GENTES IN OTHER TRIBES OF THE GANOWÁNIAN FAMILY.
DIVISIONS OF AMERICAN ABORIGINES.—GENTES IN INDIAN TRIBES;
WITH THEIR RULES OF DESCENT AND INHERITANCE.—I. HODENOSAUNIAN
TRIBES.—II. DAKOTIAN.—III. GULF.—IV. PAWNEE.—V. ALGONKIN.—VI.
ATHAPASCO-APACHE.—VII. TRIBES OF NORTHWEST COAST.—ESKIMOS,
A DISTINCT FAMILY.—VIII. SALISH, SAHAPTIN, AND KOOTENAY
TRIBES.—IX. SHOSHONEE.—X. VILLAGE INDIANS OF NEW MEXICO,
MEXICO AND CENTRAL AMERICA.—XI. SOUTH AMERICAN INDIAN
TRIBES.—PROBABLE UNIVERSALITY OF THE ORGANIZATION IN GENTES IN
THE GANOWÁNIAN FAMILY.
When America was first discovered in its several regions, the
Aborigines were found in two dissimilar conditions. First were the
Village Indians, who depended almost exclusively upon horticulture for
subsistence; such were the tribes in this status in New Mexico, Mexico
and Central America, and upon the plateau of the Andes. Second, were
the Non-horticultural Indians, who depended upon fish, bread-roots
and game; such were the Indians of the Valley of the Columbia, of
the Hudson’s Bay Territory, of parts of Canada, and of some other
sections of America. Between these tribes, and connecting the extremes
by insensible gradations, were the partially Village, and partially
Horticultural Indians; such were the Iroquois, the New England and
Virginia Indians, the Creeks, Choctas, Cherokees, Minnitarees, Dakotas
and Shawnees. The weapons, arts, usages, inventions, dances, house
architecture, form of government, and plan of life of all alike
bear the impress of a common mind, and reveal, through their wide
range, the successive stages of development of the same original
conceptions. Our first mistake consisted in overrating the comparative
advancement of the Village Indians; and our second in underrating
that of the Non-horticultural, and of the partially Village Indians:
whence resulted a third, that of separating one from the other and
regarding them as different races. There was a marked difference in
the conditions in which they were severally found; for a number of
the Non-horticultural tribes were in the Upper Status of savagery;
the intermediate tribes were in the Lower Status of barbarism, and
the Village Indians were in the Middle Status. The evidence of their
unity of origin has now accumulated to such a degree as to leave no
reasonable doubt upon the question, although this conclusion is not
universally accepted. The Eskimos belong to a different family.
In a previous work I presented the system of consanguinity and affinity
of some seventy American Indian tribes; and upon the fact of their
joint possession of the same system, with evidence of its derivation
from a common source, ventured to claim for them the distinctive rank
of a family of mankind, under the name of the Ganowánian, the “Family
of the Bow and Arrow.”[144]
Having considered the attributes of the gens in its archaic form, it
remains to indicate the extent of its prevalence in the tribes of the
Ganowánian family. In this chapter the organization will be traced
among them, confining the statements to the names of the gentes in
each tribe, with their rules of descent and inheritance as to property
and office. Further explanations will be added when necessary. The
main point to be established is the existence or non-existence of the
gentile organization among them. Wherever the institution has been
found in these several tribes it is the same in all essential respects
as the gens of the Iroquois, and therefore needs no further exposition
in this connection. Unless the contrary is stated, it may be understood
that the existence of the organization was ascertained by the author
from the Indian tribe or some of its members. The classification of
tribes follows that adopted in “Systems of Consanguinity.”
I. _Hodenosaunian Tribes._
1. Iroquois. The gentes of the Iroquois have been considered.[145]
2. Wyandotes. This tribe, the remains of the ancient Hurons, is
composed of eight gentes, as follows:
1. Wolf. 2. Bear. 3. Beaver. 4. Turtle.
5. Deer. 6. Snake. 7. Porcupine. 8. Hawk.[146]
Descent is in the female line, with marriage in the gens prohibited.
The office of sachem, or civil chief, is hereditary in the gens,
but elective among its members. They have seven sachems and seven
war-chiefs, the Hawk gens being now extinct. The office of sachem
passes from brother to brother, or from uncle to nephew; but that of
war-chief was bestowed in reward of merit, and was not hereditary.
Property was hereditary in the gens, consequently children took nothing
from their father; but they inherited their mother’s effects. Where
the rule is stated hereafter it will be understood that unmarried as
well as married persons are included. Each gens had power to depose
as well as elect its chiefs. The Wyandotes have been separated from
the Iroquois at least four hundred years; but they still have five
gentes in common, although their names have either changed beyond
identification, or new names have been substituted by one or the other.
The Eries, Neutral Nation, Nottoways, Tutelos,[147] and
Susquehannocks[148] now extinct or absorbed in other tribes, belong to
the same lineage. Presumptively they were organized in gentes, but the
evidence of the fact is lost.
II. _Dakotian Tribes._
A large number of tribes are included in this great stock of the
American aborigines. At the time of their discovery they had fallen
into a number of groups, and their language into a number of dialects;
but they inhabited, in the main, continuous areas. They occupied the
head waters of the Mississippi, and both banks of the Missouri for more
than a thousand miles in extent. In all probability the Iroquois, and
their cognate tribes, were an offshoot from this stem.
1. Dakotas or Sioux. The Dakotas, consisting at the present time of
some twelve independent tribes, have allowed the gentile organization
to fall into decadence. It seems substantially certain that they once
possessed it because their nearest congeners, the Missouri tribes, are
now thus organized. They have societies named after animals analogous
to gentes, but the latter are now wanting. Carver, who was among them
in 1767, remarks that “every separate body of Indians is divided into
bands or tribes; which band or tribe forms a little community with the
nation to which it belongs. As the nation has some particular symbol by
which it is distinguished from others, so each tribe has a badge from
which it is denominated; as that of the eagle, the panther, the tiger,
the buffalo, etc. One band of the Naudowissies [Sioux] is represented
by a Snake, another a Tortoise, a third a Squirrel, a fourth a Wolf,
and a fifth a Buffalo. Throughout every nation they particularize
themselves in the same manner, and the meanest person among them will
remember his lineal descent, and distinguish himself by his respective
family.”[149] He visited the eastern Dakotas on the Mississippi. From
this specific statement I see no reason to doubt that the gentile
organization was then in full vitality among them. When I visited the
eastern Dakotas in 1861, and the western in 1862, I could find no
satisfactory traces of gentes among them. A change in the mode of life
among the Dakotas occurred between these dates when they were forced
upon the plains, and fell into nomadic bands, which may, perhaps,
explain the decadence of gentilism among them.
Carver also noticed the two grades of chiefs among the western
Indians, which have been explained as they exist among the Iroquois.
“Every band,” he observes, “has a chief who is termed the Great Chief,
or the Chief Warrior, and who is chosen in consideration of his
experience in war, and of his approved valor, to direct their military
operations, and to regulate all concerns belonging to that department.
