University of Nevada, Reno

CULTURAL MAPPING OF A FOLKLORIC PEOPLE

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Anthropology

by

Ean T. Barnett

Dr. Donald L. Hardesty/Thesis Advisor

May, 2011

THE GRADUATE SCHOOL

We recommend that the thesis prepared under our supervision by

EAN T. BARNETT

entitled

Cultural Mapping Of A Folkloric People

be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Donald L. Hardesty Ph.D., Advisor

Louis Forline Ph.D., Committee Member

Paul F. Starrs Ph.D., Graduate School Representative

Marsha H. Read, Ph. D., Associate Dean, Graduate School

May, 2011

i

Abstract

Folklore serves a fundamental societal function spreading accepted culture from generation to generation. The role of folklore is paramount in social networking and the scope of folklore will be investigated using specific myths from the Great Basin region. The Si-teh-cah as the Paiute referred to them was a mysterious group of purported cannibalistic giants. The study of this myth helps aid the understanding of the archetypical motifs and their roles in society. The underpinning of this research is to understand the cultural perceptions and perspectives that go into their folklore. From this understanding folklore has applicable functions in its role affecting the understanding of migration trends, societal framework, behavioral functions and the purpose of identity as well as the esoteric and exoteric dynamic of each group with the “Other.” The typical “Other” goes through transmutation based on the society discussing the “Other.” This research explores the behavioral patterning of perspective and perception that has developed and shows how this cultural framework alters aspects of myth to put each culture’s signature traits into the narrative. From this understanding it also becomes apparent that through folklore we can see elements of how place affects the culture along with how all these aspects are entangled and play roles in migrational trends, social order, identity and aspects of perseverance and warfare. Folklore serves a function of cultural relativism and the dynamic art form of perception and perspective on history. Folklore can be advantageous in multiple disciplines and shows that even what we purport as factual history in contemporary times is folkloric in the respect that it is history from specific perspectives. This Great Basin research is a dynamic way to understand the universality and the cause of universality while sorting the factual information from the absurdities.

ii

Dedication

To all of those who play a part in the art of performance and the act of identity.

iii

Acknowledgment

I want to thank my inspirational wife Julie, my sister Engrid a stoic, diabolical dictator of epic proportions, and my loving family and friends. Special thanks to Donald L. Hardesty, Louis Forline, and Paul F. Starrs for their guided direction and exemplary work ethic.

iv

Contents

1. Introduction 1

2. Folklore: Functionality In a Social Network and Seeking Truth 7 Functions in Society 9 Esoteric and Exoteric 21 The Functions of Folklore to Anthropology 23 Folklore Archetypes and Motifs 26

3. Great Basin Folklore: The Si-teh-cah and the Giants 37

4. Environmental Context of Great Basin Folklore 49 Influence of Environmental Factors in Culture 52

5. Lovelock Cave and the Archaeological Record of the Si-teh-cah 56 Lovelock Cave Archaeological Record 63

6. The Documentary Record and the Si-teh-cah 74

7. The Si-teh-cah and the Biological Record 85

8. Conclusion 90

Index 93

1

CULTURAL MAPPING OF A FOLKLORIC PEOPLE By Ean T. Barnett

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

Perspectives and perceptions, the cultural gaze and the idea of social integrity and identity are all wrapped up into an entangled web of social structure, meaning and transmission of information. This thesis will explore the function of folklore within the context of the Great Basin landscape from a multidisciplinary perspective by utilizing analysis criteria from researchers in the fields of Folklore Studies, Cultural

Anthropology, Cultural Geography, Sociology, Environmental Studies, and Archaeology.

In particular, it will consider the purposes of specific folkloric themes by dissecting the processes by which archetypes develop and how they underline localized folkloric traditions. In more general terms, the folklore of a people includes collections of events and stories passed on from generation to generation, and so this research will focus primarily on myths from the folkloric tradition of the Great Basin, or rather, more specifically, stories about the mythic people referred to as the Si-teh-cah by the Northern

Paiutes, the Nu’numic and Suskia by the Southern Paiute, and the Tso’apittuse, Dzo’avtis,

Zoe’ah’vich, and Nuwa’deca by the Shoshone. Despite linguistic variations in the monikers listed above, each tribal tradition appears to describe a similar people group, one of legendary physical proportions or giant stature. All groups being discussed share the Great Basin region and its environment can shape cultural and therefore folklore as people interact with a diverse and ever changing system. The Great Basin was a region undergoing severe transitionary flux as it changed from a pluvial environment to a more

2 arid region therefore it is entirely reasonable to explore the inescapable influence of environmental implications on cultures of the Great Basin. This touches on Ellen

Churchill Semple's thoughts and aspects of environmental determinism making connections between environmental conditions and societal development.

These so-called giant legends could potentially represent cultural memories of a

Pre-Numic people their dynamic representation changes from culture to culture, expressing each group‟s folkloric tradition as well as showing elements of factual truth.

Folklore represents stories that hold the elements of the narrative heritage of the perspectives and perceptions that are the signature stamp from each particular group.

Through this understanding of folklore we see diverse functions of folklore as the very essence and signature of the culture relaying the information. Folklore seems to be the representation of the collective population and serves purposes in understanding behavioral patterning, migrational trends, warfare, and overall social functions as well as incorporating aspects of preservation. Folklore relays all of these elements, yet it is also formed and created from these factors as well as by environmental features. All of this will be explored more closely in later sections of this thesis.

To provide context, Numic refers to the language group of the most recent populations of the Great Basin region. Their language is part of the Uto-Aztecan linguistic family, and so Pre-Numic peoples would date to a prior wave of immigration and occupation of the Great Basin. To date, very little is known about the Pre-Numic people including why they vanished from the region. As this thesis asserts, further study of folkloric elements from the above-mentioned oral traditions may lead to a better

3 understanding of who these long lost people actually were. The similarities between these three folkloric traditions will be explored in further detail later in this paper.

But first, this thesis will fundamentally explore folklore and its universal themes as well as esoteric and exoteric factors. Lévi-Strauss‟ structural analysis of myth,

Vladimir Propps formalist folkloric thought, and Malinowski‟s definition of folklore will be explored (Strenski 1987: 131). Further focus will be shifted to the exploration of the

“Other,” a concept articulated essentially as any group of people deemed outsiders by another group and, therefore, rendered exceptional through cultural, physical or other means. Such is the case of the Si-teh-cah who were vilified through stories and folktales.

In this particular case, the folkloric stories of the Paiute, Washoe, and Shoshone discuss mythical giant people that cannibalized Great Basin natives, especially their children, when they were not on guard and/or disobedient to their parents. Although on the surface these myths are reminiscent of a prehistoric „boogie man‟, one created to motivate children to behave, there is more to these legends than initially meets the eye.

For through these folkloric stories, the natives justified and gave cause to wars and the eventual genocide of some suspected Pre-Numic groups. So, what might at first appear to be an innocuous childhood fable to Western eyes contains entirely different dimensions to the natives of the Great Basin. Their perceptions and perspectives of culture helped mold and develop the folkloric traditions of their societies. Moreover, environmental factors played a prominent dynamic in their folklore as well.

After understanding the significance and the function of folktales within their culture, it becomes apparent that there are similarities across cultures, and patterns

4 emerge. Folkloric accounts provide information on events, wars, lineage, migration movements, and so forth. Folkloric tradition has long been considered primarily oral (as in the case of the Paiute, Washoe, and Shoshone) but this paper will also look at later treatments of the giant myth thereby asserting that literate societies also use folklore to fill functions in societies and relate ideas through a cultural scope. This will be shown through accounts and newspaper articles of mysterious “giant” skeletons and finds. After analyzing the purpose of folklore and understanding it within the context of oral and written accounts, specifically dealing with purported “giants” (some of which are quite possibly associated with Pre-Numic peoples), attention is turned towards archaeological materials and the Lovelock Cave site. The intent is to search for further evidence in support of some of the claims in these folkloric traditions. Brief attention will be paid to descriptions of some of the remains in question. Also, there will be a discussion of the lack of concrete research into Paleo-Indian remains, which could properly determine conclusive evidence on migrations.

The use of folklore has been debated in the archaeological and historical world because of its obvious mythical and supernatural tendencies. So, to some degree the purpose of this research is to determine the usefulness of folkloric records and attempt to separate truth from obvious exaggerations or fictional elements. It is crucial to note that the oral transmission of is not in and of itself folklore. For example, teaching farming and hunting techniques would not be considered folklore but rather accounts of techniques and instructions. When delving into the history of stories that are transmitted orally, however, their validity is questioned, and this is where folklore comes into play (Dundes

5

1965. The study of oral tradition is related to folklore, but it is important to remember that the information contained therein is not always purely fictional in nature and should not necessarily be discounted off the cuff. Rather, kernels of truth are often present and, through careful examination, can be gleaned from such accounts.

Oral tradition is termed “folklore,” which leads many to believe it is without merit and should not be considered in archaeology and other disciplines (Kirshenblatt-Gimblett

1998.) Folklore refers to more than just how the transmission of the information occurs it also incorporates the cultural scope and perspectives of a society and how the society expresses itself through their accounts with overarching cultural themes directing the interpretation of material. That said, it does not necessarily mean it is mythical or untrue but rather a culture‟s interpretation of their environment or their varying perceptions of themselves and others (Sims and Stephens 2005). Thus, in many ways, folklore is no different than the theories and interpretations made in other accepted forms including present-day textbooks, newspapers, and the news.

Besides a theoretical and, somewhat generalized examination of folklore and myth among a variety of cultures, this thesis will delve more specifically into the context of the Pre-Numic landscape and its various peoples. In order to do this, it is essential to take a closer look at the geographical features and physical boundaries of the Great Basin and, in particular, the Lovelock Cave site, which was utilized and formed in ways similar to other associated sites (Grosscup 1957). In particular, Lovelock Cave contains evidence of the Pre-Numic culture, and the site provides necessary background and possible context for Great Basin folkloric traditions, specifically those associated withSarah

6

Winnemucca. Thus, information from the site stands to increase knowledge of Pre-Numic artifacts as well as provide a guide for why specific items were present at this particular place. Due to the arid conditions of this cave, there is a high level of preservation of cultural material, which is a fortunate feature (Loud and Harrington 1929).

This location will be used as the key site due to the vast quantity of cultural and physical materials removed from the context of this cave site and will be used to briefly discuss finds and possible locations of use of those items. Moreover, it fits the description of the final cave where the Si-the-cah (a.k.a “Tule-Eaters,” “People-Eaters,” or cannibal red-haired giants) were trapped and killed by the Paiute according to their recorded oral tradition (Winnemucca 1883). Cross comparison of collections could aid in possible cultural identification of this mysterious group of people. This cross comparison of materials would also help on a morphological level to determine if the earliest inhabitants show marked morphological variation from modern Native American populations

(Raymond 1992). Due to the scope of this thesis, it will only be briefly mentioned but awaits further study and interpretation to understand the peoples of the Great Basin region

In summary, this thesis will touch on several disciplines and open the way for further research along these lines. The mapping of cultural groups will aid cultural anthropology as well as cultural geography in the understanding of the development and changes that occurred throughout the Great Basin on cultural, social and folkloric levels.

Coupled with the archaeological and biological record, this research may shed light on population movements and socio-ecological functions in cultural maintenance and

7 transition. This research will begin with the identification of archetypes in folklore and cultures. Through this attempt to show how these key elements are part of diverse cultures that relate to the human psyche, a determination will be made as to whether the so-called Si-teh-cah or “Others” of the Great Basin are a semi-universal cultural creation or indeed the cultural memory of a “real,” long-lost ethnic group (Nashu 2005: 385-396).

The following questions will be addressed in this thesis.

1. What is the function of folklore in a social networking system? What role can a culture‟s folklore play in regard to understanding explanations of events in time and space and what methods can help separate truth from fiction? 2. Who were the “Tule-Eaters,” also referred to as the Si-Teh-Cah, and other titles, that the Paiutes, Washoe and other Stillwater natives describe in their folklore? Do they account for a diverse Pre-Numic population of differing origins killed in an ancient genocide, or rather another competing branch of the Ancestral Great Basin Native Americans? 3. What factors led to the transition of Pre-Numic to Numic occupation and how does the change occur?

CHAPTER 2. FOLKLORE: FUNCTIONALITY IN A SOCIAL NETWORK AND SEEKING TRUTH

The “Si-teh-cah,” is a possible ancestral Great Basin Native American population that the Paiutes claim to have displaced and exterminated in their oral and written accounts. Sarah Winnemucca documented these accounts in her book Life Among the

Piutes. In her account, she describes how her people trapped the last of the race of red- headed cannibals in a cave, sealing them in and setting fire to the mouth of the cave until all the cannibals within were dead (Winnemucca 1883: 74). Robert H. Lowie also records an oral tale of a giant race that the Washoe drove away from Pyramid Lake and the

8

Truckee River basin areas. Since the Paiutes had been having difficulties with these giant people and feared them, the Paiute appreciated what the Washoe did so much that they offered thanks to the Washoe by granting access to Pyramid Lake (Lowie 1935). These stories will be told in their entirety and analyzed for themes and elements.

The “Other” is a commonality in folkloric tradition and the associated struggles that the culture faced from them until their final expulsion. Alfred Schutz (1959b) developed theories on the others and their place and role in society. Hisashi Nasu (2005) discusses Schutz and describes the others as the “general thesis of the alter ego,” which tends to guarantee the differentiation between the I and the other. And the other argument is how the other appears in our everyday life, or how we experience the other. The latter is led by the fundamental insight that the world appears only within perspectives (Nasu

2005: 394). Schutz also proceeds to discuss the stranger in this context and states, “The stranger is a person who meets with obstacles in the course of interaction with the members of the in-group. For the stranger, the state of affairs does not proceed as expected, and the taken for granted proves to be rather problematic. Furthermore, such a frustration of expectation derives from “genuine vacancy” intrinsic in our experience and knowledge. The actual experience carries along the infinite horizon (Nasu 2005: 394), which “functions in its indeterminateness from theoutset as the scope of anticipated possibilities of further determination” (Schutz 1959b: 94). The question that arises is, is this just an example of creation of foes through perceptions and thus a culturally created universality that builds tribal cultural affinity or are some of these accounts full of kernels of truth (Gary and El-Shamy 2005)? If these are accounts of truthful events, which

9 aspects are true and which are fictional? It would be easy to discount the reports of them being giants; however, to truly understand that aspect, we have to understand the definition of giants in the mind of the culture of the groups expressing their folklore. It is also important to understand the themes that are present in the Paiute tradition and examine them from alternative perspectives to the traditional western conceptualization of rules and structure. These questions would be difficult to answer without the use of other sources of information gathering and a basic understanding of how these motifs serve a psychological function (Randle 1952).

Functions in Society

It is also important to understand the countless functions of folklore in a given

society. In his article “Four Functions of Folklore,” William Bascom discusses the

primary role of folklore, describes its “cultural context” and explores how it socially

relates to particular societies. Specifically, Bascom delves into the stage upon which

the folkloric story is displayed, who delivers it when it is told and the purpose it serves

for the people as a whole. As with all societies, some stories are known to be fictional

like “fairy-tales” while others are mixed with truth as in “legends” and still others

overlap and are believed to be authentic by the people although not necessarily by

other cultures as in the case of “myths.”

The Russian scholar Vladimir Propp was a pioneer in the examination of the first of the aforementioned categories, the fairytale. Propp with his formalist framework believed in looking at Morphology and the Historical roots of myth. He published

10

Morphology of a Folktale in 1928 in Russia. Propp developed a list of 31 functions from studying a hundred Russian tales. He also developed 8 categories to discuss characters in all these tales and suggested that these functions and character traits were the underlying elements in the development of the fairytale. Propp was heavily criticized receiving much discourse from Lévi-Strauss who used his writing from Morphology of the Folklore to show the superiority of his own structuralist theory. Propp and his followers argued that the purpose of these functions was to understand the key root elements that helped build and develop these stories. He further implied that structuralists and psychoanalysists were seeking meaning while he was seeking elementary understanding of the development of the fairytale and its key functions

(Dundes 1999: 119-130).

The primary focus of this thesis, however, will be myth as related to the folkloric traditions of the Great Basin peoples and, therefore, it is essential to briefly provide a framework for the exploration of what myth is. In his book Four Theories of Myth in

Twentieth-Century History, Ivan Strenski, “Myth is everything and nothing at the same time. It is the true story or a false one, revelation or deception, sacred or vulgar, real or fictional, symbol or tool, archetype or stereotype. It is either strongly structured and logical or emotional and pre-logical, traditional and primitive or part of contemporary ideology” (Strenski 1984: 1). From this we get the dualistic Yin and Yang idea of myth and how it encompasses mass levels of information on a multi-gradient level of story, performance, cultural identity and cultural perceptions and perspectives. These ideas will pave the way to some thought from structuralists as well as psychoanalysts.

11

French anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss developed his structural analysis theory by studying, categorizing and attempting to define mythic stories. In his interpretation, a story was considered to be myth if it manifested certain structural characteristics. Stories lacking these structures were inevitably given over to another category in the folkloric tradition (Strenski 1984: 131-132). Lévi-Strauss then exploited this restricted definition of myth to advocate for its importance to the understanding of culture and to explore what he regarded to be certain universal truths of humanity founded in what he termed “operational modes” of the psyche. Lévi-

Strauss wrote the following about myth and these operational modes:

“[They] teach us a great deal about the societies from which they originate, they help us lay bare their inner workings and clarify the raison d’être of beliefs, customs… and most importantly, they make it possible to discover operational modes of the human mind, which have remained so constant over the centuries, and are so widespread… that we can assume them to be fundamental and can seek to find them in other societies and in other areas of mental life, where their presence is not suspected” (Lévi-Strauss from Strenski 1984: 132).

