 | "The North American Indian—The Disappearance of the Race A Popular Fallacy |  |
THE NORTH AMERICAN INDIAN—THE DISAPPEARANCE
OF THE RACE A POPULAR
FALLACY.
—
BY J. WORDEN POPE, U. S. ARMY.
—
There undoubtedly exists a deeply-rooted conviction, supposed to rest upon a firm historical basis, that the race of North American Indians is rapidly disappearing before the advance of civilization; and this conviction, coupled with the twin conception that the noble red man has been the victim of the abuse of the European conqueror, has long formed a theme for the writers of poetry, romance, and history. For so many generations has this theme formed part of the traditions of our race, and so firm a hold has it taken upon the imagination, the sympathy, and the sentiments of the populace, that any attempt to dislodge it would doubtless be regarded with complete incredulity, and any data adduced to disprove the belief would be disbelieved as absurd by the average well-read American. To assert, therefore, that there is no proof to sustain the popular belief, that on the contrary there is reason to doubt that the Indian race has materially diminished, would be considered by such persons simply as an iconoclastic attempt to subvert the basal facts of history. It may therefore be startling, but it is true, not only that there exists no substantial proof that the red man is disappearing before the encroachments of civilization, but that many solid facts indicate that there has been no material diminution of the Indian population, or at least in the quantity of Indian blood, within the historic period.
Were this regarded a moot question, it would require that the burden of proof should fall upon those asserting a decrease in population under improved conditions of food supply; but as such a status of the question had passed long before the existence of the present generation, it will be necessary to marshal a formidable array of evidence in favor of the opposing view, and this article is penned with the intention, in the interest of historic truth, of presenting
The reasons for the belief in the lessening of the Indian population certainly seem to rest upon a substantial basis so long as the statistics are not critically examined, and numerous authorities might be quoted in its favor. For instance, the Encyclopaedia Britannica says:
At the date of the European settlement in the American Continent, the Indian population of the present area of the United States was variously estimated, and as low as 1,000,000. In Mr. Jefferson's time, it was thought that there were 600,000 to 1,000,000. In 1822 Rev. J. D. Morse estimated them at 471,136. In 1832 Drake placed the number at 313,000, and in 1840 at 400,000. In 1855 the Commissioner of Indian Affairs reported 350,000 then in the United States; 306,475 in 1866. By the census of 1870 there were 383,577, and by that of 1880, 255,938. In 1887 the Commissioner of Indian Affairs estimated the number at 247,761. The conclusion is that the Indians are gradually decreasing in numbers. For the last eighteen years the average decrease of the "civilized" or "partially civilized" Indians has been a little less than 2,000 a year. The number of Indians in Canada at the present time is estimated at 130,000.
Again, "Ballaert estimated the number existing in 1863 as follows: United States, 500,000." Such views are also held by Catlin, Hubert Bancroft, Baron de la Hontan, and Bartram.
Despite such authorities, it must be evident, in the first place, that any estimate of the early Indian population must have been based upon very flimsy evidence, no census being possible of a wild population scattered over a vast unknown and largely unvisited region, inhabited by scattered bands of roaving savage tribes—mere guesswork, in truth, complicated by the invariable tendency to exaggerate numbers.
If there is thus reason to doubt the accuracy of the estimates of writers on the numbers of Indians inhabiting the territory of the United States in early times, there are more substantial reasons for doubting the enumerations of the Indian population previous to recent really accurate censuses, say from 1886. Much gross exaggeration is known to exist in these reports by reason of the direct pecuniary gain accruing to Indian agents from multiplying numbers. The supplies so much coveted by these agents depended largely upon the number of individuals returned, and it is well established that many corrupt agents rapidly enriched themselves by exaggerations in the enumerations of their charges and pocketing the proceeds. These causes undoubtedly made the enumerations of Indian tribes entirely unreliable, and are sufficient to account for the supposed decrease
- 1860......250,300 1872......265,900 1880......256,127
- 1864......294,574 1873......295,084 1881......261,851
- 1865......294,574 1874......275,003 1882......259,632
- 1866......295,774 1875......305,068 1883......265,565
- 1867......295,899 1876......291,151 1884......264,369
- 1869......289,778 1877......250,882 1885......259,244
- 1870......313,371 1878......250,864 1886......247,761
- 1871......350,000 1879......252,897
As the census of 1890 shows 250,483, it would indicate that the Indian population, after so many strange oscillations, had returned nearly to that of 1860.
