means ofsubsistence.

Job Muqyunnik stated as follows.We waited over there to have our belongings to bebrought, but we had no axes, no knives what so ever.No place to sleep. We would just lie down on theground, still waiting for the plane to bring back ourbelongings but they never did. So we slept on the rocksfor many nights, thinking that our belongings wouldbe brought back to us. But they never did. A few of usdidn’t even have mittens. And after some time somewomen start to cry. They would cry because they hadnothing to live, nothing to survive on (Muqyunnik, J.2005).Fortunately some help and materials were provided by

Indians in the area and a trader called Bill Black. AndrewAlikashuak recalled.

Each morning we would get up and there would benothing. The only shelter we would have was thepieces of trees put together as shelter. We would layon the ground and sleep with no pillow or whatsoeveror blanket to cover us. [. . .] I remember it wasvery dark in that place at night. I saw a personwalking toward me and I thought it was Anautalik,because I called Anautalik my aqatik, but it was notAnautalik, it was the Indian. I couldn’t communicatewith him even though he stopped in front of me, Icouldn’t speak with him. Even if he spoke Englishor his language I couldn’t understand. There wasno way of communicating. So he pointed to a tent.My mother was there. I was given some kind ofbiscuits I thought that was a lot of food. At least I atesomething.I remember that, after we walked for about one month,my father couldn’t get up anymore. So he would tellus what to do since he couldn’t get around anymore.He would tell me and my mother what to do and wewould follow his instructions. We would put the netout to fish, if we were lucky we might get one fishand we would take it back to my father. We wouldcut the fish in such small pieces that we could eat onepiece everyday [. . .]. We survived by cutting the fishinto small pieces so at least we could chew something(Alikashuak 2005).


Mary Anautalik recalled how several elders diedbecause of the cold.

Because it was springtime, when we got there, we usedtrees as shelters, because we didn’t have anything else.Because we didn’t have a tent or any kind of shelterwe started to get sick. We had a cold, we didn’t havemedical help so we started to get sick after two to threeweeks.We were sick, because we didn’t have a tent, so oneby one, we started to have a cold. Because everybodygot sick that time, four of the elders died thattime.It hurts to remember when those four elders died. Wecouldn’t even find a box to put them into when theydied. So we buried them on the ground. We had to justleave them there. It was not our fault. We didn’t haveany choice but to leave them.It was because of our parents’ ability that we were ableto go back to our homeland, because of the way theycould survive. It was only through their help that wewere able to go back to our land (Anautalik, M. 2005).

The Ahiarmiut drifted back to Ennadai Lake within a fewmonths. Eva Muqyunnik recalled.

It was in the fall. We didn’t have any dogs. So wedragged everything we had. We walked, we startedwalking back to Ennadai Lake. It took us about threemonths from the time we were taken there to go backto Ennadai Lake. It must have been around Christmastime when we got back. We would not have survived,none of us would had survived if we stayed where wewere taken too. When we got back to Ennadai Lake, ittook us 3 months. Once we got there, there were plentyof animals again: caribou, fish, so we had plenty to eatonce we got back to our home land (Muqyunnik, E.2005).

Alikashuak related that it took his family six months tomake the trip back to Ennadai.

I think it must have taken six months for my family towalk back to Ennadai Lake. Muqyunnik and Anautaliksaw us coming from a distance. So they came to meetus since we were all weak from starvation. And that isall I can remember.I forgot to mention that when we were walking back toEnnadai Lake, I was about eight years old. My mothergave birth to a little girl. She didn’t survive since mymother was already very weak from starvation. Shewas between my brother and my sister but she did notsurvive. (Alikashuak 2005)The Ahiarmiut had suffered considerable hardships at

Nueltin Lake and on the trip back. These recollectionsfrom the elders are congruent with written sources as anRCMP report noted that Gleason Ledyard, an Evangelicalmissionary, had advised the police that the Ahiarmiutdid not like Nueltin Lake saying that it was strange tothem and inadequate for hunting (see Steenhoven 1955;Rowley 1956 in Marcus 1995: 135). The matter wouldhave rested there, if the government had not planned asecond relocation.

The preparation of the Henik Lake relocation1954–1956

In 1954, the weather station was taken over from theCanadian Army Signal Corps by the Department ofTransport air radio branch. In the summer of 1954 aserious problem emerged when the RCAF indicated thatthey did not wish to continue to supply the Ahiarmiut withfood and take out their furs as had been customary duringthe last three years. Cunningham stated in a letter to theRCMP commanding officer in Ottawa, dated 25 August1954:

[a]s you also know, a recent Cabinet directive prohibitsthe RCAF from undertaking work for civilian depart-ments except in emergencies or where no commercialcarrier is prepared and able to do work. As Mr. Cantleyadvised Staff Sgt. Kearney by telephone on Friday last,however, the RCAF have now consented to continuethe arrangement of carrying supplies from Churchill tothe Eskimos at Ennadai Lake on an availability basis.In other words, they will take such supplies on planesgoing into that area whenever there is space availablebut special flights will not be made (Cunningham1954a).

Cunningham sets out his policy in the same letter.From the experience we have had with these peopleduring the past two or three years, we are inclined tothink that they are beginning to rely more and moreon outside assistance and are not exerting themselvesas much as they might do, in obtaining and laying upa sufficient amount of food. We intend, therefore toinvestigate this situation more fully later in the year,with a view to deciding whether it is worthwhile tocontinue to maintain this small community at EnnadaiLake or whether we should not make an attempt tohave these people moved to an area where they couldbe more closely supervised and where they would benearer to a trading post. . .We feel however that thepresent arrangement calls for too great an expenditureof time and money and accomplishes little except tobarely keep this small isolated group alive. We havealways considered it a temporary arrangement and feelnow that that we should take steps to more adequatelytake care of this group (Cunningham 1954a).A week later in a memorandum to the deputy minister

dated 31 August 1954, Cunningham suggests: ‘[i]t maybe possible, however, to interest them in moving to thevicinity of Padlei or Eskimo Point where they used totrade in earlier years, but this is something which weintend to enquire into as opportunity offers during thecoming winter’ (Cunningham 1954b).

In a memorandum in June 1955 (quoted in Marcus1995: 139), Cunningham pointed out to Henry Larsenof the RCMP that the free servicing of Ennadai wouldsubject the government to increasing criticism fromair carriers and traders. He stated ‘. . .I don’t thinkthe government should give undue consideration to theimagined convenience of this small and perverse groupof ex-Padleimiuts who have apparently become used to


and fond of free help from the Ennadai radio station.’ Thenotion of perversity probably refers to sexual relationshipsthat had developed between Inuit women and the staff ofthe radio station. The notion of ex-Padleimiuts probablyrelates to Birket-Smith’s conjecture that the Ahiarmiutmay originally have come from the Padlei area.

The question to what extent starvation was reallyoccurring was already a point of controversy at the time.Cunningham reported in his memorandum to the deputyminister of 31 August 1954 that:

[i]n a signal received from the army station at Ennadaithrough the Edmonton Command, it was stated that theEskimo had been starving; that their general conditionwas poor, especially the children that they werecontracting all sorts of disease and that twelve hadbeen evacuated for hospital treatment. Indian HealthServices at our request inquired concerning this reportand received a telegram from the Winnipeg RegionalSuperintendent that reports of starvation at Ennadaiwere without foundation and that the only casesreaching hospital were ordinary medical ones. IndianHealth Services believe that the Superintendent’sreport may not be based on the latest information andare making further enquiry (Cunningham 1954b).Cunningham’s memorandum clearly shows that the

idea of relocation was primarily conceived to solve theproblem of the assumed dependency of the Ahiarmiuton the weather station. This dependence was thoughteconomically and morally to be unacceptable.

The issue of starvation was as this stage not yetcentral to the argument. In his memorandum to the deputyminister dated 31 January 1956 he states with respect tostarvation: ‘[d]espite this, there is nothing to indicate thatthere has been any major catastrophe among these peopleduring the past fifty years’ (Cunningham 1956).

The main issue at the time was, therefore, lessstarvation than the costs and the assumed dependencyof the Ahiarmiut on the weather station. A solution wasfound in the appointment of a Northern Service Officer(NSO) to relieve the burden of the weather station. Anexplicit request for such an officer was formulated in aletter dated 20 October 1954 by (?) De Niverville onbehalf of the deputy minister of transport, requesting theappointment of an Indians affairs agent to handle ‘theEskimo problem’ (De Niverville 1954). William G. Kerrwas appointed and received his instruction from Sivertz,then chief of the Arctic division. In the letter dated3 November 1954, it is stated:

[i]t seems evident that we shall have to make somearrangement for the care of this small group. It isscarcely justified to set up full trading facilities inthis isolated area but I would like to see what can bedone on a cooperative basis. The solution might be totransfer this people to Padlei where they were at onetime or to Eskimo point. It is just possible that someof them might be employed at Churchill. Probablythe best approach at the moment would be to discussthe subject with them at length over a period of some

days and preferably leaving them to talk it over amongthemselves for a couple of weeks. Their cooperationis essential. It will no doubt be difficult to make themunderstand that plane service cannot be supplied freeas a continuing thing. In order to discuss these mattersfully, it will be desirable for you to engage a competentinterpreter at Churchill (Sivertz 1954b).But Kerr soon developed his own views. Instead of

supporting a move to Padlei, he suggested that a smallstore or a comparable facility would be opened at EnnadaiLake (Sivertz 1955b). On 28 April 1955, Sivertz (1955c)sent a letter to P.A.C. Nichols, HBC manager in Winnipeg,stating that many caribou skins were wasted that could besold at a trading post if it were available. Could the HBCopen a trading post at Ennadai Lake? Nichols answeredon 6 May 1955 that this was economically not feasible.He suggested that the Ahiarmiut should be moved toPadlei. That trading post had become ‘a losing propositionbecause of its greatly reduced native population.’ Heproposed that HBC agent Henry Voisey of the Padleitrading post would assist in the operation (Nichols 1955b).Sivertz agreed and asked Kerr on 17 May 1955 to persuadethe Ahiarmiut to move to Ennadai Lake (Sivertz 1955d).

Through Voisey, the HBC was now involved in theprocess as an interested party. Among the elders in Arviattoday, the reputation of Voisey remains controversial.According to James Tuungaujaq Konek (2006), Voiseywas pretty rough with his clients. If they came forassistance he turned them away or told them to go fishingeven if there was no fish in the lakes nearby. He neverlet Inuit enter his house. Leo Ahmak (2006) confirmedthat Henri Voisey looked down on Inuit, especially theAhiarmiut. The Ahiarmiut elders themselves, however,do not speak negatively about Voisey.

At that time, Sivertz informed Kerr that he was notenthusiastic about his proposition to open a small store atEnnadai. He reiterated that the solution was to persuadethe Ahiarmiut to go nearer to Padlei. He informed Kerr ofNichols’ offer to involve Voisey in the matter. Kerr visitedthe Aharmiut on 2 July 1955, but he did so without Voiseyas engine trouble prevented the aircraft from picking himup. And Kerr reported: ‘[t]he natives were in apparentlygood health and their dogs were tied up and in excellentcondition’ (Kerr 1955b). He raised the matter of therelocation with Ahiarmiut.

Through Ohoto, they replied that the Padlei district,where most of them had been, was a poor country forgame and that they would be hungry there. They were infamiliar country at Ennadai and happy there. They saidthat if they had some ammunition and enough tea andtobacco it would be sufficient to make them contentedand that they did not want the Government to do ‘[t]oomuch work for them’. The whole discussion was carriedon in amiable manner by both sides (Kerr 1955b).

