Chapter VII: Part 7

Since Gallatin’s time, through the labors of Riggs, Hale, Tolmie, Dawson, Boas, and others, our knowledge of the territorial limits of this linguistic family has been greatly extended. The most southern outpost of the family, the Tillamook and Nestucca, were established on the coast of Oregon, about 50 miles to the south of the Columbia, where they were quite separated from their kindred to the north by the Chinookan tribes. Beginning on the north side of Shoalwater Bay, Salishan tribes held the entire northwestern part of Washington, including the whole of the Puget Sound region, except only the Macaw territory about Cape Flattery, and two insignificant spots, one near Port Townsend, the other on the Pacific coast to the south of Cape Flattery, which were occupied by Chimakuan tribes. Eastern Vancouver Island to about midway of its length was also held by Salishan tribes, while the great bulk of their territory lay on the mainland opposite and included much of the upper Columbia. On the south they were hemmed in mainly by the Shahaptian tribes. Upon the east Salishan tribes dwelt to a little beyond the Arrow Lakes and their feeder, one of the extreme north forks of the Columbia. Upon the southeast Salishan tribes extended into Montana, including the upper drainage of the Columbia. They were met here in 1804 by Lewis and Clarke. On the northeast Salish territory extended to about the fifty-third parallel. In the northwest it did not reach the Chilcat River.

Within the territory thus indicated there is considerable diversity of customs and a greater diversity of language. The language is split into a great number of dialects, many of which are doubtless mutually unintelligible.

The relationship of this family to the Wakashan is a very interesting problem. Evidences of radical affinity have been discovered by Boas and Gatschet, and the careful study of their nature and extent now being prosecuted by the former may result in the union of the two, though until recently they have been considered quite distinct.

PRINCIPAL TRIBES.

Atnah. Pentlatc. Skitsuish.
Bellacoola. Pisquow. Skokomish.
Chehalis. Puyallup. Skopamish.
Clallam. Quaitso. Sktehlmish.
Colville. Queniut. Smulkamish.
Comux. Queptlmamish. Snohomish.
Copalis. Sacumehu. Snoqualmi.
Cowichin. Sahewamish. Soke.
Cowlitz. Salish. Songish.
Dwamish. Samamish. Spokan.
Kwantlen. Samish. Squawmisht.
Lummi. Sanetch. Squaxon.
Met’how. Sans Puell. Squonamish.
Nanaimo. Satsop. Stehtsasamish.
Nanoos. Sawamish. Stillacum.
Nehalim. Sekamish. Sumass.
Nespelum. Shomamish. Suquamish.
Nicoutamuch. Shooswap. Swinamish.
Nisqualli. Shotlemamish. Tait.
Nuksahk. Skagit. Tillamook.
Okinagan. Skihwamish. Twana.
Pend d’Oreilles.

_Population._--The total Salish population of British Columbia is 12,325, inclusive of the Bellacoola, who number, with the Hailtzuk, 2,500, and those in the list of unclassified, who number 8,522, distributed as follows:

Under the Fraser River Agency, 4,986; Kamloops Agency, 2,579; Cowichan Agency, 1,852; Okanagan Agency, 942; Williams Lake Agency, 1,918; Kootenay Agency, 48.

Most of the Salish in the United States are on reservations. They number about 5,500, including a dozen small tribes upon the Yakama Reservation, which have been consolidated with the Clickatat (Shahaptian) through intermarriage. The Salish of the United States are distributed as follows (Indian Affairs Report, 1889, and U.S. Census Bulletin, 1890):

Colville Agency, Washington, Coeur d’ Alene, 422; Lower Spokane, 417; Lake, 303; Colville, 247; Okinagan, 374; Kespilem, 67; San Pueblo (Sans Puell), 300; Calispel, 200; Upper Spokane, 170.

Puyallup Agency, Washington, Quaitso, 82; Quinaielt (Queniut), 101; Humptulip, 19; Puyallup, 563; Chehalis, 135; Nisqually, 94; Squaxon, 60; Clallam, 351; Skokomish, 191; Oyhut, Hoquiam, Montesano, and Satsup, 29.

Tulalip Agency, Washington, Snohomish, 443; Madison, 144; Muckleshoot, 103; Swinomish, 227; Lummi, 295.

Grande Ronde Agency, Oregon, Tillamook, 5.

SASTEAN FAMILY.

= Saste, Hale in U.S. Expl. Exp., VI, 218, 569, 1846. Gallatin in
Trans. Am. Eth. Soc., II, pt. 1, c, 77, 1848. Berghaus (1851), Physik.
Atlas, map 17, 1852. Buschmann, Spuren der aztek. Sprache, 572, 1859.

= Shasty, Hale in U.S. Expl. Exp., VI, 218, 1846 (= Saste). Buschmann,
Spuren der aztek. Sprache, 573, 1859 (= Saste).

= Shasties, Hale in U.S. Expl. Exp., VI, 199, 569, 1846 (= Saste).
Berghaus (1851), Physik. Atlas, map 17, 1852.

= Shasti, Latham, Nat. Hist. Man, 325, 1850 (southwest of Lutuami).
Latham in Proc. Philolog. Soc., Lond., VI, 82, 1854. Latham, ibid, 74,
1856. Latham, Opuscula, 310, 341, 1860 (allied to both Shoshonean and
Shahaptian families). Latham, El. Comp. Phil., 407, 1862.

= Shaste, Gibbs in Schoolcraft, Ind. Tribes, III, 422, 1853 (mentions
Watsa-he’-wa, a Scott’s River band).

= Sasti, Gallatin in Schoolcraft, Ind. Tribes, III, 402, 1853
(= Shasties).

= Shasta, Powell in Cont. N.A. Eth., III, 607, 1877. Gatschet in Mag.
Am. Hist., 164, 1877. Gatschet in Beach, Ind. Misc., 438, 1877.

= Shas-ti-ka, Powers in Cont. N.A. Eth., III, 243, 1877.

= Shasta, Gatschet in Mag. Am. Hist., 164, 1877 (= Shasteecas).

< Shasta, Bancroft, Nat. Races, III, 565, 1882 (includes Palaik,
Watsahewah, Shasta).

< Klamath, Keane, App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent. and So. Am.), 475, 1878
(contains Shastas of present family).

Derivation: The single tribe upon the language of which Hale based his name was located by him to the southwest of the Lutuami or Klamath tribes. He calls the tribe indifferently Shasties or Shasty, but the form applied by him to the family (see pp. 218, 569) is Saste, which accordingly is the one taken.

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION.

The former territory of the Sastean family is the region drained by the Klamath River and its tributaries from the western base of the Cascade range to the point where the Klamath flows through the ridge of hills east of Happy Camp, which forms the boundary between the Sastean and the Quoratean families. In addition to this region of the Klamath, the Shasta extended over the Siskiyou range northward as far as Ashland, Oregon.

SHAHAPTIAN FAMILY.

X Shahaptan, Scouler in Jour. Roy. Geog. Soc., XI, 225, 1841 (three
tribes, Shahaptan or Nez-percés, Kliketat, Okanagan; the latter being
Salishan).

< Shahaptan, Prichard, Phys. Hist. Mankind, V, 428, 1847 (two classes,
Nez-perces proper of mountains, and Polanches of plains; includes also
Kliketat and Okanagan).

> Sahaptin, Hale in U.S. Expl. Expd., VI, 198, 212, 542, 1846
(Shahaptin or Nez-percés, Wallawallas, Pelooses, Yakemas, Klikatats).
Gallatin in Trans. Am. Eth. Soc., II, pt. 1, c, 14, 1848 (follows
Hale). Gallatin, ibid., II, pt. 1, c, 77, 1848 (Nez-percés only).
Berghaus (1851), Physik. Atlas, map 17, 1852. Gallatin in Schoolcraft,
Ind. Tribes, III, 402, 1853 (Nez-perces and Wallawallas). Dall, after
Gibbs, in Cont. N.A. Eth., 1, 241, 1877 (includes Taitinapam and
Kliketat).