Recurring to the early estimates of the numbers of Indians, it must appear marvellous to any one acquainted with the mode of life of the various tribes subsisting chiefly by hunting and fishing, with their constant and destructive warfare, tending to the extermination or decimation of weaker tribes, with their roving life over vast tracts of territory, with the difficulty of raising and maintaining large families—it must appear strange indeed that even so vast a territory as that of the United States could support the large numbers of savages estimated by early writers, rising above the million mark.
The chief reason which causes the persistence of the notion of the decrease of Indians in modern times, and prevents proper inspection into the accounts of early writers, is the enormously rapid increase of the whites upon this continent, which makes the large numbers of Indians estimated seem insignificant in proportion. The knowledge that not only most of the states, but even several cities, contain more population than the total of the highest estimated number of Indians in the United States territories, makes even such largely exaggerated numbers seem reasonable, and reasoning is always largely, though unconsciously, affected by such comparisons.
Again, it would appear extraordinary that the small early settlements of whites could have maintained themselves against the large numbers of predatory savages trained throughout life to warfare had their numbers been equal to the lowest estimates of numbers which early writers ascribe to the Indians. The acceptance of such exaggerations by our early forefathers may not unfairly be accredited to the tribute that such numbers would pay to their prowess in overcoming them. It is doubtless true that should one ac-
To the readers of Parkman, the most careful of American historians, it would certainly appear strange that such small bands as he describes should be scattered over so vast an area had the Indian population amounted to so large numbers as were generally estimated.
After the numbers of eastern tribes became comparatively well known, the upholders of the theories of exaggerated numbers of Indians found a vast unknown field in the boundless plains of the western territories in which to plant numerous hordes of savages; but here Lewis and Clark and other travellers found only comparatively small, scattered bands roaming over endless wastes, leaving small basis for the work of the ever active imagination. With the exception of the Sioux, which tribe are and have always been comparatively numerous, few Western tribes attained to any significant numbers.
When any one calls for proof of the large numbers of Indians claimed to people this land and the reason for such large decrease as is alleged, he is usually met by statements of the decimation of Indians caused by smallpox, ardent spirits, and other evils introduced by the whites, attributing to these causes the large increase of the death-rate. It will be vain to look for any proof of any such effects produced by the whites. With the exception of the Canadian Indians of the Huron tribe, some 20,000, described by Parkman as becoming exterminated through the combined effects of smallpox and the warfare of the terrible Iroquois, no statistics are forthcoming to prove that the whites have been responsible for any large decimation of the Indian race. According to Col. Garrick Mallory, part of these Hurons survive under the name of Wyandots.
The writer was first led to a doubt of the accepted theory of the decimation of the Indian race by seeing the remarkable increase among the Sioux and Cheyenne Indian prisoners held at Fort Keogh in 1878, where these Indians came
- Births. Deaths. Increase.
- 1874............................ 2,152 1,490 662
- 1875............................ 1,889 1,601 388
- 1876............................ 2,401 2,215 186
- 1877............................ 3,442 2,781 661
- 1878............................ 2,941 2,219 722
- 1879............................ 2,352 2,025 327
- 1880............................ 3,430 2,020 1,410
- 1881............................ 2,339 1,989 350
- 1882............................ 2,998 2,478 520
- 1883............................ 4,751 4,508 243
- 1884............................ 4,069 3,787 282
- 1885............................ 4,145 3,754 391
- 1886............................ 4,419 3,929 490
Meeting an old gentleman who had passed his life chiefly as a missionary among the Indians, from New York west to the Rocky Mountains, and stating the idea that it seemed in the probabilities that the Indians should have increased rather than diminished, the old gentleman unhesitatingly affirmed that his knowledge led him to believe in an increase rather than a loss in Indian population. This man knew a large percentage of the individual Indians among all the tribes from New York, where he began his vocation, to the Rocky Mountains, where he promised to end his existence among Sioux and Northern Cheyennes. With these ideas growing up, chance placed in the hands of the writer a newspaper account of an estimate of Indians compiled from the Notes of Thomas Jefferson, which of course applies only to the Indians then known, all of whom inhabited the country east of the Rocky Mountains. The following is the compilation which that writer compared with the census of 1887, by which time an accurate enumeration became possible.
