The Siouan Indians


A Preliminary Sketch - Fifteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology
to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1893-1894, Government
Printing Office, Washington, 1897, pages 153-204


by W. J. McGee




Edition 1, (October 23, 2006)





CONTENTS


THE SIOUAN STOCK
   DEFINITION
      EXTENT OF THE STOCK
      TRIBAL NOMENCLATURE
      PRINCIPAL CHARACTERS
         PHONETIC AND GRAPHIC ARTS
         INDUSTRIAL AND ESTHETIC ARTS
         INSTITUTIONS
         BELIEFS
            THE DEVELOPMENT OF MYTHOLOGY
            THE SIOUAN MYTHOLOGY
         SOMATOLOGY
   HABITAT
   ORGANIZATION
   HISTORY
      DAKOTA-ASINIBOIN
      ¢EGIHA
      ʇƆIWE’RE
      WINNEBAGO
      MANDAN
      HIDATSA
      THE EASTERN AND SOUTHERN TRIBES
      GENERAL MOVEMENTS
SOME FEATURES OF INDIAN SOCIOLOGY






THE SIOUAN INDIANS


A PRELIMINARY SKETCH(1)

BY W.J. McGEE





THE SIOUAN STOCK




DEFINITION



EXTENT OF THE STOCK


Out of some sixty aboriginal stocks or families found in North America
above the Tropic of Cancer, about five-sixths were confined to the tenth
of the territory bordering Pacific ocean; the remaining nine-tenths of the
land was occupied by a few strong stocks, comprising the Algonquian,
Athapascan, Iroquoian, Shoshonean, Siouan, and others of more limited
extent.

The Indians of the Siouan stock occupied the central portion of the
continent. They were preeminently plains Indians, ranging from Lake
Michigan to the Rocky mountains, and from the Arkansas to the
Saskatchewan, while an outlying body stretched to the shores of the
Atlantic. They were typical American barbarians, headed by hunters and
warriors and grouped in shifting tribes led by the chase or driven by
battle from place to place over their vast and naturally rich domain,
though a crude agriculture sprang up whenever a tribe tarried long in one
spot. No native stock is more interesting than the great Siouan group, and
none save the Algonquian and Iroquoian approach it in wealth of literary
and historical records; for since the advent of white men the Siouan
Indians have played striking rôles on the stage of human development, and
have caught the eye of every thoughtful observer.

The term Siouan is the adjective denoting the "Sioux" Indians and cognate
tribes. The word "Sioux" has been variously and vaguely used. Originally
it was a corruption of a term expressing enmity or contempt, applied to a
part of the plains tribes by the forest-dwelling Algonquian Indians.
According to Trumbull, it was the popular appellation of those tribes
which call themselves Dakota, Lakota, or Nakota ("Friendly," implying
confederated or allied), and was an abbreviation of _Nadowessioux_, a
Canadian-French corruption of _Nadowe-ssi-wag_ ("the snake-like ones" or
"enemies"), a term rooted in the Algonquian _nadowe_ ("a snake"); and some
writers have applied the designation to different portions of the stock,
while others have rejected it because of the offensive implication or for
other reasons. So long ago as 1836, however, Gallatin employed the term
"Sioux" to designate collectively "the nations which speak the Sioux
language,"(2) and used an alternative term to designate the subordinate
confederacy—i.e., he used the term in a systematic way for the first time
to denote an ethnic unit which experience has shown to be well defined.
Gallatin’s terminology was soon after adopted by Prichard and others, and
has been followed by most careful writers on the American Indians.
Accordingly the name must be regarded as established through priority and
prescription, and has been used in the original sense in various standard
publications.(3)

In colloquial usage and in the usage of the ephemeral press, the term
"Sioux" was applied sometimes to one but oftener to several of the allied
tribes embraced in the first of the principal groups of which the stock is
composed, i.e., the group or confederacy styling themselves Dakota.
Sometimes the term was employed in its simple form, but as explorers and
pioneers gained an inkling of the organization of the group, it was often
compounded with the tribal name as "Santee-Sioux," "Yanktonnai-Sioux,"
"Sisseton-Sioux," etc. As acquaintance between white men and red
increased, the stock name was gradually displaced by tribe names until the
colloquial appellation "Sioux" became but a memory or tradition throughout
much of the territory formerly dominated by the great Siouan stock. One of
the reasons for the abandonment of the name was undoubtedly its
inappropriateness as a designation for the confederacy occupying the
plains of the upper Missouri, since it was an alien and opprobrious
designation for a people bearing a euphonious appellation of their own.
Moreover, colloquial usage was gradually influenced by the usage of
scholars, who accepted the native name for the Dakota (spelled Dahcota by
Gallatin) confederacy, as well as the tribal names adopted by Gallatin,
Prichard, and others. Thus the ill-defined term "Sioux" has dropped out of
use in the substantive form, and is retained, in the adjective form only,
to designate a great stock to which no other collective name, either
intern or alien, has ever been definitely and justly applied.

The earlier students of the Siouan Indians recognized the plains tribes
alone as belonging to that stock, and it has only recently been shown that
certain of the native forest-dwellers long ago encountered by English
colonists on the Atlantic coast were closely akin to the plains Indians in
language, institutions, and beliefs. In 1872 Hale noted a resemblance
between the Tutelo and Dakota languages, and this resemblance was
discussed orally and in correspondence with several students of Indian
languages, but the probability of direct connection seemed so remote that
the affinity was not generally accepted. Even in 1880, after extended
comparison with Dakota material (including that collected by the newly
instituted Bureau of Ethnology), this distinguished investigator was able
to detect only certain general similarities between the Tutelo tongue and
the dialects of the Dakota tribes.(4) In 1881 Gatschet made a collection
of linguistic material among the Catawba Indians of South Carolina, and
was struck with the resemblance of many of the vocables to Siouan terms of
like meaning, and began the preparation of a comparative Catawba-Dakota
vocabulary. To this the Tutelo, ¢egiha, ʇɔiwe´re, and Hotcañgara
(Winnebago) were added by Dorsey, who made a critical examination of all
Catawba material extant and compared it with several Dakota dialects, with
which he was specially conversant. These examinations and comparisons
demonstrated the affinity between the Dakota and Catawba tongues and
showed them to be of common descent; and the establishment of this
relation made easy the acceptance of the affinity suggested by Hale
between the Dakota and Tutelo.

Up to this time it was supposed that the eastern tribes "were merely
offshoots of the Dakota;" but in 1883 Hale observed that "while the
language of these eastern tribes is closely allied to that of the western
Dakota, it bears evidence of being older in form,"(5) and consequently
that the Siouan tribes of the interior seem to have migrated westward from
a common fatherland with their eastern brethren bordering the Atlantic.
Subsequently Gatschet discovered that the Biloxi Indians of the Gulf coast
used many terms common to the Siouan tongues; and in 1891 Dorsey visited
these Indians and procured a rich collection of words, phrases, and myths,
whereby the Siouan affinity of these Indians was established. Meantime
Mooney began researches among the Cherokee and cognate tribes of the
southern Atlantic slope and found fresh evidence that their ancient
neighbors were related in tongue and belief with the buffalo hunters of
the plains; and he has recently set forth the relations of the several
Atlantic slope tribes of Siouan affinity in full detail.(6) Through the
addition of these eastern tribes the great Siouan stock is augmented in
extent and range and enhanced in interest; for the records of a group of
cognate tribes are thereby increased so fully as to afford historical
perspective and to indicate, if not clearly to display, the course of
tribal differentiation.

According to Dorsey, whose acquaintance with the Siouan Indians was
especially close, the main portion of the Siouan stock, occupying the
continental interior, comprised seven principal divisions (including the
Biloxi and not distinguishing the Asiniboin), each composed of one or more
tribes or confederacies, all defined and classified by linguistic, social,
and mythologic relations; and he and Mooney recognize several additional
groups, denned by linguistic affinity or historical evidence of intimate
relations, in the eastern part of the country. So far as made out through
the latest researches, the grand divisions, confederacies, and tribes of
the stock,(7) with their present condition, are as follows:

                          1. _Dakota-Asiniboin_

Dakota ("Friendly") or Ot´-ce-ti ca-ko-win ("Seven council-fires")
confederacy, comprising—

   A. Santee, including Mde-wa-kan´-ton-wan ("Spirit Lake village") and
      Wa-qpe´-ku-te ("Shoot among deciduous trees"), mostly located in
      Knox county, Nebraska, on the former Santee reservation, with some
      oa Fort Peck reservation, Montana.
   B. Sisseton or Si-si´-ton-wan´ ("Fish-scale village"), mostly on
      Sisseton reservation, South Dakota, partly on Devils Lake
      reservation, North Dakota.
   C. Wahpetou or Wa´-qpe´-ton-wan ("Dwellers among deciduous trees"),
      mostly on Devils Lake reservation, North Dakota.
   D. Yankton or I-hank´-ton-wan ("End village"), in Yankton village,
      South Dakota.
   E. Yanktonai or I-hank´-ton-wan-na ("Little End village"), comprising—

         a. Upper Yanktonai, on Standing Rock reservation, North Dakota,
            with the Pa´-ba-kse ("Cut head") gens on Devils Lake
            reservation, North Dakota.
         b. Lower Yanktonai, or Huñkpatina ("Campers at the horn [or end
            of the camping circle]"), mostly on Crow Creek reservation,
            South Dakota, with some on Standing Bock reservation, North
            Dakota, and others on Fort Peck reservation, Montana.

   F. Teton or Ti´-ton-wan ("Prairie dwellers"), comprising—

         a. Brulé or Si-tcan´-xu ("Burnt thighs "), including Upper Brulé,
            mostly on Rosebud reservation, South Dakota, and Lower Brulé,
            on Lower Brulé reservation, in the same state, with some of
            both on Standing Rock reservation, North Dakota, and others on
            Fort Peck reservation, Montana.
         b. Sans Arcs or I-ta´-zip-tco ("Without bows"), largely on
            Cheyenne reservation, South Dakota, with others on Standing
            Rock reservation, North Dakota.
         c. Blackfeet or Si-ha´-sa-pa ("Black-feet"), mostly on Cheyenne
            reservation, South Dakota, with some on Standing Eock
            reservation, North Dakota.
         d. Minneconjou or Mi´-ni-ko´-o-ju ("Plant beside the stream"),
            mostly on Cheyenne reservation, South Dakota, partly on
            Rosebud reservation, South Dakota, with some on Standing Rock
            reservation, North Dakota.
         e. Two Kettles or O-o´-he non´-pa ("Two boilings"), on Cheyenne
            reservation, South Dakota.
         f. Ogalala or O-gla´-la ("She poured out her own"), mostly on
            Pine Ridge reservation, South Dakota, with some on Standing
            Rock reservation, North Dakota, including the Wa-ja´-ja
            ("Fringed") gens on Pine Ridge reservation, South Dakota, and
            Loafers or Wa-glu´-xe ("Inbreeders"), mostly on Pine Ridge
            reservation, with some on Rosebud reservation, South Dakota.
         g. Huñkpapa ("At the entrance"), on Standing Rock reservation,
            North Dakota.

Asiuiboin ("Cook-with-stones people" in Algonquian), commonly called
Nakota among themselves, and called Hohe ("Rebels") by the Dakota; an
offshoot from the Yanktonnai; not studied in detail during recent years;
partly on Fort Peck reservation, Montana, mostly in Canada; comprising in
1833 (according to Prince Maximilian)(8)—

   A. Itscheabiné ("Les gens des filles"=Girl people?).
   B. Jatonabinè ("Les gens des roches"=Stone people); apparently the
      leading band.
   C. Otopachguato ("Les gens du large"=Roamers?).
   D. Otaopabinè ("Les gens des canots"=Canoe people?).
   E. Tschantoga ("Les gens des bois"=Forest people).
   F. Watópachnato ("Les gens de l’age"=Ancient people?).
   G. Tanintauei ("Les gens des osayes"=Bone people).
   H. Chábin ("Les gens des montagnes"=Mountain people).

                2. _¢egiha_ ("_People Dwelling here_")(9)

   A. Omaha or U-man-han ("Upstream people"), located on Omaha
      reservation, Nebraska, comprising in 1819 (according to James)(10)—

         a. Honga-sha-no tribe, including—

               1. Wase-ish-ta band.
               2. Enk-ka-sa-ba band.
               3. Wa-sa-ba-eta-je ("Those who do not touch bears") band.
               4. Ka-e-ta-je ("Those who do not touch turtles") band.
               5. Wa-jinga-e-ta-je band.
               6. Hun-guh band.
               7. Kon-za band.
               8. Ta-pa-taj-je band.

         b. Ish-ta-sun-da ("Gray eyes") tribe, including—

               1. Ta-pa-eta-je band.
               2. Mon-eka-goh-ha ("Earth makers") band.
               3. Ta-sin-da ("Bison tail") band.
               4. Ing-gera-je-da ("Red dung") band.
               5. Wash-a-tung band.

   B. Ponka ("Medicine"?), mostly on Ponca reservation, Indian Territory,
      partly at Santee agency, Nebraska.
   C. Kwapa, Quapaw, or U-ʞa´-qpa ("Downstream people," a correlative of
      U-man´-han), the "Arkansa" of early writers, mostly on Osage
      reservation, Oklahoma, partly on Quapaw reservation, Indian
      Territory.
   D. (D) Osage or Wa-ca´-ce ("People"), comprising—

         a. Big Osage or Pa-he´-tsi ("Campers on the mountain"), on Osage
            reservation, Indian Territory.
         b. Little Osage or U-ʇsĕɥ´-ta ("Campers on the lowland,") on
            Osage reservation, Indian Territory.
         c. San-ʇsu´-ʞ¢in(11) ("Campers in the highland grove") or
            "Arkansa band," chiefly on Osage reservation, Indian
            Territory.

   E. Kansa or Kan´-ze (refers to winds, though precise significance is
      unknown; frequently called Kaw), on Kansas reservation, Indian
      Territory.

                 3. _ʇɔiwe´re_ ("_People of this place_")

   A. Iowa or Pá-qo-tce ("Dusty-heads"), chiefly on Great Nemaha
      reservation, Kansas and Nebraska, partly on Sac and Fox reservation,
      Indian Territory.
   B. Oto or Wa-to´-ta ("Aphrodisian"), on Otoe reservation, Indian
      Territory.
   C. Missouri or Ni-u´-t’a-tci (exact meaning uncertain; said to refer to
      drowning of people in a stream; possibly a corruption of
      Ni-shu´-dje, "Smoky water," the name of Missouri river); on Otoe
      reservation, Indian Territory.

                              4. _Winnebago_

Winnebago (Algonquian designation, meaning "Turbid water people"?) or
Ho-tcañ-ga-ra ("People of the parent speech"), mostly on Winnebago
reservation in Nebraska, some in Wisconsin, and a few in Michigan;
composition never definitely ascertained; comprised in 1850 (according to
Schoolcraft(12)) twenty-one bands, all west of the Mississippi, viz.:

   a. Little Mills’ band.
   b. Little Dekonie’s band.
   c. Maw-kuh-soonch-kaw’s band.
   d. Ho-pee-kaw’s band.
   e. Waw-kon-haw-kaw’s band.
   f. Baptiste’s band.
   g. Wee-noo-shik’s band.
   h. Con-a-ha-ta-kaw’s band.
   i. Paw-sed-ech-kaw’s band.
   j. Taw-nu-nuk’s band.
   k. Ah-hoo-zeeb-kaw’s band.
   l. Is-chaw-go-baw-kaw’s band.
   m. Watch-ha-ta-kaw’s band.
   n. Waw-maw-noo-kaw-kaw’s band.
   o. Waw-kon-chaw-zu-kaw’s band.
   p. Good Thunder’s band.
   q. Koog-ay-ray-kaw’s band.
   r. Black Hawk’s band.
   s. Little Thunder’s band.
   t. Naw-key-ku-kaw’s band.
   u. O-chin-chin-nu-kaw’s band.