> Saptin, Prichard, Phys. Hist. Mankind, V, 428, 1847 (or Shahaptan).

< Sahaptin, Latham, Nat. Hist. Man, 323, 1850 (includes Wallawallas,
Kliketat, Proper Sahaptin or Nez-percés, Pelús, Yakemas, Cayús?).
Latham in Trans. Philolog. Soc. Lond., 73, 1856 (includes Waiilatpu).
Buschmann, Spuren der aztek. Sprache, 614, 615, 1859. Latham,
Opuscula, 340, 1860 (as in 1856). Latham, El. Comp. Phil., 440, 1862
(vocabularies Sahaptin, Wallawalla, Kliketat). Keane, App. Stanford’s
Comp. (Cent, and So. Am.), 460, 474, 1878 (includes Palouse, Walla
Wallas, Yakimas, Tairtlas, Kliketats or Pshawanwappams, Cayuse,
Mollale; the two last are Waiilatpuan).

= Sahaptin, Gatschet in Mag. Am. Hist., 168, 1877 (defines habitat and
enumerates tribes of). Gatschet in Beach, Ind. Misc., 443, 1877.
Bancroft, Nat. Races, III, 565, 620, 1882.

> Shahaptani, Tolmie and Dawson, Comp. Vocabs., 78, 1884 (Whulwhaipum
tribe).

< Nez-percés, Prichard, Phys. Hist. Mankind, V, 428, 1847 (see
Shahaptan). Keane, App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent, and So. Am.), 474,
1878 (see his Sahaptin).

X Seliah, Dall, after Gibbs, in Cont. N.A. Eth., I, 241, 1877
(includes Yakama which belongs here).

Derivation: From a Selish word of unknown significance.

The Shahaptan family of Scouler comprised three tribes--the Shahaptan or Nez Percés, the Kliketat, a scion of the Shahaptan, dwelling near Mount Ranier, and the Okanagan, inhabiting the upper part of Fraser River and its tributaries; “these tribes were asserted to speak dialects of the same language.” Of the above tribes the Okinagan are now known to be Salishan.

The vocabularies given by Scouler were collected by Tolmie. The term “Sahaptin” appears on Gallatin’s map of 1836, where it doubtless refers only to the Nez Percé tribe proper, with respect to whose linguistic affinities Gallatin apparently knew nothing at the time. At all events the name occurs nowhere in his discussion of the linguistic families.

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION.

The tribes of this family occupied a large section of country along the Columbia and its tributaries. Their western boundary was the Cascade Mountains; their westernmost bands, the Klikitat on the north, the Tyigh and Warm Springs on the south, enveloping for a short distance the Chinook territory along the Columbia which extended to the Dalles. Shahaptian tribes extended along the tributaries of the Columbia for a considerable distance, their northern boundary being indicated by about the forty-sixth parallel, their southern by about the forty-fourth. Their eastern extension was interrupted by the Bitter Root Mountains.

PRINCIPAL TRIBES AND POPULATION.

Chopunnish (Nez Percé), 1,515 on Nez Percé Reservation, Idaho.
Klikitat, say one-half of 330 natives, on Yakama Reservation,
Washington.
Paloos, Yakama Reservation, number unknown.
Tenaino, 69 on Warm Springs Reservation, Oregon.
Tyigh, 430 on Warm Springs Reservation, Oregon.
Umatilla, 179 on Umatilla Reservation, Oregon.
Walla Walla, 405 on Umatilla Reservation, Oregon.

SHOSHONEAN FAMILY.

> Shoshonees, Gallatin in Trans. and Coll. Am. Antiq. Soc., II, 120,
133, 306, 1836 (Shoshonee or Snake only). Hale in U.S. Expl. Exp., VI,
218, 1846 (Wihinasht, Pánasht, Yutas, Sampiches, Comanches). Gallatin
in Trans. Am. Eth. Soc., II, pt. 1, c, 77, 1848 (as above). Gallatin,
ibid., 18, 1848 (follows Hale; see below). Gallatin in Schoolcraft,
Ind. Tribes, III, 402, 1853. Turner in Pac. R. R. Rep., III, pt. 3,
55, 71, 76, 1856 (treats only of Comanche, Chemehuevi, Cahuillo).
Buschmann, Spuren der aztek. Sprache, 553, 649, 1859.

> Shoshoni, Hale in U.S. Expl. Exp., VI, 199, 218, 569, 1846
(Shóshoni, Wihinasht, Pánasht, Yutas, Sampiches, Comanches). Latham in
Trans. Philolog. Soc. Lond., 73, 1856. Latham, Opuscula, 340, 1860.

> Schoschonenu Kamantschen, Berghaus (1845), Physik. Atlas, map 17,
1848. Ibid., 1852.

> Shoshones, Prichard, Phys. Hist. Mankind, V, 429, 1847 (or Snakes;
both sides Rocky Mountains and sources of Missouri).

= Shoshóni, Gatschet in Mag. Am. Hist. 154, 1877. Gatschet in Beach,
Ind. Misc., 426, 1877.

< Shoshone, Keane, App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent. and So. Am.), 460,
477, 1878 (includes Washoes of a distinct family). Bancroft, Nat.
Races, III, 567, 661, 1882.

> Snake, Gallatin in Trans. and Coll. Am. Antiq. Soc., II, 120, 133,
1836 (or Shoshonees). Hale in U.S. Expl. Exp., VI, 218, 1846 (as under
Shoshonee). Prichard, Phys. Hist. Mankind, V, 429, 1847 (as under
Shoshones). Turner in Pac. R. R. Rep., III, pt. 3, 76, 1856 (as under
Shoshonees). Buschmann, Spuren der aztek. Sprache, 552, 649, 1859 (as
under Shoshonees).

< Snake, Keane, App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent. and So. Am.), 477, 1878
(contains Washoes in addition to Shoshonean tribes proper).

> Kizh, Hale in U.S. Expl. Exp., VI, 569, 1846 (San Gabriel language
only).

> Netela, Hale, ibid., 569, 1846 (San Juan Capestrano language).

> Paduca, Prichard, Phys. Hist. Mankind, V, 415, 1847 (Cumanches,
Kiawas, Utas). Latham, Nat. Hist., Man., 310, 326, 1850. Latham (1853)
in Proc. Philolog. Soc. Lond., VI, 73, 1854 (includes Wihinast,
Shoshoni, Uta). Latham in Trans. Philolog. Soc. Lond., 96, 1856.
Latham, Opuscula, 300, 360, 1860.

< Paduca, Latham, Nat. Hist. Man., 346, 1850 (Wihinast, Bonaks,
Diggers, Utahs, Sampiches, Shoshonis, Kiaways, Kaskaias?, Keneways?,
Bald-heads, Cumanches, Navahoes, Apaches, Carisos). Latham, El. Comp.
Phil., 440, 1862 (defines area of; cites vocabs. of Shoshoni,
Wihinasht, Uta, Comanch, Piede or Pa-uta, Chemuhuevi, Cahuillo,
Kioway, the latter not belonging here).

> Cumanches, Gallatin in Schoolcraft, Ind. Tribes, III, 402, 1853.

> Netela-Kij, Latham (1853) in Trans. Philolog. Soc. Lond., VI, 76,
1854 (composed of Netela of Hale, San Juan Capistrano of Coulter, San
Gabriel of Coulter, Kij of Hale).

> Capistrano, Latham in Proc. Philolog. Soc. Lond., 85, 1856 (includes
Netela, of San Luis Rey and San Juan Capistrano, the San Gabriel or
Kij of San Gabriel and San Fernando).

