|
Description |
A HISTORY OF UTAH'S AMERICAN INDIANS
Edited by Forrest S. Cuch
A HISTORY OF UTAH'S
AMERICAN INDIANS
A HISTORY OF
UTAH'S
AMERICAN INDIANS
Edited by Forrest S. Cuch
with chapters by
David Begay
Dennis Defa
Clifford Duncan
Ronald Holt
Nancy Maryboy
Robert S. McPherson
Mae Parry
Gary Tom
and Mary Jane Yazzie
2003
Utah State Division of Indian Affairs / Utah State Division of History
Salt Lake City
Copyright © 2000 by the Utah Division of Indian Affairs and the Utah
Division of State History
All Rights Reserved
ISBN 0- 912728- 49- 2
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 00- 133020
Printed in Canada
Utah Division of Indian Affairs Utah Division of State History
324 South State Street Suite 500 300 Rio Grande
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101- 1182
Distributed to the book trade by
Utah State University Press
Logan, Utah 84322- 7800
The paperback edition reprint of this book is made possible through a grant
from the George S. and Dolores Dore Eccles Foundation.
Book and cover design by Richard Firmage
Cover and frontispiece art by Dallin Maybee
Preface
Allan Kent Powell
The commemorations of the Utah Statehood Centennial in 1996 and
the Sesquicentennial of Utah Settlement in 1997 were cause for reflection
not only on these milestones in Utah's history but also for a reexamination
of the people, events, and movements that constitute Utah
history. To this end, several projects were launched prior to the commemorations;
they included a one- volume Utah history encyclopedia, a
one- volume history of Utah, a four- volume comprehensive history of
the state, and a twenty- nine- volume county centennial history series. All
of these projects were designed to provide careful accounts of how Utah
has developed from prehistoric times to the present. Other books , films,
and projects looked at particular aspects of the Utah experience. They
included Utah's struggle for statehood, Utah's literary legacy, the Mormon
Trail and overland travel to Utah, the state's natural heritage, and
what Utahns thought about themselves and their state through an essay
project, known as " Faces of Utah" that involved contributions from thousands
of the state's residents.
With a combination of great pride in the history and heritage of
their peoples and concern that their story might be ignored or misrepresented,
Utah's American Indian leaders proposed their own commemorative
project— a one- volume history of the American Indian experience
in Utah. The history would be a collaborative effort between Indians
and non- Indians, but it ultimately would recount how Utah's American
Indians have celebrated and interpreted their past from the earliest days
to the present. This would not be another non- Indian perception of the
past that would ignore the Native American audience, but rather a telling
of the past from the perspective of Utah American Indians. The book,
it was hoped, would provide a written account that could help all generations
of American Indians understand their rich and diverse heritage
while also giving non- Indians a useful perspective on both their separate
VI A History of Utah's American Indians
and shared pasts. The ultimate goal was neither to condemn nor to judge;
rather, it was to instruct and enlighten.
When asked by Governor Michael Leavitt in 1993 about their legislative
priorities, Utah's Indian leaders placed state funding for the American
Indian history project near the top of the list. The governor and the
legislature concurred, and a $ 20,000 appropriation was made during the
1993 legislative session to the Division of State History ( Utah State Historical
Society) for the project. As sister agencies within the Department
of Community of Economic Development, the Division of State History
and the Division of Indian Affairs entered into a partnership to produce
the book, with Wil Numkena, director of the Division of Indian Affairs,
as project director and general editor for the volume. In 1997 Wil
Numkena resigned as director of the Division of Indian Affairs to return
to his home on the Hopi Reservation in Arizona to work in the Hopi
Tribe education program. His successor, Forrest S. Cuch, embraced the
project wholeheartedly and assumed the duties of general editor for the
volume. The Public History section of the Utah State Historical Society
provided support and assistance.
This volume is the first of six history initiatives identified by the Division
of Indian Affairs. They include: Indian History Research; curriculum
development of Utah Indian History for the public schools, including
the integration of Indian History studies into the school core
curriculum and the training of teachers to teach Indian History; public
and educational lectures; Indian oral history projects; and audio- visual
Indian history projects. This book provides an essential foundation from
which to undertake these other initiatives.
The book project was launched with the establishment of an advisory
committee made up primarily of representatives from Utah's Indian
tribes. The committee made recommendations as to content to be
included and potential authors. After considering several options, the
committee recommended that the effort concentrate on producing one
volume, which would include a thorough introduction followed by chapters
for each of the six Utah Indian tribes. A summary or concluding
chapter that focused on major issues and problems facing Utah's American
Indians at the end of the twentieth century and also considered urban
and non- reservation Indians would end the volume.
An initial goal of the committee was to identify and secure the participation
of American Indian historians and writers for the project to
ensure that the volume reflected clearly an Indian perspective and interpretation
of the Native American past. This was accomplished in great
Utah's American Indians — vn—
part by Forrest Cuch working as the general editor for the volume and
four of the chapters having been written solely by American Indians.
Two chapters were collaborative efforts by Indian and non- Indian writers,
the other three chapters were authored by non- Indians working
closely with representatives of the tribes and groups about whom they
were writing.
This volume, then, represents some of the realities of writing American
Indian history and history in general. Not all members of a group
perceive or interpret their history in exactly the same way. While there is
usually agreement about most of the basic facts, the importance that one
event or experience has over another, the implications that developed
from certain actions, or the role of one individual or group in certain
developments are all subject to differing interpretations. Therefore, just
as is the case with the history of all Utahns, it is impossible to write chapters
about Utah's American Indians that can be said to contain a consensus
of everyone's views about their past. Still, it is important to ask: Can
non- Indian historians do justice to Indian history and write with both
sympathy and accuracy about another people's past? Only well- informed
readers can answer that question for themselves about this book. However,
each of the non- Indian contributors to this volume has used oral
histories from tribal members as well as written documents and records
from the respective tribe. They also have reviewed their chapters with
members of the respective tribes to ensure that the chapters contain what
those members believe to be the essence, or at least an accurate representation,
of their history.
As the authors and committee members met, a list of suggested topics
was developed for inclusion in each chapter. These topics included:
creation legends and stories; first non- Indian contacts; a chronological
summary of important events; present- day and certain future issues and
concerns; the roles, contributions, and impacts made by the tribes on
the larger community, area, state, and nation; and consideration of such
topics as religion, politics, education, folkways, family life, social activities,
and economic issues. One of the greatest challenges to the authors
was to condense the complex and diverse history of the tribes into a chapter-
length narrative. In this sense, the chapters that follow represent a
beginning point much more than an ending point in understanding
Utah's first residents. Some chapters also are written on a more personal
level, evoking in a more lyrical manner themes important to the author,
rather than attempting a more dispassionate chronological unfolding of
events of conventional historical importance.
— viii— A History of Utah's American Indians
More than five hundred years have passed since the first encounter
between Indians and non- Indians took place with the arrival of Christopher
Columbus in what quickly became known as the New World.
Throughout those five hundred years disease, pestilence, war, atrocities,
greed, discrimination, relocation, intolerance, and misunderstanding have
characterized many of the actions and attitudes of non- Indians to the
peoples they found inhabiting this vast hemisphere. Most North American
Indian tribes faced extinction as their populations dwindled in the
face of this encounter. That tribes like the Goshute, Navajo, Paiute,
Shoshone, and Ute have survived and now flourish to some measure is
an important lesson for a planet where ecological disasters threaten in
many forms. As their histories tell us, these tribes have long endured and
will continue to endure. They have always been and will continue to be
an important part of Utah's history. What greater gift can they offer all
Utahns than an understanding of their story?
