Crooked Bough News Round-up

— Indians 101: American Indians encounter Christianity in the sixteenth century

 

at 5/22/25 8:15am

While there had been some contact between Europeans and American Indians in the fifteenth century, the European invasion of the Americas really began in the sixteenth century. The invasion was driven by many different political, economic, and personal forces, with one of the underlying, powerful forces being religion, particularly the belief that there was only one god, one true religion, and that all peoples must worship this god in the correct way.   In 1513 King Ferdinand of Spain told Native Americans that God had declared that the Pope ruled all people, regardless of their law, sect, or belief. He told the Native Americans to come forward of their own free will to convert to Catholicism or: “…with the help of God we shall use force against you, declaring war upon you from all sides and with all possible means, and we shall bind you to the yoke of the Church and Their Highnesses; we shall enslave your persons, wives, and sons, sell you or dispose of you as the King sees fit; we shall seize your possessions and harm you as much as we can as disobedient and resisting vassals.” Furthermore, the Natives who resist are to be held guilty of all resulting deaths and injuries In 1528, Pope Clement VI wrote to King Charles of Spain: “We trust that, as long as you are on earth, you will compel and with all zeal cause the barbarian nations to come to the knowledge of God, the maker and founder of all things, not only by edicts of admonitions, but also by force and arms, if needful, in order that their souls may partake of the heavenly kingdom.” The European worldview during the sixteenth century, and for the next several centuries, was that the world was divided into two groups: civilized people who were Christian and who were inherently superior to all others because of divine right, and savages or heathens. Native Americans were seen as savages, in spite of the fact that most of those in contact with the Europeans lived in agricultural towns and villages. In his book Disease, Depopulation, and Culture Change in Northwestern New Spain, 1518-1764, anthropologist Daniel T. Reff writes: “This reification of the concept of savagery ignores evidence of not only the complexity of Amerindian cultures, but the fact that the Amerindian was largely responsible for the survival of many European frontier endeavors.” In their book Discovering the Americas: The Archive of the Indies, Pedro González García et al write: “With the conversion of Indians to Christianity as its main objective and its most justifiable reason for claiming possession of those lands, in accordance with the first bull Inter Caetera, the Spanish Crown underwrote the spiritual conquest of the New World from the outset.” There were differences among Christian theologians, scholars, and missionaries regarding the best methods of harvesting Indian souls. At a special conference in Valladolid, Spain, in 1540, Bartolomé de Las Casas (1484-1566) presented the idea that Christianity should be spread by kindness and example rather than by the sword. Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda (1490-1573) argued that Indians were brutes who could only become the servants of civilized peoples. Sepúlveda viewed Indians as “natural slaves.” The Spanish authorities suppressed the detailed defense of the humanity of Native Americans prepared by Las Casas, and Sepúlveda’s ideas were widely circulated and used as justification for enslaving Indians. Paganism as Satanism Christian missionaries generally viewed Native Americans as heathen savages who worshiped Satan in their repulsive ceremonies and would, therefore, suffer the tortures of Hell after death. In 1525, Dominican official Tomas Ortiz reported that Indians ate human flesh, engaged in sodomy, went naked, and had no respect for love, virginity, or the truth. He reported: “It may therefore affirm that God has never created a race more full of vice and composed without the least mixture of kindness or culture.” It was the duty of the missionaries to save these misguided souls from the clutches of Satan. They saw themselves in a battle with Satan for Indian souls. In her book Children of Sacred Ground: America’s Last Indian War, Catherine Feher-Elston puts it this way: “The native populations were viewed as a crop to be harvested for the Christian God.” In their chapter in A History of Utah’s American Indians, Nancy Maryboy and David Begay report: “The native inhabitants were coerced into accepting Christianity, while their own religious practices were forbidden. Spanish records show that many thousands of Indians were baptized. Some reportedly were killed soon after the baptismal ceremony.” According to historian Ronald Niezen, in his book Spirit Wars: Native North American Religions in the Age of Nation Building: “The frequent concern of missionaries in North America with the pervasive influence of Satan was thus more than religious bigotry: it was based upon a version of degeneration theory, explaining the differences between Indians and Europeans as stemming from a savage fall from primitive religious grace. The Indians, according to most early missionaries, whether Spanish Franciscans, English Protestants, or French Jesuits, had at some point in human history been led away from God’s favor into a realm of moral darkness. The principal goal of evangelism, therefore, was religious conquest, to erode the influence of Satan by disseminating knowledge of the true faith.”  Missionaries In 1523, the first twelve Spanish missionaries to New Spain (what is today Mexico and the American Southwest) were told that Indians were under the control of Satan, captive to the vanity of idols, and must be redeemed for Christianity. According to the instructions, the souls of New Spain are:   “…being unlawfully reaped by the devil and the flesh, Christ does not enjoy the souls that he bought with his blood.”             For a period of about two centuries beginning in the mid-sixteenth century, the Spanish placed more than 150 Jesuit and Franciscan missionaries in the region between Miami and the Chesapeake Bay. These missions dotted the landscape and brought about many changes in Indian cultures. In his book Laboring in the Fields of the Lord: Spanish Missions and Southeastern Indians, archaeologist Jerald Milanich writes: “Missions were colonialism. The missionary process was essential to the goal of colonialism: creating profits by manipulating the land and its people.” The Jesuits   The Jesuits, the Roman Catholic order of the society of Jesus, had been founded by St. Ignatius Loyola in 1540 to fight against Satan on behalf of God and Jesus. The Jesuits viewed Satan as particularly powerful among American Indians. In 1567, the Spanish Jesuits established a mission at Calos in Florida.  Calos was the capital of the Calusa Indian nation. The following year a group of 11 Jesuits led by Father Juan Bautista de Segura arrived in St. Augustine. The Jesuits were seeking to establish missions among the Tequestas and Calusas. According to archaeologist Jerald Milanich: “Many of the chiefs and native priests were openly hostile toward the Jesuits, viewing them as threats to the power of the native elites.” Consequently, the Jesuits made few converts, and by 1569 they had abandoned their mission at Calos. In 1570, disease broke out among the Guales in present-day Georgia, killing many. The Spanish Jesuits administered medicines to the sick Indians, but the medicines were ineffective. When the Jesuits baptized the dying, the Guales complained that they were witches and were killing the people they were baptizing. In 1572, the Spanish Jesuits abandoned their missionary efforts in the southeast. The Franciscans The Franciscans are a Roman Catholic order founded in 1209 by Francis of Assisi. Their missionary work in the Americas began in 1523. The missionary work of the Franciscans among the Indians of the Southeast included the establishment of doctrinas and visitas. A doctrina was a mission where religious doctrine was taught to the Indians and included a church in which mass was also held. Each doctrina included a resident friar. Generally, the Franciscans established one doctrina per Indian chiefdom, though in some instances there was more than one for the larger chiefdoms. In the outlying communities, the Franciscans established churches which did not have a resident friar but were visited by friars from other locations (hence these were called visitas). In the Southeast, chiefs who converted to Christianity received many material gifts from the Spanish. These gifts included iron tools as well as items of clothing which served to symbolize the chief’s new status. Archaeologist Jerald Milanich reports: “Shoes, hats, stockings, doublets, shirts, and other pieces of clothing—a complete Spanish gentleman’s outfit—adorned each new Christian chief and important members of his entourage.” Converting Indians to Christianity wasn’t just the job of professionals. All Spanish settlers were encouraged to take an active part in the conversion process. In 1512 Spain established the encomienda system in the Americas. Under this system, conquistadores and Spanish settlers were given land grants in which the Indians who lived on these lands were considered a part of the lands. The Indians were required to work for the new “owners” and in return, the “owners” were to Christianize and “civilize” the Indians. In 1573, the Spanish governor of Florida arranged for the Franciscans to establish missions in the territories under his jurisdiction. Under Royal Orders, 18 Franciscans were to be sent to La Florida. By the end of the year, three Franciscans had arrived and were working with the Guale and Orista. According to archaeologist Jerald Milanich: “The Franciscans were successful in baptizing the chief and his wife of the main town of Guale.” This was a major victory for the Franciscans as the chief was in line to become the head chief over several villages. In 1575, the Franciscans decided that it was in their best interest to withdraw from Florida because of conflicts with the Spanish colonial government. In 1584, a group of Franciscans under the leadership of Father Alonso de Reynoso returned to Florida. They arrived in St. Augustine to establish missions among the Indians. However, the priest was accused of fraud and denounced for excessive card playing. According to Jerald Milanich: “The 1584 effort thus ended almost before it had begun.” In 1587, Father Alonso de Reynoso brought nine Franciscan friars to Florida to help convert and pacify the Indians. Three years later, Father Alonso de Reynoso brought in another group of 12 Franciscan friars to work among the Indians. In 1595, a group of 12 Franciscan friars under the leadership of Father Juan de Silva began missionary work among the Florida Indians. According to Jerald Milanich: “These twelve also mark the beginning of successful Franciscan missionary efforts among the La Florida Indians. Those efforts, carefully choreographed, would be couched within the context of Spanish colonial enterprise and carried out against a backdrop of native depopulation.” In 1595, the Franciscan Francisco Pareja (1570-1628) began writing down the language of the Timucua Indians. Conclusion American Indian religions had always borrowed from other groups, incorporating ceremonies and stories into their own religious systems. American Indians approached Christianity in this same fashion, intending to incorporate some elements of the European religion into their own. However, Christian missionaries demanded that Christianity replace all pagan elements. Christianity, of course, was not just ceremonies and mythology, but a religion that demanded changes in dress (Christianity was offended by the human body) and social organization (marriage and patriarchy). More American Indian histories Indians 101: Powhatan Indians and the Spanish mission at Cheasapeake Bay Indians 101: The Calusa Indians and Spanish missionaries in 1549 Indians 201: Southwestern Indians and Fray Marcos de Niza Indians 101: 16th Spanish Religious Views of Indians Indians 301: Canadian First Nations and Jacques Cartier, 1534-1542 Indians 201: Plains Indians and the Spanish in the sixteenth century Indians 201: Florida Indians and the Spanish, 1513 to 1527 Indians 101: The Zuni and the Spanish in the 16th Century

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, Christianity, History, NativeAmericanNetroots, Religion, Inclians101] [Link to media]

— Tribes, environmental groups blast Newsom's fast-tracking of Delta Tunnel, urge audit of DWR funding

 

