subsistence, which every Indian deems himself entitled to, even should
he be compelled to destroy his enemies or risk his own life to obtain
it. Moreover, they are well aware that the surrounding nations would
do the same and sweep them off entirely if they could with impunity,
and each claims the same right. Possession is nothing without power to
retain, and force to repel, and to defend with success they must limit
themselves to a certain extent of territory, for by separating their
force too widely they would be cut off in detail. By these different
necessary locations the country has been parceled out, each holding
what they can with safety occupy, and making any encroachments they
are able. They claim the land as theirs because that portion affords
the means of subsistence with more security than by moving elsewhere
they could procure. To sell their lands, they say, would be the same
as to sell their means of living, for by moving elsewhere large bodies
of enemies would require to be displaced, which could not be effected
without great loss and perhaps failure. Indians who cultivate, such
as the Mandan, Gros Ventres, and Arikara, only claim as their own
the small patches that they till, and their right even to these
(individually) only exists as long as they are occupied by the crops of
the cultivator.
Should he fence it in and work it every year no one would dispute his
right to do so, but if the land be left idle some other would plant
upon it. It is in fact merely loaned from the general district for
the purpose of him who wishes to cultivate. There being no scarcity
of land, however, no difficulties occur on this point. From this view
it would appear that their right to territory is nothing more than
defending that portion on which they are located as necessary for
their support. Invasion of a neighboring tribe’s country would only be
the consequence of famine or scarcity of game in their own and would
be looked upon by them in the light of extending their hunting after
the buffalo (which is the property of all Indians) into another part
of the great plains intended by Wakoñda for their support, being aware
at the same time that they risk their lives by so doing. The foregoing
are the outlines of the arguments they use. It is because they are
at war that their lands appear to be distinct portions assigned to
each nation, although between each there are several hundred miles of
neutral ground, the nature of their forces not admitting of closer
approximation. Were all at peace it would present the feature of one
great estate on which each would rove and hunt when and where he
pleased, and what is now neutral would become hunting grounds. But as
long as hunting was their sole occupation no claims would be set up by
any man to a certain portion of land.
They must become stationary, acquire property, real estate, before land
becomes of any value in their estimation, further than the space it
affords to game of all kinds to live and increase for their benefit.
PRIMOGENITURE
There is no general or fixed law of primogeniture. The eldest son is,
however, mostly a favorite, and although the custom is not universal
we have known instances of legacies left. If the parent be a chief
he will, if time permits, present his eldest son with his medal when
he anticipates death, if his son is of sufficient age to wear it.
They are anxious to be succeeded in their office by some of their
children, and the eldest would soonest be of sufficient age to take
upon himself the responsibility. But unfortunately for the wishes of
the parent the office or station of chief does not depend upon the
law of primogeniture, or any other, but upon the will of the greater
part to be ruled by him who is thus designated, and the capacities
and standing of the applicant. The chief whose speech is recorded on
page 598 presented his medal to his eldest son when on his death bed
in the presence of 20 or 30 persons of his band, intimating his desire
that his son should take his place and “follow in the footsteps of his
father.” The son not being the popular choice, another was appointed
and the medal was left in our possession, where it yet remains, though
his son was of age at his father’s (la-Chef-qui-parle) death six years
ago, and is living yet, and has progressed no further than becoming a
camp soldier.
Most of these Indians die violent deaths, either by war, accidents of
the chase, or rapid diseases, and thus have no opportunity to dispose
of their property, yet even when they have time do not often do it,
owing to the difficulty of having these requests fulfilled after their
demise. The dying request of a chief or warrior, if he makes any, is
that his favorite horse, or sometimes two or three horses, shall be
killed at his grave. Other horses, his gun, etc., are sometimes given
to his relatives as bequests, and this gift contains an intimation to
go to war after his death. The death of a warrior entails revenge,
from, whatever cause his death arises—sickness or accident. The
horses, therefore, there bequeathed are put in mourning by having their
mane, tail, and ears cut off and their body smeared over with white
clay. These, with the guns and other weapons bequeathed, are taken on
the first war expedition by the persons who received them. We have been
appointed executor of the will of an Indian who died at Fort Union
some years since from a wound through the bowels. A short time before
his death (about three hours) he called us to his bedside and made
a distribution of some horses and other property to be kept for his
children’s use, and desired his best running horse to be shot on the
spot where he was to be buried, while he was yet living, which with the
other requests were attended to.
There can be no doubt that if they were certain their dying requests
would be fulfilled the custom of bequeathing their property when the
circumstances of their death admitted it would be more general; but
they know that the customs are such that after death all property must
pass into the hands of strangers, as will be stated under the head of
Death and Its Consequences. Even when dying bequests are made they are
not always carried out. The horses and other property thus given to
their families are given to others who cut their legs and bodies and
cry a great deal at the interment, or rather on the occasion of their
placing the body in a tree, as they usually do. When the great chief
of the Crows, Long Hair, died no less than four hands were held out
by four different Crow Indians, each offering to cut off two fingers
to obtain the chief’s war horse that he ordered to be killed upon his
grave, but their offers were rejected and the horse was killed.
