|
Post by kingsleybray on Mar 14, 2012 17:33:20 GMT -5
There are three references to Shell Man, in order:
May 1832: Catlin paints the portrait of "Ka-pes-ka-day (the shell), a brave of the O-gla-la band", at Fort Pierre.
November 5, 1844: David Adams, chief trader at Fort Platte, is visited by "the man that is afrad of his horses and the bad wond and the medson man and the shel and 3 or 4 others . . . to get us to send a trador to vilig". The village in question is that of the Oglala proper or Hunkpatila band.
Sept. 1851 - Shell Man is one of the five Lakota delegates to travel to Washington at the conclusion of the Horse Creek Treaty councils. The delegation, plus the Cheyenne and Arapaho delegates, returns to the plains in spring 1852.
I have no later reference to Shell Man. I have sometimes wondered if the Oglala warrior Shell Boy, born c. 1836 and an associate of Crazy Horse, was his son, but I have no proof of that. Maggie No Fat, photographed at Pine Ridge by ethnologist John C. Ewers, said she was Shell Man's daughter, and had a copy of the Catlin portrait in a beaded frame.
|
|
|
Post by Dietmar on Mar 15, 2012 16:56:45 GMT -5
I think it is only known in the family.
Thanks for the details about Shell Man, Kingsley.
|
|
|
Post by gregor on Mar 16, 2012 12:59:44 GMT -5
This is Maggie No Fat Dietmar, soon i will come back for your questions. CU
|
|
|
Post by hreinn on Mar 17, 2012 16:24:17 GMT -5
Here is a different view on this matter. Ever since it was proposed several years ago, that Lone Horn is the man sitting 2nd to the right in the photograph in reply #12 above. I have several times taken a look at the photograph. I always come to the same conclusion. It is not Lone Horn who is sitting 2nd from right. Because: 1. On the photograph, the man sitting 2nd from right is the shortest of those sitting. Lone Horn was not short. For example, in the picture of the Washington delegation 1875 [1] Lone Horn is standing next to the very tall Long Mandan and is not so much shorter than him. In that photograph Lone Horn is not the shortest of those standing and he is taller than the Rattling Ribs, Oglala Sitting Bull and Scalp Face. 2. The person on the photograph has a bigger and "higher" nose than Lone Horn, i.e. the nose "arises" further into the air above the face than the nose of Lone Horn. Lone Horn's nose is "closer to his face". See all known pictures of Lone Horn in the thread Lone Horn of the North [2]. (I know it is a bit awkward description due to bad English, but I hope you understand what is meant) To me the man sitting 2nd from right is the Brulé Little Thunder (from the 1855 Blue Water Creek Massacre). Photograph of Little Thunder [3]: Everything seems to fit: the body size, the nose, the forehead, cheek bones, lips and all ratios in the face between different parts in the face. The Brulé Little Thunder would be a "logical" representative of the Brulé Wazhazha Scattering Bear - the appointed headman of all Lakhotas according to the treaty in September 1851. Belonging to the same group of the Lakhota (i.e. Brulé). Perhaps the relatively old Scattering Bear didn't trust himself to take such a long travel as to Washington. I suggest that the listed Lakhota delegate Little Chief in the original post of this thread is actually the Brulé Little Thunder. The delegates of the Lakhota in this trip to Washington according to the list in the original post of this thread: The Unicorn = Lone Horn = Mnikhowozu (Miniconju) Lakhota The Little Chief The Shellman = Shell Man = Oglala Lakhota The Watchful Elk and the Goose = Sihasapa (Blackfoot) Lakhota If Little Chief is not a Brulé Lakhota, then there is missing a representative of Brulé which would mean an "unbalance" in the group. Because there would be no one from the second largest group of the Lakhota (i.e. Brulé) and there would be no one from the same group as the appointed headman of all the Lakhotas, i.e. the Brulé Scattering Bear. In Fred Werner's book "With Harney on the Blue Water - Battle of Ash Hollow, September 3, 1855" the man on the photograph is identified as Brulé Lakota Little Thunder. The source of the photograph identifies this man as Yankton Dakota Little Thunder. I trust better Fred Werner. Hreinn References: 1. Photograph of Lakhota Delegation 1875, see reply #5 in the thread 1875 Sioux delegation = www.american-tribes.com/messageboards/dietmar/1875identitfication1.jpg2. amertribes.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=miniconjou1&action=display&thread=9013. cantonasylumforinsaneindians.com/history_blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Little-Thunder-Yankton-Dakota-1867.jpg
|
|
|
Post by hreinn on Mar 17, 2012 17:08:12 GMT -5