Lévi-Strauss analyzed myth linguistically looking for a universal underpinning, and his research suggested time and again that the characteristics of myth could be exploited to unlock these operational modes of the mind. From the study of myth, he determined that these operational modes could be sought out in the folkloric traditions of other societies and that mythic elements in particular would turn up in diverse and unexpected regions thus emphasizing certain fundamental societal features (Lévi-

Strauss 1966).

12

Lévi-Strauss, however, warned against certain academic treatments of myth and barriers to its proper appreciation within its native context. Namely, voiced numerous concerns about the effects of translation. After all, he argued that myth lost significant value and was even betrayed through translation evoking the old Gallic adage, “Traduire c‟est trahir.” Strauss was very concerned with translation and misinformation or information loss. Interestingly, though, he has been heavily criticized for only analyzing mythic stories that fit conveniently into his theoretical framework thereby creating a rubber measuring stick to gauge universality. Ironically, one could argue that this represents another type of misinformation and betrayal of the mythic textual fabric of humanity. For example, Greek and Roman myths tend to be excluded from his research because they did not fit nicely into his perceived universality mold (Champagne 1987: 36).

Lévi-Strauss suggested in Le Cru et le cuit that studying and understanding myth should start with an examination of the most concrete elements within a society or social networking group (e.g. similarities in habitat, history, and culture.) He further points out that the study of myth should begin with the exploration of one myth within a society and then branch out to comparisons with other myths within the same society before eventually analyzing myth within neighboring societies and more distant societies. These initial concrete connections are essential. As Lévi-Strauss points out,

“between these societies there must either be genuine historical or geographical connections or else such connections can be reasonably postulated” (Lévi-Strauss

1966: 42).

13

To further add to the dilemma of analyzing myth, he points out that, “myths have no author, from the moment when they are perceived as myths, and despite their real origin, they exist only as they are incarnated in a tradition” (Lévi-Strauss 1966:

64). However strong their messages might be, they appear to arise from nowhere.

While such stories obviously all have inception points, the individualistic markers and traits characteristic of that origin become lost. If the story is readily adopted by the society, it becomes mythical and a collective whole of the society with variations and deviations from time and social networking (Lévi-Strauss 1981: 64-65). Lévi-Strauss also notes that when studying myth, the beginning and end points are chosen haphazardly and that myths are in constant states of flux whereby they fall into disuse with time while at the same time succumbing to contemporary changes. Myth is a difficult topic of study, according to him, partly because it involves a different perception. The Western mindset so given over to Cartesian analysis through the breakdown of features into smaller and more manageable elements is neither productive nor possible.

Lévi-Strauss implies that structural analysis invites questions for history. The study of myth, after all, raises problems even as it seeks answers. While this concept in and of itself could fill the pages of another thesis, for purposes of this thesis it is necessary to explore cases where it provides insight into the origins, while inspiring questions about the very existence of certain “constructed” people groups such as the fabled Si-teh-cah. The correlation of a people‟s group existence within the world of myth to an actual physical origin within the discrete past can be aided by the research

14 of ethnographers, archaeologists, and historians. Strauss aptly points out that a single incident in history can be perceived in many different ways yet still be integrated into a society‟s cultural understanding (e.g. myth) thus resulting in a multi-layered structure of understanding. Furthermore, this can be used to argue that history itself contains similar attributes and elements of myth. This invariably yields to a mythical function that changes and is influenced by outside sources.

To better illustrate the facets of his structural analysis theory, Lévi-Strauss makes numerous musical and linguistic comparisons drawing on comparisons to

Wagner and musical scores to help explain structural analysis. He also delves into performance and the physiological effects of music on the listener as well as the effects of myth on the intended audience. “Musical emotion stems precisely from the fact that the composer at each instant removes or adds more or less than the listener anticipated on the basis of his faith in a project…” (Lévi-Strauss 1966: 62). Essentially, he argues that both myth and music are designed to assume reality and, therefore, designed for their audience to fulfill a cultural desire for reality-based experiences. Lévi-Strauss takes this comparison a step further in his Introduction to a Science of Mythology:

Myths are only translatable into each other in the same way as a melody is only translatable into another which retains a relationship with the homology with it: it can be transcribed into a different key, converted from a major to minor or vice versa; its parameters can be modified so as to transform the rhythm, the quality of tone, the emotive change, the relative intervals between consecutive notes, and so on. Perhaps, in extreme cases it will no longer be recognizable to the untutored ear; but it will still be the same melodic form (Lévi-Strauss 1981: 70).

15

Thus, he postulates that during the formation of the story, it undergoes certain transformations and stylistic changes in keeping with the accepted esthetic and ideological scope of the society. These changes may be ones of perception or involve other factors such as embellishment. Nevertheless, while the version of the story that one hears in the present moment is the most current accepted form, it still resides within the confines of the culture at that time. This, too, can be applied to history and the retelling of events from the perspectives of various narrators each of whom bring to the table specific interests and intents but all of which fall within the confines of the cultural networking system of their time further reinforcing cultural integrity and cultural adhesion. To further understand this point, Lévi-Strauss makes the following statement:

Mythic thought operates essentially through a process of transformation. A myth no sooner comes into being than it is modified through a change of narrator, either within tribal groups, or as it passes from one community to another; some elements drop out and are replaced by others, sequences change places, and the modified structure moves through a series of stages, the variation of which nevertheless still belong to the same set (Levi-Strauss 1981: 77).

Lévi-Strauss further discusses myth in his article entitled “The Structural Study of Myth.” Here, Strauss claims that myths, while at first glance appear to contain infinite possibilities in terms of characters and plots, actually draw upon a fairly limited although universal pool of literary patterns. While understanding myth can be difficult, he notes that throughout the world, many myths do resemble each other.

Lévi-Strauss suggests looking at myth as ancient philosophers viewed language whereby certain utterances or sounds were associated with specific meanings. This

16 concept, however, is flawed in that when other languages incorporate the same sounds, they link these utterances with entirely different meanings. Lévi-Strauss uses this point to assert that Jung‟s list of archetypes is inherently flawed. But, beyond this, he does not develop a distinctive argument. While he does further link linguistic elements and myth, at times, his points are extremely obvious and even belabored. Yes, language can be broken down into units and rules with much interpretation and conjunction.

Myth is part of its mother society, and its expression is unique but can be similarly broken down and studied as aspects and types (Lévi-Strauss 1955). This still leaves unanswered questions about universalities in myth. On one hand, the argument could be made that universalities are the result of an evolutionary psyche scheme. On the other hand, they could be the predictable result of similar input in societies founded in limited, basic developmental needs.

Although Lévi-Strauss provided thorough insight into the study of myth and developed theoretical meaning and framework for those studying it, certain aspects of the myth continued to be ignored in his analysis. In these discussions, there is a strong preponderance of evolutionary thought and unity; however, the results can be misinterpreted to seek the beginning. There are some undeniable commonalities and needs that all civilizations and societies share including food, clothes and shelters. So,

Lévi-Strauss is likely correct in one key concept of myth providing some insight into the „operational modes‟ of the brain (Lévi-Strauss 1966). His reasoning for this seems to be flawed when he suggests a Darwinian evolutionary role. These „operational modes‟ are likely experiential resulting from limited choices on the most basic levels

17 of society and the growth and development of social constructs. All societies have limited options to exploit their environment and deal with external features such as weather and so forth. Looking at these basic needs and functions alone explains much universality. For example, as this thesis will further develop, cannibalism is a major and common feature. A struggling society with limited resources could be required to draw upon unusual means of nourishment to maintain their society‟s survival in times of famine. These concerns would exist just beneath the surface and could easily be modified into stories from a personal, societal perspective or as a means to degrade another group. This is a common plight and one to be expected worldwide due to limited choices. Furthermore, this line of reasoning can be used to test concepts of universality whereby universality is constructed in terms of available choices and the likelihood of each (respectively calculated as T time and E effort) being recognized proportionally in the myth or outcome.

Continuing this thought, the fear of the giant is a basic one rooted in the nature of the society. Thus, myth is not a matter of universality through genetic or psychic links, but rather simple cause and effect. Bigger and stronger is feared because of the ability of bigger and stronger to be more powerful and capable of controlling, hurting, and even killing those that are smaller. This comes from an understanding of culture and life at a basic level. The bigger and stronger are more adapted to control and conquer their environment, which brings a sense of concern and worry expressed in myth and story due to environmental exposures as opposed to any universal evolutionary mythical unity. To further develop the idea of basic elements and limited

18 likely conclusions coming from the enculturation of society within their environmental and ecological niche, we see wider variations in folklore as societies develop and expand, and the focus of the story becomes broader than basic needs initially demanded. This is intrinsically seen with regard to the Greeks, Romans and other

Middle Eastern folkloric traditions, which were largely ignored by Lévi-Strauss.

Therefore, commonality in less civilized stories is the product of environment. All human societies require the same basic elements of survival and less range of choice is available in the basic areas of life.

Malinowski developed a less concrete view and placed “speculative history” and “real history” into a theory of society that focused upon looking at the present and past through the lens of the current period. For example, Ernest Gellner suggests that the real in „real history‟ refers more to the genuine influence of the stories on present life. Malinowski attributes „real history‟ to myth and legend, with suggestions that the past is merely understood through the remnants of it in the present. According to

Ernest Gellner, Malinowski‟s stance on „real history,‟ a.k.a. myth and legend was that,

“if that influence is genuine, accuracy is redundant; if that influence is absent, accuracy is insufficient. Either way, genuine reference to the past events is irrelevant” (Gellner and Mucha 1988: 180).

Bascom describes the importance of understanding the “cultural context” or the relationship between folklore and other aspects of culture. This gets back into understanding the perception of the population and how they view and transmit the world around them. This problem has two distinct facets, the first of which concerns

19 the extent to which folklore, like language, is a mirror of culture and incorporates descriptions of the details of ceremonies, institutions and technology, as well as the expression of beliefs and attitudes”(Dundes 1965: 284). Bascom next describes much folklore as having characters in tales who do things that are generally unnatural or prohibited in society. This can include immoral acts that are not socially accepted.

According to Bascom, Euhemerus, a Greek poet, suggested in 316 B.C. that the stories of the gods were actually stories of real events and that “the gods were once men who were deified and worshiped after their death. Thus the gods had feet of clay, and the crimes of the gods were really crimes of men” (Dundes 1965: 288). The Grimm brothers believed that absurd events in folklore were the result of mistranslations and confusions of stories passed from language to language. They believed that the “true” story could be uncovered if one linguistically reconstructed the stories using an original proto-Indo-European language (Dundes 1965: 288).

Bascom describes the second function of “folklore [as] that which it plays in validating culture, in justifying its rituals and institutions to those who perform and observe them” (Dundes 1965: 292). Malinowski felt this was the only real function of folklore and, according to Bascom, devoted little attention to folklore in later works.

It is thought that in this sense myth arose to justify culture and its practices, their morals and social codes. This theory does not give recognition to truth and generally suggests the stories are more fictional in nature. It neglects to mention, however, that while stories are used to validate reasons, this in and of itself does not make them inherently false. This justification can actually suggest truth although through a spun

20 perception of truth, an as-the-victor-gets-to-tell-the-story kind of truth whereby the teller will allow his people to be depicted in the best possible light.

The third function of myth that Bascom describes is its important role in education, and Bascom suggests this is particularly true in non-literate societies. Again, this education refers to social codes and standards as well as general behaviors and can come from stories that are specifically developed to teach these lessons. In many cases, these stories are fictional creations with a focus on teaching appropriate civil discipline

(Dundes 1965). For example, in cultures in the Great Basin and throughout the

Americas, many mythic characters are animals such as Weasel or Coyote in Shoshone and Paiute tales (Strain 2008: 75, 83). These stories contain lessons on appropriate actions at rituals and religious functions. Although the characters are attached to animals in these stories, the stories themselves arose from elements of truth, whether from previous immoral actions by people in the culture or those cultures they came into contact with or from a realistically deemed need from previous experiences to transmit a socially correct message to the youth.

The fourth function Bascom describes is that, “folklore fulfills the important but often overlooked function of maintaining conformity to the accepted patterns of behavior. Although related to the last two functions, it deserves to be distinguished from them. More than simply serving to validate or justify institutions, beliefs and attitudes, some forms of folklore are important as means of applying social pressure and exercising social control” (Dundes 1965). Bascom further separates this from purely educational motives because he points out that, in life, individuals may do that

21

which is socially incompatible, and stories, songs or proverbs might be told to show

disdain for their actions. Conversely, in other cases, it can be used for justification of

actions.

Esoteric and Exoteric

The esoteric-exoteric function in folklore as defined by William Hugh Jansen is

also crucial to the comprehension of folklore. Quite simply, Jansen defines the esoteric

as “what one group thinks of itself and what it supposes others think of it”

(Jansen1959: 207). He further defines exoteric simply as “what one group thinks of

another and what it thinks that other group[s] thinks it thinks” (Jansen 1959: 207).

How a society views itself and how others view the society can develop into

stereotypes with or without merit. From this, the only way to determine the validity of

these concepts is to compare the “blazon populaire tradition” with ethnographic

evidence. The fact that fictionalized concepts and beliefs about other groups exist leads

to prejudice whether the ideas are based in fact or fiction. Jansen gives the example of

the Jews as being greedy, and other examples from the Great Basin can be seen in how

indigenous populations refer to each other as “rabbit-eaters, “pine-nut eaters” or

“people eaters,” all of which are based on assumed dietary practices (Janson 1959:

205; Wheat 1967).

These stereotypes create a stigmatized idea of cultures whether justified by fact

or not. How others are perceived varies by situation and experience. For example, the

esoteric facts seem to arise from group‟s identity and help protect and verify that

22 understanding. This can get more complex because one group may view itself in a positive light while assuming that neighboring groups view it poorly and in prejudicial terms. The exoteric can develop in numerous ways, including through jealousy, mystery, or fears of another group (Janson 1959). This becomes yet more complex if one group starts making assumptions about what they believe other groups think of them and of what they think other groups think that they think of them.. As one can see, this is a dilemma that all boils down to perceptions of self and perceptions of the“Other” (Nasu 2005: 394-395). The discussion of esoteric-exoteric overtones can be more thoroughly studied, but, for purposes of this thesis, this abridged definition will suffice to understand perceptions and feelings that may or may not be present and how they can support the understanding of the folkloric tradition tied to the Si-teh-cah.

Thus, folklore is a broad-based cache of cultural expressions and experiences.

Folklore is the very essence of a given culture and the expression of that culture's environment as well as the traditions and rituals associated with the interplay of this culture with its dynamic environment(s). For example, “rain dances,” and “fertility festivals” (Phillips 2008: 68-69) are traditions that developed as a means for cultures to cope with and adapt to their world and associated environment. Through the dynamics of the natural world and the influences of peoples from other regions, a cultural patchwork of experiences and perceptions developed and intertwined into a milieu of cultural unity and expression and an overarching identity that binds culture and people together and provides them with a sense of place, purpose, and identity (Potter 2004).

23

The Functions of Folklore to Anthropology

Folklore has been assigned different functions and roles by members of the academic community, and it goes without saying that these functions and roles are largely defined by the discipline from which the academic originates. From an anthropological perspective, Folklore has been tied neatly into cultural anthropology, which is not surprising since it is defined as the collected stories and histories of the people in a specific culture. In his article “Folklore and Anthropology,” William R. Bascom asserts that folklore “…is a bridge between literate and non-literate societies.” In the same article, he also argues that “folklore serves to sanction and validate religious, social, political, and economic institutions, and to play an important role as an educative device in their transmission from one generation to another, there can be no thorough analysis of any of these other parts of culture which does not give serious consideration to folklore”

(Dundes 1965: 26-27). The importance of folklore to cultural anthropology, however, should not eclipse its value to other areas within anthropology. Still, this belief pervades the field creating an unnecessary limiting factor and a boundary that is not always true.

For example, physical anthropology and archaeology should play fundamental roles in some of these folkloric explorations and could elicit valuable clues about the motivations for the telling of certain tales. The inclusion of each of these fields might also point toward evidence in support of specific elements of such stories. These stories might also lead to new archaeological and physical anthropological research.

24

Bascom points out that anthropologists have focused solely on the folklore of non-literate societies despite the occurrence of folklore within literate societies as well. In fact, as he rightly asserts, oral tradition is not a requirement of folklore. Bascom does clarify, however, what the characteristics of folklore should be and breaks it down into myths, legends, tales, proverbs, riddles, the texts of ballads, and other songs, as well as folk art, dance, music, costume, medicine, custom and beliefs. In this sense, he notes that the reason folklore is studied is because it is not only an essential part of culture but incapable of being disentangled from it. Therefore, it can be studied for its form and function as an element of culture.

It is important to understand the functions and purposes of tales, the processes of developing such tales (whether from true events, fictional origins, or a mixture of the two), and whether their origins stem from within a society or transmission across cultural groups and boundaries through borrowing. Bascom explains that the development of folklore has a profound effect on society and the institutions and traditions therein.

Bascom also acknowledges the draw that the theory of cultural evolution has had on the field and how it, in some ways, has separated folklorists from anthropologists. Even after anthropologists rejected their own theory, some folklorists held fast to the idea that folklore was a holdover from lesser developed societies or as Bascom so eloquently puts it, “the shadowy remnants of ancient religious rites still incorporated in the lives of illiterates and rustics” (Dundes 1965: 31).