at 5/21/25 11:13am

As Central Valley salmon and Delta fish populations plummet to record low levels, the Delta Tribal Environmental Coalition (DTEC) and a coalition of statewide organizations dedicated to the “equitable stewardship of California’s water resources” sent letters to legislative leaders urging them to reject Governor Newsom’s proposed budget trailer bill. They say the bill would accelerate the Delta Conveyance Project, commonly known as the Delta Tunnel, and eliminate critical environmental reviews for the Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan. The Governor’s proposal to fast-track the Delta Tunnel and circumvent legal protections is also facing unanimous opposition from the California Legislative Delta Caucus, who held a major press conference yesterday in collaboration with statewide organizations and Tribes opposing the project. “Governor Newsom’s trailer bill language seeks to bypass decades of established water laws, environmental protections, and public processes in order to fast-track one of California’s most controversial and costly infrastructure projects—The Delta Tunnel. The legislation also threatens water quality standards for the San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary,” according to a statement from the coalition. “We know there are solutions that will restore and protect our sacred waterways and allow our people to maintain our culture and traditions while providing sufficient water for Southern California,” said Malissa Tayaba, Vice Chair of the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians. “Instead of pursuing those solutions, Governor Newsom is pushing the Delta Conveyance Project, which would destroy the remaining life in our Delta watershed and eco-cultural estuary.” In their letter, the Delta Tribal Environmental Coalition (DTEC) —including the Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians, Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, Winnemem Wintu Tribe, Little Manila Rising and Restore the Delta—highlights the significant harm this project could inflict on the communities relying on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. They also argue that the Governor’s proposals fail to advance climate resilience and would financially burden California ratepayers, undermining the legislature’s focus on affordability this session.  “The proposed trailer bill is a blatant attempt to codify illegal provisions to advance the Delta Tunnel. It’s a misuse of the budget process—bypassing legal requirements and undermining the public processes that are fundamental to our democracy,” said Cintia Cortez, Policy Program Manager at Restore the Delta. “As it stands, the project is incomplete, violates multiple laws, and could not legally move forward otherwise. Restore the Delta remains committed to defending Delta communities in the face of these flagrant efforts.” Tribes and organizations including the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, Restore the Delta, Golden State Salmon Association, and Sierra Club California are also urging the Joint Legislative Audit Committee to approve an audit of the Department of Water Resources’ (DWR) spending on the Delta Tunnel. The goal is to “ensure full accountability for DWR’s expenditures of public funds and to hold the agency responsible for protecting California’s crucial Delta water resources and ecosystems,” according to the coalition. The request for an audit by the Tribes and organizations takes place as the San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary is in its worst-ever crisis, as evidenced by the closure of commercial salmon fishing off the California Coast for an unprecedented third year in a row, due to the collapse of the Sacramento and Klamath River Fall Chinook Salmon populations. Meanwhile, Sacramento River Spring Chinook and Winter Chinook Salmon — listed under both the state and federal endangered species acts — continue to decline.    The data from the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) documents the abysmal situation that Sacramento River Fall Chinook Salmon, once the driver of the West Coast salmon fishery, and the Spring and Winter Chinook are now in, largely due to water and fishery mismanagement by the state and federal governments. Between 1996-2005 the average return for fall-run Chinook on the mainstem Sacramento River was 79,841 spawning salmon. In 2023 that number fell drastically to only 3,560 salmon – a 95% decline, according to an analysis by the Golden State Salmon Association. Spring-run Chinook have also experienced a staggering 95% decline due to a lack of cold water flows in Central Valley salmon rivers. The average wild and hatchery spring-run return plummeted from 28,238 fish in 2021 to just 1,231 salmon in 2023. And spawner escapement in 2024 of endangered Sacramento River Winter Chinook  was estimated to be only 789 adults and 578 jacks (two-year-olds).  Delta Smelt is functionally extinct in the wild I have written extensively about this in previous articles, but it’s crucial in understanding how bad the situation is in the once robust Bay-Delta estuary to review the current status of Delta Smelt and  other pelagic species on the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. For the seventh year in a row, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife CDFW found no Delta Smelt in the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Fall Midwater Trawl Survey in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta in 2024. This 2 to 3 inch fish is an indicator species that has been villainized by Donald Trump and his corporate agribusiness allies for supposedly being a “worthless fish,”   It is significant that zero Delta smelt were caught in the survey despite the release of tens of thousands of hatchery-raised Delta smelt into the Delta over the past few years by the state and federal governments. “The 2024 abundance index was 0 and continues the trend of no catch in the FMWT since 2017,” reported  Taylor Rohlin, CDFW Environmental Scientist Bay Delta Region in a Jan. 2 memo to Erin Chappell, Regional Manager Bay Delta Region: nrm.dfg.ca.gov/... “No Delta Smelt were collected from any stations during our survey months of September-December. While FMWT did not catch any Delta Smelt, it does not mean there were no smelt present, but the numbers are very low and below the effective detection threshold by most sampling methods,” she wrote. The CDFW has conducted the Fall Midwater Trawl Survey (FMWT) to index the fall abundance of pelagic (open water) fishes annually since 1967 (except 1974 and 1979), Rohlin stated. Why is this survey so important?  It’s because “the FMWT equipment and methods have remained consistent since the survey’s inception, allowing the indices to be compared across time,” Rohlin wrote. “These relative abundance indices are not intended to approximate population sizes; however, indices reflect general patterns in population change (Polansky et al. 2019).” Other surveys last year also reveal the functional extinction of Delta smelt in the wild. A weekly survey by the US Fish and Wildlife Service  targeting Delta smelt caught only one smelt in the summer of 2024. “A late April IEP juvenile fish survey (the 20-mm Survey) caught several juvenile Delta smelt in the same area,” noted scientist Tom Cannon in his blog on the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance website: calsport.org/...    In a January post on Truth Social, President Donald Trump falsely claimed that Governor Gavin Newsom “refused to sign the water restoration declaration put before him that would have allowed millions of gallons of water, from excess rain and snow melt from the North, to flow daily into many parts of California, including the areas that are currently burning in a virtually apocalyptic way. He wanted to protect an essentially worthless fish called a smelt, by giving it less water (it didn’t work!), but didn’t care about the people of California.” I break down the four falsehoods that Trump made in this post here: www.dailykos.com/... To summarize, the Delta Smelt is definitely not a “worthless fish.” In fact, the Delta Smelt is a key indicator species that demonstrates the health of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas. The 2 to 3 inch fish that smells like a cucumber is found only in the Delta. It was once the most abundant fish in the Delta, numbering in the millions, but now is functionally extinct in the wild due to massive water exports to agribusiness and other factors, including invasive species, toxics and pollution, over the past several decades.   The significance of the Delta smelt’s role in the Bay-Delta Estuary cannot be overstated. ”Delta Smelt are the thread that ties the Delta together with the river system,” said Caleen Sisk, Chief of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe. “We all should understand how that affects all the water systems in the state. They are the irreplaceable thread that holds the Delta system together with Chinook salmon.” Other pelagic fish species are in free-fall also The other fish species collected in the fall survey — striped bass, longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail and threadfin shad — continued their dramatic decline since 1967 when the State Water Project went into effect. Only the threadfin shad showed an increase from the last year’s index — and the population is still at just a fraction of its former abundance. The survey uses an “abundance index,” a relative measure of abundance, to document general patterns in population change. The 2024 abundance index for striped bass, an introduced gamefish, was 136, representing a 49% decrease from last year’s index. The index was 175 for longfin smelt, a native fish species, representing a 62% decrease from last year’s index. The index was 577 for threadfin shad, an introduced forage fish, representing a 12% increase from last year’s index. The index for American shad, an introduced gamefish, was 1341, representing a 45% decrease from last year’s index. The index for Sacramento splittail, a native minnow species, was 0, with 0 fish caught. To put things truly In perspective, one must understand that these substantial decreases were from already abysmally low levels of abundance. Between 1967 and 2020, the state’s Fall Midwater Trawl abundance indices for striped bass, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, American shad, splittail and threadfin shad have declined by 99.7, 100, 99.96, 67.9, 100, and 95%, respectively, according to the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. The graphs in this CDFW memo graphically illustrate how dramatic the declines in fish populations have been over the years: nrm.dfg.ca.gov/…  

[Author: Dan Bacher] [Category: BigAg, California, EnvironmentalJustice, GavinNewsom, Salmon, Water, DeltaSmelt, SacramentoSplittail, CaliforniaSportfishingProtectionAlliance, CDFW, DeltaTunnel, DeltaTribalEnvironmentalCoalition, DTEC] [Link to media]

— Indians 101: American Indians and the Black Hills 150 years ago, 1875

 

at 5/20/25 8:15am

The quest to find gold was an obsession from the very beginning of the European invasion of the Americas. While the Native American worldview generally stressed the interconnectedness of people and the natural world, Europeans saw the natural world as something to be exploited. The obsession for exploitation, for obtaining personal wealth and, importantly, for finding gold continued into the nineteenth and twentieth centuries and became an important part of the mythology of the United States. History books and popular literature are filled with the stories of “gold rushes” and the fabulous wealth that was extracted from the land. In South Dakota, the Black Hills are sacred to the Sioux Indians as well as other tribes. Geologically, the Black Hills are the site of an ancient upheaval that pushed the rocky strata far above the surrounding plains. The resulting peaks trapped the clouds and gave the region its own climate. During the summers, this was an area which was often used for ceremonies—sweat lodges, vision quests, and Sun Dances—and for gathering medicinal plants.   American greed and dishonesty collided with Sioux religion in the Black Hills. Before looking at the events of 1875 relating to the Black Hills, there are two points that need to be clarified. First there is no such thing as a Sioux tribe, meaning a single governmentally unified entity. The name Sioux has been imposed on a number of autonomous tribes resulting in the misconception that there is a single Sioux tribe. The term Sioux actually refers to three linguistic divisions – Dakota, Nakota, and Lakota – and each of these is further divided into distinct groups or tribes. Second, during the nineteenth and part of the twentieth centuries, the United States government did not recognize the validity of American Indian religions. In the United States, American Indian law is based on the premise that as a Christian nation, the United States has the right to rule the non-Christian Indian nations. Following the advice and counsel of Christian missionaries, American Indian religious activities were not only discouraged but often criminalized. In 1868, ten Sioux tribes – Brulé, Oglala, Miniconjou, Yanktonai, Hunkpapa, Blackfeet, Cuthead, Two Kettle, Sans Arcs, Santee—signed a treaty with the United States in which the Black Hills were included in an area which was to be held for the absolute and undisturbed use and occupation of the Sioux people. In 1875, the Commissioner of Indian Affairs appointed a special commission to go to South Dakota to meet with the Sioux and obtain the Black Hills for the United States. The commission was headed by Senator William B. Allison of Iowa and was thus known as the Allison Commission. In general, the members of the commission had no qualifications for negotiating land cessions from Indians. Regarding the commission’s proposal to the Sioux, James Olson, in his book Red Cloud and the Sioux Problem, reports: “If the Indians would lease mining rights, the Government would give them four hundred thousand dollars a year for as long as the lease should run; if the Indians wanted to sell the Hills outright, the government would pay six million dollars in fifteen annual installments.” In their response to the proposal the Sioux leaders, particularly Red Dog and Red Cloud, insisted that it must provide for the next seven generations of their people. The Allison Commission failed to obtain the Black Hills for the United States. The American government then brought Sioux chiefs Red Cloud and Spotted Tail to Washington, D.C. to discuss the Black Hills. The government hoped to persuade the chiefs to relinquish the Black Hills. When the subject of the Black Hills came up, Red Cloud got upset and explained that he had come to Washington only to lay his grievances before the President, not to discuss the Black Hills. Red Cloud told the Commissioner of Indian Affairs: “The white men tell me lies, and I became so troubled I wanted to come to Washington and see the Great Father himself and talk with him. That is why I have come to see you.” When the Sioux delegation met with President Ulysses S. Grant, they were all dressed in full paint and feathers. James Olson reports: “The President was not particularly warm. He was glad to see them, to be sure, but he would not talk business with them.” The Sioux were not pleased with their meeting with the President. In their discussions with the Indian Office, the suggestion was again made that they should consider moving to Oklahoma. In 1875, the U.S. Army under the command of General George Crook made a reconnaissance of the Black Hills and found at least 1,200 miners in the region. The miners were ordered to leave, but there was no effort to enforce the order. In his official report, Crook stated: “Now, when I visited the Black Hills country and conversed with the miners in regard to vacating, and reminded them that they were violating a treaty stipulation, it was but natural that they should reply that the Indians themselves violated the treaty hundreds of times every summer by predatory incursions, whereby many settlers were utterly ruined, and their families left without means of subsistence, and this by Indians who are fed, clothed, and maintained in utter idleness by the Government they, the settlers, help support.” Although United States law prohibited Euro-American occupa­tion of the Black Hills in South Dakota, President Ulysses S. Grant, in a secret November meeting with the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of War, Lieutenant General Sherman and Brigadier General George Crook, brushed aside any treaty obligations to the Sioux and orders “no further resistance shall be made to miners going into [the Black Hills].” In December all Sioux nations were ordered onto reservations away from their sacred Black Hills, and away from the gold coveted by the Americans. In her book Montana Battlefields 1806-1877: Native Americans and the U.S. Army at War, Barbara Fifer reports: “The government even claimed that the decision was made partially to protect the reservation Indians from non-treaty Indians!”   More American Indian histories Indians 101: Indian reservations 150 years ago, 1875 Indians 101: American Indian wars, conflicts, and battles 150 years ago, 1874 Indians 101: Sioux Indians and Black Hills gold 150 years ago, 1874 Indians 101: American Indians and Christianity 150 years ago, 1874 Indians 101: The Theft of the Black Hills Indians 101: Sioux Opposition to Railroads in Montana in 1872 Indians 101: The 1851 Fort Laramie Treaty Indians 101: The Sioux in Canada

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, History, Indians101, NativeAmericanNetroots, SiouxIndians, SouthDakota, AllisonCommission] [Link to media]

— Indians 101: Recycled Warrior (museum exhibition)

 

at 5/15/25 8:15am

One of the cornerstones of the mission of the Missoula Art Museum (MAM) in Missoula, Montana, is celebrating contemporary Native artists. MAM’s Contemporary American Indian Art Collection (CAIAC) was established with Jaune Quick-to-See Smith in 1997. According to MAM: “What began with Quick-to-See Smith’s generous donation has grown into a collection of over 300 works by leading Native artists—now the most requested and loaned part of MAM’s holdings.” As a part of MAM’s 50th anniversary, the museum had a special exhibition—Good Relations: Contemporary Native American Artists in the MAM Collection. The collection includes Recycled Warrior by Pikani (Blackfoot) artist Dwight Billedeaux (1947 -) . This sculpture, created in 1999, is made from mixed media, metal, stone. Billedeaux was one of the founding members of Coup Marks, an artists and craftsmen cooperative on the Flathead Indian Reservation, Ronan, Montana. Note: These photographs were taken on April 10, 2025. More American Indian Art Indians 101: Clubs and a buffalo skull (museum exhibitions) Indians 101: Three Plateau Women Artists (Photo Diary) Indians 101: American Indian modern art by Oscar Howe (museum tour) Indians 101: Contemporary Native art in the Portland Art Museum (museum exhibition) Indians 101: Contemporary Indian animal art (museum tour) Indians 101: Modern Blackfoot ledger art (museum tour) Indians 101: Caddo artist Raven Halfmoon (museum tour) Indians 101: Reborn Rez Wrecks (museum tour)

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, Art, Indians101, Montana, Museums, NativeAmericanNetroots, Photography, BlackfootIndians, MissoulaArtMuseum, DwightBilledeaux] [Link to media]

— Indians 101: American Indian tribes 200 years ago, 1825

 

