Native Peoples of North America

Native Peoples of North America

SUSAN STEBBINS

OPEN SUNY TEXTBOOKS

GENESEO, NY
Native Peoples of North America by Susan Stebbins is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.
Contents

About vii

Introduction ix

Chapter 1: In 1491... 1
Chapter 2: All Our Relations 25
Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution 49
Chapter 4: Status, Rank, and Power 83
Chapter 5: Religion and Spiritual Beliefs 105
Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art? 131
Conclusions 159

References 165

About the Author 181

About Open SUNY Textbooks 183

Errata 185
About
Native Peoples of North America is intended to be an introductory text about the
Native peoples of North America (primarily the United States and Canada) presented
from an anthropological perspective. As such, the text is organized around anthro-
pological concepts such as language, kinship, marriage and family life, political
and economic organization, food getting, spiritual and religious practices, and the
arts. Prehistoric, historic and contemporary information is presented. Each chapter
begins with an example from the oral tradition that reflects the theme of the chap-
ter. The text includes suggested readings, videos and classroom activities.

Native Peoples of North America | vii

Introduction
The attempt to write any book, especially a textbook, about the histories and cul-
tures of the indigenous peoples of what is now called North America is a daunting
task. Similar to the continent of Europe, the histories and cultures of the peoples are
diverse. It is readily accepted by both scientists and the general public that humans
were in Europe over 40,000 years ago. However, the hypothesis, based on archaeo-
logical sites in South America that fully modern humans were in the Americas 40,000
years ago is hotly debated. While there is evidence of hominid species (for exam-
ple, Homo erectus and Neanderthals) in Europe as well as Asia and Africa, the skeletal
remains of the fully modern humans called Paleo-Indians have been found only in
the Americas. While humans have not been in the Americas as long as in Africa (from
whence all humans come), Europe, or Asia, archaeological evidence shows that peo-
ple have been in the Americas for at least over 12,000 years.

The historical inquiry about human activity around the world is broken into two
large categories: prehistoric and historic. The term proto-historic applies to a period
of transition between the two. With the exception of societies like the Maya and
Aztecs of Mesoamerica, who had written documents and historical accounts on
monumental architecture well over 2,000 years ago, research about Native societies
prior to 1492 is prehistoric. A number of academic fields and sources—geology,
archaeology, botany, zoology, and the oral traditions of contemporary Native soci-
eties—are used to make hypotheses about their lives before historical documents
were kept. Archaeologists and historians use historical categories that are unique to
the Americas: Paleo-Indian, archaic, and formative.

Paleo-Indian refers to the first migration of people to the Americas during the final
glacial episodes of the late Pleistocene period. Archaic refers to the period from
8,000 BCE (before the common era) to 2,000 BCE when many but not all societies
across the Americas developed horticulture and agriculture. The estimated devel-
opment of horticulture and agriculture vary for different parts of the Americas. The
formative stage refers to the period of 1,000 BCE to 500 CE (common era) in which,
in addition to horticulture/agriculture, societies developed pottery, weaving, and
permanent towns with ceremonial centers. These categories and dates were first

Native Peoples of North America | ix

postulated in the 1950s. Contemporary archaeological data now tells us that the esti-
mated dates of these developments can be off by 1,000 years or more. Further, the
original peoples of the Americas had technology such as pottery and weaving before
they developed horticulturally, if they ever did. Such technologies are not dependent
on horticulture or permanent settlements. So, while these time frames are not sup-
ported by current data, the terms Paleo-Indian, archaic, and formative are still used
to describe the resources strategies of American indigenous peoples.

In the Americas, a wide assortment of crops was grown, including, but not limited
to: corn, potatoes, tomatoes, and several varieties of beans, chili peppers, and cocoa.
Despite the popular media image of Indians hunting bison on horseback, by the time
of European contact many, many Native Americans produced much of their food
through horticulture (the domestication of some plants) and agriculture, while still
foraging, fishing and hunting. Societies in South America, Mesoamerica, and most of
the eastern, mid-western, and southwestern parts of what is now the United States
were prosperous horticultural and agricultural societies. The original inhabitants of
the Americas developed horticultural/agriculture, a high level of technology, as well
as ceremonial/spiritual life and expressive culture (the arts) without influence from
Europe.

The Americas were separated from Africa, Asia, and Europe (the Old World) by
vast oceans. People may indeed have sailed those oceans hundreds of years before
Columbus; or people may have crossed from the Americas to the Old World. There
is little evidence for either hypothesis, and even less evidence that possible early
explorers had any impact or influence on the people and societies they may have
encountered. Another hypothesis is that during glacial eras people migrated over
the ice-covered Arctic areas between northern Asia, Europe, and North America.
Unfortunately, there has been little research in this area; it is a hypothesis that
deserves more investigation.

The physical separation of the Americas from the Old World slowed human migra-
tion, but people did eventually arrive (some hypotheses about how and when will be
discussed in Chapter 1). When they did, they brought the technology and knowledge
they had developed and used these to adapt to new environments they encountered,
and continued to develop new technologies and new knowledge. People came to the
Americas as foragers, who, like all people around the world before 12,000 years ago,

x | Susan Stebbins
acquired their food through a combination of gathering wild edibles, fishing, and
hunting. Around 8,000 to 10,000 years ago, the indigenous peoples of the Ameri-
cas, like people in the Old World, started domesticating some plants and started the
process of producing their food (horticulture). Some aboriginal people lived in rel-
atively large cities; some had hierarchical forms of government. If you could time
travel back to a Native American Mississippi River Valley village, and a village in Eng-
land 1,000 years ago, you would be struck by the similarities. Both villages would
be farming some of their food, while also gathering some wild edibles and fishing
and hunting. Chances are, the villages would be built around a mound, on which the
leader of the village lived (Chapter 3). In today’s England, he would be referred to as
a king; in the Mississippi River Valley, we would probably call him a chief, although
their roles would have been very similar. They both would have achieved their posi-
tions, rather than been ascribed (born to) their status, probably because of the status
of extended families (kin groups) and would probably still be directly accountable to
the people of their respective villages (Chapter 4).

There are marked dissimilarities between Native American and European societies
as well. Religious beliefs and practices would have been different (Chapter 5), as well
as the expressive culture, or today what we call the arts (Chapter 6). While in Europe,
Asia, and to a lesser extent Africa, kin organization became more centered around
men (patrilineal), many Native American societies were matrilineal and matrifo-
cal, meaning that their kin groups were descended from women, so inheritance or
usufruct rights went from mother to daughter (Chapter 2). Perhaps because of the
important roles of women within kin groups and religion, they held important roles
within the political systems of many Native American societies (Chapter 4). Native
American women also had very important roles within the economies of their soci-
eties, both producing and distributing important resources.

This text is written from an anthropological perspective. That is, I attempt to write
about some Native American societies from the categories frequently discussed
within cultural anthropology: kinship, gender roles, economic resources and distri-
bution, political organization, religion, and expressive culture. To write a history or
ethnography (cultural description) of all the estimated 700 indigenous societies of
just North America would require an encyclopedia (the Smithsonian has such a ref-
erence, The Handbook of North American Indians and The Handbook of South Ameri-

Native Peoples of North America | xi

can Indians, which contains nearly forty volumes). For this book, I selected different
societies from the areas of what are now Canada and the United States to illustrate
the different anthropological concepts discussed. While this is the method I have
chosen, it can pose some problems. One of them is approaching a society from com-
ponents such as kin groups and the other categories mentioned above. These com-
ponents are part of the cultural whole for any society, but when studying ancient
cultures, any of these pieces may be missing. For example, kinship systems are very
flexible and change over time. So a kinship system observed in the 19th century in
a society that has experienced much change—the Lakota for example—may have dif-
ferent kin organization then it did in the 18th century. Since each one influences the
other, just as kinship influences status, resources, and religious beliefs, which in turn
influence other aspects, it helps to think of culture as a spider web. The cells of the
web are all connected, and the destruction of one cell can greatly change or even
destroy the web. I hope that as you read the different chapters you will think about
the inter-relationships between the topics discussed in each chapter.

There are other perspectives. For those interested in the history of Native Ameri-
cans, I would suggest approaching the subject from either a societal perspective by
researching a particular society like the Crow or Lakota or Navajo, or a cultural-
geographic perspective by selecting societies from a particular region to study. For
instance, looking at the history of the peoples of the Arctic, Great Lakes area, or
Northwest Coast. In anthropology this is called the cultural-geographic perspective.

I hope you are sensing a point here: the histories and cultures of the indigenous
peoples of the Americas are no less complex than those of Europe or Asia or Africa.
Euro-Americans and Canadians (those people who are descended from immigrants
from Europe to North America) continue to hold many mistaken stereotypes about
pre-Columbian American Indians. For example, a belief still sometimes perpetuated
is that at the time of European contact the Americas were vast empty lands occupied
by a few thousand people who still acquired their food only through hunting, and had
not developed any of the attributes associated with the civilizations of Europe, such
as growing their own food. The facts are that the Americas were occupied by millions
of people, many of whom were farmers, and these people had achieved similar tech-
nological development to people in Europe except in one area: weapons (Weather-
ford 1988).

xii | Susan Stebbins

So where do the mistaken concepts about American Indians come from? One answer
may lie in the fact that Europeans introduced contagious diseases to which the
indigenous peoples of North America had no immunities. Thus, waves of epidemics
were launched into areas often years before face-to-face contact with actual Euro-
peans, wiping out enormous numbers of Native peoples. Another answer may be in
the practice that Euro-Americans and Canadians had of eliminating the Native peo-
ples they encountered as they pushed their way through the continent to get its land
and resources. In the United States this process is justified by Manifest Destiny:
the belief that it is the God-given destiny of Christian Europeans and later Euro-
Americans to control the land and resources of the Americas. Elimination came in
many ways: death from warfare or disease, termination of treaty rights of Native
American societies to their lands; the removal of Native people to what became
known as Indian Territory or to city slums; and residential boarding schools with the
expressed goal to “kill the Indian” in children. The elimination process culminated in
the belief that there were not many indigenous peoples in the Americas in the first
place—and that there are hardly any now.

Another answer may come from the ideas about biological race that were commonly
held in the eighteenth, nineteenth, and early twentieth centuries (and are still held
by some). From an anthropological or biological perspective, there is no such thing
as biological race. The last remaining humanoid species other than the one now
inhabiting planet Earth was the Neanderthals, who died out around 40,000 years
ago. We are all the same species; there is as much or more biological diversity within
any one human group (such as your classroom, dorm, or neighborhood) as is among
any human population, no matter how isolated or phenotypically (physically) differ-
ent. When we talk about race, what we are talking about is a social construct, with
real-world consequences. Race is based on a set of ideas that are focused on physical
appearance or geographic origin. Racism is a set of ideas whereby one group of peo-
ple claims that a set of physical features commonly possessed by another group of
people are directly linked to specific negative characteristics, such as poor morality,
lack of intelligence, or the inability to govern themselves. Currently anthropologists,
sociologists, historians, and others have come to refer to the ideas about race and
racism that developed in the late nineteenth century as biological determinism or
social Darwinism.

Native Peoples of North America | xiii

I prefer to refer to use the term biological determinism, because such ideas have
nothing to do with Charles Darwin’s theories about evolution and the process by
which any species (including humans) adapts to a new or changing environment. I
think Mr. Darwin would have been saddened to know his theories were used as jus-
tification for the exploitation of humans who came to be seen as biologically inferior
to other humans. From Darwin’s evolutionary perspective, the indigenous peoples
of the Americas, Africa, or Asia, were and are just as evolved as those in Europe,
because all had successfully adapted to their environments and were successfully
producing and raising offspring to succeed them by providing food, shelter, security,
and cultural knowledge and memory.

Biological determinism was combined with social ideas that many Europeans, Euro-
Americans, and Canadians had about the cultural, linguistic (language) and biolog-
ical inferiority of peoples from the Americas, Asia, and Africa. It was believed that
people from these areas had cultures or societies that were inferior to those in
Europe as well as languages that were inferior to European languages, and that this
inferiority was based in biology. Particular attention was paid to the brain. Scien-
tists such as Samuel Morton did experiments that purported to show that the skulls
of Africans, Asians, and Native Americans men and women, along with European
and American women, were smaller than the skulls of European men. He concluded
that if their brains were smaller, they were less intelligent, and, as result, their cul-
tures and languages were inferior to those of Europe—and all women were inferior
to European men.

Let’s discuss theories and facts. Darwin’s ideas about evolution are criticized by
some because they are theories, not facts. True, Darwin postulated theories about
evolution, which over the last 100 years have been supported and expanded. At no
time has any scientific finding from archaeology, geology, biology, or zoology that
examines changes to the earth, plants, or animals, found any evidence to refute evo-
lution. Evolution will probably never be proven as a fact because we may never have
the opportunity to observe similar changes on another planet. However, to disprove
a theory we need only one verified, repeatable example. No such examples to the
theory of evolution have been found. There is much tangible evidence in biology and
geology to support Darwin’s theory of evolution.

xiv | Susan Stebbins

What of Samuel Morton’s theories about skull and brain size and intelligence? We
know that skull size is related to skeleton size. An average human male’s skeleton is
larger than the average female’s, so the male’s skull on average will be larger than
the female’s. However, a 6-foot female model (and they generally are around six feet)
may well have a larger skull than a shorter, say, 5-foot, 3-inch man. So would the
model be more intelligent than the shorter man? According to Morton’s theory, this
would be the case. Second, Morton’s theory is now emblematic of the how bias can
affect even the most scientific-seeming claims. Morton knew which skulls belonged
to Europeans, men and women, Africans, American Indians, and Asians. This was not
a blind study as is used to ensure the validity of scientific research today. Morton
measured the volume of the skulls by pouring mustard seeds or lead shot into the
skulls. He may well have been guilty of packing the seeds more tightly into the male
European skulls than the others, much as we might try to get that last bit of coffee
or sugar from a bag into a canister.

What gives our brain its potential for intelligence is not its size, but its complexity,
which is revealed by its density. The human brain is remarkably heavy for such a
small object. That is because our brain is not smooth, but layered and folded in on
itself. Have you ever seen a picture of brain coral, so called because it looks like
our brains? The folding gives our brains much more surface area than that of other
mammals. The increased surface area means more brain cells, synapses, and neu-
rons. It is this density, along with environmental factors like a good diet and secure
and stimulating surroundings that give humans the potential for intelligence.

Unlike Darwin’s theory of evolution, Morton’s theories about the relationship

between skull and brain size and intelligence, and all the theories that built on his,
do not hold up to scrutiny, as many examples disprove his theory. However, ideas
such as this were (and still are) used to support beliefs about the biological, linguistic,
and cultural inferiority of non-European peoples. In the nineteenth century, early
anthropologists and archaeologists ranked societies and their people on a progres-
sive scale as being in a state of savagery-barbarism or civilization. Social attrib-
utes, such as having a written language, a patrilineal kinship or hierarchical political
system, were used to assign societies to one of the three categories. The category
of civilization was based on European societies, so that those non-European soci-
eties that were most like Europe would rank higher. There were inconsistencies. For
example, agriculture was necessary for a society to be considered in a state of civ-
Native Peoples of North America | xv
ilization. Societies such as those of China and India were agricultural long before
the societies of Europe, but China and India were usually ranked as being in a state
of barbarism. The agricultural societies of the Americas (and Africa) were generally
ranked as being in a state of savagery.

You may have noticed that the darker the skin of a society’s people, the lower they
ranked. Also, those people who occupied lands into which Europe was expanding its
economic and political power were ranked lower. Categorizing the people you are
killing, enslaving, or displacing from their homes as inferior to you is an excellent
justification for that behavior. There is always a social context for people’s beliefs and
behaviors. The peoples of the Americas (and Africa and Asia) had to be seen as infe-
rior by Europeans, Euro-Americans, and Canadians in order to allow and justify the
colonization of their lands, lives, and societies. Thus, the Americas were seen as vast,
near empty lands inhabited by a few hunting societies who, despite the resources
available, had not advanced as had the people of Europe.

None of us would consider ourselves racist, but we have all been influenced by these
ideas. When I was in elementary school, one of my classrooms had a large world map
hanging on the wall. Around the map were illustrations of “the races of the world;”
pictures of humans were arranged from lightest hair and skin to the darkest. My
textbooks often referred to the indigenous peoples of the Americas and Africa as
“savages” and “barbarians.” These ideas were often illustrated in the television shows
and movies I and other people of my generation watched. Do you think your images
are much different? Have you read any books by a Native American writer? Do you
see any Native American actors on television or in movies? When you do read or see
something about Native Americans, is it placed in the past or in the present?

Too often when people read or write about American Indians, the material is placed
in the past. Histories about Native Americans typically stop around 1890, the date
of the massacre at Wounded Knee in South Dakota. Despite disease, warfare, loss
of land, reservations, boarding schools, termination, and relocation to cities, Native
Americans have neither died out or been assimilated into the mainstream societies
of Canada and the United States. In fact, Native American populations are growing,
and many societies are experiencing a cultural regenesis.

xvi | Susan Stebbins

You may notice that I am using various terms—indigenous, Native Americans, Amer-
ican Indians—to refer to the First Peoples of the Americas. Names can be powerful:
they are the most powerful when they are the names people choose for themselves.
However, those names are not usually the ones by which we refer to people, par-
ticularly those of the Americas or Africa. Each indigenous American society had a
name by which they referred to themselves and names (not always flattering) which
they were referred to by others. When writing about a specific society, I will use
that society’s name for itself, along with the commonly known name. For example,
the people commonly known as the Navajo name themselves Dine. In addition, as we
learn more about these cultures, and as the cultures have more voice in the writing
of their histories, the politically correct name for the First Peoples of the Americas
changes. In Canada, First Nations, First Peoples, indigenous, and aboriginal are used.
In the United States, Native American or American Indian are typically used. I will
use them all at different points.

By Albert Gallatin, from Archaeologia Americana: Transactions and

Collections of the American Antiquarian Society. Vol II. Cambridge:
Printed For The Society, At The University Press. 1836. Map of the Indian
Tribes of North America about 1600 A.D. along the Atlantic & about 1800
A.D. westwardly

Native Peoples of North America | xvii

It is difficult to find a good map that illustrates the diversity of societies found in
North America at the time of European contact. This map attempts to illustrate that
diversity in 1600. You may notice it follows the political boundaries of the present
day United States, which did not exist in 1600, and as a consequence, only shows
aboriginal societies that lived within the border of what would become the United
States and part of Canada, with nothing shown below the southern border.

You may also notice that when referring to communities of Native peoples, I use the
word society. From an anthropological perspective, a society is a group of people
who reproduce offspring and have at least three generations who depend on each
other and share land, resources, and cultural traditions and institutions. The United
States and Canada are examples of societies: each country has members who repro-
duce offspring, at least three generations, each recognizes geo-political boundaries,
and their people share their resources and other traditions such as legal, economic,
and educational institutions. A culture is more difficult to define. A society may be
made up of many cultures. The Dictionary of Anthropology defines culture as, “All
that is nonbiological and socially transmitted in a society, including artistic, social,
ideological and religious patterns of behavior, and the techniques for mastering the
environment” (pg. 144). So within the societies of the United States and Canada there
are many cultures based on religion, work, class, geographic regions, volunteer orga-
nizations, sports, and even college.

Since the 1800s, the indigenous societies of the Americas have typically been
grouped by cultural-geographic areas. In that time, most anthropologists and gov-
ernment representatives thought Native peoples were dying or vanishing. As a result,
they often engaged in what is called salvage ethnography, in which Native American
artifacts were collected to be saved and studied. Museum curators, overwhelmed
with the plethora of material culture coming to them, developed this model as
a means of sorting specimens for storage and eventual exhibition in institutions
such as the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. While acknowl-
edging that these categories were not ideal in grouping Native American societies,
the anthropologist Alfred Kroeber, working in the 1920s, believed that the societies
within cultural-geographic areas shared similar social-cultural practices, behaviors,
and technologies that would be understood by museum visitors.

xviii | Susan Stebbins

 Submitted to the public domain by wikimedia user Nikater. North
American Cultural-Geographic Areas. Classification of indigenous
peoples of North America according to Alfred Kroeber, English-language
version of map

This map shows common Native American cultural-geographic areas in North Amer-
ica, including parts of Mexico. While I will reference societies from the different cul-
tural-geographic areas, I will not be using those categories in describing the various
societies discussed in this text. I find the cultural-geographic perspective of exam-
ining indigenous societies to be problematic. For example, look at the area referred
to as the Plains, which stretches from southern Canada nearly to what are now the
border of Mexico and the coast of the Gulf of Mexico. Within this area are very dif-
ferent environmental niches that were occupied by and utilized by very different
peoples. There were both horticulturalists and foragers living on the Plains. These
different peoples organized their societies differently and spoke an array of lan-

Native Peoples of North America | xix

guages. Examining Native American societies from the cultural-geographic perspec-
tive fails to illustrate the differences among societies found within these artificially
designed categories. Further, this is a very static method for studying Native Amer-
ican societies, which tended to be quite adaptable to change and mobile when the
need arose.

The indigenous peoples of the Americas did not encounter geo-political boundaries
as we do today. People would move as resources became limited, populations too
large, or segments of the population just were not getting along. People migrated
for much the same reasons as humans migrated out of Africa to Asia and Europe
and ultimately to the Americas. For example, before European contact, the people
known as the Lakota lived in the prairies of what is now the state of Minnesota, part
of the Northeast cultural-geographic area. The Lakota were not the Horse Culture
commonly seen in T.V. and movie westerns. Horses did not exist in the New World
until Europeans brought them. In 1680, many pueblos (communities) in the South-
west revolted against the Spanish who had attempted to colonize them. As a result
of the revolt, many Spanish horses were freed. Eventually these horses, ancestors of
the mustang, found their way to the Plains. In the meantime, European contact and
increasing population in the Midwest had pushed the Lakota onto the Plains. The
Lakota soon came to depend on and revere the horse that helped them survive in
their new environment. So should they be considered a society of the Northeast cul-
tural-geographic area or the Plains?

Kroeber was one of the last Renaissance anthropologists. By that I mean he studied
social-cultural organization, languages, material culture, and human biology. Today,
most anthropologists specialize in one or two of these areas. Later in his life, Kroeber
was most interested in studying the languages of Native Americans. Scientists like
to put things into categories, so he categorized the languages of Native Americas
into seven large language families. A language family consists of several to many lan-
guages that exhibit characteristics indicating they are related to one another and are
descended from a common language. If you speak Spanish, French, Italian, or Por-
tuguese you probably know they are related to each other and are descended from
Latin. These languages belong to a much larger language family called Indo-Euro-
pean, which includes languages as varied as English, Gaelic, German, Greek, San-
skrit, and Persian. Linguists examine the sounds of languages, how those sounds are

xx | Susan Stebbins
put together into words and how those words are put together into sentences to
determine their relationships to each other. Essentially, that is what Kroeber accom-
plished when studying the indigenous languages of the Americas.

CC-BY 2.0 by wikipedia user ish ishwar. North American Indigenous

Language Families

Other anthropologists and linguistics since Kroeber have theorized different num-
bers and organization for Native American languages. Some current theories
hypothesize three language families throughout North and South America. The
reconstructing of language families in the Americas is difficult because so many, at
least half, have become extinct. One important contribution Kroeber and his genera-
tion of anthropologists made to the study of Native Americans and to Native peoples
themselves was to record, either in notes or on early recordings, many languages
that have since become extinct.

You will notice on the map of language families that the speakers of various lan-
guages in a family cut across cultural-geographic areas. For example, Athabaskan
languages are spoken from the East Coast almost to the West Coast, and in pockets
of the Southwest (Apache and Navajo/Dine). This shows an additional problem with

Native Peoples of North America | xxi

cultural-geographic grouping, and demonstrates the mobility of the people. They
moved, taking their language and cultural traditions, behaviors and technologies
with them. You can see why studying American Indian societies from either the
perspective of cultural-geographic areas or language families alone are problem-
atic. But you might also think about the encounters between different societies as
they migrated and encountered new and different peoples. Languages, behaviors,
and technologies often changed from these contacts. For example, the technology of
agriculture was probably transferred from Mesoamerica to North America via migra-
tion or trade. The oral traditions of many societies speak of migrating from place to
place. Such oral traditions, which have been carefully passed down from generation
to generation, hold vast amounts of valuable knowledge for each of the 573 federally
recognized Native nations today.

Due to the significance of these oral traditions, each chapter in this text will begin
with an excerpt from the indigenous society under consideration. These examples
have been carefully chosen to illustrate the anthropological concept presented in
that chapter. While archaeologists, anthropologists, and historians have their theo-
ries about the aboriginal peoples of the Americas—where they came from, how they
got here and how long ago—Native peoples have their own beliefs and their own
knowledge. For too long, scientists and academics have ignored the beliefs, knowl-
edge, and concerns of Native peoples. But Native peoples had important truths in
their beliefs and stories. For example, many people of northern Canada have stories
about giant beavers that were thought by Euro-Canadians to be merely folk or fairy
tales. We now know the stories about giant beavers are true; their skeletal remains
have been found throughout Canada and the northern United States. The Casteror-
ides Ohioensis measured around 8 feet (2.5m) in length, weighed between 130-220
pounds (60-100 kg), and became extinct 10,000 years ago, after the last Ice Age.

The fact that Native peoples have stories about an animal species that died out
10,000 years ago indicates that Paleo-Indians were in North America 10,000 years
ago to see those animals. Until the 1920s, archaeologists generally assumed that
humans occupied the Americas less than 8,000 years ago. We know now that date is
too recent. Ongoing archaeological investigations have pushed the date for human
migration to the Americas farther and farther back in time.

xxii | Susan Stebbins

Much truth can be found in the oral traditions of any society. The stories told at
the beginning of each chapter were chosen to illustrate each society’s beliefs about
kinship, their society’s resources, the responsibility of political leaders, and religion.
The stories of a society can us tell us as much as any other source of information
if we approach them with an open mind. However, the beliefs, knowledge, interests,
and concerns of Native peoples are often ignored by the broader public and gov-
ernmental agencies of the United States and Canada. As a result, indigenous peoples
frequently find themselves in adversarial situations with the U.S. and Canadian gov-
ernments, agencies, and general public.

Some of these adversarial situations are discussed in the various chapters of this
book. One such situation I will discuss now is the removal, buying, selling, or des-
ecration of Native American artifacts or skeletons. Anthropologists and archaeolo-
gists in the United States and Canada have been fortunate in that they do not have
to travel to far distant lands to study “the Other.” They can stay relatively close to
home and study the aboriginal Others here. Perceiving an individual or group of peo-
ple as Other is the process by which one group of people excludes another group.
The process is often associated with the growth of nationalism, a process that would
have been important to both the United States and Canada as they separated them-
selves from Great Britain and came to perceive themselves as separate and unique
nations. Further, Othering will also dehumanize or even demonize a group to justify
their treatment as inferiors. U.S. and Canadian anthropologists and archaeologists
have been guilty of this, as have many within the Euro-American and Canadians soci-
eties. This attitude among anthropologists and archaeologists is particularly evident
in the collection and display of artifacts and skeletal remains considered sacred by
Native Americans. Yet, museums throughout the world display artifacts and skele-
tons that were obtained illegally or are considered sacred by their society.

In 1990, the United States government passed the Native American Graves Protec-
tion and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). This act makes it a federal crime to loot or
damage bodies or artifacts from Native American sites. Further, if a museum or any
other institution that receives federal funding has Native American artifacts, it must
inventory all Native American human remains as well as associated and un-associ-
ated funerary items, then attempt to determine what Native American society those
artifacts came from and return them. Unfortunately, the funding for the act is inad-
equate. There are not enough policemen or park rangers to patrol Native American
Native Peoples of North America | xxiii
sites within state or national parks, much less those that are not on such protected
lands. Most museums do not have the staff or funds to conduct the research needed
to determine to what society artifacts belong. However, some artifacts and skeletons
have been returned.

The prosecution of looters has been difficult. In the Southwest, the looting of Native
American sites has been going on for over a century and is seen as a hobby by many.
Over a dozen looters were arrested in the late 1980s, but none were convicted. In
June 2009, nearly two-dozen looters were arrested in southern Utah. Law enforce-
ment and the courts may be changing their attitudes about such looting and this
time there will be convictions, which may help convince potential looters of the seri-
ousness of this crime.

Despite its inadequacies, NAGPRA does illustrate changes in the ways a growing
number of archaeologists and anthropologists view the indigenous peoples they
wish to learn more about in the Americas, as well as in other countries like Australia
and New Zealand. For one thing, a growing number of American Indians have
become anthropologists, archaeologists, and historians (not to mention doctors, sci-
entists, lawyers, and even astronauts). American or Canadian Indian researchers
bring new knowledge and perspectives to the study of Native peoples. Further, fewer
and fewer anthropologists, archaeologists, and historians view the Native peoples
they study as Other, but instead as collaborators from whom they have much to
learn.

Conclusion

This Introduction has briefly covered a number of topics concerning the First Peo-
ples of the Americas. Entire books address many of these topics. You should remem-
ber that while emerging archaeological evidence is pushing the dates for human
habitation in the Americas farther and farther backward, there is only evidence for
fully modern humans in the Americas. So we will probably never find indications for
the peopling of the Americas more than 100,000 years ago. There are many hypothe-
ses concerning how humans came to the Americas, as well as how many people were
here in 1491. The most commonly known hypothesis about migration to the Ameri-

xxiv | Susan Stebbins

cas is the Bering Land Bridge (Bergina). It suggests that over the last 100,000 years
the span of ocean between present-day Alaska and present-day Siberia was dry
land during at least three periods. People, plants, and animals could have migrated
across the area, utilizing ice-free corridors between glaciers that led to the interior
of North America. Another theory postulates that peoples could have migrated over
the ice-covered Arctic between northern Asia, Europe, and North America. Another
suggests that people canoed or kayaked between the Aleutian Islands in the Bering
Sea and down the western coast of North America. Native peoples have their own
stories—such as how they came to be on the Island on the Back of the Turtle (Chapter
1). Generally, these stories are either emergence stories where people journey from
an underground world into this world or Earth Diver stories, in which people (gen-
erally women) fall from the Sky World (see page 41) to this world.

It might be surprising to you that the population of North America in 1491 may well
have been between 40 and 60 million people (or more). It is difficult to estimate
populations of peoples who lived in scattered communities—some large, some
small—throughout the continent, especially since most societies had no reason to
call for a census. But other factors may also come into play in low population esti-
mates. One reason is the catastrophic consequence of European diseases among
indigenous peoples who had no immunity to those diseases. Another may be Mani-
fest Destiny, the idea held by many Euro-Americans that it was their destiny to set-
tle, Christianize, and civilize the continent.

There were many similarities between the Native peoples of the Americas and
Europe. They all had societies whose members shared common values and passed
on their customs and traditions from one generation to another. They all recognized
rights and responsibilities between family or kin members. They all obtained food
and other resources through foraging or farming. They all had ways of distributing
those resources throughout the community. They all had a political or power orga-
nization to their society. They all had religious beliefs and rituals. They all had
arts—visual and spoken—that added to their enjoyment of life. When an anthropol-
ogist studies, teaches, or writes about societies, these are the categories they use.
These are the categories I will use in this book.

Native Peoples of North America | xxv

Suggested Questions

Can you name four Native Americans? Four Native American societies? Four accom-
plishments of American Indians?

In 1491, how many people were living in what are now Canada and the United States?
How long had they been here? How did they get here? Why are these questions
important to know?

How do American indigenous peoples say they came to the Americas?

What do you know about Native Americans; what would you like to know; what do
you think other people should know?

What do you notice about the phenotypes (physical characteristics) of peoples

thought to be inferior by eighteenth and nineteenth century Europeans, Euro-Amer-
icans, and Canadians?

Do you recall any information about Native peoples that you’ve seen in newspapers,
magazines, online, or on television? Can you summarize this information? How are
they related to topics covered in this book?

Have you recently noticed any visual or verbal stereotypes about American Indians?
What does this example depict? Is the stereotype related to any topics discussed
in the Introduction? How do you think indigenous Americans react to these stereo-
types?

Can you describe how one component of your society (such as religion) is influenced
by or influences another component of your society?

Suggested Resources

The PBS series Five Hundred Nations and the more recent We Shall Remain can be
useful for a historical overview of the Native peoples of the United States, though
both have inadequacies. Five Hundred Nations ends at the massacre at Wounded
Knee, contributing to the myth that there are few, if any, American Indians in the

xxvi | Susan Stebbins

twenty-first century. While We Shall Remain does present contemporary informa-
tion, particularly the American Indian Movement, it presents very little information
about women and their important roles within Native American societies, and its
focus is on Native societies of the United States. Five Hundred Nations does include
information about Mexico and the Caribbean, as well as some notable indigenous
women.

Myth of the Moundbuilders, also a PBS video, does an excellent job of presenting
some of the nineteenth and twentieth century myths about Native peoples that were
first confirmed and then debunked by archaeology. The video goes on to present
some contemporary information about Native American societies. I use this video
along with the book Life in a Pueblo: Understanding the Past Through Archaeology, by
Kathryn Kamp. This book does an excellent job of explaining how archaeology can
be used to obtain information about pre-historic societies and use that data to give
a multi-dimensional view of a southwestern village.

The PBS series called Evolution includes a video called Transformations that provides
an excellent summary of the evolutionary process and evidence supporting it. An
accessible book about human evolution is Becoming Human: Evolution of Human
Uniqueness by Ian Tattersall.

A couple of references for a general history of Native Americans are: Indians in

American History: An Introduction, edited by Frederick Hoxie and Peter Iverson and
for a more Canadian perspective, The Earth Shall Weep: A History of Native America,
by James Wilson.

An interesting, different perspective about other than early European contact with
the Americas is They Came Before Columbus: The African Presence in Ancient America
by Ivan Van Sertima.

For a brief summary of recent and alternative theories about human migration to the
American I recommend “Quest for the Lost Land,” by Hetherington, Renee et.al. that
appeared in Geotimes in February 2004.

A good reference for the controversies about American Indian artifacts and skeleton
remains is Skull Wars: Kennewick Man, Archaeology and the Battle for Native Ameri-
can Identity, by David Hurst Thomas.

Native Peoples of North America | xxvii

A good book about the connections between racist beliefs and Manifest Destiny is
Race and Manifest Destiny: Origins of Racial Anglo-Saxonism, by Reginald Horsman.

I frequently refer to two books by Jack Weatherford, Native Roots: How the Indians
Enriched America and Indian Givers: How American Indians Transformed the World.
Both present excellent information about important resources and ideas from the
Native peoples of North and South America.

You may look in your local library or on Amazon.com for the now out-of-print Differ-
ent Drums, Different Moccasins, by Harriet J. Kupferer, for an outstanding illustration
of the different ways indigenous peoples utilized the same ecological niche.

The histories and cultures of Mexico and Mesoamerica (present-day Mexico and
Central America) will not be discussed in this text. However, there is a number of
excellent texts that deal exclusively with those unique societies. I have found Sons of
the Shaking Earth, by Eric Wolf, The Aztecs, by Brian Fagan; and The Maya, by Michael
Coe all to be accessible to students.

Most of the stories cited in this book are taken from American Indian Myths and Leg-
ends, selected and edited by Richard Erdoes and Alfonso Ortiz.

xxviii | Susan Stebbins

Chapter 1: In 1491...

The Jicarilla Apache Genesis Story

In the beginning the earth was covered with water, and all living things were below in
the underworld. Then people could talk, the animals could talk, the trees could talk, and
the rocks could talk.

It was dark in the underworld, and eagle plumes were used for torches. The people and
animals that go about by day wanted more light but the night animals—the bear, the
panther, and the owl—wanted darkness. After a long argument they agreed to play the
thimble-and-button game, and if the day animals won there would be light, but if the
night animals won it would always be dark.

The game began. The magpie and the quail, who love the light and have sharp eyes,
watched until they could see the button through the thin wood of the hollow stick that
served as a thimble. This told the people where the button was, and in the first round,
the people won. The morning star came out and the black bear ran and hid in the dark-
ness. They played again, and the people won. It grew brighter in the east and the brown
bear ran and hid in a dark place. They played a third time, and the people won. It grew
brighter in the east and the mountain lion slunk away into the darkness. They played
a fourth time, and again the people won. The sun came up in the east, and it was day,
the owl flew away and hid.

Even though it was light now, the people still didn’t see much because they were under-
ground. But the sun was high enough to look through a hole and discover that there
was another world—this earth. He told the people. And they all wanted to go up there.
They built four mounds to help them reach the upper world. In the east they mounded
the soil and planted it with all kinds of fruits and berries that were colored black. In
the south they heaped up another mound and planted all kinds of fruits that were blue.
In the west they built a mound that they planted with yellow fruits. In the north they
planted the mound with fruits of variegated colors.

Chapter 1: In 1491... | 1
The mounds grew into mountains and the bushes blossomed, fruited, and produced
ripened berries. One day two girls climbed up to pick berries and gather flowers to tie
in their hair. Suddenly the mountains stopped growing …

The mountains stopped growing while their tops were still a long way from the upper
world. So the people tried laying feathers crosswise to make a ladder, but the feathers
broke under their weight. The people made a second ladder of larger feathers, but again
they were too weak. They made a third ladder of eagle feathers, but even these would
not bear much weight. Then a buffalo came and offered his right horn, and three others
also contributed their right horns. The horns were strong and straight, and with them
the people were able to climb up through the hole to the surface of the earth. But the
weight of those humans bent the buffalo horns, which have been curved ever since.

Now the people fastened the sun and moon with spider threads so that they could not
get away, and sent them up into the sky to give light. And since water covered the whole
earth, four storms went to roll the waters away. The black storm blew to the east and
rolled up the waters into the eastern ocean. The blue storm blew to the south and rolled
up the waters in that direction. The yellow storm rolled up the waters in the west, and
the varicolored storm went to the north and rolled up the waters there. So the tempests
formed the four oceans in the east, the south, the west, and the north. Having rolled up
the waters, the storms returned to where the people were waiting, grouped around the
mouth of the hole.

The Polecat first went out, when the ground was still soft, and his legs sank in the black
mud and have been black ever since. They sent the Tornado to bring him back, because
it wasn’t time. The badger went out, but he too sank in the mud and got black legs,
and Tornado called him back. Then the beaver went out, walking through the mud and
swimming through the water, and at once began to build a dam to save the water still
remaining in the pools. When he did not return, Tornado found him and asked why he
had not come back.

“Because I wanted to save the water for the people to drink,” said the beaver.

“Good,” said Tornado, and they went back together. Again the people waited, until at
last they send out the gray crow to see if the time had come. The crow found the earth
dry, and many dead frogs, fish, and reptiles lying on the ground. He began picking out

2 | Susan Stebbins
their eyes and did not return until Tornado was sent after him. The people were very
angry when they found he had been eating carrion, and they changed his color to black.

But now the earth was all dry except for the four oceans and the lake in the center,
where the beaver had dammed up the waters. All the people came up. They traveled east
until they arrived at the ocean; then they turned around south until they came again
to the ocean; then they went west to the ocean, and then they turned north. And as
they went, each tribe stopped where it wanted to. But the Jicarillas continued to circle
around the hole where they had come up from the underworld. Three times they went
around it, when the Ruler became displeased and asked them where they want to stop.
They said, “In the middle of the earth.” So he led them to a place very near Taos and left
them, and there near the Taos Indians, the Jicarillas made their home.

Collected by James Mooney in the 1890s (Erdoes and Ortiz)

The Haudenosaunee (Iroquois)

Creation Story

Long, long ago, the earth was deep beneath the water. There was a great darkness
because no sun or moon or stars shone. The only creatures living in this dark world
were water animals such as the beaver, muskrat, duck, and loon.

Far above the water-covered earth was the Land of the Happy Spirits, where the Great
Spirit dwelled. In the center of this upper realm was a giant apple tree with roots that
sank deep into the ground.

One day the Great Spirit pulled the tree up from its roots, creating a great pit in the
ground. The Great Spirit called to his daughter, who lived in the Upper World. He com-
manded her to look into the pit. The young woman did as she was told and peered
through the hole. In the distance, she saw the Lower World covered by water and clouds.

The Great Spirit spoke to his daughter, telling her to go down into the world of dark-
ness. He then tenderly picked her up and dropped her into the hole. The woman, who
would be called Sky Woman, by those creatures watching her fall, began to slowly float
downward.

Chapter 1: In 1491... | 3
As Sky Woman continued her descent, the water animals looked up. Far upon them they
saw a great light that was Sky Woman. The animals were initially afraid of the light
emanating from her. In their fear they dove deep beneath the water.

The animals eventually conquered their fear and came back up to the surface. Now they
were concerned about the woman, and what would happen to her when she reached
the water.

The beaver told the others that they must find a dry place for her to rest upon. The
beaver plunged deep beneath the water in search of earth. He was unsuccessful. After a
time, his dead body surfaced to the top of the water.

The loon was the next creature to try to find some earth. He too was unsuccessful. Many
others tried, but each animal failed. At last, the muskrat said he would try. When his
dead body floated to the top, his little claws were clenched tight. The others opened his
claws and found a little bit of earth.

The water animals summoned a great turtle and patted the earth upon its back. At once
the turtle grew and grew, as did the amount of earth. This earth became North Amer-
ica, a great island.

During all this time, Sky Woman continued her gentle fall. The leader of the swans grew
concerned as Sky Woman’s approach grew imminent. He gathered a flock of swans that
flew upward and allowed Sky Woman to rest upon their back. With great care they
placed her upon the newly formed earth.

Soon after her arrival Sky Woman gave birth to twins. The first born became known as
the Good Spirit. The other twin caused his mother so much pain that she died during
his birth. He was to be known as the Evil Spirit.

The Good Spirit took his mother’s head and hung it in the sky and it became the sun.
The Good Spirit also fashioned the stars and moon from his mother’s body. He buried
the remaining parts of Sky Woman under the earth. Thus, living things may always
find nourishment from the soil for it springs from Mother Earth.

While the Good Spirit provided light, the Evil Spirit created the darkness. The Good
Spirit created many things, but each time his brother would attempt to undo his good
work.

4 | Susan Stebbins
The Good Spirit made the tall and beautiful trees, including the pines and hemlock. The
Evil Spirit, to be contrary, stunted some tress or put gnarls and knots in their trunks.
Other trees he covered in thorns or poisoned their fruit.

The Good Spirit made bear and deer. The Evil Spirit made poisonous animals such as
lizards and serpents to destroy the animals created by his brother.

When the Good Spirit made springs and streams of pure crystal water, the Evil Spirit
poisoned some and placed snakes in others. The Good Spirit made beautiful rivers. The
Evil Spirit pushed rocks and dirt into the rivers creating swift and dangerous currents.

Everything the Good Spirit made his wicked brother attempted to destroy.

After the Good Spirit completed the earth, he created man out of red clay. Placing man
upon the earth, the Good Spirit instructed the man about how he should live. The Evil
Spirit made a monkey out of sea foam.

Upon completion of his work, the Good Spirit bestowed a protecting spirit upon all
of his creations. This done, he called his brother and told him he must cease making
trouble. The Evil Spirit emphatically refused. The Good Spirit became enraged at his
brother’s wickedness. He challenged his evil twin to combat. The winner would be the
ruler of the world.

For their weapons they used the thorns of the giant apple tree. The battle raged for
many days. The Good Spirit triumphed, overcoming his evil brother. The Good Spirit
took his place as ruler of the earth and banished his brother to a dark cave under the
ground. In this cave the Evil Spirit was to remain.