Some suggest that folklore is dying because much of the world is literate and

therefore relies on more concrete information thereby ensuring the disappearance of

25 oral tradition. To the contrary, the written word has not destroyed folklore, nor does folklore cease to be practiced in literate societies (Dundes 1965). These stories are the very embers of the human experience and are still communicated infinitely in literate cultures through books and novels, family customs, urban legends, and a variety of nationally and internationally practiced traditions. Each of these societal expressions develops and binds a culture (or various cultures) together even where the written word is the new constant.

After all, the practice of avoiding association with dissimilar peoples is a typical motif found in folkloric stories of the “Other,” both past and present (Nashu

2005). This form of egocentrism hypocritically purports that because one culture considers itself “more developed” or somehow more enlightened, all of its cultural productions are by association more concrete and logical. The argument can be made, however, that just the opposite has occurred. With more information and more experience, there is also more deception to pull from, and, therefore, stories within a society may become even less concrete and reality-steeped. The idea that oral tradition and folklore are completely intertwined and occur mutually is absurd. As Alan Dundes points out:

This criterion, however, leads to several theoretical difficulties. First, in a culture without writing, almost everything is transmitted orally; and although language, hunting techniques, and marriage rules passed orally from one generation to another, few folklorists would say that these types of cultural materials are folklore. Also, even in a culture with writing, some orally transmitted, the criterion of oral transmission by itself is not sufficient to distinguish folklore from non-folklore (Dundes 1965: 1).

26

Dundes effectively erases many of the distinctions made between literate and non- literate peoples by demonstrating their similar reliance on stories and culture. Of course, sorting out what is actually folklore is somewhat more complex in Dundes‟ view. Citing examples of oral transmission of skills such as hunting techniques and building successful marriages, Dundes argues that these societal communications are not folkloric in nature although they do involve the passing on of important cultural knowledge from generation to generation. So, just as non-literate peoples do not have a monopoly on folklore their oral communications need not always be classed as folkloric. When attempting to explain how certain hunting techniques or marriage skills came into being, the folkloric is often exploited thematically. In literate and non-literate societies alike, both folkloric and non-folkloric communication occurs. This is practiced without question. In terms of this thesis, the essential take away point is that the whole basis for and development of cultural expression is founded in aspects of the folkloric tradition.

Folkloric Archetypes and Motifs

After establishing the various ways folklore is defined, it is important to understand some of the overarching themes that are found in the folkloric tradition, the archetypes and the various motifs that are present in its tales, and how these features play a culturally significant function in terms of the way peoples see themselves and those around them. Studying each category could easily result in a book itself, and so for the purposes of this thesis, the motifs studied must be particularly relevant to the presented tales of the Si-teh-cah.

27

The first motif that occurs frequently in myth is that of giants. Based around men, women or manlike characters of giant stature, giant tales generally portray these individuals as evil and/or involved in unnatural behaviors such as the possession of magical powers or the partaking in cannibalism. Generally, giants are portrayed as fighting against the gods (Gary and El-Shamy 2005: 33). Some of the best examples of this mythic theme can be found in the tales of Native American groups of the Great Basin region and will be discussed in further detail later on. Ironically, in some folklore, heroes themselves are gigantic in stature although not necessarily called giants or perceived as bad. Even in stories where giants are portrayed as evil, they still exude some human traits and characteristics. Generally, wars between giants and men are wrought with peril and suspenseful, vicious battles. In the main verses of giant stories, the people typically face great difficulties surmounting the giant threat, and yet they are eventually able to conquer their giant nemeses, whether through might or more typically cunning.

This is exemplified in the Paiute, Shoshone and Washoe stories. In one creation story by the Northern Paiute, a menacing giant threatens a group of boys.

Coyote‟s children were playing the hand game indoors. A woman outside warned them, “Boys, listen, something is coming.” However, they paid no attention to her, her husband was inside and she asked him to keep her child there while she jumped into a pit and covered it up. The ogre came and killed all of the boys. Then he said, “I have killed them all,” The woman heard him say this. He sang as he went away (Strain 2008: 75).

The story continues to discuss a second ogre eating her child and trying to find her to eat also. The story discusses some cultural aspects of the Paiutes, such as interactions and fire usage. The story also refers to the Lovelock and Stillwater area

28

(Strain 2008: 75-78). On a brief side note, this translation of the legend includes one culturally weighted term (“ogre) that clearly implies meanings, preconceptions and a

Western bias not necessarily implicit in the original Great Basin myth. For anyone who has ever read a fairy-tale, the term “ogre” is definitely a loaded one replete with cultural stigma (including its lack of credibility.) So, we see in this tale a prime example of why

Lévi-Strauss was so concerned with translations.

Giant stories cut across all cultural groups, and the giant theme is a very common one that is generally thought to be fictional in origin. Yet, the following question arose while I was pondering the possible veracity of such accounts. At what height would one be considered a giant? In many of these stories, the protagonists are groups of people under six-feet tall; however, as we know today, human variation is large. With reference to human size and stature, people and cultures contain wide variations, with some people standing as high as seven to nine feet. Although rarer, being seven feet or taller is not that unusual, and, therefore, it is possible that some of the giants treated in myth were actually people of much greater stature. The universality of these myths may not be linked to some sort of “Collective Unconscious” as Jung asserted or a global cultural evolutionary model as purported by Lévi-Strauss but rather because some of these “giants” may have been living and seen.

To better express some of the details of the so called giants in Great Basin writing, the Shoshone have numerous stories of the Tso’apittse, or the cannibal giant. In these stories, the giant demonstrates human-like characteristics that range from singing to

29 emotional defeats. The following account comes from an excerpt from one of the

Tso’apittse stories:

Tso’apittse started from his house to hunt for people. When he walked, the mountains shook. He said, “I wonder if there are any Pine Nut Wood People here.” He was walking in the forest to look for people to eat.” As he came through the forest he saw a couple of fresh human tracks. The people were hunting cottontails. Tso’apittse said, “Ah human cottontails have been here,” and he looked to see which way the tracks went. He started to trot to trail them. The people heard Tso’apittse coming and saying, “Whi, whi, whi, whi.” That scared them. The only way they could get away was to climb up. So they started to climb up the hill and down the other side. When they got to the foot of the hill, there was an old woman camping there and they made for her house. The old woman said, “You keep going, I‟ll use my club on him.” She dreamed she was a monster fighter (Strain 2008; 86).

In the tradition of these Shoshone tales, Tso’apittse, who tracked the people for some time, finally manages to not only stay close to them but catch up when he comes across the old woman‟s house who was hiding:

Tso’apittse sat down and said, “Hudu.” Then he got up and the old woman jumped up too and they had a hand-to-hand fight, Tso-apittse has a conical basket for packing things in. It was lined with pitch. He threw people inside and they stuck and couldn‟t escape. He tried to put the old woman in but he failed. The old woman finally threw Tso’apittse on his behind. He got up and saw the print of his behind on the ground. He got up crying and went home because he wasn‟t allowed to have the print of his behind on the ground (Strain 2008: 86).

Giants, however, tend to have a short supply of human traits as evidenced in the next motif. This one relates to assigning giants animal-like characteristics. As previously noted, in many cultures, a distinction is made between “giants” and “heroes” although both can be described as having large statures. It is common for giants to be cannibalistic, savage, utterly lacking in intelligence, and incapable of conforming to the lifestyle of the

30 people who are fighting their “evil” influences. As a result, exterminating them becomes a readily justifiable act. This can be seen in the folklore linked to the Great Basin. The

Shoshone story of “Dzo‟avits and the Weasels” includes a fine example of this theme. In this story, Weasel is an Indian who goes to a giant‟s house while he is away. When the giant returns home to his wife, he is disappointed because his bag of dead Indians is empty, so he challenges Weasel to a throat cutting competition. Overcome with hunger, the giant enthuses that Weasel is fat. Weasel agrees:

He looked at weasel and noticed he was very fat, so the giant thought he would be good to eat. He proposed that they should try to cut each other‟s throats…..Weasel began to cut once more, and then he drew out his obsidian knife. He was going to use it and the woman notices it. What kind of stone has that boy got? What is the boy doing there?” she asked. The giant pulled away “Where is that knife?” “Nowhere,” said Weasel. “I spat it out, I threw it away, I don‟t have it anymore.”………Weasel placed his knife against the giant‟s throat and the giant fell asleep. Then Weasel took out his obsidian and cut off the giant‟s head. He carried it outside and threw it away. The woman arose and the boy struck her with the knife and killed her. Thus he killed them both (Strain 2008: 80-82).

The story concludes with Weasel crying and looking for his missing brother whom he discovers was eaten by the giant. Here is an example of evil, dim-witted giants being outsmarted by a cunning individual seeking to avenge their fellow Native

Americans. Looking at this from another perspective, it is possible that there is some ethnocentrism going on. In some situations, these exciting moral stories tell of man's struggles against overwhelming odds. On the other hand, in some of these stories, giving unnatural qualities like this would be a way to justify actions and explain why wars, battles, and struggles had to occur.

31

It is possible that some of the unnatural themes associated with giants were actually observed and/or practiced by some Native American groups, and other peoples incorporated them into their folklore as lessons and remembrances of what had occurred.

For example, one common motif is cannibalism. Many tales of the giants in the Great

Basin regions have elements of cannibalism attached to them. In the New World, there is much evidence of cannibalism in most regions, with strong concentrations in Central

America. For example, in a common practice during the festival of Panquetzaliztli, slaves were washed and sacrificed before Huitzilopochtli and the aftermath was described as follows: “The merchant [was] awarded the bodies, and, afterwards, he would take them back to his house to be consumed with maize in a cannibalistic banquet” (Phillips 2008:

68). There are numerous other reports of this activity in the Americas and around the world. The idea of cannibalism, therefore, presented a very real threat to some groups, and these fears most certainly would have been translated into their folkloric traditions.

There are few things considered as abhorrent as the taboo of humans feasting on human flesh. Sigmund Freud tried to link cannibalism with sexuality and the fear of castration as he did with every aspect of humanity. In opposition to Freud's theory, one would realize that women in situations of cannibalism would be worried about it, too, and it is likely that these stories terrify at a much deeper level of self preservation because they represent a breakdown of human cohesion. It is logical to conclude that cannibalism is the ultimate form of conquering culture. To those around the cannibal, it is more than a way of swallowing the competition. There are numerous forms of cannibalism and variations likely adding different meanings and dimensions to the tales. For example, in

32 some cases, cannibalism can be tied to starvation while in others it can be ritualized for purposes such as food, health, mourning, and so forth. In tales and traditions, this practice can be endocannibalistic, exocannibalistic, and even autocannibalistic (Abler 1980: 309-

316).

I speculate that these stories were inspired by what was a real and common practice across the world and was occurring, for various reasons and purposes, in many areas. This could be in response to the limited large game supply in most of the heavily cannibalistic folktale regions. The Aztecs are full of stories of dismemberment and sacrifice and cannibalism. One deity, Huitzilopochtli, went so far as to wear the flesh of his victims, and this was taken into the societal realm through the established practice for

Aztec warriors of keeping warrior captives up all night to slowly begin defleshing the following morning (Phillips 2008).

The next questions that need to be considered are who is claiming the cannibalism, how does it serve the purposes of those people, and what impact did that fear have on others? Accusations of cannibalism have several effects. First, it terrifies and intimidates people (unless it is a common practice among those same people.) Second, it could cause other groups to attempt to eliminate a group perceived to be threatening, to protect their people. In our modern world, it is considered horrific and assumed that accusations of cannibalism must have been used as a way to disgrace peoples and make them look less than human, which may have been true to an extent (Arens 1979). Yet if the known world was commonly practicing cannibalism, than it might have a different meaning. In fact, instead of being horrific, it might symbolize power, control, and

33 dominance in every sense over others (Alber 1980). In the Great Basin stories, sometimes the man-eaters are displayed as savage beasts. At other times, they are cast as cowardly, starving opportunistic beasts as noted in the Tso’apittse story (Strainer 2008: 86).

Although the purposes for the use of this element in stories vary, it is likely that theunderlying ideas developed from some sort of reality.

These tales often use this motif to show cause and intent for actions against cannibalistic threats and the struggles of good versus evil. For example, there are references to ogres or giants as stupid and cannibalistic. This is well observed in variations of the Great Basin giant stories, whereby the giant in many of the stories is actually an ogre that wants to eat Native Americans. In each variation, the details are slightly different; however, there are overtones of the stupid cannibalistic ogre and the quick-thinking individual who outsmarts him before they will swallow the Native

Americans‟ friends and families.

According to Antti Aarne in “The Types of Folklore,” these elements are found all over the world. What this means is that human beings demonstrate a relatively universal use of giants or ogres as vilified characters who are stupid, prone to cannibalistic desires, and animalistic in other characteristics (Aarne 1961: 116-117).

These myths also seem to play on the fears of the audience of being kidnapped and submitted to unlimited horrors where one‟s only hope of surviving is to outwit the opponent. In more narrow instances, this theme represented a well-used tale directed toward unruly children by parents hoping to inspire them to stay close to their parents or risk being taken and eaten by giants.

34

Throughout history, it was also very common to associate one's enemy with animals or describe them as animal-like. In respect to the Great Basin region in Sarah

Winnemucca‟s account, which will be discussed thoroughly in a later section, she recounted of the Si-teh-cah or the red-headed giants, “My people would ask them if they would be like us, and not eat people like coyotes or beasts” (Winnemucca 1883: 74). By elevating oneself and making one's enemy look like animals, one is able to justify his/her actions, and,those actions that they are trying to justify, are, in all actualitythe ones that embody the horrific animalistic actions couched in the highly enlightened.

Another motif that these tales refer to, whether blatantly or on a more sub-

conscious level, is the concept of “Justice versus Injustice.” In this social construct, it

is suggested that individuals have to create a level of social justice to feel safe and

comfortable enough in their environment to be able to go about their normal everyday

lives. For example, people value their sense of justice so much that they are willing to

risk wealth and prosperity to seek and secure it. As pointed out by Aarne, people are so

concerned with justice and the struggles of good versus evil that many of their folktales

have strong motifs and elements referring to these topics, with those perceived as

wicked being punished in the end for their dastardly deeds. At the same time, this

motif expresses the unfairness of life, and the struggles for justice are given more

meaning due to the perils and difficulties to achieve this objective (Gary and El-Shamy

2005: 445). This can be referred to as poetic justice and is a typical theme in stories

and tales from around the world over time. This theme is recurrent in many Great

35

Basin stories. As told in previous stories the following Shoshone tale revisits this

theme:

Once there lived an old woman and her granddaughter. They were out everyday to gather pitch from pine trees. One day the Cannibal Giant found them. He chased them around. He can run fast. He chased them around a big tree. The grandmother and her granddaughter thought it was fun to have the giant chase them. They laughed. Soon they were tired. Then he caught them. He flicked his fingers at their nipples. Their breast swelled up. Then he killed them and took them home. He ate their bodies, all except their breasts, which he cut off and hung to dry. The grandfather went out to look for his wife and granddaughter when they didn‟t come home. He found the giant‟s tracks and followed them to the cave where he found the giant asleep. He had his bow and arrows with him but he could not kill the giant. So he shot at his penis and that is how he killed the giant. The giant is like a rock (Strain 2008: 84).

This theme is played out time and time again in the face of defeat and overpowering odds. Good manages to conquer evil, and punishment is handed out.

Along the lines of Justice versus Injustice is the motif of Good versus Evil,

which seems to be as old as time itself. After all, human history is riddled with this

element. It is noted as a typical archetypal struggle, reenacted time and again. This

motif is so common that it is included in a list of oppositional theme elements along

with spirit/body, east/west, living/dead, masculine/feminine, sun/moon, and so forth.

These are examples of what Jung terms coniunctio oppositorum or the union of

opposites. He argues that these relationships are diabolically opposed yet exist because

of one another. A prime example of this would be yin and yang (Gary and El-Shamy

2005: 458).

Evil, according to the motifs can be defined as follows: “Evil is simply the

difference between the way one wishes the world to be and the way the world is”

36

(Weidhorn 1988: 470). According to Daemmrich and Daemmrich, (1987: 101)“evil appears antithetical to the reverence for life, antagonistic to the development of human potential, and the opposed to divine or temporal principles of order.” As previously pointed out, it is typical for cultures to personify this evil from the top down, staged in battles of gods and men, where evil, vengeful destructive forces are pitted against loving, creative building forces. Steering away from the creation myths in this context, this theme is found in all forms of folklore and tales. Because of the profusion of archetypes in the folkloric tradition, these stories usually personify characters that are wholly defined by a sole characteristic. For example, folkloric characters remain evil, or good, with few changes and little evolution of the characters. This is simplistic in scope and maybe true in some folklore and in simple fairy-tales, like Cinderella with the evil step-mother and step sisters who never display alternative characteristics.

There are also numerous stories, especially among the Ancient Greeks, of protagonists starting as good, and over the course of disasters, slowly sliding and sinking in character through their actions and deeds.

In some folklore, we see an evolution of good versus evil from purely good characters and purely evil characters to the inward individualistic struggles of self and good versus evil. Some people being imperfect and being mixed up with a dichotomy of emotions and feelings. It is a type of opposition in self. A theme of good and evil balanced to form the whole. Some elements of this can be understood in Great Basin stories.

