Cook estimates 6 houses per village for the Mattole on the basis of comparison with the Wiyot, Yurok, Tolowa, and Chilula. Goddard counted house pits for a few sites of the Mattole and they appear to average less than that. Not much reliance can be placed on this average, because the sample was very small. However, the number of houses per site is probably not as high as among the Yurok. I have compromised with a figure of 5.4, the same as the estimate for the Sinkyone, the eastern neighbors of the Mattole.

Cook takes Kroeber's Yurok figure of 7.5 persons per house in calculating Mattole population. The social organization here is more nearly like that of the southern Athabascans, so I have used 6 per house. This figure gives a total population of 1,200 as against 840 figured by Cook for the Mattole exclusive of Bear River. The difference here is due to the fact that Goddard's village lists were not available to Cook. If they had been, he would have obtained a figure of 1,665, or nearly double his actual estimate.

Lolangkok Sinkyone.—For the Sinkyone on the northern part of the South Fork of the Eel we have a nearly complete village count. South of Larabee Creek Goddard and Merriam give a total of 46 villages. North of Larabee Creek on the main Eel the village count is incomplete, but Merriam gives 8 place names. That these place names represent village names is clear from the Merriam place names farther south which can be checked against Goddard's data. Together, these give a total of 54 villages but leave out the areas of Bull Creek and the upper Mattole River. We may assume 5 villages in each of these, surely a conservative estimate in view of the density of sites on Salmon Creek and South Fork. We thus have an estimate of 64 villages for the Northern Sinkyone.

Goddard counted house pits in 24 of the sites he recorded. They come to a total of 162 or 6.7 per village. If we reduce this by 20 per cent to account for unoccupied pits, we get an average of 5.4 houses per site or a total estimate of 346 houses among the Lolangkok Sinkyone. At 6 persons per house this estimate yields a total population of 2,076.

Hupa.—In the present village list there are 11 villages in Hoopa Valley and 16 above the valley on the main Trinity and on South Fork. Of these sixteen, three have been rejected as being in Chimariko territory (nos. 25, 26, 27). Cook has argued, reasonably, it appears, that the villages in Hoopa Valley average 11 houses, whereas the villages above the valley average 4.5 houses each. This average gives a total of 193 houses for the Hupa.

Cook has estimated that there is an average of 10 persons per house among the Hupa. This figure is arrived at by the following line of reasoning: according to a census taken in 1870 there was a total of 601 persons in 7 villages at that time, of which 232 were male and 359 were female. This count indicates a disproportionate number of males and Cook therefore calculates a population of twice the number of females, or 718, as a more normal population. Goddard's data give the number of houses for these villages as 92, a figure Cook takes as representing the situation in 1850. This combination yields an average of 7.8 persons per house. Since there had certainly been a decline in population between 1850 and 1870, Cook proposes that the figure for the density of population be raised to 10 persons per house.

But Goddard does not say what period his figures represent, so I propose to follow a line of reasoning similar to that of Cook but to use different figures. The number of houses for 6 villages in 1851 is reported by Gibbs (see map, pl. 9). We may compare these to the 1870 population estimates as given by Kroeber (1925a, p. 131). If we adjust for male attrition by calculating population as twice the female population, or 640 (see table 1), we get a density per house of 7.8, exactly the same figure that Cook gets.

TABLE 1

Hupa Population, 1870[1]