at 5/13/25 8:15am

During the first part of the nineteenth century the United States followed policies which viewed American Indians as impediments to the economic growth of the country. At the beginning of the century, President Thomas Jefferson had expressed the idea that the future of the United States depended on acquisition of land for the rapidly growing population. Thus, the future of the country depended on dispossessing the Indians of their land. Under this Jeffersonian view, American Indians were not seen as being welcome in the United States and it was felt that they should be removed from their ancient homelands and moved to lands west of the Mississippi River. While many of the tribes within the boundaries of the United States were under pressure to give up the lands they had occupied and farmed for centuries, many of the tribes in the interior of the continent continued their traditional ways while using some European and American trade goods. Briefly described below are some of the American Indian tribal events of 200 years ago, 1825. Kansa The Kansa Indians, also known as the Kaw Indians, are a Siouan-speaking people closely related to the Osages and Quapaws. Their name means “people of the south wind.” During the nineteenth century, the Kansas were divided into three bands or villages. Each village elected its own chief. In the territory of Kansas, the Kansa tribe ceded all their territory to the United States except for a reservation. In addition, the Kansas granted the American government the right to mark a roadway through their reservation for the Santa Fe Trail. Some of the ceded lands were sold and the funds made available to Christian missionaries. In 1825, the United States recognized White Plume, who was the son of Osage chief Pawhuska and a Kansa woman, as the principal chief of the Kansas. He agreed to cede 640-acre plots in fee simple to 23 mixed bloods. This created friction with Fool Chief, American Chief, and Hard Chief. In Missouri, the Kansas agreed to extinguish their title to land in Jackson and Clay counties and in eastern Kansas. Assiniboine The Assiniboines are a Siouan-speaking Northern Plains people whose traditional territories were divided by the international boundary between Canada and the United States. In 1825, several southern Assiniboine bands migrated into Montana from the Canadian provinces. Crow The Crows call themselves Absaroka, a Siouan word meaning “bird people.” In 1825, two Crow chiefs – Arapooish and Long Hair – had an argument and the tribe split into two groups. The followers of Long Hair became known as the Mountain Crow and migrated south of the Yellowstone River in southern Montana. The followers of Arapooish became known as the River Crow and migrated along the tributaries of the Missouri River. Long Hair took his name from his long hair which was about ten feet long. The Crows were known among the Northern Plains tribes for their long hair. Long Hair attributed his abilities to the length of his hair. In North Dakota, at the 1825 treaty meeting at Knife River, Crow leaders Rotten Belly (Sore Belly) and Red Feather (Red Plume) were adopted by the Hidatsas in the Sacred Pipe Ceremony. In this way, the Crow adopted this ceremony as their own. Note: at some point in the distant past, the Crows were a part of the Hidatsas.   Kutenai The traditional homelands of the Kutenais (also spelled Kootenai) were in the Rocky Mountain areas of Idaho, Montana, British Columbia, and Alberta. In Western Montana in 1825, American traders encountered a Kutenai trading party that included a Two Spirit (berdache) chief – Kauxuma-nupika (“Gone to the Spirits”) – who was a woman who dressed like a man and had assumed masculine characteristics. The European traders referred to her by the name Berdache and gave him/her gifts the same as they did with the other chiefs. Blackfoot During the first part of the nineteenth century, Blackfoot warriors were considered the fiercest warriors on the North Plains of Montana, Alberta, and Saskatchewan. In 1825, a group of Blackfoot warriors joined a group of Gros Ventre warriors to raid a trading post in Saskatchewan. They then travelled south to the Black Hills in South Dakota where they joined Cheyenne and Arapaho warriors. This intertribal raiding party then continued southward, raiding horses from the Comanches and Kiowas in Nebraska. Shoshone In Utah, a Shoshone war party under the leadership of Bad Gocha attacked an American trading party led by Etienne Provost. In response the Americans turned to the Utes for both protection and trade. Oneida The Oneidas are a part of the Iroquois Six Nations Confederacy. The Oneidas refer to themselves as the “People of the Standing Stone.” According to oral tradition, a large granite boulder suddenly appeared in their village near Oneida Lake in New York. Whenever they moved, the boulder would move with them, untouched by human hands. This boulder became the sacred stone around which their council met to resolve the questions presented to them. In 1825, a group of Oneidas from New York settled at Duck Creek, Wisconsin. The Oneidas were responding to American removal pressures. Tsimshian  The Tsimshian (also known as Nisga’a) are “the people of the Skeena River.” They are the northernmost Penutian-speakers. Like other Northwest Coast First Nations, they traditionally lived in villages of large plank houses along the ocean shore. In British Columbia, the Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC) vessel William and Anne made contact with the Tsimshians in 1825. The HBC traders found that the Indians were already familiar with European products and trade. In his chapter in Emerging from the Mist: Studies in Northwest Coast Culture History, anthropologist Andrew Martindale reports: “Most of the Nisga’a had guns, and many wore European items of clothing. They also possessed more tobacco than the Europeans, a deficit the Nisga’a recognized and tried to exploit by offering their own at an exorbitant price.” Indian Skulls From the beginning of the European Invasion of North America, graverobbing was, and still is, a popular pastime. During the nineteenth century there was an interest in collecting American Indian skulls both for display in Cabinets of Curiosities (the forerunners of today’s museums) and as “scientific specimens” in an effort to document racial inferiority. In 1825, Dr. John Souler visited Astoria, Oregon, where he acquired some Indian skulls, including at least one of which had been deformed. The skulls were acquired by stealing them from canoe burials at Mount Coffin, a sacred burial site. More Nineteenth-Century American Indian Histories Indians 101: Attempt at Shawnee removal 200 years ago, 1825 Indians 101: American Indians and Mexico 200 years ago, 1825 Indians 101: American Indians and the federal government 200 years ago, 1825 Indians 101: American Indian battles and skirmishes 200 years ago, 1824 Indians 101: American Indian tribes 200 years ago, 1824 Indians 101: Canadian First Nations 200 years ago, 1824 Indians 101: Cherokee Indians 200 year ago, 1824 Indians 101: Sauk, Fox, Piankashaw, and Iowa Indians visit Washington 200 years ago, 1824

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, History, Indians101, NativeAmericanNetroots, BlackfootIndians, CrowIndians, HidatsaIndians, ShoshoneIndians, assiniboineindians, kansaindians, OneidaIndians, OsageIndians, TsimshianIndians, KutenaiIndians] [Link to media]

— This Mother’s Day, honor the matriarchs organizing for change ?

 

at 5/9/25 12:54pm

Arizona’s Indigenous grandmothers are reshaping democracy — and they need your support. Mother’s Day is this week — and in Native communities across Arizona, we are celebrating the matriarchs who’ve always been at the heart of organizing and leadership. Since 2022, Arizona Native Democrats has proudly supported these powerful women through Family Votes, a grassroots relational organizing program that empowers grandmothers, mothers, and family leaders to register voters, hold community events, and turn out the vote in some of the most rural and remote parts of the state. These are women who have never held political titles — but who wield incredible influence over their families, villages, and Tribal Nations. With training, support, and care from our Family Votes Coordinator Janice Ben (Diné), more than 200 matriarchs have stepped into their power and organized their families for the future. From Hopi to White Mountain Apache to Navajo Nation, our Matriarchs are: Hopi Matriarch preparing for a rally in Hotevilla Registering family members to vote and helping them get to the polls Registering new voters at flea markets and roadside intersections Holding community dinners and listening sessions to shape local advocacy Hosting "Hands Off" rallies and training the next generation of organizers And now, we’re ready to grow. With a special election this September in Southern Arizona's CD7 — and the 2026 elections on the horizon — we are expanding Family Votes to reach even more women, in even more communities. But we can’t do it without you. Will you make a Mother’s Day donation today to help us: Hire a new Family Votes Coordinator for Southern Arizona Host matriarch-led community training events Equip our organizers with voter registration materials, banners, chairs, canopies, and supplies Reach thousands of women who’ve never been contacted by the Democratic Party This is what grassroots democracy looks like — and it’s powered by love, family, and fierce matriarchal leadership. ? Chip in now to grow the movement:  secure.actblue.com/... Thank you for standing with the women leading our movement.

[Author: NEAZNativeDemocrats] [Category: Arizona, battleground, Community, fieldorganizing, Indigenous, NativeVote, ruralDemocrats, specialelction, Matriarchs] [Link to media]

— Indians 101: A Cowlitz canoe (museum exhibit)

 

at 5/8/25 8:15am

One of the first exhibits that greets visitors to the Cowlitz County Historical Museum in Kelso, Washington, is a Cowlitz canoe. For more than 12,000 years the Cowlitz Indians have lived in Western Washington along the Cowlitz River and other tributaries that flowed into the Columbia River. As a river people their traditional economy was based on fishing which was supplemented with the gathering of wild plants and hunting. Cowlitz canoes were used for fishing as well as for river travel. Behind the canoe is a mural by Portland artist Jennifer Cutshall showing the river and some Cowlitz longhouses. In creating the mural, the artist consulted historical descriptions and illustrations of Cowlitz villages so that the mural shows an accurate picture of a village. According to the Museum: “In the late 1700s, more than 40 Cowlitz villages dotted the shoreline of the Cowlitz River. Each village consisted of a number of cedar plank longhouses, each home to several families.” The canoe shown above was carved by Cowlitz Tribe member Robert Harju. It was carved for the museum. According to the Museum: “The canoe represents the type of canoe the Cowlitz people were using on the river in the 1800s. It has a ‘shovel nose,’ where someone could sit or stand and maneuver the craft with a pole.” Note: These photographs were taken on October 19, 2024. More American Indian museum exhibits Indians 101: Cowlitz Indians and the fur trade (museum exhibit) Indians 101: Coastal canoes (museum exhibit) Indians 101: Tulalip Canoes (Photo Diary) Indians 101: Suquamish Canoes (Photo Diary) Indians 101: Some repatriated Tlingit artifacts (photo diary) Indians 101: The Suquamish Museum (Photo Diary) Indians 101: Suquamish Basketry (Photo Diary) Indians 101: The Kalama totem poles (photo diary)

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, Indians101, Museums, Photography, Washington, Canoes, CowlitzIndians, CowlitzCountyHistoricalMuseum] [Link to media]

— Indians 101: Canadian First Nations 150 years ago, 1875

 

at 5/6/25 8:15am

Briefly described below are a few of the Canadian First Nations events of 150 years ago, 1875. North-West Mounted Police The North-West Mounted Police (NWMP) was formed in 1873 to administer law and order in the Northwest Territories (present day Alberta and Saskatchewan). By 1875 the North-West Mounted Police were operating out of four stations and collateral outposts. Fort Macleod had been built in southern Alberta to offset American incursions in the whiskey and fur trade. Fort Walsh had been established 160 miles to the east, just across the provincial border in Saskatchewan. Historian Jerome Greene, in his book Beyond Bear’s Paw: The Nez Perce Indians in Canada, writes: “Together, the presence of Forts Macleod and Walsh virtually ended the liquor traffic within a year.” Shown above is a model of the original fort exhibited in The Fort—Museum of the North West Mounted Police in Fort Macleod, Alberta. Métis In the early 1800s, the Métis had developed their own identity as a distinct people. The heart of Métis country was on the plains of Saskatchewan and Manitoba. In their book Louis Riel, Dan Asfar and Tim Chodan write: “The Métis were a French-speaking people living in western Canada who drew their ancestry from both whites and Natives. They were the offspring of French fur traders and Native women who married during traders’ sojourns in Rupert’s Land.” The Canadian Parliament, under the influence of the Orangemen (Protestant militants) banished Métis Catholic leader Louis Riel from all British territories for a period of five years. Assiniboines During the 1870s, the Canadian government negotiated a series of treaties with the First Nations of the Northern Plains. In his book Maps and Dreams: Indians and the British Columbia Frontier anthropologist Hugh Brody writes: “Seven of the treaties, signed between 1870 and 1877, were negotiated for the explicit purpose of opening western Canada for settlement and for the new nation’s first transcontinental railway.” The homeland for the Siouan-speaking Assiniboines in the nineteenth century was on the Northern Plains in what is now the Canadian province of Saskatchewan and the American state of Montana. The primary political unit among the Assiniboines was the band and there was no political structure which tied the bands together into a tribe. Among the Assiniboines, the chief (huká) was selected by merit rather than heredity. In Saskatchewan, the Stonies (Assiniboines) under the leadership of Piapot, Pheasant Rump, and Striped Blanket (Ocean Man) signed an addition to Treaty No. 4 at Qu’Appelle. Buffalo Robe Trade During the first part of the nineteenth century, trade began changing as the European markets for beaver declined and the eastern American market for buffalo robes and buffalo hides increased. In response to this change in demand, the Hudson’s Bay Company shifted its emphasis from furs to buffalo robes. By the 1870s, the market for buffalo had shifted from buffalo robes to buffalo hides. There was an increasing demand for leather which was used as drive belts in factories. In his book Indians in the Fur Trade: Their Role as Hunters, Trappers and Middlemen in the Lands Southwest of Hudson Bay, 1660-1870, Arthur Ray reports: “Whereas formerly the robes had to be taken during the winter season and took a considerable amount of know-how to prepare, hides were secured in the summer and required little skill to make them ready for trade. As a result, larger numbers of non-Indian groups became involved.” In Montreal in 1875, the Hudson’s Bay Company’s buffalo robe sale was a failure. In his chapter in Buffalo, J.E. Foster reports: “Supply had caught up with demand and passed it. The sale was unsuccessful as large numbers remained in the hands of the Company and the wholesalers they supplied.” The fall in prices did not, however, result in a decrease of production. Consumerism had become institutionalized in the Métis and Indian cultures, the material goods acquired in the buffalo robe trade were not luxuries, but necessities, and thus the hunters simply increased their efforts in an attempt to maintain their new lifestyles. Salmon cannery In British Columbia, a salmon cannery was built on the Skeena River using Native labor.   More First Nations History Indians 101: Canadian First Nations 100 years ago, 1925 Indians 101: The Northwest Coast Potlatch 100 years ago, 1921 Indians 101: Canadian First Nations 150 years ago, 1870 Indians 101: Canadian First Nations 350 years ago, 1670 Indians 101: The Canadian fur trade 200 years ago, 1821 Indians 301: Canadian First Nations and Jacques Cartier, 1534-1542 Indians 101: Champlain and the Canadian First Nations Indians 101: Crowfoot, Canadian Siksika leader

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, Canada, FurTrade, History, Indians101, Metis, LouisRiel, North-WestMountedPolice, assiniboineindians, NativeAmericanNet] [Link to media]

— Ancient America 201: Effigy Mounds

 