37

From this overview of motifs and archetypes, it becomes apparent that the word folklore has a deeper meaning than one might see on the surface. Folklore is the essence and transmittance of a culture through stories and other expressive techniques. This transmittance of information serves many purposes of identity and social cohesion but also seems to hold roots of true events - but through the cultural kaleidoscope of their perceptions. From these motives and exoteric and esoteric functions, it appears that although there is truth in these stories, there are also elements of fiction and interpretations that are used for justification of actions and cultural lessons. Later sections will further look into the above-mentioned functions and archetypes, but in the context of the Paiute and other Great Basin stories regarding the “others,” as well as some geographical and environmental factors that affect cultural prospective throughout the

Great Basin region through interplay and differing pressures that are imposed on the people from their ever changing landscape.

CHAPTER 3. GREAT BASIN FOLKLORE: THE SI-TEH-CAH AND

THE GIANTS

Cultures have their own perception of the world around them. This section will look at Sarah Winnemucca‟s account of the folklore of a “different group” of people than the Paiute. According to Winnemucca, they were in association with them and predated the Paiutes in the area. The following is Sarah Winnemucca‟s account in its entirety. In it, she describes a group of reddish haired people. A close examination is critical for the

38 purposes of analyzing and further understanding the cultural mapping of this folkloric group of people.

Among the traditions of our people is one of a small tribe of barbarians who used to live along the Humboldt River. It was many hundreds years ago. They used to waylay people and kill and eat them. They would dig large holes in our trails at night, and if any of our people traveled at night, which they did, for they were afraid of these barbarous people, they would oftentimes fall into these holes. The tribe would even eat their own dead—yes, they would even come and dig up our dead after they were buried, and would carry them off and eat them. Now and then they would come and make war on my people. They would fight, and as fast as they killed one another on either side, the women would carry off those who were killed. My people say they were very brave. When they were fighting they would jump up in the air after the arrows that went over their heads, and shoot the same arrows back again. My people took some of them into their families, but they could not make them like themselves. So at last they made war on them. This war lasted a long time. Their number was about twenty- six hundred. The war lasted some three years. My people killed them in great numbers, and what few were left went into the thick bush. My people set the bush on fire. They were nearly starving. My people were watching them all round the lake, and would kill them as fast as they would come on land. At last one night they all landed on the east side of the lake, and went into a cave near the mountains. It was a horrible place, for the people watched at the mouth of the cave, and would kill them as they came out to get water. My people would ask them if they would be like us, and not eat people like coyotes and beasts. They talked the same language but would not give up. At last my people were tired, and they went to work and gathered wood, and began to fill up the mouth of the cave. Then the poor fools began to pull the wood inside till the cave was full. At last my people set it on fire; at the same time they cried out to them, “Will you give up and be like men, and not eat people like beasts? Say quickly—we will put out the fire.” No answer came from them. My people said they thought the cave must be very deep or far into the mountain. They had never seen the cave nor known it was there until then. They called out to them as loud as they could, “will you give up? Say so, or you will all die.” But no answer came. Then they all left the place. In ten days some went back to see if the fire had gone out. They went back to my third or fifth great-grandfather and told him they must all be dead, there was such a horrible smell. This tribe was called people-eaters, and after my people had killed them all, the people round us called us Say-do-carah. It means conqueror; it also means “enemy.” I do not know how we came to be called Piutes. It is not an Indian word. I think it is interpreted. Sometimes we are called Pine-nut eaters, for we are the only tribe that lives in the country where pine-nuts grow. My people say that the tribe we exterminated had reddish hair. I

39

have some of their hair, which has been handed down from father to son. I have a dress which has been in our family a great many years, trimmed with this reddish hair. It is called the mourning dress, and no one has such a dress but my family (Winnemucca 1883: 73-75).

As Winnemucca discusses in the legend of the Si-teh-cah, she first describes this small group of “Others” as barbarians, to likely to separate her people from these

“Others.”. Winnemucca mentions these people living along rivers, specifically the

Humboldt River, which fits with other accounts (including the Washoe account that shortly follows) that this group of people was exploiting a riverine habitat, a very important resource in a desert environment. Winnemucca continues to justify the story and separate the Si-teh-cah by stating that the “Others” were cannibals that captured and ate her people. She describes them as setting traps and being sneaky. This group of

“Others” is described as so horrible as to dig up the dead and eat them, even their own people. So, on one hand, the Si-teh-cah are portrayed as inhuman, sneaky, animal-like kidnappers and grave robbers. Winnemucca describes the “Others,” moreover, as the aggressors in battle, stating that their women were charged with the gruesome task of carrying away the dead bodies of both sides to eat.

Not surprisingly, Winnemucca initially describes her people as victims of cannibalism, although they do eventually stand up to their enemies. Interestingly, she compliments the Si-teh-cah as being brave and fierce. But, Winnemucca describes the

“Others” as so different that they could not be assimilated into the Paiutes, although she stresses three times that they tried. In fact, throughout this story, Winnemucca explains how her people tried to get the barbarians to change and assimilate and how the Paiutes

40 only did what was necessary to these animalistic humans after exhausting other options, including taking some Si-teh-cah into their own tribe. In places, her narrative reads like an apology for what was done, and there is a heavy emphasis time and again on the uncompromising, savage nature of these “Others.” Yet, she also describes the Si-teh-cah as conversant in her native tongue, which contradicts details from many of the other

Great Basin Native traditions, where they were said to speak another language, or none at all. This detail tends to underscore their human nature rather than their animalistic side.

It is interesting that Winnemucca describes them as a small “barbarian” tribe although they numbered about 2600, which would be a fairly substantial population for the area and an intriguing estimate. According to her account, this population appears to be one of dwindling numbers possibly the result of a fluctuating transitionary environment coupled with increased pressures from other tribes. How she came up with such a precise number is unknown. In fact, it‟s impossible to verify any such figure for obvious reasons, but important to remember the story that is being transmitted is from the viewpoint of the victors of the battles and struggles. Winnemucca describes the war and the Paiutes trapping the remnants of people in boats and eventually in a cave where they exterminated the “Others.” Interestingly, in other traditions, the Tso’apittse are also noted to have lived in caves in the Stillwater region (Strainer 2008: 87-89)

Some scholars would argue that the essential purpose of Winnemucca‟s tale is the delineation of a cultural taboo. On the other hand, since the story is presented from the victor‟s point of view and represents an oral tradition several generations old, it is not particularly objective. Not surprisingly it describes the enemy as animal-like and evil and

41 not willing to change and follow civilized practices such as abandoning cannibalism.

Interestingly, Winnemucca describes these people not only as speaking a similar language but as being riverine-based.

Of course, it is also possible that the Si-teh-cah were a real population competing with the Paiutes and other groups for resources and access to them. This could be the tale of environmental changes creating scarcity of resources and fights for access to limited supplies. At the very least, it sounds like a story of competing groups and warfare to justify the killing of one‟s opponent by demoralizing and dehumanizing them first. It is also possible that there were differences in populations and that the natives the Paiutes ran into were from a more violent civilization such as that of Mesoamerica and that populations from this region spread further North than currently acknowledged. This could explain some of the purported cannibalism accusations and might even suggest that these tales contain kernels of truth. It is also interesting that Winnemucca mentions that the tribe they exterminated had reddish hair. On the one hand, they could have actually had reddish hair, which would have made them different. Similarly, this feature could be the result of Native peoples examining ancient skeletons and mummies with aged hair that had turned reddish and developing these details to fit what they saw in the caves.

Some critics of this point out that ancient hair does not turn red over time. Dr. G. Richard

Scott and Dr. Louis Forline of the University of Nevada, Reno note that some Native groups dyed their hair with plant pigments. Also Dr. Louis Forline further points out that

“some Native American groups suffered from chronic protein-energy under-nutrition, which can cause hair to become a reddish brown. Forline mentions that under some

42 circumstance this could have even lead to strange desires and so-called cannibalism

(University of Nevada Reno 2011).

In terms of physical evidence, the geographical location of this myth is determinable to some degree. Winnemucca‟s discussion of the destruction of the Si-teh- cah and their fiery deaths in a cave fit, to a degree, with natural features found at the

Lovelock Cave site. Interestingly, when the cave was excavated during the 20th century, some layers were found to have ash debris. The entrance of the cave was noted to have broken arrows shot toward its mouth suggesting that someone was taking a defensive stance inside the cave at some point in the discrete past.

The Paiute are not alone in their folkloric tradition of a mysterious group of people. The Washoe were a semi-sedentary tribe of hunter-gatherers who differed linguistically from other groups in the area. While the Paiutes and other local tribes spoke languages descended from the Uto-Aztecan tradition, the Washoe spoke a language from the much scarcer Hokan language family. The Washoe inhabited areas in the Sierra from

Tahoe east to Reno, north to Honey Lake, and south to Carson City. They had a tradition rich in basketry and fishing. Although they intermarried with the Paiutes at times, they also came into regular conflict with them over territory. In fact, the Paiute eventually seized the majority of their traditional lands, even selling some off to early Pioneers. The

Washoe‟s own folkloric tradition adds further detail to the story of cannibalistic giants in the Great Basin. The main folktale discussing these barbarians was captured by Robert

Lowie in Ethnographic notes on the Washo. Lowie entitled the folktale “The Giants,” and his informant was noted as “Dave:”

43

Between Sparks and Wadsworth an Indian had a fish house. He speared four or five big fish before sunrise. Several Washo came from near the site of Reno. A giant about thirteen feet tall watched them from the mountains. He came down where the fisherman was sitting down with his spear, and seized it when the Washo was trying to spear a fish. “What‟s the matter? Something has hold of my pole.” He jumped up and saw the giant. He asked, “Who are you!” The giant did not answer, but made signs pointing to the camp and a sign for sleeping and asking for one fish to eat. The Washo gave him one then the giant asked for all the fish. The fisherman would not give them to him, but shouted at his friends: “Come here, my friends, some strange person is taking fish from me.” Two others came up, yelling, carrying bows and arrows. They looked at the giant, who ran away. They pursued him but could not keep up with him. There were about a dozen Giant camps south of Pyramid Lake, and the Indians said they were going to war against them. The three Washo told their friends, “Something we don‟t know tried to catch fish away from us.” The war chief talked, calling all the Washo together to fight. No Paiute were living at that time; they were all by Walker Lake. Three days after the speech all came together. They went down along the river and saw the giant‟s tracks. His feet were as long as an Indians arm and his steps were about twenty feet long. The chief said, “I wonder where their camp is.” They went all day from Reno and got to the place about sunset. They made a fire, ate, and set out again, and got to within one-half mile of the lake. The chief sent two young fellows to scout. About 4 o‟clock they attacked the giants, who threw rocks but had no weapons. The Washo shot and killed four or five of them, leaving only three alive, “We‟ll let them be and be back.” The giants had no weapons, no blankets, just rock walls piled up. The hole is there yet and can be seen now. The Paiute, who until then had been afraid of the giants, heard about this battle and came from Walker River. The surviving giants went away; later the Paiute went there and held the land around the lake, getting plenty of fish to eat. They paid the Washo buckskins for driving away the giants and told them to get fish from Pyramid lake whenever they wanted to. All got fish houses up to Derby Dam and toward Sparks on both sides of the river. There is a big rocky point there close to the river. Plenty of mountain sheep were on the mountain this side of Derby Dam. They were pretty wild. The Indians watched for them but could not shoot them. They made a big net-like rope and a fence. A dozen men stood at either end and drove the game between the fences. An old woman made a fire to cook the game. The men came together for the drive, but the sheep were not afraid of anything, jumped over the fence and got away, all of them. The old woman, who was hungry and ready to eat cried (Lowie 1935: 347-348).

44

This narrative provides a very different perspective on the mysterious tribe portrayed by the Paiutes. These individuals are attributed as having an extremely large stature of approximately 13 feet. While one would initially assume them to be even more monstrous and bold than the Si-teh-cah because of their size, “the giants” are portrayed as running from danger and generally being weak. The “giant” is starving because he begs for food and sleep, and seems to lack the technology to obtain it (e.g. spears and weaponry.) Some might even suggest lower mental competency due to his lack in language skills and technology, his living conditions (with no blankets or necessities of survival) and his animal-like description. On the contrary, the Paiute story portrayed these individuals as fierce and dangerous adversaries that used simple techniques to capture their victims (e.g. pit traps.) The Paiutes make their struggle one with very high stakes, a life or death match for their people, and emphasize their attempts to show mercy by giving the Si-teh-cah chances to assimilate. The Washoe suggest that the people are weak and animal-like and eliminate them because they attempted to steal food. These two stories are both about conquering another group, possibly the same group since the locations line up. But, both representations use different elements to get their points across. Interestingly, the Washoe story compliments the Paiute myth due to the references about the Paiutes and the suggestion that the Paiutes were terrified of these giants. This changes, however, when the Washoe show the Paiutes that the giants can be defeated.

While these similarities in folklore might be the result of historical interactions and shared memories (e.g. the previously mentioned intermarriage) they also raise some interesting questions. Namely, is it possible that this group of people actually existed at a

45 discrete point in the prehistoric past, were marginalized by the Washoe and eventually moved eastward to their final demise at the hands of the Paiute? Unfortunately, there are no definitive answers to these questions. Further examination of these two myths, however, may shed some additional light on what the Paiute and Washoe were actually describing and why.

From the Paiute perspective, the main theme of the myth is one of outsiders coming into conflict with the Paiute way of life and, ultimately, paying the price. The

Paiute go to great pains − almost to the point of Pre-Columbian “Political Correctness” − however, to justify their actions and cast the Si-teh-cah as an extremely warlike tribe incapable of civilization and compromise. By preying on the Paiute people, they, in turn, force the Paiutes to take action and declare war. It is a difficult, long war with many casualties, but good triumphs over evil in the end. The moral is that social groups competing for resources must still agree to some cultural norms or face war and extinction. The Paiute try to change the savage, animal-like enemy but are unsuccessful.

The overtones of cannibalism add to the plethora of motifs and themes implied in this story.

The Washoe have entirely different stakes in the telling of this myth. A small tribe with scant resources, they desire to build themselves up as a strong, dominant force. They depict themselves as conquering heroes while other groups are regarded as weak and cowering to them. This is not only a story of outsiders but one of those who stood against the giants. While casting their role as brave and fearless, their Paiute neighbors and the giant cannibals themselves are described as weak and afraid as the Washoe waged war.

46

This aboriginal propaganda could have played an important social function to help protect the Washoe from neighboring tribes as an early warfare deterrent. This theory is supported by the real threat of Paiute encroachment faced by the Washoe. The Paiutes were located near Walker Lake and always sought to extend their range. So, at the very least, this twist on the myth shows the Washoe as a robust force capable of conquering yet generous in aiding other natives as in the case of the “giant” problem. Of course, this myth would have also bolstered up members of the tribe and provided a noble tribal legacy that the group could rally around in times of stress and hardship. It provided the tribe with an identity distinct from surrounding groups.

Despite varying treatments of the myth, these two folkloric tales appear to describe a similar people. After all, the people in both tales enjoy large stature, animal- like living conditions, and, cannibalism. But, above all, both myths point to the same location of habitation. Population size varies between the two stories. The Washoe do not give a number but describe dozens of small settlements along the river suggesting small numbers. On the other hand, the Paiutes suggest as many as 2600 people. Both stories discuss wars and describe the Paiute wars with an enemy group. And both stories also mention the Paiute fear of the group.

The two stories quoted above are not the only accounts of these individuals. The

Paiute, Washoe, and Shoshone have numerous stories about hairy, giant cannibals. Other oral traditions that mention the giants include the tale of Coyote‟s children being eaten in a Paiute tale (Strain 2008: 75). The Shoshone also have numerous tales of the

Tso’apittuse and Dzo’avtis, which were both known as cannibalistic giants. They also

47 refer to a Zoe’ah’vich who was known as a hairy man and a Nuwa’deca, a man-eater. The

Southern Paiute have tales of the Nu’numic a group of hairy giants, and they have tales of the Suskia, which is a female giant (Strain 2008). It becomes apparent that these tribes have a rich folkloric tradition surrounding giants and that they even developed words to specifically refer to them and their physical characteristics. The preponderance of giant tales in Great Basin Native American myth may be explained in a number of ways. First and foremost, it may indicate that these stories serve as social memory for actual encounters with a foreign people group. Second, it may suggest a story-borrowing tradition whereby myths from other tribes were incorporated into another‟s cultural repertoire.

Adrienne Mayor (2005) discusses the Paiute legends in her book Fossil legends of the First Americans and comes up with plausible ideas to explain the creation of the

Paiute tales. She first discusses a tale of the first man and woman and how the first woman killed a giant, with the giant becoming a stone near Mono Lake. She purports that the myths originate infeatures in the natural environment and the attempt to explain those features, or in most cases, the fossil elements. After describing Winnemucca‟s accounts of the Si-teh-cah and the fact that mummies were found with red hair in the Lovelock cave, Mayor attributes the red hair to the effect of age. She argues that the oxidation of ancient black hair transforms into a reddish hue over time. Mayor also attributes the ideas of the giants as coming from “Whiteman showmanship” and natives getting confused with fossils of other prehistoric animals such as cave bears found near this area. Mayor notes that Winnemucca‟s tales do not mention the Si-teh-cah as giants, although the vast

48 majority of the other Great Basin legends do. Mayor suggests that Nevadans created bogus “giant skeletons of Paiute myth,” which is plausible but seems to be based on opinion and not fact, she does not support her claim with any definitive proof. Mayor also suggests that natives may have confused the remnants of preserved dinosaur tracks with those of giants. Mayor notes that most of the skeletons at Lovelock Cave were of normal size and dimension; however, news articles suggest otherwise as well as rumors of misplaced skeletal information. These subjects will be treated more thoroughly in the following section. One of Mayor‟s more persuasive observations is that the smell of dead, burnt bodies might have been that of the bat guano itself.

