not hope to win his bride by feats of arms or softer wooing,
but must buy her of her father like any other chattel, and
pay the price at once, or resign in favor of a richer man.
The inclinations of the girl are in nowise consulted; no
matter where her affections are placed, she goes to the
highest bidder. The purchase effected, the successful suitor
leads his blushing property to his hut and she becomes his
wife without further ceremony. Wherever this system of
wife-purchase obtains the rich old men almost absorb the
youth and beauty of the tribe, while the younger and poorer
men must content themselves with old and ugly wives. Hence
their eagerness for that wealth which will enable them to
throw away their old wives and buy new ones."[226]

A favorable soil for the growth of romantic and conjugal love! The
Omahas have a proverb that an old man cannot win a girl, he can only
win her parents; nevertheless if the old man has the ponies he gets
the girl. The Indians insist on their rights, too. Powers tells (318)
of a California (Nishinam) girl who loathed the man that had a claim
on her. She took refuge with a kind old widow, who deceived the
pursuers. When the deception was discovered, the noble warriors drew
their arrows and shot the widow to death in the middle of the village
amid general approval. I myself once saw a poor Arizona girl who had
taken refuge with a white family. When I saw the man to whom she had
been sold--a dirty old tramp whom a decent person would not want in
the same tribe, much less in the same wigwam--I did not wonder she
hated him; but he had paid for her and she was ultimately obliged to
live with him.

Of the Mandans, Catlin says (I., 119) that wives "are mostly treated
for with the father, as in all instances they are regularly bought and
sold." Belden relates (32) how he married a Sioux girl. One evening
his Indian friend Frombe came to his lodge and said he would take him
to see his sweetheart.

"I followed him and we went out of the village to where some girls
were watching the Indian boys play at ball. Pointing to a good-looking
Indian girl, Frombe said: 'That is Washtella,'

"'Is she a good squaw?' I inquired.

"'Very,' he replied.

"'But perhaps she will not want to marry me,' I said.

"'She has no choice,' he answered, laughing.

"'But her parents,' I interposed, 'will they like this kind of
proceeding?'

"'The presents you are expected to make them will be more acceptable
than the girl,' he answered."

And when full moon came the two were married.

Blackfeet girls, according to Grinnell (316),

"had very little choice in the selection of a husband.
If a girl was told she had to marry a certain man, she
had to obey. She might cry, but her father's will was
law, and she might be beaten or even killed by him if
she did not do as she was ordered."

Concerning the Missasaguas of Ontario, Chamberlain writes (145), that
in former times,

"when a chief desired to marry, he caused all the
marriageable girls in the village to come together and
dance before him. By a mark which he placed on the
clothes of the one he had chosen her parents knew she
had been the favored one."

Of the Nascopie girls, M'Lean says (127) that "their sentiments are
never consulted."'

The Pueblos, who treat their women exceptionally well, nevertheless
get their wives by purchase. With the Navajos "courtship is simple and
brief; the wooer pays for his bride and takes her home." (Bancroft, L,
511.) Among the Columbia River Indians, "to give a wife away without a
price is in the highest degree disgraceful to her family." (Bancroft,
I., 276.) "The Pawnees," says Catlin,[227] "marry and unmarry at
pleasure. Their daughters are held as legitimate merchandise.... The
women, as a rule, accept the situation with the apathy of the race."
Of the Cheyennes, Arapahoes, and other Plains Indians, Dodge says
(216) that girls are regarded as valuable property to be sold to the
highest bidder, in later times by preference to a white man, though it
is known that he will probably soon abandon his wife. In Oregon and
Washington "wives, particularly the later ones, are often sold or
traded off.... A man sends his wife away, or sells her, at his will."
(Gibbs, 199.)


OTHER WAYS OF THWARTING FREE CHOICE

Besides this commercialism, which was so prevalent that, as Dr.
Brinton says (_A.R._, 48), "in America marriage was usually by
purchase," there were various other obstacles to free choice. "In a
number of tribes," as the same champion of the Indian remarks, "the
purchase of the eldest daughter gave a man a right to buy all the
younger daughters as they reached nubile age." Concerning the
Blackfeet--who were among the most advanced Indians--Grinnell says
(217) that

"all the younger sisters of a man's wife were regarded
as his potential wives. If he was not disposed to marry
them, they could not be disposed of to any other man
without his consent." "When a man dies his wives become
the potential wives of his brother." "In the old days,
it was a very poor man who did not have three wives.
Many had six, eight, and some more than a dozen."

