NORTHWEST COAST INDIAN CHIEF'S COPPERS

PREV ARTICLE NEXT ARTICLE FULL ISSUE PREV FULL ISSUE

V29 2026 INDEX E-SYLUM ARCHIVE

The E-Sylum: Volume 29, Number 23, 2026, Article 16

E-Sylum Feature Writer and American Numismatic Biographies author Pete Smith submitted this article on Northwest Coast Indian Chief's Coppers. Thanks! -Editor

My item this week is not an article, it is a rant! I continue to be annoyed by ignorant interpretations of the Northwest Coast Indian Chief's Coppers that have persisted for more than a hundred years. I wish to make what I hope is a clear and unambiguous statement. The copper shields of the Northwest Coast Indians are not coins, not currency, not primitive money and never were.

Coins are produced as legal tender by authority of a sovereign nation. In the case of United States coins, their value is established by Act of Congress. The Chief's Coppers had no legal tender status among the Northwest Coast Indians.

Currency is a standardized, tangible medium of exchange for goods and services such as coins, banknotes and electronic bank balances. Chief's Coppers were not standardized and could not be exchanged for goods or services.

Literature on the Chief's Coppers may state that they represented great wealth. I can accept that. The same could be said of a Rolex or Lamborghini. I would call them a status symbol. I think back to a recent article I wrote about Loye Lark Lauder Laytham and her 110-foot yacht. A statement that something representing great wealth does not make that item a form of money, No one uses their Rolex to pay rent or buy groceries.

I like the term "Potlatch Copper." They can be understood only in the context of the fascinating Potlatch culture. Each copper was unique with a name and a history. Their value changed with each new chapter of their story. Their status or value within the Potlatch did not extend to purchasing power in the community.

Most accounts of a Potlatch were told after Russian and European contact and after European trade goods became common in the Potlatch. I am not sure that a trade blanket should be considered as money, but blankets became the money of account in describing a Potlatch.

A valuable Chief's Copper might be described as worth 9000 blankets. The mistake is made in describing that copper as money.

The Chief's Copper lacks the requirements to be called money. Their value is not set as legal tender. They did not circulate. They were not exchanged for goods or services. Their value exists only within the context of the Potlatch.

An extensive description of the Potlatch was included in Social Organization and Social Societies of the Kwakiutl Indians by Franz Boas and George M. Hunt, published in 1897. It is available on Internet Archive. This may be the source used by later writers.

"These coppers have the same functions which banknotes of high denominations have with us. The actual value of the piece of copper is small, but it is made to represent a large number of blankets and can always be sold for blankets. The value is not arbitrarily set, but depends upon the amount of property given away in the festival at which the copper is sold. On the whole, the oftener a copper is sold the higher its value, as every new buyer tries to invest more blankets in it. Therefore, the purchase of a copper also brings distinction, because it proves that the buyer is able to bring together a vast amount of property."

The May 31 issue of The E-Sylum included an article from the Daily Alaska Empire, Juneau, September 19, 1941.

COPPER "CURRENCY" [1] OF ALASKA NATIVES IS MUSEUM EXHIBIT

Proof [2] that Alaska Indians, before the advent of the white men, operated their finances strictly on a copper standard [3] is shown in a new exhibit which made its appearance at the Territorial Museum this week. Called a Tinneh, or Chief's Copper, it is a huge copper shield with hand-hammered decorations, once used for money [4] among the Thlinget and other Southeast Alaska Tribes.

[2] The suggestion that one large copper ceremonial object proves the exclusive use of copper as a monetary standard is ignorant and foolish.

[3]. It may be true that Indians traded lumps of raw copper and small objects made from processed copper. They also used ermine skins as trade items. The most standardized primitive money was strings of dentalium shells. Much of the economy was supported by barter of fish, furs, leather goods and fabricated items.

[4] A Potlatch Copper had a value only within the Potlatch and had no trade value in the local economy.

The Alaska Museum currently shows a photo of the object with no explanation of its cultural significance. That disappoints me.

I cannot let the story pass in the E-Sylum without a challenge. Readers should know that the 1941 article is based on a false concept of money.

To read the earlier E-Sylum article, see:
TINNAHS: THE CHIEF'S COPPER (https://www.coinbooks.org/v29/esylum_v29n22a21.html)