- 1782 1887
- Jefferson's Census. Indian Commissioner's Census.
- Oswegatchies . . . 100
- Connafedagoes )
- Conhunnewagoes) . . 300
- Orondoes . . . . 100
- Abenakies . . . . 350
- Little Algonkins . . 100
- Mickmacs . . . . 700
- Amelistes . . . . 550
- Chalas . . . . . 130
- Nipissins . . . . 400
- Algonkins . . . . 300
- Roundheads . . . . 2,500
- Missasagues. . . . 2,000
- Christenauxkris. . . 3,000
- Assinaboes . . . . 1,500 Assinaboines . . . . 1,689
- Blancs or Barbus . . 1,500
- Mohawks. . . . . 160
- Oneidas. . . . . 300 Oneidas . . . . . 1,800
- Tuscaroras . . . . 200 Tuscaroras . . . . 4,154
- Onondagoes . . . . 260 Onondagoes . . . . 4,841
- Cayugas. . . . . 220 Cayugas . . . . . 172
- Senecas. . . . . 1,000 Senecas . . . . . 2,949
- Aughguagahs . . . 150
- Nanticoes . . . . 100
- Mohicans . . . . 100
- Conoies. . . . . 30
- Sapoonies . . . . 30
- Munsies. . . . . 150
- Delawares or Linnalinopies, 750 Delawares . . . . 44
- Shawanios . . . . 300 Shawnees . . . . . 855
- Mingoes. . . . . 60
- Wyandots . . . . 300 Wyandottes . . . . 264
- Twightwees . . . . 250
- Miamis . . . . . 300 Miamis . . . . . 58
- Ouitanons . . . . 300
- Peankishas . . . . 400 Plankishas . . . . 207
- Sioux of the Meadows)
- Sioux of the Woods). . 10,000 Sioux . . . . . 29,716
- Eastern Sioux)
- Ajones . . . . . 1,100
- Panis, White . . . 2,000
- Panis, Freckled. . . 1,700 Pawnees . . . . . 998
- Padoucas . . . . 5,000
- Grandeaux . . . . 1,000
- Canses . . . . . 1,600 Kansas or Kaw . . . 206
- Osages . . . . . 600 Osages . . . . . 582
- Missouris . . . . 3,000
- Arkansas . . . . 2,000
- Caonitas . . . . 700
- Shakirs . . . . 200
- Kaskaskias . . . . 300
- Piorcas . . . . 800 Peorias . . . . . 144
- Ponteotamies . . . 450 Pottawatamies. . . . 1,056
- Ottawas . . . . 300 Ottawas )
- Chippewas . . . . 5,900 Chippewas) . . . . 16,816
- Mynonamies . . . . 550 Menominees . . . . 1,306
- 1782 1887
- Jefferson's Census. Indian Commissioner's Census.
- Onisconsuigs . . . 550
- Kickapous )
- Otagamios )
- Mascoutins)
- Mescuthins) . . . 4,000 Kickapoos . . . . 567
- Outimacs )
- Musquakies)
- Cherokees . . . . 3,000 Cherokees . . . . 25,000
- Chicasaws . . . . 500 Chicasaws . . . . 6,000
- Catawbas . . . . 150
- Chacktaws . . . . 6,000 Choctaws . . . . 16,000
- Upper Creeks)
- Lower Creeks) . . . 3,000 Creeks . . . . . 14,000
- Natchez . . . . 150
- Alibamous . . . . 600 Alabamas . . . . . 290
- Indians not enumerated 125,040
The numbers and names of the tribes enumerated, many of whom have passed out of existence or have been absorbed into other tribes or survive under other names, prove that whatever may be thought of the accuracy of the enumeration, the compilation was intended to be complete and gave the best information then obtainable, especially as all the information that could be obtained was available to that statesman; and it is an important fact to note that there could have been no object in any underestimation.
This compilation from Jefferson's Notes was based chiefly upon the reports of four authorities: first, that of George Croghan in 1779, who was deputy agent of Indian affairs under Sir William Johnson; second, by a French trader annexed to Colonel Bouquet's account of his expedition in 1768; third, by Captain Hutchins, who visited most of the tribes by order in 1768 for the purpose of learning their numbers; fourth, by John Dodge, an Indian trader, in 1779. These seem to be good authorities, and while many tribes may be omitted or underestimated, it seems impossible that such authorities could have made mistakes that could multiply their inaccuracies by more than two or three without discovery; and this multiplication could only have been possible with tribes then little known, such as the Sioux, which, it may be noted, are set down at 10,000 against the present 30,000.
