Wyoming missing persons list includes seven local teens who were last seen this summer

 My gosh, why isn't this bigger news?

Wyoming missing persons list includes seven local teens who were last seen this summer

Sunday, June 11, 1922. Nanook of the North.

Nanook of the North, a docudrama, was released. It was one of the first of its kind.

It followed the lives of a native family in far northern Quebec.

Today In Wyoming's History: June 9, 2022. Mount Doane renamed First People's Mountain

Today In Wyoming's History: June 9: 2022  The US Board on Geographic names has announced that Mount Doane in Yellowstone National Park is being renamed First People's Mountain.

Gustavus Doane was an Army officer and the peak was named for him during his lifetime.  He is associated with the Marius Massacre where he was an officer, and Native American groups have accordingly been seeking a change in the mountain's name since at least 2018

Casualties of War. The Attu Islanders and their island.

Attu woman and child, 1941.  She'd never see another summer on her home island again. By Malcolm Greany - https://www.flickr.com/photos/12567713@N00/2667001144/sizes/o/in/photostream/, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=17118121

On June 7, 1942, the Imperial Japanese Army landed on Attu Island, ferried there, of course, by the Imperial Japanese Navy.

Attu is part of the Aluetians.  It's 344 square miles in size.  For comparison's sake, that's a little bigger than Molokai in the Hawaiian Islands, and a little smaller than Kauai.  

It's relatively large, in real terms, 35 miles by 20.

It has an Aleutian climate, with average temperatures below 60F in the summer and in the mid 20s in the depth of winter.  It's coldest temperature ever was -17F, in 1902, and the hottest temperature ever, 77F in 1925.

The island has been inhabited since antiquity, and it's estimated that prior to contact with Europeans, the island had a native population between 2,000 and 5,000 souls.  Archeologists believe that settlement came from the east, not the west, even though it's the closest of the Aleutians to Asia and very distant, today, from the nearest Alaskan settlement of any kind.

It's one of the "Near Islands", as its near Asia.

Attu, along with the other Near Islands, seems to have first had settlements about 3,000 years ago, surprisingly late if it's considered that the arriving populations had spread throughout North America far before that.

The first contact with  Europeans came from Russian fur hunters in 1745, when they actually went to Attu after being confronted by a large body of armed natives on the first island they attempted to land at.  The first Russian contact on Attu violent, withe Russians taking an old woman and a boy hostage, oddly keeping the boy as an interpreter, although it has to be presumed he spoke no Russian.

A few weeks after that, the Russians raided an Attu village and killed fifteen men, with the purpose of the raid to take Attu women as sex slaves.  The location has ever since born the name Massacre Bay.

In 1750, the Russians introduced Arctic Fox to the island.

The Russian presence caused the decline of the local fauna rapidly, a devastating event for the natives, and the Russians also introduced disease, playing out a story that is often associated with the European conquest of North America. By 1762 the population was estimated at about 100 natives, which would mean that the population decline had been unbelievably massive in just a twenty or so year span.

The decline in fortunes for the Russians on the island meant that it thereafter largely skipped the Russian colonization of the Aleutians, to the extent it could be called that, and it remained free of Russian economic control.  The Russians reappeared in the early 19th Century, and the Attu population remained very small.

Christianity was introduced at least as early as 1758, but a chapel was not built until 1825, with a Russian Orthodox Priest being assigned to it, along with other island churches in 1828.  He made his first visit to the island in 1831.  By 1860 the native population had rebounded to 227 plus an additional 21 individuals who were "Creole", i.e., of mixed heritage.  When Alaska was sold to the US in 1867, services to the island dropped off massively, and by 1880 the population had declined by half.  Nonetheless, visitors to the island in the early 20th Century, who were few, were impressed by how happy the residents were and how clean the two villages were.  In the 1920s the sod structures were replaced by the natives with wooden ones, with imported wood, which included building a wooden Russian Orthodox Church in the 1920s and a school, without a teacher, in the 1932.  The teacher first appeared in 1940.

In the 19th and 20th Centuries, and indeed before, the men worked as trappers part of the year and moved to the hinterlands to do that.  Again, in the 20th Century, visitors were uniformly impressed by how happy the people living on the island were. And why not? Free of the chaos of the outside world, living a natural life, and with a Christian world view, they were as close to living in a paradise on earth as any people could be.

And then the Japanese came on June 7, 1942.

The Japanese removed all of the Attuans and kept them on Hokkaido.  By the war's end, half of them had died.  The US retook the island itself in May 1943.

The survivors wished to return to their homes when the war ended, but the US government did not allow them, garrisoning the island instead for a long range navigation site.  Truly, the government really did not have an existential right to deprive the Attuans of their home, but it did so.

The U.S. Coast Guard left in 2010.

In 2018 the descendants of the dispossessed Attuans were allowed to visit Attu.

Friday, February 13, 1942. Deciding to build the AlCan.

As we noted in our companion blog for this day, Today In Wyoming's History: February 13: 1942, it was a day of some momentous and long-lasting events.   

African American engineers working on the Alcan.  Note the very high boots.

