AW RAY WY \\ AX SAN \ WY SOY ANY NY MAMKY GZ Z; Ny WY IN RMAUARY WS NARA SANS WY AY \S AY 3 WN YS RAS ae Lie LE LI tee tisigeey: Z tise ty Li ZZ Z SEE YL ties tig ZZZA ee, SLL, \\ NN SN SN VOONG OK WAM NN \ . % . S S NY Ye Cif % z Cae LZ igs Be Ze Legge re Ge Z Ze NS o N ») ANS \ 3 LAY WR ~ NN ‘ \“ ANN A i“ ANY ANS WN AY MOSSVRRO wg ANAS SN WS NA RAY SANS SN AY Ih AN SY ied LEZ, a NR Ze SEA ave ‘N NS ZZ zy ve) SOLE ZZ Le: ie ee ry i r| hi : me ue > hk ag en ee i ie oh las es | SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS Numbers 49-56 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1957 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25,D.C. « Price $2.75 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, BurEAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY, Washington, D. C., December 28, 1956. Sir: I have the honor to submit the accompanying manuscripts, entitled ‘‘The Ormond Beach Mound, East Central Florida,’ by Jesse D. Jennings, Gordon R. Willey, and Marshall T. Newman; ‘‘Hair Pipes in Plains Indian Adornment, a Study in Indian and White Ingenuity,” by John C. Ewers; ‘Observations on Some Nineteenth- Century Pottery Vessels from the Upper Missouri,” by Waldo R. Wedel; ‘‘Revaluation of the Eastern Siouan Problem, With Partic- ular Emphasis on the Virginia Branches—The Occaneechi, the Saponi, and the Tutelo,” by Carl F. Miller; “An Archeological Reconnaissance in Southeastern Mexico,” by Matthew W. Stirling; “Valladolid Maya Enumeration,” by John P. Harrington; “Letters to Jack Wilson, the Paiute Prophet, Written between 1908 and 1911,” edited and with an introduction by Grace M. Dangberg; and ‘‘Factionalism at Taos Pueblo, New Mexico,” by William N. Fenton; and to recommend that they be published as a bulletin of the Bureau of American Ethnology. Very respectfully yours, M. W. Stirune, Director. Dr. Leonard CARMICHAEL, Secretary, Smithsonian Institution. II DEC 17 1957 \ No. 49. No. 50. No. 51. No. 52. No. 53. No. 54. No. 55. No. 56 CONTENTS The Ormond Beach Mound, East Central Florida, by Jesse D. Jennings, Gordon R. Willey, and Marshall T. Newman-------- Hair Pipes in Plains Indian Adornment, a Study in Indian and White Ingenuity, by John.C. Mwers...... 255. -.2..22..-22=-= Observations on Some Nineteenth-Century Pottery Vessels from the Upper Missouri, by Waldo R. Wedel-_-_--.--------------- Revaluation of the Eastern Siouan Problem, with Particular Emphasis on the Virginia Branches—the Occaneechi, the paponi, and the Tutelo, by Carl W. Miller. _*_..22..2-5.-2--.- An Archeological Reconnaissance in Southeastern Mexico, by VEait e meet eit hag akan: Po tees SS i Sec eh S Valladolid Maya Enumeration, by John P. Harrington___---~_-_-- Letters to Jack Wilson, the Paiute Prophet, Written between 1908 and 1911, edited and with an introduction by Grace M. Dane bene ee ee ee ee ee a ee ee . Factionalism at Taos Pueblo, New Mexico, by William N. Fenton_ Im - + . 44," 4 AtTWAC We dg a Hi mye) aan" iid fils Ail! Sie ain sabe wht ew F ta: males fs ateqitl abet: thi 10 dew et 'y Dede stehie iz fie tia stares a th bah AW: : “ite niet Fe ¢ os mm =a) ut be ense taledeviadl . { iby aut F509 : 7 , hint Tae late tutte," a t , v ; Tie ye 2000 be Joel / ‘te nex SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 164 Anthropological Papers, No. 49 THE ORMOND BEACH MOUND, EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA By JESSE D. JENNINGS, GORDON R. WILLEY, and MARSHALL T. NEWMAN Ch 0A earsqel lesizolngewllh GARY AGO fea0 CVU Hosa GvoRme Ag " AGAOLT a - firs EI Eo BAT vio a ee ae Vi AMVCAZE JT TAME tA * ne en CONTENTS PAGE Pete ike tn ere eer ey ae eS Rk Shh Se TS The environmental, archeological, and ethnohistorical setting ________-- 1 Sipe Si bee ee ane ee ee ee aa eee Are le ae = 5 Description of the site and environs: +. =— 5. s23.-.+=2--+2-22--_-=- 5 Exploration and mound features £22 22.25 2 o222. 2242252 S252 55h 6 IBUTIA Seo sob Sate eee ee ee Gogh AE ok eb es bene 13 Distribution and chronological significance of the artifacts in the site_ 16 ice ern CeInle Qn ete See soo ee Su ne ac eee ae 19 ISAT SVs, 2 ki cif ES ap saa 2, Deel UR ce Sh ge tea a ea ari PRA ee 21 Gere oo om. ee Dene. Uh Se eee Ato een ats 21 iimplementstand ornaments. — 2> 2° 3-2 = Asse 2 Soe Bees 24 SIMMMATY AiG CONCINBIONSS 22.2 eee ye eS sata. keh Stk eis 26 LTH EEDCTH APES Corn Ey MRO My ee ge ee oh ed pega ee ener: (ere aE Re 28 ILLUSTRATIONS PLATES FOLLOWING PAGE 1. Ormond Beach mound from the southwest before clearing___-------- 28 2. Ormond Beach mound from the southwest at the beginning, and upon COMMDIEMON, Ol CXCRVOMDNRS 2 aos no oe tan ee eas 28 So wiews oc burials below mound base==- 2. 2 =. Ss ee 28 4-oViews of burials: below mound Wasel2s 0+ 2-05 2 eS ee ese ue 28 5. Views of excavation showing the contrasts in the three major soil zones_ 28 Ga WIeWs OLeXCavation 6G DUTIAIS. Fe 28255. oo Go at ere 28 7. Partially restored vessels of the St. Johns Plain type_-------------- 28 Smt A Olimar En SHEre sey = ake SF eke ae a Ue eg ee 28 6) St. Johns smupio oumped suerus_. 22S oe tee eee 28 1OMSEOtshcrdstol various: typedec a) 2. ee. See. Shes Aes 28 Rivero arhiaris Liss 1 Seo Se, SEA PARE Seine eee A 28 de® VWieriousnainiacteeis bc fan ee? dee eee bet a se 28 TEXT FIGURES PAGE 1. Ground plan of features in Ormond Beach mound_-_----------------- 6 2. Ground plan of burial arrangements below mound level, Ormond Beach_ 7 3. Ground plan of burial arrangements in mound proper, Ormond Beach- 8 4. Typical cross sections, Ormond Beach mound_-__-_-_------------------ 10 + Mel nt j a *« » “Al eS ey eT fie! @ 2 ae ee Nee sehr area Sind wr o's Abn Se hte Smee alec ms ais « rh | yl Pu Kaede e Rab «ds ane oe ss aittailige Boo Heads toe 5 2 a OIE BAAS By aN 5 Ge vee selene c8oedas) brarom, bea : i igh keh SRR AA SPEAR ar AGS) Reece Aad ig fg 8 vise sibel ah jc iddinnbaapin an ciea = arte d ‘ A Ri LA RWG SORE Rhee tah od aera ite EEN KE -- leivataner i rs * i= ed i ed ee ee ee ee ee ae | sy Se Oe {3 a ae Sets) me me ee ee ee ee oe | ith dees hand ni ee gi ete a a og esoknas bea BR o 0 tha Wt Pee fee OS eee ee © pee mi are © ow ek le mule BN TUS aad gee coh ee ee Le oe ee PAOLTARPOULAL es Sk ACTA LD fone ; ie Gy Jjulwcncce petaals aroled jegmdiice 4d) mor botined ddaukl & he sical Dawe yatsrithy od att dap awrite Ot trot bao, taneil bane RP sees Nay rie sshd wm bs, bw be ow eaen 6 6 SOM EVRSTO 10 paren. 8S b Had lek Os deepen eens a apne oe ee Deon Woled ela nie te ULE 1, 3 eee BR Haiioar wolad mlaliae? Tr ek _nsaue Noe robe eos oily Gi aitnriitos odd gatwerle oiler nde kd eel ay pe ret ar = apenss teiiedte, Avid ban noWbev aura +o aay ia sy CARERERY 08 oct WW ekenagy hoot ylek a a By A RO ee ee in dvips pepe MOREE 1 sistl palola@ = && Se es eat a eae . abode bane Bice Sea - it thie oti vee epee RDOtRy Te atone = 1s oe be + = Aeon tenllhtp eene a NID) RR PT Re eh a cities so -tonlin eu ONE, Oa i, a A i... abnneds Farag iiitiecdat abies i) pathy Hag t ‘Aodatk ‘Sosa “0 lor tst brite rh wide tinal! atvere pate ladir i Aaig't # sHseet trot) soqeany Baris itt Sh oregaeTe iste io oaéln & abn inset . .., hander dane ay segaltens soa | Vy ont PREFACE The Ormond Beach mound, in Volusia County, east central Florida, has been known for some time. There is mention of it by LeBaron (1884, p. 771), Small (1929), Stirling, (1935), and Goggin (1952, p. 93). Goggin has designated the site as Vo—75, and his symbol is here used instead of the temporary symbol V-1 used at the time of ex- cavation. The V—1 symbol must be noted, however, because it is the symbol used in establishing provenience for the collections as accessioned in the United States National Museum. In both symbols, of course, the ‘V”’ or ‘‘Vo”’ signifies Volusia County. The Ormond Beach project was originally planned as the first of a series of excavations in a 6-month project to be conducted in Volusia County under Smithsonian Institution sponsorship, with funds from the Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA) of Florida, which took over the Federal relief program when the Civil Works Administration (CWA) was discontinued in April 1934. As it turned out, funds proved to be available only for the investigation of the Ormond Beach mound; this was excavated with a limited labor force between April 13 and May 21, 1934. Dr. M. W. Stirling, then di- rector of the Smithsonian Institution area research program in Flor- ida, and chief of the Bureau of American Ethnology, selected the site for investigation. Jesse D. Jennings was the archeologist in charge of the excavations. Upon completion of the fieldwork at the Ormond Beach site, Mr. Jennings shipped all notes, photographs, plans, and collections to the Smithsonian Institution, where the data were stored in the Bureau of American Ethnology files and the collections were accessioned in the United States National Museum.! In 1950 the Ormond mound collections were studied by Gordon R. Willey, then senior anthropol- ogist on the staff of the Bureau of American Ethnology. Subsequent- ly, in 1954-55, Jennings and Willey reviewed the field and laboratory data and prepared the present report. In this they were aided by Marshall T. Newman, associate curator of physical anthropology in the United States National Museum, who studied and described the skeletal material from the mound. It should be noted that the Ormond Beach report is the last of a series of publications (Stirling, 1935; Willey, 1949 a, 1949 b, 1954) 1Catalog numbers range from Nos. 383893 to 383970. The only exceptions in this series are Nos. 383964— 383965, which pertain to the “Turtle Mound” rather than to the Ormond Beach mound. Ix DEC 1 1 1957 which treat of the archeological projects carried out under the aegis of the Bureau of American Ethnology in Florida with Federal relief funds. The authors of this report realize that it is woefully late in its appearance. The course of Florida archeology has swept around and beyond it in the 20 years or more that have elapsed since the date of the fieldwork. Nevertheless, the obligation to make avail- able the basic factual information of the excavations and the primary analyses of the data is recognized. Such is the purpose of the report. It is also realized that excavation procedures, observations, and the field record on the Ormond Beach mound were not up to standard. Reasons for this are numerous, but one seems to stand out: we were working with a relief organization and this involved so many com- plexities that the investigation was seriously hampered at every turn by delays and difficulties in procuring both men and equipment. That any vestige of record exists is a tribute to the sagacity and loyalty of the foreman, Hobart Hughes, of, Murphy, N. C., who came fresh from work at the Peachtree mound to assist at Ormond. Al- though Mr. Hughes prepared no final notes, his observations and aid were at all times a benefit to the excavation supervisor, and much is owed to the loyalty and careful work he inspired in our crew. Throughout the long and discontinuous operations which have led to the publication of this work we have been aided by Dr. M. W. Stirling, Bureau of American Ethnology, and F. M. Setzler, Dr. W. R. Wedel, and Dr. Clifford Evans, Jr., of the United States National Museum. We also wish to thank E. P. Henderson, Drs. Tucker Abbott, Alexander Wetmore, and Remington Kellogg, of the United States National Museum, for their respective identifications of stone materials, marine shells, and bird and mammal remains. KE. G. Schu- macher, staff artist of the Bureau of American Ethnology, prepared the ground plans which accompany the report, and Mrs. Natalie Stoddard and Miss Maria von Mering, Peabody Museum, Harvard University, did the final typing of the manuscript. Finally, on behalf of the Smithsonian Institution as well as ourselves, we extend thanks to W. E. French, of Daytona Beach, Fla., who gave permission for the excavation of the mound, which was situated on his property, and to Mrs. Richard Reed and P. D. Gold, also of Daytona Beach, for the many courtesies shown to us. JussE D. JENNINGS, University of Utah. Gorpon R. WILLEY, Harvard Uniwersity. MarsHatt T. NEwMAn, Smithsonian Institution. May 1, 1955. x caer: 1 O80 THE ORMOND BEACH MOUND, EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA By Jzesss D. Jennines, Gorpon R. Winey, and MarsHAuu T. NewMan THE ENVIRONMENTAL, ARCHEOLOGICAL, AND ETHNOHISTORICAL SETTING The Ormond Beach mound is located in the southern portion of the Northern St. Johns archeological region. This region, as defined by Goggin (1947; 1952, pp. 15-16, ‘‘subarea IIT’), comprises most of the northeastern quarter of the State of Florida plus a small adjacent section of Georgia. The St. Johns River flows northward through the region, turning east and emptying into the Atlantic at Jackson- ville. This major drainage and its numerous stream and lake tribu- taries was the principal concourse of aboriginal occupancy for the region. A somewhat less dense clustering of archeological sites is found along the Atlantic beach and the inland lagoons which lie immediately behind it. The Ormond mound lies on one of these brackish lagoons known as the Halifax River. The Northern St. Johns region is low-lying country composed of limestones, marls, coquina, and sand deposits. It offered only mod- erately good soils for maize agriculture, but the St. Johns system with its lakes and the inlets and lagoons of the coast were once rich reser- voirs of fish and shellfish for the Indians. The vegetation cover is largely of Temperate Zone type, including pine and cypress as well as oak and other deciduous trees. There are swamps, open savannas, and forests. In general, the region is warm, with only light winter frosts. Goggin (1952) has characterized it as subhumid mesothermal ; i. e., an essentially subtropical climate. The low elevation of the Florida peninsula, the alternating swamps and sandy hammocks, and the climatic factors exercise some control over the vegetation, and tend to make for a more varied flora, and a consequently more varied fauna, than would be found in comparable climatic circumstances where soils and other factors were more uniform. The major fioral complexes are, it might be noticed, those characteristic of most of the 1 2, BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buut. 164 temperate southeast rather than those of the extreme tropical tip of the peninsula. Faunal food resources of the region are reflected in remains in the Ormond site. From scrap bone and waste shell recovered from cook- ing pits (these pits were later used for food waste), the following food animals were identified: 1 turtle, 9 fish, 100 birds, 8 deer (Odocoileus virginianus), 2 opossums (Didelphis virginiana), 5 bottlenose porpoises (Tursiops truncatus). The following shellfish have been identified from both the pits and the fill of the Ormond Beach site: Busycon carica Gmelin, B. perversum Linné, Arca incongrua Say, Ostrea vir- ginica Gmelin, Donaz variabilis Say, Tagelus gibbus Spengler, Mer- cenaria mercenaria Linné, Unionidae, Neverita duplicata Say. Goggin (1952, pp. 38-74) has summarized the prehistory and early history of the region by means of five major cultural traditions which are expressed chronologically in six periods. The first of these traditions, and one which is represented by very scanty remains, is the Paleo-Indian. It refers to those early hunting and gathering populations that occupied North America in remote times and whose evidences are best known from areas like the High Plains and the Great Basin. There seems little doubt, however, that the Eastern United States was also inhabited at the same time, and Goggin lists a number of Florida finds which may, possibly, belong to this epoch. The first substantial evidence for occupation in the northern St. Johns region is attributed to the Archaic tradition and is represented by two periods in the cultural chronology: the Mt. Taylor and the Orange. The Archaic sites of both periods are the great shell mounds along the St. Johns River. The Mt. Taylor period is characterized by large- and medium-sized stemmed triangular points of chipped stone, Busycon shell gouges, and bone awls, pins, and projectile points. The succeeding Orange period is an obvious continuation of the Archaic tradition plus the addition of fiber-tempered pottery and certain additions to and modifications of nonceramic artifacts. There are both general and specific relationships between these Archaic periods of the Northern St. Johns region and other Archaic manifes- tations of the Southeastern United States. These periods of the Archaic tradition are, in turn, followed by the St. Johns I and II periods of the St. Johns tradition. Goggin (1952, p. 68) defines the St. Johns tradition as— . a pottery using, mound building, semi-sedentary complex probably with agriculture. . . . The pottery is simple and seems to have been relatively unim- portant, plain and check stamped ware being dominant. Crude clay effigies of plant products and animals for funeral offerings, and other unusual artifacts such as flanged clay spools and funnel-like objects, are found. Smoking pipes of clay and stone now appear, and stone celts of foreign materials were imported. Noa) PaP. ORMOND BEACH MOUND, FLA.—JENNINGS ET AL. 3 As such, the St. Johns tradition marks a break with the presumed non- agricultural past. The pottery of the St. Johns genre is soft, chalky temperless ware as opposed to the fiber-tempered pottery of the late Archaic. Finally, the significant element of the burial mound is a part of the St. Johns tradition while it is lacking in the Archaic. As elsewhere in the Southeast and the Eastern United States, this shift from the Archaic to the succeeding cultures is marked by both conti- nuity and change. The culture of the St. Johns I period cannot be derived wholly from the Archaic; but, nevertheless, there are certain traits which carry over and persist. For example, the incised decora- tive motifs of Orange period pottery continue in the incised pottery designs of the St. Johns I period. The new traits, such as the burial mound idea and a number of pottery trade wares, appear to be derived from the Florida Gulf region to the west. The St. Johns tradition lasted for many centuries in the Northern St. Johns region. The major chronological divisions, periods I and II, are defined by ceramic changes, chiefly by the appearance of the small-checked stamped type in St. Johns II. Both periods are furtber subdivided, largely upon the basis of trade sherds which come into the region from the West and the North. The latter one-third of the time span assigned to the St. Johns II period is further characterized by the appearance of early European trade items. A Spanish—Indian tradition is established from archeological sites which show the fusion of native and Spanish cultures. These sites were fortified posts and missions in which the community plan or organization was essentially that of the invader. The St. Augustine period, which is representative of this tradition, is marked by a type of complicated stamped pottery, San Marcos Stamped. Materials of European manufacture or inspiration are also found in St. Augustine period sites, including ceramics, tools, weapons, ornaments of metal, and glass beads. The final tradition and period is that of Seminole. These Indians, of diverse origins but largely Georgia Creeks, moved into the Northern St. Johns region in the late 18th century. An estimated chronology of these events in the Northern St. Johns region is based upon guess, comparisons with other areas of the South- east, and some historical documentation for the later periods. Goggin (1952, fig. 3) places the close of the Orange period of the Archaic as 400 B.C. St. Johns I is extended from this date up to A. D. 1100. St. Johns II terminates about A. D. 1600. The St. Augustine period is given approximately a century and a half, closing at about 1750 with the arrival of the Seminole. The first recorded knowledge of the Northern St. Johns country and its native inhabitants comes from the account of Ponce de Leon, who 4 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buun. 164 landed in northeast Florida in 1513. (See Goggin, 1952, pp. 21-30, for a detailed statement of ethnohistory and ethnography.) Subse- quent Spanish voyages to Florida were directed, for the most part, to other sections of the peninsula; and it was not until the French Huguenot expeditions of the 1560’s that attempts at permanent col- onization were made. It is to this brief period of French exploration that we owe some of the best ethnographic accounts of the 16th century Indians of the Northern St. Johns region. The Spanish quickly smashed the French attempt to establish a colony near the mouth of the St. Johns, and from 1565 until 1763 Spain dominated Florida. The Spanish fort and city of St. Augustine dates from this victory over the French. During the 17th century the Spanish established a chain of missions along the northeast coast and across north Florida. These missions were the principal foci for the changes that were remaking Indian life during the above-mentioned St. Augustine period. At the time of European contact, northern Florida was held by Indians speaking the Timucuan language. As Goggin (1952, p. 28) has rightly pointed out, the culture of these Indians was not the same throughout north Florida, and he has suggested that the term ‘‘Hastern Timucua” be applied to those Timucuan-speaking Indians who were living in the Northern St. Johns region. There were a number of tribes among these Eastern Timucuans, including the Saturiwa, the group who met the French near the mouth of the St. Johns, the Taca- tacuru, the Yui, Icafui, Yufera, Surruque, and Urubia. These tribes were the possessors of the culture of the St. Johns tradition as repre- sented by the sites of the latter part of the St. Johns II period. As the St. Johns tradition showed no great modification from the time of its inception until the European incursions, it is reasonable to sup- pose that Eastern Timucuans were in the Northern St. Johns region as early as the St. Johns I period (ca. 400 B. C., following Goggin’s chronology). Goggin (1952, p. 76) has suggested that Timucuan speech in this territory may go back into Archaic times. The 16th-century accounts describe the Eastern Timucua as in- tensive maize agriculturists who supplemented their grain diet with abundant wild plants, game, and fish. Towns were surrounded with wooden stockades. There were both sib organizations and social classes, and chieftainship was well developed. Goggin (1952, p. 30) comments: Politically the people were grouped together in small towns, each ruled by a minor chief. Several towns formed a confederacy, or what we have called a tribe, and these were controlled by an important chief, such as Saturiba or Utina. Apparently there was considerable fluctuation in the relationships of the con- federacies with each other, all striving to be the dominant group. Roget PAP. ORMOND BEACH MOUND, FLA.—JENNINGS ET AL. 5 THE SITE DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND ENVIRONS The Ormond Beach mound was situated inside the corporate limits of Ormond Beach, Fla., near Halifax Drive, alongside the Halifax River, 1.3 miles south of Ormond bridge. The property was owned (in 1934) by W. E. French. Mr. French’s permission to excavate was contingent upon our agreement to distribute waste earth in the low spots over the entire property to level it for a building site. The mound was obliterated and the land leveled to the satisfaction of the owner, even though some data from below the base of the mound were not recovered. For archeological interpretations, the relationship of the site to the immediate terrain is of importance. The mound was a small sand tumulus about 60 feet in diameter by (an original maximum of) 6 feet in height, on the peninsula side, i. e., left or east bank, of the Halifax River. Modern dredging had increased the distance from site to river from an estimated 10 yards to approximately 100 yards; Halifax Avenue itself runs between the present riverbank and the site on the artificial fill resultant from the dredging. Construction of Halifax Drive had indeed destroyed a small part of the extreme west edge of the mound. When excavation began, the mound was far from virgin. Its surface was pecked and pitted with amateur digging which had par- tially flattened and increased its area (from, it is believed, a smaller but higher original domed or conical structure). One deep crater or pit on the summit surrounded by a ring of spoil dirt, a weed-choked trench cut in from the south side, and a dense growth of scrub oak, palm, and a jarge pine stump (pl. 1) gave ominous and accurate threat that the materials in the fill would at worst be rotten; at best, broken and shifted, and that digging would be tedious. At this stage, the mound looked higher than it eventually proved to be because road- work had, on two sides (west and south), cut away about a 2-foot depth of the sandy hammock upon which the mound had been built (pl. 2,a). Later, when the site was cleared, a broad and quite shallow moatlike trench was seen to encircle the mound on the east and north. The moat is presumed to have been the borrow source for the sand in the mound fill. The site had served essentially as a burial ground although it was underlain by midden refuse. On the basis of field guesswork, at least 66 individuals were observed. Because of the fast and complete drainage of the sandy fill, some skeletal material remained reasonably solid, but was broken, crushed, and scattered through the combined 6 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bunn.164 effects of the interlaced myriads of pine and palmetto roots, the churn- ing of the upper layers by the pot hunters (and a few rodents), and the carelessness of the aborigines themselves. Generally, however, all bone except skulls had become soft and spongy, possibly because of the humic acid content of the seeping surface waters. EXPLORATION AND MOUND FEATURES Following the clearing of vegetation from the mound surface, exploration began with the cutting of an east-west trench along the south edge of the site. The mapping control system was the grid (see figs. 1, 2, 3), oriented north-south, and laid out in 5-foot inter- vals. The first trench lay between lines 2% and 10, extending from line L5 to R4, a distance of 45 feet. This exploratory cut permitted STRUCTURAL FEATURES PROPERTY LINE ——_*" D> | | | | Ri / GROUND PLAN OF MOUND Vo-15- ORMOND BEACH, FLA. ——— PERIPHERY OF MOUND FEATURES Y, U7 WX, XL ARE SHELL PITS OR STRATA wemas EXTENT OF EXCAVAT/ON OfPTH READINGS ARE FROM SURFACE TO BOTTOM OF FEATURE. <> irs @D FIRE-O/SCOLORED AREAS OR FIRE PITS BuaE Ge ZEISS ONLY FEATURE OCCURRING ABOVE 45° OEPTHS rd £ vo “ss <= BOUNDARY OF FEATURE SCALE IN FEET FiaurEe 1.—Ground plan of features in Ormond Beach mound. ANTto, t 4?) ORMOND BEACH MOUND, FLA.—JENNINGS ET AL, | PROPERTY LINE oases ——————————————— is mm li BC 687 Jas 6 | BB 40 I 4 Lo D> op ‘s) woe GROUND PLAN -15 SHOWING ARRANGEMENTS OF SKELETONS OCCURRING BELOW BASE OF MOUND; 4&, GELOW FEATURE XZ o Ss 10 iS SCALE IN FEET Figure 2.—Ground plan of burial arrangements below mound level, Ormond Beach. Burial or skeleton number preceded by prefix ‘‘V1.’”’ Depth below mound surface, in inches, is noted by each burial. determination, by cross section, of the exact extent of the pot hunter’s trench on the south; at the same time we learned the local problems of soil texture, color, and stability while the first steps in the training of the labor crew in archeological digging began. This first cut, soon widened by 5 feet to the north, was informative inmany ways. Discovery of the low, north-south trending sand ridge (locally called a ‘“‘hammock’’) on which the mound was erected, gave notice that there was less artificial structural mound fill to deal with than had been anticipated. The loose, free-running fill sand slumped and slid and sloughed off as the trench walls dried out in the daily 370929572 8 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 164 PROPERTY LINE ee 5 BROKEN BONES IN as AMATEUR'S PIT GROUND PLAN — Vel5 SHOWING BURIALS IN MOUND PROPER (BURIAL VI-$8 NOT SHOWN ~ SKULL WAS AMONG ROOTS OF PINE STUMP BURIAL VI-34 LIES DIRECTLY UNDER V/- 16 IN SQUARE 50.) ° ts 70 “$ SCALE IN PEET Figure 8.—Ground plan of burial arrangements in mound proper, Ormond Beach. Burial or skeleton number preceded by “V1.”’ Depth below mound surface, in inches, is noted by each burial. ereater heat. A few days’ work convinced us that the clean, neat trenches and sleek cross sections so desirable for good photographic record would not be possible at Ormond. And a network of oak and palm roots laced through the sand to make the digging difficult from the first. Excavation procedure, after the approach cut, was the simple and obvious one. After the brief period of training and orientation for the crew, the north side of the approach trench served as a working face and the fill from top to bottom was cut rapidly away in thin slices with shovels. As a concession to the unstable sandfill, the NO 49], «ORMOND BEACH MOUND, FLA.—JENNINGS ET AL. 9 working face was kept on about a 60° to 70° slope, rather than near vertical. This technique prevailed until perhaps one-third of the site was cut away to a depth some 3 feet below mound base. In fact, near-vertical cutting continued to line 30; here a layer of very dark humus-laden soil containing coquina clamshell (feature V), which emphasized the two-phase nature of the site, was encountered. The source of this dark soil is uncertain; it may well have been river- bank or river-bottom muck, with heavy sand content. The coquina came from ocean waters. By the time feature V was understood to have wide extent (see fig. 1) and crucial importance in this site, the working face was nearly 10 feet high at the highest point. A two-level or step-cutting tech- nique was adopted at this time. The mound proper—i. e., all fill above the humus-coquina blanket (feature V)—-was removed for a dis- tance of 5 or 10 feet. Then the basalar material was to have been cut away. This, at least in theory, was the procedure. Actually the jumble of 40 mound-fill skeletons, and the problems of determining intrusions and other relationships, led to an early abandonment of any tidy preconceived plan of excavation. And in the final phases of the project, even less attention was paid to the niceties. As soon as the horizontal location relationship was determined and recorded for each specimen or structure, it was identified as being referable to the ‘‘below-mound”’ level or to the mound fill proper, and cleaned or snatched up. Before a week of digging had passed, the major structural features and sequences of the site had appeared and were vaguely understood (see pl. 5). As these finally worked out, we recognize as first and earliest, the domed north-south hammock of clean, light tan sand, which was almost white when dry. Upon this unstained and undis- turbed clean hammock sand lay an irregular 6- to 12-inch stratum of light ash-gray sand. This was an old soil, its color derived from a high humus content. The ash-gray sand was interpreted as a stable original ground surface antedating any human use of the spot. (For the relationships here discussed, see fig. 4.) From this old surface of sand-humus mixture, many rather deep, slope-sided round or elliptical pits had been dug (pl. 5, 6). There were 15 of these pits, 10 of which are designated herein as features I, II, II, IV, VIII, [X, XI, XI, XIII, and XIV. Five additional pits, comparable in all respects, were not assigned numbers, but show in figure 1 in squares 25L4, 30, 40L1, 45R6, 50R1. (The latter five pits were discovered, mapped hastily, and emptied during the frantic last day of project operation; in fact, the project ended before explo- ration of the hammock deposits was completed.) The pits were usually less than 36 inches deep from the level of origin. (The depths on 10 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Butt. 164 i 0 +? ais ‘i | R}! R2 R,3 R4 RS GZ BAK HALIFAX AVENUE HALIFAX AVENUE 30’ PRoFILE [_] mound sTRUCTURE SCALE OLD SURFACE b UO ee ASHY COLOR SAND-HUMUS SURFACE SOIL \Q CLEAN YELLOW UNDISTURBED SAND Figure 4.—Typical cross sections, Ormond Beach mound. Profiles along lines 20, 25, and 30. All viewed from south. figures 1, 2, and 3 were recorded from the mound surface at the time of the reading.) The pits, occurring at random, vary in diameter from 3 to 6 feet at the old forest-floor surface of origin and from 1 to 3 feet at the bottom. Each pit was filled with a very rich black earth, bits of charcoal, charred or even calcined shells, sherds, and bone scrap. The pit sides, near the constricted bottoms, were marked by a zone of fire-reddened sand, which had been subjected to quite intense AN ger PAP) ORMOND BEACH MOUND, FLA.—JENNINGS ET AL, 11 heat. In the pit floor or bottom, with perhaps two exceptions, was a hard, stony formation composed of ash and bits of shell, cemented together with heat-fused sand; these lumps were usually faintly red in color. Many of the sherds, as well as the animal bone and shell, used in analyses came from these pits. The data justify the identifica- tion of these features as aboriginal cooking pits or ovens, perhaps used once or twice, after which they served as midden disposal pits. In two or three cases (feature XI is an example), burials were subse- quently laid down where a pit had once stood open, but no burial had been laid into any refuse pit. No functional or structural con- nection existed between the pit features and the burials of the “below-mound” level. It is believed that none of the pits stood open at the time of the mass interment. Upon the old ground surface of the slightly elevated hammock, after the entire submound area had served as a cooking, and pre- sumably a dwelling, site, a series of extended, single, double, and triple burials—totaling 26 individuals, all but one adults—were placed on the ground. They were arranged head to toe in a circle nearly 25 feet in diameter (fig. 2). Over these burials a 6-inch- thick blanket of coquinalike, consolidated clamshells and dark soil (feature V) was placed (pls. 4; 5, 6). Evidence, strong but not con- clusive, was that the score of burials represented a mass interment. This is the conclusion reached during the excavation period; a careful restudy of the notes and drawings tends to confirm this view, although the record is somewhat puzzling and difficult to interpret on this score. There was also evidence that the site stood unprotected for quite a time after the mass burial ceremony. This evidence consisted of the broken and shifted condition of some of the burials (although six or more feet of mound fill lay above these “below-mound” skeletons), suggesting that they were disturbed before the mound proper was erected. Verification of this was seen in a clearly identifiable thin accumulation of forest soil or humus above the coquina clam layer. The notes reveal that there was considerable preoccupation, during excavation, with this matter of a time lapse between the interment of the first group and the raising of the mound, and long vacillation by the excavator in interpretation. His final opinion, appearing in a preliminary report done immediately after the project closed, was that there was a lapse of time between the deposition of the coquina layer and the construction of the mound itself. Such would mean that burial consisted of placing the dead upon a prepared spot or low platform with no immediate covering other than a mantle of earth and shells. At an appreciably later time a sand burial mound was constructed over the spot. In addition to the cooking pits, there were four features (VI, VII, iby BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buut. 164 X, XIV) below the mound base and one in the mound proper (feature XV) described as shell beds or layers (see fig. 1). These features are local, but thick and extensive, deposits of nothing but unburned shell. From some features, but oftener at random in the mound fill or in random little pits, 12 to 18 inches beneath the premound surface, several nearly complete pottery vessels were recovered. One such vessel (St. Johns Plain, globular bowl, pl. 7, a) came from feature IT. The final phase of activity at the site was the building of a sand burial mound. The sand of this structure occasionally had the faint gray cast of forest-humus-stained surface sand, but was chiefly clean tan subsurface sand. ‘The notes reveal that the humus content of the fill sand was heaviest near the mound center—i. e., about line 45. This is assumed to demonstrate that construction began in the central area where the borrowed surface soil was used. ‘The remainder of the mound was then built of the lower cleaner and unstained sand from the borrow area. Within the mound proper were some 40 burials. There were scat- tered human bones in the spoil dirt from amateur pits; these were neither saved nor numbered. An estimated eight or more indi- viduals are represented by these scattered bones. In rare cases it was suspected that burials lay in grave pits let down from the surface, but evidence of these grave pits was never conclusive. Many other bodies, however, had clearly been laid upon mound fill during con- struction and simply covered over with more fill. Random burials over a short period of time, while the mound grad- ually grew in size, would seem to be the best explanation of the mound building process, except for the semicircle of skeletons lying in the north half of the mound (see fig. 3); but even here the flat plan is deceiving because the half circle of skeletons was not upon a common level. Adjacent burials were found at elevations as much as 20 inches apart—e. g., Nos. 15 and 19 versus No. 17. This possibly can be explained as mass burial upon the uneven surface of the first few heaps of fill dirt. Whether intentional or not, the circular pattern is certainly as plain in the mound burials as in those beneath the mound. Also, the mass-burial idea gets some support from our observation that the central portion of the mound was built of markedly darker sand, representing surface scrapings. A continuous, short-lived build- ing spurt to accommodate a mass burial of several dead in a concentric pattern may, indeed, have been the nucleus or first stage of the mound construction, while the remainder of the mound was added later at a more leisurely rate as occasional death rites occurred. Throughout the mound fill, and particularly in the central darker portion, random sherds were common. Over 250 sherds were recovered. Neuer PAP. ORMOND BEACH MOUND, FLA.—JENNINGS ET AL. 13 In summary, despite the many details missing from the record, we can confidently sketch the major events in a sequence as follows: (1) The Ormond site, upon a slight elevation near the river bank, was first a village or a feast site. Village debris and cooking pits mark this period. (2) Then, without perceptible time lag, 20 or more adults were placed head to toe in two concentric circles and accorded a mass burial under an extensive blanket of humus and coquina shells. (3) For some time after this ceremony there was exposure or casual reoccupancy of the spot, with a soil zone developing on this surface. (4) At length, another mass burial called for the erection of a low mound of earth. (5) Intermittently thereafter the mound was the scene of burials; before it was abandoned the mound grew to be 6 feet or more high, and 50 to 60 feet in diameter. BURIALS Figures 2 and 3 adequately record the positions of all burials encountered. Of the 66 so presented, only 1 was definitely in a flexed position; this flexed body is believed to antedate both the first mass burial and mound construction. Most interments (sometimes multiple) appear to have been primary—made in the flesh—upon the then-current surface and covered with sand or shell. There were, however, several loose single skulls unassociated with any other bones. There may have been a few burials made in shallow pits dug into the mound proper; the notes, in one or two cases, record this possibility, but in no case could a pit, intrusive from a higher level, be observed clearly enough to permit positive statement on the point. The con- dition of the bones was usually poor. Roots had often destroyed facial bones, particularly in the mound proper. Long bones were often soft and fragile. Only the cranial bones remained solid. Of major interest in the burial complex is the mass burial, with bodies arranged in large concentric circles. This is one of the few documented occurrences of the ‘burials in a circle’ so often reported by amateur diggers. Another burial trait of importance is the paucity of grave furniture. With only two exceptions, the scanty artifact series derived from burials came from submound burials. Burial locations, burial relationships to each other and to other features, depth from surface, and other location data are best learned from the maps. Table 1 summarizes only those burial data not otherwise available. In Hrdlitka (1940, pp. 325, 331, 361, 367) measurements of 16 female and 9 male crania are given; the United States National Museum catalog numbers referred to by Hrdlitka have been added to table 1. [Buxy. 164 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY 14 a *(p ‘zr 1d) Teng ITH ecg zzg «| edIg «=‘“WeapD 07 Ysnoue pyoOs [[NYs AjUO ‘mel pus BATeD |~~~~~~ ~~~ OD ges | Seer 5 ee wae | a eee 7 2 Glia aie ea aaa Op---* 99 Cigar eee nos ae bet oe Ge ee Mel PUB [[NYS e[qv1ojseiuQ) |~--- ~~ ODay (peat ee ale ee Sols Gaara abla See Op cg Once. wea, tS. = oe Asef pus [[N¥S pedivm e[qeioyselug) |-~ ~~~ 100 | |Res See eS 5S CP oN iio pi = ato Gigs Se ela ae OV enc $9 *(UIe[_ suyor 4S) [BING yyyM jessea 679 ‘2Lg «| AloyOq «‘URePD 0} Ysnoue pros PNAS AjUQ “uINIUBID |---~~-~~~mm TGSE Frans a eee [soe at 1D Nees fee eujdns ‘pepusixq | 29 "(9 ‘p ‘TT ‘[d) 48014} 48 Puno} syouruNyd *(peqst4y 89 ‘CLE euojs pue Teyg “Mel pues [[NYs pediem pus equioysoluQ |~~~~~~~--~-~~ Ops lee se ee Be lara a a? © |sZeq) eurdns ‘popuesxgq | 19 Vsachee Wee a ae a ee oe Oe sdeios pue [eyuoig |------------7~ EGG Gal |e Rts TD la ergata rae Me {Ore ace NOs ss ss Sale ee ee yO? [aoa See ere ean 4|1¢ SO ES eae ae ee ee eae O Areg rng shoo) [er enone ey ene | ee nr ST i Sa aa ar Alia ie sauog Zuo] puw sdejos [[Nyg |-------- is a lal OF SDI eae a eee deagess & *(Q[npe) Avl pue [[Nys e[qeviojserun pus pedis PE9 CLE ‘Tetmnq eydy[nu “4[npeeid pus 4[npe ‘gp pues Zp ‘SON | ODEs ect Se ee 5” [meric Oe 6 ASS earn. Oe Opa: (67 ore SS Sdeios [[NYs ‘seuog puey pue ‘ede pans oe Seis te Oi Ree aS LO eee Op. OF “sou Teo 'eze | -uemsey eg AGO *S 8 pus 8 ‘s[enplarpuy Z Jo sdesos [NAG |--- TOG AM Rs 3-55 wn cane = Bel oo Se ey a eee Se Oprass 62 Nie | Ss se ee ee [sting e[dijjnu v a19M OF pue “6g ‘BE “SON [~~~ OD ee ae ee ONG sae ak he eet ee ee Op=55- 88 "(q ‘Tr Id) seprnogs 6zo'eze «| 3431 38 JouraMd [eyg ‘uMTULID UeyoIq pue pede |---- 4 el eee een Coes ae San ed oh aa ee = ipde a ~ Ops-s== 18 Cie aa ee ar eo ee on eet ae WHE DIG DLIUAWO Borla eee a ee ne ine ae Ne oe lat ate OP os. Sis nit. se euldns ‘pepueixq | 72 aR ee Ge Ce ae ee ES ee Ws te gIOOR rae aa sae ETT seo Ce eta dh oe Coe ee net ee Ose en ie gels? ee ee ae ee, sdeios AfUQ |~------ = 00d seared, ogee ae aa 08 "(y ‘TI Id) 8% “ON WaT €29 “CLE [4s ouog ‘Mel pus [NYS sqeiojselmQ “2 “ON UWA poling | ih) el ieee oi) prea ar a ee cee Sec ees Sel Ee ae ee a &% Ike jew sk a eS pepesysuoyT “Mul puw Ba[eD |---~------ MOOD, or aH satis eee ike a USNS eee ony a CS ee omage op----- G ‘Tern efdyjnur 029 “ZLE 8 919M CZ PUB FZ ‘SON “met pues BTIBA[eo UsxHOlG pus pedie ae... ha ee Ee soil |e ca dys 5 (Ds a eel ng cee ore eee Ct ¥ RIOLG. HSa See ora ee ee ae a wel pue elieAleo AiejuouIselg |~~~~ 777 fer ee egaate (Osta sar tee ee Salta Sse Ops 0z *(a ‘ZI ‘[d) poeyetoosse ou0js ZuIqqni vuINDOD “peaes seuoq JoqjO ON ‘Asojoujyed pemogs 4 “ON Jo goozze «| BIH eGL ‘Teng edy[nar 8 peynzysuoo g% puw L “SON | Oe Eee ar a ee a ee auydns ‘pepueyxq | L “mel pues BIIBA[BO WsyoIg “Psaes [[NyS AyUo ‘syetinq ssvur Seyepejue A[qeqolg £09 “CLE ‘g0BJINS PUNOIZ [SUIS]IO MOY sATsnIyUT yd uy Av[—z[NPY [~~~ TO Gaus + te + |) Loom Oop oe ee pexeld | € 038948 1.48 ‘ON Uo peyivul sy Uo peyieul SY ‘ON WNsa z (SpOOS dAvIs) SYIVUIEY | UOTIIpUuOD woyyIsOg reung xag STVIdod CGNQOOW-MOTEE *sjpling—"| Hav J, ORMOND BEACH MOUND, FLA.—JENNINGS ET AL. 15 ANTHROP. PAP. No. 49] ‘ejqrpuea “peg OU} Ul peprvostp e10M pus sovy WIA [NYS ‘uniuel ‘e[grpueuL SNUIMT 4Nq 9odR] WITA [[NyS ‘UINJIeAleo pus Alejuemsey AIOA 91OM SOTOG SOLBIIPUI FSIIO}SY “sSISBq esTULOIdUIOD & UO speUT feoey snuToI OSeq PUB 4INVA [[NYS ‘vlIvA[vd ‘ATWO 4[NBA [[NYS SojJVoIpUl BA[EH ¢ SI ,,poo3,, Jo ,,‘11eJ,, ,,{100d,, Jo JUemMSpNf “yueseid ele WOJETSYS PUB [[NYS OO AA 1 tc:t:) ) 1¢9 “CLE 0} WZnous pros pMys AjUO ‘Mef pus BAlBd AlvyUOUISBIg |-~~~~-~---- OD (oe ae ke eee ee $6: eS Se eutdns ‘pepueixq | #9 GONZO as eee ae en tha ee Ae pues BAleo AlejueuIselg |------ 7-77 100 doses as ee eal ea eee Oo en Se oe ee &|8¢ DO CLE ake oa ee ee OF UI [eng Sasi nie Sr se ROD i ar ee Gs sig- kee ce ee a OE ae tag ee Hee ae Oe (1 | 1g ZrO '2LE | UeO[ 0} YSNou Pos [Ys ATUO “Mel pu epeayed Jojiesog |~-~~-777 = 7777 Od ES ee ee Eee eee ops sa ef Ll eg #9 Se As Ss eee Ginpacid) Geof op qanows Prosymys Apu |5-- GF ee ee ee ee T#9 CLE. | 77-7 GIMpeeid) Weed 07 qsnous pros [NYS ATUQ “MINyUBID |~-~~~-~-- OD aire ee ay eke ee ae 1 |S ae en ee ee Opa Ss ce G0 te SS Ss BIg Ist ‘Asojouyed “Mel pue epweayeg [7 POSDS6 eee Oe eee a eee ee ee ope == 6h RCO hes Va hh. .o.. hee ORS oe RS Se eee JAGE DUG GATES) | a= ae ae ae = oe an ee co OM Ser Sas oat | eee OP ee ee ee | ae SF Si cea GR oe lay eee Ciripeeiad) wkd[o Op Panloud pyjOaTaae AICO i> - ~~ Say aon Ae) Sigs ee os ete ln eee te et Se eee ne oes JO Beren | NAP ECO CLE iia 8 2g W9tA [elIng edy[nu epeyy “Ae pues wywAleg |--~ ~~ 77 C170 OM aie > ae aaa | (oe eRe See 6.4 es ca a cee op oF Se gee a aaa we ge (qInupeeid) PeoplopysnoUs presi ys: AO bss ss. se Ge ka Ge el CC ee le eee ee gD 8 oY Oe Citas i. ee ~ “ueeld 0} YSNoUe pI[Os uMTUeIO ATUQ |-~~- ~~ > 7 P00y) Wes Se ee ee a ae ee le ee ee ae epr=-2- tPF AW AS ea ie i ae hie ae. Se ae As puB [[NYs UWeyOIg |~~-~~~~~~ 7-7-7 LOGS ee eat ee eS ee ea ee ee | ee ee ae ae ies 4 162 GLE AGES Sk oe a oe ee ae ABl PUB BPIBATBD ~~ ~~ SEU Reo eee a eee ble k wea Sas S27 eine eee TT me eee | 2) cate 98 RLS Jot Sy 8S 5 eet (Mef B4xq) “Mel puw Beale [-- Lay See te Srl ee ee Os tee eurdns ‘pepuesxq | os = ca | res aes el ae De: Al[suin PUL Polapiuog *DOAuS SUIUION |S" sa cocoa Geleb Ge) 0 alt eee Bees ele = eee ee Go eeawe: lure =3 = +252 |e eee eegE SRR’ § PeAee (ow “payMopeyep Aypeg FU, foe fhe) he ot ee ee ee eos fee (6), WAS.” -) 9" ae a GP ee ge Sade an e el puw BATBD [~~~ - > ~~ GT ales ee oe ee ge Oss = ae ce O:|\i_ st e e oe e OE = 6% oso | | 2s Spee ae Beal 6c UIA TENG OJAI: “Mul pus SATVC) if “so= ese pee OCT [seen na eee Ee | San aes. pegs lO lun > acs phan OP Rame an] 26 RONCAC ELEM Soot eho. oo ee a ee OM GACgS WSN Ae Noa cae oon Pa eee ae SP cen oe ES. CoGeeg OS eee] i cae ake ORe< 9% GIL oee nee oon Stes ig Dee eS Abel pus BAleO BqBIOyseIUy) [~~~ ~~~ =e apa De Pre eae a ee | ee ae ORT =- 3: &% SRR "aS nee ie iar eal ig ees Seneca ae be BE PSP ee so eo SS oS So eee ee eee ee Saas. (Ss - aa ee (Gi peard). ermal ofdnynn 27: pus. IS sSON |ess=a- ee cea) le Se TD ae. ee Ge le 2 ede a cee Se ODarenialG IGRChG 2 SRM A 5 ye ak 8 GT ON Q3IA posuey, “uInpuBID |~~--~--7 7 POGE) We os oe ee Os Se ee seee oa Oe? aco Sa aoe eee ot Opis 74 61 MISECLG "lt Ee ee 8s aoe ee 8S ee es a Che ae Oper ize de te eel | oe ee Olc= =e a a Ope SI VL Cwm eo ick a ek ee ee BEUATSS) ee a on 2 WOT Ct otoe carte ee |” Sat Be ae oe eutdns ‘pepueixq | LT WIGELS EN ae ae ws aks SoMOg Joq}0 UIT payepoosse JON “UIMPUBIQ |~-7 77 BSE sr ee 2 aapana Wise 2a Gt a ee ae 2 | OF RIGLCLG. <| te cea Teling e[di}[Nur e1oM 61 PUG CT ‘SON :Mvf puB BIBATeD [~~~ ~~~ POOH ts <> es are Oe ee ae pe Gulls sass eurdns ‘pepueyxq | ct one aces cea SAUOM IOCIO'UITM. Po} UROSSGEnh), SS POATORIOCATUO TPyS) [fe< =~ sae en SO) es en ee eee ee ee em LL ek EU EE, oe ee WR Ri Chey Aiecas Seog 10430 YIIM payeyoosseuQ “Mel PUB BIIBA[BD [~~~~~-~- ~~~ PEED sa aur eee eet Se ‘oft (ag Sa. a eS 6: Petts Ss OF aa, ee eee Sel 2SE Pie Ol ieee oe bute 0-04 ey Re gt se Aef pus B]eAyed [~~~ 77 eq | Aire PR ae ga Ya eee peystay ‘euydng | ZT lid 4 | aaa ere “ape > 35 eurdns ‘pepueixq | 9 Sse ale aes SOU AOT}O: HIP POL GPOOsSpI) ys POAIORGOAIUO [[LIGhs— as POLS Ck as ie ce ee Eee *souoq 19430 WIM pole #09 'Z2E | -foosseuQ “Mel pus BAleO AIBJUCUISeI ‘peasosqo A[UO [[N¥g |~~~~~~~7- 77777 MOOS |e pons Se eae SIs pee os eee oh\iao 7 =e Be ee a|F CAONGL CRM seg nto ors Le * bigrs. eA pepeeqsuo] ‘Mel pue walep |--~~~~ 777-7 Diet ge aoe eee Se 6o 50 2 a ae eee opr == z TDD GHUMMM SER SERS Co Toe ol ean aS Sa PR EL ee ge BATHO) sian wen eee OTs eer ee ee el Se es ee a Ose ss oe eutdns ‘pepue}xq | STvVIudod GNOOW 16 BURBAU OF AMERICAN BPTENOLOGY [Burn, 164 DISTRIBUTION AND CHRONOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ARTIFACTS IN THE SITE The 735 pottery specimens from the Ormond mound, including both restorable vessels and sherds, are classified into the following typos: Bb, DONDE iil g ink com ethmbdap cumpadapsnapecn hs dahil 667 Bt. Johna-Siinie Stamped iid cence sun edn eenn 23 St, Johna Check Stamped Dunna Creek Red 1 12 Little Manatee Shell Stamped... ... Sia ksdudaws heehee 1 Cord Marien (ert DASte) dics nee cee adcenenccn es Pe Bape 4 Indeterminate Stamped (soft paste).................-.--- 1 PasGO Pe Sln sak cen ab Keene eadek dee ceeete ces tone mee 1 Paso BSiminle Stamped... anatase chin supe} deckabmcentsnnd 1 Deptford Bold Check Stamped... .........-.--.---------- 5 Orange INcised. wn usadceendns oda de aeenpeeecunncnencens 1 Residual Plain 17 Unclassified Incised 1 SUL eee wie tae eleth citi ais a ee 8 ee Soe ee 735 There are three principal provenience categories into which these pottery specimens may be assigned: the ‘“below-mound zone,” including the cooking and refuse pits in the old surface and the sherds found in the black coquina stratum; the “mound proper,” including the body of the mound; and, finally, those proveniences where place- ment as to stratigraphic position in the mound is uncertain, In all, there are 59 small ceramic provenience units cataloged in the Ormond Beach mound collections in the United States National Museum. Twenty-one of these units belong to the “below-mound zone,” and these units total 225 pottery specimens, Twenty-seven units are grouped together in the “mound proper,” and these combined total 284 specimens. The remaining units of uncertain stratigraphic assignment number 11 and contain 226 pottery specimens. The typological breakdowns by these three major categories are as follows: Number Relow-mound gone: — : St, Jobus Plain..cs-......- B Sobok seh ive ml oh ae eee etree le 206 St. Johns Simple Stamped.........................- 3 UMHS GOMSE Reda c oe on od cue dnce euscaunt oeetian eee at 10 Indeterminate Stamped (soft paste) ..........-------- l PONO6 PIGS e cain kite Rope meee wus cena meee et 1 Uncisesined Inoised.c. cnc cncsncnans cuumedphoempeeu 1 Deptford Bold Check Stamped... .......------------ 2 Residuel PIM. dc a ntkee cc cnencce nu wuwiteteiotcka= == 1 No 49), °°" OBMOND BEACH MOUND, FLA.—JENNINGS ET AL. 17 Numba Mound proper: iene OR OER ON ili teh din asin adn vawnnbedn 270 St. Johns Simple Stamped__.......--------..---.--- 6 Little Manatee Shell Stamped___._...-----_------- 1 St. Johns Check Stamped_......-.-.-.-.-_-..-.-..-- 1 Cone Miser ew Pane) 2. ow 2 28 Fe dns 1 Pasco Simple Stamped._._......-----..--.-- ve Seae 1 pT el OE OEP LIN FR SEE SS PHAR D 4 BOM 202 ie beck dnend Gav desc tdiihtsd cha tdd oboe 284 Uncertain stratigraphic position: EO fg ON Appelt pea gl el pat kn Rpg np pe shite ih iy igh 191 St. Johns Simple Stamped_._..._.__._._-_--__-_-___- 14 aye ees Bets cics. 2 2s a ti as 2 (Jae eeneeee (Ot BRAM 5 Al el da cabo dh 3 Deptford Bold Check Stamped...__-_.-.-.--------_-- 3 eR INS, esa es st ei ahaha ia dea i] NE go ag ape lietyhage ly Rip yt: BER fal 5 Ki NT y 12 PM tek WSS eS ee Sao ba) eee. 2k 226 The principal differences between the pottery lot from the below- mound provenience category and that from the body of the mound proper are the presences of the types Dunns Creek Red and Deptford Bold Check Stamped in the first group, their absence in the second group, and, conversely, the presence of Little Manatee Shell Stamped and St. Johns Check Stamped in the second group. These particular types have a chronological significance elsewhere in Florida, and their stratigraphic relationships in the Ormond mound tend to support the inference, made during the excavation, that there is an appreciable time difference between the original occupation of the site and the first burials as opposed to the construction of the mound proper and the second mass of burials. Goggin (1952, p. 102) has noted that while Dunns Creek Red is found in both the St. Johns I and St. Johns II periods, it is more common on the earlier horizon. Deptford Bold Check Stamped is a ceramic type that is at home on the Georgia coast, and is also found in significant amounts on the northwest Florida coast (Willey, 1949 b, p. 357). Its genera) chronological position in the lower southeast is early, following immediately after the fiber- tempered wares. More specifically, it is pre-Santa Rosa-Swift Creek in northwest Florida (Willey, 1949 b) and, by this, antedates the first clearly recognizable Hopewellian influences in Florida. Along the St. Johns River, Goggin (1952, p. 105) assigns it to a very early St. Johns I time interval (St. Johns Ia, early). The presence of these two Deptford Bold Check Stamped sherds in the below-mound zone, together with three more fragments of the same type of uncertain 18 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 164 stratigraphic position, indicates a relatively early occupation of the Ormond Beach site. The single fiber-tempered sherd of undesignated provenience, Orange Incised, substantiates this. This is not to say that the basal occupation of Ormond is St. Johns Ia, early, or Orange period; but it does indicate a possible retention of minor percentages of these older types. Opposed to the earlier pottery types are the single occurrences of St. Johns Check Stamped! and Little Manatee Shell Stamped in the mound proper. St. Johns Check Stamped is the marker type for the St. Johns II period (Goggin, 1952, p. 104), and Little Manatee Shell Stamped dates from about the same time (Goggin, 1952, p. 109; Willey 1949 b, p. 444). Obviously, these two sherds do not place the Ormond Beach mound as St. Johns II period; but, like the few early sherds in the below-mound collections, they provide a bracketing date. The bulk of the Ormond pottery, from both upper and lower strati- graphic zones, is of the type St. Johns Plain. This type characterizes both St. Johns I and II periods (Goggin, 1952, pp. 101-102), although there are certain vessel form changes within this chronological span. The presence of necked or collared jar forms (pl. 8, f-A, 7) suggests period II rather than period I. Yet the near absence of the type St. Johns Check Stamped makes it difficult to place any part of the Ormond site as fully St. Johns II. The type we have called St. Johns Simple Stamped does not help us much in resolving our dating problem. As reviewed under the pottery descriptions, simple-stamped surfacing on soft, St. Johns type paste is not a reliable period marker. Although such surface treatment has been reported for the St. Johns IIb and IIe periods in some localities (Goggin, 1952, p. 105), it is also noted in St. Johns Ia contexts. In summing up the relative dating of the Ormond Beach site we can, first, consider it as falling within the time span of the St. Johns periods. Almost certainly this span can be shortened at the top, as there is no substantial evidence of early European contact at the site; and a com- plement of St. Johns Check Stamped, the reliable horizon marker for the St. Johns II period, is lacking. Thus, the essential occupation of both the premound and mound levels is most likely to have been St. Johns I. The few early sherds in the below-mound zone and the few late sherds in the mound proper suggest a use of the site ranging throughout that entire period (estimated at 400 B. C. to A. D. 1100, Goggin, 1952, p. 36 and fig. 3). Quite possibly this use or occupation was an intermittent one. 1 Goggin (1952, p. 93) dates the Ormond Beach mound as of the St. Johns II period. I am inclined to think that he may have been influenced here by 2 provenience lots of sherds of the St. Johns Check Stamped type. These 2 lots (catalog Nos. 383964 and 383965), although within the Ormond Beach number series, and stored with them in the same trays, are listed as “Turtle Mound” and apparently came from the large shell mound near New Smyrna, south from Ormond. No ds) |” ORMOND BEACH MOUND, FLA.—JENNINGS ET AL. 19 Although only one pottery vessel, a St. Johns Plain, incurving rim bowl, was found with a burial (No. 62), several of the nonceramic arti- facts from the Ormond site were associated with burials. With only two exceptions, these associations were with burials from the below- mound, or premound, zone. Thus, we have in the same general context—the mass burial on the old ground surface—the following ornaments and implements: the flared-mouth pottery elbow pipe, shell and stone plummets, a coquina hone, and a bone awl. The two arti- facts from burial associations in the body of the mound proper are the worked deer vertebra and the skull of a green heron. Without im- mediate burial associations were several sheets of mica and the point of a bone dagger. These objects belong to the below-mound zone. Loose in the body of the mound were three chipped stone projectile points, a socketed bone point, a rubbing stone, a piece of worked pumice, a fragment of a stone celt, and some shell picks and chisels. Five iron fragments came from an old looter’s pit, and are, clearly, late intrusions. A single fragment of European crockery is without pro- venience. None of the above-listed aboriginal artifacts is of significance in dating the Ormond Beach mound with greater definitiveness than we have already attempted. The pipe, the plummets or pendants, and the projectile points all fall within the St. Johns I and II time range. SKELETAL MATERIAL The skeletal collection from the Ormond Beach site consists of 50 skulls in all stages of completeness and preservation, of which 31 are associated with postcranial skeletons or parts thereof. Eighteen of the skulls, 14 with some skeletal parts, came from below the mound; 32 skulls, 17 with skeletons, were excavated from the mound structure. The submound bones are considerably more discolored than those from the mound; indeed they can be quite accurately sorted by color alone. In addition, poor preservation and breakage of bone is more prevalent in the submound bones. Although all the bones are par- tially mineralized, those from below the mound seem to be more so. We do not know whether these differences are attributable to the surrounding soils and water seepage, to a time factor, or to both. Of the 50 skulls in the Ormond Beach collection, Hrdlicka (1940, pp. 459, 462) considered only 25 (9 males, 16 females) worthy of measuring. Of these, only two males (USNM 372603, 372640) and one female (USNM 372626) are from below the mound. Obviously, then, a metric comparison of the submound versus the mound skulls - is not worth while. Yet from inspection we could see no differences between the two groups, and judge them to be samples of the same racial type. Hrdlitka’s summary tables of the combined submound 20 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bun 164 and mound means show these small series to fit in closely with other Florida series, although the Ormond Beach males and females are more brachycranic than most, with mean indices of 82.1 and 83.1, respec- tively. From Hrdlitka’s measurements and our own observations, we judge the Ormond Beach series to represent the Gulf type of Hrdlitka (1940) and Neumann’s (1952) Walcolid variety, although in common with other Florida skulls they have higher cranial vaults and more massive facial skeletons. This difference is particularly noticeable in their deep and heavy lower jaws. Hrdlitka (1922, p. 87) attributed the massive skulls and skeletons of coastal Florida Indians to a marine diet especially rich in phosphates, which seems likely enough. Further details on the racial anthropology of aboriginal Florida have already been published in summary form (Newman, in Willey, 1949 b, pp. 549-553) and need not be repeated here. Al- though the Ormond Beach series is probably too small to be repre- sentative, we are particularly impressed by the massiveness and the very heavy areas for muscle attachments of the male skeletons. In addition, several of the males showed heavy anteroposterior bowing of femoral and tibial shafts. In contrast, the female skeletons are consistently small in size and gracile in long-bone cross section, and make for a strong sexual dichotomy in body mass. Two of the Ormond Beach skulls are remarkably longheaded, and thus stand out as alien to the rest of the series. These are USNM 372602 from the mound structure and USNM 372621 from below the mound. In the course of cataloging these skulls some 20 years ago, someone (perhaps Hrdlitka) caused the catalog card for USNM 372602 to be marked “Indian (Negro?)”. If it was Hrdliéka, we suspect he reasoned that a longheaded Indian skull had no business being in a late stratum, and that perchance it was Negro. Since only the skull cap without base and face are present, no one can really tell. To us, however, the lateral profile of the vault is longheaded Indian since it lacks the more prominent forehead and the flattened parietal area characteristic of Negroes. For pathology, the teeth show the extensive wear so characteristic of coastal and riparian Indians, and there is considerable tooth loss through pulp exposure as a result. The right tibia of USNM 372606 shows nodular changes of a pathological nature, and USNM 372639 from the mound structure shows marked periostitis of the right tibia, fibula, and ulna of a possibly syphilitic origin. There are not even the slightest indications of artificial head flattening in the entire Ormond Beach series. The lack of even the simple and presumably accidental flattening of the occiput suggests that no cradleboards or any other kind of rigid beds were used for infants. Roar PaP. ORMOND BEACH MOUND, FLA.—JENNINGS ET AL. yal ARTIFACTS POTTERY As stated in the foregoing discussion of the distribution of pottery in the Ormond mound, there are 735 specimens in the excavation collections. These include eight partially restorable vessels; the remainder are sherds. By far the greater portion of this pottery belongs to the St. Johns ceramic series, mostly to the type St. Johns Plain. St. Johns is the dominant pottery tradition in eastern Florida. It has a long life span, ranging in time from the close of the Archaic periods (ca. 400 B. C.) to the middle of the 17th century (Goggin, 1952, fig. 3 and pp. 68-70). St. Johns pottery is characterized by a soft buff or gray ware of chalky texture (Griffin, 1945; Rouse, 1951, pp. 221-222; Goggin, 1952, pp. 99-105). It is similar or identical to the ware series described from south Florida as Biscayne (Goggin, 1940; Willey, 1949, pp. 98-99). In addition to the St. Johns pottery types, there is a scattering of other types in the Ormond mound collection which appear to be attributable to other major Florida ceramic series. This includes a specimen of the Little Manatee series which is closely related to the St. Johns group in ware qualities and which seems to center in west- central Florida, some check-stamped fragments which are reminiscent of the Deptford series, a few cord-marked pieces on soft, St. Johns-like paste, an occasional limestone-tempered sherd of the Pasco series, a fiber-tempered sherd of the Orange series, and some plain grit or sand- tempered pottery. St. Johns Plain —There are 667 St. Johns Plain specimens in the Ormond collections. All eight of the restorable vessels belong to this type. The Ormond material conforms closely to previous descriptions. Paste core is gray and surfaces are usually buff although badly fire mottled. Large nodules of brown clay are often embedded in other- wise homogeneous paste. The ware scratches easily at 2.5 (Mohs scale). It averages about 7 mm. in thickness, but vessel walls are bumpy and unevenly smoothed so that thickness varies a great deal. Tooling marks are in frequent evidence on both surfaces. Coiling fractures are seen on many sherds (pl. 8, e). Vessel forms include boat-shaped bowls, deep simple bowls, subglobular bowls, jars or globular bowls with short collars, shallow platelike bowls, deep bowls or pots with reflared rims, and large bowls with outslanted rims. Rims are usually unmodified, although a few show marginal thickenings. Approximately 30 sherds of the Ormond mound total of St. Johns Plain have smooth, polished surfaces. Goggin (1952, p. 101) has noted these occasional well-finished examples in his descriptions of St. Johns Plain. The Ormond Beach polished specimens are small subglobular 22 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buu 164 bowls (pl. 7, a), simple bowls with slightly incurved rims (pl. 7, 6-d), and collared jars (pl. 8, b-h, 7). Interestingly, several of these show heavy exterior folds or thickenings on the rim. These rim folds and the tendency toward surface polish, when combined with the sub- globular form, suggest the Weeden Island and Papys Bayou series pottery of the Florida gulf coast (Willey, 1949 a, pp. 409 ff. and 442 ff.). St. Johns Simple Stamped.—Twenty-three of the Ormond sherds have exterior simple stamping. These are fragments of deep bowl or pot forms with unmodified rims (pl. 7). The simple stamping is arranged diagonally to the vertical axis of the vessel, and in all cases it runs up to the edge of the rim. The lands of the stamping are 1 to 2 mms. There is some crisscrossing or overlapping of the stamp- ing. Half a dozen sherds show occasional faint cross lands (pl. 9, a, e, g), but these cross lands or crossbars occur so rarely and irreg- ularly and are so widely spaced on (3 or 4 cm. apart) that such sherds can hardly be classified as check stamped. Griffin and Smith (1949, p. 348) have defined a type, St. Johns Simple Stamped, which they identify as a marker of the St. Johns II period. On the other hand, Goggin (1952, p. 105, footnote, and pl. 1, H, J) calls attention to a form of simple stamping on soft St. Johns paste that is found in early St. Johns I contexts. The differences between these two types are not clear, and we cannot identify posi- tively the material from the Ormond mound as belonging to either the early or late variety. St. Johns Scored.—Griffin and Smith (1949) defined this type as being characterized by exterior surface scorings. These markings are parallel and close spaced and may be straight or wavy. They can be distinguished from simple-stamped impressions in that the technique of wiping, dragging, or scoring the soft surface of the vessel is evident from the result. We did not classify any of the Ormond Beach pottery as St. Johns Scored, but it is noteworthy that several sherds included in the count as St. Johns Plain do show such scoring marks (pl. 8, a—-c). St. Johns Check Stamped.—There is only a single sherd of this type in the Ormond Beach collection. This is a quite typical piece with square checks 3 mm. in diameter and lands which are of equal size (1 mm. wide) on both axes. (See Griffin, 1945; Goggin, 1952, pp. 103-104.) Dunns Creek Red.—This is the red-slipped or red-filmed type of the St. Johns series. It has been described by Goggin (1948; 1952, p. 102). There are 12 Dunns Creek Red sherds in the Ormond collec- tion. Although the brick-red pigment is not “fugitive” in the sense of being applied after firing of the vessel, it, nevertheless, wears off NO do, ® ~= ORMOND BEACH MOUND, FLA.—JENNINGS ET AL. 23 easily. Because of this it is possible that the percentage of Dunns Creek Red in the Ormond mound was originally higher than we have tallied it and that a number of specimens have lost their red paint coating through erosion. This particular collection of red-painted ware shows the pigment on either the exterior or on both the exterior and interior surfaces. Some sherds indicate relatively large (30 cm. in diameter) subglobular bowls; others suggest small (15 cm. in diameter) simple bowls with slightly incurved rims. Oord Marked.—Four soft paste, St. Johns-like sherds have exterior markings that look somewhat like the impressions of a cord-wrapped paddle (pl. 10, c, d). These impressions are badly blurred, however, and it is possible that four fragments are semiobliterated, simple- stamped pieces. Cord marking does occur with St. Johns paste, al- though it is not common. Goggin (1952, pl. 1, G) illustrates such a sherd and places it as early St. Johns I period. Orange Incised—This is a fiber-tempered type, a marker of the Archaic horizon, which has been described by Griffin (1945) (see also Goggin, 1952, p. 98). A solitary sherd is in the Ormond collections (pl. 10, A). It bears fine, sharp incised lines which compose some sort of a pattern of parallel bands. Deptford Bold Check Stamped.—There are five sherds of a hard, sandy ware which stand in contrast to the soft paste, temperless St. Johns pottery. The identification of these sherds with Deptford Bold Check Stamped is somewhat doubtful, but they appear to be closer to that type than to any other (Caldwell and Waring, 1939; Willey, 1949 b, p. 357). They bear medium-deep check impressions which are somewhat, although not markedly, linear (pl. 10, e, f, g). The in- dividual rectangles measure about 5 by 10 mm. with the lands from 1 to 2 mm. in width. The impressions are too crudely done for either Wakulla Check Stamped (Willey, 1949 b, pp. 437-438) or Gulf Check Stamped (Willey, 1949 b, pp. 387-388). The hard, sand-tempered paste sets these sherds apart from the St. Johns Check Stamped type. Pasco Plain.—This is a crushed limestone tempered type (Goggin, 1948). There is one sherd from the Ormond mound. Pasco Simple Stamped.—Another sherd of Pasco paste and temper was in the Ormond collection. This one bore very faint, close-spaced simple stamping. Litile Manatee Shell Stamped.—There is one sherd of this type (pl. 10, a). It reveals a fragment of a zoned design in which the outline is executed in incision and the filler elements in shell edge stamping (ef. Willey, 1949 b, p. 444; pl. 38a). Unclassified Incised—This sherd bears a deep, broad-lined incised design combined with what appear to be heavy grooves (impressions 370929—57—_3 24. BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bux. 164 or incisions?) (pl. 10, 6). This could, possibly, be a fragment of a St. Johns Incised vessel; but such an identification is by no means certain (see Griffin, 1945; Goggin, 1952, p. 102). Indeterminate Stamped.—One sherd, with indistinct stamping or im- pressions on soft St. Johns paste. Sand-Tempered Plain.—There are 17 sherds of sand- or fine grit- tempered pottery. Most of these are body fragments. The one rim sherd indicates a large, deep bowl with a slightly incurved rim. These sherds cannot be satisfactorily identified as either Glades Plain or Weeden Island Plain, the characteristic sand-tempered plain wares of south Florida and west Florida, respectively. IMPLEMENTS AND ORNAMENTS Pipe.—There is a single pottery smoking pipe made of St. Johns ware (pl. 12, d). Itis of the elbow-form variety with a slightly flared bowl. The bowl arm measures 3 cm. while the stem arm is 2.5 cm. in length. Diameter of the bowl at the orifice is 4.7 cm. The pipe is undecorated and unpolished. The pipe was found associated with skeleton 66. Plummets or pendants.—Two shell plummets or pendants made from conch columellae were found in the mound (pl. 11, a, 6). These objects are approximately 9 cm. long and expand to a maximum diameter of 2.7 cm. at the center. Both plummets have a knoblike or expanded head at one end. The opposite ends have a slightly smaller nub which is encircled by a single groove, in one case, and a double groove in the other. The knoblike or expanded end of one of the plummets is partially coated with black pitch or asphaltum. One of these plummets was found at the neck of skeleton 61; the other came from near the right shoulder of skeleton 37. A third plummet is made of coquinalike limestone (pl. 11, c). This one is 7.2 cm. long and flattened in cross section so that at midpoint one diameter measures 3.5 cm. and the other 2 cm. One end of the plummet comes to a smooth-rounded point. The other end is tabular and encircled by a single groove. This plummet or pendant was found associated with skeleton 61. Shell chisels —Two fragmentary sections of worked conch columellae may have been used as chisels (smaller end) or light hammers (blunt, heavy end) (pl. 11, d, e). Shell picks —There are two of these. One is made of a Busycon carica shell. The point of the conch has been sharpened into a pick- like implement, but there are no hafting holes in the body of the shell. The other specimen is made from a Busycon perversum. The point is fine and sharp, and there are two rather irregularly shaped holes in the body of the conch that could have beer used for hafting. Rofo) T“* ~=ORMOND BEACH MOUND, FLA.—JENNINGS ET AL. 25 Stone celt——There is a section broken from the cutting edge of a gray-green stone celt (diorite or igneous rock). The piece shows care- ful shaping and smoothing. Rubbing or abrading stones.—A coquina stone has unsmoothed flat surfaces, but the edges have been used for pounding or grinding. This specimen is 6 cm. in diameter and 1.2 cm. thick. A second artifact, a large flat chunk of coquina, has been used as a hone (pl. 12, e). The fragment is 14 by 10 by 2.5 cm. A deep groeve extends the full length of one surface. The hone, together with a bone awl, was found near the left hip of skeleton 7. Worked pumice stone.—A piece of pumice, irregularly shaped, has been ground on one edge and both faces. The specimen measures 9 by 6 by 2.5 cm. Sheet mica.—Nine mica sheets, averaging about 6 cm. in diameter, were recovered from an area of clean soil in immediate proximity to a firepit. This firepit was located 80 inches below surface in section 35. Points.—Three chert projectile points show medium to fine retouch flaking (pl. 12, a—c). They range from 7.5 to 6cm.in length. All have elongated ovate-triangular blade forms. Two have slight shoulders and faintly flared stems. The third specimen has asmail nubbin stem and pronounced barbs. One came from mound surface and the other two from the body of the mound. A socketed bone point was made from a deer ulna (pl. 11, g). It is just under 9 cm. in length with a basal diameter of 1.5 cm. The socket extends through from butt to point and still retains traces of black pitch. The blade of the point is smoothed and well sharpened. This point came from the body of the mound. The tip of a large bone point (or, perhaps, a dagger) similar to the one described above was recovered from feature XIII, a firepit in section 55R2 (pl. 11, f). This tip is 6 cm. long. Bone awl.—A bone awl was found with skeleton 28 in section 30R2. This artifact was made from a large splinter of deer bone (pl. 11, A). It is 10 em. long and 1 cm. wide. The butt is broken and unworked. The point is broad, flat, and well smoothed and these smoothed edges and surfaces continue for 5 cm. up the shaft of the tool. Worked vertebra.—A worked vertebra of a deer (?) was found with skeleton 2 in section 380R2 (pl. 11, 7). Both the articular surfaces and all of the sides of the bone have been ground off. The diameter of the specimen is 4.5 cm., the thickness 4 cm. European pottery.—A single sherd of reddish, wheel-made pottery (pl. 11, 7) was found in a provenience lot described simply as ‘‘sec- tion 25.” All other specimens in this lot were aboriginal ceramics 26 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuy. 164 or artifacts. The exterior surface of this piece of crockery is covered with a mottled yellow-white glaze. There is a decoration in low relief consisting of a series of lines radiating out from a circular center. Iron.—Five rusted-iron fragments came from the spoil dirt of an old pit in the vicinity of section 35L2. These appear to be frag- ments of tool blades and a bolt or section of a rod. It seems likely that they are late intrusive objects. Bird skull.—Next to the left wrist of skeleton 23, in section 35L2, was a bird skull with bill attached. It appeared to have been purposely placed with the burial. The bird has been identified as Butorides virescens or a Little Green Heron. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The Ormond Beach mound (Vo-75) is a burial tumulus constructed of sand. It is located on the east side of the Halifax River in Volusia County, east central Florida. The mound was originally about 6 feet in height, dome shaped or conical, circular in outline, and approx- imately 60 feet in diameter. It stood on and was surrounded by a small village area. Goggin (1952, p. 93) records such a village midden as site Vo—76. The locale was, obviously, a favorable one for fish- ing and shellfishing in past times. Such food remains, along with animal and bird bones, were found in and under the mound. The history of the mound site may be recapitulated in two major occupational or constructional phases. The first phase is marked by a village refuse and cooking area which was situated upon a slight natural rise. A number of cooking and garbage pits are associated with this occupation. Immediately over this village debris 20 or more adult burials were arranged in extended, on-the- back-position, head-to-toe, in two concentric circles. A few arti- facts, such as shell or stone plummets or pendants, a pottery elbow pipe, miscellaneous tools, and a pottery bowl, were placed with the burials. Although it appears from their arrangement that these burials were a mass interment, the artifacts found with them were placed singly with individual burials and not as a mass offering. A thin but extensive layer of black earth and clamshells was placed over all of these burials. Subsequently, the shell in this covering tended to consolidate into a coquinalike substance. The second occupation-constructional phase is represented by the body of the sand mound proper. Apparently this construction did not immediately follow the earlier mass burial, but an unknown period of years was allowed to elapse, during which time some of the burials under the black earth and shell mantle suffered disturbance. Upon construction of the body of the mound proper, another mass- burial ceremony must have been held, and, again, the extended bodies ANTHROP. PAP. ORMOND BEACH MOUND, FLA.—JENNINGS ET AL. 27 were placed in a circular, head-to-toe fashion. Subsequently, other burials were made in and upon the mound with the result of a gradual increase in the bulk and height of the structure. Over 40 individuals, including both adults and children, were buried in the mound proper. Although an extended, on-the-back position was the most common, some burials appear to have been no more than single skulls; and below mound base, quite possibly antedating the first mass burial, was a primary flexed interment. Most of the extended burials appear to have been primary, but the interpretation of mass burial suggests that these individuals had, perhaps, been stored or kept as cadavers for some time previous to their placement in the ground. An examination of 50 of the Ormond skulls, together with some of the postcranial skeletons, reveals no noticeable differences between the earlier, or below-mound, phase of site occupation and the mound proper; however, the limited number of crania from the lower level that were suitable for study renders this judgment inconclusive. In general (with two exceptions), the Ormond skulls are brachycranic with high vaults and rugged faces. The males give evidence of heavy musculature. As a whole, the group fits into Hrdlitka’s (1940) “Gulf” type or into Neumann’s ‘Walcolid.” None of the skulls showed the fronto-occipital head flattening that is found along the northwest coast of Florida on what are probably contemporaneous (Weeden Island period) skulls. The bulk of the Ormond pottery from both below-mound and mound-proper levels belongs to the St. Johns tradition. Most of it, including all of the restorable vessels, is of the type St. Johns Plain. The presence of the type Dunns Creek Red and the near absence (1 sherd) of the type St. Johns Check Stamped suggest that the period of occupation and construction falls into the St. Johns I range. A few earlier sherds, such as Deptford Bold Check Stamped and Orange Incised, imply an old, thin occupation antedating this; but there is little doubt that the first substantial habitation of the site and the first mass burial were St. Johns I in time. The St. Johns I period has been estimated by Goggin as 400 B. C. to A. D. 1100. As a fragment of St. Johns Check Stamped was found in the body of the mound it is likely that there was some activity at the site, however minor, as late as the close of the period. In a somewhat wider frame of reference the Ormond Beach mound site is probably contemporaneous with the Santa Rosa-Swift Creek and Weeden Island I periods of northwest and Gulf coast Florida. Its salient cultural characteristics are those of the Burial Mound or Middle Woodland stage of the Southeastern United States, although use of the site may have continued on into periods of contempo- raneity with Temple Mound or Mississippian cultures elsewhere. a8 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buut. 164 LITERATURE CITED CaLpwELL, J. R., and Warrna, A. J., JR. 1939. Newsletter of the Southeastern Archaeological Conference, vol. 1, No. 6 (Mimeographed). Lexington, Ky. Goaatn, J. M. 1940. The distribution of pottery wares in the Glades archaeological area of South Florida. New Mexico Anthrop., vol. 4, pp. 22-33. 1947. A preliminary definition of archaeological areas and periods in Florida. Amer. Antiquity, vol. 13, pp. 114-127. 1948. Some pottery types from central Florida. Gainesville Anthrop. As- soc. Bull. No. 1. 1952. Space and time perspective in northern St. Johns archeology, Florida. Yale Univ. Publ. Anthrop., No. 47. GRIFFIN, JAMES B. 1945. The significance of fiber-tempered pottery of the St. Johns area in Florida. Journ. Washington Acad. Sci., vol. 35, No. 7, pp. 218-223. GRIFFIN, JoHN W., and SuitH, Hae G. 1949. Nocoroco, a Timucua village of 1605, now in Tomoka State Park. The Florida Hist. Quart., vol. 27, pp. 340-361. St. Augustine, Fla. HRDLICKA ALES. 1922. Anthropology of Florida. Publ. Florida Hist. Soc., No. 1. 1940. Catalog of human crania in the United States National Museum col- lections. Indians of the Gulf States. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 87, pp. 315-464. LeBaron, J. F. 1884. Prehistoric remains in Florida. Ann. Rep. Smithsonian Inst. for 1882, pp. 771-790. NEUMANN, G. K. 1952. Archeology and race in the American Indian. Jn Archeology of Eastern United States, James B. Griffin, ed., pp. 13-34. Newman, Marsnatu T. 1949. Peoples [of the Florida Gulf Coast]. Jn Archaeology of the Florida Gulf Coast, by G. R. Willey, Smithsonian Misc. Coll., vol. 113, pp. 549-552. Rouse, I[RviNa. 1951. A survey of Indian River archeology, Florida. Yale Univ. Publ. Anthrop., No. 44. SMALL, Joun K. 1929. From Eden to Sahara, Florida’s tragedy. Lancaster, Pa. Smitu, Hale G., see Grirrin, John W., and Smurru, Hale G. Stiruine, M. W. 1935. Smithsonian archeological projects conducted under the Federal Emergency Relief Administration, 1933-34. Ann. Rep. Smith- sonian Inst. for 1934, pp. 371-400. Warina, A. J., Jr. See CALDWELL, J. R., and Waring, A. J., JR. WILLEY, GoRDON R. 1949 a. Excavations in southeast Florida. Yale Univ. Publ. Anthrop., No. 42, 1949 b. Archeology of the Florida Gulf Coast. Smithsonian Misc. Coll., vol. 113. 1954. Burial patterns in the Burns and Fuller Mounds, Cape Canaveral, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist, vol. 7, pp. 79-90. BULLETIN 164 PLATE 1 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY *punois 9107 9yy ul INUudAY xejlpey “‘SULIvOTS 9v1Ojoq JSOMY INOS 94} WoO} punout Yorog puouw() BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 2 te SO Acca lacie ie Ormond Beach mound from the southwest at the beginning, and upon completion, of exca- vations. a, Cleared site and the first cut along the south side. The low dome shape of the mound and the encroachment of the Halifax Road are visible. 6, View of site after leveling was completed. BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 3 Views of burials below mound base. Both a and b show burials in the outer ring (see fig. 2 for plan of burials). Burials 7, 28, 20, and 30 from left to right. BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 4 Views of burials below mound base. Both views show skeletons in the inner ring (see fig. 2 for plan of burials). a, Nos. 40, 39, 38. and 37 from left to right. 5, Closeup of Nos. 39, 40, and 38. BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 5 oe - oe BRS wih Views of the excavation showing the contrasts in the three major soil zones. At the base is the irregularly stained natural sand. Next above is the black sand containing coquina. The upper zone, the mound fill, is composed of natural sand containing various amounts of humus stain. a and b, Views of the approach trench on the south side. In a, on extreme edge of site, the pot hunter’s trench into the mound shows clearly. In b, appears the most extensive of the submound pits (feature II), which the earlier amateur’s trench had skimmed over. BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 6 Views of excavation and burials. a, View of the approach trench on the east side of line R4. 6, Burial 20, with coquina layer visible in the bank behind skeleton. BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 7 1o cms. Partially restored vessels of the St. Johns Plain type. (Streaking on specimen a results from mending fluid and is not paint. Other specimens show fire smudging.) (USNM Nos. a, 383896; b, 383895; c, 383948; d, 383893.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 8 10 CMS. St. Johns Plain sherds. Specimens a-c show scoring similar to type St. Johns Scored; d, interior of open bowl rim sherd; e, large sherd showing coil fractures; f, short, out- flared collar of bowl or jar (picture inverted); g, jar collar; 4, 7, bowls with short outflared collars; 7, rim sherd from subglobular bowl. (USNM Nos.: a, 383959; b, 383933; c, 383939; d, 383932; ¢, 383951; f, 383908; g, 383959; h, 383931; i, 383918; 7, 383909.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 9 rarer a ee St. Johns Simple Stamped sherds. Sherds a and ¢ are rim fragments; all others are body pieces. Sherds a, e, g, show occasional cross lands, vaguely reminiscent of check-stamped treatment. (USNM Nos.: a, 383916; b, 383939; c, 383914; d, 383959; ¢, 383907; f, 383909; g, 383907.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 10 The Potsherds of various types. Little Manatee Shell Stamped. b, Unclassified Incised. c, d, Cord-Marked (soft ae e, f, g, Deptford Bold Check Stamped. h, Orange Incised. (USNM Nos.: a, 383921; d, 383906: c, d, 383959; e, 383925; if ra a 383959.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 11 Various artifacts. a, b, Pendants or plummets made of conch shell columellae. c, Pend- ant or plummet of coquina. d, e, Chisels made of conch columellae. f, Tip of bone dagger or point. g, Socketed bone point. fh, Bone awl. 1, Worked vertebra (deer °). j, Fragment of European pottery. (USNM Nos.: a, 383899; b, 383919; c, 383898; d, e, 383970; f, 383956; g, 383902; h, 383962; 7, 383905; 7, 383959.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 12 Various artifacts. a-c, Chipped stone projectile points. d, Pottery smoking pipe. ¢, Hone of coquina. (USNM Nos.: a, 383900; b , 383915; c, 383901; d, 383897; ¢, 383928.) SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 164 Anthropological Papers, No. 50 HAIR PIPES IN PLAINS INDIAN ADORNMENT A Study in Indian and White Ingenuity By JOHN C. EWERS 29 4 Fi whi, ry im ’ arn ra i ant we Pai Nee ny Pally : ene ny ae me (yp VOT rrite ay ‘ ( PAYOR eI ; wonelietlt ei agotoiund iy Py che 4: Ps DAL etre Hest CONTENTS PAGE MOTE WOLER ps aes ies eet ees 15s Mate wetenls 260 eels 33 MORO srl piie = ese ee ee ee ee ae eee ee 37 Aboriginal prototypes of trade hair pipes__.....__.-------------------- 37 17th-century tubular trade ornaments of glass____.________------------ 39 18th-century silver and brass hair pipes. -_.....=........---+-.--+2--24- 40 BE MORAIE IGN) 8 enol be patel esis clo A oe me ether 42 Manufacture of shell hair pipes? be oi, geo ce es Sees Bly 42 Distribution of shell hair pipes among the Plains Indians-_--------_- 46 Uses of hair pipes by Plains Indians prior to 1880_____---------------- 51 Areheolopieal evidences of users * 2s 2 Sal ae le sees lle: seicedell 51 Haieipipesiag ear: pendamtsece = Ysio0%t4 vet ot Joke ecastwcsee al sete 52 Hair pipes as hair ornamenia... 2 25. oo. 22822 t a es ee 55 aa pipes in neckiness«— 52.2... eetaletonaes! ld aia lm ween Seon 56 icurpiied ae CNONCT SS! 2 Aor ee ee ee Se aa a ee 57 Eas pines im Dresses 204 ie a eee eS ee Sas he 58 enrtavions Of tne siell-naie pipes. £8 is Ae he ee 61 The substitution of the’ bene hair pipe... __. 22-22) 2 eee ee 62 seq sree miped: bowl Oe 8 fee oe a a nn 64 VS LETH OPH OLEH SURES fs V2 Es | ea a ce ie eas 64 RAR UP TSEC CRA SOCH 2s es Ps hs ce Si raat a era a 67 Geese OAMMOUEIN eo te i en et ee 69 iEair-pipe Gar penuantdns 2a. Shs 7 tse ee Oe OS eee 70 Eeir-pipe main oranmente2-i 20. i4Les. ls teeue. = Se ec eee 70 LEISTTs) ch.) ene Cae oy: ees ye ee ee ae Ae Pee eenneran Sen Syme SMe 2- 70 SuRwaGe Lneruse OF lair Pipes? 2.2 ee eS 71 ONE TE GESTS TTS SEM 0 | A lc peo NE me SAS 73 LS SN TIEESTY 1 D1 reyes dba eng i Db a eee Ia gt Bs PR EM sR Raa Sod Sel ee 83 ILLUSTRATIONS PLATES FOLLOWING PAGE 13. Early forms of tubular trade ornaments___--........--------.----- 86 14. Location of the Campbell Brothers’ Wampum Factory, Park Ridge, DICH Us oo OT gs ese ane eile able eines Oe Siege ee ena ae bys Sena 86 15. a, The Campbell Brothers’ Wampum Factory (1860-89). 6, The four Wak thd) Makers. (ESGO Ne ofan eee ne ER ee 86 iG: “Tools used in’ drilline shell hair pipes: 52.202) 1 ea et 86 17. Stages in the manufacture of shell hair pipes_________------------- 86 13; Hair pipes worn ies ear pendants... 25-26 2-2 2.3252 5S cee 86 19: Hair-pipe ear pendants of the Kiowa... ...---....-..--—-.4-.<+- 86 20. ,ciair pines: worn as hair ornaments... =) 5 2 eee 86 oi ier pines Worn. il Netkitced 2. 2. 2 le sis s SU ee 86 Zou Tier mines worn im neciiaces) 2 VLUs ste oso. Pee ee 86 Zo. Liat pipes sworn as Chokers) 2. S2uit) eo oo. oe sete See ta 86 32 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buu. 164 FOLLOWING PAGE 24. Hair pipes worn in breastplates by Southern Plains Indians at the Medicine: Lodge Treaty Council, 1867_.. 2222-23. 2.2L ee 86 25. Hair-pipe breastplates from the Southern Plains___________________ 86 26. Hair pipes worn in ‘breastplates #312 42. oo 2s eee 86 ae Matar pipes worn as breastplates: 2. =. 24... 2222 2 kee 86 28. Change from dentalium-shell to hair-pipe breastplates among the Brule... 2c ccc cccscuckadecsedeesteceneetessc==sessee2 2s 86 29. Shell hair pipes used in decoration of containers___________________ 86 30, Development of the bone hair pipe_.-__-__.2-0.-_222 22-2 Lele 86 31. Hair pipes worn in breastplates..-.=22i81 gui £2802 2 Oe ee 86 32. Famous wearers of hair-pipe breastplates___._._____________________ 86 33. Woman’s necklace of hair pipes, simple forms______________________ 86 34. Woman’s necklace of hair pipes, complex type__________________--- 86 36. Hair pipes worn as-bandoliersi+ 91 JOluL Souuans Peat. vu Bed Se 86 36. a, Hair-pipe necklaces worn in Oglala Omaha dance, 1893. 6, Hair- pipe breastplates worn by Assiniboin grass dancers while visiting Blood Reserve.in. 1893... 22ceses2-222./ OS et eee 86 37. Recent uses of hair-pipe breastplates_____._______________________- 86 MAPS PAGE [Distrib iconv olsiair=plpe Tet) Jem Gel be = ee 76 2., Distribdtion of hair-pipe hair ornaments. - eee 77 De Distribution Of hair-pipe necklaces 005222. fe ee 78 2. Wistribavion Of Pair-pipe Chokers 8- 2.22. ee ee 80 5. Distribution of ‘hair-pipe breastplates-2_ = 22222 - oe oe 81 6., Distripation of air-pipe bandoliers= -2 i. 2022272 2 eo ee 82 FOREWORD Students of the American Indians and of Western history are familiar with the elaborate breastplates of long, light-colored, tubular beads worn by many prominent Plains Indian men that have been depicted in photographs taken since about 1870. Yet the story of how, when, and where these picturesque ornaments originated and how the custom of wearing them was diffused widely among the Plains Indians and their neighbors has never been told. One may search in vain through the voluminous literature on the Plains tribes for a comprehensive discussion of this problem. I recall that Dr. Leslie Spier referred to this unsolved problem in one of his always stimulating classes at the Yale University Graduate School in the period 1932-34. I obtained valuable information on some important historical aspects of the question while stationed on the Blackfeet Reservation, Mont., in the early 1940’s. But it was not until after I joined the staff of the Smithsonian Institution in 1946 and became well acquainted with the wealth of ethnological specimens and dated drawings and paintings in the collections of the Division of Ethnology, United States National Museum, and with the outstanding collection of early, dated photographs in the Bureau of American Ethnology, that I began to realize that sufficient evidence might be gathered to provide a solution to this problem. As I became more familiar with the evidence obtained from these and other sources, I came to realize that the question was but one facet of a more complex one involving various Indian uses of a type of long, cylindrical orna- ment known to Indian traders since late colonial times as a “‘hair pipe.” Students of the material culture of the historic tribes commonly utilize three classes of source materials: (1) the verbal testimony of Indian informants, (2) references in the published literature, and (8) ethnological specimens in museum collections. The present study, however, required delving into the history of the Plains Indians beyond the period covered by the memories of living informants. The pub- lished literature on the subject was found to be grossly inadequate. I found, however, that the lacunae in the literature and the historical limitations of fieldwork could be overcome in large measure by careful study of dated ethnological specimens, drawings, paintings, and photo- graphs and by tedious search of archival records. Perhaps, then, this study may serve not only as a solution to a particular problem, but 33 34 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bunn. 164 also as a demonstration of the results that can be achieved through the exploitation of these research tools in the investigation of prob- lems of change and stability in American Indian material culture. In the course of this study I have incurred heavy obligations to many individuals who have generously given of their time and specialized knowledge to assist me. I am indebted to John Witthoft, Pennsylvania State Archaeologist, Harrisburg, Pa.; to Arthur A. Futer, New Holland, Pa.; to Kenneth E. Kidd, Royal Ontario Museum of Archeology, Toronto, Canada; to Glenn Black, Indiana University, Bloomington, Ind.; and to Raymond S. Baby, Ohio State Museum, Columbus, Ohio, for specific information on the archeological occur- rences of long, cylindrical ornaments of glass and of metal in historic sites of the Eastern Woodlands. J. C. Storms, of Park Ridge, N. J., patiently recalled for me his boyhood acquaintance with the last of the shell hair-pipe makers of that town. Mrs. Mary S. Curtis, curator, Bergen County Historical Society, North Hackensack, N. J., graciously searched the county records for information on the Campbell family of wampum makers. Frank and Joseph Sherburne, merchants of Browning, Mont., told me of their father’s important role in the invention of the bone hair pipe. J. V. Hurson and Edward Wentworth, both of Armour & Co., and Carl V. Otto, vice president, Missouri Meerschaum Co., Washington, Mo., kindly supplied infor- mation pertaining to the development of the bone hair pipe. The late Robert A. Boake, Indian trader of Anadarko, Okla., and John Choloff of Pine Ridge Reservation, S. Dak., told me of their trade in bone hair pipes, while Indian informants of the Blackfeet, Blood, Fort Peck, Fort Belknap, and Western Oklahoma Consolidated Agency furnished information on the use of hair pipes by their re- spective tribes. James M. Luongo, president, Plume Trading & Sales Co., Inc., of New York City, informed me of his firm’s present-day trade in bone hair pipes. Archival records furnished the greater part of the data here pre- sented on the early distribution of hair pipes by traders. I am indebted to Marius Barbeau, National Museum of Canada, Ottawa, Canada, for a copy of his notes on trade goods taken during his studies in the Archives of the Seminary of Quebec, Laval University, Quebec, Canada; to Mrs. Alice J. Turnham, director, McGill Uni- versity Museums, Montreal, Canada, for information on the sale of hair pipes contained in the account book of James and Andrew McGill; to Mrs. Frances Biese, archivist, Missouri Historical Society, St. Louis, Mo., for locating references to trade in hair pipes in the extensive manuscript collections of that society; and to Marshall Moody of the National Archives for aid in finding references to hair pipes in the records of the Office of Indian Trade. I am grateful we PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 35 to Dorothy C. Barck, librarian, The New York Historical Society, for permission to examine the American Fur Co. papers in that library. Mrs. Margaret Blaker facilitated my examination of the thousands of photographs of North American Indians in the Bureau of American Ethnology. The Chicago Musuem of Natural History and the American Museum of Natural History, New York City, kindly permitted my examination of their extensive collections of photographs of Plains Indians. I shall always be grateful to Prince Karl Viktor zu Wied, of Munich, Germany, for permission to examine the 118 original drawings and watercolors, executed by Carl Bodmer on his visit to the Upper Missouri in 1833-34, which were brought to the United States for temporary exhibition in 1953. Dr. Josef Réder showed me photo- graphs of 100 other Bodmer originals in the possession of the estate of Prince Maximilian zu Wied. 370929—57——4 i ite vo Ts os de ig e tne aie: ; Oey A sie Hitt, i ae ee ae ost ‘i nee reap ri | Ot ates | fi ti " ‘tolge hos eels (ad an fg palieh t nies +3 et 79 1. at 0 pill t ths ss 4 adibnibe. mages ¢ ted ky f ‘4 > , , 2 v4 chp ’ 4 > 7 af Me 4 ~ tt» : J 4 i » > A . 4 a at | ‘ b ‘ ' 4 hy r 4 ‘ t 4 { x ' ss ‘ ' ¢ ‘ 4 1 4 ‘ 7 . a it I ‘ : | i a! f j i A 5 ‘ ad | oho * + Yin j -s 4 ‘ . 7 ‘ ; =a ’ 2 rel nih lees 2 { 4 y : ' ti . . ie cit, 8?ue So ri { writer Taye! leis ; * al a 3," ae 4 y | - <> ‘ 7. a .* ‘ Rha ; at} ; meor fare, vial oe F ma! 7 ol es rere ry cA Annee, 4 nas. OF iar Mery ety) rte Cet & : s ‘ie i a) ’ ri a ie La ROM? i] ‘ fig inch in diameter through the center of its length. The twist is gradual, forming not quite a complete revolution in the length of the specimen. Figure 6 is a little shorter (5% inches) and a little thicker (4 inch diameter), but the center hole has the same diameter. The twist is more pronounced. A complete revolution is made in 1% inches of length. Witthoft has informed me that these beads have been found in close association with the skulls in burials AO BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buwt. 164 at the Strickler site. There were never more than four of them at the sides of a single skull. Probably the Indians used them for hair ornaments. Cadzow (1936, p. 82) mentioned the finding of tubular, conch-shell beads in association with a burial at the Strickler site. This would suggest that among the Susquehanna the tubular glass beads may have been accepted as substitutes for earlier, native-made, conch columella beads. The case of the tubular glass beads as here presented is of particular interest as an indication of the progress made by white traders among the Indians of the northern woodlands before the middle of the 17th century in getting Indians to accept long, tubular beads manufactured by white men as substitutes for tubular ornaments of native origin. We can only speculate as to the motives of the Indians in accepting the glass substitutes. We have no information on the relative cost of native-made and European-made tubular beads in trade at that time. Perhaps the Indians were attracted to these early, glass, tubular beads because of their attractive colors and their initial rarity. Certainly the fragility of the glass material was not in its favor. Surely they were much less practical ornaments than were the manufactured tubular ornaments offered Indians by traders in later colonial times. 18TH-CENTURY SILVER AND BRASS HAIR PIPES The first recorded use of the term “hair pipe” in the Indian trade of which I have knowledge, had reference to silver ornaments furnished Indians of the Ohio Valley in 1767. On October 18th of that year George Morgan of Fort Pitt ordered from Boynton and Wharton of Philadelphia two dozen silver hair pipes (Gillingham, 1934, pp. 114-115). The same article may have been known to traders in the Ohio Valley by the name “hair bob” as early as 1760. In that year several dozen hair bobs made by Philadelphia silversmiths were sent to Pittsburgh (Gillingham, 1936, pp. 14, 16-19). I find no contemporary use of the terms “hair bobs” and ‘“‘hair pipes” in the lists of silver ornaments employed in the Pennsylvania Indian trade of the 1760’s. The name “hair bob’? seems to have disappeared from these lists after the name “hair pipe’ first appeared in 1767. Apparently the numbers of silver hair pipes furnished the western Indians in colonial times never was great. By far the largest order for these articles, dated August 27, 1784, listed by Gillingham (1934, p. 122) comprised 12 dozen hair pipes to be used in the purchase of land in the State of Pennsylvania. No specimens of silver hair pipes are known to have been found in archeological sites in Pennsylvania. Nor does there seem to be a record of the finding of these specimens in documented historic sites weet PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 41 lower down the Ohio Valley. There is, however, a rolled silver tube 3%. inches long, tapering slightly toward one end from a maximum diameter of % inch, in the Ohio State Museum. The silver is 0.023 inch thick. This specimen was excavated in 1899, from an Indian grave on the Blanchard River, 1 mile east of Ottawa, Ohio. The specimen bears no touchmark and cannot be dated. It may be an example of the article known to colonial records as a “silver hair pipe,” but we cannot be positive of this identification. 1am indebted to Raymond S. Baby, of the Ohio State Museum, for calling my attention to this specimen and for the photograph of it reproduced in plate 13, d. Much more closely approximating the tapered form of articles known as hair pipes in the later Indian trade is an ingeniously made brass ornament found in an intrusive burial at the Angel site, Vander- burgh County, Ind., in 1940. The specimen is of rolled brass, 3%¢ inches long, tapering from the center toward each end, and so cut that the overlap forms a straight line. Glenn Black, who kindly informed me of this find, stated that the specimen was found at the base of a skull on the left side, and that other grave goods associated with this burial appeared to date it after 1750 and probably about 1800. The shape of this ornament, illustrated in plate 13, c, closely resembles that of later and better known shell hair pipes made by Whites for the Indian trade. There is evidence that both Canadian and American traders were offering silver hair pipes in the Indian trade during the first decade of the 19th century, and that these articles were then made in Montreal as well as in Philadelphia. On January 26, 1801, Angus Mackintosh, at Sandwich, on the Detroit River, wrote to Robert Cruickshank, Montreal silversmith, placing an order for silver trade objects which included 12 hair pipes (Barbeau, 1940, pp. 128-130). On January 16, 1807, the United States Office of Indian Trade, Georgetown, D. C., placed an order for silver objects with John McMullen and Samuel Williamson, Philadelphia silversmiths, which included $25 worth of hair pipes (National Archives, MS. A). That silver hair pipes were furnished to Government Factories ' west of the Mississippi is proved by the record of a shipment of ‘142 P. Hair Pipes” valued at $52.58, or a little more than 38 cents each, to John B. Treat, agent in charge of Arkansas Post in 1807 (National Archives, MS. A). In the next year, 33 hair pipes were sent from the Office of Indian Trade in Georgetown, D. C., to the United States Trading House at Osage River. They were valued at 40 cents each (National Archives, MS. 1 Between 1795 and 1822 the United States Government established and operated trading posts in the Indian Country. Headquarters of this system was the Office of Indian Trade in Georgetown, D. ©. (See: A history of the United States Indian Factory system, 1795-1822, by Ora Brooks Peake. Denver, Colo. 1954.) 