But this chief is not considered the head of the state; besides the
great warrior who is elected for his warlike qualifications, there is
another who enjoys a pre-eminence as his hereditary right, and has the
more immediate management of their civil affairs. This chief might with
greater propriety be denominated the sachem; whose assent is necessary
to all conveyances and treaties, to which he affixes the mark of the
tribe or nation.”[150]
2. Missouri tribes. 1. Punkas. This tribe is composed of eight gentes,
as follows:
1. Grizzly Bear. 2. Many People. 3. Elk. 4. Skunk.
5. Buffalo. 6. Snake. 7. Medicine. 8. Ice.[151]
In this tribe, contrary to the general rule, descent is in the male
line, the children belonging to the gens of their father. Intermarriage
in the gens is prohibited. The office of sachem is hereditary in
the gens, the choice being determined by election; but the sons of
a deceased sachem are eligible. It is probable that the change from
the archaic form was recent, from the fact that among the Otoes and
Missouris, two of the eight Missouri tribes, and also among the
Mandans, descent is still in the female line. Property is hereditary in
the gens.
2. Omahas. This tribe is composed of the following twelve gentes:
1. Deer. 2. Black. 3. Bird. 4. Turtle.
5. Buffalo. 6. Bear. 7. Medicine. 8. Kaw.
9. Head. 10. Red. 11. Thunder. 12. Many Seasons.[152]
Descent, inheritance, and the law of marriage are the same as among the
Punkas.
3. Iowas. In like manner the Iowas have eight gentes, as follows:
1. Wolf. 2. Bear. 3. Cow Buffalo. 4. Elk.
5. Eagle. 6. Pigeon. 7. Snake. 8. Owl.[153]
A gens of the Beaver _Pä-kuh′-thä_ once existed among the Iowas and
Otoes, but it is now extinct. Descent, inheritance, and the prohibition
of intermarriage in the gens are the same as among the Punkas.
4. Otoes and Missouris. These tribes have coalesced into one, and have
the eight following gentes:
1. Wolf. 2. Bear. 3. Cow Buffalo. 4. Elk.
5. Eagle. 6. Pigeon. 7. Snake. 8. Owl.[154]
Descent among the Otoes and Missouris is in the female line, the
children belonging to the gens of their mother. The office of sachem,
and property are hereditary in the gens, in which intermarriage is
prohibited.
5. Kaws. The Kaws (Kaw′-ză) have the following fourteen gentes:
1. Deer. 2. Bear. 3. Buffalo. 4. Eagle (white).
5. Eagle (black). 6. Duck. 7. Elk. 8. Raccoon.
9. Prairie Wolf. 10. Turtle. 11. Earth. 12. Deer Tail.
13. Tent. 14. Thunder.[155]
The Kaws are among the wildest of the American aborigines, but are an
intelligent and interesting people. Descent, inheritance and marriage
regulations among them are the same as among the Punkas. It will be
observed that there are two Eagle gentes, and two of the Deer, which
afford a good illustration of the segmentation of a gens; the Eagle
gens having probably divided into two and distinguished themselves by
the names of white and black. The Turtle will be found hereafter as
a further illustration of the same fact. When I visited the Missouri
tribes in 1859 and 1860, I was unable to reach the Osages and Quappas.
The eight tribes thus named speak closely affiliated dialects of the
Dakotian stock language, and the presumption that the Osages and
Quappas are organized in gentes is substantially conclusive. In 1869,
the Kaws, then much reduced, numbered seven hundred, which would give
an average of but fifty persons to a gens. The home country of these
several tribes was along the Missouri and its tributaries from the
mouth of the Big Sioux river to the Mississippi, and down the west bank
of the latter river to the Arkansas.
3. Winnebagoes. When discovered this tribe resided near the lake of
their name in Wisconsin. An offshoot from the Dakotian stem, they were
apparently following the track of the Iroquois eastward to the valley
of the St. Lawrence, when their further progress in that direction was
arrested by the Algonkin tribes between Lakes Huron and Superior. Their
nearest affiliation is with the Missouri tribes. They have eight gentes
as follows:
1. Wolf. 2. Bear. 3. Buffalo. 4. Eagle.
5. Elk. 6. Deer. 7. Snake. 8. Thunder.[156]
Descent, inheritance, and the law of marriage are the same among
them as among the Punkas. It is surprising that so many tribes of
this stock should have changed descent from the female line to the
male, because when first known the idea of property was substantially
undeveloped, or but slightly beyond the germinating stage, and could
hardly, as among the Greeks and Romans, have been the operative cause.
It is probable that it occurred at a recent period under American and
missionary influences. Carver found traces of descent in the female
line in 1787 among the Winnebagoes. “Some nations,” he remarks, “when
the dignity is hereditary, limit the succession to the female line. On
the death of a chief his sisters’ son succeeds him in preference to
his own son; and if he happens to have no sister the nearest female
relation assumes the dignity. This accounts for a woman being at the
head of the Winnebago nation, which, before I was acquainted with their
laws, appeared strange to me.”[157] In 1869, the Winnebagoes numbered
fourteen hundred, which would give an average of one hundred and fifty
persons to the gens.
4. _Upper Missouri Tribes._
1. Mandans. In intelligence and in the arts of life the Mandans were
in advance of all their kindred tribes, for which they were probably
indebted to the Minnitarees. They are divided into seven gentes as
follows:
1. Wolf. 2. Bear. 3. Prairie Chicken. 4. Good Knife.
5. Eagle. 6. Flathead. 7. High Village.[158]
Descent is in the female line, with office and property hereditary in
the gens. Intermarriage in the gens is not permitted. Descent in the
female line among the Mandans would be singular where so many tribes
of the same stock have it in the male, were it not in the archaic form
from which the other tribes had but recently departed. It affords a
strong presumption that it was originally in the female line in all
the Dakotian tribes. This information with respect to the Mandans was
obtained at the old Mandan Village in the Upper Missouri, in 1862, from
Joseph Kip, whose mother was a Mandan woman. He confirmed the fact of
descent by naming his mother’s gens, which was also his own.
2. Minnitarees. This tribe and the Upsarokas (Up-sar′-o-kas) or Crows,
are subdivisions of an original people. They are doubtful members of
this branch of the Ganowánian family: although from the number of words
in their dialects and in those of the Missouri and Dakota tribes which
are common, they have been placed with them linguistically. They have
had an antecedent experience of which but little is known. Minnitarees
carried horticulture, the timber-framed house, and a peculiar religious
system into this area which they taught to the Mandans. There is a
possibility that they are descendants of the Mound-Builders. They have
the seven following gentes:
1. Knife. 2. Water. 3. Lodge.
4. Prairie Chicken. 5. Hill People. 6. Unknown Animal.
7. Bonnet.[159]
Descent is in the female line, intermarriage in the gens is forbidden,
and the office of sachem as well as property is hereditary in the gens.
The Minnitarees and Mandans now live together in the same village. In
personal appearance they are among the finest specimens of the Red Man
now living in any part of North America.