Keller George, Oneida Wolf Clan, from the storytelling

of his maternal great-grandmother.

Chapter 1: In 1491... | 5
In 1491 how many people were living in the Americas, how did
they get here, how long had they been here, and what had they
accomplished?

When most of us who now live in the United States and Canada learn about the
history of our homeland, material starts with Christopher Columbus’s landing on
islands in the Caribbean in 1492. Little attention is given to the thousands of years
before his arrival, to the people who had been living here and their accomplishments.
Further, when information is given, it is generally a historical or archaeological list
of “first this happened, then that,” with little attention to the cultural diversity of the
peoples who lived on what many Native peoples call Turtle Island.

Columbus and his men were probably not the first Europeans (or Asians or Africans)
to come to the North American continent, but they did come with the intention
to stay, and stay they, and many others following them, did. These early Europeans
encountered people as diverse and advanced as they themselves were. Those of us
living in the twenty-first century are often unaware of the linguistic and cultural
diversity of the peoples who inhabited (and continue to inhabit) what we now call
North America, how they got here or how long they’ve been here. This chapter will
examine those questions, looking first at the population and cultural diversity of the
First Peoples of North America previous to 1492.

How many were there?!

It is difficult to estimate populations in the fifteenth century in most parts of the

world. Most people lived in small societies; everyone knew everyone else, their fam-
ilies, and their ancestors. There was little reason to do a population count of how
many people, how many women, men, and children, people over or under a cer-
tain age, and their occupations. This is the type of census now done in the United
States and Canada every 10 years. A census shows not only the number of people in
a society, but also how that society changes over time. Such a census is an important
source of data for governments and for future historians and anthropologists. In the

6 | Susan Stebbins
past, empires such as Rome in Europe, and the Aztec in Mesoamerica (present day
Mexico and Central American) conducted censuses, largely for tax or tribute pur-
poses, but most small-scale societies had no reason to do so. So how do we go about
estimating population numbers from so long ago?

One way is to examine documents left by the Europeans (Spanish, French, English,
Dutch, Russians, and many more) who came to the Americas. There are a number of
problems with this method. First, not everyone kept records. Among the French, for
example, while religious missionaries kept population counts (largely to show how
many people they had converted), the voyagers who came for animal skins to trade
in Europe did not. Further, Europeans based their population estimates on people
they encountered; there is no way to estimate how many people they didn’t meet.

Which leads to another issue: various Native peoples were encountered by Euro-
peans at different times. The Caribbean peoples (Caribs, Tanios, Arawaks), the
Mesoamerican peoples (Maya and Aztecs) and the many South American peoples
were probably not the first indigenous peoples to encounter the Europeans. Perhaps
surprising to many Euro-Americans and Canadians, the first Native Americans to
encounter Europeans were not the peoples of the Caribbean, but the peoples of the
Arctic and Sub-Arctic. Archaeological evidence indicates the Norse established vil-
lages in Greenland and Newfoundland 1,000 years ago. For whatever reasons, these
sites were abandoned by 1500, and it is questionable these Norse sites had much
impact on the Native peoples.

What is more intriguing, however, is the incidence of Native peoples from the area
who somehow made it to Europe. There is historical evidence to show that Native
peoples and artifacts were found in Europe, particularly in Ireland and the northern
coast of Scotland. In the case of the artifacts, it seems they were found in the bodies
of seals and other marine life. Perhaps the currents of the Gulf Stream and storms
brought what were possibly Inuit peoples to the coast of Ireland. In Lonely Voyagers,
the historian Jean Merrien notes that a man and woman were tied to wrecks that
came ashore near Galway, Ireland; and that another man—specifically described as
“red and strange” and not African, came ashore on the coast of Spain in a craft that
appeared to be a hollowed-out tree. Merrien further suggests in Christopher Colum-
bus: The Mariner and the Man, that Columbus may well have known about these inci-
dents and assumed the people were from Cathay (China). In the 1500s (not long after

Chapter 1: In 1491... | 7
Columbus’s display of people he had captured in the Caribbean) an Eskimo man and
woman captured at sea were put on exhibition in various European cities.

Christopher Columbus came in contact with the peoples of the Caribbean, among
them the Tanios, Arawaks, and Caribs. Later, Spanish conquerors such as Hernando
Cortez conquered the peoples of Mesoamerica (present-day Mexico and Central
America) such as the Maya and Aztecs. The contact continued to peoples living along
the eastern seaboard, to the southwestern part of the United States, then the west-
ern coast of North America, and finally the peoples of the interior part of North
America—the last to be encountered by Europeans. However, Native peoples did not
have to have direct contact with Europeans to be affected by them. One of the most
devastating of these encounters—direct or indirect—was disease.

The peoples of the Americas had no immunity to the diseases brought by Europeans.
The populations of the Americas had been largely isolated from Europe, Africa, and
Asia for thousands of years. In that time, many diseases evolved in the Old World.
Diseases like smallpox, the plague, and even diseases that are now commonplace,
such as measles, mumps, and chicken pox. Over time, the Europeans who survived
these diseases, and their children, developed immunities to them. Despite surviving,
they were still carriers of the disease, and they carried it to the Americas. The Native
peoples had no immunity to these diseases and many died from the exposure. Proba-
bly far more Native peoples died from disease than in warfare with Europeans. Euro-
peans may have contracted diseases, such as a form of syphilis, from Native peoples
as well, but the diseases passed onto the Europeans did not seem to have had the
same devastating impact.

This population lost due to disease further complicates estimating how many people
lived in the Americas before the significant European contact that followed in the
wake of Columbus’s arrival. Native peoples had extensive trade routes throughout
Turtle Island. People met, traded goods, and often formed marriage alliances. As a
result, trade goods often spread the European diseases before a specific society ever
encountered a European, and well before the population size could be estimated.

Starting in the nineteenth century, archaeology and the examination of burials and
the material remains of a society became a tool in helping to estimate Native pop-
ulations before European contact. However, many early archaeologists didn’t just

8 | Susan Stebbins
examine burials for population estimates. In numerous instances, Native American
skeletons were exhumed from burial sites and sent to various museums in the United
States, Canada, and Europe for examination and storage. Often the data accompany-
ing these remains were inadequate, so that now it is difficult to determine where a
skeleton and other artifacts came from. Therefore, they are not very useful in deter-
mining population size.

It must be clear by now that trying to estimate a population from more than 500
years ago can be very difficult. Estimates for North America at that time have ranged
from 8.4 million to 112.5 million. In 1976, geographer William Denevan (1992) used a
combination of techniques and data to arrive at what he called a “consensus count”
of 53.9 million people in the Americas in 1491 (with a margin of error of 20%, Denevan
suggests population could have ranged between 43 million to 65 million). He divides
the population into: 3.8 million for North America, 17.2 million for Mexico, 5.6 million
in Central America, 3.0 million in the Caribbean, 15.7 million in the Andes, and 8.6
million in the lowlands of South America. The largest populations coincide with the
city-state societies of the Aztecs and Maya in Mexico, and the Inca in Peru. Denevan
further estimates that the First Peoples of the Americas suffered a death toll of 89%,
striking their numbers from 53.9 million to 5.6 million by the sixteenth century, as
a result of disease, warfare, and the experience of slavery (Denevan: Pristine Land-
scape). Some populations, like the Maya, would not attain their pre-1492 population
levels until the twentieth century. Some never have, some have become extinct. It
is no wonder Native Americans refer to their experiences at the hands of European
invaders as genocide.

Why then, from the very beginning of European settlement were the Americas
described as vast, empty spaces ready to be occupied by Europeans who were feeling
population pressures in their home countries? Both European governments, like the
Spanish, French and British, and private companies with royal charters, like the Vir-
ginia Bay Colony, encouraged landless people to move and settle in the New World,
where land and resources were plentiful. In part, this policy was based on relieving
population pressure and civil unrest in Europe, and partly on the need to have people
to harvest the resources of the Americas. Following the wake of the Spanish—who,
it is estimated, removed $40 billion of gold and silver from Meso- and South Amer-
ica—many came looking for gold, and instead found lumber, fish, animal skins, and
a variety of foods not known in Europe, Asia, or Africa (Cowan). In the long run,
Chapter 1: In 1491... | 9
these resources proved to be more valuable than the gold and silver that were soon
depleted.

In his books Indian Givers and Native Roots, anthropologist Jack Weatherford exam-
ines how Native Americans enriched the world through their contributions of food
and medicines. Weatherford estimates 70% to 75% of the world’s food and medicines
come from the Americas and were unknown in the Old World previous to the l500s.
Euro-Americans and Canadians usually think of tobacco, a plant used by Native
Americans for religious and medical purposes, as an example of an indigenous Amer-
ican crop. Early colonial farmers like John Rolfe, the husband of Pocahontas, had
to hybridize the native tobacco to suit the tastes of European smokers. More cru-
cial were crops such as corn, beans, squash, tomatoes, potatoes, chili peppers, and
chocolate. Not only did Native Americans develop and grow these important crops,
they developed various varieties to adapt to various environmental factors. Thus
they grew over 30 varieties of corn: some varieties adapted for drought, pests, and
the shorter growing seasons of the Northeast. Early conquerors of the Southwest
noted the rainbow colors of corn drying on the roofs of the pueblos.

In the nineteenth century, when Americans were working to distinguish themselves

from their European kin as they established communities across the continent, they
developed the concept of Manifest Destiny. This concept held that it was the destiny
of “Americans” to occupy, settle, and civilize North America. This idea is depicted in
the painting American Progress by John Gast in which a woman holds a book lead-
ing the way west for “American” settlers, driving the indigenous (Native Americans)
people away into the darkness. Inherent within the understanding of Manifest Des-
tiny was the belief that the Americas were vast nearly empty lands, not an area that
was home to up to 53 million people. This myth that the Americas were nearly empty
lands until Europeans got here is one that continues in the minds of Euro-Amer-
icans today. But Turtle Island, like Europe, was home to vast array of people who
harvested resources, raised families, ran their communities, traded, and sometimes
fought with, other communities.

10 | Susan Stebbins
 Painter: John Gast Date: 1872 Source: wikipedia.org American Progress
by John Gast 1872

Where do your people come from?

When Christopher Columbus returned to Spain after his first voyage to the
Caribbean, he brought with him people, animals, plants, and other artifacts he had
found during his travels. A two-month journey in a small, crowded ship was no doubt
very difficult for the Caribbean natives who were unused to ocean travel. In Spain
(indeed in all of Europe) their arrival caused quite an upheaval in the way Europeans
viewed the world. At this time Europeans held that the earth was about 8,000 years
old (based on the calculation of generations in the Bible), and that the world and
everything in it was the same now as it was at the time of creation. So how could
Europeans account for very different animals, plants, and people that did not fit into
this very ordered view of the world?

The question of who the Native peoples of Turtle Island were and where they came
from is one that various people have tried to answer since 1492. In the 1500s there
were arguments about whether these indigenous peoples were even human or had
souls. The Dominican priest Bartolome’ de Las Casas, in 1542, established (at least for

Chapter 1: In 1491... | 11
the Catholic Church) that Indians were human and had souls, that they were not a
separate creation or created by the devil. But if that was so, how did they come to be
in the Americas, separated from the rest of the world?

Over the last 500 years there have been a number of highly speculative theories
about where the indigenous peoples of the Americas came from. One was that they
are a remnant population from the Lost Continent of Atlantis. Another theory was
that American Indians were the descendants of western societies (Egyptian, Greek,
Irish, or Welsh) sailors who were blown off-course by storms to the Americas (were
there women on these ships?). Another theory speculates that Native Americans
were the descendants of the Lost Tribes of Israel, though no explanation is given to
how these tribes traveled from the deserts of the Middle East to the Americas. More
recently, some speculators like Erich von Däniken (Chariots of the Gods: 1968) have
maintained that Native Americans are the descendants of alien visitors from space
who have lost the knowledge of their ancestors.

CC-BY-SA by Skubasteve834. Monk’s Mound, a Pre-Columbian Mississippian

culture earthwork, located at the Cahokia site near Collinsville, Illinois. The
concrete staircase is modern, but it is built along the approximate course of the
original wooden stairs.

12 | Susan Stebbins
These theories are often based on the premise that Native Americans were not capa-
ble of building the monumental architecture and art found throughout the Americas.
But those who encountered Native peoples early in the conquest of the Americas
had no such thoughts. Cortez, the Spanish conquistador who attacked, conquered,
and destroyed much of Tenochtitlan, the capital city of the Aztecs, was convinced
the Aztecs had built the city. Cortez marveled at Tenochtitlan’s floating gardens and
public baths, which were so large that he said Rome could fit in one corner. However,
he then destroyed much of it. But he didn’t think men from outer space had built it;
he knew that Aztecs had.

Archaeology has shown us how Native peoples were able to build monuments like
those in Mexico; Monk’s Mound of Cahokia, found not far from the present-day city
of St. Louis; pueblos found throughout what is now the southwestern part of the
United States; and mounds found in the Mississippi and Ohio river valleys. Like peo-
ple throughout the world who built monuments, they started off small and learned
as they went along.

From the 1700s to today, amateur archaeolo-

gists and anthropologists wondered about the
Native Americans they encountered and the
artifacts they found. Thomas Jefferson, for
example, had an extensive collection of Native
artifacts he found in Virginia. The poet William
Cullen Bryant wrote the poem “The Prairies,” in
which he postulated that the peoples who had
built the monumental architecture found in
various parts of the Americas had been killed
and supplanted by the more “brutish” and war-
like Indian Americans. This belief about Native
Americans was commonly held by Euro-Amer-
icans well into the twentieth century.
Ephraim George Squier & Edwin
Hamilton Davis, 1836. Accessed from
wikipedia.org. Drawing of the Serpent The development of archaeology and anthro-
Mound Archaeological sites in Ohio by pology as an academic discipline in which peo-
Ephraim George Squier & Edwin
Hamilton Davis, Surveyor, 1836 ple are trained to gather information with a
defined set of protocols (the systematic col-

Chapter 1: In 1491... | 13
lection and recording of data) started to develop in late nineteenth century.
Throughout the twentieth and now twenty-first century, anthropologists and
archaeologists continue to gather data about the Native peoples of the Americas.
One of the big questions continues to be: Where did they come from?

The issue of where humans come from, how they developed (evolved) is one of
the biggest general questions in anthropology and archaeology. The origination of
people of a particular geographic area is part of that question. Scientifically there
are two ways of looking at the evolution and migration of humans—monogenesis
and polygenesis. Did humans start the evolutionary process in one geographic area
(monogenesis), or in two or more (polygenesis)? Currently the evidence suggests,
and most scientists would agree, that human (Homo sapiens) evolution started in
Africa. For example, while archaeologists continue to find older and older skele-
tal remains of humans in the Americas, all these remains are fully modern humans.
There have been no Neanderthals, Homo erectus, Homo habilis, nor any of the other
early stages of human evolution found in the Americas.

Early populations of humans migrated from Africa to other parts of the world. In
the twenty-first century we may forget that until the 1869 construction of the Suez
Canal, a thin strip of land connected Africa to Asia and Europe. So that part of the
migration pattern is relatively easy to understand, but how did people (fully modern
humans like us) get across vast oceans to the Americas?

Here knowledge of geology is helpful. Unlike the Europeans of Columbus’s time, we

now know the world we live in did not always look like it does now, and it will change
in the future as well. The planet Earth has gone through periods of glaciations and
melting. What is now dry land, may have been an ocean thousands of years ago.
Mountains erupt and then wear down. Earth is an ever-changing landscape. Changes
in land, geology, and topography made it possible even necessary for early humans
to migrate out of Africa.

One of the oldest theories about how humans came to the Americas is based on
geological evidence that suggests present-day Alaska was connected to present day
Siberia by a land bridge. This phenomenon is called the Bering Land Bridge (for the
Bering Strait, which it crosses) or Beringia.

14 | Susan Stebbins
 CC-BY 2.5 in Tamm E, et al. Beringian Standstill and Spread of Native
American Founders. PLoS ONE 2(9): e829. doi:10.1371/
journal.pone.0000829

Bering Land Bridge

The Bering Land Bridge was in existence at several different periods in the last
100,000 years: 28,000-10,000 BP (before present), 50,000-40,000 years BP and
100,000-70,000 years BP. It was over 100 miles wide at its widest point and would
have been crossable for hundreds of years before it was covered up in water and
then appeared again as ocean levels rose and fell. While most of northern North

Chapter 1: In 1491... | 15
America was covered by glaciers, geological evidence suggest there might been ice-
free corridors that could have allowed for the migration of people and animals. These
factors made it possible for not just people, but also plants and animals to migrate
back and forth between North America and Asia over long periods of time. It is pos-
tulated that humans came east, while early ancestors of the horse (hyracotherium,
which was about the size of a fox) for example, went west to Asia where they con-
tinued to migrate and evolve until they were brought back, first by the Spanish and
then other Europeans.

Until recently the Bering Land Bridge was the most commonly accepted theory
about how people came to the Americas. However, new archaeological evidence
continues to emerge that suggests other migratory patterns. If you looked at the
map of the Bering Land Bridge you may have speculated about another possible
route to the Americas: down along the Pacific coastal areas of present-day western
Canada and the United States. Archaeologist Carole Mandrik has called this the Abo-
riginal Pacific Coast Highway. Unfortunately, archaeological evidence to support this
theory in most cases would now be under water, as the coastal area of western North
America has shifted. However, some archaeological evidence has been found in caves
and other protected areas along the West Coast that supports the theory of possible
migration along coastal areas.

In the popular media such as the January 2000 issue of The Atlantic Monthly the
article “The Diffusionists Have Landed” speculated that people from Europe, Asia,
or Africa might have been coming to the Americas by boat for long periods of time
before Columbus appeared. Archaeologists have evidence for Viking settlements in
Greenland and what is now Labrador in Canada, but for whatever reasons these set-
tlements did not last long. The impact of these Viking settlements on Native peoples
was probably negligible.

People could also have sailed from Asia on boats. Archaeologists now know people
were migrating to and settling in Polynesia 60,000 to 80,000 years ago. Most
recently some researchers have speculated that people could have sailed from Africa
to the Americas, as the ocean and wind currents are more favorable for western sail-
ing in the Southern Hemisphere than in the Northern.

16 | Susan Stebbins
Certainly we don’t give our ancestors enough credit. They had the same three-
pound brains we have. The fact that humans are still here attests to their intelligence
and ingenuity. However, just because people could have done something doesn’t
mean they did. We need archaeological or biological evidence to demonstrate that
Africans or Asians sailed to the Americas. And if they did, what impact did they have?
Further archaeological inquiry will help to either prove or disprove these hypothe-
ses.

From the story at the beginning of this section we see that Native American societies
have their own beliefs about where they came from, but not all Native American
societies have the same beliefs. In 1491, over 700 languages were spoken in what is
now North America. Each one of those languages represents a different society with
its own set of customs and beliefs. So there may well have been 700 stories about
each society’s origins. However, these Native stories seem to fall into two categories,
and the stories at the beginning of this section illustrate both: Emergence from the
Underground and Earth Diver stories.

In Emergence stories people once lived underground. For various reasons, they
embark on a journey that eventually leads them to emerge into the above-ground
world. Societies that have emergence tales are able to point out where their ances-
tors emerged from the underground. In Earth Diver stories, people once lived in the
Sky World above Earth, which was a great body of water with only aquatic animals
living in it. For various reasons, a pregnant woman (Sky Woman) falls from the Sky
World. The water birds see her falling and fly up to cushion her fall with their wings.
They put her on the back of a turtle. An Earth Diver (often a beaver, otter, or muskrat)
dives to the bottom of the water to bring up a paw-full of earth, which Sky Woman
takes and spreads over the back of the turtle. As she does so, the Earth spreads to
become the land the Natives knew. That is why many Native Americans refer to their
world as the Island on the Back of the Turtle, or Turtle Island.

How Long Ago?

The United States and Canada are young countries. Perhaps for that reason some
Euro-Americans or Euro-Canadians find it very important to be able to establish

Chapter 1: In 1491... | 17
how long their ancestors have been in their respective countries. People will do
extensive research to show when a certain ancestor came to North America and
from where, or which ancestors fought in the American Revolution or the War of
1812. Native Americans tend not to worry too much about these matters; their ances-
tors have always been here.

But for many others, and certainly for historians, anthropologists, and archaeolo-
gists, the questions of how long people have been here are important ones. As has
already been shown, only fully modern human remains are found in the Americas,
which means migration would have occurred less than 100,000 years ago. The avail-
ability of the Bering Bridge would have been important for at least some migrations.
Geologists believe the land bridge was in existence three times in the last 100,000
years: between 28,000 and 10,000; 50,000 and 40,000; and 100,000 and 70,000 years
ago. Consequently, people could have been migrating to the Americas over different
routes and at different times. Archaeological and linguistic (language) data certainly
indicate this.

Archaeology has been very important in helping to determine how long people have
been in the Americas, but it is far from perfect. Archaeological research done in the
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries relied on the concept of superposition to
determine how old artifacts were. This basically means that the deeper down in the
ground an artifact is found, the older it is. A nineteenth-century archaeologist would
assume that artifacts found 6 inches under the ground are more recent than arti-
facts found a foot down. This makes sense, except that a number of factors can dis-
turb areas in which artifacts are found. The freezing and thawing of water in lakes
and rivers (where most early settlements are found), the freezing and thawing of the
ground itself; earthquakes; and the effects of farming, such as plowing—these all may
shift layers of dirt, moving artifacts farther up or down in the ground.

In the 1950s the use of carbon 14 (radiocarbon dating) was developed for dating
purposes. In this technique, the amount of carbon 14, an isotope found in all living
things, is measured. When an organism dies, the amount of carbon 14 starts to
decay. By measuring the amount of carbon 14 left in the artifact, archaeologists can
estimate how old an organic artifact is.

18 | Susan Stebbins
Using this technique archaeologists were able to estimate the age of a mastodon
butchering area to 8,500 years. Found with the mastodon were very unique projec-
tile points, called Folsom Points.

The organic bones of the mastodon supplied the dating information, while finding
a projectile point embedded in one of the bones clearly indicated the animal had at
least been butchered, if not killed, by the people who made the Folsom Points.

Courtesy of the U.S.

Department of the
Interior, the Bureau of Courtesy of the Government of
Land Management. A the Commonwealth of
Folsom Point from the Virginia. Clovis point:
Paleo-indian Lithic Example of a Clovis fluted
stage Folsom blade that is 11,000 years old.
tradition.

Problems associated with carbon 14 dating are that it can only be done with organic
materials, so projectile points or pottery cannot be dated. Another problem is that
the testing process destroys a large part of the artifact. Archaeologists and geol-
ogists also use potassium-argon dating which can be used to determine the age
of igneous and volcanic rock. In potassium-argon dating, the radioactive isotope of
potassium 40 decays to the gas argon 40. By comparing the proportion of potassium
40 to argon 40, the date of rocks can be determined. However, the rocks must be
carefully collected, and it can be difficult to determine if any marks or wear on the
rocks are the result of human activity or natural erosion. Additionally, the standard
deviations for age estimates are very large (Fagan 1989).

Chapter 1: In 1491... | 19
Archaeologists, especially those within the subfield of bioarchaeology, have long
used biological material such as skeletons, especially skulls, to make hypotheses and
draw conclusions about where Native Americans may have originated and possible
relationships to other populations. However, skeletal material is very plastic or flex-
ible; it is changed, sometimes within a generation, by environmental factors such as
diet. So, drawing comparisons between skeletons from one continent to another, or
even on the same continent, can be tricky. However, with the ability of biologists to
now isolate and study genetic material, a new area of data is available to bioarchae-
ologists. In the 1980s, Glen Doran of Florida State University conducted excavations
at peat bogs at the Windover Site in Florida. The low oxygen levels and neutral pH
of the bog preserved burials that were between 7,000 to 8,000 years old. Thanks to
earlier research done in extracting DNA from brain tissue (see Allan Wilson 1977 and
Svante Paabo 1988), Doran was able to extract DNA from the brain tissue of 60 mum-
mies. Microbiologists discovered that the genetic material of the brain tissue from
the bog mummies varied very little, even though the bog had been used as a burial
site for thousands of years (Thomas: Skull Wars).

Research such as Doran’s leads other microbiologists and bioarchaelogists to study

the genetic make-up of Native Americans. At this time, research such as this indi-
cates the indigenous populations of the Americas probably diverged from common
genetic ancestors between 15,000 and 40,000 years ago. Combined with what we
know about geology, this divergence would have occurred after humans came to
the Americas. Data such as these helped scientists determine that the genetic dif-
ferences between Asian and Native Americans populations would have occurred
between 21,000 and 42,000 years ago (Thomas).

Another type of research that can be helpful in illustrating the differences between
Native American and other world populations and how long ago they occurred is
linguistics, the study of languages. Linguists have been studying the relationships
between languages for hundreds of years. Typically they analyzed sets of cognates
(words with common origins) to find language families (languages that descend from
a common proto or mother language). In this way the American anthropologist
Alfred Kroeber postulated the possibility of seven American Indian languages in the
early twentieth century.

20 | Susan Stebbins
More recently Joseph Greenberg of Stanford University hypothesized three language
families that he called Amerind, Na-Dene, and Eskimo-Aleut. He suggests that
the Eskimo-Aleut and Na-Dane speaking populations had arrived in the Americas
more recently than the Amerind-speaking populations. Greenberg thinks that the
speakers of Amerind would be responsible for the Clovis projective points found
by archaeologists. However, many experts in Native American languages discount
Greenberg’s (an expert in African languages) hypothesis.

Attempts to merge theories from archaeology, microbiology, and linguistics to make

hypotheses about the origin and time of migrations to the Americas have run into
much criticism, largely because the data used by these sciences are so very different.
The data from archaeology and geology can be very useful, as can data from archae-
ology and microbiology. But including linguistics can be very problematic, as lan-
guages can be both conservative (resistant to change) and flexible. The rate of lan-
guage change can be dependent on a number of factors; including how many other
populations and languages one society encountered, and if that society decided to
use language as a means to maintain cultural identity in the wake of encountering
other cultures, or to incorporate new words and phrases as has often been done in
our English language.

However biological, archaeological, geographic, and linguistic evidence indicates

that the peoples of the Americas have been a unique population for more than 10,000
years. Peoples from other parts of the world may have found their way to the Amer-
icas, but there is no evidence these visitors had any impact on the peoples or the
societies already here until the events of 1492.

It is interesting that the questions about how long Native Americans have been in
the Americas, and what other populations may have influenced them, is such a hot
issue of debate, especially in the popular media. In Europe, Germans or Spaniards
seldom have to defend how long ago their ancestors arrived in Europe. If asked, they
would probably say their ancestors were always in Europe, just as Native Americans
would say their ancestors were always in the Americas. However, with the exception
of the Basque people, the ancestors of Europeans migrated to Europe as well, many
of them in time frames similar to that of the migrations to the Americas. This shows
us the mobility of those ancestors and raises questions about why they migrated. It
doesn’t call into doubt the identity or sovereignty of those peoples. Like questions

Chapter 1: In 1491... | 21
about how many people were in the Americas in 1491, the subtext of such questions
by Euro-Americans about how long ago Native Americans got here can be, “Well,
they weren’t here that long ago. They are immigrants, just like us.” Like the concept
of Manifest Destiny this underlying message undermines the validity of Native Amer-
ican claims for sovereignty.

More interesting questions than how long have people been in the Americas, and
how many were here in 1491 are: What did they do once they got here? How did
those societies organize their kin groups? What resources did they have? What was
their political organization? Were the roles of women and men similar or very differ-
ent? What were their religious beliefs? What did their expressive culture (art) sound
like and look like? How did those societies survive (or not) their encounters with
Europeans and Euro-Americans? What do Native American societies look like today?
These questions, and many more, will be addressed in the following chapters.

Suggested Questions

What theories do you have about how humans came to the Americas? Are you famil-
iar with the book Chariots of the Gods? Have you heard other theories about how
other non-Native American peoples came to the Americas and what influence they
had? Why would aboriginal people be upset by these theories?

Much of the discussion about the impact or influence of Europeans, Asians, or pos-
sible extraterrestrials on Native American societies focuses on the building of mon-
umental architecture like that found among the Incas in Peru, the Mayas and Aztecs
in Mexico and Central America, the pueblos in the southwestern United States, and
mounds in the Ohio and Mississippi river valleys. Yet monumental architecture is
found everywhere around the world. Why do you think the idea that indigenous
Americans did not build monumental architecture persists?

The Human Genome Project is attempting to gather DNA from people across the
world to “map” genetic differences and similarities. Despite the scientific importance
of DNA research, most indigenous Americans are opposed to being part of such a
study. Why do you think this is so?

22 | Susan Stebbins
What is genocide? In what context have you heard this word before? The application
of the word genocide to the experiences of the indigenous peoples of the Americas
after European contact is controversial. Why do you think this is so?

Many families have members who are involved in genealogical research. What do you
know about the origins and history of your family? Why do you think genealogical
research is important to some people? Why would genealogical research be difficult
for people of Native American ancestry?

Suggested Resources

Good references for pre-European contact indigenous populations and environ-

ments is The Pristine Landscape by William Denevan, published in The Wilderness
Debate, edited by J. Baird Callicott and Michael P. Nelson, and The First Americans: In
Pursuit of America’s Greatest Mystery, by J.M. Adovasio with Jake Page.

Carole Mandryk’s article “Invented Traditions and the Ultimate American Origin
Myth: In the beginning…there was an ice free-corridor,” in The Settlement of the
American Continents, edited by C. Michael Barton, et al., is an excellent presentation
of recent archeological investigations into alternative indigenous migration routes
and dates to the Americas, as well as Quest for the Lost Land, by Renee Hetherington
et.al. that appeared in the February 2004 issue of Geotimes.

Windover: Multidisciplinary Investigation of an Early Archaic Florida Cemetery, by

Glen Doran, is an excellent presentation of archaeological and biological evidence
about a unique Native American burial site.

The article “How Columbus Sickened the World: Why Were Native Americans so Vul-
nerable to the Diseases European Settlers Brought With Them,” by D.J. Meltzer (New
Scientist, 1992:30-38) is a good summary of the consequences of European diseases
in the New World.

For more information about Bartolome’ de las Casas, an accessible article is “Prophet
and Apostle: Bartolome’ de las Casas and the Spiritual Conquest of America,” in
Christianity and Missions: 1450-1800 edited by J.S. Cummins.

Chapter 1: In 1491... | 23
American Indian Population Recovery in the 20th Century by Nancy Shoemaker, is a
good historical discussion of indigenous population loss and recovery.

In addition to the archaeology resources cited in the Introduction, An Introduction

to Archaeology, by Brain Fagan, is a good presentation of how archaeology is done,
with particular reference to North America.

If your library has a copy of the pricey American Indian Linguistics and Literatures
by William Bright (English publication by Mouton de Gruyter, 1984) it is an excellent
source of information about American Indian languages.

The Oldest Europeans: Who are we? Where do we come from? What made European
women different? by J.F. del Giorgio, discusses human migrations to Europe and the
history of the Basque people.

There of a number of websites (many of them free) which help people in doing
genealogical research about their families.

24 | Susan Stebbins
Chapter 2: All Our Relations

The Neglectful Mother (Cochiti)

Crow had been sitting on the eggs in her nest for many days, and she got tired of it and
flew away. Hawk came by and found nobody on the nest. Hawk said to herself, “The
person who own this nest must no longer care for it. What a shame for those poor little
eggs! I will sit on them, and they will be my children.” She sat for many days on the eggs,
and finally they began to hatch. Still no Crow came. The little ones all hatched out and
the mother Hawk flew about getting food for them. They grew bigger and bigger and
their wings got strong and at last it was time for the Mother Hawk to take them off the
nest.

After all this while, Crow finally remembered her nest. When she came back to it she
found the eggs hatched and Hawk taking care of her little ones.

“Hawk!”

“What is it?”

“You must return these little ones you are leading around.”

“Why?”

“Because they are mine.”

Hawk said, “Yes, you laid the eggs, but you had no pity on the poor things. You went off
and left them. I came and sat on the nest. When they were hatched, I fed them and now
I lead them about. They are mine, and I won’t return them.”

Crow said, “I shall take them back.”

“No, you won’t! I worked for them, and for many days I fasted, sitting there on the eggs.
In all that time you didn’t come near them. Why is it now, when I’ve taken care of them
and brought them up, that you want them back?”

Chapter 2: All Our Relations | 25

Crow said to the little ones, “My children, come with me. I am your mother.”

But the little ones said they did not know her. “Hawk is our mother.” At last when she
couldn’t make them come with her, she said, “Very well, I’ll take Hawk to court, and we
shall see who has the right to these children.”

So Mother Crow took Mother Hawk before the king of the birds. Eagle said to Crow,
“Why did you leave your nest?” Crow hung her head and had no answer to that. But she
said, “When I came back to my nest, I found my eggs already hatched and Hawk taking
charge of my little ones. I have come to ask that Hawk return my little ones to me.”

Eagle said to Mother Hawk, “How did you find this nest of eggs?”

“Many times I went to it and found it empty. No one came for a long time, and at last
I had pity on the poor little eggs. I said to myself, ‘The mother who made this nest can
no longer care for these eggs. I will would be glad to hatch the little ones.’ I sat on them
and they hatched. Then I went about getting food for them. I worked hard and brought
them up, and they have grown.”

Mother Crow interrupted Mother Hawk and said, “But they are my children. I laid the
eggs.”

“It’s not your turn. We are both asking for justice, and it will be given to us. Wait till I
have spoken.”

Eagle said to Mother Hawk, “Is that all?”

“Yes, I have worked hard to raise my own two little ones. Just when they were grown,
Mother Crow came and asked to have them back again, but I won’t give them back. It is
I who fasted and worked, and they are now mine.”

The king of the birds said to Mother Crow, “If you really had pity on your little ones,
why did you leave the nest for so many days? And why are you demanding to have them
now? Mother Hawk is the mother of the little ones, for she has fasted and hatched them,
and flown about searching for their food. Now they are her children.”

Mother Crow said to the king of the birds, “King, you should ask the little ones which
mother they choose to follow. They know enough to know which one to take.”

26 | Susan Stebbins
So the king said to the little ones, “Which one will you choose?”

Both answered together, “Mother Hawk is our mother, She’s all the mother we know.”

Crow cried, “No, I’m your only mother!”

The little Crow children said, “In the nest you had no pity on us; you left us. Mother
Hawk hatched us, and she is our mother.”

So it was finally settled as the little ones had said: they were the children of Mother
Hawk, who had had pity on them in the nest and brought them up.

Mother Crow began to weep. The king said to her, “Don’t cry. It’s your own fault. This is
the final decision of the king of the birds.” So Mother Crow lost her children.

Recorded by Ruth Benedict in 1931. (Erdoe and Ortiz)

The study of families or kinship is essential to anthropology. Often the first thing an
anthropologist does during fieldwork is start collecting information about families:
who’s related to whom? How are they related—by birth or by marriage? Do marriage
partners come from the same village or not? How do people set up residence after
they are married? This information tells us a lot, not only about family structures, but
also about how the larger society is organized, the economic obligations between
people, and even how people acquire and maintain status in the larger society. Fre-
quently there are religious and other traditions that explain and uphold ideals about
kinship.

It is often assumed that in post-Industrial societies like the United States or Canada,
kinship is less important than in the small-scale societies typically studied by
anthropologists. Unlike people in traditional small-scale societies, most people in
the United States or Canada are highly mobile; we often don’t live in the same town
or city in which we grew up, much less the same area where our grandparents grew
up. We are hard-pressed to identify distant cousins, or the generations of ances-
tors beyond our great-grandparents. But are ideas about kinship so different? Who
is helping most students pay for college? Who do you look to when you need money?
Who do you turn to if you are sick or feeling down and need emotional support?
Despite distance, expense, and hassle, people go to great extremes to celebrate
important days such as Thanksgiving, Christmas, Hanukkah, birthdays, and anniver-

Chapter 2: All Our Relations | 27

saries with family members. In societies around the world, families provide eco-
nomic and emotional support to its members. Societies differ when it comes to: who
is a member of my family, to whom may I go for support?

It is an axiom in anthropology that one of the most important things kinship struc-
ture tells an individual in a society is who they can marry and with whom they can
have sex. In the early twentieth century, the anthropologist Branislaw Malinowski
wrote the ethnography, The Sexual Life of Savages in North Western Melanesia. It was
one of the first books in anthropology to gain a wide, general readership. But the
title is deceiving. The book isn’t about sex, it is about kinship. Because, as the read-
ers of this book soon learned, a society’s acknowledgement of whom an individual is
related to by blood or birth then determines whom that individual may have sex with
or marry. In the United States, Canada, or any other society, who you are related to
by blood has been determined by your society.

No matter how liberal a particular society’s attitudes about sex or marriage may be,
there are always rules. The most basic rule for all societies is the incest taboo (tabu):
an individual may not have sex with or marry someone who is a close blood relative.
One of the most basic kinship differences between societies is the determination of
who is a blood relative. In anthropology, people biologically related to each other are
called consanguine kin (from the Latin word for blood). It may seem obvious who
your consanguine kin are, but there is a lot of variety among humans and their soci-
eties.

Like all other scientists, anthropologists put the data or information they collect into
categories. In examining the information about consanguine kinship, anthropologist
use the following categories:

Matrilineal—kin relationships are traced through the mother, children belong to the
kin group of their mother.

Patrilineal—kin relationships are traced through the father, children belong to the
kin group of their father.

Bilineal (bilateral)—kin relationships are traced through both the father’s and
mother’s kin groups.

28 | Susan Stebbins
Ambilineal—kin relationships are different for men and women. All men belong to
the same kin group, which is usually headed by the ruler of the society. He is often
considered to be descended from a god. Women all belong to the same kin group,
headed by the queen of the society. She is considered to be descended from a god-
dess. This arrangement occurs in very few societies, so it will not be discussed in
great detail.

These categories may seem relatively simple, but they can have strong impacts on
other aspects of society, as we will discuss in Chapter 4. And are they so simple? How
would you categorize the dominant kin groups of the United States and Canada?
Bilineal? If so, why do most of us have the last names of our fathers, as in patrilineal
societies? Further, in a patrilineal or matrilineal society the incest taboo is applied
differently to the mother’s or father’s side of the family. So whether a society is
matrilineal or patrilineal can determine with whom you can have sex and marry and
who you cannot.

The most obvious way to see how important being patrilineal, matrilineal, or bilineal
can be is in the concept of cross and parallel cousins. In a matrilineal society
your parallel cousins are your mother’s siblings’ children; your cross cousins are
your father’s siblings’ children. In a patrilineal society your parallel cousins are
your father’s siblings’ children, while your cross cousins are your mother’s siblings’
children. In a bilineal society there are no distinctions between cross and parallel
cousins. So why make such a distinction? Because in both matrilineal and patrilineal
societies, you may (it is sometimes encouraged) marry your cross cousins, but never
your parallel cousins.

So why doesn’t marrying your cross cousins violate the incest taboo? Because in a
matrilineal society you belong to the kin group of your mother; your father is of
another kin group entirely. In a patrilineal society, you belong to the kin group of
your father; your mother is from another kin group, and generally remains so even
after marriage. Thus, cross cousin marriage in matrilineal or patrilineal societies
does not violate the incest taboo. In some instances cross cousin marriage may even
be encouraged because of another concept that can limit who you can marry, within
the group or outside of the group.

Chapter 2: All Our Relations | 29

Anthropologists will often refer to societies as being either endogamous or exog-
amous. In an exogamous society people typically (in some instances must) marry
someone from outside of their group or locality (where they live, their village or
town). In an endogamous society people typically marry someone from their com-
munity. Cross cousin marriage are typically found in endogamous societies and the
practice helps to increase the relationships between families, which encourages
those related families to work with each other in getting resources. In an exogamous
society, individuals and families build relationships with families in other localities.

Anthropologists have another category when examining the kinship organization of

society: moieties. In moieties the kin groups of a particular society are divided into
two groups, which may be exogamous. Moieties often function as ceremonial divi-
sions in a society. For example, among the Iroquois, when a member of your kin
group dies, the members of a different moiety will plan and conduct the funeral to
“help wipe the tears from your eyes.” Among the Tewa, a Puebloan group living in the
southwestern part of the U.S. moieties function as a very important part of the ritual
and ceremonial aspect of the society. Men and women must marry someone from
another moiety, and women will be adopted into the moiety of their husbands after
they marry (Ortiz 1969).

There is one more concept to discuss within consanguine kinship: that of Lineage
and Clans. In societies that recognized lineages (they are often patrilineal), the mem-
bers of the lineage can trace their descent from a common ancestor. In the United
States and Canada, people may be able to trace their descent from Thomas Jeffer-
son or John MacDonald (the first prime minister of Canada). All people who can trace
their descent to Jefferson or MacDonald, particularly through the patrilineal line,
belong to the same lineage. A clan is harder to define. The members of a clan believe
they are related, even if they cannot trace their descent to a common ancestor. Both
lineages and clans are exogamous. Having sex with or marrying someone from your
clan or lineage would be considered incest. Lineages are often found in patrilineal
societies, clans in matrilineal societies. Many Native American societies recognize
clans. While European societies are now generally patrilineal, (although, less than a
1,000 years ago the Irish were matrilineal), Native American societies can be matri-
lineal, patrilineal, or bilineal. Further, these kinship organizations are very flexible
and have changed within the last 200 years.

30 | Susan Stebbins
In Tewa society there are two patrilineal clans: Summer and Winter. Ortiz says that
children are not automatically born into those clans, but must go through several
rituals of “incorporation.” Women are generally adopted into the clan of their hus-
bands after marriage. Further, children may be adopted into the other clan, even
after being incorporated into a clan. Ortiz gives an example of a man who had only
daughters. When they married, they were adopted into the clan of their husbands.
The father then adopted a son of his oldest daughter into his clan. Medicine people
and healers would also adopt apprentices who were not of their clan into their clan.
All these adoptions involved rituals of incorporation (Ortiz 1969).

The Iroquois (Haudenosaunee) confederacy is a group of Native Americans linked by

language, political organization, and kin groups. They have and continue to occupy
the area of what are now northern New York and southern Quebec and Ontario
for around 2,000 years. The Iroquois are a matrilineal society in which the consan-
guineal kin groups are organized into clans: Bear, Wolf, Deer, Hawk, Snipe, Heron,
Turtle, Beaver, and Eel. The Iroquois don’t believe they are descended from these
animals, but in the ancient times of oral tradition, the relationship between animals
and people was so close they could even communicate with each other. As you read
in the story about Sky Woman, the Turtle provided a place for her to land and on
which the Earth now resides. The women of the Bear clan learned about medicinal
plants from a shape-changing bear.

The Navajo (Diné) are also considered to be a matrilineal society. Unlike the Iroquois,
a Navajo would say s/he is born to the clan of his/her mother and for the clan
of his/her father. Further, the Diné recognize their relatedness to their maternal
and paternal grandfathers’ clans. The incest taboo would apply to all four clans. The
Navajo are considered matrilineal because the inheritance of usufruct rights (the
rights of individuals to use land or other resources) transfers from mother to daugh-
ters.