at 5/3/25 8:15am

Our American and Canadian heritage begins long before Columbus supposedly “discovered” the Americas. For thousands of years people have lived in North America and they built cities and towns which were, and still are, architectural wonders. More than a thousand years ago, Indian people in the Midwest were making earthen structures—often referred to as “mounds”—in a variety of shapes. Many of these structures have geometric shapes: linear, conical, and oval. Others, however, seem to resemble birds and animals, both real and mythical. For this reason, these earthen structures have come to be known as Effigy Mounds. Archaeologists today use the term “Effigy Mound Culture” in referring to the thousands of effigy mounds that were constructed primarily in from about 600 CE to 1200 CE during the period which archaeologists call the Late Woodland, an era of profound culture transformation.   Following the decline of Hopewell, an earlier mound building culture, the Effigy Mound Culture emerged in the Upper Midwest (abbreviated at UMW in some sources). In their chapter in Explanations in Iconography: Ancient American Indian Art, Symbol, and Meaning, Bradley Lepper, Robert Boszhardt, James Duncan, and Carol Diaz-Granados write: “Between c. AD 700 and 1150, Native people constructed more than 3000 effigy mounds across that portion of the UMW lying between southern Lake Michigan and the upper Mississippi River valley. This area conforms to present day southern Wisconsin, and contiguous portions of northern Illinois, northeast Iowa, and southeastern Minnesota.” In the first decade of twenty-first century, the Wisconsin Historical Society documented 3200 animal-shaped earthen mounds in over 1,000 locations. With regard to the appearance of effigy mounds about 700 CE, David Hurst Thomas. in his section in The Native Americans: An Illustrated History, reports: “Huge earthen likenesses of oversized bears, birds, and serpents began to appear across the northeastern landscape.” David Hurst Thomas goes on to say: “At the ancient mounds near McGregor, Iowa, on high ground bypassed by the Ice Age glaciers, ancient Americans built two hundred massive mounds. Some are geometric cones and ridges. But the most impressive are the huge birds and the Marching Bears. Today, twenty-seven such effigy mounds survive along the Iowa-Wisconsin border.” Archaeologist Philip Salkin, in his chapter in Late Woodland Societies: Tradition and Transformation Across the Midcontinent, reports: “The distinctive feature of the Effigy Mound tradition was the construction of a variety of low mounds, often in the shape of animals.” Many of the earthworks were 30-40 meters (98-131 feet) in length. In his entry on the Effigy Mound Culture in A Dictionary of Archaeology, George Milner writes: “They built variously shaped mounds, and the name Effigy Mound Culture comes from the animal shapes of many mounds, although conical and linear mounds also occur.” While the term “culture” is often used in talking about the effigy mounds, relatively little is actually known about the lifestyles. According to Thomas Emerson and Anne Titebaum, in their chapter in Late Woodland Societies: Tradition and Transformation Across the Midcontinent: “Little is known about the lifestyle of the effigy mound builders beyond a general Late Woodland material assemblage that includes triangular points and cordmarked pottery categorized as Madison ware, a foraging subsistence pattern with little or no dependence on cultigens, and a presumed nonhierarchical political and social structure.” At this time in this area, people were generally engaged in hunting, fishing, and gathering. They lived in seasonal camps and used rockshelters for their winter quarters. In his chapter in the Handbook of North American Indians, James Fitting writes:  “There are indications that Effigy Mound peoples had a generalized economic base similar to that of other northern early Late Woodland peoples.” In an article in American Antiquity, archaeologists James Theler and Robert Boszhardt report: “Effigy mound people initially followed a traditional seasonal round. In the spring, microbands left the interior and congregated in large macrobands at locations along major waterways with warm-season, resource-rich floodplains.” The construction of an effigy mound would usually begin by digging out a depression, a precise intaglio of the shape of the mound. Then successive layers of differently colored soils—called “ceremonial earths” by the archaeologists—would be laid down. The soils were brought to the mound in baskets. In between the ceremonial earths, the builders would lay down common soils and fire blackened strata. The fire blackened strata are black in color and rich in ash.  In their chapter in Late Woodland Societies: Tradition and Transformation Across the Midcontinent, archaeologists James Stoltman and George Christiansen report: “Multiple fire strata (black in color and rich in ash and charcoal) were commonly present, sometimes covering the entire surface of a mound at one particular stage and presumably marking episodes of especially intense ritual activity.”   When completed an effigy mound may have risen to five feet above the surrounding terrain. With regard to overall size, it is not uncommon to have mounds that are more than 100 feet in length. The Great Bear effigy in Effigy Mounds National Monument, Iowa, is 137 feet long and 3.5 feet high. In Wisconsin, the bird effigy mound on the Mendota State Hospital grounds has a wingspan of 624 feet. One effigy mound, now destroyed but mapped in the nineteenth century, had a wingspan of nearly 1,300 feet. There are eight different types of effigies which are generally recognized: panther, bear, bird, deer, buffalo, turtle, canine, and beaver. In addition to these animal effigies, about five human figures have been identified. There are some writers who have reported effigies of squirrel, raccoon, mink, lizard, and elephant. However, it must be understood that the current categorization of the effigies is based on the imaginations of people who didn’t build them. There is no guarantee that the name given to an effigy by today’s people accurately reflects the intentions of the people who constructed it. One of the most spectacular, and mystifying,effigy mounds is the Great Serpent Mound (33AD1) near Chillicothe, Ohio. This is one of the largest geoglyphs in the world. The mound is about 1,000 feet long and was constructed by carrying tons of yellow clay to the site in woven burden baskets. David Hurst Thomas reports: “The result is a flawlessly modeled serpent, wriggling northward, mouth agape, trying to swallow a massive egg. Although ancestors were buried nearby, the serpent mound was itself a deliberate religious effigy, not a place of burial.” Effigy mounds were usually constructed on an elevated area which overlooks streams and lakes. While an area may contain only a single mound, groups of up to 20-30 mounds are fairly common. The Harper’s Ferry Great Group in Iowa includes 895 mounds. Many of the mounds contain burials. Most frequently there is a single grave. While this grave usually contains only one individual, there are a number of cases with graves containing two or more individuals. In one instance—Mound 1 at Kratz Creek in Wisconsin—there is a mass burial of 45 individuals, and in another instance—Mound 66 at Riasbeck, there is a mass burial of 35 individuals. Charred human bones are occasionally found in the mounds, and the immense beds of ash at Kratz Creek suggest that cremation may have been common. At about 1200 CE, a 210-foot-long effigy in the shape of a panther was constructed in Ohio. Americans would later call this Alligator Mound (33LI5) in spite of the fact that Ohio was not known for its alligators. From an Indian perspective it is probably a representation of Underwater Panther, one of the supernatural beings that was common among the people of this region. The effigy mounds are undoubtedly interesting cultural features on the landscape, but what do we know about the people who built them? Why did they build them? What importance did they have for native culture? The archaeological record does not tell us a great deal about the Effigy Mound Culture. First, the mounds themselves contain very few artifacts. Unlike the Hopewell mound builders, the Effigy Mound people did not lavish grave goods upon their deceased. Most of the mound fills are sterile with regard to artifacts. Second, the Effigy Mounds were not constructed as a part of a city, village, or other community. They appear to be located well away from habitation sites and therefore the archaeologists do not have any of the day-to-day refuse which is so important in reconstructing lifestyles of the past. Third, it is difficult to associate a particular habitation site with the Effigy Mounds.  It would appear that at this time people are living in fairly small groups and so there are few, if any, intensively occupied sites which would provide archaeologists with data about their lives. The material culture of the Effigy Mound people includes ceramics, projectile points, chipped stone tools, ground stone tools, copper tools, and bone and antler tools. Fish were a part of their diet is shown by notched stone net sinkers (they used nets for catching fish) and barbed harpoon points. While wood does not survive well in the archaeological record, Effigy Mound woodworking abilities are shown through copper wedges/celts and ground stone adzes and celts. Animal hides used for clothing and housing do not survive in the archaeological record, but there is evidence of hideworking in tools such as deer bone beamers and bone and copper awls. These tools suggest that they hunted big game animals such as deer. Effigy Mound people also made clay elbow pipes showing that smoking was a part of their lifestyle. There are a number of things missing from their cultural inventory. First, there is the absence of grinding stones, hoes, and other tools normally associated with intensive plant collecting, processing, and/or cultivation. There is some evidence that cultivated plants, including corn, were grown and consumed, but it appears that there was little reliance on this food source. Corn may have been a ritual food rather than a part of the everyday diet. Second, the habitation sites do not have any storage pits or structures. This suggests that habitation sites were temporary, seasonal sites which would be consistent with hunting and gathering rather than agriculture. Third, there is an absence of non-local materials, such as marine shells and exotic lithics (such as obsidian). This may be interpreted as a lack of trade with other people. All of this has led archaeologists to describe the Effigy Mound people as having a foraging subsistence pattern (that is, they were hunters and gatherers) with little dependence on agriculture. The data seems to suggest that they had a nomadic lifestyle. The seasonal cycle of the Effigy Mound Culture people involved: harvesting nuts and deer in the late fall, winter, and early spring. fishing and gathering resources from a lowland area in the late spring, summer, and early fall. Planting gardens in late spring. Building mounds in the summer. As a nomadic, foraging people it is therefore assumed that they had an egalitarian society which included a nonhierarchical political system.   In West-Central Illinois, the effigy mounds may have been the place where members of different groups could meet to exchange information, maintain alliances, and initiate exogamous relationships. While raiding or warfare appears to have been common, interaction and ritual at such sites would have provided opportunities to minimize hostilities. It is generally assumed that the effigy mounds are somehow religious in nature, symbolic of the mythologies and ritual practices of the people who built them. With regard to this religion, Bradley Lepper, Robert Boszhardt, James Duncan, and Carol Diaz-Granados write: “It involved three premises: 1) all matter shared an animating or spirit force originating from a mysterious sacred, eternal being; 2) this force could not be destroyed and could migrated from one entity to another; 3) some entities became particular repositories for this force, possessing more of it than others.” One traditional view expressed by many archaeologists is that the effigy mound groups served as integrative mechanisms, the institutional means for coordinating and articulating the cultural activities of numerous hunting and gathering societies. By coming together during the summer, different bands would be able to reinforce their social bonds. Burying the dead in the mounds may have been one way to reinforce this association and to tie the groups together. Some archaeologists have suggested that the Effigy Mound people used both mound construction and rock art as a way of sanctifying the land. In other words, these activities were a way of making the land sacred and associating themselves with this sacred land. While all of the evidence at the present time suggests that these elaborate, artistic structures were built by hunters and gatherers—disproving the commonly held idea that only agricultural people could build great structures which require the coordinated efforts of many people—we don’t really know why they were built, nor do we really know the role which they played in the Effigy Mound Culture. More Ancient America Ancient America: A very brief overview of Adena burials (500 BCE - 100 BCE) Ancient America 201: A very brief overview of the Hopewell moundbuilders Ancient America: A very short overview of the Fort Ancient tradition Ancient America: Fort Ancient offerings (museum tour) Ancient America: Linking people to the cosmos in ancient Ohio Ancient America: The Old Copper People Ancient America: The Paleo-Indian Period in Texas (prior to 8000 BCE) Ancient America: Ohio Ceremonial Earthworks (museum tour)

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, Archaeology, AncientAmerica, effigymounds, NativeAmericanNetworks, AncientAmerica201, GreatSerpentMound] [Link to media]

— Indians 101: The Wampanoag War of 1675-1676

 

at 5/1/25 8:15am

The English invasion of North America during the seventeenth century was characterized by cultural misunderstandings, violence, and organized warfare. In looking at the causes of the wars between the English Puritans and the Indians in New England, Wilcomb Washburn, in his chapter on seventeenth-century wars in the Handbook of North American Indians, writes: “Traditional Indian tribal culture thus became a natural enemy that must be destroyed not for faults that its members may have committed but for existing as an example of a society contradicting the assumptions of Puritan society.” Within this framework, the English viewed Indians as a kind of wild vermin to be exterminated. With regard to the English and their policies toward the Indians, historian Wilbur R. Jacobs, in his chapter on British Indian policies in the Handbook of North American Indians, writes: “Native American people were seen as temporary owners of the North American continent rich in minerals, furs, fish, agricultural produce (maize, squash, and other food plants domesticated by Indians).” He also says: “Overall policy allowed no special place for the American Indian, who was regarded as a kind of nonperson.” In their book Indian Wars, Historians Robert Utley and Wilcomb Washburn sum up the English approach to Indians by saying: “The English showed little hesitation about attacking the Indians for whatever reason.”  In 1675, pushed by the Puritans who demanded that the Indians obey Puritan law and who severely punished the Indians who did not, the Wampanoag leader Metacom (known as Philip to the English) asserted the sovereignty of his people by going to war. As a result of this war – commonly called King Philip’s War – many of the smaller Indian nations were destroyed or scattered. According to historian Douglas Edward Leach, in his chapter on colonial wars in the Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 4: History of Indian-White Relations: “Philip may have been one of the first Indian leaders to catch a vision of a pan-Indian movement to halt English expansion and possibly drive the intruders back whence they had come.” The prelude to the war was a murder trial. A converted Christian Indian named John Sassamon had told the English governor that Philip was plotting against the English and that he feared for his life. A short while later, Sassamon was found dead beneath the ice of Assawompsett Pond. The Puritans believed that Sassamon was murdered because he was a spy for the Puritans. Sassamon had served as Philip’s secretary. Three Wampanoags—Tobias (one of Philip’s counselors), Wampapaquan (Tobias’ son), and Mattashunnamo (a warrior)—were tried by the Puritans, found guilty, and hung. The executions of these three men stirred many Wampanoags to advocate violence against the Europeans. The English village of Swansea, on Wampanoag land, was evacuated and then looted by Wampanoag warriors. In his Encyclopedia of American Indian Wars, 1492-1890, Jerry Keenan reports: “Faced with conducting a war he was probably not ready to wage, Philip nevertheless launched a series of raids that virtually paralyzed the English settlements.” Metacom evaded capture by basing his raids in the Pocasset territory of the female sachem Weetamoo (his sister-in-law). From here he carried out successful raids against five English towns. Jerry Keenan reports: “Operating from deep within the Pocasset swamp, Philip completely frustrated a combined Plymouth-Massachusetts Bay campaign.” Humiliated by these defeats, the English Christian ministers concluded that God was unhappy with them because of the wearing of wigs and the tolerance shown to the Quakers. Historian Michael Oberg, in his book Uncas: First of the Mohegans, reports: “The number of Indian groups taking part in attacks increases with each native success, and the colonists’ own offensives against the Algonquians proved little more than ill-led and poorly executed exercises in futility that killed needlessly large numbers of Englishmen.” With regard to Metacom’s Wampanoag military strategy, Glen LaFantasie, in an article in American History, writes: “If his plan was to fight the English rather than submit to their ways, his military strategy revealed an utter lack of careful thought or purposeful design.” In his book American Indians and Christian Missions: Studies in Cultural Conflict,  Henry Bowden puts it this way: “His war started prematurely and was conducted sporadically, but those who flocked to him succeeded in waging one of the most devastating and costly wars in American history.” While the English believe that Philip commands a large intertribal force, he actually has about 300 warriors, nearly all of whom are Wampanoag. Wilcomb Washburn writes: “While the conventional view of the war has seen it as a conspiracy of all New England Indians against the English, there is little hard evidence to suggest that this is so.” In his book The Deerfield Massacre: A Surprise Attack, a Forced March, and the Fight for Survival in Early America, James Swanson writes: “The war was the last serious attempt by the Indians to push back the ever-encroaching English off Native lands.” In 1676, English forces attacked Wetamoo’s village. Wetamoo drowned while trying to escape down the Taunton River by canoe. The English cut off her head and displayed it on a pole at Taunton The English captured Metacom’s wife, Wootonekanuske, and his nine-year-old son. They were held in a prison in Plymouth. The Puritan clergy debated the fate of Philip’s son: many felt that he should be executed, but others felt that the Bible said that no one should be executed for the sins of their fathers. After much debate, the boy was sold into slavery instead of being executed. In her book The Name of War: King Philip’s War and the Origins of American Identity, historian Jill Lepore writes: “Slavery was considered to be just this kind of a compassionate compromise: notorious Indians, like Philip himself, were executed; harmless enemies, mainly women and young children, were forced into servitude for a period of years; and those who were neither notorious enough to be hanged nor harmless enough to remain in New England were routinely sold into foreign slavery.” On the run to escape the English, Metacom was returning to his father’s old capital at Montaup when he stumbled into an ambush in which he was shot by an Indian ally of the English and killed. The English drawed and quartered the body and took his head to Plymouth where it was displayed to the public for 20 years. The Christian preacher Cotton Mather recalled that Metacom’s head:  “… was carried in triumph to Plymouth, where it arrived on the very Day that the Church there was keeping a Solemn Thanksgiving to God. God sent ‘em in the Head of a Leviathan for a Thanksgiving-Feast.” The English colonists viewed the war as a rebellion rather than as a war against a sovereign nation and thus those Indians who were captured were not considered as prisoners of war, but rather as criminals who were charged with treason and murder and tried in civil courts. Historian James Drake, in an article in the New England Quarterly, reports: “All of the Puritan colonies in King Philip’s War decided the fates of separatists by first trying to measure their degree of guilt and then doling out punishment according to the dictates of law and morality.” The Wampanoags were nearly exterminated and only 400 survived. An estimated 3,000 Indians were killed during the war. Mohegan In Connecticut, Mohegan sachem Uncas pledged his assistance to the English in their war against the Wampanoags. His son Owaneco and 50 warriors joined the English forces. In one battle, the Mohegan warriors overtook Metacom’s Wampanoag warriors, killing 30 men and capturing another. The Mohegans, however, did not pursue the Wampanoag after the battle and their English allies did not wish to proceed without them. Niantic In Rhode Island, English troops from Massachusetts and Connecticut attacked and burned the village of Niantic leader Queen Quaiapen. They destroyed 150 wigwams, killed seven Indians, and captured nine others. Niantic leader Quaiapen was also known as Magnus, Matantuck, and Sunke Squaw. She was the sister of Ninigret and the widow of Makanno. She has been described as one of the most influential sachems among the Narragansetts. Narragansett The Narragansetts remained neutral during the war, but rumors in Boston claimed that the Narragansetts were harboring Wampanoag refugees, including Metacom. In response to these rumors, English soldiers attacked a fortified Narragansett village and killed an estimated 1,000 Indians. In the months that followed, English soldiers continued to pursue the Narragansetts. Jerry Keenan writes: “Losses on both sides were heavy before the English managed to burn the stockade, driving the inhabitants out. Although the attack was a tactical success, it forced the Narragansetts into an alliance with Philip.” In Rhode Island, the Narragansetts who were friendly with the English signed a treaty in which they agreed to deliver Metacom’s subjects dead or alive. To ensure peace, certain sachems were to be held captive by the English. Other Indians In Massachusetts, some English colonists used the war as an excuse to vent their hatred for Indians. In an article in the New England Quarterly, G. E. Thomas reports that: “Captain Samuel Mosely, one of the most violent Indian haters, on the basis of later disproved allegations against the Indians of Marlborough, fasted ropes around the necks of fifteen Christian Indian men and marched them to Boston, where they were threatened by a lynch mob.” In another incident, after questioning an Indian woman, Captain Mosely and his men had her torn to pieces by their dogs. In Massachusetts, many English colonists believed that all Indians were involved in King Philip’s War even though many groups, particularly the praying villages (i.e. villages for Christian Indians), had declared their neutrality. The English colonists confined all “friendly” Indians to a few of the eastern praying towns and the colonists confiscated the crops and tools in the praying towns of Wamesit, Hassanamisset, Magunkaquag, and Chabanakongkomun. The Indians were confined to the village limits on penalty of death.   The colonists, however, continued to accuse the Christian Indians of supporting Metacom. The residents of the village of Okommakamesit were arrested and marched to jail in Boston. The court ordered the arrest of Wamesit and Punkapoag men. To avoid arrest the Penacook sachem Wannalancer and his followers fled up the Merrimac River. The Naticks were forced from their homes and interred on Deer Island in Boston Harbor. The Punkapoags were also sent to Deer Island. The setting is described as a “windswept bit of rock” with little fuel and little shelter from the cold sea wind. Historian Daniel Mandell, in his book Behind the Frontier: Indians in Eighteenth-Century Eastern Massachusetts, writes: “Despite English hostility and abuse, Indian men on the island clamored to help in the war against Metacom, showing their deep loyalty to the Christian colony, an older dislike of the Wampanoags, or perhaps a strong desire to escape the conditions of the island.” About 100 men enlisted in the colonial army as scouts. More American Indian histories Indians 201: American Indians and New Sweden Indians 201: Plains Indians and the Spanish in the early 1600s Indians 201: American Indians and the establishment of Jamestown Indians 101: The English right to rule Indians in the 17th century Indians 101: The English and Indian land in the 17th century Indians 101: Indian rights under 17th century English rule Indians 101: The French and American Indians in the 17th century Indians 101: The Dutch and American Indians in the 17th century