It will be noticed that the great increase which has since occurred, except in the case of the Sioux, is found among the so-called civilized tribes, such as the Cherokees, Chicasaws, Choctaws, and Creeks, which accessions may be largely due to the white and negro blood blended with them.
It is doubtless true that such blending of white and Indian blood among those tribes is fully overbalanced by half and quarter bloods who have passed into the vast white population who make up a portion of our western population and are not counted among the Indian population. Thus some of the best people of Saint Paul and probably other Western cities have Indian blood in their veins, just as many of the proudest of the F. F. V.s of Virginia claim descent from Pocahontas.
It is certain that only recently can it be claimed that any account of the number of Indians can be relied upon as strictly accurate, and it is a fair question whether within recent historic times, say from 1700, the Indians have not actually increased in numbers.
Thus the following birth and death rates, together with the enumeration of Indian population, from 1887 to 1893, during which time much attention has been given to obtaining really accurate statistics, is compiled from the reports of the Commissioners of Indian Affairs:
- Population. Births. Deaths. Increase. Decrease.
- 1887........... 242,299 4,594 3,850 744 ...
- 1888........... 246,036 4,028 3,606 422 ...
- 1889........... 250,483 5,181 4,719 462 ...
- 1890........... 243,534 4,908 5,208 ... 300
- 1891........... 246,834 4,128 4,762 ... 634
- 1892........... 248,340 3,508 3,660 ... 152
- 1893........... 249,366 3,559 3,741 ... 182
- _____ _____
- 1,628 1,268
The reduction in population in 1890 below that of the preceding year is explained as due mainly to reduced estimates of the numbers of Pimas, Popagoes, and Navajoes.
It will be noted that in each case of decrease of births over deaths, except in the case of 1890 explained above, the Indian population shows an increase over the preceding year. This may probably be explained by the fact that the births pass unnoted, while the deaths, involving the burial ceremony, will be brought to the notice of the agent and be noted. At any rate, these statistics, which are the most exact of any obtained by the Indian Department regarding Indian population, decidedly indicate an increase in the last seven years.
It is equally certain that before 1880 the census of Indians was seriously affected from interested motives, and that no very great diminution of the Indian population has taken place within, say, twenty-five years. That the Indian wars of recent date have not seriously reduced the Indian popu-
If such numbers existed in the days of Jefferson, how could he have made such egregious mistakes as shown by the enumeration before given? Such numbers might be accounted for through the exaggeration of combatants in their boastful accounts of their deeds, through ignorance and want of judgment, but on no known facts. It is well recognized what a power and terror the Six Nations became to all tribes within their sphere of activity, as well as to the colonists, but they certainly in historic times never until recently greatly exceeded 10,000, and probably should have been estimated at a less number in early history.
The Five Nations, increased to Six by the conquest and incorporation of the Tuscaroras, formed one of the most remarkable confederacies of savages ever known, and it would be interesting to speculate upon the course of so powerful a confederacy had the Europeans not interfered by their appearance. But however great the vital force of this wondrous confederated nation planted among the scattered tribes of aborigines, it does not seem possible that it could have exerted so terrific a power had the American Indians amounted to such numbers as we are accustomed to fancy peopled this continent. It is well known how great use was made of Indians by the French and British in their early wars, and had such numbers of savages as are estimated by early writers been at their disposal, a different history might have awaited this country.
Some of the tribes generally considered decreased or almost extinct have considerable numbers remaining in British America, as, for instance, we find in those territories: 1,249 Abnakis, 4,767 Algonquins, 17,386 Crees, 553 Delawares, 200 Kickapoos (in Mexico), 1,311 Menominees, 4,108 Mecinoes, 16,289 Ojibwas and Chippewas, 938 Ottawas, 166 Pottawatomies, 774 Mesesaugas, 1,673 Coghuawaugas, 972 Cayugas, 376 Iroquois, 2,352 Mohawks, 1,014 Oneidas, 346 Onondagas, 206 Senecas, 329 Tuscaroras, 377 Wyandots (Hurons); and this is probably true of some of the tribes of the Pacific Slope.