The Inuit of the Arctic are an example of a bilateral society. Kinship is equally traced
through both the mother’s and the father’s side. The Inuit live in a treacherous nat-
ural environment. Their kinship organization may be because the people of this soci-
ety must depend on one another for survival. The more people you can call on for
help, the more likely you (and they) will survive. Bilateral societies are typically for-
agers, traveling from area to area to get needed resources. They may have been

Chapter 2: All Our Relations | 31

mobile and bilateral for centuries, like the Inuit. Others, like the Cheyenne and
Sioux, may have become bilateral after changes in economic and settlement patterns
caused by Euro-Americans intrusions into their territory resulted in them morphing
from settled, horticultural societies to foraging societies. Bilateral kinship organiza-
tion was more adaptive to the mobility of foragers and increased kin networks.

As stated previously, one of the first things an anthropologist does in the field is to
gather information about kinship. A narrative about kin organization for a society
would be long and confusing. Instead, anthropologists utilize kinship charts to orga-
nize and present information. The structure of kinship charts is standardized, so any
anthropologist can understand the data presented, whether they are familiar with
the society being described or the language of the anthropologist. Kinship charts for
matrilineal, patrilineal, and bilateral societies are subtly different, but they do show
the differences in the kinship organization.

A two-generation comparison of the six major kinship systems (Hawaiian, Sudanese, Eskimo,
Iroquois, Crow and Omaha). Circle=female Triangle=male. Relatives marked with the same
non-gray color are called by the same kinship term (ignoring sex-differentiation in the sibling/
cousin generation, except where this becomes structurally-relevant under the Crow and Omaha
systems). Courtesy of Zander Schubert: based on information from “Systematic Kinship
Terminologies”: http://www.umanitoba.ca/faculties/arts/anthropology/tutor/kinterms/
termsys.html. CC-BY 3.0

Much of the importance of determining consanguine kin is for purposes of marriage.

Marriage gives not only the individual, but also his/her entire family a whole new

32 | Susan Stebbins
set of kin or family members. People who are related by marriage are called affine
or affinal kin. Affinal kin broaden the social and economic networks for individuals
in a society. Through marriage, your affines provide more people you can turn to
for economic help and resources. Your affines can help in raising children or raising
your family status. They may even provide a place for you to live.

The expectation in societies like the United States or Canada is that when a young
couple gets married, they will establish their own residence. In anthropology this
is called neolocality. It is further expected that, generally, this new marriage will
lead to children, who will live with their parents. In anthropological terms this is a
nuclear family: parents and children living in the same residence. When our politi-
cians talk about family values, they are referring to nuclear families. But for most
of human history, and still in many societies, people live in extended families that
include grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins and two— sometimes more—gener-
ations. Societies usually have expectations about how residence patterns are estab-
lished, and anthropologists have terms for them:

Matrilocal—when a couple gets married they reside with the wife’s extended kin
group.

Patrilocal—when a couple gets married they reside with the husband’s kin group.

Bilocal—when a couple gets married they may reside with either the wife’s or hus-
band’s kin, but they do not establish a new residence.

Avunculocal—when a couple has sons they go live with the mother’s brothers. This
residence pattern occurs in some matrilineal societies.

Frequently, but not always, a matrilineal society will be matrilocal or avunculocal,

while a patrilineal society is typically patrilocal, and bilateral societies are typically
bilocal.

For most of human history, marriage was not a romantic arrangement between two
individuals, it was an economic relationship between two families. Because con-
sanguineal and affinal kin depend upon each other for economic resources, the
marriages between members of their kin groups are very important. Elder family
members will arrange marriages for younger members to ensure the most advanta-

Chapter 2: All Our Relations | 33

geous economic arrangement. The individuals seeking a marriage, and their families,
must show or exchange their economic resources. Again, anthropology has cate-
gories for the different ways resources are exchanged between families:

Bride wealth—The intended groom and his family provide economic resources to the
intended bride and her family. This is not “buying a wife.” The groom and his family
demonstrate they can contribute resources to the bride and her family. The groom
and his family also acknowledge the labor and economic value of the bride. In a patri-
focal society the groom’s family is compensating the bride’s family for the loss of
her and her labor. Women have relatively high status in societies that practice bride
wealth. The exchange of bride wealth is found in many Native American and African
societies.

Bride service—The intended groom must provide labor to the bride’s family for a
period time, or in a matrilocal society, the rest of his life, as he will be living with his
wife’s extended family. Again, the groom is showing he can make economic contri-
butions to his bride’s family. A number of Native American societies, like the Navajo,
have bride service. The practice is also found in the Old Testament (for exam-
ple, Abraham must work 14 years for his intended father-in-law in order to marry
Rebekkah).

Gift exchange—The families of the bride and groom exchange gifts as part of the
marriage ceremony. Again, the families demonstrate they can help support the bride
and groom, and each other. However, status may be achieved through the exchange
of the gifts. If one side of the family can offer gifts of greater value, they have attained
a higher level of status than the other family. This is particularly true among soci-
eties of the Northwest Coast who have potlatches (a redistribution of resources by
giving them away during a ceremony).

Dowry—In societies that have dowries as part of the marriage, women and their fam-
ilies must provide economic resources to the groom and his family. In order for a
woman to get married, she must provide a dowry. If her family is able to provide
a sizeable dowry, she may be able to marry into a higher status family and thus
improve the status and resources of her children. Dowries indicate that women hold
a lower status in a society and are rare in Native American societies. European and
many Asian societies have, or historically had, dowries, which put women in a very

34 | Susan Stebbins
vulnerable position, as they couldn’t get married without resources, and they lost
control of those resources when they got married. If the husband were to waste
those resources, the woman and her children could be left destitute. If the husband
died before a woman bore a son who could provide for her, she was often sent back
to her family, who may or may not have taken her back in.

These are traditions that were practiced until fairly recently around the world. In
some places they are still practiced. Societies of the Northwest Coast still have pot-
latches, though the gifts given away are different than they were 200 years ago. In
addition to fishing, people of the Northwest also gathered a wide array of edible and
medical plants. While men and women had specific jobs in securing resources, both
contributed to the wealth of families and the community, and shared in the labor to
get that wealth. As a result, women had fairly equal status with men in their soci-
eties. This equal status was reflected in the fact that both men and women of rank
and wealth could be chiefs and have more than one spouse. Because the area is so
rich, the people of the Northwest were probably one of the only foraging societies
worldwide able to have resource surpluses. These surpluses became very important
in the status hierarchy of these societies. Such hierarchy sets the Northwest soci-
eties apart because foraging societies are generally egalitarian; that is, there is very
little status or rank between the members of the society. These two factors make the
societies of the Northwest unique.

Most societies of the Northwest were matrilineal. Extended families lived in large
houses constructed of various kinds of timber available in the area. Each nuclear
family had separate quarters in a partitioned part of the house. Extended families
and individuals within the family all participated in a very complex system of social
rank and status. There were three ranks in these societies: nobles, commoners and
slaves. Particularly in the northern part of the Northwest, the distinction between
nobles and commoners was of great cultural significance. Despite the fact that the
difference between the two groups was really a continuum of differences, rather
than a divide between the two groups, people strove to acquire and enhance their
social rank.

Nobles held high-ranking names and titles. They owned ceremonial property such
as masks, ancestor crests, songs, dances, and rituals. Commoners lacked these cul-
turally prestigious items, but they could acquire noble status by their inheritance.

Chapter 2: All Our Relations | 35

Slaves were war captives and along with their children, they lived in their masters’
households doing menial labor. They were generally freed after one generation, but
even then they were excluded from the status system. Status and rank are inter-
connected with marriage patterns. Parents attempted to arrange marriages for their
children with people of equal or greater status.

Marriages, along with other important life events such as birth, death, puberty rites,
and the naming of a chief, were marked with potlatches. A potlatch is a public feast
to which the entire community is invited. In addition to the feasting, singing, and
dancing, it is a confirmation of the new status of an individual (adult status for a
young girl, for example), and community witnessing of the inheritance of ceremonial
property, such as masks, songs, or the rights to fish or harvest berries at particular
locations by specific individuals. Ceremonial property is often displayed, and often
there is a give-away. Those sponsoring the potlatch give away resources to those
attending. Status can be maintained or increased by value of the items given away.
The potlatch system also helps in the distribution of resources throughout the com-
munity. Even the poorest people receive items, though they cannot gain status by
giving away valuable items themselves.

In the past, the governments of the United States and Canada have restricted these
practices. This topic will be further discussed in Chapter 6. However, one practice
still restricted by both governments is having multiple marriage partners at the same
time. This practice is called polygamy. There are actually two types of polygamy:
polygyny and polyandry. In societies that practice polygyny, men may have multiple
wives. However, in those societies most men have one. Having multiple wives is a
sign of status and wealth for a man, but he usually must have the wealth and status
before he can have more than one wife. In many societies, a man must provide bride
wealth or bride service before he can get additional wives, and then he must provide
for all the wives and their children. Most men do not have that wealth. Even in soci-
eties that have dowries, for example, Islamic societies, the Koran (the holy book of
Islam) demands men must provide equally for all wives and their children. In some
societies, many in Africa for example, that have bride wealth, the first wife may help
her husband build the wealth to acquire an additional wife, generally a female rel-
ative, to help in the labor. Women will work to increase their bride wealth to help
provide the bride wealth for their sons.

36 | Susan Stebbins
Many Native American societies historically practiced polygyny. In some societies
they practiced patrilocality, in which a sister or other unmarried female relative
might move in with the family when a young woman gave birth. Often she would
then become a second wife. This is called sororate, when close female relatives
marry the same man. But some Native American societies, Cherokees, for example,
may have practiced polyandry. Typically polyandry, in which a woman has more than
one husband, is found in patrilineal and patrifocal agricultural societies in which
land is passed from a father to his sons. Parts of Tibet and Sri Lanka have commu-
nities that practice polyandry. Typically, sons would inherit part of the farm when
they married or their father died. But in instances in which the availability of farm-
land is severely limited when one son marries, his brothers marry the woman as
well. More than three brothers will marry two sisters. In North America early Span-
ish and French documents indicate that among some Native American societies,
women, generally those of high status, had more than one husband, but not because
of limited farmland. The women who had multiple husbands generally had land and
resources. From the written documents it appears that these women had multiple
husbands for the same reasons men in other societies have multiple wives: for the
status.

In Europe, the United States, and Canada, until recently, it was very difficult for
a woman to initiate a divorce, and she might well lose custody of her children. In
Native American societies, particularly those that were matrilineal or matrifocal,
divorce was fairly easy. If a couple was not getting along, or a man was not getting
along with his wife’s family, or he was not contributing resources, he could be sent
back to his family—the equivalent of divorce. The Cherokees are such a society,
historically matrilineal and matrifocal, in which women have high status and both
women and men can easily get a divorce. Women who divorced a first husband could
have a second. This may illustrate the high status women had in some Native Amer-
ican societies, just as having multiple wives demonstrates the status of a man.

As stated before, kinship organization impacts a society in many ways. One of these
is the roles and status of women. Societies that demand dowries for women to marry
see the value and status of women very differently than those who expected bride
wealth or bride service. With bride wealth or service the society recognizes that
women have material value, they contribute resources and status to their families.
In societies that expect a dowry women also contribute to the wealth of their fami-
Chapter 2: All Our Relations | 37
lies, but it is not recognized or valued. But where do these different views of women
come from? It may be that the kinship organization of a society has a significant
impact on the roles and status of women in that society.

In a patrilineal society, more than just a lineage association passes from a father to
his children. His resources, inheritance, and his status are also passed, typically to
his sons. It is very important to men in a patrilineal society to know that the children
who are inheriting their wealth and status are indeed children of their lineage. In the
days before DNA testing and paternity tests (which are very recent), the only way
to ensure this was to restrict the sexual behavior of women. To restrict the sexual
behavior of women was to restrict their overall participation in society. In societies
throughout the world, women have been restricted to their households, or even to
the private parts of the households. In these societies, women must be accompanied
by a male member of her family or respected older woman if they are to leave the
house. Women in such societies may not speak to men to whom they are not related.
In these kinds of circumstances, it is obviously very difficult for women to partic-
ipate fully in their society. They may not leave the household to participate in the
trade or exchange of resources, and most certainly not participate in the political
organization or activities of their society. They are often restricted from participat-
ing in religious activities, especially those that bring status to men. In societies that
have an education system outside of the household, women may be restricted from
attending schools. The tenets of the society’s religion may rationalize or justify this
treatment of women

In such societies, and there are many and have been many throughout the world, the
ability of women to participate fully, particularly in obtaining economic resources
and status, are severely restricted. However, in matrilineal societies, children belong
to the clan or kin group of their mothers. So the concern of ensuring the paternity
of children for inheritance is not an issue. Children, typically daughters, inherited
the status and access to resources (like the use of a particular plot of farmland)
from their mothers. Sons typically inherited resources (tools and hunting materials
for example) from their mother’s father or brothers. There is no reason to restrict
women’s sexual behavior; therefore there is no reason to restrict participation in
their society. Women may engage in resource-getting activities such as foraging
for wild edibles, fishing, farming and even hunting. They participated in, and in
some societies like the Iroquois and Ojibwa, controlled the trade of resources. Their

38 | Susan Stebbins
exchange of resources, either through trade or gift-giving, resulted in higher sta-
tus for themselves and their families. They were valued members of the society, as is
seen in the expectation of bride wealth or bride service upon marriage. This partici-
pation in the economy of their society can result in women holding prestigious polit-
ical positions, whether as a chief (and there were many), or through membership in
women’s councils. Both the Iroquois and Cherokees, matrilineal/matrifocal societies
in which women had high status, had women’s councils who could, and did, over-
turn the decisions of the men’s councils. It was the sons of a woman’s clan who went
to war. It was the women who decided if indeed they would go to war. Iroquois and
Cherokee women could also be chiefs. Their power was such that British agent Sir
William Johnson fought to restrict the involvement of the Mohawk Women’s Coun-
cil in negotiations with the British, despite the fact that the status he held with the
Mohawks came from his association with Molly Brant, a high-status Mohawk woman.
Women also participated in religious rituals, though they might have different roles
than men. And as you have seen have through the different stories recounted thus
far, women had important roles in the origin stories of Native American societies.

European, Canadian, or U.S. women would not obtain the status of women in many
Native American societies until the twentieth century. Some people have referred
to societies such as the Iroquois or Cherokees as matriarchies. From an anthro-
pological perspective, a matriarchy is a society governed by a woman or women; a
patriarchy is a society governed by a man or men. There have been thousands of
patriarchies in the history of the world, but few, if any, matriarchies. Having matrilin-
eal descent or matrifocal residence patterns does not make a society a matriarchy.
Societies such as the Iroquois, Cherokees, Navajo, and many others are not governed
by women; they are governed by women and men. Each sex has their roles in a soci-
ety, each are valued and needed for the survival of the society. Some anthropolo-
gists have referred to such societies as demonstrating separate but equal spheres
of influence. These spheres of influence may overlap, as they do among the Iroquois
and Cherokees, or not, as among the Navajo, Zuni, and Hopi. But both women and
men make important contributions to the society, and those contributions are rec-
ognized and valued. The wealth and status of a family depend on the contributions
of both women and men.

It may seem like we are leaving out a very important part of families: children. Chil-
dren are essential to the survival of any society. Without them, the society becomes
Chapter 2: All Our Relations | 39
extinct. In most Native American societies, children belonged to the clan of their
mothers. Some Native American societies were bilateral, and children belonged to
the kin groups of both their mother and father, much as the United States and
Canada today. A very few Native American societies were patrilineal. As stated
before, the Tewa are an example of a Native American patrilineal society. Typically,
women would be adopted into their husbands’ clan after marriage, except then the
women’s clan was of a higher status than her husband’s.

Typically in patrilineal or patrifocal societies, female children have less status than
male children. They will leave the household; their children will not be part of their
lineage. They will require dowries. If their sexual behavior is suspect, they will bring
dishonor to the family. In many patrilineal societies, even today, girls or women who
bring dishonor to their families can be killed, even when the behavior is not their
fault, as is the case in rape. The value of sons is such that families will allow female
children to die, or in modern circumstances, abort female fetuses. In matrilineal
societies, girls are as equally valued as boys, maybe even more so. Girls will remain
in the household and continue to contribute both resources and more children to
the clan. Mohawk parents I know speak of the difficulty in raising sons to be good,
honorable men who will follow the right path in life, but daughters are a joy.

All societies value and love their children, but the structure of the society, the
kinship, may determine how boys and girls are treated. Other social expectations
and beliefs also affect how children are treated. In their early contacts, Spanish,
French, and British commentators all remarked on the love bestowed on children by
Native Americans, and not just their own biological children. Native Americans often
adopted the children of others. A woman or man without biological children of his or
her own would adopt a child of a sibling. Children taken as captives in times of war
(including European children) were often adopted by kin groups.

Europeans noted the excellent behavior of Native children, despite the fact their
parents did not practice corporeal punishment. At this time, it was generally
assumed that children had to be beaten from time to time to ensure good behavior
and morals. Native Americans did not think it ever appropriate to hit or beat chil-
dren. A look, word, or story, particularly from a grandparent, was usually enough to
chastise a child. A minister traveling along the St. Lawrence River related an instance
in which a British drummer boy insulted a visiting Mohawk warrior. The Mohawk

40 | Susan Stebbins
demanded a gift to excuse the insult. The British commander responded that the boy
would be punished in the British way. The warrior asked what would that be. When
he was told the boy would be beaten, he threw his blanket over the boy and ran off
with him. He would not return the boy until he was assured he would not be beaten.
All societies love their children, but that love is demonstrated in different ways.

Marriages and the birth of children are events that are often accompanied by rituals
and ceremonies in societies throughout the world. Marriage ceremonies acknowl-
edge the new relationship between the bride and groom and their families. In patri-
lineal societies, the marriage ceremony will also acknowledge the legitimacy of
future children. Marriage ceremonies can be very elaborate, or very simple. Elabo-
rate marriage ceremonies are often a means to demonstrate the status and wealth of
the bride and/or groom’s family. Smaller wedding ceremonies are simply an recogni-
tion of the new relationship between the bride and groom, their families, and future
children.

Many practices and rituals surrounded the birth of a child. Women might engage
in various behaviors to help promote pregnancy (or prevent it). Some behaviors or
food would be encouraged to ensure a healthy child; others that were thought to be
harmful would be avoided. Various practices were performed at the birth of a child
to ensure the health and recovery of both child and mother. Ceremonies, such as
naming ceremonies, took place after the birth. In our modern societies, it is hard for
most of us to conceive of the heartbreak of the death of a child. However, societies
around the world continue to experience high rates of infant morality. Native Amer-
ican societies also had rates of infant morality higher than those experienced today.
Families engaged in various practices to help ease the grief suffered from the death
of a child. Not naming a child is one such mechanism. The ceremonies surrounding
the naming of a child typically came when it seemed clear the child would survive.
Children who did not survive where often buried near the home so that they were
easily re-born into the same family.

Women and men of Native American societies would also strive to limit the number
of children they had to better ensure the health and survival of existing children.
Women would take medicinal plants to help prevent pregnancy, and, in extreme
cases, take those that would induce abortion early in a pregnancy. Most often, both
parents would take vows of sexual abstinence after the birth of a child to ensure

Chapter 2: All Our Relations | 41

another child would not be born until the first child was at least weaned. Iroquois
men would not sleep with their wives until a child was weaned, generally between
2 and 3 years old. Cheyenne parents would declare vows of abstinence, sometimes
up to 7 years after the birth of a child to ensure that child would have the resources
necessary for survival. There were also beliefs that encouraged small families, for
example stating that younger children in a family would be smaller, sicklier, and not
as smart as older siblings. As a result, family size in Native American families was
smaller than was typical for European or Euro-American families until the middle
of the twentieth century. A family of four children in a Native American family was
considered large, until Native peoples starting converting to Christian religions that
encouraged having many children.

Native American societies started altering their kin organization and expectations in
response to European influences, particularly missionaries. Missionaries preached
against the practice of polygyny, and abhorred the practice of polyandry and divorce.
In fact, they preached against the high status and independence of Native American
women. They felt Native women should be like European women, subservient to
their husbands. Europeans referred to the Iroquois and Cherokee political systems
as “petticoat governments” because of the roles of women and women councils.
Native American women were seen as “drudges” and Native American men as lazy,
because women primarily did the farming, while men engaged in hunting, a recre-
ational activity from the perspective of Europeans. Early suffragettes (those who
fought for equal rights for women, especially the right to vote) would remark on the
status women in Iroquois society. They missed the concept that women had that sta-
tus in part because of the “drudge” labor they did, and the fact they had control over
the products of that labor.

Contrary to what our contemporary politicians may say, kinship can be a very flex-
ible aspect of society. It can change to accommodate other changes in a society. An
excellent example of this is the changes that occurred among the Siouan-speaking
peoples of the Midwest. Up until the 1700s the Sioux, Lakota, Dakota, Yankton, and
Oglala peoples lived in what are now midwestern areas like Minnesota. Most com-
munities were close to water and practiced horticultural combined with fishing, for-
aging, and hunting. These peoples even had corn women stories much like those of
the eastern Native societies. In horticultural or even foraging societies, the roles of

42 | Susan Stebbins
women and men were fairly equal, as both contributed to their families’ and commu-
nities’ resources and wealth.

But starting in the late 1700s, more and more Native peoples were pushed farther
and farther west as Euro-Americans moved west. Many Native societies like the
Siouan peoples were pushed out into the plains and prairie areas. But those envi-
ronments are not well suited for horticulture. Rainfall is limited and the growing
season is short. Additionally the grasses in the plains are short and the roots grow
in dense tangles that contribute to the development of sod. Sod provided natural
“bricks” for the construction of “sod houses” for both Native peoples and early Euro-
American settlers in the area, but sod made it very difficult to farm in these areas
without steel plows. Native farmers had digging sticks. An old, derogative term for
American Indians is “diggers,” probably in reference to this form of planting technol-
ogy.

The Native peoples who migrated to the plains and prairies gradually adapted to get-
ting resources there, due to the reintroduction of horses. The arrival of horses coin-
cided with the expansion of a European presence and trade along the Mississippi
and Missouri rivers. This may be why so many Euro-Americans can only imagine the
Native peoples of the plains (and in much of popular culture all Native Americans)
hunting bison on horseback. However, the French explorer LaSalle encountered hor-
ticultural societies along the southern Missouri River in the seventeenth century.
The arrival of horses made the peoples of the prairie and plains much more effective
hunters, and they were better able to follow the migratory bison. The meat and furs
of bison and other animals also became important items to trade with the encroach-
ing Euro-Americans.

As hunting to trade with the Euro-Americans became more important, various

structures within Siouan societies started to change. The autonomy of women was
undermined. A family’s wealth became dependent on the amount of hides they
traded with Euro-Americans and Canadians. A single man could hunt many animals,
but the hides he could trade were dependent on the number of women who did the
time-consuming preparation of the hides. As a result, women no longer controlled
their own labor; the men of their families controlled it. Polygyny (having multiple
wives) increased. More wives and children meant more laborers in the hunting and
preparation of hides.

Chapter 2: All Our Relations | 43

The success of these hunting societies, as opposed to more generalized foraging
societies that also obtained resources from fishing and gathering wild edibles, also
depended on horses. The larger the horse herd, the more men (and sometimes
women) could go hunting. The more horses a man had, the more a man and his sons
could offer as a bride price for more wives. The social and economic status of men
came to depend on the number of horses and wives he had. This led to the devel-
opment of a more ranked society: more horses, more wives, more resources, more
wealth, more status, in societies that had previously been egalitarian. Political lead-
ership became more formalized and centralized.

Women retained only some of their previous status, particularly in religious rituals,
and as healers and midwives. Some women chose to participate in male-dominated
activities such as hunting and warfare. They were often referred to as Big Hearted
Women. Because Native American societies traditionally honored individual choice,
these women were not seen as deviant; they were simply fulfilling their own visions
and destinies. The changes in kinship and the roles of women in Siouan societies
were not intentional, but were a consequence of other changes in the society.
This was not always the case. The U.S. and Canadian governments often imposed
changes.

The laws of the United States and Canada did not recognize the variety of marriages
and family organization that existed in Native American societies; they only recog-
nized nuclear families with neolocal residence patterns. At times in both U.S. and
Canadian history, the marriages of Euro-American men with Native women were not
recognized. Their children were considered illegitimate, and they could not inherit
from their fathers. In other instances, the governments of the United States and
Canada did not recognize as Native the children of Native American mothers. Fol-
lowing the patrilineal history of Europe, the governments would only recognize the
children of Native men as Native.

Kinship and marriage were aspects of societies that were severely impacted by Euro-
pean contact. Europeans simply did not accept matrilineal or matrifocal practices,
and thought that the practice of polyandry and polygyny demonstrated the sav-
agery of Native societies. But the indigenous societies had a very different perspec-
tive. Individual indigenous societies often encountered other societies with varying
customs. Many Native societies, like the Iroquois, for example, had a mechanism

44 | Susan Stebbins
for incorporating newcomers into their kin groups, primarily through adoption and
marriage. As was stated previously in this chapter, adoption was common in many
Native American societies, and not just of children. Adults might also be adopted.
People might be adopted as apprentices to shamans. Adoption of war captives was
common, as was adoption and marriage with new people encountered. For Native
groups such as the Iroquois, Hurons, Ottawa, Abanakis, and many more, marriage
was a way to incorporate newcomers into existing families and communities.

There were occasional marriages between the English and Natives as well, but these
were certainly not encouraged. By the time of Metacom (often called King Phillip
by Americans), it was English policy to separate English and Native populations as
much as possible. Even those Native Americans who had converted to Christianity
were isolated in “Praying Towns.” However, the Jesuit missionaries in what became
known as “New France” encouraged intermarriage as a way to convert the Native
peoples and to make them good Catholics and French citizens. The Jesuits even
raised dowries from patrons back in Europe for Native women to give to their hus-
bands in the patrilineal, European tradition. For the French voyageurs and coureurs
de bois, intermarriage was a necessity. Marriage with Native women gave these men
the family connections that secured them guides, aides in procuring skins, help in
the preparation of skins, shelter over their heads, and food in their bellies. If a for-
eigner to an area and society hoped to have the support of the members of the soci-
ety to survive, marriage was a good way to ensure that, if he recognized that he had
kin responsibilities as well.

Native Americans still continue aspects of their traditional kin organization. While
Iroquois children may have the last names of their fathers, their clan association is
still that of their mothers. At pow-wows young people will still inquire about the
clan association of a potential love interest, continuing to avoid clan incest taboos.
Women sometimes live in extended family households, or live in close proximity to
their mothers and other female members of their families. The Navajo, who typically
do not like living too close to each other, have households in “camps”—areas in which
households are linked by matrilineal ties.

While the laws and influences of the U.S. and Canadian governments have changed
the kin organization of Native American societies, many of them continue to follow

Chapter 2: All Our Relations | 45

practices such as clan association and residence locality. These factors can be very
important in the practice of rituals, as we will see in Chapter 6.

Suggested Questions

You may have done your family tree in elementary school. Anthropologists do kin-
ship charts. Try doing one for your family using the following format.

Illustration by the author.

Illustration by the author.

46 | Susan Stebbins
These symbols are used in a very basic kinship chart. You can easily Google others.
Compare them to yours. You might also want to compare your chart to others in
your class. What kind of differences do you see? Why do you think there are those
differences?

People in non-western societies can often trace their ancestry back many genera-
tions. How far back can you name your ancestors?

Interview an older member of your family. How far back can they trace their/your
ancestry?

Many societies have “fictive kin”, that is someone who in not related to you by
descent or marriage but whom you consider to be “family”. Do you have any exam-
ples of this?

An important function of any kin group is sharing or providing resources. Do you

have an example of this?

The Iroquois societies practice exchange of resources between a bridge and groom
at marriage ceremonies. What do most Euro-American or Canadian cultures do?

In what ways is adoption in contemporary U.S. or Canadian societies different than

the way adoption functioned in indigenous American societies?

U.S. and Canadian family life has changed a great deal over the last fifty years. Dis-
cuss some of the cultural changes that contributed to this.

How do you think the concept of kinship in your society may change in the next fifty
years?

Suggested Resources

While not specially about Native American societies, anthropologist Peggy Reeves
Sanday has two books that are very important in examining kinship and the roles of
women in society. The first, Male Dominance, Female Power, looks at women’s roles
in a number of societies and what happens to those roles during cultural changes.
One of her case studies is the Lakota. In Women at the Center: Life in a Modern Matri-
Chapter 2: All Our Relations | 47
archy, Sanday argues that the Minangkabau of West Sumatra are an example of a
matriarchy.

League of the Houdenosaunee or the Iroquois, is an ethnohistorical account of the

Houdenosaunee by Lewis Henry Morgan, originally published in 1851. While much
of it reflects 19th century biases, Morgan’s description of Houdenosaunee kinship
is important and has influenced much subsequent anthropological research on kin-
ship.

The novel Waterlily, by Ella Cara Deloria is a wonderful account of Lakota life in the
early 1800’s. Included is much information about Lakota kinship and how it func-
tioned in the broader society.

Other books of interest are:

The Tewa World: Space, Time & Becoming in a Pueblo Society, by Alfonso Ortiz.

Women of the Earth Lodges: Tribal Life on the Plains, by Virginia Bergman Peters.

Negotiators of Change: Historical Perspectives on Native American Women, ed. by

Nancy Shoemaker.

Sifters: Native American Women’s Lives, ed. by Theda Perdue.

Many Tender Ties: Women in Fur-Trade Society, 1670-1870, by Sylvia Van Kirk.

48 | Susan Stebbins
Chapter 3: Resources and Their
Distribution
Coyote was out hunting and found a dead deer. One of the deer’s rib bones looked just
like a big dentalia (mollusk) shell, and Coyote picked it up and took it with him. He
went up to the frog people. The frog people had all the water. When anyone wanted any
water to drink or cook with or to wash, they had to go and get it from the frog people.

Coyote came up. “Hey, frog people, I have a big dentalia shell. I want a big drink of
water—I want to drink for a long time.”

“Give us that shell,” said the frog people, “and you can drink all you want.”

Coyote gave them the shell and began drinking. The water was behind a large dam
where Coyote drank.

“I’m going to keep my head down for a long time,” said Coyote, “because I’m really
thirsty. Don’t worry about me.”

“Okay, we won’t worry,” said the frog people.

Coyote began drinking. He drank for a long time. Finally one of the frog people said,
“Hey Coyote, you sure are drinking a lot of water there. What are you doing that for?”

Coyote brought his head up out of the water. “I’m really thirsty.”

“Oh.”

After a while one of the frog people said, “Coyote, you sure are drinking a lot. Maybe
you better give us another shell.”

“Just let me finish this drink,” said Coyote, putting his head back under the water.

The frog people wondered how a person could drink so much water. They didn’t like
this. They thought Coyote might be doing something.

Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 49

Coyote was digging out under the dam all the time he had his head under water. When
he was finished, he stood up and said, “That was a good drink. That was just what I
wanted.”

Then the dam collapsed, and the water went out into the valley and made the creeks
and rivers and waterfalls.

The frog people were very angry. “You have taken all the water, Coyote!”

“It is not right that one people have all the water. Now it is where everyone can have
it.”

Coyote did that. Now anyone can go down to the river and get a drink of water or some
water to cook with or just swim around.

A Kalapuya story told by Barry Lopez in 1927 (Erdoes and Ortiz)

Until the twentieth century, the availability of resources (food and material for mak-
ing clothing or building houses or tools) depended on where the people of a particu-
lar society lived. This was especially true for food. People might be able to travel long
distances to get materials for tools, or trade for materials with other people, but food
was perishable. It would go bad very quickly, long before it could be transported long
distances. The climate of an area could also determine resources. Farming would
be difficult to impossible in the Arctic and Sub-Arctic. People living in those areas
would have to rely on foraging, a method of getting resources through a combina-
tion of gathering wild edibles, fishing, and hunting. People who lived in more tem-
perate areas with long growing seasons, like the southeastern part of what today is
the United States, would have more options available to them, including the devel-
opment of agriculture. However resources are obtained, food is a limited resource.
Animals can be over-hunted, leading to their extinction, as can fish be over-fished.
Even wild edibles can be exploited. But as the story about Coyote and the frog people
shows, the most important resource is water.

Human living sites are always found around water, such as lakes, rivers, streams, and
creeks. Habitation sites might be found along the ocean shore, as in the Northwest
coastal areas, but there would also have to be sources for drinking water. Water was
not only necessary for drinking, cooking, and washing; it was also an important food

50 | Susan Stebbins
source. Fish, shellfish, waterfowl, and water plants were all important foods. Water
could also be an important transportation route, allowing fairly easy access by canoe
or boat to additional areas for the gathering of resources. Water sources, the cli-
mate, and environmental factors like rainfall and the length of growing seasons are
all important in determining the resources people have available. Different societies
living in the same area might utilize their environments and resources in different
ways. What and how a society gets and utilizes its resources is its economy. Today
in the United States and Canada, we think of economy as referring to money, jobs,
and businesses. But this perspective would not describe most of human history. In
a broader perspective, economy refers to the resources available to a society, how
they are obtained, and how those resources are distributed. Anthropologists have
four categories that describe the ways societies utilize or exploit their environments
for food resources: foraging, pastoralism, horticulture, and agriculture.

Industrialization, in which people work largely in factories or other business for a

wage, is the type of labor with which you are familiar. But this is a relatively recent
(in the last 120 years) way of getting resources. In an industrial society, people work
for a wage and use that to buy the resources they need or can afford. For most of
human history, people worked directly for resources they needed. The way most
people in Western societies get resources is changing again, as most of us are and
will be employed in service industries such as teaching. This is often referred to as
“post-Industrialization.” Beginning in the nineteenth century, many Native peoples
started participating in wage labor on ranches and farms. With relocation to cities in
the twentieth century, many Native Americans started working in construction and
factories in the United States and Canada. In the twenty-first century, many Native
American communities and individuals have started their own businesses. The best
known are casinos, but they have also started ski resorts, water-bottling plants, golf
courses, small-engine manufacturing facilities, and greeting card companies.

Pastoralism refers to the domestication of animals. Societies domesticated animals

like horses, cattle, sheep, goats, and reindeer to obtain needed resources from the
animals themselves or by trading the animals and their by-products (milk or meat)
with other societies. For example, in the Congo, the cattle-herding Zulu will trade
milk and meat with their foraging neighbors, the Mbuti, for the roots and fruits they
gather. Few societies in North America practiced pastoralism to any extent, although
some raised turkeys or other fowl. The Aztec of Mexico raised domesticated deer,
Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 51
and the Incas of South America raised llamas, but for the most part Native Americans
did not adopt the practice of domesticating animals until after European coloniza-
tion, so the practice will not be discussed in great detail.

Foraging societies get food resources through a combination of the collection of

wild edibles, fishing, and hunting. In the twentieth century, the anthropological
emphasis in examining and describing foraging societies focused on hunting. The
assumption was that most of the food in foraging societies came from hunting, and
that men were doing the hunting. This assumption often formed the hypothesis for
why men had more status in their societies: they provided the food. We now know
that in foraging societies in temperate climates, up to 75% to 80% of food comes
from the gathering of wild edibles, work that is generally associated with women
(Slocum 1975). Further, in Arctic and Sub-Arctic societies in which wild edibles are
limited, women participated and continue to participate in hunting, including the
hunting of elk, moose, and caribou.

More than 10,000 to 12,000 years ago, all human societies were foragers. In places
like northern Europe, Asia, and North America, now-extinct animals were hunted. In
North America these animals included mastodons, giant beavers, and ground sloths.
Because of the size of animals hunted, these societies are referred to as big game
hunting societies. In such societies, not just men participated in the hunting of large
game, but the entire community took part. The community would work together to
drive animals into corrals or over cliffs where they would be butchered, and the meat
and skins prepared. Around 10,000 years ago these large animals started becoming
extinct due to a number of environmental factors, including climate change and per-
haps over-hunting. As a consequence, these Paleo-Indian (early Native peoples) for-
aging societies adapted to hunting smaller game—such as elk, moose, caribou, and
deer—whatever was available in a particular area.

Often overlooked in examining a foraging society is the importance of fishing.

Remember, early human living sites—including those in the Americas—are found
around water. Getting needed resources through fishing does not have the same
romantic allure as big game hunting or tracking bison, but it is a very important way
of getting food. A fish diet is highly nutritious and healthier than a red meat diet.
Further, it supplies important omega-3 fats that are important to brain development.
Many members of the community could fish, not just strong, healthy men. Archae-

52 | Susan Stebbins
ological sites often have artifacts that were used to fish, including weirs (an enclo-
sure of stakes and nets to trap fish), nets, fishing spears, hooks, and weights. Current
archaeological estimates suggest that up to 75% of the non-vegetable part of forag-
ing peoples’ diets came from fish (Bonvillain 2001). Fishing and fishing rights con-
tinue to be very important to contemporary Native communities.

Another important way of getting food in foraging societies was the gathering of wild
edibles. In order to get enough food in this way, foraging societies would typically
be mobile, traveling from area to area to find the resources they needed. Excep-
tions to this lifestyle were found in societies in the northwestern area of what are
now the coast of Canada and the United States. The Tlingit, Haida, Niska, Gitkan,
Tsimshian, Bella Coola, Salish, and Kwakwaka’waku lived in such a rich environment
they were able to live in settled villages along the coastal area, where they utilized
resources from the sea, fresh water, and plants. Most other foraging societies had
to travel to different areas to find needed resources. These societies did not travel
constantly; they might settle in an area for weeks or even months. In some instances
Natives would have summer and winter camps and migrate between the two areas
seasonally. They learned the areas in which particular resources could be found and
when they would be available, then settled in these areas utilizing the resources to
be found.

By necessity, foraging societies were typically small, no more than 500 people in a
community. Foraging societies must have enough people to successfully exploit the
resources available, but not so many that they over-exploit those resources. For-
aging societies would often split into smaller groups in the winter when resources
were harder to secure, then come together again in larger groups in the summer.

An example of a foraging society would be the Innu or Montagnais, who continue

to live in what is now northeastern Quebec along the St. Lawrence River basin. His-
torically the Innu focused on hunting and fishing for resources; gathering was a less
significant part of their economy. They hunted moose, caribou, beaver, porcupines,
bears, and several varieties of birds. It appears that the Innu traded with the Huron
of Lake Ontario for fishing nets. They also used weirs for trapping eels. The Innu
would use the animals they hunted for other purposes. Clothing was made from the
skins of moose and caribou. Bones, teeth, and other parts of animals would be used
to make other household utensils.

Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 53

The size of communities would vary depending on the season. In fall and winter
people lived in scattered camps. Typically these winter camps were made up of
extended bilateral kin groups. In the spring, larger groups gathered along waterways
such as the St. Lawrence River or the Gulf of the St. Lawrence and got resources
from them. In contemporary times, a small number of Innu continue to practice the
historical foraging economy of their ancestors; however most are engaged in wage
labor. Those who do continue hunting have adopted many European and Canadian
technologies such as guns, and there is a greater emphasis on trapping using steel
traps (Bonvillain 2001).

The cultural-geographic area called the Great Basin is a large region, but because
of the scarcity of resources and the fragile environment, it was home to a relatively
small number of Native Americans. This area is referred to as the Great Basin
because it only has interior drainage; all its rivers and streams flow into lakes, with
no waterways that flow to the ocean. The Great Basin covers an area that includes
the present-day states of Nevada, Utah, northern Colorado, southern Oregon, Idaho,
western Wyoming, eastern California, northern Arizona, and New Mexico. The area
is bounded on the west by the Sierra Mountains and on the east by the Rocky Moun-
tains. The climate is largely arid except at the high altitudes of the mountains. There
are large lakes such as Pyramid Lake, Walker Lake and Lake Tahoe, but about 5% of
the land is desert. Precipitation, as well as flora and fauna, are all dependent on the
altitude.

Before European contact, most of the Native American Great Basin population was
found between altitudes of 5,000 to 7,000 feet. It was here the Utes, Washoes,
Paiutes, and Shoshones were best able to find needed resources. The Native peoples
of the Great Basin were foragers, relying on plant and animal resources. Unlike the
Native American foragers of the Northwest, the Native peoples of the Great Basin
were mobile, moving from place to place to utilize the resources found in different
areas, while not over-exploiting the resources of any one area. The anthropologist
Julian Steward, who largely examined how people adapt to their environments, said
the Great Basin peoples relied on various “microenvironments” that changed from
season to season, and from place to place.

The resources the Great Basin peoples relied on included fish, deer, bighorn sheep,
elk, antelope, rabbits, birds, and waterfowl. They ate wild plants such as pinion nuts,

54 | Susan Stebbins
pinecones, acorns, beans from mesquite, screwbeans and agave, cattails, rice grass,
bullrush, and fruits and berries. Southern Paiutes, Utes, and Shoshones learned hor-
ticulture from neighbors in the Southwest. Like the Native peoples of the Southwest,
they grew corn, beans, squash, sunflowers, and melons. Other Great Basin peoples
helped the growing of wild plants by burning brush, sowing seeds, and watering and
pruning plants. Some foods were dried and cached (stored) in underground pits for
later use. But people often were nearly out of food by the end of winter. The most
important resource in the arid Great Basin was and remains water.

The Native peoples of the Great Basin had learned to adapt and survive in this fragile
environment. People lived in small “clusters” of related nuclear families. Each indi-
vidual shared in the labor and resources of the kin network. Kinship within the family
was bilateral—each individual belonged to the lineage of her/his father and mother.
After marriage, a young couple would join the cluster of either the man or woman,
depending on which family had enough resources or needed additional labor. In the
fall, clusters of families would gather together to harvest pinion nuts, feast and cel-
ebrate, and to trade resources.

As with most foragers around the world, the peoples of the Great Basin had informal
and flexible political organizations. The leader of a group was generally the head of
a family who had gained the respect and trust of his community.

Because of the remoteness and aridness of the environment, the Native peoples of
the Great Basin were spared incursions by Europeans until the 1770s. However, they
were influenced by neighboring societies who had already had contact with Euro-
peans. Thus, peoples of the Great Basin did have European trade goods, and most
importantly, horses. The arrival of horses enabled the eastern and southern Utes and
Shoshones to better hunt bison. The Utes would also later use horses in their attacks
on Spanish settlements.

In 1776, an expedition led by the Franciscan priests Francisco Dominquez and Sil-
vestre Velezde de Escante traveled to Ute territory at Utah Lake, opening the door-
way to other Spanish missionaries. They were also followed by settlers engaged in
slaving expeditions, particularly focused on children, who were sold to farmers in
New Mexico.

Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 55

In 1805, Meriwether Lewis and William Clark led an expedition through Shoshone
territory in Idaho, on their way to the Pacific. Canadian and U.S. trappers followed
them. Spain considered the Great Basin to be Spanish territory and tried to stop
others from trading with the Native peoples there. When Mexico gained its inde-
pendence from Spain, the country lost more control over trade and Euro-American
settlements in the Great Basin. Permanent Euro-American settlements started in the
mid-1800s when Mormons (members of the Church of Latter Day Saints) settled in
the Salt Lake Valley. At this time, Mexico still claimed the territory of the Great Basin.
Mormon leadership widely stated their wish to avoid conflict with the Native Amer-
icans, but their very presence created environmental, economic, and cultural pres-
sures.

From the glut of Spanish and Euro-American settlers arriving in Native American
territory, the fragile environment and its resources were soon depleted. Native
beliefs were threatened also, as the Mormons sent missionaries to the Native com-
munities of the Great Basin, believing them to be one of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel.
Native children were often “adopted” by Mormon families to be educated in Mormon
beliefs and behaviors, and to supply domestic and farm labor. The Native peoples of
the Great Basin suffered population loss due to disease and the slave trade. Euro-
American trade routes and settlements were established on the areas with the most
resources, particularly where water was readily available. This disrupted the fragile
balance with the environment and led to malnutrition and starvation of Native Amer-
icans.