42 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Butn. 164 B, p. 7). In 1809, 20 silver hair pipes, valued at 75 cents each, were forwarded to Fort Osage by William Clark (National Archives, MS. C, p. 278). An inventory of merchandise on hand at Fort Osage, September 30, 1810, listed 32 silver hair pipes, valued at 40 cents each (National Archives, MS. D). These records show clearly that silver hair pipes were furnished to Government Factories trading with the Plains Indians in the first decade of the 19th century. However, the quantities of these articles involved in that trade seem to have been small. I have found no reference to any silver hair pipes traded to the Plains Indians in subsequent years, nor do there seem to be contemporary records of trade in silver hair pipes by private traders who were the competitors of the Government Factories for the business of Indians in the Osage Country in the first decade of the 19th century. Private traders appear to have favored less expensive hair pipes made of shell. SHELL HAIR PIPES The most common type of hair pipe in use among the Plains Indians for three-quarters of a century prior to 1880, was one made from the lip of the West Indian conch (Strombus gigas) by Whites in New Jersey. Traders who supplied the Indians with these shell hair pipes sometimes referred to them as “‘wampum hair pipes.” MANUFACTURE OF SHELL HAIR PIPES The center of commercial manufacture of shell hair pipes for the Indian trade was the little town of Pascack (now Park Ridge) in Bergen County, N. J. Dutch settlers in Bergen County made clam- shell wampum for the Indian trade in colonial times. Manufacture of hair pipes appears to have been a development from that earlier wampum industry. The apparent absence of these commercially made hair pipes of shell in historic Indian sites of the pre-Revolu- tionary War period in the Northeast and in the Great Plains, coupled with the lack of contemporary records of trade in these artifacts prior to 1799, suggest that manufacture of these articles was begun between the years 1776 and 1798. In the history of shell hair-pipe making in Bergen County one family has played a dominant role. They were the descendants of Irish-born William Campbell who settled at Schraalenburg in 1735. ‘His son John, two grandsons, four great-grandsons, and two or more great-great-grandsons became the renowned family of wampum makers. The original homestead of John W. Campbell and wife, Letitia Van Valen, of one hundred acres, was at Pascack, 25 miles from New York. They settled there prior to 1775, and began manu- facturing wampum”’ (Westervelt, 1924, p. 9). Doubtless the Camp- AN bey, F 4? PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 43 bells learned the methods employed by their Dutch neighbors of working clamshells into wampum and did not begin to make hair pipes until after they had become proficient in shaping and drilling clamshells. Although the name of the inventor of the shell hair pipe is not definitely known, it may be that this distinction belongs to John W. Campbell (born July 1, 1747, died March 15, 1826), founder of the Campbell wampum business. The invention may have been inspired by a desire on the part of Indian traders to obtain a cheaper substitute for the silver hair pipe which would be acceptable to the Indians. At the hands of successive generations of Campbells, hair-pipe making developed from a simple, hand-tooled, home industry into a factory operation in which the most difficult and precise work was performed by crude machinery which they invented. In the mid-19th century the making of hair pipes for the Indian trade was considered one of the important industries of Bergen County. Yet the thrifty, industrious Campbells continued to regard it as a seasonal occupation. They worked hard at it from October to April. The rest of the year they farmed. A contemporary map of Park Ridge, N. J., about 1876, shows the location of the Campbell Brothers’ Wampum Mill on Pascack Brook, a tributary of the Hackensack River. (See pl. 14.) This map also depicts the farms of three of the four Campbell brothers (pl. 14). The mill had been built in 1860 to utilize waterpower for turning the grinding and polishing wheels. Plate 15, a, shows the exterior of this factory as it appeared while still in use in 1886. The making of hair pipes required the use of a larger and thicker shell than the Rockaway clam previously employed in the manufac- ture of clamshell wampum. In the West Indian conch (Strombus gigas) the Campbells found a shell suitable for hair pipes. According to Westervelt (1924, p. 16) these shells were brought from West Indian ports as ballast to New York City docks, where the Campbells purchased them in lots of five and ten thousand. The large 5-pound shells were preferred. It was common for the Campbells to sell quantities of these shells to other workers in the neighborhood. In their homes the neighbors broke out long sections of shell from the lips of the conch with pick and chisel. Then the Campbells bought back the thick, roughly shaped pieces for drilling and finishing. The Campbells regarded their finishing methods as trade secrets. Among these were the baking of shell pipes in the family oven to whiten them, the soaking of pipes in buttermilk to soften them for drilling, and the tempering of metal drills in sheep’s tallow. The pipes were ground to shape by holding them against grindstones with wooden pinchers. They were highly polished with Rockaway sand and water. 44 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buv. 164 By far the most difficult step in the manufacturing process was that of drilling the long central holes. In the early period of hair-pipe making the Campbells used the same tools and methods of drilling that had been used in drilling clamshells in the manufacture of wam- pum. As Daniel Campbell explained it, the drillers ‘used to wear a sort of breastplate against which they rested a block to hold them. Then they had a spool with a string around it to revolve it. The drill was put into this spool and the end placed in the pipe. Then the string was pulled back and forth and the drill went into the pipe. Halfway through, the pipe was reversed and the drill sent through the other end. The trick was in making the two holes meet in the middle. Lots of pipes were spoiled by the drill getting in crooked” (Newark Evening News, 1923, p. 2-x). I am indebted to J. C. Storms for the photograph of this simple bow drill shown in plate 16,a@. Drilling hair pipes with such primitive equipment was undoubtedly a difficult, time-consuming operation. Yet some skilled workers were able to drill 100 pipes a day with this hand tool. The most ingenious, laborsaving invention of the Campbells was the pipe-drilling machine, capable of drilling 6 pipes simultaneously and increasing an individual’s output to 400 pipes per day. This crude but effective machine was the product of the combined skill of James Campbell, fhe family’s mechanical genius, and Daniel Camp- bell, an able carpenter. Daniel’s son claimed this machine had been in use for some time before he began to make hair pipes about the year 13866. The pipe-drilling machine was made entirely from materials found on the Campbells’ farms—wood, metal, and leather belting. To a crude wooden framework was attached the mechanism, which con- sisted of six handmade steel drills so placed as to make precise contact with the centers of the ends of six hair pipes fastened in metal troughs opposite the drills. Pipes and drills were lowered by a lever into a metal tank containing water, and a crank was turned rotating the drills and drilling the pipes halfway through. The drills were with- drawn, the pipes reversed and drilled from the other ends to the center. The water kept the pipes cool and washed the particles of shell from the bored holes. Drills were sharpened on a grindstone attached to the framework of the machine itself. They were held in a candle flame until red hot and then thrust into melted sheep’s tallow to tem- per them. The tallow was from sheep raised on the family farms. The entire mechanism was so simple that boys of the family could, and often did, operate it. This ingenious machine was the closely guarded secret that enabled the Campbells to maintain a near monopoly of hair-pipe drilling and Noo), 4?) PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 45 thus virtual control of the production of hair pipes. J. C. Storms, octogenarian resident of Park Ridge, who as a former neighbor of the Campbells knew the last two generations of hair-pipe makers, told me that they kept one machine on the upper floor of an outbuilding. That floor was entered by a trapdoor through which only members of the family were permitted to pass. Mr. Storms said two of these machines were made and used by the Campbells. He recently secured the only remaining pipe-drilling machine for the collections of the Pascack Historical Museum, Park Ridge, N. J. Mr. Storms has kindly furnished the photograph of this machine reproduced in plate 16, b. Shell hair pipes were manufactured in lengths ranging from 1% inches to 6 inches. They are characteristically barrel shaped, with center diameters about % inch, tapering to end diameters of less than ¥% inch. The longitudinal hole is about inch in diameter. On plate 17 are illustrated the successive stages in the manufacture of a shell hair pipe. At the left is an unworked shell of the Strombus gigas (a). Next to it is a portion of the thickened lip of the shell (6) broken out for making into a hair pipe. Plate 17, c, shows a fragment of a hair pipe blocked out preparatory to drilling; d, a drilled but only partially finished pipe; e, a shaped but unpolished pipe 4% inches long; and f, a polished and completed hair pipe 2 inches in length. All specimens shown, other than the unworked shell, were collected at the Campbells’ Wampum Factory and are now in the Division of Ethnology, United States National Museum. The drilled specimens were obtained by Erminnie A. Smith on a visit to the factory in 1884. At that time four aged Campbell brothers, the youngest of whom was about 70 years old, were still making hair pipes for the Indian trade. In 1886, the artist Frank M. Gregory visited the factory and made the illustrations appearing in plate 15. Plate 15, b, shows the four brothers at work. It clearly indicates a pile of conch-shell debris in the lower left-hand corner. The man at the far right is shaping a shell gorget, known to the trade as a “moon,” on a grindstone. The moons were also made from the Strombus gigas. They were turned out in considerable quantities by the Campbells. Abraham, last of the four brothers, died in 1889. Although several members of the next generation of Campbells had participated in hair-pipe manufacture they did not continue to produce them. With the death of Abraham, the making of shell hair pipes for the Indian trade came to an end. It is difficult to determine the extent to which other residents of Bergen County engaged in the manufacture of shell hair pipes. Westervelt (1924) acknowledged that neighbors of the Campbells played active parts in the early stages of manufacture, but she did not mention their production of finished hair pipes. However, the records 46 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuy. 164 of the American Fur Co. reveal that there must have been at least one rival concern in 1836. Beside an order for 3,000 inches of hair pipes placed by P. Chouteau & Co. of St. Louis, with the New York office of the American Fur Co. in that year, appears the notation ‘Wm. Hopper 1000 and S. Campbell 2000” (N. Y. Hist. Soc. MS. A, pp. 5-6). There were several William Hoppers at that period in Bergen County. It is not possible to determine which one of them was the maker of hair pipes or to learn more of the extent of his output. There is also a suggestion that others made hair pipes in the laconic statement attributed to a member of the Campbell family in the mid-eighties, to the effect that ‘‘none of ’em ever could make hair pipe equal to our’n” (Norton, 1888, p. 594).? DISTRIBUTION OF SHELL HAIR PIPES AMONG THE PLAINS INDIANS The New Jersey hair-pipe makers did not sell their products directly to the Indians. Rather they sold hair pipes wholesale to New York City merchants, some of whom were representatives of the great trading companies and others middlemen who resold the hair pipes to firms of Indian traders in the United States and Canada. Descendants of the Campbell shell workers claimed that John Jacob Astor, the most enterprising of all Indian traders, ‘“‘laid the foundation of his great wealth through the Campbells’ wampum”’ (Westervelt, 1924, p. 23). This statement grossly underestimates both the variety and complexity of Astor’s business interests in the years following his arrival in New York from Europe in 1784. Nevertheless Astor did play an important role in the marketing of hair pipes at an early period. In the mid-eighties he collected furs in the Hudson Valley, at which time he may have met the Campbells and taken an interest in marketing their shell products. As early as 1788, Astor began to make annual trips to Montreal to buy furs from Canadian traders (Porter, 1931, vol. 1, pp. 27-50). However, the earliest reference I have found to his trade in hair pipes appears in a letter from Daniel Sutherland, in charge of the Montreal office of the XY Co., to J. J. Astor, Esq., dated November 27, 1802, requesting him to purchase clamshell wampum and ‘“‘one thousand Hair pipes” for his firm (Archives Sem. of Quebec., MS. A). Three years earlier, in March 1799, the Montreal firm of James and Andrew McGill was purchasing wampum and hair pipes from 2TIn the preparation of the foregoing section on shell hair-pipe manufacture I have utilized information kindly furnished me by J. C. Storms, of Park Ridge, N.J., in a personal interview during September 1952, in addition to the following published sources: Norton (1888), Smith (1885), Storms (1939), Wester- velt (1924), and an interview with Daniel Campbell reported in the Newark Evening News, Novem- ber 3, 1923. Mrs. Mary S. Curtis, curator, Bergen County Historical Society, North Hackensack, N. J., has graciously assisted me in locating additional information on the history of the Campbell family and on hair-pipe manufacture in that county. ANtuROP. PAP. PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 47 Thomas Delves, listed in the New York City Directory for 1799 as “merchant, 56 Wall and Store 133 Front” Street. The quantities purchased were not listed (McGill Univ. Mus., MS. A, p. 259). On April 1, 1802, the Montreal firm of Forsyth, Richardson & Co., then operating in opposition to the Northwest Co., purchased ‘695 Hairpipes”’ for its trade. In 1804 the Northwest Co. ordered ‘3971 Inches Hair Pipes at 4d NYK Cy.” for its 1805 trading outfit (Archives Sem. Quebec. MS. B, C). The Northwest Co. was the first Canadian trading company known to have offered hair pipes to the Plains Indians of the Upper Missouri. During his sojourn among the Crow Indians in the summer of 1805, Francois Larocque purchased eight beaverpelts and a horse from a member of that tribe. Among the articles he gave in return were “two Wampoon hair pipes” (Larocque, 1910, p. 36). In July of the next year Alexander Henry, also of the Northwest Co., gave ‘2 wampum hair pipes” and other articles to a Hidatsa Indian in exchange for a horse (Henry and Thompson, 1897, vol. 1, p. 355). Evidence that Auguste Chouteau, leading St. Louis trader, was employing hair pipes in the Indian trade west of the Mississippi prior to the Louisiana Purchase appears in an invoice of trade goods which he purchased from Rd. Pattinson & Co. at Michilimakinac, June 17, 1802. This order included ‘‘200 white hair Pipes” (Mo. Hist. Soc., MS. A). We know that Chouteau sold hair pipes to the Lewis and Clark Expedition, as a letter from Meriwether Lewis to William Clark in April, 1804, stated “I can’t find Hair pipes purchased of Mr. Chouteau. Mr. Hays says they are necissary [sic]’’ (Mo. Hist. Soc., MS. B). The explorers either must have located the missing hair pipes or pur- chased more of them before they set out on their voyage of discovery, May 14, 1804, for their baling invoice of ‘Sundries for Indian Pres- ents” listed ‘24 Wampum Hairpipes.”? They planned to distribute these hair pipes systematically among prominent Indians encountered, thus: 2 hair pipes for the first chiefs of the Oto and Pawnee, 1 for the first chief of the Ponca or any other tribe they might meet down river from the Omaha, 1 for the second chief of the Omaha, and others for chiefs of tribes as yet unknown to them whom they might meet beyond the Mandan (Lewis and Clark, vol. 6. pp. 270-276). In June 1807, the Court of General Quarter Sessions of the Territory of Louisiana, sitting in St. Louis, considered the case of one Francis Hosler, accused of unlicensed trading with the Omaha. Among the articles he was charged with illegally selling the Omaha were “forty two Hair pipes’ and 5,300 pieces of wampum (Mo. Hist. Soc., MS. C). The United States Government supplied some shell hair pipes to their factories operated on or west of the Mississippi River in the 48 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 164 first decade of the 19th century. The hair pipes apparently were purchased directly from New Jersey manufacturers by Joseph Lopes Dias, New York agent for the Superintendent of Indian Trade. In May 1808, “50 Hair Pipes 179% Inches at 4¢’”’ were purchased and sent to the Lemoin Factory at Fort Madison in present Lowa (National Archives., MS. B, p. 9). That post supplied the Sauk and Fox Indians. Evidence that shell hair pipes were furnished Fort Osage on the Missouri, westernmost of the Government Factories, appears in an inventory of merchandise on hand at that establishment, Sep- tember 30, 1810, listing: Se silver Nair wipes: Sb AUG 228k eae ee we ee $12. 80 T Wwaniyiut Male PIE ab de. ons ee ee ee eee 15 Perhaps the relative cheapness of the shell hair pipes (% the value of silver ones) accounted for the fact that the supply of them was nearly exhausted at the time of inventory. When John Jacob Astor’s American Fur Co. opened its Western Division in St. Louis and thus entered the Upper Missouri trade, shell hair pipes were among the manufactured items offered by that firm. An inventory of its stock remaining on hand in St. Louis, October 21, 1822, lists: 100 Wampum Hair Pipes. 350 inches at 44¢__..--__------------ $15. 75 [Mo. Hist. Soc., MS. D, p. 16.] The ledger book of that company listed the quantities and inventory values of shell hair pipes furnished to its individual outfits trading with specific Upper Missouri tribes between the fall of 1831 and the spring of 1833: Ree (Arikara) Outfit of Dominique Lachapelle, Oct. 17, 1831: 15 pairs, Wampum. H: :Pipes. ,; 140 in. at G¢_ 2. 2-3-6 3 $8. 40 Poncau (Ponea) Outfit of Louis Lafleur, Oct. 31, 1831: 11 Pairs Wampum Hair Pipes. 88 in. at 6¢-_-___------------ $5. 28 White River Outfit (Sioux) under D. Papin, Feb. 238, 1832: 60.ins Wampum: Hair Pipes.at-Géicc- 22h 2 2c PL SeSbSt eR $3. 60 Ogallallah (Oglala) Outfit of Colin Campbell, Oct. 1882: 17 Prs.. Wampum Hair-Pipes.:.. 69 in. at 6¢0. 422 See $4. 14 Brule Outfit of Gabriel P. Cerre, Nov. 1832: 10 Prs. ‘Wampum. Hair’ Pipes.’ ‘60°. at G¢-— = = a $3. 60 Honcpapas (Hunkpapa) Outfit of Emille Punceau, Nov. 11, 1832: 28 4m.) Wanipum Hair Pipes, at/6¢)2 202 2 20sea 2 Ole ele $2. 88 Fort Clark (Mandan) Outfit, 1832, Nov. 23, 1832: 45 Hair Pipes. ) 200)in: at.5¢ New. York. <2... 2—-ipaisseee $10. 00 Honecpapa (Hunkpapa) Outfit of E. Punceau, March 1933: 60-in: Wampom: Hair Pipes-at (Ges) 2. = ee oo = See eee $3. 60 Fort Union in charge of James A. Hamilton, March 28, 1833: 1001 in. Hair Pipées’at G@uOplovg co siie so ee se ses $61. 67 {[Mo. Hist. Soc., MS. D, pp. 23-88.] Nog0), | “* = PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 49 These figures show that the company then carried hair pipes at an inventory value of 5 cents per inch in New York, 6 cents per inch in the Sioux country and 6%» cents per inch at the upriver post of Fort Union. The increases represent transportation and handling charges. In none of the orders listed did the length of the hair pipes average greater than 4% inches. It is significant that the quantities of hair pipes furnished the Arikara, Mandan, Ponca, and the several Teton Dakota, tribes were small in comparison with the number of pipes con- signed to Fort Union where the Assiniboin, Plains Cree, Plains Ojibwa, Crow, and some Blackfoot traded. In fact the single consignment to Fort Union was almost double the quantity supplied all the other outfits combined. Perhaps this greater demand for hair pipes on the part of the northern tribes was due to the early stimulus to trade in these articles exerted upon those tribes by Northwest Co. traders a quarter century earlier. These figures support the statement of the experienced trader, Edwin T. Denig, made about 1854, to the effect that the upper nations (i. e., those trading at Fort Union and above) preferred shell ornaments, while the Sioux showed a greater fondness for silver ones (arm and wrist bands, gorgets, brooches, ear wheels, finger rings, and ear bobs) (Denig, 1930, p. 591). After Astor retired from the fur trade his successors in the trade of the Upper Missouri, Pratte, Chouteau and Co. of St. Louis, continued to purchase shell hair pipes through the American Fur Co’s. New York office. Let us follow a typical transaction: On December 12, 1834, Pratte, Chouteau and Co. placed an order with the American Fur Co. in New York for “6000 inches Wampum Hair pipes assd. size, mostly large,” with instructions for the order to be shipped early the next February via New Orleans. They com- plained that some hair pipes of their previous order had not been “bored through.” In the New York office the notation ‘“S, Campbell”’ was placed beside this order. On December 31, Ramsey Crooks, of the American Fur Co., wrote to Samuel Campbell, Pierson’s Post Office, Franklin, Bergen County, N. J.: We want 3250 inches Wampum Hair Pipes, none less than 5 inches long, and not many of them over 6 inches — You must have them here by the first day of February next, or say 4 weeks from this time, and we shall pay you the same price as last season — Some of those you furnished last winter were not bored entirely through — This will not do, and I hope such deception will never be practiced again. [N. Y. Hist. Soc., MS. B, pp. 3, 29.] Presumably these hair pipes were received in St. Louis in time to reach the upriver posts on the Missouri the following summer for 50 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuu. 164 trade to the Indians through the ensuing winter months. On Septem- ber 9, 1835, Pratte, Chouteau & Co. placed another order: 2000 inches wampum hair pipes 3 in. Ea. 5000 inches wampum hair pipes 4 to 6 in. Ea. In placing this order they also commented: The Hair Pipes in spite of the assurances of the makers and sellers are but little better this year than last years were. They appear very well drilled at both ends, but the holes don’t meet in the middle. Be a little more particular in receiving them, and you will be able to detect the cheat. [N. Y. Hist. Soc., MS. B, pp. 154-155.] In 1836 Pratte, Chouteau and Co. placed two orders totaling 5,000 inches of wampum hair pipes. New York office notations on these orders indicate that all but 1,000 inches of the hair pipes were pur- chased from the Campbells (New York Hist. Soc., MS. A, pp. 5-6, 23). This correspondence of the middle 1830’s reveals an increasing de- mand for hair pipes in the Upper Missouri trade over the period 1831— 33. It also shows the difficulties encountered by the manufacturers in producing greater and greater numbers of hair pipes, each of which had to be laboriously drilled with the hand-operated drill. Possibly this pressure for greater output was responsible for the production of the inaccurately drilled pipes complained of. Probably it was this increasing pressure for more and more hair pipes to satisfy the demands of the Indians that led eventually to the perfection of the time- and labor-saving drilling machine by the Campbells. A letter from the American Fur Co. to Samuel Campbell, dated November 21, 1838, designated the current price for shell hair pipes paid the makers as 3 cents per inch (New York Hist. Soc., MS. D). Although it is most probable that hair pipes began to reach the Southern Plains Indians through Indian intermediaries, itinerant white traders, or traders operating from fixed posts, such as Natchi- toches, La., Fort Gibson or Bent’s Fort on the Arkansas River, before 1830, the earliest specific reference I have found to the purchase of shell hair pipes for trade with the Indians of that section is dated June 10, 1836. On that date Auguste P. Chouteau, of St. Louis, placed an order with the American Fur Co. in New York for ‘2,000 inches of Wampum Hair Pipes, longest size 4’’ to 6’’’’ for use in “‘trade with the Prairie Indians of Arkansas’ (New York Hist. Soc., MS. B, p. 253). Colonel Chouteau had established a trading post among the Comanche and their neighbors at Camp Holmes on Cache Creek near present Fort Sill, Okla., in 1835 (Van Zandt, 1935, pp. 319-322). Probably many if not all of the hair pipes Chouteau purchased in 1836 were traded to Indians at that first American post in the Comanche and Kiowacountry. Thispost was abandoned in 1838. However, in 1839 or 1840 an Americannamed Abel Warren built an independent trading an eee PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS on post near the mouth of Cache Creek. In 1842 a part of his stock in- cluded ‘‘wampum beads, which they [Comanche] wore around their necks in great quantities. These beads were from two to four inches long, pure white and resembled clay pipe stems in size. They were highly esteemed and served the part of currency in their dealings”’ (Clift, 1924, p. 139). The length of these articles indicates that they were hair pipes. Among the presents given to Comanche Indians by Capt. R. B. Marcy’s Red River Exploring Expedition in 1854 were “long wampum beads.” W. P. Parker, a member of the party, noted the lively de- mand for these items ‘‘which are procured but in one place, a small town in New Jersey,”’ and observed that Naroni, a Southern Co- manche chief, was wearing “‘a wampum necklace almost equal to a breast plate’ (Parker, 1856, pp. 194, 201-202). These “long wampum beads’”’ must have been hair pipes. This brief review of the available evidence on the distribution of shell hair pipes among the Plains Indians prior to 1855 is sufficient to show how this product of New Jersey industry was distributed widely over the area by enterprising white men of the great trading com- panies from both Canada and the United States, by independent traders, and by agents of the United States Government. During the first half of the 19th century, Plains Indian demand for hair pipes increased. Nevertheless, our data suggest that the Indians were not uniformly interested in hair pipes. Prior to about 1850 the greatest demand for these articles appears to have occurred among the tribes in the vicinity of Fort Union on the Upper Missouri and among the tribes living on the Southern Plains. The mighty, warlike Teton Dakota were then but mildly interested in these baubles. USES OF HAIR PIPES BY PLAINS INDIANS PRIOR TO 1880 ARCHEOLOGICAL EVIDENCES OF USE Wedel (1936, pp. 86-87, 121, fig. 8) has described and illustrated shell hair pipes from the Hill site on the south bank of the Republican River, Nebr. In all probability this is the site of the Republican Pawnee village visited by Zebulon M. Pike in 1806. The village was abandoned about 1810 or 1811. The specimens illustrated range in length from 4% inches to less than 3 inches, and exhibit the character- istic, even tapering of commercial shell hair pipes. They occurred “fas grave finds, always in pairs, and nearly always one on each side of the head.” Dr. Wedel concluded that ‘doubtless their purpose was for ear or hair ornamentation.” Matthew W. Stirling found a single pair of shell hair pipes at the Leavenworth Village site, above the mouth of Grand River, S. Dak. 370929—57—_5 52 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY ‘[Butn. 164 This site was occupied by the Arikara from about 1800 to 1832. The specimens are illustrated by Stirling (1924, fig. 67). One pipe meas- ures 3% inches in length, the other 2% inches. They were found in company with other trade goods, including copper, iron, and glass beads, by the skull of an adolescent male. Probably they too served as ear or hair ornaments. This Arikara find is of peculiar interest inasmuch as there appears to be no descriptive or pictorial record of the wearing of hair-pipe ornaments by this tribe. We do have the definite state- ment, however, that St. Louis traders were offering hair pipes to the Arikara in 1831 (see p. 48). I have found no reported finds of commercial shell hair pipes in documented archeological sites in the Great Plains of the 18th century. The archeological evidence, though limited, appears to support the evidence obtained from historical records regarding the introduction of hair pipes among the Plains tribes. Available evidence from both sources indicates that commercial hair pipes began to reach the Plains Indians about the year 1800. HAIR PIPES AS EAR ORNAMENTS In view of the great number of contemporary field descriptions of the Plains Indians written by explorers, travelers, fur traders, and Govern- ment officials prior to 1880, it is really remarkable how meager is the information on Indian use of hair pipes appearing in the literature. Our most complete and most accurate source of information on the uses of hair pipes is the considerable body of dated and tribally identified artists’ drawings and paintings of the precamera period and of early dated photographs. The earliest pictorial representation of the use of hair pipes by a Plains Indian appears is C. B. J. F. de Saint-Memin’s crayon portrait of an Osage warrior who was a member of a delegation from that tribe brought to Washington by the St. Louis trader Auguste Chouteau in 1806. The original portrait, in the New York Historical Society, is reproduced in plate 18, a. Pendent from the left ear of this young dandy is a complex ornament which includes what appears to be along, shell hair pipe strung vertically on a cord. Presumably this ornament was balanced by an identical pendant from the right ear, hidden from view in the profile drawing. Other members of that delegation, who posed for the same artist, did not wear hair-pipe ear pendants. They may have been something of a novelty among the Osage at that time. However, it is certain that Osage men made considerable use of paired hair-pipe ear pendants prior to 1850. Catlin depicted them in a painting of an Osage warrior executed in 1834 (USNM No. 386034). Tixier’s por- traits of the prominent Osage chiefs, Majakita and Chonkeh, drawn 5-1 i PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 58 in 1840, show this ornament (Tixier, 1940, frontispiece, opp. p. 240). John Mix Stanley’s ‘‘An Osage Scalp Dance,” painted in 1845, por- trays the wearing of hair-pipe ear pendants by several of the dancing men (Kinietz, 1942, pl. 20). A photograph of Pawnee-No-Pashee (Governor Joe) taken in 1874, indicates the survival of the hair-pipe ear pendant among the Osage (BAE neg. 4139-b). When the Kansa chief, White Plume, visted Washington in 1821 or 1825, Charles Bird King painted his portrait which clearly shows a pair of long hair-pipe ear pendants (Birket-Smith, 1942, opp. p. 22). The popularity of this ornament among the Kansa is attested by the fact that all six of the chiefs and warriors of that tribe whose portraits Catlin painted in 1831 wore long hair-pipe ear pendants (USNM Nos. 386022 through 386027). Catlin’s portrait of The Wolf, a Kansa chief, is reproduced in plate 18, b. When Bear-in-the-Forks-of-a-Tree, Sauk and Fox delegate to Washington, posed for C. B. King in 1837, he wore a pair of hair-pipe ear pendants (McKenney and Hall, 1868, vol. 1., opp. p. 139). These pendants also were worn by four Sauk and Fox delegates to Washing- ton 31 years later, including the head chief, Keokuk the Younger (BAE negs. 622-b, 654, 713, 714). None of the Iowa Indians painted by George Catlin in the field in 1832 wore hair-pipe ear decorations. Yet when he executed portraits of two Iowa men on their visit to Europe in 1845-6, both wore a long hair pipe under each ear (USNM Nos. 386312 and 386313). Catlin’s portrait of The Walking Rain, Iowa war chief, appears as plate 18, d. No Heart, Iowa head chief, wore a pair of hair-pipe ear pendants when he sat for his photograph shortly before his death in 1862 (BAE neg. 3898-a). They were also worn by two Iowa chiefs who were delegates to Washington in 1869 (BAE negs. 3897 and 3900-b). During his visit among the Comanche, Kiowa, and Wichita in 1834, Catlin apparently saw little use of hair pipes as ear ornaments. However, the four tubular ornaments hanging on cords under the right ear in his portrait of Wee-ta-ra-sha-ro, Wichita head chief, may have been hair pipes (pl. 18, c). At Fort Edmonton, in present Alberta, in 1847, Paul Kane painted a portrait of a Cree chief wearing hair pipe ear pendants. This painting is now in the Royal Ontario Museum of Archaeology, Toronto. By the time the camera began to record the portraits of Indians of the present Oklahoma region in the decade 1868-78, prominent men of several tribes of that area were wearing hair-pipe ear pendants. Seventeen photographs taken during that decade among tribes of the Oklahoma region, showing the wearing of hair-pipe ear pendants are in the Bureau of American Ethnology files. These include 3 Comanche, 9 Kiowa (among them the prominent chiefs Lone Wolf 54 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuy. 164 and Satanta), 2 Kiowa Apache (including head chief Pacer), 1 Kichai, 1 Tawaconie, and 1 Waco.’ William H. Jackson’s series of Pawnee field photographs, taken in 1871, portray the wearing of this ornament by only one man, Good Chief, a band chief of the Republican Pawnee (BAE neg. 1296). That the hair-pipe ear pendant was not unknown to the Siouan peoples of the high plains prior to 1840 is demonstrated by two of Alfred Jacob Miller’s portraits executed in the field in 1837. One portrays the wearing of hair-pipe ear pendants by the Crow chief High Lance, the other by ‘“‘a Sioux man’’ (Ross, 1951, pls. 6, 39). Early photographs portray the wearing of these pendants by Siouan men, including the Ponca, Iron Whip, in 1859? (BAE neg. 4180); the Yankton chief, Black War Eagle, in 1867 (BAE neg. 3567—a); Medi- cine Horse, Oto head chief, in 1869 (BAE neg. 3835-d); and two Yanktonai and three Hunkpapa visitors in Washington, in 1872.* Early photographs also show the wearing of hair-pipe ear pendants by representatives of three marginal peoples including the Delaware chief Great Bear prior to 1869 (BAE Neg. 817-a), the Winnebago, Winnishick (BAE neg. 3793-b), and the Jicarilla Apache, Kle-zheh, prior to 1877 (BAE neg. 2569). Although hair-pipe ear pendants were predominantly men’s orna- ments, there are a few references in the pictorial sources to their use by women. Catlin’s portraits of the Mink, a Mandan girl (USNM No. 386133), and Red-Thing-that-Touches-in-Marching, a Teton Dakota woman (USNM No. 386081), seem to show relatively short hair-pipe ear pendants. However, an unnamed Wichita woman wore long hair-pipe ear decorations when photographed in 1868 (BAE neg. 1335-d). The great majority of the pictorial references to the wearing of hair-pipe ear pendants by Plains Indian men prior to 1850 portray them adorning men with roached hair. This suggests the possibility that this method of using hair pipes was first employed by men of the eastern or prairie plains who commonly employed that style of hair- dress. Certainly the hair-pipe ear pendant was less well suited to use by long-haired Indians whose lengthy tresses might hide all or part of the ornament from view. Effective display of these pendants by long-haired men required modification in hairdress. Mooney (1898, p. 150) observed that it was an old custom among Kiowa warriors to “cut the hair from the right side of the head, on a line with the base of the ear, in order to better display the ear pendants, while allowing it to grow to full length on the left side, so as to be braided and wrapped 3 BAE negs. as follows: Comanche; 1743-a, 1727; Kiowa: 1381-a, 1475-c, 1476-d, 1376-a-2, 1378, 1374-b-1, 1382-a-3, 1387, 1880; Kiowa Apache: 2580-e-2, 2581-a; Kichai: 811-b; Tawaconie: 1362-a; Waco: 1363-a. 4 These are BAE negs. 3513-a, 3536— Yanktonai; 3180-a, 3182-b-1, 3186-a—Hunkpapa. No po, “* =~ PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 55 with otter skin after the common fashion of the southern plains.”’ Possibly, therefore, the long-haired Kiowa first adopted the hair-pipe ear pendant as a decoration for the right ear only. However, photo- graphs of Kiowa men taken in the period about 1870 show that they sometimes wore these pendants from both ears at that time and trimmed the hair forward of the ears on both sides to show off these decorations. The Kiowa and their neighbors of the southern plains commonly suspended their hair-pipe ear pendants on buckskin cords from large, hoop-shaped, brass earrings. Long brass chains and small silver pen- dants hung downward below the hair pipes. James Mooney collected specimens of this type among the Kiowa in 1891. Two of them are illustrated in plate 19, a (USNM Nos. 152842, 152847). The shell hair pipes are each 1} inches long, the hoops and chains are of brass, and the small end pendants are of German silver. The prominent Kiowa White Horse wore ear pendants of this type when he posed for his photograph in 1870 (pl. 19, b). HAIR PIPES AS HAIR ORNAMENTS A second method of wearing hair pipes was employed by long-haired men, especially among the northern tribes. The hair pipes were dis- played on vertical cords at the sides of the head, forward of the ears. The suspension cord might pass over the head, thus connecting the pendants at either side, or suspension cords were tied to the hair high on each side of the head. Although Peter Rindisbacher may indicate the wearing of this or- nament in one of his paintings, ‘‘Drunken Frolic amongst Chippeways and Assiniboins,”’ in the Rindishbacher Collection at the United States Military Academy, West Point, N. Y., probably executed prior to 1826, George Catlin was the first artist to clearly portray this use of hair pipes. His portrait of the Plains Cree chief, He-Who-Has- Eyes-Behind-Him, known also as Eyes-on-Both-Sides and Broken Arm, painted in the fall of 1831, displays four long hair pipes, two of which are pendent at each side of the head from a cord passing over the forehead above the hairline (pl. 20, a). Catlin’s paintings of The Six, a Plains Ojibwa chief, and Mouse-Colored-Feather, a young Mandan warrior, both executed in 1832, also show this use of hair pipes. Carl Bodmer’s portrait of Wolf Calf, a young Piegan, painted at Fort McKenzie in the fall of 1833, plainly shows the wearing of similar hair ornaments.°® 5 Reproduced as frontispiece in ‘‘Carl Bodmer Paints the Indian Frontier.”” Exhibition Catalog, Smith- sonian Institution, 1954. This is the only work of Bodmer’s that appears to show any use of hair pipes. I am indebted to Prince Karl Viktor zu Wied for an opportunity to examine photographs of the entire col- lection of 220 Bodmer originals in the possession of the estate of Prince Maximilian zu Wied. 56 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLL. 164 The Crow chief Rottentail wore hair-pipe hair ornaments when his portrait was drawn by the artist R. F. Kurz at Fort Union in 1851 (Kurz, 1937, pl. 48). Two photographs taken prior to 1880 portray the wearing of hair- pipe hair ornaments by the son of the Kiowa Apache head chief about 1870 (BAE neg. 2580) and by Plenty Horses, a Cheyenne (USNM print). In the summer of 1953, I showed photographs of Catlin’s portrait of the Cree chief (pl. 20, a) to elderly Assiniboin informants on Fort Peck and Fort Belknap Reservations. They informed me that in the late 1870’s and early 1880’s some Assiniboin men wore this type of hair ornament, but it was not a common Assiniboin one. More data on the use of this ornament certainly are needed. The facts that both the earliest and the greatest number of the few occur- rences reported refer to wearing of hair-pipe hair ornaments by tribes of the Missouri-Saskatchewan region suggest that the first Plains Indians to adopt this ornament were those long-haired peoples who traded with Canadian merchants. As pointed out (p. 47), Northwest Co. traders were offering hair pipes to Indians of the Upper Missouri as early as 1805-6. The fact that George Catlin also depicted this ornament worn by The Great Cloud, son of the Menomini head chief, in 1836, is further suggestive of its early northern occurrence (USNM No. 386220). HAIR PIPES IN NECKLACES Necklaces composed of hair pipes, large trade beads, and, in some cases, short lengths of clamshell wampum strung on cords appear in many of George Catlin’s portraits of Indian men and women of the Woodlands and Great Plains painted in the years 1831-46. Catlin rendered the details of some of these necklaces in a very sketchy manner, as illustrated in the reproduction of his portrait of the wife of Keokuk, the Sauk and Fox chief, painted in 1834 (pl. 21, a). How- ever, a careful study of Catlin’s original paintings in the United States National Museum leads me to believe that he intended to depict hair pipes in the necklaces worn by 30 of his Indian sitters (table 1). Catlin’s pictorial record clearly indicates the popularity of the hair-pipe necklace among the prominent leaders of the Comanche in the mid-1830’s. His portrait of the Mountain of Rocks, second chief of that tribe in 1834, wearing a hair-pipe necklace appears in plate 22, a. A statement in the literature to the effect that the Comanche wore long ‘‘wampum beads” around their necks in great quantities in 1842, appears to corroborate the testimony of Catlin’s paintings (Clift, 1924, p. 139). AD I . Pp a cola daa PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 57 TaBLE 1.—Hair-pipe necklaces depicted in George Catlin’s portraits of Indian men and women of the Woodlands and Great Plains Name Tribe Sex Year en 0. Hon-|e-A-DUt-O-- - ao noon oa se aoe WANS Hao ae eee ee enews F 1831 386023 She-W ho-Bathes-Her-Knees_______._--__--___ Gheyenne: <5 ts ets Baek F 1832 386144 NP WOMCTOWS sae eee ee eae wan renee Cc M 1832 386164 Mhe Mink . 3028 4. 2 rye ee De d. F 1832 386133 Kiay-a-tis-fisn ea - Ao 2 olen cons cote aan eae F 1832 386183 Whirling Dhunders== 223 e452 a bee 8 M 1832 386003 Wile Of lecOkuWk: ="). -* 2 5282 ecw eh ee ne F 1834 386005 Bowiand @uiver=c! 2.3.5 <: Dies 2 oo ESS Sl 147 1868=fo5 || A> DEaAVe! ces. 2-2 Se eee ee Glos tae Ae Boe PWNS y Ae dene © sien Soak SF Sees 1476-h-2 ASG8=F2 -| AU small boy.-t22 te. — bebe 3. |e owes. St ee SOA Sei LEAL? 1409-c TS68=72) | MPacer siS0Ne-- -fs-s52%--.----- 2 Kiowa Apache___- le ND 7 ae Se Se 2580-e-1 1868-724 Grey Magieto 427.224. ot ye teh ay Go: 22202 Fa Ul 2 EEE Gat 0 Se 2589 1868-72 | Heap-of-Wolves-_--------------- Comanche- ---_---- Bp sl eee eee ek eee 1782-c 1868-72 | Horse Back’s son__-------------|----- OWA Sek 58 pe ANNES 20. SASS ALLE SS 2 1782-i 1868-12"| -Asa-to-yebt_as 22. --+ =~ = 3252 eee, does S32 Aly hos Deas ee 1744-d 1868-72))| Mia-nim-ick= = 22-2 S. Cheyenne- -____- pie eee Sak es CES 267-b 1868-72 | Cheyenne brave__-_------------- Cheyenne- -------- A | $22 wae Se eee eae 365-g-h 1872 Bufialo Hamp. 222 -t* 222 8222" Comanche- -___---_- QW RQLLE UAE LES. 1735 1872 clita See oy SR ae fe Se, eae Pate dogs 3s es" Cl el Bo ee eee peel oe 1742-a 1 Reproduced as illustrations in Mooney (1898). These data indicate that the size of the breastplate was not standard- ized among these tribes in about 1870. The range of variation extends from 2 rows of 10 pipes to 4 rows of 37 pipes each. The breastplate worn by White Horse (pl. 19, b) was of about average size for the Southern Plains tribes at that time. It is of the most common four-row pattern. The wearing of hair-pipe breastplates by the Northern Arapaho, Powder Face and his son (pl. 26, a) may be of significance in connec- tion with the diffusion of the hair-pipe breastplate. It is noteworthy that these Northern Arapaho were photographed at Camp Supply in Indian Territory, apparently while visiting among the Southern Arapaho. Perhaps Powder Face and/or other Northern Arapaho and Cheyenne visitors to their kinsfolk in the south obtained their hair- pipe breastplates from the Southern Plains Indians. Through the Northern Arapaho and/or Cheyenne the hair-pipe breastplate may have been diffused to their northern neighbors about the year 1870. By the early 1870’s hair-pipe breastplates began to appear in photo- graphs of Indians of tribes distant from the apparent center of origin of this ornament among the Comanche and Kiowa. Jackson’s photo- graphs at the Loup Pawnee village in 1871 depict two Pawnee wearers of hair-pipe breastplates (BAE negs. 1228, 1248). On his visit to 60 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuy. 164 Washington in 1872, a Moache Ute, One-Who-Wins-the-Race, wore a simple 2-row breastplate of 16 hair pipes (pl. 26, 6). Hillers’ 1873 field photograph of a Uintah Ute warrior depicts a much larger 2-row breastplate (Steward, 1939, pl. 26).’ The adoption of the hair-pipe breastplate by the Teton Dakota tribes is of particular interest because men of those tribes came to be such common wearers of this ornament in later years that they might erroneously be considered its inventors. It is true that the Teton Dakota did wear a necklace of similar form made of the shorter dentalium shells for some years prior to 1870. Mooney (1898, p. 281) claimed that the Dakota were the originators of this dentalium shell breastplate. Dentalia were also supplied the Indians by fur traders, who referred to these shells as ‘Iroquois beads.”’ The large series of photographs of Teton Dakota Indians at the Fort Laramie Treaty Council in 1868, taken by Alexander Gardner, depict the wearing of dentalium shell breastplates by several Brule and Oglala men and boys. Hair-pipe breastplates are not shown in these photographs. Two Yankton Dakota men, photographed in 1867, wore dentalium shell breastplates (BAE negs. 3556, 3559). The earliest photographs of Teton Dakota men wearing hair-pipe breastplates appear in the pictorial record of delegations to Washing- ton in 1872. Of the 15 men in Red Cloud’s Oglala delegation in that year, 2 wore the hair-pipe breastplate. However, it is apparent that both wore the same breastplate when posing for their portraits. It is a 2-row ornament, of 15 pipes per row, in which one pipe is definitely broken. This breastplate is shown in High Wolf’s portrait reproduced in plate 27,a. In the same year one member of the Hunkpapa delega- tion wore a breastplate comprising 2 rows of 10 hair pipes each, and a member of the Brule group wore a 2-row breastplate of 12 pipes each (BAE negs. 3188—a, 3124-a). These simple breastplates are elemen- tary in form compared with the elaborate breastplates worn by Southern Plains Indians at that time. They are reminiscent of the earliest known Comanche specimen made at least 5 years earlier. It is noteworthy that the more traditional type of Dakota breast- plate, that made of dentalium shells, was worn by a greater number of the 1872 delegates than was the hair-pipe ornament. Dentalium shell breastplates were worn by 2 Hunkpapa, 2 Brule, and 1 Oglala, suggesting that the hair-pipe breastplate had not yet replaced the one of dentalia in popularity among these tribes.’ The transition from dentalium shell to hair-pipe breastplate among the Teton Dakota tribes is graphically portrayed in the two photo- 7 Steward (1939, p. 15) erroneously conjectured that this breastplate was ‘‘probably made of manufactured bone brought to these people by the traders.”” In 1878 trade hair pipes of bone had not been invented. These hair pipes must have been shell ones. 8 BAE negs. 3127-a, 3140-a, 3180-a, 3186-a, 3312-a. a aaa PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 61 graphs of the Brule White Thunder appearing in plate 28. Figure a shows White Thunder wearing a dentalium-shell breastplate on his visit to Washington in 1872. Figure 6 shows the same man wearing a hair-pipe breastplate on his return to Washington 5 years later. Photographs of the Teton Dakota delegations of 1877 depict no use of dentalium-shell breastplates, while the hair-pipe breastplates worn are not only more numerous but larger and more elaborate than the ornaments worn by delegates from these tribes 5 years earlier. It appears, therefore, that during the period 1872-77 the hair-pipe breastplate supplanted the one of dentalium shell as a popular orna- ment among Teton Dakota leaders. Henry Ulke’s portrait of the Miniconjou chief, Touching-the-Cloud, painted in Washington in 1877, probably is the earliest representation of the use of this ornament by that Teton tribe. It is also the first of many artists’ renderings of Sioux wearers of hair-pipe breast- plates (pl. 32, d). By 1877 the Ponca, who were moving south to Indian Territory, also had adopted the hair-pipe breastplate. Four delegates from that tribe to Washington (1877) wore these ornaments. Included among .them was their head chief White Eagle. His breastplate, shown in plate 27, }, is of the 4-row pattern, with 20 pipes per row, resembling the breastplates then worn by Southern Plains Indians more closely than the 2-row ornaments popular among the Teton Dakota. LIMITATIONS OF THE SHELL HAIR PIPE In the years prior to 1880 the hair pipe in common use among the Plains Indians was the one manufactured from the shell of the Strombus gigas by Whites in New Jersey. Although this material was used in making hair-pipe ear and hair pendants, necklaces, chokers, and breastplates, it was not ideal for those purposes. The long shell tubes were breakable, and broken hair pipes certainly decreased the attractiveness of the ornaments from which they were made. It was possible for the Indians to replace the broken pipes with new ones, but it is clear from the pictorial record that they did not always do so. Bodmer’s literal rendering of the hair-pipe hair ornament worn by Wolf Calf, the Piegan, in 1833 definitely shows a broken hair pipe. A number of photographs of breastplates worn by Indians prior to 1880 depict one or more broken pipes. Perhaps the Southern Plains tribes revealed their greater experience in working with hair pipes than had the Northern Plains Indians by developing a breastplate comprising four rows of relatively short pipes in preference to one of two rows of longer pipes. The short pipes, sometimes apparently made by sawing long hair pipes in two (note the pipes in White Horse’s breastplate, 62 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buxy. 164 pl. 19, 6, tapered at one end only), were less apt to break than were the longer ones. Thrifty Indians seem to have been loathe to discard broken hair pipes. They may have reused solid portions of broken pipes as pendants in the decoration of small beaded contamers. Such reuse appears probable in the decoration of a Mandan awl case collected in 1869 (pl. 29, a). The two short segments of shell hair pipes measure 1% inches in length (USNM No. 84387). The pipes appearing on a Kiowa toilet case collected in the 1890’s are 1% inches long (pl. 29, 6. USNM No. 385886). However, whole shell hair pipes in short lengths sometimes were employed in the same way. Witness the Northern Cheyenne awl case with two full-length 2-inch shell hair-pipe pendants, illustrated in plate 29, c. This specimen, USNM No. 129887, was received by the Museum in 1888. ‘These specimens afford examples of still another use of hair pipes in Plains Indian decoration. THE SUBSTITUTION OF THE BONE HAIR PIPE About the year 1880, at a time when the demand for large numbers of hair pipes for use in making elaborate breastplates was increasing, the Plains Indians began to obtain a cheaper and much less fragile hair pipe than the shell one long in use. The peculiar circumstances of the origin of this substitute—the bone hair pipe—comprise an interesting chapter in the history of Indian use of hair pipes which is at the same time a noteworthy case history in invention. While I was stationed on the Blackfeet Reservation in Montana in the early 1940’s, both Frank Sherburne and his brother Joseph Sherburne, Browning merchants, independently told me of the role their father, the late Joseph H. Sherburne, had played in the invention of the bone hair pipe during his early days as a trader among the Ponca Indians. The Records of Licenses to Trade (vol. 5, p. 115) in the National Archives state that Joseph H. Sherburne was issued a license to trade with the Ponca Indians between Arkansas and Shawkaskia Rivers in the Indian Territory on September 10, 1878. Frank Sherburne said that in his father’s first year of trade with the Ponca he had among his wares a quantity of corncob pipes. The corncob bowls were equipped with bone stems. ‘These pipes sold readily but without comment from the Indians. Upon his next trip to the Ponca, Mr. Sherburne found the corncob pipes in great demand. White Eagle, chief of the tribe, showed him an elaborate neck orna- ment made of the bone stems of the pipes strung on buckskin thongs. He wanted more pipestems in quantity.° § White Eagle certainly was acquainted with the use of shell hair pipes in the construction of breastplates. See his portrait showing him wearing a breastplate in 1877 (pl. 27, 6). Nobo], +" ~~ PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 63 Mr. Sherburne, desirous of pleasing the chief, wrote to S. A. Frost, in New York, from whom he had purchased glass beads and other articles for the Indian trade, explaining the problem and asking if it would be practical to furnish a quantity of long, tubular bone “‘beads.”’ Frost considered the matter and after he became convinced that the demand for this product was great enough to justify its perfection, set about having the bone articles made. However, a delay of more than a year was encountered before the new bone “beads” were ready for the market. When they became available in quantity Frost not only sold them to Mr. Sherburne but to many other traders on other reservations as well. I have not seen a sample of the bone pipestem furnished the Ponca by Mr. Sherburne in 1878. However, Carl V. Otto, vice president of the Missouri Meerschaum Co., established in Washington, Mo., by Henry Tibbe, inventor of the corncob pipe in 1872, kindly furnished me for study a pipe known to have been made by that firm prior to 1900. It is shown in plate 30,a@ and b. The bone stem bears only a superficial resemblance to the bone ‘‘beads’’ perfected by Mr. Frost. In designing the bone beads Frost seems to have followed the pattern of the shell hair pipes which for so many years had been made for the Indian trade at Park Ridge, N. J., some 25 miles from his New York headquarters. Not only did the new bone beads follow the tapered form of shell hair pipes literally but they were made in approximately the same lengths as the shell pipes. They were, in reality, bone hair pipes and became known to Indian traders as hair pipes. The Sherburne brothers had no knowledge of where or how the bone hair pipes were made. However, Mr. Otto supplied a valuable clue when he wrote me that the bone stems of corncob pipes were furnished his firm by Armour & Co. of Chicago. Through the kind cooperation of J. V. Hurson of Armour & Co.’s Washington Office, Edward N. Wentworth, director of Armour’s Livestock Bureau in Chicago, was interested in the problem of the manufacture of the bone hair pipes. In the absence of written records, he discussed the matter with long-time employees of the company, some of whom are now retired. He concluded that Armour & Co. definitely furnished the bone material from which the hair pipes were made, and that the raw material was supplied to Mr. Frost, of New York, in quantity. Mr. Wentworth further stated that the bones from which hair pipes were made were the metacarpal or lower leg bones of cattle. A specimen of this bone, kindly furnished by him, together with a finished bone hair pipe in the collections of the United States National Museum are shown together in plate 30, ¢ and d. No definite information is available regarding the process of manu- facture of bone hair pipes. Power tools probably were used. They 64 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buun, 164 may have been drilled with a rotary, belt-powered drill and shaped on a lathe. Such methods of rapid manufacture of large numbers of bone hair pipes would have made it possible to offer them to Indians at a lower price than had been asked for shell hair pipes. It must have been the pressure of competition with this cheaper, stronger bone hair pipe that caused the New Jersey shell hair-pipe makers to discontinue operations in 1889, less than a decade after bone hair pipes began to reach the Indian country. The Kiowa breastplate shown in plate 25, b, illustrates the transi- tion from shell to bone hair pipes in Indian ornament. Of the 144 hair pipes in this specimen, 49 (at the top) are of bone. The remain- der, including two broken pipes, are of shell. This specimen, USNM No. 152842, was collected by James Mooney in 1891. It must have been made up during the preceding decade when bone hair pipes were beginning to replace shell hair pipes in the Kiowa trade. USES OF HAIR PIPES 1880-1910 In the period of general economic depression among the Plains Indians following the extermination of the buffalo, during which they subsisted largely upon Government rations, possession of an elaborate hair-pipe breastplate or necklace was a coveted symbol of greater-than-average prosperity among these proud people. Not only did the Indians wear these ornaments when they attended ceremonies and participated in traditional social dances on their own reservations, but they wore them when they dressed to visit the Great White Father in Washington, when they took part in wild- west shows, such as the famous one organized by William F. Cody (Buffalo Bill) in 1883, and when they appeared in costume at national, regional, State, and local exhibitions or fairs. The cessation of intertribal wars after the Plains Indians were settled on reservations was followed by a period of increased friendly contacts between neighboring tribes formerly hostile to one another. Visits back and forth among these Indians were accompanied by the exchange of gifts between members of different tribes. These condi- tions encouraged diffusion of hair-pipe breastplates and necklaces during the Reservation Period. HAIR-PIPE BREASTPLATES Pictorial sources reveal the continued use of hair-pipe breastplates during the Reservation Period by men of all those tribes known to have made use of this ornament prior to 1880, i. e., the Comanche, Kiowa, Kiowa Apache, Ponca, and Pawnee in the south; the Arapaho and Cheyenne in Oklahoma, Wyoming, and Montana; the Teton Dakota of the Dakotas; and the Ute west of the Rockies. AntHEOP. Par. = PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 65 Tribes of the Oklahoma region preferred the wide, relatively short breastplate comprising 4 or more rows of short to medium- length pipes, rarely more than 30 pipes per row. This type was worn by Quannah Parker, the famous Comanche chief, in 1892 (pl. 32,a). It was also worn by the prominent Kiowa leader Running Bird when he attended the intertribal Indian council on the Little Big Horn in 1909 (Dixon, 1913, illus. opp. p. 52). Other tribes of the Oklahoma region appear to have adopted this type of breastplate during the Reservation Period. Bureau of Amer- ican Ethnology photographs show it worn by Sauk and Fox (before 1892), Oto and Tonkawa (1898), and Osage (1906). A 3-row breastplate was worn by a Caddo delegate to Washington in 1898." The Teton Dakota and Ute preferred a breastplate of long hair pipes, usually 2 but in some cases 3 rows in width, and not uncom- monly more than 40 pipes per row. The famous Oglala chief, Red Cloud, was repeatedly photographed wearing this type of breastplate. One of these portraits appears in plate 32, c. Spotted Tail, the noted Brule chief, also wore this type of breastplate (pl. 32, 5).!!. Among these two tribes of Teton Dakota the hair-pipe breastplate was very popular in the Reservation Period. The longest breastplates pic- tured were worn by men of these tribes. About 1900 George Little Wound wore a breastplate composed of 2 rows of 63 long pipes each (pl. 31, a). At the St. Louis Exposition in 1904, Little Soldier, an Oglala, wore a 2-row breastplate containing a total of 140 long pipes (Chicago Mus. Nat. Hist., neg. 15932). This is the largest hair-pipe breastplate of which I have knowledge. It was apparently from the Teton that this type of breastplate was diffused to other Siouan tribes north of the Platte River. Photo- graphs portray the wearing of the 2- or 3-row breastplate by men of the Assiniboin (1882), Omaha (1909), Yanktonai (1903), and Yankton (1904) tribes.’ My elderly Assiniboin informants in 1953 stated that the first breastplates worn by men of their tribe came from the Sioux (Teton), although the Assiniboin themselves began to make them in the 1880’s. They claimed the Assiniboin of Fort Peck Reservation began to wear these breastplates before they were adopted by men of that tribe living farther west on Fort Belknap Reservation. However, the Crow Indians were little impressed by the hair- pipe breastplates of their former enemies, the Teton. The large 10 BAE negs: 651-a (Sauk and Fox); 3878-a, 3884 (Oto); 1193, 1198-a-b (Tonkawa); 1367-a (Caddo). il Schmidt and Brown (1948) reproduce photographs of a number of prominent Teton Dakota leaders wearing hair-pipe breastplates, including Crow King, American Horse, Charging Bear, Fast Bear, Kicking Bear, Little Big Man, Little Wound, Low Dog, Short Bull, and Young-Man-A fraid-of-His-Horses. 2 BAE negs.: 3755-e (Assiniboin); 3972-a (Omaha); 3518-a (Yanktonai); 3580-a, 35S2-a, 3692-a, 3594-a, (Yankton). 66 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buu. 164 series of Crow photographs in the Bureau of American Ethnology files do not depict a single example of the use of this ornament. In the spring of 1953, an elderly Crow informant told Dr. Claude Schaef- fer that hair-pipe breastplates were not favored by the older Crow men and that it has been only in recent years that young Crow Indians have worn these ornaments in the grass dance. Men of the Blackfoot tribes also showed relatively little interest in hair-pipe breastplates. Piegan and Blood informants told me that men of their tribes did not make them but acquired a few breast- plates from the Assiniboin as gifts, possibly as early as 1893. Among the Blackfoot they were worn primarily in the grass dance and other social dances. R.N. Wilson’s photograph of Assiniboin grass dancers on a visit to the Blood Reserve in 1893 depicts the wearing of hair- pipe breastplates by two or three participants (pl. 36, 6). The Chicago Museum of Natural History possesses a photograph (neg. 26672) taken at the Piegan Sun Dance of 1899, showing two wearers of hair- pipe breastplates. By the turn of the century the hair-pipe breastplate had been adopted by Indians of the Plateau tribes west of the Rockies. Photo- graphs show the wearing of this ornament by men of the Bannock (1897), Flathead (no date), and Yakima (1902) tribes. Major Moor- house’s photographs, taken about 1900, show hair-pipe breastplates worn by Shoshoni, Nez Percé, Walla Walla, and Sinkiuse men.” Two undated prints in the Division of Ethnology, United States National Museum, portray hair-pipe breastplates worn by Colville and Wasco men. Spinden (1907, pp. 217-218) was of the opinion that the bone-bead (hair pipe) breastplates worn by Nez Percé men were ‘‘undoubtedly introduced from the Plains.”” He found these breastplates were less common among the Nez Percé than were breast ornaments composed of several strings of small disk-shaped beads. Teit (1930, p. 81) reported the wearing of “‘breastplates of long, polished bone beads” {hair pipes] by Coeur d’Aléne men in the early years of the present century. However, his statement that they were “adopted by the Coeur d’Aléne about the beginning of the 19th century’ must be dis- counted. It is unlikely that that tribe began to wear hair-pipe breast- plates before the 1890’s. Teit’s informants showed their lack of long familiarity with hair pipes in their testimony as to their origin. Some thought “the bones were polished buffalo bones made by the tribes east of the Coeur d’Aléne; while others claim(ed) that they were introduced by the fur traders and were quite unknown to all Indian tribes long ago.”’ 13 BAE negs.: 1706 (Bannock); 3000-b (Flathead); 2862-b (Yakima); 1704-c (Shoshoni); 2987-b-9 (Nez Percé); 2902-b-28 (Walla Walla); 3012-c-6 (Sinkiuse). A Hop. PAP PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 67 The hair-pipe breastplate does not appear to have gained popularity among the Indian tribes east of the Mississippi. However, a portrait of Joseph Sherritt of the White Earth Band of Chippewa, taken in 1911, shows him wearing a two-row breastplate of hair pipes (pl. 31, d). Another two-row breastplate, collected in 1911 among the Chippewa of White Earth Reservation, Minn., is in the collection of the United States National Museum (cat. No. 392661). In 1917 the Plains Cree leader, Little Bear, gave Frank Bird Linder- man a breastplate of bone hair pipes of the 2-row pattern, 35 pipes per row. The hair pipes are 4% inches long. This specimen (Museum of the Plains Indian, cat. No. 539L) may have been in Little Bear’s possession for a number of years prior to 1917. HAIR-PIPE NECKLACES In contrast with the breastplate, which was always a man’s orna- ment, the necklace of hair pipes continued to be worn by both men and women in the period 1880-1910. Of the tribes of Plains Indians known to have worn hair-pipe necklaces in earlier days, photographic sources illustrate their use by Cheyenne, Crow, Kiowa, Mandan, Oglala, Osage, and Sauk and Fox after 1880. Among all these tribes except the Oglala the necklace is shown as a woman’s ornament. Plate 21, b, depicts a hair-pipe necklace worn by a Sauk and Fox woman in the period 1895-97. Note that the hair pipes are strung on cords along with short lengths of clamshell wampum. The appearance of this necklace is remarkably like that worn by the wife of Keokuk, Sauk and Fox chief, in George Catlin’s painting executed more than a half century earlier, which is reproduced on the same plate. The dated pictorial records do not indicate that the hair-pipe neck- lace was popular among the Oklahoma tribes after 1880. Of the tribes of that area not known to have worn hair-pipe necklaces before 1880, its use by the Pawnee and Ponca is revealed by photographs." The hair-pipe necklace appears to have enjoyed a much greater popularity among northern tribes in the Reservation Period. Not only did it become a common ornament for women among the Oglala and Brule, but it was made into a much more elaborate form by those tribes than the more simple necklace worn by Southern Plains Indians. As was the case with the breastplate, the hair-pipe necklace appears to have been diffused from the Teton Dakota tribes (primarily Oglala and Brule) to neighboring tribes during the Reservation Period. At the Omaha Exposition of 1898, hair-pipe necklaces were worn by a Winnebago woman, by an Omaha woman and two men of that tribe, and by an Assiniboin woman. A Winnebago man, photographed in 1899, wore a hair-pipe necklace. Single photographs show the wearing 4 BAE neg. 1305-a (Pawnee man), Div. Ethnology, USNM, print (White Eagle, Ponca). 370929—57——6 68 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bui. 164 of the hair-pipe necklace by a Hidatsa woman (1903), a Yankton man (1904), and a Gros Ventres woman (1905). Dr. P. E. Goddard collected a hair-pipe necklace among the Sarsi of Alberta, which is now on exhibition in the American Museum of Natural History.% My Assiniboin field data indicate that the hair-pipe necklace was adopted by Assiniboin women prior to 1885, and from them it was diffused to the Piegan in Montana and Blood in Alberta through trade and/or gift about 1892. The extension of its distribution coincided with the diffusion of the hair-pipe breastplate to these Upper Missouri tribes. Assiniboin women made hair-pipe necklaces, but Piegan and Blood women were content to obtain them ready-made from the Assiniboin. Informants from all three of these tribes stated that their people employed hair-pipe necklaces only as women’s ornaments for use as dance and dress costume accessories. The Assiniboin said that in the 1880’s their necklaces were relatively simple affairs consisting of a few strands of vertical pipes, but after about 1895 they began to make necklaces of a much greater number of pipes in which the lower rows were connected. The elaboration of the necklace among the Teton Dakota and their neighbors definitely took place during the Reservation Period. The more simple necklace forms common to the 1880’s and early 1890’s are illustrated in plate 33. The single strand Northern Arapaho necklace (pl. 33, @) contains but four long, shell hair pipes (all of which are broken or chipped) strung on a buckskin cord together with large brass trade beads. This specimen (USNM No. 290365) probably was made prior to 1890. Plate 33, b, is a portrait of Susie- Shot-in-the-Eye, an Oglala woman, taken prior to 1900, wearing a 3-strand necklace composed of 24 long (bone?) hair pipes separated by large trade beads. Plate 34, 6, illustrates a more complex necklace type worn by a Teton Dakota woman prior to 1900. This type was developed during the 1890’s, probably by one of the Teton Dakota tribes. A museum specimen of this type of necklace appears in plate 34, a. It is composed of 120 bone hair pipes. The lower 40 pipes are 3 inches long, the remainder are 4 inches in length. The pipes are so arranged that the upper portion forms a 10-strand necklace while the lower 2 rows are connected to form continuous rows of 20 pipes each. Complex necklaces of this type were not made until after bone hair pipes were introduced in quantity. The use of commercial leather strip dividers between the vertical rows of hair pipes apparently was adapted from the similar (but vertical) dividers used in hair-pipe breastplates. This specimen (USNM No. 358117) is not tribally 15 Photographic references: BAE negs. 3799-a, 3784-a (Winnebago); 4022-a-b, 3016-a-b, 3958 (Omaha); 3728-a-b (Assiniboin); Div. Ethnology, USNM, print (Hidatsa); BAE neg. 3588-a (Yankton); Chicago Mus. Nat. Hist. neg. 26656 (Gros Ventres). Aator FA?) = PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 69 identified, but probably is of Teton Dakota origin. The largest necklace of this type that I have seen was owned and still worn in traditional social dances by Mrs. Henry Black Tail, Assiniboin woman of Fort Peck Reservation, in 1953. No less than 225 bone hair pipes were used in its construction. West of the Rockies the hair-pipe necklace, of more simple form, was adopted by several tribes prior to 1900. It appears in a portrait of a Ute Indian girl which was copyrighted in 1884. Major Moor- house’s photographs, taken about the year 1900, illustrate its use by a Paiute man (whose home reservation is not stated), and by tribes on the Umatilla Reservation in Oregon (including 2 men and a woman of the Umatilla tribe, 2 Cayuse men, and 1 Walla Walla man)." Two photographs illustrate the wearing of hair-pipe necklaces by prominent men of tribes east of the Mississippi in the early years of the present century. One necklace was worn by Fish Carrier, a Cayuga chief, photographed in 1901. The other was worn by Eniwube, a Chippewa singer of Lac du Flambeau Reservation, Wis., prior to 1913.” HAIR-PIPE BANDOLIERS Indian men also adopted the hair-pipe necklace of several strands to use as a bandolier extending over one shoulder and under the opposite arm. The earliest dated photograph illustrating this use appears to be James Mooney’s portrait of the Oglala, Weasel Bear, taken on Pine Ridge Reservation in 1893 (pl. 35, a). The bandolier of hair pipes was worn by three Omaha men in 1898. By 1900 this use of hair pipes began to appear in photographs of men from a number of tribes of the Columbia River Valley. A Yakima man who visited Washington in 1901, wore a bandolier of hair pipes, as illustrated in plate 35, 6. Major Moorhouse’s photographs, taken in the field at about the same time, show hair-pipe bandoliers worn by men of the Palouse, Cayuse, Umatilla, Walla Walla, and Wasco tribes. In 1911 a bandolier of hair pipes was worn by a Chippewa man of the White Earth Reservation, Minn. (BAE neg. 594-b-1). The survival of the wearing of the hair-pipe bandolier among the Chippewa is illustrated in a photograph of a group of Indians in ceremonial costume, taken at Mille Lacs in 1928, and reproduced in Coleman (1947, pl. 2, fig. f). 16 Photographic references: Div. Ethnology, USNM, print (Ute); BAE negs. 1662-b (Paiute); 2890-b-41, 2890-b-5 (Umatilla); 3073-b-69, 3073-b-46 (Cayuse); 2902-b-19 (Walla Walla). 17 Both of these photographs have been published: the former in Hodge (1907, pt. 1, p. 223), the latter in Densmore (1913, pl. 26). 18 Photographic references: BAE negs. 4016-a, 4019, 3958 (Omaha); 2901-c (Palouse); 3073-b-8, 3073-b-9, 3073-b-15, 3073-b-44, 3073-b-54, 83073-b-70-1, 3073-b-89 (Cayuse); 2890-b-4, 2890-b-18, 2890-b-25 (Umatilla); 2902-b-27 (Walla Walla); 2899-b-2 (Wasco). 370929—57——7 70 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuw. 164 The adaptation of hair pipes to use as men’s bandoliers, as well as the perfection of the complex woman’s necklace, provides proof that the Indians were still developing new uses for hair pipes in the Reserva- tion Period. HAIR-PIPE EAR PENDANTS In contrast to the increased popularity of the breastplate and neck- lace, the less elaborate forms of hair-pipe ornaments were little worn during the Reservation Period. The formerly popular use of hair pipes as ear pendants appears to have survived among a few tribes after 1880. Feathered Lance, an aged Kiowa, clung to the old custom of wearing hair-pipe ear pendants in 1892-93. They appear in Mooney’s field portrait of him taken at that time. Two Sauk and Fox men wore them in 1890. Four members of an Oto delegation wore these ornaments in 1895, and two of the same men, in addition to another Oto, wore them in 1898. At the Omaha Exposition of 1898 hair-pipe ear pendants were worn by 6 men—2 Omaha, 1 Winne- bago, 1 Tonkawa, and 2 Santa Clara Pueblo Indians. The most recent pictorial reference to the wearing of these ornaments appears in a portrait of a Yankton visitor to Washington in 1905.° HAIR-PIPE HAIR ORNAMENTS The wearing of hair-pipe hair ornaments appears to have become nearly obsolete by 1880. The only post-1880 pictorial reference to this ornament appears in the portrait of Medicine Crow, a handsome Crow Indian, taken during his visit to Washington in 1882 (pl. 20, b). None of the other Crow delegates who accompanied Medicine Crow wore hair pipes in any way. HAIR-PIPE CHOKERS The close-fitting hair-pipe choker, a rarity prior to 1880, appears but rarely in the pictorial record of subsequent years. The Sauk and Fox seem to have been most fond of this ornament. Five men of that tribe wore hair-pipe chokers when photographed during the period 1887-93. Plate 23, c, illustrates the choker as worn by one of these men. Plate 23, d, shows the choker worn by an Osage visitor to Washington in 1904. Other wearers of hair-pipe chokers when photographed were two Oto (one in 1896, the other in 1908),’a Ton- kawa (1899), and a Santa Clara Pueblo Indian (1898).” 1® Pictorial references: BAE negs. 1406-a-1-2 (Kiowa); 382S-a, 3831-a, 3856-a, 3870-a, 3877-a, 3829-b, 3858-a (Oto); 645-a, 685-a-1 (Sauk and Fox); 3947-a, 3958 (Omaha); 3801-2 (Winnebago); 1201-a (Ton- kawa); 1947-a, 1957-a (Santa Clara); 3593 (Yankton). % Pictorial references: BAE negs 673, 648-a, 668-a, 668, 669 (Sauk and Fox); 3873-a, 3892-b (Oto); 1188-a (Tonkawa); 1947-a (Santa Olara Pueblo). ANTHROP. PAP. “(PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 71 SURVIVAL OF THE USE OF HAIR PIPES Hair-pipe breastplates, necklaces, and bandoliers were popular ornaments worn by Plains Indians when they dressed for Indian dances near home or for exhibitionsin 1910. There was still a demand for bone hair pipes from the traders’ stores. In more recent years the demand has dwindled and local traders have discontinued stocking hair pipes. I have obtained field data on more recent trends in the history of the use of hair pipes among three tribes who formerly were fond of hair-pipe ornaments. As we have seen, the Oglala were among the most common users of hair-pipe ornaments in the early years of the Reservation Period. John Choloff, a mixed-blood Oglala, son of a trader on Pine Ridge Reservation, told me that in the late nineties, when he worked in his father’s store, the Oglala bought large numbers of hair pipes. His father purchased them wholesale from Frost’s in New York City, and sold them in two sizes. The longer ones sold for 15 cents each, the shorter ones for 10 cents each. Yet John said that by the time of World War I, there was so little demand for hair pipes among the Oglala that the traders stopped carrying them in stock. Perhaps the discontinuance of Buffalo Bill’s Wild West Show, which had employed some 65 Sioux performers, following the death of William F. Cody, January 17, 1917, brought in its wake a slackening of demand for spectacular hair-pipe ornaments among the Oglala. Of course these Indians had large numbers of the almost indestructible breastplates and necklaces on hand. Kiowa informants told me that hair-pipe ornaments had been popular among their people in their youth. A well-made breastplate was then considered equal in value to a horse. * However, they said that breastplates had not been made by members of that tribe for a number of years prior to our interviews in 1948-49. In 1948, the late Robert L. Boake, of Anadarko, Okla., who had traded with the Kiowa and their neighbors since 1891, told me he used to buy bone hair pipes in several lengths from Frost’s in New York, and sold them in quantities to the Indians. He discontinued handling them in 1926. Elderly Assiniboin informants on Fort Peck Reservation could remember the sale of shell hair pipes to their tribe prior to about 1893, although they did not recall that the old ‘“‘white’”’ pipes were made of shell. Yet from their statement that those pipes ‘were whiter and stayed white longer”, and.“‘did not show long streaks” like the later hair pipes, we can be sure that they had'reference:to shell hair pipes as contrastedito bone ones.” One informant said ‘these “white”? (shell) pipes sold at Aubrey’s Trading Post in the middle eighties at nearly 50 cents each, while the bone ones a decade later sold 7 4 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLt. 164 for 10 to 15 cents, depending on their lengths. He definitely attrib- uted the remarkable increase in the sizes of breastplates and neck- laces that took place in the 1890’s to the availability of the cheaper bone hair pipes. Fort Peck informants knew of no trader on or near their reservation who sold hair pipes to the Indians after the death of Sherman T. Cogswell, Wolf Point merchant, about 1923. Assiniboin informants on Fort Belknap Reservation recalled that Charles A. Smith, a merchant in nearby Harlem, Mont., sold them hair pipes at $10 a hundred about 1895. They claimed he continued to sell hair pipes “untilZhe couldn’t get them any more” which was “more than 15 year ago” (i. e., before 1938). These references indicate that the sale of hair pipes was discontinued on some reservations earlier than on others. It seems probable that few hair pipes were sold to Indians by local traders after the middle twenties. Nevertheless, Indians have continued to wear hair-pipe breastplates and necklaces on dress occasions. At the American Indian Exposition at Anadarko, Okla., in the summer of 1948, I observed that a number of young Southern Plains Indian competitors in the dance contests wore hair-pipe breastplates. I photographed a Taos Indian shield dancer who participated at that Exposition wearing a bone hair-pipe breastplate (pl. 37, @). When Crazy Bull, an elderly Hunkpapa, came to Washington in 1948, he brought his dress costume and posed for his photograph init. His outfit included a hair-pipe breastplate (pl. 37, 5). In the summer of 1953 my Assiniboin informants on Fort Peck Reservation showed several breastplates and complex women’s neck- laces which they owned and told me they still wore them in Indian dances and on other occasions when they felt it desirable to wear “Indian dress.” Two incidents occurred during my visit among the Assiniboin that demonstrated concretely their continued interest in hair-pipe orna- ments. In my presence an elderly Fort Belknap informant sold her 4-strand necklace of about 40 bone hair pipes to my interpreter for $5. My interpreter later explained to me that she was going to make it over into a breastplate for her adolescent son, an accomplished Indian dancer, to wear in grass dances. On Fort Peck Reservation, Bernard Standing, a middle-aged Assiniboin, showed me a breastplate of bone hair pipes which he had made the previous winter. It was one of several he had constructed for use by grass dancers. When I asked him where he obtained his hair pipes he brought out the current mail order catalog of the Plume Trading Co. of New York City, dealers in Indian craft supplies, and showed me the listing of “real bone hair pipes.”” James Luongo, president of that firm, has kindly informed me that his stock of bone hair pipes is a large one. It was poke a PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 73 purchased from S. A. Frost’s son when that old Indian trading company discontinued business about 1943. So hair pipes still are available to Indians as well as to Whites who may wish to use them in making traditional Indian ornaments. The distributing center is still, as it has been for more than 150 years, New York City. CONCLUSIONS Our quest for the origin of the long, hollow, tubular ornament, known since late colonial times as a hair pipe, has taken us back to prehistoric times, when ornaments of this general pattern were worn by Indians of the Eastern Woodlands in necklaces and perhaps as hair and ear ornaments as well. These native-made shell, bone, stone, and copper prototypes of the trade hair pipe were Indian inventions. Furthermore, Woodland Indians recognized these ornaments as de- sirable articles in intertribal trade long before the first white trader appeared among them. The introduction of glass and metal hair pipes among the Indians of the Eastern Woodlands by white traders in the colonial period illustrates the efforts of these traders to induce the Indians to accept substitutes for ornaments with which they had been familiar, noth as accessories to costume and as articles of intertribal trade. Through trial and error the traders were attempting to provide at profit to themselves substitutes which would be acceptable to the Indians. Probably the glass ornaments offered by the French in the 17th century were too fragile and the silver ones supplied by the English in the 18th century were too expensive to gain widespread popularity among the Indians. The invention of the shell hair pipe by New Jersey wampum makers prior to 1800 may have been motivated by the desire to produce a cheaper hair pipe which could be sold to Indians in greater numbers. It is not imprebable that the inventor or inventors of the commercial shell hair pipe had knowledge of the earlier use of native-made conch- shell ornaments by the Woodland Indians. However, they made these ornaments from the lips, not the columns of shells. The early shell hair-pipe makers had had previous experience in working clam- shells into wampum and they adopted the same tools employed in wampum making to the manufacture of hair pipes. The efforts of the Campbell family of Pascack (now Park Ridge), N. J., to control the manufacture of shell hair pipes for the Indian trade, although not completely successful, must have had the effect of limiting the output of shell hair pipes in the first half of the 19th century, when the drilling of these ornaments was a laborious, hand-tooled operation. Through the great fur-trading companies of Canada and the United States, through independent traders, and through agents of the United States 74 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY {Buut. 164 Government shell hair pipes were distributed widely, and in increasing numbers, among the Plains Indian tribes prior to 1850. Nevertheless, during this period the Plains Indians appear to have used hair pipes rather sparingly as ear pendants and hair ornaments and in necklaces. The development of the elaborate breastplate, an ornament requir- ing large numbers of hair pipes, by the Indians appears to have coin- cided in time with the shift of hair-pipe manufacturing from a hand to a mechanized cperation after 1850. Although the invention of the hair-pipe breastplate by the Comanche may have antedated the invention of the laborsaving, pipe-drilling machine by the Campbells, it is certain that the widespread use of hair-pipe breastplates among the Indians followed the perfection of that machine and resultant increase in hair-pipe production. The invention and Indian adaptation of the cattle-bone hair pipe about 1880 shows still more clearly the interplay of Indian and white ingenuity in the development of a cheaper, more sturdy hair pipe. It was an Indian, the Ponca chief White Eagle, who first recognized the superiority of bone over shell material in costume ornaments when he acquired some corncob pipestems of bone from a trader. Once acquainted with the Indian desire for hair pipes of bone, men who supplied the Indians proceeded to locate a supply of raw bone material, to perfect methods of manufacture of bone hair pipes, and to supply quantities of the finished pipes to Indian traders in the field. The form of the bone hair pipe was patterned exactly after the shell one which it replaced. So superior was the bone hair pipe in the eyes of the Indians that within a decade the demand for shell hair pipes decreased to the point that it was no longer practical for the New Jersey manufacturers to make them. Meanwhile, on the Indian reservations of the West a period of greater and more elaborate use of hair-pipe ornaments was inaugurated, employing the cheaper, stronger bone articles. Not only did larger breastplates for men and more complex necklaces for women come into use, but a new use of hair pipes as bandoliers gained some popularity. Indians looked upon these articles as valuable possessions and desirable gifts. 'They continued to wear them on occasions for which ‘Indian dress’’ was preferred—in traditional dances on their own reservations, on visits to Washington, in their appearances in Wild West shows, at exhibitions, and at fairs. Not until after the beginning of World War I did the demand for bone hair pipes decrease to the point that it was no longer practical for local traders on western reservations to stock them. Yet the custom of wearing hair-pipe ornaments has persisted. They are still owned and worn on occasion by some western Indians. To a limited extent ornaments still are made by Indians either through reuse of Nogol * ~=—s« PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 75 old bone hair pipes in the possession of Indians or from hair pipes ordered by mail from the Plume Trading Co. of New York. The continued use of hair pipes in Plains Indian adornment over a period of a century and a half, affords a remarkable example of stability in a trait of material culture. It is especially remarkable in view of the facts that material culture traits are generally regarded as highly susceptible to change and that the great majority of traditional material culture traits of the Plains Indians have disappeared within the Reservation Period. It is true that older types of hair-pipe ornaments became obsolete and newer types of ornaments were invented and diffused widely. But the basic form of the hair pipe employed in making these ornaments has persisted throughout the entire period. I have prepared a series of six maps to illustrate the diffusion and distribution of the six methods of employing hair pipes in Plains Indian adornment. Tribal occurrences of each method of use are indicated by chronologically ordered numbers on the basis of available information from pictorial sources, from the literature, and from field data relative to the earliest record of the use of a particular type of ornament by a member or members of each tribe. The reader will note that the geographical locations of tribes on these maps are not consistent. A number of tribes of the area changed their locations between the time of their first recorded use of one type of hair-pipe ornament and their first known use of another type of ornament made of hair pipes. It appears to me that a truer picture of the tribal and geographical distribution of each type of ornament is presented by placing each tribe in its approximate location at the time of its first known use of the specific ornament in question.” The early distribution of the hair-pipe ear pendant (as shown on map 1) suggests that the hair pipes found archeologically at Pawnee and Arikara sites probably were worn by members of those tribes as paired ear pendants. (See p. 52.) The earliest recorded use of hair- pipe ear pendants in the Plains was among the Osage (1806), who had trading relations with St. Louis merchants, as well as with the Govern- ment traders in the first decade of the 19th century. Before 1850 some men of a number of Siouan tribes as far northwest as the Crow were wearing hair-pipe ear pendants, as were also the Caddoan Wichita, Pawnee, Arikara, and the Algonquian Plains Cree and Sauk and Fox. The early popularity of this ornament among men who roached their hair suggests that this hair-pipe ornament originated within a tribe which followed this fashion of hairdress, and later was 21 Exceptions have been made in the cases of the Cheyenne and Arapaho, which tribes divided into northern and southern groups prior to 1850. Because of the difficulty in determining northern or southern affiliations of individuals on the basis of available evidence, I have located these tribes midway between the habitats of their northern and southern groups. 76 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLL. 164 Map 1.—Distribution of hair-pipe ear pendants. Western tribes: 1, Osage (1806); 2, Pawnee (before 1811); 3, Kansa (1821-5); 4, Arikara (before 1832); 5, Wi- chita (1834); 6, Teton Dakota (1837); 7, Crow (1837); 8, Sauk and Fox (1837); 9, Iowa (1845-6); 10, Plains Cree (1847); 11, Ponca (1859); 12, Yankton (1867); 13, Kichai (1868); 14, Kiowa (1868); 15, Oto (1869); 16, Kiowa Apache (1868-72); 17, Comanche (1872); 18, Tawaconie (1872); 19, Waco (1872); 20, Yanktonai (1872); 21, Jicarilla Apache (1877); 22, Omaha, (1898); 23, Tonkawa, (1898); 24, Santa Clara Pueblo (1898). Removed Woodland tribes: A, Delaware (1869); B, Winnebago (1870). adopted by some of the long-haired tribes of the Plains. In the third quarter of the 19th century it was reported for a number of other Siouan and Caddoan tribes, as well as the Delaware and Winnebago removed from east of the Mississippi, and the Kiowa, Kiowa Apache, and Comanche of the southern High Plains. Only two tribes west- ward of the Great Plains have been shown to have worn these orna- ments, the Jicarilla Apache and Santa Clara Pueblo in the Southwest. By and large the hair-pipe ear pendant appears to have been a popular pre-Reservation-Period ornament among men of the Central and Southern Plains. It does not appear to have spread to the majority of the tribes of the Upper Missouri, to the Plateau, or Great Basin tribes. Its popularity waned after the invention and diffusion of the hair-pipe breastplate and the development of the bone hair pipe. AnTHROP. Pap, = PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 77 The wearing of hair pipes as hair ornaments (map 2) appears to have been the most popular use of hair pipes among men of the Upper Missouri above the Teton Dakota in the first half of the 19th century. In view of this distribution we may surmise that the Crow and Hidatsa men who obtained hair pipes from Larocque and Alexander Henry in 1805-6 probably made use of them as hair ornaments. With the ex- ception of the Crow and Plains Cree no tribe of this group is known to have worn hair-pipe ear pendants. The occurrence of hair-pipe hair ornaments among the Menomini in 1836 further indicates that the wearing of these ornaments was a northern trait. The two cases of the wearing of these ornaments by tribes farther south (Cheyenne and Kiowa Apache) were both reported relatively late in the pre-Reserva- tion Period. I have found no indication that the wearing of hair-pipe hair ornaments was common among men of tribes living south of Map 2.—Distribution of hair-pipe hair ornaments. Western tribes: 1, Assiniboin (before 1826); 2, Plains Cree (1831); 3, Plains Ojibwa (1832); 4, Mandan (1832); 5, Piegan (1833); 6, Crow (1851); 7, Kiowa Apache (1866-72); 8, Cheyenne (1876). Woodland tribe: A, Menomini (1836). 78 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuL..164 Map 3.—Distribution of hair-pipe necklaces. Western tribes: 1, Kansa (1831); 2, Cheyenne (1832); 3, Crow (1832); 4, Mandan (1832); 5, Plains Ojibwa (1832); 6, Sauk and Fox (1832); 7, Comanche (1834); 8, Kiowa (1834); 9, Osage (1834); 10, Wichita (1834); 11, Iowa (1845-6); 12, Oglala (1868); 13, Assiniboin (before 1885); 14, Ute (1884); 15, Arapaho (before 1890); 16, Piegan (ca. 1892); 17, Blood (ca. 1892); 18, Omaha (1898); 19, Ponca (before 1900); 20, Pawnee (1900); 21, Paiute (ca. 1900); 22, Umatilla (ca. 1900); 23, Walla Walla (ca. 1900); 24, Cayuse (ca. 1900); 25, Hidatsa (1903); 26, Yankton (1904); Gros Ventres (1905); 28, Sarsi (ca. 1905). Woodland tribes: A, Seneca of New York (1830—not shown); B, Shawnee (1831); C, Seminole of Florida aa spate D, Menomini (1835); H, Ojibwa (1836); F, Winnebago (1898); G, Cayuga of Ontario 1—not shown). Montana and North Dakota. The single pictorial example of the wearing of this ornament after 1880 depicted its use by a Crow Indian, a representative of a tribe which did not readily adopt the more elab- orate hair-pipe ornament, the breastplate. Among the other Upper Missouri tribes the popularity of this ornament was on the wane before their acquisition of bone hair pipes and their adaptation of the hair-pipe breastplate. We have no record of the wearing of hair pipes in necklaces by Plains Indians prior to the travels of the artist George Catlin among these tribes in 1831-34 (map 3). However, his paintings depicting the wearing of these ornaments by men and women of 11 widely Antanor. Par, PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 79 separated tribes at that time suggest that the hair-pipe necklace was known to Plains Indians a number of years earlier. He also depicted these ornaments worn by Indians of five widely distributed Woodland tribes, among some of which the use of long tubular ornaments in necklaces may have occurred in aboriginal times. Available informa- tion reveals little diffusion of the hair-pipe necklace in the Plains in the period 1845-80. However, after the introduction of bone hair pipes a more complex, specialized form of woman’s hair-pipe necklace was invented, probably by the Dakota, which was diffused up the Missouri to the Gros Ventres, Blackfoot, and Sarsi. Mean- while the older and simpler form of necklace was diffused to tribes of the Great Basin and the Columbia River Valley. West of the Rockies the hair-pipe necklace served primarily as a man’s ornament. In the Northern Plains the necklace has survived as a woman’s orna- ment. The wearing of the close-fitting, hair-pipe choker seems to have been confined to Indians of the Southern Plains, from whom it was diffused to the Santa Clara Pueblo (map 4). Probably the failure of this ornament to gain acceptance among the Dakota tribes was due to their preference for and quite common use of a very similar choker of dentalium shells. Hair-pipe chokers do appear in use among Southern Plains tribes for an extended period (i. e., 1834 to after 1900), indicat- ing a relatively long, if not a common, use of this pattern of ornament among tribes of that subarea. The origin and diffusion of the man’s hair-pipe breastplate can be traced with greater precision than was the case with any of the pre- ceding types of hair-pipe ornaments. (See map 5.) It was invented later than the other ornaments and was adopted by the majority of tribes who used it within the period covered by abundant pictorial records. There is no contemporary proof of the existence of the hair- pipe breastplate among any Plains Indian tribe in the first half of the 19th century. Yet by 1854 the Comanche had it. We may consider that it was invented by that tribe. By 1867 it had been adopted by neighboring Kiowa, and before 1872 it was worn by men of the Kiowa Apache, Arapaho, Cheyenne, and Pawnee tribes. It appears logical to assume that the Arapaho and/or Cheyenne, who had friendly con- tacts with tribes north of the Platte as well as south of the Arkansas, played a prominent role in the northward diffusion of this ornament. In 1868 the Teton Dakota (Oglala and Brule) wore similar breast- plates of dentalium shells. In the period 1872-77 they replaced the dentalium-shell breastplate with the hair-pipe one, which soon became a common article of Teton Dakota adornment. By the early seventies the breastplate was also worn by Moache and Uintah Ute men. During the Reservation Period, and after cheaper bone hair pipes 80 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLu. 164 Map 4.—Distribution of hair-pipe chokers. Western tribes: 1, Kiowa (1834); 2, Sauk and Fox (1869); 3, Oto (1896); 4, Santa Clara Pueblo (1898); 5, Ton- kawa (1899); 6, Osage (1899). became available, the Teton tribes made more elaborate breastplates in the construction of which larger numbers of hair pipes were em- ployed. They preferred to use long hair pipes in a 2- or 3-row breast- plate, while the Southern Plains tribes more commonly wore breast- plates of shorter pipes arranged in four rows. It was the former type that was diffused most widely in the Reservation Period. It was adopted by men of at least 10 Plateau tribes west of the Rockies before about 1900. It was a breastplate of this description that was worn by a Taos dancer in 1948. Like the hair-pipe necklace, the breastplate has survived in use among the Plains Indians. It has been especially popular with young grass dancers. The bandolier of hair pipes appeared within the Reservation Period. (See map 6.) In construction this ornament did not represent a new type of ornament. Rather it was the adaptation of the traditional eT EEoe, Par. PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 81 hair-pipe necklace to specialized use as a man’s ornament after the wearing of the necklace came to be restricted primarily to women. Although the earliest recorded use of the bandolier was among the Oglala (1893), and it was worn by Omaha men, most of the examples of its use have been found among non-Plains Indian tribes of the Columbia River Valley and the Ojibwa of Minnesota. In preparing this summary of the history of the various uses of hair pipes in Indian adornment I have been aware of the limitations of my data. Some of my readers may have knowledge of archeological finds of hair pipes, of pictorial representations of their use, or of pub- lished or manuscript references to trade in or Indian use of hair pipes, Map 5.—Distribution of hair-pipe breastplates. Western tribes: 1, Comanche (1854); 2, Kiowa (1867); 3, Arapaho (1869); 4, Kiowa Apache (1868-72); 5, Cheyenne (1868-72); 6, Pawnee (1871); 7, Oglala (1872); 8, Brule (1872); 9, Hunkpapa (1872); 10, Moache Ute (1872); 11, Uintah Ute (1873); 12, Miniconjou (1877); 13, Ponca (1877); 14, Assiniboin (1882); 15, Piegan (ca. 1892); 16, Sauk and Fox (1892); 17, Blood (1893); 18, Bannock (1897); 19, Ot@ (1898); 20, Caddo (1898); 21, Tonkawa (1898); 22, Shoshoni (ca. 1900); 23, Flathead (ca. 1900); 24, Couer d’Aléne (ca. 1900); 25, Nez Percé (ca. 1900); 26, Colville (ca. 1900); 27, Sinkiuse (ca. 1900); 28, Walla Walla (ca. 1900); 29, Wasco (ca, 1900); 30, Yakima (1902); 31, Yanktonai (1903); 32, Yankton (1904); 33, Osage (1906); 34, Omaha (1909); 35, Crow be 1910); 36, Plains Cree (before 1917); 37, Taos Pueblo (1948), Woodland tribe: A, Ojibwa of White Earth Reservation (1911). 82 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY (Buu. 164 Map 6.—Distribution of hair-pipe bandoliers. pi estemn phos: 1 a (1893); 2, Omaha (1898); 3, Cayuse (ca. 000); 4, Umatilla (ca. 1900); 5, Walla Walla (ca. 1900); 6, Palouse (ca. 1900); ° 7, Yakima (1901); 8, Wasco, (ca. 1 960). Woodland tribe: A, Ojibwa (1911). unknown to me, which may provide earlier dates for the use of hair pipes by some tribes or wider distribution for specific ornament types than I have listed here. New archeological discoveries may add materially to our knowledge of the early use of shell hair pipes in the Great Plains. Certainly ethnological field workers among many tribes of the Great Plains, Great Lakes, Great Basin, and Plateau can obtain from living deigeanstts Savitiodal details regarding ¥the diffusion and/or survival of use of breastplates, necklaces, and bando- liers among those tribes. Fieldwork among the Plates tribes, in particular, should provide significant information on the processes of diffusion of hair-pipe ornaments to the Indians of the Northwest in the Reservation Period. Nogor {® = PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 83 BIBLIOGRAPHY MANUSCRIPT SOURCES ARCHIVES OF THE SEMINARY OF QUEBEC, LAVAL UNIVERSITY, QUEBEC, CANADA. A. Letter Book XY. Letters of Daniel Sutherland. B. Outfit 1799, and subsequent accounts. C. Dr. the Northwest Company for Outfit 1805. McGiLu University Museums, McGiuu Univ., MontrEeAL, CANADA. A. Account Book of James and Andrew McGill. Missouri Historicat Society, St. Louis, Mo. A. Auguste Chouteau Papers. Invoice of Sundry Goods . . . for Account and risque of Mr. Auguste Chouteau, June 17, 1802. B. Clark Collection. Memoranda of goods which may be waiting, made out by Meriwether Lewis for Wm. Clark, April, 1804. C. Territory of Louisiana, District of St. Louis, Court of General Sessions of the Peace. June term, 1807. Case of Francis Hosler. D. American Fur Co., Western Division. Ledger Book. Tus NatTIonaAL ARCHIVES, WASHINGTON, D. C. Office of Indian Trade Archives, 1795-1822. A. Superintendent of Indian Trade, Office Records, 1807. B. Invoices Outward, 1808. C. Day Book, 1809. D. Fort Osage Records, 1810. THe New York Hisroricat Society, New York City. American Fur Co. Papers, 1828-1842. A. Orders Inward. Book No. 2. B. Orders Inward. Book No. 1. C. Letter Book No. 1. D. Letter Book No. 8. PUBLISHED SOURCES ApaAIR, JAMES. 1775. The history of the American Indians. London. Attias 1776-1876 or BerGen County, NEw JERSEY. n.d. Reading, Pa. BARBEAU, MARIUS. 1940. Indian trade silver in Canada. The Minnesota Archaeologist, vol. 6, No. 17, pp. 121-138. BrirKEtT-SmitTH, Kay. 1942. Charles B. King’s Indianerportraetter i Nationalmuseet. Copen- hagen. Brown, Dez. See Scumipt, Martin W., and Brown, Dez. Capzow, Dona.p. 1936. Archaeological studies of the Susquehannock Indians of Pennsylvania. Publ. Pennsylvania Hist. Comm. vol 3. Harrisburg. Curt, W. H. 1924. Warren’s Trading Post. Chronicles of Oklahoma, vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 129-140. Co.EmMAN, SistER BERNARD. 