Morgan refers (_A.S._, 432) to forty tribes where sisters were
disposed of in bunches; and in all such cases liberty of choice is of
course out of the question. Indeed the wide prevalence of so utterly
barbarous and selfish a custom shows us vividly how far from the
Indian's mind in general was the thought of seriously consulting the
choice of girls.

Furthermore, to continue Dr. Brinton's enumeration, "the selection of
a wife was often regarded as a concern of the gens rather than of the
individual. Among the Hurons, for instance, the old women of the gens
selected the wives for the young men, and united them with painful
uniformity to women several years their senior." "Thus," writes Morgan
(_L. of I._, 320),

"it often happened that the young warrior at
twenty-five was married to a woman of forty, and
oftentimes a widow; while the widower at sixty was
joined to a maiden of twenty."

Besides these obstacles to free choice there are several others not
referred to by Dr. Brinton, the most important being the custom of
wrestling for a wife, and of infant betrothal or very early marriage.
According to a passage in Hearne (104) cited on a previous occasion,
and corroborated by W.H. Hooper and J. Richardson, it has always been
the custom of northern Indians to wrestle for the women they want, the
strongest one carrying off the prize, and a weak man being "seldom
permitted to keep a wife that a stronger man thinks worth his notice."
It is needless to say that this custom, which "prevails throughout all
their tribes," puts the woman's freedom of choice out of question as
completely as if she were a slave sold in the market. Richardson says
(II., 24) that

"the bereaved husband meets his loss with the
resignation which custom prescribes in such a case, and
seeks his revenge by taking the wife of another man
weaker than himself."

Duels or fights for women also occurred in California, Mexico,
Paraguay, Brazil and other countries.[228]

Among the Comanches "the parents exercise full control in giving their
daughters in marriage," and they are frequently married before the age
of puberty. (Schoolcraft, II., 132.) Concerning the customs of early
betrothal and marriage enough has been said in preceding pages. It
prevailed widely among the Indians and, of course, utterly frustrated
all possibility of choice. In fact, apart from this custom, Indian
marriage, being in the vast majority of cases with girls under
fifteen,[229] made choice, in any rational sense of the word, entirely
out of the question.


CENTRAL AND SOUTH AMERICAN EXAMPLES

It has long been fashionable among historians to attribute to certain
Indians of Central and South America a very high degree of culture.
This tendency has received a check in these critical days.[230] We
have seen that morally the Mexicans, Central Americans, and Peruvians
were hardly above other Indians. In the matter of allowing females to
choose their mates we likewise find them on the same low level. In
Guatemala even the men wore obliged to accept wives selected for them
by their parents, and Nicaraguan parents usually arranged the matches.
In Peru the Incas fixed the conditions under which matrimony might
take place as follows:

"The bridegroom and bride must be of the same town or
tribe, and of the same class or position; the former
must be somewhat less than twenty-four years of age,
the latter eighteen. The consent of the parents and
chiefs of the tribes was indispensible." (Tschudi,
184.)

Unless the consent of the parents had been obtained the marriage was
considered invalid and the children illegitimate. (Garcilasso de la
Vega, I., 207.) As regards the Mexicans, Bandelier shows (612, 620)
that the position of woman was "little better than that of a costly
animal," and he cites evidence indicating that as late as 1555 it was
ordained at a _concile_ that since it is customary among the Indians
"not to marry without permission of their principals ... and the
marriage among free persons is not as free as it should be," etc.

As for the other Indians of the Southern Continent it is needless to
add that they too are habitually guided by the thought that daughters
exist for the purpose of enriching their parents. To the instances
previously cited I may add what Schomburgk says in his book on
Guiana--that if the girl to whom the parents betroth their son is too
young to marry, they give him meanwhile a widow or an older unmarried
woman to live with. This woman, after his marriage, becomes his
servant. Musters declares (186) that among the Tehuelches
(Patagonians) "marriages are always those of inclination." But
Falkner's story is quite different (124):

"As many of these marriages are compulsive on the side
of the woman, they are frequently frustrated. The
contumacy of the woman sometimes tires out the patience
of the man, who then turns her away, or sells her to
the person on whom she has fixed her affections."