He concluded his memorandum in a positive vein:I cannot help but admire these Eskimo who wantto live their own mode of life and are confident ofsurviving on their own hunting ability rather than


on relief rations. The Police, the present staff of theEnnadai radio Station and myself all think they shouldbe encouraged to continue as they are (Kerr 1955b).This point of view was confirmed by Sgt. JA, Rothery

of the RCMP who accompanied Kerr on the trip stating ina letter dated 4 July 1955, ‘Mr. Kerr was able to discusswith the natives the proposal to move to Padlei but they allrefuse to do so and are apparently determined to remainon their hunting grounds’ (Rothery 1955).

In a memorandum dated 25 August 1955 to Sivertz,Kerr (1955c) confirmed, ‘[t]hey were in good health andwere obtaining plenty of fish and sufficient caribou meatfrom the small herds still in their district.’ A memorandumof a police patrol to Kerr dated 30 September 1955confirmed that ‘[s]ufficient caribou are being taken tosupply all present needs and a number of surplus skinswere brought out and turned over to Mr. Kerr who isarranging for payment of the same’ (Cunningham 1955).

In 1955, James Houston spent a few weeks amongthe Ahiarmiut. In his report he described Ahiarmiut life,observed that they provided moral support to the whitesof the radio station and commented that ‘the least likelysolution seems to move them’ (Houston 1955; quotedin Tester and Kulchyski 1994: 215). Geert van denSteenhoven spent several weeks with the Ahiarmiut inthe autumn. He gave extensive descriptions of the life inthe camp of Owlijoot and at the time everything seemedfine (Steenhoven 1956, 1962: 12; Marcus 1995: 32).

However, in the winter of 1955–1956 the situationdeteriorated. Cunningham reported to the deputy ministeron 31 January 1956 as follows.

All Eskimos were reported to be in a good health butapparently the main herd of caribou had not passedthrough the district last fall and only a few had beenobtained. However, issues of buffalo meat from theDepartment of Transport’s freezer have been made tothe Eskimo. This meat was sent in to Ennadai Lakenearly two years ago to be held for an emergency suchas this. Possibly due to the Eskimo being short of dogfeed they had not ventured too far afield and very littlefur was brought out to be sold in the usual mannerand the proceeds used to purchase winter supplies.As this group has considerably family allowancecredits, the next flight planned for February will takein family allowance supplies and goods purchasedfrom the limited proceeds of the trapping. Sufficientammunition is on hand and with the supplies they havenow received, together with what will be going in, pluswhat they will earn during the rest of the winter theywill have little difficulty in remaining self-supporting(Cunningham 1956a).However, in a memorandum to Sivertz dated 26 April

1956, J.P. Richards of the Arctic division sketched a muchgloomier image of the situation at Ennadai Lake. ‘Thenatives were ill clothed and they were unable to fend forthemselves. They said they were hungry and they lookedto be. All seemed to be suffering from heavy colds. Themorale and the condition of these natives was so low that

they were incapable of making sustained effort in theirown behalf’ Richards (1956a). This negative perceptionof the natives is well illustrated by an anecdote relatingthat Mr. Southall had given the natives ‘300 lbs. of hamthat had been condemned because it turned rancid. Inreply to a query he said that some of the local dogs hadbeen given the worst of meat to make reasonably surethat the bulk of it was safe to hand to the natives. Hesaid the natives seemed to take it with relish’. ContinuingRichards (1956a) argued, ‘[t]he distressing situation atEnnadai Lake is attributable to no small degree to lack ofsupervision and guidance of the local natives. They arenow low in morale and spirit, but the male members ofthe group appear to be capable of better effort.’ Why thisspecific reference to ‘the male members of the group’?In the Arviat workshop, the Ahiarmiut elders suggestedthat the sexual relationships that developed between themen at the radio station and the Ahiarmiut women playeda part in the decision to relocate them. One of the elderswho wishes to remain anonymous, observed:

We wonder what was the real purpose of thisAhiarmiut relocation. [. . .] We know those Qallunaatwere using two women, and had sex with them, livingwith them. In fact one of them asked a woman to havesex with him and tried to get after her but she didn’twant to be involved with those Qallunaat. Perhaps thatwas one of the reasons why we were relocated and puton an island. I don’t know, I am just wondering becausethere was something unpleasant at that time when theQallunaat were using these women. It might not be themain point, but I just wanted to get it out of my chestbecause during all those years, it bothered me.The problem of sexual relationship may be behind

Richards’s assessment. Richards stated, ‘[t]here is uni-form agreement that these natives should be moved to alocation where wildlife is more abundant and that theymust be given proper supervision them to become re-established elsewhere.’ He emphasised the tremendouscosts of relief supply and pointed out that Kerr and CplW. Gallagher were strongly in favour of this position. Bythat time the position of Kerr seems to have been changing.According to Richards, Kerr reported on 6 April 1956 thatall Eskimos were in good health, particularly the childrensuggesting that there were no problems. However, Marcus(1995: 143) quotes from a memorandum dated from 28March 1956 in which Kerr stated that after speaking withVoisey, he had changed his mind and now advocated atransfer of the Ahiarmiut to Padlei. Richards suggestedthat the relocation would be proposed to the Ahiarmiut assoon as possible by Kerr and the senior representative ofthe RCMP at Churchill. ‘If there is no valid objectionto the move, these officers might submit suggestionsas to how it should be carried out and estimate of thecost involved.’ Richards sees no need for consent bythe Ahiarmiut, but Sivertz is more careful. From thebeginning of the discussion of relocation he has expressedthe opinion that the cooperation of Ahiarmiut is requiredfor the relocation.


In a memorandum dated 7 May 1956, Sivertz (1956a)supports Richards’ proposal and suggests the assignmentof Douglas Wilkinson to this job and move to Kerr toFrobisher Bay. He does not give any other argumentthan that Wilkinson would like the job, and apparentlyhe thinks that Wilkinson is more suitable for it thanKerr. A meeting took place on the transfer of theEnnadai Lake people in Ottawa on 3 May 1956. Themeeting was attended by Cunningham, Robert A. Phillips,James Cantley, Alex Stevenson, and James Richards, allCanadian civil servants. It was agreed that Wilkinsonwould be established at Baker Lake or another convenientpoint. Kerr was to be called to Ottawa immediately fora meeting to discuss all factors involved in the proposedmove of the Ennadai Lake natives. On 4 June 1956 Kerrattended a meeting with Cunningham, Phillips, (?) Doyleand Richards. The outcome of the latter meeting wasthat Kerr would remain in Churchill. It was also decidedthat the Kivalliq area would now be divided into twozones, the southern part, including Ennadai and Padleiwould continue to be administered by Kerr, the northernzone by Wilkinson. Considering Sivertz’s proposal wemay infer that Kerr had to prove that he really was theman for the job. The relocation itself was no longer apoint of discussion. What was lacking was the approvalof Ahiarmiut themselves. Kerr may have agreed toobtain it.

After this meeting Kerr proved himself to be a loyalsupporter of the idea of relocation. In a letter to Nicholsdated 25 June 1956 Cunningham explained that LewisVoisey, a resident of Eskimo Point would be employed inthe capacity of supervisor to live with and assist the nativesin becoming established at the new location (Cunningham1956b).

Kerr went to Ennadai Lake on 2 August 1956. In hisletter to Sivertz of 3 August 1956, he reported that ‘[w]hileat Ennadai lake I held a conference with the heads of the15 Eskimo families located there and with . . . Voisey asinterpreter’ (Kerr 1956a). Kerr explained that the gist ofhis argument was as follows.

Last year, as in other years, there had been no Caribouand they had been hungry without skins for clothing.We had brought food to them but this would not alwaysbe possible as we had many Eskimo to look after andthe Plane would not be available when the Eskimowere in trouble again at Ennadai Lake. The RadioStation was not a Trading Post and there was Foodonly for the men who worked there. This year theRadio Station men had been good men and had sharedsome of their food with the Eskimo, but next year theremight be only enough for the Station and the new Menwould not want to give it to the Eskimo if they werehungry, for they might have to go hungry themselves.It might happen that next year, too, there would notbe any Caribou and they would be hungry again and Icould not get the Plane to come and help them becauseI had to visit many other Eskimo. As their Friend I didnot want them to be hungry and so I would like them

to be in a place where they could obtain ‘Whiteman’s’food themselves when Game was scarce so that theirWives and Children would not go hungry. This foodcould be obtained by them putting out many trapsand bringing the pelts of the animals they obtainedto the Trading post and that each man would get theentire benefit of what he had trapped and not have itused for the benefit of the whole band as at present.As their Friend I would only advise them to go to adistrict that would be for their good. Henik Lake wassuitable place and they would not have to leave theirown type of country but only to another part of it. Ifthey were willing to move to Henik Lake we wouldtake them there by Airlift. But if they left Ennadai theywere not to move back unless the Government agreed,otherwise we could not promise to help them as in thepast (Kerr 1956a).Kerr relates that he showed the Ahiarmiut a map of

Henik Lake. ‘They were evidently satisfied with the placeselected and immediately started to tell Mr. Voisey andmyself of all the fishing places and the good campingsites. Without exception they were all in favour of goingto Henik Lake and said they would not return to Ennadaiunless they talked it over with the Government first’(Kerr 1956a). He also stated: “I would emphasize thatthe conference was held in a friendly atmosphere and thedecision of the Eskimo was reached by themselves and nothreats or coercion was used’ (Kerr 1956a). Kerr returnedto Churchill that same day.

Today, the Ahiarmiut elders deny that such a meetingever took place. According to them they were neverinformed of the plans to relocate them to Henik Lake. Thisis consistent with contemporary testimonies. Oulijoot, theleader of the Ennadai people, and his wife stated, ‘[w]edidn’t know we were moving (to Henik Lake) till justbefore we went. Henri Voisey told us the day before.He didn’ t give any reasons.’ (This sentence is quotedin appendix B (page 4) to a memorandum written bySivertz to the deputy minister dated 28 March 1958: seeSivertz 1958a). As Oulijoot and his wife were recognizedas leaders by the Ahiarmiut (see the reports by Steenhoven1957, 1958, 1962) there is no chance that they wouldnot have been aware of such a meeting if it had takenplace.

Also, why would the Ahiarmiut agree to go to HenikLake if they knew perfectly well that it was not goodfor caribou hunting as indicated by Ohoto in 1955? Hisassessment is confirmed by Oulijoot and his wife whostated in 1958, ‘[w]e never got any caribou this side ofEnnadai. We had a net out but could only catch one fish.There was enough ammunition but no caribou. We don’ tknow why the caribou didn’t come – but there never wasmuch caribou around Henik Lake’ (Sivertz 1958a).

Kerr does not specify who the heads of the 15 familieswere. He must have been aware that Inuit leaders suchas Pongalaaq and Oulijoot were the men he should dealwith, but he did not mention their names whereas he didspecify the name of Ohoto in his report of July 1955.


Clearly Kerr was quite eager to obtain unanimousapproval from the Inuit specifying that the Inuit made theirown decisions without any external coercion or threat.However, the gist of his arguments as presented in hisletter to Sivertz is full of implicit threats and it is hardto assume that Ahiarmiut would have missed that point.Voisey may also have played a part in the process in hisrole as interpreter.