1947. Decorative designs of the Ojibwa of Northern Minnesota. Catholic Univ. America. Anthrop. Ser. No. 12. Washington. 84 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Butn. 164 Covgs, Exuiott, Epiror. See HENRY, ALEXANDER, and THompson, Davin. DEJARNETTE, Davin L. See Wess, Wim §., and DeJarnette, Davin L. Denic, Epwin T. 1930. Indian tribes of the Upper Missouri. J. N. B. Hewitt, editor. 46th Ann. Rep. Bur. Amer. Ethnol., 1928-29, pp. 345-628. DENSMORE, FRANCES. 1913. Chippewa music II. Bur. Amer. Ethnol. Bull. 53. Drxon, JosrerH K. 1913. The vanishing race. Garden City, N. Y. GILLINGHAM, HarRRoLpD E. 1934. Indian silver ornaments. The Pennsylvania Mag. of Hist. and Biogr., vol. 58, No. 2, pp. 97-126. 1936. Indian ornaments made by Philadelphia silversmiths. Museum American Indian, Heye Foundation. New York. GRIFFIN, JAMEs B., Eprror. 1952. Archaeology of the Eastern United States. Chicago. Hau, James. See McKenney, Tuomas L., and Haut, JAMEs. Henry, ALEXANDER, and THOMPSON, Davin. 1897. New light on the early history of the greater Northwest. 3 vols. Elliott Coues, editor. New York. Hopaet, FREDERICK WEBB, EDITOR. 1907-1910. Handbook of American Indians North of Mexico. Bur. Amer. Ethnol. Bull. 30. 2 pts. Kipp, KENNETH E. 1953. The excavation and historical identification of a Huron ossuary. Amer. Antiq., vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 359-379. Kintetz, W. VERNON. 1942. John Mix Stanley and his Indian paintings. Ann Arbor, Mich. KNEBERG, MapDELINE. See Lewis, THomas M. N., and Knesrere, MApDELINE. Kurz, Rupoupa F. 1937. Journal of Rudolph Friederich Kurz. J. N. B. Hewitt, editor. Bur. Amer. Ethnol. Bull. 115. LAROCQUE, FRANCOIS. 1910. Journal of Larocque from the Assiniboine to the Yellowstone, 1805. Publ. Can. Archives, No. 3. Ottawa. Lewis, MERIWETHER, and CLARK, WM. 1904-05. Original journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. 8 vols. Reuben Gold Thwaites, editor. New York. Lewis, THomas M. N., and Knesrerc, MADELINE. 1946. Hiwassee Island, an archaeological account of four Tennessee Indian peoples. Knoxville. McKenney, Tuomas L., and HAtu, JAMEs. 1868. History of the Indian tribes of North America. 3 vols. Philadelphia. Mooney, JAMES. 1898. Calendar history of the Kiowa Indians. 17th Ann. Rep. Bur. Amer. Ethnol., 1895-96., pp. 141-444. Minus, WiLLiAM C. 1922. Certain mounds and village sites in Ohio. Vol. 2. Columbus. Newark Evenine NEws. 1923. Making wampum for Indians long an industry in Bergen, p. 2-x. Nov. 3. Norton, CHARLEs L. 1888. The last wampum coinage. Amer. Mag., vol. 7, No. 5, pp. 589-595. oa PLAINS INDIAN HAIR PIPES—EWERS 895 PaRKER, W. P. 1856. Notes taken during the expedition commanded by Capt. R. B. Marcy, USA, through unexplored Texas in the summer and fall of 1854. Philadelphia. PorTER, KENNETH W. 1931. John Jacob Astor, business man. 2 vols. Cambridge, Mass. Rircure, WILLIAM A. 1944. The Pre-Iroquoian occupations of New York State. Rochester. Ross, Marvin C. 1951. The West of Alfred Jacob Miller. Norman, Okla. Scumipt, Martin W., and Brown, DEE. 1948. Fighting Indians of the West. New York. Smiru, ERMINNIE A. 1885. Artificial wampum. Sci. Illus. Journ., vol. 5, pp. 3-4. SPINDEN, HERBERT J. 1908. The Nez Percé Indians. Mem. Amer. Anthrop. Assn. vol. 2, pt. 3. Lancaster, Pa. STEWARD, JuLiAN H. 1939. Notes on Hiller’s photographs of the Paiute and Ute Indians taken on the Powell Expedition of 1873. Smithsonian Misc. Coll., vol. 98, No. 18. Strrtinc, MatrHew W. 1924. Archaeological investigations in South Dakota. Jn Explorations and field-work of the Smithsonian Institution in 1923. Smithsonian Misc. Coll., vol. 76, No. 10, pp. 66-71. Storms, J. C. 1939. The story of wampum. Park Ridge, N. J. Txt, JAMES. 1930. The Salishan tribes of the western plateaus. Franz Boas, editor. 45th Ann. Rep. Bur. Amer. Ethnol., 1927-28, pp. 25-396. Tuompson, Davip. See Henry, ALEXANDER, and THompson, Davin. THWAITES, REUBEN GoLD, Epitor. See Lewis, MERIWETHER, and CLARK, WM. TIxIER, VICTOR. 1940. Tixier’s travels on the Osage prairies. John Francis McDermott, editor. Norman, Oklahoma. Van ZANpDT, Howarp F. 1935. The History of Camp Holmes and Chouteau’s Trading Post. Chron- icles of Oklahoma. Vol. 13, No. 3., pp. 316-337. Wess, WiuiaM S8., and DEJARNETTE, Davin L. 1942. An archaeological survey of Pickwick Basin in the adjacent portions of the States of Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee. Bur. Amer. Ethnol. Bull. 129. WEDEL, WALDo R. 1936. An introduction to Pawnee archeology. Bur. Amer. Ethnol. Bull. 112. WESTERVELT, FRANCEs, A. 1924. The final century of the wampum industry in Bergen County, New Jersey. Pap. and Proc. Bergen County, New Jersey Hist. Soc. ’ a yi Beate aunties sale ee, woteseCl Pert at b Lets waiver ah serio ie Py PRM ORT AST RD 80 Lat. ae tase rains wah 7) eal sis pees Naish 3 Ae atin “eevok | “Susriaindereatink, Lait ee osoucegage. Us at ra. bairede aan “Sipye % kort a wD AS ee tied, oad, ‘saat saanibot saath cov, AT i f oe ARS ON ery ioeetarin ie AS Te * ab wh esgic. ‘ Pie Lika BOR. oct Tea wet no msick a? mniabak ntl, pigerienedh i ion preipr neta ae dor adbeey His men seenn SRG Wy Resi otd Siisoqpmed Mewio'D- ttt de 5 ease 4 aed Saaens, A yge ie: Ywie¥ : at, ra Any 2 OH roared, co SHIR. (Pie excaratiin cod Tele eetaOLD Mra Aindore (lp mabtlbin, 4 AMS. Aha hite., fe ay Die i Ds % rip 404 eke? ( ry: = va ve ae Hira TEM Gitta to a oft WERE bi pada. Aura. 4. hath . seas TIMI OHM, ID) IRAE cores Oe coy BE TSUL tome aomA wo sec (cade SOS \ ORS. it 4H nine aL tose Rolain Agoiek or wT oe ie sok eel ash Hs Hh ORR eg Migar st 20% axis ZN: marmite feuds BOTH scan Lan Biot awd ‘gral. tipped a e ea eras th 0 on mare Oot ‘Apchishe. Noo Semrodidy nao. | apetiel a ibe testi 2 , se um) wot ra CE ARGO) fe ED satay opnipl ls oot Wa BERS Wak whi és she sensei Yo, 9 ) weet baa, 8 Mate gb deh malas th aber tetod se Taw Pwd a jwibanbaquctoan, (eased areas Oe i . tT we bit ‘ Pe ae aes * ‘ vires Cet yy ate ee ana sae atid: pradicnioniael it weradaté., to saheta aelt Tine Yer’ Py Pree eee Pru y ; Re RE ee ead a Lo) meet Yee jee nates Chai baa itil tngadacd 2 RA Nish. emission ween, OF Lhe Bae ie ud Oba F ah ee ea) aa ee ty ‘yeh pepe nah, pam no eaaTTOy qo t Lage thiacbhal Tepqraew ‘sh Io RED fend of TL Paty enol wel ero awit oot fie ape: oath Por y' et Ss fe, ae se { t i y Coe , CA Ay eA bb o BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 13 Early forms of tubular trade ornaments. a, b, Glass (Susquehanna). c, Brass (Angel Site, Ind.). d, Silver (Courtesy Ohio State Univ.). BULLETIN 164 PLATE 14 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 15 = * aes a, The Campbell Brothers’ Wampum Factory (1860-89). 6, The four wampum makers (1886). BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 16 ts 4 * < . 3 — dn weds te Tools used in drilling shell hair pipes. a, Early form of simple bow drill. 3, Hair-pipe drilling machine. BULLETIN 164 PLATE 17 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY *paystjodun jnq podeys adid sey Suo7T ‘ a ‘adid sivy qs0ys pojajduros pur peysrog ‘f ‘adid sey padeys Ayenied ‘paypiq ‘p ‘ano payoojq Ayy8nox adig ‘9 “yo uexyorq diy Jo uonoag *g *svd19 snquoug peyiomuy ‘vy ‘sadid sey yfeys Jo ainqovynuew ay} Ul sade1SG BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 18 "ee : oer Hair pipes worn as ear pendants. a, An Osage warrior (1806). b, Kansa chief (1831.) c, Wichita head chief (1834). d, Iowa war chief (1845-46). BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 19 ia 3 y q . west _— ee Hair-pipe ear pendants of the Kiowa. a, Specimens collected in 1891. }b Worn by White Horse (1870). BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 20 b, Crow (1882). a, Plains Cree (1831). ir ornaments. nas ha ir pipes wor Ha BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 21 Hair pipes worn in necklaces. a, Wife of Keokuk, Sauk and Fox chief (1834). 6, Sauk and Fox woman (1895-97). BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 22 Hair pipes worn in necklaces. a, Comanche chief (1834). 6, Wichita woman (1868). BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 23 Hair pipes worn as chokers: a, Kiowa head chief (1834). c, Sauk and Fox (1887-93). d, Osage (1904). Dentalium-shell choker: }, Yankton (1867). BULLETIN 164 PLATE 24 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY uuvuliepy Aq sutuied wo) eri “Z98T “ounoy Cpyeas AYeal], WporT sulsipayy oy} wv suvIpUy sule[g uslsyinog Aq saje[dyseeiq ul UIOM sa - did mezy ar BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 25 vg et INNA UMA OT b, Kiowa specimen, collected in 1891. a, Comanche specimen, collected in 1867. Hair-pipe breastplates from the Southern Plains. BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 26 Hair pipes worn in breastplates. a, Powder Face and child, Northern Arapaho (1869). b, Tabiyuna, Moache Ute (1872). BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 27 Hair pipes worn as breastplates. a, High Wolf, Oglala (1872). 6, White Eagle, Ponca head chief (1877). BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 28 bir “f an “ ™~ . im ’ — a Change from dentalium-shell to hair-pipe breastplates. White Thunder, Brule, on visits to Washington: a, 1872; b, 1877. BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 29 - ; — Shell hair pipes used in decoration of containers. a, Awl case, Mandan (1869). 6, Kiowa toilet case (1890’s). c, Awl case, Cheyenne (1888). BULLETIN 164 PLATE 30 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY Iiey au0g poystuy pue suoqg [edivoejour ap33e9 ‘ *SMOIA pus pur opig ‘oedid Pp pur a *w9}s suoqg YIM adid qoou1OZD ‘4g pue v HON] 3NO yee a ‘adid sey auoq ay jo quaudopaasq BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY so LE 892 Oa wae eee BULLETIN 164 PLATE 31 b, Ojibwa (1911). a, Teton Dakota (before 1900). Hair pipes worn in breastplates. BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 32 I’amous wearers of hair-pipe breastplates. a, Quannah Parker, Comanche. 6, Spotted Tail, Brule. c, Red Cloud, Oglala. d, Touching the Cloud, Miniconjou. PLATE 33 164 BULLETIN BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY “(0061 240}0q) URWIOM PIRIZ_ “4 ‘uswiseds oyedeiy ‘v ; 4 z *SUIIO} 3 I du s ‘sadid 11ey jo aoe]yoou S,UPWIOM BULLETIN 164 PLATE 34 ETHNOLOGY BUREAU OF AMERICAN a1OJaq) UPUIOM vIOYeC] UOJ], “G ‘(0061 ‘ad Aq vOyRG ‘uautsedg ‘vy ‘ad. 4} xajdwioo ‘sadid sey jo aavpyoou sueUO A, BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 35 me ares b, Yakima (1901). ay, a, Oglala (189 Hair pipes worn as bandoliers. ae BULLETIN 164 PLATE 36 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY "COQ Ul PArOSaY poolg ZUITISIA O[IYM SiooUNp ssvI3 UIOqIuIssy Aq UJOM sajy[diseoiq adid-neyy “q “¢GR] ‘ULP VYLWH v[e[SO UI UIOM soov]you edid-ie yy ‘vp on BULLETIN 164 PLATE 37 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY (S61) ededyunyy ‘ Ita AZBIDZ ‘q (S61) FOUL Plays ueIpUy soe se "Ss o1e|diseoiq adid-ney JO sasn quasay SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 164 Anthropological Papers, No. 51 OBSERVATIONS ON SOME NINETEENTH-CENTURY POTTERY VESSELS FROM THE UPPER MISSOURI By WALDO R. WEDEL 87 3870929—57——8 | a Paes: Vie OP ig as - tA ual a ry itt +) Vs Ges t 2 _ ee ee a! i) VOTPUTITe 41 AAMOeNTIMe ‘holants wrobvorad Yo wont bol sitelicfl avi [2.0 ,erqed InsigoloqordinA YAUTVGO-HTVGATIMIM HMO KO enorray ail WHOLZ2IM HATIU AHT MOAT BIIeeAY XA IRCHW A OGIAW of aes Mn! is Ne Sm ee ee ete re SS te mma —— =e 4 CONTENTS PAGE Fishings lakh tyra", ShaQlene 15) [= tay SLE URES sale tae Spt pk CPR tr 5S | REE Spel en RONEN apepe Bey te, Oe 91 Pottery making as reported from the Upper Missouri--.-...---.------- 93 The Lewis and Clark Mandan vessels. . o-oo. cee bem ene nee ce nom 97 Veseeerom tie Fort. bertuold POriOd, . ac ccae ene oe emewmcecunnasunce 98 VEAsOIs SECrINed. LO Ther MA eMORN oc on ose n a ween cen nccenae ene ew eae 101 VESEY Cole] fo gay dc (Je 0g |: 4; a a ep Rn 107 STE Ce LLC BE a aie a ants owe oeedbik ab ee Uae ew bulaewmablene me 109 IMiberapMnG Clb ee meat mc cte tae ae eae = ahaa aie ae nn ine eee 111 BeTAtiOnNGr MIMO e Sao cca awd scania ws wkewa new caw nate wach maaie 113 ILLUSTRATIONS PLATES FOLLOWING PAGD 38. Fragmentary pottery vessels collected by Lewis and Clark near mouth of Knife River about 1804-5. (Photograph from University WAT YSTS] UN ah) 22) a G8 ots RE oe SN SS ER AER R ES SAE Grape ts go med Oey De See aay ae 114 39. Pottery vessels collected by Drs. C. C. Gray and Washington Mat- thews, probably at Fort Berthold, N. Dak.....-..-------.---.-- 114 40. Pottery vessels probably from Fort Berthold, N. Dak. (Photographs from (a) University Museum and (b) Peabody Museum, Harvard [han loci) ipa) ie ly oc IE Sea 28 SI SR Spee Sei SARL Ue 114 41. Pottery vessels from Fort Berthold, N. Dak. (Photographs from (a) University Museum and (b, c)) North Dakota Historical Society. 114 42. Pottery vessels from Fort Berthold, N. Dak. (Photographs from (a) University Museum and (b-d) Museum of the American Indian, aE CUCL Chas F251 0) SO oe A ET ICU TES RIOR TY 1G MSTA 114 43. Pottery vessels from Fort Berthold, N. Dak. (b, Photograph from North Dakota Historical Society)... a... enenn mene niecenwn na nhin 114 44, Pottery vessels, probably Arikara, from Fort Berthold. (b, Photo- graph from Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation)... 114 45. Recent pottery vessels from the Arikara, Fort Berthold, N. Dak. (Photographs from Museum of the American Indian, Heye Founda- PLOW) os 22 See ER Ae CSR ee ee te LS ee es AR tee 114 MAP PAGE 7. Portion of the Upper Missouri River region in North Dakota and South Dakota, showing certain Indian village sites, military forts, and racing: poste. the LOth CONtUPY 2 6.0.o wn on bee o deans dans ees nme 100 ewer Pe er vt as vena ae bs et on eh moh ic! (mo ann et Ps Me ) id eld ie er ee if Ca a Na i x ” « alee ‘ 4 bs 7 ht \ oh BAS gar mtb. ada be ae: es. if i y a 2 wh Sree remem ——s PREFACE After spending three seasons in the field in the Buggs Island-John H. Kerr Reservoir in southern Virginia and obtaining considerable ceramic and other artifactual remains from a number of sites in the area, I started to examine this material preparatory to writing a report of my results when a question arose regarding the origin of the pottery and the ethnic group to which it was attributed. The solu- tion of this question was not in the field of archeology, directly, but rather in the field of ethnology and linguistics. The recovered pottery assemblage was not recognized as that usually attributed to Siouan-speaking peoples, and since they were listed as the probable occupants of this section of Virginia it neces- sitated a perusal of the literature dealing with this group—especially the Occaneechi, Saponi, and Tutelo—from the earliest incursions by whites up to the present day in order to see whether the solution could be found. This same peculiarity was also noted by Manson (1948) in the Potomac River area. Indian tradition is highly unre- liable, hence plays a very small role in the investigations of these tribes. The earliest of the writers consulted was Captain John Smith, who was known for the veracity of his statements. Never making actual firsthand contact with the group of peoples living in southern and central Virginia, he learned about them through Algonquian sources. From these he deduced that certain groups occupied areas indicated on his map of 1624, but so far the ones indicated have never been satisfactorily identified or related with known Indian groups. William Strachey, secretary of the colony from 1609 to 1612, tells about Algonquian habits and economy, and lists a number of Indian words, giving their English equivalents, which have a direct bearing upon the study underway. Others of this early period include John Lederer, Batts and Fallam, Needham and Arthur, Robert Beverley, and John Lawson. These were followed by the interpretative school, including among others, James Mooney, David I. Bushnell, Jr., Dr. John R. Swanton, and Dr. William N. Fenton, which brings us up to the present day. These are the principal writers upon whom we rely in the following account. Rather than change or reinterpret their statements, we have decided to use their own words in order to convey the exact meaning intended 119 120 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bunx. 164 by the original writer so that no bias of the present writer could creep into the text to color it in any manner. None of the modern writers can equal in authority, nor surpass in interest, the statements made in the original records by the men who not only saw these Indians in their natural habitat but actually had dealings with them, all of which were recorded and should be evaluated exactly as presented without letting inferences, assumptions, and preconceived concepts steal into the picture. Since the source material of this area is much scattered, it is hoped that the presentation of most of the pertinent data here will serve a broader purpose than the immediate requirements of this paper. Cart F. MILuer. REVALUATION OF THE EASTERN SIOUAN PROB- LEM, WITH PARTICULAR EMPHASIS ON THE VIRGINIA BRANCHES—THE OCCANEECHI, THE SAPONI, AND THE TUTELO By Caru F. MItuer HISTORICAL DOCUMENTATION Recently a review of the literature dealing with the Occaneechi, the Saponi, and the Tutelo, three branches of the so-called Siouan family, has been made, and a number of interesting facts have come to light. The first two members of this group were first mentioned in 1651 by Edward Bland. They were again mentioned in 1670 by John Lederer, and in 1671 Batts and Fallam (Fallow) mentioned the Tutelo or Toteros. References to these three tribes keep appearing in reports from time to time in Virginia and North Carolina until it is apparent they either migrated northward or were assimilated by other groups. The question as to whether these three tribes can be rightfully classified as Siouan linguistically has arisen and an examination of the whole premise has been made. Historically, the method has been to go over the original sources and to see what each author based his authority upon in constructing his premise: if inferential—how valid were these inferences; if factual— from what sources were they gathered. Quoting the original sources chronologically, the earliest"is Edward Bland’s account, in 1651, in which he states: 1651.—At Blandina River we have some discourse with our Appamattuck Guide concerning that River, who told us that the branch of Blandina River ran a great way up into the Country; and that about three dayes journy further to the South-West, there was a far greater Branch so Broad that a man could hardly see over it, and bended it selfe to the Northward above the head of James River unto the foot of the great Mountaines, on which River there lived many people upwards, being the Occanacheans and the Nessoneicks, and that where some of the Occanacheans lived, there is an island within the River three dayes journy about, which is of a very rich and fertile soile, and that the upper end of the Island is fordable, not above knee deepe, of a stony bottome, running very swift, and the other side very deepe and navigable: Also we found many of the people of Blan- dina River to have beards, and both there, and at Woodford River we saw many very old men,’and that the{Climate’according to our opinions were far more tem- perate than ours of Virginia, and the inhabitants full“of Children;*they also told 121 122 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Butt. 164 us that at the bottome of the River was great heaps of Salt; and we saw among them Copper, and were informed that they tip their pipes with silver, of which some have been brought into this country, and ’tis very probable that there may be Gold, and other Mettals amongst the Hils. [Salley, 1911, p. 16.] What is particularly interesting about this quotation from Bland is the description of the island upon which the Occaneechi lived. He gave us an actual fact—the “upper end of the Island is fordable, not above knee deepe, of a stony bottome, running very swift.” As we go along let us keep this in mind in order to compare it with the state- ments of other observers. 1670.—John Lederer, in 1670, first contacted the Sapon (Saponi) and later the Akenatzy (Occaneechi). After parting company with Major Harris and the rest of the Englishmen near the south fork of the James River, he started out on his own. (See map 8, p. 116.) The fifth of June, my company and I parted good friends, they back again, and I with one Sasquesahanough—Indian, named Jackzetavon, only, in pursuit of my first enterprize, changing my course from west to southwest and by south to avoid the mountains. ... From the fifth, which was Sunday, until the ninth of June, I travelled through difficult ways, without seeing any town or Indian; and then I arrived at Sapon, a village of the Nahyssans, about an hundred miles distant from Mahock; scituate upon a branch of Shawan, alias Rorenock-river . . . [Alvord and Bidgood, 1912, p. 152.] Sapon is within the limits of the Province of Carolina . . . [Ibid., p. 153.] Not far distant from hence, as I understand from the Nahyssan Indians, is their kings residence, called pintahae from the same river, and happy in the same advantages both for pleasure and profit . . . [Ibid., p. 153.] From hence, by an Indians instructions, I directed my course to Akenatzy, an island bearing south and be west, and about fifty miles distant, upon a branch of the same river, from Sapon. The countrey here, though high, is level, and for the most part a rich soyle, as I judged by the growth of the trees; yet where it is inhabited by Indians, it lies open in spacious plains, and is blessed with a very healthful air, as appears by the age and vigour of the people; and though I travelled in the month of June, the heat of the weather hindered me not from riding at all hours without any great annoyance from the sun. By easie journeys I landed at Akenatzy upon the twelfth of June. The current of the river is here so strong, that my horse had much difficulty to resist it; and I expected every step to be carried away with the stream. This island, though small, maintains many inhabitants, who are fix’t here in great security, being naturally fortified with fastnesses of mountains, and water on every side. Upon the north-shore they yearly reap great crops of corn, of which they always have a twelve-months provision aforehand, against an invasion from their powerful neighbours. [Ibid., pp. 153-154.] 1671.—The following year, Batts and Fallam, two traders sent out by General Wood, reported on their western trip. Thomas Batts, Thomas Wood, and Robert Fallam left Apomatacks town on Septem- ber 1, 1671. They wrote on September 4: We set forward and about two of the clock arriv’d at the Sapiny town. We travelled south and by west course till about even(ing) and came to the Saponys ei Aas EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 123 west. Here we were very joyfully and kindly received with firing of guns and pleanty of provisions. We here hired a Sepiny Indian to be our guide towards the Teteras, a nearer way than usual. Sept. 5. Just as we were ready to take horse and march from the Sapiny’s about seven of the clock in the Morning we heard some guns go off from the other side of the River. They were siven Apomatack Indians sent by Major General Wood to accompany us in our Voyage. We hence sent back a horse belonging to Mr. Thomas Wood, which was tired, by a Portugal, belonging to Major General Wood, whom we here found. About eleven of the clock we set forward and that night came to the town of the Hanathaskies which we judge to be twenty-five miles from the Sapenys, they were lying west and by north in an island on the Sapony River, rich Land. Sept. 6. About eleven of the clock we set forward from the Hanathaskies {Ibid., p. 185.] Sept. 9... . we came to a very steep descent, at the foot whereof stood the Tetera Town in a very rich swamp between a branch and the main River of Roanoke circled about with mountains. [Ibid., p. 186.] 1674.—In 1674 Major General Wood reports on the “Journeys of Needham and Arthur” (Alvord and Bidgood, 1912, pp. 209-226). In a letter to Mr. John Richards, he says: about ye 25th of June they mett with ye Tomahitans as they were journying from ye mountains to ye Occhonechees.. . . they journied nine days from Occhonechees to Sitteree: west and by south, past nine rivers and creeks which all end in this side ye mountaines and emty them selves into the east sea. Sitteree being the last towne of inhabitance and not any path further until they came within two days journey of ye Tomahitans; they travelled from thence up the mountaines upon ye sun setting all ye way, and in foure dayes gett to ye toppe, sometimes leading theire hourses sometimes rideing. [p. 211.] He places Aeno (Eno)— an Indian towne two dayes jorny beyond Occhoneeche . . . [Ibid, pp. 214-215.] from Aeno hee journied to Sarrah, with his companions ye Tomahitons and John ye Occhoenechee accompanied with more of his countrey men which was to see ye tragady [Needham’s killing] acted as I suppose, it happened as they past Sarrah river. . . . Ochenechee Indian John tooke up Mr. Needham very short in words and so continued scoulding all day untill they had past ye Yattken towne and so over Yattken river. . . [pp. 216-217.] In this account is hidden a piece of ethnology. It is stated that— Now ye king must goe to give ye monetons a visit which were his friends, mony signifing water and ton great in theire language. [The king referred to was the king of the Tomahitans who went visiting his friends the Monetons or Monacans.] Ye monyton towne situated upon a very great river att which place ye tide ebbs and flowes. . . . This river runes northwest and out of ye westerly side of it goeth another very great river about a days journey lower where the inhabitance are an inumarable company of Indians, as the monytons told my man which is twenty days journey from one end to ye other of ye inhabitance, and all these are at warr with the Tomahitans. [Ibid., pp. 221-222.] Gabriel, a white trader captured and held captive by the Tutelo or Tomahitan Indians, in making his escape— waded over into ye iland where ye Occhenechees are seated, strongly fortified by nature and that makes them soe insolent for they are but a handful of people, 124 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bu. 164 besides what vagabonds repaire to them it beeing a receptackle for rogues. . now wee come again to ye king of ye Tomahittans. With his two sonns and one more who tooke thire packs with them and comes along by Totero under ye foot of ye mountains, untill they mett with James river and there made a cannoe of barke and came downe the river to the Manikins. from thence to Powetan by land, and across the neck and on ye 20th of July at night arrived att my house [Ibid., pp. 224—225.] In this last paragraph we have a bit more information concerning the Occaneechi. He accounts for their insolence not only from the location and position of their island home but to their internal makeup of ‘“‘vagabonds.” 1705.—Robert Beverley in his ‘The History and Present State of Virginia,” which was first published in 1705, devotes a part to the language of the peoples, in which he says: Their Lanugage differs very much antiently in the several parts of Britain; so that Nations at a moderate distance, do not understand one another. However, they have a sort of general Language, like what Lahontan calls the Algonkine, which is understood by the Chief men of many Nations, as Latin is in most parts of Europe, and Lingua Franca quite thro the Levant. The general Language here us’d is said to be that of the Occaneeches, tho they have been but a small Nation, ever since those parts were known to the English; but in what this language may differ. from that of the Algonkines, I am not able to determin. [Beverley, 1947, p. 191.] The language aspect is the most important part of the whole research, for it is upon this factor that these groups were identified, supposedly, as Siouan-speaking peoples. Lawson (1937), in his his- tory of Carolina, etc., states: I once met with a young Indian woman that had been brought from beyond the Mountains, and was sold a Slave into Virginia. She spoke the same language as the Coramine Indians, that dwell near Cape Lookout, allowing for some few Words, which were different, yet no otherwise than that they might understand one another very well. [Ibid., pp. 180—-181.] Lawson did not bother to tell the tribal affiliations of this young Indian woman, but he pointed out that those groups living “beyond the mountains” were able to converse and understand the Indians living around Cape Lookout, ‘allowing for some few Words.” The only conclusion that can be drawn from this is that this general language spread from the coastal region into the back country beyond the mountains. These ‘few words” can be accounted for on regional differences; therefore, the Algonquians of the coast spoke the same language as the Indian groups in between them and the mountains as well as those occupying portions of the mountains. 1714.—Lawson, in describing the experiences of his journey (see map 9), says: . it proving delicate Weather, three of us separated ourselves from the Horses, and the rest of the Company, and went directly for Sapona town... . We passed by the Sepulchres of several slain Indians. Coming that day about re a EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 125 7 i A rr i : & i Acone a & . = Li La 770 —— eS rm is & 4 | Se a if Fos. QC EAN 3 y im = OFA MAP OF THE INHAHIT: l PARTS OF N. CAROLINA 2 prepared by Ion Lawson : A Stale of 60 Britysh Mites cate a riser ee tt i = Z Ti) 20 r-) Rea ry ‘° Dorawre by Geo. Schroeter. NY. : Mar 9.—Facsimile of John Lawson’s map, 1709. thirty Miles, we reached the fertile and pleasant Banks of Sapona River, whereon stands the Indian Town and Fort. . . . These Indians live in a clear Field about a Mile square, . . . One side of the River is hemmed in with mountainy Ground, the other side proving as rich a Soil to the Eye of a knowing Person with us, as any this Western World can afford. . . . The Sapona River proves to be the West Branch of Cape Fair, or Clarendon River... The Saponas had (about ten days before we came thither) taken Five Pris- oners of the Sinnagers or Jennitos, a Sort of People that range several thousands 126 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Butt. 164 of Miles, making all Prey they lay their Hands on. These are feared by all the savage Nations I ever was among, the Westward Indians dreading their Ap- proach.-s 2% The Toteros, a neighboring Nation, came down from the Westward Mountains to the Sapona’s, desiring them to give them those prisoners into their Hands, to the Intent they might send them back into their own Nation, being bound in Gratitude to be serviceable to the Sinnagers, since not long ago, those Northern Indians had taken some of the Toteros Prisoners and done them no Harm, but treated them civilly whilst among them, sending them, with Safety, back to their own People, and affirming that it would be the best Method to preserve Peace on all Sides. At that time these Toteros, Saponas, and the Keyauwees, three small Nations, were going to live together, by which they thought they should strengthen themselves and become formidable to their Enemies. The Reason offered by the Toteros being heard, the Sapona King, with the Consent of his Counsellors, delivered the Sinnagers up to the Toteros to conduct them home. {Ibid., pp. 44-45.] On Monday Morning our whole Company, with the Horses set out from the Sapona-Indian Town . . . Going over several Creeks, very convenient for Water- Mills, about eight Miles from the Town we passed over a very pretty River, called Rocky River, a fit Name, having a Ridge of high Mountains running from its Banks to the Eastward and disgorging itself into Sapona-River . . . [Ibid., p. 47.] Next day we had fifteen Miles farther to the Keyauwees . . . At Noon we passed over such another stony River, as that eight Miles from Sapona. This is called Heighwaree and affords as good blue Stone for Mill-stones as that from Cologn... Five Miles from this River, to the N. W., stands the Keyauwees town. They are fortified in with wooden Puncheons, like Sapona, being a People much of the same Number. Nature has so fortified this Town with Mountains, that were it a Seat of War, it might easily be made impregnable; having large Corn- Fields joining to their Cabins, and a Savanna near the Town at the Foot of these Mountains, that is capable of keeping some hundred Heads of Cattle. And all this environed round with very high Mountains, so that no hard Wind ever troubles these Inhabitants. . . . [Ibid., p. 48.] At the Top of one of these Mountains is a cave that one hundred Men may sit very conveniently to dine in .. . [Ibid., pp. 48-49.] After a bit of travel, Lawson and his group decided to “set out for Achonechy-Town, it being by Estimation, twenty Miles off, which I believe is pretty- exact” (ibid., p. 53). En route, they met a Mr. Massey, an Indian trader, and his helpers, who told them about Sinnagers (Iroquois) activities in the area. This changed their plans and instead they went ‘‘to call upon one Enoe Will, as we went to Adshusheer, for that he would conduct us safe among the English . . .” (ibid., p. 53). Thus they missed making contact with the Occaneechi. Much later, Lawson states that: ‘These five Nations of the Totero’s, Sapona’s, Keiuwee’s, Aconechos, and Schoccories, are lately come amongst us, and may contain in all, about 750 Men, Women and Children” (ibid., p. 255). 1782-1740.—Long known only in manuscript form, the histories of the survey of the dividing line between Virginia and North Carolina and other items from the pen of William Byrd written during the years Tur T{?)~=—- EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 127 1732-1740 have provided considerable source material on the early colonies. The “History of the Dividing Line” was first printed in 1841, while the ‘Secret History” went unpublished until 1929. In the 1929 edition of the histories Dr. William Boyd writes in the introduction: William Byrd’s History of the Dividing Line Betwix’t Virginia and North Carolina has long been regarded as a classic of the colonial period of American literature, an invaluable source for the social history of that time, and a compre- hensive and dependable account of the first successful effort to establish the boundary between North Carolina and Virginia. This estimate, however, must be revised. [Italics here used are the present writer’s, rather than Boyd’s.] Only the literary merits of the work can withstand criticism. In all other respects, the History of the Dividing Line must be accepted with reservations. As a descrip- tion of the frontier region along the Virginia—North Carolina border its general tone is true to nature; but certain details leave on the mind of the reader mis- conceptions regarding conditions and policies in North Carolina. [Byrd, 1929, p. xi.] Byrd’s writings of his experiences encountered while surveying the Dividing Line, reported as ‘““The History and The Secret History,”’ contain a number of interesting statements. He gives us a number of Indian words and their equivalents in English. These are: Momni-seep = a}! -sicttie i ak Shallow water. Yaypatsco Yapatoco ;Beaver Creek. Yatapsco NMassaINOnT. 2.4 ceeh bees & Paint Creek. Ohimpamony fan's Te bo. Aathl8:) tel Fishing Creek. Tewahominy Tewaw-hommini}-_-.._-_-__-- Tuscarora Creek. Tewakominy Hicogtomony- 2.222 52 2 ee Buzzard or Turkey Buzzard River. Wieee-quolowat ole eae seen Rock Creek. In some of these he states that they are of Saponi origin, but in others he just states that such and such a word “‘is called by the Indians ; which signifies, in their Jargon, ” (ibid., p. 158). Whether philol- ogists have taken these also to be Saponian in origin is unknown. One thing which can be easily noted is that “moni” or ‘‘miny’’ can appear as either a prefix or a suffix and may mean creek or water, but if so it is lacking in both Beaver Creek and Rock Creek formation. Byrd locates for us the great falls in the Roanoke River in relation to the confluence of the Dan and Staunton Rivers where they merge to form the Roanoke River. He states it this way: The great Falls of Roanoak lie about 20 Miles lower, to which a Sloop of Moder- ate Burthen may come up. There are, besides these, many Smaller Falls above, tho’ none that entirely intercept the Passage of the River, as the great Ones do, by a Chain of Rocks for 8 Miles together. The River forks about 36 Miles higher, and both Branches are pretty equal in Breadth where they divide, tho’ the Southern, now call’d the Dan runs up the 128 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLt. 164 farthest. [See map 10.] That to the North runs away near Northwest, and is call’d the Staunton, and heads not far from the Source of Appamatuck River, while the Dan stretches away pretty near West & runs clear thro’ the great Mountains. ([Ibid., p. 156.] When Byrd speaks of the Saponi, he really waxes eloquent: All the Grandes of the Sappony Nation did us the Honour to repair hither to meet us, and our Worthy Friend and Fellow Traveller, Bearskin, appear’s among the gravest of them in his Robes of ceremony. Four Young Ladies of the first Quality came with them, who had more the air of cleanliness than any copper- Colour’d Beauties I had ever seen ... This people is now made up of the Remnant of Several other Nations, of which the most considerable are the Sapponys, the Occaneches, and Steukenhocks, who not finding themselves Separately Numerous, enough for their Defense, have agreed to unite into one Body, and all of them now go under the Name of Sapponys. Each of these was formerly a distinct Nation, orrather a Several clan or Canton of the Same Nation, Speaking the Same Language, and using the same Customs. But their perpetual Wars against all other Indians, in time, reduc’d them so lo as to make it Necessary to join their Forces together. They dwelt formerly not far below the Mountains, upon Yadkin River, about 200 Miles West and by South from the Falls of the Roanoak. But about 25 years ago they took Refuge in Virginia, being no longer in condition to make Head not only against the Northern Indians, who are their Implacable enemies, but also against most of those to the South. All the Nations round about, bearing in mind the Havock these Indians us’d formerly to make among their Ancestors in the Isolence of their Power, did at length avenge it Home upon them, and made them glad to apply to this Government for protection. Col. Spotswood, our then lieut. governor, having a good Opinion of their Fidelity & Courage, settled tham at Christanna, ten Miles north of Roanoak, upon the belief that they wou’d be a good Barrier on that Side of the Country, against the Incursion of all Foreign Indians. [Ibid., pp. 308, 310.] In regards to the Tutelo, he has this to say: The Daughter of the Tetero King went away with the Sapponys, but being the last of her Nation, and fearing she Shou’d not be treated according to her Rank, poison’d herself, like an Old Roman, with the Root of the Trumpet-Plant. Her Father dy’d 2 Years before, who was the most intrepid Indian we had been ac- quainted with. He had made himself terrible to all other Indians by his Exploits, and had escaped so many Dangers that he was estemm’d invulnerable. But at last he dy’d of a Pleurisy, the last Man of His Race and Nation, leaving only the unhappy Daughter behind him, who would not long survive Him. [Ibid., pp. 310, 312]. Whether this information was gathered during the time he was making the survey between the two States is not known, but it must have been around the year 1728. Additional information on the Occaneechi, Saponi, and Tutelo is found in ‘‘The Writings of ‘Colonel William Byrd of Westover in Virginia Esqr.’’’ The entries are in diary form with each event dated: [15th Sept., 1733]. . . we rode on 7 Miles farther to Blue Stone Castle 5 whereof were thro’ my own Land, that is to say, all above Sandy Creek. My Land there EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 129 ANTHROP. PaP. No. 52] “(ez6r ‘péog) eury Surprarq ey} Jo dew s,piAg UrelyiM JO efusovgq—OT 4VIN a ae ae i IN j “2. R ae eal 2900 J 130 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Burt 164 in all extends 10 Miles upon the River; [Roanoke] and 3 charming Islands, namely Sapponi, Occaneeche, and Totero, run along the whole length of it. The lowest of these Islands is three Miles long, the next 4, and the uppermost 3, divided from each other by only a Narrow Strait. The Soil is rich in all of them, the Timber large, and a kind of Pea, very grateful to Cattle and Horses, holds green all the Winter. Roanoke River is divided by these Islands; that part which runs on the North Side is about 80 Yards and that on the South more than 100. A large Fresh will overflow the lower part of these Islands, but never covers all, so that the cattle may always recover a Place of Security. The Middlemost Island, called Occaneeche Island, has several fields in it where Occaneeche Indians formerly lived, and these are still some remains of the Peach Trees they planted. [Byrd, 1901, p. 286.] 17 Sept. 1733. We set off about nine from Blue Stone Castle, and rode up the River 6 Miles, (one half of which distance was on my own Land,) as far as Major Mumford’s Quarter, where Master Hogen was Tenant upon Halves. Here were no great Marks of Industry, the Weeds being near as high as the Corn. My Islands run up within a little way of this Place, which will expose them to the In- roade of the Major’s Creatures. That call’d Totero Island, lyes too convenient not to receive Damage that way; but we must guard against it as well as we can. ... We returned downward agains about 4 Miles, and a Mile from the Point found a good Ford over the North Branch, into the upper end of Totero Island. ... There is a Cave in this Island, in which the last Totero King, with only 2 of his Men, defended himself against a great Host of Northern Indians, & at last oblig’d them to retire. We forded the Streight out of this into Occan- eechy Island, which was full of Large Trees, and rich land, and the South part of it is too high for any flood less than Noah’s to drown it . . . [Ibid., pp. 288, 289, 290.] 19 Sept. 1733. Because I detested Idleness, I caus’d my Overseer to paddle me up the River as far as the Streight that divides Occaneechy from Totero Island, which is about 20 Yards wide. There runs a Swift Stream continually out of the South part of the River into the North, and is in some places very deep. [Ibid., p. 291.] This is in contrast with the entry made for the 17th of September in which Byrd tells about fording the strait between these two islands without any mention of this deep water. 1775.—James Adair (1930, p. 67) in his “History of the American Indian,” first published in 1775, states: “In Virginia, resides the remnant of an Indian tribe, who call themselves Sepone...” A footnote at the bottom of this same page, inserted by Samuel Cole Williams, editor of the publication, noted: ‘Saponi, mentioned by Lawson and Byrd; later incorporated into the Catawbas and now extinct.” The great trading path often referred to by the early explorers and traders has been identified by Williams (ibid., p. 234, footnote) as: “The great trading path from Virginia to Georgia passed through the country of the Catawbas, and was known as the ‘Catawba Path.’ This brought the tribe into close contact with the whites, which was unfortunate for the redmen, as it tended to their enfeeblement and decline.” ANTHROP. Par. _ EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 131 1836.—In consulting “A Synopsis of the Indian Tribes,’ etc., by Albert Gallatin (1836), we find: No further mention is made of the Esaws, and no other populous nation is ever alluded to in that quarter but the Catawbas, there cannot, it seems, be any doubt to their identity with the Esaws of Lawson, who probably mistook a local for the generic name of the nation. Between them and the Tuscaroras of the river Neuse, he [Lawson] places the Saponas on a branch of Cape Fear River, (or rather on the Great Pedee, which he does not mention, and some branches of which he evidently mistook for tributary streams of Cape Fear River) and in their vicinity of the Toteros and Keyauwees, three small tribes amounting to- gether to seven hundred and fifty souls, which had but lately been driven away from the west into that quarter. He was shown, near the Sapona town, the graves of seven Indians ‘lately killed by the Sinnegars or Jennitos’ (Senecas or Oneidas), and the three tribes had determined to unite in one town for their better security. East of them and west of the Tuscaroras, he mentions the Sissipahaus on the waters of Cape Fear River, and the Enoes on a branch of the Neuse. With the exception of the Catawbas, we have not the least knowledge of the language of any of those tribes. [Italics are the present writer’s.] The records of North Carolina would probably throw some light on the subject (of the disappearance of many small tribes.) We learn from Williamson that the Saponas and the Chowans, about the year 1720, obtained leave to join the Tuscaroras. The Wyanokes, whom he mentions as having lived on the river Nottoway and formerly emigrated from the Susquehanna, were probably a tribe connected with the Nottoways and Chowans. To the names already mentioned may be added the upper and lower Sawara towns, laid down, south of the Dan River, in all the early maps of North Carolina. In Jeffrey’s map, a tribe called Saluda, is also laid down, south of that river, near the present site of Columbus in South Carolina, with a note, that it had removed to Conestoga in Pennsylvania. [Ibid., pp. 85-86]. The difference between the languages of those several tribes struck Lawson forcibly. He observes that he could find but one word common to the Tusca- roras and the Woccons, who lived but two leagues apart. In the absence of vocabularies, it is now impossible to ascertain, whether most of those several communities spoke languages radically different from each other, or dialects of the same. But we are indebted to Lawson for those of the Tuscaroras, of the Pamlicos, and of the Woccons; and they certainly belong to three distinct lan- guages. He did not suspect that of the Tuscaroras to be an Iroquois dialect, and that his short specimen of that of the Pamlicos would enable us to ascertain how far the Lenape tribes extended towards the south. On comparing the vocabu- laries of the Woccons and the Catawbas, out of fifty-one words found in both, sixteen appear to have more or less remote affinities; and the Woccons have accordingly been designated as belonging to the same family of languages. [Ibid., p. 87.] Gallatin gives us a bit of contradictory evidence when talking about the Meherrins and Tuteloes. (See map 11.) He states: The southern Iroquois tribes occupied Chowan River and its tributary streams. They were bounded, on the east, by the most southerly Lenape tribes, who were in possession of the low country along the seashores, and those of Albemarle and Pamlico Sounds. Towards the south and the west they extended beyond the river Neuse. They appear to have been known in Virginia, in early times, under the name of Monacans, as far north as James River. 370929—57——11 132 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY (But. 164 BERTIE PRECINCTS 1663 -1729 ° Merce By Clee. Sree! A cate 620 z ay Lad DOG TT re Halil 78" SN erTAHOITT 3 z Map 11.—Facsimile of F. L. Hawks’ map, 1663-1729. A powerful chief of the Chowans is mentioned in the accounts of the first attempts to establish a colony on Roanoke Island and its vicinity. Lawson, in his account of the North Carolina Indians, enumerates the Chowans, the Meher- rins, and the Nottoways, as having together ninety-five warriors in the year 1708, But the Meherrins or Tuteloes and the Nottoways inhabited respectively the two rivers of that name, and were principally seated in Virginia. We have but in- distinct notices of the Tuteloes. It has been seen that they had migrated to the north and joined the Six Nations, who brought them forward, in 1758, as one of the younger members of the confederacy. Evans, in the Analysis of his Map, says that the Six Nations had allotted lands on the Susquehanna to several tribes, amongst which he enumerates the Tuteloes from Meherrin River in Virginia; and he further states, that they (the Six Nations) laid no claim to the country of the Tuscaroras who had been driven away, but were not so well satisfied as to the lands of the Tuteloes and Meherrins, whom they had received under their pro- tection. We have no vocabulary of that tribe, and no knowledge that they still exist under that name. [Ibid., p. 81; italics are the present writer’s.] Rater PAF. = - EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 133 Samuel G. Drake (1848), in his book on Indians, tells us that the Occaneeches were in Virginia in 1607 and that they had at times been a powerful group but by 1607 their numbers had been greatly re- duced. ‘The Saponies (Wanamies) were known to be living on the Sapona River in North Carolina in 1700 and to have joined the Tusca- roras in 1720. The Toteros made their home in the mountains north of the Saponies in North Carolina in 1700. One interesting note is the correlation of the Mangoacs, or Tuteloes, with the Iroquois who once lived on the Nottoway River but are now extinct. Drake says that the Mannahoaks once lived on the upper waters of the Rappahannock River and were extinct long ago. ‘Dahcota (or Dacota) was the name by which the Sioux knew themselves.” 1858.—Consulting the history of North Carolina, by Hawks (1858), we find that he says: The Mahocks, from Lederer’s map, would appear to have been living near the dividing line of Nelson and Albemarle counties, at the junction of the Rockfish and James rivers. The locality of the Nahyssans appear, from Robert Morden’s map of Carolina (1687), and also from Ogilby’s, to have been west of the Mahocks, between them and the first range of mountains. [1858, p. 44.] [See map 12.] He goes on to explain that— By Shawan, Lederer means Chowan, which he here confounds with Roanoke. On Morden’s map of 1687, and Ogilby’s (1671), the Chowan is called Rokahak, while the Moratoc or Roanoke is called Noratoke. The Staunton and the Dan form the latter river, and it was probably on some of the tributaries of the first- named stream he struck, perhaps on the Staunton itself, just before its junction with the Dan. He had changed his course, as he tells us to S. W. by S. to avoid the mountains, and the only streams to which this course would bring him are the Staunton and its northern tributaries. [Ibid., p. 45.] In explaining the location of the “‘Sapon,’’ he says: We must here remember that the dividing line between the present States of Virginia and Carolina was not then established as it is now recognized. From Lederer’s map, it appears that all that part of Virginia lying south of James River, and extending as far westward as the Blue Ridge, was considered by him as part of Carolina, and is so designated on his map. Sapon, however, would appear from his map to have been in North Carolina, or just beyond the boundary in Virginia. Morden places it just south of the dividing line, in Carolina, on the upper waters of what we call the Roanoke. It was the chief town of the Nahys- sans. [Ibid. p. 46.] [See map 13.] In speaking of the Occaneechi, he states: This island Akenatzy is possibly what is found on Lawson’s map of 1709, under the name of Oconeche, in the Roanoke River. [Ibid., p. 47.] From Lederer’s account, the conjecture that seems most probable is, that taking a course southwest and by south from the falls of the James River, he came upon the Roanoke in North Carolina, and crossed it at the island which he calls Akenatzy, if he crossed it at all. This island is between Halifax and Northampton, I apprehend. His wandering then took him into some of those counties where our swamp lands are most abundant, and he certainly was in 134 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY (Buux. 164 DISC RIRTION OF CAROLINA. By Order of the Lords Prop rietors A.”.1671 o Lovext oo? uty tg rasintlf rX el ee | ped {terme pe se Fae. Simize rom Oyttby wAmerica Drawn by ico Schroeter. WY. : ~ = ev on = “== ay rad " A ee ah ead ee Map 12.—Facsimile of Ogilby’s map, 1671. Bertie, from which pursuing a northeast course, he returned to Virginia... He, however, was not the first European who had seen that land. Eighty-five years before, the hardy adventurers under Lane had placed their feet upon it, though their inland explorations were much less extensive than those of Lederer. [Ibid., p. 52.] Up to this point Occaneechi Island has been placed on the Moratock River in North Carolina by Swanton (1922, pl. 3); at the confluence of the Staunton and Dan Rivers by William Byrd in 1733; on Mitchell’s map of 1765 it appears at the confluence of these same two rivers since the basic information was drawn from Byrd; on the Fry EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 135 ANTHROP. PaP, No. 52] ‘urIe[deyo B 8B SIOUOISSTMIWIOD oY} porueduIODB OY ‘(28/T) ‘Ig ‘oureyuog Jojeg “Aoy oY} Jo deur jo oplunsoeqy—eT IVI IFOUVID HDY Ox”, x i=. = ; | Sayre z pawzag ae ang wna KLmgaR Bue RBs ; iE ee Fe or aursavag gy pn /ON) XAT % Nentaureaway une pu Jo; 3 Hewerny 22343 . o- eww ee ——) ae - = — Ff a oJ yy oad gree” Cio, poreap fo 7774 wa2-qy oe — —— FS) are giwnd Sf aS i , A: phnieh ce ek: BY) & Mme 2m TeEONE AINE weTANG YET ag OL OND a pe 136 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Butu. 164 and Jefferson’s map of 1775 a group of islands labeled ‘‘Occoneachey Islands” appear at the confluence of these same two rivers and on both the latter maps ‘‘Aconeechy”’ and “ Akonichi” Town were placed on the Eno River east of ‘‘Old Haw Fields” and just a short distance south of “The Trading Path Leading to the Catawban and Cherokee Indian Nations’; while Hawks in 1858 placed it somewhere between Halifax and Northampton Counties. 1883.—At this period we come to a most important source, Horatio Hale. In 1872 the Reverend Joseph Anderson reported upon the findings of Hale in his article entitled “The Newly Discovered Rela- tionships of the Tuteloe to the Dakotan Stock,’ which was only a preview of a later revelation published by Hale in 1883. I quote him at length, since most of the later studies stress his findings. In this article he says: The fact, which has been recently ascertained, that several tribes speaking languages of the Dakota stock were found by the earliest explorers occupying the country east of the Alleghenies, along a line extending through the southern part of Virginia and the northern portion of North Carolina, nearly to the Atlantic ocean, has naturally awakened much interest. . . . Careful researches seem to show that while the language of these eastern tribes is closely allied to that of the western Dakotas, it bears evidence of being older inform. Jf this conclusion shall be verified, the supposition, which at first was natural, that these eastern tribes were merely offshoots of the Dakota stock, must be deemed at least im- probable. . . . As a means of solving this interesting problem, the study of the history and language of a tribe now virtually extinct assumes a peculiar scientific value. . . . [Italics are writer’s.] In the year 1671 an exploring party under Captain Batt, leaving ‘““Apomatock Town” on the James River, penetrated into the mountains of Western Virginia at a distance, by the route they travelled, of two hundred and fifty miles from their starting point. At this point they found ‘the Tolera Town in a very rich swamp between a breach (branch) and the main river of the Roanoke, circled about by mountains.” (Batt’s Journal and Relation of a New Discovery, in N. Y. Hist. Co. vol. iii, p. 191). There are many errata in the printed narrative, and the circumstances leave no doubt that ‘“‘Tolera” should be ‘‘Totera.” On their way to this town the party passed the Sapong (Sapony) town, which, accord- ing to the journal, was about a hundred miles east of the ‘“Toleras.”” A few years later we shall find these tribes in closer vicinity and connection. At this period the Five Nations were at the height of their power, and in full flush of that career of conquest which extended their empire from the Georgian Bay on the north to the Roanoke River on the south. They had destroyed the Hurons and the Eries, had crushed the Andastes (or Conestogas Indians), had reduced the Delawares to subjection, and were now brought into direct collision with the tribes of Virginia and the Carolinas. The Toteras (whom we shall henceforth know as the Tuteloes) began to feel their power. In 1686 the French missionaries had occasion to record a projected expedition of the Senecas against a people designated in the printed letter the “‘Tolere,”—the same misprint occurring once more in the same publication. (Lamberville to Bruyas, November 4, 1686, in N. Y. Hist. Col., vol. iii, p. 484.) The tradition of the Tuteloes record long continued and destructive wars waged against them and their allies by the Iroquois, and more especially by the two western nations, the Cayugas ANTHROP. Pap, -_ EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 137 | and Senecas. To escape the incursions of their numerous and relentless enemies, they retreated further to the south and east. Here they came under the observa- tion of a skilled explorer, John Lawson, the Surveyor-General of South Carolina. In 1701, Lawson traveled from Charleston, S. C. to Pamlico sound.... At the Sapona river, which was the west branch of the Cape Fear or Clarendon river, he came to the Sapona town, where he was well received. (Gallatin, 1836, suggests that Lawson was in error here, and that the Sapona river was a branch of the Great Pedee which he does not mention, and some branches which he evidently mistook for tributaries of the Cape Fear River, p. 85) He there heard of the Toteros as “a neighboring nation” in the ‘‘western mountains.” ‘At that time,’”’ he adds, “these Toteros, Saponas, and Keyauwees, three small nations, were going to live together, by which they thought they should strenghten themselves and become formidable to their enemies.’”’ They were then at war with the powerful and dreaded Senecas—whom Lawson styles Sinnagers. While he was at the Sapona town, some of the Toteras warriors came to visit their allies. Lawson was struck with their appearance. ... In another place he adds: ‘“‘These five nations of the Toteros, Saponas, Keiuwees, Aconechos and Schoicories are lately come amongst us, and may contain in all about 750 men, women and children.”’ It is known that the Toteroes (or Tuteloes) and Sapones understood each other’s speech, and 7zt is highly probable that all the five tribes belonged to the same stock. They had doubtless fled together from southwestern Virginia before their Iroquois invaders. The position in which they had taken refuge might well have seemed to them safe, as it placed between them and their enemies the strong and warlike Tuscarora nation, which numbered then, accord- ing to Lawson’s estimate, twelve hundred warriors, clustered in fifteen towns, stretching along the Neuse and Tar rivers. Yet, even behind this living rampart, the feeble confederates were not secure. Lawson was shown, near the Sapona town, the graves of seven Indians who had been lately killed by the ‘‘Sinnegars or Jennitos’’—names by which Gallatin understands the Senecas and Oneidas, though as regards the latter identification there may be some question. The protection which the Tuteloes had received from the Tuscaroras and their allies soon failed them. In the year 1711 a war broke out between the Tuscaroras and the Carolina settlers, which ended during the following year in the complete defeat of the Indians. After their overthrow the great body of the Tuscaroras retreated northward and joined the Iroquois, who received them into their league as the sixth nation of the confederacy. A portion, however, remained near their original home. They merely retired a short distance northward into the Virginia territory, and took up their abode in the tract which lies between the Roanoke and the Potomac rivers. Here they were allowed to remain in peace, under the protection of the Virginia government. And here, they were presently joined by the Tuteloes and Saponas, with their confederates. In September, 1724, the governors of New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, held a conference at Albany with the chiefs of the Iroquois, to endeavor to bring about a peace between them and the southern tribes. On this occasion Governor Spotteswood, of Virginia, enumerated the tribes for which the government of his province would undertake to engage. Among them were certain tribes which were commonly known under the name of the ‘‘Christanna Indians,” a name derived from that of a fort which had been established in their neighborhood. These were “the Saponies, Ochineeches, Stenkenoaks, Meipontskys, and Toteroes,’’ all of whom, it appears, the Iroquois were accustomed to comprehend under the name of Todirichronesm (N. Y. Hist. Col., vol. v, p. 655 et seq.) 138 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuu. 164 Some confusion and uncertainty, however, arise in consulting the colonial records of this time, from the fact that this name of Todirichrones was applied by the Iroquois to two distinct tribes, or rather confederacies, of Southern Indians, belonging to different stocks, and speaking languages totally dissimilar. They were, on the one hand, the Tuteloes (or Toteroes) and their allies, and, on the other, the powerful Catawba nation. The Catawba occupied the eastern portion of the Carolinas, south of the Tuscarora nation. One result of the peace thus established was that the Tuteloes and Saponas, after a time, determined to follow the course which had been taken by the major portion of their Tuscarora friends, and place.themselves directly under the pro- tection of the Six Nations. Moving northward across Virginia, they established themselves at Shamokin (since named Sunbury) in,what,is now_the center of Pennsylvania. ... The last surviving Tutelo lived among the Cayuga, and was known to them by the name of Nikonha. ... His Tutelo name was said to be Washiteng; its meaning could not be ascertained, and it_is perhaps merely 4 corruption of the English word mosquito. He was married to a Cayuga wife, and for many years had spoken only the language of her people. But he had not forgotten his proper speech, and readily gave us the Tutelo rendering{of nearly a,hundred words. [Italics are writer’s.] At that time my only knowledge of the Tuteloes had been derived from the few notices comprised in Gallatin’s Synopsis of the Indian Tribes, where they are classed with the nations of the Huron-Iroquois stock. At the same time, the distinguished author, with the scientific,caution,which marked all his writings, is careful to mention that no vocabulary of the language was known. [Italics are writer’s.] That which was now obtained showed beyond question, that the lan- guage was totally distinct from the Huron-Iroquois tongues, and that it was closely allied to the languages of the Dacotan family. The discovery of a tribe of Dacota lineage near the Atlantic coast was so un- expected and surprising that at first it was natural to suspect some mistake. The idea occurred that the old Tutelo might have been a Sioux captive, taken in the wars which were anciently waged between the Iroquois and the tribes of the far west. With the view of determining this point, I took the first opportunity, on my next visit to the Reserve, in October 1870, of questioning the old man about his early history, and that of his people. His answers soon removed all doubt. {In what manner Hale did not bother to explain.] He believed himself to be a hundred and six years old; and if so, his earliest recollections would go back to a time preceding by some years the Revolutionary War. At that time his people, the Tuteloes, were living in the neighborhood of two other tribes, the Saponies and the Patshenins or Botshenins. Jn the latter we may perhaps recognize the Occaneeches, [italics are writer’s.] whom Governor Spotteswood, in 1702, enumer- ated with the Saponies, Toteroes, and two other tribes, under the general name of Christanna Indians. The Saponies and Tuteloes, old Nikonha said, could under- stand one another’s speech. About the language of the Patshenins, I neglected to inquire, but they were mentioned with the Saponies as a companion tribe. His father’s name was Onusowa; he was a chief among the Tuteloes. His mother (who was also a Tutelo) died when he was young, and he was brought up by an uncle. He heard from old men that the Tuteloes formerly lived on a great river beyond Washington, which city he knew by that name. In the early times they were a large tribe, but had wasted away through fighting. Their war parties used to go out frequently against various enemies. The tribes they most commonly qT )=6)«CEASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 139 fought were the Tuscaroras, Senecas, and Cayugas. Afterwards his tribe came to Niagara (as he expressed it), and joined the Six Nations. He knew of no Tutelo of the full blood now living, except himself. This, with some additions to my vocabulary, was the last information which I received from old Washiteng, or Nikonha. He died a few months later (on the 21st of February, 1871), before I had an opportunity of again visiting the Reserve. There are, however, several half-castes, children of Tutelo mothers by Iroquois fathers, who know the language, and by the native law (which traces descent through the female) are held to be Tuteloes. From this chief, and from his aunt, an elderly dame, whose daughter was the wife of a leading Onondaga chief, I received a sufficient number of words and phrases of the language to give a good idea of its grammatical framework. For- tunately, the list of words obtained from the old Tutelo was extensive enough to afford a test of the correctness of additional information thus procured. The vocabulary and the outlines of grammar which have been derived from these sources may, therefore, as far as they extend, be accepted as affording an authentic representation of this very interesting speech. There is still, it should be added, some uncertainty in regard to the tribal name. [Italics are writer’s.] So far as can be learned, the word Tutelo or Totero (which in the Iroquois dialects is variously pronounced Titterih, or Teh6tirigh, Tehitili, Tittei and Titie) has no meaning either in the Tutelo or Iroquois language. It may have been originally a mere local designation, which accompanied the tribe, as such names sometimes do, in its subsequent migrations. Both of my semi- Tutelo informants assured me that the proper national name—or the name by which the people were designated among themselves—was Yesdng or Yesdh, the last syllable having a faint nasal sound, which was sometimes barely audible. In'this word we probably {italics are writer’s] see the origin of the name, Nahyssan, applied by Lederer to the tribes of this stock. [The present writer wishes to insert a statement to the effect that Lederer never alluded to the Nahyssan as inferred by Hale, but rather as definitely to the Saponi.] . . . In these Akenatzies we undoubtedly see the Aconechos of Lawson, and the Ochineeches mentioned by Governor Spotteswood. Dr. Brinton, in his well known work on the “Myths of the NewsWorld,” has pointed out, also, their identity with the Occaneeches mentionedtby*Beverly, in*his “History of Virginia,” and in doing so has drawn attention to the very interesting facts recorded by Beverley respecting their language. (See the note‘on’p. 303%of Dr. Brinton’s volume, 2d edition.) According to this historian, the tribes of Virginia spoke languages differing so widely that natives ‘‘at moderate distance” apart did not understand one another. They had, however, a “general language,’”’ which people of different tribes used in their intercourse with one another, precisely as the Indians of the north, according to La Hontan, used the “‘Algonkine,” and as Latin was employed in most parts of Europe, and the Lingua Franca in the Levant. These are Beverley’s illustrations. He then added the remarkable statement: ‘“The general language here used is that of the Occaneeches, though they have been but a small nation ever since these parts were known to the English; but in what their language may differ from that of the Algonkins I am not able to determine.’’ Further on he gives us the still more surprising information that this ‘general language’’ was used by the priests and conjurors “of the different Virginian nations in performing their religious ceremonies, in the same manner (he observes)’’ as the Catholics of all nations do their Mass in the Latin.’ The Akenatzies or Occaneeches would seem to have been, in some respects, the chief or leading community among the tribes of Dakotan stock who formerly inhabited Virginia. [Italics are writer’s.] That these tribes had at one time a large and 140 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Butu. 164 widespread population may be inferred from the simple fact that their language, like that of the widely scattered Algonkins (or Ojibways) in the northwest, became the general medium of communication for the people of different nationalities in their neighborhood. That they had some ceremonial observances (or, as Beverley terms them ‘“‘adorations and conjurations”) of a peculiar and impressive cast, like those of the western Dakotas seems [italics are writer’s] evident from the circumstance that the intrusive tribes adopted this language, and probably [italics are writer’s] with it some of these observances, in performing their own religious rites. We thus have a strong and unexpected confirmation [?] of the tradition prevailing among the tribes both of the Algonkin and the Iroquois stocks, which represents them as coming originally from the far north, and gradually over- spreading the country on both sides of the Alleghanies, from the Great Lakes to the mountain fastnesses of the Cherokees. They found, it would seem, Virginia, and possibly the whole country east of the Alleghanies, from the Great Lakes to South Carolina, occupied by tribes speaking languages of the Dakotan stock, That the displacement of these tribes was a very gradual process and that the relations between the natives and the encroaching tribes were not always hostile, MAY BE INFERRED not only from the adoption of the aboriginal speech as the general means of intercourse, but also from the terms of amity on which these tribes of diverse origin, natives and intrusives, were found by the English to be living together. That the Tutelo tongue represents this ‘‘general language”’ of which Beverley speaks— this aboriginal Latin of Virginia—cannot be doubted. It may therefore, be deemed a language of no small historical importance. The Fact (?) that this language, which was first obscurely heard of in Virginia two hundred years ago, has been brought to light in our day on a far-off reservation in Canada, and there learned from the lips of the latest surviving member of this ancient community, must certainly be considered one of the most singular occurrences in the history of science. [Italics are writer’s.] Apart from the mere historical interest of the language, its scientific value in American ethnology entitles it to a careful study. As has been already said, a comparison of its grammar and vocabulary with those of the western Dakota tongues HAS LED TO THE INFERENCE that the Tutelo language was the older form of this com- mon speech. [Italics are writer’s.] This conclusion was briefly set forth in some remarks which I had the honor of addressing to this Society at the meeting of December 19, 1879, and is recorded in the published minutes of the meeting. [Hale, 1883, pp. 1-13.] 1886.—Edward Neill tells us about events of Bacon’s Rebellion and the part played by various Indian groups. He relates: In the hope of composing difficulties, the Governor (Berkeley), on the 3d of May, 1676, with an escort of three hundred men proceeded to visit the upper part of York and James Rivers, and found that Bacon had gone with a force of two hundred persons fo the great village of the Okinagees on an island, in a river, two hundred miles southward, [italics are writer’s] and there while the Indians were friendly in disposition, provoked a quarrel in which the Indians lost fifty, and he eleven men. [Neill, 1886, pp. 350-351.] Leading up to this event the following had occurred: In early summer of 1675, the Doegs, a tribe of the Potomac River, charged a planter, named Mathews, with unfair dealings, and retaliated by stealing his swine. The Indians were pursued, and some killed. Then Robert Henn, a herdsman was found wounded, at the door of his cabin, in Stafford County, Vir- Noga) T4® ©=©=—s« EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 141 ginia, who lived long enough to say, that his assailants were savages. A party in July, under Colonel George Mason, and Captain Brent, crossed the Potomac, in pursuit and divided their forces. The horsemen, under Brent, found a wigwam of Doegs, surrounded it, and killed the chief and ten others as they came out. Colonel Mason found an encampment also near by, and with those on foot, killed fourteen, when a chief ran up, and told him that they were friendly Susquehannas, and that the murder which had incensed the whites was committed by a band of wandering Senecas. After this, great excitement prevailed upon the Maryland, as well as the Vir- ginia shores of the Potomac, and a joint movement against the Indians was ar- ranged. The Virginians were under Colonel John Washington, Colonel George Mason and Major Isaac Allerton; and the Marylanders, were commanded by Major Thomas Trueman. The latter reached a fort of the Susquehannas, on Sunday morning, September 25th, 1675, and was informed that the marauding Senecas had done the injury to the settlers, but, they had left four days before, and were probably near the head of the Patapsco River. The next morning there was a junction of the Marylanders and Virginians, and the officers of the latter were Col. John Washington, Col. George Mason, and Major Allerton. About six of the principal Indians came out of their earth fort, and showed by their certificates and medals that they held friendly relations with the people of Mary- land, but Col. Washington said ‘““‘Why keep them any longer? Let us knock them on the head’’. The rash suggestion was adopted, and the fort in marsh ground, surrounded with limbs of trees, was besieged. The outraged savages held out, for six weeks, and then upon a moonlight night, stole away. The indignity heaped upon them was quickly avenged, and ten white people were speedily killed for each chief that had been murdered. The authorities of Maryland were shocked at what they termed the ‘“‘barbarous and inhuman” act of Major Trueman and his associates, and he was impeached by the Assembly, and debarred from holding office, while all possible reparation was made to the Indians. Virginia was requested to censure the act of Col. Washington, and others, and it is said that Governor Berkeley was willing, but no steps were taken by the Council and Burgesses. Passing round the rude stockades erected at the heads of the principal rivers, the Indians com- menced the work of retaliation, and from the Falls of the Potomac, to the Falls of the James, steadily crept, scalping the isolated planter, and mutilating the bodies of helpless women, and babes, and among other who fell, was the overseer of younger Nathaniel Bacon. For the protection of frontiersmen, the Assembly which convened, in March, 1676, declared war against those savages, who had lately committed murders, and robberies, and arrangements were made for the raising of five hundred men, in the older, and more secure counties, to be paid by the Colony, and stationed at points, liable to attacks from the savages. [Neill, 1886, pp. 346-348.] Others were chagrined because they received neither appointments as officers of the forces to operate against the Indians, nor profits from the erection of the several stockades. Throughout the Colony, moreover, there was a good deal of discontent because the Governor gave the offices and contracts, to a few favorites, and Bacon determined to lead this element, and intimidate the Governor. As one of the council, he told his neighbors, that he would pursue the Indians, without any expense to the public, and thus rallied them to his support. He then applied for a commission to lead a force against the Indians, but Berkeley did not grant it, but ordered the military officers, of each county, to appoint officers necessary to suppress Indian hostilities, ([Ibid., p. 350.] 142 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bunt 164 1892.—J. W. Powell, in his “Indian Linguistic Families of America North of Mexico,” which was largely influenced by James Mooney, states: The Tutelo habitat in 1671 was in Brunswick County, southern Virginia, and it probably included Lunenburgh and Mecklenburg counties. The Earl of Bello- mont (1699) says that the Shateras were “‘supposed to be the Toteros, on Big Sandy River, Virginia,’ and Pownall, in his map of North America (1776) gives the Totteroy (i. e., Big Sandy) River. Subsequently to 1671 the Tutelo left Virginia and moved to North Carolina. They returned to Virginia (with the Sapona), joined the Nottoway and Meherrin, whom they and the Tuscarora fol- lowed into Pennsylvania in the last century, thence they went to New York, where they joined the Six Nations, with whom they removed to Grand River Reservation, Ontario, Canada, after the Revolutionary War. The last full-blood Tutelo died in 1870. For the important discovery of the Siouan affinity of the Tutelo language we are indebted to Mr. Hale. [Powell, 1892, p. 114.] This whole statement reflects not Powell’s but Mooney’s ideas en- tirely, which are stated in his article on the Siouan tribes of the East. 1894.—At this period, we come to Mooney’s classic report. Since this work has been so liberally quoted by subsequent writers, we are taking the same liberty. Speaking about the Siouan tribes, he says: The Siouan tribes, to the contrary, although generally cultivating the ground to a limited extent, were essentially a race of hunters, following the game—espe- cially the buffalo—from one district to another, here today and away tomorrow. Their introduction to the horse on the prairies of the west probably served only to give wider opportunity for the indulgence of an inborn roving disposition. Nomads have short histories, and as they seldom stopped long enough in one place to become identified with it, little importance was attached to their wander- ings and as little was recorded concerning them. . . . War, pestilence, whisky and systematic slave hunts had nearly exter- minated the aboriginal occupants of the Carolinas before anybody had thought them of sufficient importance to ask who they were, how they lived, or what were their beliefs and opinions. The region concerning which least has been known ethnologically is that entending from the Potomac to the Savannah and from the mountains to the sea, comprising most of Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina. Of some of the tribes formerly within this area the linguistic connection has long been settled; of some others it is a matter of recent discovery; of others again it is still a matter of doubt; while some must forever remain unclassified, for the tribes have perished from the earth without leaving a word of their language behind. [Mooney, 1894, pp. 6, 7.] The tribes between the mountains and the sea were of but small importance politically; no sustained mission work was ever attempted among them, and there were but few literary men to take an interest in them. [Ibid., p. 6.] In Virginia this territory includes all west of a line drawn through Richmond and Fredericksburg, up to the Blue Ridge, or about one-half the area of the state. In North Carolina it includes the basins of the Roanoke, the Tar, the Cape Fear, the Yadkin, and the upper Catawba rivers, comprising more than two-thirds of the area of that state. In South Carolina it comprises nearly the whole central and eastern portion. In the three states the territory in question comprises wea EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 143 an area of about 70,000 square miles, formerly occupied by about forty different tribes. [Mooney never names these.] Who were the Indians of this central area? For a long time the question was ignored by ethnologists, and it was implicitly assumed that they were like their neighbors, Iroquoian or Algonquian in the north and ‘“‘Catawban’”’ in the south. It was never hinted that they might be anything different, and still less was it supposed that they would prove to be a part of the great Siouan or Dakotan family, whose nearest known representatives were beyond the Mississippi or about the upper lakes, nearly a thousand miles away. [Ibid, p. 9.] . . . the great agents in the expulsion or extermination of the eastern Siouan tribes were the confederate Iroquois of New York. With these may be included the Tuskarora, who, though established on the Neuse river in North Carolina, retained the clear tradition of their common origin and were regarded as an outlying tribe of the confederacy with which they afterward united as an integral part. . . . When their warfare against the southern tribes was inaugurated we do not know. It was probably continuous with the expulsion of the Cherokee from the upper Ohio, and was in full progress nearly three centuries ago. As early as 1608 John Smith found the Iroquois, known to the Powhatan tribes as Massawomek, regarded as “their most mortall enemies” by all the tribes of Virginia and Maryland. The Susquehanna (‘‘Sasquesahanock’’) or Conestoga at the head of the bay, who had nearly six hundred warriors, all “great and well- proportioned men,’’ he found ‘‘pallisadoed in their Townes to defend them from the Massawomekes their mortall enemies” (Smith, 1). Sixty-five years later these giant-like men, notwithstanding their palisaded defenses, were forced to abandon their country to the conquering Iroquois and come down upon the frontiers of Virginia, thus precipitating the Indian war which resulted in Bacon’s rebellion. . . . Byrd, about 1730, says that the northern Indians were the im- placable enemies of these Siouan tribes, and that the frequent inroads of the Seneca had compelled the Sara to abandon their beautiful home on the banks of the Dan and take refuge on the Pedee (Byrd, 2). [Ibid., pp. 9, 12, 13.] Up to 1670 the Monacan tribes had been but little disturbed by the whites, although there is evidence that the wars waged against them by the Iroquois were keeping them constantly shifting about. Their country had not been penetrated, excepting by a few traders who kept no journals and only the names of those living immediately on the frontiers of Virginia were known to the whites. Chief among these were the Monacan proper, having their village a short distance above Rich- mond. In 1670 Lederer crossed the country in a diagonal line from the present Richmond to Catawba river, on the frontier of South Carolina, and a year later a party under Batts explored the country westward across the Blue ridge to the headwaters of New River. Thenceforward accounts were heard of Nahyssan, Sapona, Totero, Occaneechi, and others, consolidated afterward in a single body at the frontier, Fort Christanna, and thereafter known collectively as Saponi or Tutelo. The Monacan proper form the connecting link between the earlier and the later period. The other tribes of this connection were either extinct or con- solidated under other names before 1700, or were outside of the territory known to the first writers. For this reason it is difficult to make the names of the earlier tribes exactly synonymous with those known later, although the proof of lineal descent is sometimes beyond question. We shall deal first with the Monacan and confederated tribes mentioned by Smith. According to this explorer the Monacan confederacy in 1607 held the country along James river above the Powhatan, whose frontier was about the falls at which Richmond was afterward located. Among the tribes of the con- federacy Smith enumerated the Monacan proper, the* Mowhemenchugh, Massin- 144 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuu. 164 nacack, Monahassanugh, and Monasickapanough, and says there were others, which he does not name, . . . He seems to imply that the Monacan tribes named spoke different languages, although in another place (Smith, 8) we are led to infer [writer’s italics] that they had but one. The difference was probably only dialectic, although the cognate and confederate tribes farther southward probably used really different languages. Strachey derives the name Monacan from the Powhatan word monahacan or monowhauk, ‘“sword,’”’ while Heckewelder, through the Delaware language, trans- lates it ‘“‘spade’’ or ‘‘digging instrument.’”’ It is more probable that the word is not Algonquian at all, but that the tribal names given Smith are approximations to the names used by the tribes themselves. . . . Monahassanugh is the Nahyssan of Lederer and Monasickapanough may possibly be the origin of Saponi. [Ibid., pp. 26—27.] The first actual contact into the Monacan territory was made in the fall of 1608 when a party led by Newport, together with 120 men, marched about 40 miles up the river where they discovered two of the Monacan villages, Massinacack and Mowhemenchouch. Not that the English wanted to make overture to the Indians since this was purely an exploratory trip primarily in search for rich minerals. Not finding any they returned in about a week satisfied that the Monacan country held nothing which they desired for the time being. Indirect pressure by the English caused them to abandon several of their villages and the inroads made by the Rechahecrian or Rickohockan who descended from the western mountains with the intention of settling near the falls of the James precipitated a war with the English and their Pamunkey allies in which the latter were badly defeated. Mooney further suggests that “the Powhatan to the east probably kept up the desultory raids so long as they themselves were in condi- tion to fight” (ibid., p. 28). This is contrary to the idea expressed by Smith and others, who stated that the Monacan were the offensive ones and whenever they appeared the Powhatan trembled with fear. Mooney also suggests that the Monacan— were directly in the track of the Rechahecrian (Rickohockan, Cherokee) who in 1656 (or 1654) descended from the mountains and ravaged the country as far as the falls of the James where they defeated the combined forces of the English and Pamunkey. ... A remark by Lederer indicates that the Saponi were at this time carrying on a war with the whites. [Ibid., p. 28]. In another place Lederer states that the country between the falls of the river and the mountains was formerly owned by the ‘‘Tacci” or ‘‘Dogi”’ who were then extinct, and their place occupied by the Mahoc (not identified), Nuntaneuck or Nuntaly (not identified), Nahyssan (Monahassano or Tutelo), Sapon (Saponi), Managog (Mannahoac), Mangoack (Nottoway), Akenatzy (Occaneechi), and Monakin. All these, he says, had one common language, in different dialects. This was probably true, except as to the Nottoway, who were of Iroquoian stock. [Italics are the present writer’s.] [If this common language was assigned to the whole lot, according to Lederer, and does not apply to the Nottoway, according to Mooney, why not exceptions within the rest or the grouping? Mooney goes on to make a flat statement that the:] Linguistic evidence indicates that the ae cain EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 145 eastern tribes of the Siouan family were established upon the Atlantic slope long before the western tribes of that stock reached the plains. [Ibid., p. 29.] In this same work, Mooney states: In another place he (Lederer) observes that Totopotomoi, the Pamunki chief had been killed while fighting for the English against the Mahock and Nahyssan. .. . if Lederer’s statement be true it would prove that the Siouan tribes of Virginia had aided the Cherokee in this invasion. [Ibid., p. 30.] In checking over two different copies of ‘“The Discoveries of John Lederer,’’ ete—Humphrey’s edition of 1902, and Alvord and Bidgood of 1912—neither one follows through as indicated by Mooney in identifying “a great Indian king called Tottopottoma.’’? Mooney makes a number of assumptions which he attributes to earlier writers that seem somewhat dubious. This is noticeable throughout the whole of the dissertation on the eastern Siouan problem. After leaving Major Harris on the James River, Lederer and his Susquehanna guide, Jackzetavon, set forth and arrived at ‘‘Sapon, a town of the Nahyssans.’”’ Mooney interprets this to mean: ‘The name Sapon or Saponi may possibly have a connection with the Siouan (Dakota) word ‘sapa,’ ‘black,’”’ (ibid., p. 30). Lederer tells of the chief of the Sapon residing in another village called pintahae which was not far from Sapon and situated upon the same river. Mooney thinks that— In Nahyssan we have the Monahassanugh of Smith, the Hanohaskie of Batts, and the Yesand of Hale. Pintahae was the local name of another tribe or settle- ment included under the same generic designation. ‘Thus from Lederer’s state- ment that Sapon was a Nahyssan town we understand that the Saponi were a subtribe or division of the people who knew themselves as Yesang. ([Ibid., p. 31.] Not only has he mistakenly attributed statements to Lederer but he has confused Lederer with Hale, for Lederer never indicated that he knew that the Saponi were supposed to have called themselves “yesang.” It is upon Hale’s statement that the Saponi were sup- posed to have called themselves by this word, and even on his say-so, it was acquired under pretty questionable circumstances. Mooney’s provocative statement on top of page 33: ‘‘Lederer’s account of their religion is too general to be definite, and he neglects to state to what particular tribal language the Indian names quoted belong,” a common practice in those times as well as in his own. Lederer was an explorer-trader, pure and simple, and he preserved in his journal happenings which struck his fancy and recorded events which occurred during his various expeditions. The information recorded during this particular trip was given to him mostly by his Susquehanna guide and this information would be colored by this fact. Names of places, of other Indian groups, rivers, etc., would necessarily be given in pure Susquehanna (Iroquois) terms. 146 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buy. 164 Adding further confusion to the issue, Mooney states: The Hanohaskie village [which he interpreted in an earlier paragraph as a mis- print of Manohaskie and which are the Monahassanugh of Smith’s map of 1609, on which they are located indefinitely southwest of the junction of the James and Rivanna rivers] of Batts may be the Pintahae of Lederer. The latter did not meet the tribe here designated as the Tolera, as they were far remote from the regular lines of travel, and after leaving the village which he calls Sapon he turned off to strike the trail (?) which crossed the Roanoke at the Occaneechi village about Clarksville, Virginia. [Mooney’s interpretation as to the location of the Occanee- chi village and the trail are unsupported by facts as revealed by maps of the period shortly after Lederer made his famous trip and appear to be supported only by suppositions and inferences on the part of Mooney.] The chief difficulty in com- paring the narratives arise from the fact that the names Yesang and Tutelo (of Hale’s), in their various forms, are used both specifically and collectively. [Ibid., p. 35.] The Hanohaskie of Batts and Fallam was, according to their own statement, located to the north and west of Sapony, a distance of 25 miles. Lederer never indicated either the direction or the distance from Sapon for the location of his “pintahae.” Mooney states further: The Tutelo and Saponi tribes must be considered together. Their history under either name begins in 1670. . . . The name Saponi (Monasickapanough ?) was generally limited to a particular tribe or aggregation of tribal remnants, while the Iroquois name Tutelo, Totero, or Todirich-roone, in its various forms, although commonly used by the English to designate a particular tribe, was really the generic Iroquois term for all the Siouan tribes of Virginia and Carolina, including even the Catawba. . . . In deference to Hale, who first established their Siouan affinity, we have chosen to use the form Tutelo, although Totero is more in agree- ment with the old authorities. . . . As the name is used by Batts and Lawson it probably belongs to some southern language and was adopted by the Iroquois. [First Mooney states that it is “really the generic Iroquois term” and now he states that the Iroquois borrowed it from the southern Indians.] It frequently happens that Indian tribes can not interpret their common tribal designations, but know themselves simply as “‘the people.’”’ [Ibid., p. 37.] Referring to William Byrd, Mooney continues: Unable to withstand the constant assaults of their northern enemies, the two western tribes abandoned their villages and removed (some time between 1671 and 1701) to the junction of the Staunton and the Dan, where they established them- selves adjoining their friends and kinsmen the Occaneechi, whose history thence- forth merges into theirs, The Occaneechi . . . although now themselves reduced by the common enemy, had been an important tribe. [Inferred.] They occupied at this time a beautiful island about 4 miles long, called by their tribal name, lying in the Roanoke a short distance below the forks of the stream, in what is now Mecklenburg county, Virginia. Above and below Occaneechi island, in the same stream, were two other islands, of nearly equal size. The Saponi settled on the lower of these, while the Tutelo took possession of the upper one just at the con- fluence of the two rivers. How long they remained there is not definitely known. . . . They may have been driven from their position on the Roanoke by that general Indian upheaval, resulting from the conquest of the Conestoga or Susque- hanna by the Iroquois about 1675, which culminated in Virginia in the Bacon qacrees. Far. EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 147 rebellion. In 1733 Byrd visited the islands, and found tall grass growing in the abandoned fields. [Ibid., p. 38.] Mooney places— Hale in error in supposing from Lawson’s narrative that the Tutelo and Saponi in 1701 had found shelter from the Iroquois by placing between themselves and their destroyers the “living rampart”’ of the Tuskarora. The error grows out of Lawson’s supposition that Sapona river is identical with the Cape Fear, while, as a matter of fact, he had in mind the Yadkin; and the Tutelo and Saponi were then at least a hundred miles west of the Tuskarora and direct line of the Iroquois war parties sent out against the Catawba. As the Tuskarora were friends and kinsmen of the Iroquois, who made their villages a resting place on these southern incursions, the smaller tribes had nothing to expect from them until the war, a few years later, had broken the power of the Tuskarora and rendered them dependent on the whites. [Ibid., p. 40.] From all accounts it appears that there was always bad feeling between the Saponi and their confederates on the one side and the Tuskarora, Nottoway, and Meherrin—all Iroquoian tribes—on the other, after they became near neighbors, so that it required the constant effort of the English to adjust their quarrels and prevent them from killing one another. ([Ibid., p. 42.] Again Mooney digresses from his initial statement as to the location of Occaneechi Island. He states that this island is: Situated at the confluence of two large rivers, midway between the mountains and the sea, and between the tribes of Virginia and Carolina, the Occaneechi were an important people, if not a numerous one, and their island was the great trading mart, according to a writer of this period, “for all the Indians for at least 500 miles.’’ (Mass. 1). [Ibid., p. 54.] This is the first indication that the Occaneechi were ever traders and controlled the trade over an area 500 miles in extent. This statement is attributed to an anonymous writer of 1676. Mooney developed a number of interesting statements in his “Siouan Tribes of the East,’’ which will not bear critical examination. 1895.—We will next consult William Wallace Tooker who published a@ paper on “The Algonquian Appellatives of the Siouan Tribes of Virginia” in 1895. In this he asks a number of questions and tries to supply the answers to each of them. We are particularly interested in his third and fourth questions and answers; i. e.: “Third, Can any of the Mannahoacks be identified with tribes or peoples of a later historic period? Fourth, To what language must we assign these and other names of Captain John Smith?” (Tooker, 1895, p. 378). These appellatives were bestowed upon them by their neighbors on the east, the Powhatans and their confederates, who are well known to have been a branch of the Algonquian linguistic stock. Therefore there ought to arise no question whatever in the mind of the critical student of Smith’s work against the dictum now submitted, that every one of these terms, without a single exception, are necessarily Algonquian, and consequently should be analyzed and translated by the aid of that language, no matter what the nativity of the people themselves may have been. This declaration will also apply to every aboriginal name oc- curing upon Smith’s map of Virginia, for he was never in contact with other than 870929—57——12 148 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bury. 164 an Algonquian long enough to learn a name. Besides, the historical evidence would seem to indicate that the greater number of these terms were heard spoken from the lips of the Powhatan long before the colonists saw a Monacan. For instance, Captain Newport’s guide and interpreter was a savage of Powhatan called Namontack. Newport named a mine six miles above the falls after him because he discovered it. Smith’s interpreter while among the Mannahoacks was an Algonquian, as was also his Tockwogh interpreter while interviewing the Susquehanoughs. His very brief parley with the Massawomecks, as he relates, was entirely by signs. Therefore it seems to me that failure would be necessarily foreordained in seeking for other than Algonquian elements in any of the aboriginal names of Virginia as bequeathed to us by Captain John Smith. William Strachey, secretary of the colony, 1609-1612, who was more or less familiar with the language of the Powhatan and has left us a valuable vocabulary of that dialect derives the name Monacan from Monohacan (or Monowhauk), ‘“‘a sword,” while Heckewelder, through the Delawares, translates it as ‘‘a spade or any implement for digging the soil,” corrupted from Monahacan. Hecke- welder is so rarely correct in his place-name etymologies that he should have due credit for this suggestion, for the fact appears that both of these authorities are correct in their identification of the verbal element of the name, but not in the grammar, application, or true analysis of the term as applied to a people. The prefix Mona is undoubtedly the verb signifying ‘‘to dig’’ occurring in the same primitive form in many Algonquian dialects, from the Cree Méona, in the far north, to the Narragansett Mona, on the east, and is reproduced at the south in the Powhatan Monahacan, ‘‘sword,’’ literally a digging instrument, from Mono, ‘‘to dig,’’ prefixes to -hacan, an instrumentive noun suffix used only as a terminal in compound words denotive of things artifical, so designated because so used by the Indians when purchased from the settlers. The same verb figures in other Powhatan cluster words, thus revealing its identity; for instance in Mona- scunnemti; Delaware Munaskamen, ‘‘to weede.”’ It will be found by analyzing carefully the various synonyms of the term Monacans, or Monanacans, with its English plural as displayed, that it resolves itself into the components of Mona- ach-anough, from Mona, ‘‘to dig,”’ “ack,” “land or earth,” with its generic plural of -anough, “‘nation, or people’’—that is “people who dig the earth” the phonetic sounds of which were shortened into Monacans by the English, which may be freely and correctly translated as the ‘‘diggers or miners.’”’ This abbreviation of the sounds of tribal appelatives is characteristic of English notation, as in Mo- hawk, from Mauquouog; Mohegans, from Manhigan-euck; Pequot, from Pe- quttoég, and others. [Ibid., 1895, pp. 378-381.] Tooker further points out that after studying the word ‘‘Saponi’”’ he finds that its possible derivation was from ‘“Monasukapananough (diggers of ground nuts)” (ibid., p. 384). The Whonkentyaes or Whonkenteas are another tribe of the Mannahocks or tributary to them who are unplaced on Smith’s map. The phonetic sounds of this appellative suggests that they were probably the ancestors of the Akenatzies, or Occaneeches, as it is varied, who were living, as Mr. Mooney has indicated, on an island just below the confluence of the rivers Dan and Staunton, in Mecklen- burg county, Virginia, when visited by John Lederer in 1670. I would suggest that the derivation of the term Whon-kenté-as or Whon-kenchi-aneas as from the Narragansett awdéun, Massachusetts auwon, ‘‘there is somebody,”’ i. e., who is strange or different from those speaking. The second component, -kentie, -kenatzie, or -caneeche, seems to have its parallel in various forms of the verb “‘to talk’’ or ‘‘to speak,” as in the Long Island unkenchie, ‘‘the strange talker;” Nar- Noga) ®~=—-s« EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 149 ragansett awdun-ken-tauchem? ‘‘Who are you that discourses?’ Delaware niechsin, “to speak;’’? Powhatan’ kekaten, ‘you tell,” which, with its terminal gives us whon-kentie-anies, ‘‘people of a strange talk, or another speech.’”’ This analysis confirms Smith’s statement that the Mannahocks were ‘“‘many different in language.’”’ Again in noticeable corroboration of this derivation, the Oc- caneeches seem to have been of a different linguistic stock to their Siouan neigh- bors. ... Now, it appears to me, on careful consideration of this statement of Beverley’s in all its aspects that it is open to only one construction—that is to say, if the term Whomkenties is a translation of an Algonquian interpreter of a Siouan description of a nation of another or different speech, residing among and tributary to them, and is also, as I suggest, a synonym for Occaneeche or Akenatzie, it would surely lead us to infer that the language of the Occaneeches was not Siouan, but was really nothing more nor less than a dialect of the Algonquian. [Ibid., p. 389.] This explanation in itself appears rather farfetched. The fact that Beverley, as he remarks, was unable to determine the difference between the language of the Occaneeches and that of the Algonkians would in- dicate to my mind that they were practically identical, with only an archaic difference—a difference similar to that mentioned by Mr. Mooney as existing between the Cherokee language and that used in the sacred formulas of their shamans. [Ibid., p. 391.] 1896.—Daniel Brinton, in discussing Beverley’s ‘‘Historie de la Virginie”’ (p. 266): The dialect he specified is ‘‘celle d’Occaniches,”’ and on page 252 he says, “‘On dit que la langue universelle des Indiens de ces Quartier est celle des Occaniches, quoiqui’ils ne soient qu’une petite Nation, depuis que les Anglois connoissent ce Pais; mais je ne sais pas difference qui’l y a entre cette langue et celle des Al- gonkins.”” (French trans. Orleans, 1707) This is undoubtedly the same people that Johannes Lederer, a German traveller, visited in 1670, and calls Akentazi. They dwelt on an island, in a branch of the Chowan River, the Sapona, or Deep River (Lederer’s Discovery of North America, in Harris, Voyages, p. 20). Thirty years later the English surveyor, Lawson, found them in the same spot, and speaks of them as the Acanechos. Their totem was that of the serpent. Mr. Mooney identifies them with the Occaneechi, a tribe of Siouan affinities. . . . The travellers Balboa and Coreal mention that the temple services of Peru were conducted in a language not understood by the masses, and the incantations of the priests of Powhatan were not in ordinary Algonkin, but some obscure jargon. The same peculiarity has been observed among the Dakotas and Eskimos, and in these nations, fortunately, it fell under the notice of competent linguistic scholars, who have submitted it to a searching examination. The results of their labors prove that in these two instances the supposed foreign tongues were nothing more than the ordinary dialects of the country modified by an affected accentua- tion, by the introduction of a few cabalistic terms, and by the use of descriptive circumlocutions and figurative words in place of ordinary expressions, a slang, in short, such as rascals and pedants invariably coin whenever they associate. [Brinton, 1896, footnote 2 and text, p. 326.] 