Page:Siouan Sociology.djvu/16

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
2
Siouan Sociology

some, though other members of the tribe claim that they are real units of the lowest order. Among the Teton many groups which were originally sections have become gentes, for the marriage laws do not affect the original phratries, gentes, and subgentes.

The state, as existing among the Siouan tribes, may be termed a kinship state, in that the governmental functions are performed by men whose offices are determined by kinship, and in that the rules relating to kinship and reproduction constitute the main body of the recognized law. By this law marriage and the mutual rights and duties of the several members of each body of kindred are regulated. Individuals are held responsible, chiefly to their kindred; and certain groups of kindred are in some cases held responsible to other groups of kindred. When other conduct, such as the distribution of game taken in the forest or fish from the waters, is regulated, the rules or laws pertaining thereto involve, to a certain extent, the considerations of kinship.

The legislative, executive, and judicative functions have not been differentiated in Indian society as found among the Siouan groups. Two tendencies or processes of opposite character have been observed among the tribes, viz., consolidation and segregation. The effects of consolidation are conspicuous among the Omaha, Kansa, Osage, and Oto, while segregation has affected the social organization among the Kansa, Ponka, and Teton. There have been instances of emigration from one tribe to another of the same linguistic family; and among the Dakota new gentes have been formed by the adoption into the tribe of foreigners, i. e., those of a different stock.

Two classes of organization are found in the constitution of the state, viz., (1) major organizations, which relate directly to government, and (2) minor organizations, which relate only indirectly to government. The former embraces the state functionaries, the latter comprises corporations.

Although the state functionaries are not clearly differentiated, three classes of such men have been recognized: chiefs, po-