Marcus (1995: 207) suggests that already at thetime serious doubts about the consensual nature of therelocation existed. Thus Graham Rowley stated in amemorandum to R.G. Robertson that ‘it appeared unlikelythat the move was really accepted by them’ (Tester andKulchyski 1994: 228; Marcus 1995: 207–208). He alsorefers to a memorandum of Larsen to the commissionerin 1959 in which Larsen points out that ‘the failure toobtain informed consent had been a flaw in the planning’(Marcus 1995: 208).

However that may be, once Kerr reported that hehad obtained permission from the Ahiarmiut group, animportant obstacle to the relocation had been removed andthe operation could now go ahead. Sivertz immediatelytook action to arrange that a RCAF plane would transportthe Ahiarmiut in August, but due to mechanical failureof the plane intended for the operation the relocation wasdelayed to the spring of 1957. According to Kerr (1956c)in his memorandum of 21 September the Ahiarmiut wereglad that the project had been postponed. They were allin good health and appeared happy.

The relocations to Henik Lake 1957 and to EskimoPoint (Arviat) 1958

On 10 May 1957 the first group of Ahiarmiut wasrelocated and on 24 May the Department of NorthernAffairs and National Resources proudly announced ina press release, ‘Eskimos fly to new hunting grounds’.‘A community of some of Canada’s most primitivecitizens has moved – but they did it the modern way.Eskimo hunters and huskies left their ancient waysfor a day to travel in the comfort of an aircraft tonew hunting grounds.’ And it concluded, ‘[t]his notthe first time that Eskimo hunters and their familieshave volunteered to leave their home because game wasscarce. For the same reason, Eskimos from the eastcoast of Hudson Bay were moved to Cornwallis andEllesmere islands in 1953. If the success of these earliersettlers is any guide, the Ennadai Eskimos can hopeto find relative prosperity in their new surroundings’(Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources1957).

The public was informed that the Ennadai people hadbeen relocated and provided with food for a month andammunition for the summer and new tents. Today, theAhiarmiut elders, however, relate that they had to leavemost of their equipment behind and especially missedtheir caribou skins at Henik Lake.

Eva Muqyunnik related as follows.

Once we got to this new camp, we didn’t havethose caribou skins, caribou clothing anymore. Therewere just the white man’s food, blankets, things thatcouldn’t really help us to survive. No caribou skin, nosleeping mat whatsoever. Once again we had left ourbelongings. That is why it was much harder to surviveat Henik Lake.Once again we moved to this new place. We wereused to burn wood in a stove to keep warm but wewere not used to having a Coleman stove. We werenot used to this new equipment that they gave us.Therefore we were like kids learning all over againwith this new equipment. Because we have survivedon caribou skins, caribou clothing, wood stoves. Wewere used to all these things, but we were not used tothat brand new equipment, store bought food. We hada hard time surviving because in that area there wereno small animals such as ptarmigan and rabbits wecould find. So therefore once again we were having ahard time. It makes me wonder why this had to happen.Why all the relocation all over again. What was thepurpose of it? Was it abuse? Are they mad at us? Whatis happening? All that comes to my mind.In Ennadai Lake there were plenty of animals but inHenik Lake, like it is said in the papers, there wasonly white man’s food. But that didn’t last us verylong because it was very little. After that, the food wasgone right away. So after that we went hungry again.There was no fish around in this new location, and thefamily was so large. My mother-in-law, Nutaraaluk,had ten children. Beside those ten children there wasthe rest of the family to feed. Every time Muqyunnikand Anautalik got a ptarmigan or a rabbit, that onebird was divided among 10 children. We each had alittle piece since it had to last. We all had to eat, evenif there was so many of us.It was in winter. It came to a time when we had to burnthe skin by removing the hair of the skin and eat thehide, because there was no food.Once in this second camp, in the place calledHaningajualaq at Henik Lake, it was the worst winterbecause we were all starving. And we would go toHenry Voisey’s camp for food. But he would not giveus any.It was during the time that my father in law, Aulatjut,myself and my baby Tablu stayed in bed all day andnight to keep warm, to survive. That was the hardesttime that winter because the weather was very cold.My baby was new-born. I would try to feed him but Ihad no milk at all. So we had a hard time. There wasno food at all for us, not even for the new-born to havemilk from me (Muqyunnik E. 2005).Kerr was present at the relocation on 10 May but did

not stay for long. He stated that he intended to leave Voiseywith the Inuit but decided not to do so ‘as it is evident theEskimo would not spread out over the country as long as aWhiteman was camped with them and, to them, a certainsource of food supply. Leaving them for the present would


force them to display some initiative and force them tosupply their own needs, as they did before they beganhanging around the radio station at Ennadai Lake’ (Kerr1957b). Instead he decided to send Voisey in the autumn tosupervise the Ahiarmiut. In total, 59 Inuit were relocated(see Marcus 1995: 230–231 for a detailed list).

The Ahiarmiut immediately found life at Henik Lakevery hard. Oulijoot described this to Farley Mowat, awell known Canadian author who made two trips in theArctic in 1947–1948 and created considerable trouble forthe Northern administration when he published his bookPeoples of the Deer in 1952 in which he declared that theAhiarmiut were neglected by the Canadian governmentand were approaching extinction.’

We were surprised when the white men told us thiswas a good place for caribou, for we knew it was ahungry country. All the same it was the right time forthe deer to come north and we needed meat. The foodthat had been left for us only lasted a few days. Ourpeople were hungry and they ate a lot.The white men had made us pitch the tents under abig hill. We knew this to be an evil place but we letthe tents stay there for a while and took our rifles andwent looking for deer trails and crossing places. Wefound no trails. We knew there had not been any deerin this place for a long time because there were no oldtrails. After a while we came back to the tents and wedecided to move because we were afraid of the hillspirits.We knew we could not go back to our own country,but we thought if we Went a little way to the west wemight find level ground where the deer might pass.Some of the people would not move, because theysaid it was no use. So they stayed at the camp thewhite men had chosen for us. They were Pommela,Alekahaw and Onekwaw. All the rest of us walkedfor a day to the southwest until we had crossed thebig hills and reached some little lakes where wecould see flat country to the west. Here we set upour camps. There was lots of wood here, and we hadfires, but we had no food. There were some ptarmiganbut not enough to be much use. We tried to fish inthe lakes, but the ice was thick (it would then havebeen from six to eight feet in thickness), and whenwe had cut through it we did not catch any fish byjigging. I do not think there were any fish in thoselakes.It was on the second day after we had come to Henikthat we moved to the new place. While we weremaking the new camp we heard some airplanes flyingto the southwest and Anoteelik thought they werelanding. So he and Mounik and another walked thatway. They found some white men with a big camp,and with a tractor, and one of the white men gavethem some food.The next day all the men walked to that camp and theygave us food again, but they did not have very muchto give us.

One day Alekahaw arrived at our camp and said thatPommela had died and That he had starved to death.He said there was nothing to eat at the first camp andso he had come to see if there was food where wewere. We did not have any food, for no deer had comeat all and we could not get any fish.Some thought we ought to walk back to our owncountry but it was too far when the children werehungry, and anyway the white men had told us we hadto stay where we were.One day a white man from the camp came to visit uswith Anoteelik. He slept with us and went back thenext day. He said he would send a message that wewere hungry and that some food would be brought in.Nothing happened for a long time. We were all hungry,but the white men at the camp could not give us muchfood. Mostly we stayed in the tents and some peoplewished they had run away and hidden when the planecame to Ennadai to take us away (Mowat [1959] 1995:188–189).According to Mowat this white man was P. Lynn who

reported the plight of the Ennadai Lake Inuit to the RCMPconstable in Churchill who informed the authorities aboutLynn’s report.

Kerr visited the Ennadai Lake people again on 5 June1957 and found that the caribou had not been seen, butthat they obtained fish enough. Pongalak, who had beenan important leader, had died in May (Kerr 1957c). In amemorandum dated 8 August, Kerr (1957e) reports thearrest of Ohoto and Muqyunnik on 6 August 1957 fortheft of supplies and equipment from the camp of theSherrit-Gordon Morning Corporation at Bray Lake on 6June 1957.

Job Muqyunnik recalled,I was one of the people who got arrested because therewere three of us. What really happened is that three ofus got arrested. There was Uutuq, Ayaut and myself.Ayaut’s wife had two small boys (and Kukijuaq) whowere crying for food. The children were crying forfood and we had been hunting for nine days withoutseeing any caribou. When we got to the building, Ayautbroke the lock of the building to feed the children.Later on, we found out that we were breaking the law.All we took was opened flour, a half bag of flour and apiece of lard cut in half. That’s all we took, and that’show we got arrested. The food we took was on a table(Muqyunnik J 2005).The two men were taken to Eskimo point (now

Arviat). The arrests immediately affected their families.Eva Muqyunnik reported that after Muqyunnik had beenarrested by the RCMP, and while he was in custody, Evahad a baby.

It was during the time when there was absolutely nofood. Because he was one of the hunters they had avery hard time. For up to five days they hardly hadanything to eat. Even though they went to the post inPadlei, they were refused twice. So they had nothingto eat. Because they were so hungry, they burned the


skin [of a caribou], the hair, so they could eat the hide,so they had something to eat (Muqyunnik E. 2005)Today, the Ahiarmiut elders maintain that Ohoto

(Uutuq) and Muqyunnik committed the theft becausethere was already starvation and that they only took avery limited quantity of food. However, the two Ahiarmiutwere considered as ‘ringleaders’ (see Phillips 1957a) andwere duly prosecuted. Unfortunately Ohoto became blindas a result of his detainment. Mary Whitmore related thatMuqyunnik told her how her father became blind. Whenthey were in jail, the RCMP made them work, carryingheavy rocks to the beach area. They were working on thisbig piece of rock when accidentally a splinter hit his eyeand he became blind. After that, he went to the hospitaland came back again but he never saw again. She said,‘I am glad to know that because I’ve been wondering allthose years. My mother was not even told what happenedto my father. [. . .] Years later, back in Arviat, because myfather was blind, he couldn’t see, he froze to death nearthe community. Every time I see the little ditch he diedin, it reminded me of him all over again. [. . .] I have thisin my chest for so many years and I finally got rid of it’(Whitmore 2005).

Kerr reports that the Eskimo were shooting caribou insmall numbers and catching sufficient fish. They were nothungry and in good health (Kerr 1957a).

In the mean time Voisey was brought in to prepare theEnnadai people for the winter. Later, on 16 March 1958Kerr reported, in a memorandum to the chief of the Arcticdivision,

In the first part of September I brought Lewis Voisey toHenik Lake, where he set up camp. He stayed with theEskimos and supervised and prodded them into puttingup fish and instructing them on catching and properlyrepairing caribou meat for storage for winter use. Hewas instructed to place special emphasis on savingall suitable caribou skins and the making of winterclothing for all. I then left for Ottawa on ‘leave’ andat the completion of it I was posted to Rankin Inlet.Mr. Voisey was brought out from Henik Lake justbefore ‘freeze up’ in early October, as his supplieswere depleted and there was no other accommodationfor him for the coming winter outside of a tent (Kerr1958d).Thus the Ahiarmiut, pretty much in the same condi-

tion, were left on their own.Douglas Wilkinson (1957) reported on 25 September

1957 that Voisey was not too hopeful about the adequacyof the future food supply of the group. If a large herd wouldnot wander into the area, they would be without winterfood. Wilkinson thought they would require assistance.On 8 October 1957, Phillips requested Wilkinson to‘confer with Mr, Voisey and if necessary, with the localrepresentative of the RCMP and take steps to ensurethat the condition of these natives will be kept underobservation, and if conditions deteriorate, arrangementswill be made to provide them with essential supplies’(Philipps 1957b).

