HISTORY OF THE HIDATSA

[Rankin, Robert L]

I'd have to say that I think it's probably pretty late in the game for
us to learn much new about specific events 200 years ago unless the
information got written down.  That would hold for Wm. Clark's great,
great grandson ()if he had one) or any Hidatsa or Shoshone elder.  It's
not impossible that that some new fact or other might emerge, but I
think it's doubtful that something as salient as Sakakawia's identity
will be clarified by modern memories.

That said, I think it's certainly true that Indian recollections and
views of history have often been badly neglected.  Nowhere have I found
this more true than in the little investigation into the life of
Vice-President Charles Curtis that I did when we were looking at the
Kaw-Osage inscription on the chair given to him.  The biographies of
Curtis all say basically that he gave up his Kaw identity.  All that
makes it into the histories is his place in Whiteman's politics.  But we
read that he spent 10 of his formative years solely among the Kaw.  He
simply must have spoken Kaw and participated in his native culture
during that period, but none of his biographers has paid any attention
to that.  His life through his early teens is practically a blank slate
because of historians' negligence.  History is too important to be left
to historians.       Bob

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu
[mailto:owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu] On Behalf Of Alan H. Hartley
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 5:37 PM
To: siouan at lists.colorado.edu
Subject: Re: HISTORY OF THE HIDATSA


Koontz John E wrote:

> In regard to the the Lewis & Clark and Sacagawea discussion I'd like
> to plump down on the side of the traditional view espoused by Alan
> Hartley.

It's nice to have someone besides Jimm and me plump down (on either
side) and chime in (to hash up our metaphors), but might I suggest a
rewording like "the view of traditional Euro-American historiography"?