3. Upsarokas or Crows. This tribe has the following gentes:
1. Prairie Dog. 2. Bad Leggins.
3. Skunk. 4. Treacherous Lodges.
5. Lost Lodges. 6. Bad Honors.
7. Butchers. 8. Moving Lodges.
9. Bear’s Paw Mountain. 10. Blackfoot Lodges.
11. Fish Catchers. 12. Antelope.
13. Raven.[160]
Descent, inheritance and the prohibition of intermarriage in the gens,
are the same as among the Minnitarees. Several of the names of the
Crow gentes are unusual, and more suggestive of bands than of gentes.
For a time I was inclined to discredit them. But the existence of the
organization into gentes was clearly established by their rules of
descent, and marital usages, and by their laws of inheritance with
respect to property. My interpreter when among the Crows was Robert
Meldrum, then one of the factors of the American Fur Company, who had
lived with the Crows forty years, and was one of their chiefs. He
had mastered the language so completely that he thought in it. The
following special usages with respect to inheritance were mentioned
by him. If a person to whom any article of property had been presented
died with it in his possession, and the donor was dead, it reverted to
the gens of the latter. Property made or acquired by a wife descended
after her death to her children; while that of her husband after his
decease belonged to his gentile kindred. If a person made a present
to a friend and died, the latter must perform some recognized act of
mourning, such as cutting off the joint of a finger at the funeral, or
surrender the property to the gens of his deceased friend.[161]
The Crows have a custom with respect to marriage, which I have found
in at least forty other Indian tribes, which may be mentioned here,
because some use will be made of it in a subsequent chapter. If a man
marries the eldest daughter in a family he is entitled to all her
sisters as additional wives when they attain maturity. He may waive the
right, but if he insists, his superior claim would be recognized by
her gens. Polygamy is allowed by usage among the American aborigines
generally; but it was never prevalent to any considerable extent from
the inability of persons to support more than one family. Direct
proof of the existence of the custom first mentioned was afforded by
Meldrum’s wife, then at the age of twenty-five. She was captured when a
child in a foray upon the Blackfeet, and became Meldrum’s captive. He
induced his mother-in-law to adopt the child into her gens and family,
which made the captive the younger sister of his then wife, and gave
him the right to take her as another wife when she reached maturity. He
availed himself of this usage of the tribe to make his claim paramount.
This usage has a great antiquity in the human family. It is a survival
of the old custom of _punalua_.
III. _Gulf Tribes._
1. Muscokees or Creeks. The Creek Confederacy consisted of six Tribes;
namely, the Creeks, Hitchetes, Yoochees, Alabamas, Coosatees, and
Natches, all of whom spoke dialects of the same language, with the
exception of the Natches, who were admitted into the confederacy after
their overthrow by the French.
The Creeks are composed of twenty-two gentes as follows:
1. Wolf. 2. Bear. 3. Skunk.
4. Alligator. 5. Deer. 6. Bird.
7. Tiger. 8. Wind. 9. Toad.
10. Mole. 11. Fox. 12. Raccoon.
13. Fish. 14. Corn. 15. Potatoe.
16. Hickory Nut. 17. Salt. 18. Wild Cat.
19. (Sig’n Lost). 20. (Sig’n Lost).[162] 21. (Sig’n Lost).
22. (Sig’n Lost).[163]
The remaining tribes of this confederacy are said to have had the
organization into gentes, as the author was informed by the Rev. S. M.
Loughridge, who was for many years a missionary among the Creeks, and
who furnished the names of the gentes above given. He further stated
that descent among the Creeks was in the female line; that the office
of sachem and the property of deceased persons were hereditary in the
gens, and that intermarriage in the gens was prohibited. At the present
time the Creeks are partially civilized with a changed plan of life.
They have substituted a political in place of the old social system, so
that in a few years all traces of their old gentile institutions will
have disappeared. In 1869 they numbered about fifteen thousand, which
would give an average of five hundred and fifty persons to the gens.
2. Choctas. Among the Choctas the phratric organization appears in
a conspicuous manner, because each phratry is named, and stands out
plainly as a phratry. It doubtless existed in a majority of the tribes
previously named, but the subject has not been specially investigated.
The tribe of the Creeks consists of eight gentes arranged in two
phratries, composed of four gentes each, as among the Iroquois.
I. _Divided People. (First Phratry)._
1. Reed. 2. Law Okla. 3. Lulak. 4. Linoklusha.
II. _Beloved People. (Second Phratry)._
1. Beloved People. 2. Small People.
3. Large People. 4. Cray Fish.[164]
The gentes of the same phratry could not intermarry; but the members
of either of the first gentes could marry into either gens of the
second, and _vice versâ_. It shows that the Choctas, like the Iroquois,
commenced with two gentes, each of which afterwards subdivided into
four, and that the original prohibition of intermarriage in the gens
had followed the subdivisions. Descent among the Choctas was in the
female line. Property and the office of sachem were hereditary in the
gens. In 1869 they numbered some twelve thousand, which would give an
average of fifteen hundred persons to a gens. The foregoing information
was communicated to the author by the late Dr. Cyrus Byington, who
entered the missionary service in this tribe in 1820 while they still
resided in their ancient territory east of the Mississippi, who removed
with them to the Indian Territory, and died in the missionary service
about the year 1868, after forty-five years of missionary labors. A man
of singular excellence and purity of character, he has left behind him
a name and a memory of which humanity may be proud.
A Chocta once expressed to Dr. Byington a wish that he might be made a
citizen of the United States, for the reason that his children would
then inherit his property instead of his gentile kindred under the old
law of the gens. Chocta usages would distribute his property after his
death among his brothers and sisters and the children of his sisters.
He could, however, give his property to his children in his life-time,
in which case they could hold it against the members of his gens. Many
Indian tribes now have considerable property in domestic animals and
in houses and lands owned by individuals, among whom the practice
of giving it to their children in their life-time has become common
to avoid gentile inheritance. As property increased in quantity the
disinheritance of children began to arouse opposition to gentile
inheritance; and in some of the tribes, that of the Choctas among the
number, the old usage was abolished a few years since, and the right to
inherit was vested exclusively in the children of the deceased owner.
It came, however, through the substitution of a political system in
the place of the gentile system, an elective council and magistracy
being substituted in place of the old government of chiefs. Under the
previous usages the wife inherited nothing from her husband, nor he
from her; but the wife’s effects were divided among her children, and
in default of them, among her sisters.
3. Chickasas. In like manner the Chickasas were organized in two
phratries, of which the first contains four, and the second eight
gentes, as follows:
I. _Panther Phratry._
1. Wild Cat. 2. Bird. 3. Fish. 4. Deer.
II. _Spanish Phratry._
1. Raccoon. 2. Spanish. 3. Royal. 4. Hush-ko-ni.
5. Squirrel. 6. Alligator. 7. Wolf. 8. Blackbird.[165]
Descent was in the female line, intermarriage in the gens was
prohibited, and property as well as the office of sachem were
hereditary in the gens. The above particulars were obtained from the
Rev. Charles C. Copeland, an American missionary residing with this
tribe. In 1869 they numbered some five thousand, which would give an
average of about four hundred persons to the gens. A new gens seems to
have been formed after their intercourse with the Spaniards commenced,
or this name, for reasons, may have been substituted in the place of an
original name. One of the phratries is also called the Spanish.
