Eclectic: SSTattler - The History of the Ulu Khife

John - SSTattler

The Ulu Knife

A knife form unique to the Arctic regions is the ulu. There are several configurations of the ulu depending upon its origin, but whether it originated in Greenland or points across Canada and Alaska, the basic form is a thin curved blade attached to a handle. The basic forms were cataloged in 1890 by the Smithsonian Institution in their annual report (cited below). Very early ulus were crafted from slate, shale, quartzite and other stone with bone, ivory or wood handles. Once steel was available to the Arctic peoples they incorporated it, apparently following the local patterns.

Kotzebue Sound Pattern Ulus

The ulu is generally considered a Women's knife and was designed for processing of food; ranging from fish, game and seals to whales; cleaning and filleting fish; skinning and fleshing hides; processing meat; and the making of clothing from skins. In the February 2003 edition of Current Anthropology, a comparative study of slate vs steel ulus was published. This limited ethnoarchaeological study, by Frank et al provided both ground slate and steel ulus to a family of Cup'ik Eskimos in Chevak Alaska who primarily harvest salmon during the summer for subsistence. They were primarily looking at fish processing efficiency of the two ulu materials. They conclude that steel ulus were as much as 3 times more efficient as the provided slate versions; primarily due to blade sharpness. They also stated that the women using the slate versions were not familiar with their optimal use techniques that their ancestors probably employed.

They looked at time to process various fish ranging in size from 1 lb whitefish to 8.5 lb salmon. The women using their own ulus (better shaped than the study ulus) they were able to process large salmon in 3 to 4 minutes verses 8 to 36 minutes for the slate versions. These women showed strong preference to their own ulu pattern.

The provided pattern in both steel and slate was much like the Savoonga pattern in Maynard Linder's brochure, and from what I can tell based on the papers discussion the preferred pattern was probably more like Linder's Fish River or possibly his Nunivak, (their ulus had flared corners with pointed ends). The authors state:

Although the general semilunar shape is ideal for a wide variety of tasks, differences in blade style and size may indicate the intentional design of tools for different cutting tasks. There are probably numerous functionally related ulu shapes which are not systematically recorded in the literature. Archaeologists should pay close attention to the details of shape and wear analysis when analyzing collections of ulu blades ... ====>>

See the full article The History of the Ulu Khife.