Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

“Oral Tradition” as Legal Fiction: The Challenge of Dechen Ts’edilhtan in Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia

  • Published:
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique Aims and scope Submit manuscript

“…one can read above the portals of modernity such inscriptions as ‘Here, to work is to write’, or ‘Here, only what is written is understood’. Such is the internal law of that which has constituted itself as ‘Western’.”.

Certeau [22: 134].

Abstract

Often understood as synonymous with “oral history” in Indigenous title and rights cases in Canada, “oral tradition” as theorized by Jan Vansina is complexly imbricated in the European genealogy of “scientific history” and the archival science of Diplomatics with roots in the development of property law and memory from the time of Justinian. Focusing on Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia, which resulted in the first declaration of Aboriginal title in Canada, this paper will discuss Tsilhqot’in law (Dechen Ts’edilhtan) in the context of the court’s deployment of Vansina’s theory and its genealogy, and conclude that “oral tradition” functions as a legal fiction enabling the court to remain in the familiar archive of its own historiography while claiming to listen to the Elders.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See Gordon Christie's analysis of Crown obligations re consent and consultation in the context of Indigenous title [18]. See also [11] and [12].

  2. Langbein states that "[u]nlike the modern rationale for excluding hearsay, which emphasizes as the critical deficiency that the hearsay declarant cannot be cross-examined, Gilbert focuses entirely on the cautionary effect of the Solemnities of an Oath.'…[T]he hearsay rule was not yet in place in a recognizably modern form" in Gilbert [40, pp. 1175–6].

  3. Winfield describes Bernheim's Lehrbuch as "the best treatise on methods of historical research", and Langlois/Seignobos as "the best work in English on the subject" [72, pp. 3–4]. On distanciation, see [48].

  4. Tangherlini provides a useful summary of theories of "legend" in the twentieth century [60]. Lanzoni believed that "fable, tale, story, myth, legend, saga… are often used indifferently to express one and the same idea of a fictitious or untrustworthy account" and classified "legend…[as] a sweeping term covering historical falsification of any kind" [29, p. 269].

  5. Ajay Skaria contextualizes Vansina's work of "extract[ing] historical grain from mythical chaff" in relation to the use of Western historiography as part of "the reclaiming of a history [which] was almost everywhere a crucial component of the struggle of colonized peoples for liberation" [56, pp. 1–2]. This is, of course, not how Vansina understood his own work nor how it has been used in a case like Tsilhqot’in.

  6. This account is based on the author's interviews with Chief Roger William (Aug.–Oct., 2013) in connection with the oral history of the Tsilhqot’in title case currently in preparation by Weir and William. Smallpox history and statistics are from Swanky [59]. See also Lutz [42].

  7. John Dewhirst prepared detailed genealogical charts and reports on the basis of research with the Elders, a crucial part of the Plaintiff's evidentiary record in this case.

  8. Further examples of Vickers J.'s use of "history" include: the "long history" of the trial [Tsilhqot’in, 25, 97] and of Aboriginal people's history "on this continent" (5); "written history" [Tsilhqot’in, 185, 577]; the "historical record" from Alexander MacKenzie and Simon Fraser to the present [, 202, 621]; and the forms of "historical documentary evidence." [Tsilhqot’in, 209, 639] Cf. [27] and [51] on "history" in Delgamuukw.

  9. See Robbins [54] for lists of questions asked Tsilhqot'in witnesses by counsel for the two Crowns. I am grateful to Heather Mahony of Woodward and Company for discussion of the research process with the Elders and preparation of the Elders for trial.

  10. It is interesting to note that the common law "ancient documents" rule has not yet been adapted for crosscultural use with Elders giving testimony. "Ancient documents" must be not less than thirty years old and are supported by a presumption of trustworthiness on the basis of "long existence of the document" and being found in a "proper place of custody… where it might reasonably be expected to be found." [43, p. 62] McEachern C.J. relied on "ancient documents" in relation to "scientific history," admitting them into evidence as "subject to weight, prima facie proof of the truth of the fact stated in them" [Delgamuukw, BCSC, 171].

  11. See Miller's analysis of Von Gernet [44, pp. 110–43]. See also [[2], [9], [13], [36], [45], [52]] and [69].

  12. Thanks to my colleague Margery Fee for drawing this text to my attention.

  13. Lance S.G. Finch C.J. writes that "even evidence adduced orally is, by nature of the court process, rendered into text; appellate courts, for example, will generally only encounter such testimony in written form; likewise the general public. Revision in the form of text has the effect of literally silencing laws and legal principles that are conceived as oral in form and intended to be received and passed on by word of mouth" [25], 2.1.6]. See also [10, pp. 86–92].