CRIME
Crime of any and all kinds among them is considered an offense to the
individual and as such liable to punishment by the person offended.
But no idea of a moral offense toward the Great Spirit is exhibited
or consequent future punishment feared. All our endeavors to extract
from them even an acknowledgment of the greatest crimes being morally
wrong have been unavailing. They can not see that any act of theirs
should meet with punishment after death because they think they have
just cause for these acts, and also they do not believe in future
punishments at all. To illustrate the first position, we will present
their arguments on the greatest of crimes, murder. An Indian never
commits what in his mind would be equal to murder in our estimation.
There is no inducement in any case for them to murder a man for his
horses, wife, or any other property they possess, for this step,
instead of securing these advantages, would operate in quite an
opposite direction, making it necessary for the murderer to relinquish
his own property and that of his nearest relatives to pay the damage;
also forfeiting his own life and becoming an outcast. And this is the
reason why their disputes so seldom terminate in bloodshed, as the
prospect of loss is far greater than that of gain. When they do kill
among themselves it is in consequence of some quarrel about property,
or about something, and this they are then in a manner obliged to do,
to save their own life. It then becomes self-defense or a necessary
action induced by the principle of fear and their constant habit of
carrying and raising arms. In no instance does an Indian take life,
except that of his enemies, without provocation.
A horse, a woman, a gun, or any other article may be the cause of
a quarrel, and threats and menaces pass which place each under the
necessity of destroying the other to save himself. They say they can
not do otherwise, and often regret the necessity. To kill an enemy,
instead of being reckoned an act ungrateful to Wakoñda, is thought by
them to be highly pleasing, therefore his aid to accomplish this and
even private revenge is sought in prayers, fasts, sacrifices, etc. All
mankind have, they think, an equal right to live, and an equal right
to preserve that right, and it is the sense of this self-preservation
that compels them to remove any danger in their way, such as wild
beasts, enemies, or any of their own people whom they are aware are
only waiting an opportunity against themselves; and it is also this
right to life and fear of being assassinated that compels them to take
every advantage to accomplish the destruction of the danger pending. We
have questioned several Indians on this subject who have killed their
own people and all have led to the same subject, viz., the necessity
imposed upon them by quarrels to kill or be killed. To act otherwise
when all peaceful means have failed would be considered as the height
of foolishness and cowardice. An Indian does not take life from mere
thirst for blood, nor, as has been stated, to acquire property, as in
either case no advantage would be gained. When they waylay and murder
whites they believe they are doing right; that whites have no business
in their country, and are therefore looked upon in the light of enemies.
They do not kill the white traders among each nation, or in the few
instances they have done so it was from some motive of revenge, right
in their estimation and in conformity to their law of retaliation. When
the Blackfeet kill the whites at the Crow Fort it is from no enmity
to the whites as a people, for they could if they wished kill plenty
in their own country; it is that they do not wish the Crows, their
enemies, to have traders who supply them with the means of killing
them, by trading guns, ammunition, etc. The same reasoning on their
own side is the cause of their friendship toward their own traders.
Revenge, the great principle of destroying life, is strongly contended
for by the Indians as necessary to their existence, both individually
and as a body. The fear of the consequences of dispute prevents it,
or generally is settled amicably by payment. There being no competent
judiciary to try and punish crime renders it necessary for each one to
retaliate, or they would be liable to constant imposition. That revenge
among them supplies the want of courts of justice, prisons, and public
executions. If the revenge is disproportionate to the offense, it can
not be helped; their habits, customs, and organization all have that
tendency. In all this they see no offense to Wakoñda nor any idea of
moral wrong, even if they did believe in future punishment, which they
do not, yet they know it is an offense to the individual and all his
relatives, incurring their retaliation, which is the only punishment
they expect.
Inasmuch as the warrior believes that by prayers, fasts, personal
inflictions of pain and sacrifices they can secure the aid of Wakoñda
to effect the death of their enemies or for the gratification of
private revenge, by the same train of reasoning it must be manifest
that the soul of a warrior must occupy a high degree of happiness
in Indian paradise for accomplishing these acts through his
instrumentality.