With the discovery of gold and silver, first in California and later in Nevada, the num-
ber of travelers through the area increased, creating further environmental destruc-
tion. The visitors who decided to settle in the area further restricted the Native
peoples’ access to water and other resources. The Natives reacted in two ways:
armed conflict and religious rituals (see Chapter 5 on religion and spiritual beliefs).
In 1860, the Paiutes around Pyramid Lake started to defend their lands against Euro-
American settlers. The Shoshones of Owens Valley soon followed the Paiutes in
defense of their lands. The U.S. Army broke the Native resistance, and “pacified” the
area largely by moving the Native peoples to reservations. The Native peoples were
forced to sign more than 12 treaties, each of which ceded what had been their land to
the United States in exchange for reservation land away from the new Euro-Amer-
ican settlements with military protection to the Natives’ remaining land. Congress

56 | Susan Stebbins
never ratified most of these treaties and the protection from future Euro-American
incursions was never fulfilled. Further, because the reservation land was so poor,
upwards of 60% of the Native peoples of the Great Basin could not survive living on
their reservation land.

As Euro-American settlements grew, pressure began in the states of Utah and

Nevada to deprive the Natives of more land. In 1887, the General Allotment Act, also
called the Dawes Act, decreed that there would be no more tribally- or family-owned
property for Native peoples. Each head of government would be allotted 160 acres of
land; single persons and those under the age of 18 were allotted 60 acres. Any land
not allotted in this way was declared “surplus” and sold to Euro-American settlers.
With the General Allotment Act, the people of the Great Basin, like Native peoples
throughout the United States, had most of their tribal lands declared “surplus” and
opened for settlement to Euro-Americans.

In the mid-twentieth century, the Native peoples of the Great Basin started to regain
a portion of the land they had lost, often in legal suits brought forward in U.S. courts.
In 1910, the Utes won a court case in which they were awarded $3.5 million in com-
pensation for lost land. In the 1930s, John Collier became the head of the Bureau of
Indian Affairs during the administration of Franklin Roosevelt. Collier worked to sal-
vage and restore much of the Native American traditions, particularly religious tra-
ditions, and to secure and increase the land base of Native American societies. The
loss of land through General Allotment was stopped, and in 1946, the Indian Claims
Commission was established. The total compensation awarded through the commis-
sion to Native American communities for the loss of land came to more than $130
million.

Originally, the money was divided among community members, providing only a
temporary aid to their economic situations. Since the 1960s, Native American tribal
nations have utilized the money for tribal purposes and investments such as tribal
enterprises, infrastructures, and living conditions.

In 1999, 84,000 acres of land were returned to Utes at the Uintah and Ouray reser-
vations by the U.S. government. Unfortunately, this land was severely contaminated
by shale oil extraction and low-level radioactive waste from the milling for the shale.

Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 57

The Utes have pledged 8.5% of future profits from tribally owned oil drilling to clean
up the sites they did not contaminate.

The economic conditions of Native peoples in the Great Basin vary from location to
location, and are dependent on the specific type of resources, such as oil, that are
found on their reservations. However, the economic conditions of all Native peoples
in the Great Basin are far below those of Euro-Americans in the area.

Geographically, the Great Basin is adjacent to California, but there are enormous dif-
ferences in the societies found in the two areas. Prior to European contact, the very
diverse Native peoples of California were foragers, getting their food and resources
largely from fishing and gathering, and to a lesser extent, hunting. Like most foraging
societies they lived in small, scattered communities. Living in large or closely spaced
communities may well have over-taxed the environment and the resources they
depended on. Unfortunately, being small and scattered also made them very vulner-
able to conquest—first by the Spanish and later by the Euro-Americans.

In 1542, Juan Cabrillo sailed up the California coast to the San Diego Bay. Cabrillo did
not establish settlements; he was looking for the mythic Northwest Passage, a water
passage that would go from the West Coast of North America to the East Coast.
(Many British and American sailors were simultaneously looking for the same pas-
sage from the East Coast.) Spanish settlements in California started in 1769. By the
early 1800s, Spanish missionaries and soldiers had established 21 missions, stretch-
ing from what is now San Diego to Sonoma. These Presidos (military forts and mis-
sions) enslaved thousands of Native peoples who were captured by the military and
then forced to provide agricultural labor for the priests and soldiers of the missions.

In addition to what was basically enslavement, the missionaries also tried to change
or eliminate the traditional customs and beliefs of the Native peoples. For example,
they forced Native peoples of California to convert to Catholicism. The community-
recognized chiefs were replaced with alcaldes (Spanish-appointed leaders). Despite
the best efforts of the Spanish, through the provision of needed resources and
favors, the alcades never gained prestige among the Native peoples. The missionar-
ies enforced changes in the Native peoples’ diets, not allowing them to leave the mis-
sions to fish or gather food, but instead supplying European grains, such as wheat,
and occasional animal proteins, such as beef. Families were broken apart, as unmar-

58 | Susan Stebbins
ried women and men were forced in live in dungeon-like dormitories. As among
other Native societies, disease killed thousands. Among the California Natives, the
most catastrophic diseases were pneumonia, diphtheria, measles, dysentery,
influenza, and syphilis. Most of the diseases were spread by the Spanish, fostered
by the unhealthy living conditions and complicated by malnutrition. Syphilis was the
result of the Spanish persistently raping Native women (Heizer and Almquist 1971).
It is estimated that by the nineteenth century, 300,000 Native Californians died as a
result of the Spanish invasion.

The Native communities did their best to resist the Spanish, but their small, scat-
tered numbers made an effective resistance against the Spanish all but impossible,
and retaliation by the Spanish was brutal. Many Native peoples tried to escape, both
in small and large numbers, despite the fact that capture by the Spanish military usu-
ally resulted in death. There were also consequences for those who did escape, for
with them often went the Spanish diseases, which then spread to new communities.

In 1821, the administration of California was transferred to the newly independent

Mexico. While the Native Californians were technically citizens with legal rights, in
reality their lives were changed very little, except that as Spanish and Euro-Amer-
ican settlement began to grow, Natives’ enforced labor increased. In 1832, Mexico
started the process of secularizing the missions. While the government removed the
priests, they established a system of peonage—political appointees who held power.
The Native peoples continued to provide labor for the Mexican civilians in political
power.

With the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo at the conclusion of the Mex-
ican-American War, Mexico lost land and political power in California to the United
States. This, coupled with the discovery of gold, increased the hardships for the
Native peoples of California. While Spain and Mexico had needed the labor of the
Native peoples, the Euro-Americans did not. All they wanted was land and gold. The
Native peoples were obstacles, and the new Californians hunted down and murdered
thousands of Native peoples in their quest for land and wealth.

The California state government supported militias and vigilantes who killed Native
Californians by paying a bounty of $5 per child and $10 per adult to those with proof
of a slain Indian. Proof constituted of the scalp: the pair of slain individual’s ears

Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 59

with the flesh and hair connecting them. Over $500,000 in bounty was dispensed
between 1850 and 1870 in payment for these deaths. Laws furthered the discrimina-
tion against the Natives. For example, a Native American could be forced into labor
for 40 days for “loitering.” Children were often kidnapped and forced into labor on
Euro-American farms, with no legal recourse. Rape of a Native woman by a Euro-
American man was never prosecuted. The legal system also protected the continued
loss of Native land and resources (Heizer and Almquist 1971, 215).

Responding to accounts of these atrocities, often covered in newspapers, the United

States government established temporary reservations for the Native peoples in Cal-
ifornia in the 1850s. These reservations were meant to offer personal protection for
the Natives, and stop the further confiscation of land by Euro-Americans. The gov-
ernment also arranged for the distribution of needed rations, such as food and blan-
kets.

The Indian agents (government-appointed personnel who were supposed to protect

the Natives and enforce government regulations) often stole the rations. Euro-
American livestock often destroyed native farm crops. Any retaliation on the part of
the Natives resulted in their imprisonment or death. And Euro-Americans contin-
ued to force Natives off their land. Under pressure from settlers who wanted more
and more land, the California state government withdrew support for the reserva-
tions and allowed more Euro-American settlement. Native Californians were forced
off their lands and left to survive as best they could. In 1870, the federal govern-
ment again tried to establish reservations, this time mainly in northern California.
The government also allotted funding for aid in farming and schools. But once again,
the state of California allowed for the settlement of Euro-Americans on Native lands.
It was not until the twentieth century that California’s Mission Indians would be able
to regain land, get compensation from the state and federal governments, and start
their own wage economic systems.

The Northwest coastal areas of the United States and Canada might seem to be a
continuation of the California coast, but, both environmentally and culturally, the
area and its people are unique. The Native peoples of the Northwest were foragers
who lived in a resource-rich area. They secured the majority of their food, however,
through fishing, both in fresh water and in the ocean, using large dugout canoes.

60 | Susan Stebbins
The Kwakwaka’waka, or Kwakiutls, of the Northwest coast of what is now British
Columbia, is an example of societies found in the Northwest. The resource focus
of Kwakwaka’waka society was fishing, both in the ocean and rivers; gathering of
plants; and some hunting of land animals. Their diet consisted of salmon, halibut,
eulachon, cod, herring, sea urchins, clams, and mussels. The Kwakwaka’waka had
specialized technology for catching different water animals: barbed harpoons were
used to hunt sea lions and seals; codfish and halibut were caught with fishing lines
made of kelp; while salmon were trapped in weirs as they swam upriver (Bonvillain
2001). The Kwakwaka’waka did not have to travel from area to area to get needed
resources; they were able to live in large, permanent settlements. Their houses were
large structures made from the cedar trees found in the area. The style of the houses
changed over time, gradually becoming the painted structures with a central door
found today. Many Kwakwaka’waka continue to be involved in the fishing industry of
the Northwest coast, but in wage labor jobs that include fishing and working in area
canneries. The maritime societies of the Northwest do not fit the Native Americans
stereotype held by most Euro-Americans and Canadians.

Courtesy of Library & Archives Canada Skidegate Indian Village of

the Haida tribe. Skidegate Inlet, British Columbia, Canada.
Photograph by George M. Dawson, July 1878.

Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 61

European contact in the Northwest did not start until the late eighteenth century.
Russian, Spanish, British, French, and American merchants all tried to establish trad-
ing posts for the fur trade. The Russians were the first to establish a permanent fort
in 1799 at what is now Sitka, Alaska. This fort became the center of the Russian-
American Company. In 1827, the Hudson Bay Company established Fort Langley on
the Fraser River in British Columbia. Unlike other cultural-geographic areas of the
Americas where trade had devastating results on the Native societies, this was less
so in the Northwest. The Northwest societies were already involved in long-distance
trade. The items the Europeans brought to trade: food, alcohol, blankets, firearms,
copper, and body ornaments were incorporated into the pre-existing status system,
but generally the Natives did not rely on them. The Europeans depended on the
trade system, and they complained about the shrewd bargaining of the Northwest
peoples. If Natives did not find a price to be agreeable, they would simply refuse to
trade.

Because of the Europeans’ dependence on trade, they did not interfere with Native
culture to the extent that they did in other parts of the Americas. However, there
were changes within the Northwest societies. They gradually shifted their focus
from getting resources for subsistence to getting trade items. In some cases, this
led to over-exploitation of some resources. Because the Europeans did not like to
trade with women, a task in which they traditionally participated, the status of
women became reduced. The arrival of missionaries in the nineteenth century fur-
ther reduced women’s standing. The chiefs became richer, and their political power
solidified, because the Europeans preferred to work with one individual they saw as
being in power. Subsequently, the society became more traditionally European, with
the status of women being lowered and one man being in charge.

As Euro-American and Canadian settlements grew, Native population numbers and

lands declined. Both the Canadian and U.S. governments tried to extinguish all land
titles held by Native peoples, but the Native communities refused to concede to
those demands. The lack of treaties, particularly in Canada, became the impetus for
land claims in the twentieth century. Native communities began to organize for eco-
nomic and political rights. As the northwestern Native communities traditionally had
extensive trade networks, their organizing networks were also far-reaching. Their
political networking triumphed in 1997, when the First Nations of Canada attained
an important ruling from the Supreme Court of Canada that stated First Nations’
62 | Susan Stebbins
rights to land and resources must be considered when mining, logging, and resource
exploration are undertaken in their territories.

Early in their encounters with Europeans, the Native peoples of the Northwest
were better able than many other Native peoples of the Americas to adapt to the
impacts of Euro-American and Canadian settlement and hegemony (social and polit-
ical power) to their traditions. Many Northwest communities continue to adapt,
especially within the fishing industry. This adaptation is reflected in economic data
demonstrating that the Native peoples of the Northwest, in both Canada and the
United States, have the highest standard of living of any Native American/First
Nations group. It must be remembered, however, that the standard of living for the
Native peoples of the Northwest is still far below that of average Euro-Americans
and Canadians.

Horticulture

More stereotypical examples of American foraging societies would be found in the

prairies and plains (both terms refer to flat, grassy land) of the United States and
Canada. The Arikara, for example, lived on the plains along the Missouri River for
thousands of years. The Arikara practiced a combination of foraging and horticul-
ture. Through a trial-and-error method that is typical of how humans make impor-
tant discoveries, people found that some of the plants they were gathering in the
wild could be domesticated: that is, they would become dependent on human cul-
tivation for reproduction. Seeds or pods of the plant would not be eaten or thrown
away, but kept and used to grow the plant in the next year. People might plant
these seeds close to dwelling areas where they could be watched, watered, and pro-
tected from birds and other animals. Among the first plants to be domesticated in
the Americas were squash and beans. Between 8,000 to 12,000 years ago we see peo-
ple around the world starting to rely more and more on domesticated plants.

Initially, people planted domesticated crops but continued to rely on foraging, fish-
ing, and hunting. This is called a horticultural society. Societies that had summer
and winter camps could grow domesticated crops during the summer, and hunt
and/or fish in the winter. Gradually, many, societies relied more and more on their

Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 63

domesticated crops. Planting, tending, and harvesting domesticated crops required
people to live in more settled communities rather than be mobile.

Among the Arikara, women farmed bottomlands along the river, where they planted
corn, beans, squash, and sunflowers. They also foraged for wild edibles, such as wild
potatoes, turnips, various grasses, fruits, and berries. The men fished in the Missouri
River using spears and wooden traps, and caught turtles and waterfowl. The men
also hunted, bison being the most important source of meat. Before the arrival of the
Spanish in Mesoamerica, there were no horses on the plains to help in the hunting of
bison. Instead, the entire community would construct corrals into which they would
then drive the bison and kill them with spears and bows and arrows. The community
would then work together to butcher the animals and prepare the meat and skins, as
well as tools made from bone, sinew, and internal organs.

Currently, most Arikara live on the Fort Berthold Reservation in North Dakota with
two other societies: the Hidatas and Mandans. Together they are known as the “The
Affiliated Tribes.” Farming continues, especially the farming of European crops such
as wheat, and the ranching of both cattle and bison.

A more stereotypic plains or prairie society would be the Teton Lakota. The typical
image of the Lakota depicts hunters and warriors mounted on horseback. But the
word Lakota means “friends” or “allies,” and Teton comes from “tetonwan” which
means “dwellers of the prairie”( Bonvillain 2001). So how did the friendly people of
the prairies become feared warriors of the plains? Before 1750, the Teton Lakota lived
in what is now the state of Minnesota, along the Missouri and Minnesota rivers. The
French explorer LaSalle encountered horticultural societies along the southern Mis-
souri River in the seventeenth century. The Spanish sent out expeditions from their
settlements in the southwest, but these were short-lived. Like the Arikara, Lakota
women grew corn, beans, and squash along the rivers and gathered wild rice and
other edible plants. The men hunted bison, elk, and deer. The Lakota also had exten-
sive trade networks that extended north, south, east, and west.

In the 1700s, the Lakota started experiencing difficulties, as more and more Euro-
peans and displaced Native American societies started moving farther and farther
west. The effect was much like a line of dominoes: when the first one falls, it knocks
down the next, and so forth on down the line. As Europeans started establishing set-

64 | Susan Stebbins
tlements farther west, they pushed Native American communities out of their tra-
ditional homelands, destabilizing many societies. Ultimately this is what happened
to the Lakota; they were continually pushed westward, away from the rivers where
they lived and farmed, to the Great Plains.

The plains and prairie geographic areas are hard to define. This area extends west
from the Mississippi River to eastern California, from the timberline of the Canadian
Prairie Provinces to what is now northern Texas. As large as this geographic area is,
it looms even larger in the American imagination. Say “Indian” or “Indian lands” and
this is the image people see in their minds: a half-naked man in a feathered head-
dress riding a horse across the flat plains in pursuit of bison. This vision of American
Indian life only applied to a relatively small number of people for a very short period
of time.

The land of the Great Plains tends to be flat. It does not have much forests and the
rainfall is typically not sufficient for agriculture. The main difference between the
plains and the prairies are the types of grasses. Prairie grass grows much taller than
the short plains grasses, sometimes as much as 6 feet in height. The roots of the
shorter plains grasses grow in dense tangles that contribute to the development of
what is termed sod, a substance that could be made into bricks to construct sod
houses for both Native peoples and early Euro-American settlers in the area. While
sod is a good building material, it makes it very difficult to farm in these areas with-
out steel plows. Euro-American farmers used steel plows to remove the sod holding
the lower layers of soil in place. However, when droughts occurred, as in the early
twentieth century, the near-constant winds stirred up the unprotected loose soil
and resulted in the infamous dust storms of the 1930s. Many areas are still recov-
ering from the environmental damage of what was known as the Dust Bowl, which,
along with cattle over-grazing, has nearly wiped out the native grasses that helped
maintain the protective layer of sod.

The arrival of horses on the plains coincided with the expansion of a European pres-
ence and trade along the Mississippi and Missouri rivers. This may be why so many
Euro-Americans can only imagine the Native peoples of the plains (and, in much of
popular culture, all Native Americans) on horseback, hunting bison. Few Plains peo-
ples encountered Europeans until the early 1800s when fur traders arrived. After the
French and Indian War in 1763, France ceded all its territory east of the Mississippi to

Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 65

England, and west of the Mississippi to Spain. At that point, Spain started more fre-
quent incursions to the plains, establishing a fort at what is now St. Louis and start-
ing a trade network to the south and central plains. Around this same time, British/
Canadian explorers made contact with farming villages on the upper Missouri. The
United States became a rival in this area with the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, and
soon after the Lewis and Clark expedition set out to explore and map the area.

At first, trade between the Plains peoples and Europeans and Euro-Americans was
balanced. The Plains peoples only gradually accepted European trade goods, while
the Europeans and Americans wanted animal furs. Some Native societies such as the
prairie horticultural Mandan and Pawnees raised surplus crops for trade with the
Euro-Americans and foraging Plains societies. Other horticultural societies func-
tioned as brokers or intermediaries between Euro-Americans and mobile foraging
societies.

The increase in population and hunting for trade soon had negative consequences.
Competition for resources made the permanent horticultural villages on the prairies
vulnerable to attack, as people grew desperate for food and supplies. Increased pop-
ulation density made these settled villages more vulnerable to diseases because the
people were living close together—a situation that always increases the transmission
of disease. Those societies that adapted to foraging to obtain resources expanded,
while horticultural societies experienced a loss of territory. Both foraging and horti-
cultural societies experienced social change and instability.

After arriving on the plains, the Lakota found it difficult to continue their horticul-
tural economy. Their farming technology of digging sticks was not successful on the
thick sod of the plains. Ultimately, the Lakota became highly mobile foragers, relying
largely on hunting. Over the next century, the Lakota adapted well to their new envi-
ronment. One reason they adapted so well was the arrival of the horse around 1750.
To the Lakota, horses are “sunka wakan” or “sacred dog” (Bonvillain 2001), which
illustrates how important the horse became to the societies of the plains.

The change in the economy of societies like the Lakota had consequences through-
out their social organization. While women did participate in hunting, their roles
in providing resources decreased, which in turn decreased their social and political
status. Warfare between Plains societies, now competing with each other for horses

66 | Susan Stebbins
and limited resources, increased. Warfare grew even greater as more and more
Euro-Americans first traveled through and then settled on the plains. In a little more
than a century the Lakota went from the friendly farmers on the prairies to the
stereotype of Native American hunters and warriors on the Great Plains.

The Haudenosaunee or Iroquois are another example of a Native American society

that is not typically thought of as horticultural. But archaeological evidence indicates
that the Haudenosaunee have been producing domesticated food resources for
close to 1,000 years. The Haudenosaunee are a group of Native American societies
(the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, and Seneca) that share similar languages
(Iroquoian), kin, political and economic systems, and a similar oral tradition and
spiritual beliefs. Archaeological, linguistic, and oral tradition all indicate that the
Haudenosaunee migrated to the Northeast over 1,000 years ago. Their languages
are related to other languages, such as Cherokee, Tuscarora, Huron, Caddoan, and
Siouan. Like many societies of the northern and southern woodlands, the Hau-
denosaunee have a matrilineal and matrilocal kinship system and a rank political sys-
tem. The oral tradition of the Haudenosaunee, particularly the story of Sky Woman,
is similar to other societies, like the Ojibwa, which were found along the St.
Lawrence River and the Great Lakes. One of the big questions of the archaeology
done in the northeastern part of what is now the United States is: did the Iroquois
migrate to the Northeast as a horticultural society, or did they develop horticulture,
particularly the cultivation of corn, once they were in the Northeast?

Archaeological evidence indicates that the Iroquois grew different domesticated

crops at different times, with beans, squash, and sunflowers being domesticated
first, followed by corn (sometimes called maize). Corn is a very unique crop in the
Americas. Most other domesticated crops were grown directly from the seeds of
wild plants, but corn is an example of a crop that the Native peoples, in what is now
Mexico, selectively bred and hybridized from the wild grass Teosinte (pronounced
tA-O-‘sin-tE) somewhere between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago.

Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 67

 CC-BY-SA 3.0 by John Doebley. Teosinte, a Maize-teosinte hybrid, Maize
or modern corn

Corncobs found at archaeological sites show the development of corn from a grass
looking much like wheat, to a cob about the size of your thumb with only a few ker-
nels of corn, to larger and larger cobs that resemble the corn we know today. Fur-
ther, the Native peoples developed a wide variety of hues in their corn. The farming
of corn soon spread from Mexico to many other parts of the Americas, both north
and south. Early Spanish explorers in the Southwest wrote about the rainbow of
colors of corn drying on pueblo roofs. The various colors of corn indicate different
breeds of corn grown for specific reasons. Some corn was bred to arid areas with lit-
tle rainfall, others to the short growing season of the Northeast. Some breeds of corn
were planted on the borders of cornfields to fight off blight and pests. The Native

68 | Susan Stebbins
peoples of the Americas developed over 30 varieties of corn to be used in different
environments and for different purposes.

In time, corn came to the northeastern and southeastern woodlands, including Hau-
denosaunee territory. Corn became one of the staple crops of the horticultural and
agricultural Native peoples, along with beans and squash. These three crops were
grown together and often eaten together, so among the Haudenosaunee they are
referred to as the Three Sisters and are very important to the economies of these
Native peoples. A cycle of ceremonies is conducted throughout the year to ensure
the growth of and to give thanks for these crops.

While the Haudenosaunee grew crops, they also continued to gather wild edibles
such as roots, tubers, greens, berries, fruit, nuts, and seeds. Wild strawberries and
maple syrup were important foraged crops and there are thanksgiving ceremonies
for them. They also hunted animals such as deer, squirrel, beaver, and bear, along
with birds and waterfowl, but fish provided most of the non-vegetable food (Bonvil-
lain 2001). The Haudenosaunee, like other Native American horticultural societies,
did not plow and plant on huge tracts of land. They planted on small tracts of land
with digging sticks. They did not irrigate their crops, but depended on rainfall, which
is called dryland farming. There is some evidence that they used natural fertilizer,
such as uneaten parts of fish. When the land grew fallow, meaning it no longer sup-
ported crops, they would move their farmland or entire village to a new area. Con-
temporary farmers allow fields to go fallow (do not plant crops on them) for a year
or two. Farming was done on a relatively small scale as compared to agricultural
communities in Europe in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, but it was very
successful. It is estimated that the women, who did most of the farming of eastern
woodland societies, produced three to four times the amount of food produced by
contemporary European farmers (Weatherford 1991).

Native American farming societies are generally referred to as horticultural, not

agricultural. In agricultural societies, most of the food consumed by a society is pro-
duced through farming, and there is little gathering of wild edibles or fishing and
hunting. Indeed, the large scale of farming in agricultural societies, with acres of
plowed fields, use of irrigation and fertilizers, and frequently domesticated animals,
such as cows, horses, sheep, goats, and pigs, makes the diversified means of getting
food found in horticultural impossible.

Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 69

In Ancient Drums, Other Moccasins, Harriet Kupfefer refers to southwestern Pueblo
societies as intensive farmers. Like European agricultural societies, the people of
the Pueblos got most of their food from farming; they did not have domesticated ani-
mals. They did irrigate their crops, built permanent villages and had—and still have—a
complex social and political organization.

Courtesy of NASA & commons.wikimedia.org A digital model of

ancient Pueblo Bonito (Chaco Canyon, New Mexico, U.S.) before it
was abandoned. The circles in the picture are kivas.

CC-BY-SA 3.0 by wikimedia user SkybirdForever. A kiva, a subterranean

religious structure at Chaco Canyon, New Mexico.

70 | Susan Stebbins
Archaeological sites of societies in the Southwest have attracted much attention
because many of them are quite spectacular. Chaco Canyon, Monte Verde, the pic-
tographs of Red Rock Canyon, and the misnamed Montezuma’s Castle all demon-
strate the skill, ingenuity, and diversity of the Native peoples who lived there. The
peoples of the Southwest have been researched and studied by generations of
anthropologists. Like all scientists, archaeologists and anthropologists like to cate-
gorize the information (data) they gather. Thus, there are a lot of categories for the
information we have about the Native peoples of the Southwest. Anthropologists and
archaeologists put the pre-historic cultures of the Southwest into four categories:
the Puebloan, Mogollon, Hohokam, and Patayan. The present-day societies of the
Southwest are also divided into four categories on the basis of cultural and linguis-
tic similarities: the Puebloan, Apachean, the Tohono O’odham, Akimel O’odham, and
Yuman.

The Ancestral Puebloans, also known as the Anasazi, lived on the Colorado Plateau,
and were probably the ancestors of today’s Pueblo peoples who continue to live and
farm in the Southwest. This development may have been in response to climatic
changes, or it may have been that their ancestors were such successful foragers that
they had to develop horticulture to feed their increasing populations. In the Amer-
icas this is called the formative era. People still got food through fishing, hunting,
and gathering wild edibles, but they also started to depend on an increasing number
of crops that they grew.

In their developmental period, Ancestral Puebloans lived in pit houses in small vil-
lages. The pit houses, because they were partly underground, would stay cool in the
hot climate. The climate of the Southwest gradually changed, making horticulture
more productive. The Ancestral Puebloan people developed above-ground masonry
houses and crop storage rooms, some of which still exist today. The pit houses devel-
oped into kivas, a semi-subterranean ceremonial structure. Chaco Canyon has many
masonry-style houses and kivas. About 500 years ago drought conditions forced the
Ancestral Puebloan peoples to consolidate their communities and migrate. Anthro-
pologists refer to these consolidated groups as the Western and Eastern Pueblos.
Despite the invasions by Spain and then the United States, the present-day Pueblo
communities demonstrate a great deal of cultural continuity with their ancestral
groups.

Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 71

The Mogollon people lived in the eastern Southwest in what is now northern Mexico.
Like the Ancestral Puebloans, they lived in pit houses, but changed to Pueblo-style
architecture much later than did the Ancestral Puebloans. The Mogollon people also
prospered until the climatic changes and drought that occurred about 500 years ago.
Some archaeologists and anthropologists think they were the ancestors of the Zuni,
in what is known today as New Mexico, which would mean that, like the Puebloans,
the Mogollon peoples migrated.

The Hohokam lived in the Sonoran Desert, along the Gila and Salt rivers. This was a
hot region, with little rainfall. The Hohokam people foraged and also produced food
through agriculture. They developed extensive irrigation systems that were possible
as their towns were usually along rivers. The Hohokam also built hundreds of miles
of canals. The cultural artifacts of the Hohokam show an influence from Mesoamer-
ica: stepped pyramids, ball courts, platform mounds, and the use of turquoise, cop-
per, and pyrite for jewelry and household items. Just as with other pre-historic
groups of the Southwest, archaeologists see great changes in the Hohokam culture
around 500 years ago. Their irrigation systems and canals started to deteriorate, and
apparently were not repaired, although their towns began to show evidence of for-
tification. It could be that the Hohokam people were experiencing pressures from
societies to the north, along with the climatic changes occurring throughout the
Southwest. The Tohono O’odham and Akimel O’odham people now live in Hohokam
territory, but it is not clear if they are descendants.

The Patalyan peoples continued foraging until fairly recently, about 1,000 years ago.
They occupied the area around the Colorado and Gila rivers, and developed into the
Yuman cultures.

In addition, several different Athabascan-speaking groups (such as the Navajo and

Apache) currently live in the Southwest. Each of these groups has an origin story,
in most cases involving some process of emergence from one or more underworlds,
anchoring them to a particular place. Scholars claim, however, that these groups
migrated into the region from the north sometime after 1200.

The historian Richard White has shown that Native American societies were very
flexible in the way they obtained resources. When a society could no longer get
enough resources using one method, they would try another. In the Southeast for

72 | Susan Stebbins
example, societies would alternate between foraging and horticultural depending on
environmental factors. A society might engage in horticulture for decades, but as the
land grew fallow, they would rely more on hunting. Allowing farm fields to go fallow
would attract animals and fowl, so hunters would not have to travel far for successful
hunting. When hunting resources grew scarce, a society would return to horticul-
ture on reinvigorated land. As the society shifted between ways of getting resources,
their social structure also changed. While engaging in horticulture the society would
be larger and live in semi-permanent settlements; when engaged in foraging, the
society would spilt into smaller groups and become semi-mobile (White 1983). This
flexible approach to getting resources helped Native American societies avoid many
of the pitfalls experienced by food-producing societies in other parts of the world.

The cultural geographer Jared Diamond has referred to agriculture as The Worst
Mistake in the History of the Human Race (1987). This is an unusual statement and
position. In Western society agriculture is seen as the epitome of civilization: with
agriculture comes settled communities, the development of written languages,
mathematics and science, more leisure time for the development of arts, and a
structured political system. Founders of the United States, such as Thomas Jeffer-
son, saw agriculture as necessary for a democracy. But as Diamond points out, for-
aging and horticultural societies had many of these things. Science and scientific
thinking, along with mathematics, was needed for people to be successful foragers
and horticulturists. These societies had (and continue to have) very elaborate arts.
Their kinships systems can be very complicated and political systems can be demo-
cratic.

Foraging and horticultural societies gather from a wide variety of resources. If one or
more resources are not available, other resources can generally be found. The vari-
ety of grains, grasses, fruits, fish, and some meat makes for a very healthy diet—the
kind our doctors wish we would eat today. There is a continuing myth that forag-
ing was a hand-to-mouth existence, with hunger always lurking. This is true of Arc-
tic or Sub-Arctic societies, where resources might be very scarce, hard to find, and
very dependent on the skill and luck of the hunters. But in foraging societies found
in temperate climates, people might spend 20 hours a week gathering food, while
in an agricultural society people might spend 20 hours a day during planting and
harvest time to produce food. The time spent in most foraging societies gathering
food would leave plenty of time for the development of storytelling, music and danc-
Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 73
ing, and other arts. Further, Diamond says, agriculture had a lot of negative conse-
quences.

Agricultural societies tend to focus on a few crops. As a consequence, the diet of an

agricultural society is often less healthy than those in foraging societies, as agricul-
turalists are frequently missing important nutrients not found in their crops. Addi-
tionally, if the crops fail because of drought, too much rain or hail, an early or late
frost, or blight, entire communities could find themselves on the brink of starvation.
Large-scale agriculture makes it difficult for people to fall back on other methods of
getting food. If the community has domesticated animals, how are they to be fed?
Additionally, wild game would have been driven from the area, and wild foods have
been eliminated. The runoff from farm fields and the waste left from domesticated
animals fouls the water, so even fishing is often not an option.

The histories and oral traditions of agricultural societies around the world illustrate
the consequences of crop failures and shows how early government systems worked
to enforce the storing of some crops in case of famine. For example, in the Old Tes-
tament, Joseph convinced the Egyptian Pharaoh to store twice the amount of grain
usually kept for emergencies such as a coming blight or drought. Continued famine
due to drought caused many southwestern agricultural societies like the Pueblos to
move or revert to horticulture or foraging as some of the negatives of agriculture
were realized.

Another factor associated with agricultural societies is the increase in communica-

ble diseases. As more and more people lived together in close proximity in settled
communities, diseases and illnesses quickly passed throughout the entire commu-
nity. You may have noticed similar incidents in your dorms. One person gets a cold
and pretty soon everyone on the floor has a cold. We now have many medicines
and antibiotics to treat illnesses that previously killed large percentages of agricul-
tural communities. Many serious diseases, such as typhoid and cholera, were spread
by water that was contaminated by human and animal waste. Water that had for-
merly been a source of nourishment became a source of disease, because people had
unknowingly dumped their waste, garbage, and even bodies into water sources. For-
aging and horticultural societies with smaller communities that moved around were
less likely to experience the epidemics found in the cities that developed as people
settled down and lived in growing urban areas as a result of agriculture.

74 | Susan Stebbins
A less visible consequence of settled agricultural societies was the changes in the
access to resources, and how those resources were distributed throughout commu-
nities. In foraging societies everyone helps in getting needed resources, and every-
one shares them. Foraging societies are very egalitarian—everyone had fairly equal
access to resources and participation in the political structure (see Chapter 4). There
was not a distinct division of labor, in which some people did particular work, some
of which had more status than others. Everyone contributed to the labor needed to
obtain resources and shared those resources through a process called reciprocity.
Reciprocity simply means that everyone in a community shares needed resources on
either an informal or formal basis. In informal reciprocity people would simply share
whatever resources they had. This was not necessarily altruism on peoples’ parts,
but good sense. There was no way to preserve foods for long periods of time, so if it
was not consumed, it would go bad. Better to share food with your community mem-
bers, particularly when they were kin. It would then be more likely that they would
share with you when they had resources and you did not. The extended kin groups
of foraging and horticultural societies were essential to the success of systems of
reciprocity. Furthermore, the sharing of resources helped ensure the survival of kin
and maintain the bonds of both existing and future affine kin.

In more formal systems of reciprocity, the exchange of food and other resources
were part of community-wide rituals. Many of the Northwest societies practiced the
potlatch. Potlatches were held to mark various life events like birth, coming of age,
marriage, and death. During the potlatch, the kin group of the honored individual
would give away resources, knowing that at some point in the near future another
kin group would be honoring one of their members with a potlatch, and they would
in turn receive resources. Plains societies had give-aways that functioned in a simi-
lar way. Whether a society practiced formal or informal reciprocity, it did two impor-
tant things for individuals and the community in general. First, it distributed goods
throughout the community. Everyone helped get needed resources and everyone
shared them. Some people might have a bit more than others, but various social
expectations and religious beliefs encouraged people to share what resources they
had. As long as resources were available, everyone shared a portion of them. Among
foraging and horticultural societies it is unusual to find that some people hold the
bulk of the resources while other portions of the population have little or none.

Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 75

Second, the sharing of resources would give a kin group and individuals within that
kin group status. The sharing of resources, the following of religious and other social
beliefs about the value of sharing, brought status to people. In the next chapter
about political organization, we will see how the practice of reciprocity could bring
political power to kin groups and individuals within those kin groups. If the way you
were brought up and your religious beliefs were not enough to encourage you to
share resources, the fact that reciprocity was how an individual would get status in
his/her community encouraged you to share.

Reciprocity was absolutely necessary to the survival of a foraging society. Everyone

worked together and shared the results of their labor. Reciprocity continued to be
important in horticultural and pastoral societies. Being able to depend on others
increased the likelihood that all people in a community, who were basically extended
kin members, would have the resources necessary for survival. But as Diamond
points out, the system of reciprocity and the status it brought started to break down
in agricultural societies. The larger these societies got, the more likely some peo-
ple had better access to resources than others. If people were not related to you
through descent or affinity, there was less reason to share resources with them. Sta-
tus became more dependent on access to resources, not the sharing of resources.
In time, the access to resources became inherited within kin groups and individuals,
along with the political power that came from having resources. Excess resources,
more than you need to survive, can be defined as wealth. Over time in agricultural
and then industrial societies, a few people have access to resources, while most peo-
ple have limited access or none. Within agricultural and industrial societies, access
to resources meant a wealthy family or individual also had access to power, and vice
versa. Another reason, says Diamond, from the perspective of what is best for an
entire community, agricultural was a big mistake.

In many ways the history of the European invasion of the Americas demonstrates
how the indigenous peoples lost the ability to get or produce their own resources
and control the distribution of those resources. The loss of land, people and control
of resources changed Native societies, and had such severe economic and political
consequences that most of them are only now starting to recover. The previous
example of the Teton Lakota being pushed west out of the prairies to which they had
adapted is but one example of the experiences of most indigenous peoples in the

76 | Susan Stebbins
Americas. From the seventeenth to the twentieth century, most indigenous societies
were pushed from their homelands to reservations and urban areas.

Among the first of these relocations of Native peoples were praying towns in New
England. After King Philip’s (Metacom) War in 1676, surviving Native peoples in New
England were forced from their homelands into shantytowns that were often built
on islands or land so poor white settlers did not want it. In 1835 the Five Civi-
lized Tribes of the Southeast—so called because they were horticultural-agricul-
tural societies that had adopted many European customs including Christianity,
domesticated animals, clothing, housing, fenced-in farmland, a written language,
and slavery—were forced from their farmlands west to the Oklahoma Territory. Their
removal is known as The Trail of Tears, a forced march during which an esti-
mated 25% of the population died. During the later part of the nineteenth century,
most western Native societies were either removed from traditional homelands, or
restricted to reservations. The expectation of U.S. and Canadian governments, as
well as their white citizenry, was that these Native peoples would achieve “civiliza-
tion” through agriculture. However, reservation lands were typically too small and
poor to support a farming economy. This policy also ignored both that many of these
societies were and had been horticultural or agricultural.

In the twentieth century, many Native Americans living on reservations experienced

relocation and termination. During periods of relocation, people were coerced into
moving to urban areas with the promise of better jobs and housing. What Native
peoples typically found were low-wage jobs and housing in urban slums. Termina-
tion was a U.S. governmental policy to end the special trust status of Native lands
(reservations) and end government funding—often treaty obligations owed for the
previous loss of land suffered by Native American societies. All of these factors, along
with environmental changes, required that Native peoples find new ways of get-
ting needed resources. While some continue historical methods of getting resources
part-time, most are also engaged in the wage labor force of the United States and
Canada. Unfortunately, many governmental policies in both countries limit the suc-
cess of Native communities to sustain themselves and their self-determination.

In the twenty-first century, most peoples of the Arctic and Sub-Arctic area are mem-
bers of the wage-earning population of Canada and the United States, but some are
still foragers, if only for part of the year, to supplement low wages for the little work

Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 77

available. Consequently, the First Nations of these areas are very concerned about
governmental policies that could affect their ability to obtain resources in traditional
ways, or that would alter their environments. One of the most significant of such
projects is the Hydro-Quebec project to get power from dams on lakes and rivers in
the reserve areas of the James Bay Cree of northern Quebec. This project flooded
thousands of acres, displacing not only the James Bay Cree, but also the flora and
fauna of the area.

The Cree and Inuit populations of northern Quebec, along with sympathizers from
around the world, organized to stop the development of the hydropower program
that would harm them. They won the first round of legal battles in the Canadian
Superior Court, only to have the ruling overturned by the Quebec Court of Appeals,
not on the legal issues of the case, but because the Court cited the “interests of the
larger society.”

The Cree and Inuit population negotiated the James Bay and Northern Quebec
Agreement in 1975, which relinquished their rights to the land in exchange for an
immediate payment of $60 million, and an additional $30 million to be paid in the
future. The impact of the James Bay hydroelectric projects on the environment was
enormous. Beaver, muskrat, otter, hare, and mink became nearly extinct. Migration
routes for both birds and animals were changed, resulting in the deaths of thousands
of caribou. Rotting wood and silt build up in the rivers caused the death of fish and
water birds. As a consequence, when Hydro-Quebec proposed another James Bay
project in 1983, there was overwhelming opposition. The primary beneficiaries of the
project, the states of New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine, canceled their
contracts with Hydro-Quebec, defeating the project.

After the James Bay project, the First Nations of the Arctic and Sub-Arctic areas real-
ized that by working together they could influence the government of Canada. In the
Northwest Territories, the Canadian government and multi-national companies had
been mining various minerals (zinc, nickel, uranium, and diamonds) that disturbed
the environment and did not benefit the First Nations peoples whose land was being
mined. Projects such as these and the James Bay project made it virtually impossi-
ble for the peoples of the Arctic areas to continue their traditional lifestyles that had
provided for them for over 10,000 years. In 1979, the Inuit filed a legal suit against
the multi-nationals and the Canadian government to stop further mining. The court

78 | Susan Stebbins
ruled against the Inuit, however, claiming that the 1670 royal charter to the Hudson
Bay Company stripped them of property rights. The court maintained the people had
land-use rights but not land-ownership rights.

Justifiably angry, the Inuit started advocating for self-determination, the ability to
determine for themselves the relationships they would have with the government
and businesses. They formed the Inuit Tapirisat of Canada (ITC), while Canadian First
Nations peoples formed the Committee for Original People’s Entitlement. The goals
of both organizations are to protect and advance First Nations rights and to bet-
ter their economic, political, and social welfare. In the early 1980s the ITC proposed
dividing the Northwest Territories into two regions: one to be under the control of
the Inuit (and to be known as Nunavut) and the other to remain under the control of
the provincial and federal governments. In 1982 a plebiscite was held in which 85%
of the Inuit voted in favor of the formation of Nunavut, while the majority of Euro-
Canadians voted against the plan. The Inuit and Canadian governments reached the
historic “Nunavut Final Land Claim Agreement” in 1993. As agreed, the territory of
Nunavut was established April 1, 1999, with ceremonies in the capital of Igqluit.

While the establishment of a First Nations territory is worthy of celebration, it by

no means solves the problems of the peoples of the Arctic. These are still very poor,
remote communities suffering from the problems of limited educational opportuni-
ties, few wage-earning jobs, and severe health problems. Additionally, the environ-
ment continues to suffer contamination and the loss of plants and animals, not to
mention the increasing effects of climate change. The First Nations peoples of the
Arctic and Sub-Arctic will have to continue fighting the impact and consequences of
Manifest Destiny well into the twenty-first century.

Like that of the Inuit and James Bay Cree, the lands held by Native American com-
munities are often poor and polluted by mining and other industries that have not
and do not benefit them. Indigenous-held lands (reservations in the United States
and reserves in Canada) are often in remote areas, in which education, employment,
and health facilities are scarce. Native peoples are often in the conflicting situation
of no longer being able to practice the traditional resource-getting and production
methods of their ancestors, but not having the resources for typical wage-earning
jobs that would give them the same standard of living as the majority of Euro-Amer-
icans and Canadians.

Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 79

Currently over 60% of Native peoples in the United States live in urban or suburban
areas. Growing numbers of them have the educational opportunities for well-paid
wage jobs. But most still feel a connection with their homelands; returning for pow-
wows, potlatches, give-aways, and other family celebrations. Many of them return to
their families’ traditional homelands to teach, practice medicine, and as lawyers who
work to protect what remains of those homelands.

The earth will no longer support large numbers of egalitarian foraging societies in
which all people have equal access to resources. Can human societies find ways to
make sure all people have access to enough resources to survive? This requires much
more than reciprocity within a community; this requires that all of us think differ-
ently about the resources we consume, and those that are available for others and
for the future. The Iroquois believe that decisions should be made with considera-
tion for seven generations: our generation, the three generations that came before
us that will hold us accountable for our decisions, and the generations that come
after us who will have to live with the consequences of our decisions. Perhaps even
more difficult is to think differently about the access to power that some people have
because of their access to resources. That is the subject of the next chapter.

Suggested Questions

What resources do you depend on? How do you get them? What would happen if the
stores in which we get our resources were to all close: how would you get needed
resources?

We are beginning to see consequences to climate change in our time. Can you name
some of these consequences?

Climate change has occurred in the past and has had consequences for historical
societies. For example, early societies in the Southwest experienced cultural
changes and migration because of climate change. What might we experience in the
future because of climate change?

80 | Susan Stebbins
We all want to have good jobs in our future. What is a “good job”? What jobs have
high status; what have low status? Why do some jobs have greater status than oth-
ers?

Diseases go through an evolutionary process, as do any other life forms. New dis-
eases evolve, old diseases mutate. Can you think of any recent examples of this?

The Mohawk leader Joseph Brant visited England several times in the Seventeenth
Century. He was impressed by Britain’s military power, but shocked by the sight of
people begging and living on the streets. Why do you think he was shocked? What
would be the expectation about resources in a Native American society?

How might factors like climate change and the need for new sources of energy effect
the way humans get their resources in the future?

Suggested Resources

For more information about the role of women in pre-historic economies, see
Woman the Gatherer, edited by Frances Dahlberg, which includes the article
“Woman the Gatherer: Male Bias in Anthropology,” by Sally Slocum.

Peggy Sanday’s works previously sited are also good references for the role of
women in economies.

Richard White’s The Roots of Dependency offers excellent case studies of the eco-
nomic flexibility of indigenous American societies and how those economies were
undermined by European intrusion.

Robert Jarvenpa’s Northern Passage illustrates how the contemporary Na Dinéh

people attempt to maintain their economy within the larger political structure of
Canada.

While not about indigenous American societies per se, books by Jared Diamond, such
as Collapse and Guns, Germs and Steel, offer insights into how and why indigenous
societies in Africa, Asia, and the Americas were overwhelmed by European intru-
sions.

Chapter 3: Resources and Their Distribution | 81

The pre-historic societies of the southwestern part of the United States are good
case studies for the consequences of climate change. In addition to the previously
mentioned Life in a Pueblo by Kathy Kamp, I also recommend Those Who Came
Before: Southwestern Archaeology in the National Park System, by Robert Lister and
Florence Lister, and its companion video of the same title.

Excellent studies of the food and medicinal resources of the Americas are Indian
Givers and Native Gifts, by Jack Weatherford.

82 | Susan Stebbins
Chapter 4: Status, Rank, and Power
The Lords of the Confederacy of the Five Nations shall be mentors of the people for all
time. The thickness of their skin shall be seven spans—which is to say that they shall be
proof against anger, offensive actions and criticism. Their hearts shall be full of peace
and good will and their minds filled with a yearning for the welfare of the people of
the Confederacy. With endless patience they shall carry out their duty and their firm-
ness shall be tempered with a tenderness for their people. Neither anger nor fury shall
find lodgement in their minds and all their words and actions shall be marked by calm
deliberation.

From Gayanashagow, The Great Law of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy

As was discussed in the last chapter, control over resources and their distribution
contributes to the status kin groups and individuals have within their societies. This
status is the path to political power. Political power gives kin groups or individu-
als greater access to surplus resources (wealth), their distribution, and influence or
control over the lives of other people. Political power can be ascribed, meaning a
person is born to it, inherits resources (wealth) and power; or a kin group or individ-
ual can achieve it through the actions of those within a kin group or an individual.
These two ways of obtaining political power have consequences for the societies in
which they exist.

Formerly anthropologists, when talking about the political organization of Native

American societies would categorize them as bands, tribes, and chiefdoms. These
terms are still frequently used in referring to indigenous societies around the world.
A band would refer to a small, usually migratory, foraging society in which there was
little division of labor and political power was egalitarian, that is, everyone shared
resources and any political power was achieved within a kin group. A tribe would
refer to a larger society that got its resources through foraging, pastoralism, or hor-
ticulture. In a tribe, there was a greater division of labor, and individuals within some
kin groups had greater rank than others in the community, who could in turn give
them greater political power; but it was still generally achieved power, not ascribed.
Chiefdom societies were larger than tribal societies, but were still foraging, pastoral,

Chapter 4: Status, Rank, and Power | 83

or horticultural. In chiefdoms, some individuals would have greater political influ-
ence or power than others, but the foundation of this power came from their high
status kin groups. Power was ascribed within kin groups, but achieved by individuals
within that kin group.

You may find these categories to be somewhat confusing. And you may be asking
some questions: Do societies change from bands to chiefdoms? What characteristics
would define a society that moved from one category to another (population size,
are they foragers or engaged in food production)? What happens when a society
adapts to environmental changes, as in the Southwest? Terms such as bands are
also applied to kin groups. Many Plains’ societies, such as the Lakota, are organized
around kin groups called bands; for example, the Hunka Punka, of which Sitting Bull
was a member, and the Crow Dogs, a common family name in the Dakotas. The
Lakota had chiefs, particularly in times of war, so, are the Lakota a band, tribal, or
chiefdom society? In The Roots of Dependency, the historian Richard White points
out that Native peoples were flexible in the way they obtained resources—sometimes
largely through foraging, other times through horticulture. When Native American
societies changed the way they got resources, they also changed their political orga-
nization. So, in one time period they might be a horticultural society with chiefs, and
a few decades later they might be foragers with a more equalitarian political system.

There is a fourth category, kingdoms, that is seldom applied to indigenous societies

in North America. Generally a kingdom refers to societies in which an individual
inherits ascribed power on the basis of his (or her if there are no males heirs) kin
group and is usually only applied to European and some Asian societies. But archae-
ological evidence from societies in the Mississippi River Valley of 1,000 years ago,
and those found in the Great Lakes area of 2,000 years ago indicates these soci-
eties were very similar to European societies of the same time. These were horticul-
tural/agricultural societies in which people lived in villages with populations of up
to 30,000 people (Cahokia or the Fatherland Site of the Natchez, for example). Some
individuals within these societies certainly had more status than others. That sta-
tus is demonstrated by where they lived, frequently on top of mounds constructed
by community labor; and where and how they were buried, frequently on the top of
mounds with valuable grave goods. Biological examination of skeletons shows that
these individuals had a better diet and fewer injuries and diseases than others in the
community and generally lived longer. If you were to read the archaeological reports
84 | Susan Stebbins
from sites in the Mississippi River Valley and Ireland or Britain from 1,000 years ago,
you would have a hard time determining which are from North America and which
are from Europe. Yet, the European societies are referred to as kingdoms, while the
Mississippi River Valley societies would be called chiefdoms.

CC-BY-SA 3.0 by Herb Roe. Mississippian and Related Cultures

So why do Euro-Americans or Canadians so frequently see great political distinc-

tions between societies in the Americas and those in Europe, and based on those
distinctions find Native Americans societies to be inferior to those from Europe?
Societies in Europe and Asia benefit from having written records. Native American
societies of North America have their oral traditions, archaeological evidence, and
the written documents of European explorers and conquerors, which were often
quite biased. But these documents can still be informative, so let us look at a society
that was documented by early French and Spanish explorers, the Natchez.

Chapter 4: Status, Rank, and Power | 85

Hierarchical Society or Kingdom?

The name “Natchez” probably came from French explorers who were among the
first Europeans to have contact with the people who called themselves Theloel. The
Theloel homeland was along the Mississippi River, in what are now the states of
Louisiana and Mississippi. Their capital city was located southeast of what is now the
city of Natchez, Mississippi. It is hypothesized that some elements of Theloel culture
were influenced by societies of Mesoamerica through a process called diffusion:
two societies have contact through trade, migration, or warfare and each influences
the other. Like societies of Mesoamerica, the Theloel practiced skull deformation,
(cradleboards were designed to gradually mold the skull of a baby into an angular
shape), worshiped a sun deity, and had very complex social and political structures.

The oral tradition of the Theloel influenced their political and social organization.
Their origin story tells of a man and a woman who came to a Theloel village. They
were so bright it was assumed they had come from the sun. The man told of the
Great Spirit and told the people not to drink, lie, steal, or commit adultery. He com-
manded the people to build a temple mound to better communicate with the Great
Spirit. This man became the first Great Sun.

The Great Sun was the leader of the Theloel and held the dual offices of king and
high priest. In many ancient societies the political leader, such as the pharaohs of
Egypt, was also the religious leader. Like many ancient societies the Great Sun was a
theocratic ruler, meaning that he ruled in the name of the society’s god. Unlike the
leaders of most Native American societies, who achieved power within their lifetimes
and could be removed from power if they abused it, the Great Sun had ascribed and
complete power over the people of his society; he could even order them to be exe-
cuted if they displeased him, much like a European king. Like a European king, peo-
ple bowed in the presence of the Great Sun, and he and his family were carried about
on litters.

The Great Sun lived at the capital city, now referred to as the Fatherland Site. This
ancient city (it was occupied at least 500 years before French contact) covered hun-
dreds of acres around a central plaza that was used for public ceremonies. The Great
Sun and his family lived in a house built on a platform mound on the north end of

86 | Susan Stebbins
the plaza. Directly across from the Great Sun’s house was another platform mound
on the south side of the plaza where the main temple stood. Inside an eternal flame
was kept. The layout of the Fatherland Site is much like that of ancient cities found
in Mesoamerica.

The Theloel were an agricultural society. Their main crops were corn, beans, pump-
kins, and tobacco. Because of the long growing season and the fertility of the soil,
two corn crops could be grown annually. Although it was a matrilineal society, it
appears that the oldest male was the leader of extended families. Men were warriors,
but they also hunted and fished, cleared fields, helped in the planting and harvesting
of crops, and built the houses. Women were primarily responsible for the weeding
the fields, along with general domestic duties that included basketry, pottery, and
making fishing nets. Both men and women worked the farm fields, and, while men
did the hunting, the meat belonged to the women of the family of the hunter. Men
and women worked in the construction of the society’s mounds.

Just like in many societies around the world, warfare was very important. The second
most important person in Theloel society was the war leader, called Tattooed Ser-
pent, who was always a brother of the Great Sun. However, warfare among the
Theloel was different than that found in Europe. It generally was not to gain addi-
tional land or force people to change their religion, but to capture men, women, and
children for slaves or sacrifice without suffering any casualties. The war chief was
required to pay compensation to the families of men of his society who were killed
in raids.

We have only French and Spanish documents that describe the social organization of
the Theloel, so there are many disagreements among anthropologists and historians
about the details. We do know the Theloel were matrilineal. The mother of the Great
Sun, through whom he inherited his office, was known as White Woman. When a
Great Sun died, one of his sister’s sons would inherit his rank, role, and power. The
society consisted of four major classes of people: sun, noble, honored, and com-
moner (also called stinkards). The three highest classes were small but held most of
the political power. Most Theloel people were commoners. However, unlike similarly
structured European or Asian societies, there was social mobility among the Theloel
because the upper classes were required to marry commoners. The class of the com-
moner spouse did not change, but it did for the children. The Theloel were matrilin-

Chapter 4: Status, Rank, and Power | 87

eal, so a child of a commoner father and a sun mother would inherit her class. If the
mother was a commoner and the father was a sun the children would be of the next
lower class (in this case noble).

Clearly, the Theloel should be considered a kingdom within the categories of political
organization. In many ways, Theloel social and political organization was much like
that of the European powers that would ultimately cause their extinction.

Equalitarian Societies

Currently anthropologists typically categorize the political organization of societies

as equalitarian, rank, and hierarchical. The Theloel are an example of a hierarchical
society: one in which economic, political, and frequently religious power are inter-
woven and invested in a small percentage of the population. A small percentage of
people, generally men, inherit ascribed power and have control over the lives of oth-
ers and their access to resources. Hierarchical societies are rare in North Amer-
ica. The hierarchical political organization of the Theloel may well show contact and
influence from Mesoamerican societies such as the Maya or Aztecs. More typical of
Native North America are equalitarian or rank societies.

Generally foraging societies, in which everyone participates equally in obtaining and

sharing resources are equalitarian. Political power is flexible and often dispersed
among most of the population. The Innu, or Montagnais, of the northern St.
Lawrence River Basin are an example of an equalitarian society. Their economy
focused on hunting and fishing and the gathering of wild edibles. Kinship was reck-
oned bilaterally, the more formal kin groups as found among the Haudenosauneee
did not exist. Residence arrangements (called lodge-groups) were flexible. Generos-
ity (especially as demonstrated by reciprocity), hospitality, cooperation, and loyalty
were considered important attributes for all society members, especially for lead-
ers. The Innu valued individual autonomy and the rights of women and men to make
their own decisions and act independently. The members of the society made deci-
sions. The absolute power of the Theloel Great Sun would not have been tolerated.
Any kind of coercion of others was not tolerated, including in marriage. People who
did not behave appropriately were ridiculed or ostracized, thus inappropriate behav-

88 | Susan Stebbins
ior did not happen often. Leadership of a group was diffused, flexible, and depended
on personal qualities (being generous and hospitable to all, including strangers,
cooperating with others, rather than trying to control any task) and skills in obtain-
ing or making resources. While an individual’s skill and advice would be asked for,
their influence was temporary and they could not exert authority or control. Euro-
peans would refer to some men within these groups as chiefs, but within their soci-
ety these men did not exercise any formal authority or power.

Europeans may have referred to some men as chiefs in an attempt to control the
Innu in order to better exploit their resources. Instead of trying to deal with heads
of families or individuals, European powers would try to work only with men who
seemed to have some respect within the community, and, more importantly, were
willing to serve as intermediaries between the Europeans and the Native communi-
ties. In many instances the men were bribed or given other incentives for working
with the Europeans. In many of their encounters with Native Americans, Europeans
would try to alter traditional leadership patterns to better suit their purposes, which
in turn disrupted the traditional system of achieved power and resource distribu-
tion.

Rank Societies

The Kwakwaka’wakw (Kwakiutis), although foragers, were an example of a rank

society. Kwakwaka’wakw kin groups (numayms) were part of a system of social rank
in which all kin groups were ranked in relation to others. Additionally, each kin group
“owned” names or positions that were also ranked. An individual could hold more
than one name. Names were inherited from parents and grandparents, (generally
by primogeniture, to the firstborn, who, whether a son or daughter, would take an
ancestral name when she/he inherited from her/his father) and could be acquired
through marriage. Thus, while an individual did not have an ascribed rank, he or she
could acquire rank through kin associations. Kin groups did have ascribed rank. Indi-
viduals worked to enhance and validate the status of their families largely through
potlatches. Potlatches were public feasts, open to the entire community, with eco-
nomic, social, and ritual purposes. It was, and still is, an often-ostentatious distrib-

Chapter 4: Status, Rank, and Power | 89

ution of property by an individual of rank to enhance or increase his or her status.
A potlatch benefitted both the individual and their kin group and the whole soci-
ety because, while it helped increase status for families, it also distributed resources
throughout the community. Even the poorest people with no status were invited and
received gifts.

People of the highest ranks (these high-ranking men were called chiefs by Euro-
peans, but the translation from Kwakwaka’wakw would be closer to “Big Man”) were
the leaders of their kin groups and their villages. They were exempt from most sub-
sistence activities, so members of their community would contribute food to them.
The Big Men would organize cooperative labor, such as the building of houses, whale
hunting, and warfare. While Kwakwaka’wakw society had three ranks: nobles, com-
moners, and slaves, the rank of any individual or kin group was flexible. If the fam-
ily were noble, their rank would have been maintained through the distribution of
resources in potlatches. The greater the wealth of resources distributed, the more
likely the status of the individual or kin group would be increased. Individuals could
also move from one social rank to another by acquiring a “seat” or position of rank,
or through the manipulation of kinship ties, as well as the accumulation of valued
resources (wealth) through hard work. Big Men would also utilize gossip or their ties
to the spiritual powers of shamans to increase their status or decrease that of oth-
ers. As in most political systems, those who have wealth and power are more likely
to keep it or increase it. Among the Kwakwaka’wakw, power was maintained through
wealth that was redistributed in potlatches. But those who already had wealth and
power were more likely to increase it, because it was they who organized communal
work projects—especially the important whale hunts. Individuals could rise in sta-
tus, wealth, and power, but they had to have the cooperation of their kin group to
accomplish this.

Early in their encounters with Europeans, the societies of the Northwest were able
to conduct trade on their own terms. They had long been involved in long-distance
trade with other Native societies; they never became dependent on the European
trade items and would refuse to trade if they did not find the price to be agreeable.
The Europeans were much more dependent on the trade goods they got from the
societies of the Northwest than the Native peoples were on the trade goods of the
Europeans. Because of the Europeans’ dependence on the Native trade goods, they
did not interfere with Native culture to the extent found in other parts of the Amer-
90 | Susan Stebbins
icas. However, there were changes within the Northwest societies. They gradually
shifted their focus from getting resources for their own subsistence to getting trade
items. In some cases this led to the over-exploitation of some resources. Also, the
Europeans did not like trading with women, a task in which they had traditionally
participated. The arrival of missionaries in the nineteenth century further reduced
the status of women, as they did not see trade as an appropriate role for women. As
a result, the status of women became reduced. The chiefs became richer and their
political power solidified because the Europeans preferred to work with one individ-
ual they saw as being in power.

Although the Zuni had a matrilineal kinship organization, politically they were hier-
archical. Their matrilineal households are the central focus of their society and
function as social, economic, and ceremonial units. The senior woman of a house-
hold is responsible for organizing economic, social and ceremonial activities, as well
as running her household and settling family disputes. The village leadership, like
that of the Theloel, is a theocracy, with civil and religious authorities.

The Zuni socio-religious system is composed of five interlocking subsystems, each

operating independently, yet synchronically to provides for the physical and social
needs of the people. There are 15 clans extant at Zuni today; six Kachina societies; 12
separate curing societies, including eight Societies of the Completed Path (members
of these societies perform ceremonies to cure the sick); and there is the Rain Priest-
hood and the Bow Priesthood.

Leaders of each organization plan and execute esoteric, non-public ceremonies that
must be conducted in order to keep the world in beauty and harmony. These are
done in private 40-day cycles. Only members of the individual society in question
know when these ceremonies are performed, and they are the only ones present
during the ceremonies. Only Rain Priesthood ceremonies are exclusively private. All
other religious organizations have some parts of their religious ceremonies that are
open to the public. The men and women who are members of the various Kachina
societies perform public dances in the plazas.

Unlike the female heads of households, the leaders of these multiple religious orga-
nizations do not involve themselves in disputes but lead by moral example and
speeches they make to the entire village. Because these religious leaders are not

Chapter 4: Status, Rank, and Power | 91

supposed to engage in any kind of conflict, the members of the priestly council the
Bow Priesthood are responsible for carrying out such decisions. Formerly the Bow
Priests were warriors responsible for military protection and defense of the Zuni
people. Now they are charged with disciplining Zuni people for infractions. They
implement decisions made by the leaders of religious organizations. Religious lead-
ers also appoint a village “house chief” or Pekwin, who is always a member of the
Dogwood clan. The Pekwin has Bow Priesthood assistants who aid him in settling
disputes and protecting a village. The Pekwin can be removed from office if the peo-
ple of a village complain to the Council of Priests about inappropriate behavior.

Contemporary Zuni political structures are an excellent example of syncretism, the

blending of two or more cultural traditions. In addition to this socio-religious sys-
tem, the Zuni now have a Constitution (ratified in 1970) and an elected system of gov-
ernor, lieutenant governor, and tribal council, these officials take an oath of office
from a traditional Head Rain Priest who reminds them they have responsibility for
all their people whether “rich or poor, clean or dirty” (Ladd 1979). Recently, the Zuni
have been remarkably successful in winning legal decisions that have returned land,
particularly sacred sites such as Kolhuwala:wa and Zuni Salt Lake. The traditional
social systems of the Zuni people, such as their clans, the practice of reciprocity, and
their religious traditions have enabled them to maintain a high degree of cultural
continuity.

An example of a very elaborate, extensive, and codified rank society was the Iroquois
or Haudenosaunee Confederacy. This Confederacy consisted of the Mohawks, Onei-
das, Onondagas, Cayugas and Senecas (joined by the Tuscaroras in the early eigh-
teenth century), all societies that spoke similar Iroquoian languages and had similar
social organizations. All were matrilineal and horticultural. Together, the Confeder-
acy covered an enormous territory, from what is now Quebec City, south to the city
of Schenectady, New York, and east from the Hudson River to the border of what are
now the states of New York and Pennsylvania—an expanse larger than many Euro-
pean countries at the time of European contact. Through the Confederacy, these
six societies bound themselves together to maintain peace among them and to act
as a collective voice in their actions with other societies, including the Europeans
when they arrived. In the oral tradition of the Haudenosaunee, the Confederacy was
founded by The Peacekeeper, a Huron (a society that spoke an Iroquoian language,

92 | Susan Stebbins
but never joined the Confederacy) who established peace among the five nations
and a codified social and political system which is laid out in The Great Law. Among
the Haudenosaunee, leadership was vested on the village, national, and confederacy
level, much like the towns, states, provinces, and the nations of the United States
and Canada today.

On the village level, clan chiefs were appointed by their clan mothers or matrons,
the leading women of their extended matrilineal families. A chief was appointed for
life, but he could be removed from office if his behavior was considered inappropri-
ate by his village, especially the clan mothers. Each chief had a council of advisors,
men and women, who could also be removed from office if the community con-
sidered their behavior inappropriate. These chiefs or sachems were not war lead-
ers—indeed the Great Law stated that before appointment they should not have shed
blood. Their duties involved settling disputes and making sure that each individual
within the village had the resources they needed to survive. As the Iroquois highly
valued the independence of individuals, a chief could not order people to take care
of each other; he had to lead by example—by getting the resources for a poor family
or doing whatever labor was necessary. It is said that the chiefs lived in the poorest-
looking longhouses of a village, because so much of their time was spent in seeing
to the welfare of their neighbors. If a chief did not live up to these expectations, he
could be recalled and replaced by the clan mothers.

Each Haudenosaunee village had three councils that would express opinions and
decide on village policies: one council of elder men, one of women, and one of
younger men (sometimes wrongly referred to as warriors). In debating public policy,
it was the goal of these councils to reach a unanimous opinion, a collective voice.
This does not mean that individuals strove to get the councils to do what he or she
wanted; collective action meant that all could voice their opinions, but they were
then expected to want what was for the best for their society. A speaker from each
group would then present its decision in a meeting of all three councils. If the deci-
sions of the three groups did not agree, further discussion and debate was needed to
reach a collective voice for the village. Some Iroquois, such as the Seneca Red Jacket,
were renowned for their rhetorical skills as speakers for the councils.

When conditions deemed it necessary, villages would send representatives from all
three councils to either national meetings (all Mohawk villages for example) or of the

Chapter 4: Status, Rank, and Power | 93

Confederacy. Confederacy meetings involved trade, diplomatic, and military rela-
tions with other societies, but might also honor the lives of respected members of
the community when they died and included discussions regarding whom to appoint
as a new chief upon his death. A year of “condolence” typically followed the death of
a chief. His successor would inherit his chief name, which was one of the names of
the chiefs who first followed The Peacekeeper. Chiefs appointed in this method were
called “hereditary” or “condoled chiefs,” as their appointments followed this mourn-
ing period.

Confederacy meetings were and are typically held once a year, but could be called
more often if necessary, at Onondaga the geographic center of Haudenosaunee ter-
ritory. Onondaga holds a symbolic importance for the Confederacy as well. Accord-
ing to Haudenosaunee oral tradition, the Confederacy was founded, perhaps as early
as the 1100s, by The Peacekeeper and an Onondaga man named Hiawatha (no rela-
tion to the Longfellow poem, which is based on an Ojibwa story). While the Senecas
and Mohawks accepted the words of the Gayanashagowa or Great Law (even adopt-
ing The Peacekeeper and Hiawatha as chiefs) the Onondaga were slow to do so. A
man named Adodarhoh, crazed by the murder of his wife and daughters during war-
fare, became a cannibal who terrorized the Onondaga territory. The Peacekeeper
went into the forest and found this man, whose hair hung in locks that looked like
snakes, and who resembled an evil spirit. The Peacekeeper was able to bring Ado-
darhoh back to himself, to his right mind. Because of The Peacekeeper’s accomplish-
ment, the Onondaga accepted the Great Law. The Peacekeeper appointed them to
be the Firekeepers of the Confederacy, with Adodarhoh as their chief. In time the
Cayugas and Oneidas joined the Confederacy.

The Haudenosaunee use their household structure, the longhouse, as a metaphor

for the Confederacy, with each nation occupying a fire under the rafters, as families
each had their place around a fire under the roof rafters of the longhouse. Each long-
house had an eastern and western door. In the Confederacy, the Mohawks occupy
the eastern territory and are called the Keepers of the Eastern Door, while the
Seneca occupy the western territory and are called the Keepers of the Western
Door. The large Mohawk and Seneca nations, the first to follow The Peacekeeper,
were named the Elder Brothers, protectors of the territory. The Onondagas, occu-
pying the central area of Iroquoia, serve as the Keepers of the Fire of the Con-

94 | Susan Stebbins
federacy. The Cayugas and Oneidas, smaller in population and later in joining the
Confederacy were the Younger Brothers.

From Stories of American History by Wilbur F. Gordy. New York: Charles

Scribner’s Sons, 1913. Pg 20. An Iroquois Longhouse

In addition to visualizing the Confederacy as a longhouse, the Haudenosaunee also

used a wampum belt to show their unity. Wampum belts, made from purple and
white shells found along the coast of New England and used by many northern
societies, were and are not money; they are equivalent to written documents. Rel-
atively simple belts of strung beads record agreements between individuals or fam-
ilies. More elaborate belts are documentation of important events or treaties. The
Washington Belt marks the Treaty of 1789, in which the design illustrates the Iro-
quois and Euro-Americans joining their hands in peace.

CC-BY-SA 3.0 by wikipedia user Junuxx. Hiawatha’s wampum belt.

Chapter 4: Status, Rank, and Power | 95

The Hiawatha Belt illustrates the Hauodenosaune Confederacy. At the right and
left ends of the belt (east and west) are squares that represent the Mohawks and
Senecas; the Keepers of the Eastern and Western Doors. A path of white shells leads
to two larger squares that represent the Cayugas and Oneidas. A path from the larger
squares leads to the center, a symbol of the fire kept by the Onondagas. Look care-
fully and you will see a small path of white shells on the outside of those squares
representing the Mohawks and Senecas. You will remember from Chapter 2 on kin-
ship, the Haudenosaunee were generally willing to accept new members into their
clans and villages through adoption or marriage. They were also willing to accept
new members into the Confederacy, as illustrated by those two white paths leading
out from the Eastern and Western Doors. Because of warfare between Native groups
and American colonists, in the early 1700s an Iroquoian speaking group called the
Tuscaroras left their southern lands and moved north, asking for refuge among the
Confederacy. They were admitted as Nephews, but did not receive any of the tradi-
tional confederacy chief titles.

There are fifty chiefs representing the nations who joined the Confederacy and fol-
lowed The Great Law of The Peacekeeper. While the Mohawks and Senecas had
(and continue to have) larger populations, they did not have the greatest number
of chiefs. The Mohawks and Oneidas each have nine, the Onondagas have fourteen,
the Cayugas ten, and the Seneca have eight. This distribution of power ensures that
larger nations, like the Seneca or Mohawk, do not have more power than smaller
nations like the Cayugas. Except for the names of the founders of the Confederacy,
The Peacekeeper and Hiawatha, the names of the original fifty chiefs are passed on
to those who inherit their positions and names after their deaths. Upon the death of
a chief there is a period of mourning, called a condolence. During this time the clan
mothers start discussing who will assume the position and name of the deceased
chief. This successor will come from the clan of the deceased chief, typically a son
of one of his sisters who has demonstrated the qualities important to the Iroquois:
bravery, loyalty, patience, and willingness to work for the betterment of the entire
community. At the end of the condolence period, the new chief is raised up and
receives the name and kasto’:was (Mohawk spelling of the ceremonial headdress) of
the condoled chief. The ceremonial Chief of Chiefs of the Confederacy inherits the
name of Adodarhoh, the Onondaga man who The Peacekeeper brought back to his
right mind. Even these Confederacy chiefs can be recalled from power if they do

96 | Susan Stebbins
not meet the expectations of their people. They are literally “dehorned” as the clan
mothers will remove their the kasto’:was and give it to the new chief.

Other Native American societies also organized themselves into confederacies, such
as the confederacy brought together by Powhatan, Pocahontas’s father. But few
had the longevity, political institutions, or sheer territorial expanse of the Hau-
denosaunee. Benjamin Franklin, by his own account (Johansen 1998) adapted the
Haudenosaunee concepts of divisions of political power and recall into his Albany
Plan, which was then incorporated into the American Constitution. The traditional
system of Haudenosaunee chiefs still exists in the United States, along with govern-
ments of elected chiefs. Generally the U.S. government and state of New York con-
duct business with the elected government, not the traditional chiefs.

When the Europeans first came to the eastern part of North America, they either
recognized the political power of chiefs or sachems in rank societies such as the
Haudenosaunee, or identified particular men as chiefs in equalitarian societies.
Europeans lived in societies in which political power was ascribed and sanctioned
by religious belief and authorities. When the Europeans encountered the indigenous
peoples of the Americas, they assumed they would also have leaders with ascribed
power. Certainly the first encounters of the Spanish in Mesoamerica supported this.
However, this was not the case in the eastern woodlands. Among rank societies like
the Haudenosaunee, chiefs were often identified by Europeans as kings and were
assumed to have the same ascribed power as kings in England. The long councils that
were part of any treaty discussion often confused the Europeans, as did the distri-
bution throughout the community of gifts given to chiefs, and the role of women in
politics. As mentioned in Chapter 2, societies like the Iroquois and Cherokees were
referred to as “petticoat governments,” because of the power of the women in polit-
ical affairs. Europeans were equally confused by equalitarian societies in which no
one seemed to be in charge. Europeans assumed that such political organization was
primitive and a further example of the inferiority of Native peoples.

Native societies functioned quite well with their diversity of social and political orga-
nization. When they encountered a society with a different type of organization,
Natives did not tend to try and change that society socially, economically, or politi-
cally. Yet European societies did try to change the indigenous peoples they encoun-
tered, and Euro-Americans and Canadians continue to do so. One of the foremost

Chapter 4: Status, Rank, and Power | 97

issues among Native peoples in Canada and the United States today is the issue
of sovereignty, the authority of Native American societies to govern themselves.
Despite the fact that Britain, France, the United States, and Canada all had or have
treaties (formal agreements) with Native American societies, the governments of
the United States and Canada both categorize the Native Americans societies that
live within their borders as “wards of the state,” which means individual Native peo-
ples were formerly considered to be unable to make their own decisions. The gov-
ernments of the United States and Canada have recognized as leaders people who
have no standing in their communities; have insisted that Native communities elect
representative governments much like those of the United States and Canada; have
taken land over the protests and wishes of the Native communities; and despite
occasional concessions to Native communities (the building of casinos, for example)
have insisted that Native communities follow the laws of the dominant societies (for
example, the taxation of goods like cigarettes or gasoline). This is a historical process
that started with the control of land and resources.

In the period of European conquest of the Americas, European societies came to

both continents to gain land and resources. The Americas were not empty lands, but
were occupied by many people, and like Europeans, these peoples spoke many dif-
ferent languages and lived in different societies with unique beliefs, traditions, and
organization. Unlike European societies, the peoples of the Americas, North Amer-
ica in particular, had highly individualist social systems. The political organization
of these societies did not infringe on individuals unless the behavior of an individ-
ual put the community at risk. It was kin groups and the practice of reciprocity—the
sharing and exchange of resources—that held communities together. Sometimes kin
association and give-aways were not enough to support a society, and one or more
segments would splinter off and form their own community. This was true of soci-
eties around the world until the political leadership of societies started designating
geopolitical boundaries and recognized all people living within those boundaries as
citizens who were expected to abide by laws made by the political hierarchy. Fre-
quently, in this form of political organization, only people of status, usually men who
were landowners, had any influence in the political organization.

In their encounters with societies that had very different ideas about social mem-
bership, political power, and geographic boundaries, the Europeans would often rec-
ognize a man, usually one who cooperated with them, as the chief. They assumed
98 | Susan Stebbins
that agreements made with this man would apply to the entire community. This
assumption was absurd among highly individualist Native American societies. When
these societies were foragers, the Europeans would first exercise control over them
through the trade of animal furs. In the Canadian Sub-Arctic European societies, the
French, and later the British, formed trade and political alliances with the First Peo-
ples they encountered. These alliances often did not benefit the First Peoples. In
addition to the introduction of new diseases, the Europeans brought firearms and
alcohol. The firearms made it possible to kill many more animals than was possible
with the Native technologies of spears and bows and arrows. That, along with the
increasing European market for animal furs, led to the near extinction of many ani-
mals. Additionally, the indigenous peoples would focus on obtaining animals, such
as beavers, for trade, not for food. They would purchase food and other resources,
including now-needed guns and ammunition, and alcohol with the profits from the
fur trade. European companies, such as the Hudson Bay Company, had monopolies
over the trade, and as a result, the Native hunters usually ended up in debt to the
company.

The interference of European powers in the traditional equalitarian organization

of foraging societies, along with the impact of trade and resulting environmental
damage, had devastating consequences for these societies. Additionally, religious
missionaries tried to change the kinship of societies, particularly if they were matri-
lineal, and the system of status associated with the practice of reciprocity. For exam-
ple, among societies on the western coast of the United States, the potlatch was
outlawed from the 1880s until 1935. Basically, it became the goal of U.S. and Canadian
governments, through religion, education, and control of the political economy to
assimilate Native peoples into a wage-earning underclass—no longer Indian, but not
really white either. For many foraging societies, threats to the environment, which
in turn threatened their livelihoods and lifestyles, were what spurred them to take
political action.

Even the powerful Haudenosaunee Confederacy suffered from the impacts of Euro-
American and Canadian governmental policies. Early in its encounters with Euro-
peans, the Haudenosaunee functioned as brokers between European powers and
other Native societies. European governments wanted to trade with these prosper-
ous peoples. Good relationships with the Haudenosaunee assured safe passage in a
large expanse of the Northeast. And during times of war, everyone wanted the use

Chapter 4: Status, Rank, and Power | 99

of Haudenosaunee warriors. The Haudenosaunee were able to play the competing
interests of the Dutch, French, and English off one another for their own benefit. As
the Dutch presence in New York waned, the Haudenosaunee continued their trade
and diplomacy with the French and English. The decline of the Confederacy started
during the French and Indian War (called the Seven Years War in Europe). During
this war, large numbers of Haudenosaunee warriors were drawn into battles as allies
with the French or the British. However, most battles were far from the farms and
homes in what was then the Haudenosaunee heartland.

The defeat of the French lessened the power the Haudenosaunee had in playing one
European power off another. Only the British remained, and their colonists wanted
more and more land. The British government tried to appease the Haudenosaunee
(and other Native societies) and build up their power within the colonies by decree-
ing that British colonists would stay east of the Allegany Mountains, respecting the
treaty and land agreements made with Native societies. However, the colonists did
not stay east of the Allegany Mountains.

One of the justifications given by the colonists for the Revolution in the Declaration
of Independence was that His Majesty’s government refused to protect the colonists
from “attacks from the wild savages;” whose land they had taken against British
governmental policy. Once again Native Americans, particularly the Iroquois, were
drawn into warfare, this time between Britain and her colonies. The American Revo-
lution nearly pulled apart the Confederacy. Most Mohawks fought on the side of the
British, while the Seneca largely fought for the colonists. In part, Iroquois alliances
were based on previous trading partnerships. The Mohawks, through the British
agent William Johnson, had very strong trade ties with the British. Mohawk lead-
ers, such as Joseph Brant, a friend and brother-in-law of Johnson, had traveled to
England and had been educated at colonial schools. The Seneca did not have these
ties with the British. Further, there was self-preservation to be considered. The
Mohawks, many of whose leaders had been to England, could not imagine how a
small, poorly armed army could possibly defeat England, the world power of the
time. It was in their best interests to ally with the British. Meanwhile, the colo-
nial government had assured the Seneca, along with other Native societies like the
Delaware, that their land and rights would be protected by the future American gov-
ernment. Unfortunately for the Native Americans, neither side was right. The British

100 | Susan Stebbins

did lose, and completely left their Native American allies out of treaty negotiations.
The Continental Congress soon forgot its promises to its Native allies.

Further, the Iroquois heartland was severely affected by the Revolution. While Iro-
quois warriors were fighting on the boundaries of their territory, General John Sulli-
van marched through the interior, from one Iroquois village to another, burning the
towns, fields, and orchards. The end of the war found the Iroquois population much
reduced, with the survivors starving and demoralized. Many, particularly among the
Mohawks, fled from their homelands of over 1,000 years for new communities in
Canada, such as Grand River.

Consequently the power of the Confederacy is diffused between Canada and the
United States. For example, the U.S.-Canadian border cuts through the Mohawk
reservation of Akwesasne (also called St. Regis). Documents from both the United
States and Canada state Akwesasne is “adjacent “ to New York state and the
provinces of Ontario and Quebec. However, to get from the southern part of the
reservation to the part on the north side of the St. Lawrence River, one must go
through Canadian Immigration and Customs and show a passport or tribal identi-
fication. How can Akwesasne function as a sovereign entity when it is divided by
two other powerful sovereign entities? On June 1, 2009, residents of Akwesasne
protested at the border crossing dividing their territory in response to the arming
of Canadian border guards. Because of previous hostile actions on the part of border
guards, the people of Akwesasne were fearful of the possible consequences of an
armed patrol. The Akwesasne protestors did not block the bridge or stop traffic.
They were simply protesting on the side of the road. However, the Canadian Office
of Customs and Immigration closed the bridge, stopping traffic along a very impor-
tant economic route for both Canada and the United States. The closing did not stop
travel at Akwesasne. The Mohawk people simply set up a system of boats and ferries
that transported people from the south side of the river to Cornwall Island, the north
side of the river. After six weeks, Canada moved their Customs and Immigration sta-
tion to Cornwall, Ontario. This was, however, a short-lived victory for the people of
Akwesasne who wish to go to Cornwall Island (which is part of the reservation), as
they are now required to drive into Cornwall to check in at the customs station and
then drive back across the bridge to Cornwall Island.

Chapter 4: Status, Rank, and Power | 101

While a little more complex because of the border issues, Akwesasne is an example
of the clash that develops as two or more societies with very different ideas about
political and social organization encounter one another; and of the outcome when
one is able to gain more power and control over land and resources than the other.
This is the dilemma of Native societies in the Americas today if they have state-
province or federal recognition. On one hand they are sovereign entities with their
own laws, land, and social organization; on the other, they are citizens of much larger
nation-states and must abide by those legal and political systems. Another issue is
that an estimated 64% of Native peoples in Canada and the United States do not live
on reservation-reserve lands, but in cities, towns, and suburbs, often far from their
traditional homelands. What is their legal and political relationship to their tribal
nation as well as the nations of Canada and the United States? Additionally, there are
communities who consider themselves to be Native American, but through treaties
and the policy of termination do not have tribal lands or federal recognition. Many of
these societies, such as the Abenaki of Vermont and the Lumbee of North Carolina,
have waged legal battles with state and federal governments to gain recognition.

Another issue is the recognition of people with mixed Native American and Euro-
American or African-American heritage. Before European contact most Native soci-
eties, through their kin groups, easily assimilated individuals from other societies
through adoption. Early in their encounters with Europeans, this practice continued,
and in some instances continues today. For example, President Barack Obama was
adopted by the Crow Nation and given a Crow name (One Who Helps People
Throughout the Land). In Canada the Metis, the descendants of French, Irish, and
Scots traders who intermarried with various Native American groups are a recog-
nized political-ethnic minority. While there are similar groups in the United States,
there is no similar recognition. In the United States, governmental agencies such as
the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) instituted a policy of federal recognition of Native
peoples based on blood quantum. This is not a policy based on the DNA profiles of
individuals (which were not available decades ago when this policy was established),
but on the family genealogies of individuals; you were considered Indian based on
the number of your ancestors who could be determined to be Indian from written
documents. The U.S. government collected this information as part of the Dawes
Act, which functioned largely to terminate the federal government’s treaty responsi-
bilities to indigenous societies. The family genealogies they collected are called the

102 | Susan Stebbins

Dawes Rolls. This policy is fundamentally different than another governmental pol-
icy of the same time in U.S. history that stated if a person had “one drop of Negro
blood,” no matter how many generations ago or the phenotype (physical appearance)
of an individual, that individual was Negro (African-American) and was subject to the
Jim Crow and miscegenation laws (laws that sought to prevent marriage or sexual
relations between people of different races). While the “one drop rule” functioned to
preserve the African identity of people for the enforcement of Jim Crow and misce-
genation laws, blood quantum and documents like the Dawes Rolls sought to reduce
or eliminate the identity of Native peoples and the government’s treaty obligations
to them.

As in the situation of armed representatives of another political entity on tribal land,

such as that at Akwesasne, an important issue for Native peoples in twenty-first
century American will be their continued attempts to have control of their lands,
resources, and identities while remaining citizens of the United States and Canada.

Suggested Questions

Can you cite an example of ascribed power?

Have you had experiences with organizations that have achieved power?

Have you had experiences with organizations that you would describe as being egal-
itarian?

What do you think about when you hear of a society being described as a tribe? What
stereotypes are associated with tribal societies?

Why do you think hierarchical indigenous American societies whose leaders have
ascribed power are not typically referred to as kingdoms?

How could ridicule or ostracizing work to promote socially recognized good or

appropriate behavior by individuals? Can you give any examples?

I have heard it said that indigenous American societies lost their battles with U.S.,
British, and Canadian military forces and should accept their defeat and not insist on

Chapter 4: Status, Rank, and Power | 103

political sovereignty. Japan and Germany also lost battles to U. S., British, and Cana-
dian military forces and yet they remain sovereign political entities. Why the differ-
ence?

Do you know of any American or Canadian organizations that function like the socio-
political organizations of the Zuni?

Suggested Resources

The Roots of Dependency, by Richard White, has excellent descriptions of American

Indian political organizations and their flexibility.

The classic book about the Natchez/Theloel, The Choctaw, Chickasaws and Natchez
Indians, by H.B. Cushman and Angie Debo, is once again available with an introduc-
tion by Clara Sue Kidwell.