Ahiarmiut elders recall the starvation of that winter.Mary Anautalik related that she told her husband, LukeAnautalik, that her father could no longer get up.

Anautalik said to me ‘I will go to Padlei to see ifthey give us some food. While I’m gone, why don’tyou take skin down and remove the hair, chew the hideand put it in his mouth to see if he would chew it.’ [. . .]I did what Anautalik asked me to do. So I grabbed abig piece of hide from the covers, removed the hairand I chewed it a long time, and when it was goodand wet I put it into his mouth, my father’s mouth,and he swallowed it. At least he had something in hisstomach. (Anautalik 2005)

Alikashuak related:I remember my father told us that he would go outfishing. It was cold outside, and stormy. The wind wascoming from the north, so you can imagine how coldit was. My mother knew there was no food. She triedto breast feed us one by one. First of all, she triedto breast feed me, and then after me it would be mybrother Andy, after Andy it was my little sister Eva.When she realised she couldn’t breast feed us, she cutthe soles of the kamik, both of them and burned themso we had something to chew on (Alikashuak 2005)

Mary Anautalik related that her little sister died, becauseher mother was unable to breastfeed her.

Even though my mother tried to breast feed her, shecouldn’t feed her so she died. I was the one who lookafter the body as well. So it has been very hard for me.I have never seen my father having so much hard timeelse then that time when he couldn’t get up. He wasalways able to do something, always able to hunt. Mylittle sister would have been adult just like us, onlya bit younger than me. But she never had a chanceto grow up because we were relocated to a differentplace. Perhaps if we had stayed in Ennadai Lake, shewould have survived. Because we would have enoughfood and know what to do (Anautalik 2005).By December 1957 the Canadian authorities were

aware that the caribou had not come and that the Ahiarmiuttherefore were in serious trouble. Their response was torevive the discourse on the incapacity of the Ennadaipeople to take care of their own life. On 3 December Kerr(1957f) observed, ‘I do not think that I, or anyone else,could get them to shake of their lethargy about providingfor themselves. They will agree to follow any programto better themselves that is suggested to them and thengo back to their former ways and blithely forget theirpromises.’ He agreed with Gallagher that they should beput under permanent supervision and proposed to locatethem in the Churchill area and integrate them in a wageearning economy. At the same time, 3 December CplGallagher proposed to move the Ennadai Lake people toTavani, north of Eskimo Point. This place had severaladvantages for example ‘[t]here are only few vacantbuildings throughout the Tavani district with no foodcaches etc. thereby removing the temptation to committheft which is now present in the Henik Lake area.’ And he


added ‘[t]he writer feels that these Eskimos are not suitedto live without supervision on the land and as yet are notready or adaptable for life in or near a settlement such asRankin Inlet or Eskimo Point, but at a location as Tavanithey would be much more accessible should opportunityarise and where patrols at least monthly could be madeto their camps’ (Gallagher 1957). Among contemporaryInuit elders, Gallagher was thought to be harsh towardsthe Inuit. Some elders state that he had a reputation forsexual abuse of Inuit women and left several children whoare still alive in Arviat and was known to look down on theAhiarmiut. The reports speak well of him and he seemsto have been devoted to his job, but he may have takenquite some liberties in the community that was entrustedto him.

Unfortunately, the proposals by Kerr and Gallaghercontain no suggestions how to deal with the increasingstarvation at Henik Lake. They seem aware that things aregoing wrong at Henik Lake but appear too busy with theirvisions of the future to concern themselves with what washappening at the present.

Rowley, who travelled extensively in the Arctic, seemsto have been better aware of these problems. In a memor-andum to the director of Northern Affairs, Phillips com-ments on the notes the director made of Rowley’s views:

1. He thinks these people have been moved toomuch, and that their decision to move – toEnnadai – to Nueltin – to Henik – was probablybecause they regarded it as a command of thewhite manThey have now lost leadership, lost confidenceand are afraid – This is reason for theft.

2. It is no good morning to Tavani – a strange andunwelcome landThey are not ready to go to ChurchillThey like Ennadai and probably would drift backif left to themselves.

3. What is need now is some person to go amongthem as an N.S.O. staying for three or fouryears and -dedicated -like a missionary – at theirpreferred location at Ennadai (Phillips 1958a).

Rowley was probably thinking of Steenhoven. In 1981he pointed out that Steenhoven had ‘suggested to theadministration that they return to the area they knew, andhe offered to go live with them to see that they prosperedand to summons help if it were needed’ (Rowley 1981:227). However, the administration rejected the proposal.

Phillips commented: ‘I cannot agree with this solution.Our entire policy of Arctic development must rest uponsound economic foundations. I think it would be folly toencourage people to move to an area where we know thatthere is not a solid economic basis for their future lives’(Philipps 1958a).

Rowley’s assessment of leadership agrees with that ofthe Ahiarmiut elders. They explain that at Henik Laketraditional leadership patterns broke down and sharingstopped. The position of a leader was to an importantextent based on his knowledge of the land and the game.

In an unfamiliar area where the game was not availableleadership became pointless and everyone tried to survivein his own way.

But in January 1958 the situation only worsened. JobMuqyunnik gave an account of the death of Qajait inJanuary 1958.

Once I got into the igloo, I saw him lying down inside.He had his hood up, his face was covered with hishood. So I opened the hood. He opened his eyes. Itried to talk to him but he couldn’t answer, becausehe was starving. He was not able to get up and talkanymore. I removed my outer coat, put him inside andtook him to Padlei. It was 2 o’clock when I left there.When I left at 2 o’clock that afternoon, we arrived at10 pm in the evening. But before getting into EskimoPadlei, I stopped three times to rest. I didn’t have anydogs, but I was pulling him with me. Once in a whileI would stop, and feel his mouth to make sure he wasstill alive. Every time I moved my hand and touch hismouth, he would move his mouth. He did that twice.First, I stopped at the lake, and then I went up thehill. Just before going down from the hill, I touchedhis mouth again to make sure he was still alive. Justbefore reaching the Eskimo Padlei, it was not very faranymore, probably the distance of the water reservoir,just west of us, before moving on to start walkingthere again, although it was very close to the building,I touched his mouth again. But this time it was coldand he was not moving his mouth anymore. I knewthat he had died. So I stopped, and just rested rightbeside my little qamutik.Because I knew he had died and the buildings werevery close, I left him at the qamutik and him, and Iran. Because in those days I ran, I could go aroundvery actively. So I ran to Henry Voisey’s place, to thebuilding, and told them what happened.Once I got into Henry Voisey building, there was stilllight in the building. I knew they were up. So I knockedon the door, and Henry opened it. And I told him thatI found Qajait but that he had died on the way. I toldhim that he almost got up to here but finally died. I toldhim that. He opened the door and asked me to cometo him. He took me to a room and told me that I hadkilled Qajait. ‘You have killed him, so I have to callthe RCMP.’ And then he put me in the room in frontof the table and closed the door and nailed it. He toldme that he was going to call the RCMP thinking I hadkilled Qajait.The next day, Henry Voisey and an RCMP agent tookme to the body. They held my arm all the way tothe body, fearing I would run away and thinking that Ikilled him. Once they got there, the RCMP agent had aknife and he cut the coat all the way down, and studiedthe body to see if there were any marks. After he didthat, knowing that there was no mark, the RCMP agentput down his head and stayed there for a while.When the RCMP cut up the clothing in front all theway down, you could see Qajait’s body had turned all


black. It was just bones, there was no meat. He diedof starvation.After that they put the body up where there was a pieceof wood. They put it on top of that to keep it off theground. After they did that, we had tea, and HenryVoisey kept asking me where I started to walk from,where I came from and how long it took me to walkto Padlei. I kept telling him that I left at 2 o’clock inthe afternoon that day in January and got there thatevening, at 10 pm. He kept saying I was lying. Allthat time he told me I was lying. Right beside himwas the RCMP agent who was continually moving hishead, knowing that he agreed with Henry. They didn’tbelieve me. After a while, Henry said, ‘Why don’t wecheck your footprints to make sure you are telling thetruth? Let’s follow your footprints to make sure youare telling the truth. From here to the place you startedwalking.’We kept following my footsteps. Once in while I wouldlook back to the RCMP agent who was following us.Every time I looked back, he would shook his headat me. All that time Henry was asking, ‘Where is theplace. Where is the place. Are we there yet. Are weclose now?’ We kept walking until we got to this igloothat was partly made. At sun down we finally reachedit. We finally got there. Once we got there, I guess theyfinally believed me, that I walked all the way from thatpartly made iglu to the buildings. Once we stoppedthere, we made tea and I was fed. We ate, but HenryVoisey didn’t even eat himself. He was suddenly verybusy picturing the sled and all that.When we went back to Padlei, Henry told me to sleepover at Qarjuk’s place. He told me to come back in themorning.The next day I went back to Henry Voisey’s place.Once I got there, the RCMP agent gave me a piece ofpaper and he told me, ‘Give this paper to Henry.’ SoI did. When I gave the paper to Henry, he said, ‘Let’sgo to the store.’After going to the store, I went back to the buildings.Just before I started walking home again, to my camp,Henry Voisey told me ‘Tell everybody to come to mycamp, to Padlei. Anybody you see along the way, tellthem to come to Padlei.’ It was at that time that wewere relocated to Arviat. (Muqyunnik J. 2005)The administration was not sure how to deal with the

situation. On 4 February 1958, Phillips, chief of the Arcticdivision, informed NSO officer Kennedy that he did notwish to move the people now, anticipating a study of theNorthern Research Centre (Phillips 1958b).

On 6 February 1958, G.D. Ruttan of Sherrit GordonMines reported a new break in (Ruttan 1958a) and NSOofficer Robert Kennedy replied to Ruttan on 13 February,1958 explaining,

[t]he people at Oftedal Lake are not a representativegroup of Eskimos, They together with a few othersmall bands living on the barrens, constitute the lastremaining examples of ‘primitive’ Eskimos. They are,

for the most part ‘pagans.’ Almost exclusively, theydepend upon the migrating caribou herds to providethem with meat for food and with skins and sinews forclothing. The caribou herds, as you must know, havedeclined drastically during the last few years. Thisyear there have been no caribou in the Oftedal Lakearea and this has meant much hardship and misery forthe Eskimos. I do not wish to excuse their conduct butit maybe that prolonged hunger will often dull a man’sconscience (Kennedy 1958a).But Kennedy was well aware that things had gone

astray at Henik Lake. In a memorandum to Phillips dated13 February 1958 he states.

From what I can gather conditions are serious bothat Oftedal Lake and at Padlei. Almost every familyis receiving relief rations either as such or in thedisguise of increased family allowance benefits. Twomen of the Padlei group have died of frostbite andexposure during the past month. Another has beenbrought here to hospital in an extremely emaciatedcondition (Kennedy 1958b).On 14 February, news of the murders at north Henik

Lake, usually referred to as the Kikkik case, reached theDepartment of Northern Affairs and National Resourcesfrom Supt. Larsen of the RCMP.

For your information the Eskimos concerned are theEnnadai Lake Eskimos who were moved from EnnadaiLake last year to North Henik Lake and it appearsthat this move has not proven very successful, andwe are recommending to the Department of NorthernAffairs and National Resources that they consider therecommendation and of the NCOI/C Eskimo PointDetachment to move these Eskimos from Henik Laketo Eskimo Point as soon as possible in order that theycan be given proper supervision and guidance (Larsen1958).