                               5. _Mandan_

Mandan (their own name is questionable; Catlin says they called themselves
See-pohs-kah-nu-mah-kah-kee, "People of the pheasants;"(13) Prince
Maximilian says they called themselves Numangkake, "Men," adding usually
the name of their village, and that another name is Mahna-Narra, "The
Sulky [Ones]," applied because they separated from the rest of their
nation;(14) of the latter name their common appellation seems to be a
corruption); on Fort Berthold reservation, North Dakota, comprising in
1804 (according to Lewis and Clark(15)) three villages—

   a. Matootonha.
   b. Rooptahee.
   c. __________(Eapanopa’s village).

                               6. _Hidatsa_

   A. Hidatsa (their own name, the meaning of which is uncertain, but
      appears to refer to a traditional buffalo pannch connected with the
      division of the group, though supposed by some to refer to
      "willows"); formerly called Minitari ("Cross the water," or,
      objectionally, Gros Ventres); on Fort Berthold reservation, North
      Dakota, comprising in 1796 (according to information gained by
      Matthews(16)) three villages—

         a. Hidatsa.
         b. Amatìlia ("Earth-lodge [village]"?).
         c. Amaliami ("Mountain-country [people]"?).

   B. Crow or Ab-sa´-ru-ke, on the Crow reservation, Montana.

                               7. _Biloxi_

   A. Biloxi ("Trifling" or "Worthless" in Choctaw) or Ta-neks´ Han-ya-di´
      ("Original people" in their own language); partly in Rapides parish,
      Louisiana; partly in Indian Territory, with the Choctaw and Caddo.
   B. Paskagula ("Bread people" in Choctaw), probably extinct.
   C. ?Moctobi (meaning unknown), extinct.
   D. ?Chozetta (meaning unknown), extinct.

                               8. _Monakan_

Monakan confederacy.

   A. Monakan ("Country [people of?]"), ? extinct.
   B. Meipontsky (meaning unknown), extinct.
   C. ?Mahoc (meaning unknown), extinct.
   D. Nuntaneuck or Nuntaly (meaning unknown), extinct.
   E. Mohetan ("People of the earth"?), extinct.

Tutelo.

   A. Tutelo or Ye-san´ (meaning unknown), probably extinct.
   B. Saponi (meaning unknown), probably extinct. (According to Mooney,
      the Tutelo and Saponi tribes were intimately connected or identical,
      and the names were used interchangeably, the former becoming more
      prominent after the removal of the tribal remnant from the Carolinas
      to New York.(17))
   C. Occanichi (meaning unknown), probably extinct.

?Manahoac confederacy, extinct.

   A. Manahoac (meaning unknown).
   B. Stegarake (meaning unknown).
   C. Shackakoni (meaning unknown).
   D. Tauxitania (meaning unknown).
   E. Ontponi (meaning unknown).
   F. Tegniati (meaning unknown).
   G. Whonkenti (meaning unknown).
   H. Hasinninga (meaning unknown).

                     9. _Catawba or Ni-ya ("People")_

   A. Catawba (meaning unknown; they called themselves Ni-ya, "Men" in the
      comprehensive sense), nearly extinct.
   B. Woccon (meaning unknown), extinct.
   C. ? Sissipahaw (meaning unknown), extinct.
   D. ? Cape Fear (proper name unknown), extinct.
   E. ? Warrennuncock (meaning unknown), extinct.
   F. ? Adshusheer (meaning unknown), extinct.
   G. ? Eno (meaning unknown), extinct.
   H. ? Shocco (meaning unknown), extinct.
   I. ? Waxhaw (meaning unknown), extinct.
   J. ? Sugeri (meaning unknown), extinct.
   K. Santee (meaning unknown).
   L. Wateree (derived from the Catawba word watĕrăn, "to float in the
      water").
   M. Sewee (meaning unknown).
   N. Congaree (meaning unknown).

                           10. _Sara (extinct)_

   A. Sara ("Tall grass").
   B. Keyauwi (meaning unknown).

                         11. _? Pedee (extinct)_

   A. Pedee (meaning unknown).
   B. Waccamaw (meaning unknown).
   C. Winyaw (meaning unknown).
   D. "Hooks" and "Backhooks"(?).

The definition of the first six of these divisions is based on extended
researches among the tribes and in the literature representing the work of
earlier observers, and may be regarded as satisfactory. In some cases,
notably the Dakota confederacy, the constitution of the divisions is also
satisfactory, though in others, including the Asiniboin, Mandan, and
Winnebago, the tabulation represents little more than superficial
enumeration of villages and bands, generally by observers possessing
little knowledge of Indian sociology or language. So far as the survivors
of the Biloxi are concerned the classification is satisfactory; but there
is doubt concerning the former limits of the division, and also concerning
the relations of the extinct tribes referred to on slender, yet the best
available, evidence. The classification of the extinct and nearly extinct
Siouan Indians of the east is much less satisfactory. In several cases
languages are utterly lost, and in others a few doubtful terms alone
remain. In these cases affinity is inferred in part from geographic
relation, but chiefly from the recorded federation of tribes and union of
remnants as the aboriginal population faded under the light of brighter
intelligence; and in all such instances it has been assumed that
federation and union grew out of that conformity in mode of thought which
is characteristic of peoples speaking identical or closely related
tongues. Accordingly, while the grouping of eastern tribes rests in part
on meager testimony and is open to question at many points, it is perhaps
the best that can be devised, and suffices for convenience of statement if
not as a final classification. So far as practicable the names adopted for
the tribes, confederacies, and other groups are those in common use, the
aboriginal designations, when distinct, being added in those cases in
which they are known.

The present population of the Siouan stock is probably between 40,000 and
45,000, including 2,000 or more (mainly Asiniboin) in Canada.



TRIBAL NOMENCLATURE


In the Siouan stock, as among the American Indians generally, the accepted
appellations for tribes and other groups are variously derived. Many of
the Siouan tribal names were, like the name of the stock, given by alien
peoples, including white men, though most are founded on the descriptive
or other designations used in the groups to which they pertain. At first
glance, the names seem to be loosely applied and perhaps vaguely defined,
and this laxity in application and definition does not disappear, but
rather increases, with closer examination.

There are special reasons for the indefiniteness of Indian nomenclature:
The aborigines were at the time of discovery, and indeed most of them
remain today, in the prescriptorial stage of culture, i.e., the stage in
which ideas are crystallized, not by means of arbitrary symbols, but by
means of arbitrary associations,(18) and in this stage names are connotive
or descriptive, rather than denotive as in the scriptorial stage.
Moreover, among the Indians, as among all other prescriptorial peoples,
the ego is paramount, and all things are described, much more largely than
among cultured peoples, with reference to the describer and the position
which he occupies—Self and Here, and, if need be, Now and Thus, are the
fundamental elements of primitive conception and description, and these
elements are implied and exemplified, rather than expressed, in thought
and utterance. Accordingly there is a notable paucity in names, especially
for themselves, among the Indian tribes, while the descriptive
designations applied to a given group by neighboring tribes are often
diverse.

The principles controlling nomenclature in its inchoate stages are
illustrated among the Siouan peoples. So far as their own tongues were
concerned, the stock was nameless, and could not be designated save
through integral parts. Even the great Dakota confederacy, one of the most
extensive and powerful aboriginal organizations, bore no better
designation than a term probably applied originally to associated tribes
in a descriptive way and perhaps used as a greeting or countersign,
although there was an alternative proper descriptive term.—"Seven
Council-fires"—apparently of considerable antiquity, since it seems to
have been originally applied before the separation of the Asiniboin.(19)
In like manner the ¢egiha, ʇɔiwe’re, and Hotcañgara groups, and perhaps
the Niya, were without denotive designations for themselves, merely
styling themselves "Local People," "Men," "Inhabitants," or, still more
ambitiously, "People of the Parent Speech," in terms which are variously
rendered by different interpreters; they were lords in their own domain,
and felt no need for special title. Different Dakota tribes went so far as
to claim that their respective habitats marked the middle of the world, so
that each insisted on precedence as the leading tribe,(20) and it was the
boast of the Mandan that they were the original people of the earth.(21)
In the more carefully studied confederacies the constituent groups
generally bore designations apparently used for convenient distinction in
the confederation; sometimes they were purely descriptive, as in the case
of the Sisseton, Wahpeton, Sans Arcs, Blackfeet, Oto, and several others;
again they referred to the federate organization (probably, possibly to
relative position of habitat), as in the Yankton, Yanktonai, and Huñkpapa;
more frequently they referred to geographic or topographic position, e.g.,
Teton, Omaha, Pahe’tsi, Kwapa, etc; while some appear to have had a
figurative or symbolic connotation, as Brulé, Ogalala, and Ponka. Usually
the designations employed by alien peoples were more definite than those
used in the group designated, as illustrated by the stock name, Asiniboin,
and Iowa. Commonly the alien appellations were terms of reproach; thus
Sioux, Biloxi, and Hohe (the Dakota designation for the Asiniboin) are
clearly opprobrious, while Paskagula might easily be opprobrious among
hunters and warriors, and Iowa and Oto appear to be derogatory or
contemptuous expressions. The names applied by the whites were sometimes
taken from geographic positions, as in the case of Upper Yanktonai and
Cape Fear—the geographic names themselves being frequently of Indian
origin. Some of the current names represent translations of the aboriginal
terms either into English ("Blackfeet," "Two Kettles," "Crow,") or into
French ("Sans Arcs," "Brulé"," "Gros Ventres"); yet most of the names, at
least of the prairie tribes, are simply corruptions of the aboriginal
terms, though frequently the modification is so complete as to render
identification and interpretation difficult—it is not easy to find Waca’ce
in "Osage" (so spelled by the French, whose orthography was adopted and
mispronounced by English-speaking pioneers), or Pa’qotce in "Iowa."

The meanings of most of the eastern names are lost; yet so far as they are
preserved they are of a kind with those of the interior. So, too, are the
subtribal names enumerated by Dorsey.



PRINCIPAL CHARACTERS


PHONETIC AND GRAPHIC ARTS


The Siouan stock is defined by linguistic characters. The several tribes
and larger and smaller groups speak dialects so closely related as to
imply occasional or habitual association, and hence to indicate community
in interests and affinity in development; and while the arts (reflecting
as they did the varying environment of a wide territorial range) were
diversified, the similarity in language was, as is usual, accompanied by
similarity in institutions and beliefs. Nearly all of the known dialects
are eminently vocalic, and the tongues of the plains, which have been most
extensively studied, are notably melodious; thus the leading languages of
the group display moderately high phonetic development. In grammatic
structure the better-known dialects are not so well developed; the
structure is complex, chiefly through the large use of inflection, though
agglutination sometimes occurs. In some cases the germ of organization is
found in fairly definite juxtaposition or placement. The vocabulary is
moderately rich, and of course represents the daily needs of a primitive
people, their surroundings, their avocations, and their thoughts, while
expressing little of the richer ideation of cultured cosmopolites. On the
whole, the speech of the Siouan stock may be said to have been fairly
developed, and may, with the Algonquian, Iroquoian, and Shoshonean, be
regarded as typical for the portion of North America lying north of
Mexico. Fortunately it has been extensively studied by Riggs, Hale,
Dorsey, and several others, including distinguished representatives of
some of the tribes, and is thus accessible to students. The high phonetic
development of the Siouan tongues reflects the needs and records the
history of the hunter and warrior tribes, whose phonetic symbols were
necessarily so differentiated as to be intelligible in whisper, oratory,
and war cry, as well as in ordinary converse, while the complex structure
is in harmony with the elaborate social organization and ritual of the
Siouan people.

Many of the Siouan Indians were adepts in the sign language; indeed, this
mode of conveying intelligence attained perhaps its highest development
among some of the tribes of this stock, who, with other plains Indians,
developed pantomime and gesture into a surprisingly perfect art of
expression adapted to the needs of huntsmen and warriors.

Most of the tribes were fairly proficient in pictography; totemic and
other designs were inscribed on bark and wood, painted on skins, wrought
into domestic wares, and sometimes carved on rocks. Jonathan Carver gives
an example of picture-writing on a tree, in charcoal mixed with bear’s
grease, designed to convey information from the "Chipe’ways" (Algonquian)
to the "Naudowessies,"(22) and other instances of intertribal
communication by means of pictography are on record. Personal decoration
was common, and was largely symbolic; the face and body were painted in
distinctive ways when going on the warpath, in organizing the hunt, in
mourning the dead, in celebrating the victory, and in performing various
ceremonials. Scarification and maiming were practiced by some of the
tribes, always in a symbolic way. Among the Mandan and Hidatsa scars were
produced in cruel ceremonials originally connected with war and hunting,
and served as enduring witnesses of courage and fortitude. Symbolic
tattooing was fairly common among the westernmost tribes. Eagle and other
feathers were worn as insignia of rank and for other symbolic purposes,
while bear claws and the scalps of enemies were worn as symbols of the
chase and battle. Some of the tribes recorded current history by means of
"winter counts" or calendaric inscriptions, though their arithmetic was
meager and crude, and their calendar proper was limited to recognition of
the year, lunation, and day—or, as among so many primitive people, the
"snow," "dead moon," and "night,"—with no definite system of fitting
lunations to the annual seasons. Most of the graphic records were
perishable, and have long ago disappeared; but during recent decades
several untutored tribesmen have executed vigorous drawings representing
hunting scenes and conflicts with white soldiery, which have been
preserved or reproduced. These crude essays in graphic art were the germ
of writing, and indicate that, at the time of discovery, several Siouan
tribes were near the gateway opening into the broader field of scriptorial
culture. So far as it extends, the crude graphic symbolism betokens
warlike habit and militant organization, which were doubtless measurably
inimical to further progress.

It would appear that, in connection with their proficiency in gesture
speech and their meager graphic art, the Siouan Indians had become masters
in a vaguely understood system of dramaturgy or symbolized conduct. Among
them the use of the peace-pipe was general; among several and perhaps all
of the tribes the definite use of insignia was common; among them the
customary hierarchic organization of the aborigines was remarkably
developed and was maintained by an elaborate and strict code of etiquette
whose observance was exacted and yielded by every tribesman. Thus the
warriors, habituated to expressing and recognizing tribal affiliation and
status in address and deportment, were notably observant of social
minutiæ, and this habit extended into every activity of their lives. They
were ceremonious among themselves and crafty toward enemies, tactful
diplomatists as well as brave soldiers, shrewd strategists as well as
fierce fighters; ever they were skillful readers of human nature, even
when ruthless takers of human life. Among some of the tribes every
movement and gesture and expression of the male adult seems to have been
affected or controlled with the view of impressing spectators and
auditors, and through constant schooling the warriors became most
consummate actors. To the casual observer, they were stoics or stupids
according to the conditions of observation; to many observers, they were
cheats or charlatans; to scientific students, their eccentrically
developed volition and the thaumaturgy by which it was normally
accompanied suggests early stages in that curious development which, in
the Orient, culminates in necromancy and occultism. Unfortunately this
phase of the Indian character (which was shared by various tribes) was
little appreciated by the early travelers, and little record of it
remains; yet there is enough to indicate the importance of constantly
studied ceremony, or symbolic conduct, among them. The development of
affectation and self-control among the Siouan tribesmen was undoubtedly
shaped by warlike disposition, and their stoicism was displayed largely in
war—as when the captured warrior went exultingly to the torture, taunting
and tempting his captors to multiply their atrocities even until his
tongue was torn from its roots, in order that his fortitude might be
proved; but the habit was firmly fixed and found constant expression in
commonplace as well as in more dramatic actions.