For more about both the issue of Native American lands being settled by colonists
as a reason for the American Revolution and the role of the Haudenosaune Confed-
eracy in Benjamin Franklin’s ideas for the U.S. Constitution, I recommend Forgotten
Founders: Benjamin Franklin, the Iroquois and the Rationale for the American Revolu-
tion, by Bruce E. Johansen.

104 | Susan Stebbins

Chapter 5: Religion and Spiritual
Beliefs

The White Buffalo Woman (Brule Sioux)

One summer so long ago that nobody remembers how long, the Oceti-Shakowin, the
seven sacred councils fires of the Lakota Oyate, the nation, came together and camped.
The sun shone all the time, but there was no game and the people were starving. Every
day they sent scouts to look for game, but the scouts found nothing.

Among the bands assembled were the Itazipcho, the Without-Bows, who had their own
camp circle under their chief, Standing Hollow Horn. Early one morning the chief sent
two of his young men to hunt for game. They went on foot, because at that time the
Sioux didn’t yet have horses. They searched everywhere but could find nothing. Seeing
a high hill, they decided to climb it in order to look over the whole country. Halfway
up, they saw something coming toward them from far off, but the figure was floating
instead of walking. From this they knew that the person was wakan, holy.

At first they could make out only a small moving speck and had to squint to see that
it was a human form. But as it came nearer, they realized it was a beautiful young
woman, more beautiful than any they had ever seen, with two round, red dots of face
paint on her cheeks. She wore a wonderful white buckskin outfit, tanned until it shone
a long way in the sun. It was embroidered with sacred and marvelous designs of porcu-
pine quill, in radiant colors no ordinary woman could have made. This wakan stranger
was Ptesan-Wi, White Buffalo Woman. In her hands she carried a large bundle and a
fan of sage leaves. She wore her blue-black hair loose except for a strand at the left side,
which was tied up with buffalo fur. Her eyes shone dark and sparkling with great power
in them.

The young men looked at her open-mouthed. One was overawed, but the other desired
her body and stretched his hand out to touch her. This woman was lila wakan, very
sacred, and could not be treated with disrespect. Lightning instantly struck the brash

Chapter 5: Religion and Spiritual Beliefs | 105

young man and burned him up, so that only a small heap of blackened bones was left.
Or some say that he was suddenly covered by a cloud, and within it he was eaten up by
snakes that left only his skeleton, just as a man can be eaten up by lust.

To the other scout who behaved rightly, the White Buffalo Woman said: “Good things I
am bringing, something holy to your nation. A message I carry for your people from the
buffalo nation. Go back to the camp and tell your people to prepare for my arrival. Tell
your chief to put up a medicine lodge with twenty-four poles. Let it be made holy for
my coming.”

This young hunter returned to the camp. He told the chief, he told the people, what
the sacred woman had commanded. The chief told the eyapaha, the crier, and the
crier went through the camp circle calling: “Someone sacred is coming. A holy woman
approaches. Make all things ready for her.” So the people put up the big medicine tipi
and waited. After four days they saw the White Buffalo Woman approaching, carrying
her bundle before her. Her wonderful white buckskin dress shone from afar. The chief,
Standing Hollow Horn, invited her to enter the medicine lodge. She went in and circled
the interior sunwise. The chief addressed her respectfully, saying: “Sister, we are glad
you have come to instruct us.”

She told them what she wanted done. In the center of tipi they were to put up an
owanka wakan, a sacred alter, made of red earth, with a buffalo skull and a three-stick
rack for a holy thing she was bringing. They did what she directed, and she traced with
her finger on the smoothed earth of the altar. She showed them how to do all this, then
circled the lodge again sunwise. Halting before the chief, she now opened the bundle.
The holy thing it contained was the chanunpa, the sacred pipe. She held it out to the
people and let them look at it. She was grasping the stem with her right hand and the
bowl with her left, and thus the pipe has been held ever since.

Again the chief spoke, saying: “Sister, we are glad. We have had no meat for some time.
All we can give you is water.” They dipped some wacanga, sweet grass, into a skin bag of
water and gave it to her, and to this day the people dip sweet grass or an eagle feather
in water and sprinkle it on a person to be purified.

The White Buffalo Woman showed the people how to use the pipe. She filled it with
chan-shasha, red willow bark tobacco. She walked around the lodge four times after
the manner of Anpetu-Wi, the great sun. This represented the circle without end, the
106 | Susan Stebbins
flame to be passed on from generation to generation. She told them that the smoke ris-
ing from the bowl was Tunkashila’s breath, the living breath of the great Grandfather
Mystery.

The White Buffalo Woman showed the people the right way to pray, the right words
and right gestures. She taught them how to sing the pipe-filling song and how to lift
the pipe up to the sky, toward Grandfather, and down toward Grandmother Earth, to
Unci, and then to the four directions of the universe.

“With this holy pipe,” she said, “You will walk like a living prayer. With your feet
resting upon the earth and pipestem reaching into the sky, your body forms a living
bridge between the Sacred Beneath and the Sacred Above. Wakan Takan smiles upon
us, because now we are as one: earth, sky, all living things, the two-legged, the four-
legged, the winged ones, the trees and grasses. Together with the people, they are all
related, one family. The pipe holds them all together.

“Look at this bowl,” said the White Buffalo Woman. “Its stone represents the buffalo, but
also the flesh and blood of the red man. The buffalo represents the universe and the four
directions, because he stands on four legs, for the four ages of creation. The buffalo was
put in the west by Wakan Tanka at the making of the world, to hold back the waters.
Every year he loses one hair, and in every one of the four ages he loses a leg. The sacred
hoop will end when all the hair and legs of the great buffalo are gone, and the water
comes back to cover the earth.

The wooden stem of this chanunpa stands for all that grows on the earth. Twelve feath-
ers hanging from where the stem—the backbone—joins the bowl—the skull—are from
Wanblee Galeshka, the spotted eagle, the very sacred bird who is the Great Spirit’s mes-
senger and the wisest of all flying ones. You are joined to all things of the universe, for
they all cry out to Tunkashila. Look at the bowl: engraved in it are seven circles of var-
ious sizes. They stand for the seven sacred ceremonies you will practice with this pipe,
and for the Ocheit Shakowin, the seven sacred campfires of our Lakota nation.”

The White Buffalo Woman then spoke to the women, telling them that it was the work
of their hands and the fruit of their bodies which kept the people alive. “You are from
mother earth,” she told them. “What you are doing is as great as what the warriors do.”

Chapter 5: Religion and Spiritual Beliefs | 107

And therefore the sacred pipe is also something that binds men and women together in
a circle of love. It is the one holy object in the making of which both men and women
have a hand. The men carved the bowl and make the stem; the women decorate it with
bands of colored porcupine quills. When a man takes a wife, they both hold the pipe
at the same time and red trade cloth is wound around their hands, thus tying them
together for life.

The White Buffalo Woman had many things for her Lakota sister in her sacred womb
bag—corn, wasna (pemmican), wild turnip. She taught them how to make the hearth
fire. She filled a buffalo paunch with cold water and dropped a red-hot stone into it.
“This way you shall cook the corn and meat,” she told them.

The White Buffalo Woman also talked to the children, because they have an under-
standing beyond their years. She told them that what their fathers and mothers did was
for them, that their parents could remember being little once, and that they, the chil-
dren, would grow up to have little ones of their own. She told them: “You are the coming
generation, that’s why you are the most important and precious ones. Some day you
will hold this pipe and smoke it. Some day you will pray with it.”

She spoke once more to all the people: “The pipe is alive; it is a red being showing you
a red life and a red road. And this is the first ceremony for which you will use the
pipe. You will use it to keep the soul of a dead person, because through it you can talk
to Wakan Tanka, the Great Mystery Spirit. The day a human dies is always a sacred
day. The day when the soul is released to the Great Spirit is another. Four women will
become sacred on such a day. They will be the ones to cut the sacred tree—the can-
wakan—for the sun dance.

She told the Lakota that they were the purest among the tribes, and for that reason
Tunkashila had bestowed upon them the holy chanunpa. They had been chosen to take
care of it for all the Indian people on this turtle island.

She spoke one last time to Standing Hollow Horn, the chief, saying, “Remember: this
pipe is very sacred. Respect it and it will take you to the end of the road. The four ages
of creation are in me; I am the four ages. I will come to see you in every generation
cycle. I shall come back to you.”

108 | Susan Stebbins

The sacred woman then took leave of the people, saying: “Toksha ake wacinyanktin
ktelo—I shall see you again.”

The people saw her walking off in the same direction from which she had come, out-
lined against the red ball of the setting sun. As she went, she stopped and rolled over
four times. The first time she turned into a black buffalo; the second time into a brown
one; the third time into a red one; and finally, the fourth time she rolled over, she turned
into a white female buffalo calf. A white buffalo is the most sacred living thing you could
ever encounter.

The White Buffalo Woman disappeared over the horizon. Sometime she might come
back. As soon as she had vanished, buffalo in great herds appeared, allowing themselves
to be killed so that the people might survive. And from that day on, our relations, the
buffalo, furnished the people with everything they needed-meat for food, skins for their
clothes and tipis, bones for their many tools.

Told by Lame Deer at Winner, Rosebud Reservation, South Dakota, 1967 (Erdoes and
Ortiz)

This story is a genesis or origin story. Such a story tells people of the societies from
which they come where they come from, their origins. They tell people of the soci-
ety to whom they belong, how they are expected to interact with each other, with
other elements of creation or nature, and with spiritual beings. Origin stories are
an important part of the religious or spiritual beliefs of any society. This story is
quite different than the Judeo-Christian story of the Garden of Eden that you may
be familiar with. The origin stories of Native peoples throughout North America are
also quite different from each other. Each Native American society has its own origin
story; there is no one story as there is in Christianity and Judaism.

Origin stories are just one aspect of religious or spiritual beliefs for any society. Spir-
itual beliefs tell us where we come from, where we are going after death, and what is
expected from us while we are in this world. Spiritual beliefs function on an individ-
ual and community level. They tell individuals what they must do to be considered a
good person by their family, society, and by the spiritual beings. Spiritual beliefs also
tell societies what is expected from them as a community: how individuals within
the community should be treated, what qualities are needed for leadership, and how
outsiders should be treated. Spiritual beliefs also tell kin groups and communities

Chapter 5: Religion and Spiritual Beliefs | 109

the consequences of inappropriate behavior. In this way, spiritual beliefs function as
a form of social control. They tell individuals within a community what behavior is
desired and appropriate, and the consequences of inappropriate behavior.

In Native American origin stories, animals, plants, and even forces of nature like the
snakes that ate the disrespectful young man, are active participants in the story.
Unlike the Judeo-Christian story in which the serpent is the only animal to have a
part mentioned, in Native American stories the animals are very important to the
action of the story; often they help humans to survive. Animals may sometimes be
tricksters, like Coyote of southwestern stories or the Great Hare of the Southeast,
but even they sometimes help humans. You may notice from many of the stories
included in this book, humans and animals cooperate and work together. Many
Native American societies believe that all things in the world have souls or spir-
its: therefore all things in the world must be treated respectfully. Anthropologists
and others who study religious beliefs call this animism, the belief that key parts
of nature have spirits. In foraging societies there are thanksgiving rituals for the
animals that give their lives for us to eat. Failing to enact the rituals may result in
the animals withdrawing themselves. For all living things there are expectations of
behavior, and when humans or animals do not meet these expectations, there are
consequences. For example, in the Apache story told at the beginning of Chapter 1,
the gray crow eats carrion and is turned black for this inappropriate behavior.

The stories from Native American societies included in this book are parts of much
longer cycles of stories that tell what all religious texts tell its followers: where peo-
ple came from; what will happen to you in the afterlife; and what is expected from
you while you are in this world. In telling people what is expected from them while
they are in this world, religious or spiritual beliefs function as part of the larger social
order. People behave properly because their families and their spiritual beliefs tell
them what is appropriate behavior and what will happen to them if they don’t behave
appropriately. In any society the stories that relate religious beliefs also tell what
is considered appropriate behavior in a society. Origin stories are told and retold
within family and community groups. In Native American societies, if a child misbe-
haves, they are told a story about the consequences of similar behavior for a human
or animal.

110 | Susan Stebbins

Ceremonies and rituals are another important part of any religious tradition. Cere-
monies are formal religious or public occasions that are performed according to a
traditional or prescribed form. There are secular ceremonies like the inauguration
of a new president or prime minister, as well as sacred ceremonies that mark reli-
gious occasions such as Easter and Passover. Among many Native American societies
there are rituals or ceremonies that re-enact aspects of origin stories. Among the
Hidatsa this ceremony is called the Naxpike or hide beating, and has many of the
elements common to the Sun Dance practiced by societies throughout the plains.
The ceremonial grounds where the ritual will take place are prepared and blessed by
the elder women, then a post made from a cottonwood tree is placed in the middle
of the grounds by the elder men Young men volunteer to re-enact the suffering and
torture of Spring Boy, the first to person to do the Naxpike. By doing so they achieve
individual visions and help renew the earth for their community (Bonvillain 2001). As
with origin stories, rituals and ceremonies vary from society to society.

In many predominately Christian countries, new governmental leaders often take an

oath of office with their hand on the Bible. Among many Native American societies,
such as the Haudenosaunee or the southwestern societies, the raising up of a new
leader also has heavy religious overtones; the chiefs are fulfilling religious obliga-
tions laid out in their origin stories.

A ritual is much like a ceremony, except there is an emphasis on the actions that are
done according to a prescribed order. Think about the order of rituals you might be
familiar with, like a wedding or services at your church, temple, or mosque. Every-
one knows what is coming next in the ritual and there is significance to the order.
Among foraging societies, there are rituals to thank the animals, birds, and fish that
gave up their lives to be killed for food, and rituals to ensure there will continue to be
animals, fish, and birds for the coming years. These rituals are called renewal cere-
monies. Foraging societies may also have rituals for the growth of plants, particularly
plants that are important for medicines. If the rituals are not done, or done incor-
rectly, the animals or plants may withdraw themselves and no longer be available.

Rituals and ceremonies can meet the needs of individuals and the community. For
instance, horticultural or agricultural societies have ceremonies or rituals to ensure
the growth of their crops. Among the Haudenosaunee, there are ceremonies for the
coming of maple sap and strawberries. There are several for corn: the planting of

Chapter 5: Religion and Spiritual Beliefs | 111

the seeds, the “greening of the corn,” when the plant “tassels,” and the harvesting
of the crop. Many societies also have rituals that renew the earth itself, such as the
Hidatsa’s Naxpike or the Sun Dance practiced by many Plains societies. The Naxpike
or Sun Dance may be done to fulfill an individual’s vow or to invoke a vision. These
rituals also fulfill community needs, bringing the community together and renewing
the earth for the upcoming year.

Some rituals are done as called for, a thanksgiving ritual when an animal is killed,
for example. Additionally, foraging, horticultural, and agricultural Native American
societies typically have a cycle of ceremonies that are done on a yearly or calendric
basis. The cycle of ceremonies includes those having to do with important foods and
crops, such as the Mid-Winter Ceremony, typically held in January. Many Native
American societies have yearly rituals to renew the earth. The Plains’ Sun Dance is
an example of such a ritual. Foraging societies have yearly rituals done to ensure
the renewal of needed animals. Horticultural and agricultural societies have cere-
monies, of which feasts were an important part, to celebrate and thank the earth
for a successful growing season and to ask for a successful succeeding year. These
feast-ceremonies often included speeches by leaders about community responsibil-
ities, speeches by ordinary people about the responsibility of the leaders, and games.
An important game among many Native societies was a ball game, from which the
modern game of lacrosse is probably derived.

In addition to offering thanks, these ceremonies were and are also an opportunity
for the community to come together, iron out grievances, have a good time, and look
for potential marriage partners. Modern-day pow-wows function in a similar way
for contemporary Native American communities. While the traditional ceremonies
are still practiced by many societies, pow-wows are an opportunity for those who
no longer live on the reservation or reserve to come home to celebrate their cul-
ture and family connections. Pow-wows are used to honor respected members of
the community, and currently are often held to welcome returning war veterans and
incorporate them back into the community. These gatherings are an example of how
rituals function on a societal level, bringing the community together for mutual pur-
poses and benefits.

Among Native American societies, rituals and ceremonies may be carried out by
ordinary people, or they may be officiated by religious specialists. For example:

112 | Susan Stebbins

everyone is expected to do a thanksgiving ritual when hunting or fishing. Any man
may pledge himself to do the Sun Dance; but respected women bless and prepare
the dance grounds. Respected older men who have already participated in the Sun
Dance chop down the cottonwood tree that will be used for the dance pole, and they
erect of the pole. Among the Dine’ important rituals are performed by a singer, a
man (women have recently started assuming this role as well) who has spent his life
learning a cycle of over 250 chants or songs that are used in curing and other cer-
emonies, along with the technique and designs of sand paintings that are a part of
the rituals. Many of the songs or chants are curing ceremonies, used to help cure
an individual or even the community. People in Native American societies generally
know what available plants are useful in treating illnesses or diseases. As Jack Weath-
erford has pointed out in Indian Givers and Native Gifts, a number of these plants are
now essential to many modern-day medicines. In addition to these medicinal plants,
religious practitioners could call upon spiritual powers for help in curing someone.
Many medicinal plants themselves were thought to have spiritual powers.

Among the most specialized of spiritual roles is that of a shaman. The word “shaman”
is Siberian in origin and refers to a man or woman who is able to travel to the spirit
world through a trance state. In Native American societies, all people have some
access to spiritual power and knowledge. Shamans typically work for the entire com-
munity to find out why the crops have failed or why hunting has been unsuccessful.
In many Arctic societies, it is believed that the animals they depend on were made
from the fingers of a woman named Sedna, the guardian of the animals. Sedna will
withdraw or remove the animals if hunters have not treated them respectfully and
done the thanksgiving rituals after killing them. If hunting becomes unsuccessful,
the community’s shaman will enter a trance state and travel underwater to where
Sedna lives to find out why the animals have been withdrawn and what must be done
to bring them back. To appease Sedna, the shaman will comb her hair, which she can
no longer do because of the loss of her fingers.

Shamans and trances are part of the spiritual traditions of many societies around the
world. In some societies, anyone may attain a trance through dancing, drumming,
chanting, or the use of hallucinate drugs, but they are not recognized as shamans
because their trances are typically for individual purposes, while a shaman typically
goes into a trance state to benefit his/her community. Shamans are usually called to
what can be very difficult roles in their society. An individual may be called through
Chapter 5: Religion and Spiritual Beliefs | 113
dreams. In many Native American societies, people who have nearly died, particu-
larly through an illness, are thought to have the power to become a shaman because
they have already traveled to the spirit world and returned. Among the societies of
the Northwest coast, individuals might spend their lifetimes training to become a
shaman, often apprenticing themselves to a shaman and inheriting their teacher’s
powers upon their death.

As with the specialized, religious practitioners of any society, shamans undergo

much training and must live according to many taboos (also spelled tabu). Taboos are
things shamans are not suppose to do, though other members of their society may
do them. For example, Catholic nuns and priests take vows of celibacy, something
the rest of us are not expected to do. Some taboos apply to everybody, such as the
taboos prohibiting incest or cannibalism. Taboos may also be temporary. For exam-
ple, Catholics used to not eat meat on Fridays. In some foraging societies, pregnant
women will not eat rabbit meat because they believe it will cause their children to be
timid and fearful. In the United States and Canada, athletes may abstain from certain
foods or behaviors, believing they will be weakened. For shamans, taboos are usually
life long.

In addition to abiding by the taboos, shamans typically live very solitary lives. They
must spend much time learning their skills. In turn, their skills make them very pow-
erful, and potentially vary dangerous. Those who have the power to heal, also have
the power to injure or kill. As a result, shamans are often feared and somewhat
distrusted by their societies. Among the Northwest coast societies, who typically
live in large, extended families, shamans live alone in the woods. When they die,
their homes are abandoned and allowed to decay. Because of their power, special
funeral rites and burial methods are often accorded to shamans. Despite the power
a shaman may have, it is not a life to which many people aspire.

While shamans have special spiritual powers, Native American societies believe all
people—indeed, all living things—have access to spiritual power. One of the ways
spiritual power is attained is through dreams. Revitalization movements were often
started in response to dreams. Dreams are seen as a conduit between people and
the spirit realm. Through dreams the spirits tell people how to live their lives, what
they’re doing wrong, even warning them of danger. Many Native American societies
have rituals in which people seek advice about their dreams. A person with a trou-

114 | Susan Stebbins

bling dream may go to a shaman; or, as among the Haudenosaunee, they may tell it
to the entire community for advice about its meaning. The Iroquois, and many other
Native American societies, believe the messages of dreams must be acted upon or
there will be negative consequences for the individual and the entire community.

Another way individuals have access to spiritual power is through visions. Men and
women will undertake a vision quest as a way to attain spiritual power. In a vision
quest individuals will go to a solitary place and go without food, water, and sleep in
order to obtain a vision. It is believed the spirits will tell individuals what is expected
from them through visions.

The vision quest can be part of life cycle rituals—rituals that mark important tran-
sitions in a person’s life. Not all Native American societies have the same life cycle
rituals, but there are typically rituals to mark birth, the attainment of personhood,
adulthood, marriage, and death. A mother (and sometimes the father) may begin rit-
uals before a child is born. A mother may abstain from some foods, such as rabbit,
to ensure the child will be brave and not run away from danger. Rituals are done to
ensure an easy delivery and a healthy child. Among the Dine’, a blessingway song is
sung over the mother to ensure an easy birth and protect the child and mother from
evil spirits. The mother may also be given medicinals, and the women in her family
may manipulate her abdomen to aid in the birth. After birth and bathing, the baby is
sprinkled with white and yellow corn pollen, and the women of the mother’s family
will gently press the baby’s body to ensure good health.

It is a sad fact that not all children who are born survive. Factors like malnutrition,
diseases, and poor water supplies can all affect the survival rates of infants. In non-
industrial societies, infants who die are generally not given their society’s typical
burial rituals. Many societies believed the infant’s soul enters the body of another
newborn, went into an animal or bird, or returned to the spirit world until it could be
born again. So while ceremonies may be done at birth, a child is often not considered
a person or given a name until she or he has lived for a time. Such rituals are person-
hood rituals, as they incorporate the child into his or her society. Among the Tewa
Pueblo, for example, children are incorporated into their moiety and given a moiety-
specific name during the water-giving ritual when they are eight days old. The Zunis
believe a newborn child is soft or not yet ripened, so it is kept in the house away from
the sun for eight days after birth. Before dawn on the eighth day the child’s umbilical

Chapter 5: Religion and Spiritual Beliefs | 115

cord is buried, connecting the child to Mother Earth and the underworld from which
its ancestors emerged. The baby is washed, put in its cradleboard, and cornmeal is
put in its hands. Its paternal grandmother will carry the baby outside, facing the ris-
ing sun. The baby usually does not receive a name then. Its family will wait until the
baby has hardened and are confident the child will survive (Bonvillain 2001).

Among the most important rituals for any individual are coming of age rituals. Ado-
lescence (teen years), when one is not a child but not yet an adult, is the invention of
industrial societies in which young people are not suppose to engage in adult behav-
iors and are not supposed to be engaged in wage-labor, but instead go to school. In
non-industrial societies, individuals are considered either children or adults. Even
children may engage in labor that provides resources for their families and commu-
nities. Coming of age rituals mark the transition from childhood to adulthood. The
vision quest is an example of a coming of age ritual for young men. Often, for the
first time, they must go into the woods, mountains, or desert by themselves, fast,
and try to stay awake until they receive a vision. Killing an animal for food or fighting
an enemy may also be part of a young man’s coming of age ritual. The young man’s
family will hold a feast and often give-aways, in which goods and resources are given
away, to mark his transition to adulthood.

Young women also go through coming of age rituals, usually when they start men-
struating. Among the most elaborate is the kinaalda, girl’s puberty rite, of the Dine’.
The kinaalda is a four-day ceremony. At dawn and noon on each day, the young
woman, accompanied by friends and family members, races to the east to build up
her strength and endurance. A respected older woman will knead her body (as new-
born babies are kneaded) to mold her to also become a respected woman. The young
woman and her family prepare large amounts of food, particularly corn, to be part of
a community feast held on the fourth day. On this day the young woman washes, and
then her face is painted with white lines. She then distributes food to all the guests
(Schwarz 1997).

Coming of age rituals have several purposes. They show that young men and women
have acquired the skills and knowledge needed for adulthood. They mark the transi-
tion from childhood to adulthood in front of the entire community. Historically, after
a coming of age ritual, newly anointed men and women are able to marry. Thus, like
many religious beliefs and rituals, it functions on the individual and societal level.

116 | Susan Stebbins

In historical Native American societies, marriage ceremonies were not as elaborate
as those of contemporary U.S. and Canadian societies. The ceremony would often
consist of the exchange of gifts between the bride and groom and their families and
a feast. Of more importance were death or funeral rituals. Like birth and adulthood,
death is a transition, so anthropologists often call rituals that mark them rites of
passage. For many Native American societies, birth is the transition from the spirit
world; death is a transition back to the spirit world. Death rituals may be started
before the individual dies to help in this transition. Among the Dine’, for example, a
night way ceremony may be held to help prepare the individual and his/her family
for the death. The Dine’ have a great fear of ghosts; so much of the behavior at the
funeral ritual is to ensure the ghost of the dead does not stay around kin members.
The body is carefully washed and dressed by kin members, but the left moccasin is
put on the right foot and the right moccasin is put on the left foot, to make it diffi-
cult for the ghost to walk. If the person dies at home, the body is carried out through
a hole cut into the wall so as to not contaminate the usual paths of the living. If the
deceased dies in a hogan, the traditional house-structure of the Dine’, the hogan is
abandoned or burnt down. The body is transported in silence to a remote spot. Bur-
ial typically takes place in the ground, or a rock niche that is then sealed. The mourn-
ers return by a different path, go through a purification ceremony, and never speak
the name of the deceased. These observances help to ensure that the ghost of the
deceased does not follow or return to haunt family members (Bonvillain 2001). The
Dine’ believe the deceased must become part of nature or the cosmos, “as a drop of
water is part of a rain cloud.”

Unlike the Dine’, the Lakota have a ritual to keep the spirit of the beloved family
member close, at least a period of time. Called the Ghost Bundle ritual, the belong-
ings, cloths, hair, tools, or ornaments of the deceased are kept in a bundle. The
keeping of a Ghost Bundle requires a great commitment on the part of the family.
A woman of the family is required to always be with the Ghost Bundle. When the
Lakota were on the plains and living in teepees, the Ghost Bundle was the first item
to be removed, and held by the woman in charge of it when the community moved.
She then carried it to the new living site. The first thing to go into the teepee when it
was re-erected was the Ghost Bundle. After the end of a year the bundle is opened,
the spirit or ghost released to the spirit world, and the items distributed to family
members (Deloria 1988). A give-away usually occurs during the opening of the bun-

Chapter 5: Religion and Spiritual Beliefs | 117

dle, so the family must also have economic resources to conduct this ritual. The time
and resources required for keeping a Ghost Bundle all serve to prohibit families from
holding such a ceremony for all deceased family members, only their most honored
members, such as grandparents.

Missionaries and government agents all strove to convert Native American societies
to Christianity, or to at least to stop them from practicing their own religious tra-
ditions. In the United States, from the 1880s until John Collier’s administration of
the Bureau of Indian Affairs in the 1930s, Native American religious practices were
openly prohibited. It was not until 1978 that The American Indian Religious Freedom
Act, which guaranteed the rights of American Indians to practice their religions, was
passed by the U. S. government. The act was amended in 1993 and 1994, largely to
protect the right of Native Americans, particularly those who are members of the
American Indian Church to use peyote as part of their rituals. Peyote is a hallucino-
genic cactus found in the Southwest. The Huichol people of northern Mexico have
used peyote for thousands of years to attain a trance state to commune with Brother
Deer, the creator-spirit of the Huichol. Members of the American Indian Church also
use peyote to attain a trance state. In 1999 the Religious Freedom Act was further
amended to allow Native American prisoners the right to have their own religious
rituals while in jail.

The American Indian Church is a part of the Pan-Indian Movement in the United
States. Because of population loss, the loss or removal from traditional lands, and
the boarding school experience, many Native peoples have lost parts of their culture,
such as language and religious rituals. When Native peoples from across Canada and
the United States would meet through boarding schools, the military, and college,
they would practice what they remembered of their rituals and combine them with
those from other Native peoples they encountered who might have very different
practices. For instance, not all Native peoples partook in sweat baths, the practice
of enduring a very hot steam bath for an extended period of time for both physi-
cal and spiritual cleansing. Sweat baths, like pow-wows, are practices that have been
adopted by many Native American groups throughout North America and are part of
the American Indian Church. Through a process called syncretism, the amalgama-
tion or combining of religions or cultures, practices of the American Indian Church

118 | Susan Stebbins

may also include Christian beliefs. Some people who have taken peyote as part of rit-
uals in the American Indian Church say they see Jesus Christ while in a trance.

Christian missionaries of all denominations liked to think they were successfully

converting Native Americans to their churches. But in many instances the traditional
religions went “underground,” and were practiced secretly in isolated spots. In other
instances, Native American religious traditions were combined with Christian tradi-
tions, as in the American Indian Church. The Christian celebration of Christmas is an
example of syncretism. We have no idea when Jesus Christ was born; but Christians
celebrate it on December 25 because that date coincides with the Roman holiday of
Saturnia, a winter solstice ceremony in which gifts are exchanged. Many attributes
of Christmas, such as lights, trees, and mistletoe are northern European traditions
also associated with the winter solstice. As Christianity spread throughout Europe,
its leaders found it was often better to incorporate these pagan (which simply means
“of or from the country”) traditions into their own, rather than try to eliminate them.
The same process of syncretism happened in Native American societies.

In the Southwest, pueblos where churches were built with Native slave labor are
found the Stations of Cross, statues or paintings that depict events from the cru-
cifixion of Christ. In the Pueblo churches, in front of each station is a small pot or
bowl that contains the corn pollen that is essential to all Pueblo rituals. In front of
grave markers and crosses there are small bowls containing corn pollen. So while
the Puebloan peoples may attend the Catholic churches, it contains elements of the
pre-Christian Pueblo traditions. In the Northeast, at the St. Regis Catholic Church at
the Akwesase, Mohawk church hymns are often sung in Mohawk, and sweet grass is
burnt during Mass instead of incense.

These are just a few examples of the syncretism found in many Native American
communities. People might attend Christian church on Sunday, but they will also
attend the cycle of rituals to thank the earth for its plants and animals, and people
will still have potlatches or kinaaldas to mark the coming of age of their sons and
daughters. People do not randomly adopt new traditions alongside old beliefs. The
people of a society will adopt or accept new traditions and beliefs that best fit with
their existing beliefs and traditions. The Pueblo peoples of the Southwest used corn
pollen as part of religious rituals for thousands of years before the arrival of Christ-
ian missionaries, and they still use corn pollen within the Catholic churches. Just as

Chapter 5: Religion and Spiritual Beliefs | 119

Christians around the world may celebrate Christmas, they celebrate it differently
because the Christmas celebrations are combined with the celebrations of previous
societies. In the United States and Canada people from all over the world have set-
tled here and brought their traditions with them, which through syncretism have
become part of the Christmas traditions practiced here.

Religion and spiritual beliefs were/are important ways the indigenous peoples of the
Americas adapted to and survived the consequences of European contact. After the
American Revolution, the Seneca prophet Handsome Lake was gravely injured, and
while in a coma he had visions. When he regained consciousness, he told those gath-
ered around him that in his visions he had seen The Peacekeeper and Jesus Christ.
Handsome Lake went on to preach a new religious doctrine called the Good News.
This doctrine included the centuries-old beliefs of the Seneca and Haudenosaunee,
along with elements of Christianity, particularly as presented by Quaker missionar-
ies that fit with existing Iroquois beliefs. Handsome Lake didn’t think he was undo-
ing any aspect of The Great Law, but some aspects of the new beliefs taken from
the Christian missionaries showed to be of benefit to his people. The anthropologist
Anthony Wallace, in Death and Rebirth of the Seneca, suggests it was the new beliefs
and practices of the Good News that helped enable the Seneca to survive their dev-
astating losses after the American Revolution and adapt to the changes occurring
around them.

Whether Wallace is correct in his assessment, Handsome Lake’s visions and preach-
ing about the Good News is an example of a revitalization movement. Revitalization
movements have occurred in societies around the world and throughout history.
They continue to occur. These movements are ways for people to cope with and
adjust to societal and cultural changes. Sometimes revitalization movements work
with other societal elements, such as the political system. Such was the case with
the Shawnee Tecumseh and his brother Tenskwatawa, better known as the Shawnee
Prophet.

Unlike many other Native American leaders who would try to hold on to at least
some land and sovereignty by accommodating to European, American, and Canadian
demands, Tecumseh maintained that all land in North America was Indian land and
that no Native American individual or tribe could sell what belonged to all Native
Americans. Tecumseh’s ideas of Native American unity was aided by his brother

120 | Susan Stebbins

Tenskwatawa, whose visions told him that Native peoples had been corrupted by
adopting white ways. Tenskwatawa told the Shawnee to get rid of these corrupt-
ing influences, which included drinking, domesticated animals, and the goods from
European trade, such as guns, and return to their traditional ways. According to Ten-
skwatawa, if enough Native peoples would do this, the Europeans, Americans, and
their effects on Native societies would be supernaturally swept away.

In 1808, Tecumseh and Tenskwatawa established a village called Prophet’s Town

on Tippecanoe Creek in what is now Indiana. Using Prophet’s Town as his base,
Tecumseh traveled down the Mississippi, across the southeast to Florida, west to the
Osages in what is now Missouri, and east to the Iroquois. In his journeys, Tecumseh
did his best to arouse these various Native American societies to join forces against
the Europeans and Americans. Some, particularly in the Old Northwest, joined him,
while others like the Iroquois, still recovering from the ravages of the American Rev-
olution, welcomed him politely, but did not join him.

On June 18, 1812, the United States declared war against Great Britain. Almost imme-
diately, the United States launched invasion forces against the British in Canada.
Once again, Native American communities were torn apart by the enticements of
Great Britain and the United States to join them in war against the other. Like
most Iroquois, Tecumseh saw alignment with the British as the best opportunity to
maintain the sovereignty and land base of Native peoples. Tecumseh and his war-
riors joined England’s General Isaac Brock and his soldiers and helped capture Fort
Detroit and later Fort Dearborn.

Tecumseh’s diplomacy in the Southeast paid off as the Creeks initiated attacks in
Georgia and Tennessee. In the fall, Tecumseh visited the Creek territory with a
promise of British support. He left a bundle of red sticks, one of which was sup-
posed to be broken every day, with the day of the last stick signaling the day of a
concerted attack. Thus, the battles in the Southeast have become known as the Red
Stick War. In 1813, some of Tecumseh’s followers were overeager and started attacks
before the prescribed day. As a result, the American Indian agent Benjamin Hawkins
demanded the guilty parties be punished. Afraid to start a full-blown conflict and
fighting among their own people, the chiefs sent out enforcement parties against the
hostile forces, killing eight of Techumseh’s warriors.

Chapter 5: Religion and Spiritual Beliefs | 121

Unfortunately for Tecumseh and his followers, the able leader Brock, a man Tecum-
seh respected, was killed in battle. The incompetent Colonel Henry Procter replaced
Brock and allowed the massacre of survivors who had advanced to retake Detroit.
When he heard this news, Tecumseh was equally enraged at Procter and his own
troops. Procter was again allowing the killing of prisoners taken when William Henry
Harrison advanced to build Fort Meigs. When Tecumseh heard this from one of his
soldiers, he galloped to the scene, throwing himself upon the killers and stopping
another massacre. Tecumseh is said to have told Procter he was unfit to command
and “to go on put on petticoats.” Two days later, Procter lifted the siege and returned
to Fort Malden, over the protest of Tecumseh.

On September 10 1813, American Admiral Matthew Perry achieved his famous naval
victory on Lake Erie, cutting off the British supply route to the West. Procter
retreated from Detroit, abandoning the Native troops. Harrison eventually caught up
with Tecumseh’s army at the Battle of the Thames on October 5. Tecumseh, the man
who had tried to unify eastern Native Americans against further British or Ameri-
can invasion, was killed in fierce fighting among his troops; a monument topped by
a Canadian flag marks the spot.

The peoples of the Northwest also turned to religion and revitalization movements
to adapt to changes brought by Euro-American power. In 1881, a Salish man in Wash-
ington state named John Slocum grew very ill. His wife Mary and the rest of his fam-
ily thought he had died and were preparing him for the funeral when he revived.
Slocum said God told him the Native peoples would be saved if they gave up drinking,
smoking, and gambling and returned to their traditional ways of sharing resources
and cooperation. However, Slocum warned against some of the traditional rituals,
including healing rituals practiced by shamans.

Slocum’s family and friends organized a church for him to preach from in Shake
Point, Washington. The following year he again became very ill. Contrary to his
instructions, his family brought in a shaman to cure him. His wife Mary became so
distraught about the presence of the shaman, she left their house, crying and pray-
ing. She started to shake and tremble. Returning to their home in this condition, she
began to pray over her husband. He soon returned to health. News of her curative
powers—supposedly brought on by the shaking—soon spread throughout the North-

122 | Susan Stebbins

west and California, which attracted new members to the church. Many members of
Slocum’s Church started to shake at services.

Missionaries and federal and local authorities were critical of what soon became
known as the Shaker Church. To protect their form of religious practice, the Shakers
formerly constituted themselves as a church in 1892. The Church’s governing body is
based on the structure of Protestant churches, with an elected bishop and board of
elders.

The Shaker Church is an excellent example of the syncretism of Christian and Native
American beliefs. Members of the Shaker Church make the sign of the cross and
believe in God, Jesus and the Spirit of God. The Spirit of God is manifested in them
when they start to shake. Church members believe the shaking gives them the power
to heal, foretell the future, and battle evil, all skills of traditional shamans. The Shak-
ers’ belief in the Spirit of God and “Shaker Spirits,” who guide them to heaven after
death, is also consistent with traditional beliefs about the power to contact the spirit
world through trances or visions, the ability to prophesize, and the existence of
helping spirits. The Shakers’ healing trance is similar to shamanistic healing through
a shaman’s trance. The ethical principles of the Shaker Church are similar to those
of other Native American revitalization movements that stress sharing, cooperation,
and refraining from alcohol and disruptive behavior, usually associated with Euro-
American influence. The beliefs of the Shaker Church also fit into the traditional
qualities valued by Northwest societies, especially traditional patterns of status and
rank. Although members of the Shaker Church are often a minority in Northwest
Native communities, they are often the communities’ most influential members.

What is now known as the first Ghost Dance began in 1869 with the spiritual visions
of a prophet named Wodziwob, a Northern Paiute from the Walker River Indian
Reservation in Nevada. In his vision, Wodziwob was told that the Indian dead would
return and with them the old, happy life, provided that Native people tirelessly
devoted themselves to round dances. Native adherents assembled for dances that
lasted four or five days. Dancers collapsed from exhaustion and received visions in
which they saw their deceased relatives. This Ghost Dance spread throughout native
California and up into Oregon in the 1870s. As the 1870 Ghost Dance grew, three sep-
arate cults developed among certain tribes in Native California: the Earth Lodge Cult,
the Bole-Maru, and the Big Head Cult, an offshoot of the Bole-Maru.

Chapter 5: Religion and Spiritual Beliefs | 123

The Earth Lodge Cult came from the practice of the Ghost Dance among the severely
depopulated Northern Yana. It spread from them to various groups including the
Pomo of the southwest. It was similar to the Ghost Dance proper in its excitement
over immediate supernatural phenomenon. But, whereas the Ghost Dance stressed
the return of the dead, the Earth Lodge cult stressed the end of the world. The faith-
ful would be protected from this catastrophe by semi-subterranean structures built
for this specific purpose. The cult’s basic tenets were that world destruction was
imminent and only performing religious rituals in large, specially constructed cere-
monial earth lodges, which usually spanned 40 to 60 feet in diameter, could ensure
survival. Followers of the cult also prophesied that the Native American dead would
rise.

Local prophets appeared in each tribe—each bringing his own special message and
form of enlightenment. For example, in 1871 through 1872, a Long Valley Cache Creek
Pomo medicine man named Richard Taylor preached that to bring on the end of
the world, Pomo people needed to come together in round houses and follow spe-
cific standards of behavior associated with those of white society. They must refuse
alcohol and limit their contact with Euro-Americans. In addition, they must prac-
tice the songs and prayers obtained by Taylor in a vision. This was a powerful and
seductive message for people ravaged by years of conquest. A thousand Pomo peo-
ple constructed 7 roundhouses in which participants could congregate. They danced
faithfully for days, but the world did not end. The Native American dead did not
return. Some might consider this religious movement to have, therefore, been a fail-
ure. Further reflection is warranted, however.

This religious movement arose during a time of tremendous social upheaval. We

need to consider what it provided for the people involved. It gave Pomo people a new
spiritual life upon which to focus, that helped to meld divergent people—remnant
groups from populations devastated by European-introduced diseases and con-
quest—into a new community. This gave them hope and out of it another new form
of spiritual life arose, the Bole-Maru.

The Bole-Maru name comes from the combination of Patwin and Pomo words for
the Ghost Dance cult, which developed among the California Hill Patwin. Followers
of the Bole-Maru cult emphasized individual salvation through a Supreme Being and
a ceremonial dreamer—a person who could see into the future. The Big Head Cult,

124 | Susan Stebbins

which used special masks, was a ceremonial variation of the early Bole-Maru. Both
the Bole-Maru and the Big Head cults prophesied the resurrection of the American
Indian dead, though both downplayed this idea in favor of other religious prophe-
cies. The Big Head cult continued among some native Californians throughout the
1880s.

The Bole-Maru gradually abandoned the doctrines of imminent world catastrophe

and instead stressed concepts of afterlife and of the Supreme Being. Because mem-
bers of the Bole-Maru cult held to this particular belief, many scholars have under-
stood this religious movement to be the transition to adoption of Christianity. More
recently, others have taken into consideration the time at which the Bole Maru
developed and do not believe it was a transition to Christianity. This was a time when
governmental officials had tremendous power over the lives of American Indian peo-
ple. Native American religions were frowned on as primitive and counterproductive.
In fact, Indian religions were formally outlawed with the Religious Crimes Codes
of 1883. The Bole-Maru evolved, therefore, during a time of extreme repression of
Native life. As a result, many traditional practices went underground. Pomo people
could not afford to show how the blending of different religious and cultural ideals
laid the foundation for a fierce form of Indian resistance.

Perhaps the best-known rituals of Native peoples to Euro-Americans are the Sun
Dance and Ghost Dance. Many people of the Plains have a ritual called the Sun
Dance. While the way the Sun Dance was and is done varies from one society to
another, there are many similarities. Traditionally, the Sun Dance is held during the
summer when groups of communities come together to trade, dance, and feast.
Marriage partners were often found during the dancing and feasting. The Sun Dance
was an important part of these activities. A temporary encampment of tipis was set
up in a circle, with a cleared area in the middle. The trunk of a cottonwood tree
was set up in the middle of this cleared area. Many rituals accompanied the clear-
ing of the area, the selection, cutting down and setting up of the pole, often directed
by women. Men would purify themselves in sweat baths and refrain from eating or
drinking before starting to dance around the pole. They would not eat or drink dur-
ing the day as they were dancing, sometimes for up to four days. In some societies,
men pierced the muscles on their chests and backs with hooks connected to leather

Chapter 5: Religion and Spiritual Beliefs | 125

thongs attached to the pole. The men would dance until the hooks broke through
the muscles.