Phillips contacted Kerr who sent the following telegramon 15 February 1958.

Arrived Eskimo Point today stop proceeding Heniktomorrow stop preliminary police investigation dis-closes evidence of dementia praecox among Eskimoconcerned stop sufficient country produce in districtfor needs of Eskimo stop no question of starvationinvolved stop will take necessary action for welfare ofall concerned (Kerr 1958d).On February 17, 1958 Richards informed Phillips that

the relocation to Eskimo Point had started. He related that,according to Kerr, the Eskimo did not suffer from lack offood but from mental depression (Richards 1958a). In hismemorandum of 23 February 1958, Kerr reported that 33people had been relocated to Arviat and that ten morewould be brought from Padlei. In this memorandum Kerrdefends his policy pointing out,

These would have to be moved either this year or,the most, next year. In spite of all the help giventhem, they were incapable of looking after themselveswithout supervision. It was only a question of timebefore they would have to be guided into the inevitable


wage economy that will replace their old mode oflife.As they are at present, bewildered by events, they hadto be brought out of their area. Beset by their manytaboos and superstitions, they cannot seem to graspthe need for saving from the plenty of today for thefamine of tomorrow.Henry Voisey, post manager at Padlei, and who hasdealt with the Padlei Eskimos of the same stock, forover fourteen continuous years has stated that he cando nothing with the Henik Lake Eskimos. It is not thatthey are stubborn or resistant to White Man’s guidanceand advice, but rather that they appear to be confidentthat food and shelter will be provided without anyeffort on their part (Kerr 1958a).Thus Kerr puts the blame firmly on the Ennadai

people, especially on their attitude to life. With regardto their condition he observes rather surprisingly, ‘[t]heyare all in good health and their appearance other thantheir clothes, is that of well-fed people. The children,especially, appear robust and vigorous.’ Apparently Kerrdenied that starvation that was going at Henik Lake. Buthe was very well aware that things went terribly wrongand that questions would be asked. He states,

I still am convinced that the moving of the Eskimosfrom Ennadai Lake to Henik Lake was sound basicallyand justified, present events not withstanding.Our division, basing their approval on my recommend-ation, perhaps will have to face some criticism forthe move. I fully accept all personal responsibilityfor moving the Eskimos from Ennadai Lake and ifthere is any blame to be assessed, it is mine alone. Iwould recommend the same action again under similarcircumstances (Kerr 1958a).

In his memorandum he states,[t]he Eskimo, with their full consent, were moved toHenik Lake by the RCMP aircraft in May 1957. TheseEskimos according to them had previously hunted inthe Henik Lake area and were pleased that the countryhad been selected for them. The Eskimos had beenallowed to discuss the move among themselves andmake their own decision (Kerr 1958a).The tone of this statement is already something

different from that adopted in his memorandum of4 August (Kerr 1957d), suggesting that the Inuit weregiven the chance to reject the proposal of relocation.The tendency to put the blame on the Ahiarmiut wasalso clearly expressed in a letter from Phillips to Ruttanon 25 February 1958, qualifying the Ahiarmiut as ‘witha few other small bands living on the Barrens, . . . thelast remaining examples of truly primitive Eskimos.’ Heexplained to Ruttan,

[f]rankly, we are exceedingly disturbed by what hastaken place. Outright vandalism has rarely, if ever,been associated with the Eskimo people in any part ofthe Arctic. Murders have occurred before, but withthis group they may well be a reflection of somedeep malaise. What this wrong is, we do not yet

know. Neither do we know the underlying causesof their behaviour. It may result in part from ahistory of inbreeding; it may in part be a reflectionof the disturbing influences that have come into theirlives in the past twenty years or it may come froma powerful malcontent in the group provoking theothers. Whatever it is, we are determined to find thecauses of this trouble and after careful study to takeappropriate remedial action (Phillips 1958c).On 7 March, Richards (1958b) responded to Kerr that

he needed not be afraid that the responsibility would fallon him and asked him to explore what Voisey had beendoing since he left Henik Lake in the autumn of 1957.Further inquiries were made into the activities of Voisey,and it soon became clear that he had no further doings withthe Ahiarmiut at Henik Lake. Neither had Kerr who wason leave in Ottawa for most of the time during the winterof 1957–1958 (September-February). Kerr continued todefend his position arguing in a memorandum dated 20March 1958.

All the deaths, with the exception of possibly 2, couldhave occurred in any area of the North where Eskimosare congregated, irregardless of food shortage or otherallied conditions. The unfortunate part is that thedeaths all occurred within a short space of time andwould give the impression that a major catastrophehas happened and was directly connected with livingconditions at Henik Lake (Kerr 1958e).However, the administration as well as the general

public were soon convinced that a major disaster hadhappened and it was especially the Kikkik case thatcreated this impression.

Ootuk, stepbrother of Kikkik and her husband Hallaukwere camping with their children at North Henik Lake.Ootuk’s son had already died of starvation. Ootuk shotHallauk while he was jigging for fish on the lake. ThenKikkik and Ootuk fought with each other. Kikkik told oneof her children to give her a knife and she stabbed Ootukwho was trying to shoot her. Kikkik then went with herfive children to Padlei. They met some other people onthe way to Padlei but could not keep up with them. Theytold them to wait in an igloo while they continued toPadlei. They waited for five days. Then Kikkik decided toleave two children behind. She buried them in a caribousleeping bag in the snow, and with the other three wenton to Padlei. The others had already reached Padlei.The manager there warned the RCMP in Arviat and CplCallagher and Constable Laliberte chartered an aircraftto search for the survivors. They found Kikkik and herchildren, not far from Padlei. When Kikkik told themher other children were dead they went to look for themand found the igloo with one of the children dead andthe other one alive. This case received much attention inthe international press. A trial started on 14 April 1958 atwhich Kikkik was acquitted from murder on both charges.

The case of Kikkik received attention as the predic-ament of a terrible choice a woman might have to makein extreme conditions. Dorothy Eber (1997) discussed the


case in her book Images of Justice. The actions of Kikkikwere seen in the perspective of starvation. The killingof Ootuk was assessed as self defence. The leaving ofher children behind as a choice a woman might have tomake in the terrible conditions of starvation. That thisstarvation was by no means a natural phenomenon, butthe result of a relocation of the Ahiarmiut to another areaby the Government hardly was given any attention. Thusthe trial deflected the attention of the general public fromthe relocation to the individual case of Kikkik. After hertrial she settled in Arviat. But what happened to the othersurvivors?

In 1958, they were flown into Arviat and housed in theRCMP garage. Their caribou skin clothes were taken awayand destroyed because they were infested by lice. Therelocated ones then received Qallunaat clothing. Today,the Ahiarmiut elders relate that they were bewildered bywhat happened.

They received buffalo meat. During the night theylooked for warmth in a room where the stove was. Therewas an explosion, covering them all with smoke andsoot. Even today some elders wonder whether that wasan attempt to destroy them. Mary Anautalik reflected,

‘[o]nce we went to bed at the RCMP garage, every-body went to sleep. But in a little room there was afurnace. During that night, when we got in there it wasnice and warm but during the night, the furnace blewup and there was dust all over the place, including oureyes, our faces our ears. People were not treated well.I can’t help but wonder why did it happen that night?Was it planned to get rid of us?’ (Anautalik 2005).Clearly Ahiarmiut had lost all confidence in the

RCMP. They felt completely unwelcome and badlytreated. Mary Anautalik (Anautalik 2005) related howCpl Gallagher interrupted a drum dance they wished toorganise when they were celebrating their return, becausethey were making too much noise. Gallagher attemptedto break the drum on his knee and struck it on the headof an elder woman. Finally an old woman handed hima knife so he could destroy the drum. It was hard forthe elders not to assume that the white people wishedtheir culture and traditions destroyed. They were sentout of the community carrying all their belongings andone of the women who was pregnant, miscarried as aconsequence. Mary Anautalik (2008) relates that whenthey were allowed to return they were received better.

Their culture was officially declared dead. In 1958Walter Rudnicki reported in his report of field trip toEskimo Point:

[t]he Ahearmiut as Rasmussen knew them, and morerecently Steenhoven, are no more. This is a realityconfronting both those who wished to see this culturepreserved and those who are left with the problem ofa new life for the survivors.The last of the Ahearmiut are living in six igloosbeside the policeman’s house at Eskimo Point. Theyno longer have dogs, sleds, kayaks or any other of theaccoutrements of a way of life on the land. With no

more caribou to hunt, they no longer have any aimin life. Their present existence is based on only oneawareness – that they are absolutely dependent on thewhite man (Rudnicki 1958).But the white people had no place for them in Arviat.

From Arviat they were moved by ship first to Whale Coveand a few months later to Rankin Inlet (see Tester andKulchyscki 1994: 274 ff. for the Whale Cove Relocation).The Ahiarmiut had lost complete control over their lives.Most of them ended up in Rankin and remained therefor a few years. In the 1960’s most of the Ahiarmiutreturned, first to Whale Cove, then to Arviat. But thescars of the relocations remained and they never receivedany explanation or apology from the Government.

Discussion

The Ahiarmiut never understood why they were relocated.During the Arviat workshop they often raised thatquestion (see Fig. 4 for photographs of source of theparticipants in the workshop as well as of Luke Anautalik,one of the Ahiarmiut elders, a year before his death). MaryAunatalik (Aunatalik 2005) stated:

I am wondering what the purpose of the relocationwas. Was it because they wanted our land, becausethey wanted the land for themselves, or was it becausewe were just in the way? These are questions that cameup to our mind when we think about relocations.

Eva Muqyunnik related:I am also wondering because one summer while theAhiarmiut were visiting Ennadai Lake, one of theladies who could speak English came to me and said:‘Can I tell you something?’ And I said ‘Yes, please tellme’. ‘Do you know that it is stated in a letter that theAhiarmiut are just seekers of food. They want food allthe time. They are nothing but trouble, they are alwaysafter food’ (Muqyunnik E. 2005).

Job Muqyunnik suggested,[i]t seems that in those days, the Qallunaat living atthe weather station, would come to us wanting tosleep with our wives. When we refused them, then thetrouble seemed to start from there. Maybe that’s oneof the reasons because they couldn’t use our women.Things started to get complicated then. Once we makeit clear to them that we would not share our womenwith the Qallunaat men, it started to get difficult afterthat. When we were going to their camp to trade, evenbefore we got to their place they would go outside andsignal us to go away (Muqyunnik, J. 2005).Thus the Ahiarmiut elders still speculate about the

reasons why they were relocated as no satisfactoryexplanation was ever given to them,

The decision for the relocation was made in Ottawa,and Sivertz, first as chief of the Arctic division, later asdirector of the DNANR, skilfully executed it and defendedit. The relocation was mainly founded on economic andmoral considerations. The administration consideredthe Ahiarmiut to be a primitive people that should beintegrated into Canadian society. Their existence should


Fig. 4. Job Muqyunnik (top left) and Eva Muqyunnik (topright) now living in Arviat, Nunavut. Andre Alikashuak(centre left) now living in Whale Cove, Nunavut. LukeAnautalik (centre right) in Arviat, a year before his deathin 2006. Geena Aulatjut (bottom) one of the youngerAhiarmiut participating in the workshop from Arviat,Nunavut.

have a sound economic base. They were considered asa ‘primitive’, ‘lazy’ and ‘indolent’ people with ‘loosemorals.’ For that reason they should be removed from theweather station. Their presence resulted in undesirablerelations between Ahiarmiut women and the crew ofthe weather station and as elsewhere, for example inFrobisher Bay, they were not supposed to remain therein contact with the forces. The Ahiarmiut group was tobe moved to an area where they could be guided andsupervised. The fact that the Ahiarmiut considered theEnnadai Lake as their home and an excellent hunting areadid not affect this point of view in the least. The issuewhether they should be transported to an area where theycould not rely on support and should be able to provide

for themselves or be integrated in modern Canadianeconomy and removed to a community such as Churchillremained an matter of debate.

