Native American Warrior Women

2 Replies

Lozan, Native American Warrior Woman

Native American women not only shared political power with men, they sometimes shared in their tribe’s fighting. Though they were certainly not common, female warriors joined in warfare when necessary. Running Eagle became a Blackfoot warrior after her husband was killed, and led many successful raids on Flathead horse herds. Many warrior women entered battle because they had accompanied husbands or other male relatives into a conflict, but Chilhenne-Chiricahua Apache woman, Lozen, decided to become a warrior at a young age. She trained with her brother and developed the gift of finding the enemy. She went by herself to a deserted place and stood with her arms stretched, palms up, to the sky. She turned slowly until a tingling in her palms alerted her to the direction of the enemy’s presence. Lozen was a skilled warrior and scout in addition to acting as a guide to the enemy’s whereabouts.

Unlike Lozan, most women didn’t pursue warfare as a way of life, though they could do so without censure if they wished. But, childless married women often accompanied their husbands into battle zones; this proximity to fighting could bring them into an active role in a conflict, particularly if a husband were killed. Women were often leaders in deciding when a tribe would go to war, and in deciding when to end it. They often decided the fate of prisoners, as well. Women could sentence a prisoner to torture or death, or spare his life. After a battle, women also took a share in the spoils.

Young (perhaps Kiowa) Woman in Buckskin Dress, Bow and Arrow, circa 1895

Six Young Women on Horseback, circa 1895

______________________________________________________________________________________

Invisible Women

Leave a reply

Indian Women and Children, South Dakota, circa late 1880s, courtesy Library of Congress

Native American women were often dismissed as drudges or near-slaves by European men who saw them working in fields or performing the many chores inherent to village life. European women were seldom viewed much differently, but their reality was quite different. European women had few or no rights, and were under the control of males at every stage of their lives unless they were extremely privileged or exempted in some way due to special circumstances. In contrast, Native American women had political and property rights that protected them and gave them power. Many tribes were matrilineal. A new husband lived with his wife’s family and did not control her property. Unlike European women, Native women could initiate divorces, throw men out of the household, and keep their property.

Unfortunately, European men interested in trading fell back on their own traditional stereotypes and wanted to deal with Native men, only. Consequently, women were pushed to the sidelines of commerce. Europeans wanted to make treaties with men, only, so women were pushed aside in this respect, as well. In far too short a time, Native women reflected the status of European women, much to their detriment.

Indian Woman Fetching Water, circa 1936, courtesy Library of Congress

Native American Women in Third Class Railway Coach 1895, courtesy Library of Congress

______________________________________________________________________________________

Finer Things

Leave a reply

Seneca Women Selling Beadwork at Niagra Falls

When explorers and settlers first came to the New World, they brought beads with them. These items were small, lightweight, and (hopefully) useful trading goods. Native Americans had used beads before contact with whites, but they valued the new, unusual beads that the Europeans brought. Glass beads, usually made in Venice, Italy, were something Native Americans could not manufacture on their own, and were highly valued. Early trade beads were large, but eventually, tiny “seed” beads were introduced, and Native Americans used them on buckskin and cloth.

Different tribes developed different preferences for bead colors and ornamentation styles. Sioux Indians preferred chalk white or blue background colors, and various shades of blues and greens for design.The Crow liked blue and a color called Cheyenne Pink for their backgrounds, with red, dark blue, yellow, green, and sometimes purple design colors. Native American women invented two methods of using beads: loom beading and applique embroidery. For looms, they fastened birch bark with holes in it over bow-shaped branches and threaded rows of beads through the holes. Women created distinctive patterns from chains of beads in rows and columns; these patterns became associated with different groups so that an Indian man could be identified from a distance based on the bead color and pattern of his clothing.

Nineteenth Century Beaded Vest

Apache Bead Loom

______________________________________________________________________________________

Gender Roles

Leave a reply

Female-Owned Tipi

Europeans found much to puzzle them when they first met Native American populations; the last two posts have discussed their surprise that Native Americans did not own property or animals. Europeans also misinterpreted Native American gender roles. Native American women were busy people. Women didn’t just tend a small kitchen garden, they farmed–planting, hoeing, and harvesting the village crops of corn, squash, and beans. On the Plains, Indian women also set up and dismantled tipis, collected firewood, preserved meat, took care of children, cooked, fetched water, and made clothing. It seemed like an enormous workload compared to the hunting men did (plus clearing fields for planting, completing religious and spiritual ceremonies, and war-making, among other tasks). Europeans normally observed men’s hunting role alone, and for this reason, frequently criticized Indian men as lazy, and Indian women as down-trodden and over-worked.