A few of such tribes are also incorporated with other tribes; thus 1,000 Delawares are with the Cherokees, 3 with the Senecas, 36 with the Onondagas and Senecas, 23 with the Stockbridges, and 37 with the Chippewas.
After penning the above reflections, the writer was, by the
Careful examination since the publication of the above tends to corroborate the soundness of the conclusions then first formulated. . . . Over-estimates of population resulted from the fact that the same body of Indians visited different points during the year, and not infrequently were counted two or three times; change of permanent village sites also tended to augment estimates of population. . . . For these and other reasons a greatly exaggerated idea of Indian population was obtained, and the impressions so derived have been dissipated only in comparatively recent times.
Again, on page 38:
Nor is there anything in the accounts of any of the early visitors to the Columbia valley to authorize the belief that the population there was a very large one. . . . The Dalles was the best fishing station on the river, and the settled population there may be taken as a fair index of that of other favorable locations. The Dalles was visited by Ross in July, 1811, and the following is his statement in regard to the population: "The main camp of the Indians is situated at the head of the narrows, and may contain, during the salmon season, 3,000 souls or more; but the constant inhabitants of the place do not exceed 100 persons."
And as it was on the Columbia, with its numerous supply of fish, so was it elsewhere in the United States. . . . The effect of wars in decimating the people has often been greatly exaggerated.
Again, on pages 44 and 45:
Second, the early Indian population of North America was greatly exaggerated by other writers, and, instead of being large, was, in reality, small as compared with the vast territory occupied and the abundant food supply; and furthermore, the population had nowhere augmented sufficiently, except in California, to press upon the food supply.
On page 45 appears this statement, which will be equally a surprise with the conclusions against the exaggerated ideas of the numbers of the Indians:
Fourth, prior to the advent of the European, the tribes were probably nearly in a state of equilibrium, and were in the main sedentary;
On the same page finally we read:
Fifth, while agriculture was general among the tribes of the United States, and while it was spreading among the western tribes, its products were nowhere sufficient wholly to emancipate the Indian from the hunter state.
The treatise of Col. Mallory referred to in the above report has come into the possession of the writer and is conclusive of the general views herein adopted. After showing the entire lack of facts on which early estimates were based and their numerous contradictions, he goes on to give such facts as are known by the best and most reliable authorities. These authorities conclude that the Indian race started from the Columbia River and spread east along the borders of streams where game chiefly abounded, leaving vast regions unoccupied; that travellers going along these streams and finding numerous bodies of Indians, supposed the whole country likewise occupied, though other travellers who journeyed through those regions found vast areas wholly unoccupied; that tribes wandering around were counted many times under different names; that the exaggeration of numbers was a trick of the savages themselves to increase their importance; that the many names given the different tribes augmented the mistakes of travellers; that many tribes supposed to be extinct exist under other names. For instance, the supposed extinct Mohicans of Cooper have descendants surviving as Mensees, Brothertons, and Stockbridges, originally known as Pequods.
He shows also that tribes supposed to be decimated by smallpox and other diseases simply migrated and continued to exist under altered names unknown to travellers and uncorrected, no records being kept by the tribes themselves. He shows that Europeans did not add to the destructive character of wars, the early Indian wars being equally or more destructive. Taking the instance of the Iroquois, he proves that there existed 13,668 in 1877, and less than 12,000 in 1763. He also proves that the alleged destruction of Indians in California through the barbarities of the gold-seekers of 1849 was greatly exaggerated, being less than 7,000 out of 30,000, while double this number was supposed to have been destroyed; that the reports of the Indian Bureau of births and deaths show an increase; and that
His conclusions are:
That the native population of the territory occupied by the United States at its discovery has been wildly over-estimated—that while many of its opponent bodies have been diminished, or been destroyed, by oppression and violence, their loss has been in large part compensated by gains among others; that though some temporary retrogradation must always be expected among individual tribes at the crisis of their transition from savagery or barbarism to more civilized habits, yet now the number of our Indians is on the increase.