In his negative assessment of the Ennadai Lakearea Sivertz (1959a) relied on the popular books ofMowat and not on the careful ethnographic descriptionsof Steenhoven that were also made available to theDNAND. Mowat wrote extensively about the Ahiarmiut(Mowat 1951, 1959a, 1959b, 2000) but many of thesetexts remain controversial. Steenhoven provides a muchmore favourable image of life in the Ennadai Lake area(see also Laliberte 1955). In selecting Henik Lake theadministration completely disregarded Ahiarmiut viewsof the area. They were convinced that they were inthe position to make a more adequate assessment ofthe hunting potential of an area than the native peoplethemselves. The illusion that the white man had to instructthe Ahiarmiut where and how to hunt is a recurrentelement in the archival documents.

Thus Lt. Col. Grant observed:[t]he extremely primitive existence led by the nat-ives and the almost sub-human level of intelligencedisplayed by the group made them very susceptibleto epidemics and famines. They came in time todepend almost entirely on the station personnel, whoregularly inspected them for injury or disease, toldthem when and where to hunt and fish, and acted asagents to dispose of any furs caught during the winter(Grant 1958).The administration at the time was insufficiently aware

that hunting knowledge of the land has to be built overtime. When the Ennadai people were relocated to HenikLake, their primary asset, the knowledge of the land ofEnnadai Lake, lost its relevance. They had to explore alargely unknown area.

Helen Agaaqtuq Konek (2006) who grew up at HenikLake related that there is plenty of game around HenikLake, but one has to know the land to locate it and tohunt it. One has to know where the good fishing spots are,where the caribou crossings are etc.

The administration had always claimed that theAhiarmiut needed supervision and guidance, but exactlyon this point it failed utterly. Some visits were made duringthe summer, and Voisey spent a month in September andwas then airlifted out because he was out of supplies. Afterthat nobody made any attempt to supervise or guide theAhiarmiut or even to assess the situation. Kerr had takenhis leave in Ottawa. The Ahiarmiut frequently visitedVoisey in Padlei, and it is unlikely that he was unaware oftheir predicament. However, he saw no need to inform theauthorities until it was too late. By that time the DNANRrealised that they had completely failed in supervising theprocess and they attempted to find out what Voisey hadbeen doing.

Fortunately for the Department public attentionswitched to the Kikkik case that became a strong publicimage of the inherent problems of primitive life. ThusBishop Marsh related that in 1958, for example, Joyce


Marlow, wife of the Eskimo Point missionary-in-charge(and later appointed as nurse there), wrote that muchwitchcraft and superstition prevailed among the Eskimosof Ennadai Lake, some 250 miles west. She wrote:

[e]ight men had died in a week because of taboosimposed by the witch doctor. He had said they couldn’teat certain foods and as these were the only foodsavailable, the men died of starvation. The trouble didnot end there. The witch doctor had demanded a fishfrom an Eskimo. As the fish was all he had for himselfand his family, the man refused and turned away. Atthis point the witch doctor shot him in the back. Notcontent with killing the man, he decided to kill theman’s wife too. He approached her igloo. He triedto shoot the wife, but the shot missed her and in thestruggle that followed, the witch doctor himself wasstabbed to death. The poor woman was distraught anddidn’t know what to do. She decided she would try towalk to the nearest trading post several miles away,which was an impossible feat to undertake in badweather, without food, and with her five children. Sheset off and after some time realized the impossibilityof the task, especially as two of the young childrenwere holding them all back. She must have thoughtthat is was better for a few of them to get to the postrather than have them all die. Whatever prompted her,she disposed of two of her children (aged four andsix years) who were causing the hold up. She buriedthem alive, wrapping them first in caribou skins andplacing them deep in the snow. She then set off againwith the other children, but was met by the police.Having heard of the eight men who had originallydied, the police were making their investigations. Thewoman told them her story and reported that two of herchildren had died on the way. The police searched forthe bodies and discovered that the (six-year-old) girlburied was still alive. The mother had to be put on trial,however, and after some time was finally acquitted.The rest of the Ennadaimiuts were brought to EskimoPoint to be under police supervision (Marsh 1991:139–140).This account is to some extent fictitious as there was no

relationship between the deaths of starvation we referredto in this report and the killings connected to the Kikkikcase (for more details on this trial, see Marcus 1995:153–178). The Ahiarmiut elders did not discuss thesekillings with us as they took part in another area and theyhad not personally witnessed them. In our interviews Joband Eva Muqyunnik strongly denied that there were anyrules prohibiting them from fishing and up to this day thequestion of rules has remained a sensitive issue amongthe Ahiarmiut. The idea that the Ahiarmiut themselveswere to some extent to be blamed seems to be at the rootof this perception of Ahiarmiut rules and unfortunatelythe failure of the relocation itself was never satisfactorilyinvestigated.

The relocation experiment was intended to improvethe situation of the Ahiarmiut. It implied a structural

conflict between native Inuit culture and modern Canadiansociety. Native culture was only to be tolerated tothe extent that it allowed itself to be integrated inthe encompassing framework of Canadian society. Theexistence of a primitive society living of the land, cut offfrom the rest of Canadian society was unacceptable. Thefamous Life publication of 1956, depicting the Ahiarmiutas a stone age people (see Marcus 1998) as well asMowat’s books played an important role in the creationof the image of the Ahiarmiut as a primitive people boundfor extinction.

In his memorandum of 9 March 1959 Sivertz explainsthat the image of the ‘noble savage’ should be rejected:

Their inability to provide for themselves without theshattering catastrophes that have kept their numberslow through death-rates and infant mortality thatshock civilized people, clearly show that we cannotafford a ‘laissez-faire’ attitude. Experience has shownthat there is strong need for close supervision, tech-nical assistance and well planned education (Sivertz1959a).The perceptions of the administration and Inuit with

regard to starvation also appear contradictory. The admin-istration emphasised the occasional periods of starvationand the relief that had to be provided. Ahiarmiut describeEnnadai Lake as an excellent hunting area that providedsufficient animals for them to survive. These conflictingvisions are not based on different perceptions of facts,but on different values. The Ahiarmiut were a nomadichunting people, and they knew that incidental periodsof starvation where unavoidable but part of their lives.Stories of starvation are part and parcel of their culturalheritage (see Csonka 1992, 1995). Even in the best huntingarea the game may fail to appear. This is a fact of life anddoes not in the least affect their positive assessment ofthe Ennadai Lake area. For the administration, however,starvation was unacceptable, especially if it would becomeknown internationally.

This conflict of views is clearly expressed by Sivertzin his memorandum of 9 March 1959. ‘Frequent casesof starvation among the Eskimos are historical fact and,in the past, have been accepted as part of their way oflife. However, in these times, starvation is not longeracceptable (Sivertz 1959a). The consequence of thisposition was that either the administration would haveto continue to provide assistance in times of scarcity, orto force the Ahiarmiut to give up their nomadic huntinglife. The former option was unacceptable for economicas well as ideological reasons and therefore the latterwas gradually implemented even though it implied adestruction of Ahiarmiut culture, traditions and waysof life. The Ahiarmiut were given no choice and theagreement that was suggested in documents only existedon paper. The federal government took over control ofthe life of the Ahiarmiut and in doing so destroyed thestructure of their society. Muqyunnik related:

The government took over the leadership, they took thepower. It’s like taking the power from the leaders, from


our parents. Because we no longer had any power,we just did what ever the government told us to do.Looking back at the time I became an adult, I startedto think about what it was like for my parents andother Ahiarmiut. Once the government started takingcontrol over Ahiarmiut, the hardship seemed to start.(Muqyunnik, J. 2005)

He observed that the destruction of Ahiarmiut leadershipand the fragmentation of Ahiarmiut society that it entailedalso terminated the tradition of sharing food, a centralvalue of Inuit society,

Because the life changed completely, we didn’t have areal leader any more. The government started to leadus instead of our leader. Everything changed. Wheneverything changed we no longer lived like we did inEnnadai Lake. People started to have a hardship. Infact, four people died Pongalaq, Qajait, Angatarjuaqand Angmak died of starvation. [. . .] back in EnnadaiLake people were sharing whatever they had. But oncethey were moved to Ennik Lake they were no longersharing everything they had. They were each lookingafter their own family. Life changed. Therefore, somepeople died of starvation. (Muqyunnik 2005)Up to this day the memories of the relocations have

continued to put a shadow over the lives of the Ahiarmiutelders. There are only a few Ahiarmiut elders left whoparticipated in the relocations as adults. They wish topreserve the cultural and historical traditions of theAhiarmiut and pass them on to the next generations. The2005 workshop allowed them to share their experienceswith younger people and helped elders as well asyoungsters come to terms with the hardships of the past.

Acknowledgements

We presented a first draft of the results of this study atthe 15th International Inuit Studies Conference in Paris,on 27 October 2006. We thank our colleagues YvonCsonka and Peter Kulchyski for their comments afterthe presentation of our paper. We also wish to thankthe Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council ofCanada (SSHRC) for providing us with financial support.Finally, we are grateful to Marco Michaud, an MA studentfrom Laval University who helped us in the archivalresearch as well as to the elders who shared so muchof their knowledge with us. The writers have greatlybenefited from a perusal of the following contemporarysources in addition to those specifically referred to in thetext: Curwin (1988); Fitzsimmons (1957, 1958, 1959);Gallagher 1959a, 1959b); Hunt (1959); Kennedy (1958c);Kerr (1954, 1955a, 1956b, 1958b, 1958c); Larsen (1955);Nichols (1955a); Oswalt (1961); Philipps (1958d, 1958e,1958f); Richards (1956b, 1956c); Robertson (1954);Serkoak (no date); Sivertz (1954a, 1955a, 1956c, 1956d,1958b, 1959b); Stevenson (1958a, 1958b, 1958c). In thereferences all sources are quoted as they appear in theoriginal text.

ReferencesAhmak, L. 2006. Interview with J. Oosten, F. Laugrand and

M. Thompson. Arviat, 9 May 2006. Tape in possessionof authors.

Alikashuak, A. 2005. Statement recorded in the Arviatworkshop 2005. Tape in possession of authors.

Anautalik, M. 2008. Interview with J. Oosten, F. Laugrand.Arviat, 5 June 2008. Tape in possession of authors.

Anautalik, M. 2005. Statement recorded in the Arviatworkshop 2005. Tape in possession of authors.

Arima, E.Y. 1984. The caribou Eskimos. In: Sturtevant,W.C., and D. Damas (editors). Handbook of NorthAmerican Indians, vol. 5, Arctic. Washington: Smith-sonian Institution: 447–462.

Belsey, W. 1985a. Return to Ennadai – a bitter sweetjourney. Northwest Explorer 5(3): 28–37.