1897. —James Owen Dorsey in “‘Siouan Sociology” reports that— Among the tribes of the Siouan family the primary unit is the clan or gens, which is composed of a number of consanguinei, claiming descent from a common 150 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buut. 164 ancestor and having common taboos; the term clan implying descent from the female line, while gens implies descent in the male line. Among the Dakotas, as among the cegiha and other groups, the man is the head of the family. [Dorsey, 1897, p. 213.] This is an important point in determining the designation of the individual’s classification as to tribe when the amalgamation was in effect, such as the Tutelo in relation to the Iroquois groups. 1912.—Alvord and Bidgood (1912, p. 152, footnote) quoted Mooney as to the location of the Indian Sapony village or town. As for the “Rickahockans or Richecrians,’”’ they refer to Neill (1886, pp. 245- 246) who told about their attempt at colonization near the falls of the James River and the subsequent battle between them and the English and their Indian allies in which the chief of the Pamunkeys, Totto- pottomoy, was killed. Lederer tells about this same event in relating experiences while on “The First Expedition” (Alvord and Bidgood 1912, p. 146). Mooney (1894, p. 30), on the other hand, gives an entirely different version of this event. 1913.—Leo Frachtenberg, in 1913, published “Contributions to a Tutelo Vocabulary,” in which he says: Besides the present list, there are in existence two other Tutelo vocabularies. Of these, the earliest was collected by Horatio Hale on the Grand River reserva- tion, Ontario, in 1883, while the latest attempt to obtain a vocabulary of this extinct dialect was made by Dr. Edward Sapir. My own material was collected under the auspices of the Bureau of American Ethnology, on the Grand River reservation, Ontario, in July, 1907. My informant was Lucy Buck, an old Tutelo woman, who remembered only the few words and phrases that are herein recorded. As she was unfamiliar with English, it was necessary for me to obtain this scanty material by using as an interpreter Andrew Sprague, a Cayuga, who in his early youth had been adopted by the Tutelo tribe. [Writer’s italics.] As is well known, Tutelo (and Saponi) form a subdivision of the great Siouan family. They lived in North Carolina at a very early date. During one of their frequent raids, the Iroquois took these two tribes along with them northward. According to information obtained from Andrew Sprague, the Tutelo were ad- mitted into the Confederacy of the Iroquois, thereby forming the sixth nation of the Iroquois League—by which we may assume that the Tutelo and the Saponi were adopted with the Tuscarora. Sprague also informed me that at the Iroquois festivals it is customary to sing a few Tutelo songs in deference to that tribe. At the time this material was collected, only two Tutelo families survived, namely, the Williams and Buck families. No members of the Williams family remembered a single word of their former tongue. Of the Buck family, Lucy was the only one who seemed to know a few words of her language. She told me, however, that the head of her family, John Buck, who at that time was a fugitive from the reservation, could speak Tutelo fluently. I made several fruitless attempts to locate him. This material is presented in the form in which it was given to me. No attempt to verify the words by means of other vocabularies has been made, owing chiefly to the fact that I deemed the material obtained highly unreliable [writer’s italics], as a glance at the various confusing terms given for the different cardinal numerals will show. Nooo). Y)~=©—)s«xEASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 151 The appended song was rendered toward the close of the Iroquois Strawberry festival, at which I happened to be present. Sprague told me that it was a Tutelo song. No translation could be obtained. [Frachtenberg, 1913, pp. 477—478.] During this same year (1913) Edward Sapir reported on “‘A Tutelo Vocabulary’’, which was obtained on the— White or Six Nations Reserve, Ontario, in August, 1911. I was told of a Cayuga Indian named Andrew Sprague, who had had opportunity during his childhood to hear Tutelo spoken fluently and who was supposed to remember considerable of it. As Tutelo is an extinct language, I thought it imperative to rescue from oblivion what was still to be obtained and thus add, if only a mite, to what had already been put on record. As a matter of fact, it turned out that Andrew remembered only very little indeed of Tutelo, and what small amount of material could be obtained from him was extorted with some difficulty. No attempt will here be made to discuss the data. They are given for what they are worth in the hope that they may at some future time prove of use to the student of comparative Siouan linguistics. If in nothing else, perhaps the words listed are of value be- cause they have been recorded with greater phonetic accuracy than is generally attained in mere vocabularies. ([Sapir, 1913, p. 295.] Both Frachtenberg and Sapir placed very little stress upon these last two vocabularies, as they deemed the sources to be very unreliable. An examination of these in comparison with other vocabularies would soon show wide discrepancies which would tend to invalidate Tutelo as belonging to the Siouan linguistic family. 1914,—W. H. Holmes, discussing “‘Areas of American Culture Char- acterization,’”’ etc., pertaining to the Algonquian, Iroquoian, and Siouan stocks, remarked: . . . the aborigines, largely of the Algonquian, Iroquoian and Siouan stocks, were primarily hunters and fishers, although agriculture was practiced success- fully in many of the fertile valleys. The native culture of both colonial and pre- colonial times, so far as known, though varying with the widely distributed centers of habitation, was quite uniform in grade and general characteristics. It is well differentiated from that of the south and middle west, but passes with no abrupt change into that of the upper lakes and the great interior region of the north, The changes from north to south were due in large measure to differences in food resources and the influence of neighboring cultures. [Holmes, 1914, p. 417.] These statements would indicate that the material culture of a group would depend somewhat upon what other culture groups surrounded them and the influence this would bear upon each other. The basic material culture would tend to follow a definite cultural pattern with modifications depending upon geographical location and outside influences. 1914.—Jobn R. Swanton and Roland B. Dixon published a paper dealing with “Primitive American History” in which they discussed the ‘Indians of the Siouan Stock.”’ They said: When first encountered by Europeans the great Siouan linguistic family occupied two large and two small areas, Of the former one lay along the eastern skirts of the Appalachian mountains, between them and the tidewater region of the 152 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuw. 164 Atlantic coast, from about the great falls of the Potomac to Santee River, South Carolina. [Swanton and Dixon, 1914, p. 383.] They then go on to say: It is a striking fact that, in contrast with both the Muskhogean and Siouan peoples, the migration legends which have been preserved from the Indians of this stock are meager and unsatisfactory [writer’s italics]. According to colonial docu- ments the Meherrin were a band of refugee Conestoga which fled south after the destruction of that tribe by the Iroquois about 1675, but one form of their name occurs in the census of Virginia Indians taken in 1669. Thus it is evident either that some Conestoga had replaced an Algonquian tribe of similar designation or else that the tribe antedated the destruction of the Conestoga and the reputed influx of population at that time. Possibly, as Mooney suggests, an original small Iroquoian tribe was practically submerged by later immigrations of Conestoga. At all events the whole question of origin is left in uncertainty. . . . So far as this evidence goes, however, it indicates a northern origin for the southern Iro- quoian group. [lIbid., p. 390.] Swanton admitted, in 1923, that “there is much of speculation in all this’’ (1923, p. 43) regarding the early history of any of these eastern groups, especially that of the Siouan peoples. 1927—An interesting tie-in with Frachtenberg’s report on the Tutelo occurred in J. N. B. Hewitt’s report on fieldwork in 1926 in which he says: With the aid of Chief John Buck, an Onondaga—Tutelo mixed blood, as an Onon- daga informant and interpreter, and Chief (retired) Alexander G. Smith, a Mohawk speaker”’and ‘informant, Mr. Hewitt obtained a fine Mohawk version and literal translation of the remarkable Requickening Address of this famous Council. [Hewitt, 1927.] Frachtenberg would indicate that John Buck was a full-blood Tutelo very fluent in the Tutelo tongue; Hewitt, on the other hand, recorded him as a mixed blood, without any mention as to his knowledge of the Tutelo language. 1929.—Hewitt, reporting on the “League of Nations of the Iroquois Indians of Canada,’ stated: From a capable informant [Chief John Buck, Jr.] [writer’s italics] an Onondaga- Tutelo mixed blood, I recorded in Onondaga text a most interesting historical detailing the northward migration of the Tutelo (Siouan) tribe from its southern habitat in Virginia and North Carolina to the country of the Cayuga in what is now the state of New York and the negotiations preceding it. This tradition is of unusual interest because it embodies references to a number of customs and especially intertribal amenities at an early day and customary precautions taken for such a journey of a tribal people through the lands of other hostile peoples. [Hewitt, 1930, p. 201.] The tradition related by John Buck, Jr., would seem to be at*odds with what Frachtenberg indicated. As we recall," Frachtenberg told about the Iroquois taking” the, Tuscarora, Saponi,"and Tutelo north with them on, their return trip, which would indicate that they were AnTHnOP. Par, = EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 153 escorted back to the Cayuga country. Hewitt’s informant would indicate that the Tutelo made their own arrangements of a northward journey. ‘To the present writer, it would appear that Frachtenberg’s source of information is the more reliable. On top of this, if John Buck, Jr., was so fluent in the Tutelo lan- guage, why was it necessary for him to make use of the Onondaga language to relate a Tutelo tradition of migration? 1980.—Along about this time David J. Bushnell, Jr., wrote about the “Five Monacan Towns in Virginia, 1607.” We will quote him rather fully here, reserving comments for later. How long the country had been occupied by the Siouan tribes can never be determined. Others had preceded them, but who they were or whence they came may ever remain unknown. The earlier habitat of the Siouan tribes, to which stock the Monacan belonged, is believed to have been in the Valley of the Ohio [indicating Swanton—1923], from which region they crossed the mountains to the eastward and later occupied the lands where they were encountered by the Virginia colonists early in the 17th century. A comparison of the material to be recovered from sites eastward from the Ohio makes it possible to trace the line of migration of these tribes; this would require much time and careful study, but if successful would prove of the greatest interest. ... Powhatan’s statement to Captain Newport at the time of their first visit in 1608 that the Monacan ‘came Downe at the fall of the leafe and invaded this Country’ would indicate that the Monacan rather than the Algonquian dominated the region and did not fear the latter. [Bushnell, 1930, p. 5.] Bushnell, quoting Smith in 1612, states: ‘Upon the head of the Powhatans are the Monacans, whose chief habitation is at Russawmeake,’ but all his knowledge of the place had been derived from Indians. It stood evidently at the confluence of the James and Rivanna, some miles beyond the point where Newport turned to retrace his way to Jamestown, in the autumn of 1608. The site had been abandoned before white settlers entered the region and consequently its exact position may never be known. {[Bushnell, 1930, p. 12.] Yet, Bushnell places it at the confluence of the two named rivers. One new facet of identification is here displayed. Bushnell says: ‘The name Rechacherian or Rickohockan has been applied to them, (?), believed by some to have been the Cherokee, although it was Mooney’s later belief that they were Erie who had come southward. However, a statement by Lederer makes it appear they were a people of two Monacan groups, the Massinacack and Monahassanugh, who may have come from farther up the James to settle a new home more protected from the war parties of the Iroquois. [Ibid., p. 16.] Lederer, on his map, gave the name Rickohockans to a tribe then living far to the westward beyond the mountains. The name or term has never been clearly understood or translated, and with slight variation of spelling has been used to designate several tribes in widely separated parts of the country. But the word may have been a term applied under certain conditions and not the definite name of any tribe or group of tribes. If this belief is correct it could have been applied to Siouan as well as to Iroquoian or other tribes. [Ibid. pp. 16-17.] 154 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuu. 164 This assumption on Bushnell’s part may be nearer the truth than the various explanations offered in the past. The Rickohockans, so-called, were to Lederer a vague group, evidently known to him only during his travels away from the English settlements. Had he associated them in any way with the great battle he would undoubtedly have mentioned them in that connection, but this he failed to do. The Algonquian and Monacan tribes had ever been enemies, it was known as early as 1608, and this fact may explain the willingness with which Totopotomi and his Pamunkey warriors joined the English in attacking their ancient tribal enemies. [Ibid., p. 17.] Mooney was of the belief that Monasukapanough was possibly “the original of Saponi.” There is little reason to doubt the correctness of this belief. Lederer stated that he “arrived at Sapon, a village of the Nahyssans.”’ The latter... were the Monahassanugh whose name appears on the map of 1624. Therefore it is quite evident that at the time of the settlement of Jamestown, 1607, the site on the bank of the Rivanna was occupied by the Saponi, closely allied with the Monahassanugh or Tutelo, whose village stood on the banks of the James some miles away in a southwesterly direction. Had it not been for the work and interest of Jefferson, no account of the great burial mound which once stood at the ancient village of Monasukapanough would now be available. It would have disappeared as have the burial places once belonging to other villages of the Siouan tribes and no reference to it would have been preserved. The site of the Indian town was visible from Monticello, and the burial mound stood near the south, or right bank of Rivanna. . . . [Ibid., p. 18.] Strachey (1849, pp. 48-49), on the other hand, stated that: “Monahassanugh, which stands at the foote of the mountains” does not mention the presence of any river in the vicinity of the village. The mountains alluded to were either the Blue Ridge or the Alle- ghanies and were probably the latter. A few paragraphs farther on, Bushnell says: “The exact position of the mound [which Jefferson excavated] may never be determined, but it certainly stood on the low ground, on the right bank of the Rivanna, evidently nearer the river than the cliffs, and it may have been some distance above the ford’”’ (Bushnell, 1930, p. 20). This is quite different from the positive statement which is quoted above. As for the exact location of the old Indian village of Monasuka- panough, Bushnell states: There is no known record of a white man having visited Monasukapanough, the ancient Saponi village on the banks of the Rivanna, and consequently no description of the settlement has been preserved. Bushnell continues correlating the Saponi with Monasukapanough and the Tutelo with Monahassanugh even though such associations were never proved to be true. He made the same assumption in regard to the Saponi on the Rivanna River. Both placements were built upon assumptions on Mooney’s part and here they are quoted as “gospel truths.’”’ He goes on to say: It is believed [by Bushnell] that some time before the year 1670 the people, or at least the greater part of them moved from the valley of the Rivanna and went on Aa EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 155 southward to establish a new village which, according to Mooney, ‘‘was probably on Otter River, (but never verified), a northern tributary of the Roanoke, in what is now Campbell county, Virginia, nearly south of Lynchburg.’”’ Here they were visited by Lederer in 1670, and by Batts party during the following year, but these explorers failed to describe the settlement. Soon the movement was resumed; they wandered far, nearly reaching the center of North Carolina, later returning to Virginia. [Ibid., p. 28.] This whole bit of testimony is purely inferential, not only on Bushnell’s part, but on Bushnell’s acceptance of Mooney’s assumptions regarding the correlation of Smith’s names of groups with the Saponi and Tutelo and placing them upon the James River system when no positive identification of such has ever been made. If, as has been pointed out and proved upon observation—that the Siouan groups are of a nomadic trend, always on the move depending upon wild game to sustain life—why should they change their pattern of living to establish themselves long enough in a place to erect a fairly large-sized burial mound in which were placed the remains of their dead in the vicinity of the Rivanna? This would seem to refute Bushnell’s contention that the mound excavated by Jefferson was of Siouan origin. 1934.—Ludwik Krzywicki, in his study of ‘‘Primitive Society and its Vital Statistics,’ ete., used Mooney’s study of the ‘‘Siouan Tribes of the East’’ as his basic source of information. In this work he lists a number of Indian tribes referred to in earlier works. These groups are the: Adshusheer, Biloxi, Eno, Keyauwee, Occaneechi, Saponi, Shakori, and Tutelo. He says: As regards the petty eastern Siouan tribes, we have deemed it sufficient to cite the estimates of J Mooney ... Four earlier sources give the names of the same tribe variously: sometimes these various versions are extremely unlike and often differ greatly from the designations commonly accepted today. These sometimes quite numerous variants of tribal names do not appear in our statistics of tribal population. [Krzywicki, 1934, p. 520.] These estimates on Mooney’s part are not based on factual knowledge, but are figures either from early listings of Indians or from what he thought the group to be at that particular time. 1935.—In this year Bushnell dealt with “The Manahoac Tribes in Virginia.” He makes one statement which is worth calling attention to: As yet it has not been possible to translate the names as given by Smith and Strachey. They were undoubtedly in some Siouan dialect and were told to the English by an Algonquian Indian. The latter appear to have attempted to translate the Siouan word into his own language, and this resulted in the names as recorded by the English being a combination of Siouan and Algonquian, making it difficult, if not impossible, ever to learn their true meaning. [Bushnell, 1935, p. 8.] This is not a new conception on Bushnell’s part, but the very wording 156 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buny. 164 makes it appear as some modern “gobbledygook”? whose meaning is beyond fathoming. In this same year (1935), Frank Speck reported on the Siouan tribes of the Carolinas, etc., and states: Among the Six Nations Iroquois of Ontario a reminiscence of the Tutelo, which has escaped recording by those who have questioned the Iroquois on the subject was offered me in 1925 by Joe Henry, the oldest Cayuga living at that time. This addition to our knowledge of the Tutelo relates that the name of the last Tutelo chief was Ka’stq’hagy, the term referring to his ‘“‘Dwelling in Stone.” [Footnote: We learn that John Key, a Tutelo of the Six Nations Reserve, Ontario, one of the last to speak the language, bore the name Gostango, ‘‘Beloe the Rock.” He is evidently the person referred to above.] Legend states that he had killed a number of people; that he was the ‘‘first Tutelo who came to the Six Nations,” and that he had formerly lived in a cave having a room perpendicular to the entry passage in which recess he lived for protection. The cave was so formed that only one invader at a time could enter and turn the corner. Intrenched in this cavern he had accounted for his enemies. The interesting tale of this old Cayuga is apparently a native version of a tradition recorded in 1733 by Byrd in reference to a cave that he found on an island in Roanoke River [Mecklenburg County, Va.] lying above Occaneechi Island, inhabited by the Tutelo before 1701; in which cave the last Tutelo king with only two men had defended himself against a large party of Iroquois and at last forced them to retire. Tradition among the Iroquois at times dies hard! [Speck, 1935, p. 206.] Speck develops a new aspect. Such an attitude toward cultural history here could be held to account for the allocation of the Powhatan peoples in the lower country to the eastward and the Siouan peoples in the piedmont region, their hostility toward each other, the survival of the language of the Occaneechi as a trade language of the region and the language of religious ritual, which facts we learn from Strachey (1948, p. 161; Hale, 1883, p. 12; Beverley, 1705, p. 191). If accordingly, my inferences for a more easterly habitat of certain Siouan peoples, the Shoccoree and possibly Eno, are accepted, then we have a trend of evidence hinting at the conclusion that Siouan peoples were earlier residents in eastern Virginia and Carolina and were invaded several centuries before the coming of the Europeans by the Powhatan, and gradually dispossessed of their territories by them. [Ibid., p. 202-203.] The identification of these two tribes (Saponi and Tutelo) in the historical period with the Monahassanugh and Monasickapanough (Smith, 1607), divisions of the Monacan group, as residents in the Virginia foothills has been undertaken by Mooney and concluded by Bushnell (Mooney, 1894, p. 37; Bushnell, 1919, pp. 13, 17). Their exodus from Virginia, their wanderings southward and then their return to Virginia to settle for a while at Fort Christanna have been suc- cinctly traced by Mooney. As yet, however, we have no mention of their asso- ciation with the Catawba as allies or as incorporated units. Nevertheless there must have been at one time an association between the northern (Tutelo and associated peoples) and the southern (Catawba, Woccon, and others) divisions of the Siouan tribes in the region. Swanton thinks that the incursion of the Span- iards in to the Carolinas in the 16th century resulted in forcing certain of them to the northward. Catawba tradition is silent in regard to the Tutelo. A single echo of the once important name Saponi possibly comes down to us through Catawba memory in the mention by Margaret Brown of a tribe whose name was remembered as (ye) AnTHnor. Pap. _ EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 157 pa’na spoken of by her mother. She knew nothing more of the term or its meaning. Of the proper names denoting Tutelo (Toteri, Yesang, Nahissan, etc.) there is no hint of cognizance among the Catawba. . . The words of Mooney applying to the Saponi seem to be the last that can be said of the tribe. . . . [Ibid., pp. 205-206.] Speck would infer here that the word (ye) pa’na brought forth from deep memory by Margaret Brown correlated with the word yesang recorded by Hale to refer either to the Tutelo or to the Saponi. Since Margaret Brown did not recollect its meaning or to which tribe or group this name applied, it probably would have been better unrecorded, for then no one would draw meaningless inferences to its probable or possible correlation with either the Tutelo or Saponi or with the whole so-called northern Siouan-speaking group. Under another form of the tribal name, Mohetan, a village of this affinity is indicated on Alvord and Bidgood’s map (1673-4), visited by Needham and Arthur, a days journey from the Great Kanawha River, West Virginia. At present we may admit that this reference means an earlier wider extension toward the west in the Alleghenies or a move toward the end of the 17th century in that direction, after which the village may have acquired a name derived from some other tongue. The association of the Mannahoac with the Monacan brings up another aspect of the problem before us. Both peoples are described as occupants of the pied- mont and mountain slopes of Virginia, and they have been regarded as related tribes, by all the authorities who speak about them since Hale and Mooney, both as concerns the characteristics of speech and culture. Since, therefore, we possess a vocabulary from only the one language of Virginia area, namely Tutelo, it may be profitable to apply the lexical forms of Tutelo to the half dozen terms reserved by Captain Smith as place or tribal names of the Mannahoac confederacy. .. . Without intending to assume a positive attitude concerning the interpretation of Mannahoac names written in Smith’s manuscript three hundred years ago, by a stranger to the Indian tongue, explained through the medium of the small Tutelo vocabulary (spoken by a Siouan tribe about one hundred miles distant from them) of about one hundred fifty words recorded by Hale in 1870, the above suggestions will be accepted merely as such. Occaneechi. The term Occaneechi (with its variants Akenatzy, Occanacheans, Patshenins) comes down to us as the tribal designation of an early people of the Virginia-Carolina frontier, dwelling (1670) on a large island in Roanoke River just below the confluence of the Staunton and the Dan Rivers, near the site of Clarksburg, (Clarksville), Mecklenburg County, Virginia. [In this, Speck refers to Mooney’s article in Bulletin 30, pt. 2, of the Bureau of American Ethnology’s publication in which Mooney is supposed to be referring to Lederer. Mooney, as before, misquotes Lederer, fitting a premise of his own.—Present writer’s comment.] It is undoubtedly, as Mooney has shown, the designation of a Siouan- speaking tribe affiliated with the Saponi and Tutelo. Yet we have no linguistic proof of such an affinity beyond the statement that their languages were similar, which is supported by testimony given to Hale by Nikonha, the Tutelo. (Hale, p. 10) Nor is it possible to add anything to its meaning or history from Catawba sources. [Writer’s italics.] Its connections, were, however, definitely with the north- ern (Saponi, Tutelo, or Nahissan) branch of the eastern Siouan tribes with 158 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLu. 164 whom they finally combined. Bland (1650) writes of the Occanecheans and Nessoneicks (which I have already noted is a synonym for Nahissan) as living together on a branch of the Roanoke (Bland, p. 16). [Ibid., p. 212.] The hope entertained since 1893 among students of native history and institutions, that the confusion of tribal names mentioned in the early narratives of the Carolinas would sooner or later be cleared up has not as yet been realized. Nor are the prospects very favorable, now that the last remaining persons speaking any of the Siouan languages of the Southeast have dwindled to the number of two of the Catawbas. As Mooney points out in summarizing the results of his study of Siowan tribes of the east, the actual identity of only the Tutelo and Catawba languages can be ascertained with certainty, whereas twenty-two other of his Siouan classifications were so deter- mined only through the inference of [their political relations with the Catawba. [Writer’s italics.] Later Swanton described grounds upon which Woccon, of the extreme eastern North Carolina region, could be linked by lexicon with the Catawba as a Siouan idiom, and subsequently, I was encouraged by him to suggest a similar solution for the identity of Duhare, spoken about Winyaw Bay, south of Cape Fear River. Mooney (1893), following Hale (1870) and Gatschet (1880), concluded that historical sources were sufficient to remove doubt as to the Tutelo relationship of Saponi and Occaneechi, finally reducing the totally unattached languages of the Carolinas to some fifteen. No lexical terms from these latter are known to exist for purpose of classification except for three or four chief’s names in Cheraw and Santee, and the river and village names from which the tribes themselves derived their proper names. [Ibid., p. 201.] [Speck pointed out that:] Several Muskhogean names can be construed into meaning in Catawba without these, however, being in any way responsible for their origin. (Ibid., pp. 221-222.) Can this indicate a possible linkage linguistically with the Musk- hogean? Muskhogean, on the other hand, were Creek and heretofore were never linked with the Catawba linguistically. This is one relationship which should be reviewed in the future by competent linguists. 19386.—John R. Swanton indicated that— The Siouan linguistic stock was given its place and name in the Powellian classification [primarily by Mooney’s aid] mainly on the basis of papers by Albert Gallatin published in 1836 and 1848. ... By a curious accident the Catawba Indians of South Carolina are given the same color as the Siouan tribes generally, though Gallatin does not appear to have recognized any connection between Catawba and Muskhogee or even Choctaw. Ultimately, it will probably be shown that he was not entirely astray here though considerably ahead of his times i=." Horatio Hale, the Canadian linguist, was first to suggest the existence of a Siouan dialect east of the Appalachians. In 1870 he interviewed an old Tutelo man living among the Cayuga Indians and obtained a vocabulary from him which “showed beyond question . . . that it was closely allied to the languages of the Dacotan family.””’ The discovery was so unexpected that Hale at first thought this individual might have been a Dakota captive. A second visit, however, in October of the same year, removed all doubts and the language was recognized as that of the old Tutelo of Virginia. On December 19, 1879, Hale set forth his conclusions briefly at a meeting of the American Philosophical Society, and at a later meeting, March 2, 1883, made a complete presentation accompanied by a historical account of the tribe, a grammatical sketch, and comparisons be- Nota 4? = EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 159 tween Tutelo words and corresponding terms in Dakota and Hidatsa. This paper placed the relationship of the Tutelo beyond question, and it was further confirmed through material collected by Hewitt,! Sapir,! and Frachtenberg.! .. . [Swanton, 1936, p. 371.] As has already been noted, Gallatin, as far back as 1836, had suggested that the Woccon and several other tribes of the Carolinas were perhaps connected with Catawba, and Hale had been told by his old informant Nikonha that the Tutelo and Saponi could understand each other’s speech. Nikonha knew of another tribe associated with these which he called Patshenins or Botshenins, and which Hale was probably right in identifying with the Occaneechi. He also assumed that the speech of these last was connected with the two others, though unfor- tunately he neglected to ask Nikonha about it... . The results of the work of Hale, Gatschet, and Dorsey, and further information derived from a careful study of historical sources, were incorporated by James Mooney into a small, now classic, bulletin which appeared in 1895 (1894). In this paper Mooney demonstrated very satisfactorily the Siouan connection of the following tribes: the Indians of the Manahoac and Monacan confederations, in- cluding the Tutelo and Saponi, Occaneechi, Eno, Shakori or Shaccoree, Sissipahaw, Keyauwee, Woccon, Catawba, Sugeree, Waxhaw, Cheraw or Sara, Wateree, Congaree, Santee, Sewee, Pedee, Winyaw, Waccamaw, Cape Fear Indians, and a tribe he called Mohetan. He suggested, indeed that the Eno and Shakori might not be Siouan and admitied that the relationship of several others rested on rather tenuous circumstantial evidence, but, as we shall see presently, the peculiarities of the Eno and Shakori may be otherwise explained, and all additional evidence has tended to confirm the correctness of Mooney’s classification. [Writer’s italics.] The word Mohetan, however, is now known to be a misprint of Monetan, a tribe located much farther toward the northwest than the position Mooney assigns to it, probably on the Kanawha river. To the west of these again were the Ofo or Mosopelea; farther down the Ohio, according to tradition, was the former home of the Quapaw; and there is evidence of an ancient residence of the Biloxi and Osage in adjoining territories. Modern research has, therefore, tended to extend the domain of the ‘‘Siouan tribes of the west’ farther west and that of the Siouan tribes of the west farther east at a not remote period. This, of course, is merely confirmatory of the evidence furnished by community in language and current traditions. We now come to a point of particular significance regarding the Eastern Siouans, but one upon which insufficient emphasis has hitherto been placed. Because, when first known to Europeans, they occupied one continuous geographical area, and were separated by a considerable interval from those in the west, it has natu- rally been assumed that the former were all more closely related to one another than to any of the trans-Mississippi Siouans. On the contrary, the eastern Siouans must be sharply separated into two groups, the Virginia Siouans, including the Manahoac, Monacan, Nahyssan, Saponi, Tutelo, Occaneechi, and Moneton, and the Carolina Siouans embracing all the rest. Even a superficial comparison of the Tutelo and Catawba vocabularies on one hand and the western dialects on the other is sufficient to show that Catawba stands clearly apart from all of them, and that Tutelo is nearer Dakota, Hidatsa, and others of the western languages than it is to Catawba. Indeed, Catawba may prove to have been more closely connected with one or more of the western and southern dialects than with Tutelo. In this conclusion I am supported by 1 See articles referred to in present paper. 160 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buny. 164 the leading Catawba specialist of today, Professor Frank G. Speck. [Ibid., pp. 373-374.] The last sentence in Swanton’s conclusions reads: There is evidence, which has not yet been thoroughly marshaled, that the Siouan and Muskhogean linguistic families are related and that the Catawba tongue occupies an intermediate position between the extreme branches of each (ibid., p. 380). This same thought had been pointed out by Speck in 1935, so does not represent a new thought at this time. 1940.—By 1940 we get a number of elaborations, an example of which is readily found in “Red Carolinians,” by Chapman Milling (1940, p. 218): On the following Saturday morning the party (Lawson’s) set out for Sapona passing ‘‘seven Heaps of Stones, being the Monuments of seven Indians that were slain in that Place by the Sinnegers or Iroquois. Our Indian Guide added a Stone to each Heap.”’ Here Milling has changed the seven Indian graves to monuments which were accretional by the adding of stones to each heap by the Indian guide, an elaboration which was never mentioned in the original doc- ument. During the same year (1940) David Bushnell brought out his ‘‘Vir- ginia before Jamestown,” in which he points out: The northern Siouan group, those in Virginia at the beginning of the seventeenth century, occupied the piedmont beyond the country claimed by the Algonquian tribes; but they may not have been there many generations, having moved into the valleys from the west and southwest. The Monacans and Manahoac confed- eracies, whose villages were in the valleys of the James, Rivanna, Rappahannock, and lesser streams, were Siouan peoples. This was as far north as the tribes advanced, and soon after the middle of the century they were returning southward, having been forced to abandon their scattered settlements by the invasion of the Susquehanna and others from the north. [Bushnell, 1940, p. 134.] There does not occur in the records any incursion of the Susquehanna against the settlements of the Indians at any time, but rather the joining of the Susquehanna with some, especially the Occaneechi. This mistaken interpretation is characteristic of Bushnell. Continuing, he says: Little was recorded about the people of the piedmont section. There is no known reference to a European having visited a native village in the valleys beyond the falls of the Rappahannock; nor was the valley of the James, beyond the mouth of the Rivanna, reached by the colonists until after the Indian settlements had been abandoned. Few, if any, Indians remained in the piedmont in 1670. When Lederer, Colonel Catlet, and their party of ‘‘nine English horses, and five Indians on foot” traversed the country westward from the falls of the Rappahannock, they did not mention encountering a native camp. But on August 24, so the journal states, “we trav- elled thorow the Savanae amongst vast herds of red and fallow deer which stood Nos2))" ~~+EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 161 gazing at us; and a little after, we came to the Promontories or spurs of the Apalat- aean-mountains.” A check against the reprint consulted by Bushnell reveals that they were on an expedition to the ‘‘Apalataean Mountains” from the falls of the Rappahannock River, and tells very little about the country in between these two points with the exception of describing the foothill country and some of the nearby fauna, and a harrowing experience from a spider bite. There was no intimation that the Indians had vacated the country traversed, so it is difficult to understand why Bushnell made such an inference. [See Lederer, as given in Talbot, 1902, pp. 23-25.] Bushnell states: In the year 1682, twelve years after Lederer explored the valley of the Rappa- hannock, Cadwalader Jones, then in command of the Rappahannock Rangers, traversed the same country. When near the headwaters of the Rapidan he “saw an Indian yt made a periuger at the mountain and brought her down to the Gar- ison with Skins and venison.” The garrison was at the falls of the Rappahan- MOCK: 4 ty, The villages in the piedmont were composed of clusters of bark or mat-covered lodges, probably more scattered than in the towns nearer the coast. There were no large structures in the villages that would have resembled the council houses of the tribes farther south. [Bushnell, 1940, p. 134.] Since Bushnell never conducted an excavation of any of these sites to which he refers, there is no wonder that he can make such sweeping statements regarding the internal structure of the villages. He then goes on to say: As no description of a Siouan settlement in the Virginia piedmont has been preserved it is not known to what extent the villages were palisaded. However, after the Tutelo and Saponi had moved away from the banks of the James and Rivanna, their towns were so protected. In 1701 the Tutelo village stood on the bank of the Yadkin River, in central North Carolina, where it was visited by Lawson. One night there was a severe storm accompanied by a strong wind from the northwest and, so wrote Lawson: “The first Puff blew down all the Palisadoes that fortified the town.” Lawson continued his journey, soon passed through the Saponi village and some miles beyond arrived at the Keyauwee town, ‘fortified in with Wooden Puncheons, like Sapona, being a People much of the same Number.’”’ Mooney located the Keyauwee village about the present High Point, Guilford County, N. C. The Tutelo and Saponi belonged to the northern, and the Keyauwee to the southern group of Siouan tribes. Settlements on the headwaters of the James and Rappahannock may, at an earlier time, have been similarly protected. ([Ibid., p. 134.] . . . the tribes then settled at Fort Christanna had moved down from the north, from the valleys of the James and Rivanna, to join the kindred Occaneechi about the year 1670. They settled on islands below the junction of the Staunton and Dan Rivers, in the present Mecklenburg County, Va., but moved to several other localities before reaching Fort Christanna. However, many of the customs practiced by the earlier generations at the villages in the north were undoubtedly 162 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bunn 164 followed by the people gathered at Fort Christanna. . . . They ‘‘live entirely upon their hunting and the corn which their wives cultivate.” Such were the conditions at Fort Christanna, about 10 miles north of Roanoke River, in the present Brunswick County, Va., during the month of April 1716. [Ibid., p. 135.] 1942.—An important bit of added information was brought out by Frank G. Speck in 1942 in the “Tutelo Adoption Ceremony.” In the introduction to this work, we find Claude E. Schaeffer saying: A brief statement should first be made regarding the language of the Tutelo and their congeners. Recognition of the existence of a group of Siouan languages in the Atlantic area first came about through the Tutelo. In 1870 Horatio Hale gathered from one of the last fluent Tutelo speakers on the Six Nations reserve a list of about 200 native words. After comparing this vocabulary with similar lists taken from western Siouans, Hale was able to show the relationship of the Tutelo language to the trans-Mississippi phylum of the stock. Subsequently, Catawba of South Carolina, Biloxi of Mississippi and a number of other eastern languages were assigned to the Siouan stock. Swanton recently argued for separation of eastern Siouan into two distinct divisions, a northern group repre- sented by the Tutelo, Saponi, Occaneechi and related tribes of Virginia and a southern one composed of Catawba and kindred peoples of the Carolinas; Tutelo, Saponi and less certainly Occaneechi, of the Virginia division, are thought to be closely similar in character. Of the three only Tutelo, from the limited vocab- ulary collected by Hale, is known to any degree. [Speck, 1942, p. xvi.] The proper names of the second series, however, fail to yield any discernible Siouan affinities nor on the other hand do they lend themselves to analysis from the standpoint of Iroquoian phonetics as determined from living Seneca speakers on the Cornplanter reserve. . . . It must, therefore, be admitted that for the time being, the second series linguistically remains an unknown quantity. Re- calling, however, that the Occaneechi are believed to have accompanied the Tutelo-Saponi on their migration northward, the possibility confronts us that these terms, otherwise unidentifiable, may belong to that Siouan language. Sup- port of such an assumption, apart from Mooney’s (55-56) tentative identification of the ‘‘Botshenins’”’ mentioned by Hale’s informant as the Occaneechi, is not strengthened by the total absence of documentary reference to this tribe in the north. An alternative possibility remains that the second series is representative of Saponi, except for the presumed similarity of that language to Tutelo and the stated presence of the Saponi on Seneca river at this date (1789). In view of these difficulties, the question for the present remains unresolved. Thus it has been beyond the scope of this introduction to present the various conflicting opinions of students as to the earlier home of the Virginia-North Carolina Siouans, a question which must wait upon archeology for its final answer. [Italics are writer’s.] [Ibid., p. xvii.] Speck states: It is now, however, time to realize that while the manifold cultural pattern of the Iroquois supervened, from all that we may deduce, in the subsequent life of the Tutelo there remained a national tradition continuously operating in the Tutelo minority among the Cayuga to preserve part of its cultural independence from that epoch down to the present. The political agenda of the Iroquois tolerated, even fostered, the retention of tribal institutions among those minority bodies of natives who voluntarily came to ally themselves with the Long House, notwithstanding the circumstances that they be of alien speech-stock and extrac- Anrepor, Haz. EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 163 tion. The Tutelo were evidently of a temper to enjoy this form of institutional freedom with the added dignity of social and political equality accorded them. Their emigration to the north must have radically affected the structure of their economic life through coresidence with a confederacy of progressive tribes already long adjusted to the conditions of existence on the southern border of the Cana- dian zone. But, as we infer substantially from tradition among the Cayuga as well as among the Tutelo descendants themselves, the Tutelo preserved the ritualistic and ceremonial solemnities which they cherished distinctly as their own. They have even been responsible for the introduction of some elements of the same into the ritual systems of their Iroquois hosts, if we are to credit the Cayuga priest-chiefs. . . . [Ibid., pp. 2-3.] The rites in almost all of these cases are characterized by (1) adoption after the death of a person, of an individual of the same age and sex by the family of the deceased, (2) the clothes of the deceased are turned over to the adoptee, and (3) the adoptee takes on privileges and responsibilities of a member of the bereaved family. [Ibid., p. 8.] The rite to which we are now to devote attention bears the proper names djudadiy at! hahroni, “they are going to redress him,” or sdsayat! hahrGni, ‘‘they are going to redress her,’”’ (according to the sex of the person to be adopted). These denotations are in the Cayuga language. The Tutelo of the Six Nations, it may be recalled, have not only lost their idiom but the proper name of the ceremony in their own tongue. Briefly stated, the avowed purpose of the ceremony is to bring back the soul of a defunct Tutelo tribe member who has died recently, within approximately a year, into association with the living for the space of one night. The ritual reinstates the deceased among the living by the appointment, through adoption, of a beloved one in his or her place as an earthly representative. At its conclu- sion with the approach of daylight a final adieu is formally enacted to the de- parted spirit, sending it upon its final journey over the pathway of the rising sun’s rays to the permanent celestial abode of spirits. [Ibid., p. 10.] The frequency of occasions for the celebration of the Adoption Rite depends entirely upon the occurrence of the death of those who carry Tutelo descent; either blood descent or that derived from previous adoption into the name-registry of the group. [Italics are present writer’s.] [Ibid., p. 12.] In this same year (1942), James Griffin brought out an article “On the Historic Location of the Tutelo and the Mohetan in the Ohio Valley.”” Here he makes use of a number of the same sources of information used in this paper. He says: One interpretation of their former habitat is that the Tutelo came into the Piedmont area from the Ohio Valley. In a recent article Swanton has located the Tutelo in the Big Sandy Valley, near Williamson, West Virginia, and has shown on his map the movement of the Tutelo from that point to near Salem, Virginia, and from there to a site near Clarksville, Virginia. The evidence for this movement is given in the text. In the meantime another Siouan tribe, known as Tutelo or Totero, which, near the end of the seventeenth century, seems to have been on the Big Sandy, and which Fallam and Batts had visited in a town somewhere near the present Salem, Virginia, moved to an island just above that of the Occaneechi at the junction of the Staunton and the Dan. Before 1701 all of them had abandoned that region in turn and retired into North Carolina, where the Saponi and Tutelo 370929—57——13 164 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuy. 164 were found by Lawson on the headwaters of the Yadkin and the Occaneechi on Eno river near the present Hillsboro. The footnote reference in the above quotation is to Volume IV of the Docu- ments Relative to the Colonial History of the State of New York published in Albany in 1854 and edited by E. B. O’Callaghan, M. D. The same reference is cited for the following quotation taken from Swanton which presents the evidence used for the historic seventeenth century location of the Tutelo in the Ohio Valley. [Griffin, 1942, p. 275.] A check of Swanton’s article to which Griffin refers was made to determine the source of this statement regarding the Tutelo. Swanton refers to page 488 of volume IV, but when a careful perusal of this page has been made no mention of the Tutelo or Totero and their ever appearing upon the Big Sandy near the end of the 17th century is to be found. As for the Fallam and Batts statement, see their exact description as earlier presented in this paper (pp. 122-123). Griffin continues: As the Earl of Bellomont, in 1699, says the ‘‘Shatteras’”’ were “supposed to be the Toteras, on Big Sandy River, Va.,’’* it may be that the Virginia Siouans had advanced up that stream, but it is more likely that most of them came by the great trail along the Kanawha.” [Ibid., p. 275]. Again we find an inconsistent reference in that his ‘‘29”’ in the quota- tion above is supposed to refer to Alvord and Bidgood, 1912, page 218. When checked against Alvord and Bidgood, page 218, we find that this page is devoted to ‘Journeys of Needham and Arthur,” and the Earl is not mentioned in any portion of the message on this particular page. Griffin states: This quotation by Swanton is supposed to be from a letter of the “Earl of Bello- mont to the Lords of Trade’’ written in ‘“New Yorke, April the 13th 1699.” In this letter the Earl refers to certain Indian tribes which could be more easily reached from the colony of Carolina than from the colony of New York. His letter is significant because it reveals his lack of knowledge of the location of some of the contemporary Indian tribes. The entire section in which he refers to the Tutelo is given below. But as it ‘tis the interst of England I chiefly meditate I reckon I should abuse your Lordships if I did not freely own to you that Carolina lyes infinitely more commodious for a trade with those Nations of Indians which are called the Shateras Twichtwicht and Dowaganhas Indians and a world of other nations, which some of our Indians at Albany told me were as numerous as the sand on the sea shoar., [Ibid., pp. 275-276.] Griffin in his concluding paragraph points out that— This is not to deny the hypothesis that the central Ohio Valley could have been such an area. If it was, however, it must have been at a period far removed from that of the Fort Ancient occupation. Such a reconstruction can only be made by comparing the material from known Siouan sites in the east with that from known Siouan sites in the Chiwere, Dhegiha, Dakota, and Akansa areas and checking back to discover if there is archeological material in the Ohio Valley at the correct Ne EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 165 time horizon which would indicate a generic connection to the remains of these dispersed Siouan tribes, I venture to predict that such a search will be unsucess- ful. [Ibid., p. 280]. Again referring to James Griffin, in 1945, we find him saying that— A re-examination of the historic locations and movements of the Siouan tribes of the Piedmont may provide a firmer background for the understanding and inter- pretation of the archaeological material found on the sites occupied by these tribes. Since it is impossible at this time to make a critical examination of the primary sources of this historical] information, it is necessary to rely on the available second- ary sources. A division into southern and northern Piedmont Siouan groups has been accepted by Speck and Swanton. .. . Because of this, it would be well to speak of the ‘‘Virginia’’ Siouans as the Tutelo division and the ‘‘Carolina’’ Siouans as the Catawba division. No one has yet given any very accurate idea of the degree of divergence of these two linguistic units or the meaning, historically, of this divergence. However, the recognized local bands or tribes of the Catawba division were differentiated by 1520-1540, those of the northern, or Tutelo, divi- sion, by 1600. It has been suggested that the Siouan tribes of the Catawba division found in North Carolina by Lederer and Lawson had moved in shortly before 1670. It was Swanton’s opinion in 1936 that this movement of some of the Catawba Siouans (Sara and Keyauwee) into North Carolina was the result, partly of Pardo’s jour- neys into the interior in 1566, and partly of an assumed movement of the Cherokee Nation from some point on the upper Ohio, up the Kanawha and New Rivers to the headwaters, and then down the Clinch and Holston as far as Chattanooga. This Cherokee movement took place before the arrival of the Spaniards—hence at some time before 1540. The Cherokee found Muskhogean people to the south of them and Siouan tribes of the Catawba division to the east of them. According to this interpretation, the movement of the Catawba out of their postulated home in the Ohio Valley probably took place not later than about 1450. The story of the historic movements of the Tutelo division is somewhat different. The Manahoac and Monacan units were already located along the Rappahannock- Rapidan and James valleys, between the fall-line and the mountains, in about 1600. We do not hear of the Tutelo-Occaneechi-Saponi as such until some time later, namely around 1670, when they were south of the territory occupied by the Mana- hoac and Monacan at the beginning of the seventeenth century. Bushnell has called some of the Monacan groups Tutelo and Saponi. Swanton has suggested that the location of a village called Mohetan, which may or may not have been Siouan, in the lower Kanawha Valley in 1674 indicates a movement of the Mohetan tribe from the Ohio Valley into Virginia. It is known, however, that this tribe was on the eastern side of the mountains in 1669-1670 and hence was going westward. In any event, an east to west movement in 1670-1673 can hardly be used as evi- dence for the location in Virginia in 1600 of tribes that came from the Ohio Valley. Nor can an erroneous location of the Tutelo on the Big Sandy in 1699 be used as historical evidence for an Ohio Valley home of the Tutelo. A different view of the location of the pre-1600 homes of the Tutelo division is suggested by Speck, who feels that the Powhatan and other Algonquian tribes of the Tidewater area displaced the Siouan groups, forcing them into the Piedmont section some 200 years or more before the coming of the Europeans. If this hunch were correct, any movement of the Tutelo division out of the Ohio Valley would necessarily have occurred some time before 1400. In any event, the historical evidence suggests that the late seventeenth—and early eighteenth—century merging of the Tutelo and Catawba groups in north- 166 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLL, 164 central North Carolina and south-central Virginia was the result of pressure on the Catawba division from the south and east and of pressure on the Tutelo division from the north and east. ([Griffin, 1945, pp. 322-323.] Griffin states in his conclusions: The study of cultural remains from sites attributed to eastern Siouan tribes was undertaken in order to obtain an idea of their cultural homogeneity and to indicate their cultural position with regard to artifacts attributed to neighboring contem- poraneous groups and to the prehistoric cultures of the same and adjoining areas. The main cultural affiliations of the northern division of the Siouan tribes are with the complex of artifacts from the coastal region known to belong to the Algonquian tribes of the Powhatan confederacy and related groups. . Archeological material now attributed to the Siouan tribes of the Piedmont cuuld have been derived as well from antecedent cultural stages in that area as from any other area. . . . pottery of Woodland type known to belong in the Hopewell period in a number of known sites in North Carolina, such as the Puette site in Transylvania County and the Hardaway site in Stanley County, strongly suggests that they belong in the Hopewellian period. At present, they look as though they were contemporary with, and not derived from, Ohio Hopewellian sites. [Ibid., pp. 328-330.] Swanton (1946) reiterates what has been said earlier and compiles this under one cover. No new point of view is presented. Douglas Rights, in 1947, brought out his book “The American Indian in North Carolina” in which he referred to James Needham and Gabriel Arthur: With their Indian escort they traveled to the island home of the Occaneechee at the confluence of the Dan and Staunton rivers. The island-dwellers were a strong tribe, fierce and warlike, and their power was feared by neighboring tribes. So great was their influence that the religious ritual of the Indians for miles around was in their tongue. They controlled the back country trade, forcing traders to pass through their island gateway to the hinterland of the Piedmont, and com- pelling the westward Indians to transport their furs via Occaneechee Town. Their advantage in trade resulted in prosperity that later caused their downfall. [Rights, 1947, p. 67.] Contrary to the position in which the early narrators found the Saponi, Rights says that: These Saponi Indians had been met by Lederer in Virginia. They had later moved to one of the islands at the forks of the Staunton and Dan rivers to become close neighbors of the Occaneechee. Forced to move again, they migrated to the Trading Ford location, which has been previously vacated by the Saura, who had lived here as late as 1673, when Needham and Arthur were on the trail, but had since deserted the Yadkin and had sought a home on Dan River. [Ibid. p. 79.] Continuing with the Saponi, he goes on to say: This people is now made up of the Remnant of Several other Nations, of which the most considerable are the Sappons, the Occaneches, and Steukenhocks [prob- ably Conestoga], who not finding themselves Separately Numerous, enough for their Defence, have agreed to unite into one Body, and all of them go under the Name of Sapponys. [Ibid., pp. 105.] This is more or less a direct quote from William Byrd. Noga) Fe EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 167 Later, while discussing the islands in the Roanoke, Rights says: This middle island was the former home of the Occaneechee to which we traced Lederer and Needham and Arthur. On the uppermost island the Saponi dwelt. The Tutelo had settled on the lowestisland. . . [Ibid., p. 109.][Italics are writer’s.]. Here Rights switched ends with the Saponi and Tutelo. William Byrd placed the Tutelo on the uppermost island and the Saponi on the lowest island. In his latest report, ‘“The Indian Tribes of North America,’ Swanton (1952) modified some of the former statements of yesteryear, but he still adhered to a number of the “die-hard” statements without any qualifications of them. In this work he presents a very brief summary of the main events in the history of the Occaneechi, Saponi, and Tutelo. Of the Occaneechi, he says: Meaning unknown. Connections.—The Occaneechi belonged to the Siouan linguistic stock; their closest connections were probably the Tutelo and Saponi. Location.—On the middle and largest island in Roanoke River, just below the confluence of the Staunton and the Dan, near the site of Clarksville, Mecklenburg County, Va. History—Edward Blande and his companions heard of them in 1650. When first met by Lederer in 1670 at the spot above mentioned, the Occaneechi were noted throughout the region as traders, and their language is said to have been the common speech both of trade and religion over a considerable area (Lederer, 1912). Between 1670 and 1676 the Occaneechi had been joined by the Tutelo and Saponi, who settled upon two neighboring islands. In the latter year the Conestoga sought refuge among them and were hospitably received, but, attempting to dispossess their benefactors, they were driven away. Later, harassed by the Iroquois and English, the Occaneechi fled south and in 1701 Lawson (1860) found them on the Eno River, about the present Hillsboro, Orange County, N. C. Later still they united with the Tutelo and Saponi and followed their fortunes, having, according to Byrd, taken the name of the Saponi. Connection in which they have become noted.—The name Occaneechi is associated particularly with the Occaneechi Trail or Trading Path, which extended south- west through North and South Carolina from the neighborhood of Petersburg, Va. [Swanton, 1952, pp. 65-66.] Regarding the Saponi, he says: Evidently a corruption of Monasiccapano or Monasukapanough, which, as shown by Bushnell, is probably derived in part from a native term ‘‘moni-seep” signifying “‘shallow water.’? Paanese is a corruption and in no way connected with the word ‘‘Pawnee.”’ Connections.—The Saponi belonged to the Siouan linguistic family, their nearest relations being the Tutelo. Location.—The earliest known location of the Saponi has been identified by Bushnell (1930) with high probability with ‘‘an extensive village site on the banks of the Rivanna, in Albemarle County, directly north of the University of Virginia and about one-half mile up the river from the bridge of the Southern Railway.” This was their location when, if ever, they formed a part of the Monacan con- federacy. [Note the conditioning here!] 168 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY (Butt. 164 History.—As first pointed out by Mooney (1894), the Saponi tribe is identical with the Monasukapanough which appears on Smith’s map as though it were a town of the Monacan and may in fact have been such. Before 1670, and probably between 1650 and 1660, they moved to the southwest and probably settled on Otter Creek, as above indicated. In 1670, they were visited by Lederer in their new home and by Thomas Batts (1912) a year later. Not long afterward they and the Tutelo moved to the junction of the Staunton and Dan Rivers, where each occupied an island in Roanoke River in Mecklenburg County. This movement was to enable them to escape the attacks of the Iroquois, and for the same reason they again moved south before 1701, when Lawson (1860) found them on Yadkin River near the present site of Salisbury, N.C. Soon afterward they left this place and gravitated toward the White settlements in Virginia. They evidently crossed Roanoke River before the Tuscarora War of 1711, establishing themselves a short distance east of it and 15 miles west of the present Windsor, Bertie County, N. C. A little later, they along with the Tutelo and some other tribes, were placed by Governor Spotswood near Fort Christanna, 10 miles north of Roanoke River about the present Gholsonville, Brunswick County. ... By the treaty of Albany (1722) the Iroquois agreed to stop incursions on the Virginia Indians and, probably about 1740, the greater part of the Saponi and the Tutelo moved north stopping for a time at Shamokin, Pa., ... [Ibid., pp. 71-72.] As for the Tutelo, he says: Significance unknown but used by the Iroquois, who seem to have taken it from some southern tongue. Connections.—The Tutelo belonged to the Siouan linguistic family, their nearest connections being the Saponi and probably the Monacan. Location.—The oldest known town site of the Tutelo was near Salem, Va., though the Big Sandy River at one time bore their name and may have been an earlier seat. History.—In 1671 Fallam and Batts (1912) visited the town above mentioned. Some years later the Tutelo moved to an island in Roanoke River just above the Occaneechi, but in 1701 Lawson found them still farther southwest, probably about the headwaters of the Yadkin (Lawson, 1860). From that time forward they accompanied the Saponi until the latter tribe separated from them at Niagara as above noted. [Ibid., p. 73.] In the Archives of the Bureau of American Ethnology are a number of undated papers. Among these is a notebook of James Mooney’s (MS. Doc. No. 1901). Pages 1 and 2 are devoted to the ‘‘Acconechi.”’ Here he tells us that in 1701 Lawson found them— living on the headwaters of the Neuse, about Hillsborough, N. C. & apparently in leag with some other small tribes (Lawson 96-7). By 1710 They had moved down nearer the settlements, in company with the Tutelos, Saponis, Shoccori & Keyauwees, the five tribes numbering altogether only about 750 souls (Lawson 384). Occaneechee neck & swamp on the north bank of the Roanoke, apposit Halifax, may indicate their location at this period. In 1717 the friendly Tus- caroras were assigned a reservation on the north bank of the Roanoke in Bertie county (N C Rec II 283). The Saponis had a town, under their protection, upon the same reservation & it is probable that the Acconechis etc liv’d with or near them. [Mooney, MS.] Noe, Y)~=—)« EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 169 Here let us quote an undated letter written by Cyrus Thomas to Mr. (J. N. B.) Hewitt in its entirety (MS. Doc. No. 4014): Dear Mr. Hewitt: I am still tied up and will be this week, but could do some work if I had the Yuman cards and have written Mr. Clayton to send them to me but to have you pick out the boxes. I want all of them including the cross references. Please see that whoever brings them wraps them up well. I sent you one part of our De Soto paper for you to look over and have a copy made—then return the copy I sent, to me by mail with your notes & suggestions on separate sheet. You had better have a copy made for you to keep. It is rather strange that a Uchean cacica or chieftainess should have as a part of her dominion and of her most trusted subjects the country and people of a Siouan tribe. The whole thing is ridiculous. I am becoming impressed with the idea that there ts much rotten timber in the “‘Siouan Tribes of the East.’”’ [Italics are writer’s.] Yours truly s/d Cyrus Thomas 1316 Kenesaw Street. Apparently this was written shortly after Mooney’s work on the “Siouan Tribes of the East” came off the press, for apparently he did not get a chance to look over the manuscript before it was printed. Associated with this letter were a number of notes headed ‘‘Siouan tribes of the East.’”’ These are presented in the following pages: On page 29, the writer reaches the conclusion that “the upper region of the Ohio—Alleghany, Mongahela and Kanawha country’”—was the “original home” of the Siouan stock—‘“‘from which one branch crossed the mountains to the waters of Virginia and Carolina, while the other followed along the Ohio and the lakes toward the west.” On pg. 11: He has those going west—first crossing the mountains and following “down the valleys of New River and the Big Sandy to the Ohio.” Yet, as he informs us their homes were on the upper Ohio. The route taken to go west seems a rather strange one. Pg. 11: He says ‘‘the theory of a Siouan migration down the Big Sandy is borne out by the fact that this stream was formerly known as the Totteroy a corruption of the Iroquois name for the Tutelo.’”’ Yet in the quotation from pg. 29 given above, the eastern branch is said to have crossed the mountains from upper Ohio region to the waters of Virginia and Carolina. Pg. 9—The statement that ‘‘the concurrent testimony of the Siouan tribes themselves to the effect that they had come from the East.’’ is not true as here used. The western Sioux claim to have come from a more eastern locality, but this does not reach farther east than Lake Michigan. The statement given above is therefore misleading and the truth concealed, to maintain a theory. Pg. 9—‘‘The inference that the region west of the Mississippi was the original home of the Siouan tribes” is a man of straw set up by the writer to be knocked down. No acceptable authority, if any, ever held such a theory. Pg. 10—The statement that ‘‘As early as 1701 Gravier stated that the Ohio was known to the Miami and Illinois as the “River of the Akansea” is untrue. Gravier says the Ouabache (Wabash) and expressly distinguishes between it and the Ohio—continuing the Wabash and the Mississippi and making the Ohio a tributary to it. It was from this erroneous interpretation of Gravier’s words that the Sibley Osage tradition—in all its various forms grew up. 170 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buu. 164 Pg. 10—The statement that Dorsey found the tradition of an eastern origin (in the sense here used) as “common to almost all the tribes of that [Siouan] stock’’ is incorrect. Dorsey also contradicts himself on this point—moreover his statements do not include the Dakota group. Pg. 10—De Soto found the Quapaw only a short distance above the locality occupied when the French descended the Mississippi. De Soto did not pass through any portion of the Osage country. Pg. 11—No Ohio tribe, so far as known, had any tradition regarding the Qua- paw (or Akansa)—This was limited, so far as known to some Illinois tribes. It is not true that the Quapaws were “in the vicinity of that stream [Ohio] when encountered by De Soto.’’ This is apparent from the fact that they were then somewhere in the vicinity of the site of Helena, Arkansas. Pg. 11—After stating that the cause of the exodus of the Siouan tribes from their original home, was probably pressure by northern and southern alien tribes, he says ‘‘they retreated across the mountains, the only direction in which a retreat was open to them.”’ Does this refer to those who went west or those who went east into “‘Virginia and Carolina’? Pg. 12—The statement that ‘‘within this period, traditional and historical evidence point out as the cradle of the Algonquian race the coast region lying between Saint Lawrence river and Chesapeake bay”; is untrue. The most “coherent” tradition points to some locality north of the lakes as their original home. The Leni Lenape were the “grandfather”, and that was their original home. Pg. 12—‘‘When their [Iroquois] warfare against the southern tribes was inau- gurated we do not know. It was probably continuous with the expulsion of the Cherokee from the Upper Ohio.”” As the Cherokee were in their southern home in 1540—it may be safely assumed that their expulsion could not have occurred later than the latter part of the 15th century. Were the Iroquois already raiding the southern tribes at this early date? Pg. 19—Compare the statements in the first paragraph of this page as regards the information respecting the Manahoacs and subdivisions with what is stated near the bottom of page 22 and top of page 23. The inference of relationship of Manahoac with Monacan on pg. 23, is changed to certainty on pg. 26—“‘the cognate Manahoacs” .. . Pg. 30—The statement that the Dogi of Lederer “‘have no relation to the Doeg named in the records of the Bacon rebellion in 1675’, is wholly gratuitous as it is more than probable that Lederer obtained the name from the history of the Bacon rebellion.”” [Thomas, MS.] Among the lot were a series of notes by James O. Dorsey (MS. Doc. No. 3804) on the Eastern Siouans. In these he refers to volume 13, number 8, of the American Antiquarian, page 147: The earliest known migrations of the Dakotas were from the east... The Tuteloes having once been located in Northern Georgia, not far from where the bird effigy is; other tribes—such as the Iowas and Mandans—having, according to tradition, carried their symbols to Dakota. The effigy mounds of southern Ohio, especially the great serpent, the bird mounds of Northern Georgia, the effigies of Wisconsin, and the stone effigies of Dakota are assigned by some to different branches of the Dakotas—the Tuteloes having, etc., as above. Up to this time no one has mentioned the Tuteloes as having lived in northern Georgia. Who could have mistakenly supplied this bit of misinformation? Antepr PAP. = EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 171 Included in this batch of Dorsey notes were some on “Migrations of certain tribes of the Siouan family.” Herein he says: Some authors speak of a series of migrations of these tribes from the west toward the east; but the writer has not been able to learn of what authority such statements have been made; nor has he ever found any tradition of such eastward migrations among the tribes that he has visited. This statement upsets Mooney’s theory, since Dorsey is the outstand- ing authority on the Sioux. Dorsey then lists some pertinent comments on Mooney and his “Siouan tribes of the East.” Mooney [in the Siouan Tribes of the East, Galley 4 AL] says: ‘‘The theory of a Siouan migration down the valley of the Big Sandy is borne out by the fact that this stream was formerly known as the Totteroy, a corruption of the Iroquois name for the Tutelo and other Siouan tribes of the South.” (Big Sandy, the Big Totteroy; and Little Sandy, the Little Totteroy). If Mooney accepts this traditional name of the Big Sandy as good evidence (see above), why should he reject the traditional name of the Kentucky R. (a stream near the Big Sandy), Cuttawa, Cuttawo, or Catawba River? He says in Galley 26 AL: “The Shawano and other tribes of the Ohio Valley made the word (i. e., Catawba) Cuttawa.” Catawba in Carolina as early as 1569 Kwapa on the Mississippi in 1540-41 (La Vandera) (De Soto) Yet Yet Kentucky R. given as ‘Cuttawa’ on Ohio given as ‘R. d’Acansea’ on Vaugondie’s Map (1755) De L’Isle’s Map (1722) Big Sandy called Totteroy in 1746 Mooney says (The Siouan Tribes of the East (p. 70) Galley 26 AL), “The Catawba were found living about where we have always known them, as early as 1567. Kentucky river was called by that name among the Shawano and other northern tribes because up that river lay the great war trail to the Catawba country.” This may beso; but what proof have we of this. If proof can be given, that settles the question of the origin of this name for Kentucky river; but if no proof (no authority) can be given for this statement, if it be a mere inference on the part of Mr. Mooney, it is in order to call attention to another explanation of the origin of that appellation, i. e., that it referred to a traditional or prehistoric occupation of that region by the Catawba tribe, just as the name Totteroy, applied to the Big Sandy, referred to a traditional or prehistoric occupation of that region by the Tutelo tribe or confederacy. [Referring to the American Antiquarian, vol. xiii, number 4, July, 1891, p. 236:] I find that Dr. Morgan is disposed to classify the Catawba among the Dakotas, as also all Iroquois dialects. This brings out a new idea, for which the Saponas, Toteros, Nottoways, and Catawbas added to the Tuscaroras, we have an aggrega- tion of Dakotas east of the Alleghenies numbering many thousands, and to these may be possibly added a half dozen other or small tribes in the immediate neigh- borhood. Take the Saponies, for instance, known to contemporary writers under half a dozen different names and whom Gallatin classed among the Iroquois; called by the Troquois, Todericks; by the French, Panis; west of the Mississippi, Pawnees, ike BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Butt. 164 alias Naudowasses, alias Dakotas, alias Sioux. These purely Dakota tribes were on the Atlantic coast in 1700. In comparing the notes made by Thomas with those of Dorsey’s, one will see that there is a similarity in criticism running throughout, but an elaboration along certain lines in which each authority has specialized. Dr. Swanton left with the Bureau of American Ethnology a number of notes which were placed in the Archives under No. 4234. In this group he lists the ‘“‘Results of the comparison of 117 terms in 6 Siouan languages. The number of closest resemblances is indicated in each case.”’ These were listed in chart forms, most of which incorporated a basic foundation with either additions to or subtractions from each. These are shown as he has listed them without any attempt made to incorporate all three under a common chart. In reading over these charts one is immediately struck with the inconsistencies of the number of resemblances between the Tutelo and the other dialectic groups. [Chart 1] Between Biloxi and Ofo there are 38 resemblances ce ce igi Hidatsa “ 36 ce ce “ce cc Dakota a3 33 ce § Ofo ‘“ Dakota re 26 es Es Gidatsa ‘‘ Dakota gs 24 ef Hi Biloxi ‘* Tutelo cs 23 fc 19.7% ee Hidatsa ‘“‘ Mandan cf 20 a Os Hidatsa ‘“ Tutelo ce 19 as 16.2% ce Tutelo ‘' Dakota ef 18 ne 15.4% LY Hidatsa ‘“‘ Ofo “6 ily ¥ ss Biloxi « Mandan ff 13 ‘s ¥ Ofo « Mandan § 11 f Ff Tutelo ‘ Mandan a 9 “ 7.7% tf Tutelo ‘“ Ofo i 8 § 6.8% es Dakota ‘' Mandan Es 20 es [Chart 2] Biloxi and Ofo 38 ef “ Hidatsa 36 ef “ Tutelo 34 29.1% rf “« Dakota 33 Tutelo ‘ Hidatsa 29 24.8% Ofo “« Dakota 26 Tutelo ‘“ Dakota 25 21.3% Hidatsa ‘ Dakota 24 Biloxi “ Tutelo 23 19.7% Hidatsa ‘* Mandan 20 Dakota ‘ Mandan 20 Hidatsa ‘“ Ofo 17 Biloxi «Mandan 13 Tutelo ‘* Mandan 13 11.1% Tutelo ‘ Ofo 12 10.2% Ofo “ Mandan 11 A . Pap. ee EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 173 Swanton’s third chart was as follows: 117 terms Osage and Winnebago 40 resemblances [Note.—Pen line was drawn through this entry.] Biloxi sts Ofo 38 be Biloxi “Hidatsa 36 ee Biloxi “ Tutelo 34 ce [? 29.05%] Biloxi « Dakota SB) ‘s Tutelo ‘“ Hidatsa 29 me [? 24.8%] Osage ** Dakota 27 va Ofo “ Dakota 26 Tutelo ‘* Dakota 25 3 [2 21.3%] Hidatsa “ Dakota 243 .. “ Hidatsa ‘‘ Mandan 20 ss Dakota ‘“‘ Mandan 20 és Ofo “Hidatsa 17 Le Biloxi “Mandan 13 Ofo “ Tutelo 12 ‘ ? 10.2%] Ofo “ Mandan 11 “6 Osage “ Tutelo 10 ss 2 8.5%] Osage “Biloxi 9 S Osage “ Hidatsa 5 _ Osage “ Ofo 3 ¢ Osage “Mandan 3 F On the back of one of these charts were the following notes: Gallatin established the Siouan stock, 1836. Tutelo language discovered and identified by H. Hale in 1870; discovery announced at a meeting of the Am. Philos. Soc., Dec. 19, 1879. More complete statement made Mar. 2, 1883 before same Society. Catawba vocabulary collected by Gatschet in 1881 and classed with Siouan languages in First Ann. Report of the Bureau [of American Ethnology] in 1881 but Gatschet was still in doubt in 1882. Finally examined and pronounced Siouan after 1890 by J. O. Dorsey. Gallatin classed Woccon with Catawba, 1836. EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION OF THE FACTS REGARDING THE SIOUAN QUESTION We have given in the foregoing section, in a brief summary fashion, the whole historical background of the Siouan question consisting of a number of the primary and the bulk of the secondary sources which were based on reports given out by explorers, traders, and historians. The whole ‘‘tapestry” of the Eastern Siouan question evolved out of implications, inferences, hypotheses, and assumptions wherein the premise is: a Siouan-speaking people occupied not only southern Virginia but central Virginia as well. These data were interpreta- tions to fit a somewhat modified preconception that such a group was 3 Percentage was determined by the present writer. 174. BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buut. 164 in existence in Virginia, North Carolina, and possibly Carolina during protohistoric and historic times. First, let us point out how the whole thing started and developed out of statements issued by Captain John Smith, William Strachey, Edward Bland, John Lederer, and General Wood’s reports of the experiences of Thomas Batts, Robert Fallam, James Needham, and Gabriel Arthur. John Smith never contacted the Indian groups above the Falls of the James River but he did receive word about them from a captive Indian in sign language. Most of his informa- tion came from members of the Powhatan confederacy and was colored by a number of factors involving both groups, such as dif- ferences in language, the enmity of each group for the other, etc. NO FIRSTHAND OBSERVATIONS WERE EVER MADE AMONG THOSE INDIAN GROUPS OCCUPYING THE AREA WEST OF THE FALLS OF THE JAMES RIVER. Strachey, secretary of the Jamestown colony from 1609 to 1612, depended to a great extent on Smith and his reports of the country and on firsthand information gleaned from the Algonquian groups which were in contact with the colonists. He compiled a list of words from the Indian together with their English equivalents which supple- ments Smith’s works. Edward Bland actually went among the Meherrin group to the west of the falls of the James River, trading with them for their various commodities. He was the first to report on certain Indian groups occupying central and south-central Virginia. He either contacted the Occaneeches directly or otherwise received word from Indian sources regarding them. A few years later, John Lederer’s expeditions into this section of Virginia not only gave distances but directional position of one group from the other as well as bits of Indian tradition. The following year two Indian traders, Batts and Fallam, covered a portion of this same country as well as a section to the west, where they came upon a new Indian group, the Toteros or Tutelo. At this time they were not in association with any other known Indian group and resided beyond two ridges of mountains. Later, two other Indian traders, Needham and Arthur as a team, were sent out by General Wood to this same area, and they contacted not only the Saponi and Occaneechi, but the Tutelo as well. During this time Arthur was captured but after a number of experiences succeeded in returning to the white settlements. General Wood reported upon their experiences, divulging additional Indian data. Most of these data are supported by Robert Beverley, but the out- standing contribution was that concerning the ‘general language” that all these people talked about. Beverley has definitely pinned it down as belonging to the Occaneechi and as used not only during a ana EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 175 religious rites but also during trading transactions by the people of the entire area, John Lawson, James Adair, and William Byrd noted further refine- ments which were from not too reliable sources. Byrd, it seems, is given over to fanciful statements. Adair went in for the “lost tribes of Israel” theory to account for the origin of the American Indian, while Lawson was pretty well mixed up in his geography. To support the statement regarding William Byrd a quotation from William Boyd’s Introduction is given (see p. 127, this paper). By the time we get to Byrd the clear picture has become muddied somewhat by unreliable Indian traditions of fairly recent origin and imagination. By this we allude to his statement about the cave supposedly located on the island occupied by the Tutelo in the Roa- noke, if they ever lived there, wherein the supposed last king of the Tutelo, together with two of his men, stood off a larger northern Indian group for several days and later compelled them to give up and go home. Then too, there is the placement of the Occaneechi, Saponi, and Tutelo on the island group at the confluence of the Dan and Staunton Rivers in the vicinity of Clarksville, Mecklenburg County, Va. Up to this time the Occaneechi were said to have oc- cupied an island in the Roanoke River, but just where this island lay was never stated. The topography surrounding this island does not correspond with that surrounding the island assigned by Byrd as the island home of the Occaneechi. Now, Byrd not only places the Occaneechi on one of the three islands at the confluence of the Dan and Staunton Rivers, but he brings the Saponi and Tutelo down to join them. By the time he reports on this so-called fact, the three groups have long been identified by Lawson as being down in North Carolina. Then, too, there is his description of the topography of these islands together with the dividing straits, none of which con- forms to present-day conditions before they were inundated by the lake of the John H. Kerr reservoir. In the first place, there was never a cave anywhere on the uppermost island, which was assigned to the Tutelo by Byrd. If such cave ever existed its presence was so cleverly hidden that no evidence of it remained. The present writer walked over every foot of this island hoping to find any tangible remains of this cave. Engineers were consulted regarding the same and they, as well as the writer, failed to note that any cave could have existed owing to the nature of the island—its topography and innate structure. In the second place, it would be impossible for anyone to ford “the Streight out of this (Tutelo Island) onto Occaneechy Island”’ for the river bed is from 20 to 25 feet deep at this spot and the head of Oc- caneechi Island is a straight bluff about 22 feet above normal river 176 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Butt. 164 level. Not only does he contradict himself in this but later on he says (Byrd, 1929, p. 291): Because I detested Idleness, I caus’d my Overseer to paddle me up the River as far as the Streight that divides Occaneechy from Totero Island, which is about 20 Yards wide. There runs a Swift Stream continually out of the South part of the River into the North, and is in some places very deep. This second statement is mostly correct, while the first statement probably did not apply to that body of water separating the two islands of Occaneechi and Tutelo. What he was talking about in this instance, only William Byrd knew. To Edward Bland must be given the credit for first mentioning the “‘Occancheans.’’ He never made direct contact with this group, but he received word about them from his Appommotoc guide Pyancha, while on the banks of the Blandina River. This was in 1651. John Lederer, the German Indian trader, is credited with making first physical contact with this group in 1670, but before he could contact the Occaneechi he had to pass through the Saponi town which lay 50 miles northeast of ‘‘Akenatzy.’? With Lederer was his Susque- hanna Indian guide Jackzetavon, who accompanied him on this particular expedition. It is only natural for both Bland and Lederer to rely on their Indian guides to give them the desired information, and this must have been rendered in their own particular dialects. The Appomatoc is listed as one of the constituents of Powhatan’s confederacy—an Algonquian group; while the Susquehanna is a recognized tribe of the Iroquoian stock. Lederer mentions that he heard about the ‘‘Akenatzy’’ from the Indians, supposedly the Saponi. Later, inferences have linked the Saponi with the Occaneechi and Tutelo linguistically, but no direct proof that such was ever the case has been uncovered. Batts and Fallam, after leaving the Saponi town, arrived at the ‘“Hanathaskies town,’’? which in this instance is located 25 miles northwest of the Saponi town. Whether these ‘““Hanathaskies” were another group of the “‘Akenatzy’” is not known, for Lederer found his “Akenatzy” 50 miles southwest of the Saponi. According to Lederer, the Saponi ‘‘was a village of the Nahyssans, about a hundred miles distant from Mahock, scituate upon a branch of the Shawan, alias Rorenock river.’’ The residence of the king of the Saponi was to be found in a village called “‘pintahae’”’ upon this same river. Mooney infers from this statement that the ‘‘Pintahae was another tribe of the Saponi”’ and that the Saponi and Nahyssans were two different groups. Since no one else has ever mentioned this village, he had to refer to Lederer; but instead of telling it like Lederer did, he implied an altogether different meaning, giving a different AogoP {? = EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 177 slant to the data. Not only does Mooney become so involved with this question, but he contradicts himself, as has been pointed out in the historical section of this paper. The initial statement concerning the island occupied by the Oc- caneechi and the ‘‘Nessoneicks” was given to Bland by Pyancha, his Indian guide. Bland stated that— There is an island within the River three days journy about, which is of a very rich and fertile soile, and that the upper end of the Island is fordable, not above knee deepe, of a stony bottome, running very swift, and the other side very deepe and navigable. Compare this with a statement issued by Lederer: This island, though small, maintains many inhabitants, who are fix’t here in great security, being naturally fortified with fastnesses of mountains, and water on every side. Upon the north shore they yearly reap great crops of corn, of which they always have a twelve-month provision aforehand, against invasion from their powerful neighbours. [These powerful enemies are not mentioned by name.] Their government is under two kinds, one presideing in arms, the other in hunt- ing and husbandry. They hold all things, except their wives in common; (Social- ism) and their custome in eating is, that every man in his turn feasts all the rest; and he that makes the entertainment is seated betwixt the two kinds; where having highly commended his own chear, they carve and distribute it among the guests. We are told that this island is located in the ‘‘SShawan alias Rorenock river” and that the occupants lived under a socialistic form of econ- omy and were preyed upon by powerful enemies who were their neigh- bors. It is known that members of the Iroquois confederacy sent war parties foraging as far south as this region during historic times. Whether these ‘‘powerful neighbours” were Iroquois is not known for certain. If one is careful in plotting Lederer’s course of travel taken during this particular expedition to the Saponi and Occaneechi and points beyond, maintaining directions and distances traveled, one does not land on the islands at the confluence of the Staunton and Dan Rivers for the location of ‘“Akenatzy,’”’ as contended by Byrd, Mooney, Bushnell, Swanton, and others, but rather on the upper reaches of the Staunton River where the river makes a very noticeable bend directly south of Lynchburg. This is ‘‘arm chair’’ research and therefore is not very reliable, but it does indicate the impossibility of Lederer’s landing on the islands at the confluence of the two rivers in order to meet up with the Occaneechi. (See map 14.) Another bit of information was learned from the “Journeys of Needham and Arthur” concerning the Occaneechi. Arthur, in escaping from his Indian captors: Ye next day came before night in sight of ye Occhenechees towne undiscovered and there hid himselfe until it was darke and then waded over to ye island where (Butt. 164 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY 178 ‘Wes pus syyegq Aq pus JolepeT Aq woe} Soynod oY} Zuryefoid deul ulopoJy—'FI 4VIN ee © eee 6 Cees 6 SE Cm UVEL SAWVITWE ONY SLLVE wocoooowe uves $,05080977 HHO —— oa EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM-—MILLER 179 ye Occhenechees are seated, strongly fortified by nature, and that makes them so insolent for they are but a handful of people, besides what vagabonds repaire to them in beeing a receptackle for rogues. Thus, we learn in 1674, that the Occaneechi were not only a mixed lot made up of vagabonds and rogues, but that they were small in numbers and still living upon an island which was well fortified by nature—the same as indicated by Lederer. Robert Beverley, like John Lederer, speaks of a common language used by the inhabitants of the land. Lederer stated it this way: “One language is common to them although they differ in dialects.” Beverley puts it this way: Their Language differs very much, as antiently in the several parts of Britain; so that Nations at a moderate distance, do not understand one another. However, they have a sort of general Language, like what Lahontan calls the Algonkine, which is understood by the Chief men of many Nations, as Latin is in most parts of Europe, and Lingua Franca quite thro the Levant. The general Language here us’d, is said to be that of the Occaneeches tho they have been but a small Nation, ever since those parts were known to the English; but in what this Language may differ from that of the Algonkines, I am not able to determin. As the reader will notice, Beverley makes a positive statement that this “general language” is that used by the Occaneechi and adopted by the surrounding groups. Along comes Horatio Hale in 1879 and 1883, warping this initial statement of Beverley’s, and attrib- uting the language to the Tutelo instead of the Occaneecha, and crediting Beverley as the source of this information. Just because Hale wanted to prove that the vocabulary gathered on the Six Nations Reserve, from a so-called Tutelo, was the “‘general language”’ to suit his premise, he apparently stretched a point in his own favor. This error affected the subsequent trend of thought concerning the existence of a Siouan- speaking people east of the Alleghenies and in Virginia. Gallatin, in 1836, stated that there was no knowledge of the language of the Tutelo or any of the other Indians in their vicinity. To be specific, let us refer to the quotation from Gallatin: As no further mention is made to the Esaws, and no pupulous nation is ever after alluded to in that quarter but the Catawbas, there cannot, it seems, be any doubt of their identity with the Esaws of Lawson, who probably mistook a local for the generic name of the nation. Between them and the Tuscaroras of the river Neuse, he places the Saponas on a branch of Cape Fear River, [or rather on the Great Pedee, which he does not mention, and some branches of which he evidently mistook for tributary streams of Cape Fear River] and in their vicinity of the Toteros and the Keyauwees, three small tribes amounting together to seven hundred and fifty souls [see Lawson’s original statement about this group], which had but lately been driven away from the west into that quarter. He was shown, near the Sapona town, the graves of seven Indians “‘lately killed by the Sinnegars or Jennitos” [Senecas or Oneidas], and the three tribes had determined to unite in one town for their better security. East of them and west of the Tuscaroras, he 370929—57——_14 180 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 164 mentions the Sissipahaus on the waters of Cape Fear River, and the Enoes on a branch of the Neuse. With the exception of the Catawbas, we have not the least knowledge of the languages of any of those tribes. [Italics the writer’s.] [Gallatin, 1836, pp. 85-86.] This was more fully elaborated on page 131 of this paper. Earlier, Byrd wrote that— The Daughter of the Totero King went away with the Sapponys, but being the last of her Nation, and fearing she Shou’d not be treated according to her Rank, poison’d herself, like an Old Roman, with the Root of the Trumpet-Plant. Her Father dy’d 2 years before, who was the most intrepid Indian we had been acquainted with. He had made himself terrible to all other Indians by His Exploits, and had escaped so many Dangers that he was esteem’d invulnerable. But at last he dy’d of a Pleurisy, the last Man of his Race and Nation, leaving only that unhappy Daughter behind him, who would not long survive him. [Byrd, 1929, pp. 310, 312.) Byrd wrote this in his “History of the Dividing Line” and in his “Secret History” of events that took place around 1733. Whether Gallatin was referring to Byrd when he stated that the Tutelo were extinct is not known, but Byrd was rather positive about this fact. Powell (1892, p. 14) states: ‘“The last full-blood Tutelo died in 1870.”’ This follows along with Hale, owing to Mooney’s influence on Powell. Whether the ‘‘most intrepid Indian Tutelo king” who died 2 years before his daughter poisoned herself was truly the last man of his race and nation is not known. It would seem that there must have been some reason for this statement, but we have found Byrd mistaken before. Three sources—Lederer, Beverley, and Needham and Arthur—all agree that the Occaneechi were a small group or nation. Beverley goes one better in that he is more definitive as to time: “ever since those parts were known to the English,’’ which must have been in the early part of the 17th century. One language aspect which has never been satisfactorily explained appeared in Lawson’s history of Carolina. He says: I once met with a young Indian Woman that had been brought from beyond the Mountains, and was sold a Slave into Virginia. She spoke the same language as the Coramine Indians [?] that dwell near Cape Lookout, allowing for some few Words, which were different, yet no otherwise than that they might understand one another very well. [Lawson, 1937, pp. 180—181.] Could they have been using the “general language’’ of the Occaneechi or were they of the same linguistic stock and kin—Algonquian—each speaking a dialect of the same stock which would and could account for the differing of the few words? The only Indian group living beyond the mountains was the Tutelo, the Mohetan, or the er aa EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 181 Cherokee; the latter were members of the Iroquoian linguistic stock. One attribute never stressed about these Indians is their means of recording events. Lederer alludes to this by saying: Before I treat of their ancient manners and customs, it is necessary I should shew by what means the knowledge of them has been conveyed from former ages to posterity. Three ways they supply their want of letters: first by counters, secondly by emblems of hieroglyphicks, thirdly by tradition delivered in long tales from father to son, which being children they are made to learn by rote. For counters, they use either pebbles, or short scantlings of straw or reeds. Where a battle has been fought, or a colony seated, they raise small pyramid of these stones, consisting of the number slain or transplanted. Their reeds and straws serve them in religious ceremonies: for they lay them orderly in a circle when they prepare for devotion or sacrifice; and that performed, the circle remains still; for it is sacriledge to disturb or to touch it: the disposition and sorting of the straws or reeds, shew what kind of rites have there been celebrated, as invocation, sac- rifice, burial, etc. The faculties of the minde and body they commonly express by emblems. By the figure of a stag, they imply swiftness; by that of a serpent, wrath; of a lion, courage; of a dog, fidelity: by a swan, they signifie the English, alluding to their complexion, and flight over the sea. An account of time, and other things, they keep on a string or leather thong tied in knots of several colours. I took particular notice of small wheels serving for this purpose amongst the Oenocks, because I have heard that the Mexicans use the same. Every nation gives his particular ensigne or arms: The Sasquesa- hanaugh a Tarapine, or a small tortoise; the Akenatzy’s a serpent; the Nahyssans three arrows, etc. In this they likewise agree with the Mexican Indians. [Alvord and Bidgood, 1912, p. 142.] Lawson, too, in 1714, tells about the Indians making records of events. To prove the times more exactly, he produces the Records of the Country, which are a parcel of Reeds of different Lengths, with several distinct Marks, known to none but themselves, by which they seem to guess very exactly at Acci- dents that happened many Years ago: nay, two or three Ages or more. The Reason I have to believe what they tell me on this Account, is, because I have been at the Meeting of several Indian Nations, and they agreed, in relating the same Circumstances as to Time, very exactly; as for Example, they say there was so hard a Winter in Carolina 105 Years ago, that the great Sound was frozen over, and the Wild Geese came into the Woods to eat Acorns, and that they were so tame {I suppose through Want], that they killed abundance in the Woods by knocking them on the Heads with Sticks. [Lawson, 1937, 191—192.] As for the Sapeni, Lawson tells us that they occupied a village and fort in a clear field about a Mile square on the banks of the Sapona River. One side of the River is hemmed in with mountainy Ground, the other side proving as rich a Soil to the Eye of a knowing Person with us, as any this Western World can afford. . . . The Sapona River proves to be the West Branch of Cape Fear, or Clarendon River, whose iniet, with other advantages, makes it appear as noble a River to pliant a Colony in, as any I have met withal. 