4. Cherokees. This tribe was anciently composed of ten gentes, of which
two, the Acorn, _Ah-ne-dsŭ′-la_, and the Bird, _Ah-ne-dse′-skwä_, are
now extinct. They are the following:
1. Wolf. 2. Red Paint 3. Long Prairie. 4. Deaf. (A bird.)
5. Holly. 6. Deer. 7. Blue. 8. Long Hair.[166]
Descent is in the female line, and intermarriage in the gens
prohibited. In 1869 the Cherokees numbered fourteen thousand, which
would give an average of seventeen hundred and fifty persons to each
gens. This is the largest number, so far as the fact is known, ever
found in a single gens among the American aborigines. The Cherokees
and Ojibwas at the present time exceed all the remaining Indian tribes
within the United States in the number of persons speaking the same
dialect. It may be remarked further, that it is not probable that
there ever was at any time in any part of North America a hundred
thousand Indians who spoke the same dialect. The Aztecs, Tezcucans and
Tlascalans were the only tribes of whom so large a number could, with
any propriety, be claimed; and with respect to them it is difficult to
perceive how the existence of so large a number in either tribe could
be established, at the epoch of the Spanish Conquest, upon trustworthy
evidence. The unusual numbers of the Creeks and Cherokees is due to the
possession of domestic animals and a well-developed field agriculture.
They are now partially civilized, having substituted an elective
constitutional government in the place of the ancient gentes, under the
influence of which the latter are rapidly falling into decadence.
5. Seminoles. This tribe is of Creek descent. They are said to be
organized into gentes, but the particulars have not been obtained.
IV. _Pawnee Tribes._
Whether or not the Pawnees are organized in gentes has not been
ascertained. Rev. Samuel Allis, who had formerly been a missionary
among them, expressed to the author his belief that they were, although
he had not investigated the matter specially. He named the following
gentes of which he believed they were composed:
1. Bear. 2. Beaver. 3. Eagle.
4. Buffalo. 5. Deer. 6. Owl.
I once met a band of Pawnees on the Missouri, but was unable to obtain
an interpreter.
The Arickarees, whose village is near that of the Minnitarees, are the
nearest congeners of the Pawnees, and the same difficulty occurred with
them. These tribes, with the Huecos and some two or three other small
tribes residing on the Canadian river, have always lived west of the
Missouri, and speak an independent stock language. If the Pawnees are
organized in gentes, presumptively the other tribes are the same.
V. _Algonkin Tribes._
At the epoch of their discovery this great stock of the American
aborigines occupied the area from the Rocky Mountains to Hudson’s
Bay, south of the Siskatchewun, and thence eastward to the Atlantic,
including both shores of Lake Superior, except at its head, and both
banks of the St. Lawrence below Lake Champlain. Their area extended
southward along the Atlantic coast to North Carolina, and down the east
bank of the Mississippi in Wisconsin and Illinois to Kentucky. Within
the eastern section of this immense region the Iroquois and their
affiliated tribes were an intrusive people, their only competitor for
supremacy within its boundaries.
Gitchigamian[167] Tribes. 1. Ojibwas. The Ojibwas speak the same
dialect, and are organized in gentes, of which the names of
twenty-three have been obtained without being certain that they include
the whole number. In the Ojibwa dialect the word _totem_, quite as
often pronounced _dodaim_, signifies the symbol or device of a gens;
thus the figure of a wolf was the totem of the Wolf gens. From this Mr.
Schoolcraft used the words “totemic system,” to express the gentile
organization, which would be perfectly acceptable were it not that we
have both in the Latin and the Greek a terminology for every quality
and character of the system which is already historical. It may be
used, however, with advantage. The Ojibwas have the following gentes:
1. Wolf. 2. Bear. 3. Beaver.
4. Turtle (Mud). 5. Turtle (Snapping). 6. Turtle (Little).
7. Reindeer. 8. Snipe. 9. Crane.
10. Pigeon Hawk. 11. Bald Eagle. 12. Loon.
13. Duck. 14. Duck. 15. Snake.
16. Muskrat. 17. Marten. 18. Heron.
19. Bull-head. 20. Carp. 21. Cat Fish
22. Sturgeon. 23. Pike.[168]
Descent is in the male line, the children belonging to their father’s
gens. There are several reasons for the inference that it was
originally in the female line, and that the change was comparatively
recent. In the first place, the Delawares, who are recognized by
all Algonkin tribes as one of the oldest of their lineage, and who
are styled “Grandfathers” by all alike, still have descent in the
female line. Several other Algonkin tribes have the same. Secondly,
evidence still remains that within two or three generations back of the
present, descent was in the female line, with respect to the office of
chief.[169] Thirdly, American and missionary influences have generally
opposed it. A scheme of descent which disinherited the sons seemed
to the early missionaries, trained under very different conceptions,
without justice or reason; and it is not improbable that in a number
of tribes, the Ojibwas included, the change was made under their
teachings. And lastly, since several Algonkin tribes now have descent
in the female line, it leads to the conclusion that it was anciently
universal in the Ganowánian family, it being also the archaic form of
the institution.
Intermarriage in the gens is prohibited, and both property and office
are hereditary in the gens. The children, however, at the present time,
take the most of it to the exclusion of their gentile kindred. The
property and effects of the mother pass to her children, and in default
of them, to her sisters, own and collateral. In like manner the son
may succeed his father in the office of sachem; but where there are
several sons the choice is determined by the elective principle. The
gentiles not only elect, but they also retain the power to depose. At
the present time the Ojibwas number some sixteen thousand, which would
give an average of about seven hundred to each gens.
2. Potawattamies. This tribe has fifteen gentes, as follows:
1. Wolf. 2. Bear. 3. Beaver.
4. Elk. 5. Loon. 6. Eagle.
7. Sturgeon. 8. Carp. 9. Bald Eagle
10. Thunder. 11. Rabbit. 12. Crow.
13. Fox. 14. Turkey. 15. Black Hawk.[170]
Descent, inheritance, and the law of marriage are the same as among the
Ojibwas.
3. Otawas.[171] The Ojibwas, Otawas and Potawattamies were subdivisions
of an original tribe. When first known they were confederated. The
Otawas were undoubtedly organized in gentes, but their names have not
been obtained.
4. Crees. This tribe, when discovered, held the northwest shore of
Lake Superior, and spread from thence to Hudson’s Bay, and westward to
the Red River of the North. At a later day they occupied the region
of the Siskatchewun, and south of it. Like the Dakotas they have
lost the gentile organization which presumptively once existed among
them. Linguistically their nearest affiliation is with the Ojibwas,
whom they closely resemble in manners and customs, and in personal
appearance.
Mississippi Tribes. The western Algonkins, grouped under this name,
occupied the eastern banks of the Mississippi in Wisconsin and
Illinois, and extended southward into Kentucky, and eastward into
Indiana.
1. Miamis. The immediate congeners of the Miamis, namely, the
Weas, Piankeshaws, Peorias, and Kaskaskias, known at an early day,
collectively, as the Illinois, are now few in numbers, and have
abandoned their ancient usages for a settled agricultural life. Whether
or not they were formerly organized in gentes has not been ascertained,
but it is probable that they were. The Miamis have the following ten
gentes:
1. Wolf. 2. Loon. 3. Eagle. 4. Buzzard.
5. Panther. 6. Turkey. 7. Raccoon. 8. Snow.
9. Sun. 10. Water.[172]
Under their changed condition and declining numbers the gentile
organization is rapidly disappearing. When its decline commenced
descent was in the male line, intermarriage in the gens was forbidden,
and the office of sachem together with property were hereditary in the
gens.