Regarding Shell Man: It was suggested in reply #10 above by Gregor that Shell Man could be the 3rd from left in photograph in replies #10 and #12. Gregor I am sorry to say that I don't see the same. I don't find the man sitting 3rd from left looking alike the man in Catlin's drawing. But as often, people don't see the same expression in faces. Catlin's drawing from 1832 (reply #10 above) shows a man with a nose which is a little bit flattened at the end (where the air is inhaled). There are only 2 persons on the photograph (best viewed in reply #12) who have their nose a little bit flattened at the end. That is the person sitting on far right and the person sitting 3rd from right. Another features in the drawing: 1. A relatively thick upper lip. 2. Relatively long distance between the eyes 3. Relatively long distance from the eyelids to the eye brows. 4. Not broad shouldered. It is difficult to say if either is looking alike Catlin's drawing. Especially the man on the far right is very unclear. I find it convincing that Shell Boy is the son of Shell Man. Based on information in this thread, Shell Man (b.ca.1800-1815) perhaps had 3 children: 1. Shell Boy (b.ca.1836) 2. Quick Bear 3. Maggie No Fat Is more known about this family ? Hreinn
|
|
|
Post by Dietmar on Mar 18, 2012 6:35:33 GMT -5
Hi Hreinn,
thanks for your contribution.
I know there´s a little bit speculation in most of what is presented in this thread, but there are some points in your posts that are a little too far off for me.
There is not one source about Little Thunder being a part of the 1851/52 delegation. Actually the little we know speaks for Little Chief being a Cheyenne representative. There is confusion regarding Red Skin/Plume, yes. Some accounts have him as Cheyenne, but you can see by his Lakota name that he wasn´t.
Little Chief in turn clearly has a Cheyenne name applied to him. A descendant later stated that he was part of the delegation. And after the trip he signed a treaty in 1853 under the name Little Chief. Moreover we have two portraits of Little Chief taken on the trip to Washington in 1851 and to me there is no resemblance to the man sitting second from right.
The 1867 Little Thunder photograph you took for comparison has always be labeled Yankton, and I could be wrong, but I find it more convincing that he was a indeed Yankton. He was part of a big Yankton delegation that year. Perhaps he was the Little Thunder who was listed in 1864 as a Yankton Scout for the US Army. There were almost no Western Sioux in the delegation, apart from two Lower Brule and Kills First, Miniconjou.
No one here presented a proof yet that Quick Bear and the Shell Man of Catlin were related so to list him as a son in your post is not so appropriate, or at least too soon.
Finally, I´m grateful for any Catlin portrait, because he was the first to create pictures of Lakota and other Indian chiefs, but I don´t have much confidence in the quality of his portrait skills and so I won´t comment on any comparison to later photographs.
Best wishes
Dietmar
|
|
|
Post by hreinn on Mar 18, 2012 8:13:59 GMT -5
Dietmar: OK. I agree it is well established that Little Chief on the list of the delegates was the Cheyenne Little Chief. OK. Most likely it seems to be correct that Little Thunder in the photograph is the Yankton Dakota Little Thunder, but not Brulé Lakhota. After I posted reply #18 yesterday, I have seen several photographs of Yankton Dakota delegates from 1867 and many of them have the same background and carpet on the floor as the one refered to in my reply #18. See the website: www.josephmarshall.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1195793944But there is a small possibility that Little Thunder on the photograph was actually the Brulé Lakhota Little Thunder and wrongly labeled as Yankton Dakota just because most of the delegates were Yankton Dakota. Because as you wrote, there were also 2 Lower Brulés in the 1867 delegation along with the Yankton Dakotas. So perhaps the photographer or the one who labeled the photographs didn't know that few of the delegates were Brulé unlike the vast majority of the delegates who were Yankton Dakota. So there is a small change that Brulé Little Thunder was actually also a delegate. And that is perhaps the reason why Fred Werner labeled the man on the photograph as Brulé Lakhota in his detailed book. Whether or not the man on the photograph is Brulé Lakhota or Yankton Dakota. I still think the person sitting 2nd from right on the picture in reply #12 is not Lone Horn, based on the body size and the nose, as described above in reply #18. Regarding Shell Man: No one here presented a proof yet that Quick Bear and the Shell Man of Catlin were related so to list him as a son in your post is not so appropriate, or at least too soon. Yes I agree there is no proof for the link between Quick Bear and Shell Man, that is why I wrote; "perhaps". As quoted in full: Based on information in this