1942  US and Canada agree to construct the Alcan Highway.  This is, of course, not directly a Wyoming event, but it is significant in that it represents the ongoing expansion of road transportation.  A highway of this type would not have even been conceivable just 20 year prior.  It also is a feature of the arrival of really practical 4x4 vehicles, all Army vehicles at that time, which were capable of off-road and road use for the first time. Such vehicles would become available to the public at the conclusion of World War Two, and would provide widespread, easy winter access to much of Wyoming for the very first time.

1942  All Japanese nationals employed by the Union Pacific Railroad were dismissed.

The AlCan is still with us, of course.  It was once one of my goals to drive it, and while that desire has waned over the years, I'd still like to.

The impetus for building the road was the fear that the Japanese would attack Alaska, which was accessible only by sea and air from the lower 48 states and which had no long roads connecting it in any fashion to the lower Canadian provinces.  If attacked, it was featured, it was not possible to supply the state.

Linking up the road as it was built in both directions.

Construction commenced on March 9, 1942 and was completed on October 28, 1942, an amazingly short amount of time, but then it was hardly a highway in the modern sense.  Being completed in the fall, as it was, use of the highway didn't start until 1943.

Alaska was incredibly remote at the time.  With a population of only 73,000, half its residents at the time were natives, many who had very little contact with European culture.  Prior European penetration into Alaska had come from Russians interested in furs, Canadians interested in furs, and then Americans interested in furs and gold.  Logging had commenced, and during the Great Depression an intentional effort had been made to resettle some displaced farmers to those regions of Alaska temperate enough to engage in crop agriculture.  Fishing was also an industry.  Oil was not, having not yet been discovered there.  It was not a conventional tourist destination.

In context, fears that the Japanese would land in Alaska were accordingly not as farfetched as they would seem to today, and likewise fears that they would land in Australia were not either.  Indeed, the Japanese did land within air striking distance of parts of Australia, and they did land in the Aleutians, albeit only as a diversion.

Fear of the Japanese had obviously also extended to the point where employers felt free to fire Japanese nationals in the country.

On the same day, the Germans completed the Channel Dash successfully, although both of their battleships had been damaged by mines.

The Battle of Palembang began on Sumatra and the Battle of Pasire Panjang began in the struggle for Singapore.

Monday, February 6, 1922. Evolutions.

 On this day in 1922, the Conference on the Limitation of Armament resulted in the signing of the Washington Naval Treaty and the Nine-Power Treaty.

Signing the treaty.

The Washington Naval Treaty sought to limit the size of navies in the hope that would help prevent arms races and wars.  The treaty stated:

General Provisions Relating To The Limitation Of Naval Armament

Article I

The Contracting Powers agree to limit their respective naval armament as provided in the present Treaty.

Article II

The Contracting Powers may retain respectively the capital ships which are specified in Chapter II, Part 1. On the coming into force of the present Treaty, but subject to the following provisions of this Article, all other capital ships, built or building, of the United States, the British Empire and Japan shall be disposed of as prescribed in Chapter II, Part 2.

In addition to the capital ships specified in Chapter II, Part 1, the United States may complete and retain two ships of the West Virginia class now under construction. On the completion of these two ships, the North Dakota and Delaware, shall be disposed of as prescribed in Chapter II, Part 2.

The British Empire may, in accordance with the replacement table in Chapter II, Part 3, construct two new capital ships not exceeding 35,000 tons (35,560 metric tons) standard displacement each. On the completion of the said two ships the Thunderer, King George V, Ajax and Centurion shall be disposed of as prescribed in Chapter II, Part 2.

Article III

Subject to the provisions of Article II, the Contracting Powers shall abandon their respective capital ship building programs, and no new capital ships shall be constructed or acquired by any of the Contracting Powers except replacement tonnage which may be constructed or acquired as specified in Chapter II, Part 3.

Article IV

The total capital ship replacement tonnage of each of the Contracting Powers shall not exceed in standard displacement, for the United States 525,000 tons (533,400 metric tons); for the British Empire 525,000 tons (533,400 metric tons); for France 175,000 tons (177,800 metric tons); for Italy 175,000 tons (177,800 metric tons); for Japan 315,000 tons (320,040 metric tons).

Article V

No capital ship exceeding 35,000 tons (35,560 metric tons) standard displacement shall be acquired by, or constructed by, for, or within the jurisdiction of, any of the Contracting Powers.

Article VI

No capital ship of any of the Contracting Powers shall carry a gun with a calibre in excess of 16 inches (406 millimetres).

Article VII

The total tonnage for aircraft carriers of each of the Contracting Powers shall not exceed in standard displacement, for the United States 135,000 tons (137,160 metric tons); for the British Empire 135,000 tons (137,160 metric tons); for France 60,000 tons (60,960 metric tons); for Italy 60,000 tons (60,960 metric tons); for Japan 81,000 tons (82,296 metric tons).

Article VIII

The replacement of aircraft carriers shall be effected only as prescribed in Chapter II, Part 3, provided, however, that all aircraft carrier tonnage in existence or building on November 12, 1921, shall be considered experimental, and may be replaced, within the total tonnage limit prescribed in Article VII, without regard to its age.

Article IX

No aircraft carrier exceeding 27,000 tons (27,432 metric tons) standard displacement shall be acquired by, or constructed by, for or within the jurisdiction of, any of the Contracting Powers.