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, History, Indians101, KingPhilipsWar, NativeAmericanNetroots, Puritans, Uncas, MoheganIndians, Metacom, WampanoagIndians, NianticIndians, QueenQuaiapen, JohnSassamon, PocassetIndians, NarragansettIndians, PunkapoagIndians, NatickIndians] [Link to media]

— Indians 101: Attempt at Shawnee removal 200 years ago, 1825

 

at 4/29/25 8:15am

During the first part of the nineteenth century the United States followed policies which viewed American Indians as impediments to the economic growth of the country. At the beginning of the century, President Thomas Jefferson had expressed the idea that the future of the United States depended on acquisition of land for the rapidly growing population. Thus, the future of the country depended on dispossessing the Indians of their land. Under this Jeffersonian view, American Indians were not seen as being welcome in the United States and it was felt that they should be removed from their ancient homelands and moved to lands west of the Mississippi River. In 1824, President James Monroe presented Congress with a plan for “civilizing” Indians by sending them voluntarily west of the Mississippi River. By 1825, the United States was pursuing a policy of manifest destiny to spread out between the Atlantic and the Pacific Oceans. In their chapter in North American Indian Wars, James Davidson et al write: “Many Americans had long believed that their country had a special, even divine mission. The Protestant version of this conviction could be traced back to John Winthrop, who assured his fellow Puritans that God intended them to build a model ‘city upon a hill’ for the rest of the world to emulate.” The Shawnees are relatively well-known in American history because of their involvement in eighteenth-century and nineteenth century wars in the greater Ohio area. The Shawnee language belongs to the Central Algonquian language family and their name, Shawnee, means “Southerner”, reflecting the fact that they lived to the south of other Algonquian-speaking Indian nations. The Shawnees, like many other Algonquian-speaking people, engaged in a combination of farming, hunting, fishing, and gathering wild plants. Farming was of secondary economic importance and contributed less than half of their food. The Shawnees used slash and burn agriculture. The fields would be cleared and then burned so that the wood ash would fertilize the soil. Corn would be planted first. When the corn was about a foot high, beans, squash, and pumpkin were interplanted with the corn. The Shawneess were a confederacy of five political units: Chillicothe (Chalahgawtha), Hathawekela (also spelled as Thawekila or Thawegila), Kispoko (Kispokotha), Mequachake (Mekoche or Maykujay), and Piqua (Pekowi). In his book The Shawnees and the War for America, Colin Calloway reports: “The Shawnees traditionally comprised five divisions, though it is not certain whether these divisions originally constituted different tribes, which came together to form the Shawnees, or if they developed during their migrations.” Among the Shawnees there were two kinds of chiefs. The peace chiefs were responsible for domestic order. This was an office which could be inherited. On the other hand, the war chief was an earned office. To be considered a war chief, a young man was expected to organize and lead (to persuade other young men to follow him) four raids, bringing back honor and all of his men. According to Ian Steele, in an article in Ethnohistory: “A raid was considered successful only if the entire raiding party returned unhurt, and if it brought back at least one scalp or prisoner.” In 1824, Shawnee leader Captain Lewis (Quitewepea) met with Indian agent William Clark and the Cherokees in Missouri to discuss the possibility of Shawnee removal from Ohio to lands west of the Mississippi. Captain Lewis and the Cherokee were then sent to Washington, D.C. to present their plans to the President. In 1825, President James Monroe instructed the Indian agent to assemble all of the Ohio Shawnees at Wapakoneta when Shawnee leader Captain Lewis returns from Washington, D.C. The government intended to purchase all remaining Shawnee land in Ohio and to remove the tribe west of the Mississippi River. In his book The Shawnee Prophet, David Edmunds reports: “Black Hoof and other village chiefs were jealous of Lewis, and resented his attempts to represent the tribe in Washington.” Thus, when Captain Lewis returned to Ohio, Black Hoof used his influence to sabotage the plans for removal. In order to strengthen their arguments for removal, the American persuaded the Shawnee prophet Tenskwatawa to return from Canada where he had been living since 1811. The government envisioned settling the Shawnee on new lands in the west, away from the corrupt influence of American settlers, and this had some appeal to Tenskwatawa. The Shawnee prophet Tenskwatawa attended the tribal meeting to advocate removal, but most of the Shawnees were determined to remain in Ohio. Following the presentation by the government, the Shawnees met among themselves for several days. David Edmunds reports: “Only about two dozen younger warriors, led by William Perry, or Pemthata, a minor chief from Wapakoneta, were interested in the government’s proposals, and they seemed reluctant to speak in opposition to Black Hoof.” Black Hoof informed the Americans that the Shawnees were not interested in removal, and furthermore, he told them, if they wanted to remove, they would do so on their own. More American Indian histories Indians 101: A very short overview of the Shawnee Indians Indians 101: American Indians and Mexico 200 years ago, 1825 Indians 101: American Indians and the federal government 200 years ago, 1825 Indians 101: American Indian battles and skirmishes 200 years ago, 1824 Indians 101: American Indian tribes 200 years ago, 1824 Indians 201: The Indian Removal Act Indians 101: Manifest Destiny Begins Indians 101: Who Owns the Land?

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, History, Indians101, NativeAmericanNetroots, ShawneeIndians] [Link to media]

— Ancient America: Utah's Archaic Indians

 

at 4/26/25 8:15am

Ten thousand years ago, Native American people in what is now Utah had a lifeway that was centered around a pattern of seasonal wandering, the hunting of animals, and the gathering of plants. The time period which archaeologists call the Archaic Period in Utah lasted for a long time: from about 10,000 years ago to 1,500 years ago. With regard to the designation Archaic, Alan Schroedl, in an article in the Utah Historical Quarterly, writes: “The name Archaic is not meant to imply a backward or outmoded style of life; on the contrary, the Archaic lifeway was the most dynamic and flexible mode of adaptation that ever developed in the New World. Based on a pattern of regional specialization, it was the most persistent of all the known technological stages in North America.” With regard to the Archaic Period in Utah, Robert McPherson, in his chapter in A History of Utah’s American Indians, writes: “Over this long period of time, Native American groups have survived in an austere environment that required an intimate knowledge of the land and its resources.” Alan Schroedl also writes: “This lifeway was centered around a pattern of seasonal wandering, the hunting of animals, and the gathering of plants.” In an article in the Utah Historical Quarterly, Joel Janetski explains: “Particularly important were small seeds and nuts (grass seeds, pickleweed, bulrush, etc.) and both large and small animals (mountain sheep, deer, antelope, rabbits, ground squirrels, and others). Seeds were collected in tremendous numbers using baskets of various kinds and were processed into flour with milling stones.” The milling stones are, of course, part of the archaeological record that provides us with clues about the lifeways of archaic peoples. In his book Comb Ridge and its People: The Ethnohistory of a Rock, Robert McPherson writes: “The Archaic people appear to have been all business, preoccupied with survival, capturing and consuming everything edible from lizards to prickly pears to mice to grasses to bighorn sheep.” By 7500 BCE, the Utah Native Americans were engaged in a roving pattern of hunting and gathering and occupying settlements seasonally. Some of the plant foods being used by the people at this time included seeds from pickleweed. They were also hunting big game animals including deer, pronghorn antelope, mountain sheep, elk, and buffalo. They were trapping small game, such as rabbit, with netting. The Archaic Period in Utah ends with the emergence of the Fremont people in 1500 BCE.  The archaeological evidence of human habitation in Utah during the Archaic Period comes primarily from caves and rockshelters. This does not necessarily mean that these were used as their primary homes, but rather the preservation of materials was better in these locations and thus the archaeologists are more likely to find evidence here. Briefly described below are a few of Utah’s Archaic Period archaeological sites. Danger Cave Some of the earliest evidence of Native Americans in Utah comes from Danger Cave. Archaeological evidence shows that American Indians were camping here by 9000 BCE. They were lighting fires on the cave’s sandy floor and leaving a scattering of stone flakes and milling stones. North Creek Shelter Indian people were occupying the North Creek Shelter on the western edge of the Escalante Valley by 7,690 BCE. This is an area where three streams come together to form the Escalante River. They had an oval-shaped hearth toward the back of the shelter. Among the food resources which they were exploiting was deer. Old Man Cave Indian people were occupying Old Man Cave by 6900 BCE. The plants being used by the people at this site included prickly pear, sand dropseed, marsh elder, sunflower, and goosefoot. Indian rice grass was also an important food.   Hogup Cave In 6350 BCE, Indian people began to use Hogup Cave as a base camp. Here they gathered plants for food, fuel, and for making baskets and mats. They also hunted waterfowl, small mammals, and larger mammals. The larger mammals included pronghorn antelope, mule deer, mountain sheep, and bison. Among the artifacts left at Hogup Cave were engraved pebbles. Archaeologists are somewhat puzzled about the use of the odd little stone slabs and pebbles. They were neatly engraved with some tough stone tool; the simple designs being cut rather carefully in any of several geometric patterns. Sudden Shelter By 6000 BCE, Indian people were occupying the Sudden Shelter located in Ivie Creek Canyon. Hunting was the major activity carried out by the people who occupied this site. Sudden Shelter was a base camp from which the people were able to exploit a wide variety of resources. One of the main animals being hunted there was the mule deer. By 4300 BCE, the Indian people who occupied Sudden Shelter had changed their patterns of resource exploitation. They were now using slab-lined fire pits and milling stones, indicating that plant resources had become more important. The most heavily utilized plant resource at this time was goosefoot. At this time Sudden Shelter was occupied primarily between April and September. By 2600, the Indian people at Sudden Shelter were using more amaranth. In addition, they were hunting more bighorn sheep. While the technology used by the Indian people at Sudden Shelter was similar in many respects to the hunters and gatherers who occupied this area later, the size of the local group at Sudden Shelter appears to have been smaller.   Deluge Shelter By 5000 BCE, Indian people were occupying the Deluge Shelter on Jones Hole Creek. The people at this site were hunting mule deer. Spotten Cave About 4000 BCE, there was a dramatic increase in the number of sites occupied by Indian people. There was a broadening of settlement patterns with an increased emphasis on the exploitation of resources in the upland zones. At this time, Indian people were using Spotten Cave at the south end of Utah Valley. Spotten Cave was used as a temporary stopover as the people moved from the Goshen Valley bottoms to the uplands of Long Ridge or the Wasatch Front. Thorne Cave In 2220 BCE, Indian people began to occupy Thorne Cave in the Uinta Basin. They were hunting jackrabbit, cottontail, antelope, beaver, and bighorn sheep. American Fork Cave By 1700 BCE, Indian people were now using American Fork Cave. The cave was used as a base camp from which mountain sheep were hunted in the steep and broken country of American Fork Canyon. More Ancient America Ancient America: The Marmes Rockshelter Ancient America: Paquime, trading center between the Southwest and Mexico Ancient America: American Indians at Rancho La Brea Ancient America: The Halliday Site in Illinois Ancient America: The Meadowcroft Rockshelter Ancient America: The Paleo-Indian Period in Texas (prior to 8000 BCE) Ancient America: Paleoindian stone tools in Washington's Plateau area Ancient America: The Columbia Plateau, 2000 to 500 BCE