Belsey, W. 1985b. The Ennadai Lake project. Inuktitutwinter 1985: 6–12.

Belsey, W. 1985c. A home and native land. Inuktitut winter1985: 13–23.

Birket-Smith, K. 1929. The caribou Eskimos. Materialand social life and their cultural position. Descriptivepart. Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel NordiskForlag. (Report of the fifth Thule expedition 1921–1924, vol. 5, part 1 and 2).

Burch, E. 1978. Caribou Eskimo origins. An old problemreconsidered. Arctic Anthropology 15(1): 1–35.

Burch, E. 1986. The caribou Inuit. In: Morrison, R., andC. Wilson (editors). Native peoples, the Canadianexperience. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart: 106–133.

Csonka, Y. 1992. Expansion et famines chez les Inuit duCaribous: le scenario et ses interpretations. Anthropo-logie et Societes 16(2): 15–35.

Csonka, Y. 1995. Les Ahiarmiut (1920–1950). A l’ecartdes Inuit Caribous. Neuchatel: Victor Attinger.

Cunningham, F.J.G. 1954a. Memorandum to the of-ficer commanding RCMP G division. 25 Au-gust 1954. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/1.

Cunningham, F.J.G. 1954b. Memorandum for the deputyminister. 31 August 1954. Ottawa: National Archives ofCanada NAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/1.

Cunningham, F.J.G. 1955. Memorandum for Mr. W.G. Kerr.Police patrol to Ennadai on September 15, 1955. 30September 1955. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/3.

Cunningham, F.J.G. 1956a. Memorandum to the deputyminister. Conditions among the Eskimos in the dis-trict of Keewatin. 31 January 1956. Ottawa: NationalArchives of Canada NAC/RG85/543/630-129/1.

Cunningham, F.J.G. 1956b. Letter to Mr P.A.C. Nicholsre: Eskimos Ennadai, Ottawa, 25 June 1956. Ottawa:National Archives of Canada NAC/RG85/1267/1000-179/1.

Curwin, K. 1988. Life at Maguse River during the 50s. AnInterview with Gleason and Kathryn Ledyard. Isumasi1(3): 25–34.

De Niverville, (?) 1954. Letter to the deputy minister. 20October 1954. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/1.

Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources.1957. Eskimos fly to new hunting grounds. Ottawa:DNANR, Editorial and Information Division. (Documentfor immediate release. 24 May 1957). Ottawa: NationalArchives of Canada NAC/RG85/1000-179/2.


Eber, D.H. 1997. Images of justice. Montreal, Kingston,London, Buffalo: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

Fitzsimmons, W.J. 1957. Memorandum to the officercommanding, RCMP G division. Movement of Eskimosfrom Ennadai Lake, NWT. (Assistance to Depart-ment of Northern Affairs and National Resources).3 July 1957. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179/2.

Fitzsimmons, W.J. 1958. Memorandum to the officercommanding, RCMP G division. Re: Eskimo Ootuk(E-467), North Henik Lake Area, NWT, Murder.17February 1958. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85.

Fitzsimmons, W.J. 1959. Memorandum to the officercommanding, RCMP G division. Movement of Eski-mos from Ennadai Lake, NWT to Henik Lake, NWT.(Assistance to Department of Northern Affairs andNational Resources). Ottawa: National Archives ofCanada NAC/RG85/1349/1000-179/3.

Gabus, J. 1940. Iglous. La vie des Esquimaux-caribou.Neuchatel/Paris: Attinger.

Gabus, J. 1940–1941. Les mouvements migratoiresdes Esquimaux Caribous. Anthropos 35–36: 221–238.

Gabus, J. 1944. Vie et coutumes des Esquimaux Cari-bous. Lausanne: Payot.

Gallagher, W. 1957. Memorandum to the officer com-manding, RCMP G division. Re: Movement of Eskimosfrom Ennadai lake, NWT. (Assistance to Depart-ment of Northern Affairs and National Resources). 3December 1957. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179/2.

Gallagher, W. 1959a. Memorandum to the officer com-manding, RCMP G division. Re: Article by Far-ley Mowat in Macleans Magazine issued January31, 1959 entitled ‘The Two Ordeals of Kikkik’. 26January 1959. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1349/1000-179/3.

Gallagher, W. 1959b. Memorandum to the officer com-manding, RCMP G division, Movement of Eskimosfrom Ennadai Lake, NWT to Henik Lake, NWT. (As-sistance to Department of Northern Affairs and Na-tional Resources). 3 December 1959. Ottawa: NationalArchives of Canada NAC/RG85/1349/1000-179/3.

Grant, D. 1958. Letter to D.Sigs. Aid to native pop-ulation, Ennadai Lake, NWT. 20 June 1958. Ott-awa: National Archives of Canada NAC/RG24/1983-84/215/288/2001-581/3.

Harper, F. 1964. Caribou Eskimos of the upper KazanRiver, Keewatin. Lawrence: Kansas University Mu-seum of Natural History, miscellaneous publications36.

Hearne, S. 1958. A journey from Prince of Wales’ fort inHudson’s Bay to the northern ocean. Undertaken byorder of the Hudson’s Bay Company, for the discoveryof copper mines, a north west passage, &c. In the years1769, 1770, 1771, 1772 (editor R. Glover). Toronto:McMillan (first edition 1795).

Houston, J. 1955. Ennadai Lake, Northwest Territories.Hull: Department of Northern Affairs and National De-velopment. Department of Indian Affairs and NorthernDevelopment Library.

Hunt, L.A.C.O. 1959. Memorandum for Mr. Cunning-ham. Starvation among the Keewatin Eskimos in thewinter of 1957–58. 26 January 1959. Ottawa: NationalArchives of Canada NAC/RG85/1349/1000-179/3.

Karetak, E. 2000. Kikkik. A daughter’s story. Up HereNovember-December: 38–44.

Kennedy, R.L. 1958a. Letter to Mr. G.D. Ruttan. 13 Feb-ruary 1958. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85.

Kennedy, R.L. 1958b. Memorandum for the chief of Arcticdivision. Oftedal Lake Eskimos. 13 February 1958. Ot-tawa: National Archives of Canada NAC/RG85/1000-179.

Kennedy, R.L. 1958c. Memorandum for the chief ofthe Arctic division. Eskimos, central District. 8April 1958. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179.

Kerr, W.G. 1954. Memorandum to the chief, Arctic di-vision. Re: Eskimo – Ennadai Lake Area, NWT. 8November 1954. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/1.

Kerr, W.G. 1955a. Memorandum to the chief of theArctic division. Re: Ennadai Lake Eskimo. 14April 1955. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/3.

Kerr, W.G. 1955b. Memorandum to the chief of the Arcticdivision. 4 July 1955. Ottawa: National Archives ofCanada NAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/3.

Kerr, W.G. 1955c. Memorandum to the chief of the Arc-tic division. 25 August 1955. NAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/3.

Kerr, W.G. 1956a. Memorandum to the chief of theArctic division. Re: Eskimo – Ennadai Lake, NWT. 3August 1956. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1267/1000-179/1.

Kerr, W.G. 1956b. Memorandum to the chief of theArctic division. Re: Eskimo – Ennadai Lake, NWT. 12September 1956. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1267/1000-179/1.

Kerr, W.G. 1956c. Memorandum to the chief of theArctic division. Re: Eskimo – Ennadai lake, NWT. 21September 1956. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1267/1000-179/1.

Kerr, W.G. 1956d. Memorandum to the chief of the Arcticdivision. Re: Work program. – Mr. Louis Voisey. 23December 1956. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1267/1000-179/1.

Kerr, W.G. 1957a. Memorandum to the chief of theArctic division. Re: Eskimos – Ennadai Lake, NWT.6 January 1957. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1267-179.

Kerr, W.G. 1957b. Memorandum to the chief of theArctic division. Re: Eskimos – Ennadai Lake, NWT.12 May 1957. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179/2.

Kerr, W.G. 1957c. Memorandum to the chief of theArctic division. Re: Eskimos – Ennadai Lake, NWT.6 June 1957. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179/2.

Kerr, W.G. 1957d. Memorandum to the chief of theArctic division. Re: Eskimos – Henik Lake, NWT(formerly of Ennadai Lake). 4 August 1957. Ottawa:National Archives of Canada NAC/RG85/1000-179/2.

Kerr, W.G. 1957e. Memorandum to the chief of the Arcticdivision. Re: Eskimos – Henik Lake, NWT (formerlyof Ennadai Lake). 8 August 1957. Ottawa: NationalArchives of Canada NAC/RG85/1000-179/2.

Kerr, W.G. 1957f. Memorandum to the chief of theArctic division. Re: Eskimos – Henik Lake, NWT.


3 December 1957. Ottawa: National Archives ofCanada NAC/RG85/1000-179/2.

Kerr, W.G. 1958a. Memorandum to the chief of theArctic division. Re: Eskimos, Henik Lake, NWT. 23February 1958. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179.

Kerr, W.G. 1958b. Memorandum to the chief of theArctic division. Re: Eskimos, Henik Lake, NWT. 3March 1958. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179.

Kerr, W.G. 1958c. Memorandum to the chief of the Arcticdivision. Re: Eskimos, Henik Lake. 16 March 1958. Ot-tawa: National Archives of Canada NAC/RG85/1000-179.

Kerr, W.G. 1958d. Canadian national telegraph. 15 Feb-ruary 1958. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179.

Kerr, W.G. 1958e. Memorandum to the chief of theArctic division. Re: Eskimos, Henik Lake, NWT. 20March 1958. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179.

Konek, H. 2006. Interview with J. Oosten, F. Laugrand andM. Thompson. Arviat, 8 May 2006. Tape in possessionof authors.

Konek, J. 2006. Interview with J. Oosten, F. Laugrand andM. Thompson. Arviat, 8 May 2006. Tape in possessionof authors.

Laliberte, J. 1955. Eskimos at Ennadai Lake district,NWT: RCMP Churchill detachment report. 8 Feb-ruary 1955. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG18/acc.no 8586048 box 14/G-577-14/3.

Larsen, H.A. 1955. Memorandum to the director of North-ern Administration and Lands Branch. Re: Eskimos inthe Ennadai Lake district, NWT – proposed move toPadlei, NWT. 27 June 1955. Ottawa: National Archivesof Canada NAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/3.

Larsen, H.A. 1958. Memorandum to the officer com-manding, RCMP G division. Re: Eskimo Ottuk, E-467,Henik Lake area, NWT, murder. 14 February 1958. Ot-tawa: National Archives of Canada NAC/RG85/1000–179.

Life Magazine. 1956. The Mesolithic age today. LifeMagazine February 1956: 82–91.

Marcus, A. 1995. Relocating eden. The image and politicsof Inuit exile in the Canadian Arctic. Hanover andLondon: University Press of New England.

Marcus, A. 1998. Reflecting on contested images. In: King,J.C.H., and H. Lidchi (editors). Imagining the Arctic.London: British Museum Press: 190–196.

Mallet, T. 2000. Kakoot. Recits du pays des caribous.(traduit de l’anglais, presente et annote par M. Therrienavec commentaire ethnohistorique de Y. Csonka).Quebec: Septentrion.

Marsh, D.B. 1991. Echoes into Tomorrow, a personaloverview of a century of events and endeavoursaffecting the history of Canada and the Inuit (editorW. Marsh). Three Hills, Alberta: Prairie Graphics andPrinting.

Michea, J. 1949. Terre sterile: six mois chez les EsquimauxCaribous. Paris: Bloud et Gay.