INDUSTRIAL AND ESTHETIC ARTS


Since the arts of primitive people reflect environmental conditions with
close fidelity, and since the Siouan Indians were distributed over a vast
territory varying in climate, hydrography, geology, fauna, and flora,
their industrial and esthetic arts can hardly be regarded as distinctive,
and were indeed shared by other tribes of all neighboring stocks.

The best developed industries were hunting and warfare, though all of the
tribes subsisted in part on fruits, nuts, berries, tubers, grains, and
other vegetal products, largely wild, though sometimes planted and even
cultivated in rude fashion. The southwestern tribes, and to some extent
all of the prairie denizens and probably the eastern remnant, grew maize,
beans, pumpkins, melons, squashes, sunflowers, and tobacco, though their
agriculture seems always to have been subordinated to the chase.
Aboriginally, they appear to have had no domestic animals except dogs,
which, according to Carver—one of the first white men seen by the prairie
tribes,—were kept for their flesh, which was eaten ceremonially,(23) and
for use in the chase.(24) According to Lewis and Clark (1804-1806), they
were used for burden and draft;(25) according to the naturalists
accompanying Long’s expedition (1819-20), for flesh (eaten ceremonially
and on ordinary occasions), draft, burden, and the chase,(26) and
according to Prince Maximilian, for food and draft,(27) all these
functions indicating long familiarity with the canines. Catlin, too, found
"dog’s meat ... the most honorable food that can be presented to a
stranger;" it was eaten ceremonially and on important occasions.(28)
Moreover, the terms used for the dog and his harness are ancient and even
archaic, and some of the most important ceremonials were connected with
this animal,(29) implying long-continued association. Casual references
indicate that some of the tribes lived in mutual tolerance with several
birds(30) and mammals not yet domesticated (indeed the buffalo may be said
to have been in this condition), so that the people were at the threshold
of zooculture.

The chief implements and weapons were of stone, wood, bone, horn, and
antler. According to Carver, the "Nadowessie" were skillful bowmen, using
also the "casse-tête"(31) or warclub, and a flint scalping-knife. Catlin
was impressed with the shortness of the bows used by the prairie tribes,
though among the southwestern tribes they were longer. Many of the Siouan
Indians used the lance, javelin, or spear. The domestic utensils were
scant and simple, as became wanderers and fighters, wood being the common
material, though crude pottery and basketry were manufactured, together
with bags and bottles of skins or animal intestines. Ceremonial objects
were common, the most conspicuous being the calumet, carved out of the
sacred pipestone or catlinite quarried for many generations in the midst
of the Siouan territory. Frequently the pipes were fashioned in the form
of tomahawks, when they carried a double symbolic significance, standing
alike for peace and war, and thus expressing well the dominant idea of the
Siouan mind. Tobacco and kinnikinic (a mixture of tobacco with shredded
bark, leaves, etc(32)) were smoked.

Aboriginally the Siouan apparel was scanty, commonly comprising
breechclout, moccasins, leggings, and robe, and consisted chiefly of
dressed skins, though several of the tribes made simple fabrics of bast,
rushes, and other vegetal substances. Fur robes and rush mats commonly
served for bedding, some of the tribes using rude bedsteads. The
buffalo-hunting prairie tribes depended largely for apparel, bedding, and
habitations, as well as for food, on the great beast to whose comings and
goings their movements were adjusted. Like other Indians, the Siouan
hunters and their consorts quickly availed themselves of the white man’s
stuffs, as well as his metal implements, and the primitive dress was soon
modified.

The woodland habitations were chiefly tent-shape structures of saplings
covered with bark, rush mats, skins, or bushes; the prairie habitations
were mainly earth lodges for winter and buffalo-skin tipis for summer.
Among many of the tribes these domiciles, simple as they were, were
constructed in accordance with an elaborate plan controlled by ritual.
According to Morgan, the framework of the aboriginal Dakota house
consisted of 13 poles;(33) and Dorsey describes the systematic grouping of
the tipis belonging to different gentes and tribes. Sudatories were
characteristic in most of the tribes, menstrual lodges were common, and
most of the more sedentary tribes had council houses or other communal
structures. The Siouan domiciles were thus adapted with remarkable
closeness to the daily habits and environment of the tribesmen, while at
the same time they reflected the complex social organization growing out
of their prescriptorial status and militant disposition.

Most of the Siouan men, women, and children were fine swimmers, though
they did not compare well with neighboring tribes as makers and managers
of water craft. The Dakota women made coracles of buffalo hides, in which
they transported themselves and their householdry, but the use of these
and other craft seems to have been regarded as little better than a
feminine weakness. Other tribes were better boatmen; for the Siouan Indian
generally preferred land travel to journeying by water, and avoided the
burden of vehicles by which his ever-varying movements in pursuit of game
or in waylaying and evading enemies would have been limited and
handicapped.

There are many indications and some suggestive evidences that the chief
arts and certain institutions and beliefs, as well as the geographic
distribution, of the principal Siouan tribes were determined by a single
conspicuous feature in their environment—the buffalo. As Riggs, Hale, and
Dorsey have demonstrated, the original home of the Siouan stock lay on the
eastern slope of the Appalachian mountains, stretching down over the
Piedmont and Coastplain provinces to the shores of the Atlantic between
the Potomac and the Savannah. As shown by Allen, the buffalo, "prior to
the year 1800," spread eastward across the Appalachians(34) and into the
priscan territory of the Siouan tribes. As suggested by Shaler, the
presence of this ponderous and peaceful animal materially affected the
vocations of the Indians, tending to discourage agriculture and encourage
the chase; and it can hardly be doubted that the bison was the bridge that
carried the ancestors of the western tribes from the crest of the
Alleghenies to the Côteau des Prairies and enabled them to disperse so
widely over the plains beyond. Certainly the toothsome flesh and useful
skins must have attracted the valiant huntsmen among the Appalachians;
certainly the feral herds must have become constantly larger and more
numerous westward, thus tempting the pursuers down the waterways toward
the great river; certainly the vast herds beyond the Mississippi gave
stronger incentives and richer rewards than the hunters of big game found
elsewhere; and certainly when the prairie tribes were discovered, the men
and animals lived in constant interaction, and many of the hunters acted
and thought only as they were moved by their easy prey. As the Spanish
horse spread northward over the Llano Estacado and overflowed across the
mountains from the plains of the Cayuse, the Dakota and other tribes found
a new means of conquest over the herds, and entered on a career so facile
that they increased and multiplied despite strife and imported disease.

The horse was acquired by the prairie tribes toward the end of the last
century. Carver (1766-1768) describes the methods of hunting among the
"Naudowessie" without referring to the horse,(35) though he gives their
name for the animal in his vocabulary,(36) and describes their mode of
warfare with "Indians that inhabit still farther to the westward a country
which extends to the South Sea," having "great plenty of horses."(37)
Lewis and Clark (1804-1806) mention that the "Sioux of the Teton tribe ...
frequently make excursions to steal horses" from the Mandan,(38) and make
other references indicating that the horse was in fairly common use among
some of the Siouan tribes, though the animal was "confined principally to
the nations inhabiting the great plains of the Columbia,"(39) and dogs
were still used for burden and draft.(40) Grinnell learned from an aged
Indian that horses came into the hands of the neighboring Piegan
(Algonquian) about 1804-1806.(41) Long’s naturalists found the horse, ass,
and mule in use among the Kansa and other tribes,(42) and described the
mode of capture of wild horses by the Osage;(43) yet when, two-thirds of a
century after Carver, Catlin (1832-1839) and Prince Maximilian (1833-34)
visited the Siouan territory, they found the horse established and in
common use in the chase and in war.(44) It is significant that the Dakota
word for horse (śuk-taɲ’-ka or śuɲ-ka’-wa-kaɲ) is composed of the word for
dog (śuɲ’-ka), with an affix indicating greatness, sacredness, or mystery,
so that the horse is literally "great mysterious dog," or "ancient sacred
dog," and that several terms for harness and other appurtenances
correspond with those used for the gear of the dog when used as a draft
animal.(45) This terminology corroborates the direct evidence that the dog
was domesticated by the Siouan aborigines long before the advent of the
horse.

Among the Siouan tribes, as among other Indians, amusements absorbed a
considerable part of the time and energy of the old and young of both
sexes. Among the young, the gambols, races, and other sports were chiefly
or wholly diversional, and commonly mimicked the avocations of the adults.
The girls played at the building and care of houses and were absorbed in
dolls, while the boys played at archery, foot racing, and mimic hunting,
which soon grew into the actual chase of small birds and animals. Some of
the sports of the elders were unorganized diversions, leaping, racing,
wrestling, and other spontaneous expressions of exuberance. Certain
diversions were controlled by more persistent motive, as when the idle
warrior occupied his leisure in meaningless ornamentation of his garment
or tipi, or spent hours of leisure in esthetic modification of his weapon
or ceremonial badge, and to this purposeless activity, which engendered
design with its own progress, the incipient graphic art of the tribes was
largely due. The more important and characteristic sports were organized
and interwoven with social organization and belief so as commonly to take
the form of elaborate ceremonial, in which dancing, feasting, fasting,
symbolic painting, song, and sacrifice played important parts, and these
organized sports were largely fiducial. To many of the early observers the
observances were nothing more than meaningless mummeries; to some they
were sacrilegious, to others sortilegious; to the more careful students,
like Carver, whose notes are of especial value by reason of the author’s
clear insight into the Indian character, they were invocations,
expiations, propitiations, expressing profound and overpowering devotion.
Carver says of the "Naudowessie," "They usually dance either before or
after every meal; and by this cheerfulness, probably, render the Great
Spirit, to whom they consider themselves as indebted for every good, a
more acceptable sacrifice than a formal and unanimated thanksgiving;"(46)
and he proceeds to describe the informal dances as well as the more formal
ceremonials preparatory to joining in the chase or setting out on the
warpath. The ceremonial observances of the Siouan tribes were not
different in kind from those of neighboring contemporaries, yet some of
them were developed in remarkable degree—for example, the bloody rites by
which youths were raised to the rank of warriors in some of the prairie
tribes were without parallel in severity among the aborigines of America,
or even among the known primitive peoples of the world. So the sports of
the Siouan Indians were both diversional and divinatory, and the latter
were highly organized in a manner reflecting the environment of the
tribes, their culture-status, their belief, and especially their
disposition toward bloodshed; for their most characteristic ceremonials
were connected, genetically if not immediately, with warfare and the
chase.

Among many of the Siouan tribes, games of chance were played habitually
and with great avidity, both men and women becoming so absorbed as to
forget avocations and food, mothers even neglecting their children; for,
as among other primitive peoples, the charm of hazard was greater than
among the enlightened. The games were not specially distinctive, and were
less widely differentiated than in certain other Indian stocks. The sport
or game of chungke stood high in favor among the young men in many of the
tribes, and was played as a game partly of chance, partly of skill; but
dice games (played with plum stones among the southwestern prairie tribes)
were generally preferred, especially by the women, children, and older
men. The games were partly, sometimes wholly, diversional, but generally
they were in large part divinatory, and thus reflected the hazardous
occupations and low culture-status of the people. One of the evils
resulting from the advent of the whites was the introduction of new games
of chance which tended further to pervert the simple Siouan mind; but in
time the evil brought its own remedy, for association with white gamblers
taught the ingenuous sortilegers that there is nothing divine or sacred
about the gaming table or the conduct of its votaries.

The primitive Siouan music was limited to the chant and rather simple
vocal melody, accompanied by rattle, drum, and flute, the drum among the
northwestern tribes being a skin bottle or bag of water. The music of the
Omaha and some other tribes has been most appreciatively studied by Miss
Fletcher, and her memoir ranks among the Indian classics.(47) In general
the Siouan music was typical for the aboriginal stocks of the northern
interior. Its dominant feature was rhythm, by which the dance was
controlled, though melody was inchoate, while harmony was not yet
developed.

The germ of painting was revealed in the calendars and the seed of
sculpture in the carvings of the Sionan Indians. The pictographic
paintings comprised not only recognizable but even vigorous
representations of men and animals, depicted in form and color though
without perspective, while the calumet of catlinite was sometimes chiseled
into striking verisimilitude of human and animal forms in miniature. To
the collector these representations suggest fairly developed art, though
to the Indian they were mainly, if not wholly, symbolic; for everything
indicates that the primitive artisan had not yet broken the shackles of
fetichistic symbolism, and had little conception of artistic portrayal for
its own sake.


INSTITUTIONS


Among civilized peoples, institutions are crystallized in statutes about
nuclei of common law or custom; among peoples in the prescriptorial
culture-stage statutes are unborn, and various mnemonic devices are
employed for fixing and perpetuating institutions; and, as is usual in
this stage, the devices involve associations which appear to be
essentially arbitrary at the outset, though they tend to become natural
through the survival of the fittest. A favorite device for perpetuating
institutions among the primitive peoples of many districts on different
continents is the taboo, or prohibition, which is commonly fiducial but is
often of general application. This device finds its best development in
the earlier stages in the development of belief, and is normally connected
with totemism. Another device, which is remarkably widespread, as shown by
Morgan, is kinship nomenclature. This device rests on a natural and easily
ascertained basis, though its applications are arbitrary and vary widely
from tribe to tribe and from culture-status to culture-status. A third
device, which found much favor among the American aborigines and among
some other primitive peoples, may be called _ordination_, or the
arrangement of individuals and groups classified from the prescriptorial
point of view of Self, Here, and Now, with respect to each other or to
some dominant personage or group. This device seems to have grown out of
the kin-name system, in which the Ego is the basis from which relation is
reckoned. It tends to develop into federate organization on the one hand
or into caste on the other hand, according to the attendant
conditions.(48) There are various other devices for fixing and
perpetuating institutions or for expressing the laws embodied therein.
Some of these are connected with thaumaturgy and shamanism, some are
connected with the powers of nature, and the several devices overlap and
interlace in puzzling fashion.

Among the Siouan Indians the devices of taboo, kin-names, and ordination
are found in such relation as to throw some light on the growth of
primitive institutions. While they blend and are measurably involved with
thaumaturgic devices, there are indications that in a general way the
three devices stand for stages in the development of law. Among the
best-known tribes the taboo pertained to the clan, and was used (in a much
more limited way than among some other peoples) to commemorate and
perpetuate the clan organization; kin-names, which were partly natural and
thus normal to the clan organization, and at the same time partly
artificial and thus characteristic of gentile organization, served to
commemorate and perpetuate not only the family relations but the relations
of the constituent elements of the tribe; while the ordination, expressed
in the camping circle, in the phratries, in the ceremonials, and in many
other ways, served to commemorate intertribal as well as intergentile
relations, and thus to promote peace and harmonious action. It is
significant that the taboo was less potent among the Siouan Indians than
among some other stocks, and that among some tribes it has not been found;
and it is especially significant that in some instances the taboo was
apparently inversely related to kin-naming and ordination, as among the
Biloxi, where the taboo is exceptionally weak and kin-naming exceptionally
strong, and among the Dakota, where the system of ordination attained
perhaps its highest American development in domiciliary arrangement, while
the taboo was limited in function; for the relations indicate that the
taboo was archaic or even vestigial. It is noteworthy also that among most
of the Siouan tribes the kin-name system was less elaborate than in many
other stocks, while the system of ordination is so elaborate as to
constitute one of the leading characteristics of the stock.