  14. Australian linguist David Nash provides a similar account of the challenges of the court's use of English in the context of interpreters and claimants in land rights hearings in the North Territory, Australia [47].

  15. My thanks to Linda R. Smith for bringing this Report to my attention.

  16. The orthography of "GwenIg" includes \-I-\ representing the barred/i/in the APA/American Phonetic Alphabet. It is pronounced 'gwe/nik' with stress on the second syllable. Vickers J.'s practice of not italicizing Tsilhqot'in words has been followed in this paper.

  17. This passage is Stsmél'ecqen (Ronald Ignace)'s eloquent description of Secwépemc stories which is here respectfully adapted to the description of similar Tsilhqot'in traditional pedagogy. On Tsilhqot'in concepts of the land, see [6]. See also [23], [37] and [69].

  18. Gilbert Solomon testified about ethnographer Robert Lane doing salvage anthropology on Tsilhqot'in stories: "What he said was the government put him in the Tsilhqot'in territory to collect stories and all the things they knew because they're gonna lose all that…. Once we've lost everything, he said he'll bring it back to us, like, sort of like in the curriculum form" [Transcript, 10 April 2005, 00025.32–42].

  19. Philosopher Mary Poovey associates the development of double-entry book-keeping with modernity [50].

References

  1. Aboriginal Justice Implementation Commission. 1999. Report of the aboriginal justice inquiry of Manitoba. Vol. 1: The justice system and aboriginal people. http://www.ajic.mb.ca/volume.html.

  2. Banks, Judy. 2008. Taking culture to court: Anthropology, expert witnesses and aboriginal sense of place in the Interior Plateau of British Columbia. M.A. thesis. University of British Columbia.

  3. Benjamin, Walter. 1970. Theses on the philosophy of history. Illuminations—Essays and reflections, 255–266. Trans. Harry Zohn. London: Jonathan Cape.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Berger, Adolf. 1953. Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman Law. Vol. 43, Pt. 2.Vol. 43, Pt. 2. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bernheim, Ernst. 1908. Lehrbuch der historischen Methode und Geschichtsphilosophie (1894). New York: Franklin. http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/009948359.

  6. Bhattacharyya, Jonaki, Marilyn Baptiste, David Setah, and Roger William. 2013. It’s who we are—Locating cultural strength in relationship with the land. In The social transformation of Canada: New insights into community, culture and citizenship, ed. J. Parkins and M. Reed, 211–231.

  7. Blackstone, Sir William. 1765. Blackstone’s commentaries on the laws of England. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th-century/blackstone.

  8. Borrows, John. 1999. Sovereignty’s alchemy: An analysis of Delgamuukw v. British Columbia. Osgoode Hall Law Journal 37(3): 537–596. http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol37/iss3/3.

  9. Borrows, John. 2001. Listening for a change: The courts and oral tradition. Osgoode Hall Law Journal 39(1): 2–38.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Borrows, John. 2002. Recovering Canada—The resurgence of indigenous law. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Borrows, John. 2010. Drawing out law—A spirit’s guide. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Borrows, John. 2012. (Ab)Originalism and Canada’s Constitution. Supreme Court Law Review 58(2d): 351–398.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Brownlie, Robin Jarvis. 2011. Disciplining orality: Alexander von Gernet and the Crown’s invalidation of aboriginal oral history in Canadian litigation. National Claims Research Workshop. http://www.ajic.mb.ca/volume.html.

  14. Campo, Gary S. 2008. William v. British Columbia et al.: Challenges, successes, and lessons learned in relation to oral history. http://www.woodwardandcompany.com/media/pdfs/gary_oralhistory_westbank.pdf.

  15. Chakrabarty, Dipesh. 2010. Empire, ethics, and the calling of history. Unsettling history—Archiving and narrating in historiography, 63–86. Frankfurt: Campus.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cheah, Pheng. 2004. Spectral nationality: Passages of freedom from Kant to postcolonial literatures of liberation. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Colquhoun, Patrick. 1851. A summary of the Roman Civil Law illustrated by commentaries and parallels from the Mosaic, Canon, Mohammedan, English, and Foreign Law. London: William Benny & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Christie, Gordon. 2014. ‘Obligations’, decolonization and indigenous rights to governance. Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 27: 259–282.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cover, Robert M. 1983. The Supreme Court, 1982 term—Foreword: Nomos and narrative. Faculty scholarship series. Paper 2705. http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/2705.

  20. Cruikshank, Julie. 1998. The social life of stories—Narrative and knowledge in the Yukon Territory. Vancouver: UBC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Cunliffe, Emma. 2007. (This is Not a) Story: Using court records to explore judicial narratives in R v Kathleen Folbigg. Australian Feminist Law Journal 27: 71–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. de Certeau, Michel. 1984. The practice of everyday life. Trans. Steven Rendall. Berkeley: University of California Press.

