EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM — AOLLER 167 Later, while discussing the islands in the Roanoke, Eights says

This middleislandwasthe former

home

ofthe Occaneecheetowhich

we

traced Ledererand

Needham

and Arthur.

On

the uppermost island the Saponi dwelt.

The

Tutelohadsettledonthelowestisland. . . [Ibid.,p. 109.] [Italicsarewriter's.].

Here Rights switched ends with

the

Saponi and

Tutelo.

WUliam Byrd

placed the

Tutelo on

the

uppermost

island

and

the

Saponi on

the lowest island.

In

his latest report,

"The Indian

Tribesof

North America," Swanton

(1952)

modified some

of the

former statements

ofyesteryear,

but he

still

adhered

to a

number

ofthe "die-hard"

statements without any

qualifications of

them. In

thisworls

he

presents

a very

brief

summary

of the

main

events in the history of the Occaneechi, Saponi,

and

Tutelo,

Of

theOccaneechi,

he

says:

Meaning unknown.

Connections.

— ^The

Occaneechi belonged to the Siouan linguistic stock; their closestconnectionswere probably the TuteloandSaponi.

Location.

— ^On

^{themiddleand largestisland in Roanoke} River, justbelowthe confluenceoftheStauntonandtheDan,near thesiteof Clarksville, Mecklenburg County, Va.

History.

— ^Edward

^{Blandeand hiscompanions heardof}

^them

^{in 1650.}

When

first

met

by Ledererin 1670 at thespot abovementioned, the Occaneechi were noted throughout theregion as traders,andtheirlanguageissaid tohavebeen the

common

speechbothoftradeandreligionovera considerablearea (Lederer, 1912).

Between1670and1676 theOccaneechihadbeenjoinedbytheTuteloandSaponi,

who

settled upon two neighboring islands. In the latter year the Conestoga sought refuge

among them

and were hospitably received, but, attempting to dispossess their benefactors, they were driven away. Later, harassed by the IroquoisandEnglish,the Occaneechifledsouthandin1701

Lawson

(1860) found

them

on the

Eno

River, about the present Hillsboro, Orange County, N. C.

Later still they united with the Tutelo and Saponi andfollowed their fortunes, having,accordingtoByrd,taken the

name

oftheSaponi.

Connectioninwhichtheyhave becomenoted.

— The name

Occaneechiisassociated particularly with the Occaneechi Trail orTrading Path, which extended south- west through North and South Carolinafrom the neighborhood of Petersburg, Va. [Swanton, 1952, pp. 65-66.]

Regarding

the Saponi,

he

says:

Evidently a corruption of Monasiccapano or Monasukapanough, which, as shown byBushnell, isprobably derivedinpart from a nativeterm "moni-seep"

signifying "shallow water." Paanese is a corruption and in no

way

connected with the

word

"Pawnee."

Connections.

— ^The

Saponi belongedtotheSiouanlinguisticfamily, theirnearest relations being the Tutelo.

Location.

— ^The

^earliest

^known

location of the Saponi has been identified by Bushnell(1930) with highprobabilitywith"anextensivevillage siteonthebanks oftheRivanna,inAlbemarle County,directlynorthofthe UniversityofVirginia and aboutone-halfmile uptheriver fromthe bridgeofthe Southern Railway."

This was their location when, ifever, they formed apart ofthe

Monacan

con- federacy. [Note theconditioninghere!)

168 BUREAU ^OP AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

[Bull. 164 History.

—

^Asfirstpointed outby

Mooney

(1894),the Saponi tribeisidentical with the

Monasukapanough

which appears on Smith's

map

as though it werea townofthe

Monacan

and

may

infacthavebeensuch. Before1670,andprobably between 1650 and 1660, they

moved

to the southwest and probably settled on Otter Creek, as above indicated. In 1670,they were visitedby Ledererintheir

new home

and by

Thomas

Batts (1912) a yearlater.