The chapters that follow will enlighten and enrich readers with knowledge
about cultures that stretch back to the ancient past. Special thanks
is extended to the Utah State Legislature and Governor Michael Leavitt,
who recognized the importance of this project and appropriated the necessary
funds to undertake the research and writing and to provide copies
to each public school and library in the state.
— Allan Kent Powell
Contents
Introduction xi
Forrest S. Cuch
Setting the Stage: Native America Revisited 3
Robert S. McPherson
The Northwestern Shoshone 25
Mae Parry
The Goshute Indians of Utah 73
Dennis R. Defa
The Paiute Tribe of Utah 123
Gary Tom and Ronald Holt
The Northern Utes of Utah 167
Clifford Duncan
The White Mesa Utes 225
Robert S. McPherson and Mary Jane Yazzie
The Navajos 265
Nancy Maryboy and David Begay
Conclusion: The Contemporary Status of Utah Indians 315
Robert S. McPherson
Notes to Chapters 341
Selected Bibliography 369
Notes on Contributors 381
Index 385
— ix—
— x— A History of Utah's American Indians
• i
jilllR
t f » A
A Ute Indian photographed by a member of the John Wesley Powell ethnographic
expedition in 1873- 74. ( Utah State Historical Society— USHS)
Introduction
Forrest S. Cuch
The day will come, when a white people will set foot on the eastern
shores and claim this land as their own. They will build a white
house near the shore from where they will govern their people. Upon
establishing their government, they will raise a banner upon a flagstaff,
on top of which they will place the spirit of the Hopi ( Indian)
people, this will be a sign to us that the Creator will keep his promises
to us. This people, the " Bahana", will scatter our people, seek to
destroy us down to the last child, and bring upon us diseases that
we have never known before.
—( Oral History of the Hopi Prophecy)
My understanding of ancient American Indian philosophy is that
there is purpose for all things and that there are no accidents in this world.
To many, it was no accident that the ancestors of the Hopi, the pre-
Puebloan ( Anasazi) people, once inhabited the area today known as the
state of Utah. I also think it was no accident that my friend and predecessor,
Wil Numkena, was Hopi, and a person of great wisdom and esteem.
His vision, dedication as an educator, and love for the Indian people of
Utah made this book possible. To him we all owe a debt of gratitude for
this major accomplishment. I, and many others, will always appreciate
his role in making this book possible and his contributions to our state.
The Hopi people claim there are four worlds of human passage. We
are nearing the end of the third world and entering the fourth. In many
ways, this book reflects this transition. We, the indigenous people of Utah,
have endured great suffering during these times but are now coming forth
in our development. The time has passed for non- Indian people to speak
for us about " our past" about " our history." It is now time for us to bring
forth the truth as we know it to be, and share it with others. Through
bringing forth the truth, and through earnest discussions about it in our
— xt—
Xtl A History of Utah's American Indians
schools, and with our neighbors, we will truly heal our wounds and take
our rightful place in society.
Presenting the truth is necessary to dispel the myriad myths surrounding
Utah history. One of the most obvious but prevailing myths is
that " no one" ( or no people of importance) lived in this area prior to
Mormon settlement. Knowledge of pre- Mormon human presence in this
area must hereafter be vital to any endeavor of educational enlightenment
and postures of advanced learning by our citizenry. Furthermore,
the belief must be eliminated from our consciousness that Utah's American
Indians were treated better than " other Indians" outside our state
boundaries. In its place must be found the facts, suggesting that the treatment
of the American Indian in the state of Utah was rarely different
from what occurred in surrounding states. In some cases, treatment of
the Indians was better; but, in the case of the Bear River Massacre, for
example, treatment was even more harsh and severe than what was experienced
by Indians residing in other states.
For the most part, the histories of Utah's American Indian tribes
have not been considered a viable and integral part of the history of the
state of Utah. They have been treated as addenda or commentary rather
than official textbook documentary. To quote Will Numkena, " Non- Indian
authors have traditionally been the writers of Indian history. Therefore,
it is their perceptions, understandings and views reflected in those
writings. The reader is given a one- sided perspective without presentation
of the Indian experience." In other words, until this time, Indian
history has been written by the conqueror, with little or no regard for
those conquered.
In the following pages, the reader will have an opportunity to view
six tribal histories as perceived by members of those tribes in consultation
with local scholars. Each author has used written and oral sources
to tell the respective stories of each tribe. Their histories reflect a series
or combination of differing aspects, stories that are thought- provoking
yet tragic, awe- inspiring yet plain, simple yet complex. Clearly, groups
have a common thread binding them all together, but each has its own
distinction, its unique history and perspective.
A common perception is that all Indians are the same, when, in fact,
Indians are a very diverse group. There are over 540 federally recognized
Indian tribes in the United States and over 340 languages of Indian people
currently still in use. The tribes differ in so many ways: different customs,
practices, clothing, housing, and foods. Also, however, although
many differences exist, Indian tribes also have many commonalities: high
Utah's American Indians — xin—
A Shoshone mother and her two children. ( Courtesy Mae Parry)
value placed on family and spirituality, nuclear family and extended family
and extended kinship structures; similar tribal spiritual philosophies; a
high regard for the elderly, who sometimes serve as the educators and
second parents; and many more.
The following chapters provide a rare look into American Indian
history from an Indian perspective— one that has been ignored because
it is unwritten and is based on oral tradition. To quote Will Numkena
again, " Generally speaking, scholars and publishers do not give the ere-
— xiv— A History of Utah's American Indians
Paiute Jim, his wife, and two children. ( USHS)
dence to oral Indian history afforded European folk tales and oral history
because they apply Euro- American standards— if not written in black
and white, oral history does not deserve validation. By featuring tribal
oral histories in this volume, the readers are provided several unique creation
stories, explanations for life- ways, rituals and traditions, including
tales of [ first contact with the white man] and early interactions between
Indians, explorers, soldiers, and settlers."
It has only recently been determined ( or the truth has escaped us)
that neither Columbus, Cortez, nor the English colonials ever " discovered"
America. The Western Hemisphere was discovered thousands of
years before them by American Indians. Nor did early explorers find
America to be an exotic untouched wilderness. Rather, all explorers on
both continents encountered real live people and thriving civilizations.
Columbus encountered kind and loving people, the Tanoan people, living
on an island Utopia that is yet to be equaled— and he quickly vanquished
them into slavery. Cortez encountered an incredible civilization
marveled about to this day. The English colonials found evidence of an
Utah s American Indians — xv—
Indian population estimated at between thirty to forty thousand who
lived in tree- bark structures, managed the land, and excelled in agriculture,
as evidenced by expansive fields of corn. Both of the latter groups
possessed written forms of language— the Aztecs and Mayans used stone
tablets and parchment scrolls, the Delaware ( Leni Lenape) wrote their
tribal history in pictographs on wooden tablets, while the Algonquian
and Iroquoian people portrayed their histories on sacred wampum belts.
Beginning with Columbus and the ensuing colonial contacts, the
precedent would be set in America for Indians to be treated as separate
and sovereign nations. It goes without saying that, if Indians were here
prior to the colonial nations, their forms of government and independent
sovereign status preceded the colonials as well. The Iroquois nations
would also suggest that " democracy" preceded the colonials via the
Iroquoian Confederacy— their governing council referred to as the
" Council of Fire" and their constitution referred to as " The Great Roots
of Peace." In other words, the sovereign status of the American Indian
tribes was in place prior to the arrival of European colonists and is solidly
lodged in history.