In his synopsis of the Indian tribes[78] Gallatin’s reference to this great family is of the most vague and unsatisfactory sort. He speaks of “some bands of Snake Indians or Shoshonees, living on the waters of the river Columbia” (p. 120), which is almost the only allusion to them to be found. The only real claim he possesses to the authorship of the family name is to be found on page 306, where, in his list of tribes and vocabularies, he places “Shoshonees” among his other families, which is sufficient to show that he regarded them as a distinct linguistic group. The vocabulary he possessed was by Say.

[Footnote 78: Trans. and Coll. Am. Antiq. Soc., II, 1836.]

Buschmann, as above cited, classes the Shoshonean languages as a northern branch of his Nahuatl or Aztec family, but the evidence presented for this connection is deemed to be insufficient.

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION.

This important family occupied a large part of the great interior basin of the United States. Upon the north Shoshonean tribes extended far into Oregon, meeting Shahaptian territory on about the forty-fourth parallel or along the Blue Mountains. Upon the northeast the eastern limits of the pristine habitat of the Shoshonean tribes are unknown. The narrative of Lewis and Clarke[79] contains the explicit statement that the Shoshoni bands encountered upon the Jefferson River, whose summer home was upon the head waters of the Columbia, formerly lived within their own recollection in the plains to the east of the Rocky Mountains, whence they were driven to their mountain retreats by the Minnetaree (Atsina), who had obtained firearms. Their former habitat thus given is indicated upon the map, although the eastern limit is of course quite indeterminate. Very likely much of the area occupied by the Atsina was formerly Shoshonean territory. Later a division of the Bannock held the finest portion of southwestern Montana,[80] whence apparently they were being pushed westward across the mountains by Blackfeet.[81] Upon the east the Tukuarika or Sheepeaters held the Yellowstone Park country, where they were bordered by Siouan territory, while the Washaki occupied southwestern Wyoming. Nearly the entire mountainous part of Colorado was held by the several bands of the Ute, the eastern and southeastern parts of the State being held respectively by the Arapaho and Cheyenne (Algonquian), and the Kaiowe (Kiowan). To the southeast the Ute country included the northern drainage of the San Juan, extending farther east a short distance into New Mexico. The Comanche division of the family extended farther east than any other. According to Crow tradition the Comanche formerly lived northward in the Snake River region. Omaha tradition avers that the Comanche were on the Middle Loup River, probably within the present century. Bourgemont found a Comanche tribe on the upper Kansas River in 1724.[82] According to Pike the Comanche territory bordered the Kaiowe on the north, the former occupying the head waters of the upper Red River, Arkansas, and Rio Grande.[83] How far to the southward Shoshonean tribes extended at this early period is not known, though the evidence tends to show that they raided far down into Texas to the territory they have occupied in more recent years, viz, the extensive plains from the Rocky Mountains eastward into Indian Territory and Texas to about 97°. Upon the south Shoshonean territory was limited generally by the Colorado River. The Chemehuevi lived on both banks of the river between the Mohave on the north and the Cuchan on the south, above and below Bill Williams Fork.[84] The Kwaiantikwoket also lived to the east of the river in Arizona about Navajo Mountain, while the Tusayan (Moki) had established their seven pueblos, including one founded by people of Tañoan stock, to the east of the Colorado Chiquito. In the southwest Shoshonean tribes had pushed across California, occupying a wide band of country to the Pacific. In their extension northward they had reached as far as Tulare Lake, from which territory apparently they had dispossessed the Mariposan tribes, leaving a small remnant of that linguistic family near Fort Tejon.[85]

[Footnote 79: Allen ed., Philadelphia, 1814, vol. 1, p. 418.]

[Footnote 80: U.S. Ind. Aff., 1869, p. 289.]

[Footnote 81: Stevens in Pac. R. R. Rep., 1855, vol. 1, p. 329.]

[Footnote 82: Lewis and Clarke, Allen ed., 1814, vol. 1, p. 34.]

[Footnote 83: Pike, Expl. to sources of the Miss., app. pt. 3, 16,
1810.]

[Footnote 84: Ives, Colorado River, 1861, p. 54.]

[Footnote 85: Powers in Cont. N.A. Eth., 1877, vol. 3, p. 369.]

A little farther north they had crossed the Sierras and occupied the heads of San Joaquin and Kings Rivers. Northward they occupied nearly the whole of Nevada, being limited on the west by the Sierra Nevada. The entire southeastern part of Oregon was occupied by tribes of Shoshoni extraction.

PRINCIPAL TRIBES AND POPULATION.

Bannock, 514 on Fort Hall Reservation
and 75 on the Lemhi Reservation, Idaho.
Chemehuevi, about 202 attached to the Colorado River Agency, Arizona.
Comanche, 1,598 on the Kiowa, Comanche and Wichita Reservation,
Indian Territory.
Gosiute, 256 in Utah at large.
Pai Ute, about 2,300 scattered in southeastern California and
southwestern Nevada.
Paviotso, about 3,000 scattered in western Nevada and southern Oregon.
Saidyuka, 145 under Klamath Agency.
Shoshoni, 979 under Fort Hall Agency and 249 at the Lemhi Agency.
Tobikhar, about 2,200, under the Mission Agency, California.
Tukuarika, or Sheepeaters, 108 at Lemhi Agency.
Tusayan (Moki), 1,996 (census of 1890).
Uta, 2,839 distributed as follows:
985 under Southern Ute Agency, Colorado;
1,021 on Ouray Reserve, Utah;
833 on Uintah Reserve, Utah.

SIOUAN FAMILY.

X Sioux, Gallatin in Trans. and Coll. Am. Antiq. Soc., II, 121, 306,
1836 (for tribes included see text below). Prichard, Phys. Hist.
Mankind, V, 408, 1847 (follows Gallatin). Gallatin in Trans. Am. Eth.
Soc., II, pt. 1, xcix, 77, 1848 (as in 1836). Berghaus (1845), Physik.
Atlas, map 17, 1848. Ibid., 1852. Gallatin in Schoolcraft, Ind.
Tribes, III, 402, 1853. Berghaus, Physik. Atlas, map 72, 1887.

> Sioux, Latham, Nat. Hist. Man, 333, 1850 (includes Winebagoes,
Dakotas, Assineboins, Upsaroka, Mandans, Minetari, Osage). Latham in
Trans. Philolog. Soc. Lond., 58, 1856 (mere mention of family).
Latham, Opuscula, 327, 1860. Latham, El. Comp. Phil, 458, 1862.

> Catawbas, Gallatin in Trans. and Coll. Am. Antiq. Soc., II, 87, 1836
(Catawbas and Woccons). Bancroft, Hist. U.S., III, 245, et map, 1840.
Prichard, Phys. Hist. Mankind, V, 399, 1847. Gallatin in Trans. Am.
Eth. Soc., II, pt. 1, xcix, 77, 1848. Keane, App. Stanford’s Comp.
(Cent. and So. Am.), 460, 473, 1878.

> Catahbas, Berghaus (1845), Physik. Atlas, map 17, 1848. Ibid., 1852.

> Catawba, Latham, Nat. Hist. Man., 334, 1850 (Woccoon are allied).
Gallatin in Schoolcraft, Ind. Tribes, III, 401, 1853.

> Kataba, Gatschet in Am. Antiquarian, IV, 238, 1882. Gatschet, Creek
Mig. Legend, I, 15, 1884. Gatschet in Science, 413, April 29, 1887.

> Woccons, Gallatin in Trans. and Coll. Am. Antiq. Soc., II, 306, 1836
(numbered and given as a distinct family in table, but inconsistently
noted in foot-note where referred to as Catawban family.)

> Dahcotas, Bancroft, Hist. U.S., III, 243, 1840.

> Dakotas, Hayden, Cont. Eth. and Phil. Missouri Ind., 232, 1862
(treats of Dakotas, Assiniboins, Crows, Minnitarees, Mandans, Omahas,
Iowas).