At the time of the discovery, most of the Siouan tribes had apparently
passed into gentile organization, though vestiges of clan organization
were found—e.g., among the best-known tribes the man was the head of the
family, though the tipi usually belonged to the woman. Thus, as defined by
institutions, the stock was just above savagery and just within the lower
stages of barbarism. Accordingly the governmental functions were
hereditary in the male line, yet the law of heredity was subject to
modification or suspension at the will of the group, commonly at the
instance of rebels or usurpers of marked prowess or shrewdness. The
property regulations were definite and strictly observed; as among other
barbarous peoples, the land was common to the tribe or other group
occupying it, yet was defended against alien invasion; the ownership of
movable property was a combination of communalism and individualism
delicately adjusted to the needs and habits of the several tribes— in
general, evanescent property, such as food and fuel, was shared in common
(subject to carefully regulated individual claims), while permanent
property, such as tipis, dogs, apparel, weapons, etc, was held by
individuals. As among other tribes, the more strictly personal property
was usually destroyed on the death of the owner, though the real reason
for the custom—the prevention of dispute—was shrouded in a mantle of
mysticism.

Although of primary importance in shaping the career of the Siouan tribes,
the marital institutions of the stock were not specially distinctive.
Marriage was usually effected by negotiation through parents or elders;
among some of the tribes the bride was purchased, while among others there
was an interchange of presents. Polygyny was common; in several of the
tribes the bride’s sisters became subordinate wives of the husband. The
regulations concerning divorce and the punishment of infidelity were
somewhat variable among the different tribes, some of whom furnished
temporary wives to distinguished visitors. Generally there were sanctions
for marriage by elopement or individual choice. In every tribe, so far as
known, gentile exogamy prevailed—i.e., marriage in the gens was forbidden,
under pain of ostracism or still heavier penalty, while the gentes
intermarried among one another; in some cases intermarriage between
certain tribes was regarded with special favor. There seems to have been
no system of marriage by capture, though captive women were usually
espoused by the successful tribesmen, and girls were sometimes abducted.
In general it would appear that intergentile and intertribal marriage was
practiced and sanctioned by the sages, and that it tended toward harmony
and federation, and thus contributed much toward the increase and
diffusion of the great Siouan stock.

As set forth in some detail by Dorsey, the ordination of the Siouan tribes
extended beyond the hierarchic organization into families, subgentes,
gentes, tribes, and confederacies; there were also phratries, sometimes
(perhaps typically) arranged in pairs; there were societies or
associations established on social or fiducial bases; there was a general
arrangement or classification of each group on a military basis, as into
soldiers and two or more classes of noncombatants, etc. Among the Siouan
peoples, too, the individual brotherhood of the David-Jonathan or
Damon-Pythias type was characteristically developed. Thus the corporate
institutions were interwoven and superimposed in a manner nearly as
complex as that found in the national, state, municipal, and minor
institutions of civilization; yet the ordination preserved by means of the
camping circle, the kinship system, the simple series of taboos, and the
elaborate symbolism was apparently so complete as to meet every social and
governmental demand.


BELIEFS


THE DEVELOPMENT OF MYTHOLOGY


As explained by Powell, philosophies and beliefs may be seriated in four
stages: The first stage is hecastotheism; in this stage extranatural or
mysterious potencies are imputed to objects both animate and inanimate.
The second stage is zootheism; within it the powers of animate forms are
exaggerated and amplified into the realm of the supernal, and certain
animals are deified. The third stage is that of physitheism, in which the
agencies of nature are personified and exalted unto omnipotence. The
fourth stage is that of psychotheism, which includes the domain of
spiritual concept. In general the development of belief coincides with the
growth of abstraction; yet it is to be remembered that this growth
represents increase in definiteness of the abstract concepts rather than
augmentation in numbers and kinds of subjective impressions, i.e., the
advance is in quality rather than in quantity; indeed, it would almost
appear that the vague and indefinite abstraction of hecastotheism is more
pervasive and prevalent than the clearer abstraction of higher stages.
Appreciation of the fundamental characteristics of belief is essential to
even the most general understanding of the Indian mythology and
philosophy, and even after careful study it is difficult for thinkers
trained in the higher methods of thought to understand the crude and
confused ideation of the primitive thinker.

In hecastotheism the believer finds mysterious properties and potencies
everywhere. To his mind every object is endued with occult power, moved by
a vague volition, actuated by shadowy motive ranging capriciously from
malevolence to benevolence; in his lax estimation some objects are more
potent or more mysterious than others, the strong, the sharp, the hard,
and the swift-moving rising superior to the feeble, the dull, the soft,
and the slow. Commonly he singles out some special object as his personal,
family, or tribal mystery-symbol or fetich, the object usually
representing that which is most feared or worst hated among his
surroundings. Vaguely realizing from the memory of accidents or unforeseen
events that he is dependent on his surroundings, he invests every feature
of his environment with a capricious humor reflecting his own disposition,
and gives to each and all a subtlety and inscrutability corresponding to
his exalted estimation of his own craft in the chase and war; and,
conceiving himself to live and move only at the mercy of his multitudinous
associates, he becomes a fatalist—kismet is his watchword, and he meets
defeat and death with resignation, just as he goes to victory with
complacence; for so it was ordained.

Zootheism is the offspring of hecastotheism. As the primitive believer
assigns special potency or mystery to the strong and the swift, he
gradually comes to give exceptional rank to self-moving animals; as his
experience of the strength, alertness, swiftness, and courage of his
animate enemy or prey increases, these animals are invested with
successively higher and higher attributes, each reflecting the mental
operations of the mystical huntsman, and in time the animals with which
the primitive believers are most intimately associated come to be regarded
as tutelary daimons of supernatural power and intelligence. At first the
animals, like the undifferentiated things of hecastotheism, are regarded
in fear or awe by reason of their strength and ferocity, and this regard
grows into an incipient worship in the form of sacrifice or other
ceremonial; meanwhile, inanimate things, and in due season rare and
unimportant animals, are neglected, and a half dozen, a dozen, or a score
of the well-known animals are exalted into a hierarchy of petty gods,
headed by the strongest like the bear, the swiftest like the deer, the
most majestic like the eagle, the most cunning like the fox or coyote, or
the most deadly like the rattlesnake. Commonly the arts and the skill of
the mystical huntsman improve from youth to adolescence and from
generation to generation, so that the later animals appear to be easier
snared or slain than the earlier; moreover, the accounts of conflicts
between men and animals grow by repetition and are gilded by imagination
as memory grows dim; and for these and other reasons the notion grows up
that the ancient animals were stronger, swifter, slier, statelier,
deadlier than their modern representatives, and the hierarchy of petty
gods is exalted into an omnipotent thearchy. Eventually, in the most
highly developed zootheistic systems, the leading beast-god is regarded as
the creator of the lesser deities of the earth, sun, and sky, of the
mythic under-world and its real counterpart the ground or mid-world, as
well as the visionary upper-world, of men, and of the ignoble animals;
sometimes the most exalted beast-god is worshiped especially by the great
man or leading class and incidentally by all, while other men and groups
choose the lesser beast-gods, according to their rank, for special
worship. In hecastotheism the potencies revered or worshiped are
polymorphic, while their attributes reflect the mental operations of the
believers; in zootheism the deities worshiped are zoomorphic, and their
attributes continue to reflect the human mind.

Physitheism, in its turn, springs from zootheism. Through contemplation of
the strong the idea of strength arises, and a means is found for bringing
the bear into analogy with thunder, with the sun, or with the
avalanche-bearing mountain; through contemplation of the swift the concept
of swiftness is engendered, and comparison of the deer with the wind or
rushing river is made easy; through contemplation of the deadly stroke of
the rattlesnake the notion of death-dealing power assumes shape, and
comparison of the snake bite and the lightning stroke is made possible;
and in every case it is inevitably perceived that the agency is stronger,
swifter, deadlier than the animal. At first the agency is not abstracted
or dissociated from the parent zootheistic concept, and the sun is the
mightiest animal as among many peoples, the thunder is the voice of the
bear as among different woodland tribes or the flapping of the wings of
the great ancient eagle as among the Dakota and ¢egiha, while lightning is
the great serpent of the sky as among the Zuñi. Subsequently the zoic
concept fades, and the constant association of human intellectual
qualities engenders an anthropic concept, when the sun becomes an
anthropomorphic deity (perhaps bearing a dazzling mask, as among the
Zuñi), and thunder is the rumbling of quoits pitched by the shades of
old-time giants, as among different American tribes. Eventually all the
leading agencies of nature are personified in anthropic form, and retain
the human attributes of caprice, love, and hate which are found in the
minds of the believers.

Psychotheism is born of physitheism as the anthropomorphic element in the
concept of natural agency gradually fades; but since none of the
aborigines of the United States had passed into the higher stage, the mode
of transition does not require consideration.

It is to be borne in mind that throughout the course of development of
belief, from the beginning of hecastotheism into the borderland of
psychotheism, the dominant characteristic is the vague notion of mystery.
At first the mystery pervades all things and extends in all directions,
representing an indefinite ideal world, which is the counterpart of the
real world with the addition of human qualities. Gradually the mystery
segregates, deepening with respect to animals and disappearing with
respect to inanimate things; and at length the slowly changing mysteries
shape themselves into semiabstractions having a strong anthropic cast,
while the remainder of the earth and the things thereof gradually become
real, though they remain under the spell and dominion of the mysterious.
Thus at every stage the primitive believer is a mystic—a fatalist in one
stage, a beast worshiper in another, a thaumaturgist in a third, yet ever
and first of all a mystic. It is also to be borne in mind (and the more
firmly because of a widespread misapprehension) that the primitive
believer, up to the highest stage attained by the North American Indian,
is not a psychotheist, much less a monotheist. His "Great Spirit" is
simply a great mystery, perhaps vaguely anthropomorphic, oftener
zoomorphic, yet not a spirit, which he is unable to conceive save by
reflection of the white man’s concept and inquiry; and his departed spirit
is but a shade, much like that of the ancient Greeks, the associate and
often the inferior of animal shades.

While the four stages in development of belief are fundamentally distinct,
they nevertheless overlap in such manner as apparently, and in a measure
really, to coexist and blend. Culture progress is slow. In biotic
development the effect of beneficial modification is felt immediately, and
the modified organs or organisms are stimulated and strengthened
cumulatively, while the unmodified are enfeebled and paralyzed
cumulatively through inactivity and quickly pass toward atrophy and
extinction. Conversely in demotic development, which is characterized by
the persistence of the organisms and by the elimination of the bad and the
preservation of the good among qualities only, there is a constant
tendency toward retardation of progress; for in savagery and barbarism as
in civilization, age commonly produces conservatism, and at the same time
brings responsibility for the conduct of old and young, so that
modification, howsoever beneficial, is measurably held in check, and so
that the progress of each generation buds in the springtime of youth yet
is not permitted to fruit until the winter of old age approaches.
Accordingly the mean of demotic progress tends to lag far behind its
foremost advances, and modes of action and especially of thought change
slowly. This is especially true of beliefs, which, during each generation,
are largely vestigial. So the stages in the evolution of mythologic
philosophy overlap widely; there is probably no tribe now living among
whom zootheism has not yet taken root, though hecastotheism has been found
dominant among different tribes; there is probably no people in the
zootheistic stage who are completely divested of hecastotheistic vestiges;
and one of the curious features of even the most advanced psychotheism is
the occasional outcropping of features inherited from all of the earlier
stages. Yet it is none the less important to discriminate the stages.


THE SIOUAN MYTHOLOGY


It was partly through pioneer study of the Siouan Indians that the popular
fallacy concerning the aboriginal "Great Spirit" gained currency; and it
was partly through the work of Dorsey among the ¢egiha and Dakota tribes,
first as a missionary and afterward as a linguist, that the early error
was corrected. Among these tribes the creation and control of the world
and the things thereof are ascribed to "wa-kan-da" (the term varying
somewhat from tribe to tribe), just as among the Algonquian tribes
omnipotence was assigned to "ma-ni-do" ("Manito the Mighty" of
"Hiawatha"); yet inquiry shows that wakanda assumes various forms, and is
rather a quality than a definite entity. Thus, among many of the tribes
the sun is wakanda—not _the_ wakanda or _a_ wakanda, but simply wakanda;
and among the same tribes the moon is wakanda, and so is thunder,
lightning, the stars, the winds, the cedar, and various other things; even
a man, especially a shaman, might be wakanda or a wakanda. In addition the
term was applied to mythic monsters of the earth, air, and waters;
according to some of the sages the ground or earth, the mythic
under-world, the ideal upper-world, darkness, etc, were wakanda or
wakandas. So, too, the fetiches and the ceremonial objects and decorations
were wakanda among different tribes. Among some of the groups various
animals and other trees besides the specially wakanda cedar were regarded
as wakandas; as already noted, the horse, among the prairie tribes, was
the wakanda dog. In like manner many natural objects and places of
striking character were considered wakanda. Thus the term was applied to
all sorts of entities and ideas, and was used (with or without
inflectional variations) indiscriminately as substantive and adjective,
and with slight modification as verb and adverb. Manifestly a term so
protean is not susceptible of translation into the more highly
differentiated language of civilization. Manifestly, too, the idea
expressed by the term is indefinite, and can not justly be rendered into
"spirit," much less into "Great Spirit;" though it is easy to understand
stand how the superficial inquirer, dominated by definite spiritual
concept, handicapped by unfamiliarity with the Indian tongue, misled by
ignorance of the vague prescriptorial ideation, and perhaps deceived by
crafty native informants or mischievous interpreters, came to adopt and
perpetuate the erroneous interpretation. The term may be translated into
"mystery" perhaps more satisfactorily than into any other single English
word, yet this rendering is at the same time much too limited and much too
definite. As used by the Siouan Indian, wakanda vaguely connotes also
"power," "sacred," "ancient," "grandeur," "animate," "immortal," and other
words, yet does not express with any degree of fullness and clearness the
ideas conveyed by these terms singly or collectively—indeed, no English
sentence of reasonable length can do justice to the aboriginal idea
expressed by the term wakanda.

While the beliefs of many of the Siouan tribes are lost through the
extinction of the tribesmen or transformed through acculturation, it is
fortunate that a large body of information concerning the myths and
ceremonials of several prairie tribes has been collected. The records of
Carver, Lewis and Clark, Say, Catlin, and Prince Maximilian are of great
value when interpreted in the light of modern knowledge. More recent
researches by Miss Fletcher(49) and by Dorsey(50) are of especial value,
not only as direct sources of information but as a means of interpreting
the earlier writings. From these records it appears that, in so far as
they grasped the theistic concept, the Siouan Indians were polytheists;
that their mysteries or deities varied in rank and power; that some were
good but more were bad, while others combined bad and good attributes;
that they assumed various forms, actual and imaginary; and that their
dispositions and motives resembled those found among mankind.