Not

long afterward they andtheTutelo

moved

tothejunctionoftheStaunton and

Dan

Rivers,whereeach occupied an island in

Roanoke

River in Mecklenburg County. This

movement

wastoenable

them

toescape the attacksoftheIroquois,andforthesamereason they again

moved

southbefore 1701,

when Lawson

(1860) found

them

on Yadkin River near thepresentsite ofSalisbury,N.C. Soonafterwardtheyleftthisplace andgravitatedtowardtheWhitesettlementsinVirginia.

They

evidently crossed

Roanoke

RiverbeforetheTuscarora

War

^of1711, establishingthemselves ashort distance eastofitand15 mileswestofthepresent Windsor, BertieCounty, N. C.

A

little later, they along with the Tutelo and

some

other tribes, were placed by Governor Spotswood near Fort Christanna, 10 miles north of

Roanoke

River about the present Gholsonville, Brunswick County. . . .

By

the treaty of Albany (1722)the Iroquoisagreedto stop incursionsontheVirginiaIndians and, probablyabout 1740, thegreater part ofthe SaponiandtheTutelo

moved

north stoppingforatimeat Shamokin, Pa., . . . [Ibid., pp. 71-72.]

As

fortheTutelo,

he

says:

Significance

unknown

butusedbytheIroquois,

who

seemtohavetakenitfrom somesouthern tongue.

Connections.

— The

TutelobelongedtotheSiouanlinguisticfamily,theirnearest connections beingthe Saponi andprobably the Monacan.

Location.

— The

oldest

known

town site of the Tutelo was near Salem, Va., though the BigSandyRiver atone time boretheir

name

and

may

havebeenan

earlier seat.

History.

—

In 1671 Fallamand Batts (1912) visited thetown above mentioned.

Some

yearslatertheTutelo

moved

toan islandin Roanoke Riverjustabovethe Occaneechi, but in 1701

Lawson

found

them

^still farther southwest, probably about the headwatersofthe Yadkin (Lawson, 1860).

From

that time forward they accompanied the Saponi until the latter tribe separated from

them

at Niagaraasabovenoted. [Ibid., p. 73.]

In

the

Archives

ofthe

Bureau

of

American Ethnology

are

a number

of

undated

papers.

Among

these is

a notebook

^of

James Mooney's (MS. Doc. No.

1901).

Pages

1

and

2 are

devoted

to the

"Acconechi."

Here he

tells us that in 1701

Lawson found them

—

living on the headwaters ofthe Neuse, about Hillsborough, N. C.

&

apparently in leagwithsome other smalltribes (Lawson 96-7).

By

1710

They

had

moved down

nearer the settlements, in

company

with the Tutelos, Saponis, Shoccori

&

Keyauwees, thefive tribesnumberingaltogetheronlyabout750souls (Lawson 384). Occaneechee neck

& swamp

on the north bank of the Roanoke, apposit Halifax,

may

indicate their location at this period. In 1717 the friendlj' Tus- caroraswere assigned areservation on thenorth bank ofthe

Roanoke

in Bertie county (N

C

RecII283).

The

Saponishada town, undertneirprotection,upon the samereservation

&

^{it is} probable that the Acconechisetc liv'd with or near them. [Mooney, MS.]

No™2]^'^^^'

EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM — ^MILLER 169 Here

let us

quote an undated

letter written

by Cyrus Thomas

to

Mr.

(J.

N.

B.)

Hewitt

in its entirety

(MS. Doc. No.

4014):

Dear Mr. Hewitt:

I

am

stilltied up andwill bethis week, but coulddo some work if Ihad the

Yuman

cardsand havewritten Mr. Claytontosend

them

to

me

but tohave you pickoutthe boxes. Iwantallof

them

including the crossreferences. Please see thatwhoeverbrings

them

wraps

them

upwell.

Isentyou onepartofour

De

Sotopaperforyoutolookoverand haveacopy

made —

^{thenreturnthecopy I sent, to}

me

bymailwithyour notes

&

suggestions onseparatesheet.

You

hadbetterhaveacopy

made

foryoutokeep.

It is ratherstrangethata Uchean cacica or chieftainessshould have asa part of her dominion and of her most trusted subjectsthe country and people of a Siouantribe.

The

wholething is ridiculous. /

am

becoming impressed with the ideathatthereis

much

rottentimber inthe"Siouan Tribes oftheEast." [Italicsare writer's.]