> Dacotah, Keane, App. to Stanford’s Comp. (Cent. and So. Am.), 460,
470, 1878. (The following are the main divisions given: Isaunties,
Sissetons, Yantons, Teetons, Assiniboines, Winnebagos, Punkas, Omahas,
Missouris, Iowas, Otoes, Kaws, Quappas, Osages, Upsarocas,
Minnetarees.)

> Dakota, Berghaus, Physik. Atlas, map 72, 1887.

Derivation: A corruption of the Algonkin word “nadowe-ssi-wag,” “the snake-like ones,” “the enemies” (Trumbull).

Under the family Gallatin makes four subdivisions, viz, the Winnebagos, the Sioux proper and the Assiniboins, the Minnetare group, and the Osages and southern kindred tribes. Gallatin speaks of the distribution of the family as follows: The Winnebagoes have their principal seats on the Fox River of Lake Michigan and towards the heads of the Rock River of the Mississippi; of the Dahcotas proper, the Mendewahkantoan or “Gens du Lac” lived east of the Mississippi from Prairie du Chien north to Spirit Lake. The three others, Wahkpatoan, Wahkpakotoan and Sisitoans inhabit the country between the Mississippi and the St. Peters, and that on the southern tributaries of this river and on the headwaters of the Red River of Lake Winnipek. The three western tribes, the Yanktons, the Yanktoanans and the Tetons wander between the Mississippi and the Missouri, extending southerly to 43° of north latitude and some distance west of the Missouri, between 43° and 47° of latitude. The “Shyennes” are included in the family but are marked as doubtfully belonging here.

Owing to the fact that “Sioux” is a word of reproach and means snake or enemy, the term has been discarded by many later writers as a family designation, and “Dakota,” which signifies friend or ally, has been employed in its stead. The two words are, however, by no means properly synonymous. The term “Sioux” was used by Gallatin in a comprehensive or family sense and was applied to all the tribes collectively known to him to speak kindred dialects of a widespread language. It is in this sense only, as applied to the linguistic family, that the term is here employed. The term “Dahcota” (Dakota) was correctly applied by Gallatin to the Dakota tribes proper as distinguished from the other members of the linguistic family who are not Dakotas in a tribal sense. The use of the term with this signification should be perpetuated.

It is only recently that a definite decision has been reached respecting the relationship of the Catawba and Woccon, the latter an extinct tribe known to have been linguistically related to the Catawba. Gallatin thought that he was able to discern some affinities of the Catawban language with “Muskhogee and even with Choctaw,” though these were not sufficient to induce him to class them together. Mr. Gatschet was the first to call attention to the presence in the Catawba language of a considerable number of words having a Siouan affinity.

Recently Mr. Dorsey has made a critical examination of all the Catawba linguistic material available, which has been materially increased by the labors of Mr. Gatschet, and the result seems to justify its inclusion as one of the dialects of the widespread Siouan family.

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION.

The pristine territory of this family was mainly in one body, the only exceptions being the habitats of the Biloxi, the Tutelo, the Catawba and Woccon.

Contrary to the popular opinion of the present day, the general trend of Siouan migration has been westward. In comparatively late prehistoric times, probably most of the Siouan tribes dwelt east of the Mississippi River.

The main Siouan territory extended from about 53° north in the Hudson Bay Company Territory, to about 33°, including a considerable part of the watershed of the Missouri River and that of the Upper Mississippi. It was bounded on the northwest, north, northeast, and for some distance on the east by Algonquian territory. South of 45° north the line ran eastward to Lake Michigan, as the Green Bay region belonged to the Winnebago.[86]

[Footnote 86: See treaty of Prairie du Chien, 1825.]

It extended westward from Lake Michigan through Illinois, crossing the Mississippi River at Prairie du Chien. At this point began the Algonquian territory (Sac, etc.) on the west side of the Mississippi, extending southward to the Missouri, and crossing that river it returned to the Mississippi at St. Louis. The Siouan tribes claimed all of the present States of Iowa and Missouri, except the parts occupied by Algonquian tribes. The dividing line between the two for a short distance below St. Louis was the Mississippi River. The line then ran west of Dunklin, New Madrid, and Pemiscot Counties, in Missouri, and Mississippi County and those parts of Craighead and Poinsett Counties, Arkansas, lying east of the St. Francis River. Once more the Mississippi became the eastern boundary, but in this case separating the Siouan from the Muskhogean territory. The Quapaw or Akansa were the most southerly tribe in the main Siouan territory. In 1673[87] they were east of the Mississippi. Joutel (1687) located two of their villages on the Arkansas and two on the Mississippi one of the latter being on the east bank, in our present State of Mississippi, and the other being on the opposite side, in Arkansas. Shea says[88] that the Kaskaskias were found by De Soto in 1540 in latitude 36°, and that the Quapaw were higher up the Mississippi. But we know that the southeast corner of Missouri and the northeast corner of Arkansas, east of the St. Francis River, belonged to Algonquian tribes. A study of the map of Arkansas shows reason for believing that there may have been a slight overlapping of habitats, or a sort of debatable ground. At any rate it seems advisable to compromise, and assign the Quapaw and Osage (Siouan tribes) all of Arkansas up to about 36° north.

[Footnote 87: Marquette’s Autograph Map.]

[Footnote 88: Disc. of Miss. Valley, p. 170, note.]

On the southwest of the Siouan family was the Southern Caddoan group, the boundary extending from the west side of the Mississippi River in Louisiana, nearly opposite Vicksburg, Mississippi, and running northwestwardly to the bend of Red River between Arkansas and Louisiana; thence northwest along the divide between the watersheds of the Arkansas and Red Rivers. In the northwest corner of Indian Territory the Osages came in contact with the Comanche (Shoshonean), and near the western boundary of Kansas the Kiowa, Cheyenne, and Arapaho (the two latter being recent Algonquian intruders?) barred the westward march of the Kansa or Kaw.

The Pawnee group of the Caddoan family in western Nebraska and northwestern Kansas separated the Ponka and Dakota on the north from the Kansa on the south, and the Omaha and other Siouan tribes on the east from Kiowa and other tribes on the west. The Omaha and cognate peoples occupied in Nebraska the lower part of the Platte River, most of the Elkhorn Valley, and the Ponka claimed the region watered by the Niobrara in northern Nebraska.

There seems to be sufficient evidence for assigning to the Crows (Siouan) the northwest corner of Nebraska (i.e., that part north of the Kiowan and Caddoan habitats) and the southwest part of South Dakota (not claimed by Cheyenne[89]), as well as the northern part of Wyoming and the southern part of Montana, where they met the Shoshonean stock.[90]

[Footnote 89: See Cheyenne treaty, in Indian Treaties, 1873, pp.
124, 5481-5489.]

[Footnote 90: Lewis and Clarke, Trav., Lond., 1807, p. 25. Lewis
and Clarke, Expl., 1874, vol. 2, p. 390. A. L. Riggs, MS. letter
to Dorsey, 1876 or 1877. Dorsey, Ponka tradition: “The Black Hills
belong to the Crows.” That the Dakotas were not there till this
century see Corbusier’s Dakota Winter Counts, in 4th Rept. Bur.
Eth., p. 130, where it is also said that the Crow were the
original owners of the Black Hills.]

The Biloxi habitat in 1699 was on the Pascogoula river,[91] in the southeast corner of the present State of Mississippi. The Biloxi subsequently removed to Louisiana, where a few survivors were found by Mr. Gatschet in 1886.

[Footnote 91: Margry, Découvertes, vol. 4, p. 195.]

The Tutelo habitat in 1671 was in Brunswick County, southern Virginia, and it probably included Lunenburgh and Mecklenburg Counties.[92] The Earl of Bellomont (1699) says[93] that the Shateras were “supposed to be the Toteros, on Big Sandy River, Virginia,” and Pownall, in his map of North America (1776), gives the Totteroy (i.e., Big Sandy) River. Subsequently to 1671 the Tutelo left Virginia and moved to North Carolina.[94] They returned to Virginia (with the Sapona), joined the Nottaway and Meherrin, whom they and the Tuscarora followed into Pennsylvania in the last century; thence they went to New York, where they joined the Six Nations, with whom they removed to Grand River Reservation, Ontario, Canada, after the Revolutionary war. The last full-blood Tutelo died in 1870. For the important discovery of the Siouan affinity of the Tutelo language we are indebted to Mr. Hale.