While Mayor takes a reasonable stance on the issue, she neglects some features of this and other stories. There is direct evidence that individuals of larger stature were mentioned by numerous sources. That said, a giant can be a matter of perception. For example, if the general population is just over 5 feet tall, individuals of 6 feet, or taller, might be misconstrued as giants. Next, she does not have evidence that skeletons on display were faked. Since most of the skeletal remains seem to be lost, destroyed and/or largely not studied, it is a moot point. Simply assuming they are fake is illogical, especially since the Smithsonian, along with other universities and museums, were interested enough to collect them. Mayor‟s suggestion of mistaking cave bear bones for giants is logical but holds no merit since it can neither be refuted nor proven. This also goes along with dinosaur footprints, which are quite unique and do not look similar to human footprints at all. Since the tales refer to giants as looking human with no detail of three-toed feet, it makes sense that a group of real people were involved. Mayor reports

49

“Whiteman showmanship,” which is possible. This argument is irrelevant without more substance and a little bit of evidence to give it any validation. Mayor should note that the archaeological record demonstrates that there was a fire in this cave and that ashes were found on numerous remains by excavators Loud and Harrington. Shattered and broken arrows and shafts were found at the mouth of the cave positioned as if they had been fired to keep something or someone inside (Loud and Harrington 1929: 115). Finally, Mayor suggests that the skeletons with red hair really had black hair that discolored with age because the pigments became unstable and a chemical reaction occurred. This very well might be the case; however, analysis should be used to review the texture of the hair.

After all, black hair tends to be thicker and coarser than red hair.

CHAPTER 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT OF GREAT BASIN

FOLKLORE

To better understand the motivations of the Great Basin folkloric tradition, it is necessary to start by understanding their environment, their lifestyle and the social influences that impacted their perspectives. The region is one of diverse mountains and large basins each like separate islands separated by steep mountains and changes in flora and habitats. The area has gone through large changes from a pluvial lake environment to an arid sun-scorched expanse. Pyramid and Walker lakes, constitute the remnants of Lake

Lahontan whose shores once lapped against the mountain ranges and made the area around Lovelock Cave ideal for fishing and exploitation of marine resources (Raymond

50

1992). As the area continued to change and become more arid, coping strategies and environmental transitional living caused cultures to adapt to the environment as well as to possibly force groups to compete for more limited resources, which, in turn, increased incidents of warfare and conflicts. To this day, water can be found in valleys and mountain locations from springs and other sources; however, one would have to be knowledgeable about where to find these locations. The natives had to develop techniques to navigate an increasingly drier and more difficult environment in transition from a marine-based habitat to a large game-based region and finally to a desert area where the exploitation of plant and small animal resources was essential. As the environment became more arid, the natives devoted more time to fulfilling caloric needs and the processing of food sources (Wheat 1967: 3-4). When the Americans of European descent arrived in the area as pioneers and settlers, five native tribes were identified, of which four (the Southern Paiute, Northern Paiute, Goshutes, and Shoshone) had linguistic ties to the Uto-Aztecan language group, and one (the Washoe) to the Hokan language group. Excluding the Washoe, the other native groups were relatively new to the Great Basin region, and they started the spread of the Numic culture across the region. Petroglyphs and artifacts were generally attributed to the Pre-Numic peoples

(Baumhoff and Bettinger 1982). Many of these groups relied heavily on waterways and rivers originating in the Sierra and winding their way through the modern Truckee

Meadows and across the state. These would include, but not be limited to,the Truckee

River from Tahoe to Pyramid Lake, the Carson River which flows to the Carson Sink, and the Humboldt River which currently flows to the Humboldt Sink. These waterways

51 provided water and fish to natives and led to marshlands replete with resources such as reeds, cattails, game, and birds (Wheat 1967: 6). As the Great Basin transitioned, tribes would have competed to control and access ample resources, especially as they dwindled.

The peoples in this region became more and more nomadic and had to follow seasonal patterns to ensure proper subsistence in this diverse, changing habitat (Madsen and Berry

1975). All of these factors have influences on people and their perspectives and, therefore, their general life view.

It is important to remember that much of the natives‟ time was spent processing food and developing tools. When Anglo-Americans started settling the region, they observed Paiutes using the following tools. A shrubby bush known as Greasewood was used as fuel for fires. Tule was employed in the making of blankets, fabrics, shoes and many other items, as well as for eating, once the outer peel was removed. Small fruits such as “buck berries” were collected when they were in season, and numerous seeds and roots were exploited. Baskets and water jugs were made from plant fibers tightly woven together. Winnowing baskets were made as well as specifically designed implements for pine nut gathering. To process seeds and nuts, natives used metates and manos, or grinding stones and grinders, to process the seeds and nuts into flours that could be readily used in food production (Wheat 1967: 19-28). Boats were made from cattails, and duck decoys from the actual skins of ducks that were carefully filled with tule and sewn back up. Cordage and netting were made from plant fibers and fish hooks and harpoons from wood or bone. Similarly, arrows were made with stone points. The natives used hides and sinews for clothing, cordage and so forth. The skins were tanned in cooked

52 animal brains. Clothes were also made from plant fibers and bark. Toys and baskets were woven from soft fibers from the marsh. Cradle-boards were woven from willow. Houses were made from sticks and covered with grasses and tule (Wheat 1967). This is a very general overview of how the Paiute were connected with their environment and relied on it for all the essentials of life, from food and clothing to entertainment items.

Influence of Environmental Factors on Culture

To better understand the function of folklore in Great Basin culture, it is crucial to understand and discuss the various ways that the environment affects the people that live in it. Environmental factors as well as influences from dispersal and cultural diffusion are geographical in scope and can alter societal perceptions. They can be the result of natural barriers and/or geographical location. A natural barrier could be anything from a desert and mountain range, to a large waterway. In the Great Basin region, there are numerous barriers from deserts to high mountain ranges, with intermediate valleys forming basins all over the region. These obstacles may not have stopped migration and diffusion, but they would have definitely hampered it and slowed down activities and dissemination, thereby giving diverse populations time to become isolated and distinct from one another.

Due to the various obstacles presented by the Great Basin landscape, pathways and migration movements generally would be limited to specific areas and routes thus minimizing exposure to cross-cultural influences in specific areas and certain situations

(Semple 1911: 5). Climatic changes would have impacted areas including economic and

53 resource prosperity. When the Great Basin went into transitionary flux and resources decreased, large groups of people who once flourished in the lush region were forced to compete for more limited resources. This led, in turn, to more pressures from warfare and disease and more time devoted to seeking and protecting resources.

All of the aforementioned environmental conditions would directly impact the development of culture within the Great Basin societies as seen in other cultures around the world. For example, Mesoamerican folklore is concerned with death and tends to be very morbid and dark. It is full of sacrifice motifs due in part to stressors in the environment, such as famines, droughts and disease. Understandably, the folklore is also very preoccupied with preventing environmental disasters through appeasement of the gods (Phillips 2008: 378). Clearly, environmental factors play into a culture‟s perception.

In the Great Basin, folkloric traditions reflect peoples struggling with their environments. Warfare and even genocide would have occurred because of limited resources and competition for said resources. In here book “Influences of Geographic

Environment,”Ellen Churchill Semple writes of direct and indirect effects that the environment has on peoples (Semple 1911: 20-24). Semple notes that under certain conditions, several geographic features can conspire together to create division within cultures and nations. Some more direct applications would be the direct daily interplay of the individual with nature and the environment. Within human culture, one‟s surroundings and environment are generally tied to the natural world; however, a socio- cultural environment can also be created, which has impact on succeeding generations and produces variants in perception and, therefore, folklore. Semple also discusses

54

“classes of geographic influence” and how these work to shape a cultural group. In particular, Semple discusses four classes:

Physical effects

Psychical effects

Economic and social effects

Effects of migration

These diverse environmental factors clearly effect cultures and, therefore, impact their folkloric traditions. To better understand the influence that these elements play, each will be briefly reviewed. First, Semple discusses physical effects or the variation in a group‟s physical appearance and how the interplay between culture and the environment fostered those changes. This may involve physical impacts to stature, body type, skin pigmentation as well as a variety of other physical features. The interplay between cultures and the environment can account for some of these changes such as specific activities creating variations in muscles and body types. Physical variation and activity variation are some features in folklore used to distinguish the “I” or “we” from “them,” which helps foster the “Other” motif (Nashu 2005: 387).

Second, Semple discusses the psychical effects of geography. Psychical effects are expressed as climatic and environmental factors, which interlude with culture and motifs and seep into the underlying elements of culture represented in cultural landscapes that the people recognize and understand. This can be better understood by looking at the

Inuit who had four different words to describe snow or the Eskimos who had about a dozen different words for it. There is also the case of the Dinkas from Africa who have

55 numerous words to describe the colors of the cattle in their herds. These color names represent very slight variations in hues and shades (Semple 1911:41). Semple states, “To such influences man is a passive subject, especially in the earlier stages of his development; but there are important influences emanating from his environment which affect him as an active agent, challenge his will by furnishing the motives for its exercise, give purpose to his activities, and determine the direction which they shall take” (Semple

1911: 41).

Third, Semple explores the effects of economic and social factors associated with the environment and neighboring cultures on folklore and cultural perspectives. This has been touched on several times before, but it is simply how resources and the social needs of the society affect the outlook and, therefore, the folklore of a people. For example, in the Great Basin region, natives were identified by their main food sources. Thus, there were rabbit-eaters, tule-eaters, and pine-nut eaters (Wheat 1967). Their stories also incorporate animal resources that were paramount to the survival of specific cultures and played into status and prestige. Other important factors, as mentioned previously, included group size and access to resources (Semple 1911: 43).

Finally, Semple examines migration and the effect it has on perspectives. This not only includes the effect of contact with other groups, but it involves the influence of natural barriers and the experiences of different landscapes (whether swamp, forest, desert, river, and so forth) on migration. Traditionally, for example, rivers have been very important as territorial markers and even used to form portions of the borders of current states and countries (Semple 1911: 46). These differing perceptions of the world were

56 further magnified when isolated groups came into contact with one another. For example, when agrarian-based peoples came into contact with nomadic peoples, they would have appeared very exotic to one another. Since the groups were isolated from each other, they would have developed and created their own cultures, alien to each other, and these meetings would have altered perceptions and folkloric traditions to account for diffusion and explanations of the “Other”in both cultures. Semple describes how differences in movements and environments can cause cultures to adopt distinct lifeways (for example, from sedentary to nomadic or vice versa), depending on conditions and resources.

CHAPTER 5. LOVELOCK CAVE AND THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL

RECORD OF THE SI-TEH-CAH

Lovelock Cave is a key site to Great Basin archaeology and is critical to a better understanding of the lifeways of the Humboldt and Stillwater inhabitants associated with pluvial Lake Lahontan. This site will thoroughly be discussed throughly to support some of the environmental elements previously mentioned as well as to consider its suspected link to the Paiute legend of the Si-teh-cah. Evidence of human activity at the cave is estimated to date from between 2740 +/- 110 B.C. and 1900 A.D., although some researchers have suggested an even earlier occupation by as many as a couple thousand years (Napton and Tuohy 1986: 814). The site was first excavated, in part, by miners

James Hart and David Pugh of Lovelock, Nevada, who filed a guano mining claim in

1911 (Heizer and Napton 1970: 3). While mining the cave, they uncovered prehistoric

57 artifacts many of which were discarded in a waste pile. Once word of Hart and Pugh‟s artifact discovery spread, the University of California, Berkeley, dispatched archaeologist

Llewellyn Loud to conduct salvage archaeological work at the site in 1912. In 1924,

Harrington continued excavations at the site. Following excavations by Loud and

Harrington, several smaller expeditions were launched to the site in 1936, 1949, and

1950; however, these represented only surface collection expeditions. In 1960, Gordon

Grosscup conducted an analysis of cultural material from Lovelock Cave. In particular, he looked at the Harrington Collection housed in New York and came to the conclusion that the site had been occupied until around 900 A.D. and thereafter fell into disuse for the next 800 years (Grosscup 1960: 12). This theory was considered controversial, and later evidence would suggest it to be inaccurate. In fact, further data suggested that the mining operations of the 20th century had skewed the record leading to this faulted theory. In 1965 and 1969, Robert F. Heizer and Lewis Napton conducted further excavations and rescreened waste piles from all previous excavations (Heizer and Napton

1970:12).

The archaeological magnitude of the discovery of Lovelock Cave cannot be underscored enough because the fruits of research at this site yielded the discovery of suspected Pre-Numic inhabitants. The Numic spread, which refers specifically to the diffusion of the Numic language across the Great Basin, is thought to have occurred between 500 to 700 years ago, making it a relatively new phenomenon (Bettinger and

Baumhoff 1982). Lovelock Cave contains a vast array of well-preserved material culture items in a prehistoric Pre-Numic context.

58

Lovelock Cave is located in Churchill County, Nevada, in an outcropping of limestone, which forms part of the rim of the Humboldt Valley to the southeast. The formation is identified to be from the middle Jurassic Age and known as unit Jal. This ridge is sporadically exposed on the slopes of the western Humboldt Range. It is approximately two miles from the dry lake bed of Humboldt and 22 miles by road southwest of Lovelock, Nevada (Heizer and Napton, 1970: 2-3).

The cave looks out onto the old dry lake bed of prehistoric Lahontan and was once an ideal location for indigenous peoples because of ample resources such as food, water and nearby shelter when the area was moist and swampy. Geological evidence suggests that the physical features of the landscape were carved and molded by powerful natural forces including earthquakes and the constant lapping of Lake Lahontan‟s shores against the rock face of the foothills. The cave's makeup is limestone as well as quartzite, gypsum, and dolomite breccia. The unit of limestone suggests tectonic movement at some point in the discreet past because its face slopes at a 65 degree angle before veering off to the Northeast. Lines on the hillsides from water movement and old beach lines suggest that the Lovelock Cave flooded at times, and there is demonstrable evidence of wave action further suggesting that the lake levels were subject to significant change. Tufa, both on the rock surfaces outside and along the inner walls of the cave, suggests that the cave entrance was exposed at different periods of time as Lake Lahontan flooded the area.

Wave effects were noted and Llewellyn Loud, who excavated the site in 1912 and assisted in the 1924 excavation, suggested that water lines were as high as 100 feet

59 around the entrance. In fact, it is estimated that the cave may have been under as much as

140 feet of water at certain times. But, later research suggests that Loud‟s interpretation was wrong. According to Heizer and Napton, “L.L. Loud (1929:30) states that the cave was located just above the Dentritic terrace of Lake Lahontan, and asserts that at one time the cave was perhaps a hundred feet high. This is doubtful in view of the geomorphology of the site, but, at the same time, it is evident that wave action played a major part in its formation. Strand lines are visible both above and below the cave” (Heizer and Napton:

37). After the final recession of the lake's waters, it is believed that the cave was actually used as a long shelter. A long shelter is simply a shelter carved out of the mountainside as a result of constant wave action, leaving an overhang that provides some protection from the elements. Eventually, part of the overhang collapsed creating the cave and its narrow entrance. Heizer and Napton suggest the following (Heizer and Napton 1970: 38):

Not long after Lake Lahontan finally withdrew below the level of Lovelock Cave, a huge block of limestone detached from the cave roof near the portal and fell into the west end of the cave. This block is some 50 feet long, 25 feet wide and 15 feet thick. Excavation demonstrated that the outer surface of the rock, which once formed part of the overhanging cliff above the outer surface of the cave portal, bears the weathered remnants of tufa, but nearly all traces of tufa have long since been eroded away from the cliff above the fallen rock (Heizer and Napton 1970: 38).

As a result of the mining operation and some looting, Loud found himself starting out at a distinct disadvantage in terms of interpreting the cave finds as he salvaged thousands of specimens from the guano dump in front of the cave. These salvaged artifacts were comprised mostly of skeletal remains and vegetal material. Harrington would further run into difficulties resulting from the mining operations, which lasted less

60 than a year, as well as Loud‟s poor site documentation. Throughout the 1960s, other excavations were conducted to improve the synthesis of previous work on the Lovelock

Cave site because of the shady circumstances surrounding all previous excavations.

In the 1960s, Robert Heizer and Lewis Napton revisited the site with expeditions sponsored by the University of California, Berkeley. In 1965, one expedition focused on a re-screening of all debris piles and turned up numerous projectile points all of more recent origin. This suggested that the original mining operation had primarily disturbed the most recent occupation layer and suggested to Napton that the site was heavily used even into more recent times (Clewlow and Napton 1970: 64). Napton‟s conclusion also contradicted Grosscup‟s Hiatus Theory (Grosscup 1960: 12).

For the first time, these expeditions also examined human coprolites found at the site to reconstruct the diet of the prehistoric peoples that used the Lovelock Cave. While the study was rudimentary, Heizer noted evidence of plant and animal material as well as eggs evidenced in the retrieved human waste (Heizer 1967: 3). From this study, Heizer was able to surmise the season in which the coprolites were produced based upon the seasonal variability of particular food stuffs and specimens. Heizer and Napton also looked into previous excavations by Loud and Harrington and concluded that since the cave was discovered and mined in 1911 its integrity as an archaeological site was compromised. Other persistent concerns with the site involved the ease of access and lack of protection. Burrow furrows by treasure seekers were commonplace, adding further damage to the stratigraphy. Because of such concerns, Heizer and Napton maintained that their work, as well as the work conducted by Loud and Harrington, was more or less a

61 function of salvage archaeology; however, they argued that the finds from the cave, while definitely compromised for the previously discussed reasons, could still be utilized in an effort to reconstruct the culture.