However, any of the Contracting Powers may, provided that its total tonnage allowance of aircraft carriers is not thereby exceeded, build not more than two aircraft carriers, each of a tonnage of not more than 33,000 tons (33,528 metric tons) standard displacement, and in order to effect economy any of the Contracting Powers may use for this purpose any two of their ships, whether constructed or in course of construction, which would otherwise be scrapped under the provisions of Article II. The armament of any aircraft carriers exceeding 27,000 tons (27,432 metric tons) standard displacement shall be in accordance with the requirements of Article X, except that the total number of guns to be carried in case any of such guns be of a calibre exceeding 6 inches (152 millimetres), except anti-aircraft guns and guns not exceeding 5 inches (127 millimetres), shall not exceed eight.

Article X

No aircraft carrier of any of the Contracting Powers shall carry a gun with a calibre in excess of 8 inches (203 millimetres). Without prejudice to the provisions of Article IX, if the armament carried includes guns exceeding 6 inches (152 millimetres) in calibre the total number of guns carried, except anti-aircraft guns and guns not exceeding 5 inches (127 millimetres), shall not exceed ten. If alternatively the armament contains no guns exceeding 6 inches (152 millimetres) in calibre, the number of guns is not limited. In either case the number of anti-aircraft guns and of guns not exceeding 5 inches (127 millimetres) is not limited.

Article XI

No vessel of war exceeding 10,000 tons (10,160 metric tons) standard displacement, other than a capital ship or aircraft carrier, shall be acquired by, or constructed by, for, or within the jurisdiction of, any of the Contracting Powers. Vessels not specifically built as fighting ships nor taken in time of peace under government control for fighting purposes, which are employed on fleet duties or as troop transports or in some other way for the purpose of assisting in the prosecution of hostilities otherwise than as fighting ships, shall not be within the limitations of this Article.

Article XII

No vessel of war of any of the Contracting Powers, hereafter laid down, other than a capital ship, shall carry a gun with a calibre in excess of 8 inches (203 millimetres).

Article XIII

Except as provided in Article IX, no ship designated in the present Treaty to be scrapped may be reconverted into a vessel of war.

Article XIV

No preparations shall be made in merchant ships in time of peace for the installation of warlike armaments for the purpose of converting such ships into vessels of war, other than the necessary stiffening of decks for the mounting of guns not exceeding 6 inch (152 millimetres) calibre.

Article XV

No vessel of war constructed within the jurisdiction of any of the Contracting Powers for a non-Contracting Power shall exceed the limitations as to displacement and armament prescribed by the present Treaty for vessels of a similar type which may be constructed by or for any of the Contracting Powers; provided, however, that the displacement for aircraft carriers constructed for a non-Contracting Power shall in no case exceed 27,000 tons (27,432 metric tons) standard displacement.

Article XVI

If the construction of any vessel of war for a non-Contracting Power is undertaken within the jurisdiction of any of the Contracting Powers, such Power shall promptly inform the other Contracting Powers of the date of the signing of the contract and the date on which the keel of the ship is laid; and shall also communicate to them the particulars relating to the ship prescribed in Chapter II, Part 3, Section I (b), (4) and (5).

Article XVII

In the event of a Contracting Power being engaged in war, such Power shall not use as a vessel of war any vessel of war which may be under construction within its jurisdiction for any other Power, or which may have been constructed within its jurisdiction for another Power and not delivered.

Article XVIII

Each of the Contracting Powers undertakes not to dispose by gift, sale or any mode of transfer of any vessel of war in such a manner that such vessel may become a vessel of war in the Navy of any foreign Power. Article XIX

The United States, the British Empire and Japan agree that the status quo at the time of the signing of the present Treaty, with regard to fortifications and naval bases, shall be maintained in their respective territories and possessions specified hereunder:

(1) The insular possessions which the United States now holds or may hereafter acquire in the Pacific Ocean, except (a) those adjacent to the coast of the United States, Alaska and the Panama Canal Zone, not including the Aleutian Islands, and (b) the Hawaiian Islands;

(2) Hong Kong and the insular possessions which the British Empire now holds or may hereafter acquire in the Pacific Ocean, east of the meridian of 110° east longitude, except (a) those adjacent to the coast of Canada, (b) the Commonwealth of Australia and its Territories, and (c) New Zealand;

(3) The following insular territories and possessions of Japan in the Pacific Ocean, to wit: the Kurile Islands, the Bonin Islands, Amami-Oshima, the Loochoo Islands, Formosa and the Pescadores, and any insular territories or possessions in the Pacific Ocean which Japan may hereafter acquire.

The maintenance of the status quo under the foregoing provisions implies that no new fortifications or naval bases shall be established in the territories and possessions specified; that no measures shall be taken to increase the existing naval facilities for the repair and maintenance of naval forces, and that no increase shall be made in the coast defenses of the territories and possessions above specified. This restriction, however, does not preclude such repair and replacement of worn-out weapons and equipment as is customary in naval and military establishments in time of peace.

Part 2.-Rules for Scrapping Vessels of War

The following rules shall be observed for the scrapping of vessels of war which are to be disposed of in accordance with Articles II and III.