The death of a man who killed another would suffice if it were possible
to stop there, but we have said enough on this subject to show they
have no power to stop. The taking of the second life produces an
obligation on the part of the kindred of the deceased to revenge, and
retaliation is continued. The original cause of quarrel is lost in the
greater necessity of defending life on either side. Therefore in their
yet deplorable state of ignorance the crime of murder as an act of the
same nature in our ideas can have no existence among them, neither can
anything be morally wrong in which the aid of Wakoñda is invoked and
if successful obtained. Robbery or theft is also an individual offense
though not by them considered as such to Wakoñda. An Indian gives for
his reason for stealing an article that his necessities required it and
he could not get it any other way. He will not steal an article he does
not want or can not use and run useless risk of detection, but a horse,
gun, knife, of other things will sometimes be taken and the act excused
on the plea of his necessities.
The risk attending the extraction of large articles or the disgrace
incurred by pilfering is, they grant, all the punishment necessary, and
these seldom are attended with any serious consequences. All must live
some way and the right to property not being well defined—besides each
being accustomed to frequent reverses—stealing is looked upon more
as a means of subsistence necessitated by the state of their peculiar
wants, and does not present the idea of theft to them as an immoral
act or one tending to aggravate Wakoñda. Robberies to the extent of
depriving another of his means of living are seldom if ever attempted,
though retaliation would of course be severe in proportion, and in the
progress of this retaliation the property thus acquired, be it horses
or women, would be destroyed, besides the risk attending the robber
personally.
Fornication and adultery are not considered offenses to Wakoñda. If the
consent of the woman has been obtained, punishment is seldom inflicted
on the man unless caught in the act. The woman, however, is punished
in various ways, sometimes, though not usually, by death. The property
of the offender is taken or destroyed for his trespass on the property
of the offended. The chastity of any woman not the property of another
man may be violated without any moral sense of wrong presenting itself,
though the seducer would be liable to be made to pay or in default of
doing so his horses would be killed by the relatives of the woman.
Moreover, they look upon women as intended for this purpose, and only
take into consideration the different claims upon them as an article of
property.
Rapes on virgins are nearly unknown. Were such a crime accomplished
the law would be death to the perpetrator, not because it is morally
wrong, but because it depreciates the price of the woman and lessens
her chance of marriage. It is also considered as an insult to her
relatives, intimating a contempt of their feelings and power of
protection.
The evils arising from falsehood or lying are with them of small
importance. Any lies an Indian could invent would not be productive of
any great evil, and owing to their associations the falsehood would
soon appear. This being the case it is not regarded as a great offense
even to the individual, much less Wakoñda. They all lie occasionally,
and the custom is so common as scarcely to attract any further notice
than their ridicule. Therefore there is no punishment attending on it
further than the person famed for lying would be neglected and despised
by the others. To call an Indian a liar would be insult certainly, but
not in the same degree as the same epithet among whites. It would not
be aggravation enough alone to merit a blow or any revenge. There is
no such thing as profane swearing among any of these prairie tribes,
nor is there a word in their language equivalent to even the smallest
profane oaths in such general use among whites. The name of Wakoñda is
never mentioned without manifestations of awe and reverence. In this
respect at least they are far superior to their Christian brethren. In
conclusion of this answer we come again to the starting point.
What in their estimation is crime, is wrong, is an offense to Wakoñda?
Crime and wrong can be nothing more than offenses to persons subject
to their law of retaliation, the punishment being greater or less
according to the object which entails it. Although they do not believe
in future punishments, yet they think that Wakoñda can be offended and
does punish in this life; not for crimes, as they have no existence,
but for neglect of proper fasts, sacrifices, and personal privations
and inflictions necessary to propitiate his anger. They believe that
they are under obligations to worship Wakoñda, not from the fact of
their creation or even as to the author of all good, but through fear
of his power. In almost every emergency an Indian can be placed, the
cause of which is not visible or the result doubtful, that is, where
his own powers fail, he applies to Wakoñda. These applications are made
by presenting to the Sun, Thunder, and other supernatural agencies
offerings of considerable value, by fasting, by lacerating their
bodies, prayers, and incantations, with the view of avoiding sickness
in their families, personal harm of every description, attacks of
enemies, to obtain success in war, to collect the buffalo near their
camp, to avoid the attacks of bears, strokes of lightning, or even
the appearance of ghosts. Where success has not followed these rites
and ceremonies they believe it is caused by the offerings not being
of sufficient value, or not of long duration, or their having been
too seldom performed. Therefore the neglect or incompetency of these
sacrifices constitutes the crime and the punishment is visible in the
misfortune that occurs. This part of the subject will meet with further
consideration under the head of religion.
PRAYERS
PRAYER OF A WARRIOR.[17]—“O Wakoñda, you see me a poor man; have pity
upon me. I go to war to revenge the death of my brother; have pity upon
me. I smoke this tobacco taken from my medicine sack, where it has been
enveloped with the remains of my dead brother.[18] I smoke it to my
Tutelary, to you; aid me in revenge. On my path preserve me from mad
wolves. Let no enemies surprise me. I have sacrificed, I have smoked,
my heart is low, have pity upon me. Give me the bows and arrows of
my enemies. Give me their guns. Give me their horses. Give me their
bodies. Let me have my face blackened on my return. Let good weather
come that I can see. Good dreams give that I can judge where they are.