What Europeans seldom realized was that Indian women were more powerful than they appeared to be on the surface. Unlike European women who had few rights, Indian women often owned whatever possessions the family had. Women had the right to demand a divorce, and in a 180-degree turn from the European system, it was the male who was left without possessions. Rather than being patronized as delicate creatures with limited stamina and intellectual powers and prone to error and emotional bondage as European women were, Indian women were respected for their value to their villages. They were much more involved in village decision-making than their European counterparts, and often made life-and-death decisions concerning prisoners of war and adoption. Until Europeans forced cultural changes that transformed Indian society into the European mold, Indian women had an unusual degree of power.

Two Comanche Girls

Comanche Camp

______________________________________________________________________________________

Animal Kingdom

2 Replies

Native American Farming, circa 1920, courtesy Harry Ransom Center, University of Texas

White settlers to New England had different ideas about animals than Native Americans, as well as different ideas about land ownership (see last post). Native Americans did not own animals, except for a loose affiliation with dogs and horses, and perhaps tame fowl in some areas. Settlers, on the other hand, brought domesticated livestock with them, which they considered private property. Native Americans were prepared to respect these new animals, but didn’t understand the ownership of another creature.

These differing views led to clashes when Native Americans sometimes hunted livestock or kept a wandering animal for their own use. Tobacco farmers, in particular, let their hogs roam in the forest and eat fallen acorns and nuts. Often, these pigs went wild and tore up Native American corn crops. But, when they killed these feral pigs, Native Americans found themselves somehow in the wrong. Clashes over livestock allowed whites to justify pushing tribes further out from the perimeter of white settled areas. Eventually, this mentality led to a justification for Native American  removal from areas of white settlement.

These contrasting world views of property rights (land and animal) could not be reconciled. Whites found Native American ways inexplicable and “uncivilized.” Some humanitarians called the Dawes Act the “Indian Emancipation Act,” because it gave Native Americans their own private property, which they hoped would lead Indians on the road to civilization.

Band of Feral Pigs

Sketches of Indian Life

______________________________________________________________________________________

 

Land of Plenty

Leave a reply

New England Home

Native Americans had a different approach to land than Europeans. Settlers in the New World were often surprised to find a lack of land ownership among Native peoples. Europeans were familiar with the  idea of common grazing land that entire villages used, but individuals also owned plots of land and livestock.

In the New England area, Native Americans settled in advantageous areas near water and game, and may have used fire to burn off forest for agricultural use. They cleared land by girdling–removing a strip of bark around the circumference of trees to kill them–or by cutting trees down. After living in an area for ten years or so, the land and game would become scarcer, and bands would move on to new land. The old land was left empty for up to fifty years to allow a return of nutrients, and then might be used again.

White settlers, in contrast, wanted to stay on a particular plot of land  that they owned. This led to many problems as they depleted the soil with intense agriculture, and contended with a growing population. The only way to give everyone property  was to push out to new lands. Unfortunately, settlers acquired additional  land at the expense of the Native Americans already occupying the newly desirable territory.

Girdled Trees

Native American Farming

______________________________________________________________________________________

Land Benefits

Leave a reply

Fort Peck Reservation

When farmers began to look at the benefits of mechanization in the early part of the 20th century, most realized that any real labor and cost savings would have to take place on large farms. Thomas Campbell believed wholeheartedly in the benefits of large-scale, mechanized farming, and wanted to prove it. During WWI, he wanted to sow huge quantities of wheat on land that Indians weren’t using.

Campbell wrote to various government officials without much success, but finally convinced President Woodrow Wilson that the country could benefit from his idea. Frank Thackery, a supervisor in the Indian Office, met Campbell and showed him around various reservations. Thackery suggested Campbell farm about 200,000 acres, about ten times what Campbell had originally envisioned. The Commissioner of Indian Affairs approved leases on Crow, Blackfeet, and Fort Peck reservations.