The organization of the vague Siouan thearchy appears to have varied from
group to group. Among all of the tribes whose beliefs are known, the sun
was an important wakanda, perhaps the leading one potentially, though
usually of less immediate consideration than certain others, such as
thunder, lightning, and the cedar tree; among the Osage the sun was
invoked as "grandfather," and among various tribes there were sun
ceremonials, some of which are still maintained; among the Omaha and
Ponka, according to Miss Fletcher, the mythic thunder-bird plays a
prominent, perhaps dominant rôle, and the cedar tree or pole is deified as
its tangible representative. The moon was wakanda among the Osage and the
stars among the Omaha and Ponka, yet they seem to have occupied
subordinate positions; the winds and the four quarters were apparently
given higher rank; and, in individual cases, the mythic water-monsters or
earth-deities seem to have occupied leading positions. On the whole, it
may be safe to consider the sun as the Siouan arch-mystery, with the
mythic thunder-bird or family of thunder-birds as a sort of mediate link
between the mysteries and men, possessing less power but displaying more
activity in human affairs than the remoter wakanda of the heavens. Under
these controlling wakandas, other members of the series were vaguely and
variably arranged. Somewhere in the lower ranks, sacred animals—especially
sports, such as the white buffalo cow—were placed, and still lower came
totems and shamans, which, according to Dorsey, were reverenced rather
than worshiped. It is noteworthy that this thearchic arrangement
corresponded in many respects with the hierarchic social organization of
the stock.

The Siouan thearchy was invoked and adored by means of forms and
ceremonies, as well as through orisons. The set observances were highly
elaborate; they comprised dancing and chanting, feasting and fasting, and
in some cases sacrifice and torture, the shocking atrocities of the Mandan
and Minitari rites being especially impressive. From these great
collective devotions the ceremonials graded down through war-dance and
hunting-feast to the terpsichorean grace extolled by Carver, and to
individual fetich worship. In general the adoration expressed fear of the
evil rather than love of the good—but this can hardly be regarded as a
distinctive feature, much less a peculiar one.

Some of the mystery places were especially distinctive and noteworthy.
Foremost among them was the sacred pipestone quarry near Big Sioux river,
whence the material for the wakanda calumet was obtained; another was the
far-famed Minne-wakan of North Dakota, not inaptly translated "Devil’s
lake;" a third was the mystery-rock or medicine-rock of the Mandan and
Hidatsa near Yellowstone river; and there were many others of less
importance. About all of these places picturesque legends and myths
clustered.

The Siouan mythology is especially instructive, partly because so well
recorded, partly because it so clearly reflects the habits and customs of
the tribesmen and thus gives an indirect reflection of a well-marked
environment. As among so many peoples, the sun is a prominent element; the
ice-monsters of the north and the rain-myths of the arid region are
lacking, and are replaced by the frequent thunder and the trees shaken by
the storm-winds; the mythic creatures are shaped in the image of the
indigenous animals and birds; the myths center in the local rocks and
waters; the mysterious thearchy corresponds with the tribal hierarchy, and
the attributes ascribed to the deities are those characteristic of
warriors and hunters.

Considering the mythology in relation to the stages in development of
mythologic philosophy, it appears that the dominant beliefs, such as those
pertaining to the sun and the winds, represent a crude physitheism, while
vestiges of hecastotheism crop out in the object-worship and place-worship
of the leading tribes and in other features. At the same time well-marked
zootheistic features are found in the mythic thunder-birds and in the more
or less complete deification of various animals, in the exaltation of the
horse into the rank of the mythic dog father, and in the animal forms of
the water-monsters and earth-beings; and the living application of
zootheism is found in the animal fetiches and totems. On the whole, it
seems just to assign the Siouan mythology to the upper strata of
zootheism, just verging on physitheism, with vestigial traces of
hecastotheism.


SOMATOLOGY


The vigorous avocations of the chase and war were reflected in fine
stature, broad and deep chests, strong and clean limbs, and sound
constitution among the Siouan tribesmen and their consorts. The skin was
of the usual coppery cast characteristic of the native American; the teeth
were strong, indicating and befitting a largely carnivorous diet, little
worn by sandy foods, and seldom mutilated; the hands and feet were
commonly large and sinewy. The Siouan Indians were among those who
impressed white pioneers by the parallel placing of the feet; for, as
among other walkers and runners, who rest sitting and lying, the feet
assumed the pedestrian attitude of approximate parallelism rather than the
standing attitude of divergence forward. The hair was luxuriant, stiff,
straight, and more uniformly jet black than that of the southerly stocks;
it was worn long by the women and most of the men, though partly clipped
or shaved in some tribes by the warriors as well as the worthless dandies,
who, according to Catlin, spent more time over their toilets than ever did
the grande dame of Paris. The women were beardless and the men more or
less nearly so; commonly the men plucked out by the roots the scanty hair
springing on their faces, as did both sexes that on other parts of the
body. The crania were seldom deformed artificially save through cradle
accident, and while varying considerably in capacity and in the ratio of
length to width were usually mesocephalic. The facial features were
strong, yet in no way distinctly unlike those found among neighboring
peoples.

Since the advent of white men the characteristics of the Siouan Indians,
like those of other tribes, have been somewhat modified, partly through
infusion of Caucasian blood but chiefly through acculturation. With the
abandonment of hunting and war and the tardy adoption of a slothful,
semidependent agriculture, the frame has lost something of its stalwart
vigor; with the adaptation of the white man’s costume and the incomplete
assimilation of his hygiene, various weaknesses and disorders have been
developed; and through imitation the erstwhile luxuriant hair is cropped,
and the beard, made scanty through generations of extirpation, is commonly
cultivated. Although the accultural condition of the Siouan survivors
ranges from the essentially primitive status of the Asiniboin to the
practical civilization of the representatives of several tribes, it is
fair to consider the stock in a state of transition from barbarism to
civilization; and many of the tribesmen are losing the characteristics of
activity and somatic development normal to primitive life, while they have
not yet assimilated the activities and acquired the somatic
characteristics normal to peaceful sedentary life.

Briefly, certain somatic features of the Siouan Indians, past and present,
may be traced to their causes in custom and exercise of function; yet by
far the greater number of the features are common to the American people
or to all mankind, and are of ill-understood significance. The few
features of known cause indicate that special somatic characteristics are
determined largely or wholly by industrial and other arts, which are
primarily shaped by environment.




HABITAT


Excepting the Asiniboin, who are chiefly in Canada, nearly all of the
Siouan Indians are now gathered on the reservations indicated on earlier
pages, most of these reservations lying within the aboriginal territory of
the stock.

At the advent of white men, the Siouan territory was vaguely defined, and
its limits were found to vary somewhat from exploration to exploration.
This vagueness and variability of habitat grew out of the characteristics
of the tribesmen. Of all the great stocks south of the Arctic, the Siouan
was perhaps least given to agriculture, most influenced by hunting, and
most addicted to warfare; thus most of the tribes were but feebly attached
to the soil, and freely followed the movements of the feral fauna as it
shifted with climatic vicissitudes or was driven from place to place by
excessive hunting or by fires set to destroy the undergrowth in the
interests of the chase; at the same time, the borderward tribes were
alternately driven and led back and forth through strife against the
tribes of neighboring stocks. Accordingly the Siouan habitat can be
outlined only in approximate and somewhat arbitrary fashion.

The difficulty in defining the priscan home of the Siouan tribes is
increased by its vast extent and scant peopling, by the length of the
period intervening between discovery in the east and complete exploration
in the west, and by the internal changes and migrations which occurred
during this period. The task of collating the records of exploration and
pioneer observation concerning the Siouan and other stocks was undertaken
by Powell a few years ago, and was found to be of great magnitude. It was
at length successfully accomplished, and the respective areas occupied by
the several stocks were approximately mapped.(51)

As shown on Powell’s map, the chief part of the Siouan area comprised a
single body covering most of the region of the Great plains, stretching
from the Rocky mountains to the Mississippi and from the Arkansas-Red
river divide nearly to the Saskatchewan, with an arm crossing the
Mississippi and extending to Lake Michigan. In addition there were a few
outlying bodies, the largest and easternmost bordering the Atlantic from
Santee river nearly to Capes Lookout and Hatteras, and skirting the
Appalachian range northward to the Potomac; the next considerable area lay
on the Gulf coast about Pascagoula river and bay, stretching nearly from
the Pearl to the Mobile; and there were one or two unimportant areas on
Ohio river, which were temporarily occupied by small groups of Siouan
Indians during recent times.

There is little probability that the Siouan habitat, as thus outlined, ran
far into the prehistoric age. As already noted, the Siouan Indians of the
plains were undoubtedly descended from the Siouan tribes of the east
(indeed the Mandan had a tradition to that effect); and reason has been
given for supposing that the ancestors of the prairie hunters followed the
straggling buffalo through the cis-Mississippi forests into his normal
trans-Mississippi habitat and spread over his domain save as they were
held in check by alien huntsmen, chiefly of the warlike Caddoan and Kiowan
tribes; and the buffalo itself was a geologically recent—indeed
essentially post-glacial—animal. Little if any definite trace of Siouan
occupancy has been found in the more ancient prehistoric works of the
Mississippi valley. On the whole it appears probable that the prehistoric
development of the Siouan stock and habitat was exceptionally rapid, that
the Siouan Indians were a vigorous and virile people that arose quickly
under the stimulus of strong vitality (the acquisition of which need not
here be considered), coupled with exceptionally favorable opportunity, to
a power and glory culminating about the time of discovery.




ORGANIZATION


The demotic organization of the Siouan peoples, so far as known, is set
forth in considerable detail in Mr Dorsey’s treatises(52) and in the
foregoing enumeration of tribes, confederacies, and other linguistic
groups.

Like the other aborigines north of Mexico, the Siouan Indians were
organized on the basis of kinship, and were thus in the stage of tribal
society. All of the best-known tribes had reached that plane in
organization characterized by descent in the male line, though many
vestiges and some relatively unimportant examples of descent in the female
line have been discovered. Thus the clan system was obsolescent and the
gentile system fairly developed; i. e., the people were practically out of
the stage of savagery and well advanced in the stage of barbarism.

Confederation for defense and offense was fairly defined and was
strengthened by intermarriage between tribes and gentes and the
prohibition of marriage within the gens; yet the organization was such as
to maintain tribal autonomy in considerable degree; i.e., the social
structure was such as to facilitate union in time of war and division into
small groups adapted to hunting in times of peace. No indication of
feudalism has been found in the stock.

The government was autocratic, largely by military leaders sometimes
(particularly in peace) advised by the elders and priests; the leadership
was determined primarily by ability—prowess in war and the chase and
wisdom in the council,—and was thus hereditary only a little further than
characteristics were inherited; indeed, excepting slight recognition of
the divinity that doth hedge about a king, the leaders were practically
self-chosen, arising gradually to the level determined by their abilities.
The germ of theocracy was fairly developed, and apparently burgeoned
vigorously during each period of peace, only to be checked and withered
during the ensuing war when the shamans and their craft were forced into
the background.

During recent years, since the tribes began to yield to the domination of
the peace-loving whites, the government and election are determined
chiefly by kinship, as appears from Dorsey’s researches; yet definite
traces of the militant organization appear, and any man can win name and
rank in his gens, tribe, or confederacy by bravery or generosity.

The institutional connection between the Siouan tribes of the plains and
those of the Atlantic slope and the Gulf coast is completely lost, and it
is doubtful whether the several branches have ever been united in a single
confederation (or "nation," in the language of the pioneers), at least
since the division in the Appalachian region perhaps five or ten centuries
ago. Since this division the tribes have separated widely, and some of the
bloodiest wars of the region in the historic period have been between
Siouan tribes; the most extensive union possessing the slightest claim to
federal organization was the great Dakota confederacy, which was grown
into instability and partial disruption; and most of the tribal unions and
coalitions were of temporary character.

Although highly elaborate (perhaps because of this character), the Siouan
organization was highly unstable; with every shock of conflict, whether
intestine or external, some autocrats were displaced or slain; and after
each important event—great battle, epidemic, emigration, or destructive
flood—new combinations were formed. The undoubtedly rapid development of
the stock, especially after the passage of the Mississippi, indicates
growth by conquest and assimilation as well as by direct propagation (it
is known that the Dakota and perhaps other groups adopted aliens
regularly); and, doubtless for this reason in part, there was a strong
tendency toward differentiation and dichotomy in the demotic growth. In
some groups the history is too vague to indicate this tendency with
certainty; in others the tendency is clear. Perhaps the best example is
found in the Cegiha, which divided into two great branches, the stronger
of which threw off minor branches in the Osage and Kansa, and afterward
separated into the Omaha and Ponka, while the feebler branch also ramified
widely; and only less notable is the example of the Winnebago trunk, with
its three great branches in the Iowa, Oto, and Missouri. This strong
divergent tendency in itself suggests rapid, perhaps abnormally rapid,
growth in the stock; for it outran and partially concealed the tendency
toward convergence and ultimate coalescence which characterizes demotic
phenomena.

The half-dozen eastern stocks occupying by far the greater part of North
America contrast strongly with the half-hundred local stocks covering the
Pacific coast; and none of the strong Atlantic stocks is more
characteristic, more sharply contrasted with the limited groups of the
western coast, or better understood as regards organization and
development, than the great Siouan stock of the northern interior. There
is promise that, as the demology of aboriginal America is pushed forward,
the records relating to the Siouan Indians and especially to their
structure and institutions will aid in explaining why some stocks are
limited and others extensive, why large stocks in general characterize the
interior and small stocks the coasts, and why the dominant peoples of the
fifteenth and sixteenth centuries were successful in displacing the
preexistent and probably more primitive peoples of the Mississippi valley.
While the time is not yet ripe for making final answer to these inquiries,
it is not premature to suggest a relation between a peculiar development
of the aboriginal stocks and a peculiar geographic conformation: In
general the coastward stocks are small, indicating a provincial shoreland
habit, yet their population and area commonly increase toward those shores
indented by deep bays, along which maritime and inland industries
naturally blend; so (confining attention to eastern United States) the
extensive Muskhogean stock stretches inland from the deep-bayed eastern
Gulf coast; and so, too, three of the largest stocks on the continent
(Algonquian, Iroquoian, Siouan) stretch far into the interior from the
still more deeply indented Atlantic coast. In two of these cases
(Iroquoian and Siouan) history and tradition indicate expansion and
migration from the land of bays between Cape Lookout and Cape May, while
in the third there are similar (though perhaps less definite) indications
of an inland drift from the northern Atlantic bays and along the
Laurentian river and lakes.




HISTORY(53)



DAKOTA-ASINIBOIN


The Dakota are mentioned in the Jesuit Relations as early as 1639-40; the
tradition is noted that the Ojibwa, on arriving at the Great Lakes in an
early migration from the Atlantic coast, encountered representatives of
the great confederacy of the plains. In 1641 the French voyageurs met the
Potawatomi Indians flying from a nation called Nadawessi (enemies); and
the Frenchmen adopted the alien name for the warlike prairie tribes. By
1658 the Jesuits had learned of the existence of thirty Dakota villages
west-northwest from the Potawatomi mission St Michel; and in 1689 they
recorded the presence of tribes apparently representing the Dakota
confederacy on the upper Mississippi, near the mouth of the St Croix.
According to Croghan’s History of Western Pennsylvania, the "Sue" Indians
occupied the country southwest of Lake Superior about 1759; and Dr T.S.
Williamson, "the father of the Dakota mission," states that the Dakota
must have resided about the confluence of the Mississippi and the
Minnesota or St Peters for at least two hundred years prior to 1860.