I. A vessel to be scrapped must be placed in such condition that it cannot be put to combatant use.

II. This result must be finally effected in any one of the following ways:

(a) Permanent sinking of the vessel; (b) Breaking the vessel up. This shall always involve the destruction or removal of all machinery, boilers and armour, and all deck, side and bottom plating; (c) Converting the vessel to target use exclusively. In such case all the provisions of paragraph III of this Part, except sub-paragraph (6), in so far as may be necessary to enable the ship to be used as a mobile target, and except sub-paragraph (7), must be previously complied with. Not more than one capital ship may be retained for this purpose at one time by any of the Contracting Powers. (d) Of the capital ships which would otherwise be scrapped under the present Treaty in or after the year 1931, France and Italy may each retain two sea-going vessels for training purposes exclusively, that is, as gunnery or torpedo schools. The two vessels retained by France shall be of the Jean Bart class, and of those retained by Italy one shall be the Dante Alighieri, the other of the Giulio Cesare class. On retaining these ships for the purpose above stated, France and Italy respectively undertake to remove and destroy their conning-towers, and not to use the said ships as vessels of war.

III. (a) Subject to the special exceptions contained in Article IX, when a vessel is due for scrapping, the first stage of scrapping, which consists in rendering a ship incapable of further warlike service, shall be immediately undertaken.

(b) A vessel shall be considered incapable of further warlike service when there shall have been removed and landed, or else destroyed in the ship:

(1) All guns and essential portions of guns, fire-control tops and revolving parts of all barbettes and turrets;

(2) All machinery for working hydraulic or electric mountings;

(3) All fire-control instruments and range-finders;

(4) All ammunition, explosives and mines;

(5) All torpedoes, warheads and torpedo tubes;

(6) All wireless telegraphy installations;

(7) The conning tower and all side armour, or alternatively all main propelling machinery;

and (8) All landing and flying-off platforms and all other aviation accessories.

IV. The periods in which scrapping of vessels is to be effected are as follows:

(a) In the case of vessels to be scrapped under the first paragraph of Article II, the work of rendering the vessels incapable of further warlike service, in accordance with paragraph III of this Part, shall be completed within six months from the coming into force of the present Treaty, and the scrapping shall be finally effected within eighteen months from such coming into force.

(b) In the case of vessels to be scrapped under the second and third paragraphs of Article II, or under Article III, the work of rendering the vessel incapable of further warlike service in accordance with paragraph III of this Part shall be commenced not later than the date of completion of its successor, and shall be finished within six months from the date of such completion. The vessel shall be finally scrapped, in accordance with paragraph II of this Part, within eighteen months from the date of completion of its successor. If, however, the completion of the new vessel be delayed, then the work of rendering the old vessel incapable of further war-like service in accordance with paragraph III of this Part shall be commenced within four years from the laying of the keel of the new vessel, and shall be finished within six months from the date on which such work was commenced, and the old vessel shall be finally scrapped in accordance with paragraph II of this Part within eighteen months from the date when the work of rendering it incapable of further warlike service was commenced.

Part 3.-Replacement

The replacement of capital ships and aircraft carriers shall take place according to the rules in Section I and the tables in Section II of this Part.

Section I.-Rules For Replacement

(a) Capital ships and aircraft carriers twenty years after the date of their completion may, except as otherwise provided in Article VIII and in the tables in Section II of this Part, be replaced by new construction, but within the limits prescribed in Article IV and Article VII. The keels of such new construction may, except as otherwise provided in Article VIII and in the tables in Section II of this Part, be laid down not earlier than seventeen years from the date of completion of the tonnage to be replaced, provided, however, that no capital ship tonnage, with the exception of the ships referred to in the third paragraph of Article II, and the replacement tonnage specifically mentioned in Section II of this Part, shall be laid down until ten years from November 12, 1921.

(b) Each of the Contracting Powers shall communicate promptly to each of the other Contracting Powers the following information:

(1) The names of the capital ships and aircraft carriers to be replaced by new construction; (2) The date of governmental authorization of replacement tonnage; (3) The date of laying the keels of replacement tonnage; (4) The standard displacement in tons and metric tons of each new ship to be laid down, and the principal dimensions, namely, length at waterline, extreme beam at or below waterline, mean draft at standard displacement; (5) The date of completion of each new ship and its standard displacement in tons and metric tons, and the principal dimensions, namely, length at waterline, extreme beam at or below waterline, mean draft at standard displacement, at time of completion

(c) In case of loss or accidental destruction of capital ships or aircraft carriers, they may immediately be replaced by new construction subject to the tonnage limits prescribed in Articles IV and VII and in conformity with the other provisions of the present Treaty, the regular replacement program being deemed to be advanced to that extent.

(d) No retained capital ships or aircraft carriers shall be reconstructed except for the purpose of providing means of defense against air and submarine attack, and subject to the following rules: The Contracting Powers may, for that purpose, equip existing tonnage with bulge or blister or anti-air attack deck protection, providing the increase of displacement thus effected does not exceed 3,000 tons (3,048 metric tons) displacement for each ship. No alterations in side armor, in calibre, number or general type of mounting of main armament shall be permitted except:

(1) in the case of France and Italy, which countries within the limits allowed for bulge may increase their armor protection and the calibre of the guns now carried on their existing capital ships so as not to exceed 16 inches (406 millimeters) and (2) the British Empire shall be permitted to complete, in the case of the Renown, the alterations to armor that have already been commenced but temporarily suspended.