Although the focus remained largely salvage archaeology, fortunately, there were some well-preserved areas of the cave left undamaged by the mining operation. In fact, according to Loud and Harrington, at each excavation they found undisturbed areas

(Heizer and Napton 1970: 5). Apparently, Loud focused his attention on the northeast end, as the southwest end was plundered by relic hunters; however, these treasure hunters did not dig very deep. Harrington and Loud went back to the site together in 1924 and, after closer inspection of the cave, stated, “…we found enough undisturbed or slightly disturbed beds of aboriginal refuse to keep us busy more than 3 months” (Loud and

Harrington 1929: 4).

62

Fig. 1 Excavation map of 1912 and 1924 expeditions. Taken from Lovelock Cave, Loud and Harrington 1929: Plan of Lovelock Cave.

63

Lovelock Cave Archaeological Record

Due to the arid conditions and relative isolation of the Lovelock Cave prior to

1911, its wealth of artifacts was originally quite well preserved. During the 1912 expedition, Loud uncovered numerous human remains. But, the exact number of individuals discovered at the site remains open for debate. It is documented that the original mining operation recovered at least 13 individuals, some of which were purported to be mummies of large stature. This is plausible since people take artifacts and finds they consider interesting over fragments and pieces. In Loud‟s excavation, it was uncertain how many individuals‟ remains were found because the individuals were buried in close proximity to each other with some bones intermingled. Moreover, they were laid out on tule mats and/or other vegetative materials, which, at some point, burned, rendering the remains “calcined fragments” (Loud and Harrington 1929: 31). This is interesting because it suggests that the individuals were laid close together on mats and that there was a fire that burned the bones and the mats. This is in keeping with Sarah

Winnemucca‟s account of her people setting fire to the Lovelock cave to kill the

“cannibals,” and so this evidence may point toward a possible folkloric elaboration of an actual event in the past. For example, one could argue that if the remaining Si-teh-cah were trapped in a cave whose entrance was set on fire, the individuals might huddle together in fear of the all consuming fire before passing out from the smoke inhalation and being incinerated.

64

Moving back into Loud‟s findings, it is estimated that 32 additional individuals were found during Loud‟s 1912 excavation, bringing the total to at least 45 individuals.

Questions quickly arose because an unspecified number of individuals were identified solely through the identification of single, isolated bone fragments. This method is error prone for a number of reasons. Most importantly, it dramatically increases the potential of false identification of individuals and could also express an overall inflation of total individual numbers. Isolated bones are typically found at sites where individuals‟ bones were scattered by scavengers and/or grave robbers, and it is also evident that the mining activities disrupted and further scattered such remains. Of the individuals found, it is believed that 29 represent adults, and 16 represent children. Of those adults, eight were identified as male and two as female. According to Loud, the rest of the remains were indeterminate. At the site, several mummies were uncovered including an adult male and a child. They were found by the mining crew nearly intact, and some of their finds were turned over to the Nevada Historical Society. Also, partial mummies were found in situ as well as in the debris pile associated with the mining exploitation. One infant skeleton was well preserved with a rattle and netting as part of the burial (Loud and Harrington

1929: 31-32). Besides human remains, various animals from the region, mostly consisting of bone material were uncovered. Some of these bird species were represented solely by feather material.

The primary excrement in the cave was that of bat guano; however, pack rat excrement was also found and, when in association with artifacts, destroyed textiles and rotted wood. Apparently, the pack rat excrement was prone to soaking up moisture and

65 holding it against artifacts while the bat guano was more resistant to moisture. In many areas, the bat guano showed signs of being carbonized by fire at some point, again reinforcing the fact that there had been a fire in the cave. Other excrement of note was that of coyotes, which was assumed to be the byproduct of eating the dead in the cave with the hopes of containing human and textile remnants. The human coprolites found, they demonstrated evidence of a coarse, fibrous diet. Human coprolite specimens varied in size with some of as large as two inches in diameter (Loud and Harrington 1929: 34-

35).

As for cultural material, many of the animal bones were used as tools. Twenty- four awls were found of which the majority were worked from the bones of deer or bighorn sheep. Of these, ten were made from a scapula, one from the ulna, two from the cannon (which is typical of Californian sites), three from the radius, and one from the tibia. As for non-deer or bighorn remains, one tool came from the tibia of a coyote, and another derived from the ulna of a coyote. The last five tools worked from faunal remains were listed as unspecified. The awls are of particular interest because they do not closely resemble their Californian counterparts. Instead, they show some similarities to awls found in Utah and Southern Colorado sites, although they are still quite different than those as well (Loud and Harrington 1929: 36-37). It is interesting that the site contains unique cultural materials as well as items that suggest diffusion and admixture from and with other populations coming from the east, westward, and possibly southward.

Also found at the site were a variety of artifacts with various attributed uses that were fabricated using diverse faunal remains. Of these artifacts, there were 56 total bone

66 tubes taken primarily from coyote and birds with three examples of deer and one example from a wildcat. Loud mentions working closely with a Paiute native, Natches, upon whose experience and knowledge Loud relied for some identification of recovered cultural materials. Interestingly, Natches is the same individual who helped John Reid with his work and told him about the red-haired giants and where to find them. Not all items were identifiable by Natches, who was the chief of the Paiutes at the time, and it is important to remember that many of his identifications might have been guesses. Since

Loud‟s consultation with Natches, the conclusion was that some bone tubes were used as rattles, and others were carried as charms. Interestingly, some items appear to suggest ornamentation purposes and were potentially braided into hair. According to Loud, one specimen recovered from the site appears to have been inserted into the septum of the nose based on his comparison of it to other versions of bone tubes found. Another specimen looked like a container for hair oil, and yet another was a possible bone flute worked from the faunal remains of an unspecified bird. Along with these bone tubes, other objects were identified including a rib pendant, an incised pendant, a scraper, multiple spatulas, a mink head, and fishhooks (Loud and Harrington 1929: 37-41).

Artifacts made from horn and hooves were also found including 20 documented specimens. Of these specimens, there were four were straighteners, three spoons, four pendants, four flat objects, one perforated disk, one fish carving, one perforated sheep hoof that was possibly used as a rattle, and another rattle found with 38 objects thought to be part of its original construction (Loud and Harrington 1929: 42).

67

The next set of artifacts discovered fall into the skin or leather category. Loud uncovered numerous pieces of hide, many of which were identified as bits of sandal or moccasin. One example was a sole from a moccasin evincing numerous attempts to mend it. Some of the moccasins were beaded, and there were numerous examples of leather found in a pile. Some pieces were tanned while others were not. The area was suspected to be a scrap pile for the making of moccasins. Thongs were found as well as fur and some examples of sewn furs. Some blankets of muskrat fur and others of bird skin were uncovered as well. In other cases, bird skin was twisted together to make decorative rope for use in clothing. Along with these artifacts, approximately 48 tule stuffed bird heads were discovered (Loud and Harrington 1929: 46-53).

Other notable finds during Loud‟s excavation included large collections of textile materials, over 1,528 fragments of basketry, 1,418 fragments of matting, and 378 fragments of other items possibly associated with blankets. Of these fragments, many were woven from tule and appear to be sandals. There are also numerous examples of matting, as mentioned above, varying in weave style and materials used. Generally, most were constructed from tule, rush, or other available plant materials. Basketry remained mostly design free, although some specimens do show faint patterns and band patterning.

Of this, both the wicker style and the coiled style were recovered (Loud and Harrington

1929: 53-74).

Along with other items, cordage was uncovered as well as small woven bags and containers made from animal bladders. Numerous styles of twine were found, produced mostly using tule, rush, or grass fibers, although a smaller percentage was also retrieved

68 that had been created from human hair. Some twine was merely twisted, while other examples were twisted and then wrapped. From this, two examples of strand twine nets were discovered. Loud also noted another category of intricate braided materials consisting of between three and 18 braided strands per specimen. On much of the material, knots were found, and the natives executed numerous styles. Ordered from most to least prevalent, these knots included Granny Knots, Overhand Knots, Slip Knots,

Clove Knots, and Reef Knots. Loud used this information to suggest that the natives were not very sophisticated because they used Granny Knots most often, and only rarely employed Reef Knots (Loud and Harrington 1929: 72-87).

Loud also found parts of baby cradles. In fact, one was a nearly complete example located in the back of the cave. Digging sticks were also uncovered as well as fire making sticks. Along with these finds, tools, bows, spears and arrows were also retrieved. Bows and arrows were fragmentary. Tragically, a complete spear-thrower was found by an anonymous private party who looted the cave, and it was kept moving from seller to seller until it was eventually lost somewhere in California around 1912 (Loud and

Harrington 1929: 94-97). Other examples of spear-throwers found by Loud were only fragmentary. Loud found several styles of knives as well as combs and miscellaneous tools that were classified as indeterminate. Loud also mentions numerous discoveries of shell used in beads on necklaces and other adornments, as well as some examples of clay work and paint. Most of the clay was in the form of clay balls embellished with red paint

(Loud and Harrington 1929: 105-109).

69

In 1924, Harrington found similar items but made a few important discoveries. In pit nine, Harrington found 116 complete mummified fish (Loud and Harrington 1929:

36). Harrington also found large parts of spear-throwers, atlatls, darts, and clubs, which looked comparable to those of the Southwestern traditions. The most notable observation was that many of the darts had been purposely blunted, suggesting their use for training or as stunning points. Points retrieved from the site were fabricated using stone, wood or bone. Harrison also discovered numerous stone balls ranging from ½ to 1 ½ inches in diameter. While their function is unknown, it was hypothesized that they may have been employed in games or during religious activities. Harrington also noted the presence of snares and wooden pendants (Loud and Harrington 1929: 110-114).

Harrington‟s largest find was that of a stash of duck decoys. Harrington mentioned finding 11 in pit 12, but was not specific as to whether or not that was the total number found at the site. Harrington broke the decoys into two categories, stuffed and painted. The stuffed decoys were produced by preserving the skin of the bird and then stuffing it with tule or other unspecified organic material to make it appear alive from a distance. On the other hand, the painted versions were constructed from tule or other materials, which were formed into shapes like those of ducks and then painted to resemble their distinctive markings. Of these, a variety of birds were preserved through stuffing while only ducks were imitated using the painted construction type. The natives tied a string to each decoy upon which they attached a weight or anchor to keep the decoys in place. Some of the decoys still retained evidence of this anchoring practice at the time of the 1924 excavation (Loud and Harrington 1929: 114). Harrington thought the

70 decoys were more contemporary because the Stillwater band of Northern Paiutes had made them during more recent periods.

Unfortunately, since the stratigraphy at the site had previously been destroyed by guano mining, little evidence remained to support this theory. In the 1970s, samples were extracted from the duck decoys and radiocarbon dated. Based on these tests, it was determined that the finds were older than Harrington had theorized with an average estimation of 2160 +/- 180 BP (Napton and Tuohy 1986: 814). Still, to accept the radiocarbon date as accurate without any further corroboration would be as illogical as

Harrington‟s initial supposition since there are other environmental and temporal factors that bring the test‟s findings into question, namely fire. What this does demonstrate is that

Loud and Harrington were poorly equipped to accurately determine the ages of the specimens that they recovered. Even worse, because of poor methodology and unfounded assumptions on the part of both Loud and Harrington, it is nearly impossible to determine when the decoys were created as well as many other items associated with Lovelock

Cave.

Harrington also discovered what he felt was corroborating evidence of an old

Paiute myth. The myth, as previously described, was of a warlike tribe who fought with

(and possibly cannibalized) neighboring tribes such as the Paiutes. In order to end their reign of terror, the Paiutes eventually managed to trap the last of this tribe in a cave and then set fire to the entrance of the cave to exterminate them. Sarah Winnemucca wrote,

“At last my people were tired and they went to work and gathered wood, and began to fill the mouth of the cave…….. At last my people set it on fire.” Winnemucca further stated

71 that her Paiute ancestors left the cave burning for ten days before they entered it to verify that all of the cannibals were indeed dead (Winnemucca 1883: 74). Harrington noted a large concentration of broken arrow fragments at the mouth of the cave and found them in crevices as if arrows had been shot at the entrance to keep something or someone inside. Harrington also noted that in areas where the cave floor was intact, there was evidence that the cave had been burned as the Paiute legend goes. Harrington also noted that this evidence appeared to be from a later period than that suggested in the Paiute myth (Loud and Harrington 1929: 115). Unfortunately, Harrington used little evidence to draw such a conclusion precisely because of the poor methodology used to determine the age of artifacts at the site, the uncontrolled destruction of key features of the site‟s integrity, and the fundamental lack of clear evidence as to when the Paiutes might have waged this battle. The chronology of the cave is still debated, and, therefore, it is plausible that the folkloric tradition of the Paiutes is somewhat correct and that they did, in fact, exterminate numerous individuals from a competing group.

During his excavation, Harrington also found other objects such as a hairbrush and a scoria ring painted yellow. The scoria ring‟s use is unknown, but it has been suggested that it was used for a club head or a digging stick weight. Some examples of necklaces were also retrieved including one made with bear claws as well as strong line and hemp. Very fine cord was found with barbs and hooks attached. Numerous wooden handles of knives also were reported.

Another significant find for Harrington was a ceremonial plume made from the feathers of gulls, pelicans and other unspecified birds. Harrington recorded the exposed

72 height of the plume as being 11 ½ inches with the lower four to five inches wrapped in bobcat fur. The tip of the plume was embellished with numerous small colorful feathers and some stiff string that held beads in place. Some of the beads still remained attached.

The plume was protected and covered in animal skin. Harrington suggested this was possibly a wand-type item rather than one worn on the head or put on a staff (Loud and

Harrington 1929: 116-118).

The variation in the descriptions of artifacts recovered by Loud and Harrington is remarkable. Generally, Loud specifically categorized most items and carefully numbered every artifact, giving each one extremely thorough treatment in terms of details. On the other hand, Harrington did not assign specific numbers to artifacts or even include their weights. He did not organize his thoughts very clearly and rather randomly lumped his observations all together. This lack of organization, detail, and description is unsettling and undermines the integrity of the 1924 excavation. Harrington tried to be more detailed in describing where items were uncovered in the stratigraphy by placing them with the determined occupation layers that he developed. Loud‟s records, however, remain obscure as to where each artifact might have been properly placed in a chronological ordering of the site. Such carelessness on both accounts skewed their results and did not allow for a true understanding and appreciation of information. Not to mention much of the finds were left sitting and not thoroughly investigated including but not limited to the human skeletal materials. What is perhaps most startling about the writing differences is that Harrington and Loud prepared this report together from the records of their two different expeditions, yet Loud‟s lack of contextual information on methodology is not

73 thoroughly addressed, just as the unorganized jumble of non-specifics on Harrington‟s part is ignored.

Fig. 2 Harrington and Louds Occupation Phases. Taken from Loud and Harrington 1929: Lovelock Cave 19.

For example, in their article “A Prehistoric Sling from Lovelock Cave, Nevada,”

Robert F. Heizer and Irmgard W. Johnson discuss an artifact that Loud found and included a drawing of it in his records. But, ultimately, he never described or identified this artifact. On closer analysis, Heizer and Johnson determined that it was a unique specimen made of “Indian Hemp” and likely the oldest sling ever attributed to Native

74

Americans (Heizer and Johnson 1952: 140). Although this artifact might not have been as

“exciting” to Loud as some of the other finds that were easier to identify, his lack of interest in the object and numerous other finds presents yet another troubling inconsistency. Loud was very detailed in the descriptions of the specimens that he recorded; however, he did not describe all items. This suggests that he may have discussed only those finds with which he was more interested or comfortable identifying.

CHAPTER 6. THE DOCUMENTARY RECORD AND THE SI-TEH-

CAH

This section will refer to a few accounts of purported “giant” finds in the

Americas by individuals that tried to document and record them, as well as newspaper articles discussing the “red-haired giants” of Lovelock Cave. There are literally hundreds of accounts of large stature individuals from numerous sources in the Americas. For the purposes of this thesis, only a small percentage will be briefly discussed. The interesting feature is the contrast between the sources of information and the accounts themselves, which tend to be very detailed and reported in a surprisingly matter-of-fact tone. The material in the articles is not presented as abnormal or remotely lacking in authenticity.

Of course, by contrast, when it comes to the discussion of the large stature of skeletal remains, modern standards would generally conclude they are fictional in nature or at least approach them with hesitation and skepticism. The newspaper sources also tend to be sensationalized, and small details of the stories change. There is also repeated

75 recycling of the same stories. From these small changes, it appears that new folkloric versions of prehistoric Native American myths are being adopted to the folkloric traditions of the United States as perceptions and cultural trends continue to shift with society.

The first to be examined in this section dates to 1792 and was written by O.

Turner in his book the Pioneer History of the Holland Purchase of Western New York. In this account, Turner discusses numerous finds of pipes, beads, hatchets, stone axes, and so forth in present day New York state. Turner expressed belief in ancestral peoples prior to contemporary Native Americans and created a distinction between the two. Turner discussed the mounds in the area and how they played roles in fortification. In fact, he argued that their layout was similar to contemporary European fortifications. It is important to note that the style of his account up to this point is very matter-of-fact. Next, he mentions the skeletal remains that were unearthed. While they appear to be an extraordinary find according to his report, they did not seem unusual to him or possibly the people of that period based on the tone of his narrative. Turner writes as follows:

Some of the skeletons almost entire have been exhumed; many of giant size, not less than seven and eight feet in length. The skulls are large and well-developed in the anterior lobe, broad between the ears, and flattened in the coronal region. Half a mile west of the fort is a sand hill. Here a large number of human skeletons have been exhumed, in a perfect state. Great numbers appeared to have been buried in the same grave. Many of the skulls appear to have been broken in with clubs and stones (Turner 1850: 36).