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, Archaeology, NativeAmericanNetroots, Utah, AncientAmerica, AmericanForkCave, ThorneCave, SpottenCave, DelugeShelter, SuddenShelter, HogupCave, OldManCave, NorthCreekShelter, DangerCave] [Link to media]

— Indians 101: Cowlitz Indians and the fur trade (museum exhibit)

 

at 4/24/25 8:15am

For more than 12,000 years the Cowlitz Indians have lived in Western Washington along the Cowlitz River and other tributaries that flowed into the Columbia River. As a river people their traditional economy was based on fishing which was supplemented with the gathering of wild plants and hunting. Cowlitz canoes were used for fishing as well as for river travel. Shown above is a map showing Cowlitz territory. In his book History of the Cowlitz Indian Tribe, Roy Wilson reports: “Aboriginally, the Cowlitz had the largest land-base of all Western Washington tribes.” The name Cowlitz means “The People Who Seek Their Medicine Spirit” and identifies them as a spirit seeking people.In their book A Guide to the Indian Tribes of the Pacific Northwest, Robert Ruby, John Brown, and Cary Collins explain the origins of the name this way: “The name ‘Cowlitz’ is said to mean ‘capturing the medicine spirit” because the Cowlitzes visited a small prairie on the Cowlitz River, a Columbia River affluent in Washington State, to commune with the spirit world and receive ‘medicine’ power.” The Cowlitz Indians had their first recorded contact with Europeans in 1811 when Gabriel Franchère (1786-1863) led a Pacific Fur Company fur-trading party up the Cowlitz River. At this time, beaver pelts were valuable in the European markets where they were used in making hats. The English (Hudson’s Bay Company), Canadian (North West Company), and American (Pacific Fur Company) traded metal items, guns, glass beads, tobacco, and other items to obtain beaver pelts and other furs from American Indian hunters and trappers. The Cowlitz County Historical Museum in Kelso, Washington, includes an exhibit on the fur trade. According to the Museum: “Native Americans incorporated the beads, thimbles, and metals they got through trade into clothing decoration, necklaces, and bracelets. They sometimes used these new materials alongside the shells, quills, and feathers that had been used in similar ways for thousands of years.” Shown above are baby moccasins decorated with glass trade beads. These were made in the mid-nineteenth century. Shown above are trade items from the early 1800s. Shown above is a beaded bag made in the 1880s. The use of flower designs was inspired by European patterns. Shown above is the iconic Hudson’s Bay blanket. The stripes on the end, known as “points”, indicate the trading value of the blanket. A four-point blanket is a fairly expensive blanket. (These blankets are still being made and sold.) Shown above are tobacco twists. Shown above is a rum bottle (1845-1850). Alcohol was both an important trade item and a social lubricant used in trading sessions. The alcohol used in trade was often highly diluted and sometimes “seasoned” with other materials. Shown above is a small beaded bag with metal cones from the 1840s.   Shown above is an example of trade beads being used along with traditional beads. Note: These photographs were taken on October 19, 2024. More American Indian stories Indians 101: American Indian trade goods (museum exhibit) Indians 101: Plateau Indian Tourist Trade (Photo Diary) Indians 101: A Cowlitz canoe (museum tour) Indians 101: The Tulalip and Europeans (Photo Diary) Indians 101: A Chehalis Indian Artifact Collection (Photo Diary) Indians 101: Some Northwest Coast Indian artifacts (museum exhibit) Indians 101: Oregon's Clatsop Indians (museum exhibit) Indians 101: Suquamish Basketry (Photo Diary)

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, FurTrade, History, Indians101, Museums, Photography, Washington, HudsonsBayCompany, CowlitzIndians, NorthWestCompany, PacificFurCompany, CowlitzCountyHistoricalMuseum] [Link to media]

— Indians 101: American Indians 300 years ago, 1725

 

at 4/22/25 8:15am

At the beginning of eighteenth century, Indian nations were interacting with many European nations which had invaded the Americas and had claimed for themselves Indian land. By 1725 the Europeans, particularly the French, were moving inland and were trading with the Indian nations of the central and southern Plains. Briefly described below are some of the American Indian events of 300 years ago, 1725. Visiting Paris One of the customs of the European invaders was to take a select group of Indians, often chiefs, back to Europe to impress them with European wonders. When the Indians returned home, they could tell tales of the magnificent European culture which would help reduce resistance to the European invasion. In 1725 a group of Central Plains Indians, including one Otoe, one Osage, one Missouri chief, one Missouri young woman, one Illinois, one Chicagou, and one Metchegamias, were taken to Paris, France. There they met with the Director of the Company of the Indies, and the Duke and Duchess de Bourbon. The chiefs were given a complete French outfit which included a blue dress coat, silver ornaments, and a plumed hat trimmed in silver. The Indians were then presented to King Louis XV, and they performed a dance at the opera. The French King gave each of the chiefs a royal medallion, a rifle, a sword, and a watch. Kiowa The modern horse spread from the Spanish settlements in the southwest. Following trade routes from Taos Pueblo, the horse was traded to the Utes and the Comanches and then to their linguistic relatives, the Paiutes and the Shoshones. With the horse, the vast buffalo herds of the Great Plains became a great “supermarket” used by many different tribes. This also meant that the potential for conflict over hunting territories increased and subsequently there was an increase in inter-tribal warfare. The Kiowas speak a language which linguists classify as a part of the Tanoan language family and is thus related to the Pueblos of Taos, Jemez, Isleta, and San Idelfonso in New Mexico. By 1725, the Kiowas in Kansas had obtained enough horses to become mounted buffalo hunters. They were obtaining their horses from the Wichitas and Caddos.   Among the Kiowas, there were three kinds of horses: (1) those which were used as pack animals, (2) those which were ridden by the family, and (3) those which were used for hunting, war, and racing. According to anthropologist Bernard Mishkin, in his book Rank and Warfare Among the Plains Indians: “The average household of some five adults with a well-balanced herd of ideal size owned approximately ten pack animals, five riding animals and two to five buffalo horses.” Yanktonai Dakota In North Dakota, the Yanktonai Dakotas established their winter villages on the James River. Piankashaw In Indiana, the Piankashaws moved their village from a location near the present-day city of Lafayette downstream to a location near the mouth of the Vermilion River. More American Indian histories Indians 101: Natchez Indians 300 years ago, 1725 Indians 101: American Indians and the English 300 years ago, 1724 Indians 101: American Indians and Europeans 300 years ago, 1723 Indians 101: Indians and Europeans 300 years ago, 1722 Indians 101: American Indians 300 years ago, 1721 Indians 101: The Cherokees 300 years ago, 1721 Indians 201: The Tuscaroras join the Iroquois League Indians 201: The Iroquois Peace, 1700-1713

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, History, Indians101, NativeAmericanNetroots, TaosPueblo, UteIndians, PaiuteIndians, ShoshoneIndians, CaddoIndians, illinoisindians, KiowaIndians, ComancheIndians, OsageIndians, WichitaIndians, PiankashawIndians, OtoeIndians, MissouriIndians, ChicagouIndians, MetchegamiasIndians, Tanoanlanguagefamily, YanktonaiIndians] [Link to media]

— Feds okay copper mine on sacred Apache land while Supreme Court case is pending

 

at 4/18/25 9:03am

Trump’s stopping offshore wind projects and opening up sensitive public lands to development, so I wasn’t surprised to read that he’s pushing ahead with a copper mine at Oak Flat, an ecological jewel in Tonto National Forest about an hour east of Phoenix. Walk around the city and you might see signs saying “Save Oak Flat.” The signs have been there for years as environmentalists, religious leaders, and many Native American tribes have battled different administrations, courts, and Resolution Copper for at least two decades. The defenders of Oak Flat hope to stop a massive mine on sacred land, a blessed place near the San Carlos Apache Reservation where it’s said tribal guardians carry messages to and from the Creator, and where young girls’ coming-of-age sunrise ceremonies are held. Some compare Oak Flat to Mount Sinai for Jews.   “Trump’s decision to launch the Oak Flat land exchange shows his complete disdain for religious liberty, Native American rights and the protection of public lands," said Russ McSpadden, Southwest conservation advocate for [the Center for Biological Diversity]. “Oak Flat is central to the spiritual and cultural practices of the Apache people and other tribes in the region.” He said it is also a biological gem, home to rare desert ecosystems, springs and wildlife. I’ve camped at Oak Flat Campground for decades and attended one of Resolution Copper’s community meetings about ten years ago, just after the US Forest Service approved the land swap that would turn over the area to the British-Australian mining company. Resolution Copper says they revised their plans after meeting with community and tribal members, but the fact remains the ground will eventually cave in and leave a crater two miles wide and a thousand feet deep. Resolution of course champions “jobs” at the same time DOGE is firing workers at the VA in nearby Globe, Arizona. I guess jobs digging up sensitive, sacred land are more important than those assisting veterans.    Trump’s moving ahead with the land grab even as the US Supreme Court deliberates whether to take up the case filed by the group Apache Stronghold in 2021. This Court has gone out of its way to protect religious liberties in other areas, but given the Court’s makeup Resolution Copper is confident and ready to dig, while Oak Flat’s defenders vow to continue their 20-year campaign to preserve their place of worship.   “The U.S. government is rushing to give away our spiritual home before the courts can even rule — just like it’s rushed to erase Native people for generations,” said Apache Stronghold leader Wendsler Nosie. “This is the same violent pattern we have seen for centuries. We urge the Supreme Court to protect our spiritual lifeblood and give our sacred site the same protection given to the holiest churches, mosques, and synagogues throughout this country.” The jobs and copper are temporary at best, but pursuing them would destroy a world of beauty and deep spirituality forever.

[Author: Mother Mags] [Category: Apache, Arizona, Copper, Environment, ForestService, Indian, Indigenous, Mining, NativeAmerican, Religion, OakFlat, SanCarlosApache, WendslerNosie] [Link to media]

— Indians 101: Some Columbia Gorge Indian artifacts (museum exhibit 3)

 

at 4/17/25 9:03am

The Columbia Gorge Museum in Stevenson, Washington has a large gallery dedicated to the First Peoples of the Columbia Gorge: Watlalas (Wahlalas; also known as the Cascade Indians), Wascos, and Wishrams. In this exhibit, most of the artifacts are unlabeled. This appears to be a stone net sinker. This may be another stone net sinker. Shown above is a stone pestle. The center object appears to be a stone awl or drill; the other two are arrowheads. Shown above is a typical arrowhead display put together by collectors. It doesn’t really tell us anything about ancient Indians. Shown above is a stone bowl. Shown above is an atlatl (spear thrower). Note: These photographs were taken on October 18, 2024. More American Indian museum exhibits Indians 101: Some Columbia Gorge Indian artifacts (museum exhibit 1) Indians 101: Some Columbia Gorge Indian artifacts (museum exhibit 2) Indians 101: Busy Fingers in the Columbia Gorge (museum exhibit) Indians 101: A collection of Plateau Indian artifacts (museum exhibit) Indians 101: A display of Plateau Indian beadwork (museum exhibit) Indians 101: Some Plateau Indian artifacts (museum exhibit) Indians 101: Sanpoil and Wanapan Indians (museum exhibit) Indians 101: Paiute Home Life (museum exhibit)

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, Indians101, Museums, NativeAmericanNetroots, Photography, Washington, PlateauIndians, WascoIndians, ColumbiaGorgeMuseum, WatlalaIndians, WishramIndians, CascadeIndians, WahlalaIndians] [Link to media]