For the community, the Sun Dance was performed in thanksgiving for a bountiful
year and a request for another year of food, health, and success. Individual men
would pledge to do the Sun Dance to honor a lost family member and in thanks that
a family member (particularly a child) had recovered from injuries or illness. Today
men and women will pledge to do the Sun Dance to maintain their sobriety from
alcohol or drugs, as well as to honor lost family members or in thanksgiving that a
family member has recovered from illness. I know one young man who was told by
an elder he should pledge the Sun Dance in thanksgiving for the birth of his daugh-
ter and to understand the pain her mother went through in giving her birth. Many
veterans pledge the Sun Dance in thanksgiving for returning home safely and to help
recover from the horrors of war.

Missionaries and government officials tried to stop the Sun Dance among the Plains
peoples. While its practice was reduced, for many reservations the ritual went
underground and was practiced in secret at remote spots. In the United States
the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (1978) guaranteed the rights of Native
Americans to practice their religious ceremonies and rituals, including the Sun
Dance, although missionaries and government representatives still tried to stop
many practices. During his tenure as director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, John
Collier tried to eliminate restrictions on Native American religious rituals and other
cultural traditions. Some of the varieties of the Sun Dance may have been lost, but in
general, the memories of communities kept the ritual alive. Following times of war,
many veterans returning to both reservation and urban homes sought out elders to
show them how the Sun Dance was done. As a result, the Sun Dance has experi-
enced a resurgence. Native men and women from around the country, along with
some Euro-Americans, often travel to the plains to participate in the Sun Dance.

Many societies of the plains also adopted an outgrowth of the 1869 Ghost Dance
as part of their religious rituals. Among the Plains peoples, the Ghost Dance largely
consisted of people dancing in a circle for hours or even days at a time. It was their
belief that if they danced long enough, the Creator would wipe the Euro-Americans
away by rolling the surface of the earth up like a giant carpet. Under that surface
would be a new and pristine earth where lost family members and the important

126 | Susan Stebbins

bison would be found again. After the victory at Little Big Horn, the Cheyenne and
Lakota tried to evade the U.S. Army that was pursuing them. For a time, Sitting
Bull and his people resided in western Canada. Ultimately, the Cheyenne and Lakota
returned to their homelands. Many were rounded up by the Army and placed on
reservations. Remember the Ghost Dance is an example of a revitalization move-
ment. In this time of distress, many Plains peoples started doing the Ghost Dance in
an attempt to bring back their traditional lifestyles. Government officials were con-
vinced that the Ghost Dance was dangerous and the Lakota were planning another
uprising. Indian agents decided to withhold rations until the Ghost Dance stopped.
Ethnologist James Moody submitted a report to government officials, assuring them
that the Ghost Dance was a peaceful religious ritual to help the Native peoples adjust
to the trauma they were experiencing and that rations and blankets should be imme-
diately given to the people, but government officials remained unconvinced. On
December 15, 1890, Sitting Bull was shot and killed while being arrested, apparently
by a Lakota policeman. The Ghost Dance continued and tensions continued to esca-
late among the U.S. government officials and the Lakota. At dawn on December 29,
the Army attacked the encampment of Big Foot and his followers at Wounded Knee
Creek. More than 300 men, women, and children were massacred and buried in a
mass grave. Ironically, Big Foot was traveling to the Pine Ridge Reservation to nego-
tiate a resolution to the tensions.

Reports of the massacre in newspapers and by military officials resulted in an official

investigation. The investigation found the government had:

• Failed to provide the seeds and agricultural implements promised for farming,
• Failed to provide the cows and oxen promised,
• Failed to issue the annuity supplies to which the Lakota were entitled through
treaties,
• Failed to pay for the horses taken from the Indians

(Mooney 1965:79-80)

In the past, as today, the dominant culture can be very uncomfortable with religious
practices that are different then their own. In any society, religious and spiritual
beliefs and practices are important to most individuals in that society, and to the
society itself, as it adjusts and adapts to new cultural circumstances. Sometimes

Chapter 5: Religion and Spiritual Beliefs | 127

these changes are part of the natural evolution or change in a society: such as in the
United States or Canada in which people have to adjust to changes brought about
by science and technology or in the cases of indigenous peoples who have to adjust
to changes brought on by dominant political entities. Human societies have had to
adapt to another since one group of extended kin met another group of extended
kin—in other words for thousands of years. As humans, we have adapted in various
ways. Religious and spiritual beliefs have been and continue to be one of those ways.

Suggested Questions

What does the story about White Buffalo Woman tell you about Sioux society?

Write a description of a ritual you have witnessed or participated in. Would this ritual
tell a visitor something about your society?

Can you give an example of a ritual you are familiar with in which playing games is
an important part?

Does the society or community in which you live have any rituals, such as the Sun
Dance, to help soldiers who have participated in warfare re-integrate himself or her-
self back into broader society? Do you think this would be a good idea? Why?

What is an example of a taboo in your society?

Does your society have a coming of age ritual? Can you write a description of it?

If you don’t think your society has a coming of age ritual, do you think it should? Can
you give some suggestions as to what the ritual would be like?

Suggested Resources

For more about Dine’ ceremonies, I recommend the previously mentioned Molded In
the Image of Changing Woman, by Maureen Trudell Schwarz.

128 | Susan Stebbins

There is a lot of false information about shamans available. For information that is
based on research, I recommend looking up the topic in any of a number of books
about the anthropological study of religion.

For more information about rituals and religious beliefs of the Puebloan peoples, I
recommend The Tewa World: Space, Time Being and Becoming in a Pueblo Society, by
Alfonso Ortiz.

Ella Deloria’s Waterlily contains much information about religious rituals, including
the Sun Dance and Ghost Bundle.

Chapter 5: Religion and Spiritual Beliefs | 129

Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art?

The Legend of the Flute (Brule Sioux)

Many generations ago, the people had drums, gourd rattles, and bull-roarers, but no
flutes. At that long-ago time a young man went out to hunt. Meat was scarce, and the
people in his camp were hungry. He found the tracks of an elk and followed them for a
long time. The elk, wise and swift, is the one who owns the love charm. If a man pos-
sesses elk medicine, the girl he likes can’t help sleeping with him. He will also be a lucky
hunter. This young man I’m talking about had no elk medicine.

After many hours he finally sighted his game. He was skilled with bow and arrows, and
had a fine new bow and quiver full of straight, well-feathered, flint-tipped arrows. Yet
the elk always managed to stay just out of range, leading him on and on. The young
man was so intent on following his prey that he hardly noticed where he went.

When night came, he found himself deep inside a thick forest. The tracks disappeared
and so had the elk, and there was no moon. He realized he was lost and that it was too
dark to find his way out. Luckily he came upon a stream with cool, clear water. And he
had been careful enough to bring a bag of wasna—dried meat pounded with berries and
kidney fat—strong food that will keep a man going for a few days. After he had drunk
and eaten, he rolled himself into his fur robe, propped his back against a tree, and tried
to rest. But he couldn’t sleep; the forest was full of strange noises, the cries of night ani-
mals, the hooting of owls, the groaning of trees in the wind. It was if he heard these
sounds for the first time.

Suddenly there was an entirely new sound, of a kind neither he nor anyone else had
ever heard before. It was mournful and ghost-like. It made him afraid, so that he drew
his robe tightly about himself and reached for his bow to make sure that it was prop-
erly strung. On the other hand the sound was like a song, sad but beautiful, full of love,
hope, and yearning. Then before he knew it, he was asleep. He dreamed that the bird
called wagnuka, the redheaded woodpecker, appeared singing the strangely beautiful
song and telling him: “Follow me and I will teach you.”

Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art? | 131

When the hunter awoke, the sun was already high. On a branch of the tree against
which he was leaning, he saw a redheaded woodpecker. The bird flew away to another
tree, and another, but never very far, looking back all the time at the young man as if to
say: “Come on!” Then once more he heard that wonderful song, and his heart yearned
to find the singer. Flying toward the sound, leading the hunter, the bird flitted through
the trees, while its bright red top made it easier to follow. At last it alighted on a cedar
tree and began hammering on a branch, making a noise like the fast beating of a small
drum. Suddenly there was a gust of wind, and again the hunter heard that beautiful
sound right above him.

Then he discovered that the song came from the dead branch that the woodpecker was
tapping with his beak. He realized also that it was the wind that made the sound as it
whistled through the holes the bird had drilled.

“Kola, friend,” said the hunter, “let me take this branch home. You can make yourself
another.”

He took the branch, a hollow piece of wood full of woodpecker holes that was the length
of his forearm. He walked back to his village bringing no meat, but happy all the same.

In his tipi the young man tried to make the branch sing for him. He blew on it, he waved
it around; no sound came. It made him sad, he wanted so much to hear that wonder-
ful sound. He purified himself in the sweat lodge and climbed to the top of a lonely hill.
There, resting with his back against a large rock, he fasted, going without food or water
for four days and nights, crying for a vision which would tell him how to make the
branch sing. In the middle of the fourth night, wagnuka, the bird with the bright-red
top, appeared, saying, “Watch me,” turning himself into a man, showing the hunter how
to make the branch sing, saying again and again: “Watch this, now.” And in his dream
the young man watched and observed very carefully.

When he awoke, he found a cedar tree. He broke off a branch and, working many hours,
hollowed it out with a bowstring drill, just as he had seen the woodpecker do it in his
dream. He whittled the branch into the shape of a bird’s head with a long neck and an
open beak. He painted the top of the bird’s head with washasha, the sacred red color. He
prayed. He smoked the branch up with incense of burning sage, cedar and sweet grass.
He fingered the holes as he had seen the man-bird do in his vision, meanwhile blow-
ing softly into the mouthpiece. All at once there was the song, ghost-like and beautiful
132 | Susan Stebbins
beyond words drifting all the way to the village, where the people were astounded and
joyful to hear it. With the help of the wind and the woodpecker, the young man had
brought them the first flute.

Told by Henry Crow Dog in New York City, 1967 and recorded by Richard Erdoes
(Erdoes and Ortiz)

In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Western anthropologists and the
general public frequently referred to non-Western societies as being in stages of
savagery, barbarism, or civilization. Assumptions were made about societies based
on elements such as religion, language (particularly having a written language), kin-
ship organization, political and economic organization, how a society gathered or
produced resources, and the arts, or expressive culture, of the society. Societies
were ranked based on these elements and how they compared to Western societies.
Nomadic societies were thought of as being in a state of savagery; horticultural and
pastoral societies were seen as being in a state of barbarism; and the agricultural
Western societies were seen as civilized. The defining attribute of a civilized society
was agriculture, although non-Western agricultural societies were often categorized
as barbaric. At this time in history, it was thought that agriculture made it possible
for societies to develop mathematics, science, and the arts. In order to survive, all
humans and their societies must have mathematical and scientific knowledge. To
survive, humans have made observations about their surroundings and drawn con-
clusions from those observations. Today, scientists refer to this process as the sci-
entific method. Mathematics is necessary to determine when plants or animals will
be available, if they are growing scarce in a particular area, and how much food is
necessary to feed a group of people.

This concept of science and mathematics may be different than what we typically
think of when we hear the words, but these kinds of observations, conclusions, and
calculations are the basis of the mathematics and science of twenty-first century
post-Industrial societies. The same can be said about the art of indigenous societies.
Their works may not look like Western art, the society may not even have a word
for “art,” but it is artistic expression nonetheless. In Native American societies, artis-
tic expression was used in the making of utilitarian items such as blankets, pottery,
weavings, pipes, jewelry, drums, cradleboards, clothing, shoes, and even skins used
for housing. Artistic expression was also shown in music, dance, and storytelling.

Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art? | 133

Anthropologists and archaeologists use the artistic artifacts found in contemporary
societies and burial sites of others as a way to identify one Native American society
from another. Different Native American societies used different artistic elements in
their pottery, weaving, and beading designs. Stories, songs, chants, and dances can
be considered the property of a particular society, and, in some cases, of a particular
kin group. The elements of these art forms changed over time before the Europeans
came, and continued to change after, just as European and American artistic styles
have changed throughout time.

The oldest form of art is storytelling. Humans have been capable of speech for
100,000 years. Archaeologists have evidence of ritual behavior in human habitation
and burial sites between 60,000 and 80,000 years ago. This is significant, because if
humans were engaged in symbolic behavior, then they were also capable of symbolic
language—language that told of the past and speculated about the future. Symbolic
language would be part of the rituals and ceremonies performed and of the stories
people told each other. These stories could be about ancestors and the history of the
society, but could also be about questions such as: Where did we come from? Why
are we here? Why do we perform ceremonies and rituals? What are our relation-
ships with each other and other aspects of the world? Each chapter of this book has
started with an example from the oral tradition—the stories—of a different society,
and each of these stories has addressed one or more of these questions.

Stories have been told by all societies throughout human history. Storytelling
occurred when human societies were all nomadic and foragers and have continued
to the present. There is evidence of very ancient stories in much of the folklore from
societies through all parts of the world. Much of this ancient folklore is retold in what
are now children’s fairy tales and stories of heroes. With the development of writ-
ing, stories started to be documented for others to read. The Greeks and Romans
even wrote down plays that reflected their oral traditions; some that are still extant
today. In the early part of the twentieth century motion pictures (movies) started
telling stories, both old and new. But even the new stories had elements from the
past. Today, some of us sit around campfires listening or telling stories, but most of
us sit around our digital campfires—televisions and computers—watching stories. As
with our books and movies, many of these stories reflect elements of our own and
others’ oral traditions.

134 | Susan Stebbins

Think about the movies, television shows, or even plays that you’ve seen recently.
Some of them are simply entertainment: to make you laugh, cry, or even scare
you. But others can be of educational or inspirational value. An example is the
movie Schindler’s List, the story of a man who saved many Jewish people from the
Nazi Holocaust during World War II. The movie told people about a little-known
man—one who should be known and remembered for his heroism. The movie will
continue to educate people about the Holocaust for generations to come, much like
the plays of Shakespeare continue to inform us about Elizabethan England. The film
also inspires people. As one woman I know said after seeing the film, “I’ll never know-
ingly hurt anyone ever again.” The stories of pre-Industrial societies also informed
and inspired the people who heard them. Oral traditions taught the origins and his-
tory of the society, illustrating what was important to them and how people should
behave toward one another. Each chapter in this book begins with a story from the
oral tradition of a Native American society that illustrates the topic being discussed
in the chapter: the importance of kin groups, political organization, resource-get-
ting, origin stories, and in this chapter, how the flute came to the Sioux people.
What have you learned from these stories about the Native societies from which they
came? Based on these stories, what do you think was of importance to these soci-
eties? What similarities do you see about the different societies who tell these sto-
ries? What similarities do you see reflected in these stories with Euro-American or
Canadian societies; what differences?

While oral tradition continues to be of great importance to Native American soci-

eties, many Native peoples have also adapted written and visual arts to tell stories.
Contemporary Native American writers work within the forms of novels, short sto-
ries, essays, and poetry, as well as history and anthropology books. Like Euro-Amer-
ican and Canadian poets, many Native American poets participate in poetry slams
and utilize the styles of spoken word, rap, and hip-hop. Native American writers such
as Sherman Alexie (Smoke Signals, The Fancy Dancer), Greg Sarris (Grand Avenue),
and Tom King (As Long as the Grass Grows and the River Runs, Medicine River) have
had their novels and short stories made into movies. Chris Eyres has directed many
films, including Smoke Signals and the We Shall Remain series for PBS in the United
States. In Canada and the United States, there are many Native filmmakers who
have made films about their communities or issues important to Native peoples. For
example, the Choctaw writer LeAnne Howe (The Shell Shaker, The Miko Kings) has

Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art? | 135

written the scripts for films about Native American baseball including, Playing for
Time, and a study of the Qualla Cherokee community in North Carolina, Spiral of Fire.

In contemporary Native American societies, some people use modern technology

to tell stories. The Tewa musician and storyteller Robert Maribell uses performance
to illustrate Tewa stories. He dresses puppets and actors in elaborate masks and
costumes, and they perform stories on stage. Many of these have been filmed and
can be bought or viewed online. The Akwesasne Mohawk artist and high school
teacher Katsitsionni Fox video records her students performing the Haudenosaunee
origin stories in Mohawk. The Onondaga writer Eric Gansworth has filmed parts
of the Haudenosaunee oral tradition, but with some twists to reflect modern con-
cerns, as has Mohawk multimedia artist Shelly Niro. Canadian author Thomas King
writes contemporary novels and short stories that incorporate traditional elements
like tricksters. Coyote, in one example, gets on an airplane and goes to Ottawa to
straighten out Parliament. Across Indian Country, artists, writers and storytellers
continue to tell the stories of their societies—both as they were and as they are.

The list of Native American authors is vast and ever-growing. There are a number of
fairly up-to-date websites that list authors and their works. It has been harder for
Native storytellers to break into movies and television, but some have succeeded. In
Canada, for instance, in addition to movies like Dance Me Outside and Medicine River,
there have been some television shows, such as North of 60 and Artic Air that have
primarily focused on contemporary indigenous communities. The important word in
that sentence is “contemporary”. Literature, movies and television shows that have
Native American influences are contemporary, taking place in the present, not the
past.

Some recent movies from the United States also reflect contemporary Native Amer-
ican storytelling. For example, Smoke Signals was based on the stories in The Lone
Ranger and Tonto Fistfight in Heaven, by the well-known Coeur d’Alene writer Sher-
man Alexie and also features a cast of Native American actors. Smoke Signals is a
contemporary story about two young men on the Spokane Reservation. Unlike in
Canada, the United States has no television shows that I am aware of that are focused
on contemporary Native peoples. Native American appearances on U.S. television
are scarce. Adam Beach, one of the stars of Smoke Signals and Artic Air, was briefly
on Law and Order, SVU. The series Longmire takes place in a small town that is

136 | Susan Stebbins

adjacent to a Cheyenne reservation. A number of episodes have focused on con-
temporary issues, such as the adoption of children away from the reservation and
disenrollment of tribal members. Lou Diamond Phillips co-stars as Henry Standing
Bear, a character that straddles both a contemporary and traditional role in his com-
munity. Other examples are few and far between, but let us hope that the United
States follows Canada’s example and that novels and television shows begin to fea-
ture more Native Americans.

Storytellers of all kinds will continue to tell and perform the oral traditions of their
society. Please be aware of them, support them, and remember: the stories of one
society are not reflective of all societies.

Masks were and are an important component of Native American storytelling, as

were rituals and ceremonies. The nations of the Northwest coast, the Hau-
denosaunee, the Zuni, and the Hopi are just a few examples of Native societies whose
masks are desired by museums and individuals who collect Native American arti-
facts. Many masks are housed in museum collections to protect them. But for these
Native American societies, masks have special religious purposes. For the Zuni and
Hopi the masks represent spirits who visit their villages during religious festivals. It
is an honor for an individual to wear a mask, which among the Zuni can encase the
whole body, to take on the role of the god or spirit represented. Dances are often
an important part of the spirits’ visit. After they leave the village, children are given
small dolls called kachinas, which also represent the gods and spirits and will remind
the children of the lessons they each teach to the society.

The Haudenosaunee have False Face Masks that depict Flint, one of the twin sons
of Sky Woman. His face is distorted because he was hit in the face by a tree while
attempting to cheat his twin Sapling in a contest. Honored Haudenosaunee men
belong to False Face Societies. Each society has a Mistress of the Masks, a woman
who takes care of the masks and sees they are regularly “fed” tobacco. The men of
these societies use masks in healing ceremonies, particularly for ailments involving
the face and neck. False Face Masks should only be seen during such ceremonies.

Some of the most elaborate masks are made by the societies of the Northwest coast.
The masks are often referred to as spirit masks, because they represent the spirits
and gods of these peoples. The masks also can reveal the spirits of individuals, par-

Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art? | 137

ticularly shamans. Some very special masks can open to reveal an inner mask, just as
people may have an outer mask hiding an inner spirit.

While museums or private collectors may think they are protecting such artifacts,
for Native peoples these are sacred items that should be returned to Native com-
munities according to laws such as the Native American Repatriation and Graves
Protection Act, as discussed in the Introduction. While this process is slowly taking
place with museums in the United States, Native communities have asked that arti-
facts such as masks and kachinas that have religious significance not be put on pub-
lic exhibition. Some museums are complying with these requests; others are not. You
may notice I have not included any pictures of these items.

Art almost always has important significance for a society; and art can tell us much
about that society. Art may provide an outsider with the only understanding they
may have about another society. What do you think the average person knows about
ancient societies like Greece or Rome? Is the average person knowledgeable about
their political organization? What resources they depended on and how they were
distributed? How their kin groups were organized? Most are unaware of any details
regarding these areas, but they do recognize one thing: the art. Greek and Roman
sculpture, architecture, surviving paintings and murals, and even stories and plays
that continue to be told and performed in our societies are what most of us know
and remember about these ancient societies. What do you think will be remembered
about the contemporary United States or Canada centuries from now?

Both traditional and contemporary styles of music continue to be played by Native

American musicians and singers. Traditional music is essential for the dancing at
any pow-wow. Pow-wow music typically consists of chanting and drumming. The
pow-wow tradition of dancing, chanting, and drumming that developed is largely
inter-tribal—it incorporates elements from many tribes and is not specific to any one
particular group. Within the overall tradition, the style of chants, as well as the struc-
ture of the drums, and the drumming styles, vary from society to society insofar as
there are northern styles and southern styles. Men typically do the drumming and
chanting, but as fewer men are able to go through the required training, women have
started to take on these roles to ensure traditions will continue. The words and vocal
styles—which range from high-pitched to low registers—of the chants vary from area
to area. In pow-wow dance, the style of the dancing, drumming, and chanting will

138 | Susan Stebbins

identify the society from which it originated. Chanting and drumming styles, as well
as dancing styles, are also often borrowed, and guest drummers and dancers may
participate in pow-wows, particularly in dances specifically called inter-tribal. Tra-
ditional chanting and drumming are also important to the healing ceremonies that
are still conducted in many societies.

While traditional music continues to be of importance to Native societies, some

artists have also adapted to modern styles. Robert Mirabell is such an artist; he
presents music and stories in a way that makes them better understood by non-
Native people. Perhaps one of the best-known Native musicians is the flutist R. Car-
los Nakai. Nakai plays traditional southwestern flutes and music, but he also plays
contemporary music on the flutes. Country music is typically very popular in Indian
Country, so many musicians may play both traditional music and perform in a coun-
try band. Some write songs that reflect concerns of their Native communities, as
do blues groups like Corn Bread. Some Native American musicians have adapted
the musical styles of the dominant culture, including hip-hop (the Cherokee rap-
per Gary “Litefoot” Davis), or have joined jazz, rock, blues, and other bands, or clas-
sical orchestras. Some musicians, for example, folk singer Buffy Saint-Marie, have
become very well-known performing popular styles of music that include Native
American issues (“Now That the Buffalo Are Gone”) as well American or Canadian
standard styles of popular music. St. Marie wrote the song “Up Where We Belong” for
the movie An Officer and a Gentleman, which is not a Native-themed movie. Native
musicians may also sing songs in a contemporary style, but in their own languages,
or translate popular American or Canadian songs into their languages. While dri-
ving through the Akwesasne Mohawk reservation one afternoon, I heard the popular
country song “Jackson” being sung in Mohawk by a father/daughter duo. In this ver-
sion of the song, Kahnawake, a Mohawk reserve in the province of Quebec, in Canada
replaces the city of Jackson.

Dancing is another form of artistic expression that continues to be important in

Native American societies. Dance was so important to Native communities that it is
hard to list all the ways it was incorporated into daily life. Native peoples danced to
celebrate births, marriages, successful harvest or hunts, to ask the spirits for a suc-
cessfu l harvest or hunt, to mark a death, to prepare for war, to celebrate victory over
enemies, or just because they wanted to dance. Dance was also an important part
of special religious occasions like the Sun Dance. As people in the plains were striv-
Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art? | 139
ing to survive deaths and displacement in the 1870s, the Ghost Dance brought them
hope that their society could be revitalized. The Sun Dance and the Ghost Dance are
still regularly performed in many Native societies.

One of the most visible ways dance continues to be of importance to contemporary

Native American societies is as part of a pow-wow.

Over time, pow-wows evolved into a much larger artistic expression. They are per-
formed in most Native communities, and in cities that have a large number of Native
residents, pow-wows are held by Native Cultural Centers. Many pow-wows welcome
Native drummers (drumming is the only musical accompaniment to the dancing)
and dancers from around the Americas. Societies have different dances and proto-
col, but during the twentieth century, many societies have borrowed from others.
For example, a popular Haudenosaunee social dance is the Alligator Dance, obvi-
ously borrowed from societies to the south. Generally social or tribal dances are
done by women and men and are frequently open to anyone who would like to par-
ticipate. There are men’s and women’s dances that have turned into competitions in
the twentieth century, such as Shawl Dress dancing for women and Fancy Dance for
men.

A pow–wow generally starts at noon with a grand entry in which all the dancers, in
their tribal regalia, dance to the drums into the pow-wow grounds. Most pow-wows
have multiple drumming groups that will take turns throughout the day. A veteran
and mother of a veteran, followed by the head woman and male dancers, lead the
grand entry. They are followed by the male dancers, often in groups based on the
type of dance they will do (Smoke Dance, Eagle Dance, Fancy Dance) and the women
dancers, also in groups of Traditional, Shawl or Jingle Dress dancers, followed by
children referred to as Tiny Tots. The regalia generally change to match the differ-
ent styles of dancing. The regalia worn by women, men, and children are art forms in
themselves, typically made by the dancers and their families. The regalia incorporate
traditional and modern elements. A few years ago, old CDs were very popular on the
male Fancy Dancers.

The women and men are also generally divided by age: seniors, adults, teens, and
children under 12, although the Tiny Tots often dance with a parent. It is not unusual
to see a baby, in regalia, carried by a parent during Grand Entry. An Honoring Dance,

140 | Susan Stebbins

to mark the death of an individual, the success of community members, or to honor
returning veterans, may follow the Grand Entry. One of the most moving Honoring
Dances I have seen was on the Akwesasne Mohawk Reservation shortly after 9/11.
The dance honored men who had been working construction in New York City when
the Twin Towers were destroyed. Many of these men rushed to the scene to help
rescue people. Some of these men had worked to construct the towers years before.

CC-BY-SA 3.0 by Joe Mabel. Drummers at the Seafair Indian Days

Pow-wow

During a pow-wow, which generally starts on Friday and goes through Sunday, there
are social dances, in which anyone may participate, and the more competitive tribal
dances. Competitive dancers, both men and women, have registered to compete;
observers will see numbers on their regalia. There are referees on the dance grounds
that judge the skill of the dancers and make sure protocols are followed. For exam-
ple, a dancer will be disqualified if a part of his/her regalia falls to the ground. The
falling of an eagle feather, used in the regalia for the men’s Eagle Dance, requires
that the dancing stop and the grounds be re-blessed. Dancers are awarded cash and
other prizes for winning the competitive dances.

Pow-wows are now held around Canada and the United States during the summer.
There are families who spend summer weekends on the “Pow-Wow Circuit,” travel-
ing from Native community-to-community and camping at the pow-wow grounds
Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art? | 141
for the weekend. Pow-wows have become a way for Native peoples to continue to
participate in and demonstrate their culture, and to meet people from other Native
communities. People who no longer live at their home reservations will come home
for the pow-wow. In urban areas it is an opportunity for Native peoples to come
together and participate in their society’s music and dance traditions. Young peo-
ple continue to look for possible marriage partners at pow-wows. But it is not just
the drummers, dancers, and tourists who come to pow-wows; there are also native
vendors who are selling other forms of expressive culture such as weavings, pottery,
and baskets.

For thousands of years, pottery and bas-

kets have been utilitarian items found in
all societies around the world. Pottery
was used to carry water and to store
seeds or wine and to cook. Baskets were
also used to carry and store items.
Weaving designs are found in clothing,
rugs, blankets, and housing materials.
People around the world have created
such art, though those in Western soci-
eties often refer to these items as
“crafts.” These were items to be used in
day-to-day activities, not simply to put
CC-BY-SA 3.0 by wikipedia user Brian0918.
on the walls and shelves to be looked at Seed pot pottery from Acoma Pueblo.
and admired. While societies in Europe
and Asia developed art forms to be admired and not used, these all evolved from ear-
lier utilitarian art forms. Colors, designs, and techniques all continued to be used as
people settled into permanent households and had the resources or wealth to create
or buy items that had no utilitarian use or value. During the nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries, when anthropologists or people in the general public said that
indigenous peoples around the world did not have art, they were operating under
the perception that art cannot be utilized in everyday life. But indigenous people
around the world did have art that was expressed as part of utilitarian items. Imagine
the commitment and care of a woman beading her children’s moccasins that she
knows will soon be outgrown or worn out, and still taking the time to bead elaborate

142 | Susan Stebbins

designs that have been handed down from mother to daughter for generations in her
family. Imagine a potter taking the time to paint designs on a pot he knows may be
broken the first time it is used to store corn kernels. Imagine the value people of the
society would give to these items made with such care and attention by their family
members.

Displayed at Museum of Man, San Diego, California. Dec. 2007 CC-BY-SA 3.0 by Durova. Beaded
moccasins originally from the estate of Chief Washakie, Wind River Reservation (Shoshone),
Wyoming

It is difficult to write about the art of Native American societies from a general per-
spective, because artistic designs varied according to the communities who made
them. If you have taken art history classes, you know the art of Renaissance Italy was
very different than that of France or northern Europe. The same is true of Native
American art. Examples of pottery, baskets, and sometimes weavings are found in
archaeological sites. As in dance and chant styles, designs, and techniques pot-
tery and weaving vary from society to society. These artifacts can be used to iden-

Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art? | 143

tify a society or those that might be related to or descended from one another
(often called Mother and Daughter Cultures). These items can be useful to track the
migrations of societies, whether those societies are migratory, or horticultural that
migrated because of environmental factors. These artifacts can also illustrate how
a society might expand. The Haudenosaunee and Cherokees both grew to cover a
vast territory in the Northeast and Southeast. Researchers today can tell a site is
Iroquoian or Cherokee by the designs and techniques used in tools, weavings, and
pottery. So while a particular artifact may be identified as belonging to a particular
society, it by no means is indicative of all American Indian art.

In the nineteenth century, many Euro-Americans and Canadians thought those First
Peoples caught inside their political boundaries would become extinct or assimilate
into the dominant society. This belief, along with the rise of museums that sought
to preserve the arts and crafts of lost societies, led to the collection of artifacts
of indigenous societies around the world. Anthropologists, trading posts owners,
missionaries, teachers, and many others started collecting artifacts from the Native
societies with which they worked. Anthropologists generally collected for museums,
while many others collected for their own private collections. Items were sometimes
given as gifts by Native peoples, but more often were bought from people desper-
ate for money. Items were taken from archaeological sites, and even from burial
grounds. Museums in the United States and Canada (as well as in Europe) often had
exhibit halls containing the artifacts and art of Native Americans. Typically the items
were displayed by cultural-geographic area. Museum curators believed societies liv-
ing in the same geographic area would share cultural traits, thus their artifacts would
display commonalities. This thinking does not take into account that a given society
might be a recent arrival to a geographic area, or that societies occupying an area
might have very different languages, religious beliefs, and cultural histories. Indeed,
some art forms may be found only in a few societies. The carving of soapstone and
whalebone, for example, is generally only found in Arctic and Sub-Arctic societies.

144 | Susan Stebbins

 Photo rights held by the author. Sculpture of a seal hunter in soapstone.

Perhaps some of the earliest examples of visual art were also the most permanent:
rock art. Centuries ago, people around the world painted or craved designs onto
rock walls. These pictographs used symbols to convey information that would have
been understood by the contemporaries of the people who made them, if not by
researchers today. Rock art may have been used to indicate the location of a stored
cache of food, may have given directions to where people had moved, may have told
of a great battle or hunt, or may have simply stated that a group of people occupied
that space. Many figures found in rock art may have had religious or other social
proposes. Snakes (associated with the coming of rain), as well as rainbows, thun-
derbolts, and other illustrations of rain are found throughout the Southwest. As are
human shapes with horns, often indicative of a shaman. Perhaps the best known
of southwestern rock art figures is Kokopelli. Kokopelli is an obviously male figure

Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art? | 145

often shown with a flute and also as a hunchback, though some interpretations are
that he is carrying a bag of seeds on his back. Kokopelli has been associated with
agricultural and fertility. He’s also sometimes known as a trickster. Whatever the
people who originally carved his image into rock thought him to be, today Kokopelli’s
image is found on jewelry and t-shirts, an example of the evolution of an art style.

CC-BY-SA 3.0 by Einar Einarsson Kvaran. Kokopelli petroglyph in New

Mexico, June 2009.

While changes in expressive culture changed from society to society in the Americas
before European contact, weavings, textiles, baskets, and pottery changed dramat-
ically with the new introduction of new materials (for example, glass beads replac-
146 | Susan Stebbins
ing porcupine quills) and designs brought by the settlers. Pre- and post-contact
weavings and textiles deteriorate easily in most climates. Fortunately some were
collected in the nineteenth or early twentieth centuries and preserved in muse-
ums. Textiles would include the animal skins Native peoples would prepare to use
as clothing, blankets, and, in some cases, the walls of their housing. The technology
of preparing the skins is a long, labor-intensive process that was typically done by
women. Native women knew that the skins of animals killed in the late spring and
summer typically had been affected by parasites and would not last long, thus were
good material for children who would soon outgrow their clothing. They knew how
to make the skins waterproof, typically by rubbing the skins with animal brains, and
they sewed stitches (with needles made from animal bones and thread made from
animal sinew) that did not leak in water or snow. In addition to the time needed to
prepare skins, women would also take the time to paint or bead elaborate designs on
the materials. Vivid colors were typically used in the traditional designs of the soci-
ety or a kin group. Thus, collectors can typically tell the society of the women who
made the textiles.

Native women would also bead designs on clothing and footwear that are often
called moccasins, although that is not a word used by all Native peoples. Before
European contact, porcupine quills, often dyed different colors, were used as dec-
orating materials. After contact, glass beads became important trade items for this
purpose. Like the painted designs, beaded designs would also be handed down from
mother to daughter in a society.

Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art? | 147

 CC-BY-SA 3.0 by Wolfgage Sauber. Sioux parfleche (saddle bag), circa
1900, Gilcrease Museum.

The use of glass beads in the textiles made by Native women is but one example of
how Native peoples adapted to trade goods within the context of their own culture.
A further example is how Native women used beaded goods (and blankets, baskets,
and pottery) for economic survival. In the late nineteenth century, Euro-American
and Canadian peoples started to acquire the “crafts” made by Native Americans as
curios; not considered art, but as curiosities collected from a vanishing race. Native
women soon learned that they could contribute to the economic resources of their
families in a new way, by making beaded goods or baskets specifically for the tourist
trade. Soon Native women started making non-utilitarian goods such as purses, pin-
cushions, scissor holders, and “whimsies” specifically for this trade. Trips to trading
posts, towns, and tourist destinations such as Niagara Falls were made by the women
of families to sell their “crafts,” which became important sources of income to Native
families.

Perhaps the best-known example of how the making of utilitarian items became an
important economic resource for Native peoples is the making and selling of Navajo/
Dine’ blankets. Native peoples around North America used various materials for
weaving; including cotton in the Southeast, as well as milkweed and grass fibers. The
Spanish brought southeastern cotton to the cultures of the Southwest and forced

148 | Susan Stebbins

the Native peoples there to plant and harvest it. Many peoples in the Southwest,
especially the Dine, Zuni, and Hopis, quickly adapted cotton to weaving clothing and
especially blankets. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the designs on the
blankets were relatively simple, with a few colors and designs of horizontal lines.
Over time, the use of color and design became much more complicated. Among the
Dine’, these designs often incorporated images from their oral tradition: images of
Father Sky, Mother Earth, snakes, and rainbows. Weavers, women among the Dine’,
but men among the Hopi, showed their increasing skill in the use of colors and
design. These types of blankets quickly became items sold at trading posts, and are
now shown and sold in art galleries in cities in North America and Europe.

Courtesy of the Arizona State Museum:

http://www.statemuseum.arizona.edu/
exhibits/navajoweave/historic/blankets/
8369_dtl.shtml. Navajo blanket from
Transitional Period.

For centuries, Native peoples in the Americas used whatever resources were avail-
able to them to weave baskets. Pine needles, willow, sweet grass, tree bark, and wood
splints have been and are all used to make baskets. The materials used depended

Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art? | 149

on the society’s environment. Sweet grass and black ash trees, commonly used in
the Northeast are not found in Oklahoma, where willow strips are often used, or
in the Great Basin where Native peoples will use pine needles. As with beading and
weaving, the people of different societies will incorporate traditional designs into
their baskets. Native peoples would use natural dyes made from berries or differ-
ent soils to color strips that were woven into the baskets. Different materials and
styles of weaving would also be used to create baskets. For example, among the
Haudenosaunee, sweet grass and black ash splints were the most common materi-
als used in baskets. Baskets could be made with either or both the sweet grass and
black ash, which could create designs and different textures in the baskets. Differ-
ent weaving techniques were also used, along with designs of dyed strips of wood
splints.

As with beaded work and blankets, baskets became important trade goods by which
Native weavers contributed important economic resources to their families. In the
twentieth century, baskets became larger and incorporated more and more different
techniques and designs. For example, among many Haudenosaunee basket makers
the traditional wedding basket (a simple basket with a handle that carried the corn
and dried fish and meat to be exchanged by the newlywed couple) started to look
like the multi-tiered wedding cakes of Euro-Americans and Canadians.

Pottery is yet another example of how Native Americans developed technologies

and utilized mud and natural dyes found in their environments to make necessary
items, which then became tourist trade goods that contributed important economic
resources to families and communities. Archaeologists and museum collectors know
that one way pottery can be traced to a particular community is by the materials
used. In the Arctic and Sub-Arctic, soapstone is shaped into bowels and lamps that
hold oil that is lit to provide light. Soapstone would also be shaped and craved into
animal, human, and spirit shapes. South of the Arctic, as humans around the world
did, Native peoples learned how to shape and fire mud found in their areas to form
pottery. The soil and techniques used to make the pottery and the designs all help
determine who made the pottery.

Some of the most unique styles of pottery are the storytellers made by Pueblo peo-
ples in the Southwest. Storytellers are female figures with open mouths covered

150 | Susan Stebbins

with smaller, child-like figures sitting and climbing all over the mother-like story-
teller.

CC-BY-SA 3.0 by The Children’s Museum of Indianapolis. Photo by

Wendy Kaveney, sculpture by Rose Peco-SunRhodes. “Storyteller Under
Sunny Skies,” a clay sculpture by Rose Pecos-SunRhodes, Jemez Pueblo,
New Mexico, in the permanent collection of The Children’s Museum of
Indianapolis.

Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art? | 151

While the various arts made by Native peoples became important sources of eco-
nomic resources in the later nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, they also
became an important way for Native peoples to maintain their indigenous identities.
As a consequence of the colonization, forced assimilation, and termination discussed
in other chapters, many Native peoples in Canada and the United States lost their
homelands. As Native peoples became dispersed, they stopped speaking their
indigenous languages and often converted to Christianity. Residential schools pro-
hibited the speaking of Native languages, which contributed to the extinction of
many languages. Governmental policy made it impossible for societies to maintain
matrilineal kinship patterns and women’s involvement and power in the political
organization of their societies. Traditional methods of obtaining or producing
resources became more and more difficult. Often the one thing maintained by Native
peoples from their traditional culture was their expressive culture in storytelling,
music, and dance, and economically important weavings, beadwork, baskets, and
pottery. These art forms helped to maintain Native peoples both economically and
culturally.

CC-BY-SA 3.0 by wikipedia user Uyvsdi. Sampler of beadwork

In contemporary Native communities, whether on reservations or in rural, suburban,

or urban communities, people continue to learn how to make items of expressive
culture that is not always for sale to museums, galleries, or pow-wows. Young people
learn how to create the art of their societies as a way to help maintain their Native
identity within the dominant culture of the twenty-first century. Often the younger

152 | Susan Stebbins

Natives will also learn the words associated with the materials and techniques used
to make items, along with the name of the items themselves. This has helped keep
some indigenous languages from becoming completely extinct. Expressive culture
is also a way for young people to demonstrate the skills they have in their tradi-
tional societies. For example, communities across Indian Country, like Euro-Ameri-
can or Canadian communities, hold contests in which young women are named the
“Princess” of their community. In such contests, the young women are expected to
display some Native traditional skills in language, dance, and art in beadwork, bas-
ket-making, or pottery.

Courtesy of the U.S. Department of Interior, Indian Arts and Crafts

Board. Maria Martinez preparing pottery for firing.

Some Native American artists have maintained or reclaimed the traditional methods
of making items of expressive culture such as carving soapstone or making canoes,
masks, baskets, or pottery. Perhaps the most famous are Maria and Julian Martinez
of the San Ildefonso Pueblo, who were able to recreate traditional Puebloan methods
of making pots. They first experimented with black-on-red and polychrome painting
on pottery. After World War I, the archaeologist Edgar Hewitt asked them to try
and recreate the black-on-black pottery he was finding in Frijoles Canyon (Bande-
lier National Park). The black-on-black pottery had a highly polished background
with matte designs. The Martinezes were successful in re-creating the technique,

Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art? | 153

which they then taught to other members of their family, providing important eco-
nomic resources to their community (Penny 2004). After the death of Julian, Maria
Martinez would make pottery for tourists and even take special orders. The pho-
tographer Ansel Adams ordered a full set of dinnerware from her, which is now in
the collection of the University of Arizona’s Museum of Anthropology. The Martinez
potteries are now very valuable items in museum and private collections around the
world.

Many contemporary Native American artists continue to incorporate traditional fea-

tures into modern art techniques. For example, the Mohawk multimedia artist Shel-
ley Niro has an instillation depicting the fall of Sky Woman at the First People’s Hall
at the Museum of Civilization in Ottawa.

Other artists use photography or computer generation. While some, like Niro, incor-
porate traditional elements into their art, others use it to make political statements
about the history and present-day situation of Native peoples. Others make art for
art’s sake and may not necessarily be identified as a Native American artist. The
Mohawk artist Alex Jacobs, who is also a spoken-word poet, has many pieces that
that satirize the popular culture images of Native peoples, such as a series of very
modern cigar store Indians. He also has a series of watercolors of the St. Lawrence
River that contain no traits or elements of what would generally be considered
Native American art.

So what is Native American art? The cigar store Indians or the watercolors of the St.
Lawrence River? The dinnerware pieces made by Maria Martinez? Beadwork, pot-
tery, and baskets made for the tourist trade? The photography of Tuscarora artist
and art professor Jolene Rickard or the sculpture of Alan Houser or Stan Hill? Must
the art look “Indian” or have American Indian themes to be considered Native Amer-
ican Art? Who is considered a Native American artist? The investigation of those
questions is very much a part of the story of the continued identity of Native peoples
in the twenty-first century.

154 | Susan Stebbins

 Skywoman, Kanien’kehaka (Mohawk): Ontario,
2001. Made By Shelley Niro (1954) Foam, fiberglass
resin, oil paint, canvas and metal. Located at the
Canadian Museum of Civilization, 2000.129.1.1-10,
D2004-11229. Skywoman, an installation piece at
the Museum of Civilization in Ottawa by Shelley
Niro

Suggested Questions

What does art tell us about a society?