The description continues and officials such as S.M. Burrough, Esq. of Medina suggest massive battles and massacres of populations and even theorize the influence of

76 movements of the Aztecs throughout North America based on cross-comparisons of pottery. Ironically, artifacts from these sites were stored away along with the skeletal remains. Some have suggested that Turner‟s description of giant skeletons points toward misidentification of human bones with those of animals; however, this account mentions mass graves and completely articulated remains in contact with their natural surfaces, which does not lend credit to that suggestion.

There are literally hundreds of accounts from settlers, native populations and newspaper articles regarding giant skeletal remains. Another example of such an account comes from the Ancient History of the Six Nations by David Cusick. Discussing an Ohio

Valley tribal history story of giants and the extermination of the giants by the

Eagwehowe people, it is interesting to note the similarities in these giant tales from the natives about exterminating an ancestral giant group with whom they were in constant conflict and the treatment these natives would eventually see at the hands of the pioneers over the course of Native American history. There are also some basic similarities between this account and the ones of the Paiute and Washoe.

This notion of an extinct giant race has pervaded folkloric traditions from coast to coast in America and was readily adopted by the scientific community of the era due to the corroboration of several massacre sites and mass graves. The Eagwehowe people discuss being invaded by the Ronnongwetowanea who came from the North. The

Ronnongwetowanea were known for their raids on the Eagwehowe people and were described as only engaging in battles they knew they would win. The Eagwehowe people explained that their houses were plundered by the giants. Ultimately, the giants were

77 exterminated after their settlement in the North was discovered and destroyed. Some speculation typical of the day even stated that the Ronnongwetowanea comprised a previously unknown Viking settlement in the New World. They supported this by pointing out that Vikings would have indeed been taller than the natives although certainly not giants in modern terms. Whether this story is the result of contact all the way into the Ohio Valley region or a diffused story from another native population is unclear.

Another account from O. Turner discussed giant remains found in the Pioneer

History of Allegany County New York whereby he states, “on the shores of Lake Ontario, on high bluff near Irondesquoit Bay, in 1796, the bank caved off, and untombed a large quantity of human bones, of large size. The arm and leg bones upon comparison were much larger than those of our own race” (Turner 1850: 428). Later, in the same book, he described large quantities of both male and female specimens all of larger stature.

In 1888, Josiah Priest‟s book American Antiquities and Discoveries in the West appeared. It contained the compiled research of travelers‟ notes, “authentic sources,” and the research of the Antiquarians Societies according to Priest. Describing finds of other populations in the Americas, he referred to Native legends of giants and purported finds of “giants.” Priest discussed fossilized footprints of large-stature individuals as well as remains and larger tools and axes. Priest looked at crumbing ruins and sites and drew upon these for his conclusions. As was the trend during this period, Priest attempted to harmonize all aspects of his observations with the accepted worldview of the time. In fact, he consistently cited references to biblical events, made suggestions about Atlantean

78 cross-cultural exchange and drew on other folkloric traditions to support his claims. His work also argued for the existence of Native Americans in partially civilized nations prior to the arrival of Columbus. This is even stated in his extremely lengthy title.

In 1883, it was reported by the St. Paul Press that ten skeletons of gigantic stature were exhumed from one of the mounds in the area (St. Paul Press 1883).

In Medina County, Ohio, in 1881 an account described skeletons that were accidentally exhumed during house construction efforts:

In digging the cellar for a house 9 human skeletons were found and like such specimens from other mounds of the country they showed that the mound builders were men of large stature. The skeletons were not found lying in such a manner that would indicate any arrangement of the bodies on the part of the entombers. In describing the tomb, Mr. Albert Harris said: “It looked as if the bodies had been dumped into ditches. Some of them were buried deeper than others the lower ones being almost seven feet below the surface. When the skeletons were found Mr. Harris was twenty years of age, yet he states that he could put one of the skulls over his head, and let it rest upon his shoulders, while wearing a fur cap at the same time. The large size of all the bones was remarked, and the teeth were described as double all the way round (Perrin 1881: 215).

Later, in this same account, the then Judge Harris found the need to rebury the skeletons and did so uncovering remnants of their civilization. Interestingly, this description continues and discusses other skeletons found of smaller stature only three feet down.

In the account History of Marion County (1875) from Marion County, West

Virginia, it describes how workmen building a bridge discovered some large stature skeletons around 8 feet tall with reddish hair still on the skulls. The report further discusses coming across thousands of skeletons, the majority being noted as normal size.

79

This report notes that Professor Alexander Winehell from Michigan State University was present, as well as Dr. J.W. Devore, noted for having one of the ”giant” Indian relics.

This account discussed earthen mounds and other finds as well as a cemetery described as follows. “Nearly 3,000 graves have been discovered, containing bones which at some time must have constituted the framework of veritable giants, while others are of no unusual size” (History of Marion County 1883).

In the Historical Collections of Virginia from 1845, it mentions a human jawbone of great size that was purported to be so big as to “pass over a man‟s face entirely with ease” (Howe 1845: 300). In the Natural Aborigine History of Tennessee from 1766, skeletons of seven feet were described as discovered in the excavation of an ancient fortification (Haywood 1823: 143). In the History of Monongalia County, West Virginia, they describe a skeleton of at least seven feet in height (Wiley 1883: 624).

The aforementioned cases only touch upon the literally hundreds of accounts of people of larger stature found in mounds and prehistoric sites east of the Mississippi. The interesting part of these stories is that they fit the folkloric types mentioned previously in many ways. There is a universality that cuts across cultural lines regarding giants, whether it is wars with giants from the native perspective or interesting archaeological finds from the pioneer viewpoint. In both cases, there is an obvious intertwining of universal motifs with in-vogue folkloric traditions of the 19th century and those of much older native cultures. These stories touch on giants and their purported extermination at the hands of Native Americans, a genocide supposedly supported by several accounts and sites. The extent of truth in the stories themselves is unknown, especially due to the

80 suggestion of exaggeration and/or mystical elements. Still, these stories have ties to the

Great Basin narratives already examined, although the Paiutes in particular go to much greater lengths to justify the necessity of their genocide. At this juncture, it is worth contrasting the above articles with newspaper clippings about Lovelock Cave and its so- called giant myth.

Numerous articles about Lovelock Cave date from the early 1900s into more recent times. During the 1930s and the 1970s, the articles discussed mostly red-headed giants with few exceptions, a subject regarded as both exciting and convincing. After

1976, one article circulated across the country suggesting that the bones were misidentified cow bones. All previous talk of skeletons had discussed mummies and complete skeletons; therefore, the cow bone article was strangely out of place (Kiley

1976: 46). After that, the talk of red-haired giants disappeared in print and was replaced with discussions of duck decoys. What follows delves into some excerpts from these articles.

In 1920, in the Bakersfield Californian there was a report of upcoming archaeological work to be conducted by the Smithsonian. By 1929, the Chronicle

Telegraph from Ohio discussed Harrington‟s work, the purported age of the cave, and some of his finds. In 1929, in the Reno Evening Gazette, a detailed report of the Lovelock

Cave appeared giving special attention to the Paiute legend associated with it. In this article, however, there is no mention of cannibalism. Instead, the “Others” were said to be unpopular for carrying off Paiute women.

81

In the Billings Gazette in 1931, there is mention of finds of a red-haired giant by an engineer/scientist/archaeologist named John T. Reid. “Reid, local archaeologist, announces Wednesday the discovery of the skeleton of a 7 ½ foot Indian which he said offered evidence that a race of giants once inhabited the region surrounding Lovelock”

(Billings Gazette 1931). In this article, Reid claims to have found inscriptions linked to the Mayans in the Great Basin region. Interestingly, Reid is the one who identified the skeleton, which was found by a worker. It was noted that the skeleton still had red hair attached to the skeletal remains. The article also mentioned that Reid rode the desert with

Natches, chief of the Paiutes, who told him of the red-haired Indians that had come from the south. It should be noted that Natches appears to be the same native that served as an artifact identifier for Loud on his excavation of Lovelock Cave. With regard to Natches‟

Southern migration theory, there is also an article about a purported giant found in

Mexico City in The Gleaner. In this 1930 article, , they discuss a skeleton of gigantic stature. It may possibly be the same skeleton reported in 1909 by The Washington Post as being the remains of a 15 foot giant in Mexico City. According to the article, “Romulo

Luna, judge of the district has taken possession of the skeleton, which is complete except for the skull. Judge Luna stated that as soon as the search for the skull is finished the skeleton will be forwarded to the national museum in Mexico” (The Gleaner 1930). This story originally appeared in the New York Tribune and then The Washington Post. The latter goes on to describe the Aztec legend as follows:

The discovery of the skeleton has revived the old Aztec legend that in a prehistoric age a race of giants lived in the valley of Anahuac, a name given by the aboriginal Mexicans to the part

82

of the Mexican plateau nearly corresponding to the modern valley of Mexico City. These giants were known as the Quinatzina, the story goes, afterwards destroyed by the Ulmecas also of great stature, who in turn, perished by earthquakes interpreted as an expression of the wrath of God (Washington Post 1909).

Returning to the 1931 The Billings Gazette article, it reports that the last of the

“Sid-u-cahs”, as the article referred to them, were six women who lived in the Fallon and

Lovelock area and interbred with other Indian groups (The Billings Gazette 1931: 8). The following year Reid is again discussed in the Nevada State Journal as giving talks about the red-haired giants of Lovelock to the Lions Club in Reno (Nevada State Journal 1932:

6).

By 1950, the folkloric tradition underwent a momentary transformation, which did not last for very long. Suddenly, in an article Paiute Legend says There was a Pygmy

Band that Liked to Eat Cooked Paiute, by George Crabble, the giants were no longer giants but rather red-haired pygmy cannibals. Crabble asks, “Did cave-dwelling pygmy cannibals roam Nevada‟s hills and stalk their human prey on the shores of prehistoric lake Lahontan?” Developing this premise, he further states, “they are supposed to have had red hair and freckled faces—a far departure from the black-visaged, bicep-budging cavemen of the cartoonists!” (Crabble 1950: M3). Crabble goes on to controversially suggest that early White inhabitants had been discovered in the prehistoric cave and, further on, notes that archaeologists reported evidence of “inhabitants of the cave [who] were of normal to large stature….. well-preserved mummies one of them the body of a man 6 feet 6 inches tall!” Crabbles also discusses their red hair and the scientific

83 interpretation of the color change due to chemical processes (Crabble 1950: M3). In

1952, the Nevada State Journal reported on new finds in the Lovelock site, which provided evidence for the proposed Asiatic Bering Theory becoming a hot topic at that time. In this article, they suggested similarities of a new find of a head in a woven reed cap to the style of caps Mongolians wear (Nevada State Journal 1952: 6).

In 1970, the Victoria Advocate looked at Paiute legends and mentioned Stoker‟s museum in Winnemucca and the display of one of the giant‟s skulls. In this article, the red-headed giants were described as light-skinned by an informant named Anne Bill who claimed to be retelling an old story passed on for generations. Clarence Stoker, who was noted to be the curator of the Stoker Museum, is mentioned as a local to Lovelock and to have one of the giant‟s skulls on display open to the public. Also, there was some suggestion to links and connections to mummies from Egypt (Victoria 1970: 9A). This article was picked up in the Lawton Constitutional in 1970. These two articles discuss hundreds of red-haired mummies and the implications their discovery would have on archaeology as a whole. By 1976, the Brownsville Herald discussed cannibalistic giants as ghosts that wandered about and haunted the area around Lovelock after dark. The title of the article says it all: “Cannibal Tribe Ghost Lingers” (MacDonald 1976: 12B). In instances such as this, it is clear that a new folkloric tradition is being created through the media. Also in 1976, articles about scientific investigations on the giants appeared in several newspapers such as the Greeley Tribune and Ogden Standard-Examiner, discussing the University of Nevada, Reno‟s and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas‟ involvement in studying some finds from the cave, although not specifying which ones.

84

In their preliminary finds, they suggested that individuals were of larger stature, but closer to 6 feet than the 7 and 8-feet-tall claims. A researcher known as Dr. Sheilagh

Brooks suggested that many of the bones recovered from the cave were cow bones.

Donald Tuohy also worked on the investigation and was tied into much research at the

Lovelock Cave site. After this period, the articles of Lovelock Cave focus on artifacts and material culture finds.

There is a marked shift in the information about Lovelock Cave associated with changes in perceptions and the way that society viewed the world. Ironically, this is the same process observed at work in all types of folklore. What stays the same are some of the basics like the Paiute legend and the finds in Lovelock Cave. The press releases from

Berkeley and the Smithsonian excavators did not discuss skeletal materials. Then, it became apparent that the mainstream media shifted towards accepting the red-haired giants as fact. After this, the scientific perception changed and Asiatic migration became more of the trend. Ideology changed and perceptions of the giants again changed. In regards to the articles on conducted scientific investigation, on some of the skeletal material, the idea that giants were merely larger stature people diminished, and this became a modern day fairy tale in the mainstream media. Despite all of the contentions and controversy, there is still enough evidential support to suggest that another group of people, who might have been larger than the native population (although not giant in the modern sense of the word,) did exist. Ironically, some of the more creditable sources are the articles and accounts discussing the finds. In terms of where these finds went, most were sent back to Berkeley, the Smithsonian, Mexico City or other institutions. Whether

85 this folklore represents a crafty tale with elements to make the reader more inclined to believe them, it has and always will generate controversy.

CHAPTER 7. THE SI-TEH-CAH AND THE BIOLOGICAL RECORD

This section will briefly look at some of the controversial skeletal materials that may suggest variations in populations and a Pre-Numic population. Surprisingly enough, for as many purported skeletal finds as there have been over the last few centuries, very few of them have been properly investigated.

This section will briefly look at the Kennewick and Spirit Cave finds and the possibility that cultural identification links each to other migrational populations, such as

Caucasoids, Pacific Islanders, or some Australian aboriginal links. A problem occurs not just because of the NAGPRA law for studying remains but also due to the fact that in the case of Spirit Cave, the remains were actually discovered in 1940 and left in storage pending further research.. Ironically, had remains from sites including Lovelock Cave not been stuffed away, the folkloric tradition of the Si-teh-cah could have been better understood in addition to unearthing possible migration routes and a revised model for the peopling of the Americas. At this point, it‟s a struggle to obtain necessary information with lost remains, stored remains in light of NAGPRA laws. This section will look at two finds that, for purposes of this thesis, suggest different migrations of peoples to the

Americas. This in no way suggests that these particular specimens represent the Si-teh- cah, although they may. It does show, however, an area of ever changing movements and cultural influences, and it is my contention that the Great Basin may have had migrations

86 from numerous directions. The Paiute and Shoshone just happened to be the last of these migrational waves at the advent of European settlement.

Spirit Cave man is noted to be of a similar age to Kennewick man, and they share similar traits and possible origins. Respectfully, the skeletons are dated and estimated at

9,400 and 9,300 years old. There has been little serious academic work published on the

Spirit Cave man, and the remains of both are in limbo in terms of where they will eventually go. According to a Newsweek article in 1999 called “The First Americans,” the remains are estimated to be 9,400 years old. The individual was middle aged and most likely died from an abscess. The individual was wrapped in rabbit-fur robes, and he was entombed in a rock shelter lined with reed mats similar to reports of the Lovelock cave burials. This article delves into information suggesting numerous migrations to the

Americas and the inherent problems associated with the inadequate (if at all) study of those remains. Andrew Murr and Sharon Begley who wrote the article write,

He wasn‟t supposed to be there. Spirit Caveman is the wrong guy, in the wrong place, at the wrong time. According to the standard anthropology script, anyone living in America 9,000 years ago should resemble either today‟s Native Americans or, at the very least, the Asians who were their ancestors and thus, supposedly, the original Americans. But Spirit Caveman does not follow that script—and neither do more than a dozen other skeletons of Stone Age Americans. Together, the misfits have sparked a spirited debate: who were the first Americans? (Begley and Murr 1999).

Whether this article is of scientific merit, it does raise some very good questions of why hundreds, perhaps thousands of remains have been sent to museums and warehouses, awaiting further study. Why were they never studied, especially when

87 theories of migrational trends abound in Anthropology? Is this a case of using only what evidence supports a theory, or the result of lost or overwhelming amounts of information?

This article on Spirit Cave Man also discusses remains found in Nebraska and Minnesota suggesting Southern Asian or European ancestry, and a specimen from Brazil suggesting

Southern Asian or Australian ancestry. In the article, David Hurst Thomas suggests evolutionary changes to account for the differences. This is an interesting suggestion that evolutionary changes created similar features to populations from other regions independently, however this theory is not verifiable and migrations from various regions coupled with interbreeding factors within the Americas can also be speculated from the existing.evidence

Of course, it is not the intent of this thesis to dive into the peopling of the

Americas debate but rather to explore the possibility of other migrations and whether the

“Others” might really have been “Others.” The article mentions Kennewick man in

Washington and the similarities between him and Spirit Cave, as well as the spear point embedded in his hip and the ossification of bone over the point, suggesting healing of the wound. The spear tip was identified as one from the Cascade culture, and Kennewick‟s suspected tool kit is reported to differ from theirs, perhaps indicating that the Cascade

Culture might have been moving into the region, coming into conflict with another ethnic group. This is interesting and fits with Native American stories of displacing other groups throughout the country.