Capital Ship

A capital ship, in the case of ships hereafter built, is defined as a vessel of war, not an aircraft carrier, whose displacement exceeds 10,000 tons (10,160 metric tons) standard displacement, or which carries a gun with a calibre exceeding 8 inches (203 millimetres).

Aircraft Carrier

An aircraft carrier is defined as a vessel of war with a displacement in excess of 10,000 tons (10,160 metric tons) standard displacement designed for the specific and exclusive purpose of carrying aircraft. It must be so constructed that aircraft can be launched therefrom and landed thereon, and not designed and constructed for carrying a more powerful armament than that allowed to it under Article IX or Article X as the case may be.

Standard Displacement

The standard displacement of a ship is the displacement of the ship complete, fully manned, engined, and equipped ready for sea, including all armament and ammunition, equipment, outfit, provisions and fresh water for crew, miscellaneous stores and implements of every description that are intended to be carried in war, but without fuel or reserve feed water on board.

The word "ton" in the present Treaty, except in the expression "metric tons", shall be understood to mean the ton of 2240 pounds (1016 kilos).

Vessels now completed shall retain their present ratings of displacement tonnage in accordance with their national system of measurement. However, a Power expressing displacement in metric tons shall be considered for the application of the present Treaty as owning only the equivalent displacement in tons of 2240 pounds.

A vessel completed hereafter shall be rated at its displacement tonnage when in the standard condition defined herein.

Chapter III.-Miscellaneous Provisions

Article XXI

If during the term of the present Treaty the requirements of the national security of any Contracting Power in respect of naval defense are, in the opinion of that Power, materially affected by any change of circumstances, the Contracting Powers will, at the request of such Power, meet in conference with a view to the reconsideration of the provisions of the Treaty and its amendment by mutual agreement.

In view of possible technical and scientific developments, the United States, after consultation with the other Contracting Powers, shall arrange for a conference of all the Contracting Powers which shall convene as soon as possible after the expiration of eight years from the coming into force of the present Treaty to consider what changes, if any, in the Treaty may be necessary to meet such developments.

Article XXII

Whenever any Contracting Power shall become engaged in a war which in its opinion affects the naval defense of its national security, such Power may after notice to the other Contracting Powers suspend for the period of hostilities its obligations under the present Treaty other than those under Articles XIII and XVII, provided that such Power shall notify the other Contracting Powers that the emergency is of such a character as to require such suspension.

The remaining Contracting Powers shall in such case consult together with a view to agreement as to what temporary modifications if any should be made in the Treaty as between themselves. Should such consultation not produce agreement, duly made in accordance with the constitutional methods of the respective Powers, any one of said Contracting Powers may, by giving notice to the other Contracting Powers, suspend for the period of hostilities its obligations under the present Treaty, other than those under.

Articles XIII and XVII

On the cessation of hostilities the Contracting Powers will meet in conference to consider what modifications, if any, should be made in the provisions of the present Treaty.

Article XXIII

The present Treaty shall remain in force until December 31st, 1936, and in case none of the Contracting Powers shall have given notice two years before that date of its intention to terminate the treaty, it shall continue in force until the expiration of two years from the date on which notice of termination shall be given by one of the Contracting Powers, whereupon the Treaty shall terminate as regards all the Contracting Powers. Such notice shall be communicated in writing to the Government of the United States, which shall immediately transmit a certified copy of the notification to the other Powers and inform them of the date on which it was received. The notice shall be deemed to have been given and shall take effect on that date. In the event of notice of termination being given by the Government of the United States, such notice shall be given to the diplomatic representatives at Washington of the other Contracting Powers, and the notice shall be deemed to have been given and shall take effect on the date of the communication made to the said diplomatic representatives.

Within one year of the date on which a notice of termination by any Power has taken effect, all the Contracting Powers shall meet in conference.

Article XXIV

The present Treaty shall be ratified by the Contracting Powers in accordance with their respective constitutional methods and shall take effect on the date of the deposit of all the ratifications, which shall take place at Washington as soon as possible. The Government of the United States will transmit to the other Contracting Powers a certified copy of the procès-verbal of the deposit of ratifications.

The present Treaty, of which the French and English texts are both authentic, shall remain deposited in the archives of the Government of the United States, and duly certified copies thereof shall be transmitted by that Government to the other Contracting Powers.

In faith whereof the above-named Plenipotentiaries have signed the present Treaty.

Done at the City of Washington the sixth day of February, One Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty-Two.

A fatal defect in the treaty would be to treat aircraft carriers specifically as a lesser vessel, meaning that the treaty had the effect of emphasizing that ship within navies, given that battleships and heavy ships were restricted.  Long term, the treaty did not achieve its goals.

The Nine Power Treaty was a treaty regarding Chinese sovereignty. 