Probably the most complete data on this subject are given in a report of Major S. M. Clark, who was charged by the Bureau of Education to investigate the subject, and whose report is published in the Report of the Indian Commissioner for 1877. He gives the following estimates:
- 1 1780 Estimate of Secretary of War Knox...... 76,000
- 2 1790-91 Estimate of General Imlay.............. 60,000
- 3 1820 Report of Dr. Morse on Indian Affairs.. 471,000
- 4 1825 " " Secretary of War............. 129,366
- 5 1829 " " " " ............. 312,934
- 6 1834 " " " " ............. 312,610
- 7 1836 " " Supt. of Indian Affairs...... 253,464
- 8 1837 " " " " " ...... 302,498
- 9 1850 " " H. R. Schoolcraft............ 379,264
- 10 1853 " " U. S. Census, 1850........... 400,764
- 11 1855 " " Indian Office................ 314,622
- 12 1857 " " H. R. Schoolcraft............ 379,204
- 13 1860 " " Indian Office................ 254,300
- 14 1865 " " " " ................ 294,574
- 15 1870 " " U. S. Census................. 313,712
- 16 1870 " " Indian Office................ 313,371
Of the estimates from 1790 to 1876, this writer says:
1. It is entirely impracticable to present any trustworthy statement of the number of Indians in the whole territory comprised within the present limits of the United States. All enumerations and estimates were based on fragmentary and otherwise insufficient data. Our official intercourse with the Indian tribes at the beginning of this century did not extend much beyond the Ohio River and the Mississippi from its confluence with the Ohio to the Gulf of mexico; and our information respecting the number of Indian tribes beyond, and their numerical strength, was extremely meagre and indefinite. The number of Indian tribes in official relations with the United States steadily increased from 1778, the date of our first Indian treaty, to within a few years.
2. Such estimates and enumerations as have been presented do not coincide (except in two instances, 1820 and 1870) in date with the years in which the regular census of the United States was taken; nor do they appear at regular intervals.
3. It is almost invariably true that estimates of the numbers of our Indian tribes exceed the real numbers; and from the nature of the case, all official enumerations, until within a very recent period,
4. The United States census returns before 1850 did not include Indians.
A footnote states that the estimates of Knox and Imlay may represent warriors only, in which case the total number would be 380,000 and 300,000, warriors being estimated at one-fifth of the population. Dr. Morse made his estimate under an appointment to make a report on the condition of the Indians, which ended in 1822.
The estimate of 1825 did not include Indians in or west of the Missouri valley, and is therefore incomplete. The estimate of 1829 noted the geographical distribution; that of 1834 did not include tribes north of Virginia and east of Ohio; and that of 1836 did not include Indians west of the Rocky Mountains nor those of Texas. That of 1837 is taken from Schoolcraft's history and includes all Indian tribes in the estimate stated by him to have been made up by the Indian Office.
The enumeration by Schoolcraft was the first real attempt to accurately count the Indians, and cost $130,000, appropriated by Congress. The investigations were never completed, and the enumeration was made up partly of estimates, some exaggerated, as, for instance, the tribes in Texas and the new territories being put at 183,042. The census of 1850 was chiefly estimated, one estimate being 271,930. The California Indians were placed at 100,000, whereas Schoolcraft had three years before placed them at 32,231, which was also doubtless an overestimate. The estimate of 1855 was admitted to be largely conjectural, also that of Schoolcraft of 1857.
From 1860 the Indian Office published statements of population, schools, etc., of tribes connected with the Government of the United States, which became of value after 1870.
This writer gives the following substantial reasons for the exaggerations in the estimates of Indians since 1790:
1. The estimates of the Spanish adventurers, whose explorations were more extensive than those of any other nation in the sixteenth century, were accepted and seldom questioned for a long period; some of them are still accepted. The Spanish estimates were largely based on their previous experience in the more densely populated countries of Mexico and Peru: besides, they warred with the natives, and it has never been a Spanish trait to underrate the numerical strength of an enemy.
2. The French explorers were largely composed of ecclesiastics whose imaginations were kindled by a contemplation of the heathen multitudes they were to win to the cross. The extravagance of many of their estimates has been shown, and yet they are to a considerable extent accepted to-day.
3. The early English colonists formed permanent settlements. Their little towns were naturally seated on water-courses which were the great highways of Indian travel, and at points on the coast to which the Indians had long resorted. They thus came in contact with a very large proportion, relatively, of the Indian population. They were also engaged in hostilities with the Indians, and were naturally misled as to the number of their foes by the ubiquity of the savages, whose mode of warfare enabled them to strike a hamlet here to-day and another fifty miles away to-morrow.
4. There were other reasons more general why estimates were exaggerated. Trade brought to the points of exchange large numbers of Indians from great distances. The Indians naturally, for purposes of their own, magnified their own numbers and importance.