2. Shawnees. This remarkable and highly advanced tribe, one of the
highest representatives of the Algonkin stock, still retain their
gentes, although they have substituted in place of the old gentile
system a civil organization with a first and second head-chief and a
council, each elected annually by popular suffrage. They have thirteen
gentes, which they still maintain for social and genealogical purposes,
as follows:
1. Wolf. 2. Loon. 3. Bear. 4. Buzzard.
5. Panther. 6. Owl. 7. Turkey. 8. Deer.
9. Raccoon. 10. Turtle. 11. Snake. 12. Horse.
13. Rabbit.[173]
Descent, inheritance, and the rule with respect to marrying out of the
gens are the same as among the Miamis. In 1869 the Shawnees numbered
but seven hundred, which would give an average of about fifty persons
to the gens. They once numbered three or four thousand persons, which
was above the average among the American Indian tribes.
The Shawnees had a practice, common also to the Miamis and Sauks
and Foxes, of naming children into the gens of the father or of the
mother or any other gens, under certain restrictions, which deserves
a moment’s notice. It has been shown that among the Iroquois each
gens had its own special names for persons which no other gens had a
right to use.[174] This usage was probably general. Among the Shawnees
these names carried with them the rights of the gens to which they
belonged, so that the name determined the gens of the person. As the
sachem must, in all cases, belong to the gens over which he is invested
with authority, it is not unlikely that the change of descent from
the female line to the male commenced in this practice; in the first
place to enable a son to succeed his father, and in the second to
enable children to inherit property from their father. If a son when
christened received a name belonging to the gens of his father it would
place him in his father’s gens and in the line of succession, but
subject to the elective principle. The father, however, had no control
over the question. It was left by the gens to certain persons, most of
them matrons, who were to be consulted when children were to be named,
with power to determine the name to be given. By some arrangement
between the Shawnee gentes these persons had this power, and the name
when conferred in the prescribed manner, carried the person into the
gens to which the name belonged.
There are traces of the archaic rule of descent among the Shawnees, of
which the following illustration may be given as it was mentioned to
the author. _Lä-ho′-weh_, a sachem of the Wolf gens, when about to die,
expressed a desire that a son of one of his sisters might succeed him
in the place of his own son. But his nephew (_Kos-kwa′-the_) was of the
Fish and his son of the Rabbit gens, so that neither could succeed him
without first being transferred, by a change of name, to the Wolf gens,
in which the office was hereditary. His wish was respected. After his
death the name of his nephew was changed to _Tep-a-tä-go-the′_, one of
the Wolf names, and he was elected to the office. Such laxity indicates
a decadence of the gentile organization; but it tends to show that at
no remote period descent among the Shawnees was in the female line.
3. Sauks and Foxes. These tribes are consolidated into one, and have
the following gentes:
1. Wolf. 2. Bear. 3. Deer. 4. Elk.
5. Hawk. 6. Eagle. 7. Fish. 8. Buffalo.
9. Thunder. 10. Bone. 11. Fox. 12. Sea.
13. Sturgeon. 14. Big Tree.[175]
Descent, inheritance, and the rule requiring marriage out of the gens,
are the same as among the Miamis. In 1869 they numbered but seven
hundred, which would give an average of fifty persons to the gens. The
number of gentes still preserved affords some evidence that they were
several times more numerous within the previous two centuries.
4. Menominees and Kikapoos. These tribes, which are independent of
each other, are organized in gentes, but their names have not been
procured. With respect to the Menominees it may be inferred that, until
a recent period, descent was in the female line, from the following
statement made to the author, in 1859, by Antoine Gookie, a member of
this tribe. In answer to a question concerning the rule of inheritance,
he replied: “If I should die, my brothers and maternal uncles would rob
my wife and children of my property. We now expect that our children
will inherit our effects, but there is no certainty of it. The old law
gives my property to my nearest kindred who are not my children, but my
brothers and sisters, and maternal uncles.” It shows that property was
hereditary in the gens, but restricted to the agnatic kindred in the
female line.
Rocky Mountain Tribes. 1. Blood Blackfeet. This tribe is composed of
the five following gentes:
1. Blood. 2. Fish Eaters. 3. Skunk.
4. Extinct Animal. 5. Elk.[176]
Descent is in the male line, but intermarriage in the gens is not
allowed.
2. Piegan Blackfeet. This tribe has the eight following gentes:
1. Blood. 2. Skunk. 3. Web Fat.
4. Inside Fat. 5. Conjurers. 6. Never Laugh.
7. Starving. 8. Half Dead Meat.[177]
Descent is in the male line, and intermarriage in the gens is
prohibited. Several of the names above given are more appropriate
to bands than to gentes; but as the information was obtained from
the Blackfeet direct, through competent interpreters, (Mr. and Mrs.
Alexander Culbertson, the latter a Blackfeet woman) I believe it
reliable. It is possible that nicknames for gentes in some cases may
have superseded the original names.
_Atlantic Tribes._
1. Delawares. As elsewhere stated the Delawares are, in the duration
of their separate existence, one of the oldest of the Algonkin tribes.
Their home country, when discovered, was the region around and north of
Delaware Bay. They are comprised in three gentes, as follows:
I. Wolf. Took′-seat. Round Paw.
II. Turtle. Poke-koo-un′-go. Crawling.
III. Turkey. Pul-la′-ook. Non-chewing.
These subdivisions are in the nature of phratries, because each is
composed of twelve sub-gentes, each having some of the attributes
of a gens.[178] The names are personal, and mostly, if not in every
case, those of females. As this feature was unusual I worked it out
as minutely as possible at the Delaware reservation in Kansas, in
1860, with the aid of William Adams, an educated Delaware. It proved
impossible to find the origin of these subdivisions, but they seemed to
be the several eponymous ancestors from whom the members of the gentes
respectively derived their descent. It shows also the natural growth of
the phratries from the gentes.
Descent among the Delawares is in the female line, which renders
probable its ancient universality in this form in the Algonkin tribes.
The office of sachem was hereditary in the gens, but elective among its
members, who had the power both to elect and depose. Property also was
hereditary in the gens. Originally the members of the three original
gentes could not intermarry in their own gens; but in recent years the
prohibition has been confined to the sub-gentes. Those of the same
name in the Wolf gens, now partially become a phratry, for example,
cannot intermarry, but those of different names marry. The practice
of naming children into the gens of their father also prevails among
the Delawares, and has introduced the same confusion of descents found
among the Shawnees and Miamis. American civilization and intercourse
necessarily administered a shock to Indian institutions under which the
ethnic life of the people is gradually breaking down.