Westermarck fancies he has a case on his side in Tierra del Fuego,
where, "according to Lieutenant Bove, the eagerness with which young
women seek for husbands is surprising, but even more surprising is the
fact that they nearly always attain their ends." More careful study of
the pages of the writer referred to[231] and a moment's unbiassed
reflection would have made it clear to Westermarck that there is no
question here either of choice or of marriage in our sense of the
words. The "husbands" the girls hunted for were boys of fourteen to
sixteen, and the girls themselves began at twelve to thirteen years of
age, or five years before they became mothers, and Fuegian marriage
"is not regarded as complete until the woman has become a mother," as
Westermarck knew (22, 138). In reality the conduct of these girls was
nothing but wantonness, in which the men, as a matter of course,
acquiesced. The missionaries were greatly scandalized at the state of
affairs, but their efforts to improve it were strongly resented by the
natives.[232]


WHY INDIANS ELOPE

With the Abipones of Paraguay "it frequently happens," according to
Dobrizhoffer (207),

"that the girl rescinds what has been _settled and
agreed upon between the parents and the bridegroom_,
obstinately rejecting the very mention of marriage.
Many girls, _through fear of being compelled to marry_,
have concealed themselves in the recesses of the woods
or lakes; seeming to dread the assaults of tigers less
than the untried nuptials."

The italics are mine; they make it obvious that the choice of the
girls is not taken into account and that they can escape parental
tyranny only by running away. Among the Indians in general it often
happens that merely to escape a hated suitor a girl elopes with
another man. Such cases are usually referred to as love-matches, but
all they indicate is a (comparative) preference, while proving that
there was no liberty of choice. A girl whose parents try to force her
on a much-married warrior four or five times her age must be only too
glad to run away with any young man who comes along, love or no
love.[233]

In the chapter on Australia I commented on Westermarck's topsy-turvy
disposition to look upon elopements as indications of the liberty of
choice. He repeats the same error in his references to Indians. "It is
indeed," he says,

"common in America for a girl to run away from a bridegroom
_forced upon her by the parents_, whilst, if they _refuse to
give their daughter_ to a suitor whom she loves, the couple
elope. Thus, among the Dakotas, as we are told by Mr.
Prescott, 'there are many matches made by elopement, _much
to the chagrin of the parents_.'"

The italics again indicate that denial of choice is the
custom, while the elopement indicates the same thing, for if there
were liberty of choice there would be no need of eloping. Moreover, an
Indian elopement does not at all indicate a romantic preference on the
part of an eloping couple. If we examine the matter carefully we find
that an Indian elopement is usually a very prosaic affair indeed. A
young man likes a girl and wishes to marry her; but she has no choice,
as her father insists on a number of ponies or blankets in payment for
her which the suitor may not have; therefore the two ran away. In
other words, an Indian elopement is a purely commercial transaction,
and one of a very shady character too, being nothing less than a
desire to avoid paying the usual price for a girl. It is in fact a
kind of theft, an injustice to the parents; for while paying for a
bride may be evidence of savagery, it is the custom among Indians, and
parents naturally resent its violation, though ultimately they may
forgive the elopers. Dodge relates (202) that among the Indians of the
great plains parents prefer a rich suitor, though he may have several
wives already. If the daughter prefers another man the only thing to
do is to elope. This is not easy, for a careful watch is kept on
suspicious cases. But the girl may manage to step out while the family
is asleep. The lover has two ponies in readiness, and off they speed.
If overtaken by the pursuers the man is liable to be killed. If not,
the elopers return after a few weeks and all is forgiven. Such
elopements, Dodge adds, are frequent in the reservations where young
men are poor and cannot afford ponies. Moreover, the concentration of
large numbers of Indians of different bands and tribes on the
reservations has increased the opportunities of acquaintance and
love-making among the young people.

In an article on Love-Songs among the Omaha Indians,[234] Miss Alice
Fletcher calls attention to the fact that the individual is little
considered in comparison with the tribal organization: "Marriage was
therefore an affair of the gentes, and not the free union of a man and
woman as we understand the relation." But side by side with the formal
marriage sanctioned by the tribe grew up the custom of secret
courtship and elopement; so the saying among the Omahas is: "An old
man buys his wife; a young man steals his." Dorsey says (260):

"Should a man get angry because his single daughter, sister,
or niece has eloped, the other Omahas would talk about him
saying, 'That man is angry on account of the elopement of
his daughter.' They would ridicule him for his behavior."

Other Indians take the matter much more seriously. When a Blackfoot
girl elopes her parents feel very bitter against the man.