  23. Dinwoodie, David W. 2002. Reserve memories—The power of the past in a Chilcotin Community. Lincoln & London: University of Nebraska Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Duranti, Luciana. 1989. Diplomatics—New uses for an old science. Archivaria 28: 7–21.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Finch, Lance S.G. and C.J. 2012. The duty to learn: Taking account of indigenous legal orders in practice. In Indigenous legal orders and the common law. Continuing legal education seminar, Vancouver, BC, 2.1.1–2.1.10.

  26. Finnegan, Ruth. 2007. The oral and beyond–Doing things with words in Africa. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Fortune, Joel R. 1993. Construing Delgamuukw: Legal arguments, historical argumentation, and the philosophy of history. University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review 51: 80–117.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Fuller, Lon. 1967. Legal fictions. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Garraghan, Gilbert J., and Jean Delangley. 1946. Guide to historical method. New York: Fordham University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ginzburg, Carlo. 1991. Checking the evidence: The judge and the historian. In Questions of evidence—Proof, practice and persuasion across the disciplines, ed. James Chandler, Arnold I. Davidson, and Harry Harootunian, 290–303. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Goodrich, Peter. 1996. Law in the courts of love—Literature and other minor jurisprudences. London & N.Y.: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Green, Anna. 2004. Oral history and history. Remembering—Writing oral history, 1–8. Auckland: Auckland University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Grondin, Jean. 1997. Introduction to philosophical hermeneutics. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Guyotjeannin, Olivier. 1996. The expansion of diplomatics as a discipline. American Archivist 59: 414–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Henige, David. 1982. Oral historiography. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Hutchins, Peter W., Lysane, Cree., and Jeeroburkhan, Jameela. 2007. A modest proposal in two parts. Part II: The role of elders and oral history evidence in the courts. Toronto: Aboriginal Law Forum. www.hutchinslegal.ca/our-publications.html.

  37. Ignace, Ronald. 2008. Our oral histories are our iron posts: Secwepemc stories and historical consciousness. Ph.D. dissertation, Simon Fraser University.

  38. Johnson, Allen. 1926. The historian and historical evidence. New York: Scribner’s. www.babel.hathitrust.org.

  39. Justinian. 535CE. Institutes. www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/535institutes.asp.

  40. Langbein, John H. 1996. Historical foundations of the law of evidence: A view from the Ryder sources. Columbia Law Review 96: 1168–1202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Langlois, Ch. V. and Ch. Seignobos. 1904. Introduction to the study of history. Trans. N.Y.: Henry Holt. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/29637-htm.

  42. Lutz, John Sutton. 2008. Makúk—A new history of Aboriginal–White relations. Vancouver: UBC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  43. MacNeil, Heather Marie. 1998. Trusting records: The evolution of legal, historical, and diplomatic methods of assessing the trustworthiness of records, from antiquity to the digital age. Ph.D. diss., University of British Columbia.

  44. Miller, Bruce Granville. 2011. Oral history on trial—Recognizing Aboriginal narratives in the courts. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Milward, David. 2010. Doubting what the elders have to say: A critical examination of Canadian judicial treatment of Aboriginal oral history evidence. The International Journal of Evidence & Proof 14: 287–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Napoleon, Val. 2005. Delgamuukw: A legal straightjacket for oral histories? Canadian Journal of Law and Society 20(2): 123–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Nash, David. 1984. Linguistics and land rights in the N.T. In Further applications of linguistics to Aboriginal contexts, ed. Graham R. McKay and Bruce A. Sommer. Occasional Papers no. 7 [sc.8]. Melbourne: Applied Linguistics Association of Australia. http://www.anu.edu.au/linguistics/nash/papers/1984/ALAA.html.

  48. Paul, Herman. 2011. Distance and self-distanciation: Intellectual virtue and historical method around 1900. History and Theory 50: 104–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Paul, Herman. 2014. Manuals on historical method: A genre of polemical reflection on the aims of science. In The making of the humanities. Vol. 3, the modern humanities, ed. Rens Bod, Jaap Maat, and Thijs Weststeijn, 171–182. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Poovey, Mary. 1998. A history of the modern fact: Problems of knowledge in the sciences of wealth and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  51. Reiter, Eric H. 2010. Fact, narrative, and the judicial uses of history: Delgamuukw and beyond. Indigenous Law Journal 8(1): 55–96.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Ridington, Robin. 2014. Dane-Zaa oral history: Why it’s not Hearsay. BC Studies 183: 37–62.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples Report. 1996. Looking Forward, looking back, vol. 1. http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/webarchives/20071115053257/http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ch/rcap/sg/sgmm_e.html.