Michea, J. 1952. Les Ahiarmiut. Essai de morphologiedu dernier groupe d’Esquimaux du caribou. Comptes-rendus sommaires des seances de l’Institut francaisd’ethnologie 6(80–86): 23–29.

Mowat, F. 1952. People of the deer. Toronto: McClellandand Stewart.

Mowat, F. 1959. The two ordeals of Kikkik. MacleanMagazine. 31 January 1959.

Mowat, F. 1995. The desperate people. Boston: Little,Brown (1st edition 1959).

Mowat, F. 2000. Walking on the land. Toronto: Key PorterBooks.

Muqyunnik, E. 2005. Statement recorded in the Arviatworkshop 2005. Tape in possession of authors.

Muqyunnik, J. 2003. Statement recorded in the Arviatworkshop 2003. Tape deposited at Nunavut ArcticCollege and copy in possession of authors.

Muqyunnik, J. 2005. Statement recorded in the Arviatworkshop 2005. Tape in possession of authors.

Nichols, P.A.C. 1955a. Eskimos in the Ennadai Lakedistrict, NWT. Report from the Churchill detach-ment. 23 February 1955. Ottawa: National Archivesof Canada Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1267/1000-179/1.

Nichols, P.A.C. 1955b. Letter to Mr. Sivertz. 6May 1955. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/3.

Philipps, R.A.J. 1957a. Memorandum for Mr. Kerr. Re-port August 4, Eskimos – Henik Lake, NWT. 12August 1957. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179/2.

Philipps, R.A.J. 1957b. Memorandum for Mr. Wilkinson –Churchill, Manitoba. Ennadai Eskimos at Oftedal Lake.8 October 1957. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179/2.

Philipps, R.A.J. 1958a. Memorandum for the dir-ector. Movement of Henik Lake Eskimos. 15 Janu-ary 1958. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179/2.

Philipps, R.A.J. 1958b. Memorandum for Mr. Kennedy,Churchill. 4 February 1958. Ottawa: National Archivesof Canada NAC/RG85/1000-179.

Philipps, R.A.J. 1958c. Letter to Mr. G.D. Ruttan. 25February 1958. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179.

Philipps, R.A.J. 1958d. Memorandum for Mr. Stevenson,Mr. Rudnicki. 27 February 1958. Ottawa: NationalArchives of Canada NAC/RG85/1000-179.

Philipps, R.A.J. 1958e. Memorandum for Mr. Sivertz.9 April 1958. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179.

Philipps, R.A.J. 1958f. Memorandum for Mr. Kennedy,Churchill, Manitoba. Eskimos, central Keewatin Dis-trict. 16 April 1958. Ottawa: National Archives ofCanada NAC/RG85/1000-179.

Oosten, J., F. Laugrand, and C. Remie. 2006. Perceptionsof decline. Inuit Shamanism in the Canadian Arctic.Ethnohistory 53(3): 445–477.

Oswalt, W.H. 1961. Caribou Eskimo without caribou. TheBeaver Spring 1961: 12–17.

Richards, J.P. 1956a. Memorandum for Mr. B.C. Sivertz.Eskimos Ennadai Lake. – Proposed transfer toHenik Lake region – southern Keewatin district. 26April 1956. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1267/1000-179/10.

Richards, J.P. 1956b. Memorandum for file. Proposedtransfer of Eskimos from Ennadai Lake to Henik LakeRegion. 31 May 1956. Ottawa: National Archives ofCanada NAC/RG85/1267/1000-179/1.

Richards, J.P. 1956c. Transfer of Ennadai Lake natives.4 June 1956. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1267/1000-179/1.


Richards, J.P. 1958a. Memorandum for Mr. Philipps.Eskimos – Henik Lake Region. 17 February 1958. Ot-tawa: National Archives of Canada NAC/RG85/1000-179/C2.

Richards, J.P. 1958b. Memorandum for Mr. Kerr. RankinInlet – Eskimos Henik Lake. 7 March 1958. Ott-awa: National Archives of Canada NAC/RG85/1000-179.

Robertson, R.G. 1954. Memorandum for J.B. Baldwin. 5November 1954. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/1.

Rothery, J.A. 1955. Eskimos in the Ennadai Lake dis-trict, NWT. RCMP Churchill detachment report. 4July 1955. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/3.

Rowley, G. 1956. Memorandum for the deputy minister. 1November 1956. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG22/545/Rowley-1956.

Rowley, G. 1981. Geert van den Steenhoven. In:Remie, C., and F. Strijbosch (editors). AfscheidsalbumGeert van den Steenhoven, Nijmegen: Faculteit derRechtgeleerdheid, K.U. Nijmegen: 225–228.

Rudnicky, W. 1958. Report – field trip to Eskimo Point.March, 1958. Hull: Department of Northern Affairs andNational Development. Department of Indian Affairsand Northern Development Library.

Ruttan, G.D. 1958a. Letter to Mr. R.L. Kennedy. 6February 1958. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179.

Ruttan, G.D. 1958b. Letter to Mr. R.A.J. Philips. 14March 1958. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179.

Serkoak, D. no date. Interview with David Serkoak onAhiarmiut relocation. Language Arts Module, EL2 –Senior Secondary-10, by Shirley Tagalik, Arviat: De-partment of Education: 97–100.

Sivertz, B.G. 1954a. Letter to Sgt. L. Smyth, RCMP De-tachment. 26 August 1956. Ottawa: National Archivesof Canada NAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/1.

Sivertz, B.G. 1954b. Memoradum for Mr. W.G. Kerron taking up duty as Northern Service Office atChurchill, Manitoba. 3 November 1954. Ottawa: Na-tional Archives of Canada NAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/1.

Sivertz, B.G. 1955a. Memorandum for Mr. Kerr. Enna-dai Lake Eskimo. 31 March 1955. Ottawa: NationalArchives of Canada NAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/2.

Sivertz, B.G. 1955b. Memorandum for Mr. Kerr. 14April 1955. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/2.

Sivertz, B.G. 1955c. Letter to Mr. P.A.C. Nichols. 28April 1955. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/3.

Sivertz, B.G. 1955d. Memorandum for Mr. W.G. Kerr,Northern Service Officer. Re: Ennadai Lake Eskimos.17 May 1955. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1513/1000-500/3.

Sivertz, B.G. 1956a. Memorandum for the director. 7May 1956. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1267/1000-179/1.

Sivertz, B.G. 1956b. Memorandum to the chief of theArctic division. Re: Eskimo – Ennadai Lake, NWT. 3August 1956. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1267/1000-179/1.

Sivertz, B.G. 1956c. Memorandum for the deputy minister.Transfer of Eskimos – Ennadai Lake to Henik Lake.

9 August 1956. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1267/1000-179/1.

Sivertz, B.G. 1956d. Memorandum for Mr. W.G. Kerr. Re:Ennadai Lake, NWT. 28 September 1956. Ottawa:National Archives of Canada NAC/RG85/1267/1000-179/1.

Sivertz, B.G. 1958a. Memorandum for the deputy minister.Report field trip to Eskimo Point and appendices. 28March 1958. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179.

Sivertz, B.G. 1958b. Memorandum for Mr. Mair, chiefCanadian Wildlife Service. Service Lewis Voisey. 30April 1958. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179.

Sivertz, B.G. 1959a. Memorandum for the deputyminister. Background of Henik Lake Eskimos. 9March 1959. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1349/1000-179/3.

Sivertz, B.G. 1959b. Memorandum for the deputy minister.Re: Tragedy on the tundra by Patrick Karl Lynn –March issue of The Carleton. 18 March 1959. Ottawa:National Archives of Canada NAC/RG85/1349/1000-179/3.

Steenhoven, G. Van Den. 1955. Notes of interest, theNW. territories and Yukon radio System. Hernen:Steenhoven private collection.

Steenhoven, G. Van Den. 1956. Extract from publicationKatholieke Illustratie. 7 June 1956. Ottawa: NationalArchives of Canada NAC/RG85/1267/1000-179/1. Fileno 30126.

Steenhoven, G. Van Den. 1957. Research report onCaribou Eskimo law. Report to the DNANR on afield-research journey for the study of legal conceptsamong the Eskimos in some parts of the KeewatinDistrict, NWT, in the summer of 1955. Ottawa: NationalArchives of Canada NAC/RG 85/1000-179.

Steenhoven, G. Van Den. 1958. Ennadai lake people1955. The Beaver, Spring 1958, outfit 298: 12–18.

Steenhoven, G. Van Den. 1962. Leadership and lawamong the Eskimos of the Keewatin district, NorthwestTerritories. La Haye: Uitgeverij Excelsior.

Stevenson, A. 1958a. Memorandum to Mr. Richards.Re: Mr. Lewis Voisey’s activities, 1 Nov 1957 to 28February1958. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179.

Stevenson, A. 1958b. Memorandum for Mr. Philipps.Kikkik (E1-472), Henik Lake. 30 April 1958. Ott-awa: National Archives of Canada NAC/RG85/1000-179.

Stevenson, A. 1958c. Extract from report of A. Stevenson,O.I.C, Eastern Arctic Patrol, 1951. Ottawa: NationalArchives of Canada NAC/RG85/1000-179.

Tester, F.J., and P. Kulchyski. 1994. Tammarniit. Inuitrelocation in the eastern Arctic 1939–1963. Vancouver:UBC Press.

Turquetil, A. 1904. Lac Caribou. Apostolat desEsquimaux – premieres tentatives. Missions de laCongregation des Missionnaires Oblats de Marie-Immaculee 42: 51–58.

Turquetil, A. 1907. Premiere tentative d’apostolat chezles Esquimaux. Missions de la Congregation desMissionnaires Oblats de Marie-Immaculee 45: 330–353, 484–503.

Turquetil, A. 1912a. Chronique historique de la Mis-sion Saint-Pierre du Lac Caribou. Missions de la


Congregation des Missionnaires Oblats de Marie-Immaculee 50: 171–201, 278–300.

Turquetil, A. 1912b. Les Esquimaux du Nord. Bulletinde la Societe de Geographie de Quebec 6(6): 398–408.

Turquetil, A. 1926. Notes sur les esquimauxde la Baie d’Hudson. Anthropos 21: 419–434.

Turquetil, A. 1986–1987. Second voyage du Pere Turquetilchez les Esquimaux en 1906. Eskimo 31: 8–23, 32: 8–23.

Tyrrell, J.B. 1894. An expedition through the barren landsof northern Canada. The Geographical Journal 4(5):437–451.

Tyrrell, J.B. 1897. Report on the Doobaunt, Kazan andFerguson rivers, and the north-west coast of HudsonBay. Ottawa: Geological Survey of Canada.

Tyrrell, J.B. 1975. Eskimos of the kazan. The Beaver305(4): 40–46.

Vanstone, J.W., and W. Oswalt. 1959. The Caribou Eski-mos of Eskimo Point. Ottawa: Department of NorthernAffairs and National Resources.

Whitmore, M. 2005. Statement recorded in the Arviatworkshop 2005. Tape in possession of authors.

Wilkinson, D.E. 1957. Memorandum for chief, Arcticdivision. Ennadai Eskimos at Oftedal Lake. 25 Septem-ber 1957. Ottawa: National Archives of CanadaNAC/RG85/1000-179/2.

The saddest time of my life’: relocating the Ahiarmiut from Ennadai Lake (1950–1958

Documents

Transcript of The saddest time of my life’: relocating the Ahiarmiut from Ennadai Lake (1950–1958