"The girl has been stolen. The union is no marriage at
all. The old people are ashamed and disgraced for their
daughter. Until the father has been pacified by
satisfactory payments, there is no marriage."
(Grinnell, 215.)

The Nez Percés so bitterly resent elopements that they consider the
bride in such a case as a prostitute and her parents may seize upon
the man's property. (Bancroft, I., 276.)

Indian elopements, I repeat, are nothing but attempts to dodge payment
for a bride, and therefore do not afford the least evidence of exalted
sentiments, _i.e._, of romantic love, however romantic they may be as
incidents. Read, for instance, what Mrs. Eastman writes (103)
regarding the Sioux:

"When a young man is unable to purchase the girl he
loves best, or if her parents are unwilling she should
marry him, if he have gained the heart of the maiden he
is safe. They appoint a time and place to meet; take
whatever will be necessary for their journey....
Sometimes they merely go to the next village to return
the next day. But if they fancy a bridal tour, away
they go several hundred miles, with the grass for their
pillow, the canopy of heaven for their curtains, and
the bright stars to watch over them. When they return
home the bride goes at once to chopping wood, and the
groom to smoking."

What does such a romantic incident tell us regarding the nature of the
elopers' feelings--whether they are refined and sentimental or purely
sensual and frivolous? Nothing whatever. But the last sentence of Mrs.
Eastman's description--photographed from life--indicates the absence
of at least four of the most elementary and important ingredients of
romantic love. If he adored his bride, if he sympathized with her
feelings, if he felt the faintest impulse toward gallantry or
sacrifice of his selfish comforts, he would not allow her to chop wood
while he loafed and smoked. Moreover, if he had an appreciation of
personal beauty he would not permit his wife to sacrifice hers before
she is out of her teens by making her do all the hard work. But why
should he care? Since all his marriage customs are on a commercial
basis, why should he not discard a wife of thirty and take two new
ones of fifteen each?


SUICIDE AND LOVE

Having thus disposed of elopements, let us examine another phenomenon
which has always been a mainstay of those who would fain make out that
in matters of love there is no difference between us and savages.
Waitz (III., 102) accepts stories of suicide as evidence of genuine
romantic love, and Westermarck follows his example (358, 530), while
Catlin (II., 143) mentions a rock called Lover's Leap,

"from the summit of which, it is said, a beautiful
Indian girl, the daughter of a chief, threw herself
off, in presence of her tribe, some fifty years ago,
and dashed herself to pieces, to avoid being married to
a man whom her father had decided to be her husband,
and whom she would not marry."

Keating has a story which he tells with all the operatic
embellishments indulged in by his guide (I., 280). Reduced to its
simplest terms, the tale, as he gives it, is as follows:

In a village of the tribe of Wapasha there lived a girl
named Winona. She became attached to a young hunter who
wished to marry her, but her parents refused their
consent, having intended her for a prominent warrior.
Winona would not listen to the warrior's addresses and
told her parents she preferred the hunter, who would
always be with her, to the warrior, who would be
constantly away on martial exploits. The parents paid
no attention to her remonstrances and fixed the day for
her wedding to the man of their choice. While all were
busy with the preparations, she climbed the rock
overhanging the river. Having reached the summit, she
made a speech full of reproaches to her family, and
then sang her dirge. The wind wafted her words and song
to her family, who had rushed to the foot of the rock.
They implored her to come down, promising at last that
she should not be forced to marry. Some tried to climb
the rock, but before they could reach her she threw
herself down the precipice and fell a corpse at the
feet of her friends.

Mrs. Eastman also relates the story of Winona's leap (65-70). "The
incident is well known," she writes. "Almost everyone has read it a
dozen times, _and always differently told_." It is needless to say
that a story told in a dozen different ways and embellished by
half-breed guides and white collectors of legends has no value as
scientific evidence.[235] But even if we grant that the incidents
happened just as related, there is nothing to indicate the presence of
exalted sentiments. The girl preferred the hunter because he would be
more frequently with her than the warrior (one of the versions says
she wanted to wed "the successful hunter")[236]--which leaves us in
doubt as to the utilitarian or sentimental quality of her attachment.
Apparently she was not very eager to marry the hunter, for had she
been, why did she refuse to live when they told her she would not be
forced to marry the warrior? But the most important consideration is
that she did not commit suicide for _love_ at all, but from
_aversion_--to escape being married to a man she disliked. Aversion is
usually the motive which leads Indian women to what are called
"suicides for love." As Griggs remarks (_l.c._):

"Sometimes it happens that a young man wants a girl,
and her friends are also quite willing, while she alone
is unwilling. The purchase-bundle is desired by her
friends, and hence compulsion is resorted to. The girl
yields and goes to be his slave, or she holds out
stoutly, sometimes taking her own life as the
alternative. Several cases of the kind have come to the
personal knowledge of the writer."