Indian sovereign status was reflected, then and now, through a legal
instrument referred to as a " treaty." Treaties between the colonials ( soon
to be the United States of America) and the Indians came about as a
result of wars between them. As American settlers appropriated to themselves
more and more Indian land, fighting between the nations occurred.
Some treaties were ratified by the U. S. Congress, some were not, and
some treaties and land settlements were the result of executive orders of
the president of the United States. One of the primary terms and conditions
specified in most treaties was the understanding and provision that
large amounts of Indian land were to be exchanged for government services
to the Indians and peaceful relations between them. It was the treaty
process that established the unique political status and nation- to- nation
relationship Indian tribes presently possess with the United States. Many
treaties between the U. S. government and Indian tribes continue to be
honored and enforceable to this day.
Another important aspect of U. S. government relations with Indian
Tribes was changing federal Indian policy. The first federal policy era,
referred to above, was the Treaty Period of 1789- 1871, when treaties were
entered into with the Indians. Following this came the Reservation Period
of 1871- 1887, when the United States removed tribes from their
aboriginal lands onto reserved sections of land called reservations. Next
came the Allotment Period of 1887- 1934, during which time the United
— xvi— A History of Utah's American Indians
States attempted to break up reservation land holdings by assigning plots
of land from 40 to 160 acres to individual Indians considered heads of
households. The next period was called the Reorganization Period of
1934- 1953, during which time the U. S. government attempted to establish
governments for tribes resembling their forms of government. The
Howard- Wheeler Act mandated establishment of tribal governments with
constitutions and governing bodies, soon to be called tribal councils.
Ironically, following this period to reorganize tribes came the Termination
Period of 1953- 1970, a time when the federal government disenfranchised
and disestablished many tribes. In 1954, under the prodding
of Senator Arthur Watkins of Utah, Chairman of the Subcommittee
on Indian Affairs of the Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, a
number of termination bills for specific tribes were enacted. The bills
attempted to integrate Indians into mainstream American society. They
proved to be of benefit to land- grabbing non- Indians but a miserable
failure resulting in poverty for those tribes terminated, with the loss of
thousands of acres of land on the part of individual Indians and their
tribes.
The Self- Determination Era of 1970- 1994 recovered some of the
losses of the previous period. Under the Self- Determination policy, federally
recognized Indian tribes were granted the authority to plan, develop,
and operate ( through contract with appropriate federal agencies)
programs serving Indian people. The policy proved to be a refreshing
change to prior oppressive policies and set the stage for the next and
current policy mandate, the Self- Government policy. The Self- Govern-ment
policy is a refinement of the previous policy and provides additional
authority to tribal governments to prioritize and configure their
own appropriations to meet their needs.
Writing this volume is important to the State of Utah, not only because
it recognizes and validates the history of the various Indian tribes
but also because it makes this information available to schools, libraries,
and the general public. A written history including Indian perspective
and the blending of Indian oral traditions and experiences with non-
Indian written accounts is a major contribution to all people. This text
provides a glimpse into traditional Native American life prior to the coming
of the pioneers, into experiences of first contact with the white man,
and into personal family perspectives, the ravages of war, and mistreatment
of Indians by the pioneers and by the state and federal governments.
It is apparent, not all has been well for Indians in the history of
Utah.
Utah's American Indians — xvn—
A Ute baby in a traditional cradleboard. ( USHS)
All Utah tribes have experienced their moment of great suffering.
For the Shoshone, it was, as mentioned above, the Bear River Massacre
of 1863. For the Utah Utes, it was forced removal in 1865 from their
beloved Utah Valley into the arid Uinta Basin. For the Goshutes, it was
broken promises and removal from traditional sacred lands. For the Navajo
and Paiute, it was countless skirmishes with Mormon settlers in
southern Utah. The Paiute suffered again late in their history, when, dur-
— xviii— A History of Utah's American Indians
WK^ KBKSIKISB^ M
• in
*
iiiii
mum
MillllilMll
Hoskaninni Begay and his grandson photographed in 1939. Hoskaninni
Begay was the son of Hoskaninni ( Haashkeneinii), who crossed the San Juan
River in 1863 to escape the round- up of Navajos and the Long Walk to Fort
Sumner in eastern New Mexico. ( USHS)
Utah's American Indians — xix—
ing the 1950s, they were terminated from federal assistance and their
reservation lands were taken from them.
In many ways, some of Utah's Indian tribes continue to suffer from
traumas of the past. The Shoshone have not recovered from the Bear
River Massacre; they continue to suffer from limited land- base, scattered
and substandard home sites, intertribal political strife, poverty, poor
health, and ineffective educational programs for their children. The Confederate
Tribes of Goshute Indians continue to struggle with lands having
limited natural resources. The Skull Valley Goshute have encountered
external and internal conflict and strong resistance to proposed
development on their lands. The Paiute continue to struggle to restore
much of what was lost following the termination era. The Ute continue
to experience difficulty adapting to complexities and sophistication required
in developing their natural resources. The Navajos along with the
other tribes face issues of development and equity. This history seeks to
restore hope and healing to all Utah tribes and to promote improved
relationships with their non- Indian neighbors.
This text is organized to provide the reader with information and
themes which include creation stories, traditional Indian beliefs, oral
history, first non- Indian contacts, the Indian experience, historic events
of significance, and present- day issues impacting Indian tribes. Authors
include Dennis Defa, with the assistance of Milton Hooper ( Goshute)
on the Goshute tribal history; Clifford Duncan ( Northern Ute) on the
Ute tribal history; Ron Holt and Gary Tom ( Paiute) on the Paiute tribal
history; Robert McPherson, with the assistance of Mary Jane Yazzie ( Ute
Mountain Ute) on the White Mesa Ute history; Nancy Cottrell Maryboy
( Dine') and David H. Begay ( Dine') on the Navajo ( Dine') history; and
Mae Parry ( Northwestern Shoshone) on the Northwestern Shoshone history.
We respectfully honor and acknowledge the contributions of Vyrie
Gray ( Goshute), who passed away prior to the completion of this publication.
Thanks to those who assisted in other ways includes Janet Smoak
and Kent Powell of the Utah State Historical Society and Richard Firmage
for the design and editing of this volume.
Presently, Utah Indian tribes are faced with many challenges in the
areas of economic development, natural resources, unemployment, education,
health, environment, high crime, and substance abuse. Successful
tribal governments will invest in developing human resources as much
as in developing natural resources, for many of the problems identified
above have a direct effect upon family, children, and the elderly in particular.
Regarding the future, tribes that are wise will maintain sovereign
- XX A History of Utah's American Indians
political status with the U. S. Congress and both federal and state governments.
They will put forth long- range planning strategies for tribal programs
and services, and initiate intertribal partnerships with other public
groups and the private sector. They will strengthen relationships with
state governments and put into effect policies building upon those relationships.
The political relationships, decisions, and agreements will influence
effectiveness in deliberations and interactions with state and federal
agencies on behalf of their constituents.
Many Indian people have long believed that through nature, with its
expression and glory, all other connections are made— the vital link with
our true God, our Creator. The ancient people of this land maintained
this connection with nature. The teachings of these people, as, for example,
through the Hopi prophecy above, demonstrated this vital link.
This wisdom is evident in the warnings of the Hopi traditionalists, descendants
of the Anasazi, who urge us to keep life simple and remember
two things: Love one another, and love the earth.
