Labrador Kajait Within the Moravian Church Records

I work as the Kajannik Piuliniattik, Kayak Revival Lead, under the Nunatsiavut Government. In this role, I teach kayak courses, guide new kayakers, teach kayak skin-on-frame construction and also research Labrador Kajannik (a plural of Kajak). A great deal of my research focuses upon Moravian Church records from Labrador. The Labrador Kajak is among a relatively misunderstood typology of Kajak to the world. Moravian church records have helped add a light to this Kajak.

It might seem strange for someone adept in kayaking to search through religious based records for kayak information and content. And indeed, my former Adventure Guide classmates, kayak guide co-workers, and kayak instructors would agree. Yet, I have come across at least 60 pages of Labrador kayak information which contribute to kayak research. These records provide data for future consideration of Kajattuk (kayaking) in Nunatsiavut. They chronicle a range of kayak scenarios that Inuit faced that are unaccounted for in current documentation such navigating through moving fields of sea ice, or hunting polar bears from a Kajak.

From a Kajattik (kayaker’s) perspective, these records also contain forgotten stories of kayak in Kalaallit Nunaat (Greenland). Though Kalaallit Nunaat is not part of my mandate, these stories are to interesting to be overlooked. Who has ever heard of retrieving a lost kayak with harvested seals?

For Labrador, these records provide a deeper understanding of how nearby settlements used Kajait in different ways. They give us important glimpses into how Kajak history unfolded between Labrador settlements since European contact. There are accounts of the number of seals harvested per annum by kayak, deaths by kayak at sea, and large sea creatures such as walrus, polar bears, and belugas harvested. The importance of Kajait (a plural form of Kajak) to Labrador Inuit is clear. They appear much more frequently in these records than other other tools like snowhouses, skin boats, harpoons.

There are also a number of unique details about Kajait in these records like references to kayak accessories such as spray skirts, bird spears, and bone tipped paddles. There are also descriptions of Kajait that are shorter than what is commonly accepted by non-Inuit about Labrador Kajait today.

As we know, the missionaries did not chronicle the details and use of Kajait with the eyes of anthropologists. There is much left out. If Inuit had had an opportunity to contribute directly to directly these records, they would be a stronger resource. On occasion, in particularly dramatic stories, the missionaries attempt to include an Inuit point-of-view. But more often this is not the case.

Without Inuit voices, today, one might be tempted to believe that Canadians and British fine-tuned the Kajak. A key component of my research is interviews with elderly Inuit from northern settlements. It is important that secondary sources, like Moravian church records, work with rather than not overshadow these primary resources. I occasionally wonder what both Labrador Inuit and missionary record-keepers would think if they watched YouTube kayak videos.

For audiences today, particularly Inuit audiences, the language and views of the missionaries can be difficult to read at times. These records are laced with derogatory and racist comments. These can be difficult to stomach, especially in the earlier records. Still, these records provide information that helps us to construct an accurate understanding of how Inuit used this important tool.

Noah Nochasak