I have suffered. I wish to live. I wish to be revenged. I am poor. I
want horses. I will sacrifice. I will smoke. I will remember; have pity
upon me.”
[17] Almost every sentence is repeated over three or four times in a
low running tone, with the pipe presented to the Charm, Amulet, or Sun.
[18] Meaning with a lock of his hair.
PRAYER TO GHOSTS.—“Spirits of our dead relatives, I make this feast
for you to call you all around me. I smoke this tobacco which has been
inclosed with your hair; be near us and hear. My friends are around me,
and you are called to the feast. Call on all the spirits of our dead
friends to aid in giving us what we ask. Make the buffalo come near
and the clouds and wind fair to approach them, that we may always have
meat in camp to feed us and you. Help us in every way; let our children
live. Let us live. Call on all these spirits and ask them to assist you
in helping us.
“If we hunt, be with us. If we go to war, be with us. Enable us to
revenge some of your deaths upon our enemies. They have killed you;
they have brought our hearts low. Bring their hearts low also. Let us
blacken our faces. Keep us from harm, rest quiet, we will not cease to
cry for and remember you. You are remembered in this feast, eat some of
it [here small bits are scattered around]. This to you, my father. This
for you, my grandfather, my uncle, my brother, the relations of all
present eat, rest in quiet, do not let disease trouble us. We eat for
you, we cry for you, we cut ourselves for you.”
In conclusion, if the spirit addressed be recently dead they will all
cry, and some of the immediate relatives cut their legs and arms, but
if it is a feast to the memory of those long since dead some of the
concluding words are left out. There is a good deal of repetition and
often a long prayer is said, but the above is in amount what they ask.
For the previous ceremony before the prayer is said, see the article
where feasts to the dead are described.
THE MOON
They say the moon is a hot body and derives its light from its own
nature, not as a reflection of the sun’s rays; that it is eaten up
monthly or during a given period by a great number of moles, which they
call we-as-poo-gah (moon nibblers). These moles are numerous all over
the prairies, have pointed noses, no teeth, and burrow in the ground.
They (the Indians) believe that in eating up the moon their noses are
burned off, their teeth worn out, and for their damage have been cast
down from above, where they are doomed to burrow in the earth and get
nothing to eat. The same operation is going on all the time by other
moles, who in their turn will be thrown down. They think Wakoñda causes
a new moon to grow when the old one has been destroyed. The moon is
not supposed to be an abiding place for beings, but is worshipped and
sacrificed to on account of its affording light by which to travel at
night. They take the dark part of the face of the moon to be a large
light Man holding kettle in each hand. Stars are other bodies of fire
far off, which they admit may be the residences of spirits or beings,
though no great stress is laid on the idea. They are not regarded as
parts of a system. Except the Polar Star and the Ursa Major, but few of
the planets, if any, are known.
PARENTAL AFFECTION
The Indians show great veneration for their parents and affection among
brothers and sisters; more, perhaps, to their parents than the others;
but this only continues as long as they are vigorous enough to hunt,
travel, and follow the camp. When old age and helplessness come on they
are neglected. In proportion as age advances, veneration diminishes,
and when parents become a burden they are left in some encampment with
a small supply of provisions, which being exhausted, they perish. Age
is under no circumstances the object of veneration; the fate of very
old brothers and sisters is the same. They excuse themselves from
this unnatural act by saying they are unable to transport them and
that they are of no more use; also that it is the request of the old
persons. This may be true, and it is likely that the life they lead
in camp or in traveling, exposed to all weather and hardship, renders
death desirable. There are very few very old Indians. They are not a
long-lived people, and this is the reason these acts are not of more
frequent occurrence. We do not know that the striking of a parent would
be deemed a crime; at least no punishment would follow from others, but
it is not customary and would be considered disgraceful. Eight years
since this period we were present when an Indian shot his father dead
for striking his mother, but this is the only instance of the kind we
ever saw or heard of, and the person is despised by all, besides being
since that afflicted by an incurable disease resembling scrofula.
Indian priests, doctors, or conjurors are not more venerated on account
of their supposed supernatural powers, but are somewhat feared, and
sometimes persecuted or killed for supposed inflictions of diseases by
sorcery. This fear is general but secret, and these men are neither
venerated nor associated with as much as ordinary persons. If their
services be required they are paid, and afterwards let alone, at least
not trifled with nor loved. We can not by close inquiry find that any
of these Indians ever killed by stoning a person, though enemies are
tortured in almost every other way, if taken alive.
RELIGION