— Indians 101: American Indians 350 years ago, 1675

 

at 4/15/25 8:15am

By 1675, many American Indians were aware of the European invasion of the Americas. European trade goods—metal artifacts, glass beads, cloth, and guns—were already having an impact on Native cultures; refugees, displaced from their ancient homelands, were seeking new homes, and bringing with them tales of the invaders’ inhospitality; and finally European diseases, such as smallpox, were infecting Native people long before actual physical contact between Indians and Europeans. Briefly described below are a few American Indian events of 350 years ago, in 1675. English Colonists In his book Cycles of Conquest: The Impact of Spain, Mexico, and the United States on the Indians of the Southwest, 1533-1960, Edward Spicer summarizes the English approach to American Indians this way: “In contrast with Spain, England had conceived of the Indians of North America as continuing to exist as separate nations outside the political organization of Britain. The British government organized no campaign for conversion of Indians to Christianity. It proposed to acquire land for colonization by purchase, by simple appropriation of unoccupied or sparsely settled areas, or by conquest and treaty where necessary.” The first English colonies included Jamestown (1607), Plymouth (1620), Massachusetts Bay (1630), and the Colony of Maryland (1634). One of the conflicts between the English colonists and the Indians centered around land and the different cultural views regarding land. In their book Native American Heritage, Merwyn Garbarino and Robert Sasso write: “To the Indian, land was a free good, to be used but not owned. But for the English, owning their very own land was the goal that drew many, perhaps most, across the ocean. Most of the British immigrants were the poor, the dispossessed, and the younger sons of nobility who had no rights in land back home. They had dreamed of finding cheap real estate subject to complete private ownership, and that was what they came after.” In Massachusetts, the Wampanoag population had decreased from 12,000 in 1600 to only 1,000 by 1675. The declining population was the result of European diseases, murder/war by the English colonists, slavery (Wampanoags being taken as slaves to be sold in the Caribbean slave markets), and the loss of their farmlands, hunting lands, and fishing areas to the English colonists. The Wampanoags did not always respond passively to English aggression. In 1675, two Plymouth settlers killed an Indian they found in an abandoned house. In retaliation, Wampanoag warriors killed the two settlers and seven others. In Rhode Island, English troops from Massachusetts and Connecticut attacked and burned the village of Niantic leader Queen Quaiapen. They destroyed 150 wigwams, killed seven Indians, and captured nine others. Niantic leader Quaiapen was also known as Magnus, Matantuck, and Sunke Squaw. She was the sister of Ninigret and the widow of Makanno. She was described as one of the most influential sachems among the Narragansetts (the Niantic were one of the Narragansett tribes).   Spanish By 1675, the Spanish colonization efforts focused primarily on Florida and what later became the Southeastern United States, the Southwest (which would become Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona), and California. In Florida, in response to the declining Apalachee population, the Spanish moved a number of Indians from other tribes—Chacato, Tama, Chine, Tocobaga, Amacano—into the Apalachee region. In Texas, Spanish explorers, including a group of Franciscan missionaries, traveled northward from Eagle Pass to present-day Edwards County. They encountered three tribes (we don’t know today which tribes) and noted that smallpox had already decimated tribal numbers. Some of the tribes were hunting buffalo and making jerky. Oneota In Iowa, the Oneota established a settlement along the banks of the Big Sioux River. As many as 10,000 people would eventually live at this site. Apache In Kansas and Nebraska, Apaches began living in permanent villages. They were raising corn and making pottery. The addition of farming to the economy was not caused by a scarcity of food. According to archaeologist James Gunnerson, in his chapter in Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 13, Part 1: Plains: “Rather, it was a dietary matter—a desire to assure a supply of the corn they had learned to like as supremely successful bison hunters who had been trading their surplus to the village dwellers for garden produce.” James Gunnerson goes on to say: “The spur to Apachean horticulture was probably the disruption of this trade brought about when the Apacheans began taking slaves from the Caddoans to sell in the Spanish Southwest.” More Seventeenth-Century American Indian histories Indians 101: American Indians and Christianity 350 years ago, 1675 Indians 101: American Indians and English colonists 350 years ago, 1675 Indians 101: American Indians in the Southeast 350 years ago, 1674 Indians 101: American Indians in New England 350 years ago, 1674 Indians 201: American Indians and New Sweden Indians 201: The Spanish search for the mythical American Indian cities of Cibola Indians 101: The French and American Indians in the 17th century Indians 101: The Dutch and American Indians in the 17th century

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, Franciscans, History, Indians101, NativeAmericanNetroots, smallpox, ApacheIndians, WampanoagIndians, NianticIndians, QueenQuaiapen, ApalacheeIndians, ChacatoIndians, TamaIndians, ChineIndians, TocobagaIndians, AmacanoIndians, OneotaIndians] [Link to media]

— Indians 101: Some American Indian artifacts (museum exhibit)

 

at 4/10/25 8:15am

The Willapa Seaport Museum in Raymond, Washington has a display case filled with unlabeled Indian artifacts from tribes who traded with the peoples of the Northwest Coast. These baskets are decorated with porcupine quills. Note: These photographs were taken on October 11, 2024. More American Indian museum exhibits Indians 101: Clubs and a buffalo skull (museum exhibitions) Indians 101: Some Northwest Coast Indian artifacts (museum exhibit) Indians 101: A collection of Northwest Coast and Alaska artifacts (museum exhibit) Indians 101: Some Columbia Gorge Indian artifacts (museum exhibit 1) Indians 101: Some Plateau Indian artifacts (museum exhibit) Indians 101: California Indian Baskets in the Maryhill Museum (Photo Diary) Indians 101: Southwestern Baskets in the Maryhill Museum (Photo Diary) Indians 101: Zuni Fetishes (Photo Diary)

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, Indians101, Museums, NativeAmericanNetroots, Photography, Washington, WillapaSeaportMuseum] [Link to media]

— Indians 101: Canadian First Nations 100 years ago, 1925

 

at 4/8/25 8:15am

Briefly described below are a few of the Canadian First Nations events of a hundred years ago, 1925. Gathering at Fort Macleod The North-West Mounted Police (NWMP) was formed in 1873 to administer law and order in the Northwest Territories (present day Alberta and Saskatchewan). The North-West Mounted Police built Fort Macleod in southern Alberta in 1875 to offset American incursions in the whiskey and fur trade. Shown above is a model of the original fort exhibited in The Fort—Museum of the North West Mounted Police in Fort Macleod, Alberta. In 1925, some 3,000 Indians gathered in Fort Macleod for a powwow, rodeo and political meeting organized by Mike Mountain Horse. An encampment of 196 tipis was set up under the direction of Joseph Mountain Horse. The rodeo events were managed by Tom Three Persons. Representatives from the Pikuni, Kainai, Siksika, Cree, Sarcee, and Kootenai First Nations attended the political meeting. Also present was Chief Buffalo Child Long Lance (Lumbee pretending to be Blackfoot). No federal officials attended the political meeting. The principal speaker was Weasel Calf, a Blackfoot leader who had signed the 1877 treaty. He said: “We as Indians have kept our part of the treaty, but the Government at times have failed to keep theirs.” In an article in Alberta History, Yale Belanger reports: “The problems brought out at the conference were considered serious, but with no federal officials present, they fell on deaf ears.” Buffalo  The buffalo or bison is the largest land mammal in North America and was the most important animal for the Plains Indians. Anthropologist Raymond J. DeMallie, in his introduction to the Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 13, Part 1: Plains, writes: “All definitions of Plains culture begin with the dependence on the buffalo for subsistence and the integration of the buffalo into all aspects of life: the hides for making clothing, shelter, and containers; the bones and horns for tools; hair for ropes; dried dung for fuel; and the spirit of the animal as an important part of religious life.” In their chapter in Archaeology on the Edge: New Perspectives from the Northern Plains, J. Rod Vickers and Trevor Peck put it this way: “There can be no doubt that the bison was the primary, life-sustaining, resource of the Plains Indian and a seasonal round that did not successfully ensure access to the herds was not possible on the Northwestern Plains.” In North America there are two species of bison: the Plains Bison and the Wood Bison. In their chapter in Buffalo, C. Gates, T. Chowns, and H. Reynolds report: “The historic range of the wood bison was reported to have been centered in the north central section of the Interior Plains Physiographic Region of Canada. This region includes northern Alberta, southwestern Northwest Territories (NWT), northeastern British Columbia, and northwestern Saskatchewan.” The only remaining Wood Bison are found in Wood Buffalo National Park in Alberta, Canada. By 1925, Plains Bison were beginning to be transferred from the Wainwright herd to Wood Buffalo National Park in Alberta, which had been established in 1909 with Plains Bison from the Pablo herd on the Flathead Reservation in Montana. Over the next three years, 6,673 Plains Bison were transferred and released into the range occupied by Wood Bison. The transferred animals brought with them both bovine tuberculosis and brucellosis. In addition, there was some interbreeding between the two species. Totem Poles Totem poles are the iconic symbol of the Northwest Coast First Nations. Museum curator Audrey Hawthorn, in her book Kwakiutl Art, writes: “It is an art form unique to the region, characterized by its tall, columnar form bearing images of humans, birds, and other animals of the sea and forest.”  She also says: “The totem pole is a precise art form embodying a statement of beliefs about important social realities—descent, inheritance, power, privilege, and social worth—of the people who inhabited the Northwest Coast before the advent of European explorers and settlers.” Totem poles are a visual record of one’s ancestors which show the social position and antiquity of the family. Museum curator Audrey Hawthorn writes: “It is not possible for an outsider who is ignorant of the ceremonial context to ‘read’ the pole as if it were a glyphic or pictographic presentation of myth or history.” Noting that the totem poles are erected in commemoration of certain events, Christian Feest, in his book Native Arts of North America, explains: “Thus, they were not themselves narrative in character but symbolic of rights validated by narratives.” The homeland of the Kwakwaka’wakw (Kwakiutl) First Nation is centered on Vancouver Island and the name Kwakwka’wakw probably means “beach at the north side of the river”, referring to the Nimkish River in northern Vancouver Island. In British Columbia, two Kwakwaka’wakw totem poles were relocated to Vancouver’s Victoria Park by the Vancouver Art, Historical and Scientific Association. Art professor Ronald Hawker, in an article in American Indian Art, writes: “This relocation seemed to reinforce a growing sense of the displacement of Native culture.” More Canadian histories Indians 101: The North-West Mounted Police Indians 101: Canadian Indians 250 years ago, 1774 Indians 101: Canadian First Nations 200 years ago, 1824 Indians 101: The Canadian fur trade 200 years ago, 1821 Indians 301: Canadian First Nations and Jacques Cartier, 1534-1542 Indians 101: Canadian First Nations 150 years ago, 1873 Indians 101: Outlawing the potlatch in Canada Indians 101: The Northwest Coast Potlatch 100 years ago, 1921

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, Canada, History, Indians101, NativeAmericanNetroots, BlackfootIndians, KootenaiIndians, FlatheadReservation, North-WestMountedPolice, CreeIndians, totempoles, KwakwakawakwIndians, PikuniIndians, SiksikaIndians, SarceeIndians, KainaiIndians, LumbeeIndians, WoodBuffaloNationalPark] [Link to media]

— Ancient America 201: A very brief overview of the Hopewell moundbuilders

 