These ancient prophesies may be significant to modern times— to
non- Indian people as well as to Indian people. Perhaps the wisdom of
ancient prophesies will provide direction for the future. From the ancient
high plains symbolism ( found in the " Medicine Wheel") to the Hopi
prophesy, perhaps a new direction can be found for all of mankind.
And so it is with this newfound wisdom and enlightenment from
the ancients that we look forward to this new millennium. Once we discover
that we truly are brothers and sisters— that the world is one community
for all— we can begin to discover our true essence, our beauty,
and what we, as enlightened beings, truly have to offer. It is when our
world becomes safe that we can begin to develop our true potential and
make this world into heaven on earth.
In closing, I think it is important to note the most important legacy
of the Utah American Indians: Despite widespread attempts at genocide
and often full- scale extermination campaigns against us by the dominant
culture, " we continue to exist." We continue to live as a people with
a distinct and beautiful culture, worldview, and way of life. " We are still
here! And we do not plan to be leaving ... not real soon anyway."
— Forrest S. Cuch ( Ute)
A HISTORY OF UTAH'S
AMERICAN INDIANS
Map showing approximate general territory of Utah's Indian tribes just prior
to white settlement in 1847. Note that not only are boundaries inexact but
also there was some interaction and use of adjacent territories by members of
virtually all tribes.
Setting the Stage:
Native America Revisited
Robert S. McPherson
The writing of Native American history can be said to have started
when Christopher Columbus first waded ashore on San Salvador Island
in the Caribbean. It has continued ever since. What preceded his arrival—
the prehistoric phase of Native Americans— has generally been left to
archaeologists and anthropologists to decipher and explain from physical
remains. The initial contact, post- contact, and contemporary phases
are the realm of historians, who write in keeping with longstanding conventions
of their own trade. In both instances, facts, dates, and interpretation
generally are presented from an Anglo American perspective that
has evolved over centuries.
What this has meant to the Indian people is that rarely, if ever, has
their view been predominant, if it has even been known. Calvin Martin,
a noted Indian historian, put it this way: " We presume to document and
interpret the history of a people whose perception of the world for the
most part eludes us, whose behavior, as a result, is enigmatic... To ignore
the Indian thoughtworld is to continue writing about ourselves to
ourselves." 1 This has been especially true until recently.
Within the last twenty- five years, there has been a perceptible shift
in the tide of writing that now insists on a more balanced treatment of
the Indians' view of events. However, this is at times a difficult thing to
achieve. Native Americans in the past have been slow to come forth with
their own story for a number of reasons, including fear of retribution, a
desire to leave the past behind, reticence to speak as an individual for a
group, and the belief that certain events are sacred, personal, and not to
be divulged for public view. Whatever the reason, when one considers
how much has been produced about these people, there are relatively
few tribal histories written or sanctioned by Native Americans. 2
In the following pages, the reader will encounter six tribal histories
composed either by Native Americans or their representatives. Each au-
— 3—
A History of Utah's American Indians
Part of Chief Washakie's village encamped near South Pass in the Wind River
Mountains. Photo taken by William Henry Jackson in 1870 while he was with
the Hayden Survey. ( Utah State Historical Society— USHS)
thor has used both written and oral sources to tell the story of the tribes
living within the boundaries of Utah. The tribal histories are complex, as
they speak of persistence and change, the past and the present, diversity
and unity. What will be recognized early on is that there are common
threads woven throughout each tribal account; but these may assume a
different cultural pattern. Thus, each group enjoys a distinct identity.
Among the most prominent of these threads is a religious worldview
that ties these people of Utah to a living, sentient creation. Their world is
one of power, filled with holy beings who either help or hinder those
who interact with them. Unlike most Anglo Americans, who separate
themselves from a world they divide into animate and inanimate objects,
the Indian worldview sees the land as an interconnected whole—
with rocks, trees, animals, water, clouds, and a host of other participants
in a circle of life. 3 Human relationships exist with non- human entities,
bonded by a mutual respect for the role each plays as a part of nature.
An example provided by the Navajo illustrates this type of connection
between the land and its creatures, a characteristic viewpoint shared
by all of Utah's tribes. To the Navajo, deer were animals treated and hunted
with respect. They were controlled by certain gods who made them avail-
Setting the Stage: Native America — 5—
Navajos taking sheep to water in Monument Valley. ( USHS)
able for man's use. Before leaving for the hunt, men participated in a
sweat bath to purify themselves and to encourage the holy beings to give
them the best meat. Ritualized behavior circumscribed the hunt, making
the act of killing a deer a sacred event recognized as good by both the
animal and the gods.
The disposal of entrails and other parts not used by the hunter was
also treated in a ceremonially prescribed manner to insure that new deer
would be plentiful. Failure to do so could affect the amount of rainfall,
since Navajo people believed that deer were in close contact with the
holy beings who controlled moisture. Because deer lived in the mountains,
they were protected by thunder and lightning; their antlers were
not brought home since they attracted electrical storms; and, because
they fed on sacred, medicinal plants, to eat their meat was to ingest medicine.
4 This type of thinking and practice is pervasive throughout traditional
Native American life.
The roots of this worldview, so different from that of most Euro-
Americans, lies embedded in religious beliefs. In order to understand
how these Native American practices began, one must return to the creative
period of time, when the earth was " soft" and creatures talked and
acted like humans. The gods were close, visible, and involved, establishing
the laws and forming the world for the People— the term many dif-
— 6— A History of Utah's American Indians
ferent groups used to identify themselves, using, of course, the appropriate
word in their own language. Rivers and canyons, mountains and
deserts, lakes and caves took their place in an orderly universe recognized
and utilized by the tribes. Plants, insects, fish, and wildlife made
their homes under the direction of the gods. The territory in which these
creatures lived was bounded by familiar landmarks given to the bands
and tribes by the holy beings.
A survey of any Utah map quickly testifies to the intensity of this
relationship between the land and its early inhabitants. The state's name
itself comes from the Ute tribe. Other Ute names on maps include Wasatch
( signifying a mountain pass or low place); Oweep ( grass) Creek; Cuberant
( long) Lake; and Ouray, Peteetneet, and Santaquin ( Ute leaders). From
the Paiutes come Panguitch ( fish), Parowan ( harmful water), Paunsaugunt
( place of beavers), and Parunuweap Canyon ( roaring water). The
Goshutes added Oquirrh ( wooded or shining) Mountains, Onaqui ( salt)
Mountains, and Tintic ( a Goshute leader). Both Washakie and Wanship
were Shoshone leaders, while the Navajo have provided Cha ( beaver)
Canyon, Oljato ( moon water), Nasja ( owl) Creek, and Peshlikai ( silver)
Fork, among many other names on the land. 5
To the Indians of Utah, these were places for hunting, fishing, gathering,
and worship. They were sites where the People could contact the
supernatural through ceremonies to invoke protection and sustain life
through a holy means. A covenant based upon respect for these unseen
powers, coupled with an intimate knowledge of the land, motivated the
People to live within the guidance given them during the time of the
myths.
This word " myth" holds a variety of meanings central to understanding
the difference between the Native American and Anglo views of the
world. To the former, the word defines a truth that is real— sometimes
tangible, sometimes intangible— but always considered to be a powerful
force in explaining why things are the way they are. Because this explanation
is derived from a religious belief, faith and knowledge are mutually
supportive in their explanations of physical and social relations. Victor
Turner, an anthropologist who has studied the force of myths in
society, calls them " the powerhouses of culture." They define and guide
people through the uncertainties of life.