thread, Shell Man (b.ca.1800-1815) perhaps had 3 children: It was based on reply #13 above: I wonder if there is any link to the Wazhazha leader Quick Bear, whose father was also named Shell Man. And also based on reply #15 above: I have no later reference to Shell Man. I have sometimes wondered if the Oglala warrior Shell Boy, born c. 1836 and an associate of Crazy Horse, was his son, but I have no proof of that. Maggie No Fat, photographed at Pine Ridge by ethnologist John C. Ewers, said she was Shell Man's daughter, and had a copy of the Catlin portrait in a beaded frame. Were there two different Shell Man, one Oglala and another Brulé ? Oglala Shell Man = on Catlin's drawing from 1832. Brulé Shell Man = father to the Wazhazha Brulé Quick Bear. If so, it was perhaps the Brulé Shell Man who visited Washington 1851-1852 but not the Oglala Shell Man who Catlin painted. If so, then we would have a Wazhazha Brulé Shell Man as a delegate representing the Wazhazha Brulé Scattering Bear. Just a speculation. Hreinn
|
|
|
Post by gregor on Mar 18, 2012 9:23:42 GMT -5
Hi Dietmar, unfortunately I have to disappoint you. I could not improve the picture of the delegation. The format is probably too small and too blurry. Each tool I used has deteriorated the result. The picture is probably a scan from a print. We would need a scan of the original. Luskey and Fleming give in their book "The North American Indians in early photographs," Notes on this Daguerreotype. The shooting of the Delegation of 1851 were probably done in Philadelphia (possibly by James E. McClees or Marcus Aurelius Root). In 1880 the son of the Cheyenne Little Chief wrote to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs and asked for a copy of the photograph of his father (with White Antelope and alights-On-A-Cloud) . The request could not be met. At that time, an identification of the image and of the persons was no longer possible, presumably because the original was no longer available.
|
|
|
Post by gregor on Mar 18, 2012 10:13:30 GMT -5
Hi Dietmar, hello hreinn, of course it is always difficult to identify persons from different media, which are also created to distinguishable historic times. My reference to Shell One is of course a theory. But what do we have? Friday, Alights and White Antelope are save. Then we have theories about the second persons on the left and right side. I believe Lone Horn possible. Not only because of his facial features, also for his posture. Lone horn is always something lost in thought and stoic. But it is true that he looks somehow "healthier" on the 1868er photos. On the left side we have an obviously great man. This man I compared with the photo of Red Plume (with feather bonnet and the white face painting). Here too, in my "humble" opinion, fit the facial features, not including the necklace, which appears to be identical in both images. For me Red Plume is a supposedly alternative. Now to Shell Man. He must have been an important person, otherwise he would not have been painted by Catlin (yes, he always focused on the dignitaries first). I think that Catlin has always tried to paint the facial features as accurately as possible. What do we see? A young warrior with an open, pleasant countenance. Straight, well-proportioned nose, a straight mouth and bright eyes. The parting of the hair is not in the middle, but slightly offset to the left (from the viewer). All this I find also on the Daguerreotype with the third man from left (of course the man is older). Maybe he wears the same shell necklace he wore, when painted by Catlin in 1834. So far, I have nowhere found a satisfying explanation for this man. So I looked for alternatives. Who took part in the delegation? Are there pictures of these people? Of Shell Man I found unfortunately only Catlin paintings. But the longer I looked at the painting and the photography, the better it seemed to fit. It's only Rock'n'Roll (a theory), but I like it! ;D
|
|
|
Post by hreinn on Mar 18, 2012 10:52:44 GMT -5
Gregor, keep the stones rolling That is how matters advance. And I like it ! Hreinn
|
|
|
Post by gregor on Mar 18, 2012 16:23:16 GMT -5
hreinn, Dietmar, Kingsley, thanks! That's why I like this board. It's a good spirit here! Maybe someday we'll find the right answers! Toksha Gregor
|
|
|
Post by kingsleybray on Mar 19, 2012 1:52:25 GMT -5
to recap on the 1851-52 Lakota delegates to Washington, and clarify which tribal divisions they represented:
Looking Elk (Hehaka Wakita, also translated Watchful Elk) - represented the Brules. Born about 1800. He belonged to the Wazhazha band according to his grandson Makula (statement to Scudder Mekeel, 1931). Like many Southern Lakotas he had strong Cheyenne kinship connections. He was a contemporary of Scattering Bear, appointed Lakota head chief by the treaty commissioners.