Not long ago I read in the Paris _Figaro_ a learned article on suicide
in which the assertion was made that, as is well known, savages never
take their own lives. W.W. Westcott, in his otherwise excellent book
on suicide, which is based on over a hundred works relating to his
subject, makes the same astounding assertion. I have shown in
preceding pages that many Africans and Polynesians commit suicide, and
I may now add that Indians seem still more addicted to this idiotic
practice. Sometimes, indeed, they have cause for it. I have already
cited the words of Belden that suicide is very common among Indian
women, and that "considering the treatment they receive, it is a
wonder there is not more of it." Keating says (II., 172) that "among
the women suicide is far more frequent [than among men], and is the
result of jealousy, or of disappointments in love; sometimes extreme
grief at the loss of a child will lead to it." "Not a season passes
away," writes Mrs. Eastman (169),

"but we hear of some Dacotah girl who puts an end to
her life in consequence of jealousy, or from the fear
of being forced to marry some one she dislikes. A short
time ago a very young girl hung herself rather than
become the wife of a man who was already the husband of
one of her sisters."

It cannot be denied that in some of these cases (which might be
multiplied indefinitely) there is a strong provocation to self-murder.
But as a rule suicide among Indians, as among other savages and
barbarians, and among civilized races, is not proof of strong feeling,
but of a weak intellect. The Chippewas themselves hold it to be a
foolish thing (Keating, II., 168); and among the Indians in general it
was usually resorted to for the most trivial causes.

"The very frequent suicides committed [by Creeks] in
consequence of the most trifling disappointment or
quarrel between men and women are not the result of
grief, but of savage and unbounded revenge."

(Schoolcraft, V., 272.) Krauss (222) found that suicide was frequent
among the Alaskan Thlinket Indians. Men sometimes resorted to it when
they saw no other way of securing revenge, for a person who causes a
suicide is fined and punished as if he were a murderer. One woman cut
her throat because a shahman accused her of having by sorcery caused
another one's illness. A favorite mode of committing suicide is to go
out into the sea, cast away oar and rudder, and deliver themselves to
wind and waves. Sometimes they change their mind. A man, whose face
had been all scratched up by his angry wife, left home to end his
life; but after spending the night with a trader he concluded to go
home and make up the quarrel. Mrs. Eastman (48) tells of an old squaw
who wanted to hang herself because she was angry with her son; but
when, "after having doubled the strap four times to prevent its
breaking, she found herself choking, her courage gave way--she yelled
frightfully." They cut her down and in an hour or two she was quite
well again. Another squaw, aged ninety, attempted to hang herself
because the men would not allow her to go with a war-party. Her object
in wanting to go was to have the pleasure of mutilating the corpses of
enemies! Keating says that Sank men sometimes kill themselves because
they are envious of the power of others. Neill (85) records the cases
of a Dakota wife who hanged herself because her husband had flogged
her for hiding his whiskey; of a woman who hanged herself because her
son-in-law refused to give her whiskey; of an old woman who flew into
a passion and committed suicide because her pet granddaughter had been
whipped by her father.

If a storm in a tea-kettle is accepted as a true storm, then we may
infer from these suicides the existence of deep feeling and profound
despair. As a matter of fact, a savage's feelings are no deeper than a
tea-kettle, and for that very reason they boil up and overflow more
readily than if they were deeper. Loskiel tells us (74-75), that
Delaware Indians, both men and women, have committed suicide on
discovering that their spouse was unfaithful; these are the same
Indians among whom husbands used to abandon their wives when they had
babes, and wives their husbands when there were no more presents to
receive. Yet even if we admitted such feelings to have been deep,
suicide would not prove the existence of genuine affection.
Heckewelder reports instances of Indians who took their own lives
because the girls they loved and were engaged to jilted them and
married other men. Was the love which led to these suicides mere
sensual passion or was it refined sentiment, devoted affection? There
is nothing to tell us, and the inference from everything we know about
Indians is that it was purely sensual. Gibbs, who understood Indian
nature thoroughly, took this view when he wrote (198) that among the
Indians of Oregon and Washington "a strong sensual attachment" not
rarely leads young women to destroy themselves on the death of a
lover. And the writer who refers in Schoolcraft (V., 272) to the
frequent suicides among the Creeks declares that genuine love is
unknown to any of them. Had the young men referred to by Heckewelder
lost their lives in trying to save the lives of the girls in question,
it might be permissible to infer the existence of affection, but no
Indian has ever been known to commit such an act. If a savage commits
suicide he does it like everything else, for selfish reasons--as an
_antidote to distress_--and selfishness is the very negation of love.
The distinguished psychologist, Dr. Maudsley, has well said that