The general understanding of myths by most non- Indian Americans
is far different. Although biblical teachings are prominent in Anglo
culture, there is a far greater dependence by most people on scientific
methodology and practices to explain the physical world. This has led
Setting the Stage: Native America — 7—
white people to view myths of other peoples as amusing tales without
true substance, powerless ramblings or fairytales about the supernatural.
Superstition is considered to be the basis of myth. Factual proof, recorded
events, and material culture— although intermixed by many with
Christian dogma— have been a much more comfortable means of explaining
the past for general Western culture. Thus, truth is considered
to be something objectively discoverable through logic and observation.
This stands in contrast to the Indian's view of truth as a preexisting framework,
partially revealed in myth to help interpret phenomena. This dichotomy
in thinking has characterized relations between native peoples
and Euro- Americans throughout the Americas, including Utah.
What, then, does this non- native worldview say about the evolution
of cultural development in Utah? Archaeologists and anthropologists have
sketched a fairly complete picture of what they believe happened before
the historic tribes appeared. Although there is disagreement on dates
and the interpretation of some factual evidence, there is general agreement
among researchers on the sequence of events. A very brief synopsis
of this analysis of prehistory follows.
Portions of the eastern Great Basin, western Rocky Mountains, and
northern Colorado Plateau, which comprise the state of Utah, were the
setting for the Archaic cultures that lasted from roughly 9,000 or 8,000
B. C. to the beginning of the Christian era ( A. D. 1). Although there were
climatological variations during this time, including more water and vegetation
than are now found in the state, much of the semi- desert environment
as it now appears was similar at the start of the archaeological
record at the end of the last Ice Age, around 8,000 B. C. Over this long
period of time, Native American groups have survived in an austere environment
that required an intimate knowledge of the land and its resources.
As Jesse D. Jennings, noted scholar of Utah's prehistory, said:
" The key to understanding prehistoric Great Basin human adaptation
lies in the recognition of a myriad of microenvironments.... Instead of
being the uniformly uninviting desert so often visualized, the Great Basin
consists of hundreds of special and often rich environments where a
widely varying mix of desired plant and animal species was available for
harvest." 6
The first period of human habitation in this environment ( from
roughly 9000- 7500 B. C.) is known from scanty remains preserved in
rock shelters such as Danger, Smith Creek, and Deer Creek Caves. Most
of these sites were located on the margins of lakes and sources of water,
some of which have since disappeared. Knife blades, projectile points,
— 8— A History of Utah's American Indians
Paiute Indians living on the Kaibab Plateau playing the game of
" Ni- aung- pi- kai" or " Kill the Bone" now referred to as " The Hand
Game." Photograph taken by John K. Hillers of the Powell
Expedition sometime between 1871 and 1875. ( USHS)
milling stones, and fire pits indicate a hunting- and- gathering lifestyle,
much of which focused around sources of water. 7
The next period ( 7500- 4000 B. C.) is characterized by a more diverse
use of ecological zones, ranging from high to low altitudes, for hunting
and gathering. Seasonal occupation of various areas and a greater variety
in diet resulted. Twined basketry, grinding stones, animal nets, and
the spear thrower ( atlatl) with dart were some of the simple but effective
tools invented and made to work the environment. Excavations at Hogup
Cave indicate how effective this lifeway was. The remains of four species
of large mammals ( deer, antelope, mountain sheep, and elk), thirty- two
species of small mammals, and thirty- four species of birds have been
Setting the Stage: Native America — 9—
found there, indicating that they were part of the diet of the cave's inhabitants.
Add to this thirty- six different types of plants, and one can see
a widening variety in the diet of these early inhabitants of the land. 8
The final phase of this Desert Archaic Culture lasted from about 4000
B. C. to the beginning of the Christian era and is characterized by a large
expansion of people into peripheral areas in the uplands and a decreased
emphasis on living near lakes and basin areas. The diet of these people
became more restricted in both plant and animal varieties, indicating a
reduction in marshland habitat that forced these Native Americans to
utilize other areas of the environment. At the same time, the bow and
arrow replaced the atlatl, increasing their efficiency in hunting. 9
But there were even greater changes on the horizon, starting around
400 B. C. in the eastern Great Basin— the beginning of horticultural societies.
The raising of corn, and later beans and squash, now offered an
alternative to the more traditional hunting and gathering activities. From
a strictly utilitarian perspective, domesticated plants increased the carrying
capacity of the land. People could now better determine the amount
of food available for their use and, if environmental conditions cooperated,
could harvest not only what was needed immediately but enough
to store for the future. As with many cultures in Native America, a slow
revolution in lifestyles occurred, giving rise to a variety of sedentary cultures.
One of the most impressive prehistoric cultures in America was that
of the Anasazi, found in the San Juan River drainage of the Four Corners
region and extending into southwestern Utah and southern Nevada. 10
This culture appeared in approximately 1000 B. C. and descendants are
believed to live today in the historic pueblos along the Rio Grande and in
the villages of Hopi, Zuni, and Acoma. The prehistoric ancestral pueblos
have been generally subdivided into two major categories— Basketmaker
( early and late) and Pueblo ( Periods I, II, and III; examples of the later
Periods IV and V are not present in Utah). This archaeological classification
scheme is based on changes in technology, art, and subsistence patterns.
The relationship between the late Archaic and the early Basketmaker
groups is unclear. Early Basketmaker life developed a technology centered
on shallow pithouses, and it included circular storage pits, skillfully
crafted baskets and sandals, feather and fur robes, and a greatly expanded
tool kit. The people made their homes and stored their food in
the rock overhangs of the canyon floors or amid the juniper and pinyon
groves of the higher lands above. Their lifestyle still reflected a partial
— 10— A History of Utah's American Indians
Chief Kanosh lived from 1821 until 1884 and is buried
in the town of Kanosh, Millard County. ( USHS)
orientation to the hunter- gatherer tradition in that the people seasonally
moved to various sites to harvest their foods ( although they returned to
their villages to care for their crops), continued to use the atlatl for hunting,
and foraged for wild plants as a supplement to their main diet of
corn and squash. Bell- shaped underground chambers and shallow slab-lined
storage cists located in protective rock alcoves held not only food
supplies but also the Anasazi dead.
The Late Basketmaker Period started around A. D. 450 and is distinguished
from the earlier phase by the introduction of beans, stone axes,
pottery, and the use of larger, more elaborate pithouses with internal
storage facilities and antechambers located to the south or east of the
main room. These houses may be found alone, in small clusters, or in
groups of a dozen or more dwellings. Other innovations during this phase
were the appearance of pottery— gray utility and black- on- white painted
ware— as well as the bow and arrow to replace the atlatl.
By A. D. 750 the Anasazi reached the next stage of development, that
of Pueblo I. As the name suggests, there were some significant changes in
their dwellings, although elements from earlier phases persisted. For in-
Setting the Stage: Native America — 11—
Chief Washakie of the Shoshone Tribe is seated in the center of this group of
Indian leaders. ( USHS)
stance, the Anasazi now built their homes above ground in connected,
rectangular blocks of rooms, using rocks and jacal ( a framework of woven
saplings and sticks packed with mud) for construction materials.
One or more deep pithouses have been found in each of the building
clusters and may have served a ceremonial function. These rooms were
equipped with a ventilator shaft that brought in fresh air, deflected it
around an upright stone placed between the shaft and the firepit, and
then evacuated the smoke by the entryway in the roof, a technique utilized
by the Anasazi for the remainder of their stay in the Four Corners
region. In Pueblo II times this structure became the common kiva.