[Footnote 92: Batts in Doc. Col. Hist. N.Y., 1853, vol. 3, p. 194.
Harrison, MS. letter to Dorsey, 1886.]

[Footnote 93: Doc. Col. Hist. N.Y., 1854, vol. 4. p. 488.]

[Footnote 94: Lawson, Hist. Carolina, 1714; reprint of 1860,
p. 384.]

The Catawba lived on the river of the same name on the northern boundary of South Carolina. Originally they were a powerful tribe, the leading people of South Carolina, and probably occupied a large part of the Carolinas. The Woccon were widely separated from kinsmen living in North Carolina in the fork of the Cotentnea and Neuse Rivers.

The Wateree, living just below the Catawba, were very probably of the same linguistic connection.

PRINCIPAL TRIBES.

I. _Dakota_.

(A) Santee: include Mde´-wa-kaⁿ-toⁿ-waⁿ (Spirit Lake village, Santee
Reservation, Nebraska), and Wa-qpe´-ku-te (Leaf Shooters);
some on Fort Peck Reservation, Montana.

(B) Sisseton (Si-si´-toⁿ-waⁿ), on Sisseton Reservation, South Dakota,
and part on Devil’s Lake Reservation, North Dakota.

(C) Wahpeton (Wa-qpe´-toⁿ-waⁿ, Wa-hpe-ton-wan); Leaf village.
Some on Sisseton Reservation; most on Devil’s Lake Reservation.

(D) Yankton (I-hañk´-toⁿ-waⁿ), at Yankton Reservation, South Dakota.

(E) Yanktonnais (I-hañk´-toⁿ-waⁿ´-na); divided into _Upper_ and
_Lower_. Of the _Upper Yanktonnais_, there are some of the
_Cut-head band_ (Pa´-ba-ksa gens) on Devil’s Lake Reservation.
_Upper Yanktonnais_, most are on Standing Rock Reservation, North
Dakota; _Lower Yanktonnais_, most are on Crow Creek Reservation,
South Dakota, some are on Standing Rock Reservation, and some on
Fort Peck Reservation, Montana.

(F) Teton (Ti-toⁿ-waⁿ); some on Fort Peck Reservation, Montana.

(a) _Brulé_ (Si-tcaⁿ´-xu); some are on Standing Rock Reservation.
Most of the _Upper Brulé_ (Highland Sitcaⁿxu) are on Rosebud
Reservation, South Dakota. Most of the _Lower Brulé_ (Lowland
Sitcaⁿxu) are on Lower Brulé Reservation, South Dakota.

(b) _Sans Arcs_ (I-ta´-zip-tco´, Without Bows).
Most are on Cheyenne Reservation, South Dakota; some on Standing
Rock Reservation.

(c) _Blackfeet_ (Si-ha´sa´-pa).
Most are on Cheyenne Reservation; some on Standing Rock
Reservation.

(d) _Minneconjou_ (Mi´-ni-ko´-o-ju).
Most are on Cheyenne Reservation, some are on Rosebud Reservation,
and some on Standing Rock Reservation.

(e) _Two Kettles_ (O-o´-he-noⁿ´-pa, Two Boilings), on Cheyenne
Reservation.

(f) _Ogalalla_ (O-gla´-la). Most on Pine Ridge Reservation, South
Dakota; some on Standing Rock Reservation. _Wa-ża-ża_ (Wa-ja-ja,
Wa-zha-zha), a gens of the Oglala (Pine Ridge Reservation);
_Loafers_ (Wa-glu-xe, In-breeders), a gens of the Oglala;
most on Pine Ridge Reservation; some on Rosebud Reservation.

(g) _Uncpapa_ (1862-’63), _Uncapapa_ (1880-’81), (Huñ´-kpa-pa), on
Standing Rock Reservation.

II. _Assinaboin_ (Hohe, Dakota name); most in British North America;
some on Fort Peck Reservation, Montana.

III. _Omaha_ (U-maⁿ´-haⁿ), on Omaha Reservation, Nebraska.

IV. _Ponca_ (formerly _Ponka_ on maps; Ponka); 605 on Ponca Reservation,
Indian Territory; 217 at Santee Agency, Nebraska.

[Transcriber’s Note: [K] and [S] represent inverted K and S]

V. _Kaw_ ([K]aⁿ´-ze; the Kansa Indians); on the Kansas Reservation,
Indian Territory.

VI. _Osage_; _Big Osage_ (Pa-he´-tsi, Those on a Mountain); _Little
Osage_ (Those at the foot of the Mountain); _Arkansas Band_
([S]an-ʇsu-ʞ¢iⁿ, Dwellers in a Highland Grove), Osage Reservation,
Indian Territory.

VII. _Quapaw_ (U-ʞa´-qpa; Kwapa). A few are on the Quapaw Reserve, but
about 200 are on the Osage Reserve, Oklahoma. (They are the _Arkansa_
of early times.)

VIII. _Iowa_, on Great Nemaha Reserve, Kansas and Nebraska, and 86 on
Sac and Fox Reserve, Indian Territory.

IX. _Otoe_ (Wa-to´-qta-ta), on Otoe Reserve, Indian Territory.

X. _Missouri_ or _Missouria_ (Ni-u´-t’a-tci), on Otoe Reserve.

XI. _Winnebago_ (Ho-tcañ´-ga-ra); most in Nebraska, on their reserve:
some are in Wisconsin; some in Michigan, according to Dr. Reynolds.

XII. _Mandan_, on Fort Berthold Reserve, North Dakota.

XIII. _Gros Ventres_ (a misleading name; syn. _Minnetaree_; Hi-da´-tsa);
on the same reserve.

XIV. _Crow_ (Absáruqe, Aubsároke, etc.), Crow Reserve, Montana.

XV. _Tutelo_ (Ye-saⁿ´); among the Six Nations, Grand River Reserve,
Province of Ontario, Canada.

XVI. _Biloxi_ (Ta´-neks ha´-ya), part on the Red River, at Avoyelles,
Louisiana; part in Indian Territory, among the Choctaw and Caddo.

XVII. _Catawba_.

XVIII. _Woccon_.

_Population._--The present number of the Siouan family is about 43,400, of whom about 2,204 are in British North America, the rest being in the United States. Below is given the population of the tribes officially recognized, compiled chiefly from the Canadian Indian Report for 1888, the United States Indian Commissioner’s Report for 1889, and the United States Census Bulletin for 1890:

Dakota:
Mdewakantonwan and Wahpekute (Santee) on Santee Reserve,
Nebraska 869
At Flandreau, Dakota 292
Santee at Devil’s Lake Agency 54
Sisseton and Wahpeton on Sisseton Reserve, South Dakota 1,522
Sisseton, Wahpeton, and Cuthead (Yanktonnais)
at Devil’s Lake Reservation 857