The vast extent of country, compared with the more limited areas to which the English, French, and Spaniards were accustomed, and which were densely populated, led them to magnify the actual population of the new world.
The most perfect illustration of the effect of European civilization upon the American aborigines is to be found in the history of the Iroquois Confederacy, of which we fortunately possess complete and accurate accounts from an early date, which nation of Indians has come into contact in more various ways and has figured more largely in our early history than any other. The estimates below are from Major Clark's treatise:
- Date. Authority.
- 1660 Jesuit Relation....................................... 11,000
- 1665 Jesuit Relation....................................... 11,750
- 1665 French Expedition..................................... 11,700
- 1671 Wentworth Greenhalgh.................................. 10,750
- 1677 Col. Coursey.......................................... 17,000
- 1681 Du Chesneau........................................... 10,000
- 1682 Governor de la Barre.................................. 13,000
- 1685 French Memoir of Canada............................... 10,250
- 1687 French Memoir of Canada............................... 10,000
- 1689 Governor Bellemont.................................... 12,850
- 1698 Governor Bellemont.................................... 6,150
- 1720 Governor Hunter....................................... 10,000
- 1736 Joncaire (including Tuscaroras)....................... 7,350
- 1738 Indian Commissioners of New York (including Tuscaroras) 8,825
- 1763 Sir William Johnson................................... 11,650
- 1768 Capt. Thomas Hutchins................................. 14,150
- 1770 Sir William Johnson................................... 10,000
- 1774 Sir William Johnson................................... 12,500
- 1779 John Dodge, Indian Trader............................. 8,000
- 1791 General Imlay......................................... 7,430
- 1796 Dr. Morse............................................. 3,748
- 1818 Jaspar Parrish, Indian Sub-Agent...................... 4,575
- 1819 Report to New York Legislature........................ 4,538
- 1821 Rev. Jedidiah Morse................................... 4,056
- 1825 Secretary of War...................................... 5,061
- 1829 Secretary of War...................................... 5,100
- 1845 H. R. Schoolcraft..................................... 6,942
- 1850 Indian Office......................................... 5,225
- Date. Authority.
- 1855 Indian Office......................................... 5,778
- 1860 Indian Office......................................... 3,953
- 1865 Indian Office......................................... 5,300
- 1870 U. S. Census.......................................... 4,962
- 1870 Indian Office......................................... 4,804
- 1875 N. Y. Census.......................................... 4,672
- 1875 Indian Office......................................... 4,804
- 1877 Indian Office......................................... 5,881
- If to these are added the Iroquois in Canada.......... 13,068
The figures from 1796 do not include the Iroquois who had moved into Canada. The number estimated in 1877, which is said to be an underestimate (13,068), considerably exceeded any trustworthy estimate of their numerical strength for more than one hundred years, and proves a certain increase. The wars of the French and Indians, the Revolutionary War, and the War of 1812, probably the most destructive wars to which Indians have been subjected, undoubtedly decreased the numbers of the Iroquois, but it is seen that they have more than recovered their earlier numbers.
Major Clark concludes:
It may not be impertinent for the writer to observe that the above, and a multitude of other facts that have come to his knowledge during several years of study of the question of Indian civilization, have convinced him that the usual theory that the Indian population is destined to decline and finally disappear, as a result of contact with white civilization, must be greatly modified, probably abandoned altogether.
The above-mentioned reports were the result of vast research after an exhaustive consulting of the best authorities by the most painstaking inquirers, and their conclusions are absolutely decisive of the question so far as they extend. No amount of loose compilation by guesswork, indulged in by ordinary writers, can stand before the perfect method and unprejudiced study given by these honest government inquirers, and their deductions will undoubtedly be accepted as conclusive by all unprejudiced students.
It may therefore be claimed with confidence that the notion of the dying-out of the Indian race on this continent is a popular fallacy which the painstaking system of modern research has exploded; though it will long remain in the minds of the people as a tradition rendered sacred by many generations of believers, and will still hold its place as an historic fact to be worked up by sentimentalists in story, song, and romance.
It is time, however, that future historians should, in the interest of truth, relegate the theory of the disappearance of the race of North American Indians to its proper place among the disproved fallacies of history.
| "The North American Indian—The Disappearance of the Race A Popular Fallacy | |