"any poor creature from the gutter can put an end to
himself; there is no nobility in the act and no great
amount of courage required for it. It is a deed rather
of cowardice shirking duty, generated in _a monstrous
feeling of self_, and accomplished in the most sinful,
because wicked, ignorance."

In itself, no doubt, a suicide is apt to be extremely "romantic,"
A complete dime-novel is condensed in a few remarks which Squier
makes[237] anent a quaint Nicaraguan custom.

Poor girls, he says, would often get their marriage portion by having
amours with several young men. Having collected enough for a "dowry,"
the girl would assemble all her lovers and ask them to build a house
for her and the one she intended to choose for a husband. She then
selected the one she liked best, and the others had their pains and
their past for their love. Sometimes it happened that one of the
discarded lovers committed suicide from grief. In that case the
special honor was in store for him of being eaten up by his former
rivals and colleagues. The bride also, I presume, partook of the
feast--at least after the men had had all they wanted.


LOVE-CHARMS

Indians indulge not only in elopements and suicide, but in the use of
love-charms--powders, potions, and incantations. Inasmuch as the
distinguished anthropologist Waitz mentions (III., 102) the use of
such charms among the things which show that "genuine romantic love is
not rare among Indians," it behooves us to investigate the matter.

The ancient Peruvians had, according to Tschudi,[238] a special class
of medicine men whose business it was

"to bring lovers together. For this purpose they
prepared talismans made from roots or feathers, which
were introduced, secretly if possible, into the clothes
or bed of those whose inclination was to be won.
Sometimes hairs of the persons whose love was to be won
were used, or else highly colored birds from the
forest, or their feathers only. They also sold to the
lovers a so-called _Kuyanarumi_ (a stone to cause love)
of which they said it could be found only in places
that had been struck by lightning. They were mostly
black agates with white veins and were called _Sonko
apatsinakux_ (mutual heart-carriers). These
_Runatsinkix_ (human-being-uniters) also prepared
infallible and irresistible love-potions."

Among North American Indians the Ojibways or Chippawas appear to have
been especially addicted to the use of love-powders. Keating writes
(II., 163):

"There are but few young men or women among the
Chippewas who have not compositions of this kind, to
promote love in those in whom they feel an interest.
These are generally powders of different colors;
sometimes they insert them into punctures made in the
heart of the little images which they procure for this
purpose. They address the images by the names of those
whom they suppose them to represent, bidding them to
requite their affection. Married women are likewise
provided with powders, which they rub over the heart of
their husbands while asleep, in order to secure
themselves against any infidelity."

Hoffman says[239] of these same powders that they are held in great
honor, and that their composition is a deep secret which is revealed
to others only in return for high compensation. Nootka maidens
sometimes sprinkle love-powders into the food intended for their
lovers, and await their coming. The Menomini[240] have a charm called
_takosáwos_, "the powder that causes people to love one another." It
is composed of vermilion and mica laminae, ground very fine and put
into a thimble which is carried suspended from the neck or from some
part of the wearing apparel. It is also necessary to secure from the
one whose inclination is to be won a hair, a nail-paring, or a small
scrap of clothing, which must also be put into the thimble.

The Rev. Peter Jones says (155) that the Ojibway Indians have a charm
made of red ochre and other ingredients, with which they paint their
faces, believing it to possess a power so irresistible as to cause the
object of their desire to love them. But the moment this medicine is
taken away, and the charm withdrawn, the person who before was almost
frantic with love hates with a perfect hatred. The Sioux also have
great faith in spells.