It provided:

Treaty between the United States of America, Belgium, the British Empire, China, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, and Portugal, Signed at Washington February 6, 1922

The United States of America, Belgium, the British Empire, China, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands and Portugal:

Desiring to adopt a policy designed to stabilize conditions in the Far East, to safeguard the rights and interests of China, and to promote intercourse between China and the other Powers upon the basis of equality of opportunity;

Have resolved to conclude a treaty for that purpose and to that end have appointed as their respective Plenipotentiaries;

Who, having communicated to each other their full powers, found to be in good and due form, have agreed as follows:

ARTICLE I

The Contracting Powers, other than China, agree:

(1) To respect the sovereignty, the independence, and the territorial and administrative integrity of China;

(2) To provide the fullest and most unembarrassed opportunity to China to develop and maintain for herself an effective and stable government;

(3) To use their influence for the purpose of effectually establishing and maintaining the principle of equal opportunity for the commerce and industry of all nations throughout the territory of China;

(4) To refrain from taking advantage of conditions in China in order to seek special rights or privileges which would abridge the rights of subjects or citizens of friendly States,[2] and from countenancing action inimical to the security of such States.

ARTICLE II

The Contracting Powers agree not to enter into any treaty, agreement, arrangement, or understanding, either with one another, or, individually or collectively, with any Power or Powers, which would infringe or impair the principles stated in Article I.

ARTICLE III

With a view to applying more effectually the principles of the Open Door or equality of opportunity in China for the trade and industry of all nations, the Contracting Powers, other than China, agree that they will not seek, nor support their respective nationals in seeking-

(a) any arrangement which might purport to establish in favour of their interests any general superiority of rights with respect to commercial or economic development in any designated region of China;

(b) any such monopoly or preference as would deprive the nationals of any other Power of the right of undertaking any legitimate trade or industry in China, or of participating with the Chinese Government, or with any local authority, in any category of public enterprise, or which by reason of its scope, duration or geographical extent is calculated to frustrate the practical application of the principle of equal opportunity.

It is understood that the foregoing stipulations of this Article are not to be so construed as to prohibit the acquisition of such properties or rights as may be necessary to the conduct of a particular commercial, industrial, or financial undertaking or to the encouragement of invention and research.

China undertakes to be guided by the principles stated in the foregoing stipulations of this Article in dealing with applications for economic rights and privileges from Governments and nationals of all foreign countries, whether parties to the present Treaty or not.

ARTICLE IV

The Contracting Powers agree not to support any agreements by their respective nationals with each other designed to create Spheres of Influence or to provide for the enjoyment of mutually exclusive opportunities in designated parts of Chinese territory.

ARTICLE V

China agrees that, throughout the whole of the railways in China, she will not exercise or permit unfair ,discrimination of any kind. In particular there shall be no discrimination whatever, direct or indirect, in respect of charges or of facilities on the ground of the nationality of passengers or the countries from which or to which they are proceeding, or the origin or ownership of goods or the country from which or to which they are consigned, or the nationality or ownership of the ship or other means of conveying such passengers or goods before or after their transport on the Chinese Railways.

The Contracting Powers, other than China, assume a corresponding obligation in respect of any of the aforesaid railways over which they or their nationals are in a position to exercise any control in virtue of any concession, special agreement or otherwise.

ARTICLE VI

The Contracting Powers, other than China, agree fully to respect China's rights as a neutral in time of war to which China is not a party; and China declares that when she is a neutral she will observe the obligations of neutrality.

ARTICLE VII

The Contracting Powers agree that, whenever a situation arises which in the opinion of any one of them involves the application of the stipulations of the present Treaty, and renders desirable discussion of such application, there shall be full and frank communication between the Contracting Powers concerned.

ARTICLE VIII

Powers not signatory to the present Treaty, which have Governments recognized by the Signatory Powers and which have treaty relations with China, shall be invited to adhere to the present Treaty. To this end the Government of the United States will make the necessary communications to nonsignatory Powers and will inform the Contracting Powers of the replies received. Adherence by any Power shall become effective on receipt of notice thereof by the Government of the United States.

ARTICLE IX

The present Treaty shall be ratified by the Contracting Powers in accordance with their respective constitutional methods and shall take effect on the date of the deposit of all the ratificationsn which shall take place at Washington as soon as possible. The Government of the United States will transmit to the other Contracting Powers a certified copy of the procès-verbal of the deposit of ratifications.

The present Treaty of which the French and English texts are both authentic, shall remain deposited in the archives of the Government of the United States, and duly certified copies thereof shall be transmitted by that Government to the other Contracting Powers.

IN FAITH WHEREOF the above-named Plenipotentiaries have signed the present Treaty.

DONE at the City of Washington the Sixth day of February One Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty-Two.

The treaty had no enforcement provisions and would be violated by Japan in 1931.

These treaties can, of course, be run down, but they were made with the knowledge of the time and in a spirit of trying to prevent a Second World War.  That they did fail cannot, all in all, be regarded too severely.  These treaties sought to address what they could, but they couldn't really address the collapse of the old order and the rise of political extremism in its wake.

The College of Cardinals elected the Archbishop of Milan Achille Rattie as Pope.  He would take the name Pius XI.

Pope Pius XI would serve until 1939 and would therefore be on Peter's Chair during the agonizing Great Depression and the coincident rise of fascism and communism.

The headlines also featured the murder of movie director William Taylor, an Anglo-Irish Hollywood figure.  His murder would never actually be solved.

The Soviets dissolved the Cheka and replaced it with the supposedly less murderous GPU.  It was subject to the NKVD, and in a year would simply be replaced by it.

Ojibwe figure John Smith died.