  54. Robbins, David M. 2004. Aboriginal witness evidence and the Crown in Chief Roger William v. British Columbia and Canada. www.woodwardandcompany.com, http://www.woodwardandcompany.com/media/pdfs/witnessevidence_robbins.pdf.

  55. Sarat, Austin. 1999. Rhetoric and remembrance: Trials, transcription, and the politics of critical reading. Legal Studies 23: 355–378.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Skaria, Ajay. 1999. Hybrid histories—Forests, frontiers and wilderness in Western India. Delhi: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Skemer, Don C. 1989. Diplomatics and archives. American Archivist 52: 376–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Smith, Linda R. 2008. Súwh-tŝ eghèdúdinh: The Tsìnlhqút’ín Nímính Spiritual Path. M.A. thesis, University of Victoria.

  59. Swanky, Tom. 2012. The true story of Canada’s War of extinction on the Pacific Coast. Vancouver: Dragonheart.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Tangherlini, Timothy R. 1990. “It Happened Not Too Far From Here…”: A survey of legend theory and characterization. Western Folklore 49: 371–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Torstendahl, Rolf. 2003. Fact, truth, and text: The quest for a firm basis for historical knowledge around 1900. History and Theory 42: 305–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Turner, James. 2014. Philology—The forgotten origins of the modern humanities. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Vansina, Jan. 1961. Oral tradition—A study in historical methodology. Trans. H.M. Wright. 2nd. ed., 2006. New Brunswick: Aldine Transaction.

  64. Vansina, Jan. 1974. The power of systematic doubt in historical enquiry. History in Africa 1: 109–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Vansina, Jan. 1985. Oral tradition as history. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Vansina, Jan. 1994. Living with Africa. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Von Gernet, Alexander. 1996. Oral narratives and aboriginal pasts: An interdisciplinary review of the literature on oral tradition and oral histories, vol. 1. Ottawa: Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/webarchives/20061209053423/http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/pub/orl/intr_e.html (Accessed November 30, 2014).

  68. Von Gernet, Alexander. 2000. What my elders taught me—Oral traditions as evidence in aboriginal litigation. In Beyond the Nass Valley: National implications of the Court’s Delgamuukw decision, ed. Owen Lippert, 103–132. Vancouver: Fraser Institute. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=2448.

  69. Walkem, Ardith Wal’petko We’dalx. 2005. Bringing water to the land: Re-cognize-ing indigenous oral traditions and the laws embodied within them. Ll.M. thesis, University of British Columbia.

  70. Weir, Lorraine. 2013. ‘Time Immemorial’ and indigenous rights: A genealogy and three case studies (Calder, Van der Peet, Tsilhqot’in) from British Columbia. Journal of Historical Sociology 26(3): 383–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Williams, Caroline. 2005. Diplomatic attitudes: From Mabillon to metadata. Journal of the Society of Archivists 26(1): 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Winfield, Percy Henry. 1925. The chief sources of English legal history. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  73. Woolf, D.R. 1988. The “Common Voice”: History, folklore and oral tradition in early modern England. Past and Present. 120: 26–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Cases Cited

  1. Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1989), 38 B.C.L.R. (2d).

  2. Delgamuukw v. The Queen [1997] 3 SCR 1010.

  3. Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia. 2007 BCSC 1700.

  4. Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia. 2014 SCC 44.

  5. Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia. 2007 BCSC 1700. Court transcript.

  6. William et al. v. British Columbia et al. 2004 BCSC 148.

  7. William et al. v. British Columbia et al. 2006 BCSC 1427.

  8. William v. British Columbia. 2012 BCCA 285.

Download references

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to all of the Tsilhqot’in people who have shared their wisdom, learning and hospitality with me and in particular to Chief Roger William, my collaborator on the oral history of the Tsilhqot’in title case (in preparation) and to Linda R. Smith whose generous sharing of her knowledge of Tsilhqot’in language and culture with me has contributed significantly to this paper. Sechanalʔ in gulin. Thanks also to Jan Vansina whose references in personal communication to Bernheim and the Ecole Nationale des Chartes took me on a fascinating journey. Any remaining errors are my own. An early version of this paper was presented at the Canadian Law and Society Association conference, Winnipeg, June 3, 2014. This research was supported by a grant from the Hampton Foundation, University of British Columbia, and a Humanities and Social Sciences grant from the Faculty of Arts, University of British Columbia. Last but not least, I am grateful to my family for their support, patience and forbearance over many long hours and days.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of English, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z1, Canada

    Lorraine Weir

Authors
  1. Lorraine Weir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lorraine Weir.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Weir, L. “Oral Tradition” as Legal Fiction: The Challenge of Dechen Ts’edilhtan in Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia . Int J Semiot Law 29, 159–189 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-015-9419-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-015-9419-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation