The Spartans of the West

Sparťané západu

GoogleTranslate Open by Google Translator

Sem klikněte, pokud chcete obsah přeložit.
Překlad se vám otevře v nové záložce.
Upozorňujeme, že možnosti automatického překladače jsou omezené!

⁴¹⁾

II. The Spartans of the West

No world-movement ever yet grew as a mere doctrine. It must have some noble example; a living, appealing personality; some man to whom we can point and say, “This is what we mean.” All the great faiths of the world have had such a man, and for lack of one, many great and flawless truths have passed into the lumber-room.

To exemplify my outdoor movement, I must have a man who was of this country and climate; who was physically beautiful, clean, unsordid, high-minded, heroic, picturesque, and a master of Woodcraft, besides which, he must be already well-known. I would gladly have taken a man of our own race, but I could find none. Rollo the Sea-King, King Arthur, Leif Ericsson, Robin Hood, Leatherstocking, all suggested themselves, but none seemed to meet the requirements, and most were mere shadows, utterly unknown. Surely, all this pointed the same way. There was but one figure that seemed to answer all these needs: that was the Ideal Indian of Fenimore Cooper and Longfellow.

For this reason, I took the Native American, and called my organization “Woodcraft Indians.”^[1] And yet, I am told that the prejudice against the word “Indian” has hurt the movement immensely. If so, it is because we do not know what the Indian was, and this I shall make it my ⁴²⁾sad and hopeful task, at this late day, to have our people realize.

We know more about the Redman to-day than ever we did. Indeed, we knew almost nothing of him twenty years ago. We had two pictures offered us; one, the ideal savage of Longfellow, the primitive man, so noble in nature that he was incapable of anything small or mean or wicked; the other was presented by those who coveted his possessions, and, to justify their robberies, they sketched the Indian as a dirty, filthy, squalid wretch, a demon of cruelty and cowardice, incapable of a human emotion, and never good till dead.

Which of these is the true picture? Let us calmly examine the pages of history, taking the words and records of Redmen and white, friends and foes of the Indian, and be prepared to render a verdict, in absolute accordance with that evidence, no matter where it leads us.

Let us begin by admitting that it is fair to take the best examples of the red race, to represent Indian philosophy and goodness; even as we ourselves would prefer being represented by Emerson, Tolstoi, Lincoln, Spencer, Peabody, General Booth, or Whitman, rather than by the border ruffians and cut-throat outlaws who were the principal exemplars of our ways among the Indians.

It is freely admitted that in all tribes, at all times, there were reprobates and scoundrels, a reproach to the people; just as amongst ourselves we have outcasts, tramps, drunkards, and criminals. But these were despised by their own people, and barely tolerated.

We must in fairness judge the Indian and his way of life and thought by the exemplifications of his best types: Hiawatha, Wabasha I, Tshut-che-nau, Ma-to-to-pa, Tecumseh, Kanakuk, Chief Joseph, Dull Knife, Washakie, ⁴³⁾and many that loved their own people and were in no wise touched by the doctrines of the whites.

If from these men we gather their beliefs, their teachings, and the common thoughts that guided their lives, we may fairly assume that we have outlined the creed of the best Indians.

The Indian's Creed

These are the main thoughts in the Redman's creed:

(1) While he believed in many gods, he accepted the idea of one Supreme Spirit, who was everywhere all the time; whose help was needed continually, and might be secured by prayer and sacrifice.

(2) He believed in the immortality of the soul, and that its future condition was to be determined by its behavior in this life.

(3) He reverenced his body as the sacred temple of his spirit; and believed it his duty in all ways to perfect his body, that his earthly record might be the better.

We cannot, short of ancient Greece, find his equal in physical perfection.

(4) He believed in the subjection of the body by fasting, whenever it seemed necessary for the absolute domination of the spirit; as when, in some great crisis, that spirit felt the need for better insight.

(5) He believed in reverence for his parents, and in old age supported them, even as he expected his children to support him.

(6) He believed in the sacredness of property. Theft among Indians was unknown.

(7) He believed that the murderer must expiate his crime with his life; that the nearest kin was the proper avenger, but that for accidental manslaughter compensation might be made in goods.⁴⁴⁾

(8) He believed in cleanliness of body.

(9) He believed in purity of morals.

(10) He believed in speaking the truth, and nothing but the truth. His promise was absolutely binding. He hated and despised a liar, and held all falsehood to be an abomination.

(11) He believed in beautifying all things in his life.

He had a song for every occasion — a beautiful prayer for every stress. His garments were made beautiful with painted patterns, feathers, and quill-work. He had dances for every fireside. He has led the world in the making of beautiful baskets, blankets, and canoes; while the decorations he put on lodges, weapons, clothes, dishes, and dwellings, beds, cradles, or grave-boards, were among the countless evidences of his pleasure in the beautiful, as he understood it.

(12) He believed in the simple life.

He held, first, that land belonged to the tribe, not to the individual; next, that the accumulation of property was the beginning of greed that grew into monstrous crime.

(13) He believed in peace and the sacred obligations of hospitality.

(14) He believed that the noblest of virtues was courage, and that, above all other qualities, he worshipped and prayed for. So also he believed that the most shameful of crimes was being afraid.

(15) He believed that he should so live his life that the fear of death could never enter into his heart; that when the last call came he should put on the paint and honors of a hero going home, then sing his death song and meet the end in triumph.

If we measure this great pagan by our Ten Commandments, we shall find that he accepted and obeyed them, all ⁴⁵⁾but the first and third: that is, he had many lesser gods besides the one Great Spirit, and he knew not the Sabbath Day of rest. His religious faith, therefore, was much the same as that of the mighty Greeks, before whom all the world of learning bows; not unlike that of many Christians and several stages higher than that of the Huxley and other modern schools of materialism.

The Dark Side

These are the chief charges against the Indian:

First: He was cruel to his enemies, even torturing them at the stake in extreme cases. He knew nothing about forgiving and loving them.

In the main, this is true. But how much less cruel he was than the leaders of the Christian Church in the Middle Ages! What Indian massacre will compare in horror with that of St. Bartholomew's Eve or the Massacre of Glencoe? Read the records of the Inquisition, or the Queen Mary persecutions in England, or the later James II. abominations for further light!

There was no torture used by the Indians that was not also used by the Spainards. Every frontiersman of the Indian days knows that in every outbreak the whites were the aggressors; and that in every evil count – robbery, torture and massacre – they did exactly as the Indians did. “The ferocity of the Redman,” says Bourke, “has been more than equaled by the ferocity of the Christian Caucasian.” (“On the Border with Crook,” p. 114.)

There are good grounds for stating that the Indians were cruel to their enemies, but it is surprising to see how little of this cruelty there was in primitive days. In most cases the enemy was killed in battle or adopted into the tribe; very, ⁴⁶⁾very rarely was he tortured. Captain Clark says of the Cheyennes:

“There is no good evidence that captives have been burned at the stake, flayed alive, or any other excruciating torture inflicted on persons captured by these fierce, war-loving and enterprising barbarians.” (“Sign Language,” p. 106.)

But we know now that the whites did use diabolical tortures in their dealings with the Indian, and deliberately and persistently misrepresented him in order to justify their own atrocities.

The whites, however, had print to state their case, while the Indians had none to tell their story or defend them. Furthermore, it is notorious that all massacres of Indians by the whites were accomplished by treachery in times of peace, while all Indian massacres of whites were in time of war, to resist invasion. At present, I know of no exception to this rule.^[2]

In almost every case, it must be said that the army officers and men were personally guiltless. They were impressed with the heroism of the Indians, admired them for their bravery, were horrified by the wickedness of the orders sent them, and did all they could to mitigate the atrocious policies of the shameless Indian Bureau. But there were instances in which the army officers showed themselves the willing tools of the politicians. Among the notorious cases was the cold-blooded massacre, in 1864, by Col. J. H. Chivington, of several hundred Cheyennes. Men, women, and children had surrendered and disarmed, and were, indeed, at the time, under military protection. The fiendish cruelty and cowardice of that one attack on these defenseless beings was enough to more than justify ⁴⁷⁾everything the Cheyennes have ever done to the race of the assassins. (See “Century of Dishonor,” pp. 341–358.)

Still worse was the Baker massacre of Blackfeet, on January 23, 1870.

A border ruffian, a white man named Clark, had assaulted a young Indian, beating him severely, and the Indian, in retaliation, had killed Clark and gone off into Canada. Without troubhng to find the guilty party, or even the band he belonged to, Brevet Col. E. M. Baker, major Second Cavalry, stationed at Fort Shaw, marched out, under orders from Gen. Philip H. Sheridan, to the nearest Indian village, on Marias River; as it happened, they were peaceable, friendly Indians, under Bear's Head. Without warning, the soldiers silently surrounded the sleeping village. But the story is better told by Schultz, who was on the spot later, and heard it all from those who saw:

“In a low tone Colonel Baker spoke a few words to his men, telling them to keep cool, aim to kill, to spare none of the enemy; and then he gave the command to fire. A terrible scene ensued. On the day previous, many of the men of the camp had gone out toward the Sweetgrass Hills on a grand buffalo hunt; so, save for Chief Bear's Head and a few old men, none were there to return the soldiers' fire. Their first volley was aimed low down into the lodges, and many of the sleeping people were killed or wounded in their beds. The rest rushed out, men, children, women, many of the latter with babes in their arms, only to be shot down at the doorways of their lodges. Bear's Head, frantically waving a paper which bore testimony to his good character and friendliness to the white men, ran toward the command on the bluff, shouting to them to cease firing, entreating them to save the women and children; down he also went with several bullet holes in his body. Of the more than four hundred souls in camp at the time, very few escaped. And when it was all over, when the last wounded woman and child had been put out of misery, the soldiers piled the corpses ⁴⁸⁾on overturned lodges, firewood and household property, and set fire to it all.

“Several years afterward I was on the ground. Everywhere scattered about in the long grass and brush, just where the wolves and foxes had left them, gleamed the skulls and bones of those who had been so ruthlessly slaughtered. ‘How could they have done it?’ I asked myself, time and time again. ‘What manner of men were these soldiers who deliberately shot down defenseless women and innocent children?’ They had not even the excuse of being drunk; nor was their commanding officer intoxicated; nor were they excited or in any danger whatever. Deliberately, coolly, with steady and deadly aim they shot them down, killed the wounded, and then tried to burn the bodies of their victims. But I will say no more about it. Think it over, yourself, and try to find a fit name for men who did this.” (“My Life as an Indian,” pp. 41–42.)

According to G. B. Grinnell, one hundred and seventy-six innocent persons were butchered on this day of shame; ninety of them women, fifty-five babies, the rest chiefly very old or very young men, most of the able-bodied hunters being away on a hunt. No punishment of any kind was given the monster who did it.

There is no Indian massacre of whites to compare with this shocking barbarity, for at least the Indian always had the excuse that war had been declared, and he was acting on the defensive. Of a similar character were the massacres at Cos Cob, 1641; Conestoga, 1763; Gnadenwhütten, 1782; Coquille River, 1854; Wounded Knee, 1890; and a hundred more that could be mentioned. And no punishment was ever meted out to the murderers. Why? First, because apparently the Bureau at Washington approved; second, because “An Indian has no legal status; he is merely a live and particularly troublesome animal in the eye of the law.” (New York Times, February 21, 1880.) (See “Century of Dishonor,” p. 367.) Governor Horatio Seymour says: ⁴⁹⁾

“Every human being born upon our continent, or who comes here from any quarter of the world, whether savage or civilized, can go to our courts for protection — except those who belong to the tribes who once owned this country. The cannibal from the islands of the Pacific, the worst criminals from Europe, Asia or Africa, can appeal to the law and courts for their rights of person and property — all save our native Indians, who, above all, should be protected from wrong.” (“Century of Dishonor,” title-page.)

And this is the land whose Constitution grants equal rights to all alike. This is the land that waxes virtuously indignant when Russia expels or massacres Nihilists, Poles or Jews. Have we not enough courage left to face the simple truth that every crime of despotism in Russia has been more than doubled in atrocity by what has but recently been done in America? Nihilists, Jews and Poles were certainly breaking the law, usually plotting against the Government, when attacked. Russia never used burnings at the stake, as did the American unofficial Indian-killers. And never did Russia turn batteries of machine-guns on masses of men, women and children who were absolutely quiet, unarmed, helpless and submissive: who had indeed thrown themselves on the mercy of the Government, and were under its protection.

Americans were roused to a fury of indignation by doubtful newspaper accounts of Spanish misrule in Cuba. But the atrocities so credited to Spain pale into insignificance beside the unspeakable abominations proved against the United States by records of its own officials in its dealings with the native American race during the last hundred years.

There are many exceptions to this charge that the Indian is cruel to his enemies, enough, almost, to justify a complete rebuttal, and among these was none more honorably ⁵⁰⁾distinguished than Tecumseh, the war chief of the Shawnees; perhaps the greatest of all historic Indians. Like a new incarnation of Hiawatha, he planned a defensive federation of the whole red race, and led them in war, that he might secure for them lasting peace. All great Indians had taught the doctrine “Love your friend.” But Tecumseh was the first in authority to extend the heaven-taught precept, so they should be kind, at least, to their enemies; for he put an end in his nation to all torturing of prisoners.

Above all whose history is fully known, Tecumseh was the ideal noble Redman realized; nevertheless, he was not alone; Wabasha, Osceola, Kanakuk, and Wovoka must be numbered among those whose great hearts reached out in kindness even to those who hated them.

Tecumseh taught, “Love your enemy after he is conquered”; Kanakuk preached non-resistance to evil; Wovoka, “Be kind to all men.”

Second: The Indian had no property instincts. He was a Socialist in all matters of large property, such as land, its fruits, rivers, fish, and game.

So were the early Christians. “And all that believed were together; had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.” (Acts, ii., 44–45.)

They considered that every child had a right to a bringing up, and every old person to a free living from the tribe. We know that it worked well, for there was neither hunger nor poverty, except when the whole tribe was in want. And we know also that there were among them no men of shameful, monstrous wealth.

Third: He was improvident. He is now, just like our own drunkards. He was not, until after the Great Degradation that we effected in him. All the old travelers, ⁵¹⁾testify that each Indian village had its fields of corn, beans, and pumpkins. The crops were harvested and safely carried them over long periods when there was no other supply. They did not believe in vast accumulations of wealth, because their wise men had said that greed would turn their hearts to stone and make them forget the poor. Furthermore, since all when strong contributed to the tribe, the tribe supported them in childhood, sickness and age. They had no poor; they had no famine until the traders came with whiskey and committed the crimes for which we as a nation have yet to answer.

Fourth: He was dirty. Many dirty habits are to be seen to-day among the Reservation Indians, but it was not so in the free days. A part of the old Indian's religion was to take a bath every day the year round for the helping of his body. Some tribes bathed twice a day. Every village had a Turkish bath in continual use. It is only the degraded Indian who has become dirty, and many of the whites who oftenest assail him as filthy never take a bath from birth to judgment day.

Fifth: He was lazy. No one who saw the Indian in his ancient form has preferred this charge. He was not fond of commercial manufacturing, but the regular work of tilling his little patch of corn and beans he did not shirk, nor the labor of making weapons and boats, nor the frightful toil of portaging, hunting and making war. He undertook these at all times without a murmur.

Many men will not allow their horses to bear such burdens as I saw the Chipewyans bear daily, without a thought of hardship, accepting all as a part of their daily lot.

Sixth: He degraded woman to be a mere beast of burden. Some have said so, but the vast bulk of evidence to-day goes to show that while the women did the household drudgery and lighter tasks, the men did all the work beyond ⁵²⁾their partners' strength. In making clothes, canoes, and weapons, as well as in tilling of the fields, men and women worked together. The woman had a voice in all the great affairs, and a far better legal position than in most of the civilized world to-day.

Seventh: He was treacherous. Oh! how ill it becomes us to mention such a thing! Every authority tells us the same — that primitive Redman never broke a treaty; his word was as good as his bond; that the American Government broke every treaty as soon as there was something to gain by doing so. Captain J. G. Bourke thus scores the continual treachery of the whites: “The occasional treachery of the aborigines,” says he, “has found its best excuse in the unvarying Punic faith of the Caucasian invader.” (“On the Border with Crook,” p. 114.)

But let us look for evidence of the Indian's character among those who saw with their own eyes, and had no object to serve by blackening the fair fame of the bravely dying race.

It would be easy to fill a large volume with startling and trustworthy testimony as to the goodness of the old Indian of the best type; I shall give a few pages bearing on the Indian life and especially relating to the various characteristics for which the Redman has been attacked, selecting the testimony preferably from the records of men who knew the Indian before his withering contact with the white race.

Reverence

In 1832 George Catlin, the painter, went West and spent eight years with the unchanged Indians of the Plains. He lived with them and became conversant with their lives. He has left one of the fullest and best records we have of the ⁵³⁾Redman. From his books I quote repeatedly. Concerning the Indian's rehgion, he says:

“The North American Indian is everywhere, in his native state, a highly moral and religious being, endowed by his Maker with an intuitive knowledge of some great Author of his being, and the Universe, in dread of whose displeasure he constantly lives, with the apprehension before him of a future state, where he expects to be rewarded or punished according to the merits he has gained or forfeited in this world.

⁎

“Morality and virtue I venture to say the civilized world need not undertake to teach them.

⁎

“I never saw any other people of any color who spend so much of their lives in humbling themselves before and worshipping the Great Spirit.” (Catlin's “N. A. Indian,” Vol. II., p. 243)

“We have been told of late years that there is no evidence that any tribe of Indians ever believed in one overruling power; yet, in the early part of the seventeenth century, Jesuits and Puritans alike testified that tribes which they had met, believed in a god, and it is certain that, at the present time, many tribes worship a Supreme Being who is the Ruler of the Universe.” (Grinnell's “Story of the Indian,” 1902, p. 214.)

“Love and adore the Good Spirit who made us all; who supplies our hunting-grounds, and keeps us alive.” (Teachings of Tshut-che-nau, Chief of the Kansas. J. D. Hunter's “Captivity Among the American Indians,” 1798–1816, p. 21).

And, again, Hunter says (p. 216):

“A day seldom passes with an elderly Indian, or others who are esteemed wise and good, in which a blessing is not asked, or thanks returned to the Giver of Life, sometimes audibly, but more generally in the devotional language of the heart.”⁵⁴⁾ “Every Indian of standing has his sacred place, such as a tree, rock, fountain, etc., to which he resorts for devotional exercise, whenever his feelings prompt to the measure; sometimes many resort to the same place.” (P. 221).

A typical prayer is recorded for us by Grinnell.

A Pawnee, in dire distress and despair, through a strong enemy, decided to sacrifice his horse to the unseen powers, that they might intercede for him with the Creator, and thus prayed beforehand :

“My Father [who dwells] in all places, it is through you that I am living. Perhaps it was through you that this man put me in this condition. You are the Ruler. Nothing is impossible with you. If you see fit, take this [trouble] away from me. Now you, all fish of the rivers, and you, all birds of the air, and all animals that move upon the earth, and you, O Sun! I present to you this animal. You, birds in the air, and you, animals upon the earth, we are related; we are alike in this respect, that one Ruler made us all. You see how unhappy I am. If you have any power, intercede for me.” (Grinnell's “Story of the Indian,” p. 213.)

Capt. W. P. Clark, one of our best authorities on the Plains Indians, says: “There are no people who pray more than Indians.” (“Indian Sign Language,” 1885, p. 309.)

And, again, he says:

“Indians make vocal petitions to the God or Force which they wish to assist them, and also make prayer by pointing the long stem of the pipe. The Poncas call the sun God or Grandfather, and the earth Grandmother, and pray to both when making supplications. Running Antelope, a chief of the Uncapapa Band of Sioux, said in regard to pointing the pipestem, that the mere motion meant, ‘To the Great Spirit: give me plenty of ponies; plenty of meat; let me live in peace and comfort with my wife, and stay long with my children. To the Earth, my ⁵⁵⁾Grandmother: let me live long; hold me good and strong. When I go to war, give me many ponies and let me count many “coups.” In peace, let not anger enter my heart.’” (P. 309.)

But the best account of the Indian's belief and mode of worship is given to us by Dr. Charles A. Eastman, himself a Sioux Indian; he has written of the things that were his daily life in youth. He says:

“When food is taken, the woman murmurs a ‘grace’ as she lowers the kettle, an act so softly and unobtrusively performed that one who does not know the custom usually fails to catch the whisper: ‘Spirit partake!’ As her husband receives the bowl or plate, he likewise murmurs his invocation to the spirit. When he becomes an old man, he loves to make a notable effort to prove his gratitude. He cuts off the choicest morsel of the meat and casts it into the fire — the purest and most ethereal element.” (“Soul of the Indian,” 1911, pp. 47–48.)

“The first hambeday, or religious retreat, marked an epoch in the life of the youth, which may be compared to that of confirmation or conversion in Christian experience. Having first prepared himself by means of the purifying vapor bath, and cast off, as far as possible, all human or fleshly influences, the young man sought out the noblest height, the most commanding summit in all the surrounding region. Knowing that God sets no value upon material things, he took with him no offerings or sacrifices, other than symbolic objects, such as paints and tobacco. Wishing to appear before Him in all humility, he wore no clothing save his moccasins and breech-clout. At the solemn hour of sunrise or sunset, he took up his position, overlooking the glories of earth, and facing the ‘Great Mystery,’ and there he remained, naked, erect, silent, and motionless, exposed to the elements and forces of His arming, for a night and a day to two days and nights, but rarely longer. Sometimes he would chant a hymn without words, or offer the ceremonial ‘filled pipe.’ In this holy trance or ecstasy the Indian mystic found his highest happiness, and the motive power of his existence.” (“Soul of the Indian,” Eastman, pp. 7–8.)⁵⁶⁾ “In the life of the Indian there was only one inevitable duty, the duty of prayer — the daily recognition of the Unseen and Eternal. His daily devotions were more necessary to him than daily food. He wakes at daybreak, puts on his moccasins and steps down to the water's edge. Here he throws handfuls of clear cold water into his face, or plunges in bodily. After the bath, he stands erect before the advancing dawn, facing the sun as it dances upon the horizon, and offers his unspoken orison. His mate may precede or follow him in his devotions, but never accompanies him. Each soul must meet the morning sun, the new, sweet earth, and the Great Silence alone!

“Whenever, in the course of the daily hunt, the red hunter comes upon a scene that is strikingly beautiful or sublime — a black thunder-cloud, with the rainbow's glowing arch above the mountain; a white waterfall in the heart of a green gorge; a vast prairie tinged with the blood-red of sunset — he pauses for an instant in the attitude of worship. He sees no need for setting apart one day in seven as a holy day, since to him all days are God's.” (“Soul of the Indian,” Eastman; pp. 45–6.)

In the light of all this evidence, is it to be wondered that most of the early historians who lived with the primitive Indians of the Plains, were led to believe, from their worship of God, their strict moral code, their rigid laws as to foods clean and unclean, and their elaborate system of bathings and purifications, that in these red men of the New World, they had indeed found the long-lost tribes of Israel?

Cleanliness

Nothing will convince some persons but that “Yankees have tails,” because, in their nursery days, these persons always heard it was so. That is exactly the attitude of the world on the subject of dirty Indians.

Alexander Henry II., a fur and whiskey trader, who did his share in degrading the early Indians, and did not love them, admits of the Mandans, in 1806:⁵⁷⁾“Both men and women make it a rule to go down to the river and wash every morning and evening.” (“Journal,” Vol. I., p. 325.)

“These people, like their neighbors, have the custom of washing, morning and evening.” (“Journal,” Vol. I., p. 348.)

Catlin, after eight years in their lodges (1832–40) says that notwithstanding many exceptions, among the wild Indians the “strictest regard to decency and cleanliness and elegance of dress is observed, and there are few people, perhaps, who take more pains to keep their persons neat and cleanly, than they do.” (Vol. I., p. 96.)

“In their bathing and ablutions at all seasons of the year, as a part of their religious observances — having separate places for men and women to perform these immersions — they resemble again [the Jews].” (Vol. II., p. 233.)

J. W. Schultz, who spent his life among the Blackfeet, comments on their wonderful hardiness. During the intensest zero weather, he, himself, wore twice as much clothing as they did, and yet was suffering severely, while “They never froze, nor even shivered from the cold. They attributed their indifference to exposure, to the beneficial effect of their daily baths, which were always taken, even if a hole had to be cut in the ice for the purpose. And they forced their children to accompany them, little fellows from three years of age up, dragging the unwilling ones from ther beds, and carrying them under their arms to the icy plunge.” (“My Life as an Indian,” pub. 1907; p. 63.)

This same experienced observer says:

“I have seen hundreds of white homes — there are numbers of them in any city — so exceedingly dirty, their inmates so slovenly, that one turns from them in absolute disgust, but I have seen nothing like that among the Blackfeet.” (P. 413.)

Friendly enthusiasts like Catlin may sometimes get only part of the facts, but the trained observers of the Smithsonian Institution ⁵⁸⁾usually have absolute and complete evidence to offer. Here is J. O. Dorsey's paragraph on Omaha cleanliness:

“The Omahas generally bathe (hica) every day in warm weather, early in the morning and at night. Some who wish to do so, bathe also at noon. Jackson, a member of the Elkgens, bathes every day, even in winter. He breaks a hole in the ice on the Missouri River, and bathes, or else he rubs snow over his body. In winter the Omahas heat water in a kettle and wash themselves (kigcija) … The Ponkas used to bathe in the Missouri every day.” (Dorsey, 3th Ann. Dep. Eth.; p. 269.)

Every Indian village in the old days had a Turkish bath, as we call it; a “Sweat Lodge,” as they say, used as a cure for inflammatory rheumatism, etc. Catlin describes this in great detail, and says:

“I allude to their vapor baths, or sudatories, of which each village has several, and which seem to be a kind of public property — accessible to all, and resorted to by all, male and female, old and young, sick and well.” (Vol. I., p. 97.)

The “Sweat Lodge” is usually a low lodge covered with blankets or skins. The patient goes in undressed and sits by a bucket of water. In a fire outside, a number of stones are heated by the attendants. These are rolled in, one or more at a time. The patient pours water on them. This raises a cloud of steam. The lodge becomes very hot. The individual drinks copious draughts of water. After a sufficient sweat, he raises the cover and rushes into the water, beside which, the lodge is always built. After this, he is rubbed down with buckskin, and wrapped in a robe to cool off.

This was used as a bath, as well as a religious purification. ⁵⁹⁾I have seen scores of them. Clark says they were “common to all tribes,” (p. 365). Every old-timer knows that they were in daily use by the Indians and scoffed at by the white settlers who, indeed, were little given to bathing of any kind.

Chastity

About one hundred years ago the notorious whiskey-trader, Alexander Henry, already mentioned, went into the Missouri region. He was a man of strange character, of heroic frame and mind, but unscrupulous and sordid. His only interest and business among the Indians was beating them out of their furs with potations of cheap alcohol. This fearless ruffian penetrated the far North-west, was the first trader to meet certain “Western tribes, and strange to tell he wrote a full, straightforward and shocking account of his. wanderings and methods among the red folk he despised for not being white. In spite of arrogance and assumed superiority, his narrative contains much like the following:

“The Flatheads on the Buffalo Plains, generally encounter the Piegans and fight desperately when attacked. They never attempt war themselves, and have the character of a brave and virtuous people, not in the least addicted to those vices so common among savages who have had long intercourse with Europeans. Chastity is particularly esteemed, and no woman will barter her favors, even with the whites, upon any mercenary consideration. She may be easily prevailed upon to reside with a white man as his wife, according to the custom of the country, but prostitution is out of the question — she will listen to no proposals of that nature. Their morals have not yet been sufficiently debauched and corrupted by an intercourse with people who call themselves Christians, but whose licentious and lecherous manners are far worse than those of savages. A striking example is to be seen throughout the N. W. country, of the depravity and wretchedness of the natives; but as one ⁶⁰⁾advances into the interior parts, vice and debauchery become less frequent. Happy those who have the least connection with us, for most of the present depravity is easily traced to its origin in their intercourse with the whites. That baneful source of all evils, spirituous liquor, has not yet been introduced among the natives of the Columbia. To the introduction of that subtle poison among the savage tribes may be mainly attributed their miserable and wretched condition.” [So at once he set about introducing it. E. T. S.] (A. Henry's Journal, 1811; pp. 710–11.)

Jonathan Carver, who traveled among the Sioux from 1766–9, says:

“Adultery is esteemed by them a heinous crime, and punished with the greatest rigor.” (Travels, 1796; p. 245.)

George Catlin, after his eight years among the wild Mandans of the Missouri (1832), says of them:

“Their women are beautiful and modest — and amongst the respectable families, virtue is as highly cherished and as inapproachable, as in any society whatever.” (Vol. I., p. 121.)

Colonel R. I. Dodge, an Indian fighter and hater, says:

“The Cheyenne women are retiring and modest, and for chastity will compare favorably with women of any other nation or people … almost models of purity and chastity.” (“Hunting-grounds of the Great West,” p. 302.)

I am well aware that the Crows, the Arapaho and some West coast tribes were shockingly immoral in primitive times, but these were the exceptions, and in consequence they were despised by the dominant tribes of the Plains.

Bravery

Old-time travelers and modern Indian fighters agree that there was no braver man on earth, alive or in history, than the Redman. Courage was the virtue he chiefly honored. His whole life and training were with the purpose ⁶¹⁾of making him calm, fearless and efficient in every possible stress or situation.

Father Lafitau said of the Eastern Indians, in 1724:

“They are high-minded and proud; possess a courage equal to every trial; an intrepid valor; the most heroic constancy under torments, and an equanimity which neither misfortune nor reverses can shake.” (Moeurs des Sauv. Amer.)

“An Indian meets death, when it approaches him in his hut, with the same resolution he has often faced him in the field. His indifference relative to this important article, which is the source of so many apprehensions to almost every other nation, is truly admirable. When his fate is pronounced by the physician, and it remains no longer uncertain, he harangues those about him with the greatest composure.” (Carver's “Travels Among the Sioux,” 1766–9; p. 261.)

“The greatest insult that can be offered to an Indian, is, to doubt his courage.” (J. D. Hunter, “Captivity”; 1798–1816; pp. 301.)

“These savages are possessed with many heroic qualities, and bear every species of misfortune with a degree of fortitude which has not been outdone by any of the ancient heroes either of Greece or of Rome.” (Carver's “Travels Among the Sioux,” 1766–9; pp. 221–2.)

None of us are likely to question the Redman's prowess when we remember for example that Black Hawk with 40 warriors utterly routed 270 American riflemen in 1832, Chief Joseph in 1877 with inferior weapons beat the American soldiers over and over again vith half their number, and in 1878 Dull Knife with 69 warriors fought and defied 2000 American troops for over four months.

Thrift nad providence

Every Indian village in the old days had its granaries of corn, its stores of dried beans, berries, and pumpkin-strips, as well as its dried buffalo tongues, pemmican and deer's meat. To this day all the Fisher Indians of the north and west dry great quantities of fish, as well as berries, for the famine months that are surely coming.

Many of the modern Indians, armed with rifles, have ⁶²⁾learned to emulate the white man, and slaughter game for the love of slaughter, without reference to the future. Such waste was condemned by the old-time Indians, as an abuse of the gifts of God, and which would surely bring its punishment.

When, in 1684, De la Barre, Governor of Canada, complained that the Iroquois were encroaching on the country of those Indians who were allies of the French, he got a stinging reply from Garangula, the Onondaga Chief, and a general statement showing that the aborigines had gamelaws, not written, indeed, but well known, and enforced at the spear-point, if need be: “We knock the Twightwies [Miamis] and Chictaghicks [Illinois] on the head, because they had cut down the trees of peace, which were the limits of our country. They have hunted beaver on our lands. They have acted contrary to the customs of all Indians, for they left none of the beavers alive, they killed both male and female.” (Sam G. Drake's “Indian Biog.” 1832, p. 111.)

Hunter says of the Kansas Indians:

“I have never known a solitary instance of their wantonly destroying any of those animals [buffalo, elk, and deer], except on the hunting-grounds of their enemies, or encouraged to it by the prospect of bartering their skins with the traders.” (Hunter's “Captivity,” 1798–1816, p. 279.)

“After all, the Wild Indians could not be justly termed improvident, when the manner of life is taken into consideration. They let nothing go to waste, and labored incessantly during the summer and fall, to lay up provisions for the inclement season. Berries of all kinds were industriously gathered and dried in the sun. Even the wild cherries were pounded up, stones and all, made into small cakes, and dried, for use in soups, and for mixing with the pounded jerked meat and fat to form a much-prized Indian delicacy.” (“Indian Boyhood,” Eastman; pp. 237-8.)⁶³⁾The Spartans of the West 31 Their wise men were not blind to the dangers of greed, as we know, from many sources, and, in particular, their attitude toward money-getting is full of interest: "The Indians, except those who live adjoining to the Euro- pean colonies, can form to themselves no idea of the value of money; they consider it, when they are made acquainted with the uses to which it is applied by other nations, as the source of innumerable evils. To it they attribute all the mischiefs that are prevalent among Europeans, such as treachery, plundering, devastations and murder." (Carver's "Travels," p. 158.) Could we have a more exact paraphrase of "The love of money is the root of all evil?" Beware of greed which grows into cHme and makes men for- get the poor. A man's life should not be for himself, but for his people. For them he must be ready to die. This is the sum of Indian economic teaching. (See Eastman Soul of Indian," pp. 94 and 99-103.) CHEERFULNESS OR THE MERRY INDIAN Nothing seems to anger the educated Indian, to-day, more than the oft-repeated absurdity that his race was of a gloomy, silent nature. Any one that has ever been in an Indian village knows what a scene of joy and good cheer it normally was. In every such gathering there was always at least one recognized fun-maker, who led them all in joke and hilarious jest. Their songs, their speeches, their fairy- tales are full of fun and dry satire. The reports of the Ethnological Bureau sufficiently set forth these facts. Eastman, the Sioux, says on this subject: "There is scarcely anything so exasperating to me as the idea that the natives of this country have no sense of humor and no⁶⁴⁾32 The Book of Woodcraft faculty for mirth. This phase of their character is well under- stood by those whose fortune or misfortune it has been to live among them, day in and day out, at their homes. I don't believe I ever heard a real hearty laugh away from the Indians' fireside. I have often spent an entire evening in laughter with them, until I could laugh no more. There are evenings when the recognized wit or story-teller of the village gives a free entertainment which keeps the rest of the community in a convulsive state until he leaves them. However, Indian humor consists as much in the gestures and inflections of the voice, as in words, and is really untranslatable. " ("Indian Boyhood, " p, 267.) And, again, Grinnell: "The common belief that the Indian is stoical, stolid, and sullen, is altogether erroneous. They are really a merry people, good-natured and jocular, usually ready to laugh at an amusing incident or a joke, with a simple mirth that reminds one of children. " (" Ind. To-day, " p. 9.) There is, however, an explanation of our widespread mis- conception. Many a time in Indian camp or village, I have approached some noisy group of children or hilarious ring of those more grown. My purpose was wholly sympathetic, but my presence acted as a wet-blanket. The children were hushed or went away. I saw shy faces, furtive glances, or looks of dis- trust. They hate us; they do not want us near. Our presence is an evil influence in their joy. Can we wonder? OBEDIENCE — REVERENCE FOR THEIR PARENTS AND FOR THE AGED We cannot, short of the Jews or the Chinese, perhaps, find more complete respect for their parents than among the Indians. Catlin says: " To each other I have found these people kind and honorable, and endowed with every feeling of parental, of filial, and con-⁶⁵⁾The Spartans of the West 33 jugal affection, that is met in more enlightened communities. I have found them moral and religious; and I am bound to give them credit for their zeal, which is often exhibited in their modes of worship, however insufficient they may seem to us, or may be in the estimation of the Great Spirit." (Vol. 11., p. 242.) While Hunter, after living with the Kansas Indians for nineteen years, says: "They are very assiduous and attentive to the wants and comforts, particularly, of the aged; and kind to all who require their assistance. And an Indian who failed in these respects, though he otherwise merited esteem, would be neglected and despised. To the credit of their morals, few such are to be found, except where debauched by the vices of the white people." (Hunter's "Captivity," 1798-1816; p. 251.) Among the maxims laid down by the venerable Chief of the Kansas, was: "Obey and venerate the old people, particularly your par- ents." ("Teachings of Tshut-che-nau, Chief of the Kansas;" Hunter; p. 21.) Father J. F. Lafitau, the Jesuit missionary, was far from being predisposed in favor of savage ways or views, yet says of the Eastern Indians: "Toward each other, they behave with a natural politeness and attention, entertaining a high respect for the aged," (Moeurs des Sauv. Am., 1724.) "The Indians always took care of their aged and helpless. It was a rare exception when they did not." (Francis La Flesche, Conversation, April 27, 1912.) There have been cases of Indians abandoning their very aged to die, but it was always done by request of the vie-⁶⁶⁾34 The Book of Woodcraft tims, under dire stress of hunger or travel, and was dis- approved and denounced by all their great teachers. During my Northern journey in 1907 I selected for one of my guides a fine young Indian named Freesay. At the end of our first journey I said to him: "Would you like to go with me still farther, to the Far North country, and see the things your people have not yet seen? I will give you good wages and a big present. " He replied: "Yes; I would like to go very much, but my uncle [his adoptive father] told me not to go beyond Pike's Lobstick, and so I cannot go. " And he did not, though his uncle was 350 miles away. This was one case out of several noted, and many heard of. The Fifth Command- ment is a very big, strong law in the wigwam. KINDNESS At every first meeting of red men and whites, the whites were inferior in numbers, and yet were received with the utmost kindness, until they treacherously betrayed the men who had helped and harbored them. Even Christopher Columbus, blind and burnt up with avarice as he was, and soul-poisoned with superstition, and contempt for an alien race, yet had the fairness to write home to his royal accompHces in crime, the King and Queen of Spain: "I swear to your Majesties that there is not a better people in the world than these; more affectionate, affable or mild. They love their neighbors as themselves, and they always speak smilingly. (Catlin, "N. A. Indian," II., p. 246.) Jonathan Carver, who Hved among the Sioux from 1766-9, after speaking of their severity in dealing with enemies, says:⁶⁷⁾The Spartans of the West 35 "But if they are thus barbarous to those with whom they are at war, they are friendly, hospitable, and humane in peace. It may with truth be said of them, that they are the worst enemies and the best friends of any people in the whole world. " (" Trav- els, "p. 157.) "We shall likewise see them sociable and humane to those whom they consider as their friends, and even to their adopted enemies: and ready to partake with them of the last morsel, or to risk their lives in their defence." (P. 269.) And, again: "No people are more hospitable, kind and free than the Indians." (P. 171.) "Nothing can exceed the tenderness shown by them to their offspring." (P. 247.) Catlin, writing of the Plain Indians generally, says: "To their friends, there are no people on earth that are more kind; and cruelties and punishments (except for capital offences) are, amongst themselves, entirely dispensed with." (Vol. IL, p. 241.) Schultz evidently went among the Blackfeet with the usual wrong ideas about the Indians, but he soon wrote: "I have read, or heard, that an Indian's loss of to-day is for- gotten on the morrow. That is certainly not true of the Black- feet, nor the Mandans. Often and often I have heard many of the Blackfeet mourn for one dead long years since." ("My Life as an Indian," p. 154.) And again: " I have often heard the Blackfeet speak of various white men as utterly heartless, because they had left their parents and their youthful home to wander and seek adventure in a strange land. They could not comprehend how one with right feeling might⁶⁸⁾36 The Book of Woodcraft absent himself from father and mother, as we do, for months and years. 'Hard hearts,' 'stone hearts,' they call us, and with some reason." (Schultz, p. 155.) "There are few people so generous as the Indians. In their religious and war ceremonies, at their feasts, festivals, and funerals, the widows and orphans, the poor and needy are always thought of; not only thought of, ... but their pov- erty and necessity are relieved. iti ifi * Hi 41 * * "I have seen white men reduced to the last 'hard tack,' with only tobacco enough for two smokes, and with no immediate prospect of anything better than horse-meat 'straight.' A portion of the hard bread was hidden away, and the smokes were taken in secret. An Indian, undemoralized by contact with the whites, under similar circumstances, would divide down to the last morsel." (Clark's "Sign Language," p. 185 and 186.) HOSPITALITY This is a point that needs little discussing, even the sworn enemy was safe, once he was admitted to an Indian lodge "as a guest." Carver says of the Sioux, in 1766 ("Travels," p. 172): "No people are more hospitable . . . and free than the Indians. " And, again, I found them ready to share with their friends the last morsel of food they possessed. (P. 269,) The Jesuits testify of the Iroquois, 1656: "Hospitals for the poor would be useless among them, because there are no beggars; those who have are so liberal to those who are in want, that everything is enjoyed in common. The whole village must be in distress before any individual is left in necessity." (“Century of Dishonor,” p. 379.)⁶⁹⁾The Spartans of the West 37 Catlin, in 1832-40, enthusiastically writes of the Plains Indians and their hospitality: " I have been welcomed generally in their country, and treated to the best that they could give me [for eight years], without any charges made for my board." (Vol. I., p. 9.) "No matter how great the scarcity of food might be, so long as there was any remaining in the lodge, the visitor received his share without grudging." (Grinnell, "Ind. of To-day," p. 9.) The same authority writes me: "When Lone Chief had gone into the Lodge of the Chief of the enemy, and food and water had been given to him, the Chief stood up and spoke to his tribespeople saying, 'What can I do? They have eaten of my food, I cannot make war on people who have been eating with me and have also drunk of my water. ' " ("Pawnee Hero Stories," pp. 59-60.) TREATMENT OT THEIR WOMEN "The social condition of the North Americans has been greatly misunderstood. The place of woman in the tribe was not that of a slave or of a beast of burden. The existence of the gentile organization, in most tribes, with descent in the fe- male line, forbade any such subjugation of woman. In many tribes, women took part in the councils of the chiefs; in some, women were even the tribal rulers; while in all, they received a fair measure of respect and affection from those related to them." (Grinnell's "Story of the Indian," p. 244.) This is Grinnell's summing up of what every student of Indians has known for long. Here in addition are the statements of other good authorities: " I have often heard and read that Indian women received no consideration from their husbands, and led a life of exceedingly hard and thankless work. That is very wide of the truth, so⁷⁰⁾38 The Book of Woodcraft far as the natives of the northern plains were concerned. It is true, that the women gathered fuel for the lodge — bundles of dry willows, or limbs from a fallen cottonwood. They also did the cooking, and, besides tanning robes, converted the skins of deer, elk, antelope, and mountain sheep, into soft buckskin for family use. But never a one of them suffered from overwork; when they felt like it, they rested; they realized that there were other days coming, and they took their time about anything they had to do. Their husbands, never interfered with them, any more than they did with him in his task of providing the hides and skins and meat, the staff of life. The majority — nearly all of them — were naturally industrious, and took pride in their work; they joyed in putting away parfleche after par- flecheof choice dried meats and pemmican; in tanning soft robes and buckskins for home use or sale, in embroidering wonderful patterns of beads or colored porcupine quills upon moccasin tops, dresses, leggings and saddle trappings. When robes were to be traded, they got their share of the proceeds. " (Schultz, p. 64.) "It has often been asserted that the 'Indian' did no work, even leaving the cultivation of the corn and squashes to the women. That the women in some of the tribes tended the crops, is true, but in others, like the Pueblos, they seldom or never touched hoe or spade. The Eastern men were hunting or build- ing boats, or were on the war-path, hence it was necessary for the women to look after the fields. " ("The N. A. of Yesterday," by F. S. Dellenbaugh, p. 333.) Schultz tells us that the men had to make their own clothing. ("My Life as an Indian," p. 180.) Prof. J. O. Dorsey writes of Omaha manners: "Politeness is shown by men to women. Men used to help women and children to alight from horses. When they had to ford streams, the men used to assist them, and sometimes they carried them across on their backs. " (Dorsey, 270-1 ; 3rd Ann. Rep. Ethn.) "One of the most erroneous beliefs relating to the status and condition of the American Indian woman is, that she was, both before and after marriage, the abject slave and drudge of the⁷¹⁾The Spartans of the West 39 men of her tribe, in general. This view, due largely to inac- curate observation and misconception, was correct, perhaps, at times, as to a small percentage of the tribes and peoples whose social organization was of the most elementary kind politically and ceremonially, and especially of such tribes as were non- agricultural. " ("Handbook of American Indians," Bur. Am. Ethn., p. 968.) "Among the Iroquoian tribes — the Susquehanna, the Hurons, and the Iroquois — the penalties for killing a woman of the tribe were double those exacted for the killing of a man, because in the death of a woman, the Iroquoian lawgivers recognized the probable loss of a long line of prospective offspring." ("Handbook American Indian," p. 971.) " In most, if not in all, the highly organized tribes, the woman was the sole master of her own body." ("Handbook North American Indian," p. 972.) " The men are the warriors and hunters, though an old woman of rank usually steers the war-canoe." ("Coast Indian"; Niblack; 1889; p. 253.) "A mother possessed the important authority to forbid her sons going on the war-path, and frequently the chiefs took advantage of this power of the woman, to avoid a rupture with another tribe." ("Handbook North American Indian," p. 971.) "Roger Williams, with reference to another subject, brings this same respect for woman to view; he wrote: 'So did never the Lord Jesus bring any unto his most pure worship, for he abhors, as all men, yea, the very Indians, an unwilling spouse to enter into forced relations. " ("Handbook North America, " p. 972.) "At a later day, and in the face of circumstances adverse to the Indians, Gen. James Clinton, who commanded the New York Division in the Sullivan expedition in 1779, against the hostile Iroquois, paid his enemies the tribute of a soldier, by writing in April, 1779, to Colonel Van Schaick, then leading the troops against the Onondaga, the following terse compliment: ' Bad as the savages are, they never violate the chastity of any woman, their prisoners.'" " Among the Sioux and the Yuchi, men who made a practice of seduction were in grave bodily danger, from the aggrieved women and girls, and the resort by the latter to extreme meas-⁷²⁾40 The Book of Woodcraft ures was sanctioned by public opinion, as properly avenging a gross violation of woman's inalienable right — the control of her own body. The dower or bride-price, when such was given, did not confer it, it seems, on the husband, absolute right over the life and liberty of the wife: it was rather compensation to her kindred and household for the loss of her services." ("Handbook American Indian," pp. 972,3.) "It is the universal testimony, as voiced by Portlock (1787), that they [the Coast Indians] treat their wives and children with much affection and tenderness. " ("Voyages," p. 290.) "In the approach to political and industrial equality of the sexes, and in the respect shown for the opinions of their females, these Indians furnish another refutation of the old misconception concerning the systematic mal-treatment of the women by savages. Such a thing is incompatible with the laws of nature. Good treatment of the female is essential to the preserv- ation of the species, and it will be found that this ill-treatment is more apparent than real." (Niblack, "Coast Indian," 1889, p. 238-9.) That is, the sum of evidence, according to all reliable authority, plainly shows that the condition of the women among the primitive Indians was much as with white folks. They had the steady, dreary work of the household, while the men did the intermittent, yet much harder work of por- taging, hunting and fighting. But the Indian woman had several advantages over her white sister. She owned the house and the children. She had absolute control of her body. There could be no war without her consent; she could and often did become the Head Chief of the Nation. Awashonks, the Woman Chief of Seconset, R. I. (1671), and Wetamoo, the beautiful woman Sachem of the Massa- chusetts Wampanoags (1662) were among the many famous women whose lives and positions give the lie to the tiresome calumny that the "Indian women were mere beasts of burden ; they had no rights, nor any voice in their public affairs. "⁷³⁾The Spartans of the West 41 COURTESY AND POLITE BEHAVIOR There has never been any question of the Redman's politeness. Every observer remarks it. I have seen countless cases of it, myself. The white who usurped his domain are immeasurably his inferiors in such matters. For fuller testimony, let us note these records by early travelers : "Toward each other, they behave with natural politeness and attention." (Pere Lafitau, 1724.) Catlin says of the Mandans : "They are handsome, straight, and elegant in their forms — not tall, but quick and graceful ; easy and polite in their manners, neat in their persons, and beautifully clad." (Catlin; Vol. I., p. 96.) "The next and second Chief of the [Mandan] tribe is Ma-to- to-pa (The Four Bears). This extraordinary man, though sec- ond in office, is undoubtedly the first and most popular man in the nation. Free, generous, elegant and gentlemanly in his deportment — handsome, brave and valiant ; wearing a robe on his back with the history of his battles emblazoned on it, which would fill a book of themselves, if properly translated. This, readers, is the most extraordinary man, perhaps, who lives at this day, in the atmosphere of Nature's nobleman." (Catlin; Vol. L, p. 92.) Omaha politeness: " When persons attend feasts, they extend their hand and return thanks to the giver. So, also, when they receive presents. « * * * * « * " If a man receives a favor and does not manifest his gratitude, they exclaim, 'He does not appreciate the gift; he has no man- ners!'

- - - - *

" Mothers teach their children not to pass in front of people, if they can avoid it." (Dorsey, 3d Ann. Rep. Bur. Eth., 1881-2, p. 270.)⁷⁴⁾42 The Book of Woodcraft TEEPEE ETIQUETTE — THE UNWRITTEN LAW OF THE LODGE {Gathered chiefly from observations of actual practice, but in many cases from formal precept.) Be hospitable. Always assume that your guest is tired, cold, and hungry. Always give your guest the place of honor in the lodge, and at the feast, and serve him in reasonable ways. Never sit while your guest stands. Go hungry rather than stint your guest. If your guest refuses certain food, say nothing; he may be under vow. Protect your guest as one of the family; feed his horse, and beat your dogs if they harm his dog. Do not trouble your guest with many questions about himself; he will tell you what he wishes you to know. In another man's lodge follow his customs, not your own. Never worry your host with your troubles. Always repay calls of courtesy; do not delay. Give your host a little present on leaving; little presents are little courtesies and never give offence. Say "Thank you" for every gift, however small. CompHment your host, even if you strain the facts to do so. Never walk between persons talking. Never interrupt persons talking. Let not the young speak among those much older, unless asked. Always give place to your seniors in entering or leaving the lodge; or anywhere. Never sit while your seniors stand. Never force your conversation on any one. Speak softly, especially before your elders, or in presence of strangers.⁷⁵⁾The Spartans of the West 43 Never come between any one and the fire. Do not touch live coals with a steel knife or any sharp steel. Do not stare at strangers; drop your eyes if they stare hard at you ; and this, above all, for women. The women of the lodge are the keepers of the fire, but the men should help with the heavier sticks. Always give a word or sign of salute when meeting or passing a friend, or even a stranger, if in a lonely place. Do not talk to your mother-in-law at any time, or let her talk to you. Be kind. Show respect to all men, but grovel to none. Let silence be your motto till duty bids you speak. Thank the Great Spirit for each meal. HONESTY Catlin says: "As evidence of . . . their honesty and honor, there will be found recorded many striking instances in the following pages. "I have roamed about, from time to time, during seven or eight years, visiting and associating with some three or four hundred thousands of these people, under an almost infinite variety of circumstances; ana under all these circumstances of exposure, no Indian ever betrayed me, struck me a blow, or stole from me a shilling's worth of my property, that I am aware of." (Vol. I., p. 9-10.) "Never steal, except it be from an enemy, whom it is just that we should injure in every possible way." ("Teachings of Tshut-che-nau, Chief of Kansas," Hunter; p. 21.) "Among [between] the individuals of some tribes or nations,⁷⁶⁾44 The Book of Woodcraft theft is a crime scarcely known." (Hunter's "Captivity Among American Indians," 1798-1816; p. 300.) "Theft was unknown in an Indian camp." (G. B. Grinnell; "Indians of To-day," p. 8.) Every traveler among the highly developed tribes of the Plains Indians tells a similar story, though, of course, when at war, it was another matter. Even that roUicking old cut-throat, Alexander Henry II, says after fifteen years among the Wild Indians: "I have been frequently fired at by them and have had several nar- row escapes for my Hfe. But I am happy to say they never pillaged me to the value of a needle." ("Journal" 1799- 1814, p. 452-) In my own travels in the Far North, 1907, I found the Indians tainted with many white vices, and in many re- spects degenerated, but I also found them absolutely honest, and I left valuable property hung in trees for months, without fear, knowing that no wild Indian would touch it. There is a story told of Bishop Whipple: He was leaving his cabin, with its valuable contents, to be gone some months, and sought some way of rendering all robber-proof. His Indian guide then said: "Why, Brother, leave it open. Have no fear. There is not a white man within a hundred miles!" On the road to a certain large Indian Ojibway village in 1904 1 lost a considerable roll of bills. My friend, the white man in charge, said: "If an Indian finds it, you will have it again within an hour; if a white man finds it, you will never see it again, for our people are very weak, when it comes to property matters." Finally, to cover the far Southwest, I found that the experience of most travelers agrees with the following:⁷⁷⁾The Spartans of the West 45 "I lived among the Wild Indians for eight years (1872-1880); I know the Apaches, the Navajos, the Utes, and the Pueblos, and I never knew a dishonest Indian." (Robert A. Widenmann, West Haverstraw, N. Y.) TRUTHFULNESS AND HONOR "Falsehood they esteem much more mean and contemptible than stealing. The greatest insult that can be offered to an Indian, is, to doubt his courage: the next is to doubt his honor or truth! " Lying, as well as stealing, entails loss of character on habitual offenders; and, indeed, an Indian of independent feelings and ele- vated character will hold no kind of intercourse with any one who has been once clearly convicted." (Hunter's "Captivity Among Indians," 1797-1816, p. 301.) "This venerable, worn-out warrior [the Kansas Chief, Tshut-che-nau, Defender of the People], would often admonish us for our faults and exhort us never to tell a lie. " (Hunter, p. .) "On all occasions, and at whatever price, the Iroquois spoke the truth, without fear and without hesitation." (Morgan's "League of the Iroquois," p. 330.) "The honor of their tribe, and the welfare of their nation is the first and most predominant emotion of their hearts; and from hence proceed in a great measure all their virtues and their vices. Actuated by this, they brave every danger, endure the most exquisite torments, and expire triumphing in their forti- tude, not as a personal qualification, but as a national charac- teristic." (Carver's "Travels," p. 271.) The Indian's assent to a treaty was always binding. I cannot discover a case of breach, excepting when the whites first broke it; and this does not mean the irresponsible whites, but the American Government. The authorities at Washington never hesitated to break each and every⁷⁸⁾46 The Book of Woodcraft treaty apparently, as soon as some material benefit seemed likely to accrue. Col. R. I. Dodge says: "The three principal causes of wars with the Indians are: "First, Non-fulfilment of treaties by the United States Government. "Second, Frauds by the Indian agents. " Third, Encroachments by the whites. " ("Hunting-grounds of the Great West," 1878, pp. XLIII-XLIV.) Captain John G. Bourke, who served under General Crook in 1872, when the Apaches were crushed by over- whelming numbers and robbed of their unquestioned heri- tage, says: "It was an outrageous proceeding, one for which I should still blush, had I not long since gotten over blushing for any- thing that the United States Government did in Indian mat- ters. " ("On the Border with Crook," p. 217.) "The most shameful chapter of American history is that in which is recorded the account of our dealings with the Indians. The story of our Government's intercourse with this race is an unbroken narrative of injustice, fraud and robbery." (Grin- neh's "Blackfoot Lodge Tales," 1892, p. IX.) In brief, during our chief dealings with the Redman, our manners were represented by the border outlaws, the vilest criminals the world has known, absolute fiends; and our Government by educated scoundrels of shameless, heartless, continual greed and treachery. The great exception on American soil was that of William Penn. He kept his word. He treated the Indians fairly; they never wronged him to the extent of a penny, or harmed him or his, or caused a day's anxiety; but con- tinued his loyal and trusty defenders." (See Jackson's “Century of Dishonor.”)⁷⁹⁾The Spartans of the West 47 How is it that Canada has never had an Indian war or an Indian massacre? Because the Government honorably kept all its treaties, and the Indians themselves were honorable, by tradition; they never yet broke a treaty. In northwestern Canada, there were two slight outbreaks of half-breeds (187 1 and 1885), but these were misunder- standings, easily settled. There was little fighting, no massacres, and no heritage of hate in their track. What wonder that all who could, among the Indian tribes, moved over the "Medicine Line," and dwell in Canada to-day ! TEMPERANCE AND SOBRIETY When the white traders struck into the West with their shameful cargoes of alcohol to tempt the simple savages, it was the beginning of the Great Degradation for which we must answer. The leading Indians soon saw what the drink habit meant, and strove in vain to stem the rising current of madness that surely would sweep them to ruin. About 1795, Tshut-che-nau, chief of the Kansas, did his best to save the youth of his people from the growing vice of the day. '"Drink not the poisonous strong-water of the white people;' he said, 'it is sent by the Bad Spirit to destroy the Indians.' He preached, but preached in vain." (J. D. Hunter, p. 21.) Pere Lafitau says, in 1724: "They never permit themselves to indulge in passion, but always, from a sense of honor and greatness of soul, appear masters of themselves." (P. 378, "Century of Dis- honor.")⁸⁰⁾48 The Book of Woodcraft In 1766, living among the Sioux, Carver writes: "We shall find them temperate, both in their diet and pota- tions (it must be remembered that I speak of those tribes who have little communication with Europeans) that they withstand with unexampled patience, the attacks of hunger, or the incle- mency of the seasons, and esteem the gratification of their appetites but as a secondary consideration. ' (" Travels," p. 269.) Concerning the temperance of the Wild Indian, Catlin writes, in 1832: "Every kind of excess is studiously avoided.

* * 4ii * ile ^

"Amongst the wild Indians in this country, there are no beg- gars — no drunkards — and every man, from a beautiful natural precept, studies to keep his body and mind in such a healthy shape and condition as will, at all times, enable him to use his weapons in self-defense, or struggle for the prize in their manly games." (Catlin, Vol. I., p. 123.) And, how was it he fell from these high ideals? Alas! we know too well. G. B. Grinnell has sent me a record which, in one form or another, might have been made about every western tribe: "The Reverend Moses Merrill, a missionary among the Oto Indians from 1832 to the beginning of 1840, kept a diary from which the following account is taken: "'April 14, 1837. Two men from a trading expedition in the Indian country called on me to-day. They state that one half of the furs purchased in the Indian country are obtained in exchange for whiskey. They also stated that the Shiennes, a tribe of Indians on the Platte River, were wholly averse to drink- ing whiskey, but, five years ago — now (through the influence of a trader, Captain Gant, who, by sweetening the whiskey, induced them to drink the intoxicating draught), they are a tribe of drunkards.'" ("Trans, and Repts. Nebraska State Historical Society, IV.," p. 181.)⁸¹⁾The Spartans of the West 49 After describing the rigid dieting that formed part of the Indian's training, Eastman adds: " In the old days, no young man was allowed to use tobacco in any form until he had become an acknowledged warrior and had achieved a record." ("Ind. Boy.," p. 50.) PHYSIQUE We need but little evidence on this head. All historians, hostile or friendly, admit the Indian to have been the finest type of physical manhood the world has ever known. None but the best, the picked, chosen and trained of the whites, had any chance with them. Had they not been crushed by overwhelming numbers, the Indians would own the continent to-day. Grinnell says ("Indians of To-day," p. 7.): "The struggle for existence weeded out the weak and the sickly, the slow and the stupid, and created a race physically perfect, and mentally fitted to cope with the conditions which they were forced to meet, so long as they were left to them- selves. " Speaking of the Iroquois in primitive condition, Brinton says that physically "they were unsurpassed by any other on the continent, and I may even say by any other people in the world." ("The American Race," p. 82.) The most famous runner of ancient Greece was Phi- dippides, whose record run was 152 miles in 2 days. Among our Indians such a feat would have been consid- ered very second rate. In 1882, at Fort ElUce, I saw a young Cree who, on foot, had just brought in despatches from Fort Qu' Appelle (125 miles away) in twenty-five hours. It created almost no comment. I heard Httle from the trad- ers but cool remarks like, "A good boy " ; "pretty good run." It was obviously a very usual exploit, among Indians.⁸²⁾so The Book of Woodcraft "TlieTaraliumare mail carrier from Chihuahua toBatopilas, Mexico, runs regularly more than 500 miles a week; a Hopi messenger has been known to run 120 miles in 15 hours." ("Handbook American Indians," Part II., p. 802.) The Arizona Indians are known to run down deer by sheer endurance, and every student of southwestern his- tory will remember that Coronado's mounted men were unable to overtake the natives, when in the hill country, such was their speed and activity on foot. We know that white men's ways, vices, and diseases have robbed them of much of their former physique, and yet, accord- ing to Dr. Daniel G. Brinton ("The American Race," 1891.) "The five Companies (500 men) recruited from the Iroquois of New York and Canada, during the Civil War, stood first on the list among all the recruits of our army, for height, vigor, and corporeal symmetry. " (Grinnell's " Indian of To-day, " p. 56.) The wonderful work of the Carlisle Indian School foot- ball team is a familiar example of what is meant by Indian physique, even at this late date, when the different life has done so much to bring them low. (While this was in press the all round athletic champion- ship of the w^orld was won at the Olympic games (191 2) by James Thorpe, a Carlisle Indian. He was at best the pick of 300,000, while against him were white men, the pick of 300,000,000.) The whole case, with its spiritual motive, is thus summed up by Eastman in his inspiring account of the religion of his people, the Dakotas: "The moment that man conceived of a perfect body, supple, symmetrical, graceful, and enduring — in that moment he had laid the foundation of a moral life. No man can hope to main- tain such a temple of the spirit beyond the period of adolescence.⁸³⁾The Spartans of the West 51 unless he is able to curb his indulgence in the pleasures of the senses. Upon this truth the Indian built a rigid system of physical training, a social and moral code that was the law of his life. "There was aroused in him as a child a high ideal of manly strength and beauty, the attainment of which must depend upon strict temperance in eating and in the sexual relation, together with severe and persistent exercise. He desired to be a worthy link in the generations, and that he might not destroy by his weakness that vigor and purity of blood which had been achieved at the cost of so much self-denial by a long line of ancestors. " He was required to fast from time to time for short periods and to work off his superfluous energy by means of hard running, swimming and the vapor bath. The bodily fatigue thus induced, especially when coupled with a reduced diet, is a reliable cure for undue sexual desires." (Eastman's "Soul of the Indian," pp. 90-92.) In their wonderful physique, the result of their life-long, age-long training, in their courage, their fortitude, their skill with weapons, their devoted patriotism, they realize more than any other modern race has done the ideal of the Spartan Greek, with this advantage; that, in his moral code, the Indian was far superior. IN GENERAL "I admit, " says Father Lallemant, of the Hurons, "that their habits and customs are barbarous in a thousand ways, but, after all, in matters which they consider as wrong, and which their public condemns, we observe among them less criminality than in France, although here the only punishment of a crime is the shame of having committed it." (“Century of Dishonor,” p. 378.) Even stronger is the summary of the Jesuit Father, J. F. Lafitau: "They are high-minded and proud; possess a courage equal to every trial, an intrepid valor, the most heroic constancy under⁸⁴⁾$2 The Book of Woodcraft torments, and an equanimity which neither misfortunes nor reverses can shake. Toward each other they behave with a natural politeness and attention, entertaining a high respect for the aged, and a consideration for their equals which appears scarcely reconciliable with that freedom and independence of which they are so jealous." (Moeurs des Sauv. Amer., 1724, quoted in “Century of Dishonor,” p. 378.) Long afterward the judicial Morgan in his League of the Iroquois, says, (p. 55): "In legislation, in eloquence, in fortitude, and in military sagacity, they had no equals. " Crimes and ofifences were so infrequent, under their social system, that the Iroquois can scarcely be said to have had a criminal code." Captain John H. Bourke, who spent most of his active life as an Indian fighter, and who, by training, was an Indian hater, was at last, even in the horror of an Indian- crushing campaign, compelled to admit: "The American Indian, born free as the eagle, would not tolerate restraint, would not brook injustice; therefore, the restraint imposed must be manifestly for his benefit, and the government to which he was subjected must be eminently one of kindness, mercy and absolute justice, without necessarily degenerating into weakness. The American Indian despises a liar. The American Indian is the most generous of mortals; at all his dances and feasts, the widow and the orphan are the first to be remembered." (Bourke's "On the Border with Crook," p. 226.) " Bad as the Indians often are, " says this same frontier veteran, "I have never yet seen one so demoralized that he was not an example in honor and nobility to the wretches who enrich them- selves by plundering him of the little our Government appor- tions for him." (Bourke's "On the Border with Crook," p. 445-)⁸⁵⁾ Catlin's summary of the race is thus:

“The North American Indian, in his native state, is an honest, hospitable, faithful, brave; warlike, cruel, revengeful, relentless — yet honorable — contemplative and religious being.” (Vol. I., p. 8.)

Omitting here what he gives elsewhere, that the Redman is clean, virtuous, of splendid physique, a master of woodcraft, and that to many of his best representatives, the above evil adjectives do not apply.

Bishop Whipple thus sums up the wild Indian, after intimate knowledge, during a lifetime of associations, (“Century of Dishonor,” Jackson; p. VII.):

“The North American Indian is the noblest type of a heathen man on the earth. He recognizes a Great Spirit; he believes in immortality; he has a quick intellect; he is a clear thinker; he is brave and fearless, and, until betrayed, he is true to his plighted faith; he has a passionate love for his children, and counts it a joy to die for his people. Our most terrible wars have been with the noblest types of the Indians and with men who had been the white man's friends. Nicolet said the Sioux were the finest type of wild men he had ever seen.”

Why, then, has he so long been caluminated? “Because,” explains the Bishop, “Ahab never speaks kindly of Naboth whom he has robbed of his vineyard. It soothes conscience to cast mud on the character of the one whom we have wronged.”

When General Crook, after he had crushed, and enabled the nation to plunder the Apaches, was ordered to the northward on a similar expedition against the Sioux, a friend said to him, “It is hard to go on such a campaign,” the General replied, “Yes, it is hard; but, sir, the hardest thing is to go and light those whom you know are in the right.” (“Century of Dishonor,” p. VI.)⁸⁶⁾54 The Book of Woodcraft Finally, let me reproduce in full the account by Bonne- ville, from which I have already selected portions: In 1834, he visited the Nez Perces and Flatheads, and thus sums up these wholly primitive Indians, for they were as yet uncorrupted by the whiskey-trader or those who preached the love of money. "They were friendly in their dispositions, honest to the most scrupulous degree in their intercourse with the white man." (P. 200.) " Simply to call these people rehgious would convey but a faint idea of the deep hue of piety and devotion which pervades their whole conduct. Their honesty is immaculate, and their purity of purpose and their observance of the rites of their religion are most uniform and remarkable. They are certainly more like a nation of saints than a horde of savages. " (" Cap- tain Bonneville's Narrative;" by Washington Irving, p. 171, 1837.) It would, I know, be quite easy to collect incidents — true ones — that would seem to contradict each of these claims for the Redman, especially if we look among the degraded Indians of the Reservations. But I do not con- sider them disproofs any more than I consider our religion disproved by the countless horrors and wickedness recorded every day as our daily history, in every newspaper in every corner of the land. The fact remains that this was the ideal of the Indian, and many times that ideal was exemplified in their great men, and at all times the influence of their laws was strong. One might select a hundred of these great Indians who led their people, as Plato led the Greeks or as Tolstoi led the Russians, and learn from each and all that dignity, strength, courtesy, courage, kindness, and reverence were indeed the ideals of the teepee folk, and that their ideal was realized more or less in all their history — that the noble Redman did indeed exist.⁸⁷⁾The Spartans of the West 55 The earliest of the northern Indians to win immortal fame was the great Mohawk, Hiawatha. Although the Longfellow version of his life is not sound as history, we know that there was such a man; he was a great hero; he stood for peace, brotherhood, and agriculture; and not only united the Five Nations in a Peace League, but made provision for the complete extension of that League to the whole of America. Pontiac, the Napoleon of his people; Tecumseh, the chevalier Bayard, who was great as warrior and statesman, as well as when he proclaimed the broad truths of humanity; Dull Knife, the Leonidas of the Cheyennes; Chief Joseph, the Xenophon of the Nez Perces; Wabasha, Little Wolf, Pita-Lesharu, Washakie, and a hundred others might be named to demonstrate the Redman's progress toward his ideals. SUMMARY Who that reads this record can help saying: "If these things be true, then, judging by its fruits, the Indian way must be better than ours. Wherein can we claim the better thought or results?" To answer is not easy. My first purpose was to clear the memory of the Redman. To compare his way with ours, we must set our best men against his, for there is Httle difference in our doctrine. One great difference in our ways is that, like the early Christians, the Indian was a Socialist. The tribe owned the ground, the rivers and the game; only personal property was owned by the individual, and even that, it was consid- ered a shame to greatly increase. For they held tnat greed grew into crime, and much property made men forget the poor. Our answer to this is that, without great property, that is⁸⁸⁾56 The Book of Woodcraft power in the hands of one man, most of the great business enterprises of the world could not have been; especially enterprises that required the prompt action impossible in a national commission. All great steps in national progress have been through some one man, to whom the light came, and to whom our system gave the power to realize his idea. The Indian's answer is, that all good things would have been established by the nation as it needed them; anything coming sooner comes too soon. The price of a very rich man is many poor ones, and peace of mind is worth more than railways and skyscrapers. In the Indian Ufe there was no great wealth, so also pov- erty and starvation were unknown, excepting under the blight of national disaster, against which no system can insure. Without a thought of shame or mendicancy, the young, helpless and aged all were cared for by the nation that, in the days of their strength, they were taught and eager to serve. And how did it work out? Thus: Avarice, said to be the root of all evil, and the dominant characteristic of our race, was unknown among Indians, indeed it was made impossible by the system they had developed. These facts long known to the few are slowly reaching all our people at large, in spite of shameless writers of history, that have done their best to discredit the Indian, and to that end have falsified every page and picture that promised to gain for him a measure of sympathy. Here are the simple facts of the long struggle between the two races: There never yet was a massacre of Indians by whites — and they were many — except in time of peace and made possible by treachery. There never yet was an Indian massacre of whites except in times of declared war to resist invasion.⁸⁹⁾The Spartans of the West 57 There never yet was an Indian war but was begun by the whites violating their solemn treaties, encroaching on the Indians' lands, stealing the Indians' property or murdering their people. There never yet was a successful campaign of whites against Indians except when the whites had other Indians to scout, lead and guide them ; otherwise the Redmen were too clever for the whites. There never yet was a successful war of whites against Indians except when the whites were in overwhelming numbers,with superior equipments and unHmited resources. There cannot be the slightest doubt that the Indian was crushed only by force of superior numbers. And had the tribes been united even, they might possibly have owned America to-day. Finally, a famous Indian fighter of the most desperate period thus summarizes the situation and the character of the dispossessed: "History can show no parallel to the heroism and fortitude of the American Indians in the two hundred years' fight during which they contested inch by inch the possession of their coun- try against a foe infinitely better equipped, with inexhaustible resources, and in overwhelming numbers. Had they even been equal in numbers, history might have had a very different story to tell. " (Gen. Nelson A. Miles, U. S. A., Letter, February i6, 1912.) I never yet knew a man who studied the Indians or lived among them, without becoming their warm friend and ardent admirer. Professor C. A. Nichols, of the South- western University, a deep student of Indian life, said to me, sadly, one day last autumn: "I am afraid we have stamped out a system that was producing men who, taken all around, were better than ourselves."⁹⁰⁾S8 The Book of Woodcraft Our soldiers, above all others, have been trained to hate the Redmen, and yet the evidence of those that have lived years with this primitive people is, to the same effect as that of missionaries and travelers, namely, that the high-class Indian was brave; he was obedient to authority. He was kind, clean and reverent. He was provident, unsordid, hospitable, dignified, courteous, truthful, and honest. He was the soul of honor. He lived a life of temperance and physical culture that he might perfect his body, and so he achieved a splendid physique. He was a wonderful hunter, a master of woodcraft, and a model for outdoor life in this country. He was heroic and picturesque all the time. He knew nothing of the forgiveness of sin, but he remembered his Creator all the days of his life, and was in truth one of the finest types of men the world has ever known. We set out to discover the noble Redman. Have we entirely failed? Surely,it is our duty, at least, to do justice to his memory, and that justice shall not fail of reward. For this lost and dying type can help us in many ways that we need, even as he did help us in the past. Have we forgotten that in everything the white pioneer learned of woodcraft, the Indian was the teacher? And when at length came on the white man's fight for freedom, it was the training he got from the Redman that gave him the victory. So again, to fight a different enemy to-day, he can help us. And in our search for the ideal outdoor Hfe, we cannot do better than take this Indian, with his reverence and his carefully cul- tured physique, as a model for the making of men, and as a pattern for our youth who would achieve high manhood, in the Spartan sense, with the added graces of courtesy, honor and truth.⁹¹⁾The Spartans of the West 59 The world knows no higher ideal than the Man of Gali- lee; nevertheless, oftentimes, it is helpful to the Plainsmen climbing Mount Shasta, if we lead them, first, to Sheep- Rock Shoulder, before attempting the Dome that looks down upon the clouds. STANDARD INDIAN BOOKS "Drake's Indian Chiefs, the lives of more than 200 Indian Chiefs, by Samuel G. Drake. Boston. 1832. "Adventures of Captain Bonneville," by Washington Irving, in 3 vols. London. 1837. An amazing record of the truly noble Redmen. "North American Indians," by George Catlin, in 2 vols. London. 1866. A famous book; with many illustrations. "Life Amongst the Modocs," by Joaquin Miller, Bentley & Son. London. 1873. A classic. The story of a white boy's life among the uncontaminated Redmen. "Indian Sign Language," by W. P. Clark. Philadelphia, Pa. 1884. A valuable cyclopedia of Indian life, as well as the best existing treatise on Sign Language. “A Century of Dishonor,” by Helen Jackson (H. H.). Boston. 1885. Treats of the shameful methods of the U. S. in dealing with Indians, an unbroken record of one hundred years of treachery, murder and infamy. "On the Border With Crook," by John G. Bourke, U. S. A. Scribner's Sons. New York. 1891. A soldier account of the Apache War. Setting out an Indian hater, he⁹²⁾6o The Book of Woodcraft learned the truth and returned to make a terrible ar- raignment of the U. S. Government. "Indian Boyhood," by Charles A. Eastman, M. D. Mc- Clure, Phillips & Co. New York. 1902. A Sioux Indian's story of his own boyhood. The Story of the Indian," by G. B. Grinnell. Appleton & Co. New York. 1902. "Two Wilderness Voyagers," by F. W. Calkins. Fleming H. Revell Co. New York. 1902, The Indian Babes in the Woods. "Lives of Famous Indian Chiefs," by W. B. Wood. Ameri- can Indian Hist. Pub. Co. Aurora, 111. 1906. "My Life as an Indian," by J. W. Schultz. Doubleday, Page & Co. New York. 1907. A white man's Ufe among the Blackfeet in the old days. "Handbook of American Indians," by F. W. Hodge and associates. Pub. in 2 large vols, by Smithsonian Insti- tution, Washington, D. C. 1907. This is a concise and valuable encyclopedia of Indian names and matters. "Famous Indian Chiefs I have Known," by Gen. O. O. Howard. U. S. A. The Century Co. New York. 1908. Treats of Osceola, Washakie, etc. from the white man's standpoint. "The Soul of the Indian," by Charles A. Eastman. Houghton, Mifilin Co. Boston & New York. 191 1. A Sioux Indian's account of his people's religion. "Legends of Vancouver," by Pauline Johnson. Thomson Stationery Co., Vancouver, B. C. 1912. A valuable collection of charming legends gathered on the West coast. Besides these the Annual Reports of the Bureau of Eth- nology, (1878 to date, Smithsonian Institution, Washing- ton, D. C.) are full of valuable information about Indians.

↑ Also called Seton Indians and Indian Scouts.
↑ Many supposed massacres by Indians are now known to have been the work of whites disguised as Indians.

[1] Also called Seton Indians and Indian Scouts.

[2] Many supposed massacres by Indians are now known to have been the work of whites disguised as Indians.

[1]

[2]

Neregistrovaný

Hledat

The Spartans of the West

Jmenné prostory

Více

Možnosti stránky

Obsah

II. The Spartans of the West

The Indian's Creed

The Dark Side

Reverence

Cleanliness

Chastity

Bravery

Thrift nad providence

Navigace

Thewoodcraft.org

Navigace

Wiki nástroje

Wiki nástroje

Neregistrovaný

Hledat

The Spartans of the West

II. The Spartans of the West

The Indian's Creed

The Dark Side

Reverence

Cleanliness

Chastity

Bravery

Thrift nad providence

Navigace

Wiki nástroje

Nástroje ke stránkám

Kategorie