The Place-Name Analysis of the Kwupahag and Muanbissek Terms
Abstract This article will discuss why the Kwupahag and Muanbissek were historically shown only as signatories to the 1721 letter, and why the leaders of the main groups were appointed to go to Arrowsic, Maine, from their head divisions, through the experience of an examination of the complicated po...
| Published in: | Ethnohistory |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Duke University Press
2023
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00141801-10443411 https://read.dukeupress.edu/ethnohistory/article-pdf/70/3/279/2001875/279mitsuyoshi.pdf |
| Summary: | Abstract This article will discuss why the Kwupahag and Muanbissek were historically shown only as signatories to the 1721 letter, and why the leaders of the main groups were appointed to go to Arrowsic, Maine, from their head divisions, through the experience of an examination of the complicated political contexts of the relationships between Indigenous peoples and rival English and French colonists in New England. According to historical accounts and manuscripts, outsiders from Europe and non-Abenaki areas linguistically produced various Abenaki nomenclatures. Abenaki tribal identity can be clarified through these records by means of comparing place-names, demography, lifestyles, and the geographic areas where tribes resided and engaged in trading relations. However, the recognition of the identities and the correct names of the Abenaki groups were confounded by outsiders’ groundless observations and assumptions. The obscured names of the two groups have been uncovered by this research. |
|---|