The Pueblo II phase started about A. D. 900 and lasted for approximately
the next 250 years. A change in climate in the general region provided
an increase in precipitation, higher water tables that affected springs
and seeps, and temperatures more conducive to agriculture. The Anasazi
reacted by moving from clusters of populations in strategic locations to
a far- ranging decentralization. Satellite worksites and living sites fanned
out from the larger concentrations of people. At no previous time had
there been as many settlements spread over so much of the land.
— 12— A History of Utah's American Indians
The final stage of Anasazi occupation in Utah, Pueblo III, occurred
between about A. D. 1150 and 1300. The general pattern of events is characterized
by a shrinking or gathering of the dispersed communities into
a series of larger villages in areas that were more defensible. Large communal
plazas, tower clusters around springs at the heads of canyons, more
carefully crafted building techniques, and decreased regional trade relations
are indications that Anasazi society was undergoing rapid and significant
changes.
Archaeologists argue about what caused these cultural shifts and
the subsequent abandonment of the area by the Anasazi. Some people
place the cause on environmental factors such as prolonged drought,
cooler temperatures, severe arroyo cutting, and depleted soils. Others
suggest that the area was invaded by nomadic hunters and gatherers,
ancestors or precursors of the historic Ute, Paiute, and Navajo peoples.
Pueblo mythology points to internal strife and the religious need to purify
the group through migration and pilgrimage to a new land in the
south. No single explanation satisfactorily answers all of the questions;
however, by A. D. 1300 the Anasazi had left the San Juan River drainage
area and moved south to places coinciding with their descendants' present
locations.
A less spectacular, but just as interesting, group of Native Americans
called the Fremont lived in much of southwestern, central, and northern
Utah contemporaneously with the Anasazi. 11 Their origin, shrouded in
the mists of the past, does not necessarily suggest they were close relatives
of their neighbors the Anasazi. Some archaeologists suggest an influence
by the Mogollon people farther south in New Mexico and Arizona,
while others believe the Fremont sprang from indigenous roots in
the Great Basin. The earliest dated sites discovered thus far are in northern
Utah. Certainly those who lived closer to the Anasazi adopted many
of their architectural, economic, and social patterns. As one moves farther
north, there appears to be a general decreased dependence on farming
and an increased reliance on hunting and gathering of foodstuffs.
This mobile lifestyle did not encourage the same florescence in the
making of fine polychrome pottery, clustering of homesites, or intricate
social and religious relations suggested by Anasazi ruins. Small settlements,
rarely much larger than twenty homesites, varied in construction
from pithouses made of wood and dirt to slab- lined or adobe homes.
Many of these were tied to seasonal use.
These Fremont structures reflected these people's ties to their environment.
Food gathering depended upon the resources of a specific area
Setting the Stage: Native America — 13—
Utes dancing. ( Marriott Library, University of Utah— U of U)
( such as marsh, mountain, desert, and basin habitats), indicating a people
willing to travel and not totally dependent on corn. Regional variations
in these patterns have led to a sub- classification system that includes
southwestern Utah, central Utah, Great Salt Lake, Uinta Basin, and eastern
Utah groups. ( The dividing line between the Fremont and Anasazi in
southeastern Utah generally follows the Colorado River.) Like the Anasazi,
the Fremont culture ceased to exist in an identifiable form around the
same time— A. D. 1300.
One question often raised is what type of relationship, if any, did
these two groups have with the historic tribes that soon filled the vacuum
left by their departure. The Navajo have the most fully developed body
of lore that outlines their interaction with the Anasazi. Briefly, the Navajo
speak of their relations with the Anasazi in the worlds beneath this
one; relations which continued after the People emerged into this, the
Glittering World. Friendly associations eventually soured, giving rise to
a period of conflict that ended in the supernatural destruction of the
Anasazi because they fell into disfavor with the gods. Anasazi ruins and
artifacts are now generally avoided by Navajos because of the powers
contained within. However, some Navajo clans today claim ancestral ties
with this prehistoric culture. 12
— 14— A History of Utah's American Indians
Chief Ta- va- puts of the Uintah Utes, photographed by John K.
Hillers of the Powell expedition 1873- 74. ( USHS)
The Utes, Paiutes, Goshutes, and Shoshone, on the other hand, show
respect for the Fremont peoples and their sites, and some claim a vague
relationship; but they do not have as complex a knowledge and teachings
about them as the Navajo do about the Anasazi. This is one area
where further research can reveal a Native American perspective not found
in the archaeological record.
One reason that these tentative ties have not been pursued more actively
is that there is still disagreement about whether these historic cultures
were ever contemporaneous with the Anasazi. Language studies
have been used to provide part of this answer. With the exception of the
Navajo, who will be discussed shortly, all of the tribes in Utah belong to
the large Uto- Aztecan language family and are part of its Numic- speak-
Setting the Stage: Native America — 15-
ing branch. Linguists place this group's place of origin in southern California,
and most agree that by A. D. 1000 some Numic speakers were roaming
into the Great Basin area of Nevada and Utah. By the year 1300 they
had spread into Colorado. 13
What may be perceived as a fairly straightforward migration of
people, however, is not that simple. 14 In southern California at present
there are three branches within the Numic family: Western, Central, and
Southern, represented by the Mono, Panamint, and Kawaiisu
people, respectively. Even though these people live in close proximity, their
languages have some significant variation. Each of these linguistic
branches, in fact, is closely related to those languages of tribes living in
the Great Basin and Colorado Plateau— a distance of more than one thousand
miles. Thus, the Panamint in California share close linguistic ties
with the Shoshone and Goshute, the Kawaiisu with the Utes and Southern
Paiutes, and the Mono Indians with the Northern Paiutes. According
to Uto- Aztecan linguist Brian Stubbs, " This shows that the three groups
( Western, Central, and Southern Numic) first separated in Southern
California, then their language changed separately for a few centuries
before some of each of the three groups later spread out into the Great
Basin." 15
How much difference in speech is there between these three Numic
branches? Perhaps the best way for a non- linguist to understand this is
through a comparison. Within one of the branches, say between the
Southern Paiute and Southern Ute, there would be differences in dialect
and rate of speech, but generally, members of the two tribes would be
conversant, perhaps comparable to an American and an Englishman trying
to communicate. If one compares languages of different branches,
for instance the Southern Utes with the Shoshone, problems of understanding
increase dramatically. Difficulty in comprehension is now similar
to that of an American attempting to understand a Dutch person ( both
languages belonging to the same Germanic branch of the Indo- European
language family). Thus, each Numic- speaking group faced a linguistic
challenge if it ventured too far afield from its home territory.
The Navajo were in a totally different situation, belonging to another
language family— the Athabascan. As will be pointed out in their
chapter, the Navajo are believed to have come from Canada and Alaska
to the north and to have arrived in the Southwest either at the same time,
or, more likely, shortly after the Numic- speaking people. In terms of history
and culture, they saw themselves in opposition with their neighbors
the Utes, and to a lesser degree, the Paiutes. With a few exceptions, the
— 16— A History of Utah's American Indians
Utes were considered traditional enemies and the Paiutes friends and a
source of labor. The main body of Navajos generally lived south of Utah
in the future states of New Mexico and Arizona. Thus, they did not maintain
strong relations with any of the other Numic- speaking tribes.