Shell Man (Pankeska Wichasha) - represented the Oglalas. Born about 1800.
Lone Horn (Hewanzhicha) - represented the Miniconjous. Wakpokiyan band. Born 1814/15.
Red-Tailed Eagle (Wambli-pehin-luta) - represented the Sans Arcs. True Sans Arcs band, Keze (Barb) sub-band. Born c. 1815/16.
Each of the above was formally nominated as a tribal delegate in council. The fifth delegate, Goose (Maga), who belonged to the Sihasapa tribal division, was not so chosen, and while in Washington his credentials were questioned by other delegates.
Agent Twiss in 1855 indicated that one or more of the delegates had subsequently died. Since Lone Horn, Red-Tailed Eagle, and Goose were still alive, then he must have meant either Looking Elk or Shell Man (or possibly both). I don't have any other data dating the deaths of the latter two.
Hreinn, you will see that Looking Elk was Wazhazha, and therefore he may have been deputed in the sense you indicate - as a nominee of Scattering Bear. If indeed this Shell Man was the father of Qucik Bear, then he also must have had Wazhazha connections, possibly by marriage. If the data in the Clown Family DVDs is correct, there is a possibility that Lone Horn's wives were related ('sisters'?) to Scattering Bear and his brother Red Leaf, hinting at another family connection between the delegates and the man named as Lakota head chief by the treaty commissioners.
|
|
|
Post by kingsleybray on Mar 19, 2012 2:42:46 GMT -5
Cheyenne delegate Little Chief. Two little notes: George Bent in a latter to George E. Hyde confirmed that Little Chief was an 1851 delegate, and remaked that he died in 1858.
There is an 1854 report by Maj. O.F. Winship which reports on conditions on the Plains. Under Cheyennes, Winship lists Bark and Little Chief as chiefs of the "Arkansas Band" or Southern Cheyennes.
Brief as it is, this remark confirms Little Chief as an inportant Southern Cheyenne leader in the 1850s.
|
|
|
Post by kingsleybray on Mar 19, 2012 8:35:11 GMT -5
Relationships between 1851 Lakota delegates.
There seems to have been some relationship between Lone Horn and Looking Elk. Makula told Mekeel that his father was Walking Eagle, Miniconjou of the Wakpokiyan band (Lone Horn's own band). Walking Eagle's father-in-law was Looking Elk, the Wazhazha Brule delegate.
Makula added that his paternal grandfather was White Eagle, a Sihasapa. However, Emily Levine has another statement which identifies Makula's paternal grandfather as Red Fish, a Miniconjou chief who was also a 'father' to Lone Horn.
Once again, a case of Lakota kin terminology - one had several men one called father, brother, grandfather; and similarly several female relatives one called mother, grandmother, and so on.
So, there seems a possibility that Looking Elk was one of the men Lone Horn addressed as father (ate).
Walking Eagle attended the June 1867 council at Ft Laramie as an envoy from Lone Horn's camp. Walking Eagle may have been in Lakota terms a younger brother (sunka) of Lone Horn.
Emily, I wondered if we could check and confirm the details you have on Makula's ancestry?
Many thanks! - Kingsley
|
|
|
Post by hreinn on Mar 19, 2012 9:12:01 GMT -5
Kingsley: Good to see your clarification. It explains what I found strange in the original list. First, there seemed to be no Brulé representative. Second, there were listed 2 Sihasapa representatives instead of only one expected.
Is it known in more detail how Goose was able to "smuggle" himself with the delegation without any nomination or election ?
I had never before noticed this important person, the Wazhazha Brulé Looking Elk. It is always very interesting the link between Lakhota and Cheyenne. Is the connection of Looking Elk to Cheyenne known in a further detail ?
It would be interesting to see a new thread which details the individuals of the important Wazhazha band and their family relations and their influence on Lakhota history and politics, both in peace and war. A thread which would give an overview of the subject.
Hreinn
|
|