Campbell did not have to pay taxes or interest on this land, since the land was federally owned. Thackery wanted Campbell to pay Indians in grain, as a share of the crop, but many Indians preferred money. Campbell paid them 50 cents an acre for the first two years of the lease, then 75 cents an acre the third year, and finally a dollar an acre in the fifth year. He also bought land off Indians for $3 – $4 an acre. No one made much money, including Campbell, but he would have undoubtedly failed immediately without his favorable leases on reservation property.

Horse-drawn Farm Equipment, courtesy U.S. Geological Survey

Steam-Powered Threshing Machine, courtesy National Park Service

______________________________________________________________________________________

This Land is My Land

Leave a reply

Native Americans on Flathead Indian Reservation

White Americans often seemed to feel that Indian land was available for their own needs. In 1927, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Charles Burke, met with the Montana Power Company and white farmers to discuss a water project. They proposed to use land belonging to the Flathead Indians to build a water power site to create inexpensive electricity, but failed to invite Flathead Indians to the meeting. Representative Louis C. Cramton (chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee for the Interior Department) favored the action because it would help white settlers “hanging on by their fingertips . . . to share in the national prosperity.”

Activist John Collier and several powerful senators opposed the bill, saying it was detrimental to Indian interests. Collier wrote to President Coolidge to ask him to intervene in the Flathead project, but Coolidge never wrote back. Nevertheless, Congress defeated the bill, and in 1928, passed a bill that acknowledged Indian ownership of the rentals from the water project.

President and Mrs. Coolidge, courtesy Forbes Library

Charles Burke

___________________________________________________________________

The Root of Women’s Mental Disorders

2 Replies

 

Death Caused by Childbirth Insanity

Male alienists often thought that women were more susceptible to certain forms of insanity because of their female body organs (see last post). In the American Journal of Insanity, Dr. Fleetwood Churchill describes the evolution of merry childhood into womanhood, when a female becomes more serious and feels more deeply. “In short, under the influence of bodily development, her mind has expanded,” he says. In an article he published titled “On the Mental Disorders of Pregnancy and Childbed,” Churchill quotes other doctors; one noted that “insanity and epilepsy are often connected with menstruation,” and gave a case where a woman who had been confined for sixteen years, suddenly recovered when her periods ceased.

 

In a somewhat peculiar case in which the modern reader might find more than the doctor apparently did, a girl of 17 who had menstruated regularly for a year, suddenly stopped. Her mind became clouded, she spoke of herself as a castaway and doomed, and became completely insane. “Neither medicine nor change of air and scene did her any good,” said the doctor whom Churchill quoted. There was a happy ending, though. “The menses suddenly re-appeared, after eight or ten months absence. and she immediately recovered her mental health.”

Lydia Pinkham, Whose Patent Medicine Vegetable Compound Cured Female Problems

 

A Female Medicine

________________________________________________________________________

The Trouble With Women

Leave a reply

Woman Demonstrating the Stages of a Hysterical Attack, courtesy Wellcome Library

Early alienists (mental health specialists) were men. They attributed much of women’s mental health issues to “female” problems with their ovaries or uterus. In 1893, Dr. Thomas Morton, Surgeon to the Pennsylvania Hospital and Chairman of Philadelphia’s Committee on Lunacy, wrote that surgical advances had made surgeries to the abdominal cavity relatively safe. Consequently, procedures removing the uterus and ovaries had been successful and had provided relief for patients with diseases of these organs. He added: “Frequently, such diseases are complicated by hysteria . . . and various forms of well recognized insanity which are thought to originate in and be maintained by the diseased or disordered state of these organs.”

When female organs were removed for disease, women were often relieved or cured of their accompanying mental disorders, said Morton, but just as often, were not. Some surgeons were evidently jumping onto an ovary-removal bandwagon, and Morton cautioned against an overenthusiastic use of these operations. “In many instances, insanity has resulted from this operation,” he warned. Morton gave a strong opinion that unless female organs were actually diseased, there was no justification for removing them. He included in his article a legal opinion from a colleague on the Committee on Lunacy, who concurred. “I am of the opinion that the operation . . . unless necessary to save life, is not only illegal, but, in view of its experimental character, is brutal and inhuman and not excusable on any reasonable ground.”

These two men had almost remarkable restraint toward women in an age when patronization and coercion were much more often the rule. Morton, in particular, recognized that symptoms of hysteria and other common “female” types of insanity might be associated with their uterine or ovarian distress, without being caused by it.

Hospital Demonstration of Hysteria in 1887, courtesy of Science Museum.org

______________________________________________________________________________________