He was a celebrated figure at the time of his death due to his old age, something his appearnce amplified.  He was probably between 96 and 100 years old, but his date of birth was not surprisingly not know,  and there are claims for him being as old as 140 years of age at the time of his death.  Even by his own recollections, however, his age would not have been that ancient.

As is often the case, what we might imagine about 19th and early 20th Century Native American figures is inaccurate.  Mr. Smith was old, but probably not as old as imagined, and he was a Catholic, making him a co-religious of such famous Native figures as Red Cloud and Black Elk.

Blog Mirror: Pot of Gold: Rancher’s Stunning Indian Artifact Find Brings Past Alive

 

Pot of Gold: Rancher’s Stunning Indian Artifact Find Brings Past Alive

Tuesday, January 18, 1922. The Lost Treaties.

"[D]elegation of Native American men from California representing 300 tribes and bands of Californian Indians assembled to petition Congress to honor the Lost Treaties of 1851 and 1852"

The men were seeking to have Congress honor 18 treaties signed in that time frame in California that provided reservations for various Californian Native American bands. Under pressure from California, the treaties had been kept secret and dishonored.

Congress' power in this area is nearly absolute, creating a completely now irreconcilable situation.

 

Wyoming Fact & Fiction - Neil A. Waring: Chief Washakie and President Grant

Wyoming Fact & Fiction - Neil A. Waring: Chief Washakie and President Grant:   Wyoming Fact & Fiction January 10, 2022 Last weekend I was part of a discussion about listening to books. I don't do a lot of ...

Friday, January 9, 1942. Umm. . .about that salute. . . . Appropriated and Inappropriate Symbols.

On this day in 1942 West Virginia mandated a salute to the flag as a regular part of school activities.

German children?  Nope, US children in May 1942 giving the flag the "Bellamy Salute" that was advocated by Christian Socialist Francis Bellamy.  At the time, the association with Fascism and Nazism had not yet fully sunk in.

The measure was struck down by the US Supreme Court as unconstitutional the following year.

Until that summer, the salute would have been in the form advocated by Christian Socialist Francis Bellamy, who was also the author of the Pledge of Allegiance.  Bellamy had died a decade prior, but the pledge and the salute were gaining popularity since the onset of the war.  Concern over its Nazi like appearance caused adoption of the palm over the heart form of the salute now used by civilians in this gesture, a measure urged by the Veteran's of Foreign Wars and the American Legion.

Saluting by civilians is, frankly, in my view an odd deal.  Simply standing and taking off your hat makes more sense to me. But like a lot of things, things, this has really spread, and morphed, in our society.

Bellamy began advocating for it as early as 1892, when he wrote:

At a signal from the Principal the pupils, in ordered ranks, hands to the side, face the Flag. Another signal is given; every pupil gives the flag the military salute – right hand lifted, palm downward, to align with the forehead and close to it. Standing thus, all repeat together, slowly, "I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands; one Nation indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all." At the words, "to my Flag," the right hand is extended gracefully, palm upward, toward the Flag, and remains in this gesture till the end of the affirmation; whereupon all hands immediately drop to the side. 

The Youth's Companion, 65 (1892): 446.

Bellamy of course meant no fascist connotations by it, and fascism wasn't even a thing at the time.  It spread slowly but picked up speed as a school thing following World War One.

In the same period of time, however, fascism and Nazism adopted the same salute.  Distinctions are sometimes made between it and the Bellamy salute, but in reality the only difference is that the fascist weren't attempting to copy Bellamy.  At any rate, it spread like wildfire in the 20s and 30s amongst fascistic movements, making a change in the US necessary.

This wasn't the only thing to suffer such a fate.  As noted on our companion blog, Painted Bricks:

One you definately do not see anymore, brickwork, Thermopolis Wyoming

Here's one that you would not see done again, and you might also expect to have been changed since 1945. Swastika motif in brickwork.

This is not as sinister as it might seem. Swastikas showed up as ornamental designs in quite a few things prior to World War Two, and they bore no association at all with the Nazi Party. In the west, they were associated with Indians, and were regarded as an Indian good luck symbol. Chances are that the architect of this Thermopolis, Wyoming building had that in mind, as Thermopolis is not far from the Wind River Reservation.

Indeed, at the time we're speaking of, the 45th Infantry Division, a unit made up of National Guardsmen heavily featuring Native American Oklahoman's, was only two years out from the redesign of its unit patch adopted during World War One, which looked like this:

And it gets even odder yet.  Lord Baden Powell waxed about it in What Scouts  Can Do--More Yarns, in 1921, in which he stated.

On the stole of an ancient bishop of Winchester, Edyndon, who died in 1366, is the Swastika or Scouts' Thanks Badge. It was at that time called the " Fylfot," and was said to represent Obedience or Submission, the different arms of the cross being in reality legs in the attitude of kneeling.

But as you know from the account of the Swastika Thanks Badge which I have given you in Scouting for Boys, this symbol was used in almost every part of the world in ancient days, and therefore has various meanings given to it.

It has been found engraved on weapons belonging to the Norsemen. It was also engraved on the spindles used by the ancient Greeks in their- weaving at Troy.

In India rice is spread on the ground in the form of the Swastika at the baptism of a baby boy to bring him luck.

The Indians in North America use it as an ornament, and it has been found engraved on ancient pottery in Peru.