By the time of first contact with Europeans, all six of Utah's tribes
were living in their general historic locations. This is not to suggest that
there would be no major shifts once the white man exerted force— take,
for example, the push of Northern Utes from Colorado into the Uinta
Basin— but only that the tribes had adopted a specific area they considered
to be theirs. As the prehistory phase of Utah's story closes, its written
history opens. This is where many of the following tribal histories
start.
Each group has its own separate narrative to share. Before looking at
the individual stories, one might do well to consider some of the major
trends in Utah Indian history and compare them to what has happened
in the broader context of Native Americans in United States history. Relevant
questions include: Just how similar or how different was the Native
American experience in Utah? What factors caused any differences
to exist? And what lessons can be derived from the historical record?
The Spanish were the first Europeans to have a significant impact on
the tribes of Utah. Their physical presence was limited to an occasional
entrada of exploration from their centers to the south, the expeditions of
Juan Maria Antonio Rivera ( 1765) and Fray Francisco Atanasio
Dominguez and Fray Silvestre Velez de Escalante ( 1776) being the most
notable. From these expeditions came the first known written descriptions
of Native American groups living within the future state. To historians,
these accounts are invaluable.
But the Spaniards' most important contribution to the Indian people
came in the form of the horse. The dispersion of these animals began in
the early 1600s, spreading out from New Mexico to the north and east in
an arc that first introduced them onto the Great Plains and then into the
Great Basin. By the early 1700s, all of the tribes in Utah had some access
to the horse, some adopting it as a means of transportation, others accepting
it as a source of food.
In some instances, the horse became a dividing force between various
groups that had heretofore shared the same language, culture, and
values. Take, for instance, the Southern Paiute and the Southern Ute or
the Goshute and the Shoshone. Both pairs of Native American tribes
were closely related linguistically and shared a comparable technology.
The big difference between the peoples was in where they lived and what
Setting the Stage: Native America — 17—
that environment could support. To the Paiute and Goshute, who hunted
and gathered over a more austere territory, the horse appeared as a tasty
addition in the food quest. Indeed, in some instances the horse competed
for the same plant foods utilized by these people, and so they would
want to eliminate the competitor. 16 Also, Paiute and Goshute lands in
southwestern and west- central Utah did not provide sufficient grass to
sustain large horse herds, while the kinds of animals that were hunted
generally did not lend themselves to a chase on horseback. Compare this
to the situation of the Utes and Northern Shoshone, who hunted herds
of buffalo and deer and who could draw upon the richer resources of the
mountains and valleys of eastern and northern Utah and the southern
portion of Idaho. They were able to adopt a lifestyle more like that of
Plains Indians— a tepee- living, buffalo- hunting, horse- wealthy warrior
society.
The differences between the Numic- speaking groups may have been
accentuated by the introduction of the horse, but nothing encouraged
large- scale warfare between the groups. True, at times the Shoshone fought
the Utes and Paiutes, and the Utes preyed upon the Paiutes as a source of
slaves to trade to the Spaniards and Mexicans, but most of the traditional
enemies of these groups lay to the north and east of the Rockies,
home of the Blackfeet, Arapaho, Comanche, Sioux, and other Plains tribes.
Relations within the confines of Utah were usually peaceful, with a number
of areas serving as general use among groups for hunting, gathering,
and winter encampments. 17
In 1821, newly independent Mexico inherited from Spain a vast territory
that stretched from California to Colorado, encompassing the future
state of Utah. For the next twenty years, Mexico would hold title to
the land but do very little with it other than to allow trading expeditions
into the territory and cast a wary eye on the influx of American mountain
men traversing streams in search of beaver. By 1830 the Old Spanish
Trail connected Santa Fe, New Mexico, to Los Angeles, California, the
main trail entering the state near Monticello, then passing through the
future locales of Moab and Green River and Sevier Valley before exiting
to the south in the Cedar City region. For Native Americans this 1,100-
mile route brought trading groups traveling through the valleys of the
Colorado Plateau and over large stretches of the Great Basin. It served as
a conduit that introduced desirable trade goods. At this point in their
history, the Indians were in control of their destiny and could selectively
choose what they accepted from white men. This, however, was about to
change.
— 18— A History of Utah's American Indians
In 1847, a year before the area that is now Utah went from Mexican
control to that of the United States, a large contingent of Mormon pioneers
entered the Salt Lake Valley. Up until this time, the region had been
a place through which white travelers passed but in which few remained.
Now, this valley, which had been shared by both the Shoshone and Utes,
came under the plow of a determined lot of people— members of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter- day Saints. What followed will be discussed
in the chapters of this book. It should be asked at this point,
however, if this experience was different for the Indians of Utah, or was it
simply a continuation of the pattern of the westward movement of white
immigrants encountered by other tribes across the nation.
Historians are mixed in their response. Certainly there were similarities
in what and how some events unfolded. For instance, once the
settlement process took on a feverish pace, its impact on Native American
hunting and gathering practices in the territory soon proved disastrous.
In a region like the Great Basin, where resources such as grass,
water, and arable land were often restricted to relatively few locations, it
was only natural that both Indian and settler would utilize them. In the
broadest sense, the contest for resources between the two cultures was
no different from what the Powhatan confederacy faced with the first
colony of Jamestown, Virginia, during the early 1600s.
One certainly cannot miss the disruption to the native cultures in
the future state of Utah. Everything seemed to conspire against them,
from the cattle and horses that destroyed traditional food sources, to the
loss of lands important in economic and religious practices, to the intense
cultural biases that colored their daily relations with the newcomers.
And, as with other Indian groups, ranging from the Pequot in Connecticut
to the Sioux at Wounded Knee, the Utah Native Americans would
share some dark, bloody pages of history. The 1863 massacre of some
250 Northwestern Shoshone encamped on the Bear River ( just over the
border in Idaho) testifies to that. 18
The results of this frontier period were also similar to what had transpired
elsewhere. The Native Americans lost their land, were placed on
reservations, arid then were either ignored or pressured into accepting
the tenets of white civilization. This also fostered a mixed outcome—
some people choosing to walk the white man's road while others were
determined to remain true to their traditional culture. In both instances,
these paths led to prolonged periods of social, economic, political, and
cultural disruption in the lives of individuals.
Yet, there is another side to the Utah Indians' story— some things
Setting the Stage: Native America — 19—
Ute Indians at Whiterocks posed for this photograph with their shinny sticks
used in a Ute game somewhat like field hockey. ( USHS)
that make it unique in the annals of frontier history. The most notable
difference is the presence of large numbers of members of the Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter- day Saints ( Mormons) and their settlement of the
Great Basin and Colorado Plateau region. In one sense, the Mormons
fled problems in their own larger society by moving to a place they considered
free for the taking; then, either intentionally or unintentionally,
they created an even more disheartening set of problems for the people
already living here. It did not take long to set this process in motion.
Before looking at the events, one should consider certain beliefs of
the Mormons. A great deal has been written about the Book of Mormon
with its suggested ties between the scriptural " Lamanites" and the Indians
encountered on the frontier. 19 From a purely ideological point of
view, the Mormons believed that the Indians were a remnant of a people
who fell out of grace with God, were given a dark skin as a sign of their
spiritual standing, and who now lived in an unfortunate condition awaiting
restoration to an enlightened state.
The church's position was that it would serve as the vehicle by which
these people would be raised both spiritually and in this world. Although
it was patronizing from a cultural perspective, these beliefs led to the oft-quoted
sound economic Indian policy of Brigham Young that it was
— 20— A History of Utah's American Indians
Paiute Indians at Koosharem. ( USHS)
" Cheaper to feed the Indians than to fight them." 20 Assistance, not resistance,
would set the tone of relationships. Mormon men called and appointed
as special " Lamanite missionaries" would learn the language, work
with different Native American groups, convert, and then lead them into
the fold of Christ's church. That was the plan. What happened in practice
was often at odds with this and was often met by cultural and armed
resistance.