"A lover will take gum," says Mrs. Eastman, "and, after putting some
medicine in it, will induce the girl of his choice to chew it, or put
it in her way so that she will take it up of her own accord." Burton
thought (160) that an Indian woman "will administer 'squaw medicine,'
a love philter, to her husband, but rather for the purpose of
retaining his protection than his love."

Quite romantic are all these things, no doubt; but I fail to see that
they throw any light whatever on the problem whether Indians can love
sentimentally. Waitz refers particularly to the Chippewa custom of
putting powders into the images of coveted persons as a symptom of
"romantic love," forgetting that a superstitious fool may resort to
such a procedure to evoke any kind of love, sensual or sentimental,
and that unless there are other and more specific symptoms there is
nothing to indicate the quality of the lover's feelings or the ethical
character of his desires.


CURIOSITIES OF COURTSHIP

Some of the Indian courtship customs are quite romantic; perhaps we
may find evidence of romantic love in this direction. Those of the
Apaches have been already referred to. Pawnee courtship is thus
described by Grinnell.[241]

"The young man took his stand at some convenient point
where he was likely to see the young woman and waited
for her appearance. Favorite places for waiting were
near the trail which led down to the river or to the
spot usually resorted to for gathering wood. The lover,
wrapped in his robe or blanket, which covered his whole
person except his eyes, waited here for the girl, and
as she made her appearance stepped up to her and threw
his blanket about her, holding her in his arms. If she
was favorably inclined to him she made no resistance,
and they might stand there concealed by the blanket,
which entirely covered them, talking to one another for
hours. If she did not favor him she would at once free
herself from his embrace and go away."

This blanket-courtship, as it might be called, also prevailed among
the Indians of the great plains described by Colonel Dodge (193-223).
The lover, wrapped in a blanket, approaches the girl's lodge and sits
before it. Though in plain view of everybody, it is etiquette not to
see a lover under such circumstances. After more or less delay the
girl may give signs and come out, but not until she has taken certain
precautions against the Indian's "romantic" love which have been
already referred to. He seizes her and carries her off a little
distance. At first they sit under two blankets, but later on one
suffices. Thus they remain as long as they please, and no one disturbs
them. If there is more than one suitor the girl cries out if seized by
the wrong one, who at once lets go. In these cases it may seem as if
the girl had her own choice. But it does not at all follow that
because she favors a certain suitor she will be allowed to marry him.
If her father prefers another she will have to take him, unless her
lover is ready to risk an elopement.

The Piutes of the Pacific slope, like some eastern Indians, appear to
have indulged in a form of nocturnal courtship strikingly resembling
that of the Dyaks of Borneo. The Indian woman (Sarah W. Hopkins) who
wrote _Life Among the Piutes_ declares that the lover never speaks to
his chosen one,

"but endeavors to attract her attention by showing his
horsemanship, etc. As he knows that she sleeps next to
her grandmother in the lodge, he enters in full dress
after the family has retired for the night, and seats
himself at her feet. If she is not awake, her
grandmother wakes her. He does not even speak to the
young woman or grandmother, but when the young woman
wishes him to go away, she rises and goes and lies down
by the side of her mother. He then leaves as silently
as he came in. This goes on sometimes for a year or
longer if the young woman has not made up her mind. She
is never forced by her parents to marry against her
wishes."

Courtship among the Nishinam Indians of California is thus described
by Powers (317):

"The Nishinam may be said to set up and dissolve the
conjugal estate almost as easily as do the brute
beasts. No stipulated payment is made for the wife. A
man seeking to become a son-in-law is bound to cater
(_yé-lin_) or make presents to the family, which is to
say, he will come along some day with a deer on his
shoulder, perhaps fling it off on the ground before the
wigwam, and go his way without a single word being
spoken. Some days later he may bring along a brace of
hare or a ham of grizzly-bear meat, or some fish, or a
string of _hâ-wok_ [shell money]. He continues to make
these presents for awhile, and if he is not acceptable
to the girl and her parents they return him an
equivalent for each present (to return his gift would
be grossly insulting); but if he finds favor in her
eyes they are quietly appropriated, and in due course
of time he comes and leads her away, or comes to live
at her house."

Belden remarks (301) that a Sioux seldom gets the girl he wants to
marry to love him. He simply buys her of her parents, and as for the
girl, after being informed that she has been sold

"she immediately packs up her little keepsakes and
trinkets, and without exhibiting any emotion, such as
is common to white girls, leaves her home, and goes to
the lodge of her master,"

where she is henceforth his wife and "willing slave." Among the