Yourstruly

s/d Cyrus

Thomas

1316 Kenesaw Street.

Apparently

this

was

written shortly after

Mooney's work on

the

"Siouan

Tribes ofthe

East" came

off the press, for

apparently he

did

not

get a

chance

to look

over

the

manuscript

before it

was

printed.

Associated

with

this letter

were

a

number

ofnotes

headed "Siouan

tribes of the

East." These

are presented in the following pages:

On

page 29, the writer reaches the conclusion that "the upper region of the Ohio

—

^Alleghany, Mongahela and

Kanawha

country"

—

^was the "original

home"

oftheSiouanstock

—

_{"fromwhichonebranch}crossed themountainstothewaters of Virginia and Carolina, while the other followedalong the Ohio and the lakes toward the west."

On

pg. 11:

He

hasthosegoingwest

—

^firstcrossingthemountains andfollowing

"down

the valleysof

New

River and the Big Sandy to the Ohio." Yet, as he informs us their homes were on the upper Ohio.

The

route taken to go west seems a rather strange one.

Pg. 11:

He

says "the theory of a Siouan migration

down

the Big Sandy is

borne out by the fact that this stream was formerly

known

as the Totteroy a corruption of the Iroquois

name

for the Tutelo." Yet in the quotation from pg.29 given above,the easternbranch^issaid tohavecrossedthemountainsfrom upperOhioregionto thewatersofVirginiaand Carolina.

Pg. 9

— The

^statement that "the concurrent testim.ony of the Siouan tribes themselves tothe effectthatthey had

come

from the East." is nottrue ashere used.

The

western Sioux claimto have

come

from amore eastern locality, but thisdoesnot reachfarther eastthanLakeMichigan.

The

statement givenabove

is therefore misleading and the truth concealed, to maintain atheory.

Pg. 9

— _"The

_inference that the region westofthe Mississippi was the original

home

oftheSiouantribes" isa

man

ofstraw setup by the writer tobe knocked down.

No

acceptable authority,if any,ever heldsuch atheory.

Pg. 10

— The

statement that "As early as 1701 Gravier stated that the Ohio was

known

to the

Miami

and Illinois as the "River of the Akansea" isuntrue.

Gravier says theOuabache (Wabash) and expressly distinguishesbetween ^it and the Ohio

—

^continuing the

Wabash

and the Mississippi and making the Ohio a tributary to it. It was from this erroneous interpretation of Gravier's words that theSibleyOsagetradition

—

^inallitsvariousformsgrewup.

170 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

^[Bdll.164 Pg. 10

— The

statement that Dorsey found the tradition of an eastern origin (in the sense here used) as

"common

to almost all the tribes of that [Siouan]

stock" isincorrect, Dorseyalsocontradictshimselfonthispoint

—

^moreoverhis

statements do not include the

Dakota

group.

Pg. 10

— ^De

^{Soto found the}

^Quapaw

^{only a short distance above the locality}

occupied

when

the French descended the Mississippi.

De

Soto did not pass throughanyportionoftheOsagecountry.

Pg. 11

— No

Ohiotribe, so farasknown, had any traditionregarding the Qua-

paw

(or Akansa)

—

^{Thiswaslimited, sofaras}

^known

^to

^some

Illinois tribes.

It is not true that the

Quapaws

were "in the vicinity of that stream [Ohio]

when

encounteredby

De

Soto." Thisis apparent from thefactthat theywere thensomewhereinthevicinity ofthesiteofHelena, Arkansas.

Pg. 11

—

After stating thatthecauseoftheexodusoftheSiouantribesfromtheir original home, was probably pressure by northern and southernalien tribes, he says "theyretreated across the mountains, the only directioninwhich aretreat was open tothem." Doesthis refertothose

who

wentwest orthose

who

went east into "Virginiaand Carolina"?

Pg. 12

— The

statement that "within this period, traditional and historical evidence point out as the cradle of the Algonquian race the coast region lying between Saint Lawrence river and Chesapeake bay"; ^is untrue.

The

most

"coherent" tradition points to

some

locality north ofthe lakes as their original home.