Yankton:
On Yankton Reservation, South Dakota 1,725
At Devil’s Lake Agency 123
On Fort Peck Reservation, Montana 1,121
A few on Crow Creek Reservation, South Dakota 10
A few on Lower Brulé Reservation, South Dakota 10
----- 2,989
Yanktonnais:
Upper Yanktonnais on Standing Rock Reservation 1,786
Lower Yanktonnais on Crow Creek Reservation 1,058
At Standing Rock Agency 1,739
----- 4,583
Teton:
Brulé, Upper Brulé on Rosebud Reservation 3,245
On Devil’s Lake Reservation 2
Lower Brulé at Crow Creek and Lower Brulé Agency 1,026
Minneconjou (mostly) and Two Kettle, on Cheyenne
River Reserve 2,823
Blackfeet on Standing Rock Reservation 545
Two Kettle on Rosebud Reservation 315
Oglala on Pine Ridge Reservation 4,552
Wajaja (Oglala gens) on Rosebud Reservation 1,825
Wagluxe (Oglala gens) on Rosebud Reservation 1,353
Uncapapa, on Standing Rock Reservation 571
Dakota at Carlisle, Lawrence, and Hampton schools 169
----- 16,426
Dakota in British North America (tribes not stated):
On Bird Tail Sioux Reserve, Birtle Agency,
Northwest Territory 108
On Oak River Sioux Reserve, Birtle Agency 276
On Oak Lake Sioux Reserve, Birtle Agency 55
On Turtle Mountain Sioux Reserve, Birtle Agency 34
On Standing Buffalo Reserve, under Northwest Territory 184
Muscowpetung’s Agency:
White Cap Dakota (Moose Woods Reservation) 105
American Sioux (no reserve) 95
----- 857
Assinaboin:
On Fort Belknap Reservation, Montana 952
On Fort Peck Reservation, Montana 719
At Devil’s Lake Agency 2
The following are in British North America:
Pheasant Rump’s band, at Moose Mountain (of whom 6 at
Missouri and 4 at Turtle Mountain) 69
Ocean Man’s band, at Moose Mountain (of whom 4 at
Missouri) 68
The-man-who-took-the-coat’s band, at Indian Head (of
whom 5 are at Milk River) 248
Bear’s Head band, Battleford Agency 227
Chee-pooste-quahn band, at Wolf Creek, Peace Hills
Agency 128
Bear’s Paw band, at Morleyville 236
Chiniquy band, Reserve, at Sarcee Agency 134
Jacob’s band 227
----- 3,008
Omaha:
Omaha and Winnebago Agency, Nebraska 1,158
At Carlisle School, Pennsylvania 19
At Hampton School, Virginia 10
At Lawrence School, Kansas 10
----- 1,197
Ponka:
In Nebraska (under the Santee agent) 217
In Indian Territory (under the Ponka agent) 605
At Carlisle, Pennsylvania 1
At Lawrence, Kansas 24
----- 847
Osage:
At Osage Agency, Indian Territory 1,509
At Carlisle, Pennsylvania 7
At Lawrence, Kansas 65
----- 1,581
Kansa or Kaw:
At Osage Agency, Indian Territory 198
At Carlisle, Pennsylvania 1
At Lawrence, Kansas 15
----- 214
Quapaw:
On Quapaw Reserve, Indian Territory 154
On Osage Reserve, Indian Territory 71
At Carlisle, Pennsylvania 3
At Lawrence, Kansas 4
----- 232
Iowa:
On Great Nemaha Reservation, Kansas 165
On Sac and Fox Reservation, Oklahoma 102
At Carlisle, Pennsylvania 1
At Lawrence, Kansas 5
----- 273

Oto and Missouri, in Indian Territory 358

Winnebago:
In Nebraska 1,215
In Wisconsin (1889) 930
At Carlisle, Pennsylvania 27
At Lawrence, Kansas 2
At Hampton, Virginia 10
----- 2,184
Mandan:
On Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota 251
At Hampton, Virginia 1
----- 252

Hidatsa, on Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota 522

Crow, on Crow Reservation, Montana 2,287

Tutelo, about a dozen mixed bloods on Grand River
Reserve, Ontario, Canada, and a few more near
Montreal (?), say, about 20

Biloxi:
In Louisiana, about 25
At Atoka, Indian Territory 1
----- 26
Catawba:
In York County, South Carolina, about 80
Scattered through North Carolina, about 40?
----- 120?

SKITTAGETAN FAMILY.

> Skittagets, Gallatin in Trans. and Coll. Am. Eth. Soc., II, pt. 1,
c, 1848 (the equivalent of his Queen Charlotte’s Island group, p. 77).

> Skittagetts, Berghaus, Physik. Atlas, map 17, 1852.

> Skidegattz, Gallatin in Schoolcraft, Ind. Tribes, III, 403, 1853
(obvious typographical error; Queen Charlotte Island).

X Haidah, Scouler in Jour. Roy. Geog. Soc. Lond., XI, 224, 1841 (same
as his Northern family; see below).

= Haidah, Latham, Nat. Hist. Man, 300, 1850 (Skittegats, Massets,
Kumshahas, Kyganie). Latham in Trans. Philolog. Soc. Lond., 72, 1856
(includes Skittigats, Massetts, Kumshahas, and Kyganie of Queen
Charlotte’s Ids. and Prince of Wales Archipelago). Latham, Opuscula,
339, 1860. Buschmann, Spuren der aztek. Sprache, 673, 1859. Latham,
El. Comp. Phil., 401, 1862 (as in 1856). Dall in Proc. Am. Ass’n. 269,
1869 (Queen Charlotte’s Ids. and southern part of Alexander
Archipelago). Bancroft, Nat. Races, III, 564, 604, 1882.

> Hai-dai, Schoolcraft, Ind. Tribes, V, 489, 1855. Kane, Wanderings of
an Artist, app., 1859, (Work’s census, 1836-’41, of northwest coast
tribes, classified by language).

= Haida, Gibbs in Cont. N.A. Eth., I, 135, 1877. Tolmie and Dawson,
Comp. Vocabs., 15, 1884 (vocabs. of Kaigani Sept, Masset, Skidegate,
Kumshiwa dialects; also map showing distribution). Dall in Proc. Am.
Ass’n, 375, 1885 (mere mention of family).

< Hydahs, Keane, App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent. and So. Am.), 460, 473,
1878 (enumerates Massets, Klue, Kiddan, Ninstance, Skid-a-gate,
Skid-a-gatees, Cum-she-was, Kaiganies, Tsimsheeans, Nass, Skeenas,
Sebasses, Hailtzas, Bellacoolas).

> Queen Charlotte’s Island, Gallatin in Trans. and Coll. Am. Antiq.
Soc., II, 15, 306, 1836 (no tribe indicated). Gallatin in Trans. Am.
Eth. Soc., II, pt. 1, 77, 1848 (based on Skittagete language). Latham
in Jour. Eth. Soc. Lond., 1, 154, 1848. Latham, Opuscula, 349, 1860.

X Northern, Scouler in Jour. Roy. Geog. Soc. Lond., XI, 219, 1841
(includes Queen Charlotte’s Island and tribes on islands and coast up
to 60° N.L.; Haidas, Massettes, Skittegás, Cumshawás). Prichard,
Phys. Hist. Mankind, V, 433, 1847 (follows Scouler).

= Kygáni, Dall in Proc. Am. Ass’n, 269, 1869 (Queen Charlotte’s Ids.
or Haidahs).

X Nootka, Bancroft, Nat. Races, III, 564, 1882 (contains Quane,
probably of present family; Quactoe, Saukaulutuck).

The vocabulary referred by Gallatin[95] to “Queen Charlotte’s Islands” unquestionably belongs to the present family. In addition to being a compound word and being objectionable as a family name on account of its unwieldiness, the term is a purely geographic one and is based upon no stated tribe; hence it is not eligible for use in systematic nomenclature. As it appears in the Archæologia Americana it represents nothing but the locality whence the vocabulary of an unknown tribe was received.

[Footnote 95: Archæologia Americana, 1836, II, pp. 15, 306.]