Examples of succession in office afford the most satisfactory
illustrations of the aboriginal law of descent. A Delaware woman, after
stating to the author that she, with her children, belonged to the Wolf
gens, and her husband to the Turtle, remarked that when Captain Ketchum
(Tä-whe′-lä-na), late head chief or sachem of the Turtle gens, died, he
was succeeded by his nephew, John Conner (Tä-tä-ne′-shă), a son of one
of the sisters of the deceased sachem, who was also of the Turtle gens.
The decedent left a son, but he was of another gens and consequently
incapable of succeeding. With the Delawares, as with the Iroquois, the
office passed from brother to brother, or from uncle to nephew, because
descent was in the female line.
2. Munsees. The Munsees are an offshoot from the Delawares, and have
the same gentes, the Wolf, the Turtle and the Turkey. Descent is in the
female line, intermarriage in the gens is not permitted, and the office
of sachem, as well as property, are hereditary in the gens.
3. Mohegans. All of the New England Indians, south of the river
Kennebeck, of whom the Mohegans formed a part, were closely affiliated
in language, and could understand each other’s dialects. Since the
Mohegans are organized in gentes, there is a presumption that the
Pequots, Narragansetts, and other minor bands were not only similarly
organized, but had the same gentes. The Mohegans have the same three
with the Delawares, the Wolf, the Turtle and the Turkey, each of
which is composed of a number of gentes. It proves their immediate
connection with the Delawares and Munsees by descent, and also reveals,
as elsewhere stated, the process of subdivision by which an original
gens breaks up into several, which remain united in a phratry. In
this case also it may be seen how the phratry arises naturally under
gentile institutions. It is rare among the American aborigines to
find preserved the evidence of the segmentation of original gentes as
clearly as in the present case.
The Mohegan phratries stand out more conspicuously than those of any
other tribe of the American aborigines, because they cover the gentes
of each, and the phratries must be stated to explain the classification
of the gentes; but we know less about them than of those of the
Iroquois. They are the following:
I. _Wolf Phratry. Took-se-tuk′._
1. Wolf. 2. Bear. 3. Dog. 4. Opossum.
II. _Turtle Phratry. Tone-bä′-o._
1. Little Turtle. 2. Mud Turtle. 3. Great Turtle.
4. Yellow Eel.
III. _Turkey Phratry._
1. Turkey 2. Crane. 3. Chicken.[179]
Descent is in the female line, intermarriage in the gens is forbidden,
and the office of sachem is hereditary in the gens, the office passing
either from brother to brother, or from uncle to nephew. Among the
Pequots and Narragansetts descent was in the female line, as I learned
from a Narragansett woman whom I met in Kansas.
4. Abenakis. The name of this tribe, Wä-be-nă′-kee, signifies “Rising
Sun People.”[180] They affiliate more closely with the Micmacs than
with the New England Indians south of the Kennebeck. They have fourteen
gentes, as follows:
1. Wolf. 2. Wild Cat. (Black.) 3. Bear.
4. Snake. 5. Spotted Animal. 6. Beaver.
7. Cariboo. 8. Sturgeon. 9. Muskrat
10. Pigeon Hawk. 11. Squirrel. 12. Spotted Frog.
13. Crane. 14. Porcupine.[181]
Descent is now in the male line, intermarriage in the gens was
anciently prohibited, but the prohibition has now lost most of its
force. The office of sachem was hereditary in the gens. It will be
noticed that several of the above gentes are the same as among the
Ojibwas.
VI. _Athapasco-Apache Tribes._
Whether or not the Athapascans of Hudson’s Bay Territory, and the
Apaches of New Mexico, who are subdivisions of an original stock, are
organized in gentes has not been definitely ascertained. When in the
former territory, in 1861, I made an effort to determine the question
among the Hare and Red Knife Athapascans, but was unsuccessful for want
of competent interpreters; and yet it seems probable that if the system
existed, traces of it would have been discovered even with imperfect
means of inquiry. The late Robert Kennicott made a similar attempt
for the author among the A-chä′-o-ten-ne, or Slave Lake Athapascans,
with no better success. He found special regulations with respect to
marriage and the descent of the office of sachem, which seemed to
indicate the presence of gentes, but he could not obtain satisfactory
information. The Kutchin (Louchoux) of the Yukon river region are
Athapascans. In a letter to the author by the late George Gibbs, he
remarks: “In a letter which I have from a gentleman at Fort Simpson,
Makenzie river, it is mentioned that among the Louchoux or Kutchin
there are three grades or classes of society—undoubtedly a mistake for
totem, though the totems probably differ in rank, as he goes on to
say—that a man does not marry into his own class, but takes a wife from
some other; and that a chief from the highest may marry with a woman of
the lowest without loss of caste. The children belong to the grade of
the mother; and the members of the same grade in the different tribes
do not war with each other.”
Among the Kolushes of the Northwest Coast, who affiliate linguistically
though not closely with the Athapascans, the organization into gentes
exists. Mr. Gallatin remarks that they are “like our own Indians,
divided into tribes or clans; a distinction of which, according to
Mr. Hale, there is no trace among the Indians of Oregon. The names of
the tribes [gentes] are those of animals, namely: Bear, Eagle, Crow,
Porpoise and Wolf.... The right of succession is in the female line,
from uncle to nephew, the principal chief excepted, who is generally
the most powerful of the family.”[182]
VII. _Indian Tribes of the Northwest Coast._
In some of these tribes, beside the Kolushes, the gentile organization
prevails. “Before leaving Puget’s Sound,” observes Mr. Gibbs, in a
letter to the author, “I was fortunate enough to meet representatives
of three principal families of what we call the Northern Indians, the
inhabitants of the Northwest Coast, extending from the Upper end of
Vancouver’s Island into the Russian Possessions, and the confines of
the Esquimaux. From them I ascertained positively that the totemic
system exists at least among these three. The families I speak of are,
beginning at the northwest, Tlinkitt, commonly called the Stikeens,
after one of their bands; the Tlaidas; and Chimsyans, called by
Gallatin, Weas. There are four totems common to these, the Whale, the
Wolf, the Eagle, and the Crow. Neither of these can marry into the same
totem, although in a different nation or family. What is remarkable
is that these nations constitute entirely different families. I mean
by this that their languages are essentially different, having no
perceptible analogy.” Mr. Dall, in his work on Alaska, written still
later, remarks that “the Tlinkets are divided into four totems: the
Raven (Yehl), the Wolf (Kanu′kh), the Whale, and the Eagle (Chethl)....
Opposite totems only can marry, and the child usually takes the
mother’s totem.”[183]
Mr. Hubert H. Bancroft presents their organization still more fully,
showing two phratries, and the gentes belonging to each. He remarks of
the Thlinkeets that the “nation is separated into two great divisions
or clans, one of which is called the Wolf and the other the Raven....
The Raven trunk is again divided into sub-clans, called the Frog, the
Goose, the Sea-Lion, the Owl, and the Salmon. The Wolf family comprises
the Bear, Eagle, Dolphin, Shark, and Alca.... Tribes of the same clan
may not war on each other, but at the same time members of the same
clan may not marry with each other. Thus, the young Wolf warrior must
seek his mate among the Ravens.”[184]
The Eskimos do not belong to the Ganowánian family. Their occupation of
the American continent in comparison with that of the latter family was
recent or modern. They are also without gentes.
VIII. _Salish, Sahaptin and Kootenay Tribes._
The tribes of the Valley of the Columbia, of whom those above named
represent the principal stocks, are without the gentile organization.
Our distinguished philologists, Horatio Hale and the late George
Gibbs, both of whom devoted special attention to the subject, failed
to discover any traces of the system among them. There are strong
reasons for believing that this remarkable area was the nursery land
of the Ganowánian family, from which, as the initial point of their
migrations, they spread abroad over both divisions of the continent.
It seems probable, therefore, that their ancestors possessed the
organization into gentes, and that it fell into decay and finally
disappeared.
IX. _Shoshonee Tribes._
The Comanches of Texas, together with the Ute tribes, the Bonnaks, the
Shoshonees, and some other tribes, belong to this stock. Mathew Walker,
a Wyandote half-blood, informed the author, in 1859, that he had lived
among the Comanches, and that they had the following gentes:
1. Wolf. 2. Bear. 3. Elk.
4. Deer. 5. Gopher. 6. Antelope.
If the Comanches are organized in gentes, there is a presumption that
the other tribes of this stock are the same.
This completes our review of the social system of the Indian tribes of
North America, north of New Mexico. The greater portion of the tribes
named were in the Lower Status of barbarism at the epoch of European
discovery, and the remainder in the Upper Status of savagery. From the
wide and nearly universal prevalence of the organization into gentes,
its ancient universality among them with descent in the female line
may with reason be assumed. Their system was purely social, having
the gens as its unit, and the phratry, tribe and confederacy as the
remaining members of the organic series. These four successive stages
of integration and re-integration express the whole of their experience
in the growth of the idea of government. Since the principal Aryan
and Semitic tribes had the same organic series when they emerged from
barbarism, the system was substantially universal in ancient society,
and inferentially had a common origin. The punaluan group, hereafter
to be described more fully in connection with the growth of the idea
of the family, evidently gave birth to the gentes, so that the Aryan,
Semitic, Uralian, Turanian and Ganowánian families of mankind point
with a distinctiveness seemingly unmistakable to a common punaluan
stock, with the organization into gentes engrafted upon it, from which
each and all were derived, and finally differentiated into families.
This conclusion, I believe, will ultimately enforce its own acceptance,
when future investigation has developed and verified the facts on a
minuter scale. Such a great organic series, able to hold mankind in
society through the latter part of the period of savagery, through the
entire period of barbarism, and into the early part of the period of
civilization, does not arise by accident, but had a natural development
from pre-existing elements. Rationally and rigorously interpreted, it
seems probable that it can be made demonstrative of the unity of origin
of all the families of mankind who possessed the organization into
gentes.
X. _Village Indians._
1. Moqui Pueblo Indians. The Moqui tribes are still in undisturbed
possession of their ancient communal houses, seven in number, near
the Little Colorado in Arizona, once a part of New Mexico. They are
living under their ancient institutions, and undoubtedly at the present
moment fairly represent the type of Village Indian life which prevailed
from Zuñi to Cuzco at the epoch of Discovery. Zuñi, Acoma, Taos, and
several other New Mexican pueblos are the same structures which were
found there by Coronado in 1540-1542. Notwithstanding their apparent
accessibility we know in reality but little concerning their mode of
life or their domestic institutions. No systematic investigation has
ever been made. What little information has found its way into print is
general and accidental.
The Moquis are organized in gentes, of which they have nine, as follows:
1. Deer. 2. Sand. 3. Rain.
4. Bear. 5. Hare. 6. Prairie Wolf.
7. Rattlesnake. 8. Tobacco Plant. 9. Reed Grass.
Dr. Ten Broeck, Assistant Surgeon, U. S. A., furnished to Mr.
Schoolcraft the Moqui legend of their origin which he obtained at
one of their villages. They said that “many years ago their Great
Mother[185] brought from her home in the West nine races of men in the
following form. First, the Deer race; second, the Sand race; third,
the Water [Rain] race; fourth, the Bear race; fifth, the Hare race;
sixth, the Prairie Wolf race; seventh, the Rattlesnake race; eighth,
the Tobacco Plant race; and ninth, the Reed Grass race. Having planted
them on the spot where their villages now stand, she transformed them
into men who built up the present pueblos; and the distinction of race
is still kept up. One told me that he was of the Sand race, another,
the Deer, etc. They are firm believers in metempsychosis, and say that
when they die they will resolve into their original forms, and become
bears, deers, etc., again.... The government is hereditary, but does
not necessarily descend to the son of the incumbent; for if they prefer
any other blood relative, he is chosen.”[186] Having passed, in this
case, from the Lower into the Middle Status of barbarism, and found the
organization into gentes in full development, its adaptation to their
changed condition is demonstrated. Its existence among the Village
Indians in general is rendered probable; but from this point forward
in the remainder of North, and in the whole of South America, we are
left without definite information except with respect to the Lagunas.
It shows how incompletely the work has been done in American Ethnology,
that the unit of their social system has been but partially discovered,
and its significance not understood. Still, there are traces of it in
the early Spanish authors, and direct knowledge of it in a few later
writers, which when brought together will leave but little doubt
of the ancient universal prevalence of the gentile organizations
throughout the Indian family.
There are current traditions in many gentes, like that of the Moquis,
of the transformation of their first progenitors from the animal, or
inanimate object, which became the symbol of the gens, into men and
women. Thus, the Crane gens of the Ojibwas have a legend that a pair
of cranes flew over the wide area from the Gulf to the Great Lakes
and from the prairies of the Mississippi to the Atlantic in quest of
a place where subsistence was most abundant, and finally selected
the Rapids on the outlet of Lake Superior, since celebrated for its
fisheries. Having alighted on the bank of the river and folded their
wings the Great Spirit immediately changed them into a man and woman,
who became the progenitors of the Crane gens of the Ojibwas. There are
a number of gentes in the different tribes who abstain from eating the
animal whose name they bear; but this is far from universal.
2. Lagunas. The Laguna Pueblo Indians are organized in gentes, with
descent in the female line, as appears from an address of Rev. Samuel
Gorman before the Historical Society of New Mexico in 1860. “Each town
is classed into tribes or families, and each of these groups is named
after some animal, bird, herb, timber, planet, or one of the four
elements. In the pueblo of Laguna, which is one of above one thousand
inhabitants, there are seventeen of these tribes; some are called bear,
some deer, some rattlesnake, some corn, some wolf, some water, etc.,
etc. The children are of the same tribe as their mother. And, according
to ancient custom, two persons of the same tribe are forbidden to
marry; but, recently, this custom begins to be less rigorously observed
than anciently.”
“Their land is held in common, as the property of the community, but
after a person cultivates a lot he has a personal claim to it, which
he can sell to any one of the same community; or else when he dies it
belongs to his widow or daughters; or, if he were a single man, it
remains in his father’s family.”[187] That wife or daughter inherit
from the father is doubtful.
3. Aztecs, Tezcucans and Tlacopans. The question of the organization of
these, and the remaining Nahuatlac tribes of Mexico, in gentes will be
considered in the next ensuing chapter.