According to traditions collected by Dorsey, the Teton took possession of
the Black Hills region, which had previously been occupied by the Crow
Indians, long before white men came; and the Yankton and Yanktonnai, which
were found on the Missouri by Lewis and Clark, were not long removed from
the region about Minnesota river. In 1862 the Santee and other Dakota
tribes united in a formidable outbreak in which more than 1,000 whites
were massacred or slain in battle. Through this outbreak and the
consequent governmental action toward the control and settlement of the
tribes, much was learned concerning the characteristics of the people, and
various Indian leaders became known; Spotted Tail, Red Cloud, Crazy Horse,
Sitting Bull, American Horse, and Even-his-horse-is-feared (commonly
miscalled Man-afraid-of-his-horses) were among the famous Dakota chiefs
and warriors, notable representatives of a passing race, whose names are
prominent in the history of the country. Other outbreaks occurred, the
last of note resulting from the ghost-dance fantasy in 1890-91, which
fortunately was quickly suppressed. Yet, with slight interruptions, the
Dakota tribes in the United States were steadily gathered on reservations.
Some 800 or more still roam the prairies north of the international
boundary, but the great body of the confederacy, numbering nearly 28,000,
are domiciled on reservations (already noted) in Minnesota, Montana,
Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota.

The separation of the Asiniboin from the Wazi-kute gens of the Yanktonai
apparently occurred before the middle of the seventeenth century, since
the Jesuit relation of 1658 distinguishes between the Poualak or Guerriers
(undoubtedly the Dakota proper) and the Assiuipoualak or Guerriers de
pierre. The Asiniboin are undoubtedly the Essanape (Essanapi or Assinapi)
who were next to the Makatapi (Dakota) in the Walam-Olum record of the
Lenni-Lenape or Delaware. In 1680 Hennepin located the Asiniboin northeast
of the Issati (Isanyati or Santee) who were on Knife lake (Minnesota); and
the Jesuit map of 1681 placed them on Lake-of-the-Woods, then called "L.
Assinepoualacs." La Hontan claimed to have visited the Eokoro (Arikara) in
1689-90, when the Essanape were sixty leagues above; and Perrot’s Mémoire
refers to the Asiniboin as a Sioux tribe which, in the seventeenth
century, seceded from their nation and took refuge among the rocks of
Lake-of-the-Woods. Chauvignerie located some of the tribe south of
Ounipigan (Winnipeg) lake in 1736, and they were near Lake-of-the-Woods as
late as 1766, when they were said to have 1,500 warriors. It is well known
that in 1829 they occupied a considerable territory west of the Dakota and
north of Missouri river, with a population estimated at 8,000; and Drake
estimated their number at 10,000 before the smallpox epidemic of 1838,
which is said to have carried off 4,000. From this blow the tribe seems
never to have fully recovered, and now numbers probably no more than
3,000, mostly in Canada, where they continue to roam the plains they have
occupied for half a century.



¢EGIHA


According to tribal traditions collected by Dorsey, the ancestors of the
Omaha, Ponka, Elwapa, Osage, and Kansa were originally one people dwelling
on Ohio and Wabash rivers, but gradually working westward. The first
separation took place at the mouth of the Ohio, when those who went down
the Mississippi became the Kwapa or Downstream People, while those who
ascended the great river became the Omaha or Up-stream People. This
separation must have occurred at least as early as 1500, since it preceded
De Soto’s discovery of the Mississippi.

The Omaha group (from whom the Osage, Kansa, and Ponka were not yet
separated) ascended the Mississippi to the mouth of the Missouri, where
they remained for some time, though war and hunting parties explored the
country northwestward, and the body of the tribe gradually followed these
pioneers, though the Osage and Kansa were successively left behind. Some
of the pioneer parties discovered the pipestone quarry, and many
traditions cling about this landmark. Subsequently they were driven across
the Big Sioux by the Yankton Indians, who then lived toward the confluence
of the Minnesota and Mississippi. The group gradually differentiated and
finally divided through the separation of the Ponka, probably about the
middle of the seventeenth century. The Omaha gathered south of the
Missouri, between the mouths of the Platte and Niobrara, while the Ponka
pushed into the Black Hills country.

The Omaha tribe remained within the great bend of the Missouri, opposite
the mouth of the Big Sioux, until white men came. Their hunting ground
extended westward and southwestward, chiefly north of the Platte and along
the Elkhorn, to the territory of the Ponka and the Pawnee (Caddoan); and
in 1766 Carver met their hunting parties on Minnesota river. Toward the
end of the eighteenth century they were nearly destroyed by smallpox,
their number having been reduced from about 3,500 to but little over 300
when they were visited by Lewis and Clark, their famous chief Blackbird
being one of those carried off by the epidemic. Subsequently they
increased in numbers; in 1890 their population was about 1,200. They are
now on reservations, mostly owning land in severalty, and are citizens of
the United States and of the state of Nebraska.

Although the name Ponka did not appear in history before 1700 it must have
been used for many generations earlier, since it is an archaic designation
connected with the social organization of several tribes and the secret
societies of the Osage and Kansa, as well as the Ponka. In 1700 the Ponka
were indicated on De l’Isle’s map, though they were not then segregated
territorially from the Omaha. They, too, suffered terribly from the
smallpox epidemic, and when met by Lewis and Clark in 1804 numbered only
about 200. They increased rapidly, reaching about 600 in 1829 and some 800
in 1842; in 1871, when they were first visited by Dorsey, they numbered
747. Up to this time the Ponka and Dakota were amicable; but a dispute
grew out of the cession of lands, and the Teton made annual raids on the
Ponka until the enforced removal of the tribe to Indian Territory took
place in 1877. Through this warfare, more than a quarter of the Ponka lost
their lives. The displacement of this tribe from lands owned by them in
fee simple attracted attention, and a commission was appointed by
President Hayes in 1880 to inquire into the matter; the commission,
consisting of Generals Crook and Miles and Messrs William Stickney and
Walter Allen, visited the Ponka settlements in Indian Territory and on the
Niobrara and effected a satisfactory arrangement of the affairs of the
tribe, through which the greater portion (some 600) remained in Indian
Territory, while some 225 kept their reservation in Nebraska.

When the ¢egiha divided at the mouth of the Ohio, the ancestors of the
Osage and Kansa accompanied the main Omaha body up the Mississippi to the
mouth of Osage river. There the Osage separated from the group, ascending
the river which bears their name. They were distinguished by Marquette in
1673 as the "Ouchage" and "Autrechaha," and by Penicaut in 1719 as the
"Huzzau," "Ous," and "Wawha." According to Croghan, they were, in 1759, on
"White creek, a branch of the Mississippi," with the "Grand Tuc;"
but"White creek" (or White water) was an old designation for Osage river,
and "Grand Tuc" is, according to Mooney, a corruption of "Grandes Eaux,"
or Great Osage; and there is accordingly no sufficient reason for
supposing that they returned to the Mississippi. Toward the close of the
eighteenth century the Osage and Kansa encountered the Comanche and
perhaps other Shoshonean peoples, and their course was turned southward;
and in 1817, according to Brown, the Great Osage and Little Osage were
chiefly on Osage and Arkansas rivers, in four villages. In 1829 Porter
described their country as beginning 25 miles west of the Missouri line
and running to the Mexican line of that date, being 50 miles wide; and he
gave their number as 5,000. According to Schoolcraft, they numbered 3,758
in April, 1853, but this was after the removal of an important branch
known as Black Dog’s band to a new locality farther down Verdigris river.
In 1850 the Osage occupied at least seven large villages, besides numerous
small ones, on Neosho and Verdigris rivers. In 1873, when visited by
Dorsey, they were gathered on their reservations in what is now Oklahoma.
In 1890 they numbered 158.

The Kansa remained with the Up-stream People in their gradual ascent of
the Missouri to the mouth of the Kaw or Kansas, when they diverged
westward; but they soon came in contact with inimical peoples, and, like
the Osage, were driven southward. The date of this divergence is not
fixed, but it must have been after 1723, when Bourgmont mentioned a large
village of "Quans" located on a small river flowing northward thirty
leagues above Kaw river, near the Missouri. After the cession of Louisiana
to the United States, a treaty was made with the Kansa Indians, who were
then on Kaw river, at the mouth of the Saline, having been forced back
from the Missouri by the Dakota; they then numbered about 1,500 and
occupied about thirty earth lodges. In 1825 they ceded their lands on the
Missouri to the Government, retaining a reservation on the Kaw, where they
were constantly subjected to attacks from the Pawnee and other tribes,
through which large numbers of their warriors were slain. In 1846 they
again ceded their lands and received a new reservation on Neosho river in
Kansas. This was soon overrun by settlers, when another reservation was
assigned to them in Indian Territory, near the Osage country. By 1890
their population was reduced to 214.

The Kwapa were found by De Soto in 1541 on the Mississippi above the mouth
of the St Francis, and, according to Marquette’s map, they were partly
east of the Mississippi in 1673. In 1681 La Salle found them in three
villages distributed along the Mississippi, and soon afterward Tonty
mentioned four villages, one (Kappa = Uʞaqpaqti, "Real Kwapa") on the
Mississippi and three (Toyengan = Tanwan-jiʞa, "Small Village"; Toriman =
Ti-uad¢iman, and Osotonoy = Uzutiuwe) inland; this observation was
verified by Dorsey in 1883 by the discovery that these names are still in
use. In early days the Kwapa were known as "Akansa," or Arkansa, first
noted by La Metairie in 1682. It is probable that this name was an
Algonquian designation given because of confusion with, or recognition of
affinity to, the Kansa or Kanze, the prefix "a" being a common one in
Algouquian appellations. In 1687 Joutel located two of the villages of the
tribe on the Arkansas and two on the Mississippi, one of the latter being
on the eastern side. According to St Cosme, the greater part of the tribe
died of smallpox in October, 1699. In 1700 De l’Isle placed the principal
"Acansa" village on the southern side of Arkansas river; and, according to
Gravier, there were in 1701 five villages, the largest, Imaha (Omaha),
being highest on the Arkansas. In 1805 Sibley placed the "Arkensa" in
three villages on the southern side of Arkansas river, about 12 miles
above Arkansas post. They claimed to be the original proprietors of the
country bordering the Arkansas for 300 miles, or up to the confluence of
the Cadwa, above which lay the territory of the Osage. Subsequently the
Kwapa affiliated with the Caddo Indians, though of another stock;
according to Porter they were in the Caddo country in 1829. As
reservations were established, the Kwapa were re-segregated, and in 1877
were on their reservation in northwestern Indian Territory; but most of
them afterward scattered, chiefly to the Osage country, where in 1890 they
were found to number 232.



ʇƆIWE’RE


The ancestry and prehistoric movements of the tribes constituting this
group are involved in considerable obscurity, though it is known from
tradition as well as linguistic affinity that they sprung from the
Winnebago.

Since the days of Marquette (1673) the Iowa have ranged over the country
between the Mississippi and Missouri, up to the latitude of Oneota
(formerly upper Iowa) river,- and even across the Missouri about the mouth
of the Platte. Chauvignerie located them, in 1736 west of the Mississippi
and (probably through error in identification of the waterway) south of
the Missouri; and in 1761 Jefferys placed them between Missouri river and
the headwaters of Des Moines river, above the Oto and below the Maha
(Omaha). In 1805, according to Drake, they dwelt on Des Moines river,
forty leagues above its mouth, and numbered 800. In 1811 Pike found them
in two villages on Des Moines and Iowa rivers. In 1815 they were decimated
by smallpox, and also lost heavily through war against the tribes of the
Dakota confederacy. In 1829 Porter placed them on the Little Platte, some
15 miles from the Missouri line, and about 1853 Schoolcraft located them
on Nemaha river, their principal village being near the mouth of the Great
Nemaha. In 1848 they suffered another epidemic of smallpox, by which 100
warriors, besides women and children, were carried off. As the country
settled, the Iowa, like the other Indians of the stock, were collected on
reservations which they still occupy in Kansas and Oklahoma. According to
the last census their population was 273.

The Missouri were first seen by Tonty about 1670; they were located near
the Mississippi on Marquette’s map (1673) under the name of Ouemessourit,
probably a corruption of their name by the Illinois tribe, with the
characteristic Algonquian prefix. The name Missouri was first used by
Joutel in 1687. In 1723 Bourgmont located their principal village 30
leagues below Kaw river and 60 leagues below the chief settlement of the
Kansa; according to Groghan, they were located on Mississippi river
opposite the Illinois country in 1759. Although the early locations are
somewhat indefinite, it seems certain that the tribe formerly dwelt on the
Mississippi about the mouth of the Missouri, and that they gradually
ascended the latter stream, remaining for a time between Grand and
Chariton rivers and establishing a town on the left bank of the Missouri
near the mouth of the Grand. There they were found by French traders, who
built a fort on an island quite near their village about the beginning of
the eighteenth century. Soon afterward they were conquered and dispersed
by a combination of Sac, Fox, and other Indians; they also suffered from
smallpox. On the division, five or six lodges joined the Osage, two or
three took refuge with the Kansa, and most of the remainder amalgamated
with the Oto. In 1805 Lewis and Clark found a part of the tribe, numbering
about 300, south of Platte river. The only known survivors in 1829 were
with the Oto, when they numbered no more than 80. In 1842 their village
stood on the southern bank of Platte river near the Oto settlement, and
they followed the latter tribe to Indian Territory in 1882.

According to Winnebago tradition, the ʇɔiwe’re tribes separated from that
"People of the parent speech" long ago, the Iowa being the first and the
Oto the last to leave. In 1673 the Oto were located by Marquette west of
Missouri river, between the fortieth and fortyfirst parallels; in 1680
they were 130 leagues from the Illinois, almost opposite the mouth of the
Miskoncing (Wisconsin), and in 1687 they were on Osage river. According to
La Hontan they were, in 1690, on Otontas (Osage) river; and in 1698
Hennepin placed them ten days’ journey from Fort Crève Cœur. Iberville, in
1700, located the Iowa and Oto with the Omaha, between Wisconsin and
Missouri rivers, about 100 leagues from the Illinois tribe; and
Charlevoix, in 1721, fixed the Oto habitat as below that of the Iowa and
above that of the Kansa on the western side of the Missouri. Dupratz
mentions the Oto as a small nation on Missouri river in 1758, and Jefferys
(1761) described them as occupying the southern bank of the Panis (Platte)
between its mouth and the Pawnee territory; according to Porter, they
occupied the same position in 1829. The Oto claimed the land bordering the
Platte from their village to the mouth of the river, and also that on both
sides of the Missouri as far as the Big Nemaha. In 1833 Catlin found the
Oto and Missouri together in the Pawnee country; about 1841 they were
gathered in four villages on the southern side of the Platte, from 5 to 18
miles above its mouth. In 1880 a part of the tribe removed to the Sac and
Fox reservation in Indian Territory, where they still remain; in 1882 the
rest of the tribe, with the remnant of the Missouri, emigrated to the
Pouka, Pawnee, and Oto reservation in the present Oklahoma, where, in 1890
they were found to number 400.