The family name to be considered as next in order of date is the Northern (or Haidah) of Scouler, which appears in volume XI, Royal Geographical Society, page 218, et seq. The term as employed by Scouler is involved in much confusion, and it is somewhat difficult to determine just what tribes the author intended to cover by the designation. Reduced to its simplest form, the case stands as follows: Scouler’s primary division of the Indians of the Northwest was into two groups, the insular and the inland. The insular (and coast tribes) were then subdivided into two families, viz, Northern or Haidah family (for the terms are interchangeably used, as on page 224) and the Southern or Nootka-Columbian family. Under the Northern or Haidah family the author classes all the Indian tribes in the Russian territory, the Kolchians (Athapascas of Gallatin, 1836), the Koloshes, Ugalentzes, and Tun Ghaase (the Koluscans of Gallatin, 1836); the Atnas (Salish of Gallatin, 1836); the Kenaians (Athapascas, Gallatin, 1836); the Haidah tribes proper of Queen Charlotte Island, and the Chimesyans.

It will appear at a glance that such a heterogeneous assemblage of tribes, representing as they do several distinct stocks, can not have been classed together on purely linguistic evidence. In point of fact, Scouler’s remarkable classification seems to rest only in a very slight degree upon a linguistic basis, if indeed it can be said to have a linguistic basis at all. Consideration of “physical character, manners, and customs” were clearly accorded such weight by this author as to practically remove his Northern or Haidah family from the list of linguistic stocks.

The next family name which was applied in this connection is the Skittagets of Gallatin as above cited. This name is given to designate a family on page _c_, volume II, of Transactions of the Ethnological Society, 1848. In his subsequent list of vocabularies, page 77, he changes his designation to Queen Charlotte Island, placing under this family name the Skittagete tribe. His presentation of the former name of Skittagets in his complete list of families is, however, sufficiently formal to render it valid as a family designation, and it is, therefore, retained for the tribes of the Queen Charlotte Archipelago which have usually been called Haida.

From a comparison of the vocabularies of the Haida language with others of the neighboring Koluschan family, Dr. Franz Boas is inclined to consider that the two are genetically related. The two languages possess a considerable number of words in common, but a more thorough investigation is requisite for the settlement of the question than has yet been given. Pending this the two families are here treated separately.

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION.

The tribes of this family occupy Queen Charlotte Islands, Forrester Island to the north of the latter, and the southeastern part of Prince of Wales Island, the latter part having been ascertained by the agents of the Tenth Census.[96]

[Footnote 96: See Petroff map of Alaska, 1880-’81.]

PRINCIPAL TRIBES.

The following is a list of the principal villages:

Haida: Kaigani:
Aseguang. Chatcheeni.
Cumshawa. Clickass.
Kayung. Howakan.
Kung. Quiahanless.
Kunχit. Shakan.
Massett.
New Gold Harbor.
Skedan.
Skiteiget.
Tanu.
Tartanee.
Uttewas.

_Population._--The population of the Haida is 2,500, none of whom are at present under an agent.

TAKILMAN FAMILY.

= Takilma, Gatschet in Mag. Am. Hist., 1882 (Lower Rogue River).

This name was proposed by Mr. Gatschet for a distinct language spoken on the coast of Oregon about the lower Rogue River. Mr. Dorsey obtained a vocabulary in 1884 which he has compared with Athapascan, Kusan, Yakonan, and other languages spoken in the region without finding any marked resemblances. The family is hence admitted provisionally. The language appears to be spoken by but a single tribe, although there is a manuscript vocabulary in the Bureau of Ethnology exhibiting certain differences which may be dialectic.

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION.

The Takilma formerly dwelt in villages along upper Rogue River, Oregon, all the latter, with one exception, being on the south side, from Illinois River on the southwest, to Deep Rock, which was nearer the head of the stream. They are now included among the “Rogue River Indians,” and they reside to the number of twenty-seven on the Siletz Reservation, Tillamook County, Oregon, where Dorsey found them in 1884.

TAÑOAN FAMILY.

> Tay-waugh, Lane (1854) in Schoolcraft, Ind. Tribes, V. 689, 1855
(Pueblos of San Juan, Santa Clara, Pojuaque, Nambe. San Il de Conso,
and one Moqui pueblo). Keane, App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent, and So.
Am.), 479, 1878.

> Taño, Powell in Rocky Mountain Presbyterian, Nov., 1878 (includes
Sandia, Téwa, San Ildefonso, San Juan, Santa Clara, Pojoaque, Nambé,
Tesuque, Sinecú, Jemez, Taos, Picuri).

> Tegna, Keane, App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent, and So. Am.), 479, 1878
(includes S. Juan, Sta. Clara, Pojuaque, Nambe, Tesugue, S. Ildefonso,
Haro).

= Téwan, Powell in Am. Nat., 605, Aug., 1880 (makes five divisions: 1.
Taño (Isleta, Isleta near El Paso, Sandía); 2. Taos (Taos, Picuni); 3.
Jemes (Jemes); 4. Tewa or Tehua (San Ildefonso, San Juan, Pojoaque,
Nambe, Tesuque, Santa Clara, and one Moki pueblo); 5. Piro).

> E-nagh-magh, Lane (1854) in Schoolcraft, Ind. Tribes, V, 689, 1855
(includes Taos, Vicuris, Zesuqua, Sandia, Ystete, and two pueblos near
El Paso, Texas). Keane, App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent, and So. Am.),
479, 1878 (follows Lane, but identifies Texan pueblos with Lentis? and
Socorro?).

> Picori, Keane, App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent, and So. Am.), 479, 1878
(or Enaghmagh).

= Stock of Rio Grande Pueblos, Gatschet in U.S. Geog. Surv. W. 100th
M., vii, 415, 1879.

= Rio Grande Pueblo, Gatschet in Mag. Am. Hist., 258, 1882.

Derivation: Probably from “taínin,” plural of tá-ide, “Indian,” in the dialect of Isleta and Sandia (Gatschet).

In a letter[97] from Wm. Carr Lane to H. R. Schoolcraft, appear some remarks on the affinities of the Pueblo languages, based in large part on hearsay evidence. No vocabularies are given, nor does any real classification appear to be attempted, though referring to such of his remarks as apply in the present connection, Lane states that the Indians of “Taos, Vicuris, Zesuqua, Sandia, and Ystete, and of two pueblos of Texas, near El Paso, are said to speak the same language, which I have heard called E-nagh-magh,” and that the Indians of “San Juan, Santa Clara, Pojuaque, Nambe, San Il de Conso, and one Moqui pueblo, all speak the same language, as it is said: this I have heard called Tay-waugh.” The ambiguous nature of his reference to these pueblos is apparent from the above quotation.

[Footnote 97: Schoolcraft, Indian Tribes, 1855, vol. 5, p. 689.]

The names given by Lane as those he had “heard” applied to certain groups of pueblos which “it is said” speak the same language, rest on too slender a basis for serious consideration in a classificatory sense.

Keane in the appendix to Stanford’s Compendium (Central and South America), 1878, p. 479, presents the list given by Lane, correcting his spelling in some cases and adding the name of the Tusayan pueblo as Haro (Hano). He gives the group no formal family name, though they are classed together as speaking “Tegua or Tay-waugh.”

The Taño of Powell (1878), as quoted, appears to be the first name formally given the family, and is therefore accepted. Recent investigations of the dialect spoken at Taos and some of the other pueblos of this group show a considerable body of words having Shoshonean affinities, and it is by no means improbable that further research will result in proving the radical relationship of these languages to the Shoshonean family. The analysis of the language has not yet, however, proceeded far enough to warrant a decided opinion.

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION.

The tribes of this family in the United States resided exclusively upon the Rio Grande and its tributary valleys from about 33° to about 36°. A small body of these people joined the Tusayan in northern Arizona, as tradition avers to assist the latter against attacks by the Apache--though it seems more probable that they fled from the Rio Grande during the pueblo revolt of 1680--and remained to found the permanent pueblo of Hano, the seventh pueblo of the group. A smaller section of the family lived upon the Rio Grande in Mexico and Texas, just over the New Mexico border.

_Population._--The following pueblos are included in the family, with a total population of about 3,237:

Hano (of the Tusayan group) 132
Isleta (New Mexico) 1,059
Isleta (Texas) few
Jemez 428
Nambé 79
Picuris 100
Pojoaque 20
Sandia 140
San Ildefonso 148
San Juan 406
Santa Clara 225
Senecú (below El Paso) few
Taos 409
Tesuque 91

TIMUQUANAN FAMILY.