This article also suggests that the reason Natives are demanding reburial, already reburying numerous remains, is due more to legal dilemmas that may follow if they are

88 not considered to be “the first natives”, but a migrational group that exterminated the natives. This is an interesting argument but ignores incidences of interbreeding as well as multiple migrational patterns within and throughout the Americas. According to this article, Owsley and Jantz discuss 11 ancient skulls, being the oldest found, and explain how their traits come from three distinct groups most likely from Southern Asia and

European descent, and how none of them share an affinity with modern Native

Americans. This article can be best summed up by anthropologist Dennis Stanford of the

Smithsonian Institute, “it‟s clear to me that we are looking at multiple migrations through a very long time period—migrations of many different people of many different ethnic origins” (Begley and Murr 1999).

Kennewick Man was discovered in Kennewick, Washington, where his remains eroded out of the Columbia River‟s banks. James C. Chatters, who analyzed the remains, thinks that they date from a more recent period. Reports of numerous artifacts exist but the only artifact in direct contact with the remains was an embedded projectile point.

Chatters describes the point as being that of a Cascade point, which had to be x-rayed because it was so deeply embedded and ossified in the bone. Kennewick was recovered from approximately 350 fragments and included a nearly complete cranium and mandible missing just two teeth. Chatters notes that all permanent teeth were found. Chatters goes into a thorough description of the individual and writes, “the Kennewick skeleton differs markedly from modern American Indians, particularly those of the Northwestern U. S.

Anthroposcopy, craniofacial morphometrics, and discrete dental traits were used to determine to which modern geographic group he was most similar” (Chatters 2000: 305).

89

Chatters was under the impression that he was looking at a colonial find and, once the dating came back, noted “cranial characteristics, femoral morphology and stature together led me, in the forensic venues, to suggest an affinity with modern Euro Americans. Once the skeleton‟s age was known, however, I referred to the remains as “Caucasoid-like.” I did not state, nor did I intend to imply, once the skeleton‟s age became known, that he was a member of some European group” (Chatters 2000: 306). Kennewick is more similar to eight other Paleo-Indian skeletons from Brown‟s cave in Minnesota, Horn

Shelter in Texas, Hourglass Cave in Colorado, Spirit Cave and Wizard Beach, Nevada and Gore Creek, British Colombia. They all vary more and are outliers from modern

Native populations and have greater association with African, European and Pacific

Island groups. Chatters sums up his research by stating, “the man‟s dental and craniofacial characteristics show an affinity with the Ainu and Pacific Island peoples, but make him stand out from modern American Indians, especially those who occupied

Northwestern North America in later prehistory, he does, however compare favorably with other Paleo-American males, although he is significantly taller and has a more projecting face” (Chatters 2000: 312). Some might wonder why this debate is just occurring now on migrations and peopling trends. Actually, as shown before, migrational movements and diverse populations were assumed and suggested by finds from the late

1700s to the 1940s and 1950s, after which a monoculture idea developed limiting migration routes and trends. What seem to weaken this monocultural peopling theory are the skeletal remains themselves in view of the Paleo-Indian finds currently being researched. Chatters notes that, “actual physical remains have largely been ignored, partly

90 because they are so rare and partly because of a prevailing view that the early skeletal material was indistinguishable from later Amerindians (Hrdlicka 1937).

CHAPTER 8. CONCLUSION

The folkloric tales of the Si-teh-cah as with so many tales of the “Other” and giants are the essence of folkloric stories, and the universal themes contained therein are found from region to region around the world. The general motifs and archetypes associated with warlike giants who preyed on people whether by stealing, kidnapping, killing or cannibalizing are all themes fostered in native stories. Do these tales demonstrate humanity's underlying “collective unconsciousness” or an evolutionary unity linking all of mankind? Or, are these myths simply the result of drawing conclusions from limited available choices? Further research must be done before these questions can be definitely answered. But the exploration of these myths from an anthropological perspective still provides tantalizing new glimpses into what may have occurred in prehistoric times, how faulty archaeological work has forever changed the dynamics of this research, and what still needs to be conducted in future investigations of the folklore.

The folkloric tales of the Great Basin come from the perceptions and perspectives of the teller, the roles they may have played in actual events and the esoteric and exoteric elements. Wars and struggles inspired by migrations, and environmental changes might be reflected in the tales of the “Others.” After all, the peoples were forced to compete for dwindling resources and range. Based on the analysis of oral tradition and the archaeological record, this thesis asserts that it is plausible that a population likely did

91 exist referred to as the Si-teh-cah. The questions that remain are who exactly were these people? Were they from an earlier migration from the East as is suggested by some of the similarities with material culture in Utah and Colorado sites? Or, could they have migrated from the South as was suggested with links to the Mesoamerican world. Is it possible that the people in question were the remnants of another older migration from a distant land? These are all very good questions that can only be answered with more research and study.

The research for this thesis turned up many more questions and avenues to investigate. The myths chosen for comparison in this thesis were compared and contrasted at the local regional level, further national level, and so forth. Further research is recommended to have a full comparison of cultural material with various native

American populations to see if stylistic and item trends might shed light on tribal affiliation as well as migration patterns, possibly from Eastern and/or Mesoamerican regions. Also, DNA analysis on skeletal material such as hair or mitochondrial DNA from bone might point to more cultural affinities. That said, it would be prudent to research the skeletal remains that are left instead of leaving them on shelves, thus to map the variations in very ancient remains to those of more recent occupations and even contemporary populations.

After studying the location and environmental features of the region briefly, it became apparent that the region was in a transitionary flux and this change might have caused populations to struggle with adapting froman area of plenty, full of wetlands, to an area drying up with desertification changing the land. From this continued change and

92 limited range areas for meaningful subsistence, this would lead further to population dealing with social pressures and limited land usage area would lead to inevitable conflicts and war.

Folklore is not just found in the dark, dank jungles, a primitive hang over of a more primitive time. Folklore is an aspect of every culture and also spills into modern life as can be seen in the newspaper archives and other accounts of the red-haired giants and other large stature human finds. The stories adopted by the newspaper tell of giants and the extermination of the giants, mass graves and replacement of one population for another. These folkloric elements relate to those of the natives and either suggest some truthful elements or, at the very least, the perceptions and folklore of societies mixing and developing with input from each other culturally. Further research would be helpful to study and unravel these myths by seeing physical evidence or records and documents about said artifacts.

From the folkloric tradition, it is obvious that stories spread and are retold from group to group with modern variations still developing across time and cultures. With each new telling, the stories are modified in order to appeal to the current audience.

These stories are uniting factors in society and are used to help further the culture as a whole as Bascom pointed out in his “Four Functions of Myth.” As Lévi-Strauss noted, these stories are like a composition with elements of culture, history and a dynamic presentation to hold and enamor the intended audience. The underlying elements suggest aspects of truth and real events (possibly with translation errors as Lévi-Strauss would point out, or lack of understanding of cultural perception and perspective.) The question

93 now is to further separate this analysis and recall that, to truly understand a story, it needs to be viewed through the gaze of the culture it is from. This fundamental idea brings back the question: what is a giant to any given culture? In the case of the natives of the Great

Basin, giants make up a colossal part of their folkloric tradition.

REFERENCES

Aarne, Antti 1961 the Types of the Folklore: A Classification and Bibliography. Translated by Stitch Tompson. Academia Acientiarum Fennica, Helsinki.

Aikens, C. Melvin 1976 “Cultural Hiatus in the Eastern Great Basin?” American Antiquity, 41:4 543-550.

Arens, William 1979 The Man-Eating Myth. Oxford University Press; New York, New York.

Bakersfield Californian 1926 November 1st AP “Research Planned in Lovelock Cave,” The Bakersfield Californian. Bakersfeild, CA 2.

Baumhoff, Martin A. and Robert L. Bettinger 1982 “The Numic Spread: Great Basin Cultures in Competition,” in American Antiquity, 47:3 pp 485-503.

Begley, Sharon and Andrew Murr 1999 “The First Americans.” Newsweek Online http://www.newsweek.com/1999/04/25/the-first-americans.html.

Billings Gazette 1931 April 23rd “Remains of Giant Red-haired Indian found near Lovelock,” The Billings Gazette, Billings pp. 8.

94

Binford, Lewis R. 1962 “Archaeology as Anthropology,” American Antiquity 28: 2 pp 217-225.

Chatters, James C. 2000 April “The Recovery and First Analysis of an Early Holocene Human skeleton from Kennewick, Washington.” American Antiquity. 65:2, 291-316.

Chronicle-Telegraph 1929 May 2nd “Cave Reveals Evidence of Ancient Tribe,” The Chronicle- Telegraph. Akron, OH pp. 16.

Crabble, George 1950 October 15th “Nevada‟s Red-Headed Cannibals,” Salt Lake Tribune. Salt Lake City, Utah, pp. M3.

Cusick, David 1828 History of the Six Nations. University of Nebraska-Lincoln Faculty Publications; Lincoln, NB.

Dundes, Alan 1965 The Study of Folklore. Prentice-Hall; Englewood cliffs, New Jersey.

Dundes, Alan Ed. 1999 International Folklorists: Classic Contributions by the Founders of Folklore. “The Structure of Russian Fairy Tales.”(Valdimir Propp). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, INC.; Lanham, Maryland.

Ellen, Roy and Ernest Gellener, Grazyna Kubica and Janusz Mucha 1988 Malinowski Between Two Worlds: The Polish Roots of an Anthropological Tradition. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge, Great Britain.

Elsasser, Albert B. 1960 “The Archaeology of the Sierra Nevada in California and Nevada,” in Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey. No. 51.

Foline, Louis 2011 “Comments on Native Americans.” University of Nevada Reno. Reno, Nevada.

Garry, Jane and Hasan El-Shamy Ed. 2005. Archetypes and Motifs in Folklore and Literature: A Handbook. M.E. Sharpe; London, England.

95

Gleaner 1930 June 10th “Find Giant Skeleton,” The Gleaner. 21.

Grosscup, Gordon L. 1957 “A Bibliography of Nevada Archaeology,” in Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey. No 36, the University of California Archaeological Survey, Berkeley, California.

Grosscup, Gordon L. 1960 “The Culture History of Lovelock Cave,” in Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey. No 52, the University of California Archaeological Survey, Berkeley, California.

Haywood, John 1823 The Natural History of Tessessee, Up to the First settlements Therein by the White People in the Year 1768. Printed by George Wilson; Nashville, TN.

Heizer, Robert F. 1942 “Ancient Grooved Clubs and modern Rabbit-Sticks.” American Antiquity, 8:1, pp. 41-56.

Heizer, Robert F. and Irmgard W. Johnson 1952 “A Prehistoric Sling from Lovelock Cave, Nevada,” in American Antiquity, 18:2 pp 139-147.

Heizer, Robert F. 1967 “Analysis of Human Coprolites From a Dry Nevada Cave,” in Papers on the Great Basin, University of California Archaeological Research Facility. No. 70, Berkeley, California.

Heizer, Robert F. and Lewis K. Napton. 1970 Archaeology and the Prehistoric Great Basin Lacustrine Subsistence Regime as seen from Lovelock Cave, Nevada. University of California Archaeological Research Facility, No. 10, Berkeley, California.

Heizer, Robert F. and Lewis K. Napton. 1970 Archaeology and the Prehistoric Great Basin Lacustrine Subsistence Regime as seen from Lovelock Cave, Nevada. University of California Archaeological Research Facility; Berkeley, CA.

96

History of Marion County, Ohio 1883 The history of Marion County, Ohio, containing a history of the county; its townships, towns, churches, schools, etc; general and local statistics; military record; portraits of early settlers and prominent men; history of the Northwest Territory; history of Ohio. Leggett, Conaway & Co.; Chicago, IL. Howe, Henry 1845 Historical Collections of Virginia. Babcock and Company; Charleston, SC.

Jansen, William Hugh 1959 “The Esoteric-Exoteric Factor in Folklore.” Fabula. 2:2 205-211.

Kelly, Robert L. 2001 Prehistory of the Carson Desert and Stillwater Mountains: Environment, Mobility, and Subsistence in a Great Basin Wetland. The University of Utah Press; Salt Lake City, UT.

Kiley, Brenda 1976 November 3rd “Tale of Red-haired Cannibals study for scientists,” The Greeley Tribune. Greeley, CO. 46.

Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, Barbara 1998 “Folklore‟s Crisis.” The Journal of American Folklore. 111:441 281-327.

Lawton Constitution 1970 October 7th “Who Were the Giant, People-Eating Red-Heads of Nevada?” The Lawton Constitution. Lawton, OK 21.

Levi-Strauss, Claude 1955 “The Structural Study of Myth.” The Journal of American Folklore. 68:270 428-444.

Levi-Strauss, Claude and Joseph H. McMahon 1966 “Overture to le Cru et le euit.” Yale French Studies. 36/37 41-65.

Levi-Strauss, Claude 1981 “Structuralism and Myth.” The Kenyon Review. 3:2 64-88.

Loud, Llewellyn L. and Mark R. Harrington. 1929 Reprint 1991 Lovelock Cave. Falcon Hill Press; Sparks, NV.

97

Lowie, Robert H. 1939 Ethnographic Notes on the Washo. University of California Press; Berkeley, California: 36:5, 301-352.

MacDonald, Craig 1976 June 27th “Cannibal Tribe Ghost Lingering,” The Brownsville Herald. Brownsville, TX pp. 12B.

Madsen, David B. and Michael S. Berry 1975 “A reassessment of Northeastern Great Basin Prehistory.” American Antiquity, 40:4391-405.

Mayor, Adrienne. 2005 Fossil Legends of the First Americans. University Press, Princeton; New Jersey.

Napton, L. Kyle and Donald R. Tuohy 1986 “Duck Decoys from Lovelock Cave, Nevada, Dated by 14C Accelerator Mass Spectrometry,” in American Antiquity 51: 4813-816.

Nevada State Journal 1932 May 12th “Notes on Lovelock,” Nevada State Journal, Reno NV. 6.

Nevada State Journal 1952 August 3rd “Amazing Artifacts from Lovelock Cave uphold Movieland‟s Make-Believe About out Indians,” Nevada State Journal, Reno NV. 6.

Nevada State Museum‟s Newsletter 1999 September/October “Spirit Caveman Update,” Nevada State Museum’s Newsletter. Carson City, NV. 27; 5, 5.

Ogden Standard-Examiner 1977 January 2nd “Debate Goes on About Lovelocks „Giant‟ Cannibals,” Ogden Standard-Examiner. Ogden. 15A.

Perrin, William Henry 1881 History of Median County and Ohio: Containing a history of the state of Ohio, from its earliest settlement to the present. Baskin & Battey; Chicago, Il.

Phillips, Charles The Complete Illustrated History Aztec & Mayan: The Greatest Civilizations of Ancient Central America. Petro Books; New York, NY.

98

Priest, Josiah 1888 American Antiquities and the Discoveries in the West. Hoffman and White; Albany, NY.

Potter, James M. 2004 “The Creation of Person, the Creation of Place: Hunting Landscapes in the American Southwest.” American Antiquity 69:2 322-338.

Raymond, A.W. 1992 Who were the Ancient People of the Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada? Us Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service; Fallon, NV.

Reno Evening Gazette 1929 June 24th “Home of Ancient Civilization is Explored,” Reno Evening Gazette, Reno, NV 3.

Scott, G. Richard 2011 “Comments on Native Americans.” University of Nevada Reno. Reno, Nevada.

Semple, ellen Churchill 1911 Influences of Geographic Envirnoment: On the basis of Ratzel’s system of Anthropo-Geography. Henry Holt and Company; New York, NY.

Sims, Martha C. and Martine Stephens. 2005. Living Folklore: An Introduction to the Study of people and Their Traditions. Utah State University Press; Logan, Utah.

Strain, Kathy Moskowitz 2008 Giants, Cannibals & Monsters. Hancock House Publishers LTD; Blaine, WA.

Strenski, Ivan 1987 Four Theories of Myth in Twentieth-Century history. University of Iowa Press; Iowa City, Iowa.

Turner, O. 1850 Pioneer History of the Purchase of Western New York. Buffalo, NY; Jewett Thomas and Company.

University of California Archaeological Research Facility. 1970. Papers on the

99

Anthropology of the western Great Basin. Department of Anthropology; Berkeley, Ca. Vol 51.

University of California Archaeological Research Facility. 1967. “Papers on Great Basin Archaeology,” in Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey. Department of Anthropology; Berkeley, Ca. No. 70.

University of California Archaeological Survey. 1957. “Bibliography of Nevada Archaeology,” in Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey. Department of Anthropology; Berkeley, Ca. No. 36.

University of California Archaeological Survey. 1958. “Papers on California Archaeology,” in Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey. Department of Anthropology; Berkeley, Ca. No. 41.

Victoria Advocate 1970 September 23 “Tribe” Incomplete article. The Victoria Advocate, Victoria, TX. pp. 9A.

Wheat, Margaret M. 1967. Survival Arts of the Primitive Paiutes. University of Nevada Press; Reno, Nv.

Wiley, Samuel T. 1883 History of Monogalia County, West Virginia. Publishing Company; Kingwood; Preston.

Winnemucca-Hopkins, Sarah. 1883, 1994 Reprint. Life Among the Piutes, University of Nevada press; Reno, Nevada.