Unlike many areas of western settlement, Utah, in its earliest stages,
was engulfed by a systematic flow of pioneers who looked to a central
organization for leadership. The U. S. Census of 1850, taken three years
after the Mormons arrived and each decade thereafter, shows just how
efficient this migration was. In 1850 the white population was 11,380;
subsequent ten- year periods showed dramatic increases— to 40,273 ( a
254 percent increase) in 1860; 86,786 ( 116 percent) in 1870; 143,963 ( 66
percent) in 1880; and 210,779 ( 46 percent) in 1890.21 In 1847, as the
advancing frontier moved to Utah in the guise of the first Mormon wagon
train, there was an estimated Indian population in the future state of
20,000.22 While these demographic estimates on both sides are dwarfed
by comparison to the influx of people during the California gold rush of
1848- 49, for instance, the impact on the scarce resources was great, and
Native American tribes in the Great Basin felt it. The resulting competition
proved to be all too one- sided.
Setting the Stage: Native America — 21—
The movement into areas peripheral to Salt Lake City was just as
inexorable and organized as the initial entrance of the Mormons into the
territory. From 1847 to 1857 there were sixteen cities and towns established
within territory claimed by at least one of the Utah tribes except
the Navajo. 23 Some of these towns were established for a short time only,
like the Elk Mountain Mission ( Moab, 1855) which soon closed because
of Ute hostility; but the Moab area was permanently settled some two
decades later. The end result of this movement was to push the sinuous
tentacles of civilization deep into the hunting and gathering grounds
that had been utilized for hundreds of years by the native peoples. As
their resources diminished, so too did their patience.
Mormon theology and practice joined together to form an Indian
policy that allowed for variations in response from each tribe. The Paiutes,
for example, would provide the largest number of Mormon converts and
adopted children of all of the groups in the last half of the 1800s. The
Utes, on the other hand, waged two costly wars— the Walker War ( 1853-
54) and the Black Hawk War ( 1865- 68)— that the struggling settlers could
hardly afford. The Shoshone and Goshute followed similar forms of resistance,
although lesser in their scope.
The Mormon response to these conflicts has received differing reviews
from historians, some insisting that they were waged with a stern
but fair justice, tempered with love and understanding. Others have argued
that once the initial spark ignited the conflict, attitudes of destruction
and hate found on every other frontier became prevalent in Utah—
there was no difference between Mormons and non- Mormons when it
came to meting out the white man's view of justice. 24 Readers will have
to determine for themselves how they see this issue.
On a more positive side, there were times when Indians were actively
sought as allies in answer to external pressures being placed on the Mormons.
A prime example of this is found during the late 1850s, as the
settlers of southwestern Utah became increasingly concerned with events
associated with the Utah War and the advance of federal troops under
Colonel Albert Sidney Johnston. As early as January 1858, Mormons met
with Navajos, Utes, and Paiutes to form an alliance that could oppose
federal forces if they entered southwestern Utah. 25 While nothing concrete
came of these efforts, it does indicate an interesting reversal of traditional
frontier practices. Certainly the earlier Mountain Meadows
Massacre, in which Mormons and ( perhaps) Paiutes killed more than
one hundred California- bound emigrants in this region in 1857, could
show the potential effectiveness of this type of alliance. 26
— 22— A History of Utah's American Indians
There were, of course, more peaceful relations and a desire of many
Mormons to help the Indians as their natural resources diminished. The
creation of four farms in Millard, Sanpete, Utah, and Tooele Counties
was designed to help move the Indians toward greater self- sufficiency as
they shifted from their traditional economies. This project eventually
proved to be ineffective, but it had the blessing of both federal and Mormon
officials. As Utah came under increasing federal control, however,
the quality of Indian relationships generally assumed the form of government
relations found in other parts of the West during the nineteenth
century.
In the 1870s, federal policy began to coalesce into a more consistent
program of change for the Indian. The next sixty years were filled with
government initiatives that first grouped and then moved Indians onto
reservations with resident agents; divided various tribes among Christian
denominations for proselyting purposes; encouraged farming or
simple skilled labor as a way of life; sent children to reservation schools
or boarding schools as part of a systematic attempt at acculturation to
Western culture; and created a series of legal codes designed to erase elements
of the native culture. Indian resentment, underground resistance,
and a general failure of many government programs followed.
Of all of the federal programs of this era, the most damaging was the
allotment period ( 1887- 1933), during which the government attempted
to replace tribal land ownership with individual ownership of land parcels
and sell any remaining lands to non- Indian people. The vehicle by
which this was to be done was the Dawes Severalty Act of 1887. As an
incentive, Indian adults received somewhere between 40 and 640 acres,
depending on the suitability of the land for farming. This property, supposedly,
enjoyed a protected status that forbade its being sold by the individual
for twenty- five years, at the end of which time the owner would
be recognized as an American citizen. ( Blanket citizenship for Native
Americans was not received until 1924 under the Snyder Act.) In reality,
however, large chunks of both tribal and individual lands soon were sold.
One example will suffice. Between 1890 and 1933 the Uintah- Ouray Reservation
lost 523,079 acres through the Dawes Act. Add to this another
973,777 acres removed in 1906 as part of the Uintah National Forest,
and one can begin to understand why this era in history was so difficult
for Native Americans. 27
A respite from the loss of lands and assault on Utah Indian cultures
occurred in 1934, when Commissioner of Indian Affairs John Collier
introduced the Indian Reorganization Act. Among this bill's accomplish-
Setting the Stage: Native America - 23—
Connie Mack on the left with an unknown person. ( U of U)
ments was the creation of tribal governments for self- determination; the
stopping of the allotment process and the restoration of some of the lost
lands; the development of reservation schools that encouraged pride in
Indian culture; permission to return to Indian religious practices; an
improvement in health care; and various programs to foster the growth
of economic self- sufficiency. For most of the tribes in Utah, the Reorganization
Act could not have been better news. The Navajo, however,
proved to be an exception. This was not because of the above changes,
some of which they wholeheartedly accepted, but because of the loss of
their animals during the livestock reduction program. This overshadowed
all else for them.
While the 1930s and 1940s brought increasing benefits to Utah's
Indians in the form of greater recognition and more employment— especially
associated with the war industries of World War II— the 1950s
would swing the pendulum of change in the other direction. House Concurrent
Resolution 108, passed in 1953 and championed by Senator
Arthur V. Watkins of Utah, attempted to end the trust relationship between
the federal government and the tribes, thus mainstreaming Native
Americans into the dominant society. In Utah, these efforts translated
into termination of the Southern Paiute Tribe and of the mixed- blood
— 24— A History of Utah's American Indians
Five Ute leaders on horseback. ( U of U)
Uintah- Ouray Utes. 28 Other tribes were more successful in their struggle
to fend off the loss of lands and community.
The foregoing discussion provides an overview of events to be encountered
in the following chapters. Specific information about six different
tribal experiences lies ahead, with each author emphasizing what
he or she feels most important in these very complex histories. The final
chapter will provide a survey of contemporary Native American events
in Utah. But, in spite of the complexity and change, the reader will find
the constant theme of the people's love for the land and their desire to
maintain their cultural identity. These two ideas are inseparably intertwined,
threading throughout these tribal histories. |