= Timuquana, Smith in Hist. Magazine, II, 1, 1858 (a notice of the
language with vocabulary; distinctness of the language affirmed).
Brinton. Floridian Peninsula, 134, 1859 (spelled also Timuaca,
Timagoa, Timuqua).

= Timucua, Gatschet in Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., XVI, April 6, 1877 (from
Cape Cañaveral to mouth of St. John’s River). Gatschet, Creek Mig.
Legend I, 11-13, 1884. Gatschet in Science, 413, April 29, 1887.

= Atimuca, Gatschet in Science, ibid, (proper name).

Derivation: From ati-muca, “ruler,” “master;” literally, “servants attend upon him.”

In the Historical Magazine as above cited appears a notice of the Timuquana language by Buckingham Smith, in which is affirmed its distinctness upon the evidence of language. A short vocabulary is appended, which was collated from the “Confessionario” by Padre Pareja, 1613. Brinton and Gatschet have studied the Timuquana language and have agreed as to the distinctness of the family from any other of the United States. Both the latter authorities are inclined to take the view that it has affinities with the Carib family to the southward, and it seems by no means improbable that ultimately the Timuquana language will be considered an offshoot of the Carib linguistic stock. At the present time, however, such a conclusion would not be justified by the evidence gathered and published.

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION.

It is impossible to assign definite limits to the area occupied by the tribes of this family. From documentary testimony of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the limits of the family domain appear to have been about as follows: In general terms the present northern limits of the State of Florida may be taken as the northern frontier, although upon the Atlantic side Timuquanan territory may have extended into Georgia. Upon the northwest the boundary line was formed in De Soto’s time by the Ocilla River. Lake Okeechobee on the south, or as it was then called Lake Sarrape or Mayaimi, may be taken as the boundary between the Timuquanan tribes proper and the Calusa province upon the Gulf coast and the Tegesta province upon the Atlantic side. Nothing whatever of the languages spoken in these two latter provinces is available for comparison. A number of the local names of these provinces given by Fontanedo (1559) have terminations similar to many of the Timuquanan local names. This slender evidence is all that we have from which to infer the Timuquanan relationship of the southern end of the peninsula.

PRINCIPAL TRIBES.

The following settlements appear upon the oldest map of the regions we possess, that of De Bry (Narratio; Frankf. a. M. 15, 1590):

(A) Shores of St. John’s River, from mouth to sources:

Patica. Utina.
Saturiwa. Patchica.
Atore. Chilili.
Homolua or Molua. Calanay.
Alimacani. Onochaquara.
Casti. Mayarca.
Malica. Mathiaca.
Melona. Maiera.
Timoga or Timucua. Mocoso.
Enecaqua. Cadica.
Choya. Eloquale.
Edelano (island). Aquonena.
Astina.

(B) On a (fictitious) western tributary of St. John’s River, from mouth
to source:

Hicaranaou.
Appalou.
Oustaca.
Onathcaqua.
Potanou.
Ehiamana.
Anouala.

(C) East Floridian coast, from south to north:

Mocossou.
Oathcaqua.
Sorrochos.
Hanocoroucouay.
Marracou.

(D) On coast north of St. John’s River:

Hiouacara.

(E) The following are gathered from all other authorities, mostly from the accounts of De Soto’s expedition:

Acquera. San Mateo (1688).
Aguile. Santa Lucia de Acuera
Basisa or Vacissa (SE. coast).
(1688). Tacatacuru.
Cholupaha. Tocaste.
Hapaluya. Tolemato.
Hirrihiqua. Topoqui.
Itafi Tucururu
(perhaps a province). (SE. coast)
Itara Ucita.
Machaua (1688). Urriparacuxi.
Napetuca. Yupaha
Osile (Oxille). (perhaps a province).
San Juan de Guacara
(1688).

TONIKAN FAMILY.

= Tunicas, Gallatin in Trans. and Coll. Am. Antiq. Soc., II, 115, 116,
1836 (quotes Dr. Sibley, who states they speak a distinct language).
Latham, Nat. Hist. Man, 341, 1850 (opposite mouth of Red River; quotes
Dr. Sibley as to distinctness of language).

= Tonica, Gatschet, Creek Mig. Legend, I, 39, 1884 (brief account of
tribe).

= Tonika, Gatschet in Science, 412, April 29, 1887 (distinctness as a
family asserted; the tribe calls itself Túniχka).

Derivation: From the Tonika word óni, “man,” “people;” t- is a prefix or article; -ka, -χka a nominal suffix.

The distinctness of the Tonika language, has long been suspected, and was indeed distinctly stated by Dr. Sibley in 1806.[98] The statement to this effect by Dr. Sibley was quoted by Gallatin in 1836, but as the latter possessed no vocabulary of the language he made no attempt to classify it. Latham also dismisses the language with the same quotation from Sibley. Positive linguistic proof of the position of the language was lacking until obtained by Mr. Gatschet in 1886, who declared it to form a family by itself.

[Footnote 98: President’s message, February 19, 1806.]

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION.

The Tonika are known to have occupied three localities: First, on the Lower Yazoo River (1700); second, east shore of Mississippi River (about 1704); third, in Avoyelles Parish, Louisiana (1817). Near Marksville, the county seat of that parish, about twenty-five are now living.

TONKAWAN FAMILY.

= Tonkawa, Gatschet, Zwölf Sprachen aus dem Südwesten Nordamerikas,
76, 1876 (vocabulary of about 300 words and some sentences). Gatschet,
Die Sprache der Tonkawas, in Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 64, 1877.
Gatschet (1876), in Proc. Am. Philosoph. Soc., XVI, 318, 1877.

Derivation: the full form is the Caddo or Wako term tonkawéya, “they all stay together” (wéya, “all”).

After a careful examination of all the linguistic material available for comparison, Mr. Gatschet has concluded that the language spoken by the Tonkawa forms a distinct family.

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION.

The Tónkawa were a migratory people and a _colluvies gentium_, whose earliest habitat is unknown. Their first mention occurs in 1719; at that time and ever since they roamed in the western and southern parts of what is now Texas. About 1847 they were engaged as scouts in the United States Army, and from 1860-’62 (?) were in the Indian Territory; after the secession war till 1884 they lived in temporary camps near Fort Griffin, Shackelford County, Texas, and in October, 1884, they removed to the Indian Territory (now on Oakland Reserve). In 1884 there were seventy-eight individuals living; associated with them were nineteen Lipan Apache, who had lived in their company for many years, though in a separate camp. They have thirteen divisions (partly totem-clans) and observe mother-right.

UCHEAN FAMILY.

= Uchees, Gallatin in Trans. and Coll. Am. Antiq. Soc., II., 95, 1836
(based upon the Uchees alone). Bancroft, Hist. U.S., III., 247, 1840.
Gallatin in Trans. Am. Eth. Soc. II., pt. 1, xcix, 77, 1848. Keane,
App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent. and So. Am.), 472, 1878 (suggests that
the language may have been akin to Natchez).

= Utchees, Gallatin in Trans. and Coll. Am. Antiq. Soc., II., 306,
1836. Gallatin in Schoolcraft, Ind. Tribes, III., 401, 1853. Keane,
App. Stanford’s Comp. (Cent. and So. Am.), 472, 1878.

= Utschies, Berghaus (1845), Physik. Atlas, map 17, 1848. Ibid., 1852.

= Uché, Latham, Nat. Hist. Man, 338, 1850 (Coosa River). Latham in
Trans. Philolog. Soc. Lond., II., 31-50, 1846. Latham, Opuscula, 293,
1860.

= Yuchi, Gatschet, Creek Mig. Legend, I, 17, 1884. Gatschet in
Science, 413, April 29, 1887.