What art do you think the United States or Canada will be remembered for 500 hun-
dred years from now?

Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art? | 155

Non-Native authors have written about Native peoples and their societies. What do
you think the differences are between a non-Native person and a Native person
writing about American or Canadian indigenous culture?

Movies and television shows often depict stereotypes, sometimes very negative
stereotypes, about Native peoples. Why do you think this is so?

What First Peoples writers or artists do you know about? How did you learn about
them?

Suggested Resources

For more information about the role of artistic expression in indigenous societies, I
recommend Exploring World Art by Eric Venbrux, Pamela Sheffield Rosi, and Robert
Welsch, especially the essay “Do We Still Have No Word for Art?: A Contemporary
Mohawk Question” by Morgan Perkins.

For those who need further convincing that indigenous people in “hostile” environ-
ments like the Arctic and Sub-Arctic have the time or imagination for artistic expres-
sion, I recommend Inuit Art: An Anthology. Additionally, if you are ever in Ottawa,
Ontario, I recommend a visit to the Museum of Fine Arts and the Museum of Civiliza-
tion, both of which have excellent collections of historical and contemporary pieces.

North American Indian Art, by David Penney, is an excellent introduction to both his-
torical and contemporary examples of American Indian art.

There is a relatively new video available through Visionmaker Video and PBS about
Dine’ (Navajo) weavers called Weaving Two Worlds: Tradition and Economic Survival.
An older video, simply called Maria Martinez, may be available in your library, and
there are a number of websites devoted to her art and life story.

Paul Chaat Smith’s Everything You Know about Indians Is Wrong is an insightful col-
lection of essays about American Indian stereotypes and Native American art and
artists.

156 | Susan Stebbins

There are also a large number of websites devoted to Native American writers, both
as groups and individually. There is no reason not to read about American Indians by
American Indian writers.

A video about Native American dance styles called Native American Men’s and
Women’s Dance Styles is available through Full Circle Videos at www.fullcir.com.

Chapter 6: Is There a Word for Art? | 157

Conclusions
I believe one of our greatest traditions is precisely this. In earlier eras, Indians were
suppose(d) to surrender; instead we fought. We were suppose(d) to die off from war and
starvation and disease; instead we survived. We were suppose(d) to assimilate; instead
we kept our traditions and languages. We were suppose(d) to leave reservations for
cities; instead we live in cities, towns and reservations.

Paul Chaat Smith, Everything You Know about Indians is Wrong (Pg. 185)

Recently I was driving to Montreal, Quebec with a friend. We had to take a longer-
than-usual route to get there because the International Seaway Bridge across the
St. Lawrence River had been closed by the Canadian government in response to
protests by Akwesasne Mohawks. I didn’t mind; it was a beautiful drive through farm-
land and small villages along the St. Lawrence River. I appreciated the Akwesasne
Mohawks standing up in a democratic and non-violent manner to the Canadian
government’s new policy to have armed border guards—guards who have harassed
Mohawks. Because of the reasons we were taking this longer route, my friend was
asking me about the situation at Akwesasne, and what I foresaw for the future. I don’t
remember how the issue of assimilation came up but it did, and my friend was very
surprised when I said I didn’t think the Akwesasne Mohawks or the indigenous peo-
ples of the Americas in general would ever totally assimilate, nor should they.

Assimilation is basically the adoption by individuals or a group, aspects of another,

usually dominant, culture. It can be voluntary, or it can be forced. For example, if you
travel to other countries known to be very different than those of the United States
or Canada, the countries of Africa for example, you might be surprised to see people
dressed very much as they would in your home country. I have heard people who
had visited the Holy Land be very disappointed to see people dressed in Western
style clothes as opposed the robes of the Bible. The first time I went to Mexico City
I saw young girls wearing leg warmers in the fall heat, because that’s what they saw
in U.S. movies and magazines. Just about anywhere you go, you will hear American
popular music. One of my professors from graduate school told a story about travel-
ing for days on a donkey to get to a remote Maya village in southern Mexico to study

Conclusions | 159
a nearly extinct dialect of Quiche’ (one of the major languages of the Maya) that was
still spoken in the village. As he and his donkey came over the last hill to the village,
he could hear the then-popular pop group the Bee-Gees blaring from a radio in the
village. These are examples of voluntary assimilation. Or are they?

One of the reasons people around the world wear our clothes, watch our movies
and television shows, and listen to our music is because we are a dominant world
power culturally, politically, economically, and militarily. (I am referring primarily to
the United States, but those of you who live in Canada know what I mean. I live
close to the Canadian/U.S. border. I can watch two Canadian television networks.
One of them broadcasts Canadian shows, and the other one airs U.S. shows like The
Sopranos.) A factor that gets left out when discussing assimilation is that of hege-
mony: the dominance of one social group over another. The dominance of hege-
mony can be based on gender, race, economic class, and language—any number of
factors. For example, when people immigrate to the United States, they are expected
to learn English. But when people of the United States travel to other countries
they expect people wherever they go—France, Italy, Germany, Ghana, or Thailand,
for instance—to speak English. They do not consider that they should learn at least
a few words in the language of the country they are visiting. And they expect they
should be able to eat American food, not the cuisine of the country. That’s hege-
mony. I’m not saying that U.S. travelers never attempt to learn the language or try
the food of the countries they visit. But while traveling, I have observed and talked
to people who see no reason to learn a bit of Spanish while traveling in Mexico. The
early European immigrants to the Americas did not learn Algonquin, or Mohawk, or
Cherokee. But they did expect the indigenous peoples to learn the language of the
incoming settlers, either English, French, or Spanish.

In the nineteenth century, Christian churches and the U.S. and Canadian govern-
ments established residential schools to, in the words of William Pratt, “kill the
Indian” in the children who were forcibly removed from their families and taken to
the schools. When children arrived at the residential schools, their hair was cut,
their clothes were burned, and they were given new, often ill-fitting, clothes to
wear. In the case of Pratt’s Carlisle Indian School, those clothes were altered mil-
itary uniforms. The children were punished if they spoke their own languages or
practiced their religious rituals. They were forced to attend Christian church ser-
vices. Residential schools had cemeteries where the children who died from mal-
160 | Susan Stebbins
nutrition, disease, abuse, and loneliness were buried. The education the children
received was third-rate compared to that of Euro-American children. Children at
residential schools spent most of their time working in the school buildings doing
the cooking and cleaning if they were girls, or farming the surrounding fields if they
were boys. What education they did receive was Euro-American, designed to lead to
the extinction of their languages and cultures.

At the same time, their families and communities were forced to live on reservations
or reserves, sometimes at great distances from their homelands. In the twentieth
century, the land bases of many reservations-reserves were reduced or entirely
eliminated. In the United States some reservations and the treaty obligations that
went along with them were terminated. Across the country, Native peoples were
coerced into relocating to slums and tenements, taking low-wage jobs in cities such
as Oakland, Milwaukee, and Chicago. These are examples of forced assimilation. Yet
despite all this, the First Peoples of the Americas remain. According to census counts
in both the United States and Canada, their populations are growing. While over 60%
of Native peoples live in towns and cities, not reservations or reserves, they still have
ties with their home communities, speak their languages, and practice their cere-
monies. As I told my friend during our drive, if Native peoples haven’t assimilated yet,
despite the worst that was thrown at them, what makes you think they will now or
in the future?

Not entirely assimilating doesn’t mean Native peoples don’t usually dress as most
other Euro-Canadians or Americans dress. It doesn’t mean that they don’t drive cars
and trucks instead of ride horses—which, remember, were introduced by the Euro-
peans. Euro-Canadians and Americans don’t dress or drive around in a horse and
buggy like their founding mothers and fathers. Does that mean they’re not Ameri-
can or Canadian? I sometimes feel that the indigenous peoples of the Americas are
like the Geico cavemen on television commercials. First, non-cavemen are surprised
to find out they’re still around; and then media advertisements continue to portray
the urban Cavemen wearing animal skins and carrying clubs. The First Peoples of
the Americas are still here; they still do their traditional dances, but they also go to
country music dances on Saturday night at the VFW or to dance clubs, classical con-
certs, and operas. Sometimes they are the performers. Was Maria Tallchief any less
Indian because she was a ballet dancer?

Conclusions | 161
When I told my friend that I didn’t think Native peoples would ever totally assimilate,
I was referring to the Akwesasne Mohawk demonstration. Despite the fact that
Akwesasne may look like any other rural community in northern New York, southern
Ontario and Quebec, it is not. Despite the fact that people at Akwesasne typically
dress like other people in the area and shop at many of the same stores doesn’t mean
they aren’t culturally different. They are, and throughout 400 years of encounters
with Euro-Americans and Canadians they have been constantly reminded of how
different they are. In the couple of hours it took my friend and I to get to Montreal,
the discussion about assimilation led to a discussion about another issue of great
importance to aboriginal peoples of the Americas: that of sovereignty.

Sovereignty is the right to exercise within a specific territory the highest authority
of law. In other words, the Akwesasne Mohawks, as other Native peoples on reserva-
tions and reserves, expect to be able to exercise their laws in their territory, such as
to not have armed border guards on their territory. There are over 200 treaties that
ensure that Native communities can exercise their own laws on their own lands “for
as long as the sun shines and rivers run,” as the law that removed the Cherokees to
Oklahoma states. But as you read throughout this book, these treaties and laws have
been violated time after time. As I write this, it remains to be seen how the Akwe-
sasne Mohawks and the government of Canada will resolve the issue of the bridge
closure. This is but one issue of sovereignty in one reservation. It is one example of
the ongoing struggles of Native communities in Canada and the United States.

Basic to the issues of assimilation and sovereignty is the issue of identity; not only
who is an American Indian or First Peoples, but what does it mean to be an Ameri-
can Indian or First Peoples. It often seems like non-Native peoples want to control
aboriginal identity. The U.S. and Canadian governments, through agencies like the
Bureau of Indian Affairs and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada have attempted to
control the identity of Native peoples through various policies like blood-quantum
(Chapter 1). Native peoples often hear, “Well you don’t look like an Indian,” or “Can
you speak any Indian?, or “What part of you is Indian?” or “Some of my best friends
are Indian and they think…” (this last one was published by a reporter in the Albany
Times Union newspaper).

Identity is essential to the issues of assimilation and sovereignty: if you look like us,
and dress like us, you must be like us—so why should you be treated any differently?

162 | Susan Stebbins

American aboriginal people may at times, like peoples in Mexico or Ghana or Thai-
land, choose to dress like people of the dominant culture, or eat the same food and
listen to the same music. That doesn’t mean they have assimilated, or given up their
identity or sovereignty.

Within these issues of assimilation, sovereignty, and identity, are many other issues:
hunting and fishing rights, land and mineral rights, and water rights. As issues
of population growth, economic fluctuations, and climate change continue in the
twenty-first, the sovereignty and identity of indigenous peoples and nations will be
challenged. These issues will establish the patterns of encounters between Native
peoples and nations and the United States and Canada. As you have read in the var-
ious chapters, in the late twentieth century continuing into the twenty-first cen-
tury, the courts and even occasionally the governmental agencies of Canada and the
United States, have been more willing to acknowledge that past interactions with
Native peoples have been wrong, illegal, and uncertainly have not lived up to their
expressed ideals of justice for all.

Will the indigenous peoples of the North America assimilate to the dominant cul-
tures that surround them? Remember in Chapter 1 you read about the Basque people
of Europe, those who are probably the descendants of the people who made the
cave paintings found around Europe 30,000 to 40,000 years ago? The Basque were
in Europe when very different Indo-European peoples migrated to western Europe
and pushed them to the margins and no doubt tried to assimilate them. We don’t
know much about the process because people weren’t writing back then. What we
do know we must infer from archaeology, linguistics, and the oral tradition. Sur-
rounded by dominant cultures for thousands of years, the Basque adopted some
traditions, for example, they are Christian. But the Basque still have their own lan-
guage, they tend to still live in the mountains between France and Spain. When they
migrate, they tend to keep their language, and seek the same type of labor they did
in their homeland, largely sheep-herding and fishing. In Europe the Basque have
been very active politically, sometimes violently, in trying to establish their auton-
omy from Spain and France and create their own nation-state. Thinking about the
Basque and what you’ve read in the previous chapters, do you think the indigenous
peoples and nations of North America will ever fully assimilate to the dominant soci-
eties of the United States and Canada?

Conclusions | 163
In these aspects, it is frustrating to write a book about the indigenous peoples of
North America because there is still so much that should be written and shared.
I’ve written about the border closure at Akwesasne, but across Indian Country there
many other events occurring that also demonstrate the continued identity and sov-
ereignty of Native peoples. Do you know about any of these incidents around your
home? For all the examples I included in this book, there are hundreds of other
incidents that I could have written about. I hope this book will inspire you to learn
more about the First Peoples of the Americas. Each chapter has a list of resources
that will be a good place to start. Remember, the ongoing history of Native peoples
hasn’t stopped, any more than the ongoing history of Canada or the United States
has stopped. The other knowledge I hope you take away from this book is the amount
of diversity among the aboriginal peoples of the Americas. In my classes, I tell my
students if they remember nothing else from class to remember that the Native peo-
ples of what is now the eastern United States were farmers, as were the peoples
of the Southwest. Those peoples who were foragers may have gotten most of their
food through fishing, not hunting, certainly not hunting on horseback more than 500
years ago. Some Native societies had chiefs, some had kings, and in some it would be
difficult to tell who was in charge—true democracies. The roles of women in societies
such as the Haudenosaunee would inspire women in the United States to campaign
for full political and economic rights. Over 700 languages were spoken across these
societies, and so much more. Indian County was and continues to be a very diverse
place.

164 | Susan Stebbins

References
Adovasio, J. M., and Jake Page. 2002. The First Americans: In Pursuit of America’s Greatest Mys-
tery. New York: Random House.

Alexie, Sherman. 1994. The Lone Ranger and Tonto Fistfight in Heaven. New York: Harper
Collins Press.

Ambler, Marjane. 1992. “Women Leaders in Indian Education.” Tribal College. 3 (4): 10-15.

Armstrong, William H. 1989. Warrior in Two Camps: Ely S. Parker, Union General and Seneca
Chief. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

Ashmore, Wendy, and Robert J. Sharer. 2006. Discovering Our Past: A Brief Introduction to
Archaeology. 4th ed. Boston: McGraw Hill.

Barton, C. Michael, Geoffrey A. Clark, David R. Yesner, and Georges A. Pearson. 2004. The Set-
tlement of the American Continents: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Human Biogeogra-
phy. Tuscan: The University of Arizona Press.

Bataille, Gretchen M., and Kathleen Mullen Sands. 1987. American Indian Women: Telling Their
Lives. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Bee, Robert L. 1990. “The Predicament of the Native American Leader: A Second Look.” Human
Organization 49 (1): 56-63.

Bernstein, Alison R. 1991. American Indians and World War II: Toward a New Era in Indian
Affairs. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

Berthrong, Donald J. 1992. “Struggle for Power: The Impact of Southern Cheyenne and Ara-
paho ‘Schoolboys’ on Tribal Politics.” American Indian Quarterly 16 (1): 1-24.

Blackhawk, Ned. 2006. Violence Over the Land: Indians and Empires in the Early American
West. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Blu, Karen I. 1980. The Lumbee Problem: The Making of an American Indian People. New York:
Cambridge University Press.

Native Peoples of North America | 165

Bonvillain, Nancy. 2001. Native Nations: Cultures and Histories of Native North America. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Brading, David. 1997. “Prophet and Apostle: Bartolomé de las Casas and the Spiritual Conquest
of America.” In Christianity and Missions, 1450–1800, edited by J. S. Cummins, 117-138.
Aldershot, UK: Ashgate/Variorum.

Bright, William. 1984. American Indian Linguistics and Literature. Berlin: Mouton.

Brody, Hugh. 1981. Maps and Dreams: Indians and the British Columbia Frontier. Prospect
Heights: Waveland.

Bruchac, Joseph. 1985. Iroquois Stories: Heroes and Heroines, Monsters and Magic. Trumans-
burg, NY: Crossing.

Bumsted, J. M. 1996. The Red River Rebellion. Winnipeg, MB: Watson and Dwyer.

Caldwell, Joseph R., and Robert L. Hall, eds. 1964. Hopewellian Studies. Springfield: State of Illi-
nois.

Callicott, J. Baird, and Michael P. Nelson, eds. 1998. The Great New Wilderness Debate. Athens:
University of Georgia Press.

Calloway, Colin G. 1995. The American Revolution in Indian Country: Crisis and Diversity in
Native American Communities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Child, Brenda J. 1998. Boarding School Seasons: American Indian Families, 1900–1940. Lincoln:
University of Nebraska Press.

Clark, Ella Elizabeth. 1991. Indian Legends of Canada. Toronto, ON: McClelland and Stewart.

Clifford, James. 1991. “Four Northwest Coast Museums: Travel Reflections.” In Exhibiting Cul-
tures: The Poetics and Politics of Museum Display, edited by Ivan Karp and Steven D.
Lavine, 212–254. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.

Cowan, Richard. “Gold and Silver: Spain and the New World” Essays on Geology, History, and
People. http://mygeologypage.ucdavis.edu/cowen/~GEL115/115ch8.html.

Cronon, William. 1983. Changes in the Land: Indians, Colonists, and the Ecology of New England.
New York: Hill and Wang.

166 | Susan Stebbins

Crosby, Alfred W. 1986. Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of Europe, 900–1900.
New York: Cambridge University Press.

Cummins, J. S., ed. 1997. Christianity and Missions, 1450–1800. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate/Vario-
rum.

Cushman, H. B. 1999. History of the Choctaw, Chickasaw and Natchez Indians. Edited by Angie
Debo. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

Dahlberg, Frances, ed. 1981. Woman the Gatherer. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

von Däniken, Erich. 1973. Chariots of the Gods. New York: Berkley.

Darian–Smith, Eve. 2004. New Capitalists: Law, Politics, and Identity Surrounding Casino Gam-
ing on Native American Land. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Debo, Angie. 1970. A History of the Indians of the United States. Norman: University of Okla-
homa Press.

———. 1966. And Still the Waters Run: The Betrayal of the Five Civilized Tribes. Norman: Univer-
sity of Oklahoma Press.

Deloria, Ella Cara. 1990. Waterlily. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Deloria, Vine, Jr. 1973. God is Red. New York: Dell.

Denevan, William M. 1992. “The Pristine Myth: The Landscape of the Americas in 1492.” Annals
of the Association of American Geographers 82 (3): 369–385.

———. 1996. “Carl Sauer and Native American Population Size.” Geographical Review 86 (3):
385–397.

Diamond, Jared. 1987. “The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race.” Discover Maga-
zine: 64–66.

———. 1997. Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. New York: W. W. Norton.

———. 2005. Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. New York: Viking Penguin.

Dobyns, Henry F. 1983. Their Number Become Thinned: Native American Population Dynamics
in Eastern North America. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.

Native Peoples of North America | 167

Doran, Glen H., ed. 2002. Windover: Multidisciplinary Investigations of an Early Archaic Florida
Cemetery. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.

Doran, Glen H., David N. Dickel, William E. Ballinger Jr., O. Frank Agee, Philip J. Laipis, and
William W. Hauswirth. 1986. “Anatomical, Cellular and Molecular Analysis of 8,000-yr-old
Human Brain Tissue from the Windover Archaeological Site.” Nature 323: 803–806.

Edmunds, R. David. 1984. Tecumseh and the Quest for Indian Leadership. Boston: Little, Brown.

Erdoes, Richard, and Alfonso Ortiz, eds. 1984. American Indian Myths and Legends. New York:
Pantheon Books.

Etienne, Mona, and Eleanor Leacock, eds. 1980. Women and Colonization: Anthropological Per-
spectives. New York: Bergin and Garvey.

Fagan, Brian M. 1989. The Great Journey: The Peopling of Ancient America. New York: Thames
and Hudson.

Finster, David. 1975. “Museums and Medicine Bundles.” Indian Historian 8 (2): 40-48.

Fisher, Robin. 1977. Contact and Conflict: Indian–European Relations in British Columbia,
1774-1890. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.

Forbes, Jack D. 1993. Africans and Native Americans: The Language of Race and the Evolution of
Red–Black Peoples. Urbana: University of Illinois.

Francis, Daniel, and Toby Morantz. 1983. Partners in Furs: A History of the Fur Trade in Eastern
James Bay 1600–1870. Kingston, ON: McGill–Queen’s University Press.

Freire, Paulo. 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder Press.

Gallay, Alan. 2002. The Indian Slave Trade: The Rise of the English Empire in the American
South, 1670–1717. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Gansworth, Eric. 1998. Indian Summers. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.

Giorgio, J. F del. 2006. The Oldest Europeans: Who Are We? Where Do We Come From? What
Made European Women Different? N.p.: A.J. Place.

Goodenough, Ward H. 1981. Culture, Language, and Society. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin/Cum-
mings.

168 | Susan Stebbins

Gould, Stephan Jay. 1981. The Mismeasure of Man. New York: W. W. Norton.

Graymont, Barbara. 1972. The Iroquois in the American Revolution. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse Uni-
versity Press.

Greenbaum, Susan D. “In Search of Lost Tribes: Anthropology and the Federal Acknowledg-
ment Process.” Human Organization 44 (4): 361–367.

Greenberg, Joseph H. 1987. Languages in the Americas. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Grinnell, George Bird. 1972. The Cheyenne Indians: Their History and Ways of Life. 2 vols. Lin-
coln: University of Nebraska Press.

Griswold del Castillo, Richard. 1992. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo: A Legacy of Conflict.
Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

Heizer, Robert F. 1978. “The Impact of Euro-American Exploration and Settlement in Califor-
nia.” California, 99–127. Vol. 8 of Handbook of North American Indians, edited by William C.
Sturtevant. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.

Heizer, Robert F., and Alan J. Almquist. 1971. The Other Californians: Prejudice and Discrimina-
tion under Spain, Mexico, and the United States to 1920. Berkeley: University of California
Press.

Herzfeld, Michael. 2001. Anthropology: Theoretical Practice in Culture and Society. Malden, MA:
Blackwell.

Hetherington, Renée, J. Vaughn Barrie, Roger MacLeod, and Michael Wilson. 2004. “Quest for
the Lost Land.” Geotimes. http://www.geotimes.org/feb04/feature_Quest.html.

Hoebel, E. Adamson. 1960. The Cheyennes: Indians of the Great Plains. New York: Holt, Rhine-
hart and Winston.

Holm, Tom. 1996. Strong Hearts, Wounded Souls: Native American Veterans of the Vietnam War.
Austin: University of Texas Press.

Horsman, Reginald. 1986. Race and Manifest Destiny: The Origins of American Racial
Anglo–Saxonism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Houston, Alma. 1988. Inuit Art: An Anthology. Winnipeg: J. Gordon Shillingford Publishing.

Native Peoples of North America | 169

Howe, LeAnne. 2001. Shell Shaker. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Books.

———. 2007. The Miko Kings: An Indian Baseball Story. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Books.

Hoxie, Frederick E., and Peter Iverson, eds. 1998. Indians in American History: An Introduction.
2nd ed. Wheeling: Harlan Davidson.

Ingstad, Anne Stine. 1977. The Discovery of a Norse Settlement in America: Excavations at L’Anse
aux Meadows, Newfoundland, 1961–1968. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

Jackson, Lionel E., Jr., and Michael C. Wilson. 2004. “The Ice-Free Corridor Revisited.” Geot-
imes. http://www.geotimes.org/feb04/feature_Revisited.html.

Jaggar, Alison, and Paula Rothenberg. 1984. Feminist Frameworks: Alternative Theoretical
Accounts of the Relations Between Women and Men. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Jaimes, M. Annette, ed. 1992. The State of Native America: Genocide, Colonization, and Resis-
tance. Boston: South End Press.

Jarvenpa, Robert. 1998. Northern Passage: Ethnography and Apprenticeship Among the Subarc-
tic Dene. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.

Jennings, Francis. 1976. The Invasion of America: Indians, Colonialism, and the Cant of Conquest.
New York: W. W. Norton.

———, ed. 1985. The History and Culture of Iroquois Diplomacy: An Interdisciplinary Guide to the
Treaties of the Six Nations and Their League. With the assistance of William N. Fenton,
Mary A. Druke, and David R. Miller. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

———. 1988. Empire of Fortune: Crowns, Colonies and Tribes in the Seven Years in America. New
York: W. W. Norton.

Johansen, Bruce E. 1982. Forgotten Founders: Benjamin Franklin, the Iroquois, and the Rationale
for the American Revolution. Boston: Harvard Common Press.

Jorgensen, Joseph G. 1972. The Sun Dance Religion: Power for the Powerless. Chicago: Univer-
sity of Chicago Press.

———. 1980. Western Indians: Comparative Environments, Languages, and Cultures of 172 West-
ern American Indian Tribes. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.

170 | Susan Stebbins

Judkins, Russell. 2004. Lewis Henry Morgan’s League of the Iroquois: The Ethnographic Core.
North Andover, MA: Persimmon.

Judson, Katherine Berry, ed. 1912. Myths and Legends of California and the Old Southwest.
Chicago: A. C. McClurg.

Kamp, Kathryn. 1998. Life in a Pueblo: Understanding the Past Through Archaeology. Prospect
Heights, IL: Waveland.

Kaplan, David, and Robert A. Manners. 1986. Culture Theory. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.

Kehoe, Alice Beck. 1998. The Land of Prehistory: A Critical History of American Archaeology.
New York: Routledge.

King, Thomas. 1990. Medicine River. Markham, ON: Viking.

———, ed. 1992. All My Relations: An Anthology of Contemporary Canadian Native Fiction. Nor-
man: University of Oklahoma Press.

———. 1993. Green Grass, Running Water. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Klein, Laura F., and Lillian A. Ackerman, eds. 1995. Women and Power in Native North America.
Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

Krouse, Susan Applegate. 2008. North American Indians in the Great War. Lincoln: University
of Nebraska.

Kupferer, Harriet J. 1988. Ancient Drums, Other Moccasins: Native North American Cultural
Adaptation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Kupperman, Karen Ordahl. 2000. Indians and English: Facing Off in Early America. Ithaca, NY:
Cornell University Press.

Ladd, Edmund J. 1979. “Zuni Economy.” Southwest, edited by Alfonso Ortiz, 492–498. Vol. 9 of
Handbook of North American Indians, edited by William C. Sturtevant. Washington, DC:
Smithsonian Institution.

Landsman, Gail. 1979. “The Ghost Dance and the Policy of Land Allotment.” American Sociolog-
ical Review 44 (1): 162-166.

Native Peoples of North America | 171

———. 1988. Sovereignty and Symbol: Indian-White Conflict at Ganienkeh. Albuquerque: Univer-
sity of New Mexico Press.

Lepore, Jill. 1998. The Name of War: King Philip’s War and the Origins of American Identity. New
York: Knopf.

Locust, Carol. 1988. “Wounding the Spirit: Discrimination and Traditional American Indian
Belief Systems.” Harvard Educational Review 58 (3): 315-331.

Lomawaima, K. Tsianina. 1994. They Called It Prairie Light: The Story of Chilocco Indian School.
Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Malinowski, Bronislaw, and Havelock Ellis. 1929. The Sexual Life of Savages in North Western
Melanesia. New York: Routledge.

Mandelbaum, David G. 1979. The Plains Cree: An Ethnographic, Historical, and Comparative
Study. Regina, SK: Canadian Plains Research Center.

Mandryk, C. A. S. 1990. “Could Humans Survive the Ice-Free Corridor?: Late Glacial Vegetation
and Climate in West Central Alberta.” In Megafauna and Man: Discovery of America’s
Heartland, edited by Larry D. Agenbroad, Jim I. Mead, and Lisa W. Nelson. 67–79. Hot
Springs, SD: Mammoth Site of Hot Springs.

Mandryk, C. A. S., H. Josenhans, D. W. Fedje, and R. W. Mathewes. 2001. “Late Quaternary Pale-
oenvironments of Northwestern North America: Implications for Inland Versus Coastal
Migration Routes.” Quaternary Science Reviews 20 (1): 301-314.

Marcus, George E., and Michael M. J. Fischer. 1986. Anthropology as Cultural Critique: An
Experimental Moment in the Human Sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

McGuire, Thomas R. 1990. “Federal Indian Policy: A Framework for Evaluation.” Human Orga-
nization 49 (3): 206–216.

McHugh, Gretchen. 1993. “Clouds Over James Bay.” Clearwater Navigator: 4-12.

Meltzer, David J. 1992. “How Columbus Sickened the New World: Why Were Native Americans
So Vulnerable to the Diseases European Settlers Brought with Them?” New Scientist, Oct.
10: 38-41. http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13618424.700-how-columbus-sick-
ened-the-new-world-why-were-native-americans-so-vulnerable-to-the-diseases-
european-settlers-brought-with-them.html

172 | Susan Stebbins

Merrien, Jean [pseudo.]. 1954. Lonely Voyagers. London: Thames and Hudson.

———. 1958. Christopher Columbus: The Mariner and the Man. San Francisco: Odhams.

Michael, Henry, ed. 1963. Studies in Siberian Shamanism. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto
Press.

Mihesuah, Devon A. 1998. Cultivating the Rosebuds: The Education of Women at the Cherokee
Female Seminary, 1851–1909. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Milbrath, Lester W. 1994. “Climate and Chaos: Societal Impacts of Sudden Weather Shifts.” The
Futurist, May/June: 26-28.

Miles, Tiya, and Sharon P. Holland, eds. 2006. Crossing Waters, Crossing Worlds: The African
Diaspora in Indian Country. Durham: Duke University Press.

Milloy, John S. 1988. The Plains Cree: Trade, Diplomacy and War, 1790 to 1870. Winnipeg, MB:
University of Manitoba Press.

Molnar, Stephen. 1998. Human Variation: Races, Types, and Ethnic Groups. 4th ed. Upper Sad-
dle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Montagu, Ashley. 1997. Man’s Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Race. 6th ed. Walnut Creek,
CA: AltaMira.

Mooney, James. 1965. The Ghost-Dance Religion and the Sioux Outbreak of 1890. Chicago: Uni-
versity of Chicago Press.

Morgan, Lewis Henry. 1962. League of the Iroquois. Secaucus, NJ: Corinth Books.

Nadel, Siegfried F. 1964. The Theory of Social Structure. Glencoe, IL: Free Press of Glencoe.

Nanda, Serena. 2000. Gender Diversity: Crosscultural Variations. Long Grove, IL: Waveland.

Nielsen, Joyce McCarl. 1990. Sex and Gender in Society: Perspectives on Stratification. 2nd ed.
Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.

Ortiz, Alfonso. 1969. The Tewa World: Space, Time and Becoming in a Pueblo Society. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.

Pääbo, Svante. 1993. “Ancient DNA.” Scientific American, 269 (5): 87–92.

Native Peoples of North America | 173

Pääbo, Svante, John A. Gifford, and Allan C. Wilson. 1988. “Mitochondrial DNA Sequences from
a 7000-year-old Brain.” Nucleic Acids Research, 16 (20) 9775–9787.

Paper, Jordan. 1993. “A Material Case for a Late Bering Strait Crossing Coincident with Pre-
Columbian Trans-Pacific Crossings.” Sino-Platonic Papers, edited by Victor H. Mair, 39.
http://sino-platonic.org/complete/spp039_bering_strait_crossing.pdf.

Park, George K. 1974. The Idea of Social Structure. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.

Parker, Arthur C. 1989. Seneca Myths and Folk Tales. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Penney, David W. 2004. North American Indian Art. London: Thames and Hudson.

Perdue, Theda. 1998. Cherokee Women: Gender and Culture Change, 1700–1835. Lincoln: Uni-
versity of Nebraska Press.

———, ed. 2001. Sifters: Native American Women’s Lives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Peters, Virginia Bergman. 2000. Women of the Earth Lodges: Tribal Life on the Plains. Norman:
University of Oklahoma Press.

Pettipas, Katherine. 1994. Severing the Ties that Bind: Government Repression of Indigenous
Religious Ceremonies on the Prairies. Winnipeg, MB: University of Manitoba Press.

Prucha, Francis Paul, ed. 1975. Documents of United States Indian Policy. Lincoln: University of
Nebraska Press.

Reyhner, Jon, and Jeanne Eder. 2006. American Indian Education: A History. Norman: Univer-
sity of Oklahoma Press.

Richter, Daniel K. 2001. Facing East from Indian Country: A Native History of Early America.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Roberts, John M., and David M. Schneider. 1965. Zuni Daily Life and Zuni Kin Terms. New
Haven, CT: Human Relations Area Files Press.

Robertson, James Alexander, trans. 1993. “True Relation of the Hardships Suffered by Gov-
ernor Don Hernando de Soto and Certain Portuguese Gentlemen in the Discovery of
the Province of Florida, Now Newly Set Forth by a Gentleman of Elvas.” In The De Soto
Chronicles: The Expedition of Hernando de Soto to North America in 1539–1543, edited

174 | Susan Stebbins

 by Lawrence A. Clayton, Vernon James Knight, Jr., and Edward C. Moore, Vol. 1, 41–168.
Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Rosaldo, Michelle Zimbalist, and Louise Lamphere, eds. 1974. Women, Culture, and Society.
Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Sanday, Peggy Reeves. 1981. Female Power and Male Dominance: On the Origins of Sexual
Inequality. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

———. 2002. Women at the Center: Life in a Modern Matriarchy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University
Press.

Sanday, Peggy Reeves, and Ruth Gallagher Goodenough, eds. 1990. Beyond the Second Sex: New
Directions in the Anthropology of Gender. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Sarris, Greg. 1993. Keeping Slug Woman Alive: A Holistic Approach to American Indian Texts.
Berkeley: University of California Press.

Schoepfle, Mark, Michael Burton, and Frank Morgan. 1984. “Navajos and Energy Development:
Economic Decision Making Under Political Uncertainty. Human Organization 43 (3):
265–276.

Schwarz, Maureen Trudelle. 1997. Molded in the Image of Changing Woman: Navajo Views on
the Human Body and Personhood. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

———. 2003. Blood and Voice: Navajo Women Ceremonial Practitioners. Tucson: University of
Arizona Press.

———. 1994. Grand Avenue: A Novel in Stories. New York: Hyperion.

Service, Elman Rogers. 1962. Primitive Social Organization: An Evolutionary Perspective. New
York: Random House.

Shoemaker, Nancy, ed. 1995. Negotiators of Change: Historical Perspectives on Native American
Women. New York: Routledge.

———. 1999. American Indian Population Recovery in the Twentieth Century. Albuquerque: Uni-
versity of New Mexico Press.

Native Peoples of North America | 175

Simmons, William S. 1986. Spirit of the New England Tribes: Indian History and Folklore.
Lebanon, NH: University Press of New England.

Slocum, Sally. 1975. “Woman the Gatherer: Male Bias in Anthropology.” In Toward an Anthro-
pology of Women, edited by Rayna R. Reiter. 36-50. New York: Monthly Review Press.

Smith, Paul Chaat. 2009. Everything You Know About Indians Is Wrong. Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press.

Smith, Paul Chaat, and Robert Allen Warrior. 1996. Like a Hurricane: The Indian Movement
from Alcatraz to Wounded Knee. New York: New Press.

Sorenson, John L., and Carl L. Johannessen. 2004. “Scientific Evidence for Pre-Columbian
Transoceanic Voyages.” Sino-Platonic Papers 133, edited by Victor H. Mair.
http://www.sino-platonic.org/complete/spp133_precolumbian_voyages.pdf.

Sowell, Thomas. 1994. Race and Culture: A World View. New York: Basic Books.

Stengel, Marc K. 2000. “The Diffusionists Have Landed.” Atlantic Monthly, January: 35-48.

Stone, Linda. 2006. Kinship and Gender: An Introduction. 3rd ed. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Strauss, Joseph H., and Kenneth Pepion. 1993. “Broken Promises: An American Indian Case
Study.” Thought and Action 8 (2): 77–87.

Sturtevant, William C., ed. 1978-2008. Handbook of North American Indians. 20 vols. Washing-
ton, DC: Smithsonian Institution.

Sutton, Mark Q. 2008. An Introduction to Native North America. 3rd ed. Boston: Pearson.

Tattersall, Ian. 1999. Becoming Human: Evolution and Human Uniqueness. New York: Harcourt,
Brace.

Taylor, Alan. 2006. The Divided Ground: Indians, Settlers, and the Northern Borderland of the
American Revolution. New York: Knopf.

Terrell, John Upton. 1971. American Indian Almanac. New York: World Publishing Company.

Thomas, David Hurst. 2000. Skull Wars: Kennewick Man, Archaeology, and The Battle for Native
American Identity. New York: Basic Books.

176 | Susan Stebbins

Tooker, Elisabeth, and Morton H. Fried. 1983. The Development of Political Organization in
Native North America: 1979 Proceedings of the American Ethnological Society. Washington,
DC: American Ethnographical Society.

Tuck, James A. 1976. Newfoundland and Labrador Prehistory. Ottawa, ON: National Museum of
Canada.

Van Kirk, Sylvia. 1990. Many Tender Ties: Women in Fur-Trade Society, 1670–1870. Norman:
University of Oklahoma Press.

Van Sertima, Ivan. 2003. They Came Before Columbus: The African Presence in Ancient America.
New York: Random House.

Venbrux, Eric, Pamela Sheffield Rosi, and Robert L. Welsch. 2006. Exploring World Art. Long
Grove, IL: Waveland Press.

Wallace, Anthony F. C. 1972.The Death and Rebirth of the Seneca. New York: Vintage Books.

Weatherford, Jack. 1988. Indian Givers: How the Indians of the Americas Transformed the World.
New York: Crown.

———. 1991. Native Roots: How the Indians Enriched America. New York: Crown.

White, Richard. 1983. The Roots of Dependency: Subsistence, Environment, and Social Change
Among the Choctaws, Pawnees, and Navajos. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

White, Robert H. 1990. Tribal Assets: The Rebirth of Native America. New York: Henry Holt.

Wickett, Murray R. 2000. Contested Territory: Whites, Native Americans and African Americans
in Oklahoma, 1865–1907. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.

Williams, Walter L. 1986. The Spirit and the Flesh: Sexual Diversity in American Indian Culture.
Boston: Beacon.

Wilson, A. C., S. S. Carlson, and T. J. White. 1977. “Biochemical Evolution.” Annual Review of Bio-
chemistry 46: 573–639.

Wilson, James. 1998. The Earth Shall Weep: A History of Native America. New York: Grove Press.

Witherspoon, Gary. 1975. Navajo Kinship and Marriage. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Native Peoples of North America | 177

Wolfe, Eric R. 1982. Europe and the People Without History. Berkeley: University of California
Press.

Videos

An excellent source of videos about Native Americans in the United States is Native American
Public Telecommunications, 1800 N. 33rd. St., Lincoln, NE 68503 and in Canada the
National Film Board of Canada, PO Box 6100, Station Centre-Ville, Montreal, Quebec.

Black Indians: An American Story. Rich-Heape Films, Inc. 5952 Royal Lane. Suite 254 Dallas, TX
75230.

Daughters of the Country. National Film Board of Canada. PO Box 6100. Station Centre-Ville,
Montreal, Quebec.

House Made of Dawn. New Line Home Video.

500 Hundred Nations. Warner Home Video.

How the West Was Lost, volumes I and III. Discovery Enterprises Group, Bethesda, MD 20814.

In Whose Honor: American Indian Mascots in Sports. New Day Films. 22D. Hollywood Ave. Ho-
ho-kus, NJ 07423.

Indian Country Diaries. Native American Public Telecommunications. Visionmaker Videos.

Box 83111, Lincoln, NE 68501.

Medicine River. Sterling Entertainment Group. Fort Mill, SC 29708.

Mountain Wolf Woman. Women’s History and Literature Media. PO Box 5264, Madison, WI
53705.

Myths and Moundbuilders. PBS Video, Public Broadcasting Service.

Native American Men’s and Women’s Dance Styles, volumes I and II. Full Circle Videos.
www.fullcir.com.

Smoke Signals. Buena Vista Home Entertainment. Burbank, CA 91521.

178 | Susan Stebbins

The People Today: Native Americans Examine the Impact of the Catholic Church on the Tribes of
the Plateau and Northern Rockies. DeSmet Project, Washington State University, Pullman.

Those Who Came Before. Southwestern Parks and Monuments Association, Tucson, AZ.

Weaving Two Worlds: Tradition and Economic Survival. PBS Video, Public Broadcasting Service

Native Peoples of North America | 179

About the Author
Susan Stebbins, D.A., Professor of Anthropology and Director of Global
Studies, SUNY Potsdam

Dr. Susan Stebbins (Doctor of Arts in Humanities from the University at Albany)
has been a member of the SUNY Potsdam Anthropology department since 1992. At
Potsdam she has taught Cultural Anthropology, Introduction to Anthropology, The-
ory of Anthropology, Religion, Magic and Witchcraft, and many classes focusing on
Native Americans, including The Native Americans, Indian Images and Women in
Native America. Her research has been both historical (Traditional Roles of Iroquois
Women) and contemporary, including research about a political protest at the bridge
connecting New York, the Akwesasne Mohawk reservation and Ontario, Canada, and
Native American Education, particularly that concerning the Native peoples of New
York. She currently is the Special Assistant to the President for Diversity at SUNY
Potsdam, where she continues to teach Native American Studies.

Native Peoples of North America | 181

About Open SUNY Textbooks
Open SUNY Textbooks is an open access textbook publishing initiative established
by State University of New York libraries and supported by SUNY Innovative Instruc-
tion Technology Grants. This initiative publishes high-quality, cost-effective course
resources by engaging faculty as authors and peer-reviewers, and libraries as pub-
lishing infrastructure.

The pilot launched in 2012, providing an editorial framework and service to authors,
students and faculty, and establishing a community of practice among libraries. The
first pilot is publishing 15 titles in 2013, with a second pilot to follow that will add
more textbooks and participating libraries.

Participating libraries in the 2012-2013 pilot include SUNY Geneseo, College at

Brockport, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, SUNY Fredonia, Upstate
Medical University, and University at Buffalo, with support from other SUNY libraries
and SUNY Press.

For more information, please see: http://textbooks.opensuny.org

Native Peoples of North America | 183

Errata
• A misspelling of Haudenosaunee were corrected throughout the text
• Meso-America was corrected to Mesoamerica throughout the text

Introduction

• NAGPA corrected to NAGPRA

• Athabascan corrected to Athabaskan
• The number of federally recognized tribes was updated to reflect current
information: 573
• colonialization corrected to colonization
• General rewording and clarifying language

Chapter 1

• Beringa corrected to Beringia

• chemical corrected to isotope
• italicized species
• hyraacotherium corrected to hyracotherium
• Erich von Daniken corrected to Erich von Däniken

Chapter 2

• consanguine and consaquineal corrected to consanguineal

• Iroquois society corrected to Iroquois confederacy
• General punctuation and spelling corrections

Native Peoples of North America | 185

Chapter 3

• prayer towns corrected to praying towns

• punctuation and grammar corrections

Chapter 4

• Kashina corrected to Kachina

• In the discussion of the Tuscaroras joining the Haudenosaunee Confederacy,
seventeenth century was corrected to early eighteenth century
• The mention of General John Sherman was corrected to General John Sullivan

Chapter 6

• Greg Serris corrected to Greg Sarris

• The Cherokee rapper Gary “Litefoot” Davis was originally misidentified as
Mohawk and misspelled as “Lightfoot”

186 | Susan Stebbins