The

Leni Lenape were the "grandfather", and that was their original home.

Pg. 12

— _"When

their [Iroquois] warfareagainst the southern tribeswas inau- gurated

we

do notknow. Itwasprobably continuouswith the expulsionofthe CherokeefromtheUpperOhio." Asthe Cherokee wereintheirsouthern

home

in 1540

—

^it

may

besafely assumedthat their expulsion could nothave occurred laterthanthelatterpartofthe 15thcentury.

Were

the Iroquoisalreadyraiding thesoutherntribes atthisearly date?

Pg. 19

— ^Compare

^{thestatementsinthefirstparagraphof thispageas regards}

the information respectingthe

Manahoacs

and subdivisions withwhat is stated near thebottomofpage22andtopofpage23.

The

inferenceofrelationshipof

Manahoac

with

Monacan

onpg. 23,ischanged to certaintyonpg. 26

—

"the cognate Manahoacs" . . .

Pg.30

— The

statement that theDogiofLederer "havenorelation tothe

Doeg named

intherecordsoftheBaconrebellionin1675",iswhollygratuitous asitis

more

thanprobablethatLederer obtained the

name

fromthehistoryofthe

Bacon

rebellion." [Thomas, MS.]

Among

tlie lot

were a

series of notes

by James O. Dorsey (MS.

Doc. No.

3804)

on

tlie

Eastern

Siouans.

In

these

he

refers to

volume

13,

number

3, ofthe

American Antiquarian, page

147:

The

earliest

known

migrations oftheDakotas were from theeast ^{. .} .

The

Tuteloes having oncebeen locatedin Northern Georgia, notfarfrom wherethe bird efiigy is; othertribes

—

^such asthelowasand

Mandans —

^{having, according}

to tradition, carried their symbols to Dakota.

The

effigy

mounds

of southern Ohio, especially the great serpent, the bird

mounds

of Northern Georgia, the

effigies of Wisconsin, and the stone effigies of

Dakota

areassigned by

some

to differentbranchesoftheDakotas

—

^theTuteloes having, etc.,asabove.

Up

to this

time no one has mentioned

the

Tuteloes

as

having

lived in

northern

Georgia,

Who

^could

have mistakenly

supplied this bit of

misinformation?

No^fir^

EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM — ^MILLER 171 Included

in this

batch

of

Dorsey

notes

were some on "Migrations

ofcertain tribes ofthe

Siouan

family."

Herein he

says:

Some

authors speak of a series of migrations of these tribes from the west towardtheeast;but thewriterhas notbeenable to learnofwhatauthoritysuch statementshavebeenmade;nor hashe everfoundanytraditionofsuch eastward migrations

among

thetribesthathe hasvisited.

This statement

upsets

Mooney's

theory, since

Dorsey

isthe outstand- ing authority

on

the Sioux.

Dorsey then

lists

some

pertinent

comments on Mooney and

his

"Siouan

tribes of the

East."

Mooney

[intheSiouan TribesoftheEast, Galley4AL]says:

"The

theoryofa Siouan migration

down

thevalleyoftheBig Sandyis borne outbythefactthat this stream was formerly

known

as the Totteroy, a corruption of the Iroquois

name

forthe TuteloandotherSiouantribes ofthe South."

(Big Sandy, the Big Totteroy; and Little Sandy, the Little Totteroy). If

Mooney

accepts this traditional

name

of the Big Sandy as good evidence (see above),

why

shouldherejectthetraditional

name

ofthe KentuckyR. (astream near the Big Sandy), Cuttawa, Cuttawo, or

Catawba

River?

He

saysinGalley 26AL:

"The Shawano

andothertribesofthe Ohio Valley

made

theword (i. e.,

Catawba) Cuttawa."