at 4/5/25 8:15am

In the eighteenth century, the European invaders began to spread westward from their coastal colonies and across the Appalachia Mountains.  Here they found monumental earthworks and ancient burial mounds. Following the pattern that they had established since their initial invasion of New England, the Europeans looted the graves, taking from them the finely made grave goods which they found. While the Europeans found the grave goods to be both exotic and aesthetically pleasing, the existence of thousands of well-engineered earthworks clashed with their stereotypical view of American Indians. Although the early Europeans in North America survived because of American Indian agricultural surpluses and the adoption of some Native American crops, they insisted that American Indians were wild, savage, hunting and gathering people with no real ownership of the land. While it seems obvious to us today that Indians would have built these great works, this would have implied a level of Indian civilization which many Euro-Americans could not accept. In an article in American Archaeology, Kenneth Feder puts it this way: “…many Americans of European descent refused to believe that America’s aboriginal inhabitants possessed such capabilities. Consequently, it was thought that some other group was responsible.” In his 1930 book The Mound-Builders,Henry Clyde Shetrone writes of some of the theories proposed: “From the ancient Chinese, Phoenicians, and Egyptians at one end to the Welsh and the Irish at the other is but a suggestion of the range of supposed sources of origin. The Ten Lost Tribes of Israel seem to have been an alluring subject of consideration for those who saw an opportunity of clearing up two major mysteries in the simplest possible manner.” In his entry on the mound builders in The Encyclopedia of North American Indians, James Brown writes: “Most travelers, missionaries, and settlers were quick to conclude that these constructions were the legacy of a race of people unrelated to the region’s current Native American inhabitants. They were confirmed in their ideas by the then prevalent white attitude that Native Americans were too indifferent to labor to have been capable of devoting the effort required in the mounds’ construction and would not have had the engineering knowledge to plan and execute the most demanding examples.” The first major study of the mound building traditions was done in 1848 by Ephraim G. Squier and Edwin H. Davis. It was published by the Smithsonian Institution and indicated a Mexican connection with the mound builders. Shown above is the survey map of the Hopewell enclosure in Carillon Park (Dayton, Ohio) drawn by Squier and Davis. Shown above is the survey map for the Hopewell enclosure in Greene County, Ohio. From 1881 to 1893, Cyrus Thomas led a study of the mounds for the newly created Bureau of Ethnology. This study found cultural continuity between the mound building traditions and indigenous tribal practices. James Brown reports: “The theory of a distinct race of Mound Builders was declared without substance from both an archaeological and an ethnohistorical standpoint.” In general, today’s archaeologists describe four major mound building traditions in North America: (1) Poverty Point which dates from 1500 BCE to 700 BCE; (2) Adena which dates from 500 BCE to 100 BCE; (3) Hopewell which dates from about 200 BCE (300 BCE in some sources) to about 400 CE (300 CE in some sources); and (4) Mississippian which dates from 700 CE to 1731 CE. Near Chillicothe, Ohio, the Hopewell site attracted the attention of early archaeologists and gave its name to a much broader cultural tradition. At the Hopewell site, there were thirty-eight earthen mounds within a rectangular earthen enclosure which enclosed 110 acres. In her book America Before the European Invasions, Alice Beck Kehoe writes: “Overall, Hopewell is the earliest civilization to impress Euroamerican archaeologists with displays of wealth objects reminiscent of European concepts of wealth and status displays.” Around the world, archaeologists have found monumental architecture—massive structures which required thousands of hours of communal labor to construct—in association with urban civilizations. Hopewell, on the other hand, is an example of a civilization without cities. The Hopewellians lived in small, dispersed villages. In his book The First North Americans: An Archaeological Journey, Brian Fagan writes: “Hopewell is a ‘great tradition’ or an ideology in the spiritual sense, a set of understandings, as it were, shared by numerous small regional societies over much of the Midwest, accompanied by distinctive artifacts and mortuary rituals.” Shown above is a map of the Hopewell Interaction Sphere displays in the Carillon Historical Park in Dayton, Ohio. According to the display: “Evidence of Hopewell culture can be found across a large swath of the country, from Illinois to west of the Appalachians Mountains and from southern Ontario to Florida, with the fullest expression found in southern Ohio in the valleys of the Great and Little Miami, Scioto and Muskingum Rivers.” In their chapter in Archaeology and Ancient Religion in the American Midcontinent, Brad Koldehoff and Kenneth Farnsworth describe Hopewell this way: “Hopewell is a cultural florescence that spread across much of the Eastern Woodlands and is represented in the archaeological record by remnants of shared ritual practices, objects, raw materials, and motifs. These shared practices and materials indicate Hopewellian participants were likely members of a widespread cult or religious movement in addition to participants in an interaction network.” Briefly described below are some of the features of the Hopewell Moundbuilding Culture. The Earthworks One of the outstanding characteristics of the Hopewell culture is the earthen mounds. Typical Hopewell mounds are 12 meters high and about 30 meters across at the base. Earthworks (berms of earth), which sometimes exceed 500 meters in diameter, were constructed in circular, square, rectangular, and octagonal shapes. Anthropologist Peter Nabokov, in his book Where the Lightning Strikes: The Lives of American Indian Sacred Places, reports: “Most spectacular of the ten thousand mounds produced by Hopewell people are sites that pair circles and squares, a configuration which is repeated in some dozens of locations.” In his entry on Hopewell in The Oxford Companion to Archaeology, William Dancey reports: “Ceremonial centers commonly combined earthworks in geometric shapes such as circles, squares, semicircles, arcs, and parallel walls. The orientation of some of these figures has suggested that Hopewellians recognized the cycles of the moon, sun, and Venus.” The Hopewell earthworks, particularly the circles and squares, appear to be oriented toward some fairly precise lunar observations and suggest that the Hopewell people were accomplished astronomers. In at least one instance, the orientation of the earthworks corresponds with the 18.6-year lunar cycle and suggests that the Hopewell astronomers made and recorded observations over fairly long periods of time. The size and complexity of the mounds provide insights into Hopewell planning, engineering skills, and social organization. The mounds and other archeological evidence show that Hopewell people had a highly developed social organization that included class structure and a division of labor, with specialists like metal workers, artists, and traders. In addition, they had leaders of hereditary rank and privileges, a strong religious system, and control over cooperative labor. The Hopewell mounds appear to have been ceremonial centers, places where people were buried. In addition to mortuary ceremonies, they were probably also used for other ceremonies.  These ceremonies provided an opportunity for the people living in scattered villages to come together. The Great Hopewell Road, which runs for about 60 miles roughly parallel to the Scioto River, links a number of prominent mound sites. Archaeologists have also found “alleys” or “avenues” created by earthen walls which may have marked processional routes from outlying communities into the ceremonial centers. Hopewell Social Organization The mounds and other features show that the Hopewellians had a highly developed social organization. This probably included a class structure and a division of labor, with specialists like metal workers, artists, and traders; leaders of hereditary rank and privileges; a strong religious system; and direction over cooperative labor. William Dancey summarizes Hopewell social structure this way: “Some archaeologists argue that Hopewell must have had a chiefdom type of society in which a single lineage dominated the social order, aggregating and redistributing resources through negotiation. Others have envisioned a more egalitarian system in which leaders emerged through achievement, as among modern tribal societies, and the structure was not institutionalized.” In his book An Introduction to Native North America, Mark Sutton writes: “Hopewell social and political systems were very complex with a class structure and at least a tribal level political organization, perhaps even a chiefdom level. It appears that ‘commoners’ were cremated, while the elite were buried in graves with lavish offerings.” Hopewell Art In addition to earthen mounds, one of the major characteristics of Hopewell was the flowering of artistic creation. William Dancey reports: “Hopewell people chipped ceremonial daggers from obsidian acquired in the Rockies and cold-hammer copper from Lake Superior sources to make bracelets, broaches, necklaces, headdresses, and ornamental cutouts. Mica from southern Appalachia was cut into various forms and attached to clothing (skin and woven cloth). Buscyon shells from the Gulf coast were used as containers. Pipestone from local sources was carved to form effigy platform pipes, the bowls of which often depicted the region’s common birds and mammals.” The Hopewell people not only made many useful items, but they made artifacts that were beautiful. They decorated their pottery with both dentate-stamping and rocker-stamping. Their pottery often had cross-hatched rim decorations and zoned decorations. Regarding Hopewell pottery, Christian Feest, in his book Native Arts of North America, writes: “Stylized bird motifs are outlined by deep, incised lines, and the background is textured with a toothed rocker or roulette.” While it is common to characterize Indian people prior to the arrival of the Europeans as “stone age” people, the Hopewell artists made many different artifacts from copper. Their copper artifacts included musical instruments such as panpipes; cutting tools such as copper celts; copper needles; and beads made from both copper and from meteoric iron. In addition to working with copper, the Hopewell artists also made some objects from gold and silver. In addition to pots, the Hopewell people also made pottery figurines, usually depicting humans. All of the Hopewell figurines have strong realistic tendencies. The figures include both seated and standing males and females. Smoking Pipes Using pipes for smoking tobacco, particularly in ceremonial or religious contexts, seems to have been a universal trait among the native peoples of North American. The oldest form of smoking pipes were tubular in shape and first appear  in the Eastern Woodlands about 1500 BCE. The tube pipes transformed into platform pipes which became one of the hallmarks of Hopewell. Hopewell platform pipes were sometimes carved with animal and bird effigies. In his chapter on Hopewell in North American Archaeology, William Dancey writes: “The birds and mammals carved on some Hopewellian platform pipes are nearly exact replicas of their subjects, complete with a sense of movement. Conversely, some Hopewell art shows animals and animal parts, including human, in silhouette fashion in copper and mica cutouts.” Shown above is a Hopewell pipe displayed in the Ohio History Center in Columbus, Ohio. Brad Koldehoff and Kenneth Farnsworth write: “We propose that while tube pipes were simple shamanistic devices, platform pipes were powerful symbols of a new religious/political movement known today as Hopewell.” Brad Koldehoff and Kenneth Farnsworth also write: “…we suspect that platform pipes were more than shamanistic devices; they were powerful objects that shaped human events.” Personal Decoration and Art For personal decoration, the Hopewell people made pottery rings, ear spools from both copper and stone, and copper headpieces. They often used antlers to indicate chiefly or leadership status. Shown above is a gorget—an ornamental plaque which is hung by a string or cord around the neck like a pendant. This was displayed in the Ohio History Center in Columbus, Ohio. Another interesting Hopewell artifact is the Hopewell Hand: a hand which was carved from mica and buried in a mound in Ohio.   Shown above is the Hopewell Hand. Trade  Like other Indian cultures, the Hopewell were not isolated from the rest of North America. The Hopewell trading network spread west to Yellowstone Park in Wyoming, north to Ontario, Canada, and south to the Gulf of Mexico. Trade goods included copper from the Lake Superior area, mica from the southern Appalachians, obsidian and grizzly bear teeth from Wyoming and Montana, and marine shells from both the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. It is clear from the distribution of these goods that some network, either social or religious, must have existed for this exchange to take place. As evidence of this wide trading network, Hopewell graves contain such items as conch shells from the Gulf Coast, shark teeth from the ocean, and pipes with alligator effigies.   Shown above is an obsidian projectile point. The obsidian was obtained in trade and originated in what is now Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming. Subsistence The Hopewell farmers raised a number of indigenous crops, such as sunflowers, marsh elder, squash, little barley, erect knotweed, maygrass,  and stumpweed. In farming, they used hoes made from stone and from the shoulder blades of bison and deer. In his book Native American Archaeology in the Parks, Kenneth Feder writes: “The Hopewell supplemented their reliance on wild plant and animal resources with agriculture, but not the stereotypical crops of corn, beans, and squash.” The Hopewell people got much of their food from gathering wild plants, including hickory nuts, acorns, walnuts, grapes, and wild plums. They hunted deer, turkeys, and other small game.  For fishing, they made fishhooks from both copper and bone. Hopewell villages tended to be in areas which were good for growing native crops. Usually, their settlements were dispersed along stream and river valley corridors. Their villages generally did not appear to have any overall community plan. In his book Prehistory of the Americas, Stuart Fiedel writes: “…the largest villages cold not have held more than a few hundred people. They were generally located at the foot of a bluff, near the river and about 20 km (12½ miles) away from the next large village.” Decline The Hopewellian centers began to decline about 300 CE and by 550 CE they disappeared completely. In his chapter on the Hopewell phenomenon in The Oxford Handbook of North American Archaeology, Douglas Charles writes: “…the end of Hopewell was not a collapse, but rather a diminishing and disappearance of ritual and exchange practices as the floodplain environments and demographic influx stabilized, again varying regionally.” On the other hand, in his book The First North Americans: An Archaeological Journey, Brian Fagan sees the decline as fairly rapid—325 to 350 CE—and describes it this way: “Charnel-house building slowed, earthen enclosures were no longer constructed. Ceremonial activity declined dramatically. An explanation for this sudden change eludes us.” Several reasons for the Hopewell decline have been suggested by archaeologists. Mark Sutton writes: “A number of hypotheses propose to explain this decline, including overpopulation, climate change, an increase in warfare, and/or an increase in hunting efficiency (and thus the decimation of game) due to the introduction of the bow and arrow.” One potential reason is, of course, climate change as the Hopewell decline corresponds to a period in which the weather became too cold and moist for tropical flint corn. This three-century cooling period would have impacted other foods as well. In her book North American Indians: A Comprehensive Account, Alice Beck Kehoe writes: “Cultivated grain harvests would have been subject to destructive frosts much more often in this cooler period than during the Hopewell climax, and many supplementary foods, such as hickory nuts, would also have become less plentiful.” Some scholars, however, disagree with this suggestion. In her book Native Americans Before 1492: The Moundbuilding Centers of the Eastern Woodlands, Lynda Shaffer writes: “The peoples of this epoch were not dependent upon corn for their food supply.” Brian Fagan writes: “Climatic cooling did not play a significant role in triggering change.” The Hopewell decline may have been brought about by a decline in the exchange of northern copper for southern coastal shells. At the end of the Hopewellian era, the Indian peoples in the Southeast began to exploit local copper deposits. Once the Southeastern people developed their own copperworking traditions, the need to exchange shells for northern copper objects disappeared. Once the exchange was gone, there was no reason to continue the ceremonies associated with the culture. Lynda Shaffer writes: “This southern shift from northern to local sources of copper certainly is significant, but it is difficult to say whether it caused the collapse of the Hopewellian network or was a result of its collapse.” The Hopewellian decline may have been brought about by warfare which accompanied the introduction of the bow and arrow. By the end of the Hopewell period, their sites tended to be located on hilltops where they could be easily defended. At some of these sites, there are indications of fires and massacres. Lynda Shaffer reports: “The introduction of the bow and arrow could have temporarily altered the balance of power and contributed to an increase in the frequency and intensity of warfare.” Hopewell Influence Hopewell influence stretched from Minnesota in the north to Mississippi in the south, from Nebraska in the west to Virginia in the east. This does not mean that Hopewell was an empire, or even a political confederation of tribes. Rather, Hopewell as probably one of the first Pan-Indian religious movements whose artistic style and ideas influenced many other cultures stretching from Mississippi to Minnesota, from Nebraska to Virginia. In his book Prehistory of the Americas, Stuart Fiedel describes the geographic spread of Hopewell influence this way: “From southern Illinois, Hopewell culture traits appear to have spread, by diffusion and/or migration, northward into Wisconsin (Trempealeau culture) and Michigan (Goodall culture); westward into Missouri (Kansas City and Cooper cultures), and southward, through western Tennessee (Copena culture), to Louisiana (Marksville), Mississippi (Miller), Alabama (Porter), and Florida (Santa Rose and Swift Creek cultures).” Stuart Fiedel also writes: “The spread of Hopewell artifacts may denote acceptance of an ideology that stressed elaborate funerary rites.” In his chapter on Hopewell in North American Archaeology, William Dancey asks: “Does Hopewell art represent art for art’s sake, or is it a material manifestation of a worldview or cosmology?” In her book North American Indians: A Comprehensive Account, Alice Beck Kehoe writes: “Above all, Hopewell was the integration of thousands of villages throughout the East into a system in which material goods were moved in the service of political leaders marked by well-defined status symbols.” In looking at the influence of Hopewell on other cultures, it seems logical to also explore possible influences from other cultures on Hopewell. One logical candidate is Mexico as influences from cultures such as the Maya are found in other parts of North America, including the Southeast. Alice Beck Kehoe writes: “Though some occasional contacts between Hopewell and Mexico must have occurred, Hopewell has strong indigenous roots in the Late Archaic of the central Midwest.” While there are no clear connections between Hopewell and contemporary Indian tribes, many of the cultural traditions of the Iroquois tribes seem to be linked to Hopewell. The Iroquois, like the Hopewell, used antlers as the metaphor for chiefly office. Similarly, both groups use a weeping-eye motif in their art. More Ancient America Ancient America: Hopewell Offerings #1 (museum tour) Ancient America: Hopewell Offerings #2 (museum tour) Ancient America: Linking people to the cosmos in ancient Ohio Ancient America: Ohio Ceremonial Earthworks (museum tour) Ancient America: A very brief overview of Adena burials (500 BCE - 100 BCE) Ancient America: A very short overview of the Fort Ancient tradition Ancient America: Fort Ancient offerings (museum tour) Ancient America: The Old Copper People

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, Archaeology, AncientAmerica, Hopewell, AncientAmerica201, NativeAmericanNet] [Link to media]

— Tulalip Indian longhouse

 

at 4/3/25 2:08pm

Welcome to the Street Prophets Coffee Hour cleverly hidden at the intersection of religion, art, science, food, and politics. This is an open thread where we can share our thoughts and comments about the day. The people of the Tulalip tribes would traditionally spend the winter in their longhouses situated in permanent villages. During the winter months, a great deal of teaching would take place around the longhouse fires. During this time, the elders would pass on the family stories, songs, lineages, and moral teachings. According to the exhibit in the Hibulb Culture Center: “Our songs, dances, stories, basket designs and carvings are owned by certain families and are used only with their permission. Ownership of this knowledge may be given by families to particular family members, other selected people, or the whole tribe. We have a strict process of granting rights and permission to use this type of knowledge.” Shown above is the entrance to the longhouse in the Hibulb Culture Center. The television screen provides visitors with the stories of the Tulalip peoples. he poles shown above were carved about 1914 by William Shelton. As a young boy in the 1870s, he had been to the great potlatch house at Skagit Bay Head. In 1912, he advocated for a longhouse to be built on the Tulalip Bay. These posts were carved for this longhouse according to his childhood memories of the posts at the great potlatch house. Shown above is the outside of the longhouse showing the shed roof configuration.  Coast Salish houses were often built in a shed style with the roof pitched because of the great width of the structure. Open thread This is an open thread—all topics are welcome.

[Author: Ojibwa] [Category: AmericanIndians, CoffeeHour, Community, Museums, OpenThread, Photography, Washington, HibulbCultureCenter, StreetProphets, TulalipIndians] [Link to media]

As of 5/22/25 10:01pm. Last new 5/22/25 8:24am.