Where the Trails Return: - California Cultures: A Monograph Series

Transcription

CALIFORNIA CULTURES : A MONOGRAPH SERIES. VOLUME 1. 2015
Where the Trails Return:
Cultural Influences on Hupa History
By Brian Gleeson
2015
Verso
Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Gleeson, Brian Patrick
Where the Trails Return : Cultural Influences on Hupa History
California Cultures : A Monograph Series. Vol. 1. 2015
Oakland, CA: Land of Oaks Institute.
102 pages. Includes bibliographic references and appendices. 23 illustrations. 4 tables.
Design and layout by Brian Gleeson
ISSN 2333-9667 (electronic format)
Copyright © 2015 by Land of Oaks Institute (publisher of California Cultures : A Monograph Series)
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of California Cultures : A Monograph Series
(published by The Land of Oaks Institute). To request permission to reproduce selections from this monograph, email [email protected],
or write to Permissions, Land of Oaks Institute, 7932 Sterling Dr., Oakland, CA 94605. Website: http://www.californiacultures.org
Citation Information
Gleeson, Brian
2015 Where the Trails Return : Cultural Influences on Hupa History. California Cultures : A Monograph Series v. 1. Oakland, CA: Land of Oaks
Institute. Online at: http://www.californiacultures.org (Accessed March 1, 2015).
i
Abstract
The history of the Hupa in northwestern California after the
California Gold Rush in 1848 includes many struggles and
wars, of which the Treaty of 1864 was a climax. This study
uses an ethnohistorical approach to examine how culture
guided Hupa responses during this era, and influenced the
cause, course, and outcome of events. The cultural themes of
the homeland and legal systems of conflict resolution played a
key role in Hupa strategies and actions. The Hupa collectively
countered the invasion of settlers in their homeland, and
engaged in complex power struggles with the United States
Government. The focal motivation of Hupa efforts was in
ensuring the continued possession of their homeland, which
was executed through Hupa systems of law and conflict
resolution. The Hupa were successful in their struggle, as the
Treaty of 1864 established a reservation encompassing a vast
amount of their aboriginal territory, which has remained a
foundation for the Hupa to this day.
ii
Acknowledgements
This research study could not have been possible without the support of several people. Initially, this thesis grew
from an undergraduate course taught by Dr. Lee Davis ten years ago at San Francisco State University. This
course inspired my intense interest in the Indigenous cultures and histories of California. Dr. Davis has been an
incredible mentor, research partner, and unwavering friend throughout. The final product of this research is a
testament to her abilities as a teacher, steadfast scholarship, passion for Anthropology, and devotion to the Hupa.
This work would not exist without her.
Several professors have aided me over the years that deserve specific recognition, especially my two readers, Dr.
James Quesada and Dr. Gary Pahl. Dr. Quesada has been an amazing advisor and friend, helping me bridge
theory and data to open my mind. The longstanding support and input of Dr. Pahl is greatly appreciated. I also
owe a debt of gratitude to professors: Dr. Joanne Barker, Dr. Melissa Nelson, and Dr. David Kojan. Moreover, to
Mike Merrifield, who taught my first Anthropology courses and sparked my interest in the field.
Special thanks to my friends and colleagues Tim Jordan and Queue Rolo for their editorial support, and also to
George Blake, who’s kindness, rich personal stories and insights helped deepen my understanding. Many thanks
to Phil & Gloria Vigil for their support and enthusiasm for my work. I sincerely appreciate the numerous
individuals from the Hupa Tribe who have provided me with gracious hospitality and welcoming over the years.
Their collective histories, struggles, and living culture are the foundation of this work, and taught me a great deal
about our common humanity, and inspired me to try and share their part of their story.
Finally, I could not have completed this journey without the constant support and encouragement of my family:
my loving wife Monica, and my son Theo, my parents Theresa and Michael Gleeson, my sister Margaret, and my
in-laws Rodrigo Lois and Ana Maria Cobos. Thank you one and all.
iii
C HAPTER 1
Introduction
C HAPTER 1: I NTRODUCTION
1. Overview
2. Literature Review
3. Methodology & Antecedents
4. Structure
5. Terminology & Language
California Cultures: A Monograph Series. Volume 1. 2015
S ECTION 1
Overview
After sixteen years of conflict, in 1864, Hupa leaders brokered
a peace treaty with the United States Government that laid an
enduring foundation for the tribe as a geographical and
political entity. Prior to the formation of the Treaty of 1864,
U.S. army troops had been ineffective in ending hostilities in
the region or protecting settlers, and were facing a potential
expansion of the war. This drove U.S. authorities to seek an
end to the conflict. The terms of the Treaty of 1864 amounted
to a victory for the Hupa, which set aside a significant amount
of aboriginal land for a reservation, and gave amnesty to those
warriors who had taken up arms. The formation of the treaty
would be a pivotal event that affected the cultural and
historical trajectory of the Hupa.
How did this come to pass? How, in the face of overwhelming
U.S. Military power and resources, did the Hupa achieve such
an outcome? What drove Hupa actions and how did they
negotiate the treaty? The heart of this research concerns such
questions. The answers reveal that the role of culture was
preeminent in driving the thoughts, strategies, and actions of
Hupa people. In the long and complicated struggle that the
Treaty of 1864 sought to end, the Hupa proved to be
significant players in the cause, course, and outcome of
events.
Culture informed the actions of the Hupa People in numerous
ways, and collectively wrought a remarkable influence on
historical outcomes. Culture consists of the mass of learned
and transmitted reactions, habits, techniques, ideas and
values, and the behavior they induce. From the lattice of
Hupa culture, two themes were key: the Hupa homeland, and
the aboriginal legal systems of conflict resolution. The first
cultural theme regards Hupa relationships with their
ancestral homeland expressed economically, socially,
politically, and religiously. The culmination of these cultural
aspects reflected a set of values and sentiments held by the
Hupa towards their homeland, that they would fight and die
for. The second cultural theme involves Hupa legal systems
and methods of conflict resolution, encompassing cultural
systems of law, crime, enforcement, adjudication, warfare,
and reconciliation. These cultural systems of law provided
social order, and echoed Hupa morals and concerns for
justice. This thesis aims to demonstrate how Hupa culture
influenced the trajectory of history that resulted in the Treaty
of 1864, where the Hupa achieved their collective goal of
maintaining possession of their homeland through cultural
modes of law and conflict resolution.
5
S ECTION 2
Literature Review
While the amount of scholarly work dedicated to the Hupa is
relatively ample in comparison to other California Indian
tribes, this thesis considers dynamics of Hupa culture in
history that have not been specifically examined to date. This
presents an opportunity to further integrate historical sources
with ethnographic research, making a contribution to the
existing scholarship on Hupa culture and the ethnohistory of
Northwestern California.
Works specifically addressing Hupa history include Our
Home Forever by Byron Nelson et al (1988), Neither Wolf
Nor Dog by David Lewis (1994), and three master’s theses:
The Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation in Northwestern
California: A Study of its Origins by George Anderson (1956),
No “Red Atlantis” on the Trinity (Roschmann 1991), and An
Ethnohistoric Overview of the Hoopa Valley Indian
Reservation (Roscoe 1986). The presentations of history in
these works entail various amounts of cultural analysis.
George Anderson’s thesis (1956) was the first to digest the
primary sources regarding Hupa history into a presentable
and focused narrative, with rich levels of detail. Being a tribal
member, Byron Nelson’s book (1988) took Hupa history a
step beyond where Anderson trails off in 1873, adding
additional accounts into the 1930s, and infusing the historical
narrative with a Hupa perspective of events and more cultural
detail.
In Lewis’ book (1994) he conducted three case studies of the
U.S. Government implementation of agriculture with the
Hupa, and two other tribes. Lewis considered the ability of
the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to implement agrarian
policy in the Hoopa Valley Reservation. In Lewis’ analysis, he
focused on the economics and environmental factors affected
agrarian change, as well as how Hupa cultural values hindered
and resisted BIA efforts over time.
In Roscoe’s thesis (1986), she presented the history of the
Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation covering the period of about
1850 to 1900, employing ethnohistorical techniques.
However, her work focuses mainly on the experience of
settlers and, like Lewis, the agricultural and administrative
history of the Reservation. There are some descriptive
accounts regarding Hupa responses to non-Indian people in
the Valley, however the core emphasis is not on the Hupa, but
on the experience of settlers in the Valley over time.
Roschmann’s thesis (1991) focused on the to the initial
rejection by the Hupa of Indian Reorganization Act of 1934
policies, and why the Hupa sought to complete the land
allotment process started in the 1890s with the Dawes Act.
6
Roschmann’s work gives little focus to Hupa culture, and
instead presents the Hupa as an example of how the Indian
Reorganization Act was not embraced by all tribes.
Ethnographic works concerning the Hupa, and culturally
similar tribes in the region are relatively numerous. Given the
dense collection of different indigenous groups in
Northwestern California, there is a great deal of overlap and
cross-referencing when seeking rich details on Hupa culture.
Some ethnographic works focusing on the Hupa standout.
Life and Culture of the Hupa by Pliny Goddard (1903)
provides a seminal overview of the Hupa and some
background information on Hupa history. On This Earth by
Lee Davis (1988) compiles rich ethnographic details to explain
the multifaceted ways in which Hupa culture creates and
reflects their worldview. Additionally, there are various
articles and chapters of volumes dedicated to Hupa culture.
This research study aims to make a contribution to this
existing body of work, using ethnohistorical methods to focus
on the activity of Hupa culture in history. Other paths of
research on the influence of Hupa culture on history could be
conducted focusing on other events or eras. Several periods in
Hupa history offer rich opportunities for future research,
including the geopolitical events subsequent to the outcomes
of the Treaty of 1864, such as the Hupa-Yurok Settlement Act
of 1988. However the period ending with the Treaty of 1864
was chosen, because it offers a sharp contrast between the
cultures in conflict and due to its seminal influence on later
periods of Hupa history.
Photo 1: White Deerskin Dance #3, Hoopa, 1899, photo by A. W.
Ericson. Ericson Photo Collection, Humboldt State University. Used
with permission.
7
S ECTION 3
Methodology & Theoretical
Antecedents
Herein, the influence of culture in the power struggles of the
time is analyzed using an ethnohistorical approach, including
interdisciplinary methods of cultural anthropology and
history. In this method, ethnographies are intersected with
historical sources and given reconsideration under an
anthropological lens. Ethnohistorical techniques study
culture by integrating anthropological methods and theories
with the unfolding of history. Ethnohistory employs three
basic dimensions: a focus on past cultures, inclusion of
primary sources, such as oral histories and written accounts,
and an emphasis on change over time (Carmack 1972:230).
Ethnohistorical methods are especially useful when studying
indigenous cultures that contain scarce sources of
information, or archival sources that are problematic due to
the biased or shortsighted perspective of the recorder. This
thesis applies ethnohistorical methods as a way of describing
outcomes of history, with an emphasis on how culture drove
actions that influenced the path of history.
The approach of this thesis aims to be interdisciplinary, and
does not promote any single theoretical model. This is in an
effort to avoid “the Procrustean bed” where conformity to
theoretical assumptions is arbitrarily forced upon data.
Instead, this work followed a theoretical approach that draws
influence from a diverse set of scholars towards
understanding and interpreting data. Descriptive data is
presented with culture as the central focus. Theories and
concepts relevant to the data at hand were then given
consideration in the analysis of this presentation. For
example, theories of structural anthropology were considered
in examining Hupa mythology, and theories of political
economy were considered in examining group organization
and labor.
Inspiration and modeling is taken from ethnohistorical works,
such as Sahlins’ Islands of History (1985), Fowler’s Arapahoe
Politics, 1851–1978 (1982), Champagne’s American Indian
Societies: Cultural Survival (1989) and The Political
Economy of North American Indians, edited by Moore
(1993). The cultural anthropological aspects of this research
are interdisciplinary as well, including the works of
ethnohistory and ethnography discussed in the above review
of literature.
Influence is also drawn from theories regarding the notion of
culture itself, as something that works unconsciously from
within to inform values that drive group behavior. This thesis
follows a simple definition of culture posited by Kroeber
(1963:8) as being the mass of shared practices, reactions,
8
techniques, and values of a group of people, and behavior they
induce. Culture includes unconscious structures of abstract
thought and epistemologies that inform and reflect cultural
systems that drive behavior within the group. This definition
holds that the core structures of values and symbolic
meanings are within cultural expressions, and, as Levi-Strauss
(1966) argues, inform cultural systems, and underlie human
actions. This also follows Durkheim’s concept of culture
reflecting a “collective conscience,” where the totality of
beliefs and sentiments common in a society form a
determinate system with a life of its own (1997:38-39).
Moreover, Durkheim elaborates on the potency of the
“collective conscience” in enforcing common values that
govern group behavior and inform law (1997:43). This thesis
will show how Hupa actions were guided by cultural systems
that were unconsciously informed by underlying concepts and
values, most notably the themes of homeland and law.
In discussing Hupa culture, the concept of the Hupa People as
a distinct cultural group, or tribe, begs the question as to what
it means when referring to “the Hupa.” In The Notion of The
Tribe (1975), Morton Fried discussed how the term “tribe” has
been defined and applied in various ways. Fried argued that
groups with shared beliefs, economic systems, language,
marriage, and are acephalous societies without a central
political authority or chiefdom, such as the Hupa, are better
referred to as “culture units,” than “tribes” due to the
immense variation of what could be considered a tribe
(1975:85). Defining a “tribe” as a culture unit can be difficult
when not isolated from bordering groups that share similar
cultural traits (Fried 1975:85). The Hupa shared many
cultural traits with neighboring tribes, such as the Yurok,
Karuk, Chilula, and South Fork Hupa (who shared religious
beliefs). However, one significant feature distinguished the
Hupa from their neighbors, adding a layer of tribal/cultural
identity: the valley the Hupa called home. The geographical
boundaries of the Hoopa Valley, from the ridges on the east
and west, and the canyons to the north and south, were the
domain of the Hupa and heart of their society. Hupa
possession and use of the Valley differentiated them from
neighboring tribes, and was a point of political organization
for those living in the Valley with a shared interest in it. This
differentiation was expressed in Hupa culture, and was
reflected in their self-designation, Natinixwe, which
translates to, “people of the Hoopa Valley.”
Another area of conceptual concern in this research involves
sovereignty, and its expression in tribal societies. The use of
the term “sovereignty” is complex when discussing
Indigenous peoples, since the etymology of this term refers to
monarchic European roots, connoting the supreme power and
authority of a state to govern itself. In Sovereignty Matters,
Barker (2005:26) contends that concepts of sovereignty are
incomplete, inaccurate, and inconsistent when applied to
Indigenous peoples, and that the endemic historical and
cultural contexts must be considered when applying it to
concepts of self-governance or inherent rights. Moreover, the
designation of tribes as political entities with sovereignty
9
again elicits Fried. He maintains that political entities defined
as “tribes” did not arise from cultural notions, but were
instead a secondary phenomenon produced from relations
with states (such at the United States), with specific historical
contexts imposing such political concepts (1975:103-104).
Defining the “Hupa Tribe” as a uniform political entity was a
designation applied to the Hupa by the U.S. The Hupa later
adapted these political concepts to indigenous political
systems and concepts of sovereignty. This is important since
the expression of Hupa tribal sovereignty prior to the Treaty
of 1864, included unique and contextually specific dimensions
of culture that had not been transmuted.
A key theoretical aspect of this research involves the concepts
of “power” and “power dynamics.” In this conceptual
framework: “power” is described as the ability to impose one’s
will socially and politically in different relational arenas:
interpersonal, organizational, and structural; “dynamics”
refers to the interactions of culturally derived forces and
activity; and “power dynamics” refers to the interactions of
different interests competing for power, or in other words, a
battle of wills. The application of these concepts is useful
when untangling the complexities of historical events in order
to identify the forces at play, and then evaluate the culturally
rooted motivations in action. The arenas of organizational
and structural power are key elements of this thesis,
considering the actions of groups (organizational), and the
shared cultural systems that governed society (structural).
The power dynamics between individual leaders
(interpersonal) are not emphasized, since in this context their
decisions and actions were as representatives of their groups,
rather than individual power brokers.
Eric Wolf’s Envisioning Power (1999) provides inspiration
regarding the study of culture and power. Here, Wolf
discusses concepts of power using various historical cultural
settings that involve groups engaged in political struggles. He
then articulates the ways in which power is manifested and is
interwoven, within social relations at all levels of political and
economic organization.
In this thesis, the Treaty of 1864 is used as a climactic
waypoint in early post–contact Hupa history. The strategies
employed by the Hupa to counter the invasion of settlers and
U.S. power reveal cultural influences underlying Hupa
actions. The focus on the Hupa experience in this specific
epoch provides an opportunity to more clearly view
traditional Hupa culture with less influence from post–
contact cultural adaptation. Moreover, this thesis shows the
genesis of such cultural adaptations and how they link to core
traditional values. Additionally, the focus on one epoch of
time allows for a more succinct presentation of the cultural
elements at work and how they tie into history.
The sources of data most valuable to this ethnohistoric
research come from three primary categories. The first are
primary sources, including U.S. Military records from the era,
such as The Rebellion Records (U.S. War Dept. vol. 50-1,2
1897), and various newspaper articles that include reports and
10
editorials on the events of the time. Another primary source
comes from linguistic texts on the Hupa and their cultural
neighbors, containing oral histories and myths, such as the
works of Goddard (1904) and Sapir (2001). The works of
Sapir (2001) on the Hupa were especially useful, given the
extraordinary level of detail and organization brought to the
collection by its editors, Victor Golla and Sean O’Neill. Next
are secondary sources, most notably the works of Anderson
(1956), and Nelson (1988), and regional histories such as
Bledsoe’s Indian Wars of the Northwest (1885). The third are
ethnographies on the Hupa and their neighbors. On This
Earth, by Davis (1988) provides an especially comprehensive
view of Hupa culture and their worldview.
Since focus of this thesis is on 19th century ethnohistory, a
direct ethnographic component was not needed or employed.
However, during the roughly ten years of formal and informal
research on Hupa culture represented in this thesis, visits to
the Hoopa Valley and interactions with those familiar with
Hupa culture have occurred, providing additional
background, context, and humanity, which helped enrich this
thesis.
11
S ECTION 4
Structure
This monograph presents data and findings using a
progressive approach to build a case that reflects research
conclusions. The intention of this progressive approach is to
establish the fundamental elements of culture that would
come into play, present historical data, and then discuss the
role of culture in the unfolding of events. Chapter II covers
Hupa culture, providing an ethnographic overview, along with
detailed presentations of the two core cultural themes that
played pivotal roles in the shaping of history: homeland and
law. Chapter III presents 19th century Hupa history, with an
emphasis on the wars and power dynamics that lead to the
Treaty of 1864. To provide additional detail and interpretive
insights into historical events, the presentation of history has
been collated with ethnographic data collected since contact.
The purpose is to add a Hupa perspective, and to draw
connections to the places, people, and cultural elements that
were present in the lead up to 1864. Chapter IV examines
how the history of this era was influenced by Hupa culture by
focusing on the key themes of homeland and legal systems of
conflict resolution. Also included is a discussion of how
culture informed Hupa power dynamics in conflict with U.S.
entities at the time. Chapter V encapsulates the conclusions
drawn from this research, and projects the continued
relevance and influence of Hupa culture in history.
12
S ECTION 5
Terminology & Language
The terms and language used within this thesis attempt to
maintain consistency and sensitivity. The primary and
secondary sources used within this study contained varied
terminology when discussing the peoples involved in history.
Moreover, the field of anthropology, other disciplines
regarding Indigenous peoples, and Indigenous peoples
themselves, all have reasoned and understandable opinions
regarding certain terms. This thesis takes such discourses
into respect, and gives final consideration to the terms and
naming conventions understood to be commonly accepted
many Hupa people.
The term “Hupa” denotes the People, and comes from a
geopolitical name given to the first U.S. treaty commission in
1851 by the Yurok. The term “Hoopa” refers to the valley in
Northwestern California that is the center of Hupa culture.
The names ascribed to groups of Indigenous peoples by
ethnographers have been used as well, rather than solely selfdesignations, such as “the Hupa” instead of “Natinixwe.”
Furthermore, as previously discussed, these groups
sometimes consisted of clusters of autonomous but related
culture units, and are referred to as “tribes.” When
appropriate, more specific identifiers are given to denote what
cluster of the larger culture group is being referred to, such as
the Redwood Creek Whilkut, instead of just Whilkut.
The term “Indians” is used to denote Indigenous peoples of
North America, rather than other terms such as “American
Indian” or “Native American.” Use of this term helps
maintain consistency with the primary sources of this
research, and is considered a generally accepted term use by
many Hupa people themselves.
The term “Whites” is used to denote Euro-Americans as
the predominate population in conflict with the Indigenous
peoples of California. This term is used widely in the historic
record as a self-reference in a non-offensive fashion. In some
cases, the more broad terms such as, “settlers” or “miners” are
used to refer to non-Indigenous people entering the region for
specific economic purposes.
The term “U.S. invasion” is used to denote the era after
acquisition of California by the United States and subsequent
Gold Rush in 1848, that resulted in the movement of nonIndigenous people into Northwestern California, until end of
1864 when most warfare ended and the U.S. Military drew
down its forces. “U.S. Military” connotes the various Army
forces and administrative entities under the U.S. Department
of War (predecessor of the Department of Defense), and does
13
not include independent militias or vigilante groups and
volunteer companies.
The term “power” refers to the ability to impose one’s will
socially and politically in different relational arenas:
interpersonal, organizational, and structural. Other forms of
power include a descriptor, such as political power, spiritual
power, and economic power.
As a matter of consistency this monograph is presented in the
past tense. While the focus is primarily on events that
occurred over 150 years ago, many of the places, tribes,
villages, and cultural practices described still exist and remain
important. This is especially true in regards to the Hupa, who
remain and thrive in Northwestern California to this day.
14
C HAPTER 2
Hupa Culture
C HAPTER C ONTENTS
1. An Overview of Hupa Culture
2. Theme I: The Hupa Homeland
3. Theme II: Hupa Law & Conflict Resolution
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, suspendisse
nulla pretium, rhoncus tempor placerat
fermentum, enim integer ad vestibulum
volutpat. Nisl rhoncus turpis est, vel elit,
congue wisi enim nunc ultricies dolor sit,
magna tincidunt. Maecenas aliquam est
maecenas ligula nostra.
S ECTION 1
An Overview of Hupa Culture
1994:75). The prairies and woodlands provided resources for
basketry, and other forms of material culture through
gathering and hunting/snaring animals. While the Hoopa
Valley was the central geographical feature in the heart of
Hupa territory, the Trinity River was its lifeblood. During the
spring and autumn, major runs of anadromous king and coho
salmon brought a bounty of fish into the rivers, providing a
staple source of food (Swezey & Heizer 1977:9).
The Hupa aboriginal homeland followed the lower course of
the Trinity River in northwestern California, radiating out
from the heart of their territory in the Hoopa Valley. The
floor of the Hoopa Valley was created from an alluvial flood
plain of the Trinity River, approximately six miles long and
two miles wide, with river canyons at the northern and
southern ends of the valley, and hills leading to mountain
ridges to the east and west (see Photo 1 below). Beyond the
valley laid the mountainous landscape of the Pacific Range.
The geography of the region varied widely, containing coastal
wetlands, redwood rain-forests, riparian canyons, and alpine
summits. Within this landscape were prairies of grass; groves
of oak, madrone, and pine trees; streams and rivers that
contained abundant fish, birds, and animals; and mountain
forests of pine, fir, yew, and oak, teeming with wildlife
(Nelson 1988:5).
The landscape provided diverse and abundant resources for
the subsistence and material culture of Indian peoples in the
region. Subsistence came from fishing the river, gathering
acorns and other vegetables, and hunting game (Lewis
Photo 2: View of the Hupa Valley, 1901, photo by Goddard, P.
California Ethnographic Field Photographs. Phoebe A. Hearst Museum
of Anthropology and Regents of the University of California.
Host: Online Archive of California. http://oac.cdlib.org
16
Karuk territory
Yurok territory
Chilula Territory
Hupa territory
Chimariko Territory
Whilkut Territory
South Fork Hupa
Territory
I NTERACTIVE 2.1 Interactive Map of Aboriginal Territory.
By Brian Gleeson.
Figure 1: Hupa Aboriginal Territory, and neighboring tribes.
By Brian Gleeson.
Northwestern California was one of the most culturally
diverse and densely populated regions in the State (see map
Figure 1 above). The Hupa, along with some neighboring
tribes, were part of the Athabaskan language group, rooted in
the Pacific Northwest. To the south was a close relative of the
Hupa, the South Fork Hupa (also referred to as the Kelta or
Tsnungwe), living upriver along about twelve miles of the
South Fork River, a major tributary of the Trinity River. The
South Fork Hupa spoke a similar dialect as the Hupa, and
they were closely affiliated, only differing in slight religious
matters (Goddard 1903:7). Three other Athabaskan-speaking
tribes were on the western border of Hupa territory: the
Chilula (west), and Redwood Creek Whilkut (southwest), and
Nongatl (south-southwest). The Chilula were another close
17
relative and ally of the Hupa, also speaking a similar dialect
and sharing numerous cultural attributes. To the east lived,
the Chimariko, Wintu, and Shasta (New River Shasta, and
Konomihu). Also to the southeast, bilingual and intermarried
groups of Hupa-Chimariko lived near the boundary with the
South Fork Hupa and in a few sites along New River. Finally,
the northern border of Hupa territory was shared along the
Trinity-Klamath River junction, with the Yurok (northnorthwest) and Karuk (northeast).
The position of the Hupa homeland along these rich
watersheds and ecosystems, and the Hoopa Valley’s relatively
large size, amongst an otherwise mountainous region, was
strategically important. The Hupa had access to numerous
resources that they employed to accumulate economic
resources and wealth. The abundance of fishing resources
supported the permanent tribal settlements on the KlamathTrinity watersheds. This was similarly true along the Klamath
River for the Yurok, downriver, and Karuk, upriver, who both
had relatively large populations for the region.
Hupa villages were permanent settlements along the river,
and served as social centers where Hupa people spent most of
their lives (Davis 1988:76). Villages had populations of 50 to
200 people, comprised of varying family households with six
to seven people each (Wallace 1978:169) (see map Figure 2
below). The Hupa population in 1850 was estimated at about
1,000 (Cook 1976:238). Houses were built of cedar planks
over an excavated rectangular pit, with a cobbled pavement of
river rocks in front of the house (Wallace 1978:166).
Households were grouped together along extended family
lines of patrilineal descent, forming a base unit for
cooperative activities (Wallace 1978:168). Gender divisions
applied to different activities, hunting and fishing for men,
and collecting and preparing acorns for women. Women and
children slept in the family house (xonta), whereas men
typically slept in a shared sweathouse (taikyuw).
Land and various economic resource sites were often owned
and controlled at different group levels. Some areas were
regarded as communal property for any tribal member to use,
such as areas not adjacent to villages, or in the high country.
However, men of aristocratic or common status could
individually or jointly hold property claims over highly
valuable resource areas, acquired through inheritance, gift,
marriage exchange, compensation for an offense, or purchase
(Davis 1988:174). This included areas such as productive
fishing grounds, acorn groves, deer snaring tracts, and
prairies with good materials for basket-weaving. Valuable,
rare, or scarce foods/goods obtained from these privately held
resource areas could be traded in raw or prepared form,
acting as a key source of income. Moreover, the use of family
owned properties could be rented for a fee or with the owner’s
permission (Davis 1988:269-271). In some situations, the
rights of use and ownership over lands outside the Hupa
territory could be intertribally leased, such as prairies in the
Bald Hills in Chilula territory. This system of land ownership
extended from the river up to the surrounding hills, and
played a key role in social and economic life.
18
Figure 2: Map of Villages in the Hoopa Valley, with fort added
(Goddard 1903:89)
Dakisxankut
Xonsadin
Kintcuhwikut
Tceindeqotdin
Miskut
Takmildin
Tsewenaldin
Medildin
Xowunkut
Djictanadin
I NTERACTIVE 2.2 Interactive Map of Hupa Villages,
adapted from Goddard (1903:89).
While the Hupa had no single tribal-wide political body, such
as a single chief in charge of the whole tribe, they were not
anarchistic. The Hupa had stratified society with an
aristocracy that included political and religious leaders. The
foundation of Hupa organization was kinship. Lines of
kinship extended from close individual and family
relationships, to relations through marriage, to ancestral
relations associated with villages, and so on. Kinship and
19
descent acted as the initial point group identity, from which
people thought, organized, and mobilized in social, economic,
legal, and political matters. In matters of conflict or
cooperation, these kinship networks activated along
escalating levels of group organization based on how the
matter involved the group.
river for all to use (see Photo 2 below). Hupa religious leaders
would represent their district of villages to organize religious
ceremonies. Hupa religious leaders and dancers would meet
with Yurok and Karuk religious leaders to organize the
ceremonies of the shared World Renewal religion, that cast
out sickness and restored spiritual balance in the world.
Figure 3: Levels of Hupa Group Organization
This form of social order practiced by the Hupa and their
neighbors resembled a cultural pattern of “segmentary
lineage,” best described by Evans-Pritchard (1940), where
groups organized along lines of kinship from closely related to
more distantly related based on the matter at hand (resource
gathering, warfare, religious events, etc.). In some
circumstances group organization expanded beyond extended
kinship ties to include social, political and religious
allegiances. For example, Hupa families would cooperatively
catch and prepare salmon from privately held fishing grounds.
If a Hupa village were attacked, the people of the village
mobilized to retaliate against the people of offending village.
The tribe annually organized to build a fish dam across the
!
Photo 3: Fish Weir Across The Trinity River, 1923, photo by Curtis, E.
Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Edward E. Curtis
Collection, reproduction number: LC-USZ62-98669
The cultural and legal structures of Hupa society collected to
form a tribal polity. The observance of laws were culturally
shared amongst the Hupa and their neighbors, and thus
applied in Hupa territory and in intertribal matters. Social or
20
territorial offenses were considered to be against the
individual or groups of individuals. Traditional Hupa law
revolved around tort, where wrongs against individuals
required compensation. All offenses, intentional or not, could
be resolved with compensation, lest one risk threat of force
from the offended as retribution, or the compounding of the
payment needed to settle (Wallace 1978:169). If conflicts
arose, payments were negotiated to end the dispute or
hostilities, and once terms were accepted and transacted the
conflict was considered permanently resolved.
Every village contained a headman, who was the head of a
wealthy family that exercised spheres of power and influence
based on their property holdings, prestige, and alliances
(Kroeber 1976:133). In matters domestic or intertribal,
headmen represented their families, and villages. Headmen
deployed their wealth and support to aid kin in marriage
exchanges, and the conflict resolution. In times of scarcity,
headmen would use their control over prime resource areas to
provide sustenance to villagers. Those receiving these forms
of support from headmen were indebted, and gave their
allegiance (Kroeber 1976:133). While the reputations or
abilities of individual headmen bolstered their positions of
power in some setting, the main source of their power was
corporate, not individual. Their political power derived from
their ability to employ wealth in the resolution of disputes
(prospective or active), and to politically influence others.
They exercised their status and political power through:
displays of wealth items such as fine dance regalia; hosting
ceremonies; feasting; supporting others during times of
scarcity; and through gifts (Davis 1988:274).
There was a cultural focus on the accumulation of wealth due
to its instrumental nature in social status. Wealth could be
inherited, gained through the trade of goods and material
culture items, through service, or through the acquisition of
rights to valuable resource areas. Wealth and prestige items
all came from the land, and included things such as
woodpecker scalps, white deerskins, fine quality material
crafts (basketry, canoes), obsidian blades, and shell money.
The traditional form of currency to purchase items was
dentalium shell money. These long white tube-like shells
came into the region across long trade routes, extending from
where they were collected in the waters off Vancouver Island
in present-day Canada (Wallace 1978:168). The values of
dentalium shells were enhanced by their size, condition, and
decoration. The red plumes of pileated woodpecker
(Dryocropus pileatus) scalps were an especially important
wealth item in the Hupa economy and religion (Jordan
2009:26). Wealth empowered all levels of Hupa group
organization, from individuals and families, to villages and
the tribe.
There was “clean” and “unclean” wealth, referring to the
manner in which the wealth came into one’s possession,
whether through honesty and good spiritual practice, or
through misdeeds (Davis 1988:276). Unclean wealth came
through acts such as gambling, or theft. To receive clean
wealth, a person had to be spiritually clean, through reverent
21
preparations such as fasting, ritual sweating, and prayer. The
Hupa would avoid unclean acts and thoughts. Being clean
meant lifting oneself to connect with spiritual forces that
animated the physical landscape (Keeling 1992:65). Once in
right state of being and with the right intention, wealth
serendipitously manifested. The clean acquisition of wealth
items, such as woodpecker scalps, showed one’s luck, and
their favor with the Kíxûnai (the Immortals/Angels that lived
in the world before humans). This placed a spiritual value to
how one conducted their livelihood and their respect for the
land in seeking wealth and status.
Utilizing the natural resources of their homeland, the Hupa
held a concentration of wealth. The accumulation of wealth
brought prestige and influence to the Hupa, who were
regarded by their neighbors as very rich (Davis 1988:271-274).
The Yurok and Karuk, as well as other bordering tribes,
shared this cultural emphasis, with stratified societies of
status based on wealth and lineage. The Hupa used their
wealth to exercise political power to help secure their
holdings, and influence neighboring tribes. The Hupa did this
through political and economic means, and occasionally
warfare or threat of force, and were considered influential
amongst neighboring tribes.
In addition to sharing the Klamath-Trinity watershed, the
Hupa, Yurok, and Karuk shared many cultural traits, as well
as the World Renewal religion. This created somewhat of a
cultural anomaly in the region, as all three tribes derive from
separate linguistic stocks: the Yurok were Algonquian
speakers, the Karuk were Hokan speakers, and the Hupa were
Athabaskan speakers.
The World Renewal religion formed a cornerstone of Hupa
culture, and the neighboring tribes that shared it. While the
Hupa, Yurok, and Karuk were linguistically distinct, they had
strong intertribal relationships that stemmed from sharing
this religion. The ceremonialism was intertribal and
coincided with the annual change of seasons, times of harvest,
and fish runs. Daily life was imbued with supplications made
for health and wealth, prayer, superstitions, and preventive
acts to bring luck (Wallace 1978:174).
The centerpiece of the religion was its dances, which
rejuvenated as spiritual and social relationships. The biennial
dances of the World Renewal religion in the Valley reached
their apex at the end of summer, with the White Deerskin
Dance and Jump Dance. The multiple ten-day dance cycles
sought to renew the World and rectify social, spiritual, and
ecological imbalance. The main ceremonial towns of
Takmildin and Medildin contained religious leaders,
representing Valley districts with shared responsibilities for
organizing World Renewal dances and other ceremonial rites.
Religious leaders were priests from elite aristocratic families
that inherited their roles/status along family lines, and
underwent rigorous training to lead ceremonies, prayers,
practices, and a cadre of Hupa with special religious training
(Davis 1988:121). In religious matters, the power of these
leaders was overarching. In conjunction with dances and
22
ceremonies in the Hoopa Valley, Hupa religious leaders also
communicated with Yurok and Karuk religious leaders. This
was to organize and schedule dances and ceremonies in the
intertribal ceremonial districts along the Klamath River. This
was especially important in intertribal matters related to the
maintenance of fisheries during annual runs, for which
specific rites were held to mark the beginning of fishing
seasons.
The history of the early post-contact era, of which the Treaty
of 1864 was a climactic moment, was shaped by Hupa
responses to incursions by settlers and the U.S. Military in
their homeland. In the examination of how Hupa culture
influenced these conflicts and power dynamics, two pivotal
cultural themes emerge: Hupa concepts of homeland, and
modes of conflict resolution
23
S ECTION 2
Theme I: The Hupa Homeland
T HE H UPA H OMELAND D EFINED A CROSS T IME
1. Overview
2. Myth Time: The Creation of the Hupa World
3. Indian Time: Manifestations of The Hupa
Homeland
4. Present Time: The Hupa Homeland PostContact
Overview
The Hupa relationship with their aboriginal homeland was
culturally all encompassing, and enduring. Their homeland is
connected to the surrounding world, extending beyond their
political territory in many ways. Cultural concepts of
homeland can be found expressed within all three of their
epochs of time: Myth Time when the Kíxûnai (Immortals/
Angels) lived in ninnisan neen (“The World That Used To
Be”), Indian Time when humans lived upon deddeh ninnisan
(“This Earth”), and Present Time where the Hupa live in the
Hoopa Valley (Davis 1988). The cultural expression of the
Hupa homeland spanning these epochs reveals a deep-rooted
cultural connection to place, history, ecology, and economy.
It can be seen in all aspects of their culture, such as language,
cosmology, place names, numerology, gifting, and social
organization. As a result, the Hupa held a clarity of vision
throughout their history, regarding who they were (culturally
and politically), and where they were from (geographically
and mythically). This clarity has played a vital role in forming
Hupa cultural concepts of sovereignty, and their political
economy.
Myth Time: The Creation of the Hupa World
One of the cornerstones of Hupa sovereignty is that the Hupa
people and the Immortals have occupied their lands since
24
time immemorial, and this is reflected in Hupa sacred
narratives from Myth Time. As quoted above, these
narratives do not tell of people traveling to the Hoopa Valley
from another world, but rather of humans coming into
existence within their very homeland, emerging from smoke
at places within the valley itself. In total, Hupa sacred
narratives from Myth Time construct a form to the world,
interweaving mythic places and events with the physical and
cultural geography of the region.
When Yimantuwinyai looked back the way he had come
he was surprised to see smoke. When anything is about
to come into existence its smoke appears. Indians were
to appear… ‘In that place they will come into existence
before my eyes,’ he thought. ‘I will go back to the place
where I was born.’… He saw a man and a woman had
grown there. He came up the Trinity to Miskut. He
found again a man and a woman. At Takmildin several
had grown. He went on south to Leldin. There, Indians
had come into existence… The next day he went back
across the ocean to the north where he became lost from
men.
Excerpts from Yimantuwinyai – Creator and Culture
Hero(Goddard 1904:123, 132-134)
The Hupa sacred narrative of the first Immortal, creator, and
culture hero, Yimantuwinyai, explains the genesis of the
world, how places came into existence, and the coming of
humans. Amongst his many deeds, Yimantuwinyai was the
principal creator of the Hupa landscape, freed animals to
roam the earth, and imparted knowledge of the world and
medicine to the Hupa people when they came into existence.
In the story of Yimantuwinyai, he sprang into existence near
the center of the Hoopa Valley. A Hupa variation of this
creator culture hero narrative, tells of the marriage of the Sun
and the Earth, who gave birth to twins: one of which was
Yimantuwinyai (Goddard 1903:76).
The oral tradition of this sacred narrative contained variations
on the specific location of his emergence. Such variations on
the creator and other figures and places from sacred
narratives are a reflection of the intertribal World Renewal
religion shared by the Hupa, Yurok, and Karuk. For example,
the Yurok held that the village of Kenek was near the site
where the creator emerged, named Wohpekumeu (Kroeber
1976:73). Kenek was located near the mouth of Tuley Creek
on the Klamath River, about four miles downstream from the
Klamath-Trinity confluence. One clear constant for the Hupa
was that their homeland contained the cosmological center of
the world, the site of the emergence of their creator, and
where the Hupa people came into existence.
In Hupa cosmology the world was a circular disc surrounded
by an ocean that was believed to be a very wide river flowing
clockwise. After his emergence from smoke, Yimantuwinyai
travelled to “The Middle of the World.” For the Immortals,
“The Middle of the World” was a mythic place along the
Trinity River that was the center of the Immortals society.
The world underwent a transformation before the coming of
humans, settling into “This Earth” that the Hupa lived in. In
25
the Hupa worldview, the ninnisan nedjox or “Earth’s Center”
is set in the middle of the Hoopa Valley near Takmildin (Davis
1988:6-7). Takmildin was where the World Renewal Jump
Dance took place, and was the chief religious center for the
Hupa. Slightly downriver from Takmildin, an eddy in the
river marks the exact axis point. This area in the Hoopa
Valley acts as the axis mundi of the physical world, as well as
the point of connection betwixt the upper world heavens (“Sky
Above” and four worlds/heavens of the Immortals) and lower
world (“World Below,” location of the Hupa land of the dead)
(Davis 1988:2).
This mythic axis point can be seen expressed in the Hupa
language. When referring to the locations of the heavens
where the Immortals live beyond the sky, the phrase, denohol, (“from us here”) is attached to the expression: as in, denohol-yimaniyide (“the heaven across the Pacific Ocean to the
northwest”), or de-nohol-yideiyidag (“the heaven to the
north”). “From us here” assumes “here” to be a point on the
east bank of the Trinity River in Takmildin, specifically the
“Big House” church next to the Jump Dance grounds (Sapir
2001:896). Thus, these directional names of the heavens are
always oriented from the “Earth’s Center.”
With the valley as the axis, Hupa sacred narratives define the
geographic and cultural boundaries of the world. While the
Earth was somewhat different during its creation in Myth
Time, several myths reference specific geographic areas. This
can be seen in the sacred narrative of the Hupa creator and
culture hero, Yimantuwinyai (Goddard 1904:96-134). In the
story of Yimantuwinyai, he went southeast from the valley
where he found an Immortal had trapped deer inside Ironside
Mountain. Yimantuwinyai used trickery to release the deer
into the world, and then returned to the “Middle of the
World.” The southeast cultural boundary dividing the
territories of the Hupa (and South Fork Hupa) and the
Chimariko was near Ironside Mountain. The story of
Yimantuwinyai also describes how he created neighboring
tribes, such as the Yurok, Karuk, Shasta, Tolowa, Mad River
Lassik, South Fork Hupa, New River Shasta, and Chilula.
Yimantuwinyai traveled south towards the mythic headwaters
of the Trinity River and its tributary the South Fork River to
search for salmon. There at the ocean on the south edge of
the world, he freed salmon from their grandmother, who had
them penned in a lake. These headwaters extended far
beyond the edges of Hupa territory. The headwaters of the
South Fork are about 100 miles south of the Hoopa Valley in
the high elevation Yollo-Bolly Wilderness. The Trinity River
runs about twenty miles southeast through Chimariko and
Wintu territory, where it turns east for about 25 miles before
reaching its headwaters, currently dammed at Trinity Lake.
Next, Yimantuwinyai traveled northeast up the Klamath River
to Sommes Bar (Karuk territory) where he romanced women.
Yimantuwinyai performed acts of terraforming in southern
part of the Hoopa Valley near the Hupa village of Djictanadin
(Tish-Tang) and a place just upriver called Sugar Bowl.
Yimantuwinyai was in the valley when someone came from
the west over the Bald Hills to warn of a coming sickness, and
26
helped perform a Jump Dance to ward it off. The Bald Hills
form part of the boundary with the lower Redwood Creek
division of the Chilula tribe to the west of the Hoopa Valley.
When mortal humans were going to emerge into existence,
the Immortals began to travel across the ocean to their
heavens in the north. Yimantuwinyai initially left with the
Immortals, but returned to further prepare the world for
humans. He went to the south edge of the world, where he
saw a scrub jay that would later become the people of the
Wintu tribe. The primary cultural boundary with the Wintu
lay upstream on the Trinity River and south fork of the Trinity
River, beyond the Chimariko territory. While traveling north
from the southern edge of the world, Yimantuwinyai camped
at Xontelme, just past the southern boundary of the South
Fork Hupa territory (the site of a mixed Wintu-Chimariko
village at the mouth of Hayfork Creek, near the modern town
of Hyampom, California). He continued to the Hoopa Valley
and slept at the Hupa village of Xowunkut, where he
developed a medicine using redwood sorrel. Upon seeing
humans coming into existence, Yimantuwinyai travelled north
and then down the Klamath River and left the world to be
with the Immortals in the heavens across the ocean to the
north. In Hupa, “Yimantuwinyai” translates to “Lost Across
the Ocean.” In this single sacred narrative, several
landmarks, boundaries, and places of spiritual power from
Myth Time are linked to the locations of “This Earth.”
Many other sacred narratives define the Hupa world and how
it was formed. The “Formula of Medicine to Protect Children
in Strange Places” (Goddard 1904:302) describes birds
traveling to several locations including important places such
as, Ironside Mountain, Bald Hill, and Weitchpec Butte. Each
time the flock of birds safely returned to their mother, who
was an old woman Immortal who lived at the “Middle of the
World.” However, at one point they travel to Trinidad Head, a
peninsula on the coast near the Yurok village of Tsurai. There
they are enslaved by a wicked Immortal, and the old woman
uses medicine and prayer to free her children, and then
declares the rite for others to employ. Trinidad Head lies due
west from the Hoopa Valley, and was considered to be a
malevolent place on the road to the “Land of the
Dead” (Indian Hell).
Another narrative, “The Young Man Who Threw Himself with
the Arrow,” tells of an Immortal and his son could fly with an
arrow, landing at several important geographical and religious
sites, such as the southern edge of the world. This follows the
mythic method of the Immortals shooting an arrow to cast
lines linking points of spiritual energy. For the Hupa, these
invisibly crisscrossing lines wove a cosmic net that gridded
the sacred landscape, where Immortals often lived at the
junctions (Davis 1988:329).
The “Directions and Formula for the Brush Dance” recorded
by Goddard (1904:248) tells of a woman in search of medicine
for a sick baby, traveling to Mount Shasta far to the east, then
to the western edge of the world on the coast of the Pacific.
Mount Shasta served as a cardinal point to the east, and was
where all kinds of Immortal creatures swam for safety when
27
Yimantuwinyai flooded the world (Davis 1988:326). The
“Formula of the Salmon Medicine” (Goddard 1904:268) tells
of three Immortals who in preparing for the coming of
humans, made salmon swim down the Trinity and Klamath
Rivers. From there, the salmon swam south along the beach
around the world until they again reached the Klamath River
and could swim upstream to where they started. The
Immortals spotted the returning salmon at Sugar Bowl, just
upstream from the Hoopa Valley, and gave instructions for
the First Salmon Ceremony, which the Hupa would hold at
that same location.
The Hupa sacred narratives even reflect the Immortals having
a similar social organization as the Hupa. For example, in the
story of “Salmon’s Grandmother and Timber Robin,” they
speak about how Salmon’s Grandmother’s private acorn
gathering claims had been taken over by humans (Sapir
2001:394). All together, Hupa sacred narratives turn the
geography of the Hupa world into a sacred landscape.
Sacred narratives tell that eventually the world of the
Immortals became spoiled by the first death, and the
emergence of mortal humans. A large pestilent cloud
appeared to the west over Takmildin, and the Immortals
performed a Jump Dance to push it away. Yimantuwinyai
instructed the Hupa to hold this dance to in order to ward off
sickness and renew the world. “The Formula of the Jumping
Dance” (Godard 1904:82) states that after each dance and
song, the Hupa saw that the cloud had gone back a little, and
after two periods of five days (ten days) it was gone.
In addition to the geographical and ecological formation of
the Earth other evidence from Myth Time was in the Hupa
homeland. The tops of ridges visible from the valley floor had
ritual trees that were bent on top, thought to be the sticks
used by the Immortals when they played the ball game, shinny
(Davis 1988:341). There were large boulders used as grinding
stones by the Immortals, and a large fallen tree was believed
to be Yimantuwinyai’s walking cane (Davis 1988:341).
Despite the centricity of the Hoopa Valley and Hupa people in
sacred narratives, nowhere did they ascribe Hupa dominance
over the world. Rather, the narratives instill the covenant of
stewardship (spiritual and ecological) made between the
Hupa and the Immortals. They explain that Immortals made
the world and its bounty, and prescribed models of spiritual
practice and social behavior. They instill that adherence to
spiritual practices would restore balance, ward off sickness,
bring clean wealth, and renew the world. Furthermore, they
inferred the consequences of deviation from religious morals
for the individual and the world. Since the Hupa shared their
religion with neighboring tribes, this covenant required
intertribal collaboration between the different ceremonial
districts. Hupa culture was rooted in Myth Time, imbuing
their homeland with a potent significance that defined their
sacred landscape, reinforced patrimony over their lands, and
prescribed Hupa stewardship.
28
Indian Time: Manifestations of The Hupa Homeland
The Hupa consistently laid a sovereign claim over the
aboriginal territory they occupied and subsisted on since the
start of Indian Time. Their culture interwove social,
economic, and supernatural order into their homeland (Davis
1988:270). This included their cultural identity, territorial
boundaries, traditional practices of land use, the political
order of their tribe, and concepts of wealth. This sense of
sovereignty was expressed and reflected in several aspects of
their culture.
The principal territory of the Hupa homeland was the Hoopa
Valley, up to the ridges both east and west, and to the river
canyon entrances on the north and south ends of the Valley.
The traditional Hupa geopolitical name for the Hoopa Valley
was natinix, meaning, “where the trails and journeys lead
back here to the river valley” (Davis 1988:7). Moreover, the
self-designation for the Hupa people, natinixwe, translates to
“those of the place where the trails return” or more simply,
“people of The Hoopa Valley” (Sapir 2001:955). This was
somewhat preserved in English post-contact, as “Hupa”
referred to the people and language, and “Hoopa” referred to
the valley at the center of their reservation (Davis 1988:12).
The emphasis of the Hoopa Valley, with it as the cosmological
“Earth’s Center,” reflects an axiomatic sense of homeland in
Hupa identity.
Hupa villages were divided into two sub-districts that
comprised the tribe: Downriver to the north, and Upriver to
the south (Wallace 1978:169). The dividing line between
these two sub-districts was Supply Creek, flowing into the
Trinity River from the west, between the villages of
Tsewenaldin and Medildin. These two districts served as a
political entity in the organization of tribal activities, such as
religious ceremonies and the construction of fish dams. The
main religious and political center was the village of
Takmildin, in the Downriver District, where the Hupa axis
mundi was located. Also within the valley there were eight
“Fields,” corresponding to geographical and river features
around village sites (Davis 1988:79).
In the worldview ideal shared by the Hupa, Yurok, and Karuk,
the layout of their tribal territory was to contain ten villages
arranged in five village-pairs (Davis 1988:82). Built alongside
the Trinity River as it meandered across the valley floor,
village pairs were either across the river from each other, or
sometimes on the same side. The number of village sites
varied slightly over time due to dramatic events such as
floods, and population shifts, especially post-contact. For
example, the village of Xontehl-Miwah had been recently
abandoned before contact. Moreover, the village of Miskut
had no pair, but was strongly associated with ceremonial
grounds across the river where a paired village would logically
arise (Davis 1988:83). Around the time of contact in 1850,
there were eleven Hupa villages in the valley proper (see
Figure 4). There were a few Hupa peripheral villages
29
upstream from the Valley towards the cultural and linguistic
transition with the South Fork Hupa and Chimariko, near the
village of Leldin at the confluence of the Trinity River and
South Fork Trinity River.
Figure 4: Villages in the Valley From North to South by
Pairing and Sub-District (adapted from Davis 1988:164).
DOWNRIVER (NORTH)
Dakisxankut
Xonsadin
Kintcuhwikut
Tceindeqotdin
Miskut (unpaired)
Takmildin
Tsewenaldin
UPRIVER (SOUTH)
Medildin
Xowunkut
Djictanadin
Xontehl-Miwah
(abandoned)
Between the Hupa, Yurok, and Karuk there were ten districts
that comprised the larger intertribal organizational entity of
the World Renewal Religion. As can be seen below, in a
description by Davis (1988:164), the structure of these
Districts followed the same enumerating pattern prescribed in
the ideal layout of ten paired villages:
The Yurok, Karuk, and Hupa were divided into
Districts rather than tribes in the strict sense of the
term. Only the Hupa District also comprised a
standard tribe. The Yurok had three coastal
Districts, Tsurai-Opyuweg, Orekw-Osegon, and
Welkwa-Rekwoi. The Yurok had three river
Districts, Turip-Erner, Pecwan-Merip, and KenekWeitchpec. The Karuk had three Districts,
Panemenik-Amaikiaram, Katimin-Tii, and Inam[Athith-uff]. The Hupa only had one District,
Takmildin-Medildin. Within each District, there
were two Sub-Districts. In each Sub-District, there
was a central ceremonial town. In each District,
one of the two towns was the more important. For
the Hupa, the central Sub-District ceremonial
towns were Takmildin and Medildin, for the Hupa
District as a whole, the town and Sub-District of
Takmildin was preeminent.
Like the Sub-Districts in the Hoopa Valley, the boundaries of
these Districts were generally defined along geographical
features, such as creeks, rock outcrops, and mountains.
These districts formed a circuit for the organization of
religious dances and ceremonies, in conjunction with the
management of their most important shared resource, their
fisheries. Representing their districts in negotiations, the
managers of these tribal fisheries were important religious
leaders, as many religious ceremonies concerned the fisheries.
They were charged with maintaining calendars, and watching
30
the skies and change of season in order to predict and prepare
for fish runs (Davis 1988:223-224). Large communal fishdams were constructed in conjunction with politically
apportioned scheduling and placement, resulting from the
intertribal cooperation of these ceremonial districts (Davis
1988:163). Fishing seasons were ritually regulated by
religious leaders, who used astronomical calendar keeping to
time ceremonies, and determine the opening and closing of
the season (Swezey & Heizer 1977:12). Scheduling the
construction of fish-dams required complex inter-tribal
partnerships and communication that often lead to
dissension. Downstream, there were three Yurok Districts for
the Hupa to contend with in ensuring they received the flow of
fish they relied. Intertribal structures like this showed the
intertwining of religion and political economy in Hupa
culture, and reflected territorial boundaries and expressions
of sovereignty.
Areas near intertribal boundaries were sometimes culturally
mixed, such as the boundary between the Hupa and the South
Fork Hupa and Chimariko. However, as seen in the sacred
narratives, boundaries were defined through geography.
Intertribal boundaries were often marked by geographical
features, such as, mountains, ridges, creeks, and canyons. For
example, the Yurok-Hupa boundary involved a transitional
area between full Yurok legal jurisdiction at Weitchpec on the
Klamath River, and full Hupa legal jurisdiction about two or
three miles up the Trinity River towards the Hoopa Valley
(Pilling 1978:138). These transitional areas essentially
created an intertribal buffer zone due to the topography or
availability of resources.
Territorial boundaries, whether intertribal, District, village, or
private resource claims, were defined in many ways. One type
of marker was miy, supernaturally dangerous places usually
in the form of large rocks that were considered taboo. There
was a miy rock that marked the division between Hupa and
Yurok lands. The miy rock was in the river canyon between
most northern Hupa village, Dakisxankut and the Yurok
villages of Weitchpec. Two key miy rocks marked the Hupa
southern boundaries: “Thunder Rock” at the Sugar Bowl on
the Trinity River before entering the Valley. Another miy rock
was on the upper Trinity River about one and a half miles
from the South Fork Hupa village of Leldin (Sapir 2001:949).
Named after this rock, the village of Miyimi was in the
transitional zone between the South Fork Hupa, and mixed
Hupa-Chimariko villages upstream towards New River.
Within the Hoopa Valley there were rocks, and trees that
marked the boundaries of villages, and personal land claims.
There were several venerated rocks used to denote specific
locations along the east bank of the Trinity River, called
Tcewoltcwe, or “Story People” (Goddard 1903:80). Stories
told of a Hupa man who visited the Immortals where he
learned the Jump Dance and Acorn Feast, and upon his
return he placed the rocks where he did to conform to the
arrangement from the Immortals’ world (Goddard 1903:80).
31
Trees were also used to mark the sacred and political
geography. Trees of sacred importance that had been pruned
at their tops by religious figures to form the shape of a man
standing, acted as gateposts marking the boundaries of village
territories (Davis 1988:339). Such sacred-trees in the
mountains also acted as markers in the sacred landscape,
often pruned in such a way that they acted as compasses to
locations of spiritual power. There were also pruned trees
located near villages that served as conspicuous markers,
signaling the location of the village, and acting as a point
where small signal fires were lit in times of conflict (Bushnell
1939:20). Groves of acorns trees that were privately held were
known to have markings on their bark to denote boundaries
and ownership.
Shrines along trails in the country surrounding the Hoopa
Valley, called “arrow trees,” marked places of significance
from Myth Time, and served as markers in the sacred
landscape. The locations of arrow trees also denoted
intertribal boundaries, and transitions of geographic zones.
Arrow tree sites were resting spots and waypoints along trails,
and were associated with the resting places of Immortals
during their travels in Myth Time. The term “arrow trees”
referred to the custom of men stopping along the trail to rest,
and shooting an arrow into the crotch of the tree for good
luck. This custom also included offerings made to honor the
significance of the place, and prayers asking for safe passage
and of thanksgiving (Goddard 1913:702).
One such waypoint was found along a trail traveling west from
the Hoopa Valley towards the coast. The trail followed Supply
Creek up to its head near a mountain called Buck Buttes,
about six miles from the Hoopa Valley floor. The Hupa called
this place “Miqid-dahnadeiladin” or “the place where they
shoot arrows” (Sapir 2001:946). This area marked the
transition between the high country and descent to the Hoopa
Valley, and correlated to the western intertribal buffer zone
between Hupa and Chilula territory.
Further west along the trail to the coast was another marker:
an arrow tree on the ridge near Redwood Summit between
Redwood Creek and North Fork Creek (a tributary of the
North Fork Mad River). This arrow tree, called
“Gawkyoctow,” was later named “Ten Mile Tree,” referring to
its distance on the trail from the town of Korbel to the west
(see Photo 3 in the Gallery below). In Myth Time,
Yimantuwinyai had rested at this arrow tree while he was
traveling the world. This is also where Salmon’s Grandmother
and Timber Robin would meet to discuss matters, such as
their migration and gathering habits during the year. When
Hupa people stopped to rest at Gawkyoctow they would say a
prayer, reiterating their good intentions for traveling and wish
for an auspicious return home (Sapir 2001:903). On the way
west, after shooting an arrow, or leaving a stick or stone, it
was recorded that they said, “I am going into the country of
the enemy; may I return home safely.” On the return trip to
the Hoopa Valley, they would stop at this same point on the
trail to give thanks and say, “I have been in the country of the
32
enemy. I am glad I am returning alive” (Goddard 1906:702).
The arrow tree on this ridge also acted as a marker of the
intertribal boundary between the Chilula, and the North-Fork
Whilkut.
Another arrow tree that corresponded to an intertribal
boundary was found further along the former trail to the
coast. As the mountains finished their descent along the
North Fork Mad River near Korbel, there was an arrow tree
comprised of a pair of redwoods (see Photo 4 in the Gallery
below). In the late 1800s, a logger cut one of the trees down
for lumber, and it was said that the other tree later died of
loneliness (Goddard 1906:702). Geographically, this arrow
tree marked the transition from the mountains to the lower
elevation Mad River Basin that begins about ten miles from
the coast. This arrow tree also marked the transitional
boundary between the North Fork Whilkut, and Wiyot.
Mountains and ridges in the Hupa homeland acted as
territorial markers and waypoints for cardinal directions, as
well as important resource sites and places of spiritual
significance. Some key mountains encompassing the Hupa
homeland were: Burrill Peak (north), Trinity Summit (east),
Ironside Mountain (south-southeast), Horse Mountain
(south-southwest), Telescope Peak (southwest), Hupa
Mountain (west), and the Bald Hills (northwest).
People often travelled into the high country for deer and other
game hunting, as well as the gathering of special foods, plants
and material culture resources that could be found in the
G ALLERY 2.1 Photos of Arrow Trees
Photo 4: Place of Offering, Redwood Summit, 1906, photo by
Goddard, P., California Ethnographic Field Photographs (15-3168).
Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology and Regents of the
University of California.
forested hills and mountains around the Valley. When leaving
the relative safety of the Valley for the high country, people
faced many potential dangers. This included things such as
unseasonable weather, predators such as grizzly bears,
mountain lions, and wolves, and the risk of being attacked by
thieves, enemies, or malevolent Indian Devils. Winter snow
that fell in the mountainous landscape surrounding the
33
Hoopa Valley created barriers that made travel nearly
impossible, making the valley relatively isolated during those
months. Moreover, the mountainous landscape helped define
geopolitical and resource boundaries, and provided buffer
areas between villages and owned resource areas. The
mountainous landscape of the Hupa homeland also offered
refuge from the valley during times of conflict.
The mountains themselves were considered places of spiritual
power, and all religious figures and healers would visit sacred
mountains, such as Trinity Summit (Heffner 1983:8).
Journeys into the high country were significant and
dangerous, requiring physical and spiritual preparation.
Important religious activities were conducted in the
mountains, which were different from the ceremonies held in
the valley, where instead of inviting the Immortals back to the
valley, Indian Doctors (shamans) would travel to specific
mountains to visit the homes of Immortals, and seek spiritual
knowledge and power (Davis 1988:319). Summits often
marked points of alignment and intersection in the sacred
landscape, similar in concept to “ley lines,” and were
considered places of spiritual power. The summits of key
points in the high country contained “training circles,”
circularly arranged piles of rocks about four or five feet in
diameter, where Indian Doctors would train and receive their
spiritual power (Sapir 2001:878).
In total, the Hupa homeland and surrounding landscape was
clearly defined by the Hupa and their neighbors. The cultural
definition of the Hupa homeland was comprised of several
overlapping elements including: ecology, geography, territory,
economy, property, society, politics, jurisdiction, and religion.
Linking back to Myth Time, their homeland was considered a
sacred gift, inherent with a responsibility of stewardship.
Manifesting from these overlapping elements, the Hupa
relationship to their homeland amounted to something
greater than the sum of its parts. The Hupa concept of
homeland informed their collective sense of polity, territory,
and right to self-determination; or in other words, their sense
of sovereignty.
Present Time: The Hupa Homeland Post-contact
The changes and struggles that came post-contact affected all
dimensions of the Hupa homeland. Following the acquisition
of California in 1848 by the U.S., the cultural geography and
ecology of Northwestern California would be changed forever.
Reservations would draw hard lines, defining territorial
boundaries under U.S. law. Hupa political economy and
subsistence would be altered. Boarding schools and
missionaries would supplant aspects of traditional Hupa
culture.
However, the Hupa connection to their homeland would
persist, remaining a focal point of their culture, politics,
economics, and spirituality. While a great deal of traditional
territory would be lost with the establishment of the Hoopa
34
Valley Reservation, it would encompass a great deal of Hupa
aboriginal territory, and most importantly, the Hoopa Valley.
These changes in the 19th century would bring a transition
from Indian Time to a third age of the Hupa: the world of
Present Time. Following chapters will discuss the genesis of
this new epoch and demonstrate how cultural elements
regarding the Hupa homeland influenced historic outcomes,
and shaped the historical trajectory of the tribe.
35
S ECTION 3
Theme II: Hupa Law &
Conflict Resolution
T HE A DJUDICATION OF T RADITIONAL H UPA L AW
1. An Overview of Traditional Hupa Law
2. Levels of Conflict Resolution
3. Feuds & Warfare
4. Social Order & Conflict Resolution
An Overview of Traditional Hupa Law
“The rule of law is better than the rule of any individual.”
– Aristotle, 350 BCE
In pre-contact Hupa culture, there was no single tribal wide
political authority, such as a chief, to set rules or render
judgments. Rather, the culture held established laws,
expressed through the rules and practices of religion, politics,
economics, and kinship. For the Hupa and their neighbors,
the key system of law was tort. Torts were offenses or wrongs
against an individual. An offender is one who has infringed
on the rights of another, broken their responsibility, or caused
harm intentionally or through negligence.
Following the crime, the victim (or next of kin) would seek
compensation from the offender. For the Hupa, all disputes
were resolved as torts through payment. Simple matters were
usually resolved between the individuals involved. More
serious matters often required negotiation in order to settle
and an arbiter would be solicited. The arbiter would judge the
guilt or innocence of the parties involved, mediate any
hostilities, and set the amount of payment needed to rectify
the wrong. Aside from minor transactions, any large
payments were rendered by headmen, to which the offender
was then indebted. Once the settlement was transacted, the
issue was to be considered permanently resolved by all parties
involved, and the matter was not to be spoken of again.
36
Levels of Conflict Resolution
Hupa tort law was a complex system, covering everything
ranging from insults, the improper use or destruction of
property, injuries, murders, sacrilege, and malevolent sorcery.
Payments were commonly in the form of dentalium shell
money (often paid in strings of ten to twelve shells),
woodpeckers scalps, dance regalia, and in some cases, a
daughter for marriage was offered, or a “slave” (indentured
servant) was given. There was no uniform currency rate given
to the forms of payment since they often depended on the
quality of the items being given as payment, method in which
the item was obtained, and the negotiated valuation of the
offense. However, there were standard units of measurement
for dentalium, using rulers tattooed on the forearm.
Photo 7: McCann Measuring Dentalia, Hoopa, 1901, photo by
Goddard, P., California Ethnographic Field Photographs (15-2947).
Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology and Regents of the
University of California.
Should a rich and prominent person be wronged, payment
was inevitably greater than if a person of lower status was
wronged. Thus, payment was determined not only by the
crime committed, but also according to the value borne by the
owner or claimant (Kroeber 1976:33). Thus, the severity of
the offense, and the status of the individuals involved affected
the amount of payment needed to usually resolve the conflict.
Figure 5: Examples of Tort Valuations (adapted from Kroeber
1976:27-28)
CRIME
EXAMPLE OF VALUATION
Breaking a mourning necklace
Three or four pieces of dentalium
Saying the names of the dead
Two strings of dentalium, or
three high quality strings if it
involved a person of high status
Seduction that lead to pregnancy
Five strings of dentalium, or
perhaps twenty large pileated
woodpecker scalps
Murder of a common status man
Ten strings of dentalium, twenty
woodpecker scalps, and a good
boat
Murder of a high status man
Fifteen strings of quality
dentalium, red obsidian blade,
dance regalia, and other property
37
There were escalating levels of intervention needed to settle
the conflict based on the nature of the offense, the individuals
involved, and the levels of group organization involved:
interpersonal, family, village, tribe, and religion.
Figure 6: Escalation of Torts Based on Level of Hupa Group
Organization & Severity
LEVEL OF
ORGANIZATION
IN CONFLICT
EXAMPLES OF
TORTS
ARBITER
EXAMPLES OF
FORMS OF
SETTLEMENT
Interpersonal, or
Intra-family
Minor insults,
obscenity, losing
property
None, or
Head of the
Family
Dentalium,
woodpecker scalp,
regalia
Village
Adultery, saying the
names of the dead,
theft, unauthorized
use of private land,
wrongful death
Village
Headman
Dentalium strings,
obsidian blades,
woodpecker scalps,
indentured
servant, daughter
for marriage
Inter-tribal (intertribal villages or kin
groups)
Murder, theft,
sorcery, refusal to
settle, warfare
Headmen, or
Religious
Leaders
Dentalium, fine
regalia items, life
of the offender or
member of
opposing kin
Religion
Sorcery, deviling,
sacrilege, grave
robbing, defamation
of sacred spaces
Religious
Leaders
Life of the offender
for serious crimes
This mirrored the segmentary system of kinship found in
levels of Hupa group organization: individual, family,
extended family, village, district, tribe, and religion. The ways
in which the Hupa thought, organized, and acted in conflict
followed these same lines of escalation, and were expressed in
tort law. In Hupa society, as the level of group organization
involved in a conflict increased, so did the level of arbitration
needed to resolve it. This cultural system could be described
as a variation of “segmentary opposition,” as articulated by
Evans-Pritchard (1940). Evans-Prichard described
segmentary opposition as a system of political organization in
acephalous societies, where conflicts between different groups
follow segmentary lines of kinship, placing close kin groups
against more distant kin groups.
Interpersonal offenses were the most common, and were
often resolved between the individuals. This included things
such as insults and bad behavior that offended another
person. Some examples were: using inappropriate language,
making obscene gestures, implied threats, teasing,
unauthorized use of property (such as using a canoe without
permission), and unwelcome sexual advances. Usually, the
issue would be resolved when the wrongdoer gave an
appropriate amount of payment to the individual they
offended. If the matter was not immediately settled, the
parties involved would avoid each other until the offender
made payment, or the matter escalated (Powers 1877:75). If a
conflict arose within a family, the head of the family would
intervene as the arbiter and set the terms of the settlement.
38
Payment for minor offenses would be in the form of
something simple, such as a few pieces of dentalium shell
money, or woodpecker scalps. If the head of the family could
not afford the settlement, he would seek assistance from the
village headman.
revenge was always present (Wallace 1978:169). If the
murdered individual belonged to a large and powerful family
an offer of payment sometimes came without negotiation due
to the potential threat of force presented by the victim’s family
(Wallace 1948:346).
In a village, if the conflict involved individuals from different
families, two groups of families, the village headman would
intervene as the arbiter. Headmen were employed in such
matters since their wealth and status afforded them the power
and influence to intervene in the conflict. Moreover, headmen
and influential families were hubs of reciprocity cycles, and
intervening in conflicts was done at a price, and/or as a
matter of exercising their power and status. Throughout the
year, Hupa headmen received tribute in various forms,
ranging from food to wealth items, such as woodpecker scalps.
In turn, headmen were able to use their accumulated wealth
in order to make larger payments on behalf of his group
members for marriage exchanges, and feud settlements for
family members (Davis 1988:274). For this service, family
members were indebted to the headman financially and
socially (Davis 1988:274).
If payment for the offense did not come voluntarily, the
involved parties would avoid each other. The aggrieved
would make a case to the headman judging the conflict. The
headman would meet with the other party as well, in order to
hear the different sides of the story. If the two accounts
conflicted, the headman might interview witnesses, and/or
the conflicting parties might be made to confront one another
to clarify what happened (Goddard 1903:59). Sometimes,
prolonged haggling occurred, as the aggrieved would often
press their rights, as a means of saving face (Wallace 1978:16).
Once the terms were agreed to, the payment was set and
arrangements made for the exchange. The longer it took to
resolve, the greater compensation required. Moreover,
sometimes the offense would involve multiple individuals who
made claims that they were affected. For example, if someone
uttered the name of a dead man to a group of the dead man’s
kin, all individuals affected could lay claims since it was
serious offense to break the taboo and call back the spirit of
the individual who had died.
Conflicts at this level included crimes that brought offense to
the larger kin group, such as saying the names of the dead,
theft, adultery, and even rape or murder. Destroying a
privately owned resource area was especially heinous and
required payment, as it impacted the owner’s subsistence
(Davis 1988:276). Crimes such as murder could also be
compensated with payment, however the threat of blood
Once compensation was made, the parties were expected to be
on good terms, (or at least act as if they were), even if the
transgression involved murder. Furthermore, the matter was
to be considered mutually resolved, and could not be further
39
discussed or re-litigated. Violations of this expectation were
considered new offenses unto themselves, and the guilty
individual was regarded as dishonest in their previous
willingness to make peace. In situations where the offender
was unable to provide ample compensation, indentured
servitude (often referred to as “debt slavery” in ethnographic
accounts) was often necessary in order to pay the debt. The
debtor, or a daughter of the debtor, would go to work for the
family to whom the debt was owed (Pilling 1978:143).
Alternately, if the headman could make the payment on behalf
of his group members, they would in turn be indebted to him,
or an indentured servant given.
This system extended to conflicts involving different villages,
however conflicts involving two villages were often large scale,
requiring huge settlements. In such cases, finding an
appropriate arbiter was difficult, since there was no tribal
wide authority to intervene. This could lead to the conflict
continuing for an extended period of time as a feud. However,
political or religious leaders concerned with the wider social
and spiritual impacts of the conflict, could intervene as
intermediaries. They heard the grievances of the opposing
sides, acted as a conduit of communication between the two
parties, and called for reconciliation. Often such conflicts
were resolved during a formal War Dance ceremony, where
the exchange of goods for the settlement was transacted, and
matter spiritually resolved.
Crimes against the religion were considered very serious
offenses, and often could result in the death of the offender.
This was because such crimes were against the Immortals,
and could produce negative repercussions for all. Such crimes
included: malevolent sorcery to cause starvation, disturbing
graves, and desecrating sacred spaces. Malevolent sorcery
was often attributed to Indian Devils, believed to be a subrace of evil wild humans that lived deep in the forest (Davis
1988:277). Indian Devils often travelled at night, appearing
as flashes of light, and could transform themselves into wolves
or bears. Indian Devils were believed to use witchcraft,
poisons, and spiritual powers from the World Below, to prey
on people and enrich themselves through nefarious acts, such
as grave robbing. Fear of Indian Devils was palpable, and
compelled people to remain constantly vigilant when in
vulnerable circumstances, like traveling in the hills
(Thompson 1916:133). As a result, traditional Hupa culture
contained many practices and superstitions aimed at warding
off Indian Devils, such as having someone guard a new grave
for ten days after burial. If someone was killed in a feud and
the body was not properly dealt with or was abandoned, more
would have to pay more in compensation for the death when
settled (Spott and Kroeber 1942:196).
Some individuals or families were occasionally suspected of
being Indian Devils, employing their evil to cause strife and
illness, while enriching themselves. Alternately, one could be
accused of practicing black magic, or “deviling” against others,
or for their own greed. Such crimes were considered abjectly
profane offenses against the people and the Immortals. Those
suspected of being an Indian Devil would be captured, and
40
brought to be tried by religious leaders, and if found guilty,
put to death (Goddard 1903:65). If someone’s death was
attributed to a person suspected of being an Indian Devil, the
kin of the deceased might kill the suspected Indian Devil in an
ambush as revenge. However, if the family of the dead person
suspected of being an Indian Devil sought payment, the
burden of proof was actually placed on them to disprove the
allegation (Goddard 1903:65).
offenders did not practice Hupa tort law, or there was no
political means of brokering a settlement, then it often
escalated to an irreconcilable feud or blood revenge.
Conflicts that erupted between groups belonging to different
tribes were often the most complex, and were the most
difficult to peacefully resolve. The Yurok, Karuk, and other
neighboring tribes, all shared tort as their system of law.
Even the Chimariko to the southeast (upriver on the Trinity
River) generally practiced this system, though they were not a
part of the World Renewal religion and were traditionally
regarded as an enemy of the Hupa. Therefore, offenses
between individuals of corporate groups belonging to
different tribes could be negotiated and settled through
payment.
At all levels of Hupa group organization, feuds could erupt if a
resolution could not be brokered, either because the
aggressors refused to negotiate, or the terms of the settlement
could not be agreed upon. Depending on the circumstances
and parties involved, such conflicts would escalate along
levels of Hupa organization in opposition. For some serious
offenses, such as murder, the life of the offender was
demanded as payment. In such instances, life of the head of
the family or any other member of the kin group involved
could be given to atone for the crime (Goddard 1903:59).
Most conflicts never escalated beyond this level, and there are
no recorded instances where all the members of one tribe
rallied in war against another. However, there are some tribes
in the region that the Hupa generally regarded as enemies,
such as the Chimariko that lived along the Trinity River
southeast, beyond the intertribal buffer zone ending near
Ironside Mountain. Intertribal conflicts often involved issues
such as: wrongful deaths, issues with marriage arrangements,
Indian deviling, and religious crimes. In serious cases, if the
Feuds and Warfare
If the matter was between villages or tribes, the life of any
male member of the group could be considered settlement.
Hupa conflicts regarded as “wars” were essentially feuds that
involved large groups of kin, villages, or tribes. Most feuds
occurred within the Hupa group, but occasionally there were
extended conflicts that erupted between tribes, usually
involving extended sets of kinsmen or villages. Bloodshed
was disliked and avoided where possible (Wallace 1949:1).
The conflict would escalate, but typically only to the point of
inflicting enough damage on the other party to force them to
41
negotiate (Nelson 1988:27). War parties spent time preparing
themselves spiritually, hiring warriors from other tribes, and
gathering materials for their campaign, and typically
employed tactics of surprise and ambush in their attacks
(Wallace 1949:6-7). If the attack was decisive, the war party
conducted a short dance to mark the victory in a display of
power, resembling a dance performed before setting out for
battle (Wallace 1949:9).
In the 19th century there were a few notable wars between
tribal groups. One involved a Hupa attack on a Karuk village
at the mouth of the Salmon River, after a Karuk man had
killed a Hupa man and refused to make settlement (Wallace
1949:10). Another major conflict began sometime around the
1830s, when a war between the Yurok and Hupa broke out
due to a dispute, the nature of which contained conflicting
accounts. One account states the feud started after a Yurok
woman in the village of Requa was killed by Hupa from the
village of Takmildin due to allegations that she was using
sorcery to block salmon from swimming up the Klamath River
into Hupa territory (Nelson 1988:27). A conflicting account
states that the feud started after some Yurok men from the
villages at Weitchpec were attacked while visiting the Hoopa
Valley, and during the retaliation that ensued, a prominent
Yurok woman was killed and her relatives from the Yurok
village of Requa became angered (Kroeber 1976:50). While
the exact cause of the war is unclear, it is known that the
villages of Requa and Takmildin were the principle players,
and most accounts suggest that following the opening of
hostilities, Takmildin was attacked before Requa.
A war party of about 85 people, including Yurok from Requa
and hired men from the Tolowa tribe in the north, retaliated
for the death of this woman by attacking the Hupa village of
Takmildin. In the attack they killed many people, stole
property, and destroyed much of the village by fire. In
response, six months later the Hupa launched a war party of
about 100 people, including Hupa women, and hired men
mustered from the Chilula, Redwood Creek Whilkut, South
Fork Hupa, and Chimariko. Requa was located far
downstream on the coast, near the mouth of the Klamath
River. Half of the war party went overland, while the other
half went by canoe down the Trinity River. The party
traveling by boat had to pass through a great deal of Yurok
territory, so they travelled clandestinely and brought along a
woman who knew a “bad” medicine song that lulled the Yurok
to sleep as they passed (Sapir 2001:515). Once they reached
Requa, they surrounded the village at dawn and attacked,
killing almost everyone there, burning the village, and
collecting valuables (Nelson 1988:27). There was one
headman at Requa the Hupa especially sought after, and after
searching the village he was found and killed (Wallace
1948:351). One account states that one Yurok survivor of the
attack travelled up the coast and told their Tolowa allies what
had occurred, to which they said “that will teach you to make
war on the Hupa” (Wallace 1948:352).
42
Blood feuds and wars such as this were rare, and typically
only erupted when there was no will or means to resolve the
conflict. Most feuds were regarded as something to be
avoided, and were eventually settled. Since all injuries were
compensable, if a feud arose, the parties involved would do so
knowing that they would incur heavy financial drain. Getting
involved in an extensive fight could mean bankruptcy, even
for wealthy families. Even during fights, care was taken to
avoid unnecessary killing, destruction, or stealing since
payment for these actions would be required, regardless of
who was initially at fault for the feud. Again, the higher the
status of the individual injured, the greater the payment that
would need to be made. In total, the greater financial burden
typically bore on the winner (Kroeber 1976:49). Aside from
the financial pressure to end the conflict, there was a social
and religious pressure as well, since the World Renewal
Dances, that healed the world, could not be held until the
conflict was resolved.
To end hostilities, a settlement had to be negotiated and a
formal event held to ratify the peace. A neutral arbiter was
solicited by one of the opposing sides that was considered a
good negotiator and not involved in the conflict (Wallace
1949:11). Settlements accounted for all injuries and damages
incurred during the conflict. Every man hurt or killed was to
be paid their value, all captives were to be returned, destroyed
property compensated for, and stolen items returned
(Kroeber 1976:49). The total payment needed to end
hostilities was negotiated between both sides by the arbiter,
who often sought to have the sides relinquish some of their
claims. Once a settlement was agreed upon, both sides paid
the amount they each owed, rather than only the side that
owed the most paying the difference between the two amounts
(Kroeber 1976:49).
An event that resembled the White Deerskin Dance was held
to formally exchange the payments, often referred to as a
“War Dance.” A religious leader organized the event due to
the severity of the conflict, and lack of other political means
for bringing an end to the strife and imbalance. Religious
leaders were of an elite rank in Hupa society that headed
ceremonies and came from the principal religious and
political villages of the Valley: Takmildin and Medildin, of
which the preeminent was Takmildin (Davis 1988:121). The
authority of religious leaders differed from the political
leadership, and was supreme when it came to the organization
of dances (Powers 1877:74). Concerned with the spiritual
wellbeing of the people, religious leaders held a higher
authority which could influence feuding groups and political
leaders to settle their differences, where no other political
figure had overarching authority or an objective position from
which to intervene.
At the event, the opposing parties would meet in an open area
and dance in parallel lines facing one another about 100 yards
apart (Nelson 1988:28). Carrying their weapons, the dancers
would taunt each other by casting forward their bows and
weapons, and would sing medicine songs and prayers while
they got closer. Should anyone try to start a fight, the women
43
present would intervene and knock the weapons out of their
hands (Wallace 1949:11). At the dance, the wealth items that
were being exchanged would be “cooked” by briefly passing
them through the smoke of a central fire containing sacred
incense (Angelica californica). This act was to cleanse the
items of any ill will. Once the transaction was complete, the
two sides would retreat to separate camps at a distance from
one another, and a feast was held. The acceptance of the
settlement was regarded as a final resolution to the matter.
All hostilities were to cease, no grudges were to be held, and
the matter was not to be publicly argued or re-litigated.
Raising the matter at a later date was considered a new
offense.
Social Order and Conflict Resolution
The Hupa tort system furnished legal and social order. Even
though they had no pre-contact tribal-wide political authority,
such as a chief, they were not anarchistic as suggested by
Kroeber (1976:38). Rather, Hupa legal and social order was
derived from the law, and was culturally shared with
neighboring tribes. Women also had rights to make claims
under the law. This delineation in Hupa society between
politics and law is important. In traditional Hupa culture,
political institutions did not establish or enforce laws, but
rather meetings of leaders (aristocrats, religious leaders,
headmen elders, etc.) acted as forums for collective decision
making where public affairs and policy were negotiated.
Examples of this can be seen in the intertribal organization of
annual fish dams, or the resolution of intertribal warfare.
Moreover, due to the nature of tort law, anyone with a claim
could exercise jurisdiction. However, the ability to enforce
the law was not consistent everywhere, since brokering
settlements depended heavily on the size of the group,
political will, wealth, and subsequent power of the kin groups
involved (Wallace 1978:169). However, culturally shared laws
governed life, and the financial and social risk associated with
crimes was often effective in mitigating conflict.
The Hupa tort system was intrinsically linked to their culture
of “wealth” as a medium for power. Wealth was not simply
defined by the abstract material value of the item or property,
and included the spiritual value of how the wealth was
obtained. The belief was held that the acquisition of anything
worthwhile in life could only come through good deeds,
reverence, good intentions, and humility (Spott and Kroeber
1942:144). Wealth could be “clean” or “unclean” based on
how it was obtained. A woodpecker scalp that was stolen or
gained through gambling was considered unclean. Whereas, a
woodpecker scalp obtained through “good luck,” was
considered clean when obtained after saying the right prayers
and preparing oneself spiritually to receive it.
While from an outside perspective wealth items, such as
dentalium shell money, could be compared to modern
currency, in traditional Hupa culture wealth items were
considered conscious entities and products of the divine
44
(Keeling 1992:61). Hence, wealth items being exchanged at
War Dances as part of the settlement were “cooked” over
incense smoke to exorcise any ill will that may have been
stored within them. A person could better his or her fortunes
or status in life, through luck obtained via piety and good
deeds. A man did not catch a deer merely because he was a
good hunter, but the deer gave themselves to the hunter as a
reward for their spiritual purity. Furthermore, freely giving
away fish would bring you good luck. The spirit of wealth
showed the religious qualities and cycles of reciprocity
associated with it.
Hupa families of high status were considered to be in good
favor with the gods, and carried responsibilities for good of all
people. In addition to headmen, the Hupa aristocracy also
included elite religious leaders, Indian Doctors, calendar
keepers, and others with special roles/training. The
reputations of these aristocratic families were tied to how they
maintained their wealth, and their reputation affected their
overall status and the strength of their dynasties. Some elite
families were revered and held long generational dynasties of
political and religious leaders, both of which were influential
roles. Conversely, some families were feared and thought to
have obtained their fortunes through sorcery or through
unclean methods.
Wealth was not only spiritually significant, but was the
primary medium from which legal power could be derived.
The wealth of a family was intrinsic to other social facets such
as reputation, status, and allegiances, and determined their
power (ability to impose their will socially and politically).
For example, power was reflected in: the ability to persuade
someone to settle a conflict; the ability to organize a War
Dance; and the ability to hire and deploy warriors.
When headmen travelled to other villages or tribes for feasts
and ceremonies, they would often display their wealth items
in transit. This acted as a warning to those who might
consider attacking his corporate group, since the headman
and his rich family could in return demand a huge material
settlement in order to resolve the hostilities that would ensue
(Davis 1988:274). Greater wealth increased the ability of a
headman or corporate group to exercise the law, extending
their power and status.
Tribes in the region used wealth to exercise political power as
a means of securing their holdings, and influencing other
tribes, and the Hupa were regarded as a rich and powerful
tribe. The influence of Hupa power over their neighbors
created allegiances and payments of tribute into the Hoopa
Valley. This power in the intertribal relations was relative to
their accumulated wealth and capacity for physical force
(Powers 1877:73). These alliances would be summoned in
times of conflict as opposing forces gathered, and the
existence of such alliances demonstrated a threat of force that
acted to intimidate potential intertribal foes.
Consistent allies of the Hupa living in the Hoopa Valley were
part of a confederation of culturally related tribes speaking a
common language (Davis 1989:371). These culturally related
45
groups were the Chilula (Redwood Creek Hupa), South Fork
Hupa, and groups living in tribally mixed and bilingual HupaChimariko villages undergoing cultural transition, near South
Fork Hupa territory and a few sites along New River on the
eastern boundary of the Hupa homeland. Allied warriors
were a part of the 1830s raid against Requa, and would later
join in the conflicts during the U.S. invasion. This alliance of
Hupa (those living in the Valley), Chilula, South Fork Hupa,
and Hupa-Chimariko hereafter will be referred to as the Hupa
Confederacy.
Payment and conflict resolution extended beyond torts, and
were an important aspect of social and religious life for the
Hupa. Torts in Hupa law were one facet of the interrelated
cultural systems of wealth, status, power, and reciprocity. For
example, when the annual fish dam was built all outstanding
debts payments had to be paid, including those due payments
as the result of offenses or minor insults (Davis 1988:170).
This deadline to make payments held a religious significance
as well, since it immediately preceded the start of the World
Renewal dance cycles. There was a religious pressure to
resolve feuds and standing conflicts, since the World Renewal
dances could not be held in the Hoopa Valley if there was
active rancor amongst the people. Hupa religious leaders
(priests) maintained different roles than political leaders
(headmen), focusing on the cycles, rites, and responsibilities
of the World Renewal religion, along with a cadre of
dancemakers, singers, Indian doctors, regalia craftsmen and
others with special religious training. The dances were
intended to renew the world for the welfare of all people, to
cast out sickness from the world, and to call back and give
thanks to the Immortals. Open conflict was incongruent with
the spirit of these dances, and could actually invite sickness
and ill will into the world if present. The dances acted as a
time of social renewal, where the whole tribe, and visitors
from neighboring tribes, joined together. Hupa religious
leaders exercised their roles in close proximity to political
leaders, often coming from the same elite aristocratic families
as political leaders, and held a preeminent authority on
religious matters.
Shares of fish caught on personally owned fishing grounds
were often distributed on a social schedule (Davis 1988:197).
This social schedule of giving fish went in order of priority: to
Elders who could not fish (which also acted as tribute to the
local headman who needed a large supply of fish for
redistribution to the elderly), to satisfying social obligations at
ceremonies, marriages, conflict negotiations, village or family
payments, and hospitality (Davis 1988:197). In times of
scarcity, headmen would give food to villagers in need
(Kroeber 1976:133). Moreover, there was a distribution of fish
from the communal dam that was constructed annually.
Regardless of status or wealth, all Hupa were entitled to a
share of the fish caught at the communal dam (Davis
1988:170). Everyone participated in the construction and use
of the fish-dam. It was considered a public resource to ensure
the well being of people through the winter months, and
ensured people of lower status, without claims to private
46
fishing grounds, received some share of the bounty (Davis
1988:170). The communal organization and construction of
fish dams required contributions of supplies and labor, which
in turn furthered cycles of reciprocity and built social
relationships. This was but one example of communal action.
47
C HAPTER 3
Historical
Trajectory of
The Treaty of
1864
C HAPTER C ONTENTS
1. A Fork in the Trail of Hupa History
2. Antecedents: Early Contacts, the Gold Rush, &
The Treaty of 1851
3. The Red Caps War of 1855
4. The Bald Hills War, 1858 to 1859
5. Rising Tensions & Hupa Proxy Wars
6. The Two Years War: Rebellion in the Hupa
Homeland, 1863 to 1864
7. The Treaty of 1864
S ECTION 1
A Fork in the Trail of Hupa
History
Starting in 1848, life for the Hupa began to change rapidly, as
the California Gold Rush began to render dire impacts on the
landscape and people. The conflicts that erupted were violent,
and left many tribes decimated or completely vanquished. In
the defense of their kin and homeland, tribes followed
different paths in their response to the specific challenges they
faced. The Hupa response culturally adapted to new
challenges as history unfolded, taking different strategic
approaches over time as conditions changed. However, the
consistent focus was culturally rooted in preserving their
homeland through the adjudication of Hupa law, adaptively
applied to the foreign invaders they faced. Ultimately, the
Hupa were successful in achieving their goal.
The signing of the Treaty of 1864 between the Hupa and their
allies, and the U.S. Government on August 21, 1864 was a
victory for the Hupa, and brought closure to the Bald Hills
War, and climactic Two Years War (1863-1864). After years
of guerrilla warfare against settlers and U.S. soldiers, the
terms of the treaty amounted to a successful outcome for the
Hupa. The Hoopa Valley Reservation was set aside, and those
who had participated in the conflict were to be given amnesty.
Sec. 1. The United States government… by these presents
doth agree and obligate itself to set aside for reservation
purposes for the sole use and benefit of the tribes of
Indians herein named… the whole of Hoopa valley...
Sec. 2. Said reservation shall include a sufficient area of
the mountains on each side of the Trinity River as shall be
necessary for hunting grounds, gathering berries, seeds,
etc…
Sec. 3. All Indians who have taken part in the war waged
against the Whites in this district for the past five years
shall be forgiven and entitled to the same protection as
those who have not been so engaged…
Excerpts from The Treaty of 1864 (see Appendix 1)
The treaty would signal the end to sixteen years of active
warfare that started with the Gold Rush, and would usher in a
new era of reservation life for the Hupa. This outcome for the
Hupa was the culmination of efforts, both peaceful and
militant, to resist threats to their people, homeland, and
sovereignty. The background of this conflict and how it
unfolded shows the focus given to preserving their homeland,
and the application of traditional modes of conflict resolution,
and how these cultural concepts adapted to meet these new
challenges and influence the outcome of historic events
49
S ECTION 2
Antecedents: Early
Contacts, the Gold Rush,
and the Treaty of 1851
While much of the North America had already been impacted
by colonialism and the push of Manifest Destiny, the Hupa
did not have any contact with Whites until 1828. The position
of the Hoopa Valley in relation to the coast and the coastal
mountain range had secluded them from the Spanish Mission
system, and subsequent explorers and settlers (Goddard 1903:
8-11). Previously the Hupa had heard accounts of strangers in
the region from neighboring tribes. Starting as early as 1775
and 1793, European ships harboring in Trinidad Bay had
contacts and conflicts with Yurok, near the village of Tsurai,
located about 30 miles due west from the Hoopa Valley
(Hezier & Mills 1952:73). When an American fur-trapper
expedition, led by Jedediah Smith, brought a pack-train of
horses through the Hoopa Valley on April 26, 1828, Hupa
men approached them without hesitation (Davis: 1989:382).
Smith and his party stayed without conflict for three days, and
did some trading with the Hupa they met before heading
northwest along the Klamath (Goddard 1904:201). The Hupa
reacted peacefully to these transients, and did not encounter
any more Whites for several years (Nelson 1988: 38).
From 1828 to 1848, most of the settlers in the region
preferred the Sacramento River as a means of traveling north,
thus initially shielding the Hupa from the devastation that
many other tribes encountered to the east (Nelson 1988:
37-38). During this early period, the Hupa had very few
scattered contacts with fur trappers entering the Valley.
Starting in 1848, the Gold Rush would permanently impact
the cultures of the region and bring violence to all. There
were reports of gold found on the Upper Fork of the Trinity
River in 1849, and at that time it was erroneously believed by
explorers that the Trinity flowed all the way to the Pacific
Coast, at Trinidad Bay. In fact Trinidad Bay was given its
name for this reason, even though in reality the Trinity turns
north, flowing through the Hoopa Valley to join the Klamath
River.
In November 1849, a party of prospectors (the Gregg Party)
travelled down the Upper Trinity River, believing they would
eventually reach Trinidad Bay. When the party reached the
Upper Trinity’s confluence with the South Fork of the Trinity
River, they crossed the river, ascended the bank, and
unexpectedly came upon the South Fork Hupa village of
Leldin (Bledsoe 1885:34). The next day a group of 75 to 80
warriors approached the prospector’s camp, warning them
that their tribe was numerous and powerful (Bledsoe
1885:34). The South Fork Hupa delegation also advised them
50
not to continue further down the Trinity, in order to avoid
conflict with the villages along the way, and instead continue
west over the mountains if they wanted to reach Trinidad Bay.
Most of the Gregg Party survived their harrowing journey,
barely making it back to the Sacramento Valley in February
1850. However, their description of the coastal region
spurred many settlers and prospectors to travel up the coast
and lay claims, almost immediately establishing towns in both
Trinidad Bay and Humboldt Bay in April 1850.
During this time, many of the settlers who came into the
region carried with them preconceived notions of Indian
culture and character. An editorial published in the
California Star, January 15, 1848 stated:
Indians, and particularly those in California, are,
as we all know, mentally, and morally, an inferior
order of our race; are unfit and incapable of being
associated with whites on any terms equally, or of
being governed by the same laws, and if retained
among us, must necessarily have a code and
treatment applicable to their peculiar character
and condition. Were it possible to have all masters
just, mild, and good, I would– I say it for the
benefit of the Indians themselves– make slaves of
them. But since this cannot be so… I would
suggest the propriety of some sort of an apprentice
system being established, and Indians prohibited
from passing through the inhabited parts of the
country without passes.
On, April 22, 1850, the new California legislature enacted “An
Act for the Government and Protection of Indians” (Heizer
1971:39). This law essentially allowed for the slavery of
California Indians, and created an economy of kidnapping
and forced labor (Heizer 1971:40). During the thirteen official
years of this law, thousands of people were forced into labor
or servitude. Moreover, under California law, there existed no
legal means for Indians to charge a White with a crime.
The loss of life and methods used during the Gold Rush
constituted genocide against the tribes of Northwestern
California (Norton 1978:138). It is estimated that between
1848 and 1852 the Indian population of California dropped by
at least 10,000, and the Hupa saw their population drop by at
least 10% in those four years; and by 1880, California’s Indian
population would be reduced by around 80% (Cook 1976:351).
The exploitation of land and people disrupted tribal life, and
created cycles of violence and revenge (Nelson 1988:45).
Many of the volunteer militia and vigilante attacks against
California Indians aimed to remove them from their land,
gain political points, and for financial gain.
Between 1851 and 1857, the State of California issued millions
of dollars in bonds, that essentially acted as bounties for the
“suppression of Indian hostilities,” creating an economic
incentive towards the violence (Castillo 1978:108). Contrary
to Federal Indian policy that aimed to sequester tribes, in a
message to the State Legislature in 1851, the Governor of
51
California stated that “a war of extermination [would]
continue to be waged between the races until the Indian race
[became] extinct [and was] the inevitable destiny of the race
beyond the power or wisdom of man to avert” (Castillo
1978:109).
In 1850, thousands of miners began to descend upon the
Northwestern California region. During this time, the
conflicts that surfaced between white settlers and the tribes of
the region were numerous. In just this first year of
colonization in the region, 1850, miners attacked at least one
native villages belonging to all of the tribes neighboring Hupa
territory: the Chilula, Redwood Creek Whilkut, Nongatl,
Chimariko, Wintu, Shasta, Yurok, and Karuk. The Hupa were
encircled by the violence.
For example, after a few early encounters with while traveling
through the region, miners began encroaching upon the South
Fork Hupa (an upstream tribe related to the Hupa). About 30
miles southeast of the Hoopa Valley, just beyond the edge of
South Fork Hupa territory and mixed Hupa-Chimariko
villages near Ironside Mountain, was the Chimariko village of
Cutamtace. In 1850 Cutamtace was attacked by miners and
burned down, killing fourteen people. The attack, on what
was later renamed “Burnt Ranch,” was perpetrated by a party
of French Canadian gold miners retaliating for the alleged
theft of horses and mules (Anderson 1956:24).
The miners that came through the Hoopa Valley in search of
gold never found any significant deposits, and overt violence
was initially kept away. Still, refugees fleeing the violence
with kinship ties to the Hupa gave accounts of the atrocities
committed by Whites: killing indiscriminately, burning
villages, and seizing lands. The Hupa were stunned by the
actions of these strangers, and lack of compensation for the
crimes they committed (Nelson 1988: 45). Whites were now
seen as a new unorthodox and untrustworthy invader, and
many Hupa took caution when dealing with Whites.
In addition to the violence, starvation became a concern for
tribes during the Gold Rush. Staple fisheries were being
ruined as mining operations began polluting rivers with
runoff, and destroying riverbeds used as spawning grounds by
fish. The stress this caused the tribes was worsened by the
social disruption of harvest cycles caused by fighting,
displacement, disease, and the introduction of more lethal
weaponry. Worse still, when a village was burned and their
food stores destroyed, the impact on survival was severe.
In July 1851, a conflict broke out between the Yuroks and
Whites near the Klamath-Trinity junction after five Whites
were killed by a group of Yuroks downriver at a ferry crossing
(near the contemporary site of Martin’s Ferry). The Yurok
argued that the responsibility for the attack belonged to the
Whites, as they had killed some Yurok people and had
prevented the local Yurok from building their annual fish
dam. In retaliation for the five dead Whites, a volunteer
company of armed men was raised, and hurried east along the
Trinidad Trail. The company attacked and burned several
Yurok villages, including Kepel, and a cluster of three Yurok
52
villages at the Klamath-Trinity junction, collectively referred
to as Weitchpec (Wekpus, Ertlerger, and Pactah).
Furthermore, following the attack those remaining at
Weitchpec were prevented from building a fish dam
(Anderson 1958:26).
In the few years following the discovery of gold, conflicts had
become so serious that by presidential act, three
commissioners were sent from Washington D.C. to try and
make treaties (Heizer 1971: 68). The government solution
used in the rest of the U.S. was to move the Indians westward
and onto unwanted lands. In California, implementing such
policies was not possible. The Treaty Commission held that,
unlike past Indian policy, since there was no land further west
to relocate tribes to, some fraction of land would have to be
set aside (Alta California 1851:2)
Commissioner Redick McKee toured the Northern California,
drafting treaties to try and end the violence, and set up
reservations on U.S. terms. In October 1851, McKee held a
treaty council at the confluence of the Trinity and Klamath
rivers near Weitchpec. The Yurok and Karuk leaders present
advised McKee that the Hupa should be invited as well, as
they were regarded as another powerful and influential tribe
in the area, vital to the establishment of peace (Nelson 1988:
49). Based on their reputation, McKee considered the
participation of the Hupa highly important and encouraging
in securing peace in the area (Anderson 1956:47). McKee
noted that the Hupa recognized no superiors and exercised
some influence over the smaller tribes neighboring them
(indirectly referring to groups of Chilula, Whilkut, and South
Fork Hupa).
McKee’s intention was primarily to halt the violence between
Whites and Indians, so colonization could unfold.
Secondarily, his intention was to establish terms towards
“domesticating” the tribes by breaking down the power and
influence of “petty chiefs,” replacing them with a single leader
the U.S. could control (Heizer 1972:144). Moreover, the
commission assessed the need of a military presence, and a
fort in the Hoopa Valley was suggested.
The headmen representing their groups at the negotiations
listed their grievances, relating to murders and destroyed
villages, and demanded they be compensated. In one
instance, during the treaty negotiations with Yurok leaders
present it was noted that a Yurok headman displayed a bone
marked on one edge with twenty-six notches, being the
number of white men killed; while the other side had twentyseven notches, being the number of Yurok men killed (Heizer
1972:145). As compensation for this imbalance, the U.S.
commission offered sixteen pairs of blankets, and four-dozen
axes to persuade the Yurok to sign.
To appease tribal leaders, the 1851 treaty intended to pay
Indians for damages caused by the Whites. Moreover, the
U.S. officials requested in return, that the tribal leaders
present work to influence their own tribes, and neighboring
“Redwood and Bald Hill Indians” (Whilkut and Chilula) in
being friendly towards settlers (McKee 1851:136). These
53
additional payments would never come nor would the violent
intrusions cease. McKee implored the settlers to help uphold
the treaty provisions so as to build trust, but conflicts
returned. These treaties were left un-ratified by the U.S.
Congress, due to complaints from Californian power brokers
arguing that the treaties ceded too much to Indians (Nelson
1988:55). The size of the proposed reservation in this area
was likely more generous, because, as noted by expedition’s
interpreter, George Gibbs, the amount of gold available was
richer upriver from the proposed boundaries, and there was
little arable land in the area (Heizer 1972:138). Moreover,
they had intended to relocate Indians from surrounding tribes
into a new consolidated reservation.
Since they had no time to conduct a specific survey, the land
that was to be set aside for the reservation to generally include
lands running from the ridge above Martin’s Ferry due west to
Red Cap’s Bar, then about 20 miles south to Tish-Tang Point,
then about 12 miles west to a point due south of Pine Creek,
and then north along Pine Creek back to Martin’s Ferry.
While this reservation would have included lands belonging to
the Yurok villages of Kenek, Weitchpec, and Otsepor, and the
Karuk village of Wopum; it also included the primary lands
belonging to the Hupa and their villages in the Hoopa Valley.
The Yurok at Weitchpec provided details of the course of the
Trinity River and layout of Hupa villages along the Hoopa
Valley upriver to its junction with the South Fork Trinity
River, last noting the South Fork Hupa village of Leldin.
It is unknown whether or not the specific terms and
implications of this treaty were accurately explained or
understood by the Hupa, Yurok and Karuk representatives
that participated in the treaty-making, nor that the U.S.
intended to relocate people from neighboring tribes onto this
reservation at a later date. The Hupa delegation was likely
satisfied at first with the land arrangement, as it was to
guarantee a great deal of their prime territory, including all of
the Hoopa Valley (Anderson 1956:51). The Yurok leaders in
attendance represented only the villages in the vicinity of the
Klamath-Trinity junction, and therefore were likely agreeable
to the land arrangement. However, none of the 1851 treaties
from California would be ratified by the U.S. Congress, and
were rejected during a secret session on June 8, 1852.
Regardless, the Treaty of 1851 did not stop the processes of
colonization unfolding around the Hupa. The treaty
commissioners acknowledged that the cause of violence in the
region was owed much to the Whites moving in the area,
hoping to establish terms that would separate the opposing
factions (Nelson 1988: 50). Despite this, the commissioners
could do little to alter the intentions of settlers or get them to
accept indigenous customs and land rights. Thus the violence
and destruction would continue in the region.
54
S ECTION 3
The Red Caps War of 1855
Between 1852 and 1854 there were no major outbreaks of
violence in the Hupa homeland. Even a handful of white
settlers, led by a man named Captain David Snyder, had been
able to take up residence in the Hoopa Valley after persuading
the Hupa they were harmless. However, the steady
encroachment of settlers and miners in the region continued
to cause problems, and conflicts continued to gradually
percolate around the Hupa homeland.
The Hupa and their neighbors correctly recognized that these
invaders were responsible for the ecological disruption and
disease. Initially, the Whites were seen as an invading tribe of
foreigners. Hupa leaders would later reveal that they believed
with the concerted efforts of neighboring tribes, the Whites
could be expelled from the Hupa homeland.
Whites were held to the same expectations of compensation
under the law and threat of blood revenge. However, Whites
would not negotiate and easily reacted with lethal violence.
None of the factors that had helped to keep peace in the land
seemed to have any meaning to these warring invaders, and
created cycles of violence (Nelson 1988:45). New strategies
would have to be adapted to counter the invasion.
Tensions and mistrust had continued to build between the
Whites and Indians in the Klamath-Trinity region. The terms
of the Treaty of 1851 were not accurately communicated to
those who had signed it, and moreover, the promises made by
McKee were not coming to fruition. The breaking point would
come after the State of California passed a law in 1854
prohibiting the sale of firearms or ammunition to Indians.
In January 1855 a group of Whites settled in Orleans Bar
(located upriver on the Klamath River about 15 miles from the
Trinity junction) held a mass meeting. There, they decided to
enforce this law as a means of neutralizing the threat they
perceived from the local tribes. They vowed to punish any
White man caught selling such contraband, and decided to
begin by seizing any guns possessed at the Karuk villages near
Orleans (such as Wopum, Sahwuram, and Panamenik). The
local Karuk headmen were warned that they would have to
surrender their weapons or face attack, and word spread of
the ultimatum to disarm. Some Karuk people reluctantly
complied with the demands out of fear for their lives, while
others fled to the hills due to their mistrust. When a company
of miners attempted to disarm one village, the Karuk instead
opened fire, killing some Whites.
This event would begin the conflict known as the Red Cap
War. A resistance group comprised initially of local Karuk
quickly emerged. This insurgency formed around the Karuk
village of Wopum, which the Whites called Red Cap Bar after
an influential Karuk leader and aristocrat of the village who
55
wore a red hat. As a result, the participants of this resistance
group were referred to as “the Red Caps.”
The conflict quickly grew when a group of miners exacted
revenge against the Karuk villagers who had stayed behind in
peace, and then intended to begin attacking every village in
the area. Several skirmishes occurred around Orleans, and
hostilities opened up to the west of the Hupa homeland,
including the Chilula on Redwood Creek, and Whilkut near
the Mad River (Bledsoe 1885:85). U.S. soldiers had to be
dispatched to prevent the miners from attacking peaceful
villages as they sought to ethnically cleanse the Klamath
River. What had started in one cluster of Karuk villages
spread further downriver into Yurok lands, with conflicts to
the west.
The Red Caps used guerrilla warfare tactics to combat their
foes. In one instance, Yurok guides claiming to offer
assistance to U.S. troops hunting the Red Caps near the Yurok
village of Kepel, instead led the troops into an ambush. By
March 1855, the Red Cap’s tactics were showing to be
effective, however it was also inciting a great deal of violence
and bringing more U.S. troops into the region. Miners were
away from their digs, participating in the conflict, and many
of the pack-trains along the Trinidad Trail were being
attacked.
At one point, a delegation of Hupa offered to assist the U.S.
troops in getting the Red Caps to end their hostilities if the
Whites would protect their homes and property in the Hoopa
Valley while they were away. However, this would never
happen since the Whites settled in the Hoopa Valley warned
that if they left the valley they would likely never be allowed to
return home (Bledsoe 1885:89). The rationale for this offer
from the Hupa delegation was unclear, but likely influences
were: the impacts of the war on their homeland, the increased
military presence along the Trinidad Trail near the northwest
boundary of the Hupa territory, and the desire to settle the
conflict on amicable terms before it spread further. It was
noted that during the conflict the Hupa had used their
influence to keep the conflict from opening further into the
region (Anderson 1956:87).
Eventually, the momentum of this uprising was diminished by
the reduction of resources and men to intervene. The
presence of U.S. troops was meant to quell the violence from
spreading and prevent the miners and local volunteer militias
from massacring innocent or peaceful Indians. Yurok from
coastal villages downstream on the Klamath River met with
the U.S. commanders and provided some assistance in
helping end the hostilities. To try and prevent future conflicts
between the tribes and Whites, it was decided that a
reservation on the Klamath River near the coast would be
established, and the different tribes from the region relocated
there. By June 1855, the Red Caps War was over, and on
November 16, 1855 the Klamath River Reservation was
created by Executive Order.
56
S ECTION 4
The Bald Hills War, 1858 to
1859
The end of the 1855 Red Cap War did not serve to lessen the
tensions in the region. While there was some measure of
peace between the few settlers in the Hoopa Valley, the Hupa
had been rebuilding their strength with the greater acquisition
of guns. In 1856 when the Hupa learned of the intention to
relocate them to the Klamath River Reservation they told
officials that if the U.S. attempted to move them by force,
there would be consequences. Since there were not enough
U.S. troops in the region to move them by force, the idea was
tabled. A settler in the Hoopa Valley, Captain Snyder,
attempted to calm the tensions and was assured by the local
Hupa that they had no intention of starting violence in the
Valley (Nelson 1988:65). Conversely, the Hupa had been
working to gain their strength and were thought to be
preparing for hostilities.
Photo 8: Bald Hills view south, photo by Goddard, P., California
Ethnographic Field Photographs (15-3292). Phoebe A. Hearst Museum
of Anthropology and Regents of the University of California.
In 1856, cattle were brought into the Redwood Creek area of
the Bald Hills to the west of the Hupa (see Photo 6 above) and
further south towards the Mad River. The intrusion of these
cattle caused the Chilula, and Redwood Creek Whilkut to take
action, and many cows were driven off or killed and butchered
for food when possible to supplement lost food. In retaliation,
the White livestock owners attacked Chilula and Redwood
57
Creek Whilkut camps they suspected of being responsible.
Moreover, ranchers were frustrated that the local natives
occasionally burned grasses in prairies the settlers had hoped
to graze their livestock in. Setting fire to prairies was an
indigenous mode of fire management that renewed the
prairies for the grazing of game and collection of foods and
basketry materials.
As tensions rose, there was a general call from the settlers to
U.S. officials demanding the relocate the Chilula and Whilkut
(North Fork Whilkut, Mad River Whilkut, and Redwood
Creek Whilkut) to a reservation (Anderson 1956:92).
Countless articles can be found in the Humboldt Times from
this era expressing frustration with the tribes of the region,
and making calls to remove them. One editorial stated, “… it
is too much of a tax on our people to be compelled to hunt
these diggers and chastise them for repeated depredations… it
makes little difference to our people which department of the
Government has performed its duty [but] little has been done,
so far, to rid the country… of these treacherous
natives…” (Humboldt Times 1857:1)
Due to a harsh winter, 1857 was a generally free of overt
conflicts. However, by March 1858, clandestine attacks
against Whites transiting the area began to occur, and
volunteer companies/militias that sought to retaliate against
the Chilula and Whilkut were met with stiff resistance.
Soldiers were posted along Redwood Creek and the Trinity
Trail (running from Arcata to Willow Creek) in an attempt to
protect pack-trains and establish a local military presence to
quell hostilities between Whites and Indians. The location of
the post was strategically important because, it was at a
midpoint along the supply trail. This was also the general
intertribal transitional zone of the Chilula, Whilkut, and Hupa
territories, with Chilula villages immediately downstream,
and Whilkut villages upstream.
These attacks brought greater volume to the calls from the
settlers in the region to eliminate all the tribes of the region,
and preparations were being made to do exactly that (Bledsoe
1885:135-136). Since there were limited amounts of troops to
intervene in the violence, volunteer militias were being
formed across the region with the intention of eliminating
tribes.
During that time, the opinion amongst White settlers was that
the Hupa were not only militarily powerful, but also held
influence over the neighboring tribes. The Hupa were also
suspected of being directly involved in some of the attacks
against Whites, and were suspected of giving support to their
tribal allies. The Chilula, South Fork Hupa, and to a lesser
extent, the Redwood Creek Whilkut, were historical allies and
spoke similar dialects, and shared cultural similarities. The
Chilula were even allowed to witness the World Renewal
Dances held in the Hoopa Valley (Kroeber 1972:141). They
were part of the Hupa Confederacy, with the Hupa living in
the Valley with concentrated power.
Captain Snyder saw the escalating conflict, and left the Hoopa
Valley to travel to San Francisco in early October. Snyder was
58
to help lobby for the establishment of a military presence to
stave off the violence around the Hupa territory (and likely
help protect his interests in the Valley by seeking the
relocation of the Hupa to a reservation). In consultation with
U.S. officials, Captain Snyder brought with him a Hupa
headman from the village of Medildin known as Captain John,
and a party of other local natives to show them the population
and resources of the Whites in San Francisco (Humboldt
Times 1858:2). Medildin was the principal village and
religious center for the upriver ceremonial sub-district of the
Hoopa Valley. Captain John had been a regular intermediary
with the settlers living in the Valley, and Snyder hoped to
dissuade him, and indirectly other Hupa leaders, from joining
the impending conflict.
The account of Captain John’s visit to San Francisco was
reported in the San Francisco Herald October 16, 1858:
For several days past out city has been honored by
the presence of the most distinguished warrior and
sachem of Northern California… Chief of the Hoopa
Valley tribe… No chief among the tribes of Northern
California exercises anything like the influence and
power wielded [by him]. … Owing to his vast
influence, the Indian Agent Major Heintzleman
wisely adopted the policy of bringing him to San
Francisco… to give him some clear idea of the
numbers, wealth, and power of whites and also that
he might have an interview with Col. Henley and
Gov. Weller for the purpose of coming to some
understanding by which to obviate any further
difficulties between his people and the whites… The
grim old sagamore [Captain John] could not control
his wonder when our city burst upon his sight as the
steamer rounded the point and he very anxiously
inquired ‘How long it took to build it’ expressing a
strong doubt of the statement when told that it had
all be done in ten years. He said that his people had
never seen many whites, and they believed our
numbers to be few, and thought that by killing five
or six at one time, and as many at another in a short
while they could have killed them all off. But he now
felt how greatly they had deceived themselves and
for his part he should tell all the tribes when he got
back.
Photo 9: White Deerskin Dance (Capt. John seated center), Hoopa,
1890s, photo by A.W. Ericson. Ericson Photo Collection, Humboldt
State University. Used with permission.
59
After describing a trip to the theater, the article goes on to
describe that: Captain John as a firm friend of the Whites who
used his influence to make peace; several years earlier a ranch
was burned, and Captain John went to the White owner and
inquired into all the facts, and put an end to the hostilities; all
the neighboring tribes are afraid of the Hupa; and that U.S.
troops could help keep the peace since Whites did not
discriminate between the Hupa and other tribes when
retaliating for attacks. (San Francisco Herald 1858:1)
The only known account of what Captain John relayed to the
Hupa upon his return was documented by the son of the
interpreter for the trip to San Francisco. The account states
that upon returning to the Hoopa Valley, Captain John told
the Hupa that they better not fight the Whites, and that to
illustrate how numerous the Whites were, he scooped up dry
sand from the Trinity’s riverbank and let it trickle through his
fingers (Anderson 1958:97-98). While the accuracy of the
exact details in this account are second hand, the core
message demonstrates an understanding of challenges the
Hupa faced, and which would augment their resistance
strategies and subsequent political negotiations.
Due to the amount of violence and relative success of the
native armed insurgency, during the Bald Hills War many
military forts and camps were strategically placed in the
region west of the Trinity River. On October 30, 1858 Fort
Gaston was established in the Hoopa Valley on the central
west bank of the river (see Photo 8 below). The fort was
initially a camp, founded after word came that a vigilante
militia from Weaverville was mustering to attack the Hoopa
Valley. The U.S. Military’s intention of the fort was to subdue
hostilities, and offer protection to Whites, and peaceful
Indians.
During this time, a volunteer militia company lead by Captain
Messec had been formed and begun a war against the tribes,
to drive them away from lands and interests held by the
settlers. Much of their initial activity was against the Whilkut,
Nongatl, and Chilula to the Southwest of the Hupa. Messec’s
strategy entailed pursuit and capture to lessen the ability of
the Indians he was pursuing to maintain supplies for the
winter.
In January 1859, the U.S. military sought to capitalize on the
winter conditions and sought assistance from Hupa leaders in
getting the hostile Chilula groups to sign a treaty (Bledsoe
1885:149). The military knew that the Hupa were allies of the
Chilula and assured the Hupa that if the Chilula surrendered
they would be well treated and much bloodshed would be
avoided. The Hupa leaders that agreed to assist in making the
peace, at first feigned sending a delegation to the Chilula.
When pressed again, they set out and were able to arrange a
modest surrender at Big Lagoon (near the mouth of Redwood
Creek). The military campaign continued during the winter,
and by March 1859 the military campaign was ended. During
the five-month campaign, approximately 300 Indians were
taken prisoner (many of whom many were not involved in the
fighting), and at least 100 others were killed.
60
Photo 10: Fort Gaston, Hoopa, 1890s, photo by A.W. Ericson
Ericson Photo Collection, Humboldt State University. Used with
permission.
61
S ECTION 5
Rising Tensions & Hupa
Proxy Wars
Many of the Chilula, Whilkut, and Nongatl captured during
the Bald Hills War were taken to the Fort Mendocino
Reservation far south, giving the settlers a wider berth to
claim lands west of the Hupa without stiff resistance.
However, many of those captured were able to escape the
reservation, and journeyed back to their homelands in the
Redwood Creek and Mad River region. In 1860, a small group
of Hupa participated as mercenaries in a war party of about
seventy Chilula and Whilkut, traveling far south to attack a
Lassik village. The attack was an act of revenge against the
Lassik for participating in the massacre a group of Chilula
traveling north after having escaped from Military custody
(Wallace 1949:10).
As the Chilula, Whilkut, and Nongatl returned from the Fort
Mendocino Reservation they found that more settlers and
livestock had moved into their homelands. Conflicts began to
reemerge, and vigilante groups formed to try and exterminate
the local Indians. These groups were locally organized to
attack the villages of tribal groups associated with raids, cattle
killing, and the deaths of Whites, even if in self-defense.
February 25, 1860 a secretive group of vigilantes, called The
League, committed the Indian Island Massacre near Eureka,
killing at least fifty-five innocent Wiyot men, women, and
children, attending religious ceremonies. The massacre was
coordinated with three other attacks in the region, resulting in
a total of 180 dead (Secrest 2003:329). Around this same
time, a member of The League named Hank Larabee
committed several other murderous attacks against the
Nongatl and Wiyot.
These acts of violence were well known to the Hupa, and
efforts were made when necessary to demonstrate their desire
to keep such violence out of their homeland. The public
image was that the Hupa living in the valley were peaceful and
did not want to get openly entangled in the wars unfolding
around them. The events that had elapsed since the Gold
Rush began taught the Hupa that open warfare would bring
them violence and displacement (Nelson 1988:69). However,
the new presence of Fort Gaston in the Hoopa Valley, growing
tensions, and Hupa covert support of native insurgency would
eventually lead to conflict in the Hoopa Valley.
The introduction of Fort Gaston created tensions due to the
proximity between the soldiers and the Hupa. The soldiers
were quick to overact when dealing with the Hupa, especially
since there were less than a hundred Whites in the Valley, and
a thousand Hupa. Two subsequent events occurred that
raised tensions between the Hupa and U.S. troops garrisoned
62
in the Valley, and would open a rift between Hupa villages.
First, in 1859 a Hupa woman from the village of Tsewenaldin
was physically attacked by soldiers, during which she
managed to kill one of them (Nelson 1988:74). Second, in
September 1860, a young Hupa man from Takmildin got into
a fight with two drunk men, a soldier and a civilian, over an
issue involving the treatment of Hupa women, and the Hupa
man was killed. A party of Hupa was able to capture the
civilian, and temporarily imprisoned him before he was
handed over to the military authorities. However, the civilian
and the soldier were acquitted because, there were no Whites
that would provide testimony against the two men, and
California law precluded the testimony of Indian witnesses
against Whites. The young man’s kin from Takmildin were
infuriated when the civilian was released, and sought to exact
blood revenge against the civilian, but he was able to escape
from to Arcata under the cover of darkness (Anderson
1958:124).
The young man’s kin from Takmildin turned their blame to
the Tsewenaldin family of the woman who had killed the
soldier in 1859, stating that they had started the whole trouble
with the Whites (Goddard 1903:10). Under Hupa law any
killing had to be compensated for, either by blood revenge or
payment, and the young man’s kin felt that his murder was an
indiscriminate act of blood revenge in response to the soldier
killed the year before (Wallace 1948:351).
A feud between these villages began, and those Hupa not
wishing to get involved, left the area. Fearing conflict between
the two villages and discontent towards the fort was leading to
a general uprising, on April 8, 1861 the Captain of Fort Gaston
demanded that Hupa leaders arrange for the surrender of all
guns possessed by the Hupa within four days (Anderson
1958:125-126). The Hupa leaders debated what action to take
in response to the ultimatum. There were about 1,000 Hupa
living in the Valley, and less than 100 Whites. Captain John,
who had visited San Francisco and was the preeminent leader
from Medildin, convinced some of them to surrender their
weapons rather than risk a confrontation with the soldiers.
When presenting the weapons, the Fort Captain noted that
Captain John stated, “he did not wish to fight [and] he wanted
to be buried where all his tribe were buried” (Anderson
1958:126). Those who did not want to give up their guns,
gathered supplies and left for camps in the mountains.
During the rest of 1861, guerrilla warfare against the settlers
and intervening soldiers erupted in the mountains between
the coast and the Trinity River. The frequency and
sophistication of the native insurgency had escalated. Settlers
were being attacked and killed, ranches were being burned,
and cattle set loose. There was a general lack of U.S. troop
reinforcements due to the escalation of the Civil War, and the
local settler population continued resorting to the formation
volunteer militia groups that indiscriminately attacked
Indians. The intensity of the warfare led to increased calls
from settlers to have the U.S. Government forcibly settle the
tribes onto reservations (Anderson 1958:135).
63
The winter of 1861-1862 was especially difficult due to
massive floods that occurred in Northern California. The
floods seriously damaged settlements along the Trinity River
and Klamath River, and caused Fort Ter-Waw, near Requa,
to be abandoned by the U.S. Military. Moreover, tons of
debris was washed down from mines and ranches upriver.
The presence of Fort Gaston had stifled the Hupa from openly
participating in insurgency for the sake of peace in the Hoopa
Valley. Given the violence and dispossession being inflicted
upon neighboring tribes, Hupa leaders, such as Captain John,
remained cautious in their dealings with U.S. officials.
Though one should not generalize such a complex and
circumstantial political environment, the Hupa adapted their
tactics to the presence of U.S. agencies in the Valley after
1858. While apparently amicable, the Hupa were feared by
the Military due to their relative numbers and military power,
and the tribe was kept under vigilant watch (Anderson
1958:140).
While conflicts continued to rage to the west and southwest of
the Hoopa Valley, by 1862 the Military began to correctly
suspect that the Hupa had been prime movers influencing the
guerrilla warfare being fought by surrounding tribes (Nelson
1988:79). Tribal allies of the Hupa were carrying out this
guerrilla warfare. The Hupa were covertly providing support
to these resistance movements along kinship lines of
intermarriage and through political alliances. With Hupa
support, these were conflicts effectively Hupa proxy wars
serving the defense of the Hupa homeland, where allies were
acting as substitutes for the Hupa living in the Valley in the
resistance against the settlers.
On April 6, 1862, a clandestine attack against pack-train just a
mile from Fort Anderson resulted in the death of man
identified as a Hupa headman (Anderson 1958:143). When
the Commander of Fort Gaston was asked if the Hupa were
preparing for hostilities, the Commander reported that all was
quiet in the Hoopa Valley. However, to preempt any
escalation, on August 14, 1862 the Fort’s Commander met
with seventeen Hupa representatives (headmen). Three of the
headmen were noted as “chiefs” and were likely representing
groups from Takmildin, Tsewenaldin, and Medildin.
The agreement made at this meeting stipulated that the Hupa
wanted to stay at peace and not be removed from their
homeland, and that they did not want to be blamed for any
violence against settlers in the Valley inflicted by their
neighboring tribes. They also said they would turn over any
Hupa known to be participating in the warfare, and that they
would supply guides to help in the counter-insurgency.
Conversely, the Hupa only feigned compliance with their
willingness to assist the Military, and the few Hupa scouts
that could be mustered often furtively gave warning to
insurgents. The effectiveness of the native insurgency
continued to the extent that by November 1862, the tribes had
repossessed practically all of the area between Mad River,
Redwood Creek, and Hoopa Valley (Anderson 1958:152)
64
S ECTION 6
The Two Years War:
Rebellion in the Hupa
Homeland, 1863 to 1864
At the end of winter in 1863, the insurgency resumed their
operations. Hupa and Chilula allies attacked a coastal Yurok
village near Stone Lagoon called Hikwi due to the allegation
that the year before, villagers had given warning to a group of
Whites in the area the insurgents had planned on attacking. A
survivor from the attack on Hikwi later informed U.S. officials
that the insurgent group responsible had also committed
other recent attacks against Whites. The woman went on to
describe the insurgent group as being comprised of
approximately forty Hupa and a mix of twenty Chilula and
Whilkut, using fourteen pack animals to carry their
provisions, ammunition, and plunder (Anderson 1958:156).
On July 9, 1863, this same large group attacked a pack-train
and military escort near Redwood Creek. The battle raged for
approximately eight hours, and it was estimated that the
Hupa and their allies used 500 rounds of ammunition in the
engagement (Anderson 1958:159).
The successes and sophistication of the native insurrection
were drawing the attention of the U.S. Military, who realized
the situation had gotten out of control. A new commander
was brought into the region, Lieutenant Colonel Whipple, to
change strategies and bring in newly commissioned army
units to try and counter the tide. In a reverse of strategy,
Whipple determined that in order to prevent an escalation of
hostilities with the Hupa, they should not be removed from
their lands, and instead kept peaceful by stationing a large
and intimidating garrison at Fort Gaston. At one point, Fort
Gaston put on a display of force, firing canons and guns in
staged military drills that were solely intended to indirectly
intimidate and threaten the Hupa. Moreover, Whipple issued
orders that surrendering Indians be treated as prisoners of
war, and that U.S. Military scouts foster friendly relations
with the Hupa and Yurok to discourage them from giving aid
to hostiles (Anderson 1958:161-162).
The ongoing feud between Takmildin and Tsewenaldin had
become evermore divisive, effectively splitting the Valley in
half. Groups from Tsewenaldin, led by Tswenaldin John, and
allied groups from Medildin, led by Big Jim, were warring
with downriver villages allied with Takmildin, led by Charley
Hostler. When a man from either of the feuding families in
Takmildin or Tsewenaldin was killed, there was often a short
victory dance held by the war party responsible; and due to
the close proximity of the two villages, the dance could be
heard at the opposing village, further inciting them, and
leading them to do the same whenever they killed a man
(Wallace 1949:351). During the years the feud lasted, over
twenty people, most from Tsewenaldin, would be killed
(Goddard 1903:10).
65
The focus of the U.S. Military was on intervening in the
hostilities between the settlers and Hupa. Moreover, they
were to offer protection to peaceful/innocent Indians from
indiscriminate violence. However, individual U.S. Military
commanders were not consistently sympathetic in protecting
Indians. In fact, the commander at Fort Gaston, Major
Taylor, did not intervene in the feud, instead giving those
involved free reign to fight, as long as they did not interfere
with the Whites, stating that it would “be a Godsend for both
parties to get killed” (U.S. War Dept. vol. 50-2 1897:694).
Meanwhile, evidence of Hupa involvement in the insurgency
continued to mount. The Military could do relatively little in
the Hoopa Valley there had been no day-to-day conflict. At
the end of August, 1863 the Fort Commander wished to arrest
three Hupa men suspected of being connected with a group of
Indians who recently attacked and killed Whites living on
New River (near Ironside Mountain). The Commander
believed the men were being harbored at the village of
Medildin, and issued a three day ultimatum to produce them
or the village would be attacked. Medildin was considered
one of the largest and most powerful villages in the Valley,
and soldiers monitored the movements of the other peaceful
villages in the Valley and advised them not to intervene
(Bledsoe 1885:244). After the three days expired, soldiers
surrounded the village and 115 residents of Medildin were
arrested. However, many Hupa took to the hills in defiance,
joining with other fighters to continue the insurgency.
This event would mark the beginning of the open involvement
of Hupa groups in the war. The military estimated there were
about 730 Hupa and South Fork Hupa along the Trinity River
between the junctions of the South Fork Trinity (near Leldin)
and Klamath (upriver from Weitchpec); of which 230 were
fighting (Anderson 1958:166). A headman named Charley
Hostler, who was seeking to preserve the peace in the Valley
by offering some assistance in ending the hostilities, led the
Hupa at the religious center of Takmildin. The divergence of
Hupa fighting in the surrounding region and those
maintaining peace in the Valley reflected the acephalous
nature of Hupa tribal organization, the political savvy of those
Hupa leaders dealing with the U.S. Military, and the effect of
the feud on intra-tribal politics.
Following the capture of Medildin, Hupa guerrilla warfare
escalated to join the existing open conflict against the settlers
up the Trinity River. This guerrilla warfare was proving to be
effective in plundering homesteads, supply trains, and
commerce. A Hupa leader from Medildin, called Big Jim,
headed one prominent group of fighters, and a Hupa leader
from Tsewenaldin, called Tsewenaldin John, headed another.
Several fronts opened up, and by the end of October 1863, all
of the White settlements along the Trinity River had been
destroyed from the Hoopa Valley to Big Flat (near the former
Chimariko village of Sitmaace), about 45 miles upriver
(Bledsoe 1885:241).
The Hupa and their Chilula and South Fork Hupa allies were
also continuing to engage in skirmishes with U.S. troops,
66
causing several fatalities on both sides. For example, on the
morning of November 17, 1863 a group of thirty to forty
armed Hupa, South Fork Hupa, and Chilula ambushed fifteen
soldiers camping near the junction of Willow Creek and the
Trinity River (U.S. War Dept. vol. 50-1 1897:241). The
fighting lasted for seven and a half hours, killing five Indians
and wounding many soldiers (U.S. War Dept. vol. 50-1
1897:241). Events such as this showed that the few hundred
U.S. troops present in the region were incapable of quelling
the resistance and protecting settlers across such a large and
mountainous region. Realizing this, the U.S. Military began
to request additional troops in an effort to reinforce their
positions over the winter months.
In late December 1863, Hupa guides showed U.S. troops the
location of an insurgent fortification about 25 miles to
southwest in the intertribal buffer zone of Redwood Creek
Whilkut territory. The fort was situated in a prairie near Bald
Mountain about a mile south of the trail linking the Hoopa
Valley and Arcata. The fort contained four log houses,
approximately sixteen by twenty-two feet in size, with
loopholes cut in the walls on all sides to shoot out of, and were
defensively arranged near a spring (U.S. War Dept. vol. 50-1
1897:236). Based on the descriptions, the dimensions and
materials of these log houses bore a striking resemblance to
the early structures built by the U.S. Military at local sites,
such as Camp Anderson, Fort Gaston.
In November 1863, the Hupa leaders Big Jim and
Tsewenaldin John were seeking reinforcements as well,
soliciting groups of Yurok and Karuk to join the insurgents
from the Hupa Confederacy that included Chilula, South Fork
Hupa, and Hupa-Chimariko fighters. In one instance, Big Jim
brought his group to Orleans to recruit Karuk for the fight,
offering $30.00 and a rifle to any who would join (Anderson
1968:175). By the time troops reached Orleans to pursue Big
Jim’s group they had already returned to the Hoopa Valley
where they launched attacks against Charley Hostler’s group,
causing Charley to leave the Valley to try and recruit some
Yurok in the fight against Big Jim. While Charley was away,
another attack occurred on January 9, 1864 in the Valley,
killing his brother (U.S. War Dept. vol. 50-2 1897:694).
After locating the fort and seeing its size and defenses, U.S.
troops requested reinforcements and a mobile cannon, a 12pounder Mountain Howitzer. Despite an all day fight, the
U.S. troops were unsuccessful in taking the fort due to the
strength of the materials used in the log houses and
inaccuracy of the cannon, thus allowing the Indian garrison to
escape during the night unscathed (Bledsoe 1885:248). In the
abandoned fort, U.S. troops discovered the remnants of a
weapons cache, items plundered during previous raids, and
evidence linking Hupa insurgents to the fort (Humboldt
Times 1864a:3). The mere existence of this fort, as well as its
defensive construction and strategic location demonstrated an
escalation in the organization and tactics of the Hupa
insurgency.
67
S ECTION 7
The Treaty of 1864
The overall situation was worrying to U.S. Military
commanders, who felt their troop strength was inadequate
compared to the size and effectiveness of the groups
participating in the Hupa insurgency. Moreover, the Military
had been experiencing difficulty obtaining reinforcements due
to the Civil War raging in the east. On January 10, 1864 the
commander of Fort Gaston at the time, Major Taylor, wrote:
With the small available force that we have at this point it
will be a difficult matter to capture [the insurgent]
Indians, and it is utterly impossible to protect the settler’s
property but by threats of the utter extermination of all
the Indians in the valley. I think a treaty with the Indians
could be made on easy terms that would secure a certain
peace in this district, if I had the power to do so, and
pardon all that have been engaged in past offenses.
(U.S. War Dept. vol. 50-2 1897:694)
Troops were being concentrated at Fort Gaston to try and
keep the Hupa subdued, thus lowering amount of men
available for patrols in the mountains. In January 1864, the
U.S. Military began to receive some reinforcements, and were
able to pursue insurgent groups as they launched attacks in
the few areas still inhabited by settlers on the edges of Hupa
territory. The insurgents were also making threats against the
settlers in the Hoopa Valley. In one episode from January
1864, Big Jim’s group visited the settler-owned flourmill at
the southern edge of the Hoopa Valley. Big Jim bought flour
after intimidating the settlers at the flourmill, and openly
spoke of the attacks he had been leading outside the Valley.
He went on to tell of his intention to one day take control of
the flourmill after the settlers were eventually driven out, and
stated that he would subsequently burn it down when it was of
no longer of use to the Hupa (Roscoe 1986:33).
Fort Gaston made concerted efforts to pursue rebels
harboring in the Hoopa Valley whenever the opportunity
arose, but were often one step behind. In one instance, the
Fort learned that Big Jim’s group was in Tsewenaldin, and
sent two detachments to investigate, but found the village
largely deserted, having heard warning shots fired into the air
as they were crossing the Trinity River (Anderson 1958:150).
A few days later, on January 29, 1864 a Military officer was
shot only a half-mile away from Fort Gaston. In a dramatic
response, troops from Fort Gaston burned down the village of
Tsewenaldin, for being considered the main village
supporting the Hupa rebellion (Anderson 1958:180).
68
While events such as this, and the constant pursuit and
fighting during the winter were draining to the insurgents,
they remained successfully eluding capture or defeat. An
attack against a settler’s farm within just two miles of Arcata
troubled the U.S. Military commanders, as well as reports that
the Hupa insurgents had been seeking Yurok and Karuk
recruits to the north.
The commanders noted that if the Yurok and Karuk were
pulled into the conflict, the conflict would escalate even
further and would require even more troops to counter
(Anderson 1958:181). The number of troops stationed at Fort
Gaston was the highest it had been since it was founded,
averaging 143 men (Roscoe 1986:31). However, they were still
outnumbered by the bands of Hupa rebels in the mountains.
Facing the risk of an escalated conflict they were already
losing, in January 1864, the commander overseeing the war
operations, Lieutenant Colonel Whipple, determined that the
Military had until April 15th to end the rebellion. Reports
were sent to the State Government in Sacramento, discussing
the dire status of the conflict, and possible expansion in
spring. Around 250 additional troops were sent to the region
in March 1864 and were deployed to camps in the region,
saturating the area with U.S. troops (Anderson 1958:184).
Despite the concentration of U.S. forces, the Hupa insurgents
were still dodging capture, using their considerable familiarity
with the region and communications with allies, spies, and
sympathizers to their advantage.
The success of the Hupa campaigns against the settlers in
1863, the exhausting winter months with little solace, and
increase in U.S. Military presence led insurgent leaders to
consider ending hostilities. In early April 1864, word came
from Orleans that Tsewenaldin John would discuss making
peace. Fort Gaston replied that surrender would have to be
unconditional, and that, in return, those surrendering would
be treated with leniency, be protected from their feuding
rivals at Takmildin, and that operations against them would
cease until peace could be discussed further (U.S. War Dept.
vol. 50-2 1887:807). Using a Yurok headman at Weitchpec as
an intermediary, a captain from Fort Gaston met briefly and
peacefully with Tsewenaldin John to discuss terms for ending
the conflict. Tsewenaldin John expressed his willingness to
make peace, but that he did not feel safe traveling to Fort
Gaston in the Hoopa Valley, wishing instead to resettle his
group at Weitchpec (U.S. War Dept. vol. 50-1 1887:269).
Following this initial encounter, Tsewenaldin John had
preliminary meetings with the commanders at Fort Gaston to
discuss the making of a peace agreement. While the Military
was pleased to hear of Tsewenaldin John’s willingness to
make peace, the idea of settling his group at Weitchpec was
resisted by the Military and the local Yurok living at
Weitchpec, and Tsewenaldin John stated that he preferred the
prospect of being able to return to their home in the Hoopa
Valley (U.S. War Dept. vol. 50-2 1887:824). Tsewenaldin
John wanted to discuss the possible peace with his ally, rebel
leader Big Jim of Medildin, who was fighting upriver in
69
southern Hupa territory. To increase participation in the
peace negotiations, Charley Hostler travelled to Redwood
Creek to collect a group of Hupa that would also likely agree
to the peace. Charley noted that while en route he met the
leader of another resistance group, Curly-Headed Tom, whom
was infuriated with the prospect of the Hupa making peace
(U.S. War Dept. vol. 50-2 1887:824).
On April 27, 1864 peace negotiations were held at Fort Gaston
after Big Jim arrived with his group. Whipple noted Big Jim
was willing to make peace. Big Jim stated they no longer
wanted to live in the mountains under pursuit of the Military.
Big Jim stated his group wished to return to the Valley and
rebuild the village of Medildin, along with Tsewenaldin John’s
group because their village, Tsewenaldin, had been burned
down a few months prior. Lieutenant Colonel Whipple’s
terms were that they agree to settle in the Valley and agree not
to leave without permission, and to surrender their weapons
and plunder. After some debate over whether to surrender
their weapons, they reluctantly agreed to the offer (U.S. War
Dept. vol. 50-2 1887:831).
Though the peace process was beginning to unfold, there were
still groups upriver on the Trinity and in the Bald Hills near
Redwood Creek who were resisting the calls to make peace
with the Whites. Some even vowed to kill all that were friends
or had anything to do with the soldiers (U.S. War Dept. vol.
50-2 1887:843). By mid-May 1864, other rebel groups were
returning to the Valley, and the occupants of Medildin were
hard a work rebuilding their houses and constructing a fish
dam. However, there were concerns that Medildin would join
the conflict once again if the terms of the peace were complied
with. Through June there were still groups in hiding along
the Upper Trinity River and South Fork Trinity, trying to
evade capture by the Military patrols (U.S. War Dept. vol. 50-1
1887:284-285).
On May 25, 1864, Big Jim arranged for a group of Chilula
fighters to meet with commanders at Fort Gaston to discuss
joining the peace. Lieutenant Ulio (U.S. War Dept. vol. 50-2
1887:854) noted: “these Indians say they are tired of fighting;
that they have no home, no place of safety; that they want to
be friends with the whites, and settle again where they
formerly lived” and earnestly expressed their desire to rebuild
their village on Redwood Creek near the southern edge of
Chilula territory. These Chilula stated they had been removed
to the Mendocino Reservation earlier in the Bald Hills War
(January 1859), and had determined that Whites could not be
trusted. Big Jim pressed that their terms be agreed upon in
order to win the peace, and convince others to join as well
(U.S. War Dept. vol. 50-2 1887:854-855). Hupa leaders
helping broker peace agreements with other groups continued
into June, and by July the U.S. Military officers reported the
hostilities had effectively ended.
Around this same time, in April 1864, the U.S. Congress
passed an act allowing the establishment of no more than four
Indian reservations for the entire state of California. The
appointed Superintendent of Indian Affairs for California was
a man named Austin Wiley. Initial proposals called for
70
moving many of the tribes to Santa Catalina Island, off the
coast of Southern California. However, such proposals were
deemed impractical and potentially disastrous. Moreover,
plans to relocate the Hupa to an Indian reservation, such as
Round Valley, were discounted; as they stated it would take a
soldier for every Indian to keep them there, and that
attempting to move them would be suicidal (Anderson
1958:199-200). After consulting with the Military
commanders, Wiley determined that given the situation, a
reservation in the Hoopa Valley would be best. Public opinion
among Whites in the region continued to argue for the
removal of tribes to reservations in the south. One editorial
suggested that allowing the tribes to remain in the area after
the cessation of hostilities would be like “catching wild birds
and letting them loose again” (Humboldt Times 1864b:2).
Superintendent Wiley travelled to Fort Gaston with
Lieutenant Colonel Whipple on August 10, 1864. Wiley noted
that upon his arrival, many of the Hupa fighters were still
armed, and were present under the agreement that they be
protected and unharmed until the final terms of the “Treaty of
Peace and Friendship” could be arranged. Wiley wrote:
So cunning were they, and so suspicious of white men, that
they kept most of their guns hid, and were constantly on
the alert, ready to break to the mountains in case any effort
should be made to remove them to a reservation. The
protest that they prefer death or starvation in the
mountains to removal… among the leaders, and those
having the most influence… they all speak English and are
intelligent.
(excerpt from Anderson 1958:201).
On August 12, 1864 Superintendent Wiley and Hupa leaders
met to sign the treaty, creating the Hoopa Valley Reservation
(see Appendix 1). Under the agreement those Hupa who had
engaged in the conflict would be allowed to return to the
Valley and given amnesty if they give up their guns, made
their homes where the soldiers told them in the Valley, and
ceased hostilities (Nelson 1988:89). The U.S. Government
would set aside the Hoopa Valley and ample land surrounding
it for the sole use of the Hupa, and their allies brought in to
the newly constituted reservation, the Chilula, South Fork
Hupa, Hupa-Chimariko, and Redwood Creek Whilkut.
Moreover, as part of the Federal Indian policy of using
reservations as a place to relocate Indians to, the treaty
stipulated that use of the Hoopa Valley Reservation could
include other tribes. White settlers that had lived in the
Valley were to be compensated by the U.S. Government for
their land and moved out to prevent any renewal of conflict.
Despite resistance from settlers in the region, in October 1864
the U.S. Department of the Interior approved the Treaty, and
the Hoopa Valley Reservation was born. Over the next couple
years, the peace was generally maintained in the region
around the Hoopa Valley, keeping the promise of the
reservation alive. However, some of the leaders from the
Hupa rebellion that were to be under the amnesty provisions
of the Treaty were killed over the coming years. One act of
betrayal came when the Chilula resistance leader CurlyHeaded Tom was arrested for the murder of Whites in the
area during the war, and brought to Fort Humboldt where he
71
was nefariously executed while under guard (Anderson
1968:215). In 1867, a Hupa leader from the upriver district,
called Frank, killed agents attempting to arrest him for living
off the reservation near Willow Creek without permission and
for other alleged crimes. A party of Hupa seeking Frank on
behalf of the reservation eventually killed him, causing a feud
between his kin and the party that killed him (Anderson
1958:222).
kept them in their homeland, albeit at great cost in lives and
suffering. The historical moment of the Treaty of 1864 laid an
enduring foundation for the Hupa people, from which to
tackle future challenges.
In February 1868, Tsewenaldin John was murdered by a
soldier from Fort Gaston, causing a great deal of friction in the
Hoopa Valley. One story alleges that the soldier was hired to
ambush and kill Tsewenaldin John by his sister-in-law in an
act of blood revenge for Tsewenaldin John’s role in the death
of her husband (Wallace 1948:347). The tension caused by
Tsewenaldin John’s death was calmed in May 1868 when a
War Dance was held to ratify a peace between many of the
feuding Hupa groups, except for Charley Hostler’s group at
Takmildin for which grudges were still active. Three hundred
people attended the ceremony, where the villages reached a
settlement, with each side paying for those who were killed
(Nelson 1988:99). A few weeks later, Charley Hostler was
killed in an act related to the ongoing feud while traveling
outside the Valley (Nelson 1988:99).
The Hupa had reached a fork in their history, and made a
turn. The long era of warfare subsided, and the new era of
reservation life and politics would begin. The efforts of the
conflict, and the dualistic political approach of dealing with
the U.S. Military had resulted in a victory for the Hupa, that
72
C HAPTER 4
Culture in
Action
C HAPTER C ONTENTS
1. Culture Shaping History
2. Impacts on the Hupa Homeland
3. Defending the Hupa Homeland
4. Hupa Systems of Law & Conflict Resolution
5. Hupa Power Dynamics
S ECTION 1
Culture Shaping History
structural. “Power dynamics” refers to the interactions of
different interests competing for power (a battle of wills). The
power dynamics around the Treaty of 1864 involved Hupa in a
struggle with the U.S. Interactions with U.S. power were
something novel for the Hupa, requiring the adaptation of
tactics. However, throughout the contest Hupa core values
informed efforts to preserve their homeland and their
sovereignty over it.
The Treaty of 1864 was a climax in the struggles that unfolded
between 1848 and 1868. Examining the genesis of this treaty
reveals the influence of Hupa culture in the cause, course, and
outcomes of this era. Hupa connections to their homeland
were symbiotic and present in culture at both a conscious and
unconscious level. The defense of the Hupa homeland was a
primary and collective concern, for which the entire Tribe
sacrificed much. Hupa actions towards maintaining
possession of their homeland followed cultural systems of
conflict resolution, and the adjudication of Hupa law. The
cultural themes of homeland and law served as a common
denominator of the Hupa organization and action, and
reflected underlying cultural values that informed.
These cultural values informed Hupa decisions and actions,
wielding a potent influence in the power dynamics between
the Hupa, settlers, the U.S. Government and Military, and
other tribes. To restate definitions: “power” means the ability
to impose one’s will socially and politically in different
relational arenas: interpersonal, organizational, and
Photo 11: Scene at Hoopa Valley, Fort Gaston, Hoopa, 1890s, photo by
A.W. Ericson. Ericson Photo Collection, Humboldt State University.
Used with permission.
74
S ECTION 2
Impacts on the Hupa
Homeland
The Hupa considered the encroachment of miners and settlers
into their homeland as an invasion. Settler incursions into
privately owned Hupa property, or inappropriate trespassing
in sacred places was considered a crime. During the Gold
Rush, miners poured into the region from the east, traveling
up the Sacramento Valley before turning west.
Mining activity affecting the Klamath-Trinity watersheds was
more intense upriver to the east. Runoff from these
operations polluted the rivers, and riverbeds vital to the
spawning of salmon were destroyed. Salmon runs up the
Trinity River declined from an estimated 1,000,000 fish in
1850, to less than 500,000 in 1900 (Lewis 1994:115). The
Hupa saw the parallels between the mining pollution flowing
that began with the coming of Whites and the declines in fish
runs. As seen in the war between the Yurok and Hupa in the
1830s, the disruption of fish runs was considered one of the
worst crimes that could be committed, since it impacted
entire communities. Fishing was a foundation of Hupa
economic and social order, and the indigenous management
of the fisheries was an important and intertribal matter
(Swezey & Heizer 1977:9). McKee’s 1851 treaty expedition
made reference to the fish dams at Kenek, Weitchpec,
Orleans, and the Hoopa Valley. Regarding the construction of
fish dams, the expedition noted that they formed a frequent
cause of quarrel among the tribes, but that some
understanding seemed to exist for opening portions of them
at times to allow the passage of fish for the supply of those
above (Heizer 1972:48). The expedition also noted that
earlier in the year, a group of vigilantes had been preventing
the village of Weitchpec from building a fish dam.
Warfare during the Gold Rush destroyed whole villages, and
caused refugees to seek refuge in the mountains away from
the rivers were mining occurred. The political disruption bore
a negative impact on indigenous fishery management
systems, such as the intertribal negotiations between different
ceremonial districts that occurred regarding the timing of fish
dam construction. Moreover, available tribal labor was
reduced due to the warfare, which suppressed the ability of
districts to construct communal fish dams. This backdrop to
the conflicts leading to the Treaty of 1864, added a greater
impetus to the Hupa efforts to drive miners out of the region.
Attacks against mining areas effectively reduced their
operations by killing miners, preoccupying miners who had to
take up defense, and by pressuring miners to leave once the
risks outweighed profits.
75
The use of prairies by settlers for cattle grazing also impacted
subsistence for the Hupa and their neighbors, and was a cause
of conflict. Prairies were important sources of game,
vegetables, and resources for material culture such as
basketry. In some areas, acorn-producing oaks that tribes
depended on, were cut down by settlers for building materials
and to clear areas for cattle to graze on (Bledsoe 1885:76).
Abuse of these lands not only violated well-defined
indigenous territorial claims, but also affected subsistence.
During the Bald Hills War, the Hupa and their allies not only
struck at the ranchers, but also killed and scattered hundreds
of cattle grazing in the hills. The killing of livestock served a
dual purpose of providing food to refugees while preventing
them from destroying prairies. In 1860, the killing of cattle in
the Bald Hills region (along Redwood Creek west of the
Hoopa Valley) had become so prevalent that ranchers
deserted the area (Bledsoe 1885:173).
The violence that came during the U.S. invasion displaced
entire villages, causing many people to live refugees in the
hills for survival. Prior to 1848, families took refuge in the
hills when avoiding feuds or warfare for short periods of time.
However, the dangers of the U.S. invasion were not
temporary, making survival very challenging and causing a
great stress and suffering while displaced. During the wars
between 1848 and 1864, there were many instances where the
U.S. Military and volunteer companies noted the dire
circumstances of Indians they had captured living on the
move in the hills.
Diseases introduced to Northwestern California were also
associated with the coming of Whites. The effects of
introduced disease killed numerous people, and afflicted the
many more. In the World Renewal Religion, sickness
amongst the people was considered a reflection of disorder
and spiritual imbalance in the world that had to be cast out.
The ceremonial apexes of the White Deerskin Dance, and
Jump Dance, both included ritual acts that aim to beat back
pestilence, and undo imbalance to renew the World. A prayer
said by Hupa priests during the Jump Dance calls for the
weather to be pleasant, good food to come, people to live
happily, and for sickness to be blown out to the sea by the
wind (Goddard 1904:228). In the story of The Origin of the
Jump Dance, the Immortals passed down instructions for
dance to the Hupa, and told them that when the dance was
performed, the World would always fall back into its proper
place (Sapir 2001:74). During the U.S. invasion, the Hupa
held off-cycle Jump Dance ceremonies to try and do just this.
These emergency Jump Dances aimed to cast away disease,
and restore ecological and social balance to their world.
76
S ECTION 3
Defending the Hupa
Homeland
The Hupa response to the invasion of their homeland involved
various forms of resistance and negotiation. However, the
consistent intention of Hupa actions was singular: defend the
Hupa homeland and maintain possession of it. The Hupa
homeland was vested to them at the end of Myth Time, and
was the source of their economic and subsequent political
power. It was the center of culture, society, and religion. It
was something the Hupa showed they were willing to die
defending, and many did. The consistent purpose of the Hupa
armed/covert resistance and peace efforts was to preserve the
Hupa homeland centered on the Hoopa Valley. In the course
of negotiations, the Hupa never sought lands belonging to
other tribes. Hupa actions in relation to the conflict that
resulted in the Treaty of 1864 reflected this collective will and
intention and served the defense and preservation of the
Hupa homeland.
Prior to 1863, the wars being fought on periphery of Hupa
territory were essentially Hupa proxy wars. A proxy war is a
war instigated by a major power (the Hupa) that does not
itself become involved. Moreover, the allies fighting for
another group (the Hupa) usually had their own interests,
which could differ from those of their patron. The purpose of
Hupa engagement in these proxy wars served the defense of
the Hoopa Valley and surrounding territory. In some cases,
the Hupa fought with alongside their allies outside the Hoopa
Valley, and provided them with material support.
The centerpiece of the Hupa homeland was the Hoopa Valley
and surrounding resource areas up to the mountain ridges.
Some aristocratic Hupa even rented resource areas located
outside the core Hupa territory, such as productive prairies in
the Bald Hills that were privately held by Chilula families.
The activity of cattle ranchers in the Bald Hills was destructive
to prairies, and was an instigating factor in the Bald Hills
War. The sacred landscape extended even further, containing
numerous mountains, arrow trees, creeks and other
geographic features of spiritual importance in the World
Renewal Religion. Moreover, kinship ties often extended
beyond the Valley due to intertribal marriages, extending
connections and potential alliances.
The shared cultural value of preserving the homeland inspired
groups of Hupa to join the guerrilla warfare occurring around
their homeland. The Hupa responded with force to the U.S.
invasion both covertly and overtly. As the Gold Rush began
and conflicts erupted around the Hupa homeland, they gave
support to their allies trying to stave off the invasion. The
participation of the Hupa in early conflicts was known to
those in the region, as noted by the McKee treaty expedition,
77
who held that the Hupa were one of the key tribes needed to
secure peace. As conflicts escalated, volunteer groups
comprised of miners organized, and U.S. troops were
deployed. Many Hupa discreetly supported those involved in
the resistance since they knew that implication in the ensuing
warfare would give U.S. officials justification to attack,
imprison, or remove them (Nelson 1988:65).
Even before the U.S. invasion, the Hupa were able to muster
the allegiances of neighboring tribes to aid in the defense of
Hupa territory (Wallace 1978:169). Hupa political, cultural
and financial influence in the region was active in pre-contact
intertribal conflicts. The Hupa activated alliances with groups
of Chilula, South Fork Hupa, and Hupa-Chimariko to the east,
representing a confederacy of direct cultural relatives of the
Hupa, well as more distant relatives such as the Redwood
Creek Whilkut. The Hupa also used alliances with the Yurok
and Karuk that came from the shared World Renewal religion,
and intermarriage. These alliances were active in the conflicts
between 1848 and 1864 in response to the U.S. invasion.
Moreover, the guns and ammunition used by the Hupa to
fight these wars were often obtained along the similar
aboriginal trade routes described by Jedediah Smith in 1828
when seeing evidence of axe use in the Valley.
The Hupa supported the efforts of surrounding tribes and
even provided and hired warriors to resist the invasion and
aided allies fighting proxy wars. The Hupa often hired
warriors as mercenaries to boost their numbers, and
increased the threat of force. This was practiced during the
war between the Yurok and Hupa of the 1830s, where the
Yurok hired Tolowa warriors, and the Hupa counterstrike
against Requa included hired warriors from at least three
tribes. The Hupa had been suspected of this practice for some
time by U.S. Military commanders, noting the influence the
Hupa had over the neighboring tribes engaging in guerrilla
warfare. Moreover, several accounts tell of Hupa rebel leaders
boasting of the amount of warriors they had and how many
more they could call upon. In Hupa modes of conflict
resolution, this threat of force tactic was used as a means of
intimidating rivals from attacking and pushing opponents to
quickly settle feuds rather than risk costly retribution. In the
case with the U.S. Military, this tactic was employed and was
effective, bearing an influence on Military decisions and
actions.
The Bald Hills War in 1858 was headed by the Chilula and
Redwood Creek Whilkut, and was a proxy war for the Hupa.
The Chilula had self-interests that differed from the Hupa
regarding the defense of the Chilula homeland along Redwood
Creek. The Chilula were experiencing famine due to the
destruction of resource areas and disruption of food cycles,
which was accurately attributed to White activities (Davis
1988:250). Many Hupa joined the fight, and others gave aid
and safe harbor to those making war against the settlers.
U.S. Military commanders believed the Hupa rebel leaders
were driving most of the groups along Redwood Creek
involved in conflict with settlers in that area (Bledsoe
1885:249). In late 1858, Fort Gaston was founded in the
78
Hoopa Valley due to the strategic location of the Valley in the
theater of war, and to counter Hupa power and military force
in the region. While the Hupa had traditionally employed
tactics of ambush and deception to achieve successful
outcomes in warfare, including the hiring of warriors, these
proxy wars signaled a cultural adaptation of this tactic. The
Hupa faced an overwhelming threat of force presented by
Whites and the U.S. Military, making open participation or
implication in the conflict dangerous to those living in the
Hoopa Valley. At the time, relations with the settlers living in
the Valley were tense but amicable. However, these proxy
wars presented an opportunity to take the fight outside the
Valley, and stave off incursions to the Hupa homeland at its
borders.
At the end of 1863, U.S. Military commanders learned Hupa
insurgents were seeking to hire Karuk fighters near Orleans,
and reports came in of Hupa efforts to recruit sympathetic
Yurok warriors into the fight. The Military feared the
possibility of the war expanding, after they had suffered a
number of defeats and proved to be ineffective in protecting
settlers. The direct result of this was a decision by Military
commanders to set a deadline of April 15, 1864 to end the
conflict through force or peace. The latter prevailed.
All these efforts by the Hupa were aimed at staving off and
countering the U.S. invasion in order to ensure the continued
protection and possession of their homeland. From the first
negotiations with McKee in 1851 to the Treaty of 1864, the
consistent and prevailing sentiment amongst the Hupa was
that they would prefer death or starvation in the mountains to
being removed from their homeland. The Chilula groups
captured during the Bald Hills War, travelled hundreds of
miles back to their homeland along Redwood Creek after
escaping from the Fort Mendocino Reservation in 1859. The
sentiment was so strong amongst the Hupa, that when in 1864
Superintendent Wiley heard a proposal to remove the Hupa
and their allies to Southern California, he brushed it off as
suicidal.
Such strong connections to homeland reflect the deep cultural
values attributed to place, ancestral history, livelihood, and
stewardship. These cultural values reflect an expression of
Hupa sovereignty. The responsibility over the Hupa
homeland was something left to them by the Immortals at the
end of Myth Time. The Hupa did not claim lands outside of
their homeland during the treaty negotiations. Such lands
were not vested to them by the Immortals and the
responsibility of stewardship belonged to their neighbors.
The aim of protecting and maintaining the Hupa sacred
landscape gave greater weight to the contests of power over its
control, and influenced the methods of defending it.
By 1864 the Hupa and their allies had effectively been able to
clear settlers from most of the Hupa aboriginal territory, as
well as a great deal of the periphery to the west and southeast
(see map Figure 7 below).
79
Figure 7: Map of Hupa Insurgency Actions, Aboriginal Territory, and Reservation. By Brian Gleeson.
Weitchpec
Northern Front
Northwestern
Front
Hupa villages
Fort Gaston
Western Front
Eastern Front
Hupa Fort
1 of 9
I NTERACTIVE 4.1 Map of Hupa Insurgency Actions
However, when the treaty negotiations opened up, the Hupa
did not demand the lands they had cleared of settlers beyond
their territory. The focus of Hupa efforts served to defend the
Hupa homeland, and maintain possession of the Hoopa
Valley, extending east to west from ridge to ridge, and north
to south from canyon to canyon. This was what the Hupa
achieved in their victory. The Treaty of 1864 set aside the
Hoopa Valley and “a sufficient area of the mountains on each
side of the Trinity River as shall be necessary for hunting
80
grounds, gathering berries, seeds.” While the exact
boundaries of the Reservation would later be a point of
contention, much of the Hupa aboriginal territory and core
area of the Hoopa Valley would be included.
The Reservation did not include all Hupa aboriginal territory,
but it was centered on the Hoopa Valley and surrounding
geography. While the aboriginal lands of Hupa allies who
participated in the conflict were not included in the
Reservation, many survivors were able to move into the
Valley. The Treaty stipulated that the lands set aside be for
the use of the Hupa, as well as their allies, the South Fork
Hupa, Chilula, Redwood Creek Whilkut. Moreover, the treaty
went on to include “such tribes as may hereafter avail
themselves of the benefit of this treaty” (see Appendix 1).
In many ways the boundaries of twelve-by-twelve mile Hoopa
Valley Reservation corresponded to the aboriginal territory
and sacred landscape of the Hupa homeland. The square
shape of the Reservation was oriented at an angle of about
340 degrees north, using the Trinity River as its central northsouth meridian. From the Valley floor, the reservation
extended into the hills and mountains about five miles to the
east and west. However, the north and south edges of the
Reservation were slightly off center from the core aboriginal
territory, with the northern edge extending to the junction of
the Klamath and Trinity Rivers. The Reservation did not
include the Yurok villages of Weitchpec at this junction, but
did include lands to the south of Weitchpec that were used by
the Yurok living there, and included all the land in the canyon
leading to the river junction that was traditionally part of the
intertribal buffer zone, with few inhabitants. Moreover, the
southern edge of the Reservation ended at the southern part
of the Valley near Tish-Tang Creek. The northwestern corner
of the Reservation included Bunch Grass Ridge, which had
acted as a geographic separator between Hupa and Karuk
territory. Near the southeastern corner of the Reservation
were several important sites: Pony Buttes, and Tish-Tang
Point. The southwestern boundary of the Reservation
transects another important mountain for the Hupa,
Telescope Peak. From this area, the western edge of the
Reservation follows parallel with Pine Ridge, an important
divider between Hupa and Chilula lands, coming close to
Hupa Mountain. The northwestern corner of the Reservation
was located precisely at French Camp, on a ridge in the Bald
Hills where trails leading from the coast through Redwood
Creek split to either descend towards Yurok villages on the
Klamath River, or west to the Hoopa Valley. Moreover, a
point in the sacred landscape was located near this corner of
the Reservation near Bald Hills Peak.
Also of note is the role of the Yurok villages of Weitchpec in
peace processes. Weitchpec was located at the junction of the
Klamath and Trinity Rivers, which corresponded to a general
junction of Yurok, Hupa, and Karuk territories. Traditionally
a prairie located near Weitchpec often hosted intertribal
negotiations and was used as a War Dance site. The Treaty of
1851 was negotiated at this same site, as were the initial peace
talks between Tsewenaldin John and the U.S. Military in April
81
1864 that eventually lead to the Treaty of 1864 (Anderson
1958:187).
In all, Hupa sovereignty was a culmination of cultural beliefs
and practices regarding the Hupa homeland. While tactics
were adapted to meet the new challenges faced during the
U.S. invasion, the core values regarding the homeland
remained fundamental. Hupa sentiment towards their
homeland was a common denominator, a core value at the
root of Hupa actions and strategies, both peaceful and hostile.
The thoughts and actions of the Hupa people during this time,
were the expression of Hupa sovereignty, and had a
significant influence on the power dynamics with the U.S. and
outcome of the Treaty of 1864.
82
S ECTION 4
Hupa Systems of Law &
Conflict Resolution
The role of indigenous laws and legal systems during the U.S.
invasion reflects another aspect of Hupa sovereignty:
jurisdiction. Hupa jurisdiction involved a defined area of
responsibility where their authority applied, the Hupa
homeland. Hupa law extended rights to all individuals and
genders, and was culturally shared with their neighbors as
well. Since the legal system focused on tort law, involving
personal injuries against individuals (torts) requiring
compensation, the system had the ability to scale, rising in
stages based on the extent and rank of those involved.
This provided a core value of justice and culturally shared
medium for conflict resolution active at all levels of Hupa
organization. The administration of justice involved
overlapping jurisdictions that expanded based on the conflict,
from individuals, to villages, to entire tribes. Similar to the
cultural structures involving the coordination of religious
ceremonies or communal construction of fish dams, the law
provided a structure for the mobilization of groups in conflict.
The law also established shared systems of enforcement,
adjudication, settlement, and reconciliation. The Hupa
political structures were directly related to jurisdiction and
the administration of justice under the law. When conflicts
escalated, headmen used their accumulated wealth and power
on behalf of their kin, followers, and allies to administer
justice through negotiated settlements and warfare. The
expression of Hupa legal structures provided a social order
that favored peace, due to the costly nature of conflict, and
demanded justice as a matter of maintaining spiritual balance
in the world. These systems of indigenous law demonstrate
how despite not having a single tribal-wide political authority,
the Hupa and their neighbors were not anarchistic as
suggested by Kroeber (1976:38). Rather, culture contained
systems of social order reinforced by unconscious values and
morals, influencing behavior from within.
Between 1848 and 1868, traditional laws and methods of
adjudication were applied to the conflicts that unfolded
during the U.S. Invasion. Crimes against persons and
property demanded payment in order to be resolved. The
Hupa application of their laws to the actions of Whites served
as a medium of justice. The Hupa accepted non-Indian goods
in exchanges. From the very first contacts in 1828, the Hupa
were able to appraise the value of items offered for trade by
Whites, and incorporate such goods into their economy, from
beads and food, to axes and guns. The first Whites to enter
83
the Hoopa Valley saw evidence of previous axe use, as the
Hupa had been able to obtain such items through extended
aboriginal trade routes (Davis 1989:382). There were some
instances where such exchanges of goods took place, showing
there was a medium with which to negotiate settlements. For
example, during the negotiations of the un-ratified Treaty of
1851, the indigenous leaders demanded payments for the
crimes committed against them by Whites, to which McKee
gave as an initial payment: blankets, clothing, axes, four cows,
and other gifts during an evening campfire (McKee 1851:135).
However, most Whites held no regard for such laws, and in
many cases the severity of the crimes and lack of
compensation or repentance compounded matters to a point
beyond material compensation. Indiscriminate murders
resulted in kin groups seeking blood revenge, and only
occasionally requests for blood money, though the Hupa
quickly learned that Whites would almost never make such
payments, nor easily relent if one of their own was killed in
revenge. Whites did not respect these laws, causing cycles of
violence to arise (Nelson 1988:45). As conflicts escalated,
more distant kin groups joined together in the fight, and
eventually Hupa insurgent leaders were soliciting groups from
other tribes to join.
The Hupa sought justice through the application of their laws.
California law (section 14 of the Criminal Act) did not extend
any rights or due process to Indians, and in fact stated, “no
black, or mulatto person, or Indian shall be allowed to give
evidence in favor of, or against a White man” (Heizer and
Almquist 1971:229). Therefore, often the only method of
justice was through the adjudication of Hupa law. For
example, in 1860, when a young Hupa man was murdered in
the Valley, and his assailant was released, the young man’s kin
tried setting up an ambush for the killer along the supply trail
to Arcata. Moreover, Hupa law dictated that if the guilty party
could not be killed, the life of one of his “kin” could be taken.
In some instances, Whites living in proximity to each other
were regarded as part of the same kin group, and subject to
this blood revenge law. For example, in 1851 a pioneer living
in the vicinity of Weitchpec was put on trial by the local
headmen to determine his guilt in the matter of a woman who
was shot by troops traversing the area (Bledsoe 1885:79).
Additionally, in negotiating the Treaty of 1851 (un-ratified)
Indian leaders demanded payments for murders and the
destruction of property committed by miners. The treaty
commission gave what compensation was available in an
attempt to end hostilities, but this failed due to the
continuation of conflicts.
Since most conflicts with settlers could not be amicably
resolved, they quickly escalated into feuds that often became
full-scale wars. Often times attacks against troops or settlers
were in response to casualties the insurgents incurred, in an
effort to balance the damages. One early example was seen at
the council meeting at Treaty of 1851, where a local Yurok
leader kept a tally of twenty-seven dead Yurok, and twenty-six
dead Whites. Under the law, every crime was accounted for,
84
and the desire to “get even” was present in Hupa
counterstrikes, before and after contact with Whites.
One traditional method of conflict resolution in a feud was to
inflict enough damage to bring the opposing side into
negotiations, while not inflicting so much damage that the
settlement would leave you bankrupt. This tactic was
employed and adapted in the wars of the U.S. invasion. The
Hupa insurgents targeted the possessions and wealth of
Whites, attacking and plundering pack trains and cattle herds.
The Hupa and their confederated allies were seeking to expel
the settlers from the region, and succeeded in many areas.
The Bald Hills War (1858-1859) and Two Years War
(1863-1864) proved the effectiveness of this tactic of inflicting
enough damage to bring your foes to negotiate. Prior to
beginning the peace process in 1864, attacks were expanding
far upriver in the east, and efforts were being made to expand
the Hupa insurgency to include the Yurok to the northwest,
and Karuk to the northeast. The threat of these new theaters
of war opening up, and the ineffectiveness of U.S. troops to
suppress hostilities influenced U.S. Military strategies.
By the start of 1864, the Hupa led insurgency was able to
harass and evade the U.S. troops so well that, U.S.
commanders saw no end in sight without significantly
increasing the amount of troops in the region. Thus, the U.S.
Military decided that peace had to be made either through
force or treaty, especially the threat of the conflict expanding
to include the Yurok and Karuk. The Hupa insurgents and
their allies had achieved many victories. They had effectively
shut down commerce in the areas they were operating, had
attacked pack trains to the point where only essential supply
trains were operating in the region under heavy guard, and
had successfully cleared almost all of the settlers inhabiting
their territory. These were the conditions in the region when
the Hupa began to negotiate the Treaty of 1864.
From a U.S. Military position, they were having difficulty
being able to field enough troops to both threaten the Hupa
population in the Valley from openly joining the fight.
Reinforcements were being deployed to the region in spring
1864 to try and balance the existing insurgency. However, the
prospect of an expanded conflict with the Yurok and Karuk, as
well as more distant attacks on mining operations to the east
would have surpassed the ability of their reinforcements to
contain the conflict. Therefore, rather than risk a costly
expansion of the war that could have potentially overwhelmed
the U.S. Military, the prospect of making a peace with the
Hupa offered a chance to end the hostilities and have the
rebels return to the Valley and disarm, and remain in a central
location in proximity to Fort Gaston to ensure hostilities did
not resume.
In 1864, the U.S. Military reported that the insurgents were
willing to make peace and surrender because they were tired
of fighting and living away from their homeland. It is true
that the terms of the Treaty came at a great price, and the
fighters and their surviving family members were suffering.
Those living in the Hoopa Valley were suffering as well, from
85
disease and other effects of the warfare. Moreover, the
ongoing conflict had a religious dimension as well. The
warfare was associated with spiritual imbalance in the world
that disrupted World Renewal dance cycles. The troop
reinforcements slowly arriving into the region in early 1864
reinforced the ongoing threat of violence presented by Fort
Gaston, and reinforced awareness from Hupa leader Captain
John, who warned of the enormous population and resources
of the Whites.
However, from a Hupa position, they had accomplished their
main objective of driving out settlers from most of their
homeland, had mitigated the amount of violence that could
have occurred in the Hoopa Valley. The Hupa also drove their
other opponent intervening in the conflict, the U.S. Military,
to offer peace terms in negotiation with Hupa leaders, rather
than solely imposing terms from a point of dominant position.
Given the weakened position of the U.S. Military at the time,
the terms of the Treaty were generally favorable. The Hupa
ended hostilities in return for continued possession of the
Hoopa Valley and surrounding landscape, and safe passage
and amnesty for those who had participated in the conflict.
Furthermore, under the Treaty terms, settlers living in the
Hoopa Valley would have to leave, and most of the Hupa
ancestral territory, and principal Hupa homeland, would be
set aside for their possession. The totality of this outcome
amounted to a significant victory for the Hupa.
Payment for torts as a means of conflict resolution influenced
the outcomes of this era as well. Like the Treaty of 1851, the
Treaty of 1864 also involved payment. The Treaty of 1851
most directly involved the payment of goods, since it was held
that the tribes participating would only be convinced to halt
their retaliations against miners if given the appropriate
compensation. Whipple sought to limit the Military
involvement in the Hoopa Valley when possible so as to not
exacerbate the situation by drawing more people into the
conflict through a desire to exact revenge. Moreover, to
ensure the survival of those returning to the Valley, the peace
agreements in 1864 subsequent treaty called for Fort Gaston
to provision of food and shelter. The Hupa were also given
supplies with which to rebuild their homes. Making peace on
using these forms of settlement with U.S. entities showed an
adaptation of traditional conflict resolution systems to meet
these new challenges.
Active too during this era was the mandate of Hupa legal
systems called on parties in conflict to negotiate a settlement,
transact the agreement, and consider it permanently resolved.
Starting with the Treaty of 1851, the consideration was that
once the terms were agreed to the matter was to be considered
resolved. The provision in the Treaty of 1864 granting
amnesty to those who peacefully returned to the Hoopa Valley
is most telling. This forgiveness and release of liability for
past offenses was congruent with traditional Hupa law. Such
terms along with the prospect of returning to the Valley
motivated Hupa leaders to secure the peace, and was specific
argument used to convince other Hupa leaders to join in the
peace agreement.
86
The terms of the Treaty of 1864 would likely have been
radically different without the preceding warfare. Even when
the treaty was formally signed in August 1864, Whites in the
region were still calling for the removal of all Indians to
Southern California, and considered the terms of the Treaty a
capitulation to Indian resistance. In response, the U.S.
Military commander at the time, Lieutenant Colonel Whipple,
argued that the establishment of the Hoopa Valley
Reservation was sufficient solution to ending the hostilities
and was congruent with Federal Indian policy. However,
while the terms of the Treaty of 1864 called for U.S. plenary
power over the Reservation and generally confined the Hupa,
in a sense, it was the U.S. that surrendered to the Hupa.
87
S ECTION 5
Hupa Power Dynamics
In the events preceding the Treaty of 1864, there were many
ways the Hupa reacted to the U.S. invasion and exercised their
sovereignty. The actions and decisions of Hupa leaders
represented the interests of their groups, and exercised the
corporate power they held. Two general strategies emerged
amongst leaders. While differing in their approach and
rationale, they shared a common purpose of protecting the
Hupa homeland and both employed Hupa legal constructs.
One involved warring outside the Hoopa Valley, while the
other involved maintaining peace within the Valley.
Captain John was an early leader working to maintain peace
in the Hoopa Valley. Captain John was a religious leader from
Medildin, one of the key dance making villages in the Valley.
Even before he visited San Francisco, he was using his
influence to keep things amicable with the Whites who settled
in the Valley, such as Captain Snyder. When Captain John
visited San Francisco in 1858, the Bald Hills War was reaching
its climax and the Chilula, Whilkut, and Hupa allies were
suffering greatly. The account of Captain John using a
handful of sand to represent the number of Whites in San
Francisco was a potent image, representing the power and
resources of the United States. This event signaled a
divergence in strategies that Hupa leaders would take to
preserve their homeland. The realization that the military
power of the U.S. and enormous settler population just over
the horizon was something the Hupa could not defeat over the
long term was an epiphany. The conscious awareness of the
challenge facing the Hupa resulted in a fortunate shift in
strategies that otherwise may have led to the destruction and
dispossession of the Hupa people.
These two approaches also highlight the different roles of
Hupa political and religious leaders. In some circumstances,
Hupa political leaders held consensus views that extended
beyond their individual villages or districts, but they also
competed and fought with each other as well. This was
evident in the feud between Takmildin and Tsewenaldin. On
the other hand, Hupa religious leaders held a higher moral
authority that often transcended petty politics. Such influence
would have been brought to bear on the desires of some to
make war against the Whites in the Hoopa Valley.
However, the Hupa showed in many situations that they knew
whatever damage they inflicted against settlers or soldiers
would be revisited upon them. With the foundation of Fort
Gaston, the Hupa living in the Valley were under threat of
force. One of the intentions of locating Fort Gaston in the
Valley was to intimidate the Hupa from fighting, and make
them subordinate to U.S. power.
Those who claimed they were peaceful and disavowed any
involvement in the guerrilla warfare were often engaging in
88
more covert forms of resistance. The cold war within the
Valley contained a hidden realm, involving “everyday forms of
resistance.” “Everyday forms of resistance” included acts such
as dissimulation, false compliance, feigned ignorance,
sabotage, surreptitious assault and murder (Scott 1989:5).
Collectively, such actions made significant impacts and were
present in Hupa history. This included the actions such as
harboring insurgents and providing them with supplies,
providing false information on the whereabouts of war parties
to the U.S. Military, and providing intelligence on U.S. troop
movements. Such resistance included feigned ignorance
regarding the location or activities of rebels, as was seen
before the imprisonment of Medildin, and various U.S.
Military accounts of Hupa scouts that were supposed to lead
them to rebel camps, instead leading them away from them,
tipping off rebels, or helping set up ambushes.
The Hupa and hired warriors were careful in operating
clandestinely in order not to be directly implicated in any of
the attacks. This became more complicated in 1863, when Big
Jim and his contingent from Medildin took to the hills rather
than being imprisoned at Fort Gaston. The strategy of
feigning peaceful intentions within the Valley while
supporting insurgents in the hills was not an option for some.
This caused Hupa leaders from different villages to take
positions with the Military as to whether they supported the
U.S. actions in ending the conflict against the settlers to keep
peace in the valley, or whether they supported the war
(Anderson 1958:168). In some instances, villages that joined
the war partially vacated, with those kin unable to survive in
the mountains staying behind, such as children, the elderly,
and the infirmed.
The schism amongst the Hupa caused by the feud between
Takmildin and Tsewenaldin complicated matters further.
When the residents of Medildin were imprisoned for
supporting the guerrilla warfare, the fighters that took to the
hills where generally from Tsewenaldin and Medildin, and
their allies. These were also the rivals of Charley Hostler’s
group at Takmildin. The sides taken by villages in the feud
generally correlated the “upriver” and “downriver” districts of
the Hoopa Valley. When the Two Years War began, this
division became generally reflective of those openly
supporting and opposing the Hupa rebels. Takmildin was the
main religious center in the Hoopa Valley, and was arguing
for the peace in the Valley and presenting an amicable face to
the authorities at Fort Gaston.
Charley Hostler was also using his proximity to Fort Gaston to
protect and leverage his group’s interests. In return, during
the Two Years War the U.S. Military was exploiting his
group’s feud to obtain scouts and intelligence for their
campaign against the rebels. Meanwhile, the insurgent
groups from Tsewenaldin and Medildin were waging one of
the most effective resistance campaigns in California history.
The result was reduced the bloodshed in the Valley, while
inflicting significant damage to U.S. settler operations to the
point that peace be made on terms acceptable to most Hupa.
89
Both strategies advocating war and peace were unified in their
focus on defending the Hupa homeland, and demonstrated
the Hupa legal constructs that attach specific crimes or
conflicts to the parties involved, and allow those who wish not
be drawn in to recuse themselves. Religious leaders held a
responsibility to rectify spiritual imbalance in the World, and
ongoing warfare within the Hoopa Valley was religiously
inappropriate and unwelcome. The amount of imbalance in
the world caused by the ongoing conflicts during the 1860s
would have been cause not to conduct the World Renewal
Dances. Since feuds had to be reconciled before dances were
held, there would have been building social pressure to
resolve the conflict for the sake of all. Hupa religious leaders
held sway over spiritual matters regarding conflict. Hupa
religious leaders played a role in the defense of the Hupa
homeland, using their power to influence political decisions
and actions, brokering conflict resolution, and organizing
religious ceremonies. Hupa religious leaders also made
efforts to counter the effects of the U.S. invasion, organizing
emergency off-cycle Jump Dances to push back sickness
infecting the land and people.
In fact, the Treaty of 1864 was signed on August 12th, which
would have come just before the ceremonial apex of year
when the White Deerskin and Jump Dances would have been
held. The War Dance held in May 1868, following the death
of Tsewenaldin John, also demonstrates a collective will to
bring peace for the good of all.
The power and influence of the U.S. Military played a
significant role as well. The Military engaged in over acts of
suppression and violence, as well as engaged in subtle
political and power negotiations with Hupa leaders and
leaders from other tribes. The history of this period is rife
with accounts of Military commanders attempting to
influence tribal politics, and gain cultural insights to help
leverage their position. For example, during the McKee
Treaty Commission in 1851, it was noted that an effective
strategy for eroding indigenous power would be to
marginalize village headmen and instead support a single
chief that could be manipulated by U.S. agents. During the
Two Years War in 1863, the commander at Fort Gaston noted
how the feud in the Valley was beneficial to the war effort, and
that the Military would not intervene in the hopes that
warring factions destroyed each other.
Within the power dynamics of this time, it was culture
that united the Hupa towards a common goal and influenced
political outcomes. In lieu of codified political institutions
with centralized leadership and decision-making power,
cultural systems provided the structure that guided Hupa
political actions. The shared beliefs and sentiments of Hupa
culture informed their values and guided decision-making in
solidarity towards a higher cause; namely justice and
sovereignty over the Hupa homeland. On a collective level,
these values transcended personal quarrels, feuds, and
individual pride for the benefit of the tribe’s common
interests, and influenced the course of history
90
C HAPTER 5
Conclusions
C HAPTER C ONTENTS
1. The Influence of Hupa Culture
2. Epilogue: The End of Indian Time
Photo 12 (to right): White Deerskin Dance #2, Hoopa Valley, 1899,
photo by A.W. Ericson. Ericson Photo Collection, Humboldt State University. Used with permission.
S ECTION 1
The Influence of Hupa
Culture
This thesis shows that Hupa culture exerted a significant
influence on the cause, creation, and outcomes of the Treaty
of 1864. Underlying Hupa actions and tactical adaptations
were deep-rooted cultural values concerning sovereignty and
justice. These cultural values were expressed through Hupa
concepts of homeland, and law. Throughout the contests of
this era, the Hupa demonstrated that they were not passive
actors in face of overwhelming U.S. power. Rather, the Hupa
displayed significant agency in their ability to make
independent decisions that countered U.S. power.
Hupa actions influenced outcomes to secure their homeland
and shape the trajectory of history. While the Hupa had no
centralized leadership, cultural values provided the Hupa with
a clarity of vision that coordinated tribal efforts in response to
the U.S. invasion, employing strategies of both war and peace.
The Hupa utilized their power in the defense of their
homeland, supporting proxy wars, and giving aid to allies with
common interests and values. Furthermore, the Hupa were
conscious as to the extent of U.S. power and the threat posed
by the U.S. Military. With this awareness, the Hupa adapted
strategies and tactics to meet the new challenges they faced
during this era to mitigate these threats.
Many tribes in the region were decimated or completely
destroyed by the U.S. invasion, and if significant deposits of
gold had been found in the Hoopa Valley, the tide of hostile
settlers might have been too much to hold back. At several
points the Hupa faced serious threats of force from the U.S.
Military and vigilante groups that could have inflicted
devastating violence, or could have resulted in the forcible
removal of the Hupa from their homeland.
However, after much suffering, the cumulative result of
executing this clarity of vision was an incredible victory for
the Hupa. The Hupa resistance had effectively defeated the
U.S. Military, causing U.S. authorities to seek a negotiated
peace treaty that provided relatively favorable terms for the
Hupa. The Treaty of 1864 laid a territorial foundation
through the creation of the Hoopa Valley Reservation that
allowed the continuation of Hupa life.
The motives of the U.S. Military in the formation of the Treaty
of 1864 aimed at subduing hostilities and implementing U.S.
control of Hupa lands and people. The Federal Government
deployed troops and agents to California to intervene with
State Government policies that were complicit in the
destruction and dispossession of tribes (Hurtado 1988:127).
Such actions contradicted Federal policy, which instead aimed
to settle and “domesticate” tribes on closed reservations away
92
from conflicts from Whites (Hurtado 1988:126). The presence
of the U.S. Military in the region was to intervene in the
hostilities between Whites and Indians, and also to protect
peaceful Indians from the genocide being carried out by local
vigilante groups and volunteer militias.
Many settlers in the region had been lobbying for the
complete removal of the Hupa to a reservation far south.
However, the Hupa had made it clear to the U.S. Military that
they would strongly resist any efforts to remove them, and at
the time the U.S. Military did not have the resources to
carryout such action, nor was it congruent with the policy
directives of Federal Indian policy. Fort Gaston had been
founded in the Hoopa Valley due to its strategic location near
the Klamath-Trinity junction and proximity to the Hupa at the
center of the wars in the region. Moreover, the size of the
Hoopa Valley was a rare geographic feature in the region. The
decision to establish a reservation around the Hoopa Valley
was congruent with Federal Indian policy of the time that
military commanders were enacting. The Hoopa Valley was
well suited due to the strategic location of the Valley in
proximity to the Hupa and other tribes the U.S. Military was
concerned would take up arms again. Moreover, there was a
potential for agricultural development, and the prospect of
being able to relocate other tribes to the Valley, removing
them from proximity with lands settlers were aiming to seize.
These conditions made the terms of the Treaty of 1864
congruent with Federal Indian policy of the time.
Hupa aims in the formation of the Treaty of 1864 were to
maintain permanent possession of the Hoopa Valley and to
ensure the safety and security of the Hupa People and their
way of life. The terms of the Treaty of 1864 established the
Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation east to west from ridge to
ridge, and north to south from canyon to canyon. The
Reservation was to be for the sole use of the Hupa and their
allies, and required the removal of all settlers residing in the
Valley. Those Hupa who had fought in the war could safely
return to their homes in the Valley and were given materials
to rebuild houses destroyed during the conflict, and amnesty
was given to those know to have attacked or killed soldiers or
setters. The Hupa could begin constructing a fish dam and
begin rebuilding the Hupa economy. The return of those
engaged in the conflict to the Valley reconstituted families and
extended kin groups needed to collectively care for the sick,
young, elderly, and widowed who had remained in the Valley
during the conflict. The crux of Hupa negotiations in the
formation of the Treaty of 1864 demanded possession of the
Hoopa Valley, which is what they achieved.
The Hupa ability to counter U.S. power and influence the
outcome of events showed another aspect of the history of
Northwestern California. Contrary to common depictions of
history, while the destruction of Indigenous peoples in the
region amounted to genocide, the Hupa and other tribes were
not passive or unwitting victims. Furthermore, the role of
culture and the themes of homeland, and law would persist
and adapt throughout Hupa history into the 21st century.
93
S ECTION 2
Epilogue: The End of
Indian Time
“The End of Indian Time” was a phrase used by the Hupa,
Yurok, and Karuk to mark the epochal transition between the
pre and post-contact world (Davis 1988:38). The changes and
struggles that came post-contact affected all dimensions of the
Hupa homeland. By the end of the 19th century, the cultural
geography and ecology of Northwestern California would be
changed forever. The establishment of the Hoopa Valley
Reservation would draw hard lines defining the boundaries of
the Hupa territory under U.S. law. The Hupa economy and
subsistence would be altered towards U.S. agrarian practices.
Boarding schools and Christian missionaries would influence
Hupa culture. However, the Hupa connection to their
homeland would persist, remaining a focal point of their
culture, politics, economics, and spirituality. Systems of
traditional Hupa law would be supplanted by U.S.
jurisdiction, however the fundamental concepts of tort law
remained active, payments for personal offenses would
continue, and conflicts would have to be resolved before
World Renewal dances. Post-contact, the livelihoods of Hupa
people changed a great deal, however Indian heritage
remained a central part of personal identity (Keeling
1992:38).
The Hupa and other tribes in the region experienced dramatic
reductions in their populations due to death from disease,
starvation, and warfare. In 1866, the Hupa population in the
Valley was estimated to be 650 (Goddard 1903:9). By 1880,
the population was around 500 people, while some
neighboring tribes had been almost completely obliterated
(Cook 1976:105). The population slowly recovered, and by the
end of the 20th century there were almost 2,000 people were
enrolled as members of the Hoopa Valley Tribe.
Despite the impacts of persecution and the introduction of
other religions, the World Renewal religion endured. Dances
would still be held, Hupa beliefs and practices observed, and
the sacred narratives that tie the Hupa to their homeland told.
Sacred sites in the landscape continued to be used in the
acquisition of spiritual knowledge and power. Traditional
regalia continued to be made, and revered as objects of
wealth.
Post-contact, the percentage of subsistence derived from nonagricultural sources declined. Large-scale agriculture was
never able to take sustainable hold in the valley, due to BIA
mismanagement and changes in policy (Lewis 1994:113). Still
for several decades, farming in the valley brought sustenance
and modest income to the Hupa. While acorn gathering
declined over time to no longer be a staple food, acorns were
still harvested and prepared along with other traditional
foods, and ever-important salmon.
94
Environmental degradation of fisheries occurred during the
Gold Rush and commercial fishing in the region. Salmon runs
declined from a projected 1,000,000 fish in 1850, to 500,000
in 1900, to barely 50,000 in the 1970s (Lewis 1994:115). In
addition to the environmental damage, fish populations were
further impacted by the decline of tribal maintenance of the
fisheries. The organized tribal fish-dam system had declined
to the point that communal Indian fish dams were no longer
built (Davis 1988:165). The last Hupa fish dam was built in
1956, and with it, the last formal First Salmon Ceremony was
held (Lewis 1994:115). Nevertheless, salmon remained a
traditional food.
The Trinity River was dammed upriver towards its
headwaters in 1963, after which the Hoopa Valley Tribe began
using political and legal action to press for the restoration of
tribal fisheries. The tribe was successful on numerous
occasions in getting water districts to raise water-flows. A
consistent argument made by the Tribe was that sustainable
fisheries were vital to the economic livelihood of the Hupa,
and that water levels needed to be sufficient for World
Renewal ceremonies, such as the Boat Dance.
The largest economic shift in the Hupa homeland came from
its forests. The economic boom that came during and after
the Second World War was coupled with improved road
access to the Valley. This made Hupa timber resources
commercially viable for the first time. In 1948, the Hoopa
Valley Business Council (a precursor to the modern Tribal
Council) supported a sustainable harvest of timber on the
reservation to provide an economic base for the Tribe (Lewis
1994:114). Between 1950 and 1970 and numerous mills
opened that employed hundreds of Hupa (Lewis 1994:115).
While the methods of the timber industry exacted persistent
environmental consequences, Hupa homeland provided an
economic source, albeit modest, that provided jobs and
funding to tribal governmental institutions. The Hoopa
Valley Tribe rose to become one of the most powerful and
expansive tribal governments in California, and was the first
tribe in California to be granted “self-rule” status in 1988.
The Hupa entered a third epoch, the world of Present Time.
Tracing back to Myth Time, the Hupa hold a continuum of
cultural connections to their homeland. They continue to
adapt tactics in exerting their sovereignty and use legal
systems to seek justice. The Hoopa Valley remains the center
of cultural and economic life, and the World Renewal Religion
persists. The Hupa continue to hold deep and proud
historical connections to their ancestors, who had passed on
knowledge, endured hardships, and actively fought to defend
their homeland. This connection to ancestors continues the
covenant of stewardship with the homeland for the benefit of
all. These deep connections to place reflect underlying
cultural axioms of sovereignty over the Hupa homeland
expressed throughout history. The end result was that the
Hoopa Valley and surrounding landscape remains their home
to this day.
95
C HAPTER 6
Bibliography
& Appendices
C HAPTER C ONTENTS
1. Sources
2. Appendices
S ECTION 1
Sources
Carmack, Robert M.
1972 Ethnohistory: A Review of its Development,
Definitions, Methods, and Aims. Annual Review of
Anthropology 1:227-246.
Alta California
1851 Our Indian Relations. Archival news editorial. Page
2: January 12.
Castillo, Edward
1978 The Impact of Euro-American Exploration and
Settlement. In Handbook of the North American
Indians, vol. 8: California. Heizer, ed. Pp. 99-127.
Washington: Smithsonian Institution.
Anderson, George E.
1956 The Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation in
Northwestern California: A Study of its Origins.
Master of Arts thesis, Department of History.
University of California
Barker, Joanne, ed.
2005 Sovereignty Matters: Locations of Contestation
and Possibility in Indigenous Struggles for SelfDetermination. Lincoln: University of Nebraska
Press.
Bledsoe, A. J.
1885 Indian Wars of the Northwest: A California
Sketch. San Francisco: Bacon and Company, Book
and Job Printers.
Bushnell, David Jr.
1939 Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, vol. 97(8):
Drawings by George Gibbs in the Far Northwest,
1849-1851. Washington: Smithsonian Institution.
California Star
1848 Editorial from Sonoma California. Archival news
editorial. Page 4: January 15.
Champagne, Duane
1989 American Indian Societies: Strategies and
Conditions of Political and Cultural Survival. Report
32. Cambridge: Cultural Survival Inc.
Cook, S. F.
1943 The Conflict Between the California Indian and
White Civilization. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Davis, Lee
1988 On This Earth: Hupa Land Domains, Images and
Ecology on “deddeh ninnisan”. Ph.D. dissertation,
Department of Anthropology, University of
California Berkeley.
1989 Tracking Jedediah Smith through Hupa Territory.
Theme issue, “The California Indians” American
Indian Quarterly 13(4):369-389
Durkheim, Émile
1997[1893] The Division of Labor in Society, trans. New
York: Free Press
97
Evans-Pritchard, E.
1940 The Nuer: A Description of the Modes of
Livelihood and Political Institutions of a Nilotic
People. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Fowler, Loretta
1982 Arapahoe Politics, 1851-1978: Symbols in Crises of
Authority. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Fried, Morton
1975 The Notion of the Tribe. Menlo Park, CA:
Cummings Publishing Company.
Goddard, Pliny Earle
1903 Life and Culture of the Hupa. University of
California Publications in American Archaeology
and Ethnology 1(1):1–88.
1904 Hupa Texts. University of California Publications
in American Archaeology and Ethnology 1(2):90–
378.
1913 Wayside Shrines in Northwestern California. New
Series, American Anthropologist 15(4):702-703.
Heffner, Kathy
1983 Ethnohistoric Study of the Trinity Summit,
Humboldt County, California. January Report.
Eureka: Six Rivers National Forest.
Heizer, Robert, ed.
1972 George Gibbs’ Journal of Redick McKee’s
Expedition through Northwestern California in
1851. Berkeley: University of California
Archaeological Research Facility.
Heizer, Robert, and Almquist, Alan
1971 The Other Californians: Prejudice and
Discrimination under Spain, Mexico, and the
United States to 1920. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Heizer, Robert, and Mills, John
1952 The Four Ages of Tsurai: A Documentary History
of the Indian Village on Trinidad Bay. Sacramento:
California Indian Library Collections.
Humboldt Times
1857 Editorial. Archival news editorial. Page 1: July 24.
1858 Our Indian Troubles. Archival news article. Page 2:
October 16.
1864a Late Indian Fight at Bald Mountain. Archival
news article. Page 2: January 9
1864b Our Indian Affairs. Archival news editorial. Page
2: August 6.
Hurtado, Albert L.
1988 Indian Survival on the California Frontier. New
Haven: Yale University Press.
Jordan, Timothy A.
2009 Reciprocity and the Hupa woodpecker. Master of
Arts thesis, Department of Anthropology. San
Francisco State University.
Keeling, R. H.
1992 Cry for Luck: Sacred Song and Speech among the
Yurok, Hupa, and Karok Indians of northwestern
California. Berkeley: University of California Press.
98
Kroeber, Alfred L.
1963 Anthropology: Culture Patterns & Processes. New
York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
1976[1925] Handbook of the Indians of California. New
York: Dover Publications Inc.
Levi-Strauss, Claude
1966 The Savage Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Lewis, David
1994 Neither Wolf Nor Dog: American Indians,
Environment, and Agrarian Change. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Mason, O.T.
1887 The Hupa Indians: An Ethnographic Sketch.
Science 9(211):149-152
McKee, John
1851 Minutes of the Expedition of Colonel Redick
McKee, United States Indian Agent, through
Northwestern California, Performed in the Summer
and Fall of 1851. Bureau of Indian Affairs, National
Archives.
Moore, John, ed.
1993 The Political Economy of North American Indians.
Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Nelson, Byron Jr.
1988[1978] Our Home Forever: The Hupa Indians of
Northwestern California. Rev. edition. Salt Lake
City: Howe Brothers Press.
Norton, Jack
1978 Genocide in Northwest California: When Our
Worlds Cried. San Francisco: Indian Historian
Press.
Pilling, Arnold
1978 Yurok. In Handbook of the North American
Indians, vol. 8: California. Heizer, ed. Pp. 137-154.
Washington: Smithsonian Institution.
Powers, Stephen
1877 Tribes of California. Washington D.C. Government
Printing Office.
Roschmann, Joachim
1991 No “Red Atlantis” on the Trinity: The Rejection of
the Indian Reorganization Act on the Hoopa Valley
Reservation in Northwestern California. Master of
Arts thesis, Department of History, University of
California, Davis.
Roscoe, Kathleen S.
1986 An Ethnohistoric Overview of the Hoopa Valley
Indian Reservation. Master of Arts thesis,
Department of History, Sonoma State University.
Sapir, Edward
2001 The Collected Works of Edward Sapir, vol. 14:
Northwest California Linguistics. Victor Golla, and
Sean O’Neill eds. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Scott, James
1989 Everyday Forms of Resistance. In Everyday Forms
of Peasant Resistance. Forrest D. Colburn ed.
Armonk: M. E. Sharpe Inc.
99
Secrest, William B.
2003 When the Great Spirit Died: The Destruction of
the California Indians 1850-1860. Sanger: Quill
Driver Books.
Spott, Robert, and A. L. Kroeber
1942 Yurok Narratives. University of California
Publications in American Archaeology and
Ethnology 35(9):143–256.
1978 Hupa, Chilula, and Whilkut. In Handbook of the
North American Indians, vol. 8: California. Heizer,
ed. Pp. 164-179. Washington: Smithsonian
Institution.
Wolf, Eric
1999 Envisioning Power: Ideologies of Dominance and
Crisis, Berkeley: University of California Press.
San Francisco Herald
1858 An Indian Warrior and Sagamore. Archival news
article. Page 1: October 30.
Swezey, Sean, and Hezier, Robert F.
1977 Ritual Management of Salmonid Fish Resources in
California. The Journal of California Anthropology
4(1):6-29.
Thompson, Lucy
1916 To the American Indian. Berkeley: Heyday Books
U.S. Department of War
1897 The War of the Rebellion: a Compilation of the
Official Records of the Union and Confederate
Armies. Series 1, vol. 50: Parts 1 and 2.
Washington: Government Printing Office.
Wallace, William J.
1948 Hupa Narrative Tales. The Journal of American
Folklore 61(242):345-355.
1949 Hupa Warfare. Southwest Museum Leaflets 23.
Humboldt Room Archives, Humboldt State
University.
100
California Cultures: A Monograph Series. Number 1. 2012
S ECTION 2
Sec. 2. Said reservation shall include a sufficient area of the
mountains on each side of the Trinity River as shall be
necessary for hunting grounds, gathering berries, seeds, &c.
Appendices
Sec. 3. The United States government shall provide suitable
clothing and blankets for the men, women, and children,
which shall be distributed each year by the agent in charge.
Sec. 4. Suitable instructions shall be given the squaws to
enable them to make their own clothing, take proper care of
their children, and become generally efficient in household
duties.
Appendix 1: The Treaty of 1864
Treaty of peace and friendship between the United States
government, and the Hoopa, South Fork, Redwood, and
Grouse Creek Indians.
Article I
Sec. 1. The United States government, through Austin Wiley,
superintendent of Indian affairs for the State of California, by
these presents doth agree and obligate itself to set aside for
reservation purposes for the sole use and benefit of the tribes
of Indians herein named, or such tribes as may hereafter avail
themselves of the benefit of this treaty, the whole of Hoopa
valley, to be held for the sole benefit of the Indians whose
names are hereunto affixed as the representatives of their
tribes.
Sec. 5. An agent and a sufficient number of employees to
instruct the Indians in farming and harvesting shall be
appointed, to reside upon the reservation, and no other white
men shall be permitted to reside upon said reservation except
such as are in the military service of the United States or
employed in government service.
Sec. 6. A physician shall be appointed to reside upon the
reservation, whose duty it shall be to minister to the wants of
the sick and look to their health and comfort.
Article II
Sec. 1. All Indians included among those subscribing to this
treaty must obey all orders emanating from the agent in
charge.
Sec. 2. No Indians belonging to either of the tribes herein
enumerated shall go beyond the limits of said reservation
101
California Cultures: A Monograph Series. Number 1. 2012
without a written pass from the agent in charge. All so
offending shall not be deemed friendly, and shall be hostile
Indians.
Sec. 3. All Indians who have taken part in the war waged
against the whites in this district for the past five years shall
be forgiven and entitled to the same protection as those who
have not been so engaged.
Sec. 4. All guns and pistols shall be delivered to the
commanding officer at Fort Gaston, to be held in trust by him
for the use and benefit of the Indians to be used by them in
hunting only, in such numbers and for such length of time as
the agent may direct. All ammunition in their charge to be
turned over to the agents and paid for at its actual value in
Indian money.
102

Where the Trails Return: - California Cultures: A Monograph Series

Transcription

Similar documents

Hupa, Yurok, Karuk maps and photos of

Teacher Self-Guide - National Museum of the American Indian

T:\Working Site Plans\_Malls Site\Imperial Valley SP arch.dwg, 3/28

INSIDE High Climbers

Wednesday, March 20 6 to 8 p.m. Centerra Mirage Elementary

HHR group 2013 ltrhd - Valley of Fear and The Original Haunted

Give the Gift of Art

Peaceful Valley Flyer for Life Quest Seminars BootCamp

Every Sport Needs A Star

LEADERSHIP CIRCLE - San Jose Silicon Valley Chamber of