Catawba

in Carolinaas early as 1569

Kwapa

on the Mississippi in 1540-41

(LaVandera) (De Soto)

Yet Yet

Kentucky R. given as 'Cuttawa' on Ohio given as 'R. d'Acansea' on Vaugondie's

Map

(1755)

De

L'Isle's

Map

(1722)

Big Sandycalled Totteroyin 1746

Mooney

says(TheSiouan TribesoftheEast(p. 70) Galley26 AL),

"The Catawba

werefoundlivingaboutwhere

we

havealways

known

them, as early as 1567. Kentuckyriverwascalledbythat

name among

the

Shawano

and othernortherntribesbecauseupthatriverlaythegreatwartrailtothe

Catawba

country."

This

may

beso; but

what

proof have

we

of this. If proof canbegiven,that settlesthe questionoftheorigin ofthis

name

forKentuckyriver;butifnoproof (no authority)canbegivenforthisstatement,ifitbeamereinferenceonthe part ofMr. Mooney,it isinordertocallattention toanother explanationoftheorigin ofthatappellation,i. e.,thatitreferred toatraditional or prehistoricoccupation ofthat region by the

Catawba

tribe, just as the

name

Totteroy, appUedtothe Big Sandy, referred to a traditional or prehistoricoccupation of that region by theTutelotribeorconfederacy.

[Referring totheAmericanAntiquarian,vol.xiii,

number

4,July, 1891,p.236:]

I findthat Dr.

Morgan

^isdisposedtoclassifythe

Catawba among

theDakotas, as alsoall Iroquoisdialects. Thisbringsouta

new

idea, forwhichthe Saponas, Toteros,Nottoways,and Catawbas addedtothe Tuscaroras,

we

haveanaggrega- tion ofDakotaseast oftheAllegheniesnumbering

many

thousands,andtothese

may

bepossiblyaddedahalfdozenotherorsmalltribesintheimmediateneigh- borhood.

Take

theSaponies, for instance,

known

to contemporarywriters underhalf a dozendifferent names and

whom

Gallatin classed

among

the Iroquois; calledby the Troquois, Todericks; bythe French, Panis;westoftheMississippi, Pawnees,

172 BUREAU ^OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

^[Bull.164 aliasNaudowasses, aliasDakotas, alias Sioux. Thesepurely

Dakota

tribeswere ontheAtlantic coastin 1700.

In comparing

the notes

made by Thomas with

those of Dorsey's,

one

willsee that thereis a similarity in criticism

running throughout, but an

elaboration

along

certain lines in

which each

authority

has

specialized.

Dr. Swanton

left

with

the

Bureau

of

American Ethnology a number

of notes

which were

placed in the

Archives under No.

4234.

In

this

group he

liststhe

"Results

of the

comparison

of 117

terms

in 6

Siouan

languages.

The number

of closest

resemblances

is indicated in

each

case."

These were

listed in chart forms,

most

of

which

incorporated

a

basic

foundation with

either additions toor subtractions

from

each.

These

are

shown

as

he has

listed

them without any attempt made

^to

incorporate all three

under

a

common

chart.

In reading over

these charts

one

is

immediately

struck

with

theinconsistencies ofthe

number

of

resemblances between

the

Tutelo and

the otherdialectic groups.

[Chart 1]

Between Biloxi and Ofo

Anthrop.Pap.

No.52]

EASTERN SIOUAN PROBLEM — ^{^MILLER} 173 Swanton's'third

chart

was

as follows:

117terms

and Winnebago40 resemblances [Note.

—

^Penline was drawn through this entry,]

Biloxi '

174 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY

^[Boll.164

inexistence in Virginia,

North

Carolina,

and

possibly

Carolina during

protohistoric

and

historic times.

First, let us point

out how

the

whole

thing started

and developed out

of

statements

issued

by Captain John Smith, William

Strachey,

Edward Bland, John

Lederer,

and General Wood's

reports of the experiences of

Thomas

Batts,

Robert Fallam, James Needham, and

Gabriel Arthur.

John Smith never contacted

the

Indian groups above

the Falls of the

James River but he

did receive

word about them from

a captive

Indian

in sign language.

Most

^{of his}

informa-

tion

came from members

of the

Powhatan confederacy and was

colored

by a number

of factors involving

both

groups,

such

as dif- ferences in language, the

enmity

of

each group

^for the other, etc.

NO FIRSTHAND OBSERVATIONS WERE EVER MADE AMONG THOSE INDIAN