4. Mayas of Yucatan. Herrera makes frequent reference to the “kindred,”
and in such a manner with regard to the tribes in Mexico, Central
and South America as to imply the existence of a body of persons
organized on the basis of consanguinity much more numerous than would
be found apart from gentes. Thus: “He that killed a free man was to
make satisfaction to the children and kindred.”[188] It was spoken
of the aborigines of Nicaragua, and had it been of the Iroquois,
among whom the usage was the same, the term _kindred_ would have been
equivalent to _gens_. And again, speaking generally of the Maya Indians
of Yucatan, he remarks that “when any satisfaction was to be made
for damages, if he who was adjudged to pay was like to be reduced to
poverty, the kindred contributed.”[189] In this another gentile usage
may be recognized. Again, speaking of the Aztecs; “if they were guilty,
no favor or kindred could save them from death.”[190] One more citation
to the same effect may be made, applied to the Florida Indians who
were organized in gentes. He observes “that they were extravagantly
fond of their children, and cherished them, the parents and kindred
lamenting such as died a whole year.”[191] The early observers noticed,
as a peculiarity of Indian society, that large numbers of persons
were bound together by the bond of kin, and therefore the group came
to be mentioned as “the kindred.” But they did not carry the scrutiny
far enough to discover, what was probably the truth, that the kindred
formed a gens, and, as such, the unit of their social system.
Herrera remarks further of the Mayas, that “they were wont to observe
their pedigrees very much, and therefore thought themselves all
related, and were helpful to one another.... They did not marry
mothers, or sisters-in-law, _nor any that bore the same name_ as their
father, which was looked upon as unlawful.”[192] The pedigree of an
Indian under their system of consanguinity could have no significance
apart from a gens; but leaving this out of view, there was no possible
way, under Indian institutions, by which a father and his children
could bear the same _name_ except through a gens, which conferred
a common gentile name upon all its members. It would also require
descent in the male line to bring father and children into the same
gens. The statement shows, moreover, that intermarriage in the gens
among the Mayas was prohibited. Assuming the correctness of Herrera’s
words, it is proof conclusive of the existence of gentes among the
Mayas, with descent in the male line. Tylor, in his valuable work on
the _Early History of Mankind_, which is a repository of widely-drawn
and well-digested ethnological information, cites the same fact from
another source, with the following remarks: “The analogy of the North
American Indian custom is therefore with that of the Australian in
making clanship on the female side a bar to marriage, but if we go down
further south into Central America, the reverse custom, as in China,
makes its appearance. Diego de Landa says of the people of Yucatan,
that no one took a wife of his name, on the father’s side, for this was
a very vile thing among them; but they might marry cousins german on
the mother’s side.”[193]
XI. _South American Indian Tribes._
Traces of the gens have been found in all parts of South America, as
well as the actual presence of the Ganowánian system of consanguinity,
but the subject has not been fully investigated. Speaking of the
numerous tribes of the Andes brought by the Incas under a species of
confederation, Herrera observes that “this variety of tongues proceeded
from the nations being divided into races, tribes, or clans.”[194]
Here in the clans the existence of gentes is recognized. Mr. Tylor,
discussing the rules with respect to marriage and descent, remarks
that “further south, below the Isthmus, both the clanship and the
prohibition re-appear on the female side. Bernau says that among the
Arrawaks of British Guiana, ‘Caste is derived from the mother, and
children are allowed to marry into their father’s family, but not
into that of their mother.’ Lastly, Father Martin Dobrizhoffer says
that the Guaranis avoid, as highly criminal, marriage with the most
distant relations; and speaking of the Abipones, he makes the following
statement: ... ‘The Abipones, instructed by nature and the example of
their ancestors, abhor the very thought of marrying any one related to
them by the most distant tie of relationship.’”[195] These references
to the social system of the aborigines are vague; but in the light of
the facts already presented the existence of gentes with descent in the
female line, and with intermarriage in the gens prohibited, renders
them intelligible. Brett remarks of the Indian tribes in Guiana that
they “are divided into families, each of which has a distinct name, as
the Siwidi, Karuafudi, Onisidi, etc. Unlike our families, these all
descend in the female line, and no individual of either sex is allowed
to marry another of the same family name. Thus a woman of the Siwidi
family bears the same name as her mother, but neither her father nor
her husband can be of that family. Her children and the children of her
daughters will also be called Siwidi, but both her sons and daughters
are prohibited from an alliance with any individual bearing the same
name; though they may marry into the family of their father, if they
choose. These customs are strictly observed, and any breach of them
would be considered as wicked.”[196] In the _family_ of this writer
may at once be recognized the gens in its archaic form. All the South
American tribes above named, with the exception of the Andean, were
when discovered either in the Lower Status of barbarism, or in the
Status of savagery. Many of the Peruvian tribes concentrated under the
government established by the Inca Village Indians were in the Lower
Status of barbarism, if an opinion may be formed from the imperfect
description of their domestic institutions found in Garcillasso de la
Vega.
To the Village Indians of North and South America, whose indigenous
culture had advanced them far into, and near the end of, the Middle
Period of barbarism, our attention naturally turns for the transitional
history of the gentes. The archaic constitution of the gens has been
shown; its latest phases remain to be presented in the gentes of the
Greeks and Romans; but the intermediate changes, both of descent and
inheritance, which occurred in the Middle Period, are essential to a
complete history of the gentile organization. Our information is quite
ample with respect to the earlier and later condition of this great
institution, but defective with respect to the transitional stage.
Where the gentes are found in any tribe of mankind in their latest
form, their remote ancestors must have possessed them in the archaic
form; but historical criticism demands affirmative proofs rather than
deductions. These proofs once existed among the Village Indians. We
are now well assured that their system of government was social and
not political. The upper members of the series, namely, the tribe and
the confederacy, meet us at many points; with positive evidence of the
gens, the unit of the system, in a number of the tribes of Village
Indians. But we are not able to place our hands upon the gentes among
the Village Indians in general with the same precise information
afforded by the tribes in the Lower Status of barbarism. The golden
opportunity was presented to the Spanish conquerers and colonists, and
lost, from apparent inability to understand a condition of society from
which civilized man had so far departed in his onward progress. Without
a knowledge of the unit of their social system, which impressed its
character upon the whole organism of society, the Spanish histories
fail entirely in the portrayal of their governmental institutions.
A glance at the remains of ancient architecture in Central America
and Peru sufficiently proves that the Middle Period of barbarism was
one of great progress in human development, of growing knowledge, and
of expanding intelligence. It was followed by a still more remarkable
period in the Eastern hemisphere after the invention of the process of
making iron had given that final great impulse to human progress which
was to bear a portion of mankind into civilization. Our appreciation
of the grandeur of man’s career in the Later Period of barbarism, when
inventions and discoveries multiplied with such rapidity, would be
intensified by an accurate knowledge of the condition of society in
the Middle Period, so remarkably exemplified by the Village Indians.
By a great effort, attended with patient labor, it may yet be possible
to recover a large portion at least of the treasures of knowledge
which have been allowed to disappear. Upon our present information
the conclusion is warrantable that the American Indian tribes were
universally organized in gentes at the epoch of European discovery, the
few exceptions found not being sufficient to disturb the general rule.