182 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bunt. 164 Of the Tutelo, he says: The Toteros, a neighboring Nation, came down from the Western Mountains to the Saponas .. . .; so the Saponi were living apart from them during the time he first refers to them. Later on: These five Nations of the Totero’s, Sapona’s, Keiauwee’s, Aconechos, and Schoc- cories, are lately come amongst us, and may contain in all, about 750 Men, Women and Children. What was the determining factor that made these groups decide to pull up stakes and move into North Carolina is a mute question which has never been satisfactorily settled. It has been inferred that power- ful enemies, possibly the Iroquois, had so decimated their numbers that they had to band together for mutual protection and to move into a locality which would be more easily protected. Since the Occan- eechi occupied a ‘‘natural fortress,’’ with the mountains on most sides and water all around it, it does not seem logical for them to seek out a new location. There must have been other factors involved which were never mentioned or determined. The team of Batts and Fallam was the first to indicate the existence of the “Occaneechi Trail.” They did not tell us where the path ran, neither did they tell the extent of the trail, its head or anything about it, but we know that there was a trail known to traders as the Occa- neechi Trail. William Byrd indicated on his map where this trail crossed the Roanoke River in the vicinity of the Great Falls, which are 36 miles below the confluence of the Staunton and Dan Rivers and hence never passed across the group of islands found in the vicinity of Clarksville, Mecklenburg County, Va. William Myer (1928), in his study of Indian trails, originally indicated the crossing of this path in the same vicinity as indicated by Byrd, Mitchell, Jefferson, and Fray and other cartographers and surveyors. Swanton, on the other hand, while editing the manuscript prior to posthumous publication of Myer’s article, changed the course of the path so that it crosses in the vicinity of the islands at the confluence of the Dan and Staunton Rivers in order to fit a statement issued by Byrd that at one time the Occaneechi, Saponi, and Tutelo occupied these three islands. Mooney goes along with Byrd; Bushnell quotes Mooney; and Swanton and later writers quote both Mooney and Bushnell without going back and checking the original sources as to the validity of the later studies. With this as the case we have no actual proof: (1) that the three tribes ever actually occupied contiguous islands at the confluence of the two rivers in Mecklenburg County, Va.; (2) that the so-called Occaneechi Trail ever passed across the middle island of the group—the one attributed to the Occaneechi; and (3) Nog) ~=SS*«é«&SASTTERNN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 183 that the Path originated in the vicinity of Petersburg and ended up on the Savannah River as later suggested. What we do find is that a number of inferences were suggested which were later converted to the status of ‘‘actuality.” While the Occaneechi were occupying the middle island, so to speak, a group of Conestoga (Susquehanna) overcome by the Iroquois were seeking a place to settle. They received permission from the Occa- neechi to settle with them since they were both possibly of the same linguistic kin. How long they were joined with their hosts is not known, but it has been supposed that the Conestoga tried to chase out their host from their island home and to repossess it for themselves. They could not have been with the Occaneechi very long, for about this time Nathaniel Bacon, with his followers, caught up with them and, with the aid of the Occaneechi, proceeded to whip the Conestoga. As stated previously, this act is known as Bacon’s Rebellion. The Susquehanna Indians then moved over to the Meherrin River and apparently took over a smaller group, known as the Meherrin, both as to location and name. (See Hodge 1907, p. 839, for article by Mooney.) In the meantime Bacon and his followers decided to subdue the Occaneechi, mostly in order to secure for themselves the rich furs and other commodities in the possession of the Indians. But this time the English were not so lucky. The Occaneechi Indians proceeded to whip the English and in so doing lost 50 warriors while the English lost 10 men. The Occaneechi, fearing reprisals, fled southward, without mentioning the Saponi and the Tutelo as par- taking in the battle or occupying adjoining islands. The Occaneechi saved their prized possessions and the English lost their pride. The Occaneechi, without the Saponi and Tutelo, settled on the Eno River where Lawson found them. In the meantime the Saponi and Tutelo were occupying separate villages on the Yadkin well within the sphere of the Tuscarora. No reports tell about the Tusca- rora ever fighting these newcomers, and this may indicate that there was a rather close affiliation, probably linguistically, with the Tusca- rora, an Iroquoian group. Fenton (1953, p. 159) suggests ‘from the records that the Tuscarora, who left the Neuse River in Carolina about 1711” returned to the fold of the Five Nations in 1714. If this be true, then the events which lead to the downfall of the Tuscarora occurred in the interval between 1700 and 1711 and the Tutelo and Saponi must have wandered from place to place seeking a haven after the Tuscarora no longer afforded them protection from their enemies. Rights (1947) on the other hand, would lead one to believe that there was some connection between the Nottoway, an Iroquoian group, and 184 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuv. 164 the Saponi. Sometime during 1709 the Nottoway proposed to the Saponi that they combine forces in exterminating the Tutelo, in settlement of a number of killings on both sides. When the Saponi tried to shift the blame of their killings upon the Tutelo, the ‘“‘Notto- way answered that they were both as one people” (Rights, 1947, p. 114). This would seem to imply that the Nottoway recognized the Tutelo as being of the same linguistic kin. Fenton continued: Throughout the first half of the eighteenth century the Iroquois were at war with the ‘‘Flathead’’ or Catawba in Carolina, a cause in which their young men gained prestige by taking scalps and bringing home prisoners to replenish losses of manpower, although many Catawba were tortured. French agents among the Five Nations greatly aided and abetted these campaigns to the great distress of the English colonists (and the Indian groups which were to be found approximate to the path taken by the Iroquois) who suffered depredations along the Warrior’s Path, which roughly followed the fall line east of the mountains from Pennsylvania to Carolina. British policy was to secure these Indians against the French, and the Colonial governors were instructed to make peace between the warring tribes. [Fenton, 1953, p. 165.] The adoption of outsiders to take the place of those who were either killed or died a natural death appears to have been generally practiced not only in the east but in other parts of the west as well. The above statement made by Fenton strengthens Speck’s work on the Tutelo Spirit Adoption Ceremony (1942), in which the rites were put into practice for a Mrs. James Hess who was born an Onondaga of the Crane sib. Her family was of an unknown tribal group but was definitely not Tutelo. Through family intermarriage with the Cayuga she had been classified most of her life with that nation. Her formal seating at the convening of the group was with the members of the Wolf Moiety. Early in life she was adopted as a living substitute for a deceased Tutelo. No one seemed to remember when such an adop- tion took place and she only revealed it at the close of her life but failed to pass on the personal name given to her at that time; hence the rite was given but no mention of a personal name was used. This may mean that a great many persons who pass themselves off as Tutelo are only Tutelo by adoption rather than by birth and, of course, cannot pass themselves off as pure blood. Whether such was the case with Nikonha was never revealed; in fact, Hale knew of no such ritual when he was investigating the Tutelo on the Reserve. Nikohna, or Nikungha, whose so-called Tutelo name was said to be Washiteng, which Hale (1883) thought a corruption of the English word mosquito, a rather farfetched interpretation, was married to a Cayuga wife and ‘for many years spoke only the language of her people.” But the fact that he was 106 years old at the time of ques- Ne al EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 185 tioning would tend to throw a beam of doubt upon the validity of his statement because of his age. The factor which must be taken into account here is that the human mind, up to a certain age, tends to subtract years from one’s age, and beyond that to add years. Whether Nikonha was truly 106 years old at the time of the interview is not too important, but what is of utmost importance is that he spoke Cayuga for a number of years and since he knew of one other full-blooded Tutelo except himself—which is to be doubted at such a late date— how could he have suddenly remembered the Tutelo language sufficiently to divulge nearly a hundred words to his interviewer. The interview must have been given in Cayuga, for Hale did not recognize that the words given him were in a form of what had later been termed ‘‘Dacotan.” The age factor and the paucity of the words would tend to question the validity. Hale recapitulating Tutelo history from other sources states: In the year 1671 an exploring party under Captain Batt, leaving ‘‘Apomatock Town” on the James River, penetrated into the mountains of Western Virginia at a distance, by the route they traveled, of two hundred and fifty miles from their starting point. At this point they found “the Tolera Town in a very rich swamp between a breach [branch] and the main river of the Roanoke, circled about by mountains.’’ [Batt’s Journal and Relations of a New Discovery, in N. Y. Hist. Co., vol. 111, p. 191.] Gallatin would have brought the Tutelos far to the east upon the Meherrin River (1848, pp. 80-81), while Hale placed them in the vicinity of the Tuscarora and more or less under their protection. Hale (1883, p. 4) says: The protection which the Tuteloes had received from the Tuscarora and their allies soon failed them. In the year 1711 a war broke out between the Tuscaroras and the Carolina settlers, which ended during the following year in the complete defeat of the Indians. This would make it appear that the Tutelos went to their own linguistic kin for protection and received it for a while until the Tuscarora got into trouble with the settlers in Carolina. When the main portion of the Tuscarora migrated into Virginia under the protection of the Virginia government, “the Tutelo, Saponi and their confederates” joined them in their new quarters. This is indicated by Hale and would strengthen the inference that the Tuscarora, Tutelo, and Saponi were of one and the same linguistic stock of a common ethnic group. If one critically reads the article by Hale (1883) on ‘““The Tutelo Tribe and Language,” one is immediately struck with the large number of inferences and assumptions which were used to build up the whole picture of the Tutelo language affiliation with that of the Dacotan 186 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Boxy 164 or Sioux. Again, let us quote Hale here to point out these inferences, assumptions, etc. (italics are the present writer’s): The Akenatzies or Occaneeches would seem to have been, in some respects, the chief or leading community among the tribes of Dacotan stock who formerly in- habited Virginia. That these tribes had at one time a large and widespread popula- tion may be inferred from the simple fact that their language, like that of the widely scattered Algonkins (or Ojibways) in the northwest, became the general medium of communication for the people of different nationalities in their neighborhood. That they had some ceremonial observances for, as Beverley terms them, ‘‘adora- tions and conjurations’’] of a peculiar and impressive cast, like those of the western Dakotas, [?] seems evident from the circumstance that the intrusive tribes adopted this language, and probably with it some of these observances, in performing their own religious rites. We thus have a strong and unexpected confirmation of the tradition prevailing among the tribes both of the Algonkin and the Iroquois stocks, which represents them as coming originally from the far north, and grad- ually overspreading the country on both sides of the Alleghanies, from the Great Lakes to the mountainfastness of the Cherokees. They found, it would seem, Virginia, and possibly the whole country east of the Alleghanies, from the Great Lakes to South Carolina, occupied by tribes speaking languages of the Dakotan stock. That the displacement of these tribes was a very gradual process and that the relations between the natives and the encroaching tribes were not always hostile, may be inferred not only from the adoption of the aboriginal speech as the general means of intercourse, but also from the terms of amity on which these tribes of diverse origin, natives and intrusives, were found by the English to be living together. That the Tutelo language represents this ‘“‘general language’ of which Beverley speaks—this aboriginal Latin of Virginia— cannot be doubted. It may therefore, be deemed a language of no small historical importance. The statement quoted that the English found the various Indian tribes or groups living at peace with one another is very far from being true. Captain John Smith reported in 1607 that the Powhatan group told him about the Indians living beyond the falls of the James River; how they were constantly at war with one another, and how this group would come down river, at the fall of the leaf, to invade Powhatan’s country. Other travelers reported on strong feelings between other groups. We also know that at the coming of the white man to this continent various Indian groups were in the process of forming confederacies and alining themselves into positions of influence which brought pressures upon smaller groups of their kindred and unaffiliated groups, causing them to thrash around for new homes and for protection as well as for hunting grounds. With the coming of the white man this process became intensified and feelings ran high; as for amiable relationships between groups of this whole area, it just did not exist—even among linguistic kin. 3 Why choose the Dakotan language? There are many other stocks in which a common language has been used. In the East, the Delaware and the Muskhogean or Creek languages were rather widely used. Noga} «= EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 187 Birket-Smith (1930) in discussing the Five Nations and Post Columbian Migrations put it this way: The Five Nations waged a merciless war both against the Iroquois tribes outside of the confederation and the neighboring Algonkian peoples. ... The middle of the 17. century witnessed the climax of their power. At the same time as the Five Nations made all tribes between the Atlantic and the Mississippi tremble, fresh actors made their appearance on the stage, a group of Algonkians, which at a later period separated into the three different tribes of Ojibwa, Potawatomi, and Ottawa, advancing from the north in the direction of the Great Lakes. [Birket-Smith, 1930, p. 2.] To the forces of the Iroquois and the Algonkians just mentioned should also be added the European colonisation which did not only assert its influence directly but also indirectly played an even more considerable part, because the Whites gradually supplied the neighboring natives with fire-arms. Particularly for the Iroquois it meant an invaluable advantage that they were furnished with guns at a very early period by trading with the Dutch colonies of New Netherland. The outcome of these events was a series of movements radiating from the Law- rentic regions. The swell reached asfar as the Rocky Mountains and the Polar Sea, and it might be noticed even for centuries later. The tribes living in closest contact with the Five Nations were rapidly more or less annihilated without getting an opportunity, as it were, of seeking new places of living. In 1675 the Conestoga at Susquehanna River were also subjugated, whereas the Tuscarora voluntarily sought admission to the league as did also some foreign tribes (Tutelo, Nanticoke, Saponi, etc.). This event, however, marked the limit of its power; farther south the Cheroki and Catawba formed an insurmount- able barrier to its progress. [Ibid., p. 3.] The post-Columbian migrations . . . have a double significance. In the first place they show the distribution of certain tribal groups as it actually was at certain times; but besides they also contribute toward the understanding of the character of the folk wanderings themselves. This is of course of paramount importance if we turn to the problems connected with migrations in prehistoric times. Haddon says that ‘‘it is probable that a migration induced by an attraction is rare as compared with that produced by an expulsion.’”’ Probably this is true in a general way, but it is otherwise when the surroundings for some reason or other assume a new aspect. .. . the historical migrations in North America go to show the importance of new acquirements within material culture when they in- volve a revolution in the way of living of a tribe, or a change of its military re- lations to the aeighbors. ... [Ibid., p. 10.] Among the Algonkian nations south of the Great Lakes agriculture had entirely upset the principles of economic life, but when eliminating the latter we find an old hunting foundation evidently corresponding to the ice-hunting culture. In the Southeast outside the Algonkian area elements consistent with those of the ice-hunting culture may be found, but there they do not occur under such cir- cumstances that it is justifiable to regard them as constituting a joint complex. This is also true of the culture preceding the Algonkian within the area that in later times fell to the lot of these Indians. I will return to this later and at present only emphasize that south of the Great Lakes the ice-hunting culture is probably a complex introduced by the Algonkians. [Ibid., p. 13.] 188 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLL. 164 The main thing for us, however, is how the primitive basic culture should be understood. Of course, ice-hunting is precluded for purely geographical reasons, but on the other hand the culture has so many elements characteristic of this complex that the general aspect is essentially the same. Fritz Krause (1921) has expressed the same opinion. It is hardly improbable that a very old and primi- tive hunting and fishing culture underlies the later development everywhere in northern and western North America. As to its age nothing can be said with certainty, but some facts suggest a connection with late paleolithic or epipaleo- lithic culture in Europe (Birket-Smith, 1929). [Ibid., p. 14.] Among the Algonkian tribes still more to the south the ice-hunting layer seems to have been preserved beneath the agricultural complex adopted from without. From the northwest to the southeast the foundation of Algonkian culture assumes a more and more primitive aspect. [Ibid., p. 21.] It would no doubt be a mistake if this circumstance was taken as evidence of a southern origin of the Algonkians. This appears from the fact that typical methods of Algonkian economic life are missing in the south, whereas old-fashioned features as might be expected in an outlying border region are retained (Birket- Smith, 1918). Again, nearly ali fundamental elements in Algonkian culture are of northern origin (Speck, 1926). Even with the southernmost Algonkian tribe the northern character of the culture is evident (Swanton, 1928). In the southern Algonkian area there is, therefore, a disharmony between cul- ture and environment that cannot be explained otherwise than by assuming the tribes in question to be immigrants from the north, a view also held by Speck (1926). This agrees with the archeological facts.(?) In the whole area between the Mississippi and the Atlantic, though most abundantly in Ohio and the south- ern states, we find the famous remains of the old mound builder civilisation, which, in several respects, was at a higher level than the culture encountered by the early explorers among the trans-Appalachian Algonkians. [Ibid., p. 22.] In the piedmont area of the Appalachians in Virginia and the Carolinas there was another group of Siouans (Catawba a. o.) that is now nearly extinct, and separated from the rest of the stock were the Biloxi at the Gulf Coast (Mooney, 1894). [Birket-Smith, 1930, p. 24.] Hale made a great impression upon the linguists and ethnologists of America by his declaration of a Siouan-speaking group east of the Mississippi River. He was taken literally at face value and no actual critical examination of his material was evidently ever undertaken. From here on to the present day his word has been accepted as “‘gospel truth’? and not questioned. The same can be said about Mooney (1894) and his study of the “‘Siouan Tribes of the East.”’ While the writer was conducting a rather intense archeological program within the area supposed to have been occupied by Siouan- speaking groups—the Occaneechi, Saponi, and Tutelo—a revaluation of the whole situation was undertaken so as to either corroborate or disprove that these Siouan-speaking groups actually occupied this portion of southern Virginia at the time they were supposed to have been here. The results of the study are presented in the present paper. A PEAP: Nn EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 189 Powell, reflecting James Mooney, gave a very brief historical sum- mary of the movements of the Tutelo. The Tutelo habitat in 1671 was in Brunswick County, southern Virginia, and it probably included Lunenburgh and Mecklenburg counties. The Earl of Bellomont (1669) says that the Shateras were “‘supposed to be the Toteros, on Big Sandy River, Virginia,’ and Pownall, in his map of North America (1776), gives the Totteroy (i. e., Big Sandy) River. Subsequently to 1671 [*] the Tutelo left Virginia and moved to North Carolina, (Lawson, 1714; reprint 1860, p. 384). They returned to Virginia (with the Saponi), joined the Nottoway and Meherrin, whom they and the Tuscarora followed into Pennsylvania in the last century; thence they went to New York, where they joined the Six Nations, with whom they removed to Grand River Reservation, Ontario, Canada, after the Revolu- tionary War. [Powell, 1892, p. 114.] Now, we come to Mooney’s important paper ‘‘Siouan Tribes of the Hast.’’ Mooney, like Hale, continued the inferences and assumptions together with possibilities and probabilities, and upon these ethereal statements he has constructed the whole Siouan problem of the east. Not only does he delimit the area of influence dominated by this so- called Siouan group but he gives the extent—‘‘an area of about 70,000 square miles, formerly occupied by about forty different tribes’’ (Mooney, 1894, p. 9). Who these 40 different tribes were or are he does not bother to mention. Mooney set up a number of “‘straw men’ to be knocked down. The best example is: Who were the Indians of this central area? For a long time the question was ignored by ethnologists, and it was implicitly assumed that they were like their neighbors, Iroquoian or Algonquian in the north and ‘“‘Catawban” in the south. It was never hinted that they might be anything different, and still less was it supposed that they would prove to be a part of the great Siouan or Dakotan family, whose nearest known representaties were beyond the Mississippi or about the upper Lakes, nearly a thousand miles away. Yet the fact is now established that some at least of these tribes, and these the most important, were of that race of hunters, while the apparently older dialectic forms to be met with in the east, the identification of the Biloxi near Mobile as part of the same stock, and concurrent testimony of the Siouan tribes themselves to the effect that they had come from the east, all now render it extremely probable that the original home of the Siouan race was not on the prairie of the west but amidst the eastern foot- hills of the southern Alleghanies, or at least as far eastward as the upper Ohio region. [Mooney, 1894, p. 9.] 4 Birket-Smith stated that the Conestoga were expelled in 1675 from their home on the Susquehanna River. This same year they received permission from the Occaneechi to settle with them. Then came Bacon’s rebellion, and then the so-called migration of the group into North Carolina. Either Powell or Mooney got his dates confused, for no one knows when the actual migration took place; but it did take place sometime between 1673, after Needham and Arthur’s experience with the Occaneechi, and Lawson’s expe- dition when he found the various groups in northern North Carolina. 190 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuy. 164 No one has ever assumed such a premise before and this is ably demonstrated by Cyrus Thomas’ notes (MS., Doc. No. 4014), now in the Archives of the Bureau of American Ethnology. Let us here quote from these notes since they have a direct bearing upon this phase of Mooney’s theory: On pg. 11—He has those going west—first crossing the mountains and following “down the valleys of New River and the Big Sandy to the Ohio.” Yet, as he informs us their homes were on the upper Ohio. The route taken to go west seems a rather strange one. Pg. 11—He says “‘the theory of a Siouan migration down the Big Sandy is borne out by the fact that this stream was formerly known as the Totteroy a cor- ruption of the Iroquois name for the Tutelo.”’ Yet in the quotation from pg. 29 [quoted earlier], the eastern branch is said to have crossed the mountains from upper Ohio region to the waters of Virginia and Carolina. Pg. 9—The statement that “the concurrent testimony of the Siouan tribes themselves to the effect that they had come from the East” is not true as here used. The western Sioux claim to have come from a more eastern locality, but this does not reach farther east than Lake Michigan. The statement given above is therefore misleading and the truth concealed, to maintain a theory. Pg. 9—‘The inference that the region west of the Mississippi was the original home of the Siouan tribes” is a man of straw set up by the writer to be knocked down. No acceptable authority, if any, ever held such a theory. Pg. 10—The statement that “As early as 1701 Gravier stated that the Ohio was known to the Miami and Illinois as the ‘river of the Akansea’ is untrue.” Gravier says the Ouabache [Wabash] and expressly distinguishes between it and the Ohio—continuing the Wabash and the Mississippi and making the Ohio a tributary to it. It was from this erroneous interpretation of Gravier’s words that the Sibley Osage tradition—in all its various forms—grew up. Pg. 10—The statement that Dorsey found the tradition of an eastern origin (in the sense here used) as “common to almost all the tribes of that [Siouan] stock’’, is incorrect. Dorsey also contradicts himself on this point—moreover his statements do not include the Dakota group. Pg. 10—De Soto found the Quapaw only a short distance above the locality occupied when the French descended the Mississippi. De Soto did not pass through any portion of the Osage country. Pg. 11—No Ohio tribe, so far as known, had any tradition regarding the Quapaw (or Akansa)—This was limited, so far as known to some Illinois tribes. It is not true that the Quapaw were ‘‘in the vicinity of that stream [the Ohio] when encountered by De Soto.’”’ This is apparent from the fact that they were then somewhere in the vicinity of the site of Helena, Arkansas. Pg. 11—After stating that the cause of the exodus of the Siouan tribes from their original home, was probably pressure by northern and southern alien tribes, he says “they retreated across the mountains, the only direction in which a retreat was open to them.” Does this refer to those who went west or those who went east into “‘Virginia and Carolina’? Pg. 12—The statement that ‘‘within this period, traditional and historical evidence point out as the cradle of the Algonkian race the coast region lying between Saint Lawrence river and Chesapeake bay” is untrue. The most “coherent”’ tradition points to some locality north of the lakes as their original home. The Leni Lenape were the “grand-father’, and that was their original home, Nog)’ ~=©—) EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 191 Pg. 12—‘‘When their [the Iroquois] warfare against the southern tribes was inaugurated we do not know. It was probably continuous with the expulsion of the Cherokee from the Upper Ohio.”’ As the Cherokee were in their southern home in 1540—it may be safely assumed that their expulsion could not have occurred later than the latter part of the 15th century. Were the Iroquois already raiding the southern tribes at this early date? Pg. 19—Compare the statements in the first paragraph of this page as regards the information respecting the Manahoacs and subdivisions with what is stated near the bottom of page 22 and top of page 23. The inference of relationship of Manahoac with Monacan on page 23 is changed to certainty on page 26—“‘the cognate Manahoac.’”’—{. . . were ‘‘very barbarous” and subsisted chiefly by hunting and by gathering wild fruits. They were in alliance with the Manahoac and at constant war with the Powhatan, and in mortal dread of the Massawomeke or Iroquois beyond the mountains (Smith, 7). He seems to imply that the Monacan tribes named spoke different languages, although in another place (Smith, 8) we are led to infer that they had but one. The difference was probably only dialectic, although the cognate and confederate tribes farther southward probably used really different languages. (Mooney, 1894, p. 26.).] From the quotations given above it can be seen that Thomas did not go along with Mooney and his theories concerning the Siouan origin of the tribes in Virginia and the Carolinas as is shown in an undated letter to Mr. J. N. B. Hewitt which has already been quoted on page 169. Dorsey’s notes (MS., Doc. No. 3804) in the Archives of the Bureau of American Ethnology bearing upon this Siouan problem reveal that he, too, did not go along with Mooney and his migration theory. He says: Some authors speak of a series of migrations of these tribes from the west toward the east; but the writer has not been able to learn on what authority such statements have been made: nor has he ever found any tradition of such eastward migrations among the tribes that he has visited. Mooney [in the Siouan Tribes of the East, Galley 4 AL] says:—‘‘The theory of a Siouan migration down the valley of the Big Sandy is borne out by the fact that this stream was formerly known as the Totteroy, a corruption of the Iroquois name for the Tutelo and other Siouan tribes of the South.” (Big Sandy, the Big Totteroy; and Little Sandy, Little Totteroy.) If Mooney accepts this traditional name of the Big Sandy as good evidence (see above), why should he reject the traditional name of the Kentucky R. (a stream near the Big Sandy), Cuttawa, Cuttawo, or Catawba River? He says in Galley 26 AL: “The Shawano and other tribes of the Ohio Valley made the word (i. e., Catawba) Cuttawa.” Catawba in Carolina as early as 1569 Kawapa on the Mississippi in 1540-41 (La Vandera) (De Soto) Yet :— Yet :— Kentucky R. given as ‘‘Cuttawa”’ Ohio given as ‘‘R. d’Acansea’”’ on Vaugondie’s Map (1755) on De I’'Isle’s Map (1722) Big Sandy called Totteroy in 1746. Mooney says (The Siouan Tribes of the East, (p. 70) Galley 26 AL). “The Catawba were found living about where we have always known them as early as 1567. Kentucky river was called by that name among the Shawano and 192 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bun. 164 other northern tribes because up that river lay the great way trail of the Catawba country.” This may be so; but what proof have we of this. If proof can be given, that settles the question of the origin of this name for Kentucky river; but if no proof (no authority) can be given for this statement, if it be a mere inference on the part of Mr. Mooney, it is in order to call attention to another explanation of the origin of the appellation, i. e., that it referred to a traditional or prehistoric occupation of that region by the Catawba tribe, just as the name Totteroy, applied to the Big Sandy, referred to a traditional or prehistoric occupation of that region by the Tutelo tribe or confederacy. Thus spoke two of Mooney’s contemporaries. William Tooker (1895) in “The Algonquian Appellatives of the Siouan Tribes of Virginia,’’ pointed out that there are four questions which must be answered in relation to these. The questions that now arise, and which I shall endeavor to answer, are these: First, What were the commodities of the Monacans that Smith was instructed to search for? Second, What was it that gave rise to lasting impressions in the minds of the Virginia colonists that valuable mines of copper, iron, gold, and silver were to be found in the same region? Third, Can any of the Mannahoacks be identified with tribes or peoples of a later historic period? Fourth, To what language must be assigned these and other names of Captain John Smith? I will proceed to analyze those terms, descriptive in their character, which we have found applied to these people in the early days of the period of colonization. These appellatives were bestowed upon them by their neighbors on the east, the Powhatans and their confederates, who are well known to have been a branch of the Algonquian stock. Therefore, there ought to arise no question whatever in the mind of the critical student of Smith’s works against the dictum now sub- mitted, that every one of these terms, without a single exception, are necessarily Algonquian, and consequently should be analyzed and translated by the aid of that language, no matter what the nativity of the people themselves may have been. This declaration will also apply to every aboriginal name occurring upon Smith’s map of Virginia, for he was never in contact with other than an Algon- quian long enough to learn a name. Besides, the historical evidence would seem to indicate that the greater number of these terms were heard spoken from the lips of the Powhatan long before the colonists saw a Monacan. For instance, Captain Newport’s guide and interpreter was a savage of Powhatans called Namontack. Newport named a mine six miles above the falls after him because he discovered it. Smith’s interpreter while among the Mannahoacks was an Algonquian, as was also his Tockwogh interpreter while interviewing the Sasque- sahanoughs. His very brief parley with the Massawomecks, as he relates, was entirely by signs. Therefore, it seems to me that failure would be necessarily foreordained in seeking for other than Algonquian elements in any of the aboriginal names of Virginia as bequeathed to us by Captain John Smith. William Strachey, secretary of the colony, 1609-1612, who was more or less familiar with the language of the Powhatans and left us a valuable vocabulary of that dialect, derives the name Monacan from Monohacan (or Monowhauk), “a sword,”’ while Heckewelder, through the Delaware, translates it as ‘‘a spade or any implement for digging the soil,’ corrupted from Monohacan. Heckewelder is so rarely correct in his place-name etymologies that he should have due credit ey EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 193 for this suggestion, for the fact appears that both of these authorities are correct in their identification of the verbal element of the name, but not in the grammar, application, or true analysis of the term as applied to a people. The prefix Mona is undoubtedly the verb signifying ‘“‘to dig’? occurring in the same primitive form in many Algonquian dialects, from the Cree Médona, in the far north, to the Narragansett Mona, on the east, and is reproduced at the south in the Powhatan Monohacan, ‘“‘sword”’ literally a digging instrument, from Mono, ‘‘to dig,’’ prefixed to hacan, an instrumentive noun suffix used only as a terminal in compound words denotive of things artificial, so designated because so used by the Indians when purchased from the settlers. The same verb figures in other Powhatan cluster words, this revealing its identity; for instance in Monas- cunnemi, ‘‘to cleanse the ground to fit it for seed,’’ making it the equivalent of the Narragansett Monasktinneumun; Delaware Mundskamen, “to weede.”’ It will be found by analyzing carefully the various synonyms of the term Mona- cans, or Monanacans, with its English plural as displayed, that it resolves itself into the components of Mond-ackdénough, from Mona, “‘to dig’; ack, “land or earth,’’ with its generic plural of -anough, ‘‘nation, or people’’—that is, ‘‘people who dig the earth” the phonetic sounds of which were shortened into Monacans by the English, which may be freely and correctly translated as the ‘‘diggers or miners.’”’ The term as such probably designated the whole confederacy collec- tively. This abbreviation of the sounds of tribal appellatives is characteristic of English notation, as in Mowhawk, from Mauguauog; Mohegans, from Manhigan- euck; Pequot, from Pequttodédg, and others. [Tooker, 1895, pp. 378-380.] Saponi derived from Monasukapananough [diggers of ground nuts]. [Ibid., p. 384.] The Whonkentyaes or Whonkenteas are another tribe of the Mannahocks, or tributary to them who are unplaced on Smith’s map. The phonetic sounds of this appellative suggests that they were probably the ancestors of the Akenatzies, or Occaneeches, as it is varied, who were living, as Mr. Mooney has indicated, on an island just below the confluence of the rivers Dan and Staunton, in Mecklen- burg County, Virginia, when visited by John Lederer in 1670. I would suggest that the derivation of the term Whon-kente-as or Whon-kenchi-aneas as from the Narragansett awaun, Massachusetts auwon, ‘‘there is somebody,” i. e., who is strange or different from those speaking. The second component, -kentie, -kenatzie, or -caneeche, seems to have its parallel in various forms of the verb “to talk” or “to speak,’”’ as in the Long Island unkenchie, “‘the strange talker;’’ Narraganset awdun-kéntauchem? “Who are you that discourses?” Delaware niechsin, “to speak;’”? Powhatan kekaten, ‘‘you tell,’ which, with its terminal, gives us whon-kentie-anies, ‘‘people of a strange talk, or another speech.”’ This analysis confirms Smith’s statement that the Mannahocks were “‘many different in language.’”’ Again, in noticeable corroboration of this derivation, the Occaneeches seem to have been of a different linguistic stock to their Siouan neighbors. .. . Now, it appears to me, on careful consideration of this statement of Beverley’s in all its aspects that is open to only one construction—that is to say, if the term Whomkenties is a translation of an Algonquian interpreter of a Siouan description of a nation of another of different speech, residing among and tributary to them, and is also, as I suggest, a synonym for Occaneeche or Akenatzie, it would surely lead us to infer that the language of the Occaneeches was not Siouan, but was really nothing more or less than a dialect of the Algonquian. [Ibid., p. 389.] The fact that Beverley, as he remarks, was unable to determine the difference between the language of the Occaneeches and that of the Algonquians would indicate to my mind that they were practically identical, with only an archaic difference—a difference similar to that mentioned by Mr. Mooney as existing 194 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Borx. 164 between the Cherokee language and that used in the sacred formulas of their shamans. [Ibid., p. 391.] Whether Tooker’s explanation is a valid one relies upon the reexam- ination of the whole linguistic problem by capable linguists and is not based upon inferences but upon direct linkage and correlations with known and valid vocabularies. Daniel Brinton’s explanation of this ceremonial language, as indi- cated by Beverley, runs thus: The travellers Balboa and Coreal mention that the temple services of Peru were conducted in a language not understood by the masses, and the incantations of the priests of Powhatan were not in ordinary Algonkin, but some obscure jargon. The same peculiarity has been observed among the Dakotas and Eskimos, and in these nations, fortunately, it fell under the notice of competent linguistic scholars, who have submitted it to a searching examination. The results of their labors prove that in these two instances the supposed foreign tongues were nothing more than the ordinary dialects of the country modified by an affected accentua- tion, by the introduction of a few cabalistic terms, and by the use of descriptive circumlocutions and figurative words in places or ordinary expressions, a slang, in short, such as rascals and pedants invariably coin whenever they associate. [Brinton, 1896, footnote, p. 326.] Whether this was the actual case of this language as used by the priests in their religious rites cannot be vouched for, since the language is defunct. Hale states that the Tutelo he studied trace their descent through the female. James O. Dorsey, on the other hand, says: Among the tribes of the Siouan family the primary unit is the clan or gens, which is composed of a number of consanguinei, claiming descent from a common ancestor and having common taboos; the term clan implying descent in the female line while gens implies descent in the male line. Among the Dakota, as among the Cegiha and other groups, the man is the head of the family. In 1907 Leo Frachtenberg went up to the Grand River Reservation in Ontario, Canada, where Hale had earlier collected. Using one Lucy Buck, “an old Tutelo woman,” he collected a few phrases and words. As Frachtenberg put it: As she was unfamiliar with English, it was necessary for me to obtain this scanty material by using as an interpreter Andrew Sprague, a Cayuga, who in his early youth had been adopted by the Tutelo tribe... . This material is presented in the form in which it was given tome. No attempt to verify the words by means of other vocabularies has been made, owing chiefly to the fact that I deemed the material obtained highly unreliable, as a glance at the various confusing terms given for the different cardinal numerals will show. [Frachtenberg, 1913, pp. 477-478.] This demonstrates that Frachtenberg placed no emphasis upon this material, but only presented it as given him so as to clear the records. Apparently he thinks that Lucy Buck confused the issue by giving him a number of words whose meanings are unknown since they did not correlate with recognizable forms. . ANTHROP. Par. -_ EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 195 Edward Sapir, while on the Six Nations Reservation in 1911, heard about a Cayuga Indian named Andrew Sprague— who had had opportunity during his childhood to hear Tutelo spoken fluently and who was supposed to remember considerable of it. As Tutelo is an extinct language, I thought it imperative to rescue from oblivion what was still to be obtained and thus add, if only a mite, to what had already been put on record. As a matter of fact, it turned out that Andrew remembered only very little indeed of Tutelo, and what small amount of material could be obtained from him was extorted with some difficulty. No attempt will here be made to discuss the data. They are given for what they are worth in the hope that they may at some future time prove of use to the student of comparative Siouan linguistics. [Sapir, 1913, p. 295.] A great many of the terms recorded by Sapir occur in the list submitted by Frachtenberg, so there appears to have been some collusion at- tempted on the part of the Indians of the Grand River Reservation. W. H. Holmes in speaking about the Indians of Virginia and North Carolina states that— the aborigines, largely of the Algonquian, Iroquoian, and Siouan stocks, were primarily hunters and fishers, although agriculture was practiced successfully in many of the fertile valleys. The native culture of both colonial and precolonial times, so far as known, though varying with the widely distributed centers of habitation, were quite uniform in grade and general characteristics. It is well differentiated from that of the south and middle west, but passes with no abrupt change into that of the upper lakes and the great interior region of the north. The changes from north to south were due in large measure to differences in food resources and the influence of neighboring cultures. [Holmes, 1914, p. 417.] As we all recognize, language does not predict archeological remains but may in fact differ so radically that there may appear, on the surface, to be no similarity or connection. Whether such will prove to be the case in Virginia remains to be determined at a later date. Swanton and Dixon’s ‘Primitive American History” reveals that— It is a striking fact, that, in contrast with both the Muskhogean and Siouan peoples, the migration legends which have been preserved from the Indians of this stock are meager and unsatisfactory. According to colonial documents the Meherrin were a band of refugee Conestoga which fled south after the destruction of that tribe by the Iroquois about 1675, but one form of their name occurs in the census of Virginia Indians taken in 1669. Thus it is evident either that some Conestoga had replaced an Algonquian tribe of similar designation or else that the tribe antedated the destruction of the Conestoga and the reputed influx of population at that time. Possibly, as Mooney suggests, an original small Iro- quoian tribe was practically submerged by later immigrations of Conestoga. At all events the whole question of origin is left in uncertainty. ... So far as this evidence goes, however, it indicates a northern origin for the southeastern Iro- quoian group. [Swanton and Dixon, 1914, p. 390.] Whether this same applies to the ‘“Tutelo-Meherrins” of Gallatin is not known. 370929—57——15 196 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 164 Later Swanton in throwing ‘‘New Light on the Early History of the Siouan Peoples’’ admits ‘“‘much speculation in all this, but I have con- sidered that the facts are of sufficient importance to both the ethnol- ogist and the archaeologist of the Ohio region to present them in a usable form’”’ (Swanton, 1923, p. 43). Hewitt (1927), while working among the Iroquois Indians living on their reserve in the vicinity of Brantford, Ontario, and at Caugh- nawaga near Montreal, Quebec, Canada, contacted John Buck, ‘‘an Onondaga-Tutelo mixed blood, as an Onondaga informant and inter- preter” and as a consequence “‘obtained a fine Mohawk version and literal translation of the remarkable Requickening Address of this famous Council.”’ John Buck, brother of Lucy Buck was supposed to be most affluent in the Tutelo tongue. Instead of checking against the list of words and phrases volunteered by the sister, Hewitt used John as an informant and interpreter in Mohawk. Lucy, according to Frachtenberg, was a Tutelo, supposedly of unmixed blood while her brother is of mixed Onondaga-Tutelo stock. Later, in 1929, Hewitt made use of John Buck (this time a ‘‘Junior’’) of Onondaga-Tu- telo mixed blood, detailing the Tutelo migration tradition, in Onon- daga, from Virginia and North Carolina to the Cayuga country in which a number of allusions were made to customs ‘‘and especially intertribal amenities at an early day and customary precautions taken for such a journey of a tribal people through the lands of other hostile peoples” (Hewitt, 1930, p. 201). Heretofore, it has been recorded that the Tutelo, in company with the Tuscarora, Nottoway, and Meherrin, migrated northward to the Cayuga. In another instance, it has been stated that while the Iroquois were down in this area they took these tribes under their protection and brought them into the Cayuga country. What really happened? It would seem strange that a mixblood Indian had to give a Tutelo tradition in Onondaga rather than in his native tongue, if ever such were the case. It is noticeable at this stage that there are a number of extraneous details which do not fit into a well-rounded picture of the so-called Siouan tribes, namely linguistic deviations based on inferences and assumptions. To further befog the issue we have assumptions by Bushnell in his several papers on the Indians of Virginia. Occasionally we do retrieve a grain of truth as such: How long the country had been occupied by the Siouan tribes can never be determined. Others had preceded them, but who they were or whence they came may ever remain unknown. ([Bushnell, 1930, p. 5.] Powhatan’s statement to Captain Newport at the time of their first visit in 1608 that the Monacan ‘“‘came Downe at the fall of the leafe and invaded his Countrye,” would indicate that the Monacan rather than the Algonquian dom- \nated the region and did not fear the latter. [Ibid., p. 5.] Neer EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM —MILLER 197 Bushnell mentions the inaccuracies of Lederer as to distances traveled, but this is the usual thing noted on travel accounts not only by Lederer, but by Batts and Fallam, John Smith, De Soto, ad in- finitum. But he agrees that Lederer is accurate as far as names of streams and places are concerned. If inaccurate in one instance, why not in the other? If such an attitude were universally adopted, we would then have to discard all the early narratives by explorers and traders which constitute our whole basic stock of knowledge. Bushnell is of the opinion that these so-called Siouan tribes of Virginia followed the burial customs of the western branch—either tree or scaffold burials. It is believed . . . that all disposed of their dead as did the people of Monasuka- panough, whose village stood on the banks of the Rivanna far above Rassawek. Consequently the discovery of other sites along the course of the James, where the dead had been buried in shallow pits scattered through the village, suggests that some other tribe or tribes may have preceded the Monacan. [Bushnell, LOS OM peels Mooney was of the belief that Monasukapanough was possibly “‘the original of Saponi.” There is little reason to doubt the correctness of this belief. Lederer stated that he “arrived at Sapon, a village of the Nahyssans.” The latter, as previously shown, were the Monahassanugh whose name appears on the map of 1624. (Strachey, pp. 48-9) says: That Monahassanugh, which stands at the foote of the mountaines.) Therefore, it is quite evident that at the time of the settlement of Jamestown, 1607, the site on the banks of the Rivana was occupied by the Saponi, closely allied with the Monahassanugh or Tutelo, whose village stood on the banks of the James some miles away in a southwesterly direction. [Ibid., p. 18.] This whole placement of the Saponi and Tutelo in relation with the Monasukapanough and Monahassanugh is purely assumptive on the part of Mooney and Bushnell. Bushnell continues: Had it not been for the work and interest of Jefferson, no account of the great burial mound which once stood at the ancient village of Monasuckapanough would not be available. It would have disappeared as have the burial places once belonging to other villages of the Siouan tribes and no reference to it would have been preserved. The site of the Indian town was visible from Monticello, and the burial mound stood near the south, or right bank of the Rivana. __[Ibid., p- 18.] A few paragraphs further on he says: The exact position of the mound [excavated by Jefferson] may never be de- termined, but it certainly stood on the low ground, on the right bank of the Rivanna, evidently nearer the river than the cliffs, and it may have been some distance above the ford. [Ibid., p. 20.] The former is a positive statement while the latter is a conditional one. We either know or we do not know where this mound stood. The discordant note is the presence of mounds attributed to Siouans. 198 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buu 164 In the area under consideration mounds are the exception rather than the rule and as a consequence cannot be attributed directly to any of the so-called Siouan groups under consideration. If the Sioux buried their dead within mounds, such structures would have to appear more often and not as isolated entities. There is no known record of a white man having visited Monasukapanough, the ancient Saponi village on the banks of the Rivanna, and consequently no descrip- tion of the settlement has been preserved. . . . It is believed [by whom?] that some time before the year 1670 the people, or at least the greater part of them moved from the valley of the Rivanna and went southward to establish a new village which, according to Mooney, “was probably on Otter river, a northern tributary of the Roanoke, in what is now Campbell county, Virginia, nearly south of Lynchburg.” Here they were visited by Lederer in 1670, and by Batts party during the following year, but these explorers failed to describe the settlement. Soon the movement was resumed; they wandered far, nearly reaching the center of North Carolina, later returning to Virginia. [Ibid., p. 28.] At this point inferences have become positive statements. Mooney only inferred that Monasukapanough might be the ancient village of the Saponi without showing any proof whatsoever. Bushnell comes along and makes a positive statement out of this, as well as attributing Monahassanugh to the Tutelo. These villages were noted by Smith and hence any correlation between them and the Tutelo and Saponi is only inferential and must be accepted as such. What we do know is that the Saponi were located northeast of the Occaneechi, as noted by Lederer, and the Tutelo were located a considerable distance west of the Saponi in the ‘western mountains.” After that they were located by Lawson in North Carolina either on the Eno River or on the Yadkin River. Sometime later they were gathered up and installed at Fort Christanna by Governor Spotswood and from there on they migrated northward out of Virginia and never appeared again in Virginia’s history. Ludwik Krzywicki in his study “Primitive Society,” etc., sums up this whole situation regarding place names rather well. He states: Earlier sources give the names of the same tribe variously; sometimes these various versions are extremely unlike and often differ greatly from the designations commonly accepted today. These sometimes quite numerous variants of tribal names do not appear in our statistics of tribal population. [Krzywicki, 1934, p. 520.] In 1935 Bushnell acknowledges that— As yet it has not been possible to translate the names as given by Smith and Strachey. They were undoubtedly in some Siouan dialect [who never having had contact with any Siouan—how could they possibly have given a Siouan equivalent for any place or tribal name?] and were told to the English by an Algonquian Indian. The latter appears to have attempted to translate the Siouan word into his own language, and this resulted in the names as recorded by the English being a combination of Siouan and Algonquian, making it difficult, if not impossible, ever to learn their true meaning. [Bushnell, 1935, p. 8.] Noga, 4’? =‘ EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 199 This brings to mind a book review of Bushnell’s ‘“Native Cemeteries and Forms of Burial East of the Mississippi’? made by Alson Skinner (1921). Init he says: Owing to the lack of space required for an exhaustive critique of Mr. Bushnell’s paper, the writer will confine himself largely to a few observations on one of the regions which the archaeology and history in which he is somewhat familiar, namely the Iroquois and Algonkian area of the Middle Atlantic States. [Ibid., p. 366.] We hereby refer him [Bushnell] to Dr. Beauchamp’s observations on the lack of identity between the Iroquois and the builders of the mounds found in their territory. . . , Otherwise it would not have escaped his notice that the Iroquois were not the pristine inhabitants of the region in question, and that there are evidences of, not one, but several peoples of different culture who preceded them. {Ibid., p. 367.] If, as Bushnell states, on unknown authority, a piece of mica is proof positive that a mound opened near Chenango, N. Y., was of Tuscarora origin, then on this evidence the makers of the shellheaps at Shinnecock Hills, Long Island, and at Tottenville, Staten Island, hitherto considered Algonkian on mere cultural and historical evidence, were Tuscarora, and so were the inhabitants of what we considered to be an ancient pre-Iroquoian Algonkian burial village and burial site at Cayuga, N. Y., for mica has been found in all these places. The mystery of the origin of certain Ohio mounds will also be dissipated by this token. [Ibid., p. 368.] Bushnell’s attempt to explain this so-called Siouan occupancy is put this way: Although Siouan tribes were occupying villages on the banks of the James and Rivanna rivers at the beginning of the seventeenth century, they are believed not to have been there many years; consequently all the small camp sites and numerous objects of native origin discovered in the region should not be attributed to the Monacan. Algonquian tribes may have preceded them as occupants of the same territory. The latter had evidently been pushed eastward by the Siouan people coming from the direction of the Ohio, and the pressure was still being exerted in the year 1607, at which time Powhatan related to Captain Newport “that the Monanacan was his Enmye, and that he came Downe at the fall of the leafe and invaded his Countrye.’”’ With these continued invasions the Algonquian villages near the falls would soon have been abandoned, thus enabling the Monacan to have advanced still farther eastward. .. . If the belief that the Siouan tribes moved eastward from the Ohio is correct, they must necessarily have crossed the valley of the Shenandoah—the Valley of Virginia—before entering the piedmont where they were established when first encountered by Europeans, but the rich and fertile region just west of the Blue Ridge . . . was not occupied by any native tribe when it first became known to the colonists. War parties of the northern Iroquoian tribes traversed the land, and evidently the fear of their coming had caused the less warlike to abandon the region and to seek new homes elsewhere. Thus it is believed the Siouan groups crossed the Blue Ridge and occupied the piedmont country, in turn pushing the Algonkin tribes before them. [Bushnell, 1933, pp. 2-3.] Speck (1935) makes the suggestion that— A question that has engaged attention for some time is that of the former wider distribution of the eastern Siouan peoples farther to the eastward and northward 200 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Butt 164 of where they were found by the first explorers. I have still to find convincing proof that the Algonkian populations did not displace some of these Siouan kindreds in their expansion southward and into the Alleghenian region. The deep-rooted hostility that prevailed between the Powhatan and the Monacan and Manahoac may be attributed to intrusions of the one upon the territory of the other in later times. And in this case it would seem to have been due to the aggression of the Powhatan, supposedly the later arrivals in the Virginia lowlands. Such an attitude toward cultural history here could be held to account for the allocation of the Powhatan peoples in the lower country to the eastward and the Siouan peoples in the piedmont region, their hostility toward each other, the survival of the language of the Occaneechi as a trade language of the region and as the language of religious ritual, which facts we learn from Strachey. If accordingly my inferences for a more easterly habitat of certain Siouan peoples, the Shoccoree and possibly the Eno, are accepted, then we have a trend of evidence hinting at the conclusion that Siouan peoples were earlier residents in eastern Virginia and Carolina and were invaded several centuries before the coming of the Europeans by the Powhatan, and gradually dispossessed of their territories by them. [Speck, 1935, pp. 202—203.] Saponi and Tutelo——tThe identification of these two tribes in the historic period with the Monahassanugh and Monasickapanough (Smith, 1607), divisions of the Monaean group, as residents in the Virginia foothills has been undertaken by Mooney and concluded by Bushnell. Their exodus from Virginia, their wanderings outward and then their return to Virginia, to settle for a while at Fort Christanna have been succinetly traced by Mooney. As yet, however, we have no mention of their association with the Catawba as allied or as incorporated units. Nevertheless there must have been at one time an association between the northern [Tutelo and associated peoples] and the southern [Catawbas, Woccon, and others] divisions of the Siouan tribes of the region. Swanton thinks that the incursion of the Spaniards into the Carolinas in the 16th century resulted in forcing certain of them to the northward. Catawba tradition is silent in regard to the Tutelo. A single echo of the once important name Saponi possibly comes down to us through Catawba memory in the mention of Margaret Brown of a tribe whose name was remembered as (ye)pa’na spoken of by her mother. She knew nothing more of the term or its meaning. Of the proper names denoting the Tutelo [Toteri, Yesang, Nahissan, etc.] there is no hint of cognizance among the Catawba. Treating the village names of the Tutelo and Saponi identified as Monahassanugh and Monasickapanough, from the viewpoint of Catawba stem similarity, the element mona- is valid as the Catawba designation for “land, earth, ground” but this etymology does not apply to forms in the dialects of the northern [Monacan] eastern Siouan area. [Ibid., p. 205.] Under another form of the tribal name, Mohetan, a village of this affinity is indicated on Alvord and Bidgood’s map (1673-74), visited by Needham and Arthur, a days journey from the Great Kanawha River, W. Va. At present we may admit that this reference means an earlier wider extension toward the west in the Alleghenies or a move toward the end of the 17th century in that direction, after which the village may have acquired a name derived from some other tongue. [It is not explained what tongue is referred to.] The association of the Mannahoac with the Monacan brings up another aspect of the problem. Both peoples are described as members of related tribes, by all the authorities who speak of them since Hale and Mooney, both as concerns the Nog2)) )~—SCXEASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 201 characteristics of speech and culture. Since, therefore, we possess a vocabulary from only the one language of Virginia area, namely Tutelo, it may be profitable to apply the lexical forms of Tutelo to the half dozen terms preserved by Captain Smith as place or tribal names of the Mannahoac confederacy... . Without intending to assume a positive attitude concerning the interpretation of Man- nahoac names written in Smith’s manuscript three hundred years ago, by a stranger to the Indian tongue, explained through the medium of the small Tutelo vocabulary (spoken by a Siouan tribe about one hundred miles distant from them) of about one hundred fifty words recorded by Hale in 1870, the above suggestions will be accepted merely as such. Occaneechi.—The term Occaneechi (with its variants Akenatzy, Occaneecheans, Patshenins) [The latter is a newly introduced synonym of Speck’s not previously referred to the Occaneechi.] comes down to us as the tribal designation of an early people of the Virginia—Carolina frontier, dwelling (1670) on a large island in Roanoke River just below the confluence of the Staunton and the Dan Rivers, near the site of Clarksburg [Clarskville], Mecklenburg Co., Virginia. It is un- doubtedly, as Mooney has shown [but on inferential grounds], the designation of a Siouan-speaking tribe affiliated with the Saponi and Tutelo. Let us digress from the quotation from Speck but a moment to point out here that no historical records would validate the association of the Occaneechi with the Saponi and Tutelo until Governor Spotswood gathered the group together and took them up to Fort Christanna. After first located by Lederer on the Roanoke, not at the confluence of the Staunton and Dan Rivers, they were next located by Lawson in 1700 on the Eno, and it was from there that Spotswood enticed them to move to Fort Christanna along with the Saponi and Tutelo who occupied villages on the Yadkin River. This constitutes their first association—historically. Now we have a really questionable statement from Speck: Yet we have no linguistic proof of such an affinity beyond the statement that their languages were similar, which is supported by testimony given to Hale by Nikonha, the Tutelo. Nor is it possible to add anything to its meaning or history from Catawba sources. [Italics are writer’s.] Its connections were, however, definitely with the northern [Tutelo, Saponi, or Nihassan] branch of the eastern Siouan tribes with whom they finally combined. Bland (1650) writes of the Occaneecheans and Nessoneicks [which I have already noted is a synonym for Nahissan] as living together on a branch of the Roanoke. As an advance step in the attempt to explain the tribal names in this area of puzzling terms, I would make bold to suggest a possible explanation of the word Occaneechi, using Tutelo sources for the purpose, since we have accepted the con- clusion offered by Hale and Mooney that Saponi, Tutelo, and Occaneechi were related and reciprocally intelligible tongues. Reverting to Tutelo vocabulary recorded by Hale we encounter the term yuhkin, ‘‘man,” among five other syno- nyms listed. I suggest, accordingly that Occaneechi, and its related forms, are derivations from this form (occan=yuhkin) with a terminal modifier; whence Occaneechi, Occanachee(ans), Akenatzy, denote an equivalent of ‘‘people.” This possibility leads even farther. In the early form Monacan, denoting, in the 17th century, the Saponi, Tutelo, and probably the Occaneechi assembled, we may have a corruption of Tutelo amani, amai, “land,” prefixed to the term yuhkan, whence 202 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLL. 164 tentatively develops aman(i) (y)uhkan of Monacan, ‘“‘people of the land.” The sense of this meaning, as being logically applicable to native tribes in America and elsewhere in reference to themselves, is too obvious to be seriously disputed by the ethnologist. [Speck, 1935, pp. 212, 213.] And in the meantime we are getting farther and farther away from the initial statements upon which all these statements are based. The introduction of new terms, the free use of geography, geographical names, early spelling of Indian names, and the disregarding of the ethnic sources of information is positively breathtaking. Inferences, suppositions, and assumptions were apparently the ‘main stock in trade’ of certain ethnologists and linguists since they have managed to construct ‘whole cloth” from them and present them as actually proved facts when apparently they are, upon critical examination, nothing of the sort. Paraphrasing Speck (1935, p. 216) we might justifiably say: The possibilities rising out of these sources of information lead in many directions, one of which is that the Occaneechi, Saponi, and Tutelo were either an Iroquoian-speaking or an Algonquian-speaking group that drifted away from their linguistic kin early in the 17th century, moved westward in separate groups, and were reintroduced into the parent stock early in the 18th century along with the Tuscarora, Nottoway, and Meherrin. Speck, the leading authority on the Catawba, intimated that— Several Muskhogean names can be construed into meanings in Catawba without these, however, being in any way responsible for their origin. . . . Yet it should be noted that neither the Creek nor the Yemasee have been known even by name to the Later Catawba informants. While investigation of the language was going on the entire list of tribal and place names of the supposedly Siouan area of the Carolinas [Italics are writer’s] was examined with all four speakers of Catawba, with the results given above. Except for the river names in the country adjacent to the Catawba, the results show the futility of hoping for light, through a study of the Catawba language, on the history and affinities of the dozen or so mysterious tribes whose titles only remain on the colonial records. A I have already referred to several of Gatschet’s attempts at explanation of tribal and river designations corresponding to the terms just given. He says, “‘all these local appellations, probably many more, are terms from the Catawba lan- guage.” As far as the Catawba etymologies are concerned there can be no objections to the statement, but I must point out that the equivalents he offers for the geographical terms are no more than analytical renderings, derived from linguistic material, not from current traditional memories of the tribes in question among the Catawba informants. It is barely possible that Billy George, who was living at the time of Gatschet’s visit to the Catawba, knew more than the present informants do; but I cannot believe that even the conditions of knowledge at that time among these Indians would have justified the acceptance of the meanings given as the actual sources of origin of the long extinct tribal eponyms: “Sweee” from sawé, “island,” and ‘“Kayaways” (Kiawah) from ka’ia, ‘‘a species of turtle.” Anmamon, Bar. EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 203 For several other names, whose identity will remain a puzzle for some time to come, there is at present little to be said. So with Keyauwee, Yadkin, Sissipahaw, and Woccon no treatment can be offered from Catawba sources that would enlighten the obscurity which surrounds their relationship with other Siouan tribes of the Southeast. [Speck, 1935, pp. 221, 222, 223.] Speck’s statement regarding Billy George can just as easily apply to Nikonha’s relations as reported by Hale from the Six Nations Reser- vation, Canada. Again referring to Kaj Birket-Smith (1930) on “Folk Wanderings and Culture Drifts in Northern North America,” he stated: In his famous Anthropogeographie Friedrick Ratzel justly complained of the ethnographical maps of North America which are generally found in anthropo- logical and geographical text-books. When studying one of these maps—as examples I need only mention those of the Handbook of the American Indians North of Mexico and Buschan’s Illustrierte Voélkerkunde—you will perceive immediately that howsoever conditions were in pre-Columbian America, they certainly never appeared in the manner delineated there. The reason is obvious. As a rule a tribe has been marked out at the place where it was living at the time when it began to be better known (not always identical with the place where it was encountered for the first time); however, history of discovery of North America has a duration of three or four centuries, and they did not pass away without leaving their traces on the distribution and way of living of the aboriginal population. An ordinary ethnographical map of North America shows conditions in Mexico about 1500 and in the region of the St. Lawrence about 1600, while in western Canada we reach the 18. and in great part of the Eskimo area the 19. century. It can hardly be denied that the intrinsic value of a map of this kind is somewhat problematic. [Ibid., p. 1.] He then goes on to explain about the Conestoga’s plight and the acceptance of the Tuscarora, Tutelo, Nanticoke, Saponi, etc., by the Five Nations as the Sixth Nation. In 1675 the Conestoga at Susquehanna River were also subjugated whereas the Tuscarora voluntarily sought admission to the league as did also some foreign tribes (Tutelo, Nanticoke, Saponi, etc.). This event, however, marked the limit of its power; farther south the Cheroki and Catawba formed an insurmountable barrier to its progress. [Ibid., p. 3.] This well explains the movement of the various Indian groups before and after the first introduction of white colonists along the middle and northern Atlantic area. Mooney would have us believe that all Indian nations were living in peace with each other—a mild Utopia—a state which never existed at any time, for it was not the Indian’s nature to be at constant peace; they enjoyed war parties like the present-day whites enjoy the game of baseball or a good football contest. Such incidents as the inroads of the Iroquois on the small Virginia tribes and the appearance of the Cherokee on the James River, would tend to bring about periods of tension and unrest depending upon the safety factor. Then, too, the interior of Virginia was being 204 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLw. 164 probed, indirectly, by the various traders ever on the alert for new markets and possible settlement areas. Conditions such as these were bound to create an unstable feeling among such groups as our Saponi, Occaneechi, and Tutelo, not to mention the rest of the small eroups in the interior of central Virginia. Birket-Smith (1930) is not altogether correct in alluding to the presence of mound builders in this area, for mounds are the exception rather than the rule. The mound excavated and recorded by Jefferson is one of the instances where the mound builders erected such a structure, but such cases are few and far between. As for the archeo- logical facts, not enough archeological investigations have been con- ducted within the area under question to make such a positive state- ment as that of Birket-Smith. Work has been instigated in a very small portion of this area and our information must be secured from this small segment hoping for a more widespread investigation upon which we can base our observations and facts. Then, too, in 1905, Alexander Gregg said: ‘‘Beyond this, as the track of aboriginal descent and migration begins to be traced back, even conjecture is lost in a sea of uncertainty.” (Gregg, 1905, p. 2.) Swanton, in 1936, was approaching the truth more nearly as the present writer sees it. He wrote: The Saponi and Tutelo have been reported to have migrated to the headwaters of the Yadkin River after the split up of residence on the Roanoke. The Oc- caneechi migrated to the Eno R. near the present town of Hillsboro, N. C. This case, as evidenced by history, is borne out in that these groups separated into two groups: the Saponi-Tutelo as a unit and the Occaneechi as a separate unit. The Saponi, Tutelo, and Occaneechi were brought together later on by Governor Al. Spotswood, but what we are interested in at this time is just why was the split made thus? It would appear that there was a very close affiliation between the Saponi and Tutelo and only a friendly relationship with the Occaneechi. The Occaneechi ‘‘associated from time to time’ with the SUPPOSEDLY Siouan groups of Virginia and North Carolina but when direct pressure was brought to bear upon them by outside influences they decided to go their separate way rather than to throw in their lot with the Saponi and Tutelo. [Italics are writer’s. Grasp the “supposedly” used here by Swanton.] After the Fort Christanna episode whether the Occaneechi migrated northward with the Tutelo and Saponi has never been established. They are not mentioned, with certainty thereafter. What was their fate will remain forever unknown. [Italics are writer’s.] [Swanton, 1936, p. 375.] This same line of reasoning can be applied to the association with the Tuscarora, Nottoway, and Meherrin with which the Saponi and Tutelo affiliated themselves in their migration northward to join the Cayuga. The latter are recognized Iroquoian groups and whether there was a linguistic linkage of the entire group will have to be worked out on etymological grounds. toe BAe. EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 205 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS A brief summary of events leading up to the identification of groups, their migrations, and final assimilation by the Iroquois is needed at this point. In 1608 Captain John Smith indicated the probable location of a number of Indian villages, attributed by him to the Monacans, above the falls of the James River; the positive positions of these villages were not known and the probable positions were indicated on Smith’s map of 1624. These positions were those indicated by Algonquian- speaking Indians with whom Smith was in contact at the time. The same year (1608) Captain Newport and a number of men trav- eled 40 miles beyond the falls of the James and contacted some of the Monacans but never recorded any of their findings. In 1651 Edward Bland, traveling in the interior of Virginia, was told by an Appomattox Indian about the Occaneechi and ‘‘Nes- soneicks,’”’ but he never visited either of them. In 1670 John Lederer not only visited the ‘“Akenatzy’’ Occaneechi but also visited the Saponi, bringing back firsthand information re- garding these groups. He also mentioned a group known as the “‘Rickohockan’’—possibly Cherokee who were then living beyond the mountains. The following year, the trading team of Batts and Fallam passed through Saponi town, Hanathaskie town, and contacted the Toteros or Tuteloes, who were reported on for the first time. They mentioned that this group lived in the ‘‘western mountains” beyond the Saponi and the two groups were not in direct contact. Three years later (1673), another trading team, Needham and Arthur, practically doubled over the track laid down by Batts and Fallam, bringing back additional facts regarding the groups contacted. At this time we learn that the Saponi were in contact with the Tutelo on a friendly basis and that a reciprocal agreement was made to give over to the Tutelo a number of Iroquois captives which the Saponi had taken to be returned to their group. Whether this whole trans- action was delivered in a common language or one recognized by both was not mentioned. In 1705 Robert Beverley indicated that the ‘general language,” indicated by the former explorers and traders, used in this section of Virginia was recognized as belonging to the Occaneechi and was used not only during their trading but also while performing various religious rites. The Saponi and Tutelo, as well as other surrounding groups, used this general language of the Occaneechi; that is, all occupants of Virginia. 206 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLu. 164 During 1714, John Lawson started out from the coast of North Carolina and taking a circuitous loop contacted the Saponi and Tutelo on the Yadkin River; he reported the Occaneechi as occupy- ing a site on the Eno River, but never succeeded in visiting them on account of the presence of an Iroquois war party in the area. In 1775 James Adair wrote his ‘History of the American Indian.” He, like others of his time, attributed the origin of the American Indian to the Lost Tribes of Israel. The rest of his history is colored accordingly. William Byrd’s account of “The Dividing Line Betwixt North Carolina and Virginia’ and his “Secret History’ of the same event were republished in 1929. The survey was run in 1728 and during that time Byrd made a number of observations which were colored by stories told him by his Indian guides which influenced the whole outlook of the work. ‘Thus ends our so-called primary sources of information. Beginning with Albert Gallatin in 1836, we get the first of the evaluation of the primary sources and the introduction of some extraneous interpretations. Samuel Drake, 1848; Francis Hawks, 1858; Joseph Anderson, 1872; Horatio Hale, 1883; Edward Neill, 1886; J. W. Powell, 1892; James Mooney, 1894; William Tooker, 1895; Daniel Brinton, 1896; James O. Dorsey, 1897; and on up to James Griffin, 1945; John Swanton, 1946; Douglas Rights, 1947; John Swanton, 1952; and William Fenton, 1953, all are included in the interpretative period when each writer based his own ideas somewhat upon his predecessor’s with rarely an attempt to seek out the primary sources to check upon what had been written before. Thus, the structure of the so-called Siouan Tribes of the East was given, to all appearances, a substantial footing; but upon critical examination it has been found that the foundation was unsubstantial. Likening the study to a tapestry, we find, as we have pointed out above, that it is full of dropped stitches and wrong insertions, destroying the original pattern and creating a new one. Hale with his mistaken inferences and assumptions created the illusion of a Siouan-speaking people east of the Mississippi River—all based upon a small vocabulary gathered under rather questionable conditions. Frachtenberg and Sapir would not vouch for vocabularies gathered on the same Reserve much later from so-called Tutelo sources. Hale’s conclusions were later adopted by Mooney and became an accepted part of the literature. It is the contention of the present writer that the Occaneechi, Saponi, and Tutelo, and possibly others,® are not of Siouan linguistic stock but rather of a primitive Algonquian stock. This has been § Similar studies should be made on the Catawba, Biloxi, and Ofo to determine whether or not they should be assigned to the Siouan linguistic family. oh) EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 207 demonstrated etymologically and dialectically by Dr. John P. Harring- ton (1955, pp. 189-202). Whether these groups represented “tag ends” of tribes who amalgamated together for mutual protection and whose tribal names are meaningless is something we are not sure of. We do know that this so-called ‘general language’’ was surely not Tutelo—as stated by Hale—for Beverley specifically made a positive statement that it was Occaneechi. From the facts presented, it would appear that the Occaneechi, Saponi, and possibly the Tutelo, were a frontier group whose cultural and linguistic affiliations are of an Algonquian stock. LITERATURE CITED Apatr, JAMES. 1930. History of the American Indian. (Edited by Samuel Cole Williams.) Johnson City, Tenn. First published in 1775. ALvoRD, CLARENCE W., and Bipcoop, LEE. 1912. The first explorations of the Trans-Allegheny region by the Virginians, 1650-1674. Cleveland. ANDERSON, JOSEPH. 1872. The newly discovered relationship of the Tuteloe to the Dakotan stock. Proc. Amer. Philos. Assoc. vol. 3, pp. 15-16. New York. Barrs, THomas, Journal of. See Atvorp, CLARENCE W., and Bincoop, Lez, pp. 183-205. BEVERLEY, ROBERT. 1947. The history and present state of Virginia . . . (Edited by Louis B. Wright.) Chapel Hill, N. C. (Reproduction of the orig. ed. London, 1705.) Biveoop, Lez. See Atvorp, CLARENCE W., and Bincoop, Lzz. BrrKet-SmirH, Kags. 1930. Folk wanderings and culture drifts in northern North America. Extrait de Journal de la Sociétédes Américanistes de Paris, n. 8., vol. 22, pp. 1-32. Au Siege de la Societe, Paris. BLAND[E], Epwarp, Explorations of. See Auvorp, CLarENcn W., and Bingoop, LEE. BiaANnp[E], Epwarp. The discovery of New Brittaine, 1650. London, 1651. See SALLEY, ALEXANDER SAMUEL, EpiIToR. Brinton, DANIEL G. 1896. The myths of the New World. 3ded. Philadelphia. BusHNELL, Davin I., Jr. 1907 a. Discoveries beyond the Appalachian Mountains in September 1671. Amer, Anthrop., n. s., vol. 9, pp. 55-56. 1907 b. Virginia—from early records. Amer. Anthrop., n. s., vol. 9, pp. 31-44. 1930. The Five Monacan towns in Virginia, 1607. Smithsonian Misc. Coll., vol. 82, No. 12. 1933. Evidence of Indian occupancy in Albemarle County, Virginia. Smith- sonian Misc. Coll., vol. 89, No. 7. 1935. The Manahoac tribes in Virginia. Smithsonian Misc. Coll., vol. 94, No. 8. 1940. Virginia before Jamestown. Smithsonian Misc. Coll., vol. 100, pp. 125-158. 208 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuy. 164 Byrp, WILLIAM. 1901. The writings of “Colonel William Byrd of Westover in Virginia Esqr.”’ Edited by John Spencer Bassett. New York. 1929. William Byrd’s histories of the dividing line betwixt Virginia and North Carolina [1728-29]. With introduction and notes by William K. Boyd. Raleigh, N. C. Dorsey, J. O. 1886. Migrations of the Siouan tribes. Amer. Nat., vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 211-222. 1893. The Biloxi Indians of Louisiana. Proc. Amer. Assoc. Adv. Sci., vol. 42, pp. 2-238. MS. Migrations of certain tribes of the Siouan family [and other notes]. Archives, Bur. Amer. Ethnol., Doc. No. 3804. 1897. Siouan sociology: a posthumous paper. 15th Ann. Rep. Bur. Amer. Ethnol., 1893-1894, pp. 205-244. Dorsey, J. O., and Swanton, JouN R. 1912. A dictionary of the Biloxi and Ofo languages. Bur. Amer. Ethnol. Bull. 47. DRAKE, SAMUEL GARDNER. 1848. Biography and history of the Indians of North America, from its first discovery ...10thed. Boston. Fenton, Wiuiiam N. 1953. The Iroquois Eagle Dance; an offshoot of the Calumet Dance. Bur. Amer. Ethnol. Bull. 156. FRACHTENBERG, L. J. 1913. Contributions to a Tutelo vocabulary. Amer. Anthrop., n.s., vol. 15, pp. 477-479. GALLATIN, ALBERT. 1836. A synopsis of the Indian tribes within the United States east of the Rocky Mountains. Trans. and Coll. Amer. Antiq. Soc., Archae- ologia Americana, vol. 2, pp. 1-422. Cambridge, Mass. 1848. Hale’s Indians of North-west America, and vocabularies of North America, with an introduction. Amer. Ethnol. Soc. Trans., vol. 2. New York. GatscHET, A. S. 1881. Massawomekes. American Antiquarian, July. GreGaG, ALEXANDER. 1905. History of Old Cherawa, containing an account of the aborigines of Pedee, 1703-1810. Columbia, §. C. First published in 1867, New York. GRIFFIN, JAMES. 1942. On the historic location of Tutelo and the Mohetan in the Ohio Valley. Amer. Anthrop., vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 275-280. 1945. An interpretation of Siouan archaeology in the piedmont of North Carolina and Virginia. Amer, Antiq., vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 321-330. Hae, Horatio. 1883. The Tutelo tribe and language. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., vol. 21, No. 114, pp. 1-47. Philadelphia. HaRRINGTON, Jonn P. 1955. The original Strachey vocabulary of the Virginia Indian language. Bur. Amer. Ethnol. Bull. 157, Anthrop. Pap. No. 46, pp. 189-202. Nog?) 8 )=6SCXEASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 209 Hawks, F. L. 1858. History of North Carolina: with maps and illustrations. 2 vols. Fayetteville, N. C. Hewirt, J. N. B. 1927. Explorations and field work of the Smithsonian Institution. Wash- ington. 1930. Explorations and field work of the Smithsonian Institution. Wash- ington. Hopce, FREDERICK W. 1907. Handbook of American Indians north of Mexico. Bur. Amer. Ethnol. Bull. 30, pts. 1 and 2. Homes, W. H. 1914, Areas of American culture characterization tentatively outlined as an aid in the study of the antiquities. Amer. Anthrop. vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 413-446. JEFFERSON, THOMAS. 1801. Notes on the State of Virginia. 2d edition, 1825. Philadelphia. KRoEBER, A. L. 1939. Cultural and natural areas of native North America. Univ. California Publ. Amer. Archeol. and Ethnol. vol. 38, pp. 1-242. Berkeley. Krzywicki, LupWIK. 1934. Primitive society and its vital statistics; applied to North American Indian tribes. London. Lawson, JOHN. 1709. A new voyage to Carolina; containing the exact description and natural history of that country ... By John Lawson, Gent. Surveyor General of North Carolina. London. 1937. The history of Carolina, containing the exact description and natural history of that country. Edited by Frances L. Harriss. Rich- mond, Va. Other editions: 1714, London; and 1860, Raleigh, Ni C: LEDERER, JOHN. See ALVORD, CLARENCE W., and Bipcoop, Leg, pp. 135-171; TaALBotT, Sirk WILLIAM. Manson, CARL. 1948. Marcey Creek site: An early manifestation in the Potomac Valley. Amer. Antiq. vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 223-226. McPuHerson, O. M., Epiror. 1915. Indians of North America. U.S. 63d Cong. 3d sess., Sen. Doc. No. 677. MILLING, CHAPMAN. 1940. Red Carolinians. Univ. North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, N. C. Mooney, JAMES. 1894. Siouan tribes of the East. Bur. Amer. Ethol. Bull. 22. 1928. The aboriginal population of America north of Mexico. Smithsonian Misc. Coll., vol. 80, No. 7. MS. [Notes on Eastern Siouan.] Archives, Bur. Amer. Ethnol., Doc. No. 1901. Myer, W. E. 1928. Indian trails of the Southeast. 42d Ann. Rep. Bur. Amer. Ethnol., 1924-1925, pp. 727-857. 210 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLu. 164 NEEDHAM, JAmMEs, Journeys of. See ALvorD, CLARENCE W., and Bipeoop, LEE, pp. 207-226. NEILL, E. D. 1886. Virginia Carolorum: the colony under the rule of Charles the First and Second, 1625-1685, based upon manuscripts and documents of the period. Albany. PowELL, J. W. 1892. Indian linguistic families of America north of Mexico. 7th Ann. Rep. Bur. Amer. Ethnol., 1885-1886, pp. 7-142. Rieuts, Doveras L. 1947. The American Indian in North Carolina. Duke University Press, Durhan, N. C. SauLtey, ALEXANDER SAMUEL, EDITOR. 1911. Original narratives of early American history. Narratives of early Carolina, 1650-1708. New York. Sams, Conway WHITTLE. 1916. The conquest of Virginia, the forest primeval. New York and London. Sapir, E. A. 1913. A Tutelo vocabulary. Amer. Anthrop., n. s., vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 295-297. ScHAEFFER, CLtauDE E. See Speck, FRANK G., 1942. Simms, W. GILMORE. 1846. The life of Captain John Smith: the founder of Virginia. New York. SKINNER, ALANSON. 1921. Book review: Bushnell’s native cemeteries and forms of burial east of the Mississippi (Bur. Amer. Ethnol. Bull. 71). Amer. Anthrop. vol. 23, No. 3. Situ, JOHN. 1819. True travels, adventures and observations of Captaine John Smith in Europe, Asia, Africa and America . . . 2 vols. 1884. Works of Captain John Smith, 1608-1631. Edited by Edward Arber, English Scholar’s Library. Birmingham. 1910. Travels and works of Captain John Smith, President of Virginia and Admiral of New England, 1580-1631. 2 vols. A new edition with a biographical and critical introduction by A. G. Bradley. Edinburgh. Speck, Frank G. 1924. Ethnic position of the Southeastern Algonkian. Amer. Anthrop. vol. 26, No. 2. 1935. Siouan tribes of the Carolinas as known from Catawba, Tutelo, and documentary sources. Amer. Anthrop. vol. 37, No. 2, pt. 1, pp. 201-225. 1942. Tutelo adoption ceremony. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Dept. Public Instruction, Pennsylvania Hist. Comm. MHarrisburg. STRACHEY, WILLIAM. 1849. The historie of travaile into Virginia Britannia ... Hakluyt Soc. Publ. vol. 6. London. Noga, 4? )~=—-« EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM—MILLER 211 SwANTON, JoHN R. 1909. A new Siouan dialect. Anthropological essays presented to Frederick Ward Putnam, pp. 477-486. New York. 1918. Results of some recent investigations regarding the southeastern tribes of the United States. Amer. Anthrop. vol. 15, pp. 690-691. 1922. Early history of the Creek Indians and their neighbors. Bur. Amer. Ethnol. Bull. 73. 1923. New light on the early history of the Siouan people. Journ. Wash- ington Acad. Sci., vol. 18, No. 3. 1935. Notes on the cultural province of the Southeast. Amer. Anthrop. vol. 37, pp. 373-385. 1936. Early history of the eastern Siouan tribes. Essays in Anthropology presented to A. L. Kroeber, pp. 371-381. Univ. Calif. Press. Berkeley. 1946. Indians of the Southeastern United States. Bur. Amer. Ethnol. Bull. 137. 1952. The Indian tribes of North America. Bur. Amer. Ethnol. Bull. 145. MS. [Notes on Eastern Siouan.] Archives, Bur. Amer. Ethnol., Doc. No. 4234. Swanton, JoHn R., and Dixon, Rouanp B. 1914. Primitive American history. Amer. Anthrop. vol. 16, pp. 376-412. TALBOT, Sir WILLIAM. 1902. The discoveries of John Lederer. . . . Printed by J. C. for Samuel Heyrick, London, 1672. Reprinted for Geo. P. Humphrey, Rochester, New York. Tuomas, Cyrus. MS. Notes and letter pertaining to Eastern Siouans. Archives, Bur. Amer. Ethnol., doc. No. 4014. Tooxrr, W. W. 1895. The Algonquian appellatives of the Siouan tribes of Virginia. Amer. Anthrop., o. s., vol. 8, pp. 376-392. WiLLouGHBY, CHARLES C. 1907. The Virginia Indians in the seventeenth century. Amer. Anthrop., n. 8., vol. 9, pp. 57-86. 870929—57——16 ci ace a tal ch ee eee ot oe Rian tose lation hehe ac sisuaioepidiadotegienr © ae. & bina Aes tq edoot uf A ob FaLiay, Kex¥s ANERCAM: tty eee Joa’ Gauincl qk? eusn8* Seah Pern ar ee Ouralins, IUMALTOR New neck, rE cr : Siger Cee aod dar senA A woisocA Hino to sudiet mumbnl ads no eth 7y © oR oT” Momma etbath” PET: Re POA ARE ere Sagan. A my : i914..4 Tatite vosaniary AUR an oxk! Bina fab ae ue eers Get BE° sede iy sore 9, 9 *agers anottemA ovitiodd 4 ett et LAS + acd Poi PANS ee wh 4s seni 08 sina sok Wy eh badnie® . 0°) ctophot ito oe noire ovale ait. oe at i il eH) WT ern a Sha lovmowdas: i aan Let A rile ok ¥ s 7 iMhie. eres: ; , vie Pitesti Kate f Ti (ba arte i Ma Ls , — , agree »y tie so ities yy ‘ ‘ 1! ee ee 1 3 ee ee Spee) Gers rer i ney Commonwealth of Peon rivera, ¢ Putts laetcoltiel) Pants} ayin Biot Clem bar aang Ss fee: Lia Adrw ‘we eye ip) te BA RTY ase “Lagu ¢ taht So : Poti} aa ©. Tandon ‘ + SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 164 Anthropological Papers, No. 53 AN ARCHEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE IN SOUTHEASTERN MEXICO By MATTHEW W. STIRLING 213 ANEMIC): RM i ? pe - ? . a 1% f : a ¥ , r y . ; ov *s ‘ wit ri ia . ; nie he ‘ care?! oi ia MAE a i) io iota Te Buh" Vs een Be ANG hte ee a” R's fh ie ark. ae nT a heat Fi A é oh aan AD if Veen ea eA, - HOTUTITEML VADORTIME aLaltstiod €2.0¥1 etsqnl Inoigaloqouttak. “Ul AOVIACRIAMVIOOEN TADTQOLOSHOAA " OOIAaM VinaTeAanTI02 OVILIAITS W WAETPAM yf CONTENTS PAGH Prreroduchion=202 548 62 222 $38 RI 2 OT BN AA £0 C72 U RM Vie) 217 mre. Longin remones =~ Sacre Mee ess ee OMG A - AAA ONURt COTE PONTO 219 EAE Layee ee Sere STA ak ee ee ee RON ONS POOLS 1699 HOVE 220 Se Ge aa a eas no eee ern aa ae te wes se oh OM 220 eta: Graney os 2s)... eoegenmene. dees berets BERRY AMOT Ji99 HOverais 221 SG aa | skal a le el Se in de Pa oa Sheen eee eK OR ee 224 SEIN Ty 0) Sy UAB eh fl AR, a le, nh 225 Comalenico and views ys sO. FE Fe ERA! IO OLOTIG Ted BYSI 226 mn Caloo ee enige oe ON SPIE DIVES POTN RU eg REN A 228 Pesernaio meio. SESTUGR AL: DUETS: 00,1 HORE: SOE POON) 1G EE TERRE AG 1 "3 229 PeUGt DS) Renqat asd 2 eh ye remo 2 €- be ebes ss tarpon Ae gd 231 Brsese, = (See, - OBEN rey: Used YORE CO LD fF OOK Se OER see 231 LTPP Ry eile 8 eae i aR Recreate Peele SLR. WU ee eR EO Se oe SN Ce 232 Le ELE eR i I be cae etna pals ath gi lle ae alae owe ¢ Re a 4 233 Wpesiae. sic. Re wits SPEDE! BS nat I pel ch ee Ue a eg 19 et 234 hiteratureicijed as amir OA eer eras piety eal Ge NR is 235 Paphination ol -plates.c. 3.4. 24 22 SEAM Coo 52 artigo i Eee wee 237 ILLUSTRATIONS PLATES FOLLOWING PAGB 46. a, The village of Tapijulapa, Tabasco. 6, The Rfo de las Playas, TG: ogee ee = 8 a eee Sok i ee 240 47. Stone heads from the vicinity of San Jose del Carmen_-_-____-_-__--- 240 48. a, House foundation, Pueblo Viejo. 6, Ball Court, Ceiba Grande_... 240 49. a, Part of the Ball Court, Ceiba Grande. 6, Paved floor, Ball Court, Coiba Grandes): 6 cen ie ht. thee. oO Senet. Sree 240 50. Portion of stone head, San Miguel, Tabasco___._.___._--_--------- 240 51. a, The ruins of Comalcalco. 6, Masonry at Comalcalco____-_------ 240 52. a, Stucco figures, tomb, Comalcalco. 6, Potsherd encrusted masonry, pa rerr tol 608 eataeeahleamentnd CaENa tne ads 27 GO a Aah A a Ree eS NTR Pe 240 53. a, Monument from La Venta. Villahermosa. 6, Monument from Tea Ventama@omalanions ai) ro. ah we OE 240 54. Artifacts from the vicinity of Villahermosa and Frontera, Tabasco... 240 55. Stucco construction in the shell mound at Ceiba, Tabasco_______-__-_- 240 Ab. Lottery from shel mound af Ceiba... 25. ee oe 240 57. Figurines and pottery from shell mound at Ceiba_________-----_---- 240 Se: Pottery fromstiel mound at Ceiba 22. eek. eee ts se 240 5°: Pottery from shell sound at Geibaieiin__. bo. eu eee oe 240 60. Pottery figure from shell mound at Ceiba_________.--------------- 240 61. Cylindrical and flat stamps from shell mound at Ceiba____---------- 240 62. Stone artifacts from shell mound at Ceiba___________-_-_---------- 240 63. a, Shell mound at Bellote. 6, Salt-water channel near Bellote-_----- 240 216 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buut. 164 FOLLOWING PAGE . a, Making lime from oyster shell, Isla. 6, One of the Bellote shell MOWUMOS 2.2) 73e hee eo ee eee Cee ee eee ee 240 . Associated artifacts of pottery, shell, and jade from a tomb at Isla___ 240 . Associated pottery vessels from a tomb at Isla_______-------------- 240 « Pottery figures of Maya type from Tupilco-_--------------------+-- 240 Adornos from large urns. ‘Tupileo_._..-..--.=-=.=2--=.495oee See 240 . a, Stone celt from Rfo Candelario. 6, Hematite figure from Tapiju- Man ee ae se oe oe ee ee 240 . a, Engraved celt from vicinity of Simojoval, Chiapas. 6, Stone statue from Atasts, Campeche. . 2222250225. 2a ee 240 . a, Pottery jaguar head from San Miguel. 6, Alabaster vessel from cave near Simojoval, Chiapas. c, Portion of pottery figure from La Venta. d, Grinding stone from shell mound, Ceiba_-_------- 240 72. a, Prowling jaguar in stucco from Atasta. 6, Stucco fragments from GASES ie Sais Ss ee ees oe ee 240 73. Basalt monuments from La Venta now at San Vicente, Tabasco - - -_- 240 TEXT FIGURE PAGE 5. Ceiba Grande-site, Rio-de las- Playas 222+ =22222+2s2ss22222222-2=5 222 MAP 15. Map of Tehuantepec and adjacent territory ----------------------- 218 AN ARCHEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE IN SOUTHEASTERN MEXICO By MatrHew W. STIRLING INTRODUCTION One of the important but little-known archeological areas of Middle America is that portion of southern Mexico lying between the classic Olmec territory and that formerly occupied by the ancient Maya. In 1944 a reconnaissance was conducted in this region as part of the National Geographic Society-Smithsonian Institution archeological program, the primary purpose of which was to estab- lish the eastern boundary of the early Olmec culture. The work was made possible by funds supplied by the National Geographic Society. The territory covered during the months of March and April, extended from the Tonalé River eastward to the Laguna Terminos and the Candelario River. This includes a small part of southern Veracruz and northern Chiapas, most of Tabasco, and the western corner of Campeche. I was assisted on the trip by Richard H. Stewart, assistant chief of the National Geographic Photographic Laboratory, and by my wife Marion Stirling. (Map 15.) In general in this region there are very few roads; rivers and trails supply the principal avenues of travel. Chartered small planes were utilized for several of the longer jumps, but for the most part travel was by launches, canoes, horseback, or on foot. The coast facing the Bay of Campeche is low. A line of sand dunes fringes the water’s edge and behind these dunes mangrove swamps extend many miles inland where the water is made brackish by the tides. Back of the sandy coast is a chain of large, shallow salt-water lagoons. Along most of the Tabasco coast, the mangroves give way to fresh-water swamps in the low flat interior. This low land extends almost to the Chiapas border where the mountains leading to the central plateau begin. The major portion of this territory is covered by a dense tropical rain forest, interspersed by lakes, swamps, and large rivers, which are joined by a network of connecting sloughs. The principal rivers are the Grijalva, and the 217 218 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [But. 164 > Veracruz BAY OF CAMPECHE 0 San Andres Tuxtla > Paraiso9 & 'e2 Lteocg, ¢ malcalco Ko. C) Tonala. 16 San ¥) enti U ®) 9/5 Lo Yeota A OCazmen 3\ — $6 San Miguel Cardenas O07-~f ae, & A , Tapijdlapa |, Palengue® a . FA OSimojovel - 2 EN Cy 2 < ry ej04 / /Tuxtla Gutiérrez® § ! San Cristobal Las-Ga oComitan Pp A TEHUVUANTEPEC Map 15.—Map of Tehuantepec and adjacent territory. San Pedro y San Pablo which constitutes the lower course of the Usumacintla. In spite of what might seem an unfavorable environ- ment, the area is fairly well populated. The 1940 census gives 12 inhabitants to the square kilometer, a figure which seems too high. The abundance of archeological remains would suggest that the popu- lation in aboriginal times was greater than at present. A number of Maya sites are to be found in this region, the most important being Jonuta on the lower Usumacintla and Comalcalco on the Rio Seco. The latter is of particular interest since it represents the westernmost-known Maya site. Many of the prehistoric remains, however, are not yet identifiable as Maya, a fact which points up the importance of doing work in this key area, Here, theoretically, should be found the chronological Nog, 4? ARCHEOLOGY, SOUTHEASTERN MEXICO—STIRLING 219 link between the established culture columns of the Maya region, on the one hand, and of the Veracruz coast, on the other. In addition, there appear to be relationships with the highlands of Chiapas. There is evidence also of Toltec influence, an item of considerable current interest. All in all, Tabasco and the adjacent territory constitute a critical region of primary archeological importance. At Comalcalco there are a number of interesting anomalies. The architecture in many respects is typical of the Classic Maya. Rooms are narrow with extremely thick walls surmounted with steep cor- beled vaults. ‘Tombs contain figures modeled in stucco reminiscent of Palenque. The structures, however, are made of fired bricks instead of stone, and the substructures are earth mounds similar to those of Veracruz rather than stone-faced pyramids with rubble cores. At Jonuta also there are earth mounds instead of pyramids, but typical Maya stone sculpture exists, with Maya glyphs. At Tupilco, near the coast of Tabasco, we found a site without architecture but with typical Maya figures modeledin clay. This site lies some 30 miles west of Comalcalco and is the westernmost Maya outpost yet known. THE TONALA REGION The Tonalé River, the boundary between the States of Veracruz and Tabasco, is formed by the junction of two streams, the Pedregal and the Rio de las Playas, which originate in the rough mountains around the Cerro Mono Pelado. After flowing their separate ways through the mountains they join soon after entering the coastal plain. At the present time the region which they drain is entirely uninhabited except for the lower reaches. While working at the site of La Venta in 1943, we heard stories of ruins known as Pueblo Viejo, located on the Rio de las Playas. On many maps of Mexico this site appears in large type as though it was an existing city. Unable to find anyone who had been there, we became intrigued and resolved to make a trip up the river in an effort to locate it. Our unsuccessful attempt to do so at that time has been described elsewhere (Stirling, 1943; Weber, 1945). However, on this 1943 trip we obtained information that convinced us of the existence of the ruins of Pueblo Viejo, which we presumed was a colonial site. We were told also of a large pre-Columbian site in the vicinity known only to one man, Vicente Aguilar, a native pioneer living on the Rio de las Playas, who was unavailable to us as guide on our first expedition. On March 11, 1944, Stewart, Mrs. Stirling, and I left La Venta in a canoe with an outboard motor, in order to survey the upper reaches of the river. Having heard of a mound group near the oil camp of 220 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bunt, 164 Cuichapa, we made our first stop at Las Choapas and took the autovia car to the oil camp. Here one of the engineers, Roberto Montez, led us to the site, which is about 3 miles west of Cuichapa. The group is quite impressive, consisting of a very large long mound approximately 500 feet long and 40 feet high. Just east of it is a steep conical mound about 50 feet high. South of this are several small round mounds. We found no sherds on the surface. Although the mounds had been cleared 2 years before our visit, they had again become covered with a dense second-growth jungle. Leaving Las Choapas we continued up the river. At El Plan the first high banks appear along the river, and the mangrove swamps are left behind. EL PLAN At El Plan, formerly known as Huacapal, there are two mounds about 50 yards from the edge of the 50-foot-high riverbank. The largest of these is about 14 feet high and is dome shaped. In front of it, in the direction of the river, is a low irregular mound about 5 feet high. Some digging had been done on the east edge of the larger mound, but it had not been much damaged. The space lying between the mounds and the river was evidently an occupation site, since abundant sherds are revealed where digging has been done for con- struction purposes. These sherds are for the most part of plain buff ware with black interspace as the result of incomplete firmg. They are undecorated except for simple grooves or incising near the rims. The principal shapes noted were shallow, flat-bottomed bowls with widely everted rims. A few obsidian flakes and flint chips were scattered around. No figurine fragments were seen. RiO DE LAS PLAYAS Beyond the mangroves, the country continued low, with here and there low hills and elevations. Occasional milpas along the river were planted primarily with corn but with some beans and bananas. When we entered the Rio de Las Playas the riverbanks became much higher. Ascending the Playas for 1 hour we came to a low hill on the left, with a sandstone exposure at the river’s edge. Just back of this on a higher elevation could be seen a group of mounds and leveled terraces silhouetted against the sky. An hour’s journey beyond this point we saw another mound group on a high point back of the river on the right. At Cerro Pilén the river emerges from the mountains, the rapids begin, and it is no longer possible to use a motor. Here the river Rous, Ty) ARCHEOLOGY, SOUTHEASTERN MEXICO—STIRLING 221 passes through a limestone gorge and the remainder of the trip is slow and difficult. The region being uninhabited, there is no land trail up the river. Just beyond the gorge, at the last house on the river, we picked up our guide, Vicente Aguilar. Near the house a good-sized stream, the Arroyo de Las Amates, enters the Playas on the left bank. Vicente told us that on a hunting trip he had seen a ruin farther up this stream. To reach it one goes 2 leagues up the Amates, where it is joined by the Arroyo Burro. Then one follows the Burro to the west until the Arroyo Esperanza enters it. Near the headwaters of the Esperanza is a good-sized site with stone-faced platforms, larger than Pueblo Viejo but smaller than Ceiba Grande, the two sites we examined on the Rio de las Playas. From Las Amates it is about 3 days’ travel to the Arroyo Pueblo Viejo, on which are located the ruins of the site of the same name. On the third day we stopped just below a mountain, locally called the Cerro Tierra Colorado, in order to hunt game. At this place the left bank of the river is high and the land quite level for a considerable distance. Here along a small arroyo we saw a series of small mounds, the highest of which was about 10 feet. Some were circular in form and others were of an elongated oval shape. Most had sandstone slabs scattered on the surface. We saw one natural outcrop of this type of stone in the vicinity which gave us some doubt as to the arti- ficial nature of the mounds. However their appearance and location lead me to believe that they are manmade. It would have cost us a day of travel to test them, so we did not excavate. CEIBA GRANDE About noon of the third day of our trip from the limestone gorge, we came to a small arroyo which enters from the left bank of the Playas opposite a high bank of blue shale topped with reddish soil. We gave it the name of Arroyo Vicente. The large prehistoric site, Vicente assured us, was located on this stream. After a 4-hour search, he found it. It is situated on the right bank of the arroyo on fairly level ground and was covered with a very high growth of virgin jungle. A giant ceiba tree was growing on the exact center of the summit of the principal pyramid, so we named the site “‘Ceiba Grande.”’ Because of the heavy jungle cloak, the real nature and extent of the site was not apparent to us at first, but after 5 days of clearing and mapping, we found that it consisted of a principal pyramid, two adjacent courts, and a ball court (fig. 5). The pyramid is approximately 50 feet high and is faced with sand- stone slabs. A badly ruined wide stairway leads to the summit on the north side. 222 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bunn. 164 ENLARGED CROSS SECTION OF BALL COURT, CEIBA GRANDE A- STONE PAVED COURT PRINCIPAL MOUND. B- MAIN COURT. C- BALL COURT. EXCAVATIONS CEIBA GRANDE SITE -2/0 0E LAS PLAYAS Figure 5.—Ceiba Grande site, Rio de las Playas. Just west of the pyramid is a rectangular court, paved with flat sandstone slabs. This is flanked on the west side by an elongated mound or embankment, and on the north and south sides by three small but fairly high mounds. North of the pyramid is a large court about 400 feet long and 100 feet wide. This is flanked on the north and west sides by an L- shaped embankment. The long or north area of the L is enlarged, at the point opposite the pyramid, into a fair-sized mound. The Rosy PAP) ARCHEOLOGY, SOUTHEASTERN MEXICO—STIRLING 223 south side of the big court is flanked in part by the north wall of court ‘“‘A,” the principal pyramid, and by an embankment which extends eastward from the northeast corner of the pyramid for a distance of 190 feet. This embankment runs level for a distance of 140 feet and then slopes downward toward the ball court, which lies at a lower level. The east wall of the big court is formed by the west wall of the ball court. The ball court itself, although it appears symmetrical to the eye, actually is not. The inside measurements of the north and south ends are, respectively, 48 feet and 56 feet, while the inside measure- ments of the east and west sides are 120 feet and 116 feet. Part of this apparent irregularity may be due to the fact that the inner paving has been buried in the talus washed down from the surrounding embankments. The structures at the north and south ends of the ball court are somewhat shorter than the width of the floor, leaving a narrow passage at each corner. The entire surface of the walls is faced with flat slabs of sandstone, and the base of each wall has a vertical section which extends 2% feet above the floor. From this point the walls slope upward at an angle of 45° to the top of the wall, which is about 20 feet high. The floor has been fully leveled and consists of a well- fitted paving of sandstone slabs laid on a base of clean yellow sand. This sand is not a natural formation, but was apparently carried in (pl. 49, b). The only excavations we made were in the ball court. We dug two small pits into the floor and ran a trench 12 feet wide into the central section of the west wall from the floor level, in order to gain a more accurate picture of the construction of the court. This trench yielded a fair sampling of sherds. There were no figurines, but we encountered a few prismatic obsidian flakes. The great majority of the sherds were of a coarse brick Red Ware, undecorated and sand tempered. A few sherds of this type were black, which may have been an accident of firing. There were also a few thin sherds of fine untempered paste. There were no sherds on the surface nor could we find any in the bed of the arroyo adjacent to the site. In the dense forest south of the pyramid we saw some more mounds, but did not have time to survey them. An interesting feature of Ceiba Grande is the fact that most if not all of the mounds and embankments are faced with stone slabs. This feature, along with the paved courts and ball court, clearly indicates that this site is something quite different from the mound groups of the adjacent coastal-plain region of southern Veracruz and Tabasco. Rather, it would seem to be an outpost of a culture originating in the Chiapas highlands. The ball courts which we found 224 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bunt. 164 in Chiapas in the region of the La Venta River were of the expanded- end type for the most part, but nevertheless I feel that there may be some relationship. PUEBLO VIEJO A short distance above the Arroyo Vicente, the Arroyo Pueblo Viejo enters the river from the left bank. Directly in front of the arroyo mouth, there is a large bar. A short distance above this is a second large bar. Just back of this, the site of Pueblo Viejo is located on high level ground on the right bank of the river. The site is near the river and lies between it and a small arroyo which enters the Playas just below. The site is about 400 yards square, and consists of ap- proximately 30 rectangular platforms with masonry walls made of flat slabs of sandstone laid without cement. They are between 2 and 3 feet high, depending on the size of the platform. The largest we measured was 66 by 30 feet and the smallest 25 by 10. We selected one for excavation which was 30 by 18 feet, with walls 2 feet 10 inches high. At a distance of 7 feet 7 inches from the northwest corner there was a stone staircase 17 inches wide consisting of 3 steps, each with a rise of 7 inches. The long axis of the platform was oriented almost exactly north and south. This appeared to be the case with the other platforms as well. The space between the stone walls was filled with earth, level with the top. We dug a trench 5 feet wide extending from the middle of the north wall to the middle of the south wall and an intersecting trench connecting the centers of the east and west walls. (PI. 48, a.) A considerable amount of plain buff potsherds and a quantity of flint chips and rejects were recovered. The only European object found was a large square hand-forged iron spike. This lay at a depth of 1 foot near the middle of the platform. At the north edge of the site are two deep excavations or holes. On the rim of one of these are the remains of part of a stone wall. They might have been wells, but it is difficult to see why wells would have been necessary with the river so close at hand. My first impres- sion was that this site was of colonial origin and had been occupied by mestizos or Europeans. This thought was induced primarily by the fact that we expected it to be a colonial site since it was placed on the old maps. This seemed to be confirmed by the finding of the iron spike, the stone steps, and the rather exact orientation of the structures. On the other hand, the pottery was all of native type (a fact not necessarily conclusive), and the masonry was very similar to that of structures we later found in the vicinity of Ocozocoautla in Chiapas. My present belief is that Pueblo Viejo is a late-type aboriginal site. Noes) 4” ARCHEOLOGY, SOUTHEASTERN MEXICO—STIRLING 225 SAN MIGUEL Leaving Coatzacoalcos by small plane, we went to Cardenas by way of Comalcalco and Villahermosa. From Cardenas we hired mules and a guide and rode the 42 miles to San Miguel in 12 hours. The first part of the trail is through comparatively open country and remains so until after crossing the Arroyo Limén, where it enters the forest. At Limon there is a sizable group of small mounds, and about 5 miles beyond, near the trail, is another similar group. At both of these sites, sherds are visible on the surface. Just beyond Limén the trail passes over a pair of small parallel long mounds. San Fernando is the ruin of a former hacienda which stood at this place. The trail crosses the ruins of a brick structure. At one point it passes between two standing brick columns. A few yards back of these, hidden in the thick brush, was an aboriginal stone figure which we later learned had been brought from the site at San Miguel by a man named Villdér, many years ago when the hacienda was in operation. The figure is of basalt, representing a seated individual. It is 4% feet high. The head is the high elongated Olmec type. The ears are rectanguloid, long and narrow. The eyes are almond shaped and slanting. The features are badly eroded and now almost indis- tinguishable. The base is flat. "The knees and arms are broken. The present village of San Miguel consists of a few scattered thatched huts and is located on an archeological site. It is near the headwaters of the Blasillo River, on the lower reaches of which is the site of La Venta. The archeological site of San Miguel consists of a number of good-sized mounds and a deep pond or borrow pit similar to those at Cerro de las Mesas and San Lorenzo. The most interesting monument which we saw at the site was lying in the trail between two mounds. One of these mounds many years ago had been flattened on top in order to build a church of thatch. At the time of our visit the church had been abandoned and was falling to pieces. The stone consists of the dome-shaped upper portion of a large basalt head, broken off at the level of the eyes. In its present condition it is about 3% feet high. Scattered over the rounded head are a half dozen or more round faces, including one directly on top. Each of these faces is surrounded by a circle from which radiate five stepped elements and a long triangular point at the base. Some of the smaller faces on the back appear to have been rubbed or worn off. The rear of the head is flattened as is the case with the Olmec Colossal heads. (PI. 50.) About 300 yards south of this stone, well hidden in the jungle, was another fragment of what had evidently been a large stone monument. One surface of this is smooth with a deep groove in it. 226 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuw. 164 Carved on this smooth surface in low relief are three “flame’’- or leaf-shaped elements somewhat like the carvings in low relief back of the head of the principal figure of altar 4 at La Venta. It is impos- sible now to tell the nature of the monument from which this rather massive fragment was broken. We were informed by the men of the village that a few years ago in a nearby field part of a carved basalt figure was exposed. Being curious, they dug it up and found it to be the figure of a man somewhat larger than life size. Their curiosity satisfied, they reburied it. At the time of our visit the field was covered with a heavy growth of zacate, but the men claimed they could locate the figure later in the season when the grass was burned. One man had a small pottery hollow figurine head of a jaguar with round ears. It is made of a light buff ware which had once been covered with a white slip. (Pl. 71, a.) While not a particularly large site, San Miguel is important because of its obvious Olmec affiliations. Upon our arrival there we learned that the hard 12-hour ride to reach it was not necessary. A launch leaves Las Choapas on the Tonala River twice a week and goes to Arroyo Prieto not more than 5 miles from San Miguel. From there one can reach the site on foot or by horseback. It is also much closer by trail from La Venta than it is from Cardenas. COMALCALCO AND VICINITY From Cardenas to Comalcalco we traveled in a truck over an unimproved road. Most of this section is a rich agricultural district. The road was lined with large cacao plantations which were overgrown and neglected at the time we passed by them. Such productive lands could have supported a very large aboriginal population. The present city of Comalcalco is located on an island in the Rio Seco, and it has a population of approximately 3,000. One of our first acts upon arrival was to visit Prof. Rosendo Taracena at the Instituto Comalcalco, a school for which he was largely responsible. In the school was a considerable archeological collection that he had assembled from the region. Included in the material were many specimens recently obtained from the large shell mound at Ceiba, near Paraiso, from ‘which was taken the shell used in building the newly completed road from Comalcalco to Paraiso. The place of honor in the collections is held by a basalt seated figure from La Venta. This was placed in a corner partly covered by a wooden frame designed to resemble the arched niches on the La Venta altars. This figure was one of five which a wealthy mahogany dealer by the name of Policarpo Valenzuela had removed from the site at La Venta more than 50 years ago and brought to his hacienda San Vicente, near Aldama in Tabasco. In Aldama the great Mexican Revolution ANE, TAP) ARCHEOLOGY, SOUTHEASTERN MEXICO—STIRLING 227 began, and San Vicente was the first of the haciendas of the big landowners to be destroyed. The five La Venta monuments lay among the ruins for many years until two of them were transported to Villahermosa where they were placed in the grounds of the school (pl. 53, a). In 1939 Professor Taracena removed a third one to his institute in Comalcalco (pl. 53, 6). Later we made a trip to San Vicente to see and photograph the two remaining monuments. At the time of our visit, the road from Comalcalco to Aldama had pretty much gone to ruin, and it was with considerable difficulty that we reached Aldama by car. Aldama, the “Lexington” of Mexico, once a prosperous town now consists of a few scattered thatch huts and adobe houses around a large open plaza in which are a number of cement seats. Here was fought the first battle of the Mexican Revolution in 1910. The road from Aldama to San Vicente proved to be impassable for our car, so we made most of it on foot. Along the road, just outside Comalcalco, are two small mounds where a brick factory was being built. Halfway between Comalcalco and Aldama, on the Arroyo Seco at the site of the old Pemex camp, is a fair-sized mound and some smaller ones. The trail from Aldama to San Vicente passes over some small mounds about three-fourths of the way from Aldama. There are sherds on the surface. The remains of the hacienda are known locally as the “Casa Vieja.” The ruins of the once fine structure are now buried in jungle. The broken brick walls wrapped in strangler figs and covered with para- sitic plants look as ancient as any Maya ruin, although it was only 1913 when the hacienda was destroyed completely. Lying in the rubble of the old patio, we found the two monuments. Under the circumstances they seemed to us to epitomize the impermanence of human achievement. Policarpo took them from the wilderness which the great center of La Venta had become, and brought them to what he considered the luxurious permanence of the great hacienda. Now La Venta is, as a result of the oil industry, once more at the doorstep of civilization and easily accessible, while San Vicente, in utter ruin, is buried in a wilderness as complete as that which formerly engulfed La Venta. One of the stones, 45 inches high, represents a man sitting cross- legged, leaning forward slightly, the hands clasping the feet. A band across the forehead passes completely around the head. The facial features are considerably eroded, and part of the upper left arm has been battered off; otherwise the sculpture is in pretty good condition (pl. 73, a). 370929—57——_17 228 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bunt 164 The other stone, 36 inches high, is especially interesting. It represents the Olmec anthropomorphic jaguar in part human, part animal posture. The figure is seated with the left front paw drawn under the body, the right paw lying alongside the body with the realistically carved foot lying pads up. The head is large and represented as looking upward. The elongated eyes have branching “Olmec”’ eyebrows and the mouth is the typical Olmec “tiger mouth.” The forehead is somewhat concave and the head flat across the top, with the usual notch in the middle of the forehead. The tail is stylized and shown as branching on each side like the eyebrow conventionalization. A fresh break showed that someone very recently had knocked off the base of the tail. The piece so removed must have been carried away, since we searched for it in vain. (PI. 73, D.) A figure quite similar in appearance was found at Arroyo Sonso, 25 kilometers southeast of Coatzacoalcos and 15 kilometers from the Tonald River (Nomland, 1932). These two monuments are relatively small as La Venta sculpture goes. The bases of both pieces are perfectly flat, that of the jaguar having an opening through it which passes through the lap. COMALCALCO RUINS The Maya ruins of Comalcalco lie on the right side of the Rio Seco and less than an hour’s walk from the town. Considering the relative accessibility of the site and its great importance, it is somewhat difficult to understand why it has been so neglected by archeologists. Charnay visited the ruins for 10 days in 1880, publishing several inadequate accounts, but quite properly calling attention to the importance of the site (Charnay, 1887). (Pls. 51, a, 6; 52, 6.) In 1925 the Tulane University expedition under the direction of Frans Blom (1926-27) visited and mapped the site, excavating a tomb containing a procession of figures modeled in stucco. (Pl. 52, a.) Save for these two brief forays, archeologists have managed pretty successfully to detour away from the locality. The principal mound is a composite structure more or less rectangular in form with two large aprons projecting from the west corners. It is more than 100 feet high and probably measures almost 1,000 feet along the east-west axis. The remains of the buildings still standing are of large, flat well-fired bricks set in heavy mortar made from burned oyster shell. The walls are more than 3 feet thick. Although some of the rooms are still intact, the site has been pretty well denuded of all the paintings and stucco “adornos”’ which once embellished it. The tomb excavated by Blom had become exposed to the weather and the stucco reliefs were deteriorating although still in fair shape. Note; FA?) ARCHEOLOGY, SOUTHEASTERN MEXICO—STIRLING 229 All of the glyphs in the tomb were gone. It is possible that similar tombs occur under the corresponding apron on the northwest portion of the mound. Many years ago the major part of the walls of the main building was torn down in order to obtain bricks to build houses near Comal- calco. Despite the wreckage of the structures which surmounted the site, there has been virtually no excavation in the mounds themselves, so in one sense the vandalism has been superficial. Because of its strategic location as the westernmost outpost of the ancient Maya civilization, Comalcalco offers a splendid opportunity for finding in juxtaposition, materials typical of the southern Veracruz cultures and those of the Maya proper. Although the buildings are architecturally pure Maya, the substructures resemble the large earth mounds of the southern Veracruz area much more than they do the stone-faced Maya pyramids. While fine stucco modeling reminiscent of that at Palenque was characteristic of Comalcalco, stone sculpture seems to be absent. PARAISO The trip from Comalcalco to Paraiso over the new shell-surfaced road required only 30 minutes by car. The road is itself an attenuated archeological site, being composed of a mixture of shell and potsherds from the great shell mound near Ceiba on the lower Rio Seco. Paraiso, a town with a population of about 1,800, has apparently not changed much from its appearance when visited by Charnay in 1880. While in town we viewed some private collections of materials that came from the shell mound during the road-building period. The shell mound was located on the left bank of the Rio Seco about a mile above Ceiba in the direction of Paraiso. The location where the mound was actually situated is known as Palma, but since Ceiba is the better known place, I am referring to it as the Ceiba Mound. When we visited the site the bulk of the mound had been hauled away, but since the base still remained with numerous excavation pits exhibiting vertical faces 8 or 10 feet high, it was still very instructive. The body of the mound goes down well below the water table which is at the surface level of the river. At the time of our visit some shell was still being taken from the mound. The base of the mound was about 300 yards long by 100 yards wide. - Our informants told us that the highest part formerly reached a height of 15 meters. The body of the mound consisted mainly of oyster shell with occasional pockets of conch shell, sand, and stray miscellaneous shells. Floors, both of burned clay and cement, are fairly abundant in the remaining lower portion of the mound. In several instances cross sections show 3 or 4 floors superimposed (pl. 55, a). The layers of cement are about an inch thick and were usually the sides and tops of 230 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buun. 164 rectangular platforms with shell cores. The corners of the platforms were rounded and the walls sloped toward the top so that each plat- form was actually in the form of a much truncated pyramid (pl. 55, 6). A man who lived at the site all during the period of excavation said that there were usually human burials with offerings beneath these platforms, which ranged from 2 to 4 feet in height. According to his account, which accorded with what other informants told us, most of the better specimens came from the upper levels of the mound. The highest summit had immediately under the surface a large cement or stucco-covered platform, the sides of which were decorated with ‘alligators’? modeled in stucco relief. This made a rather impressive appearance, and the workmen, hopeful of treasure, lost no time tearing it apart only to find that the interior consisted of a pure oyster- shell core. Among the finds which our informant remembered was a string of pure white, highly polished stone beads, little pinch pots filled with red paint, some legless stone metates, and a stone ‘‘idolo”’ about 2 feet high representing a seated man. Here and there in the mound can still be seen deposits of white lime made by burning oyster shell. Potsherds were abundant with the base of the mound so well exposed and freshly excavated; half vessels, large rimsherds, and basal supports lay about in profusion, many in situ. This material was representative of the early period of the mound structure. Some of the sherds are of incised ware, occasion- ally with zoned designs set off by punctate areas. Painted ware is either monochrome, dark red (specular hematite), or polychrome con- sisting of orange and black on buff. A good many of the vessels had a cream slip on the exterior, but no further painting. All the painted designs we saw were geometric in character. ‘There were parts of comales, without handles, and fragments of large ollas. There was another type of large shallow vessel with round bottom and a short incurving neck with wide everted rim. Some of these, judging from the sherds, must have been 18 inches in diameter. Figurines appear to be relatively rare, such as there are, being of the hollow variety. The finer ware consists of shallow tetrapod vessels, usually with fluted melonlike sides and flange base. Effigy or mammiform supports terminate in a flat cylindrical nubbin. Some sherds revealed that a shallow annular or ring base was sometimes used. A common type was a round-bottomed jar with sloping shoulder and a high neck, the rounded portion below the shoulder being roughened by textile impressions or scalloping applied with the edge of a pecten shell. There was apparently no shell tempering. The nature of the ceramics is best shown by the illustrations (pls. 56-61). NOEs) Y)~)6C ARCHEOLOGY, SOUTHEASTERN MEXICO—STIRLING 231 BELLOTE From Ceiba we drove by car to the end of the road where we hired a canoe to visit the shell mounds on the Laguna Mecoacan. We passed miles of coconut groves along low mangrove flats in an area similar to that of the 10,000 island region of Florida (pl. 63, 5). We passed several small shell mounds with sections exposed by the waves. In a little more than 2 hours we reached Bellote, where the big mound group is situated on Andres Garcia Island. There was a thatched house at the foot of the mounds owned by R. Unolfo Cordoba, who guided us over the mounds which he had partly cleared for culti- vation. (Pls. 63, a; 64, b.) The Bellote group is quite impressive. There are four principal mounds placed in close proximity and several smaller scattered mounds, principally toward the north and east. The sides of the mounds are steep and do not run together aimlessly in the usual manner of shell midden mounds. The central mound is more than 40 feet high and is more or less flat on top where parts of a cement floor may still be seen. At a somewhat lower level on the east side is a flat-topped apron. Just south of this is a slightly lower, steep symmetrical conical mound. East of the central mound is a large, somewhat elongated mound about 25 or 30 feet high, while north of the central mound is another mound with two summits, probably less than 20 feet in height. North of this are three low, elongated mounds running parallel with their axis in an east-west direction. Our guide told us that in clearing his milpa they found some glass beads of large size. Potsherds were abundant on the surface, and on superficial exami- nation seemed similar to the ware at Ceiba. Although of shell, the Bellote mounds seem definitely to have been constructed, and are not simply refuse heaps. When Charnay visited Bellote around 1880, he said there were still ruins of a temple on the summit of the principal mound, and pictured a stucco relief similar in style to those at Palenque. When we visited the site, the only visible evidence of a structure was the remains of a cement floor. ISLA On our return trip from Bellote we stopped to photograph some natives burning lime in a fashion that might have been used by the aboriginal inhabitants, who also made lime from oyster shells. A sort of crib of mangrove wood was constructed, forming a plat- form which was heaped high with oyster shells. This was fired, reducing the shells to lime (pl. 64, a). 232 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bunp. 164 At a place called Isla, not far from this point, we stopped to see a man by the name of Francisco Chablé. He and his son had just dug a small mound on his property, and we made photographs of the interesting material recovered. The mound was of earth and about 5 feet high. In the body of the mound were three pottery vessels. One was a round-bodied spouted “teapot,” the upper part painted dark red and highly polished, the lower part incised (pl. 65, a-1). The spout is unsupported, the base flat with a vestigial annular ring support. The other two vessels were incrusted with ‘‘caliche” and the painted decoration, if any, did not show. The ware of both of these was brick red in color. One was a round-bottomed, high-necked jar with the rim expanded into bowl form. It was 9 inches high (pl. 65, a-3). The other was a wide- mouth jar with simple incised ornamentation (pl. 65, a—2). Below the base of the mound was a grave about 4 feet deep, with traces of the bones of a child. Accompanying these were a number of artifacts. There were two pottery vessels. One was a spouted effigy pot of incised buff-colored ware 11 inches high, the other a pot of exceptionally fine ware in the form of a coiled shell, 9 by 8 inches. The latter had short cylindrical tripod supports, and a short spout, and the interior was painted dark red and was highly polished. The outside was covered with a cream slip. On the side was a rectangular car- touche with an elaborately modeled design which probably represents a stylized serpent head (pl. 66, a, 0). Also with the burial was the profile of a human skull carved from shell, about 3 inches in diameter, and a pure white, well-preserved human head, beautifully carved and polished, made from a massive piece of some marine shell. It is 1% inches in height. With it were 7 cylindrical shell beads and 15 bright green jade beads, and a pair of very small earspools of the same material. The shell head was in position as the central piece of the jade bead necklace. There was also a string of 12 polished and perforated shells (pl. 65, 6, ¢). TUPILCO From Paraiso we drove to the finca of Alejandria Marques Gutier- rez, widow of General Gutierrez whose father was killed in the battle of Aldama. She had a very interesting collection made by her husband on what had formerly been his property, near Tupilco. The material consisted primarily of elaborate ‘‘adornos” in Maya style which had been broken from large cylindrical urns or incensarios. The best piece is a life-size head wearing a jaguar headdress. Part of the rim of the cylindrical urn to which it had been attached is still present. (Pls. 67, 68.) Noes, |?) «ARCHEOLOGY, SOUTHEASTERN MEXICO—STIRLING 233 The presence of a Maya site at Tupilco is of considerable interest, since this would make it the westernmost Maya outpost yet known. The site consisted of small shell mounds with no other architectural features. TAPIJULAPA The picturesque town of Tapijulapa is situated at the base of the central mountains, at the junction of the Hscalén and Oxolatén Rivers in the extreme southwestern part of Tabasco. There was formerly an archeological site here near the river, and specimens are occasionally found on a gravel bar in front of the town following floods. One such specimen (pl. 69, 6) was a fine highly polished figurine made from a very hard reddish-brown hematite. It was 4 inches in height. The native who found it would not part with it because he said he was using it as a “santo” in his house. We also saw a fine polished spindle whorl of blue stone and a number of quite small polished celts of blue or green stone, all found on this same bar. We spent several days in Tapijulapa visiting a number of limestone caves and shelters in the general vicinity. Near the airport, a stream of sulfur water flows from a limestone cavern on property formerly owned by Garrido, when governor of Tabasco. Near this stream is a good-sized, flat-topped mound on which was built a cement house that was never completed. We entered the cave for a considerable distance, but since it is a ‘‘wet’’ cave there was no sign of aboriginal occupation. Near this spot are the mineral springs where “‘Tapijulapa water”’ is bottled. While at Tapijulapa we went by canoe up the Oxolatan River to the Cerro Cuesta Chica, where we visited four limestone caves and a number of rock shelters along the base of the limestone cliff where the caves occur. Two of the caves are of large size and contain beautiful stalagmitic formations, some of the curtain variety being very impressive. In the caves, at the entrances, we found numerous potsherds of a red or buff ware. Some of these were of very good quality, red slipped and polished. The rock shelters contain deep deposits which include quantities of snail shells brought up from the arroyo. There are also many flint chips and pieces of stone knocked from river boulders. Excavations here would no doubt be most instructive and would yield considerable material. In Tapijulapa we secured a fine slate ax with an Olmec design en- graved on it and an alabaster bowl. The man from whom we obtained them said he had purchased them from an Indian who said he found 234 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bunx. 164 them in a cave at a place called Finca Chapay4l near Santa Caterina, between Almendro and Simojoval, in Chiapas. (Pls. 70, a; 71, 0.) ATASTA From Ciudad Carmen we went by launch across the Laguna de Terminos and then through a series of mangrove-lined passages to the village of Atasta, which is scattered for a considerable distance along the waterfront. About a mile west of the town is a group of small mounds which probably mark the site of the ancient Atasta. About a year before our arrival, from one of these mounds was excavated a life-size stone figure of a standing man. A section consisting of the chest and shoulders is missing. The face is done in an unusual style and is represented as wearing a jaguar headdress and relatively small earspools. (PI. 70, 6.) From this same mound, we were told, were taken several pottery vessels and a clay ‘‘tablet’’ elaborately engraved. These were taken away by some visiting ‘‘ingeniero.”’ When we visited the site, the corner of one mound had recently been dug into. This mound apparently covered a stucco-coated platform with a modeled frieze of prowling jaguars. On the rounded corner piece which had been removed was the figure of one of these jaguars about 3 feet in length (pl. 72, a). The underside of the stucco coating was covered with bosses or protuberances so that the coating would adhere better to the clay core. These were probably produced by punching holes in the clay before the stucco was applied. (Pl. 72, b.) This particular find is highly suggestive of Toltec influence, bringing to mind the prowling jaguar friezes at Tula and Chichen Itza. The schoolteacher in Atasta had a small archeological collection said to have come principally from this site. It contained one small complete bow! of brick red ware, fairly thin and quite hard. Another piece consisted of about three-fourths of a tetrapod, flange-base bowl, also of red ware. There were also a half dozen effigy legs from similar bowls, the effigies consisting of grotesque human faces and animal forms. Three copper bells were of the elongated oval variety. One, 2 inches in length, was cast to represent cord wrapping around the upper portion. The others, 1 inch in length, were plain. The pottery, in form and design, appeared to resemble that from Ceiba, but the red-cclored ware would seem to indicate that it was made from a different type of clay. We were not entirely convinced that this material came from the site described above. A number of years after our reconnaissance Heinrich Berlin visited Atasta and has reported on it briefly (Berlin, 1952-54). Noga) F{*)~« ARCHEOLOGY, SOUTHEASTERN MEXICO—STIRLING 235 LITERATURE CITED BERLIN, HEINRICH. 1952-54. Archeological reconnaissance in Tabasco. Carnegie Inst. Wash- ington, Dept. Archaeol. Current Reports vol. 1, No. 7. Bom, Frans, and La Faras, OLIVER. 1926-27. Tribes and temples. Tulane Univ., New Orleans. Middle Amer. Res. Ser., vol. 1. CHARNAY, D&sIRE. 1887. The ancient cities of the New World. New York. Nomuanp, GLADys. 1932. Proboscis statue from the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Amer. Anthrop., vol. 35, No. 4. Strriuine, M. W. 1943. La Venta’s green stone tigers. Nat. Geogr. Mag., vol. 84, No. 3. ‘1947. On the trail of La Venta Man. Nat. Geogr. Mag., vol. 91, No. 2. Weser, WALTER A, 1945. Wildlife of Tabasco and Veracruz. Nat. Geogr. Mag., vol. 87, No. 2. Feb. eine igaityie's Sbnaegetery> Pie a AA. got _sotgi ba c ics F to eee eb: acetl A i to Win Be etoTp a probubly sharks the shimk * irre ee Abou paibee Sattar eee YOUSHIRS Joe Senet hors’ “ga ano ath nae Weartns & ieguinr: faaddress and relatively wtatl enrol ie Biroont Wise age DIA, wh were told, ware taker severed & rhage! ond x ches, “nbicd Mahontely ongravod, Then were: AWAY be nore Vintine * reais ie ) Wow. wae init the stud “the Gevier Of one monhd lao sence i saay sts ; This r pesepsvee % ere nas CH fer ¢ LPache-comtad olen iD. sumed Mary at achwhlix joes, Cn. the reanded pieries a psy bigest i mpriid WE VaR fie ve of otait thea fie: QO (e) a ) 2 ae kK Wl Zz <{ @) V4 Wl = < LL O =) < ul V4 5) o BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 51 a, The ruins of Comalcalco. b, Masonry at Comalcalco. (For explanation, see p. 237.) BULLETIN 164 PLATE 52 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY (‘28 “d 90s ‘uoy}eue[dxe 10,7) "ooTBoTVUIOD ‘AIUOsKUI paysnioUus pisysiog ‘4q “ODT eI[e U0") ¢ quioy ¢ soinsy oodn4g ‘v BULLETIN 164 PLATE 53 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY “OO BOTRULOT) (2¢z "d oes ‘uotyeurldxe 10,7 “eJUOA BT WO} JUBWINUOTy “q “BSOULIOYE] [LA ‘equa eT WO] JuswNUOTY ‘Pv BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 54 Artifacts from the vicinity of Villahermosa and Frontera, Tabasco. (For explanation, see p. 238.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 55 Stucco construction in the shell mound of Ceiba, Tabasco. (For explanation, see p. 238.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 56 Pottery from shell mound at Ceiba. (For explanation, see p. 238 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 57 ec Figurines and pottery from shell mound at Ceiba. (For explanation, see p. 238.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 58 ‘ f = Pottery from shell mound at Ceiba. (For explanation, see p. 238.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 59 Pottery from shell mound at Ceiba. (For explanation, see p. 238.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 60 3 Pottery figurine from shell mound at Ceiba. (For explanation, see p. 239.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 61 Roe . Cylindrical and flat stamps from shell mound at Ceiba. (For explanation, see p. 239.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE Stone artifacts from shell mound at Ceiba. (For explanation, see p. 239.) 62 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 63 a, Shell mound at Bellote. 5, Salt-water channel near Bellote. (For explanation: see p. 239.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 64 a, Making lime from oyster shell. Isla. 6, One of the Bellote shell mounds. (For explanation, see p. 239.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 65 Associated artifacts of pottery, shell, and jade from a tomb at Isla. (For explanation, see p. 239.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 66 b Associated pottery vessels from a tomb at Isla. (For explanation, see p. 239.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 67 Pottery figures of Maya type from Tupilco. (For explanation, see p. 240.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 68 Adornos from large urns. ‘Tupilco. (For explanation, see p. 240.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 69 = b a, Stone celt from Rio Candelario. b, Hematite figure from Tapijulapa. (For explanation. see p. 240.) BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 70 a, Engraved celt from vicinity of Simojoval, Chiapas. 6, Stone statue from Atasta, Campeche. (For explanation, see p. 240) (ope ‘d vas ‘uo1yBuB[dxo 10,7) "eqiad ‘punNoUr [Jays Woy 9UOJs SUIPUNIH “pP “BIUVOA BT WOT ainsy Aieqjod jo uoniog ‘2 ‘sederyD jeaofourtg 1eau aA UOJ} JOssoA JOISeqLTY ‘q ‘jens ueg wor pray iensel Alsyog “V BULLETIN 164 PLATE 71 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 72 a, Prowling jaguar in stucco from Atasta. b, Stucco fragments from Atasta. For explanation, see p. 240.) BULLETIN 164 PLATE 73 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY Cope ‘d oas ‘uolyeuR[dxe 104) ‘ooseqe J, ‘aJUaI1A URS 1 MOU PIUDA wT WO; s]JUgWINUOW jeSeg SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 164 Anthropological Papers, No. 54 VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION By JOHN P. HARRINGTON 370929—57———19 241 i a ee ; Gis Auf, i A ie pr, bod CONTENTS PAGE The language recorded in hieroglyphic writing_------------------------ 245 Phonetic and terminological digression. . .-......-.....-.--.--------. 246 Maya enumeration employs the score system_-___---------------------- 247 Description from higher numeral of prominence -----~------------------ 248 History: ofsthe study of Maya enumeration. -._—..-------222.---22-+-- 249 The four anomalies of Beltrdin’s nonchronological system --~------------ 250 “High” numeral series of numerals “ascending’’_.._.....-.-..--.------ 250 (OP Rotinen ke ee SA ees ee Oe oe eee Bee ay Ve 251 ‘Dhe vse Ol vie Magers IncCOUNLINE-—_- Lo a ae (ae a tesese es 251 Some numerals have the larger number first, some the smaller__—~-------- 252 Reais MINgICNCe a eeeet see ec ene oe eee ea eee Se 252 Some ancient words survive through mere chance__-_-_------------------ 252 hewcandinalsiLonielbOul Ones Ses sea Ss see ae aa ae ee 253 Generaliremankseent= soe Nee, Se eee fe eo eee 253 ISG eee ere eee Re ey ee ey eh eel ee ete Ae 32k 253 The cardinals from 20 to the highest enumeration_---_----------------- 254 Rec en el OMAT RG] 2 sc ka Sak asa Sen SSS oe pees eee ee ee 254 TUG hSy St gpl, thee at se tk ily ea ie aos 2 TP Mel a eileen ers se arth Fl 255 fine use on “and > in-eardingis AU. Lee oil UP tis Ds eee, eee oe ae ae 256 ETO SER: OE TUE nth Sea ge a SATS Ot Fa ee SL ee SESS 256 ETUC HIOTT sl Sit og BA ppt se panne eye peri hoy etn ie 257 rere em Ings Ae Re Pea Se 257 UR TeaUA Eas LS eee a len en 2 pe eg es ters ae ee aie 257 RO reeeit et een tee ae iee h e enn | eae i ene tie eee 259 Nistor Cardi GlassINeti. 922-2 - oe ee oa nen kee 260 Maltipleation Classwiers.2ose04). 222 ee Slee ea ele eeeeees 261 Niltinlicativeordinalielassifier! 072 2282 bt ue _.. eee 261 Generaluclassitienss va mn “3 p= 2 42°39. i a ee ee es a err . ~4 2 - - “ -~ > av ae we < = gi —_ Pine! ~ o aT a amen. & 1 wre muccnnan Bele Per Sa a. aya ‘inchs bebe 2 RS OT ana SO (mot ick wt iapee hae eigen peaey staan ee age ORO in —— oe — me ae © “ « eptie Stead fe eed a ty Bee eerie jrodutd wit af QS moi? wht GE AEE GME = atte Phe Fae ek = as.) aa “¢ an oy 4 i oe a - — te oe oe oe b= ee ee ee ee Pcistitanel = = ates ; eee --. daniinas af “baa --* “=~ - + = “see “ ps cae ti" icsaly tenibuet ota WE re . : Te) cil anit tan tiga bs —— 7 ad - ~ wist iantiuhigal aha, hal Rail ‘a in baad 1? ) ae ++ ued —— =~. ein ate irks ning + Owansol-boos “os > Fipea(s asivanoencbiie ___.... »--- @tailiesel> SIpessat _ ganar yahat Jgnnte® - ae a o.+ddgiging rat SEO ay Aj aonr teil er or oe tesr Vat-et alt ines Wey tetas wie ~—_ == 25S as ~_ , ersiiz gf. - ie elt (OT Jae ina gee bz ya aL : Mes 12-2! a — san shee SGP? pine jew® we siete wees - . 5 fee Se me aay fire Bee 5 = ae ees Ce ge et (a= 2. cncitee 2 diets at das : i eee ae teeny lLeniturnsrd dit, : Petras Ves pes a . VGlaninnagesdy — .. VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION By Joun P. Harrineton ! THE LANGUAGE RECORDED IN HIEROGLYPHIC WRITING The Maya language—in an ancestral form of which in the opinion of all students the Maya hieroglyphic writing was recorded—is still spoken by the bulk of the population in the Yucatan Peninsula, situ- ated in the extreme eastern portion of Mexico. The dialects still spoken in the central and northern parts of the peninsula are very similar one to another and closely approximate the speech recorded in the large dictionary which was written at Motul, 12 miles east of Mérida, capital of the State of Yucatan. The Motul dictionary dates from the last quarter of the 16th century. A Maya person is called in the Maya language maya; plural, mayaoob. The Motul dictionary through some inadvertency writes maya, which is the Spanish, not the native, form. The Maya country, which is the Yucatan Peninsula, is called mayab. The tribal name was first recorded by Bartholomew Columbus, brother of Christopher Columbus, in 1506, under the form mayam, which he took to be plural and which is probably for mayaoob, although it may be for mayab. Valladolid is called saki’. A person of Valladolid is called saki’il. Valladolid is situated in the north-central part of the Yucatan Peninsula. It is with no idea of trespassing on the excel- lent work of decipherers of Maya hieroglyphic writing, or of trans- lators of the same, that this study is undertaken, but, on the contrary, with the thought that since the two-fifths of the Maya hieroglyphic writing which is in existence deals with dates, an investigation into what moderns remember and what dictionaries and grammars give of the Maya counting system maybe helpful. The writer was led to select the Valladolid dialect instead of the Motul dialect because of the availability of good informants. Maya enumeration is the same whatever is counted, except the classifiers considered proper may vary. Since classifiers have 1 Gratitude is expressed especially to Mr. Domingo Cantén Aguilar for his special interest in Valladolid Maya counting, and to Dr. M. W. Stirling, who has contributed unique ideas to this study. 245 246 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLy. 164 almost gone out of use, and those which remain in use are perhaps distorted in application, one may safely lay down the rule that as far as modern Maya is concerned, all things are enumerated in the same manner. It has been a matter of curiosity to the writer how one might say in Maya: Valladolid Maya Enumeration. One should begin in Maya with the term for enumeration; Soot means counting, but also means reading. One might put basi’, how much, after Soot to confine the meaning to enumeration. The word “Maya” would better be put as the compound Maya language, which is mayat’an. And instead of saying merely Valladolid, which is called saki’, it would be clearer to say tu-kahal saki’, in the city of Valladolid. So the entire wording of the title of this paper would be in Maya: u-Sot basi’ mayat’an tu-kahal saki’; literally, Maya language’s enumeration at the city of Valladolid. PHONETIC AND TERMINOLOGICAL DIGRESSION Necessary to the correct pronouncing of the forms given, it should be stated here that the Valladolid dialect of the Maya language oper- ates with two degrees of syllable stress. The Maya language has six kinds of syllable, two of these being open and four closed, illustrated by the first syllable of wagak, 8; maya, Maya; kay, fish; kan, snake; ku’uk, squirrel; and chaak, rain. Syllables of the fifth and sixth kinds have rearticulated vowel in phrase-final form, in non-phrase-final form becoming respectively of the ‘fish’ and of the “snake” kinds. An inverted breve has been placed under rearticulated vowels. Rearticulated vowels have a murmured quality. Syllables of the sixth kind come from those containing a rearticulated long vowel, but the non-rearticulated vowel is not today pronounced long, although it may formerly have been so pronounced. Maya words presented in this paper have their phrase-final form. When another word of the coherence follows, unless there is consider- able pause, phrase-final forms are clipped. As in Chinese, so also in Maya, sometimes a word with two or more meanings sounds exactly the same. But it often happens that two or more words which have been written the same, for instance in the Motul dictionary, have different pronunciations according to different meanings. They are distinguished by accentual differences which have not been written. ANTHROP. Pap. VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 247 An asterisk before a word indicates that the form is reconstructed, 2 asterisks that the following 2 or more words are in reconstruction. Each numeral, with the exception of certain higher and plainly compository ones, is written in this paper as a single word; tuy-, tu-, meaning “‘in its’’, has, in order to help the reader, been prefixed with hyphen. Each classifier also has been written as a separate word, except in the rare instances when a classifier comes in the interior of an ordinal numeral, in which instance the entire ordinal is written as one word. A score-initiating cardinal is in this paper called a major cardinal; an intervigesimal cardinal is called a minor cardinal. MAYA ENUMERATION EMPLOYS THE SCORE SYSTEM The score system, also called the vigesimal system, is mostly employed in the Maya language; only in the time-measure system is there multiplication by the number 13, and there the multiplication producing higher periods is largely by 20. Instead of 10 being the pivotal cardinal as it is in languages such as English, which employ the decimal system, the fundamental round number in Maya is 20, and special names are provided for the 2d, 3d, 4th, 5th, and 6th powers of 20. The score, group of 20 units, is called in Spanish veintena, a word which starts with the Spanish numeral veinte, 20, and has the same ending as Spanish docena, dozen. The score and its multiples by 20 are the pivotal numerals of Maya counting; they are the principal resting places on the stairs. But there are other resting places between these principal ones. At every five units there is a resting place. A place of resting, as for instance a terrace breaking the steep side of a pyramid, in Maya is called ket lu’um, literally a wide place. A small resting place could be expressed by saying chan ket lu’um, chaan meaning small. A flight of stairs is considered in Maya to belong to the floor at the head of the flight; the units terminating in 20 are supposed to belong to the first score. The resting place or landing is 20; 5, 10, and 15 are minor ones. The Maya enumeration goes k’alenk’aal, by scores. To the Maya speaker, the enumeration in a language which employs the decimal system, as English does, appears to proceed in very short steps; a language which employs the score system in longer ones. The Maya counted throughout by score, or score times score. Saying hunbak’, 400, was merely a shortcut for saying **hunk’al ten hunk’aal, 20 by 20. Lincoln’s ‘Gettysburg Address’? would in Maya say 4- score’s 7 instead of saying four score and seven. 948 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY (Buty. 164 In order to anchor Maya enumeration to that of the Indo-European Janguages, it should be said that perhaps the best exposé of the Indo- European system is in Buck (1949, ch. entitled “Quantity and Num- ber,’”’ pp. 916-952). There are in Indo-European languages, at least in traces, 10 grammatically distinct sets of numerals, most fully worked out in ancient Greek and in modern High German. The numeral for 3 is used by Buck to advantage for illustrating these sets. . Cardinal, 3. . Adverbial Collective Singular, as a group of 3. . Adverbial Collective Plural, as groups of 3. . Fractional, a third. . Ordinal, third in order. . Compositional, consisting of three kinds. . Junctatory, consisting of three kinds together. . Unipertinent, 3 apiece. . Multiplicative, 3 times. 10. Plicative, threefold. In Maya these sets are to some extent expressed differently. The basic numeral is the cardinal, as it is in Indo-European, and states how many. The cardinal is an entitative, a special kind of pronoun, and all other sets of numerals, both in Indo-European and in Maya, can be regarded as formed from it. The cardinal, being an entitative, in Maya, is capable of semireduplication denoting collectivity, and the semireduplicative form can be taken in Maya as singular or plural. Fractionals are meagerly developed in Maya, in which lan- guage there is no good way of saying a third part. The ordinal is both in Indo-European and Maya an adjective formed from a cardi- nal. Maya uses also to some extent, instead of forming an ordinal from a cardinal, merely the unchanged cardinal, insisting on such usage in certain instances; for example, saying 3-score, never the third score. For the compositional, one uses in Maya the classifier mool, com- posite, between the cardinal and the noun or adjective which the cardinal modifies. The junctatory is expressed in Maya, if one wishes to give an exact rendition, by adding to the compositional a word meaning together. For giving the meaning of unipertinent, one adds in Maya the pronoun',meaning feach and throws the nu- meral into the possessive. The multiplicative and the plicative are usually expressed in Maya in one and the same way. DESCRIPTION FROM HIGHER NUMERAL OF PROMINENCE There is a tendency in Maya to describe a numeral from the next higher numeral of prominence. For instance, one-and-a-half is called 2’s half; 21 is 2-score’s 1. In Maya a numeral within a score is con- sidered to belong to the next higher score. The cardinals from OOIOA PWN eS yetEg pr PAP. VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 249 1 to 19 are considered to belong to the first score, but their pertinency is not expressed. The moment one steps beyond 20, one is in the realm which belongs to the second score. Any part of the unit beyond the unit is considered to belong to the next higher unit of prominence; for example, 15% is called 16’s half; 21 is called 2-score’s 1, as said above. HISTORY OF THE STUDY OF MAYA ENUMERATION Early Maya grammars and dictionaries pay little attention and give little space to the interesting matter of Maya counting. Coronel (1620), in the earliest Maya grammar which has come down to us, dismisses enumeration in three brief paragraphs, while the Motul dictionary, which is the largest dictionary from early times that we possess, fails to enter some of the principal cardinals and is woefully deficient in entering the names of time periods. But there is one exception. Beltrin de Santa Rosa Maria de Lima, Fray Pedro, in ‘‘Arte de el idioma Maya” (1859, pp. 195-208), written in 1742, gives a uniquely complete exposition of Maya counting, for which all subsequent generations owe gratitude. The Beltran presen- tation contains a sufficiency for showing what the system outside of time reckoning must have been. It is to be deplored that Beltran omits the system of time reckoning, which, had he given it, would be of great value to modern hieroglyphic readers. The time reckoning system was evidently quite different from that used outside of time reckoning. All that Beltrén gives on the Maya reckoning of time is on page 204 of the second edition of his grammar, where under the entry word ahaw in a list of classifiers, Beltrin seems to infer that ahaw refers to a *k’atun, yet to end implying that ahaw refers to a Maya century. The four anomalies or seeming irregularities con- tained in the system of cardinals given by Beltran will be presented and discussed in the next section of this paper. The Pérez (1866) Maya-Spanish dictionary, published approxi- mately a century and a quarter after Beltrin’s work was done, is our next source after Beltrén of information on Maya enumeration, and supplies a few important points which Beltran did not give. Perhaps the most unexploited source of all is modern Maya, which though broken into several dialects may preserve much information when worked over thoroughly. Only with the quadruple guidance of forms contained in the Motul dictionary, Beltrdén’s exposé of the numeral, the partly misunder- stood forms given in the Pérez dictionary, and modern dialects, can one get a fairly comprehensive view of what the Maya system of enumeration must have been. 250 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLL. 164 THE FOUR ANOMALIES OF BELTRAN’S NONCHRONOLOG- ICAL SYSTEM More important than slavishly to follow the forms of numeral transmitted by Beltran, is to try to grasp the system set forth by him and to perceive pattern beyond the anomalies. (1) The first of these anomalies is that Beltrdn in giving the cardi- nals from 21 to 39 suppresses ka’, 2, after all those forms which have tu-, in its. The forms for 30 and for 35 in this train have the ka’, 2, expressed, but no tu- preceding it. Thus one says, according to Beltran, merely hun tu-k’aal, 21, literally 1 of the second score, instead of saying as one would expect **hun tu-ka’k’aal, and this in spite of the fact that one says according to Beltran hun tu-yosk’aal, 41, literally 1 of the third score; yet lahu ka’k’aal, 30, which lacks Maya tu-. Again ka’, 2, is suppressed after tu- in Beltrén’s words for 500, 600, and 700. The second score was evidently called for short the score after tu- of the forms containing tu-. (2) The second of the anomalies in Beltran’s forms is that he omits tu- in the cardinals for 30, 35, 40, 50, 55, 60, 70, 75, 80, 90, 110, 115, 120, 130, 135, 140, 150, 155, 160, 170, 175, 180, 200, 220, 240, 260, 280, 300, 320, 340, 360, 370, and 380, while inserting tu-, always with the omission of a theoretically following ka’, 2, in the terms for 25, 45, 65, 85, etc. This shows that tu-, in its, was used mainly with multiples of 5, and that where tu- was expressed there was a tend- ency on the part of Beltrén’s informant or informants to suppress a following ka’, 2. Beltrdn’s terms for 500, 600, 700, 800, 900, 1,000, and 2,000 show that evidently bak’, 400, and pik, 8,000, went the same as k’aal, 1- score, as regards alternation of ka’ and tu-. (3) The third of the Beltrén anomalies is that after the word for 400, he suppresses k’aal, 20, in the terms for 500, 600, 700, 900, and the first given of the 2 terms for 1,000; for instance, in his word for 500, but we would expect it to be **ho’k’al tu-ka’bak’. (4) The fourth anomaly in the numerals given by Beltran is that before k, k’, y, t, and w, lahu is used instead of lahun, 10. The first of these occurrences reached in counting upward is lahuka’k’aal, 30, instead of saying **lahun tu-ka’k’aal, 30. Beltrdn’s lahu probably stands for lahun with the n lost before certain consonants, and is to be held entirely separate from the lah- for lahun that appears in lahka’, 12. ‘HIGH’ NUMERAL SERIES OF NUMERALS “ASCENDING” The Maya now can speak of a “high” numeral, of a series of numerals “‘ascending,” or of the opposite of these, but this is probably due to Spanish influence. The original usage was perhaps to speak Aor PAP) VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 251 of a numeral as being beyond another numeral, or as having more load than another numeral. One speaks in Spanish or English of a number being high or low, and the ancient Egyptians, the ancient Greeks, the ancient inhabitants of India, the ancient Chinese, and others followed this usage, which must have been started in the Old World in prehistoric times, but perhaps never spread to, or was developed in, the New World. CARDINALS The fundamental enumeration in Maya is a so-called cardinal series which is used more than any other series and from which any other series can be said to be derived. The cardinal series is basic in all languages. In Maya the cardinal has four uses. (1) It answers the question: How many? (2) It is the series used in counting. The aim is to pronounce each cardinal in counting in its phrase-final form; but if the counting is rapid, this is difficult to do. (3) The cardinal is coupled with a noun, adjective, or pronoun, which it modifies. It was probably the ancient usage in Maya to put this noun, adjective, or pronoun in the singular, but Spanish uses the plural, except with the numeral for 1, with the result that present-day Maya uses either singular or plural with cardinals above 1, and when singular or plural is volunteered, the opposite of singular or plural is always approved. Sometimes in Maya a so-called classifier appears between a numeral and its modifactive, but classifiers will be discussed later. (4) A cardinal is an entitative, and like all other entitatives can be used asa verb. Just as winik, man, also means it is a man, so ka’, 2, may also mean there are 2, they are 2. One may well ask to what part of speech the Maya cardinals belong. They were called numeral nouns by some of the early writers of Maya grammars. The cardinals are entitative; they are a special set of nouns, or rather of pronouns. They go most like what are commonly called in grammars indefinite pronouns. One says, for instance, many trees, and similarly three trees. The numeral in Maya is a special kind of pronoun, developed through the use of generations into a most intricate and extensive system. THE USE OF THE FINGERS IN COUNTING In counting up the number of things, the Mayas are apt to make use of the fingers, doubling the finger down when the unit represented by the finger has been counted. One often starts by turning the palms of both hands, or the palm of the left hand only, toward self and 252 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buut. 164 beginning with the thumb of the left hand. Each successive digit is turned down to indicate cancellation until the highest number counted is reached. If the counting exceeds 5, it continues, beginning with the little finger of the right hand; if 10, it continues, starting with the thumb of the left hand again. SOME NUMERALS HAVE THE LARGER NUMBER FIRST, SOME THE SMALLER In looking over the Maya numerals, it will be seen that some of them have what we can well call the ‘twenty-four order” of elements, some the “four-and-twenty order.” Those of the first-mentioned order remind one of a Maya hieroglyphic inscription starting with an Initial Series. The general orientation is given before detail. Thus in Maya lahka’, 12, literally ten-two, but ka’ tu-ka’k’aal, 22. When katak, and, is used in a higher number, the word indicating the larger number is always placed first; thus in hunbak’ katak lahun uy-oSk’aal, 450, an example given by Beltran. SPANISH INFLUENCE Spanish influence has been exerted on the Maya language for more than 3 centuries and will probably result finally in the extinction of the Maya language. Especially in the cities and in the schools is Spanish spoken and encouraged. Maya grammar has undoubtedly been altered through influence of Spanish, and Maya vocabulary has been changed through such influence. Maya enumeration has not escaped persistent Spanish influence, as evidenced, for instance, by the disuse and forgetting of nearly all of the Maya classifiers. Especially as regards time reckoning is Maya information that has been transmitted to us very weak. This is unfortunate, since Maya hieroglyphic writing deals largely with time periods and dates. When the old pagan calendar fell into disuse, generations ago, much vita tion disappeared along with it. SOME ANCIENT WORDS SURVIVE THROUGH MERE CHANCE Sometimes a word is preserved in a meaning far afield from the one in which the preservation is sought. Thus ‘‘winik’” is remembered to mean a measure of 20 cords of wood, while a similar-sounding word, which may have been exactly the same in pronunciation, mean- ing a measure of 20 mecates of land, although attested by the Motul dictionary, is forgotten. Or the Maya word may have been helped to survive by having been given a new equivalence in Spanish. Thus “pik” originally meant Noga PA? VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 253 8,000, and probably would everywhere have become obsolete if it had not been equated to Spanish mil—1,000. In modern Valladolid Maya one thinks that “pik” signifies 1,000, and by having been given this new value, the term “pik” has survived. THE CARDINALS FROM 1 TO 19 GENERAL REMARKS The cardinals from 1 to 19 are of the first score, but this affiliation is not expressed. The cardinal for 1 has in the Valladolid dialect, lost its initial A, but the pronunciation of this h is retained when it is placed before a pivotal cardinal. Thus one says wn, but hunk’aal, 20; un is the mas- culine form of the indefinite article in Spanish, and Maya wn sounds exactly like it. The cardinals for 6, 7, and 8 seem to be ancient compounds, having said originally 1-5, 2-5, and 3-5, respectively, as they do in many languages. ‘The 5 seems to be reduced to a k at the end of these three words. Only the term for 8 retains perhaps more of the phonetics of the first member of the old compound than the cardinals for 6 and 7 do; one notices 8, perhaps being the same as in 008, 3. For the cardinals from 13 to 19, Tozzer (1921) gives different forms, all of which start with Jah, followed respectively by each of the cardinals from 3 to 9. This lah is probably the same as what is remembered in lahka’, 12, and stands for 10. Each of the cardinals from 1 to 13 had its patron divinity, and the heads shown in the so-called head-variant count of Maya hieroglyphic writing are doubtless the heads of these patron divinities, the depicting of the heads being a shortcut for the depicting of the entire bodies. Among these heads that of the death-god can be recognized as denot- ing the cardinal 10. The nether world had 9 gods, the upper world had 13; 13 was the most prominent sacred number, as we shall notice below in presenting Maya time reckoning. LIST un, 1. Anciently, and also at the present time, when accompanying a following major cardinal, pronounced hun, but when alone and also in the negative form migun, not 1, pronounced without h, sounding the same as the masculine form of the Spanish word for 1 before a noun or adjective. The form un is also used, as in most languages, as indefinite article, and in this usage has a plural unoob, several. Compare kan, 4. ka’, 2: The cardinal sounds the same as the word for metate, a kind of grinding slab. 008, 3. kan, 4. Compare ka’, 2. 254 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY (Buu. 164 ho’, 5. The initial h is never omitted, despite its required omission in the cardinal for 1. The cardinal sounds the same as the Maya name of Mérida; the reason is not known. wak, 6. Possibly for *un-ho’, 1-5. uuk, 7. Possibly for *ka’-ho’, 2-5. wagak, 8. Possibly for *oo8-ho’, 3-5. bolon, 9. Also means many. lahun, 10. In some of the cardinals it appears as lah-. The lah may easily be the same as the prefix lah-, all, the reference being perhaps to all the fingers being finished when one counts as far as 10. buluk, 11. lahka’, 12. oslahun, lahoos, 13. kanlahun, lahkan, 14. ho’lahun, laho’, 15. waklahun, lahwak, 16. uklahun, lahuuk, 17. wasaklahun, lahwaSak, 18. bolonlahun, lahbolon, 19. THE CARDINALS FROM 20 TO THE HIGHEST ENUMERATION GENERAL REMARKS There are preserved to us in the Maya language the names of the score and those of five powers of the score, making in all six score- power cardinals. The lower three of these happen to be monosyllables. These are k’aal, 20; *bak’, 400, and pik, 8,000. k’aal is still in use and its pro. nunciation is well known. *bak’ is guessed to sound the same as the word for meat. pik has bad its pronunciation preserved through equation of meaning to Spanish mil, thousand. But the higher 4 score-power cardinals are all dissyllables. One can only guess at the pronunciation of them, except that the second name of the one of 5th order, tso’tskeen, can be detected through obvious meaning to signify the hair of a deer. The intervigesimal cardinals from 21 to 39, 41 to 59, ete., have 2 manners of formation: (1) The number is expressed as belonging to a certain score; (2) the number is expressed as in Spanish except that one keeps on enumerating through the score, while in Spanish stops at 10, putting first the score cardinal next below, and coupling this through ‘‘and’’ to following unit expression. Method 1 is prob- ably the ancient method. Beltrin gives one example of what we can call the ‘‘and”’ method of formation as a term for 28, but he also gives 28 as saying 2-score’s 8, and in an example uses pik meaning 1,000. Perhaps the old word for “and” in a cardinal was katak, and yetel, the modern word for ‘‘and”’ in current use, is substituted for this. Nog) {Y)«~VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 255 Belonging to a certain score is expressed by saying ‘‘in its score,” which can also be translated “of its score.’ The term for its, 3d person singular personal pronoun possessive, is uy- before a vowel, u- before a consonant. -k’aal means score, and starts with a consonant, therefore one says u-k’aal, its score. The preposition meaning ‘‘in’”’ is ti’, which also appears as t. This preposition before uy- or u- be- comes merely the letter t; tuy-, tu- means “‘in its.”’ The interscore car- dinals are considered to belong to the cardinal which ends the score. 2-score ends with and includes the number for 40, and the interscore cardinals, starting with 21, are considered to belong to 2-score, start- ing with 41 to 3-score, etc. One proceeds by scores, each starting with its numerator designation of how many scores, until one reaches 380, which is 19-score. Then for saying ‘381’ one enters the score belonging to *hunbak’, and has to say ‘‘un tu-hunbak’’’. LIST hunk’aal, 20, literally 1 score. There are six major cardinal names used in counting upward and the term for 20 is the first of these. As a general noun meaning a score, k’aal can have the determining hun- omitted, but as a cardinal meaning 1 score must have the hun-. k’aal is the most important cardinal in Maya enumeration and corresponds to the year in Maya time reckoning and to the note in music. k’aal means also a closure and is evidently connected with the verb k’aal, to close. If k’aal means fundamentally a closure, then we see connec- tion with taab, classifier for scores, since the current meaning of taab is forehead strap, which is used for tying a completed load. When k’aal means 1-score, the informants have been strangely meticulous in insisting on the prefixation of hun-, 1, thus contrasting the term with ka’k’aal 2-score, etc., only in derivatives, such as u-k’aal, its score, and k’alenk’aal, by scores, omitting the hun-, 1. The cardinals from 1 to 20 belong to 1 score, although this ownership is not expressed. The classifier for scores is taab, as already mentioned in the Motul dictionary, and apparently this classifier taab, is the same word as taab, forehead strap. un tu-ka’k’aal, literally 2-score’s 1, hunk’al katak (or yetel) un, 21. ka’ tu-ka’k’aal, literally 2-score’s 2, hunk’al katak (or yetel) ka’, 22. lahun tu-ka’k’aal, literally 2-score’s 10, hunk—al katak (or yetel) lahun, 30. ka’k’aal, 40, literally 2-score. o8k’aal, 60, literally 3-score. kank’aal, 80. ho’k’aal, 100. wakk’aal, 120. ukk’aal, 140. wasakk’aal, 160. bolonk’aal, 180. lahunk’aal, 200. ho’lahunk’sal, 309. boloalahunk’aal, 380. From 381 to 400 the realm belongs to *hunbak’, 400. Thus **un tu-hunbak’, 381. *hunbak’, 400. Compare possibly bak’ach, plural all, totally. It is the con- census of opinion that the cardinal probably sounds the same as bak’, meat. 256 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buin 164 hunpik, 8,000 (20400). Informants have remembered the important infor- mation that pik, the cardinal, sounds the same as the name of a kind of insect, while pik, skirt, is a different word. pikil and piklis, both meaning multitude, are probably derivatives of pik. *hunkalab, 160,000 (208,000). kalab as an adverb means infinitely, many times, but this is probably a derivative of the cardinal, which can be thus figura- tively used. *hunk’inchil, or huntso’tskeeh, 3,200,000 (20X160,000). The first of these names evidently has k’in, period, but what the chil syllable is, no one knows; tsil is to make threads out of cloth. But the etymology of the second word is clear. It means the hairs of a deer, referring to the body hairs all over the deer’s body. tso’ots means either head hair or body hair, and keeh means deer. *hunalaw, 6,000,000 (203,200,000). This is the upper extension or limit to Maya enumeration, as far as we know. The name is guessed by the informants to have the accentuation of ahaw, head chief, merely because it refers to a number very great, as it would be appropriate for ahaw to do. THE USE OF “AND” IN CARDINALS There are two words meaning “‘and’’ which occur in the cardinals. The first of these is katak and no doubt occurred in preconquest Maya. Although what is considered the best way of forming the interscore cardinals in Valladolid Maya is to say un tuy-osk’aal, 41, Beltréin (1859, p. 167) indicates that one also could say hunk’al katak un, 21, and informants have also volunteered hunk’al yetel un, 21. Beltran gives three examples of numerals containing katak, which we reproduce here in phonetic restoration to avoid typographical difficulties: hunk’al katak waSakp’eel, 28; **hunbak’ katak lahun tuy-o8k’aal, 450; **hunpik ho’lahunk’al tu-ka’bak’ katak o8 tuy-osk’aal, 1743. Beltran remarks that in the last, katak comes before the last expression of cardinal, which is 43. Probably katak, and, had little usage outside of the formation of numerals. Probably yetel, and, which is now at least the universal way of saying “and,” was not used in prehispanic times at all in the numeral, the connective “and” entering mostly into the formation of higher numerals having the form katak. ZERO The native term for zero is probably preserved as misun, literally, not 1. One can also say miSbaal, nothing, negativized from baal, thing, something. Thus misun p’el che’, not a single stick; mi8un t’ul winik, not one man. A shuttle-shaped hieroglyph signifying zero is supposed to be a conventionalized picture of a shell. It is probable that zero was expressed by mere negativizing in the Maya language. Maya counting does not start with zero but with 1. Zero belongs to the realm of the negativization of 1, or of some. NOE) ~=©VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 257 FRACTIONALS Modern and apparently also ancient Maya has a most limited nomenclature for fractions, which is confined to three words: half, piece, and bit. Of these only the word for “‘half” has a definite meaning. The term for “‘piece”’ is a general noun, for “bit” a numeroid. tankoch, half. tankoch tunich, half a stone, tankoch tu-ka’p’eel, one-and-a-half, literally 2’s half, seet’, piece; un seet’, 1 piece. ka’ seet’, 2 pieces, pit, bit; un p’iit, a bit, a little. For the expression of other fractions, one uses merely the term for piece or bit, or could say, in order more definitely to express the idea of one-third, for instance: “It is cut into three pieces, and then one takes a piece.’’ There is no more definite way of saying one-third. GROUP CARDINALS For indication of a group, or groups, a cardinal is semireduplicated, as any other entitative may be; the meaning is adverbial. Semi- reduplicated forms of only a few of the cardinals of lowest value are used in actual language—who would say: ‘“They came out of the dance by fourteens?” hun when prefixed to a pivot cardinal is regarded as part of the cardinal to which it is prefixed, and since it comes first, it is the part of the word to get semireduplicated. huhun, 1 by 1. ka’ka’, 2 by 2. 0’008, 3 by 3. kankan, 4 by 4. ho’ho’, 5 by 5. wawak, 6 by 6. huhunk’aal, 20 by 20, in crowds. huhunbak’, 400 by 400, in great crowds. Distributives consisting of a noun or adjective said twice with -en- of -un- as a central ligature cannot be formed from the cardinals except that k’alenk’aal, by twenties, in score fashion, can be said, always with the dropping of hun-, which is otherwise required for expressing the singular of the score. ORDINALS The common way of forming an ordinal is to make the corresponding cardinal into an adjective by the suffixation of -il or -lil. This same process is much employed outside of ordinal formation. Thus from ka’an, heaven, one forms ka’nil, heavenly; from kah, a pueblo, one forms kahil, pertaining to a pueblo. The formation of the ordinals from 13 to 19 is peculiar in that it always has lah- as the first syllable, and there is only this one,form. 3709295720 258 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buu. 164 An ordinal *oglanunil, built on the cardinal oglahun, is denied, and only lahosil, 13th, is employed. Sometimes a classifier is used in an ordinal, always thrust in between the number-saying part of the word and the ending. Thus o§p’elil, the third, instead of o8lil, the third. According to another system, a series of the equivalents of ordinals is formed by using the classifier taas, in position beyond, after the respective cardinals. Thus hun taas, first, literally 1 beyond, 1 in order. The using sometimes of yaa’, literally first, as an ending added to a cardinal to turn the cardinal into the corresponding ordinal, sometimes heard in Valladolid Maya, has not been reported from any other language and cannot be traced in any book. Thus one says ka’ya3 nah, the second house. The words for first, other, and last are sometimes used in the same way that ordinals are. Thus yaas, first (contrast ya’aS, green); yas be, the first road; in yaS mehen, my first son; u-laak’, the other one, literally its other one; u-lak’ winik, the other man; u-ts’ok, the last one, literally its last one; u-ts’ok winik, the last man. There is a tendency both in Maya and Spanish to use a cardinal instead of bothering to form an ordinal. Thus one says in Spanish la calle catorce, and also uses the cardinal in Maya, but in English says “fourteenth street.” In counting, for instance, the houses along a road, one can say in Spanish, and also in Maya, instead of saying the second house, house number 2. The second score is always in Maya 2-score, the third score 3-score, and so on. Sometimes even though this usage is ambiguous in Maya, it is employed. For in- stance, ka’be can be taken in Maya to mean 2 roads, and it also means road number 2. The most used series of ordinals is: hunlil, 1st. ka’lil, 2d. The Motul dictionary gives ‘‘cabil,’’ 2d, but this form has not been known to the informants. odlil, 3d. kanlil, 4th. ho’lil, 5th. Contrast tho’il, native of Mérida. wakil, 6th. ukil, 7th. wasakil, 8th. bolonil, 9th. lahunil, 10th. bulukil, 11th. lahka’lil, 12th. lahoSil, 13th. lahkanil, 14th. laho’lil, 15th. Noga) {® VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 259 lahwakil, 16th. lahukil, 17th. lahwasgakil, 18th. lahbolonil, 19th. hunk’alil, 20th. hunk’al katak (or yetel) hu:nlil, 21st. *hunbak’il, 400th. hunpikil, 8,000th. *hunkalabil, 160,000th. CLASSIFIERS The Maya language has in its intransitive, and also in its transitive verb, traces of classification, and before a specific noun one sometimes puts a generic one, saying, for example, my food beans, my domestic animal dog, as is not done in speaking Spanish or English, but classi- fication comes out most of all when a numeral is coupled with a follow- ing noun or adjective of specific meaning. It is then that a so-called classifier, which is usually a noun of generic meaning or one denoting measurement, is thrust in between the first cardinal and the final noun or adjective in truly East Asiatic fashion. The classifier classifies the object enumerated, according to appearance character- istic of agroup. Sometimes the ultimate noun or adjective is omitted, and only the classifier terminates, and together with the context hints the reference, and saves repetition of detail. It is then that a classifier is seen to be of real use even by one not used to classifiers. Rarely two classifiers are employed, the first always modifying the second. Thus one says, for instance: ka’ p’el lub be, a road 2 leagues long, literally a 2 unit of league road. The classifiers fall into four categories. (1) There are pivot cardinal classifiers, such as k’aal, 20, which have already been described in presenting the cardinal. (2) There are general classifiers. A more detailed analysis of these has several times been undertaken, but owing to the difficulty at this late date of examining the fields of each classifier, such analysis has had to be abandoned. (3) Multiplication classifiers indicate time or times which the final noun or adjective is to be taken. (4) Measure classifiers name the unit of measure which the final noun or adjective undergoes. Especially are the three classifiers (1) ts’1it, for long, slender thing or things, (2) paay for long not slender thing or things, and (3) peek, for circular thing or things, seen to bring out characteristic according to shape. Some of the classifiers also appear as ordinary nouns; others do not. For instance, kuuch, for load or loads, appears both as a classifier and as an ordinary noun. Yet kuul, for plant or plants, is considered to be a classifier only, and if a plant name does not follow it, the plant name is considered to be omitted. 260 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuu. 164 Again, this same term “kuuch,” usually a general classifier, some- times appears to be on the verge of being used as a measure classifier. Certain classifiers were evidently used only for a limited sequence of numbers. There are several traces on record of such limited usage, but only traces. No early writer takes the pains to give a complete account of a single instance of such classifier usage, and no modern knows anything about such classifier usage. Beltran gives “pach” as a classifier for birds and other animals from 9 to 19. With 20 this classifier changes to ‘“‘tab.”” What it would be for the most important sequence from 1 to 8, is not stated. Beltrén’s “pach” is evidently for paach, his “tab” is evidently for taab. Only one classifier, *t’, in the examples given in early works, takes the preposition ti’, in, after it and before the final noun or adjective. teen, time, times, stands unique as a classifier in that it has a past tense; teen also sometimes suffixes -ili, only. Especially some of the measure classifiers are in origin Spanish names of measures. A classifier is called in Spanish: cuenta, or particula para contar; in translation: a count, or particle for counting. The term “classifier” is translated into Spanish as clasificador. A classification complex consists of three parts: First the numerator, which states in how many occurrences the remainder of the complex is to be taken; then the classifier, which has generic meaning and seizes upon some characteristic; aud finally the specific noun or adjec- tive, stating the thing numerated and classified. The two classifiers most in use at the present time, aside from those felt to be necessary because they state measure or type of completed action, are p’eel and tuul. The first of these starts with a clicked consonant, the second with a plain consonant. The Motul dictionary has p’eel, and states that it is used for counting things of what- ever nature, by that apparently including humans. The Motul dictionary does not have tuul as a classifier at all, but Beltran and the Pérez dictionary give it as a classifier for humans. The modern Maya use p’eel for inanimate things, plants, and nonhuman animals but tuul for humans. The only classifiers the hieroglyphs for which have been deciphered are some of the time measure classifiers. MAJOR CARDINAL CLASSIFIERS Major cardinal classifiers denote groups of numbers of the score- power cardinal count. They are: k’aal, *bak’, pik, *kalab, *k’inchil, or tso’tskeeh, and *alaw, and have already been presented in giving the cardinal count. They all denote 20 or multiple group of 20 by 20. Rae? PAP. VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 261 A few of the classifiers put in appearance in fields far apart one from the other. So do certain measure terms in Spanish and in English, as for that matter. In Spanish, estado was, according to the diction- aries, used of a measure of distance, and also of area. Arroba was a unit of liquid measure, as well as a unit of weight. In English, a pound is a unit of money, also a unit of weight. MULTIPLICATION CLASSIFIERS The multiplication classifier denotes time or times. There are on record 6 multiplication classifiers, each of which means time or times, and 2 of these have gone entirely out of use in Valladolid Maya. In the multiplication tables given by Beltran (1859, pp. 202-203), leem is used, no comment being made. A cardinal followed by another cardinal without any intervening multiplicative classifier means the same as with one, but to use a multiplicative classifier makes the wording clearer. Thus one can say in English: six 6’s, but with greater clarity: 6X6. There is one multiplicative ordinal classifier, indicating on such and such an occasion in order. ka’, 2, when followed by teen sometimes means twice, but also sometimes means again, and ka’, perhaps to be regarded as having the teen omitted, said alone, sometimes means again, teen has a past tense of different form, and is the only classifier which has tense. teen and its past also sometimes suffix the restrictive -ili, only. The 6 multiplicative classifiers are: leem, time, times. The Motul dictionary gives “lem” only in the meaning of very. *maal, time, times. os maal, 3 times. *muuk, time, times. ka’ muuk, twice. naas, time, times. (Not in the Motul dictionary, but in the Pérez dictionary.) ma’ ka’ nas in-t’an, I did not speak twice. puut, time, times. ka’ put tali, twice he came, again he came. teen, time, times. hay teen, how many times? kan teen, 4 times. hay tenak, how many times in the past? kan tenak, 4 times in the past. MULTIPLICATIVE ORDINAL CLASSIFIER Only one of these has been found. The reference is to the such- and-such occasion in order. nuum, on ordinal occasion. 08 num in-t’an, I spoke for the third time, GENERAL CLASSIFIERS *aak, for counting a high number of things. This is the first entry of a classifier in the Motul dictionary (p. 66): “[ac]: cuenta para contar muchas cosas.” This definition could be taken two ways, but is shown by Motul dictionary (p. 67) “accunah cal ti than: refiir mucho” to mean that the classifier is used for high enumeration. bal, ply. ka’ bal sum, 2-ply rope. Compare balak’. 262 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buxw. 164 balak’, coil, wrapping around, a complete turning over. 08 balak’, 3 coils (of a rattlesnake). o8 balak’, 3 wrappings around (of vine). o8 balak’, 3 complete turnings over (as one rolls downhill). baan, squad, group, pile. oS ban soldadoob, 3 squads of soldiers. kan ban tunich, 4 piles of stones. o§8 ban Sch’upoob, 3 groups of women. buuk, year. o8 buk haab, 3 years. Compare t’, classifier for years. heeb, piece. Given by the Motul dictionary only as a noun meaning the quarter of ananimal. But the Pérez dictionary gives it as a classifier for counting pieces of cloth, provinces. o8 heb lu’um, 3 pieces of land. heek’, branch (of a plant), offshoot of a deer’s horn, cluster of bananas which is part of alarger bunch. Not given in the Motul dictionary as a classifier, but as a noun meaning bunch. heech, hour, plan, string of beads. Given in the Motul dictionary only as classifier for hours, but in the Pérez dictionary as classifier for hours, plans, strings of beads. Remembered as classifier for string of beads. The word for hour not a classifier is k’intsil. koop, roll. Given in the Motul dictionary as meaning an iron or wooden hoop. bolon koop, 9 rolls (of wire). bolon kop sum, 9 rolls of rope. koot, classifier for nonhuman animals. Contrast kot, stone wall. un kot ts’unuun, 1 hummingbird. o8 kot pekoob, 3 dogs. kots’, roll. Motul dictionary gives this only a verb meaning, to roll. The Pérez dictionary states that it is a classifier for counting thread fragments, strings broken off in weaving. kuuch, load. un kuch haas, a load of bananas. un kuch si’, a load of firewood. kuul, plant. Despite the Pérez dictionary, it cannot be used except as a classi- fier. ka’ kul che’, 2 trees. ka’ kul ya’, 2 zapote trees. lot, pair. Compare the classifier yaal, accompanying mate. ka’ lot Sanab, 2 pairs of shoes. *maas, classifier for pieces of sugarcane. Guessed to mean merely piece. *mol, classifier for assemblages. Compare mol, to assemble. muuch’, group. un much’ che’, a stand of trees. *paach, classifier for birds and nonhuman animals for the cardinals 9 to 19, according to the Motul dictionary. Beltran’s ‘“‘pach”’ is evidently for paach. paak, pieces of cloth, garments, adornments. o8 pak manta, 3 pieces of cloth. Homophonous with the following. paak, blows. Not in the Motul dictionary. o§8 pak lo’, 3 blows. Homoph- onous with the preceding. pakab, bevy, brood. Not in the Motul dictionary. oS pakab bech’, 3 bevies of quail. o8 pakab poyo, 3 broods of chickens. peets’, tabloid of chocolate. Compare peets’, to press down. 08 pets’ chukwa’, 3 tabloids of chocolate. Homophonous with the following. *peets’, chapter, song, speech. The Motul dictionary gives only these 3 usages. The Pérez dictionary adds that it also refers to article and time that one sleeps. *pet, cultivated field. The Motul dictionary gives ‘‘pet” only as an adjective meaning circular. Asa noun ‘pet’? means a circular shelf. *pis, day, month, coin, weight (these only as far up as 20). Given by both the Motul and the Pérez dictionaries. *peek’, nonhuman animal. Given as a classifier of this meaning both in the Motul and Pérez dictionaries. *puut, plant bottom. The Motul dictionary gives puut only as a verb meaning “to carry.” p’eel, inanimate thing. Now at least used as a classifier for inanimate things, plants and nonhuman animals, contrasted with t’uul, which is supposed to be only Needy PA?) VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 263 a classifier having reference to humans. Given in both the Motul and Pérez dictionaries. According to the Pérez dictionary used only up to 20. piis, fanega. Given by the Motul dictionary only as a verb meaning to meas- ure. The informants have known p’iis as a verb meaning “‘to measure,” also as & nou meaning any measure. Perhaps p’iis could be called a classifier for fanega because fanega was a foreign or Spanish measure. p’uuk, mouthful of food, drink. Not in the Motul dictionary. Compare the verb p’uuk, to take a mouthful. *taab, score, use in counting scores of loads of corn, wool, or tribute mantles; bunches of 20 nonhuman animals. As employed outside of counting, the word “taab” means forehead strap. Given in the Motul dictionary. Beltran’s “tab” is evidently for taab. taas, file, row. Perhaps this is the same word as is used for a cord of firewood. *te’, piece of cocoa, egg, pumpkin. Perhaps the reference is to thing of spherical shape. Possibly the same as the classifier which immediately follows below. te’, year, month, *k’atun, league. Given in the Motul dictionary, which gives only 2 examples of the use of this classifier, but each of these examples has the lassifier te’ followed by ti’, in. *tuuk, pile. The Motul dictionary gives this word only as a noun meaning a pile, not as a classifier. tuul, human. Not given in the Motul dictionary. *tsool, file of humans. There is also a semireduplicated noun tsolentsool, in files. *tsuuk, pueblo, paragraph, article, a speech, reason, difference, word, pile This is evidently the noun tsuuk, part. *tsaak, stair flight, thing which ascends. *ts’iik, respected human, finger, spouse that one hashad. The Motul dictionary gives what is probably the same word as meaning brave. *ts’iit, candle, string, stick of firewood, fruit of long shape, ear of corn. waal, large leaf or sheet of paper. The Motul dictionary gives this same word as a noun applied to leaf of tobacco, leaf of banana, sheet of paper. *waan, group. The Motul dictionary gives what is apparently the same word as meaning placed. *waay, day (of 24-hour duration). Day with following night can be looked upon as of such duration. wuts’, fold. What sounds like this same word means a quantity measure which is the quarter of an almud. waal, mate which accompanies, lining. Given in the Motul dictionary. Com- pare lot, pair. MEASURE CLASSIFIERS Classifiers denoting measurement are here presented in separate lists as those denoting distance measures, area measures, quantity measures, and time measures. Especially time-measure classifiers are difficult to restore, since most of them fell into disuse generations ago. The verb “‘to measure” is p’is, and the noun meaning “‘any measure- ment” has exactly the same form. One can use the noun p’is as a sort of classifier, saying, for instance, un p’is fanega, 1 fanega, literally 1 measuring of fanega. 264 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buny. 164 Ascending order of values is followed in all the measure-classifier lists. Since the time of the conquest the Spanish language had a sys- tem of measures, but this was superseded about 60 years ago by another system of measures. What is known as the Spanish system of measures was followed in the Yucatan Peninsula for a couple of centuries, only to have Mexico in 1890 adopt the metric system. Many of the Spanish system names of measures still survive in the Maya language. Money and weights have been omitted, since it is said that the Maya had none, and it has been possible to obtain only Spanish terms. DISTANCE-MEASURE CLASSIFIERS Distance measures are the simplest of all measures. Among the Maya these start with the fingerbreadth and end with the league. The wonderful architecture of the ancient Maya was evidently accom- plished with good eye and commonsense, but with a very crude measuring system. k’ab, hand, arm, finger, fingerbreadth. There is no easily wielded word for finger in Maya, so it is sometimes simply called hand. As a measure, finger- breadth is called dedo, finger, in Spanish, and it may be under Spanish influence that fingerbreadth became used. But fingerbreadth may also easily have been a native measure. The Motul dictionary notes fingerbreath as a measure, and the example which it gives refers to the measuring of weaving. A hand’s breadth is still spoken of as 5 fingerbreadths. ni’ k’ab, finger, fingerbreadth, literally point of the hand. This is a second term sometimes used for fingerbreadth. pulgaéa, inch. This is patently taken over from Spanish pulgada, inch. hatk’ab, forefinger span, literally split hand. This is the distance from thumb tip to forefinger tip, when thumb and forefinger are gaped apart. ‘This is the kind of span called jeme in Spanish. naab, handspread. This is the distance from thumb tip to little finger tip, when hand is spread. This kind of span is called cuarta in Spanish, in book Spanish palmo or palmada. Beltrdn gives naab as a classifier for “‘palmos.” chinaab, handspread (?). Beltrdn gives what must be chinaab as a classifier for jemes, perhaps more correctly stated for cuartas, since the second member of the word is evidently naab. ok, foot. This may be nothing but Spanish pie, foot, translated into Maya. kuuk, cubit. This is the distance from middle-finger tip to elbow, and evidently differed considerably according to different individuals. This measure is in the Motul dictionary. The classifier is the ordinary noun for elbow. Sak’ab, step, pace. The Motul dictionary has this word only as a noun mean- ing “step.” bara, yard. Patently from Spanish vara, yard. The Spanish vara was a little longer than the English yard and contained 48 fingerbreadths. saap, fathom. Roughly speaking, the length of 2 yards. Called in Spanish braza or brazada. This is the distance from hand to hand when a person stands with sideward extended arms in the form of a cross. The term is used by the Maya in speaking of tree height or water depth. NOE PA?) VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 265 *walab, 6 yards. The Motul dictionary (p. 891) equates ‘“‘valab” to 1 estado, a Spanish term which has not been known to the informants either as a measure of distance or of area. The Motul dictionary further down on the same page gives “‘valah” as a distance measure of about 1 estado and as an area measure of 3 fathoms (on each side); the latter does not agree with my information as to length. Rescued to practical certainty through an informant remembering walabche’, 6-yard long measuring pole formerly used. See *walab, area measure. staal, Spanish estadal, Yucatan Peninsula Spanish estal. According to the Spanish dictionaries a distance measure of 4 yards. Known only as an area measure to the informants, for which see under area-measure classifiers below. awat, kilometer, mile. There are said to have been 4 miles in a league. The meaning is literally a shout, and the term denotes the very vague distance of the audibility of ashout. At least the original meaning denoted the distance at which a shout could be heard. pas, literally played piece of music. According to the Motul dictionary (p. 414), this denoted the distance at which a drum could be heard, which would be about the length of a cultivated field. luub, league, literally resting place. A league is in common parlance said to measure 4 kilometers. The ancient Maya had resting places along the trail, and after the Spanish conquest the term evidently got revalued. AREA-MEASURE CLASSIFIERS The principal measure unit for land was the mecate. Smaller areal measurements tied to the mecate, and so also did larger ones. A person’s milpa was regularly stated to consist of so many mecates and estadales. Milpa was called kol and was of most varying size and shape. One can say in Maya, following Spanish nomenclature, a square inch, a square foot, a square yard, but measured areas which interest the Maya are larger than these. *walab is a pretty certain reconstruction of the name of an area 6 yards square, a quarter of a staal. The name was rescued from having its pronunciation remain forever unknown. It was remembered that it is said that in former times the staal was measured with a pole, and that the pole was called walabche’, also that the putting of the pole down twice measured 1 side of the staal, and on another occasion it was stated that the staal has a side 12 yardslong. The pole, therefore, must have been 6 yards long and the area called walab evidently measured 6 yards on each side. che’ means pole, and walabche’ evidently means 6-yard pole. The Motul dictionary (p. 891) gives both ‘‘valab” and ‘‘valah,”’ the latter possibly intended for *walab. ‘‘valab’”’ is defined as a distance measure of 1 estado, ‘‘valah” as a distance measure of about 1 estado and an area measure having 3 fathoms on a side, while my information states 2 fathoms. A pole 3 fathoms long is pretty long and would usually have to be spliced. See *walab, distance measure. staal, Yucatan Peninsula Spanish estal, literary Spanish estadal. The staal is one quarter of a mecate in area. One side of the staal measures 12 yards. Rare memory recalled that the staal used to be measured with a special measuring pole, prepared for the purpose and known by a special name. This pole was cut maybe in nearby woods, might be of several kinds of tree, might be spliced to make it longer. Such a pole was called walabche’ and two layings down of the pole measured one side of the stag]. Although the name “mecate’’ means string 266 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buu 164 and might be taken to imply that the mecate was originally measured off with a string, what is remembered is that the staal is said to have formerly been measured off with a pole, not with a string. So that the measuring would not have to be done all over at the beginning of the next season, stone pile markers were set up about 2 feet in height as the measuring was done with the pole, and were some- times painted white to make them more visible. Thus the boundaries of the staal were measured off and marked. suuk’, literally inside corner, is a vague term, but considerably in use. A mecate is often square and each of its corners is called suuk’. Sometimes suuk’ applies to the side of a mecate rather than to the corner of a mecate. Sometimes suuk’ is used as the equivalent of staal, which is the proper term for the quarter of a mecate. k’aan, mecate, literally string. The mecate in the Yucatan Peninsula is a square one side of which is 24 yards in length, and contains 4 staal. Nonagricul- tural land jutting in sometimes caused the mecate to be irregular in shape, and land measurement by the staal had to be resorted to, or even just guessing had to be resorted to, for guessing was very accurate. The etymology of k’aan has been discussed above under ‘“‘staal.’”’ What is remembered about is that a pole, and not a string, was used for land measuring. k’aan is possibly translated from Spanish mecate. *winik, 20 mecates. There is also this larger unit of area measure consisting of 20 mecates. This name is practically certain of reconstruction and was rescued in a marvelous way. It was remembered that 20 cords of wood were called winik, and that the name of the 20-cord lot sounded the same as the word forman. So it may easily be that a 20-mecate piece of land was also called winik. QUANTITY-MEASURE CLASSIFIERS Quantity measures start with the single handful and the double handful. The most exact measures of the system are the mut and the fanega, both terms from Spanish. There was among the Maya no system of weights, the calculating of which required complicated apparatus. chaach, single handful, literally a grasp; compare chaach, to grasp. faap’, a single handful; compare laap’, to close the hand about. ok, a double handful. Perhaps the word originally meant a trip. wuts’, Spanish cuartillo, quarter of an almud. The Maya word is in pro- nunciation the same as the classifier meaning a fold, but a connection in meaning is difficult to see. mut, almud. The Spanish almud has approximately the same capacity as the celemin. Spanish dictionaries tell of almud being used as an areal measure, but this usage is not known in the Yucatan Peninsula. muk’ub, a skirtful. According to the Motul dictionary this is a quantity amounting to about half a load. fanega, fanega. This is the Spanish bushel, consisting in the Yucatan Penin- sula of 12 almudes. The classifier is sip’iis, which is merely the general noun meaning a measure. FIREWOOD-MEASURE CLASSIFIERS che’, stick of firewood. un p’el che’ si’, a stick of firewood. taas, cord; compare probably taas, general classifier for row or rows. winik, 20-cord lot of firewood. This word in this meaning is not in the Motul Nog PA?) VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 267 dictionary, but was remembered and volunteered, and it was also volunteered that it sounds the same as man. This is important toward the restoration of *winik, area measure of 20 mecates. LIQUID-MEASURE CLASSIFIERS Maya speakers at the present time do not remember well Spanish liquid measures, which preceded the coming in of the metric system. Much less do they remember native Maya measures, which may have been gourdfuls, ollafuls, bucketfuls, and the like. Not a single definite liquid measure was recoverable, if the Maya ever had such. TIME-MEASURE CLASSIFIERS Neither the lunar month nor the terrestrial year fitted perfectly into the score system of days; 13, 18, 260, and 360 as well as the score, enter for the sake of convenience or for the sake of fitting into the current religious calendar system into the formation of the higher periods of Maya time reckoning. The fundamental unit of Maya time reckoning was certainly the tu:n, or 360-day year, but tu:n as the name of a time period is not in the Motul dictionary, and probably meant to the ancient Maya a stone and nothing else, although *k’atun was the name of a time period, and is already entered in the Motul dictionary as denoting a time period of 20 years. The second higher unit of time reckoning, above the *k’atun, was evidently the *ahawk’atun, a period of 260 years. Putting brief entries in Beltran and in Pérez together, one comes to the conclusion that ahaw, meaning as a nonclassifier noun head chief, king, was a classifier for the Maya century, a period having, according to Beltran, 260 years, and called in Maya, according to Pérez, *ahawk’atun, and was not a classifier for the *k’atun as Beltran states at the beginning of his entry. The interpretation is vitally important to the de- termination of the nomenclature of higher Maya time periods, and it is well to give the exact Spanish wording of Beltran and of Pérez, followed in each instance by a translation into English. Beltran (1859, p. 203) states: ‘“Ahau. Para cuenta de veintenas de afios en calendarios de los indios yucatecos, lo mismo que las indicciones neustras; pero de mas afios que estas, eran trece ahaues que contenian 260 afios que era para ellos un siglo.”” In translation: “Ahau. For the count of the scores of years of the calendars of the Yucatec In- dians, the same as our manner of counting, but having more years than ours, it was 13 ahaws that had 260 years, that was for them a century.” Pérez (1866, p. 169) states: ““KATUN: la edad 6 indiccion [using this same word which Beltran uses] de trece afios que contaban los indios para formar otros periodos mayores 6 sus siglos. A este 2 llamaban tambien kinkatun y 4 los mayores ahaukatun 6 uakatun.”’ 268 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Butt, 164 In translation: “KATUN: the period or manner of counting having 13 years which the indians counted for forming other larger periods or their centuries. This [|*k’atun] was also called by them *k’ink’atun and the larger ones *ahawk’atun or *wak’atun.” Beltran states that the Maya century was longer than ours, that it was a period of 260 years; Pérez evidently gives the name of such a century as *ahawk’atun. ahaw was evidently the classifier for such a century, for it is difficult to think that the classifier for *k’atun was ahaw, while the century was called *ahawk’atun. This same meaning of *ahaw- k’atun as Maya century of 260 years is also suggested by Pérez in the two entries on page 10 of his dictionary. Again I quote the Spanish. “AMAYTE: los primeros veinte afios que contaban los antiguos indios en su epoca, llamada ahau katun...” In translation: “AMAYTE: the first 20 years which the ancient Indians counted in their epoch, called ahau katun .. .”’ Here Pérez suggests that the epoch was no more than 20 years. Immediately below this entry, on the same page, he states: “AMAYTUN: piedra cuadrada en que colocaban los antiguous indios los veinte afios del ahau katun.” In translation: ““AMAYTUN: a square stone on which the ancient Indians placed the 20 years of the ahau katun.” ahawkan, rattle- snake is, as most recurrent in meaning, different from kan, snake, and it may well be that *ahawk’atun was to the Maya of former times different from *k’atun. Maya time reckoning began with some unknown early event, possibly the mythological creation of the world, at the date A. D. 682, equivalent perhaps to 8 ahaw. If we assume that ahaw refers to a Maya century of 260 years, Maya time reckoning had al- ready been going on for 8 times 260 years, which is 2,080 years. The ancient Egyptians started time reckoning with the beginning of the reign of the king, the Christians of the West with the birth of Christ. The Jews and the members of the Greek Orthodox Church started time reckoning with the creation of the world. The important matter in dating is that a single commencing date is agreed upon. le mayaoob kusohkoob le haboob kah chumpahil yo’kolkab, the Maya began the count (here literally the years) from the commence- ment of the world. Coordination of the Maya system of dating with the system used by ourselves is a matter which holds prime interest for the public at large. One of the first questions asked upon seeing the ruins of Chichen Itz or of Uxmal, in Yucatan, is “How old?” The connecting of Maya time reckoning with Christian has interested students of Maya hieroglyphic writing and of general Maya culture from the first, and Antonio Ciudad Real, the supposed author of the famous Motul Maya dictionary, was evidently one of those interested. Ina RoE? PAP. VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 269 book written by him (1586), there is mentioned the obtaining from a Maya Indian of a linking of the Maya time reckoning system with the Christian. After giving a description of the ruins of Uxmal, the earliest which has come down to us, he states that through consul- tation with Indians, 8 ahaw was equated to A. D. 682. There is also a coordination of five of the month names with the rainy season, which, as far as I know, has not been noticed. It is natural that the year would be begun in the spring, and there is good testimony that the first month was poop, petate, which name is famous as entering into the title of the Popol Vuh, book of traditions written in the related Quiché language. If poop starts about the middle of May, then the frog species called wo’ suddenly comes out when the rainy season is well underway, about the beginning of June, and this name is given to perhaps the first month of the rainy season. wo’ is the first of a series of 5 months, which are evidently the months of the rainy season, and this sequence closes with the month of sul, which word means close, end. Then starts the month yaSk’in, which name means first sunniness, The rainy season is commonly called u-k’inil chaak, which means the same as Spanish tempo de lluvias. We now proceed to give the time measure classifiers in ascending according to duration of period. segundo, second. From Spanish, and no equivalent of Maya origin is known. minuto, minute. From Spanish and no Maya equivalent is known. k’intsil, hour. k’in means time, and tsil is possibly connected with tsil, to shred cloth into threads. tsil would then refer to small division of the day. The hour classifier given in the Motul and Pérez dictionaries is heech. k’in, sun, day, festival day. As a time-period measure the word means day. k’in is the day from sunup to sundown, but the ensuing night goes along with the day as a lining goes along with a coat. The two classifiers for day are te’ and *waay. The latter is defined in the Motul dictionary as being the classifier for 24-hour days. One can safely assume that each is a classifier for day. One’s saint’s day is called u-k’in u-k’aba’, literally the day of one’s name. In early times in the Yucatan Peninsula, there was always given to a baby the name of the saint on whose day the baby was born. Nowadays the parents merely give the baby a name that sounds good. There are names for the sections of a day, such as dawn, morning, forenoon, and names for sections of time defined from today, such as tomorrow, tomorrow at dawn; but such terms are not names of time- reckoning periods. The word k’in, priest, is more fully hk’in, and sounds as if it says one who heats or illuminates. *WINAAL, 18-DAY MONTH *winaal, or some similar reconstruction, is the name of the former 18-day month of the Maya; 20 of these months constituted a tun, 360-day year. Unfortunately the name cannot be reconstructed 270 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLt. 164 with certainty, and there seems to be no clue. The word may be related to u, moon. There is a word ‘“‘wi’nal,’” seed corn, said of an ear or several ears of corn kept during the winter for planting in the spring, but this word has no connection with the old word for an 18-day month. The Motul dictionary does not give the word, nor does Beltran. Each of the days of the 18-day month had its name and its patron divinity. All these day names are known to us, but only a few of the patron divinities are. Of the day names only the following are understood, and it seems probable that in each instance the under- standing is correct. ik’, wind. inw-i:k’, my breath. i:k’al k’a’naab, sea breeze. ak’bal, night time. k’aan, string, hammock. kimil, to die, death. The 1 should be restored at the end of the word, for kimi means ‘‘he died.” ok, foot, footprint, trip. eeb, flight of stairs, stairway. kib, wax, candle. ahaw, head chief. The Devil can be called kumahaw, literally the head chief who left his heavenly home. ahaw was the name of the last of the 18 days, and is felt to refer to something beyond, ultimate. This usage perhaps fits in with ahaw as a classifier being used for century or centuries. Also each of the 20 months in the 360-day year had a name and a patron divinity. Of the month names, only the following are under- stood. poop, petate, rush mat. Anciently the petate was used only for the head chief, chief, or noble to sit on. The common people sat on the bare ground. This month evidently started the Maya year, and the name has a good meaning for the month starting the year, since from the petate orders and instruction were given. With “poop” compare the first member in the title of the Popol Vuh, previously men- tioned. w6’, w6’ mu:ch, frog species. mu:ch alone is a generic word meaning frog. The w6’ is as large as one’s hat and is called the sapo gigante, giant frog, in Spanish. It is mud colored. It suddenly comes out about the beginning of June, and is prominent at the first of the rainy season, after the rainy season gets well under- way. It makes a thud with its belly as it lands on the ground after jumping. When one eats it, it is pure fat. It sings wd’ wé’ from the water with a bass voice. There is a Maya god in the form of a frog, and it may be that this species of frog is intended and it is also possible that this god is the patron of this day. The name is fitting if this month falls at the beginning of the rainy season. sip’ is actually remembered as the name of a mysterious personage, and si:p’, meaning fruit is almost ripe, tumor is about to burst, is contrasted. The last consonant, despite the old writing, is p’, not p. The information apparently fits in with the information obtained on another occasion that a good time to go hunting is near the start of the rainy season. so:ts’, bat. This is the generic name. Bats come out at dusk during the entire year. There isa Maya god in the form of a bat. ear PAP. VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 271] tseek, punishment. The Motul dictionary has this word. It is considered a punishment when it is overclouded. no:koy, it is overclouded. Sul, close, end, as a month name perhaps referring to the termination of the rainy season. yask’in, first sunniness, first day all day clear. From when the sun rises to when it sets there is no raincloud. It would be appropriate for a month to be so named coming immediately after close of the rainy season. mo’ol, foot (of either front or hind limb) of an animal of the cat family, of a dog, of a badger. Compare chakmo’ol, jaguar, literally redfoot. ch’een, well, cenote. Perhaps a dry well could be called the same way. But haktun, cave. This last word always starts with h and has short wu. yaas, first. This word may mean the same as yask’in, which has preceded as a month name. Or the month name may be ya’as, green; compare the next month name, which is the word meaning white, and the month name further below signifying yellow sun. There are these two possibilities; on the whole the former seems the more likely. sak, white. This is the adjective meaning white and sometimes said of the dawn: sak ak’ab, it is dawn, literally the night is whitening. keeh, deer. If this month starts at the beginning of December, that would be a good time to go deer hunting. mak, cover, stopple, lid. Or this month name may be maak, person. k’ank’in, yellow sun; one could hardly translate it as yellow day. pas, section of sounding, piece of music. As a classifier paS means drum- hearing distance. Compare the meaning of the following month name. k’ayab, song. Compare the meaning of the preceding month name. kumk’u’, oven for baking pottery, literally olla nest. It would be good to make such in the middle of February, when the beginning of this month would fall, before the rainy season starts in. 13-DAY FORTNIGHT A period of 13 days, the Maya name of which is unknown, con- stituted what can be called the Maya fortnight of 13 days. This unit was compositional to the tsol k’in and bore slight relation to the other time-measure classifiers. The cardinal for 13 is oglahun, and for saying 13 days the ordinary modern way would be to say oslahun p’el k’in. U, MOON, LUNAR MONTH As a time-measure classifier, u means lunar month. The lunar month has a length of almost 29 days 12 hours. The Motul dictionary gives u, month, and u, necklace, as two separate entries; but the Maya word is the same. Necklace is evidently called moon not because of the transparency or glittering quality of its beads but because it hangs in a crescent form like the crescent moon. TSOL K’IN, 260-DAY YEAR tsol k’in signifies a series in order of days, and is an invention of modern scholars for naming this period, the Maya name for which is 272 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY {Buun. 164 not known. tsool means series in order and is also used as a classifier for file or files. Each of the day names always had a cardinal from 1 to 13 preplaced. One had to say: 1 ik’, and so on. Not until each of the day names had been given a number, was the 260-day period completed. Since 13 and 20 have no common factor, 259 days have to pass before the day 1 ik’ comes again. There came 13 days. The second month started with the 5 remaining day names, followed by the first 8 of the 13 day names again. When 20 of these 13-day fortnights had been completed, the same day name with the same number preplaced came again. TUN, 360-DAY YEAR The ordinary word for year in Maya is haab, and undoubtedly haab was used instead of tun unless the designation was re- quired to be very exact. One could probably speak of the 260- day period as haab. There is also some use of haab meaning Maya time period counting in general. tun is an antiquated form; the current form is tunich, meaning stone. k’atun appears to mean 20 tun period, therefore a twentieth part of that period ought to be called tun. Whether it actually was or not, there is little evidence. tun is given in the Motul dictionary as being the generic word for precious stone, and tun meaning the pit or stone of a fruit is given as a separate entry. The Motul dictionary gives tunich as the regu- lar word for stone. The Pérez dictionary gives both tun and tunich as meaning stone. tunich is tun plus a suffix, and the suffix is omitted in many compounds. In modern Maya the pit of a fruit is commonly called u-nek’, its pit. 'The word for stone appears as second member of Maya compounds as -tun, -tunich. Thus ya’Stun, turkois, means literally green stone; also ya’Stunich, turkois; pik’tun, boundary stone; chaltun, bare rock; ebtun, flight of stairs; haltun, waterhole; chantunich, pebble; tok’tunich, piece of flaking stone. In many composite terms -tun alternates with che’, wood. Thus petentun, millstone; petenche’, wooden wheel; ebtun, stone flight of stairs; ebche’, wooden stairway. The informants have guessed *tun, yet *k’atun, *ahawk’atun, amaytun, as restorations; these guesses are not certain. HAAB, 865-DAY YEAR The exact length of the terrestrial year is 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes, 46 seconds, or with the fraction decimally expressed, 365.2422 days. The nearest integral number is 365. The Gregorian calendar makes an ordinary year 365 days, while a leap year, also called a bissextile year has 366 days, adding the extra day at the end of Noga PAP) VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 273 February, still the shortest month of the year. The word haab, like the word *tun, is also not in the Motul dictionary. The initial h of the word haab is omitted in the Mani Treaty, the form signifying the year being uy-aab instead of the expected u-haab. Instead of having leap years, the Maya had a year of 360 days followed by 5 epigominal or intercalary days. In other words, the Maya compensated their years as they went along. The left- over 5 and a fraction days were known to the ancient Egyptians and are called epigominal days. They are termed in Spanish ‘“‘inter- calar,”’ which means ‘‘intercalary.”” The Maya called them nameless days. The Maya expression for nameless day is Sma’ k’aba k’in. Pérez wrongly thought that the *k’atun had 24 years instead of 20, and attempted to set up 4 intercalary years after the fashion of the intercalary days of the haab. On the epigominal days everyone stayed at home, since if he went forth, it was believed that some misfortune would befall him. The classifiers for year are buuk, year, and te’, year, etc. The latter if followed by ti’, in. THE VENUS YEAR The planet Venus has a year which averages 584 terrestrial days in length, the Venus year being 219 days longer than the earthly year. Venus is known to modern astronomers to appear 236 days as morning star, and 250 days as evening star. By the modern Maya, the morning star and the evening star each is called nohek’, literally large star, a nomenclature which is already given in the Motul dictionary. The Venus year could be translated into Maya as: u-hab nohek’, literally the year of the large star. SUBDIVISIONS OF THE *K’ATUN At the termination of a *k’atun, or 20 *tun period, a commemora- tive stela was erected. The *k’atun was evidently divided into 4 minor periods of 5 years’ duration each, and the minor period can be called in Spanish lusivo, which according to the Spanish dictionaries and modern usage means a period of 5 years. It is significant that the stela erected at the termination of a *k’atun had four corners and sides; perhaps a *k’atun was conceived of as a quadruple thing. There was a minor ceremony at the close of a 5-year period, another at the close of a 10-year period, still another at the close of a 15- year period. Then came the great celebration at the termination of the 20-year period. 370929—56——21 274 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [But. 164 *K’ATUN OR **K’INK’ATUN, 20-TUN PERIOD Already the Motul dictionary defines *k’atun as a 20-year period, and it is very probable that the word ‘‘*k’atun”’ is a compound noun in origin, the more original form having been *k’altun, and the pres- ent form having the ‘‘l” omitted. The Pérez dictionary gives a similar- sounding word with this process caught in operation. Pérez (1866, p. 185) gives: “KULTUN: mortero, almirez. Kuttun.” In translation: “KULTUN: mortar, pounding bowl. Kuttun.” Syllable-closing ‘1’ in word interior of this word has disappeared, for I have obtained only k’utun, pounding bowl. The Pérez dictionary also gives *k’atun to be an adverb meaning ‘“‘always.’’ Informants have not known this form. The Pérez dictionary also gives *k’atunbeen, an antique, evidently meaning literally an age-old thing, but informants have not known this word. *k’ink’atun evidently means the period of a *k’atun, and, as the Pérez dictionary states, has a meaning exactly equivalent to that of *k’atun. The classifier for *k’atun is given in the Motul dictionary as t’. It is thus the same as the classifier for years. Beltrén gives ahaw as classifier for *k’atun, but ahaw, is, as has already been stated above, classifier for the Maya century known as *ahawk’atun. There was a great ceremony at the end of a *k’atun. A stela, or four-sided tall monolith, was erected. The name of this stone is recorded in the Pérez dictionary as “AMAYTUN,” which is guessed probably to be restored as: *amaytun, literally cornered stone. The Motul dictionary gives ‘‘amay,” corner, also “anamay,’’ corner. The stone had four corners, but the word ‘‘kan,’”’ 4, was omitted. 52-TUN PERIOD The 52-tun period belongs with the 260-day year, and like the 260-day year the Maya name for the period is unknown. Only after a 52-tun period did the count of 260-day years coincide with the count of 360-day years. The 52-tun period can be called the Lesser Cycle. *,HAWK’ATUN, OR *WAK’ATUN, 260-TUN PERIOD There were 13 *k’atun periods, and 20 times these constitutes what is known to us through Pérez as having been called the *ahawk’atun, evidently meaning the head chief *k’atun, or the *wak’atun, 260-year period, which was the Maya century. ahaw means head chief, king, and as first member of the compound ahawkan, rattlesnake, gives the literal meaning of lordly snake. So *ahawk’atun must mean lordly k’atun. No ef) *)~« VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 275 A second name for this Maya century is given by Pérez as being *wak’atun. As regards etymology, informants and early diction- aries come to the possible rescue. The *wa- used as a first member evidently means excessive; compare wa-, indefinitizing (p. 276). Possibly the *ahawk’atun or *wak’atun was sometimes called for short merely *k’atun when background made it clear what was meant, but such calling was ambiguous. Whether the classifier t’ was used for counting 260-tun periods is not known. It seems probable that the application of ahaw to the *k’atun is an error starting with Beltrén, who writes ambiguously, and that ahaw applies properly to the Maya century or 260-tun period. What the Maya called higher orders of time reckoning than the 260-tu:n period is not known. It is possible that they carried the score system into the denomination of higher time periods, speaking of the *bak’tun, 400-tun period, and so on, but it is also possible, and even likely, that 13 entered into the determination and naming of higher time periods. SUN ORBIT YEAR The period of time which it takes the sun to make a complete revo- lution in its orbit was not known to the Maya, nor is it known to modern astronomy. It is perhaps something in the neighborhood of 2 million years. INFINITY “chac et,” infinite thing, literally large thing, is already given in the Motul dictionary. Beltrén (1859, p. 168) gives this same term as “Chacet.” chaak, large, gigantic, sounds the same as the word for rain. THE FOUR MATHEMATICAL PROCESSES It is said in the Yucatan Peninsula that anything which can be expressed in Spanish can also be expressed in Maya. For instance, in telling of the four mathematical processes, one would say: kan hela’an u-betal le-soko’, literally there are four ways in which a solu- tion is arrived at. The four methods referred to, by which mathematical problems are solved, are the processes of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. Below are given sample wordings employed in expressing each of these processes. (1) ka’ yetel ka’ kubetik kan, 2 plus 2=4. (2) ti’ ka’ kalusil un kup’atal un, 2 minus 1=1. (3) ka’ ten ka’ kubetik kan, 2 times 2=4. (4) ti? kan kaSotik ka’e kubetik ka’, 4 divided by 2=2., 276 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bun 164 EXACTLY, APPROXIMATELY A quantity may be expressed exactly or approximately. Soot, the noun meaning number, enumeration, when placed before a numeral has of course adverbial force and means exactly. Thus Sot hunk’aal, exactly 20. naats’, approximately, means literally near, nearly. Thus nats’ hunk’aal, approximately 20, about 20, literally nearly 20. NUMEROIDS Terms expressing impressional, not exact, quantity are much employed in the Valladolid Maya dialect, and the principal ones are given below to make this paper more complete. Two of the terms, those for bit and piece, have already been presented under the caption of Fractionals, but these terms belong also to the group of Numeroids Maya enumeration pays no attention whatever to gender except in the instance of a few classifiers, but the numeroid is determined by gender classes, now difficult to investigate because of the havoc which Spanish influence has played with the Maya language. The singular of a numeroid applies to quantity of substance, or to a single member of a group. piit, bit, a little, used in the singular only with reference to quantity of sub- stance. un p’it sa’, a little gruel. p’itoob, plural, is used rarely of quantities of substance, mostly in modern Maya meaning few, a few, without gender distinction of application. p’itoob winik, a few men. ts’ets’ek, some with reference to quantity of substance. The plural would scarcely be used. wabaal, something, indefinitized by prefixing wa- to baal, thing. Plural, wabaloob, somethings. Gender application is to inanimate thing, plant, nonhuman animal. Compare *wa-k’atun, 260-tun period. wamaas, someone, somebody. Indefinitized from maas, who? Plural wama- Soob, someones, some people. Gender application is to human only. et, something, someone, the like. yaab, much, used in the singular only with reference to quantity of substance. Plural yaboob, many, used of objects of inanimate, vegetal and nonhuman animal gender, while for plural of humans bahun is preferred instead. hunab, all, with reference to quantity of substance. hunaboob, plural, would be used rarely. tu-laklil, it is all. Plural tu-lakloob, they are all. lah-, a verb prefix, means all. tase, bring it! lah-tase, bring it all! Not) {* ~VALLADOLID MAYA ENUMERATION—HARRINGTON 277 LITERATURE USED ANONYMOUS. San Francisco dictionary. ANONYMOUS. Ticul dictionary. BELTRAN DE Santa Rosa Maria DE Lima, Fray PEpRo. 1746. Arte de el idioma Maya. México. 2d ed., Mérida, 1859. BoniLua, CoNRADO. 1849. La numeracién Maya. Tegucigalpa, Honduras. Bucx, Cart Dartine. 1949. A dictionary of selected synonyms in the principal Indo-European languages. Chicago. Criupap REAL, Fray Antonto [probable author]. Diccionario Maya-Espafiol y Espajfiol-Maya. The Maya-Spanish section was evidently completed at Motul, 12 miles east of Mérida, subse- quent to 1577. This is evidently the ‘‘Calepino’” mentioned by Lizana. A photostatic copy was made about 1922, and the Maya- Spanish section was published under the editorship of Juan Martinez Hernandez, Mérida, 1929, Crupap Rea, Fray ANTONIO. 1586. Relacion de las Cosas que Sucedieron al R. P. Comisario General Fray Alonso Ponce . . . Mexico. Coronet, Fray JUAN. 1620. Arte en la lengua Maya. . . Mexico. Futton, C. C. 1947. Elements of Maya arithmetic. Carnegie Inst. Washington, Publ. 85. Cambridge, Mass. 1948. Did the Maya have a zero? Carnegie Inst. Washington, Div. Hist. Res., Notes on Middle America, Publ. 90. Cambridge, Mass. Lizana, B. Ds. 1633. Historia de Yucatan. Valladolid. 2d ed., Mérida, 1893. Mavupstay, A. P. 1889-1902. Archaeology, in Biologia Centrali-Americana. 5 vols. London. Mepiz Borro, ANTONIO. 1943. Introduccién al estudio de la lengua Maya. Mexico. Mor.ey, Sytvanus GRISWOLD. 1915. An introduction to the study of Maya hieroglyphs. Bur. Amer, Ethnol. Bull. 57. Morut Dictionary, see Crupap REAL. Pérez, JUAN Pfo. 1866. Diccionario de la lengua Maya. Mérida. [This dictionary is Maya- Spanish only. It was finished down to an entry under the letter u, when the author died.] 1898. Coordinacién alfabética de las voces del idioma Maya [Maya-Spanish dictionary]. Mérida. 278 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Butt. 164 Roys, RaureH L. 1922. A new Maya historic narrative. Amer. Anthrop., vol. 24, pp. 44-60. 1933. The book of Chilam Balam of Chumayel. Carnegie Inst. Washington, Publ. 438. 1939. The titles of Ebtun. Carnegie Inst. Washington, Publ. 505. 1943. The Indian background of colonial Yucatan. Carnegie Inst. Wash- ington, Publ. 548. SaTTERTHWAIT, L. 1947. Concepts and structures of Maya calendrical arithmetic. Joint pub- lications, Univ. Pennsylvania Mus. and Philadelphia Anthrop. Soc., No. 3. Sotfis AucaLA, Emilio. 1950. Diccionario Espafiol-Maya. Mérida. SPINDEN, HERBERT J. 1917. Ancient civilizations of Mexico and Central America. New York. 1924. The reduction of Maya dates. Pap. Peabody Mus. Amer. Archaeol. and Ethnol., Harvard Univ., vol. 6, No. 4. THomas, Cyrus. 1900. Maya time systems and time symbols. Amer. Anthrop., vol. 21, pp. 53-62. 1901. Numeral systems of Mexico and Central America. 19th Ann. Rep. Bur. Amer. Ethnol., pp. 853-955. Tuompson, J. Eric S. 1941. Maya arithmetic. Carnegie Inst. Washington, Publ. 528. 1950. Maya hieroglyphic writing, Introduction. Carnegie Inst. Washington, Publ. 582. TozzeR, ALFRED M. 1921. A Maya grammar. Pap. Peabody Mus. Amer. Archaeol. and Ethnol., Harvard Univ., vol. 9. 1941. Landa’s relacién de las cosas de Yucatdn, a translation edited with notes. Pap. Peabody Mus., Amer. Archaeol. and Ethnol., Harvard Univ., vol. 18. SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 164 Anthropological Papers, No. 55 LETTERS TO JACK WILSON, THE PAIUTE PROPHET, WRITTEN BETWEEN 1908 AND 1911 Edited and with an introduction by GRACE M. DANGBERG 279 4 Th et eh ol. Onrnegie: Lin oon! A) eo pea *! i Ae fe 09. Oh tities at a ac pit! | Cerny es Trat. il Wadhledies Pith, 608. ?) t€43: The. mates ‘¥ agitate POA 7, Or iy Nr jad Yenaigo Ph aie “! That. t oa: AA so a . iF ae ei Pe pa ; : be 7 19% Cray ge ge , i «fi : yl arette af Aieyn unten avithiniebis. | ei i oe 7 -? al be : 4 i a ‘ is * 7 Py : § ey, “to TS |) eae as, 2/38 MM Bis: Mgh ail ‘Aaeehy rhs WN “SO Mey ‘ eee ee ee orn Sa en 0! WOMPGTITRAL Vialioater ne? LHOMAL, a By nena cf asaiientl hs vrotuil . , -_ * ar nivalis : , 2 ile | ? _ 32 Moose, Wood, ----- 4/10/_- Jack Wilson of Nordyke, Nevada Dear father I must drop __---_-_-- Ines to you again, and let _--_-__-- know that all this indians ______-_ well, I pray that this indians ___.___---- well and be good peoples -__-__- to you father and ______-_- Bee TAG... 2 Sow eee 5 ee 2p in right _____.._. am going home now __--------, I let you know that _._- going to stay here no more, I am come to close ___--_ hanking hands with you, I am yours son, R. W. Medicine 370929—57——22 290 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buxe. 164 all my hearts, I am trying hard to remember you ever day, I pray to you father as I am, remember me And answer my pary, I ask of you to gett you soft red paint, & feathers again, hear me father I stand befor you to day, I will send you $2.50 a pices I am humble & pary to you that you will have a pity on me, I shake hands with you, please kindly answer me, yours truly, Rufus Medicine, Dundurn, Sask, Canada, Moose Wood, Reserve, [The handwriting is that of Rufus Medicine.] --ple nu ray to da___ afternoon, I live [leave?] moose [wood] am way to my home nls ire? 2 t J LOs8 in this Reserve for two years and ______..._____--- now I am going home, I lived _________- Brockton, Valley Co, Montana _____-_- ---- address, Well father I do best _.______ -_______- in this Reserve, for this indians they _______ your medicine, & magepie feathers__-_-___ they were very glad to have it, they _______ praying meeting every Saturday & Sunday ____-_- hear them praying & help them father _________ this I ask of you, many times, fathers wos 2 wish to see you, many times I t________- to see you, father re- member me _____-___ praying, hear my voice in praying -__.____-_ page two which give you $5.00. Bear Comes Out (1858-1938) lived for many years before his death at the Bull Head Station on the Standing Rock (Sioux) Reservation in South Dakota. According to Mr. W. O. Roberts, superintendent of the Pine Ridge Agency, he was not an outstanding person but was respected by his tribe. At the suggestion of Mr. Roberts a letter was addressed to Mr. Andrew Knife of Pine Ridge, S. Dak., a nephew of Bear Comes Out and his only close living relative, inquiring for letters written him by Jack Wilson or for further biographical details; the letter was not answered. Porcupine Tail Creek, August 10 1908 Dear Father Jack Wilson, Today I was doing and was very sorry and I was going to send you $6 dollars and was going to -s use to sorry for that I wont to know that some medicine good for you peoples I like to see those medicine, soon as you could and I wont your to send those I send 4 beets belt working I like you to send me those medicine for myself how much it cost those medicine makes those pillis them it and send it to me when I was there and you give me some medicine give me some of those for the belt.it that is all wont to say for you I am glad to shake hand with you that is me your son Bear Comes Out. 7 alana THE PAIUTE PROPHET—DANGBERG 291 Porcupine S. D. Jan 31 1910 Jack Wilson, of Nordyke Nevada Dear Sir or father— I think about make through your children Moccasins you ask for me moccasin measure & send to me but another I received letter and I found in three moccasins you wanted Therefore Ill wait you long time and what you mean Also I didnt not [under] stand an English [when] my folks your [let]ter Read for________ Shieh way. bs. 2 and for I think Best Way for answer for you I think you wants some money but I have not money therefore let you borowed for you now when you have this moccasins What you want give for me if you can sent to me now we have all my things we afraid of this year for therefore what you can tell us let me knowed. «& one of this thing yours country above. The star* we afraid what he doing Let me knowed now That is all I shake hand with you this time Bear Come Out that is me [*Halley’s Comet] Fast Horse (1860-1919), a Yankton Sioux who lived in the Riverside district near Brockton, Mont., was, according to John G. Hunter, superintendent of the Fort Peck Agency, a medicine man and a ‘‘preacher.”’ Brockton, Montana Jan. Ist, 1909. Jack N. Wilson: Father I am [staying] with all my son’s [children] we all still well. am writing letter to you on this [very] [Ha]ppy New Year’s day, [wlell father I heard that wee Bio your things were burned [tell me] thats true. Write to [me] soon. Than with my boys [we all go] an Collect as much money [as possibly] can and I’ll give Mee ee you. Well that’s all I want to say, I am Your Son, Mr. Fast Horse. Brockton, Montana, Feb. 12th, 1909. Mr. Jack Wilson. Dear father:— Father these money are yours. I hope you be glad to get them. When you get the money Please let me know soon. I put the money in two envelopes. Your Son, Fast Horse. PS. There is $32.00 in altogether. 292 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Burn. 164 Brockton, Montana, Valley County, Mar. 7, 1909 Mr. Jack Wilson, Dear father: Father I was very glad to get what you send it to me. So I wrote these few lines to let you know that I got all of them. I got them safe and give them out equally. This is all I want to say, I am Your Son, Fast Horse. Cloud Horse (1851-1923) was one of a delegation of Sioux that visited the prophet in 1890. These men had set down for them in the Teton Dakota dialect an account of the visit which is given in full by Mooney (ibid., pp. 796-798, and 819).* A letter from William Gay, (1868- —), husband of Cloud Horse’s daughter, is given in its proper chronological sequence with the letters of the older man. According to W. O. Roberts, superintendent of the Pine Ridge Agency, William Gay was half Indian and half white; he and his wife were still living at Kyle in 1988. Kyle, 8. Dak, Oct. 9 10. dear father Jack wilson I am going to say a few words to you this morning and I wish you let me Know if you get that moccison and one dollar, which I send it to you last month of may and I want medicine for it so please let me Know I want medicine if you get them now this is all from Your truly son William Gay Kyle, S. Dak. Kyle Post Office March 17, 1911. Dear Father:— Just a few lines to you this morning to let you know something I wrote to you here lately and told youthat I did not get something that you send me Well I made a mistake I did not open the package ever since you send it to me untill this moning that is on the 17 of March and when I open it and looked through the medican you send I found in it the pain that you send so I am very sorry I told you the wrong thing I said I did not get it but I hope you will excuse me for it I made a mistake so that is what I want to let you know that I got all you send me. I got a little scared for a while when I found the paint so I am going to send you money because I have foold you so bad and this morning I am sitting in a Mexican man’s house and there is a young girl there she is my miece she is 14 See footnote 1, p. 283. NCa THE PAIUTE PROPHET—DANGBERG 293 very sick so I want you to pray to the Lord to get here well again for me and when she gets well again I want to let every bod know it so that is whey I want you to helpe me and you aske me to come over to see you so I think Im going to come over whith Red Star and he told me that he send you money and asked you something but you did not answer him so if you want me to come with him I want you to let me knowsoon so this will be all for this time so I shake hand with you and hope to stand solid by you I am your son Cloud Horse. P. 8. I would like to find out if you have any kind of rules for your medicans that you send me if so let me know too -_____-____- the feathers let me know please. Pine Ridge, So. Dak., April 29, 1911. Jack Wilson, Nordyke, Nev. Dear Father: Why do you not write to me. I sit with you and I write to you this letter. I hope I will come to see you. I send you a dollar bill. Why dont you answer me? When you get this letter answer soon, Father This man writing a letter for me but he lives far and this man write for me this letter. This man a good man write for me this letter. I sit with Cloud horse and we write this letter. Your loving son, I shake hands with you, Answer quick when you get this letter. Cloud Horse Address answer to Red Star Pine Ridge, So. Dak. Kyle Post Office Dec 13, 1911 Dear Father:— Your letter has been received and I was very glad indeed to hear from you dear father Now I am going to send you a pair of mocissions but if they are not long enough for you when you write again please send me you foot measure from this day on—lI will try to get the money to send to you. I wish I had it just at present I would send it wright away I think I might get the money soon enough to send it so that is why I say that so. I will get it just as soon as possible and be sure to send it so if you get a letter from me I may have the money in that letter so dear Father this will be all. I can answer you so for your sake all the Indians out here make fun of me but I allways think dear Father that around me you would give me strength. so if you get the money I want that medican and some good feathers & that paint so that is what I want you to send me. So this is all for this time I give a good & hard shaking of the hands to you I hope you have pity on me I remain your son Cloud Man Horse 294. BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bunn. 164 Nothing is known of the John Short Bull who wrote the letter which follows. It is possible that he was a relative of Short Bull, the Sioux chief; this man was one of the delegates who visited the prophet in 1889-90 and later, in 1890, led one of the bands opposing the repressive measures which the Government directed against the “ghost dance’ (Mooney, pp. 817, 843, 849-851).'® This John Short Bull may be the Short Bull who with Kicking Bear instructed the Assiniboin in the “ghost dance’’ in 1902 (see pp. 286, 288). Allen, So. Dak. April 27th 1911. Mr. Jack Wilson, Nordyke, Nevada. Dear father I send you five dollars from Allen P. O. for P. O. money order that time I think you were at Colorado State but the money order returned to me at Allen §8. Dak. and I sent you another five dollars Cash and I never heard from you if you receive the five dollars or not so I want to know all about it. and tell me all about it the news and that we are people all sick. sick all time little fooks but now it all over by this spring and do you know what kind medicine best these sickness Cough and lungs sick and Melease and How we pray it, our god may mistake and tell me all about it these things. Yours. poor son John. Short Bull. Answer soon as possible. The fragment of a letter which follows was apparently written by an Arapaho Indian. According to Superintendent Forrest R. Stone, of the Wind River Agency at Fort Washakee, Wyo., the Sherman Sage, named in this letter, was still living in 1938 and said that he had letters from Jack Wilson after he returned from a visit to the reserva- tion in 1911 or 1912. A James Brown and John Yellow Plume also had letters from the prophet at this time; these, however, have all been lost. Lodge Pole, Mont. March 31 — 1910. My Dear Father, I am so capable to answer your welcome letter I was very glad to hear from you again. My Post Office from my plow is about a quarter of a mile, I received the medicines you send me some time ago. When I got I make a pray meeting with a good-men who have repect of you, and also we have a fest over it. I give the 15 See footnote 1, this paper. at a THE PAIUTE PROPHET—DANGBERG 295 medicines and paints to the fellows crew of 13 and also give some to those who have ask me after I got the paint. I always have my own son to write letters for me but he has been out working about Two weeks he has just come home and he write this letter for me again Samon [Salmon?] Frist Shoot is also a good young man he some times writes for me my wife is The G[ir]l I cannot Trust no other man so this is reason I always __________-_ write for me. The older Indians are still praying for? what you know send I am so anxious to know how to used the medicines and would like to have advice in regards to the medicine The Arapahoe Indians some here about two years ago Their names are Shuman [Sherman] Sage and The Gun These two men claim to see you at your place when they come here they told me lot of news about what you have said I stayed with the two about seven (7) days They made me one hand game stick. Both of the men are my best friends they like me very well I like to know if you will send the medicine rest of the medicines what we ordered in our letter It was hard to get the money this winter that was reason I send you. American Horse and F. W. Antelope, who wrote the letter which follows, were Arapaho Indians; the superintendent of the Wind River Agency reports that both died before 1938. This is not the American Horse, a Sioux chief who was one of the council of men who, in 1889, appointed a delegation to visit the prophet (see Mooney, ibid., p. 820). Arapahoe, Wyoming, Fremont Co. April 30-11 Dear Father in christ, Jack Wilson. today I am thinking of you and I would like to Write you a few lines to you this morning and to let you know that I am well with my folks and also my wife was very Sickness for along time. But she go round now days and and she go down River to take a cold Bath in water and she Said she fells much Better after she take Bath. And rest of Indians are well. Some of Indians are Farming for oats and wheat and some out working for Shearing time. now I want to ask you some thing, my Brother came from Oklahoma and he want me to go with him to your country to visit you, he would like to see you very much. So I wish you Please tell us if is alright to visit you. my Brother he is waiting for his money from Oklahoma. But we would like to hear from you. before we start off. to your Place-and I wish you Please send us little Painted if you got to spare and tell us some news that is if any news from this spring, or anything go on - let us hear from you by return mail. I am yours truly, F. W. Antelope and American Horse. Nothing is known of the man who wrote the following fragment. for ears, has been trouble -_____-- his sore ears in side for two years then he wants medicine for that. William James Rope 296 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLL. 164 A typewritten letter from a neighbor of Jack’s completes the series. Masonic, Calif., April 7, 1911. Mr. Jack Wilson, Yerington, Nevada. Dear Jack: How are all the indians getting along down there ? Please write and tell me. I heard lots of indians died down to Yerington lately. Is thisso? Weare all well here. There is about four feet of snow in Bridgeport. At Uncle Tom’s place there is about seven feet of snow, and the indians are hungry there as they can’t get out. Tom’s folks are all well only they can’t get much to eat. Old man John Craig has been down to Mono Lake and there has been so much snow that he did not come back yet. We all send our kindest regards and hope you will write soon again. Daisy Bell. SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 164 Anthropological Papers, No. 56 FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO, NEW MEXICO By WILLIAM N. FENTON 297 ‘ D | _ n ‘ Ln A z ; rk ro ee y a Th J Ped NS bes ak ak < vive Por, d ( WEE). ST er CUS 4 ‘Ve. Men oe He OPO Ay a 5 ~~ iM, ; ai Ot gs 4 Os ‘i re NS a is 02 V1 woqe'l IncigoloqordinA :: ss OOLKAM WAM OIGAUT 2OaT TA MeLIAMOFTOS i> *3 | hid : VOTATT Vi MALIUW vf | 7 7 SI IOS ee ee ee A ON — oe ie ee i n twee oS - ¥- 4 ; Pi = CONTENTS PAGE Diane ata bee ae ee ote ee at Se a ee 301 ee Oh ek as are a eee cela a pe ee a Se 304 ane meracchy puts down thie DOYS”. —-.200.--2 225-2 Lo Leese 306 UTI 2 BY aM ge lap ig ls TS A rg I oh Mi ee ee 6s EO 307 SIC ee ene See Spiele EE es SR. Se. ee ee Se 307 Ine BANehONs? neta ek Sep ee pace La tet ee Si eerie a 309 PrePsUre 2 eer ee Lesa ee OE ee oe es Se 312 Tdeal Gnerarion ot 16, COUNEH = 6. 3. 25 2 ak oe ee oe 319 SIRE SEN GE CON CEM OES. co ont. Oe ese ett ae i es ee 321 LUNE yO Sig ala le 8 te ale Pg aap ape Deer AU eb 2 at ial lg a spp i, Nae 325 IN ee De ee tk ee A Le See ee Tae 331 Puliomec reece ree CO UEe As nel serie ee Ui a eee Sn 337 Forces for self-correction in the society...__.....-.......-...-.-=-. 341 BS omen ny ess oe en ed et ee Oe ee tal EN 344 ILLUSTRATIONS PLATES FOLLOWING PAGE 74. Taos Pueblo, 1879 (photograph by J. K. Hillers)___........_------ 344 75. Diagram of the political structure of Taos__......-.-.-.----------- 344 mi STUATAOS onAt OND 5 a wei an ets Cre eal ota Rape ine Wen Peet pee mrs cv fv) te BOG iene ee do gener nee t enw ky eee win el she tec ey sean ase n ene eae ES DART EID a ae Pts, 4S Figs ho. nee hace aod odd” awob etiep % 708 et Pe te ee ee ee ee ee rahenaasiptecas ‘ =i MOD eee idee en helps nog mares ain Wen Ws wi tacmaitae swe mai Mie Ne eget 3 ee le ee Sh are oe ale ee oe -ecobtortaa Sis = Se ee ee | ee ~ akakeburn ont .. aasess esiso8 oh nb collveoo seal be a ee ee eee re ee ee ee Te Pee ee ee Pe ay AVOLLARTAURLI ovnrodios . Sa TAIT O26... 2. coe canp os. (ree A vd dqarmotoda) GTi oldout ME le... -..20aT to eintoitta lasiilog edt He FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO, NEW MEXICO By Wituiam N. Fenton THE PROBLEM Which American Indian tribes are ready for self-government and are to be turned loose from Federal control is a question that the United States Indian Service has been trying to decide for several years. Self-government inevitably flows from accustomed ways of behaving politically, and the old ways of political leadership and followership shine through and modify the forms of government that are imposed on tribal society. If this hypothesis is correct, the study of native forms and understanding traditional ways of governing are fundamental to determining the present status of American Indian tribal governments and to measuring how effectively they function before deciding which tribal organizations can stand the shock of release. Native political systems, the nature of leadership and of followership, and the operation of social sanctions behind the law are topics to which social anthropologists are paying increasing attention. The Troquois or Six Nations of New York first aroused my interest in these topics. I carried the field perspective of Indian politics over to the search in libraries and archives for materials on Iroquois political history, and the opportunity to lecture in various universities on primitive politics forced me to compare the Iroquois kinship state with other forms. The comparative method for formulating and testing hypotheses is standard scientific method in the social sciences. With a view to increasing my perspective and in hopes of making a contribu- tion to science and to the governing of men, during the summer of 1950 I proposed to officials of the Bureau of Indian Affairs that I test the preceding hypothesis by visiting three tribal communities located in 1 The fieldwork for this study, during June 1950,was made possible through the cooperation of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, U. S. Department of the Interior, and the Smithsonian Institution, where the writer was senior ethnologist, Bureau of American Ethnology. Travel and subsistence in the field were reimbursed by the Indian Bureau; salary and incidental field expenses by the Smithsonian Institution. The writer particularly wishes to thank his former chief, Dr. M. W. Stirling, director of the Bureau of American Ethnology, and the then officials of the Indian Bureau: Dr. John Provinse, assistant commissioner; Dr. Willard Beatty, the director of education; and D’Arcy McNickle, chief of tribal relations. The report was filed in 1951 and permission was granted to publish it. 301 302 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buuy. 164 separate administrative areas and having different traditions of political organization. I had in mind a Pueblo in the Southwest, a reservation community in Oregon where aboriginally chieftainship was weakly developed and where now the Indian community is enmeshed in industry, and I wanted to study a typical Plains tribe which had accepted a constitution under the Indian Reorganization Act. I sought to investigate the problem of the impact of native patterns of leadership and followership on the interpretations and operations of written constitutions. The problem thus defined rested on six pre- suppositions or expectations: (a@) Americans generally assume that governments do not exist before constitutions are written and the machinery of legislation is set up; (6) participants in Western culture lacking the intercultural viewpoint fail to recognize the diffuse sanc- tions and informal systems of social control which often are at work in building a body of custom law and which may function in societies lacking true government; (c) what then are the sanctions that were operative and what were the forms of social control formerly; (d) how did sanctions continue to operate after formal machinery was set up; (ec) how have existing patterns of political leadership and followership affected the carrying out of administrative policies; (f) how does implementation of policy differ from place to place because of different traditions of political organization and socia! control which preceded it. Typically the problem shifted as the project advanced through the planning, consultation, and the initial field approach stages. Possibly I could only phrase a problem for further investigation, and defining the problem might be of some value to social anthropology. In general, political organization is an undeveloped field in social anthro- pology, at least in the United States. The problem was bound to touch the acculturation process, both as White and Indian cultures interacted and as drift occurred over a span of time within both cultures. Beyond such theoretical considerations, the project, it was thought, might discover some implications of value to the Indian Service. Agency superintendent and the day-school teacher daily met the problems engendered by a conflict of purposes between tribal political values and administrative regulation. Why is it that policies or organizational changes in the Service which make good administrative sense in Washington fail to be accepted by the Indians? What are the vested interests in the old law ways and in outmoded governmental forms which frustrate democratic action under a sound paper consti- tution? How advance understanding between Indian leaders and Indian Service personnel? No oe) «©FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 303 During preliminary conferences in Washington it helped to see how officials in the human resources branch of the Indian Bureau sized up “the problem.”’? Conversations with Indian Bureau officials enabled me to test the problem as I saw it against ‘administrative reality.” There was a good deal of choice among Indian communities where self-government functions under written constitutions. I wanted to see a community that had not voted to come under the Indian Re- organization Act, one having a constitutional government drafted independently of I. R. A., and a representative I. R. A. community. A fourth possibility suggested a community having a long tradition of constitutional government, as among the Five Civilized Tribes of Oklahoma, but such a control was not a crucial consideration in the present research, since the writer had long familiarity with the Seneca Nation of New York. Choice gradually narrowed to three trouble cases—Taos, N. Mex., Klamath, Oreg., and Blackfeet, Mont.— which fulfilled research specifications and were ‘“‘hot spots’ to the Indian Service. Valuable suggestions on places to study and the initial approach to tribal leaders came from D’Arcy MecNickle, Dr. Willard W. Beatty, and Dr. John Provinse of the Bureau of Indian Affairs; and from my colleagues Dr. Edward A. Kennard (formerly of the Indian Service like myself) and Dr. George L. Trager, then staff members of the Foreign Service Institute, United States Department of State. In only one area was there a difference of opinion as to what com- munity to select for study—in the Southwest. I preferred Taos Pueblo, which lies on the border of the Pueblo and Plains culture areas, and has the reputation of being the toughest pueblo for an anthropological investigation. Here wasachallenge. Parsons (1936) had written the basic ethnography, and Trager had published a grammar (Trager, 1946). Taos had been a constant ‘‘problem”’ to the Indian Service for several years; it is rent with factions, and ten- sion had reached a crisis in 1949. Any suggestion bordering on con- stitutional reform meets bitter opposition from the elders. Because conditions were so tense at Taos, Isleta Pueblo was suggested instead. Isleta had passed through the narrow ground of tension and faction- alism to a makeshift compromise (French, 1948), and the writing of its I. R. A. constitution was still fresh in the minds of Indian Service personnel and was being reported by Robert Bunker of United Pueblos Agency, who kindly let me read his manuscript on Pueblo government. For these reasons alone I felt the Isleta experience was history, but Taos politics awaited a chronicler. The case history of Taos factionalism forms the present paper. The findings of the entire study were presented in two companion 304 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bun 164 papers which were read at international meetings in England and Austria during the summer of 1952.” Although the decision of which pueblo to study was deferred until after reaching Santa Fe, where I was to lecture at the Indian Service Summer School, the way to Taos had been opened by Dr. Kennard who was teaching there, and who introduced me to the Taos Day School staff. Among these teacher-students was a member of Taos Pueblo who was to guide me throughout the field session. No other nearby pueblo was represented among the students. Between classes and during free periods I prepared myself for visits to Taos Pueblo without removing to the uncertainties of residence in Taos village. The final decision was taken in consultation with the Superintendent of United Pueblos Agency and his staff. Although Taos has no I. R. A. constitution, its progressive element, in an effort to segregate church and state, had written a constitution and bylaws for conducting civil affairs. A year had passed since the Taos crisis, giving time for the community to settle itself and for individuals to gain some perspective on the recent past. The day- school principal reassured me that fieldwork was possible, and I made two preliminary visits to Taos Pueblo, one to see the place, and the second to attend a ‘‘Corn Dance.”’ By Wednesday, June 14, I de- cided that I could do limited fieldwork by remaining in Santa Fe and commuting to Taos Pueblo several days a week. That day it was tacitly agreed with Indian Service officials that I approach the Taos elders on the structure of their government, find out what I could do about the basis of factionalism—its relations to certain white political parties—and explore what possibilities the old men might see for rapprochement with the dissident element within the pueblo and with the United Pueblos Agency. This was a difficult assignment and I was prepared to fail, although I hoped for partial success. METHOD The initial approach to fieldwork may predetermine success for the investigator. JI was especially cautious about making my first contact at Taos because field conditions there are notoriously difficult. The dilemma lay between observing government protocol and working informally. I could either formally approach the governor and council, which would involve making an issue of my fieldwork in the pueblo, or I could contact directly key men whom Lincoln Steffens (1931, p. 627) called ‘‘principals”’ in the local political setup. There were advantages in either approach, and disadvantages. Something was to be gained by meeting the governor and his staff in council, 3 These papers have been published since this manuscript was written (Fenton, 1955 a and 1955 b). Noeer {® ~FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 305 although in such contacts American Indians have a way of formally introducing an official and then bowing him out of the community without letting him hear or see more than what transpires within the confines of the meeting. ‘That is the protocol due a commissioner, an area director, and persons of consequence. I was prepared to go through the governor and council and explain how as a historian and scientist I could be interested in the structure and procedure of Pueblo government and say I wanted to learn how decisions are reached; I could assert candidly that I was not then an Indian Service employee; I could request their cooperation in my study and volunteer my good offices for composing their own feuds and improving relations with United Pueblos Agency. I had seen the formal ap- proach fail in groups whose temper I knew better: A white man asks an Indian council for permission to do something for their good, he thinks; they vent their aggression against whites by making an issue of the request and saying no. My experience as a fieldworker told me to avoid making an issue of the work, to work informally with principals commencing with the most conservative, not to take up residence at the Taos Day School where I would be as effectively isolated as the school and hospital personnel, and to stay at Santa Fe and make periodic visits to Taos as a tourist. Persons who knew the situation thought this decision wise. “Tf you go to the governor and state your business he will surely call a council. They will set a date and the council will hear you. Bringing up the question of the Taos government will surely open up the recent trouble with the young men—the boys. They will deny your request.” The best approach then was on the informal level through individ- uals. It was agreed. Who, then, is the principal conservative and how approach him? I would talk first to the old men, by their leave to the boys, and last to the principal reformer. There is an established and recognized way of meeting individuals in the pueblo without bothering the gov- ernor’s office. It is going in by the front door, but it is a casual entry, a daily occurrence. One simply takes his family and makes a formal call on another family in the pueblo, being very careful to stop and ask the guide, who is the governor’s deputy in the plaza, for directions. He registers you in the book, you pay the parking fee, and you are qualified tourists. The second or third time he merely waves you on. Whether nine such visits supplemented by a dozen informant inter- views, a day of reading agency records, and reading the manuscript of a book, besides the printed sources, constitutes an adequate sample 370929—57——23 306 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY (Buu. 164 of available sources can scarcely be argued. A month would be far better than 2 weeks, 20 informants would give better balance than a handful of principals. Informants should be seen more than once on different days to provide a measure of individual outlook and a check on information. But field conditions being what they are at Taos— a facade of polite affability and a wall of reticence, which are the psychological counterparts of the sunlit plaza and the wall bounding and screening Pueblo culture from the outside world—one does one’s best in the time available and gets out. There is some advantage in being one of 20,000 tourists, for numbers bring anonymity. It would be advantageous to see the community after tourist season during the late autumn when comes the period of ceremonial retreat. THE HIERARCHY PUTS DOWN “THE BOYS” The political struggle at Taos Pueblo centers on the issue of how long the hierarchy of priests can go on dominating the maturing generation. ‘“The boys” now comprise some 104 veterans of the last war and as the liberal element in the pueblo they enjoy the sympathy if not the leadership of a few old men; they call themselves ‘‘the people’s party.”” The hierarchy controls the council, they oppose all innovations from the outside world, they consider the uninitiated boys upstarts, and they are against the Federal Indian Agency. Tension radiates beyond the wall to the people of Taos village where the resident artists, writers, and tourist entrepreneurs line up with the hierarchy, exhibiting a proprietary if not precious attitude toward the Indians of Taos Pueblo. Support for the young men is diffuse, although they enjoy the confidence of veterans’ organizations. The Agency attempted unsuccessfully to maintain a neutral position in the struggle, which reached and passed a climax in the roadblock incident in May 1949, producing a stalemate which I found a year afterward. But the Taos situation is not a simple age grade struggle between generations vying for control of village politics in order to introduce or exclude certain innovations in the economy. It is rather a Fascist revolution in which one old man of the hierarchy by virtue of status and a strong personality dominates the society. Big Earrings Man, BEM as [I shall call him in this report, occupies the apex of the Taos power structure. As leader of Big Earrings kiva group he holds the most important religious status in the village hierarchy and nominates, in fact, the civil officers. His status as leader of his kiva is next to that of Cacique, but the present Cacique is a weak man. BEM’s position as conductor of village ceremonials alone would satisfy the ordinary Pueblo Indian man with all the responsibility he would care ao in PaP, FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 307 to assume, but Big Earrings Man, taking advantage of an otherwise equable society, aggressively reaches out to control every power posi- tion in the community. “Go see BEM,” I was advised, “he is everything. When you reach the pueblo, ask the guide to direct you there. Take the family and make an informal personal call. He will be flattered.” BASIC DATA Taos is the northernmost Pueblo Indian town and the most spec- tacular settlement on the Rio Grande (pl. 74). Built at the edge of a mountain range, which screens the Pueblo world from the southern plains, its twin four- or five-storied apartment houses rise from the plaza on the north and south sides of a mountain stream. Some 800 persons seek shelter within the pueblo when they are all inside the wall for the winter period of quiet.» In summer, more and more Taos Indians occupy scattered houses built outside the wall but in close proximity, and a few families move out to distant ranches for aday or twoatatime. Trager noted a tendency for families to live outside, in the summer houses, all the year around. It is as if the intensity of town life during winter ceremonies, capped by prying summer tourists, drives people to the suburbs and even to the country for relief. Acoma, Isleta, Laguna, Santo Domingo, and Zufi all exceed Taos in popula- tion, but Taos, nevertheless, is a large society for an American Indian town and life is intense.‘ Farming has been the mainstay of Pueblo Indian economy, which the Taos people supplement by hunting. They keep horses and cattle besides other domestic animals—poultry, cats, and dogs. Of late years one-half of the people, if not more, work in town at labor, commuting daily, the men as filling station attendants, gardeners, models; and the women as cooks and maids. The tourist business has been increasingly important, becoming, in fact, the main source of political revenue. Fifteen years ago the town treasury was kept stuffed into 10 leggings, and it came mainly from the tourist collec- tion. The Pueblo fund and whether it should be kept stuffed in leggings or deposited in the bank has been a source of contention for more than 20 years. The history of this fund, its innovation, invest- ment, decline, and corruption, belongs to the case history of a progres- sive governor, to which we shall return. VALUES Certain traditional patterns and values are basic to an understand- ing of Pueblo Indian politics. Of these, cooperation, unanimity, and 3 921, official agency census; about 120 must be away. 4 The term “‘community’’ has been applied to the maximal group of persons who normally reside together in face-to-face association. Such communities rarely embrace more than 1,000 individuals (Murdock, 1950). 308 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buun. 164 considerateness are here discussed. Community work exerts a strong claim on the loyalty of every Pueblo Indian male. Even the young veteran who wants the franchise manifests willingness to work for the community. And those few who shirk community work by way of civil disobedience must experience considerable personal discomfort and anxiety at withdrawing from active participation in joint efforts. As in other societies, a man’s conscience at Taos re- flects the social sanctions. A man knows that community work is his responsibility. If he can’t go he hires someone to work for him. The officials set aside one ditch for delinquents who fail to show up the first time community work is called for ditch cleaning. The few delinquents take longer cleaning one ditch, and they are conspicuous examples to the pueblo. What really disturbs the old men, however, is that certain young men fail to take part and defy time-honored sanctions. Parsons (1939, pp. 107-109, 111) has remarked how the cooperative person is highly esteemed and how the spirit of cooperation reaches from the household to the hierarchy. At fiestas each woman sweeps the space before her door, snow removal is called from the housetops, and of all communal undertakings, work on irrigation ditches takes precedence at the annual spring cleaning and throughout the farming season. Why do people cooperate, Parsons speculates? She dis- misses an automatic or magical sanction, noting the general motivation when everybody is helping. She ascribes the root to the principle of mutual aid—‘Because at any time anyone may need help, therefore, all help one another.” A better approach to understanding the present situation, perhaps- is Malinowski’s identification of law with the withdrawal of reciprocal services by a party to an agreement when another party has failed to observe a social norm. The young men will not work because the old men will not give them a hearing in council; the old men will not hear them because they have devalued the council in gossip; the young men embarrass their “fathers” by not taking part in saint’s day dances. The old men will not admit the young men to political participation until they have been initiated and have worked up through the ranks to the council. Unanimity is an accepted priaciple in Taos decisions. ‘Let us move along together . . .,” say the chiefs on reaching an agreement after much discussion. Conformity is the outward manifestation of unanimity in all Taos doings from dress to house types, to participation in dances and community work. As in other societies where unanim- ity is the rule, the council can more easily apply a negative than a positive sanction. Unable to reach agreement, no decision follows or a request is denied. In fact, the council cannot function in the Noge) 1 °' ~«FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 309 face of a large area of disagreement. Anciently, a disagreeing faction might remain in possession of the pueblo while the conservatives removed to found a new town. No one can quit the present situ- ation—those who want peace have nowhere else to go. So the faction in power produces a quasi-unanimity by simply not calling eligible councillors who are known to disagree. A few dissenters oblige by not attending council. The rule of considerateness is the other face of political sovereignty (Bunker, MS.). ‘For the source of Pueblo sovereignty, day by day, is the will and the continued interest of its individual members. They will delegate power only as they can exact concessions from those who will govern them” (Bunker, MS.). Pueblo sovereignty allows some measure of individual variation within set forms so long as the innovator does not threaten the structure; so much the better if he makes obeisance to authority. It is customary usage for men to wear their hair parted and bound in two “‘braids,”’ to affect leggings and the blanket, and to remove the heels from shoes or to wear moccasins. Most younger men wear shoes and trousers. But on St. Anthony’s feast day my guide went back to the house before going down to the plaza and loosely wrapped a pink cotton blanket around his trousers. The gesture was out of consideration for his father who, as a councillor, would be singing. The rest of the time he goes about in shoes and trousers. He would not deny the Pueblo’s considered requirement of some minimum adaptation to its standards. Those militant younger veterans who consistently deny minimal standards get nowhere. Officials, too, are bound by this rule to reflect in their official capacities and in personal behavior the considered wishes of the people. When the rule is broken by the most exalted member of the hierarchy, the pueblo seethes with gossip from the elders to the smallest child. ‘Big Earrings Man has argued ad hominem in council,” say the elders; “BEM must have got hungry for steak,” say the children when he has gone again with a delegation to Albu- querque. ‘Most of all,” they say, “BEM is a bastard.’’® DIFFUSE SANCTIONS Gossip is a most powerful sanction at Taos. ‘Since the character of the chiefs should be above suspicion and a man’s behavior affects the validity of his ceremony,” writes Parsons (1939, p. 154), “town gossip . . . is not idle or barren; it is public opinion bringing pressure upon those whose behavior or character is believed to be vital to the efficacy of ritual...” Children are urged not to gossip. “A little thing gets big,” said my guide. Oftentimes scandalous tales reach such proportions that the matter lands in the governor’s office. Under Spanish law a bastard may not hold civil office, 310 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buy. 164 One of the sparks, as we shall see, which ignited the crisis of 1949, arose from gossip among the young veterans that the council was inefficient. Public criticism and the scorn of one’s neighbors was all the punish- ment meted out to the informants of E. C. Parsons. BEM’s zealotry in religious matters stems from anxiety and guilt over Parson’s exposé. In 1939 when Parson’s monograph ‘Taos Pueblo,” written in 1936, first appeared in the village and was interpreted to the old men, they were aghast and shocked that ‘‘secrets” had been divulged to a white person. An inquisition was held, and all that kept guilty parties from physical punishment was that they were strong politically. BEM’s in-laws, his wife and her people, were Mrs. Parson’s principal informants. Social status gave them a certain immunity from punishment, but not from the sanctions of gossip and public opinion. It was punishment enough to hear themselves openly censured in council. My guide said that joking to make fun of each other is not taken seriously, but I suspect that any criticism bites deep. Note that during the winter ceremonials clowns called the Black Eyes put on a backwards dance, in which some of the men appear as transvestites and imitate dress and dancing of Santa Clara Pueblo men and Navaho women; they become the objects of practical jokes, indicating perhaps how seriously Taos people take remarks about their appearance and demeanor. Apprehbensiveness is a Pueblo trait which ethnologists generally have noticed. Parsons (1939, p. 67) cites the case of a Taos victim of witchcraft who feared to make reprisals on the witch: “Fear of witchcraft, fear of ridicule, fear of public opinion!’ One avoids a public stir. Pueblo officials whom I interviewed would release pent-up tensions and pour out information for several consecutive hours. Then often I could not get a second interview because individuals would feign some other business, or they simply would not keep appoint- ments. Indeed persons must be swept with waves of guilt and suffer anxiety at having revealed something. In a closed social system almost any admission is a breach of security. There is some suggestion at Taos, as at Hopi, that the wealthy individual is open to suspicion. Kennard, in his Santa Fe lectures, observed that suspicion takes the form of jealousy with witchcraft becoming the covert channel for release of aggressive impulses.® Whereas no legal sanctions are imposed by the hierarchy on inividual self-improvements, since they neither create new roles relative to the community nor set up authorities rival to community law (Bunker, *I once mentioned to my guide that I had photographed a certain person on my first visit. “Oh yes, he is a noted sorcerer,’’ was his only comment. Noge, { ~=FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 311 MS.), diffuse controls intervene to keep the individual from distin- guishing himself propertywise from his neighbors. I am not aware how much open stealing occurs at Taos, but a “‘keep out” sign on one corral forewarned trespassers, and I observed that persons of property padlocked outbuildings, including hencoops. Trager’s informants said the padlocks were proof against Mexicans, which I suspect is a convenient euphemism for certain persistent offenders in the pueblo. A third person expressed fear that the windows in his new place would be broken. I wonder, under what circumstances do individuals resort to stoning a person or his property? In this case the individual has set himself up as a trader outside the pueblo but within the reserva- tion, catching the tourists before they come under the eyes of the governor’s staff. Taos society has an ample reservoir of aggression, and a certain proportion of it is free floating and gets projected or transferred to other persons. There is first the enormous repression from the hier- archy to make youth conform which is protested in various ways and ultimately accepted. Every Pueblo official comes in for a full share of abuse, but the total welfare of the pueblo as manifest in its most public group activities is not questioned. Any white man is a con- venient target, and United States Indian Service personnel get the full blast, with choke barrel reserved for the superintendent or area director. ‘‘Get behind them and push them,’’ BEM told me; “when we see what you have done in that direction, we will be ready to talk further.” Accommodation to Pueblo ways is the other face of Pueblo char- acter. From dress to ritualism one conforms ultimately. Resist white ways of change and accept the stability of Pueblo ways. The escape lies through ceremony, by going on down to the end together. The relationship between cause and effect is not considered; the ceremonies have a kind of arbitrary magical sanction of their own, like “work” in our own culture (Parsons, 1939, p. 97). In view of all this, two questions stand unresolved: (1) How explain Taos violence in view of Pueblo values which suppress it?? The shooting of BEM’s cows in trespass, threatened use of firearms by the boys against the hierarchy, and the roadblock at the bridge burst by the veterans—bespeak violence. What is the frequency of overt acts?® (2) How does BEM maintain his power in the face of diffuse 7 One reader of the manuscript report, Dr. George L. Trager, supplies an answer to the first question: “In Taos, I think violence, per se, is not ideologically undesirable. There is to be no violence within the group, but violence as a weapon against outsiders is there all the time, and dissidents are outsiders. The dissidents, themselves, expecting violent resistance, use violence in anticipation.’’ 8 A second reader, himself a member of the Taos Pueblo, pointed to three historical incidents which are precedents for violence. ‘‘The reoccurrence of violence may be noted in the Pueblo Revolt of 1680, in the shooting of Governor Bent at Taos in the mid-19th century, and the physical clash between officers of the Pueblo and the ‘Peyote Boys’ about 1920.” 312 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLL. 164 sanctions? Answers to these questions await further fieldwork, but there are hints where to look. Taos has a dominantly Pueblo pattern of culture, but anthropologists see with Parsons Plainslike attributes in Taos culture which give it an almost schizoid character. The very physical appearance of the people and their dress suggests the southern Plains. They love to sing Plains war songs to the tambourine drum. When the Kiowas visit them, the Taos engage in horseplay, threatening and sometimes throwing an unsuspecting Kiowa giant into the stream. Threats of physical force are not Pueblolike. The “boys” threaten gunplay on the Council, and it is unwarranted to assume as Pueblos that they would not raid the Governor’s office and seize the canes of office. When a Taos says that violence was barely avoided when several respected elders dissuaded the boys from an outbreak, the Indian Service should listen. The boys did drive through a human roadblock at the bridge. We suspect that BEM maintains his prestige in the face of criticism because of his fundamental integrity with respect to the religious duties which he exercises in the community. In the eyes of the people of Taos Pueblo, he is their most effective representative at Albu- querque; having made a reputation for standing off officialdom, he is treated with respect and feared. Personally, he is fearless. He is not afraid to back up the instruments of Pueblo government with legal sanctions, with the threat or even use of physical force. He is decisive. Moreover, Pueblo society has no way of dealing with the individual who stands out above criticism. STRUCTURE In the development of Taos society, social control has not been left entirely to value system and to diffuse sanctions, but certain control jobs have been delegated to specified units of the social struc- ture. Taos society places the organized force of the community be- hind certain individuals and has given them the job of determining and enforcing general social policy. Some individuals have more than one job. Accordingly, the individuals whom Indian Service officials meet at Taos are acting in the capacity of civil officials. In these roles they are puppets manipulated by their other selves or by other persons who may not be present.. The inner covert system is a theocracy; its outer facade is civil government. The men of author- ity are priests, or they are nominated and controlled by priests. The Indian Service seldom penetrates beyond the Taos concept of the wall, a kind of iron curtain, which delimits the inner society and screens it from the outside world. Are the functions of church and state separable? How in this situation does the personal element enter to allow a strong man to come to power? How can the Indian Service AntEpor Par. FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 313 get inside the wall to reach the people? Can the people get beyond their own wall to reach the Indian Service? ® The structural outlines of Pueblo government have been described (Laswell, 1936; Parsons, 1936, 1939; Aberle, 1948). This report, therefore, treats certain aspects of structure in some detail and at- tempts to interpret these data in the light of a problem set forth in the above questions. If we in Washington shall understand the ‘‘problems” of the pueblo, we must first understand its government. I put this proposition to a headman who replied: Way back in the time when the Indians emerged from the ground here in North America, they had the form of government which they now have. When the Spaniards came a civil front was overlaid on the old government and the man called Governor was awarded a cane by the Spanish colonial ruler. The cane was the symbol of office. The Government which the Spanish set up was like that of any other Spanish community: Governor, Lt. Governor, Sheriffs, and Fiscales. But the old Indian government continued at Taos behind the facade of the Gov- ernor and his staff. The Governor’s staff includes ten men, as follows [we enumer- ated these on our fingers to be certain that I would remember them and that we had the proper number]: First, Governor; second, Lt. Governor; third, Sheriff, an Assistant Sheriff, and a third man who is an Assistant Sheriff; sixth, the Fiscal; seventh, the Assistant Fiscal; and three Deputy Fiscales” —making 10 in all who comprise the governor’s staff and who are to all intents and purposes the civil government of the pueblo. The governor’s staff has jurisdiction over matters happening within the “‘wall’’ of the pueblo. The sheriffs are peace officers; they main- tain order, answer complaints made to the governor, investigate, and bring to trial persons guilty of misdemeanors and other crimes. The governor’s staff is a municipal court with a jury of eight men: The governor and the lieutenant governor, one of whom presides, the second usually being prosecutor, and the jury consisting of the other eight. In the meetings of this court, the lieutenant governor renders final decision and assesses the fine. The sheriff is called “Mexican” governor and is third in line. There is a device of his taking the disputants into a sideroom and suggesting that they settle out of court without going before the governor and his officers. No ® My Taos reader makes these observations: (1) How get inside the wall? The United Pueblos Agency could easily reach most of the people by direct mail, a distribution of information to which the Pueblo gov- ernment does not object. Mail is not restricted to the governor’s office and the council. Mail is delivered in town at the post office. Thus UPA could inform the people it serves. (2) How get over the wall? Special trips to the Agency by a few families would be effective. A few fam- ilies at first would dare to go to Albuquerque to complain. A few soon snowballs into many. But the Agency discourages them and maintains a hands-off policy. Heads of families formerly could have raised complaints as questions to council. This practice was 8 means of sanction on the governor and council at the Pueblo, and it prevented people from going outside and complaining of the shortcomings of their govern ment. (3) The Catholic priest is a key person and has the sanctioned privilege of delivering sermons. The priest has tenure and the high respect which the Indians have for religion would vouchsafe his person. 314 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Butn. 164 fine is assessed. It is easier and less time consuming. It reduces tension. But this is not the whole government of the pueblo. This is the government which was again confirmed by President Lincoln in 1863, after the territory was taken over from Spain, on which occasion a second set of canes was given to the governor and the war captains. The war chief or war captain and the lieutenant war captain and their staff of 10 men number 12 in all, a carryover from earlier days. Their duties are to protect the village from outside aggression, and, in recent years, they have jurisdiction of lands outside the wall; they oversee use of land for hunting, supervise control of crops, watch out for trespassers, supervise maintenance and repair of fences, control grazing rights on forest lands, and serve as fire wardens. Just as the fiscales direct community work in the village and keep up the irrigation ditches, so the war captains take care of the fences and graz- ing rights. But questions of land use repose in the council. The governor’s Office is specifically charged with maintenance of irriga- tion ditches. Now since Mexicans live below Indian lands, the governor’s office has the job of settling disputes arising over water rights from irrigation ditches. The council and the governor have jurisdiction also over parceling out of lands, over rents, and over selling of lands. The war captain’s staff of 12 plus the governor’s staff of 10 never meet as a council of 22. The concept of the “wall” epitomizes the primary functions of government: internal security and protection from outside aggres- sion. The Taos wall which formerly fenced out enemies—now the whites—is both a physical entity and a psychological screen. It makes a convenient division of labor between the staffs of the governor and the war captain ‘The first is called “inside” chief, the latter “outside” chief (Aberle, 1948, p. 38). But the governor’s staff, in additon to having jurisdiction over all happenings inside the wall and directing community work—clearing ditches, sweeping the plaza, planning dances, repairing churches, plastering—conducts external political affairs of the pueblo, maintaining relations with the Agency, greeting and guiding tourists through the pueblo, levying parking fees and camera permits, and, in general, protecting the Cacique and headmen within from the whites outside. It would appear that the governor’s and war captain’s staffs have overlapping functions outside the wall, and I am not quite clear how the Taos people themselves make the distinction. If I am not mis- taken, the governor’s staff is far busier and the war captain’s staff has fewer jobs to perform now than formerly. The practice of the war captain’s office differs markedly from the ideal concept of ‘‘outside chief” (Aberle, 1948, p. 38). Actually the war captain’s staff has Antaror. Par. FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 315 some duties inside the wall. At the St. Anthony’s Day dance (June 13) I noted the presence of a staff of men atop both north and south sidehouses. ‘The governor and his staff were on the north pueblo; and the war captain and his staff on the south housetop. For com- munity work the staff is split between the two houses." Commu- nity work is called from the housetops; the governor or one of his staff goes aloft and cries out what work is to be done and when, and on the day appointed a crier goes up again to call the people out. Attendance is checked and sanctions imposed on delinquents. Sum- mons to council are called in the evening, sometimes following a dance in the plaza. A full council of the Taos Pueblo comprises four classes of members: (1) The governor of the year and the lieutenant governor (sometimes including the eight members of his staff); (2) the war captain and lieutenant war captain (and possibly the 10 members of his staff) ; (3) councillors or principales “ who are the veterans of the first offices in the above classes; and (4) the Cacique and the six kiva chiefs or headmen. The latter are priests and heads of associations and they are frequently of the third class, occasionally accepting offices of classes 1 and 2. Class 4 constitutes the covert government of Taos, for the Cacique and his staff control all policy within the Pueblo wall and those who front for them outside make no fundamental decisions. When one of the headmen feels impelled to accept the governorship or goes along on delegations to the Agency or to Washington, he represents the hierarchy and is in fact the government of the Pueblo. As long as the headmen remain disinterested, more and more authority diffuses to the governor and his staff. At such times the staff have been considered proper members of the council. It is a fact, however, that the governor and war chief and their officers serve entirely with- out compensation. Hence no one really seeks the office, observes my Taos reader. The total council numbers between 29 and 40. Its size depends on whether the fiscal and assistant fiscal, sheriffs, and how many helpers of the war captain are called. The number seems to vary. Both the governor and war captain have secretaries, who are often staff mem- bers. Quite likely the staff of the year is called, and the following persons who have served in previous years: War captain and the war captain’s first three helpers; governor, lieutenant governor (governor’s right-hand man), head sheriff (governor’s left-hand man), and head fiscale (Aberle, 1948, p. 47). I stress this point of variation because it gives rise to misunderstanding: men who have served in junior 1 Actually, for community work there is no division of the staff according to a Taos reader. The war chief and his staff are responsible for getting the Southside people to the dance group. The staff is merely split north and south by convenience during community work. “#7*3 11 Not to be confused with Steffens’ “‘principal,’”’ although they may be the same. 316 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Burr 164 capacities feel neglected for not being called to council. While the constant appointment of new officers theoretically multiplies the number of the council, minor offices are accorded to younger men, and when they are not moved up to lieutenant grade, they do not become bona fide members of the council, say the old men. Also, the opera- tion of factionalism contributes to and is fostered by passing the offices around in a narrow kinship group. Just what degree of limit kinship imposes on Taos government I was unable to find out.” The council proper of the old men or principales is presided over by the Cacique, who in final analysis could be the real governor of the pueblo. But he is not for several reasons. His office is hereditary in the male line. Traditionally he has upheld the Pueblo ideal of consid- erateness, listening only when the others have reached a decision, epitomizing the delegated sovereignty of the people, and intervening only when convinced the public will is being violated. ‘Nothing is brought to their attention on which there is not unanimous agree- ment,’’ writes Bunker (MS). Hope might lie in this office and person but for one thing. The present Cacique at Taos is a weak man, I am told, and “he is like a child,” one leader said, and easily influenced. Theoretically when any issue affecting the whole tribe arises the Cacique is spokesman of the whole tribe. The present Cacique served once as governor (about 1940), and he is surely known to all members of the pueblo; but he leaves executive matters to his staff, to Big Earrings Man in particular. The six kiva leaders may have equally important religious offices in conducting the ceremonies, but evidently four function more fully in politics. Two kivas are not represented among the so-called headmen. This is interesting, since Parsons says there were formerly 8 kivas at Taos, and it would look as if the present 6 are dwindling to 4. Kiva affiliation is without regard to residence on the north side or the south side of the pueblo, but a true moiety system functions ceremonially. The moieties are named sexually, ‘male’ and ‘“‘female,” and direc- tionally, ‘‘north” and “south,” corresponding to the two sides of town. On the north side are Big Earring people, Day or Snow people, and Knife people kivas; Feather, Old-Axe, and Water people kivas are on the southside, as may be seen in the diagram of the political structure of Taos Pueblo (pl. 75). The heads of Snow and Feather kivas still sit on the council but are not among the headmen. And actually Old-Axe and Water people kivas are south of the wall. Every initiated adult male belongs to a kiva group, but the number and composition 12 With reference to this statement, Trager (personal communication) comments: ‘‘ This is consonant with a general impression I have always had that Taos differs from other pueblos in actually having more choices of action available. These are prescriptions, true, but there are ways around them. Factionalism is, as it were, at home in the culture. One doesn’t go out and start a new pueblo (in the old days), one simply fights or tries deviousness or takes on power.’’ None)" ~FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 317 of kiva groups vary. Beyond this and the discussion in Laswell (1936) and Parsons (1936, 1939) of how youths are assigned by their parents to kivas and trained, I got no further information. The picture of how the kivas function in electing the governor of the year, however, is fairly clear if a bit schematic. The headmen of the kiva groups serve as staff to the Cacique and they are the covert government of the pueblo. ‘Formerly the Taos Council consisted only of the chiefs of kiva societies and was probably less conspicuous,” writes Parsons (1939, p. 146). As “grandfathers” they occupy the top of the hierarchy. Of the present four headmen, two are more important than the others. Traditionally, ‘‘the chief of the Big (or Abalone) Earring people is the chief of the three kivas on the north side of town. He is town chief and president of the council.”’ Alternately he and Water Man, who is chief of the three southside kivas, direct the educa- tion of youths and lead the sacred August pilgrimage to Blue Lake. Water Man may be Cacique (Parsons, 1939, p. 121), but he is not at present. Parsons noted a tendency for the office of headman like that of Cacique to pass in the male line of primogeniture or to the nearest kin, by an officeholder giving a son to a kiva and training him for the role; this tendency was confirmed only for Cacique by my Taos critic. As in all of the Rio Grande pueblos, it is the town chief and the “orandfathers”’ at Taos who appoint the governor and his staff and all other secular officers who since the Spanish Royal edict of 1621 have stood between the true government of the Pueblo and foreigners. Parsons (1939, p. 147) contends that even the secular offices are care- fully apportioned by ceremonial groups. Obviously, Big Earrings Man holds the key position in the power structure. To quote informant D: “Nominations for civil officers are made by four headmen, leaders of the ceremonies, on the last day of December. Each of the headmen has the right to name aman. Members of the council don’t know who will be nominated, and as many as four names may be submitted if each headman has a candidate. Then they vote, and the two with the majority of votes are voted on again. Cacique conducts the election, which is really a caucus.” The Taos caucus system offers one of the most interesting examples of the operation of checks and balances in primitive politics and is quite unknown to the literature of social anthropology. If the system functioned as it has evolved in theory, the people of Taos woulP be protected from domination by the hierarchy. But Taos is a theocracy, and the priests are politicians, and they have perverted the system to their own ends. But there is an ideal pattern. The hereditary Cacique holds a moiety system in balance. The moieties, as we have seen, consist of six kiva groups oriented north and south and ascribed to ‘‘male’’ and ‘“‘female”’ categories. The latter 318 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY (BULL. 164 are comprised within caucus lines, as in the diagram. The first two north-side kivas, Big Earring people and Day people are linked as female with Feather people kiva, which is No. 4, on the south side. These three female kivas comprise a caucus, which meets underground at Big Earring kiva, on the north side, under the chairmanship of its headman, to advance a candidate for governor. The second, or male caucus, is comprised of the third north side (Knife people) kiva and the two remaining on the south side of town, Old-Axe and Water people, which meet as a caucus in Water people kiva under its head- man to find a candidate. Likewise the Cacique by himself may think of a third candidate. Actually, the Cacique, being of the Water people kiva, knows what is going on there and may in theory also be its headman, and might even accept candidacy, and be elected governor of the year. So the leader of the female caucus may report through the Cacique or directly at the convention which now always takes place underground in the main female kiva of the Big Harring people. The headman or religious leader of the Big Earring kiva presides over the convention, since he is host. The first round of voting eliminates one of the candidates, if there are three, and the two remaining become the candidates for election. When a tie occurs, it is broken by appealing to the first passing member of the public, even a little child, that is encountered by a messenger sent up the ladder from below. He says in effect, ‘‘The grandfathers are locked in argument and cannot agree between A and B for Governor of the Year. Who shall it be?” The first response settles the issue. And the public may look with fond pride upon some boy who elected the governor that year. My Taos critic, now a grown man, enjoyed this honor. It is easy to understand how the system itself plays into the hands of the religious leader of the first kiva. He has the edge on all caucuses which meet in his kiva, since as host he initiates the speaking. While in theory his opposite balances his power, and the Cacique is supposed to maintain an equilibrium between the two moieties, we shall see how two weak personalities are dominated by a strong man in a key position. It may be a footnote on personal history that the religious leader of the male moiety was a reasonably liberal person until he became religious leader of the south side; then he tight- ened up. New-found conservatism supported the position of his opposite number in the north side moiety. The latter holds office despite two alleged anomalies—that he is a bastard, and that one who has drawn blood may not hold office in the Pueblo religion. The facts, nevertheless, are most difficult to ascertain. Informant D stated that the Cacique’s sole job is to conduct the election and swear in the officials after the perfunctory validation Ate PAP’ FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 319 by the county clerk, and that he has no other functions. The De- cember caucuses, moreover, according to this informant, ideally are held at the Cacique’s house and he presides. The headmen sit in the center and the councillors range around the room. The caucus is conducted after the manner of council meetings, described by another informant, A. Four possible types of council meeting including various personnel were described to me: (1) Cacique and the six headmen; (2) the governor and his staff; (3) the full council, ““whole body of the council,” which treats civil affairs; and (4) a factional council, when Big Ear- rings Man tells the governor to call only a few men to hold a “secret gathering.”” There are no meetings of the women, but there seems to be some mechanism for consulting the women before reaching a deci- sion on certain issues. When the Commissioner of Indian Affairs visits Taos, type 2 or type 3 meeting is convened, depending on whether he wants to meet the governor’s staff or the whole council. In August 1949 the then Commissioner met the governor’s staff, which, of course, comprised the factional henchmen of Big Earrings Man. It was clear that a factional council denied the GI’s a meeting on the veterans’ program because certain other members of the council were present waiting for a meeting with the superintendent at the day school. Although in final analysis the hierarchy dominates the council and the town chief leads the conservative faction, the Taos Pueblo Council may be a more democratic organization and not the totalitarian theocracy that White and Parsons have described. In full council the councillors can sanction a nomination by any of the headmen by supporting or not supporting it. Arguments may get intense. Councillors have learned how to make their own will and the considered will of the pueblo prevail over the headmen. That Big Earrings Man resorts to not calling the full council shows how powerful are these sanctions and how bureaucratic and totalitarian methods destroy democratic action. Some of my information on the council is indeed untrustworthy, and it needs testing in the field. Remember that I did not experience a council. In fact, Big Earrings Man seemed as anxious as I to postpone a meeting as long as possible. He would tell the governor what he needed to know. IDEAL OPERATION OF THE COUNCIL “Before Big Earrings Man came to power, the council used to work wonderfully. They were very cooperative among themselves and they worked well with the Agency. (Ordinarily the council meets at the governor’s house, but Cacique can call a meeting at his own house.) The governor used to have his secretary read any pending matters of business to the council and turn the matter over to the Cacique. 320 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Butn. 164 Cacique has an interpreter who serves all members of the council. The council, seated around the room, one by one speak their minds on the problem. Each man gave his opinion and spoke impersonally to the question, never to a personality, followed by the next man on his right. Cacique sits in a certain place—the side of the room is not important—and his staff, the headmen, near him. Friends confer with neighbors en route to council and sit adjacently in conference. The circuit of speaking goes to the right and returns to the Cacique, who keeps track of the debate in his head. He proclaims a decision. When only half are agreed, he resubmits the question; someone may meanwhile be called in to interpret whether the innovation is good or bad. The decision is turned over by Cacique to governor and staff who have been present during the debate. Meanwhile governor’s secretary is taking notes. If the matter involves sending a delegation, the Cacique may so decide and name the party and appropriate money for travel; a detail like a telegram or a letter is left to the governor.” “This is the way it used to be.” The governor’s secretary and the interpreter occupy positions of potential influence in Taos affairs since many of the councillors are illiterate and most of them know English quite imperfectly. Both offices, like that of treasurer, result from white contact. The question of misinterpretation has arisen frequently in recent councils; Big Earrings Man has employed a series of interpreters who serve as long as they do his bidding. The interpreter likewise can become the instrument of Agency policy. The roles of secretary and treasurer may be combined. Before 1935 and maybe now, the tribal money was kept in some 10 leggings— “two dollar bills of the old large issue and hundred dollar bills all rumpled up and stuffed in the legging.’”’ One treasurer insisted before he took office that the moneys be deposited in a bank. “No,” they said, “that is the white man’s way and we can’t trust the banks.” The method explained of depositing and checking out funds on order of the council remained unconvincing until the council asked a neutral third party who confirmed. Then a later treasurer got to drinking. The governor did not discover how the tribal funds were being drawn on until nearly the end of the year, when the embezzler took to the bush and could not be found for an accounting to the retiring governor and council. The shortage of funds at the new year occasioned a “grand jury” investigation. Characteristically, the council, which is the court, wanted to try members of the retiring administration individ- ually, and equally characteristically, the defendants insisted on collective security: They would all be present in the council chamber during the trial. By winning the concession that they all be present Nee,’ «FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 321 and by pleading that the shortage of funds was the work of an individ- ual under the influence of alcohol, a young reformer got them off, but incurred the enmity of Big Earrings Man. This case started a rift between the boys and the old men. Resuming the statement of ideal procedure, the council reserves all policy questions affecting the whole pueblo, and it delegates only the minor business of the community to the governor and staff. Similarly, the governor refers matters of policy to the councillors for considera- tion and recommendation before taking action. Although the governor and lieutenant governor are the officials with whom the Agency in Albuquerque is concerned, in effect the council is the true government of the pueblo. And most delegations going outside the pueblo therefore include the governor and lieutenant governor, who are merely fronting for the council, and one or two councillors, pre- sumably to witness their behavior and attest to the council how they behaved. When it has been expedient to send only one or two men, BEM usually goes along with the governor to tell him what to say. In this respect BEM reminds me of the Government official in our own society who likes to travel, refuses to delegate authority, and enjoys the roles attached to power statuses. THE JOB OF GOVERNOR “The governor of the year,” as he is called, is then the surrogate for the council. If at first glance he appears to have authority, such is begrudged him by the council, and he seems equally unable to delegate it to his staff. He still must bear the irksome details of law enforce- ment, domestic relations, community work, and arrangements with outsiders, including the Federal Government. He is the “fall guy” for the Pueblo: there are jobs to do, authority is begrudged him, and he is being continually undermined by public opinion and checked from above, and heis not paid. But Bunker (MS,) has noted four techniques which are peculiar to Pueblo governors and which enable them to survive: (1) self-deprecation; (2) infinite resourcefulness in changing the subject; (3) quick, almost impersonal countering of personal attack; and (4) a sense of timing. These can be substantiated for Taos, but certain maneuvers, noted by Bunker, I can only infer, not having attended councils. Distance is underlined by sitting farther from the superintendent at each meeting; the superintendent’s role is construed as one of technical assistance, not policymaking; the self is subordinated to public responsibility; one year’s officers berate their predecessors for failures, diverting attention from themselves. What it means to be Governor of Taos and a sense of why such men accept office repeatedly or give up in discouragement can best be 3709295724 322 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY (But. 164 gained from the account of the political experience of one man, D, which follows: What is it like to be Governor of Taos? The governor job is hard work and it is a tough job to accomplish anything; it takes thinking and talking. There are a lot of problems undone. Tourist collection.—In 1928 I created the tourist collection which has become the principal source of revenue in the pueblo. When I came to office as Lt. Governor we had but $50 in the pueblo fund. I thought this tourist collection up as a means of building up the treasury. I put in as Governor, and I was Lt. Governor, and all the people knew that for four years I had been trying to raise money for the pueblo. After we were installed, the Governor asked me what was my idea of how to raise the money. He asked the question before the other officers. I spoke: ‘‘We are having trouble and we have no money. I think that we should charge 25 cents for tourist parking and a license fee of $1.00 for still cameras, and $2.00 for movie cameras, graduated according to size. People shall register in the Governor’s office and leave the money there.”’ And then we put the question of that collection before the ten officials of the Governor’s staff. “T don’t want public money for myself,” declared the Governor. (Before that the preceding several Governors had charged as much as $2.00 for tourists and kept the money for themselves.) I also proposed that commercial buses in the Indian Detour business should pay 25 cents a head for passengers coming into the pueblo—the same for hacks and stages. One concessionaire objected, saying that it was a free country and that he could drive anywhere. I told him to stay away unless he was willing to collect and pay the fee. His bossintervened. ‘We are not your monkeys,” I said. “Our reservation is private property.” The matter was deferred 2 days until the Council could convene and hear the case. The Council met at 8 p. m., and the then Agent backed us. The bus people came through under pressure. Dude ranches followed suit. When in the preceding discussion the Governor put the question to his staff, BEM, who was then a second Lt. opposed the idea. The other nine were for it. Then when we had decided we called the Council and we explained what we had in mind. These four ex-Governors who had collected for themselves were the only opponents to the new policy. The rest agreed. Carried. This was 1928. By the first of August, 1928, we had $1,500 which we had collected! The Cooperative Thresher—Now the next step: I suggested that we buy a threshing outfit. I said that we had threshed long enough with horses and that it was high time we had our own machine. We called the Council. Council thought it a lot of money. It belongs to all of us, they said. Some were for distributing it per capita; others saw the sense of the cooperative argument. The Governor suggested calling the people together outside by the wall [mass meeting]. The Governor explained. They voted and the four ex-Governors were alone in wanting to divide the money per capita. When the majority agreed I wired again to the Superintendent to come up— that we had decided to buy a $1,500 threshing outfit. The agent suggested that besides we would need from two to three hundred dollars of operating capital. I explained our source of income. He told us the legend of the Golden Goose. He thought my collection plan from tourists the best idea he had ever heard. We bought the outfit; for we knew that if a crooked Governor came to office he could make away with the funds but not the machinery. Then I realized that I had made a mistake. The guide who collects the money had to serve 2 days, and the tourists entering the Governor’s office, his house, Nobo,’ ~FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 323 tracked in mud. Late in the fall there are no tourists and in spring until May the guide wastes his time. When we turned over to the new Governor that December we recommended that the Governor is entitled to 10 percent for his house, and that 15 percent should go to the guide. Each guide gets 2 days and all that nine from Lt. Gov- ernor down serve as guides on 2-day shifts. They all agreed. It ran smoothly. The Council bought implements out of the fund, and we used the fund in land fights up to 4 years ago (1946). In 1946 a Governor closed his door, and he turned out the guide with his book on the Plaza, but the Governor still gets 10 percent without the use of his house. BEM followed in office and he too closed his door and collected the 10 percent. What is more, the next Governor sold the community binder worth $150 together with $100 worth of new parts to his own son for $15. The public granary.‘ When things were going badly back in 1938 I was elected Lt. Governor when was Governor again. At that time I had in mind a plan to help the old and needy. My idea was a community granary. I got to draw up the plan. The plan was to build the granary (out of tribal funds) and to buy surplus grain from the people—wheat (some of the original stock was purchased as certified seed), oats, peas, beans, corn—what we raise here at Taos. Moreover, we built bins on both sides. In the spring we would lend out grain to able people and charge 50 pounds for 100 pounds that had been borrowed, so that people paid back 150 pounds. The 100 pounds went back into the first granary and the 50 pounds was put into a different bin. This latter was used to take care of widows and orphans. The annual surplus would be divided among widows and orphans, and the original loan would go back into the pool. This was the plan which we proposed to the Council. The Council agreed and the plan was put into operation. The next Governor and his administration sold all the grain and bought flour and lard for distribution in the pueblo. [The old idea of equitable distribution, each individual taking his share in hand, prevailed over social security.] 1 was dis- couraged and I quit. [As an innovator D. was fighting alone; only occasionally could he muster the Council to support his plans.] This happended in 1938 that we had the granary, and in 1939 they sold out. [Ardent granary partisans have been in political limbo since.] Since 1939 I would go to no meetings. In 1948, nearly 10 years since I had been to a Council, someone came to notify me that I was elected to Governor. I accepted the duty. I began immediately the fight for the voting business. (In this I had the advice and support of many prominent white lawyers.) Under the New Mexico State law we must vote in order to qualify for the old age pension. We brought suit and got the right. Later, this BEM wanted me to stop the people from voting. ‘I can’t do it,”’ I said, “it is illegal to prevent a citizen from exercising his right to vote.” BEM went to the late Judge , an old friend, who supported me: That the elders could not be in the position of preventing members of the pueblo from voting. BEM told me to call a Council. He misled the Cacique and the Four Groups [Kiva leaders who with Cacique dominate council]. I told them that as Governor I had sworn to support the Constitution of the United States and the State and Federal laws. I had no power to stop anyone from voting. ‘Now I am going to resign,” I said, ‘“‘I would like to see someone stop the people from voting and be arrested.”? [Possibly it was here that BEM consulted the Judge; such had never happened before.] The people continue to vote. I vote. So do others, but BEM tells them that they will soon have to pay taxes and the pueblo will go the way of Mexican towns. 324 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Butn. 164 The preceding case history calls for comment. The process of acculturation and how the people have reacted to it can be held re- sponsible for factional difficulties at Taos. The pueblo has divided into two camps on how they will meet crises imposed by the world outside the wall. French (1948) found a parallel situation at Isleta, and Laswell (1936) has described the Taos reaction to culture contact as “collective autism.’”’ My own data indicate two reactions on the part of the pueblo people: a cooperative and aggressive reaction organizing to meet the threat from outside the wall; and autism, a withdrawal behind the wall and opposing new groupings within the pueblo that threaten the existing sovereignty of the hierarchy. The former reaction regards sovereignty as residing in the people, the latter reaction imputes it to the organization. Means have become ends. My informant as governor was a cooperator and an innovator. The tourist collection was an aggressive move against the whites, which had as its purpose raising funds to recover lands from the whites. The innovator sought to do this systematically and fairly, charging what the traffic would bear. The cooperative reaction met acculturation in the field of technology by proposing the investment of capital funds in a binder and thresher. These innovations also reveal the mechanism for appealing to the sources of sovereignty when the council cannot agree. Issues originate in the governor’s staff, where they are threshed out before being referred to the council for a policy decision. A minority of one dissenter in the governor’s staff meeting may find four supporters in the council. This happened in the case of the tourist collection and in the matter of the public granary. When the council agrees, the governor or his lieutenant caps it with a plan of action. But when unable to agree, there is a mechanism by which the council can appeal to Pueblo society, the ultimate source of its sovereignty, by assembling the people in a mass meeting ‘‘outside by the wall.’”” The governor appeals to the town meeting to sanction publicly a proposed course of action. Society votes. A minority of four dissenters, ex-governors, who can obfuscate such an issue in council, fades before the popular will. Beyond appealing to public sanction for a course of action, each pueblo administration faces the limits of its own term. Revenues raised must be expended or turned over to a new administration. There is a tendency to spend the money knowing that the next administration may be unfriendly to policies adopted and distribute the funds per capita. To offset this centrifugal tendency an adminis- tration can establish precedents: it does things, gains public expect- ancy, and hopes for continuity. No Eo, TY FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 325 A sense of fairness makes allowances for time spent and awards percentages of the tourist collection to the guide for his services and to the governor for the use of his house and for abiding the nuisance value of tourists. The autistic reaction to acculturation, on the other hand, denies white society outside the wall and refuses to make adequate provision for tourists within the wall. Crowds of tourists flock to Saints’ Day dances and are not controlled. Autism regards collective endeavors to meet the problems of the pueblo as threats to the sovereignty of the council, bowing only to the sanction of a public meeting which it avoids at all costs. It does not deny, however, individual acquisitive- ness. A minority of previous governors feathered their nests and charged inconsistent rates for tourist parking. They are now back in power and the guides again chisel tourists by not returning change. With the rise of graft, offices pass in a restricted kinship group. Equity in a percentage of the tourist registration continues, but the governor’s door is no longer open to the public. A governor has sold the community binder and parts to a close relative. When the cooperative faction reacted to the need of social security arising from a general economic depression by starting the public granary, the next autistic governor sold the grain and distributed the proceeds. The innovator responded by withdrawing from public life. Small wonder that he absents himself from public meetings and escapes into alcoholism. From this case history we can almost draw a syllogism. Coopera- tive and autistic administrations alternate in office. The cooperative reaction to crises imposed from without when frustrated leads to individual autism. Collective autism leads to graft and facism. The strong man is eventually turned out when public reaction revolves full cycle. (The latter process is now going on.) A man once disillusioned accepts office again, emerging from personal withdrawal, when summoned by a duly appointed representa- tive of the pueblo. This time he accepts the governorship. The innovator and the cooperators campaign for civil rights and social security, gains which were lost when the granary project was liqui- dated. But participation in external politics constitutes a threat to collective sovereignty in the pueblo. The hierarchy impeaches the governor who resigns. FACTIONS When the old men of Taos forced a progressive governor into resigning in the fall of 1948 and installed a puppet regime to complete the year, Indian Service administrators were faced with a whole complex of disagreements. The progressive governor had enabled 326 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buut. 164 members of the pueblo to register and vote in State and National elections, thereby qualifying themselves for social security benefits. BEM threatened impeachment, and the council acted apparently without full membership and without accepting the governor’s resignation. In this act, BEM had the advice of counsel. The Agency did not intervene. The coup d’etat focused attention on a long history of factionalism at Taos." What is a first-class administrative problem to the Indian Service may be a fairly common occurrence to ethnologists. Internal division into factions, usually two in number, is a recurrent feature in American Indian communities (Linton, 1936, p. 228), and such twofold factional divisions are quite widespread in the primitive world (Murdock, 1949, p. 90). AJmost no research has been done on this problem until quite recently (French, 1948; Adair and Vogt, 1949). Murdock even says that factionalism is so common a feature of community organization as to be scarcely accidental. He employs the concept of ethnocen- trism to suggest a possible common function, reasoning that a dual organization of a community . . . may provide a sort of safety valve whereby aggression generated by ingroup discipline may be drained off internally in socially regulated and harmless ways instead of being translated into outgroup hostility and warfare. What makes this hypothesis seem valid is that factions are most characteristic of peaceful societies like the Pueblos and warlike communities which are frustrated from going on the warpath. The latter is certainly true of Iroquois among whom factionalism became most bitter after the American Revolution and before going on reservations; it is also true of Blackfeet; and possibly the Klamath among whom factionalism is the status quo. Crisis situations at Taos reach back into traditional times. Tradi- tion speaks of an old factional dispute which occurred at the building of the first Catholic church; the people quarreled and some of them left Taos, going east to a new site. In such splits it is always the conservative faction that migrates, seeking a place in which to perform the ceremonies in peace and leaving the hotheads in possession of the old town (Parsons, 1939, pp. 15, 108, 1094-1097). The return of four Taos lads from Carlisle about 1910 began a series of modern crises over innovations (Parsons, 1936, p. 118). One deviant worked as a printer, resisted letting his hair grow, and stuffed his trousers before whippings. He was actually put out of his chief- 18 Siegel, in 2 recent almost identical articles on culture change at Taos (1949; 1952), discusses patterns of authority and leadership, anticipating much of my analysis, but speaks of factions as something quite new at Taos (1949, p. 577). Siegel deems it “highly desirable to undertake a comparative study of emergent factionalism at Taos with factionalism at other pueblos where it has occurred” (1949, p. 577; 1952, p. 140). While the present paper leaves this problem to be researched, I have treated factionalism generally in a paper to the Vienna Congress (Fenton, 1955 a). No ee)’ «FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 327 taincy and ceremony. But the revolt brought the introduction of white man’s clothing: pants, shoes, and hats. Leggings, moccasins, handmade shirts, and blankets have never quite regained the favor they enjoyed exclusively before the Carlisle incident. Social dys- phoria, however, was nowhere nearly as marked then as now. The Peyote controversy rivals the present dysphoria. Sometime after 1907 lads, now old men, visited the Kiowa near El Reno, Okla., and brought Peyote back to Taos. That it took here and not in the other pueblos is a clue to Taos character structure. The Peyote controversy has been treated by Parsons (1936, 1939) and analyzed by Laswell (1936). My notes add few details. The important thing is that the Peyote boys were innovators. They threw off repressions of their own training and the authority of the hierarchy by going out and bringing back what proved a threat to the constituted religion of the community, although Laswell makes a great point that even Peyote was carried out by groups in a characteristically collective autistic fashion. The innovators who were then Peyote boys are now among the older progressives and are eligible to be councillors. Even the present governor, though in BEM’s faction, belonged to the cult, if he was not a charter member. Reaction then, as now, came from the council. And the council was backed up by diffuse sanctions originating in family conflicts. The Peyote boys met on Saturday nights, and individuals who at- tended were unconscious all day Sunday. For years Sunday had been the day for family weekend picnics up the creek and at neighbor- ing ranches. Tension developed between generations of the same family and between in-laws over the Peyote addicts. Organized opposition to the cult centered in one family, that of the progressive governor of 1948. Impeachment is the function of the council. Since at the time both governor and his lieutenant were members of the cult, responsibility for calling the council shifted from governor to Cacique. The council waited until the Peyote group was in session before the Cacique ordered the sheriff and his staff to raid the meeting and arrest all members present. ‘They were held in jail on the north side of the Pueblo to cool off pending trial individually. (Note that the council sought to avoid imposing its will on a group by trying such deviants one by one.) For some reason the governor was not impeached, although Parsons implies that he resigned. But the then lieutenant governor, the present governor, was impeached by the council and resigned, along with all the other officers (Parsons, 1939, p. 1095). In such cases Cacique presides and one of the six headmen prosecutes. Councillors may individually ask further questions to clarify a point. ‘Are you willing to leave the Peyote cult and go along with the rest of 328 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bu. 164 us?” Only the lieutenant governor was unwilling to renounce Peyote. He was impeached. Cacique polls the council and each councillor gives his opinion. The final decision rests with the Cacique. Punitive fines which amounted to land confiscation were levied against individual members of Peyote. The Cacique’s court, like the governor’s court, can determine such fines and exact them. Land thus confiscated by the court may be awarded to individual officers to use. Iam uncertain of the extent to which confiscation resulted in abuse of power. The lands were returned when the Peyote Church got its charter. We are not concerned here that Peyote did not die out at Taos following the trial, with the group’s successful fight through the courts for recognition, or with its status today. I am told there are actually between 10 and 14 families who are today active Peyote adherents. Allowing 5 to a family, 50 to 70 people may be involved. ‘The present governor, the erstwhile lieutenant governor impeached, is alleged to be still a member. The net effect of the Peyote innovation was to break up family solidarity. Informal sanctions within families drove some individuals to renounce Peyote, but schisms and tensions remain. There are embittered individuals who oppose the hierarchy. Peyote faced toward Oklahoma, not inward on the plaza of Taos; it exalted individual experience, albeit in a meeting, as against collective ritual, and above all it demonstrated that the wall around the hier- archy can be breached by innovation. Peyote bears further relation to the present power structure. A source of BEM’s power arose out of the Peyote trouble. It is unlikely that he was yet headman and acting prosecutor. But he was on the way up to be lieutenant governor in 1939, governor in 1944. A renounced member of Peyote, however, became governor in 1941, following the Cacique. The impeached lieutenant governor of Peyote days is now governor, as BEM’s candidate. Peyote has not been an issue for 10 years. The Parsons exposé, already mentioned, came in 1939. BEM’s in-laws were involved, but he used his position in the hierarchy to get them off without penal sanctions. Diffuse sanctions, as we have shown, bite deeper. Preceding the Parsons affair and following Peyote, had begun the reforms of the progressive governor who had opposed Peyote. The reforms, which may be characterized as internal and external social security, followed and alternated with reactionary administrations down to 1948. Then came the GI bill of rights and the roadblock incident. The most recent Taos crisis summoned the forces for progress (those oriented outward) to join the returned veterans (who this Nagor PA? FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 329 time were the “boys,” the innovators) to test the strength of the hierarchy. Of course, the latter were not altogether old men, and the “boys” were not all young. Nor does it matter that the hierarchy put down the boys. For the time being those who face toward the plaza have put down those who look over the wall. The latter include the resigned progressive governor, another ex-governor himself a reformed Peyote boy, and at least one lieutenant governor whose sons went to war. The head of an extended family at Taos represents his sons before the governor’s court and in council. Councillors who gave sons to the war would attend council to hear questions discussed affecting their sons. The regular way of calling a council is for the governor to call every eligible man from the housetops. But BEM works on the governor, his stooge, to call only a certain few, carefully omitting opposition. By such “snaky” tactics BEM frustrates com- plete discussion of the issue—‘“‘even to the boiling point.” Another tactic is to jump up in council and brand as “outlaw faction” whoever voices the Agency point of view. That councillor is not called again. Men get dispirited at being interrupted, at being done out of their turn in the ritualized circuit of polling the council, and apparently Pueblo individuals are horrified at being attacked personally in meeting. From not knowing what to do with BEM’s type they have gone on to inaction and disinterest. Taos society seems to make no provision for handling the boss. “This is the kind of meeting we have now. This is how he came to be the only speaker when Commissioner was out here.” What then are the sources of BEM’s power? They are of three kinds: status resources, personality, and political action. First, as headman of the Big Earrings People Kiva he is ritual holder for the pueblo and he has charge of the education of the young men. He has the privilege of nominating civil officers; only two headmen may nominate, and the caucus is held in his kiva, where he speaks first. As an ex-governor of at least two terms, he has worked up through the ranks to achieve the status of principale, or councillor. Elevation to religious office came to him unexpectedly and rather early in life from a position in the hierarchy at a minor level until just a few years ago. Then he sat about four seats down from the head of his kiva. One winter, the three men ahead of him died in rapid succession. BEM suddenly came to power as the head of that kiva at the prime of life, and the office which membership ascribed to him carries strong responsibilities in the ceremonies, and ultimately in the political life of the Pueblo. The people of Taos revere his office. Fear on the part of the other councillors that BEM will quit the position that he holds in the 330 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buxx. 164 ceremonies is a weapon that he wields to its limits. Unless he is ac- corded privileges of office it is feared that he will decamp from duties on which the welfare of the pueblo depends. Threat of withdrawal of reciprocal services constitutes a powerful sanction. So the Taos people tolerate political shenanigans so long as ceremonial obligations are fulfilled. BEM impressed me as being a very sincere person and quite de- vout, although others who know him better cautioned that he is foxy, that he agrees to one thing today and does the opposite tomor- row. But these are his political enemies. He is secretive, outwardly fearless, and incessantly active. Part of this activity in ceremonies and even in politics may reflect aggression generated by anxiety that he is not doing his best, that he is criticized, or may be an attempt to offset talk that his wife’s people were Parsons’s informants. His attack on others in council may spring from the same source. What- ever the source of energy, the Taos strong man brooks no opposition, as the following incident will illustrate. A few years ago one of the sparks that led to the present difficulties arose from the attempt of a householder to hook up to the Taos Day School waterline. The householder’s water had begun to smell to- ward the middle of summer. He arranged permissions with the proper officials: the principal and the superintendent. One day three men were digging a ditch and BEM happened to pass by and asked what they were doing. He told them to stop and threatened them. He went promptly to the governor’s house and said, ‘“‘We are going to Albuquerque.” He and the governor went to the superintendent and protested. Permissions were canceled. Meanwhile the young veteran sat in his house waiting with a gun on his knees for the sheriff’s party to come and take him. The waterline was an innovation over dipping water from Taos River. Just how it threatened the sovereignty of the pueblo I can- not fathom. BEM is secretive. He does not talk clearly in council. His point of view is veiled by operations behind the scenes of which he informs the governor only in part. My visit illustrates the point. ‘I will tell the governor and the council what they have to know, what I have decided.”’? He identifies with persons in authority or persons who may confide knowledge to increase his personal power. BEM wants to shield the pueblo from change and projects his own shortcomings on innovators, and on Indian Service officials in particular. He may genuinely hold at heart a sincere interest in the welfare of the pueblo. He said that he was willing to talk all afternoon with me on matters affecting the pueblo, that he never tired when working for the people. But seeing me again he would not talk until I had demonstrated that Noe,’ ~=FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 331 I had done something for the people. I suspect that he felt guilty for already having told me something of Taos organization. What he does is what counts. (He is also held accountable for public indifference or apathy that has overcome the pueblo of late. This attitude has become a negative factor in his power position; no leadership arises to face him down.) By political manipulation, by use of his position in the hierarchy, by conscientious attendance at all meetings, and by branding as outlaw all suggestions of improve- ment or ideas counter to his own interests or which he interprets as threats to the power structure, he holds the pueblo in his grip. It is a maxim of political administration that control of budget and ap- pointments means power. In Taos, control of nominations, elections, and consequently of tribal funds amounts to the same thing. As long as his counterpart on the south side does not choose to oppose him, and as long as the Cacique who is the check to the balanced positions of headmen, remains a rubberstamp, BEM will remain in control. CRISIS What were the sparks leading to the recent Taos crisis? How did the dissident group arise? These are the questions which I addressed to BEM and to representatives of the progressive faction. Despite the tension, these questions were welcomed by both groups. They accepted me as a neutral person standing in the middle, as BEM put it, who might use his good offices to improve relations between the pueblo and the outside, with the Agency in particular. BEM said, ‘We need friends. We need them badly, because we feel that the younger men and the dissidents, the dissatisfied people, have been supported in their views by outsiders who have gained favorable publicity and have put me in a bad light.” I gathered from other informants that the number of dissidents in the pueblo is greater than BEM would have me believe. I asked him how the dissident group arose. He said that they came up in the following way: In World War I the Pueblo men were considered farmers and were allowed to stay home. When World War II came along, a great many of the boys, being unwilling to do their work in the pueblo, and unwilling to submit to the ceremonial obligation of initiation and performance of rites, had fled the pueblo or had been driven out by public opinion and were living on the outside. Many of these men enlisted. When the Government officials came to the pueblo to inquire about the draft, it was already apparent that many of the men were in the Army. It was also considered expedient by the council to allow the men to be drafted or to volunteer since the people 332 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buny. 164 might fare much worse under the Japanese or the Germans than under their American friends. Accordingly, some 100 men went into the armed services and were scattered over the seas. Now it is important that many of the men who went out from the pueblo were initiated and are now still loyal to the present form of Pueblo government. There is the son of BEM himself and the interpreter. However, a number of others came back dissatisfied with the old Pueblo way. They said, ‘“‘Let’s forget all this. Let’s give up these ceremonies. Let’s be as white men. Let’s get electric lights, water, etc.” It is quite apparent in all this that there is no fundamental objec- tion to individual improvements coming into the community. What BEM and his party in the council object to is the injection of new things which threaten the corporate identity or sovereignty of the Pueblo state. The young men have consistently refused to do their work, they have defied the authority of the headmen, and they have turned outside the pueblo to the whites for help, which in itself is a cardinal sin. The behavior of the boys after the war runs contrary to their training. During the discussion of the veterans I tried to draw BEM out on how young men are educated in the Pueblo way. On what happened during the Kiva training he was discreetly silent, but he related his long conversation with Selective Service officials at the opening of the war, which conveys something of his attitude. He quoted himself at this meeting as saying: “T will let my young men go. They are well-disciplined and well- behaved boys. If you promise to return them to me in the same condition.”” BEM asserts that he was given solemn assurance that the young men would be returned by the Army properly disciplined so that they could return to the Pueblo fold. (Of course what he anticipated and the Selective Service official chose to ignore was the disruptive effect of war experience on their personalities and the consequent inability to readjust to “civilian”? Pueblo life.) What really bothers BEM is that the boys got outside, they saw things of which he has no knowledge, and many of them who were previously dissatisfied with conditions in the pueblo have come home increasingly dissatisfied. I did not succeed, however, in getting him to tell me how young men are actually brought up in the Pueblo way, how they are trained to take their places in Pueblo religion and society. The following sparks ignited the Taos crisis: (1) As governor, BEM wanted for his relatives the patronage at the day school where a number of Indians were employed in cus- todial positions. He came to the principal of the school, himself an initiated and educated Taos Indian, saying, ‘‘Son, this is what I want you to do.” It was difficult for the old priest to understand that the Nose,’ ~«FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 333 jobs were beyond the control of his putative kinsman. Appointment and removal of personnel lay in Albuquerque. (2) Next came the question of religious training during school hours. There had been a Supreme Court decision about the use of schooltime for religious training and time off for such instruction. The Indian Service had regularly let students off during their term of training in the kivas. But some question arose about the Catholics being excluded from such participation. Whatever the issue, BEM and the elders took the affair as a personal affront and interpreted a high-level decision as local discrimination. The Indians let the issue pass. (3) For some reason BEM next decided to evict outlanders who had married into the pueblo. These persons included members of other neighboring Rio Grande Pueblos, 2 Zufii men, 2 Indians from Oklahoma, 5 Anglos (white men, of whom 1 lived in), an American woman, and 2 English war brides, perhaps 16 in all. Friction arises in mixed marriages with persons from outside Taos Pueblo. The husbands do not attend community work, even if willing, for they do not understand the language. Misunderstandings arise. When children get into fights, the older people say: ‘‘You are not Mexicans!” The Mexicans are reputed to be quarrelsome. Outlanders threaten the all-important peace of the pueblo. The English war brides created the biggest stir in the community, but the disturbance is indeed two-sided. The war brides were scarcely prepared for life in an American Indian pueblo, and the Indians of Taos found them difficult to assimilate. One English girl had had three children by a Taos Indian husband by 1950. Before the council decided to eject Indians married in from other reservations, BEM approached a Pueblo member of the civil service who had married a non-Taos Indian to interpret for him. The civil servant naturally refused to be a partisan to the action without higher authority. The incon- sistent action by BEM and council to evict outlanders by marriage was sustained by the Federal court. (4) Allotment checks coming into the pueblo during the war created new statuses and roles. The literate who could file papers for illiterate old ladies and wives of GI’s, began displacing the old men as advisers, a role which they accepted cautiously. Some few dependents followed advice and bought land, houses, farm equipment, and household goods. Others spent it on a single spree. Of the some 106 GI’s, all but 7 returned. It is significant that the pueblo never acknowledged the return of the GI’s by celebrations such as were held among Plains and Eastern Woodlands groups where war- fare is honored. Whenever there were “regular doings’ (stated ceremonies) the old men would mention the war record of the young 334 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buun. 164 men, however, but no special occasion was made for them. On several occasions some special prayers were offered for their safe return. It appears that the headmen really missed an opportunity. (5) The returned GI’s found no welcome for their experience or new knowledge. The council was neither interested, nor welcomed advice. BEM and his followers wanted them back the way they went away, but they were a transformed lot of men. They began openly to criti- cize the council. The real spark that kindled the flame of resent- ment was when the council learned that the young men gossiped that the old council was ineffective. This angered the council, but they dared not arrest anyone. (6) The veterans now constituted a threat to the sovereignty of the Pueblo Council. They organized a post as a basis for appealing to a State Veterans’ Administration for aid in a program of rehabilitation. They learned that they needed a minimum of 15 acres of farmland per man as a basis for an agricultural extension program. Arrange- ments were made for a training program under the GI bill of rights which would utilize shop facilities and tools of Taos Day School where an instructor would come to teach welding and related trades. School and Agency authorities agreed, but the school is on Pueblo property. (7) The young men now went to the governor asking his signature to their applications. And they went to the council appealing for land. BEM and his faction in the council, piqued at their audacity, “threw them out.’’ ‘Don’t come here (to the council) until you are properly initiated by the Kivas,” they were told; mature men are expected to have served in the ceremonies and to have a record of having worked up through the offices of the governor’s staff before appearing in council. The veterans were “‘boys,’”’ both ceremonially and politically. Had the young men demonstrated a better record of community service, participated in ceremonies, and had they refrained from gossiping openly about the council’s deficiencies, the issue might not have been drawn on the lines of age and achievement. Naturally, the councillors were quite unwilling to recognize achieve- ment outside the wall. (8) The veterans wanted electric lights and good drinking water. They experienced electricity and its power-driven conveniences in their service outside the wall, and they learned of sanitation. That the Taos River is polluted everyone knows, and no person who has not acquired active immunity dares drink its water, or the water that runs sparkling down the irrigation ditches, for fear of dysentery and less serious alimentary complaints. Even though sacred Blue Lake high on Taos Mountain is the source, contamination enters before Taos River flows through the pueblo. The old men shut their eyes Noga, F4? FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 335 to the annual death rate among babies, and why there are not more cases of typhoid I have no competence to say. Recall the incident of the veteran who started to connect to the day school waterline (even water from the line had to be boiled in 1950), and when frus- trated did not hesitate to write to the Taos Star, which was the liberal pro-Indian paper (Morris, 1950). El Crepusculo, which the Indians call “El Creeps,” is the conservative organ, and reflects the views of the council and its backers, the artists and writers of Taos who consider themselves the custodians of the ancient tradition. As is usual in Indian factionalism, whites can be found at the polar extremes. The movement to bring electricity to Taos and abandon the old practice of dipping all water from the Taos River in buckets, even though the progressive faction at the pueblo advocated in- stalling lights in the homes but outside the twin pueblo apartment buildings, badly scared the Taosenos, the inhabitants of the neigh- boring town, who have an economic stake in either the tourist business or an emotional one in art subjects at the pueblo. Besides the revolutionary change which the coming of electricity would bring to Pueblo life, the council perceives the entrance of a public utility on their ancient domain as a threat to their sovereignty: rights-of- way, easements, unsightly transmission lines, freedom of access for servicing, monthly bills, installment payments. Even the progres- sives put great stress on the “peace” of Pueblo life, but both factions resort to constant pressure and bickering which creates tension. And the council in its communications to ‘El Creeps’? makes much of happiness in the pueblo which they seek to protect from innovation that might make the people as unhappy as they appear to be in cities. (9) These sparks kindled a series of protest meetings of veterans and heads of families who used to sit on the council which resulted in demands directed against alleged dictatorial methods of the present council. The faction which is out of power calls itself the People’s Party, a label so frequently adopted by the out-of-power faction in Indian communities as far away as New York. The People’s Party commenced to agitate for: (a) A written charter (which would secularize the government); (b) the right to a voice in choosing the council; (c) more progressive management of Pueblo affairs; (2) a periodic audit. These general demands, susceptible of expansion into a detailed list and suggestive of appeal to the Consti- tution and Bill of Rights, if they apply at Taos, colored an analysis of the Taos situation by the area director in May of 1949 which reports the road block incident. The analysis indicted the Taos government for: (a) Failure to alternate political parties in office; (6) unseating council members who disagree; (c) refusing a hearing to important elements within the pueblo; (d) deciding every variety 336 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLt. 164 of civil case on political issues. (Hagberg to the Commissioner, 5/16/49.) The first has been the political practice and may be custom law; the second charge, although clearly a violation of Pueblo law ways, is tempered by absenteeism and the strain for unanimity; the third failure may be defended on grounds of qualifications but it ignores the public meeting as the ultimate locus of sovereignty; and the final charge cannot be denied. (10) The meeting at the school and the governor’s roadblock: The veterans decided to have a meeting of the people at the Taos Day School to discuss the benefits which would accrue to the village from the program for training GI’s in agricultural and manual arts under the GI bill of rights. They decided to invite the superintendent. The council, dominated by BEM’s faction, fearing that the intrusion of these enterprises would change the existing power structure within the pueblo, were opposed to a meeting being held at the school. When the governor received the superintendent’s wire that he would attend a mass meeting to be held in the school auditorium to hear the discus- sion of the proposed program, the governor summoned the council whose decree was dictated by BEM. ‘The governor replied that any meeting which was to receive the superintendent would be held in the governor’s office as usual, and should not be held in the school. The council’s decision that the place of meeting should be the governor’s house in the pueblo, that there would be no meeting off the pueblo, or on the school grounds or in its assembly, denied the possibility of summoning the pueblo to meet outside near the wall and ignored the fact that the pueblo has no community hall. The veterans decided to proceed anyway. The conservative faction blamed the superin- tendent principally for fomenting the trouble which followed. But an inflammatory press was responsible for arousing the whites of northern New Mexico to watch what happened in Taos, and the artists and writers of Taos rushed into the act. In espousing the cause of the veterans, somebody alleged that democracy and freedom of assembly must prevail even in a totalitarian state. Several veterans’ associa- tions became active, and the conservatives cite as evidence of white interference the large number of automobiles from Taos village which had come into the pueblo for the meeting at the school. Just what happened and the sequence of events are not clear nor are they vital to this report. The superintendent came as far as the hotel on Taos Plaza where he ordinarily stops. There he was met by BEM and the governor, who told him to come no farther and advised him to return to Albuquerque. The superintendent stood firm in Taos. At first some information implied that he and his party drove out to the pueblo where he was turned back by a human blockade at the bridge leading up to the day school. More reliable sources state that the ae PaP. FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 337 road blockade was intended to keep the GI’s from getting to town. A conservative source said that when the council found itself over- ridden by the superintendent’s resolution, the war chiefs and fiscales were sent to blockade the road at the bridge leading from the village to the school. Effectively both sides were stymied. But there is another back road to town by which the GI’s circum- vented the blockade. A moderate found an English car which some- one from town had left at the school, and started to drive it to town. At the barrier he was asked: ‘‘ Where are you going?” ‘To Taos,” he replied. ‘‘Are you going to the meeting there?” ‘No, I am taking this car to town to deliver it to its owner who can’t get here.” Al- though many bypassed the blockade, several cars pushed through. In one car rode the progressive governor who had resigned. ‘This is like France all over again,” remarked a veteran of Normandy, as he put the car in low gear and breached the human barrier. The war chief’s men held hands until they fell away on both sides of the bridge. There has been no effective government in Taos Pueblo since the incident described or since the meeting of the veterans and their superintendent in Taos Plaza. A long and bitter debate followed in the public press. Claims and counterclaims have reached the Halls of Congress. In perspective I believe that the superintendent and the Albuquerque staff never fully appreciated the heat of the contro- versy generated from these sparks, nor the tension at the time. A Taos Indian who read this report commented: “‘The only thing that prevented an armed insurrection was the lack of rifles among the young men. There was one night that the council was meeting when the hotheads wanted to crash the governor’s house and snatch the canes of office.’”’ Their own leaders and the progressive governor reasoned with them. When informed of this potential danger, the superin- tendent is quoted as replying, ‘‘ Nonsense!” Both of the latter are amazing statements in view of the firearms which I observed at ready in Pueblo homes. Every house I visited had a rifle or two on antlers above the door. No, I think the young men were held back by diffuse sanctions; they did not wish to breach the peace. Insurrection is not the way to settle anything, even at Taos. AFTERMATH In the year that had passed since the incident of the bridge the breach had widened between the factions, and matters had not im- proved during the year following my visit. Most of the troubles at Taos Pueblo, said a leader of veterans, could be solved in a single morning if the elder councillors would sit down with the veterans’ group and take up their program point by point. The grievances of 3709295725 338 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buun. 164 the People’s Party, which were made manifest in a petition to the Commissioner after the bridge incident (Petition, People’s Party to Commissioner, 9/7/49), comprise some eight major heads. Most of these specific grievances relate to government. 1. Government: a. Membership in council controlled by select few. b. Right of appeal. c. One man dominates the council. Ousted members are not called. d. A select council reaches decisions affecting the Pueblo. e. Misinterpretation; the good interpreters have quit. . The right to vote. Land. . Tribal funds; tourist collection; accounting. . Bus transportation. . Indian Service employees. . Misuse of office: sale of capital goods to relatives of officials; joyriding in the community truck. 8. Council refuses advantages of GI benefits to veterans. By the spring of 1950 the Progressive Party had reached the Con- gressman of its New Mexico district. The same grievances now ap- peared in new guise. What had originally been phrased in terms of Pueblo political practice and which suggested that the checks and balances in their own system of custom law had been contraverted, now appeared in the cloak of George Mason’s bill of rights, which seems irrelevant to local affairs in an Indian Pueblo. The fact re- mains that the People’s Committee were in close touch with a New Mexico Congressman, although the leaders of the conservative faction had also called on him. The House of Representatives heard the charges: individual rights are being neglected at Taos, and individuals as citizens are being prevented from exercise of rights accorded them under the Bill of Rights (Congressional Record, 96: 7379, 5/18/50). A progressive who read his Congressman’s article in the Record secretly hoped that the program would not be enacted into law and that he would not be forced to exert his individual rights as a citizen at the expense of the Pueblo (his group). Referring to the road block- ade the article appealed to “the right of assembly” because the vet- erans were forced to organize and attend classes off the reservation in defiance of tribal authorities who prohibited it. ‘Freedom of worship” alludes to the council taking children who are members of other religious groups out of school to train them in the kivas. Voting has been mentioned. The article alleges that there is no trial by jury, no adequate appeal, and no adequate courts. (Most jurists, I think, would recognize the governor’s court as a true court; and, be- sides, there is appeal to council.) The charge that the Pueblo Council intervenes in the homes to deny improvements—utilities, water—on the theory that these innovations violate ancient customs of the MIO OR 0 No go, ~FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 339 pueblo, cannot be denied. (Removal of a telephone is the most re- cent contention.) Individuals are restricted in improvements on their homes. (But so are they by codes in every community.) More seri- ous is the charge that persons married in the community cannot reside in the community. (The Federal court, at first, sustained the right of the Pueblo Council to eject such persons, a victory to the conservatives and their lawyer, but the decision was afterward re- versed. The evicted remain away. The overall effect, however, is that the council may not eject members legally. Thus the United States court has taken away the right of the Pueblo government to decide on citizenship.) The so-called right of self-government, the fact that no popular elections are permitted, seems irrelevant in the selection of a priestly hierarchy such as we have described. The charge gains relevancy only if the government of the pueblo is secular- ized, which is what the young men want. The same can be said for a written constitution. Although the council does lack a constitution and operates without written ordinances, it does keep minutes and cus- tom law provides sufficient checks for the proper maintenance of the system if allowed to operate. It is true that the council has refused to permit assemblies to discuss such matters, it has harassed and abused its opponents, but we have seen that a public meeting near the wall is possible under Pueblo custom law, that sovereignty rests in the people, and that they give it but grudgingly to the council. Pueblo custom law is being abused, not the Bill of Rights. A public hearing to thresh out the issues would break on the rock of separating church and state. That is what the old men fear. All of the following program converges on this one issue, that of secular- izing the government which is inescapable in any consideration of the Taos problem. The previous demands of the People’s Committee may be reduced to the following: 1. Institute regular business procedures. 2. Build a community hall for public meetings. 3. Right of a hearing for selected improvements. 4, Sever economic dependence of Pueblo on Taos village. The young men want to institute regular business procedures to account for the large sums of money which are collected annually from tourists for admission to the plaza, for parking, and for sale of camera permits. We have seen that this collection is the largest single source of revenue to the Pueblo government. No official accounting is made for the fees collected; there is no turnstile, nor are there numbered tickets. The young men advocate replacing the present guide system with a corps of instructed guides or docents, who could be instructed how to answer tourist questions without revealing cere- monial secrets, Ticket stubs would be turned in to the treasurer, 340 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLy. 164 giving the total receipts for the day. The present governor’s regis- tration book is open to serious abuse. From the parking proceeds, youth recommends erecting a com- munity hall on the plaza. At present there is no adequate community building on the whole reservation. There is no place that will shelter a meeting of the adult members of the pueblo. Such a hall would bring the meeting by the wall into a townhall and get the rump council out of the governor’s house. As it is, when BEM has the governor call a meeting of the select few to meet in the governor’s house, the interested public has to stand outside and listen through the wall. The young men want the privilege of hearing the full council meet in a building ample enough to destroy the excuse of calling a minority of councillors to meetings stacked in favor of the faction in power. The insularity of the older men is a burden to youth. Most of the older men and nearly all of the women have never been away from the pueblo. BEM’s daughter quite naively told my wife that Taos is the last Indian community where the Indians still hold their lands and old customs, that the Indians back east had all lost their lands when they forsook the old way. She was equally astonished and unprepared to believe that other Indian communities have survived white civilization to the eastward. The war provided travel for about 100 young men to see places and experience other civilizations beyond the horizon of Taos, Santa Fe, and Albuquerque. Most of the boys who came back respect the pueblo and appreciate its commercial value to the Indians. They want to keep the old three-storied apart- ments, but recommend families moving out to ranches. They believe that they have the right to a hearing to consider certain selected improvements—pave the road to Taos, bring electricity to the reser- vation but not to the apartments, install a telephone for emergencies, institute programs in the arts and agricultural extension, already discussed. As it is, the men are going outside the pueblo for training in the trades over the protest of the council, and the son of a principal conservative is learning welding at Haskell. Contrast the Blackfeet whose tribal delegates lobbied in Washington for the same program which Taos veterans were denied by their own council. Sever the economic dependence of the pueblo on Taos village, say the young men. Their leader advocates building a cooperative store on the reservation, if not at the pueblo, where people could trade without going to town. As it is, people walk, ride, drive cars, or take the buses operated by Indians under franchise to the council. The bus interests and the Taos merchants oppose a cooperative Indian store at the pueblo. The younger leaders contend that the money earned by Taos artists from the sale of paintings abroad in the land ANTHROP. Par. FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 341 is all traceable to Taos Indian culture and to Taos Indians themselves, who receive but 50 cents an hour as models. This extreme view, of course, discounts the skill of the artist and his service in publicizing the Indian. The same may be said of writers. But the attack is pointed and aims principally at the fringe of Taos colony—‘‘The culture plunderers’”’ who seek to escape the modern world and who take it out on the Indians. FORCES FOR SELF-CORRECTION IN THE SOCIETY Any solution of the present factional difficulties will have to origi- nate within the Taos community and have the support of a sub- stantial number of its residents. Within the community a successful compromise will have the best chance of success if it has the blessing of powerful elements in the hierarchy. As long as BEM remains in power, the present stalemate, which gives every indication of settling into feud lines between the generations, may continue. BEM himself constitutes the principal negative force opposing self-correction. Like many autocrats he identifies himself with the public, so that it is first of all necessary to distinguish between his personal hates and his aptitude for identifying Pueblo opinion with hisown. He says, ‘““My people feel this way’’—when he himself feels that way. By domineer- ing a powerful minority and through his position he controls public opinion—so to that extent what he effectively represents is public opinion. He symbolizes the opposition to the United States Indian Service in the pueblo if he does not constitute it, projecting on the Service every manner of fault. He is always devious, posing as a solution to a problem—such as getting better rapprochement with the Agency—dismissal of persons not present. Disillusionment has overcome the rest of his generation. In characteristic Pueblo fashion they withdraw from the reality of settlement. The people both admire BEM for getting results in the past and act defeated by his boss rule. I could detect but slight hope of his defeat at the next election. As if to clinch his position by action, during the autumn of 1950 he sent the sheriff to demand the removal of a telephone from the trading post of a young veteran called back to service. The telephone vio- lates Indian custom, it is alleged. The governor has forbidden use of gasoline-motored washing machines in the pueblo. And he has forbidden children to attend school in communities outside the pueblo. Washing machines except by analogy with electric machines certainly do not threaten the sovereignty of the council. They may disturb the peace. The women in our society would not stand for such infringement on personal liberty; in Taos they are used to repression. 342 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bunt. 164 Positive forces among the older men are few. A progressive gov- ernor has retreated into drink. A moderate person who has thought a great deal about reform in the pueblo is occasionally called to the governorship. While there is danger that fear and the drive to conformity may paralyze action, a governor may test opposition by resorting to the sounding board of public opinion by calling the people to meet by the wall. What hope is there that a moderate man may again become governor? The answer to the election lies with the “‘college of cardinals’? who are the Cacique and the heads of the kiva societies who may heed BEM again or nominate a more progressive administration. But BEM’s strategic position in the hierarchy, the fact that the caucus takes place in his kiva, where by courtesy he speaks first, coupled with his untiring devotion to politics and his tough character make a hard combination to beat. But he has to be careful because occa- sionally heads of other kivas or the Cacique will overrule him. If the Cacique were a stronger character there would be some hope of self-correction within the existing structure. I am told that the interpreters are at fault in the Cacique’s misunderstanding; they appeal to his fears: taxes, abolition of present government, etc. The Cacique does have the power if anything goes wrong with the govern- ment to call a council. He can tell the governor what to do, can censure the conduct of an officer, and the headmen can prevail on him to institute impeachment proceedings. Cacique has the power of nomination, if he chooses to exercise it. At the next level in the council several of the principales, or former governors, oppose BEM’s policy. But there is a tendency to avoid issues of disagreement because they know that if they take a stand it will end in a “fight.”” Taos is torn between a desire to thresh things out (Plains) and pacifism (Pueblo). Nothing is brought to the atten- tion of the Cacique which is disagreeable, and since he symbolizes considered public opinion, the council dislikes to discuss controversial issues. On this BEM depends. The Cacique hates to have an im- peachment. So the desire for peace is strong in the pueblo. Much of the opposition to BEM can be dismissed as precampaign talk. The recent actions of the old men do not bespeak compromise. The hope of getting a mass meeting to discuss issues remains dim so long as the faction in power prefers the small caucus in the governor’s office to the larger democratic meeting which is difficult to control. Some personalities are simply unsuited to democratic action or free discussion of issues and prefer the small meeting of ‘‘cronies” in a closed room. The boys are a repressed minority, and their political fortunes are linked to one or two farseeing older progressives from whom they - eS ANTAG pe: PAP. FACTIONALISM AT TAOS PUEBLO—FENTON 343 derive as much liability as good advice. The wise older men have long since retreated into feud lines against BEM and his faction, sallying forth to the attack whenever reform has a chance of success. It is natural that they identified their political fortunes with the veterans. While the conservative older men will say that the younger men are no good and will not turn out when called, I am convinced that the most progressive of them are willing to serve the community and do whatever community work is required of them if called. They have some ideas of their own, and the only older persons who would hear them are the progressive ex-governor and one or two others. They believe that the Pueblo must look outward over the wall, that it must expand its dealings with the modern world, of which it is inevitably a part. They believe that in order to achieve a more realistic adjustment to Southwestern society Taos Pueblo must secularize its government. This they are willing to strive for despite the opposition of the hierarchy, and they believe that separation of church and state is possible in the face of the opposition. Con- sistent with their outward orientation, the young men are ready and willing to sit down with the older men and with United States Indian Service officials to talk out their difficulties. I am not aware that any of the veterans are on the council, but several councillors who were just above the age limit to go to war and who are now in their early forties ally their sympathies with the younger men. Several others have served as junior officers on the staffs of previous governors, but this does not entitle them to member- ship on the council, although they used to be called by courtesy and for advice. Absenteeism and withdrawal from participation in Pueblo affairs, as with the older men, saps the cause of the younger men. The young men are supposed to turn out when they are called to dance on the saint’s days. Four appeared on St. Anthony’s Day (June 13), but there was only one male dancer on St. John’s Day (June 24). Now it is the function of younger men of warrior grade to dance, just as being a councillor is synonymous with singer, for the council is the choir at these fiestas. But the young men, as we have seen, do not want to dance. The council has denied them certain rights and the only sanction that they can exercise in retaliation is to withdraw their support. Absenteeism is a powerful sanction in most primitive societies, against which the council has almost no recourse because the magical sanction of ceremony itself is supposed to be sufficient. The council can call the young men into the governor’s office. The gover- nor has announced who is supposed to dance and the public conse- quently knows who is delinquent. If aman is called and fails to show at three successive saint’s day dances, a piece of work may be set 344 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buux. 164 aside for him. Even the middle-aged men feel uncomfortable about the boys’ not taking part. “It is a hard problem we have up there. They can set a piece of community work aside for them: Fix fence, road, clean the village. I hope they do. The village needs it— there are tin cans everywhere”! BIBLIOGRAPHY ABERLE, S. D. 1948. The Pueblo Indians of New Mexico, their land, economy, and civil organization. Amer. Anthrop. Assoc. Mem. 70. Apatir, JoHN, and Voet, Evon. 1949. Navaho and Zuni veterans: A study of contrasting modes of culture change. Amer. Anthrop., vol. 51, No. 4. pp. 547-561. BunkKER, ROBERT. MS. Pueblo government. (United Pueblo Agency, Albuquerque, N. Mex.) Fenton, W. N. 1955 a. Factionalism in American Indian society. Proceedings, 4th Inter- national Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences (Vienna, Austria, 1952), vol. 2, pp. 330-340. Vienna. 1955 b. Cultural stability and change in American Indian societies. Journ. Royal Anthrop. Inst. Great Britain and Ireland, vol. 83 (pt. 2), pp. 169-174 (July-Dec. 1953). London. Frencu, Davin H. 1948. Factionalism in Isleta Pueblo. Monogr. Amer. Ethnol. Soc., No. 14, pp. 1-47. LaswE Lt, H. D. 1936. Collective autism as a consequence of cultural contact: Notes on religious training and the Peyote cult at Taos. Zeitschrift fur Sozialforschung (Paris), IV (1935), pp. 232-247. Linton, Rapa. 1936. Thestudy of man. New York. Morris, Jor ALEX. 1950. Taos, New Mexico. Saturday Evening Post. July 22. Mourpock, G. P. 1949. Social structure. New York. 1950. Outline of cultural materials. 3d rev. ed. New Haven, Conn. Parsons, Este CLEws. 1936. Taos Pueblo. Gen. Ser. Anthrop., No. 2. Menasha, Wis. 1939. Pueblo Indian religion. Chicago. Sterrens, LINCOLN. 1931. The autobiography of Lincoln Steffens. New York. SIEGEL, BERNARD J. 1949. Some observations on the Puebio pattern at Taos. Amer. Anthrop., vol. 51, No. 4, pp. 562-577. 1952. Suggested factors of culture change at Taos Pueblo, acculturation in the Americas. Proc. and Selec. Pap. 29th Inter. Congr. American- ists, pp. 133-152. Chicago. TraGER, G. L. 1946. An outline of Taos grammar. Publ. Anthrop., No. 6, pp. 184-221. New York. BULLETIN 164 PLATE 74 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY Csi “Mw of Aq ydeisojoyd) eo “6L81 “O19ANd 80r,L, BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 164 PLATE 75 POLITICAL STRUCTURE OF TAOS PUEBLO SOUTH PUEBLO NORTH PUEBLO WATER PEOPLE oi! KMIFE PEOPLE AIVA KIVA OLD AXE ©) ~~___ PEOPLE-KIVA DAY PEOPLE 2 AIVA BIG EARRING PEOPLE - KIVA HEADMEN OF AIVAS (EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE YEAR ) OLO MEN WHO HAVE SERVED BELOW (70 THE SECOND LEVEL) OUTSIDE THE WALL WARCHIEF WITHIN THE WALL GOVERNOR £7 GOVERNOR LAW AND ORDER COMMUNITY SHERIFF FISCAL | STAFF 3 ] [ STAFF 2 Diagram of the political structure of Taos. INDEX Abel, Annie Heloise, quotation from, 94 Aberle, 8. D., information from, 313, 314 Acoma Pueblo, 307 Aconechos, see Occaneechi, 182 Adair, James, quotation from, 38, 130, 175, 206 Adair, John, and Vogt, Evon, informa- tion from, 326 Adhuskeer Indians, mention of, 155 Adoption ceremony, Tutelo, 162-163, 184 ‘“Adornos,”’ Maya style, 232 Aguilar, Vicente, native guide, 219, 221 ‘‘Akanatzy,”’ unknown tribe, 176, 177, 205 Aldama, Mexico, 227 Algonquian Indians, mention of, 124, 140, 147, 148, 149, 151, 152, 153, 155, 160, 165, 166, 170, 174, 179, 180, 186, 187, 188, 192, 193, 199, 200, 202, 206 Algonquian Plains Indians, use of hair pipes by, 75 “Alligators,’’ stucco, 230 Alvord, Clarence W., and Bidgood, information from, 123, 150, 200 American Fur Company, traders with Indians, 46, 48, 49, 50 American Horse, Arapaho Indian, letter to Jack Wilson written by, 295 Anderson, Rev. Joseph, information from, 136-140, 206 Andres Garcia Island, shell mounds on, Lee, 164, Antelope, F. W., Arapaho Indian, letter to Jack Wilson written by, 295 Appomatoc Indians, mention of, 176 Arapaho Indians, mention of, 294, 295 Use of hair pipes by, 58, 59, 64, 68, 75, 79 Arca incongrua, 2 Archaic horizon, 37 Archaic tradition, 2, 3, 23 Architecture, Mayan, 229 Arikara Indians, pottery from, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 98, 99, i01, 104, 107-109, 111 use of hair pipes by, 48, 49, 52, 75 Arm and wrist bands, silver, 49 Arroyo Burro, tributary of Rio de las Playas, 221 Arroyo de Las Amates, tributary of Rfo de las Playas, 221 Arroyo Esperanza, tributary of Arroyo Burro, 221 Arroyo Limén, Mexico, 225 Arroyo Pueblo Viejo, ruins at, 221, 224 370929—57——_26 Arroyo Seca, Mexico, 227 Arroyo Sonso, Mexico, 228 Arroyo Vicente, Mexico, 221, 224 Arthur, Gabriel, information from, 166, 174, 177, 180, 200, 205 Artifacts, found at Ormond Beach Mound, 16-19, 21-24 Assiniboin Indians, mention of, 286, 288 use of hair pipes by, 49, 55, 56, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 71, 72 John Jacob, early trader hair pipes, 46 Atasta, Mexico, 234 Awl, hone, 19, 25 Awl case, 62 Ax, slate, Olmec design, 233 Astor, in Baby, Raymond &., information from, 4] Bacon’s Rebellion, account of, 140-141, 143, 183 Ball court, Ceiba Grande site, 222 (map), 223 Banidoliers. hair-pipe, 69-70). 71, 74, Si, 82 (map) Bannock Trains! use of hair pipes by, 66 Batts, Thomas, information from, 122- 123, .168,,.174, 176, 177, 1%8 (map), 185, 198, 205 Bay of Campeche, surroundings of, 217-218 (map) Beads, copper, 52 glass, 52, 231 green jade, 232 iron, 52 shell, 232 shell columella, used by Indians, stone, 230 Bear Comes Out, Sioux Indian, letters ne pone Wilson written by, 290, Beatty, al ae W., information from, 303 Bellote, on Andres Garcia Island, 231 Bellis, copper, 234 Beltran de Santa Rosa Maria de Lima, Fray Pedro, information from, 249, 256, 260, 261, 267, 270, 275 Beverley, Robert, quotation from, 124, 139, 140, 174-175, 179, 180, 193, 205, 207 Big Earring people, moiety members, 316, 317, 318 Big Earrings kiva group, Indian political group, 306, 329 345 346 Big Earrings Man, Taos elder, 306, 307, 309, 310, 311, 312, 316, 317, 319, 320, 321, 323, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330, 331, 322, 333, 334, 336, 341, 342, 343 Biloxi Indians, mention of, 155, 159, 162, 172, 173, 189, 206 Bird skull, buried with body, 26 Birket-Smith, Kaj, quotation from, 187- 188, 189, 203, 204 Black, Glenn, information from, 41 Blackfeet, Mont., Indian reservation at, 303 Blackfoot Indians, mention of, 326, 340 use of hair pipes by, 49, 66, 79 Bland, Edward, information from, 121— 122, 174, 176, 177, 201, 205 Blasillo River, site of La Venta ruins, 25 Blom, Frans, information from, 228-229 Blood Indians, use of hair pipes by, 66, 68 Boake, Robert L., information from, 71 Bodmer, Carl, paintings by, 55, 61 Boller, Henry A., quotation from, 95 Bow drill, used in making hair pipes, 44 Bowls, alabaster, 233 effigy legs from, 234 fiat bottomed, 220 red ware, 234 simple with slightly incurved rims, 22, 23 subglobular, 22, 23 tetrapod, flange-based, 234 Boyd, William, Dr., quotation from, 127 Brackenridge, Henry M., quotation from, 94 Bradbury, John, quotation from, 94 Breastplates, dentalium shell, 60, 61 hair-pipe, 58-61, 64-67, 71, 72, 74, 76, 78, 79, 80, 81 (map) Bricks, fired, used in burial mounds, 219 Bricks, walls of, 228 Brinton, Daniel, quotation from, 149, 194, 206 Brooches, silver, 49 Brule Indians, use of hair pipes by, 60, 61, 65, 67, 79 Buck, Car! Darling, quotation from, 248 Buck, John, Indian interpreter, 196 Buck, Lucy, Indian interpreter, 196 Bunker, Robert, information from, 303, 308, 310-311, 318, 321 Bureau of Indian Affairs, 301 Burials, Indian, 197 Ormond Beach Mound, (tables), 26-27 Bushnell, David IL., Jr., quotation from, 153-154, 155, 160, 161, 182, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200 Busycon carica, 2, 24 Busycon perversum, 3, 24 Butorides virescens, 26 13-15 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLL. 164] Byrd, William, information from, 126- 130, 134, 146, 147, 166, 167, 175, 176, 180, 182, 206 Cacique, hereditary passing of, 317 Taos political chief, 306, 314, 315, 316, 317, 318-319, 320, 327, 328, 331, 342 Caddo anelene, use of hair pipes by, 65, Caddoan Wichita Indians, use of hair pipes by, 75 Cadzow, Donald, quotation from, 40 Calendar, Gregorian, 272-273 Maya, 267-275 Campbell, John W., manufacturer of hair pipes, 42-46, 73, 74 Campbell, Samuel, maker of hair pipes, ’ Campeche, Mexico, 217 Candelario River, Mexico, 217 Cane, symbol of office, 313, 314 Cardenas, Mexico, 225, 226 Cardinals, use in Maya enumeration, 251, 253-256 (list) cir a “‘and’’ in Maya enumeration, 6 “Casa Vieja,’ ruins of, 227 Catawba Indians, relation with Saponi, 130, 131, 138, 148, 147, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 162, 165, 166, 171, 173, 179, 180, 184, 187, 188, 191, 200, 202-203, 206 Catlin, George, paintings by, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57 (table), 58, 67, 78 © quotation from, 94-95 Cats, kept by Indians, 307 Cattle, kept by Indians, 307 Cayuga Indians, mention of, 136, 138, 139, 152, 156, 162, 163, 184, 185, 196, 204 use of hair pipes by, 69 Cayuse Indians, use of hair pipes by, 69 Ceiba Grande, ruins on Rfo de las Peng 221, 222 (fig.), 223, 226, Ceiba Mound, 229-230, 231, 234 Celt, stone, 19, 25, 233 Ceremonies, Indian, 181 Cerro pace Chica, Tabasco, Mexico, Cerro Mono Pelado, Mexico, 219 Cerro Pilén, Mexico, 220 Cerro Tierra Colorado, Mexican moun- tain, 221 Charnay, Désiré, information from, 228, b Cheraw or Sara Indians, 159 Cherokee Indians, mention of, 140, 143, 144, 145, 153, 165, 170, 181, 187, 191, 203 use of hair pipes by, 38 Cheyenne Indians, use of hair pipes by, a 57, 58, 59, 62, 64, 67, 75, 77, INDEX Chiapas, Mexico, 217, 219, 223-224 Chickasaw Indians, use of hair pipes by, 38 Chicken Itz4, reference to, 234 “Chippeway”’ Indians, use of hair pipes by, 55, 57, 67, 69 Chisels, shell, 19, 24 Choctaw Indians, mention of, 158 Chokers, dentalium shell, 79 hair-pipe, 57, 61, 70, 79, 80 (map) Chowan Indians, mention of, 131, 132, 133 Ciudad Carmen, Mexico, 234 Cloud Horse, Sioux Brave, letters to Jack Wilson by, 292, 293 Coatzocoalcos, Mexico, 225, 228 Coeur d’ Aléne Indians, use of hair pipes by, 66 Coils, fiber, used as pot stands, 94 Columns, brick, San Fernando ruins, 225 Colville Indians, use of hair pipes by, 66 Comalecalco, Maya site, Mexico, 218, 225, 226-228 Comalealeo Ruins, 228-229 Comales, parts of, 230 Comanche Indians, use of hair pipes by, 50, 51, 53, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 64, 65, 74, 76, 79 Conch shells, used for beads, 37-38 Conestoga Indians, mention of, 136, 143, oy 152, 166, 167, 182, 187, 195, Congeree Indians, mention of, 159 Copper, possessed by Indians, 122 Cordoba, R. Unolfo, guide, 231 Corn, cultivated by Indians, 122, 130, 162, 177 Corn Dance, 304 perepel aa Juan, information from, 4 Coues, Elliot, quotation from, 94 Court, stone paved, Ceiba Grande site, 222 (map), 223 Cree madiany, use of hair pipes by, 53, Creek Indians, mention of, 202 use of hair pipes by, 38 Crow Indians, use of hair pipes by, 47, a 56, 57, 65-66, 67, 70, 75, 77, Cuichapa, burial mound at, 220 Curtis, Mary S., information from, 46 Dagger, bone, buried with bodies, 19, 25 Daisy Bell, letter to Jack Wilson written by, 296 Dakota Indians, name for Sioux, 133, 136, 138, 149, 150, 158, 159, 170, 171, 172, 173, 194 use of hair pipes by, 57, 79 Dangberg, Grace M. (Letters to Jack Wilson, the Paiute Prophet, Written between 1908 and 1911), 279-296 Darling, C. W., quotation from, 101 347 Day or Snow people, moiety members, Deer vertebra, worked, buried with bodies, 19, 25 Delaware Indians, mention of, 136 use of hair pipes by, 54, 76 Denig, Edwin T., fur trader, quotation from, 49 Densmore, Frances, pottery collected ’ Dentalium shells, used for ornaments, 57, 60, 79 De Soto, information from, 170, 190 Didelphis virginiana, 2 Dogs, kept by Indians, 307 Donaz variabilis, 2 Dorsey, James Owen, quotation from, 149-150, 170, 171, 172, 173, 190, 191, 194, 206 Drake, Samuel Gardner, information from, 133, 206 Dutch colonists, effect of, on Indians, il Dyer, Robert, Mooney’s interpreter, 85, 286 ? Ear bobs, silver, 49, 55 Har ornaments, hair pipes as, 52-55, 61, 70, 75, 76 (map), 77 Earspools, carved, 234 green jade, 232 Kar wheels, silver, 49 Eastern Siouan problem, with parti- cular emphasis on the Virginia branches—the Occaneechi, the Saponi, and the Tutelo (Miller), 121-211 Kast Timucua Indians, 4 Elm wood, use of, in pottery making, 96 El Plan, Mexico, mounds at, 220 English, relations with tribes, 184 Eno Indians, mention of, 155, 156, 159, 180, 200 Erie Indians, mention of, 136, 153 Esaw Indians, mention of, 131, 179 Esealén River, Tabasco, 233 Eskimos, mention of, 149, 194 Ewers, John C. (Hair Pipes in Plains Indian Adornment), 29-85 Ewers, John C., quotation from, 95 Factionalism at Taos Pueblo, New Mexico, (Fenton), 297-344 Fallam, Robert, information from, 174, 176, 177, 178 (map), 205 Farming, practiced by Taos Pueblo, 307 Fast Horse, Yankton Sioux, letters to Jack Wilson by, 291, 292 Feather people, moiety members, 316, 318 Feathers, eagle and magpie, symbol of Jack Wilson’s power, 285, 289, 290, 293 Federal Indian Agency, feeling toward, 306 348 Fenton, William N. (Factionalism at Taos Pueblo, New Mexico) 297- 344 Fenton, William N., quotation from, 183, 184, 206 Figure, stone, Olmee type, 225, 227, 228, 234 b Figurines, hollow, 230 reddish-brown hematite, 233 Finca Chapayd4l, near Santa Catarina, Chiapas, 233-234 Finger rings, silver, 49 Firepits, 25 Five Civilized Tribes of Oklahoma, constitutional government of, 303 Five Nations, list of, 182 Flathead Indians, mention of, 184 use of hair pipes by, 66 Flint chips, on burial mounds, 220, 224, 233 Floor, cement, 231 Fontaine, Rev. Peter, Jr., information from, 135 (map) Fort Berthold Reservation, 99, 100 (map), 101, 102, 104, 105, 106, 107, 109, 110 Fort Buford, Indian Reservation, 100 (map), 101, 104, 108 Fort Christanna, Indian settlements at, 161-162, 168, 198, 200, 201, 204 Fort Stevenson, Indian Reservation, 100 (map), 101, 102 Fort Union trading posts, 49, 51 Frachtenberg, Leo J., quotation from, 150-151, 152, 158, 194, 195, 206 French, David H., information from, 324, 326 French, relations with Indians, 184 Fur-trading companies, connection with hair pipes, 46-47, 72-73, 75 Gallatin, Albert, quotation from, 131, 137, 173, 179-180, 185, 206 Gardner, Alexander, photographs taken by, 60 sera a A. §., information from, 173, 202 Gay, William, Indian halfbreed, letter to Jack Wilson by, 292 Ghost Dances, Indian, 283, 285 offerings for, 286, 290, 291, 293 Gidatsa Indians, mention of, 172 Gifford, E. W., quotation from, 96 Gilmore, M. R., quotation from, 96, 109 Glyphs, Maya, 219, 229 Goggin, J. M., quotations from, 4 Gorget, shell, manufacture of, 45 silver, 49, 58 Government Factories, sellers of hair pipes, 47, 48 Governor, functions of, 314, 315, 319, 320, 321-325 “‘Grandfathers,” head men of kivas, 317 Grass dance, use of hair pipes in, 66, 72, 80 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Buu. 164] Grave, child’s, 232 Indian, 137, 160, 179, 197 Green Heron skull, buried with bodies, 19 Gregg, Alexander, quotation from, 204 aaa quotation from, 163-166, Grijalva River, Mexico, 217 Gros Ventres Indians, pottery from, 95, 101, 102 use of hair pipes by, 68, 79 Gunnerson, James, quotation from, 103 Gutierrez, Alejandria Marques, collec- tion of, 232 Hair bobs, see hair pipes, 40 Hair dressing, long, 54, 55, 76 roached, 54, 75 Hair ornaments, hair pipe, 55-56, 61, 70, 77 (map) Hair pipes, archeological evidence of use, 1-5 bird bone, 38, 73, 78 bone, inventor of, 62-63 substitution for shell, 62-64, 71, 74, 76 brass, 40-42 cattle bone, 63-64, 74 conch columella, 38, 40, 42 conclusions about, 73-82 copper, 73 distribution of, 46-51, 75-82 (maps) glass, 39-40, 73 history of, 37-38 metal, 73 shell, 42-51, 52, 58, 73, 74 limitations of, 61-62 manufacture of, 42-46 silver, 40—42, 48, 73 slate, 39 stone, 73 survival of, 71-73 symbol of prosperity, 64 use of as chokers, 57, 61, 70, 79, 80 (map) use of as ear ornaments, 52-55, 61, 70, 75, 76 (map), 77 use of as hair ornaments, 55—56, 61, 70, 77 (map) use of in bandoliers, 69-70, 71, 74, 81, 82 (map) use of in breastplates, 58-61, 64-67, 71, 72, 74, 76, 78, 79, 80, 81 (map) use of in necklaces, 56-57 (table), 61, 67-69, 71, 72, 74, 78 (map), 79, 81 wampum, 48. See also Hair pipes, shell. Hair Pipes in Plains Indian Adornment (Ewers), 29-85 Hale, Horatio, quotation from, 136—140, 145, 147, 158, 162, 173, 179, 184, 185, 186, 194, 200, 201, 206, 207 Halifax River, 1, 5, 26 Hall, C. L., pottery collected by, 102 ‘‘Hanathaskies,” unknown tribe, 176, 205 INDEX Harrington, John P., quotation from, 207 Harrington, John P. (Valladolid Maya Enumeration), 241-278 Hawks, F. L., information from, 132 (map), 133, 136, 206 Hazen, Brig. Gen. W. B., pottery col- lected by, 104, 108, 110 Head, pottery, 232 shell, carved, 232 Heads, Olmec Colossal, 225 Henry, Alexander, and Thompson, David, quotation from, 47 Hewitt, J. N. B., quotation from, 152, 196 Hidatsa Indians, mention of, 159, 172, 173 pottery from, 91, 93, 94, 95, 96, 98, 99, 101, 102, 111 use of hair pipes by, 47, 68, 77 Holmes, W. H., quotation from, 151, 195 Hone, coquina, 19, 25 Horses, kept by Indians, 307 Howard, J. H., quotation from, 104 Huacapal, former name of El Plan, 220 Hunkpapa Indians, use of hair pipes by, 48, 54, 60, 72 Hunter, John G., information from 291 Hunting, practiced by Taos Pueblo, 307 Huron Indians, mention of, 136 use of hair pipes by, 39 Ieafui Indians, 4 “Tdolo,’”’ stone, 230 Implements and ornaments, Beach Mound, 24—26 Indian chiefs, portraits of, 52-54 Indian Reorganization Act, constitu- tion under, 302, 303. Indian Service, 325, 326, 330, 343 Indian words, English equivalents, Iowa Indians, mention of, 170 use of hair pipes by, 538, 57 Iron fragments, rusted, 26 Iroquois Indians, mention of, 131, 136, 187, 188, 139, 140, 148, 147, 150, 151, 152, 153, 156, 162, 163, 167, 168, 170, vie 184 186, 187, 191, 195, 196, 203, 205, 206, 301, 326 Isla, mounds at, 231-232 Isleta Pueblo, 324 suggested for study, 303, 307 Ormond 127 133, 146, 160, 183, 199, Jaguar, Olmec anthropomorphic, 228 Jaguar figurine, pottery, 226 Jaguar frieze, modeled, 234 Jaguar headdress, Olmec figure, 234 Jars, round-bottomed, 230, 232 collared, 22 wide-mouthed, 232 Jefferson, Thomas, information from, 154, 155, 182, 197, 204 349 Jennings, Jesse D.; Willey, Gordon R.; and Newman, Marshall T.: The Ormond Beach Mound, East Central Florida, 1-28 Jicarilla Apache Indians, use of hair pipes by, 54, 76 John Short Bull, Indian brave, letter to Jack Wilson by, 294 Jonuta, Maya site, 218, 219 Kane, Paul, paintings by, 53 Kansa Indians, use of hair pipes by, 53, 57 Kennard, Dr. Edward A., information from, 303, 304, 310 Kettles, metal, use of by Indians, 94 Keyauwee Indians, mention of, 155, 159, 161, 165, 168, 179, 182, 203 Kichai Indians, use of hair pipes by, 54 Kicking Bear, Sioux Indian, 286, 288 Kidd, Kenneth E., information from, 39 King, Charles Bird, paintings by, 53 Kiowa Apache Indians, use of hair pipes by, 54, 56, 58, 59, 64, 67, 70, 71, 76, 77, 79 Kiowa Indians, mention of, 312, 327 use of hair pipes by, 50, 53, 54, 55, 57, 58, 59, 62, 64, 65, 76, 79 Kiva, council group, 306, 316, 318, 342 enumerated, 316 method of function, 317 Klamath, Oreg., Indian reservation at, 303 Klamath Indians, mention of, 326 Knife people, moiety members, 316, 318 Krzywicki, Ludwik, quotation from, 155, 198 Kurz, R. F., paintings by, 56 Laguna Pueblo, 307 Laguna Terminos, Mexico, 217, 234 Larocque, Francois, quotation from, 47, 77 Las Choapas, Mexico, 220, 226 Laswell, H. D., information from, 313, 317, 324, 327 La Venta, ruins of, near Aldama, Ta- basco, 219, 224, 226, 227, 228 Lawson, John, quotation from, 124-125 (map), 126, 132, 133, 137, 147, 161, 167, 168, 175, 180, 181-182, 183, 198, 201, 206 Lederer, John, a ibienetion from, 116 (map), 121, 122, 133-134, 144, 145, 154, 161, 167, 168, 174, 176, 177, 178 (map), 179, 180, 181, 197, 198, 201, 205 Lenape tribes, mention of, 131 Letters to Jack Wilson, the Paiute Prophet, Written between 1908 and 1911 (Dangberg), 283-296 Lewis, Meriwether, and Clark, Wm., quotation from, 47, 93, 94, 97-98, 109 350 Like-a-Fishhook, Indian Village, (map), 101, 104 Lime, oyster-shell, 231 Linton, Ralph, information from, 326 Literature cited, 28, 83-85, 111-112, 207-211, 235-240, 277-278, 344 Little Green Heron, skull, 26 Long, James L., information from, 285, 286 Mahar Indians, pottery from, 97 Main court, Ceiba Grande site, 222 (map) Manahoac tribes, mention of, 155, 159, 160, 165, 170, 191, 200 Spee mention of, 170, 172, 173 pottery from, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97-98, 99, 101-107, 111 use of hair pipes by, 47, 48, 49, 54, 55, 57, 62, 67 Mangoaes, mention of, 133 Mannahoack Indians, mention of, 147, 148, 157, 192, 201 Mason Valley, Nebr., home of Jack Wilson, 283, 284 Massawomeck Indians, mention of, 148, 191, 192 Massinacack Indians, Monacan group, Maximilian, Prinz von, quotation from, 5, Maya, mention of, 217, 250, 257, 264, 266, 267 Maya architecture, similarity to, 219 Maya calendar, 267-275 Maya enumeration, 245-246 area-measure classifiers, 265-266 arrangement of numerals, 252 cardinals, 251, 253-256 (lists) classifiers, 258, 259-260 categories, 259-260 distance-measure classifiers, 265 “exactly,” or “approximately,’’ 276 fre wpe measure classifiers, 266—- 6 me pnoialies of Beltrdn’s system, 5 four mathematical processes, 275 fractionals, 257 from higher numeral of prominence, 248-249 general classifiers, 261—263 group cardinals, 257 ‘high’? numeral series of numerals “ascending,’’ 250-251 history of the study of, 249 liquid-measure classifiers, 267 major cardinal classifiers, 260-261 measure classifiers, 263-264 multiplication classifiers, 261 numeroids, employed in dialect, 276 ordinals, 257-259, 261 quantity-measure classifiers, 266 264- BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 164] 100) Maya enumeration—Continued score system employed, 247-248 Spanish influence, 252, 264, 265 time reckoning in, 249, 252, 253, 267-275 use of fingers in, 251-252 zero, 256 Maya language, phonetic and terminal digression, 246-247 recorded in hieroglyphic writing, 245-246, 253, 260 Spanish influence on, 252, 264 spoken in Yucatan Peninsula, 245, 264, 275 survival of some ancient words, 252-253 Maya sculpture, clay, 219 Olmec type, 225 Maya time reckoning, little known, 249, 260 McCay, Andrew, hair pipes purchased y; ‘4 46, 4 lee D’Arcy, information from, 303 Medicine, R. W., letters to Jack Wilson by, 288-289, 290 Medicines prescribed by Jack Wilson, 286, 288, 289, 290, 292, 293, 294, 295 Meherrin Indians, mention of, 131, 132, 147, 152, 174, 183, 189, 195, 196, 202, 204 Menomini Indians, use of hair pipes by, 56, 57 Mercenaria mercenaria, 2 Metates, stone, 230 Mexico, Southeastern, Archeological Re- connaissance in (Stirling), 213- 240 Mica, found in burial mounds, 199 Middle Woodland culture period, 38 Miller, Alfred Jacob, photographs by, 54 Miiler, Carl F.: Revaluation of the eastern Siouan problem with particular emphasis on the Vir- ginia branches—the Occaneechi, the Saponi, and the Tutelo, 115-211 Milling, Chapman, quotation from, 169 Minetarre Indians, pottery from, 97 Miniconjou Indians, use of hair pipes by, 61 Moache Ute Indians, use of hair pipes by, 60, 79 Mohetan Indians, mention of, 159, 163, 165, 180, 200 Moieties, functions of, 316, 318 male and female, 318 Monacan Indians, mention of, 123, 131, 143-144, 148, 153, 154, 156, 157, 159, 160, 165, 167, 168, 170, 191, 192, 196, 199, 200, 202, 205 Monahassanugh Indians, Monacan group, 153, 154, 156, 197, 200 INDEX Monasiccapano, corrupted to Saponi, 167 Monasukapanough, old Indian village, 154, 156, 167, 168, 197, 198, 200 Monetan Indians, mention of, 159 Montez, Roberto, Mexican engineer, guide to mounds, 220 Monument, stone, Mayan, 225-226, 227 Mooney, James, quotation from, 54—55, 60, 64, 69, 70, 142-149, 154, 155, 168, 182, 189-191, 197, 200, 201, 203, 206, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 292, 294 visits to Jack Wilson, 284 Moorhouse, Major, photographs by, bi Morgan, Lewis H., quotation from, 95, 101, 104 Mosopelea Indians, mention of, 159 Motul dictionary, record of Maya language, 245, 249, 252, 260, 261, 262, 263, 264, 265, 267, 268, 269, 270, 271, 272, 278, 274, 275 Mounds, Indian, 154, 197, 198, 199, 204 in Mexico, 219, 220, 221, 223, 225, 227, 228-229, 231, 232, 233, 234 shell, 229, 231, 233 stone-faced, 223 Mt. Taylor period, 2 Murdock, G. P., information from, 326 pas at aes 8., pottery collected by, 106. Muskhogean Indians, mention of, 152, 158, 160, 165, 195. Myers, William, information from, 182 Nahissan Indians, mention of, 157, 158, 159, 176. 200, 201 Nanticoke Indians, 203 National Geographic Society, cosponsor of expedition, 217 Necklace, jade bead, 232 shell, 232 Necklaces, hair pipes in, 56-57 (table), 61, 67-69, 71, 72, 74, 78 (map), 79, 81 worn by men and women, 67 Needham, James, information from, 166, 174, 180, 200, 205 Neill, Edward D., quotation from, 140-141, 206 “‘Nessoneicks,’’ unknown tribe, 177, 201, 205 Neverita duplicata, 2 Newman, Marshall T., see Jennings, Willey, and Newman. Nez Percé Indians, use of hair pipes by, 66 Nineteenth-Century Pottery Vessels from the Upper Missouri, Ob- servations on (Wedel), 87-114 North cay old maps, 125, 132, 134, 5 Northwest Company, traders with In- dians, 47, 49 Norton, Charles L., information from, 46 dol Nottoway Indians, mention of, 131, 132, 144, 147, 171, 183, 184, 189, 196, 202, 204 Obsidian flakes, on burial mounds, 220 under ball court, 223 Occaneecheans, see Occaneechi Occaneechi, history of, 167, 179 location of, 167, 175, 182, 183, 201 names connected with, 167, 201 relation to Eastern Siouan Prob- lem, 121-211 Occaneechi Island, situation of, 134, 147, 175 Occancechi Trail, location of, 182 Ocozcocoautla, Chiapas, Mexico, 224 Odocoileus virginianus, 2 Ofo Indians, mention of, 159, 172, 173 Ogilby’s map, 134 reference to, 1383 Oglala Indians, use of hair pipes by, 48, 57, 60, 65, 67, 68, 69, 71, 79, 81 Ojibwa Indians, mention of, 187 use of hair pipes by, 81 Oklahoma Indians, use of hair pipes by, 6 7 Old-Axe 316 ’ Ollas, fragments of, 230 Olmec, mention of, 217, 226 Omaha Indians, use of hair pipes by, 47, 65, 67, 69, 70, 81 Oneida Indians, mention of, 131, 137, 179 people, moiety members, 318 Onondaga Indians, mention of, 196 Orange period, 2, 3 Ordinals, Maya enumeration, 257, 258 (list) Ormond Beach Mound, artifacts found, 16-19 burial grounds, 7 (fig.), 8 (fig.), 12-18, 14-15 (tables) cross sections, 10 (fig.) environmental, archeological, and ethnohistorical setting, 1-5, 26-27 exploration and mound features, 6-13 geographical location of, 1, 5,%6 oy Feat ea implements and ornaments from, 24—26 skeletal material, 19-20 summary and conclusions, 26—27 Ormond Beach Mound, East Central Florida (Jennings, Willey, and Newman), 1—28 Osage Indians, mention of, 159, 173 use of hair pipes by, 42, 52, 53, 57, 65, 67, 70, 75 Ostrea virginica, 2 Oto Indians, mention of, 206 use of hair pipes by, 47, 54, 65, 70 Ottawa Indians, mention of, 187 Oxolatan River, Tabasco, 233 Oyster shell, lime made from, 231 352 Paanese, corruption of Saponi, 167 Paiute Indians, use of hair pipes by, 89 Paiute Prophet, Jack Wilson, letters to (Dangberg), 279-296 Palenque, stuccos like those at, 229 Paleo-Indian traditions, 2 Palmer, Edward, Dr., collections by, 58 Palouse Indians, use of hair pipes by, 69 Pamlico Indians, mention of, 131 Pamunkey Indians, mention of, 144, 145, 150, 154 Paraiso, Mexico, 226, 229-231 Parker, W. P., quotation from, 51, 58 Parsons, Elsie Clews, information from, 303, 308, 309, 310, 311, 312, 316, 317, 326, 327 Patshenins, see Occaneechi Pawnee Indians, mention of, 171 use of hair pipes by, 47, 51, 54, 59, 64, 67, 75, 79 Peach trees, planted by Indians, 130 Pedee Indians, mention of, 159 sks apes feeder of Tonald River, 21 Pendants, 19, 24 hair-pipe ear, 70 Pérez, Juan Pio, information from, 249, 260, 267, 272, 273, 274, 275 Picks, shell, 19, 24 Piegan Indians, use of hair pipes by, 55, 61, 66 Piegan Sun Dance, use of hair pipes in, ? “Pintahae,’’? unknown tribe, 176 Pipe, corncob, 62, 63, 74 pottery elbow, 19, 24 Pipe-drilling machine, used in making hair pipes, 44-45, 50, 74 Plains Cree Indians, use of hair pipes by, 49, 55, 67, 77 Plains Ojibwa, Indians, pipes by, 49, 55, 57 Platforms, cement, 230 shell-floored, 230 stone-faced, 221, 224 Plume Trading Company, New York, 75 Plummets, stone and shell, 19, 24 Ponea Indians, use of hair pipes by, 47, 48, 49, 54, 61, 62, 63, 64, 67, 74 Potawatomi Indians, mention of, 187 Pots, effigy, buff-colored, 232 pinch, paint containers, 230 Pottery, basket marked, 94 “black ware,’’ 106, 107, 223 buff, incised, 220, 232 buff, plain, 224, 226, 233 Cord Marked (soft paste), 16, 17, ae 98, 103, 104, 105, 107, 108, 109 Deptford Bold Check Stamped, 16, 17, 23,27. ss Creek Red, 16, 17, 22-23, use of hair European, 25-26 Fort Berthold Period, 98-101 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BuLu. 164] Pottery—Continued incised, 230 pepe gee Stamped (soft paste) 6, 24 Little Manatee Shell Stamped, 16, 17, 18, 23 monochrome, dark red, 230 orange and black on buff, 230 Orange Incised, 16, 17, 23, 27 painted, 230, 232 Pasco Plain, 16, 23 Pasco Simple Stamped, 16, 17, 23 plain buff, 220 polished red, 232, 233 polychrome, orange and black, 230 Pre-Santa Rosa-Swift Creek, 17 Red Ware, 223, 230, 232, 234 Residual Plain, 16, 17 St. Johns Check Stamped, 16, 17, 18, 22, 27 St. Johns Plain, 16, 17, 19, 21-22, 27 St. Johns Scored, 22 St. Johns Simple Stamped, 16, 17, 22 Sand-Tempered Plain, 24 shell-marked, 230 simple stamped, 98, 103, 105, 107, 108, 109 Unclassified Incised, 16, 23-24 Upper Missouri, observations on nineteenth-century, 87-114 Woodland type, 166 Pottery making, reported from Upper Missouri, 93—96 Pottery sherds, recovered from mounds, 12, 16-19, 21-24 Poultry, kept by Indians, 307 Powell, J. W., quotation from, 142, 180, 189, 206 Powhatan tribes, mention of, 143, 144 147, 148, 156, 165, 166, 174, 176. 186, 192, 194, 200 Pratte, Chouteau and Co., fur traders,- 49, 50, 52 Priests, position in the Indian com- munity, 312 Profile, shell, buried with grave, 232 Projectile points, bone, 25 chipped stone, 19, 25 Provinse, Dr. John, information from, Pueblo fund, town treasury, 307, 320 Pueblo Viejo, ruins of, 219, 221, 224 Pumice, worked, 19, 25 Pyramid, stone-faced, 221, 222, 223, 229 Quapaw Indians, mention of, 159, 170, 190 Real, Antonio Ciudad, supposed author of Motul Dictionary, 268 Rechacherian or Rickohockan, Cherokee Red ocher, sacred paint, used in Ghost Dance, 285, 286, 289, 290, 292, 293, 295 see INDEX Reliefs, stucco, 228-229 Reservation Period, 67, 68, 70, 71, 75, Riccaree Indians, pottery from, 95, 101 Rickohockans, name applied by Lederer, 1538, 154, 205 Rights, Douglas L., quotation from, 166, 167, 183-184, 206 Rio de las Playas, feeder of Tonald River, 219, 220-221, 224 Rio Seco, Mexico, 218, 228 Comalealeo ruins on, 226, 229 Risdisbacher, Peter, paintings by, 55 Road, new shell-surfaced, 229 Roanoke River, Virginia-North Caro- lina dividing line, 129 (map), 130 Roberts, James P., letters from, 286 Roberts, W. O., Supt. Pine Ridge Agency, information from, 290 wayne: Fred, letters to Jack Wilson, Rock shelters, Tabasco, Mexico, 233 Rope, William James, letter to Jack Wilson written by, 295 . Anthony’s Day dance, 315, 343 . Augustine period, definition of, 3 . John’s Day Dance, 343 . Johns I peried, 4, 17-19, 22, 23, 27 . Johns II period, 4, 17-19, 22 . John’s River, 1, 2, 4 St. John’s River region, faunal re- sources, 2 St. Johns tradition, definition of, 2-3 Saint-Memin, C. B. J. F. de, portrait painter, 52 Saints’ Day dance, 325 Saluda tribe, mention of, 131 San Fernando ruins, Mexico, 224 San Miguel, near La Venta, 225-226 San Pedro y San Pablo, Mexico, 218 Santa Catarina, Chiapas, 234 Santa Clara Pueblo, 310 Santa Clara Pueblo Indians, use of hair pipes by, 70, 76, 79 Santee Indians, mention of, 159 Santo Domingo Pueblo, 307 San Vicente, hacienda destroyed in Mexican Revolution, 226-227 . Sapir, Edward A., quotation from, 151, 195, 206 Saponi Indians, connected with Tutelo, 167, 200-201 history of ,168 location of, 167, 175, 176, 179, 181 relation to Eastern Siouan prob- lem, 121-211 Sara Indians, mention of, 143, 159, 165 Sarsi eee use of hair pipes by, 68, 9 Saturiwa Indians, 4 Sauk and Fox Indians, use of hair pipes by, 48, 53, 56, 57, 65, 67, 70, 75 Saura Indians, mention of, 166 Schaeffer, Claude E., quotation from, 162 353 Score system, employed in Maya enum- eration, 247-248 Sculpture, stone 229 Seasons, Maya words for, 269 Reanitiolé Indians, use of hair pipes by, 5 Seminole period, 3 Seneca Indians, mention of, 131, 136, 137, 1389, 141, 148, 162, 179 use of hair pipes by, 57 Sewee Indians, mention of, 159 Shakori Indians, mention of, 155, 159 ee Indians, use of hair pipes by, 5 Sheet mica, 25 Shells, used in mound building, 229 Sherburne, Joseph H., inventor of bone hair pipes, 62-63 Sherds, Mexican, 220, 223, 224, 230, 231 Shoccori Indians, mention of, 168, 200 Short Bull, Sioux Indian, 286 Shoshoni Indians, use of hair pipes by, 6 Siegel, Bernard J., information from, 326 Silver, used by Indians, 122 Sinkiuse Indians, use of hair pipes by, 66 Siouan family, relation of Occaneechi, the Saponi, and Tutelo Indians, to Eastern Siouan problems, 121- 211 Siouan eee comparisons of, 172- 173 Siouan question, evaluation and inter- pretation of facts regarding, 173- 204 Sioux Indians, mention of, 99, 102, 105, 148, 149, 171, 283, 290, 291, 292 use of hair pipes by, 48, 49, 54, 61, 65, 71 Sissipahaw Indians, mention of, 159, 180, 203 Skeletons, found at Ormond Beach Mound, 7 (fig.), 8 (fig.), 12-18, 14-15 (table), 26 Skinner, Alson, quotation from, 199 Skulls, Gulf type, 20, 27 Walcolid type, 20, 27 Smallpox epidemic, effect on Indians, 99 Smith, Captain John, quotations from, 119, 148, 147, 148, 174, 186, 201, 205 Snail shells, found in rock shelters, 233 Spanish dominion in Florida, 4 Spanish-Indian tradition, definition of, 3 Spanish influence on Taos government, 313 Speck, Frank G., quotation from, 156- 158, 160, 162-163, 184, 199-203 Spike, European, 224 Spinden, Herbert J., quotation from, 66 Spindle whorl, blue stone, 233 Staircase, stone, 224 Stairway, ruined, 221 Stanley, John Mix, paintings by, 53 Steffens, Lincoln, information from, 304, 315 354 Steward, Julian H., quotation from, 60 Stewart, Richard H., photographer, 217 Stieffel, Herman, paintings by, 58 Stirling, Marion, 217 Stirling, Matthew W. (An Archeological Reconnaissance in Southeastern Mexico), 213-240 si ae IN W., quotation from, Stone, Forrest R., information from, 284, 294 Stone, rubbing, 19, 25 Stone sculpture, Maya, 219 Storms, J. C., information from, 46 Strachey, William, information from, 119, 154, 174, 192 wince burial site, material from, 39- Strombus gigas, 42, 48, 45, 61 Stucco frieze, 234 Stuccos, alligator shaped, 230 similar to Palenque, 229, 231 Sugeree Indians, mention of, 159 Sully, rier Alfred, pottery collected by, Surruque Indians, 4 Susquehanna Indians, mention of, 141, 143, 145, 146, 148, 160, 176, 183, 192 use of hair pipes by, 39 Sutherland, Daniel, quotation from, 46 Swanton, John R., information from, 134, 151, 158-160, 172-178, 182, 195, 196, 200, 204, 206 and Dixon, Roland B., quotation from, 151-152, 164, 166, 167- 168, 200 Tabasco, Mexico, 217, 219, 223 Tabeau, a trader, quotation from, 93 Tacatacuru Indians, 4 Tagelus gibbus, 2 Tambourine drum, used by Indians, 312 Taos Indians, dress of, 308, 312 effect of public criticism on, 310 government of, 314, 339 Governor and staff, functions of, 3138, 314, 315 hair dressing, 308 use of hair pipes by, 72, 80 Taos Pueblo, August pilgrimage to Blue Lake, 317 basic data, 307 clothing reforms, 327 community work, 308, 314, 415 conformity, 311 cooperative thresher, 322-323, 324 crisis, 331-337 economy of, 307 eviction of outsiders, 333 factional council, 319 factionalism, the problem, 299-304, 316, 326 factions, 325-331 forces for self-correction, 341-344 full council of, 315, 319, 321, 327 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [BULL. 164] Taos Pueblo—Continued G. I. uprising, aftermath, 337-341 government, 313, 314, 317, 318-319, 321, 339 hierarchy of priests, 306-307, 317, 318-319 ideal operation of the council, 319-321 industry of members, 307, 308 interpreters, 320 method of study, 304-306 moieties, 317-318 Peyote controversy, 327-328 politics, Indian, 307 public granary, 3238, 324 ee incident, 328-329, 336- sanctions, diffuse, 309-312 sanctions imposed by, 315, 328, 343 social structure, 312-319 tourist collections, 322 unanimity in, 308-309 violence in connection with, 311 Taos Pueblo, New Mexico, Factionalism at (Fenton) 297-344 Tapijulapa, Tabasco, Mexico, 233-234 Taracena, Prof. Rosendo, Maya relics collected by, 226-227 Tawaconie Indians, use of hair pipes by, ‘‘Teapot,’”’ round-bodied spouted, 232 Tehuantepec locality, Mexico, 218 _ _(map) : Teit, James, quotation from, 66 Teton Dakota Indians, use of hair pipes by, 49, 51, 54, 60, 61, 64, 65, 67, 68, 69, 77, 79 Teton Indians, use of hair pipes by, 65 Thomas, Cyrus, quotation from, 169, 172, 190 Thwaites, R. G., quotation from, 93, 97 Time reckoning, dated from, 268 Timucauan language, spoken by In- dians, 4 Tixier, Victor, quotation from, 52-53 Toilet He Indian, hair-pipe decorated, 6 Tomahitan Indians, 123-124 -Tombs, similar to Mayan, 219, 228-229 Tonalé region, Mexico, description of, 219-220 Tonal4é River, Mexico, 217, 219, 226, 228 Tonkawa Indians, use of hair pipes by, 65, 70 Tooker, William Wallace, quotation of, 147-149, 192-194, 206 Totero Indians, see Tutelo. Towns, palisaded, 161 Trager, Dr. George L., information from, 303, 307, 311, 316 Tula, reference to, 234 Tupilco, near coast of Tabasco, Maya ruins, 219, 232-233 Tursiops truncatus, 2 INDEX Turtle Mound pottery, 18 Tuscarora Indians, mention of, 131, 132, 133, 137, 138, 189, 148, 147, 150, 152, 168, 171, 179, 183, 185, 187, 189, 196, 202, 203, 204 Tutelo Indians, 121, 126, 128-130, 131- 132, 136-140, 142, 147, 150-159, 161-167, 170, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 179, 180, 182-188, 194, 200— 201 history of, 168, 180 location of, 168, 175, 189 relation to Eastern Siouan problem, 121-211 Tutelo Isiand, location of, 176 Uintah Ute Indians, use of hair pipes by, 60, 79 Ulke, Henry, portrait by, 61 Umatilla Indians, use of hair pipes by, 69 United Pueblos Agency, 313 superintendent of, 304 United States Indian Service, feeling toward, 311, 312 Upper Missouri, pottery making re- ported from, 93-96, 100 (map) Upper Missouri, Observations on Some Nineteenth-Century Pottery Ves- sels from (Wedel), 87-114 Urns, cylindrical, 232 Urubia Indians, 4 Usumacintla River, 218 Ute Indians, use of hair pipes by, 64, 65, 69 Valenzuela, Policarpo, monuments re- moved by, 226-227 Valladolid, north-central Yucatan Pen- insula, 245 Valladolid dialect, information on, 245, 253, 256, 261, 276 Valladolid Maya enumeration (Harring- ton), 241-278 Valladolid Maya enumeration, see Maya enumeration. Venus year, in Maya calendar, 273 Veracruz, Mexico, 217, 219, 223, 229 Vessels, effigy, 230 pottery, 232 shallow, 230 shallow tetrapod, 230 Villahermosa, Mexico, 225, 227 Waccamaw Indians, mention of, 159 Waco Indians, use of hair pipes by, 54 Wall, brick, 228 stone, 224 Walla Walla Indians, use of hair pipes by, 66, 69 Wampum, clamshell, manufacture of, 42-46 War chief or war captain, functions of, 314, 315 Wasco Indians, use of hair pipes by, 66, 69 350 Wateree Indians, mention of, 159 Water Man, head of Water people, 317 Water pee moiety members, 316, Waxhaw Indians, mention of, 159 Wedel, Waldo R. (Observations on Some Nineteenth-Century Pottery Ves- sels from the Upper Missouri), 87-114 Wedel, Waldo R., quotation from, 51 Westervelt, Frances A., quotation from, 42, 45, 46 Wichita Indians, use of hair pipes by, 53, 54, 57 Will, George, and Hecker, Thad C., quotations from, 91, 111 Willey, Gordon R., see Jennings, Willey, and Newman, ete. Williams, Samuel Cole, from, 130 Wilson, David, son of J. I. Wilson, 284 teacher of Jack Wilson, 284 Wilson, Jack, interview with, 287 medicines prescribed by, 286, 288, 289, 290, 292, 298, 294, 295 Paiute prophet, 283-296 letters to, 288-296 seme I., friend of Jack Wilson, 284, Wilson, Joseph W., son of J. I. Wilson, letter from, 284-285, 286 Wilson, Mrs. J. I., letters written by, 285, 286 Winnebago Indians, use of hair pipes by, 54, 67, 70, 76 Winyaw Indians, mention of, 159 Witthoft, John, information from, 39 Woccon Indians, mention of, 131, 156, 158, 159, 178, 200, 203 Women, necklaces worn by, 67, 72 Woods, General, information from, 174 Woolworth, Alan, quotation from, 107 Writing, figures used by Indians, 181 information Yadkin Indians, mention of, 203 Yakima Indians, use of hair pipes by, 66, Yankton Dakota Indians, use of hair pipes by, 60 Yankton Indians, use of hair pipes by, 54, 57, 65, 68, 70 Yankton Sioux, mention of, 291 Yanktonai Indians, use of hair pipes by, 54, 65 Yemasee Indians, mention of, 202 Yesang Indians, mention of, 157, 200 Yucatan Peninsula, Maya country, 245 Maya language spoken in, 245, 264, 275 Yufera Indians, 4 Yui Indians, 4 Zufii Pueblo, 307 U, S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1957 ton 2 ¥ % eta _—_ or HR at: 2 re absent pee] ake ee std Led at ABE yeaiw be! rT Day a8 2 yy init Bany fa) ry e : Vee i) $e fe ot aa Jos tere it tnt) wohl lies b i ih / . : } . Pets $958 427) | 12% > Hs bit ait Mali goatake on i a ; | ee a are 4 at ae ' Li nose sy : . } * Pal Sted ra’ ie ren woke a vw ie oe Onts + + ot Phat ~ 45 2% t en ee eee ot ey Mas eogicg test do -aapry wenelbal 14 ga re Lao enisetinnnd * ded satel) Vu i 4 OSes ‘ues per hw ra ac WoL vt | 4 oe a LL worigy i eo Go| . aie hima. rst rer 'bey, e4 reese TN agate een et ae i q Al ir : é- in # i ; >. : i ~ = P| ’ d ieee Fed ae HR Pie Tae ay Paris Lie A iy ii bg Q ee a, ne , wii