WINNEBAGO


Linguistically the Winnebago Indians are closely related to the ʇɔiwe’re
on the one side and to the Mandan on the other. They were first mentioned
in the Jesuit Relation of 1636, though the earliest known use of the name
Winnebago occurs in the Relation of 1640; Nicollet found them on Green bay
in 1639. According to Shea, the Winnebago were almost annihilated by the
Illinois (Algonquian) tribe in early days, and the historical group was
made up of the survivors of the early battles. Cbauvignerie placed the
Winnebago on Lake Superior in 1736, and Jefferys referred to them and the
Sac as living near the head of Green bay in 1761; Carver mentions a
Winnebago village on a small island near the eastern end of Winnebago lake
in 1778. Pike enumerated seven Winnebago villages existing in 1811; and in
1822 the population of the tribe was estimated at 5,800 (including 900
warriors) in the country about Winnebago lake and extending thence
southwestward to the Mississippi. By treaties in 1825 and 1832 they ceded
their lands south of Wisconsin and Fox rivers for a reservation on the
Mississippi above the Oneota; one of their villages in 1832 was at Prairie
la Grosse. They suffered several visitations of smallpox; the third, which
occurred in 1836, carried off more than a quarter of the tribe. A part of
the people long remained widely distributed over their old country east of
the Mississippi and along that river in Iowa and Minnesota; in 1840 most
of the tribe removed to the neutral ground in the then territory of Iowa;
in 1846 they surrendered their reservation for another above the
Minnesota, and in 1856 they were removed to Blue Earth, Minnesota. Here
they were mastering agriculture, when the Sioux war broke out and the
settlers demanded their removal. Those who had taken up farms, thereby
abandoning tribal rights, were allowed to remain, but the others were
transferred to Crow creek, on Missouri river, whence they soon escaped.
Their privations and sufferings were terrible; out of 2,000 taken to Crow
creek only 1,200 reached the Omaha reservation, whither most of them fled.
They were assigned a new reservation on the Omaha lands, where they now
remain, occupying lands allotted in severalty. In 1890 there were 1,215
Winnebago on the reservation, but nearly an equal number were scattered
over Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Michigan, where they now live chiefly
by agriculture, with a strong predilection for hunting.



MANDAN


The Mandan had a vague tradition of emigration from the eastern part of
the country, and Lewis and Clark, Prince Maximilian, and others found
traces of Mandan house-structures at various points along the Missouri;
thus they appear to have ascended that stream before the advent of the
¢egiha. During the historical period their movements were limited; they
were first visited in the upper Missouri country by Sieur de la Verendrye
in 1738. About 1750 they established two villages on the eastern side and
seven on the western side of the Missouri, near the mouth of Heart river.
Here they were assailed by the Asiniboin and Dakota and attacked by
smallpox, and were greatly reduced; the two eastern villages consolidated,
and the people migrated up the Missouri to a point 1,430 miles above its
mouth (as subsequently determined by Lewis and Clark); the seven villages
were soon reduced to five, and these people also ascended the river and
formed two villages in the Arikara country, near the Mandan of the eastern
side, where they remained until about 1766, when they also consolidated.
Thus the once powerful and populous tribe was reduced to two villages
which, in 1804, were found by Lewis and Clark on opposite banks of the
Missouri, about 4 miles below Knife river. Here for a time the tribe waxed
and promised to regain the early prestige, reaching a population of 1,600
in 1837; but in that year they were again attacked by smallpox and almost
annihilated, the survivors numbering only 31 according to one account, or
125 to 145 according to others. After this visitation they united in one
village. When the Hidatsa removed from Knife river in 1845, some of the
Mandan accompanied them, and others followed at intervals as late as 1858,
when only a few still remained at their old home. In 1872 a reservation
was set apart for the Hidatsa and Arikara and the survivors of the Mandan
on Missouri and Yellowstone rivers in Dakota and Montana, but in 1886 the
reservation was reduced. According to the census returns, the Mandan
numbered 252 in 1890.



HIDATSA


There has been much confusion concerning the definition and designation of
the Hidatsa Indians. They were formerly known as Minitari or Gros Ventres
of the Missouri, in distinction from the Gros Ventres of the plains, who
belong to another stock. The origin of the term Gros Ventres is somewhat
obscure, and various observers have pointed out its inapplicability,
especially to the well-formed Hidatsa tribesmen. According to Dorsey, the
French pioneers probably translated a native term referring to a
traditional buffalo paunch, which occupies a prominent place in the
Hidatsa mythology and which, in early times, led to a dispute and the
separation of the Crow from the main group some time in the eighteenth
century.

The earlier legends of the Hidatsa are vague, but there is a definite
tradition of a migration northward, about 1765, from the neighborhood of
Heart river, where they were associated with the Mandan, to Knife river.
At least as early as 1796, according to Matthews, there were three
villages belonging to this tribe on Knife river—one at the mouth, another
half a mile above, and the third and largest 3 miles from the mouth. Here
the people were found by Lewis and Clark in 1804, and here they remained
until 1837, when the scourge of smallpox fell and many of the people
perished, the survivors uniting in a single village. About 1845 the
Hidatsa and a part of the Mandan again migrated up the Missouri, and
established a village 30 miles by land and 60 miles by water above their
old home, within what is now Fort Berthold reservation. Their population
has apparently varied greatly, partly by reason of the ill definition of
the tribe by different enumerators, partly by reason of the inroads of
smallpox. In 1890 they numbered 522.

The Crow people are known by the Hidatsa as Kihatsa
(They-refused-the-paunch), according to Matthews; and Dorsey points out
that their own name, Absaruke, does not mean " crow," but refers to a
variety of hawk. Lewis and Clark found the tribe in four bands. In 1817
Brown located them on Yellowstone river. In 1829 they were described by
Porter as ranging along Yellowstone river on the eastern side of the Bocky
mountains, and numbered at 4,000; while in 1834, according to Drake, they
occupied the southern branch of the Yellowstone, about the fortysixth
parallel and one hundred and fifth meridian, with a population of 4,500.
In 1842 their number was estimated at 4,000, and they were described as
inhabiting the headwaters of the Yellowstone. They have since been duly
gathered on the Crow reservation in Montana, and are slowly adopting
civilization. In 1890 they numbered 2,287.



THE EASTERN AND SOUTHERN TRIBES


The history of the Monakan, Oatawba, Sara, Pedee, and Santee, and
incidentally that of the Biloxi, has been carefully reviewed in a recent
publication by Mooney(54) , and does not require repetition.



GENERAL MOVEMENTS


On reviewing the records of explorers and pioneers and the few traditions
which have been preserved, the course of Siouan migration and development
becomes clear. In general the movements were westward and northwestward.
The Dakota tribes have not been traced far, though several of them, like
the Yanktonnai, migrated hundreds of miles from the period of first
observation to the end of the eighteenth century; then came the Mandan,
according to their tradition, and as they ascended the Missouri left
traces of their occupancy scattered over 1,000 miles of migration; next
the ¢egiha descended the Ohio and passed from the cis-Mississippi forests
over the trans-Mississippi plains—the stronger branch following the
Mandan, while the lesser at first descended the great river and then
worked up the Arkansas into the buffalo country until checked and diverted
by antagonistic tribes. So also the ʇɔiwe’re, first recorded near the
Mississippi, pushed 300 miles westward; while the Winnebago gradually
emigrated from the region of the Great Lakes into the trans-Mississippi
country even before their movements were affected by contact with white
men. In like manner the Hidatsa are known to have flowed northwestward
many scores of miles; and the Asiniboin swept more rapidly across the
plains from the place of their rebellion against the Yanktonnai, on the
Mississippi, before they found final resting place on the Saskatchewan
plains 500 or 800 miles away. All of the movements were consistent and,
despite intertribal friction and strife, measurably harmonious. The lines
of movement, so far as they can be restored, are in full accord with the
lines of linguistic evolution traced by Hale and Dorsey and Gatschet, and
indicate that some five hundred or possibly one thousand years ago the
tribesmen pushed over the Appalachians to the Ohio and followed that
stream and its tributaries to the Mississippi (though there are faint
indications that some of the early emigrants ascended the northern
tributaries to the region of the Great Lakes); and that the human flood
gained volume as it advanced and expanded to cover the entire region of
the plains. The records concerning the movement of this great human stream
find support in the manifest reason for the movement; the reason was the
food quest by which all primitive men are led, and its end was the
abundant fauna of the prairieland, with the buffalo at its head.

While the early population of the Siouan stock, when first the huntsmen
crossed the Appalachians, may not be known, the lines of migration
indicate that the people increased and multiplied amain during their long
journey, and that their numbers culminated, despite external conflict and
internal strife, about the beginning of written history, when the Siouan
population may have been 100,000 or more. Then came war against the whites
and the still more deadly smallpox, whereby the vigorous stock was checked
and crippled and the population gradually reduced; but since the first
shock, which occurred at different dates in different parts of the great
region, the Siouan people have fairly held their own, and some branches
are perhaps gaining in strength.





SOME FEATURES OF INDIAN SOCIOLOGY


As shown by Powell, there are two fundamentally distinct classes or stages
in human society—(1) tribal society and (2) national society. National
society characterizes civilization; primarily it is organized on a
territorial basis, but as enlightenment grows the bases are multiplied.
Tribal society is characteristic of savagery and barbarism; so far as
known, all tribal societies are organized on the basis of kinship. The
transfer from tribal society to national society is often, perhaps always,
through feudalism, in which the territorial motive takes root and in which
the kinship motive withers.

All of the American aborigines north of Mexico and most of those farther
southward were in the stage of tribal society when the continents were
discovered, though feudalism was apparently budding in South America,
Central America, and parts of Mexico. The partly developed transitional
stage may, for the present, be neglected, and American Indian sociology
may be considered as representing tribal society or kinship organization.

The fundamental principles of tribal organization through kinship have
been formulated by Powell; they are as follows:(55)

   I. A body of kindred constituting a distinct body politic is divided
      into groups, the males into groups of brothers and the females into
      groups of sisters, on distinctions of generations, regardless of
      degrees of consanguinity; and the kinship terms used express
      relative age. In civilized society kinships are classified on
      distinctions of sex, distinctions of generations, and distinctions
      arising from degrees of consanguinity.
  II. When descent is in the female line, the brother-group consists of
      natal brothers, together with all the materterate male cousins of
      whatever degree. Thus mother’s sisters’ sons and mother’s mother’s
      sisters’ daughters’ sons, etc, are included in a group with natal
      brothers. In like manner the sister-group is composed of natal
      sisters, together with all materterate female cousins of whatever
      degree.
 III. When descent is in the male line, the brother-group is composed of
      natal brothers, together with all patruate male cousins of whatever
      degree, and the sister-group is composed of natal sisters, together
      with all patruate female cousins of whatever degree.
  IV. The son of a member of a brother-group calls each one of the group,
      father; the father of a member of a brother-group calls each one of
      the group, son. Thus a father-group is coextensive with the
      brother-group to which the father belongs. A brother-group may also
      constitute a father-group and grandfather-group, a son-group and a
      grandson-group. It may also be a patruate-group and an avunculate
      group. It may also be a patruate cousin-group and an avunculate
      cousin-group; and in general, every member of a brother-group has
      the same consanguineal relation to persons outside of the group as
      that of every other member.

Two postulates concerning primitive society, adopted by various ethnologic
students of other countries, have been erroneously applied to the American
aborigines; at the same time they have been so widely accepted as to
demand consideration.

The first postulate is that primitive men were originally assembled in
chaotic hordes, and that organized society was developed out of the
chaotic mass by the segregation of groups and the differentiation of
functions within each group. Now the American aborigines collectively
represent a wide range in development, extending from a condition about as
primitive as ever observed well toward the verge of feudalism, and thus
offer opportunities for testing the postulate; and it has been found that
when higher and lower stages representing any portion of the developmental
succession are compared, the social organizations of the lower grade are
no less definite, perhaps more definite, than those pertaining to the
higher grade; so that when the history of demotic growth among the
American Indians is traced backward, the organizations are found on the
whole to grow more definite, albeit more simple. When the lines of
development revealed through research are projected still farther toward
their origin, they indicate an initial condition, directly antithetic to
the postulated horde, in which the scant population was segregated in
small discrete bodies, probably family groups; and that in each of these
bodies there was a definite organization, while each group was practically
independent of, and probably inimical to, all other groups. The testimony
of the observed institutions is corroborated by the testimony of language,
which, as clearly shown by Powell,(56) represents progressive combination
rather than continued differentiation, a process of involution rather than
evolution. It would appear that the original definitely organized groups
occasionally met and coalesced, whereby changes in organization were
required; that these compound groups occasionally coalesced with other
groups, both simple and compound, whereby they were elaborated in
structure, always with some loss in definiteness and permanence; and that
gradually the groups enlarged by incorporation, while the composite
organization grew complex and variable to meet the ever-changing
conditions. It would also appear that in some cases the corporeal growth
outran the structural or institutional growth, when the bodies—clans,
gentes, tribes, or confederacies—split into two or more fragments which
continued to grow independently; yet that in general the progress of
institutional developmentwent forward through incorporation of peoples and
differentiation of institutions. The same process was followed as tribal
society passed into national society; and it is the same process which is
today exalting national society into world society, and transforming
simple civilization into enlightenment. Thus the evoluffon of social
organization is from the simple and definite toward the complex and
variable; or from the involuntary to the voluntary; or from the
environment-shaped to the environment-shaping; or from the biotic to the
demotic.

The second postulate, which may be regarded as a corollary of the first,
is that the primary conjugal condition was one of promiscuity, out of
which different forms ot marriage were successively segregated. Now the
wide range in institutional development exemplified by the American
Indians affords unprecedented opportunities for testing this postulate
also. The simplest demotic unit found among the aborigines is the clan or
mother-descent group, in which the normal conjugal relation is essentially
monogamous,(57) in which marriage is more or less strictly regulated by a
system of prohibitions, and in which the chief conjugal regulation is
commonly that of exogamy with respect to the clan; in higher groups, more
deeply affected by contact with neighboring peoples, the simple clan
organization is sometimes found to be modified, (1) by the adoption and
subsequent conjugation of captive men and boys, and, doubtless more
profoundly, (2) by the adoption and polygamous marriage of female
captives; and in still more highly organized groups the mother-descent is
lost and polygamy is regular and limited only by the capacity of the
husband as a provider. The second and third stages are commonly
characterized, like the first, by established prohibitions and by clan
exogamy; though with the advance in organization amicable relations with
certain other groups are usually established, whereby the germ of tribal
organization is implanted and a system of interclan marriage, or tribal
endogamy, is developed. With further advance the mother-descent group is
transformed into a father-descent group, when the clan is replaced by the
gens; and polygamy is a common feature of the gentile organization. In all
of these stages the conjugal and consanguineal regulations are affected by
the militant habits characteristic of primitive groups; more warriors than
women are slain in battle, and there are more female captives than male;
and thus the polygamy is mainly or wholly polygyny. In many cases civil
conditions combine with or partially replace the militant conditions, yet
the tendency of conjugal development is not changed. Among the Seri
Indians, probably the most primitive tribe in North America, in which the
demotic unit is the clan, there is a rigorous marriage custom under which
the would-be groom is required to enter the family of the girl and
demonstrate (1) his capacity as a provider and (2) his strength of
character as a man, by a year’s probation, before he is finally
accepted—the conjugal theory ofr the tribe being monogamy, though the
practice, at least during recent years, has, by reason of conditions,
passed into polygyny. Among several other tribes of more provident and
less exclusive habit, the first of the two conditions recognized by the
Seri is met by rich presents (representing accumulated property) from the
groom to the girl’s family, the second condition being usually ignored,
the clan organization remaining in force; among still other tribes the
first condition is more or less vaguely recognized, though the voluntary
present is commuted into, or replaced by, a negotiated value exacted by
the girl’s family, when the mother-descent is commonly vestigial; and in
the next stage, which is abundantly exemplified, wife-purchase prevails,
and the clan is replaced by the gens. In this succession the development
of wife-purchase and the decadence of mother-descent maybe traced, and it
is significant that there is a tendency first toward partial enslavement
of the wife and later toward the multiplication of wives to the limit of
the husband’s means, and toward transforming all, or all but one, of the
wives into menials. Thus the lines of development under militant and civil
conditions are essentially parallel. It is possible to project these lines
some distance backward into the unknown, of the exceedingly primitive,
when they, are found to define small discrete bodies—just such as are
indicated by the institutional and linguistic lines—probably family
groups, which must have been essentially, and were perhaps strictly,
monogamous. It would appear that in these groups mating was either between
distant members (under a law of attraction toward the remote and repulsion
from the near, which is shared by mankind and the higher animals), or the
result of accidental meeting between nubile members of different groups;
that in the second case and sometimes in the first the conjugation
produced a new monogamic family; and that sometimes in the first case (and
possibly in the second) the new group retained a more or less definite
connection with the parent group—this connection constituting the germ of
the clan. In passing, it may be noted merely that this inferential origin
of the lines of institutional development is in accord with the habits of
certain higher and incipiently organized animals. From this hypothetic
beginning, primitive marriage may be traced through the various observed
stages of monogamy and polygamy and concubinage and wife-subordination,
through savagery and barbarism and into civilization, with its curious
combination of exoteric monogamy and esoteric promiscuity. Fortunately the
burden of the proof of this evolution does not now rest wholly on the
evidence obtained among the American aborigines; for Westermarck has
recently reviewed the records of observation among the primitive peoples
of many lands, and has found traces of the same sequence in all.(58) Thus
the evolution of marriage, like that of other human institutions, is from
the simple and definite to the complex and variable; i.e., from
approximate or complete monogamy through polygamy to a mixed status of
undetermined signification; or from the mechanical to the spontaneous; or
from the involuntary to the voluntary; or from the provincial to the
cosmopolitan.

As implied in several foregoing paragraphs, and as clearly set forth in
various publications by Powell, tribal society falls into two classes or
stages—(1) clan organization and (2) gentile organization, these stages
corresponding respectively to savagery and barbarism, strictly defined.

At the time of discovery, most of the American Indians were in the upper
stages of savagery and the lower stages of barbarism, as defined by
organization; among some tribes descent was reckoned in the female line,
though definite matriarchies have not been discovered; among several
tribes descent was and still is reckoned in the male line, and among all
of the tribes thus far investigated the patriarchal system is found.

In tribal society, both clan and gentile, the entire social structure is
based on real or assumed kinship, and a large part of the demotic devices
are designed to establish, perpetuate, and advertise kinship relations. As
already indicated, the conspicuous devices in order of development are the
taboo with the prohibitions growing out of it, kinship nomenclature and
regulations, and a system of ordination by which incongruous things are
brought into association.

Among the American Indians the taboo and derivative prohibitions are used
chiefly in connection with marriage and clan or gentile organization.
Marriage in the clan or gens is prohibited; among many tribes a vestige of
the inferential primitive condition is found in the curious prohibition of
communications between children-in-law and parents-in-law; the clan taboos
are commonly connected with the tutelar beast-god, perhaps represented by
a totem.

The essential feature of the kinship terminology is the reckoning from
ego, whereby each individual remembers his own relation to every other
member of the clan or tribe; and commonly the kinship terms are classific
rather than descriptive (i.e., a single term expresses the relation which
in English is expressed by the phrase "My elder brother’s second son’s
wife"). The system is curiously complex and elaborate. It was not
discovered by the earlier and more superficial observers of the Indians,
and was brought out chiefly by Morgan, who detected numerous striking
examples among different tribes; but it would appear that the system is
not equally complete among all of the tribes, probably because of immature
development in some cases and because of decadence in others.

The system of ordination, like that of kinship, is characterized by
reckoning from the ego and by adventitious associations. It may have been
developed from the kinship system through the need for recognition and
assignment of adopted captives, collective property, and other things
pertaining to the group; yet it bears traces of influence by the taboo
system. Its ramifications are wide: In some cases it emphasizes kinship by
assigning members of the family group to fixed positions about the
camp-fire or in the house; this function develops into the placement of
family groups in fixed order, as exemplified in the Iroquoian long-house
and the Siouan camping circle; or it develops into a curiously exaggerated
direction-concept culminating in the cult of the Four Quarters and the
Here, and this prepares the way for a quinary, decimal, and vigesimal
numeration; this last branch sends off another in which the cult of the
Six Quarters and the Here arises to prepare the way for the mystical
numbers 7, 13, and 7x7, whose vestiges come down to civilization; both the
four-quarter and the six-quarter associations are sometimes bound up with
colors; and there are numberless other ramifications. Sometimes the
function and development of these curious concepts, which constitute
perhaps the most striking characteristic of prescriptorial culture, are
obscure at first glance, and hardly to be discovered even through
prolonged research; yet, so far as they have been detected and
interpreted, they are especially adapted to fixing demotic relations; and
through them the manifold relations of individuals and groups are
crystallized and kept in mind.

Thus the American Indians, including the Siouan stock, are made up of
families organized into clans or gentes, and combined in tribes, sometimes
united in confederacies, all on a basis of kinship, real or assumed; and
the organization is shaped and perpetuated by a series of devices
pertaining to the plane of prescriptorial culture, whereby each member of
the organization is constantly reminded of his position in the group.






FOOTNOTES


    1 Prepared as a complement and introduction to the following paper oil
      "Siouan Sociology," by the late James Owen Dorsey.

    2 "A synopsis of the Indian tribes ... in North America," Trans, and
      Coll. Am. Antiq. Soc., vol. II, p. 120.

    3 "Indian linguistic families of America north of Mexico," Seventh
      Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, for 1885-86 (1891), pp.
      111-118. Johnson’s Cyclopedia, 1893-95 edition, vol. VII, p. 546,
      etc.

    4 Correspondence with the Bureau of Ethnology.

    5 "The Tutelo tribe and language," Proc. Am. Philos. Soc., vol. xxi,
      3883, p. 1.

    6 Siouan Tribes of the East; Bulletin of the Bureau of Ethnology,
      1894.

    7 The subdivisions are set forth, in the following treatise on "Siouan
      Sociology."

    8 Travels in the Interior of North America; Translated by H. Evans
      Lloyd; London, 1843, p. 194. In this and other lists of names taken
      from early writers the original orthography and interpretation are
      preserved.

    9 "Defined in" The ¢egiha Language," by J. Owen Dorsey, Cont. N.A.
      Eth., vol. VI, 1890, p. xv. Miss Fletcher, who is intimately
      acquainted with the Omaha, questions whether the relations between
      the tribes are so close as to warrant the maintenance of this
      division; yet as an expression of linguistic affinity, at least, the
      division seems to be useful and desirable.

   10 Account of an Expedition from Pittsburgh to the Rocky Mountains,
      performed in the years 1819-1820. ... under the Command of Major
      S.H. Long, by Edwin James; London, 1823, vol. ii, p. 47 et seq.

   11 Corrupted to "Chancers" in early days; cf. James ibid., vol. III, p.
      108.

   12 Information Respecting the History, Condition, and Prospects of the
      Indian Tribes of the United States, part I, Philadelphia, 1853, p.
      498.

   13 Letters and Notes on the Manners, Customs, and Condition of the
      North American Indians, 4th edition; London, 1844, vol. I, p. 80.

   14 Travels, op. cit., p. 335.

   15 History of the Expedition, under the Command of Lewis and Clark, by
      Elliott Coues, 1893, vol. I, pp. 182-4. The other two villages
      enumerated appear to belong rather to the Hidatsa. Prince Maximilian
      found but two villages in 1833, Mih-Tutta-Hang-Kush and Ruhptare,
      evidently corresponding to the first two mentioned by the earlier
      explorers (op. cit., p. 335).

   16 Ethnography and Philology of the Hidatsa Indiana; Miscel. Publ. No.
      7, U.S. Geol. and Geog. Survey, 1877, p. 38.

   17 Siouan Tribes of the East, p. 37. Local names derived from the
      Saponi dialect were recognized and interpreted by a Kwapa when
      pronounced by Dorsey.

   18 The leading culture stages are defined in the Thirteenth Annual
      Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, for 1891-92 (1896), p. xxiii et
      seq.

   19 Cf. Schoolcraft, "Information," etc, op. cit., pt. II, 1852, p. 169.
      Dorsey was inclined to consider the number as made up without the
      Asiniboin.

   20 Riggs-Dorsey: "Dakota Grammar,Texts, and Ethnography," Cont. N.A.
      Eth., vol. IX, 1893, p. 164.

   21 Catlin: "Letters and Notes," op. cit., p. 80.

   22 Travels Through the Interior Parts of North America in the Years
      1766, 1767, and 1768; London, 1778, p. 418.

   23 Op.cit., p.278.

   24 Op. cit., p. 445. Carver says, "The dogs employed by the Indians in
      hunting appear to be all of the same species; they carry their ears
      erect, and greatly resemble a wolf about the head. They are
      exceedingly useful to them in their hunting excursions and will
      attack the fiercest of the game they are in pursuit of. They are
      also remarkable for their fidelity to their masters, but being ill
      fed by them are very troublesome in their huts or tents."

   25 "Coues, "History of the Expedition," op. cit., vol. I, p. 140. A
      note adds, "The dogs are not large, much resemble a wolf, and will
      haul about 70 pounds each."

   26 Narrative of an Expedition to the Source of St. Peter’s River ...
      under the Command of Stephen H. Long, U.S.T.E., by William H.
      Keating; London, 1825, vol. I, p. 451; vol. II, p. 44, et al.
      Account of an Expedition from Pittsburgh to the Rocky Mountains ...
      under the Command of Major S.H. Long, U.S.T.E., by Edwin James;
      London, 1823, vol. I, pp. 155, 182, et al.

      Say remarks (James, loc. cit., p. 155) of the coyote(?), "This
      animal ... is probably the original of the domestic dog, so common
      in the villages of the Indians of this region [about Council Bluffs
      and Omaha], some of the varieties of which still retain much of the
      habit and manners of this species." James says (loc. cit., vol. II,
      p. 13), "The dogs of the Konzas are generally of a mixed breed,
      between our dogs with pendent ears and the native dogs, whose ears
      are universally erect. The Indians of this nation seek every
      opportunity to cross the breed. These mongrel dogs are less common
      with the Omawhaws, while the dogs of the Pawnees generally have
      preserved their original form."

   27 Travels in the Interior of North America; London, 1843. The Prince
      adds, "In shape they differ very little from the wolf, and are
      equally large and strong. Some are of the real wolf color; others
      are black, white, or spotted with black and white, and differing
      only by the tail being rather more turned up. Their voice is not a
      proper barking, but a howl like that of the wolf, and they partly
      descend from wolves, which approach the Indian huts, even in the
      daytime, and mix with the dogs" (cf. p. 203 et al.). Writing at the
      Mandan village, he says, "The Mandans and Manitaries have not, by
      any means, so many dogs as the Assiniboin, Crows, and Blackfeet.
      They are rarely of true wolf color, but generally black or white, or
      else resemble the wolf, but here they are more like the prairie wolf
      (_Canis latrans_). We likewise found among these animals a brown
      race, descended from European pointers; hence the genuine bark of
      the dog is more frequently heard here, whereas among the western
      nations they only howl. The Indian dogs are worked very hard, have
      hard blows and hard fare; in fact, they are treated just as this
      fine animal is treated among the Esquimaux" (p. 345).

   28 "Letters and Notes," etc, vol. I, p. 14; of. p. 230 et al. He speaks
      (p. 201) of the Minitari canines as "semiloup dogs and whelps."

   29 Keating’s "Narrative," op. cit., vol. II, p. 452; James’ "Account,"
      op. cit., vol. I, p.127 et al.

   30 According to Prince Maximilian, both the Mandan and Minitari kept
      owls in their lodges and regarded them as soothsayers ("Travels,"
      op. cit., pp. 383, 403), and the eagle was apparently tolerated for
      the sake of his feathers.

   31 "Cassa Tate, the antient tomahawk" on the plate illustrating the
      objects ("Travels," op. cit., pl. 4, p. 298).

   32 Described by Coues, "History of the Expedition under the Command of
      Lewis and Clark," 1893, vol. I, p. 139, note.

   33 "Houses and House-life of the American Aborigines," Cont. N.A. Eth.,
      vol. IV. 1881, p. 114.

   34 "The American Bisons, Living and Extinct," by J.A. Allen; Memoirs of
      the Geol. Survey of Kentucky, vol. 1, pt. ii, 1876, map; also pp.
      55, 72-101, et al.

   35 Op. cit., p. 283 et seq.

   36 Ibid., p. 435.

   37 Ibid., p. 294.

   38 "History of the Expedition under the Command of Lewis and Clark,"
      etc, by Elliott Coues, 1893 vol. 1, p. 175. It is noted that in
      winter the Mandan kept their horses in their lodges at night, and,
      fed them on cottonwood branches. Ibid., pp. 220, 233, et al.

   39 Coues, Expedition of Lewis and Clark, vol. III, p. 839.

   40 Ibid., vol. I, p. 140.

   41 "The Story of the Indian," 1895, p. 237.

   42 James’ "Account," op. cit., vol. I, pp. 126, 148; vol. II, p. 12 et
      al.

   43 Ibid., vol. III, p. 107.

   44 "Letters and Notes," op. cit., vol. I, pp. 142 (where the manner of
      lassoing wild horses is mentioned), p. 251 et al.; "Travels," op.
      cit., p. 149 et al. (The Crow were said to have between 9,000 and
      10,000 head, p. 174.)

   45 Keating in Long’s Expedition, op. cit., vol. II, appendix, p. 152.
      Riggs’ "Dakota-English Dictionary," Cont. N.A. Eth., vol. VII, 1890.

   46 Op. cit., p. 265.

   47 "A study of Omaha Indian Music, by Alice C. Fletcher ... aided by
      Francis La Flesche, with a report on the structural peculiarities of
      the music, by John Comfort Fillmore, A.M.;" Arch. and Eth. papers of
      the Peabody Museum, vol. I, No. 5, 1893, pp. i-vi + 7-152
      (=231-382).

   48 Ordination, as the term is here used, comprehends regimentation as
      defined by Powell, yet relates especially to the method of reckoning
      from the constantly recognized but ever varying standpoint of
      prescriptorial culture.

   49 Several of these are summarized in "The emblematic use of the tree
      in the Dakota group," Science, n.s., vol. IV, 1896, pp. 475-487.

   50 Notably "A Study of Siouan Cults," Seventh Annual Report of the
      Bureau of Ethnology for 1889-0*0 (1894), pp. 351-544.

   51 Seventh Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, for 1885-86
      (1891), pp. 1-142, and map.

   52 Chiefly "Omaha Sociology," Third Ann. Rep. Bur. Eth., for 1881-82
      (1884), pp. 205-370; "A study of Siouan cults," Eleventh Ann. Rep.
      Bur. Eth., for 1889-90 (1894), pp. 351-544, and that printed on the
      following pages.

   53 Taken chiefly from notes and manuscripts prepared by Mr Dorsey.

   54 Sionan Tribes of the East, 1894.

   55 Third Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, for 1881-82 (1884),
      pp. xliv-xlv.

   56 Notably in "Relation of primitive peoples to environment,
      illustrated by American examples," Smithsonian Report for 1896, pp.
      625-638, especially p. 635.

   57 Neither space nor present occasion warrants discussion of the
      curious aphrodisian cults found among many peoples, usually in the
      barbaric stage of development; it may be noted merely that this is
      an aberrant branch from the main stem of institutional growth. The
      subject is touched briefly in "The beginning of marriage," American
      Anthropologist, vol. IX, pp. 371-383, Nov., 1896.

   58 The History of Human Marriage (London, 1891), especially chapters
      iv-vi, xiii-xv, xx-xxii.