How it got from one country to another, separated as they are by oceans, it is difficult to guess, but some people who say they know all about these things, affirm that there was once a great continent where now there is the Atlantic Ocean, but it went under the sea in an earthquake.

This continent was called Atlantis, and joined up Europe with America.

It was supposed to have four vast rivers running from a central mountain in different directions—North, East, South, and West—and the Swastika is merely a map of Atlantis showing those four rivers rising from the same center.

The Thanks Badge

I want specially to remind Scouts to keep their eyes open and never fail to spot anyone wearing this badge. It is their duty then to go up to such person, make the Scout sign, and ask if they can be of any service to the wearer.Anyway, whatever its origin was the Swastika now stands for the Badge of Fellowship among Scouts all over the world, and when anyone has done a kindness to a Scout it is their privilege to present him—or her—with this token of their gratitude, which makes him a sort of member of the Brotherhood, and entitles him to the help of any other Scout at any time and at any place.

I have heard of several instances where Scouts have done this, and it has greatly increased the value of the Thanks Badge to the persons who were wearing it when they found that Scouts recognized it and were anxious to do a Good Turn to them.

All that is more than a little cringe worthy now, but prior to the rise of the Nazis, the symbol had a wide range of meanings and in fact was quite common in the US, derived from Native American usage.  Of course, that can take you into the conversation about European Americans appropriating Native American symbols and identities, but that's another topic (albeit one we've discussed before).

By 1939, when the 49th Infantry Division went to its new symbol. . .

it was already the case that the Nazis had claimed this one forever, although perhaps a final non fasicst use carried on, for quite awhile, by the Finns.

Finnish Me109s during the Continuation War.  Some below the radar use of the swastika goes on in Finland today, due to its wartime use, even though a turn away from it started in 1945 when the Finns ended up reluctantly declaring war on the Germans.

In Slovenia, partisans engaged the Germans in what would become the Battle of  Dražgoše.

Admiral Yamamoto made a statement to Taketora Ogata in which he stated:

A military man can scarcely pride himself on having 'smitten a sleeping enemy'; it is more a matter of shame, simply, for the one smitten. I would rather you made your appraisal after seeing what the enemy does, since it is certain that, angered and outraged, he will soon launch a determined counterattack.

This is likely the origin of the claim that on December 7, he stated that he feared that all the attack had done was to "awaken a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve".

Joe Louis regained the heavyweight boxing title by knocking out Buddy Baer in round one of a match at Madison Square Garden.

Back to saluting, I'm very glad, as I'm sure everyone is, that the Bellamy salute was dropped and I'm okay with the hand on the heart salute, although personally I think simply standing and uncovering the head would be enough, but since the First Gulf War, and dating back to the Reagan Administration really, saluting in the military style by civilians has really spread and I really don't like it.

This really started with President Reagan giving a snappy salute to the Marine Corps guards and other servicemen he routinely encountered. At the time, that was technically illegal, although probably unenforceable, as it was reserved for servicemen.  Reagan had served as a reserve cavalry officer before the war and during the war in the entertainment branch of the U.S. Army, which I do not wish to discount, but he was a civilian and should not have done that. Since then, however, every President has, encouraging the creeping militarization of our society.

At some point in the 90s or 00s, the law in this was officially changed to allow veterans to use the salute, and some really do.  I could, as I’m a veteran.  I don't, as I'm a civilian.  There's no need for it.

Icelanders have mitochondrial DNA from a Native American woman.

So notes a recent study.

I'm only noting this, as it's interesting.

Recent evidence suggests that Vikings first colonized North America in 1021.  Of course, they probably showed up prior to that.  But, at any rate, they were showing up in North America by the 1000s.   They were aware of North America, for that matter, in the 900s, so recent studies not withstanding, I'd be surprised if they didn't have some sort of presence, perhaps only occasional and seasonal, in the second half of the 900s.

And at some point, one of them brought a Native American woman home to Iceland.

Now, we don't know the circumstances, and so far it seems to be only one, which is odd.  But it did occur, and she had children, and some of her children's children, carried down many times, live in Iceland today.

Geography, Native Ameicans, Women, French, and Female Anatomy, laissez les bon mots rouler?

We recently posted this lengthy post on a Federal order to rename place names in the Federal domain that contain the word "squaw"

Today In Wyoming's History: Today In Wyoming's History: Wyoming has 43 federal...: Arapaho woman (Hisei), late 19th Century. Today In Wyoming's History: Wyoming has 43 federal places with 'squaw' in the ... :   ...

This is, as noted, a pretty in depth exploration of the topic.  We'd encourage you to read it.

Now news comes of a ranches decision, or hope, to rename such a place itself, and to drop the name "squaw" in favor of "boobs".

Well, in French, so it's nicer.

Allow us to explain.

In Teton County, as we've already noted, there exists of course the famous Grand Tetons. They're spectacular mountains, to be sure.

A panorama mic we stitched of the Grand Tetons back in 2012.  Photobucket since that time has screwed up the linkage, but it's our photo.

On Wyoming's Ladder Ranch, near Savery, just over the Wyoming border in Colorado, there exist a Little Squaw Mountain.  The owners of the ranch, whose excellent blog we link in to this site here, are proposing to rename the mountain Petite Tetons.

As many may know, Grand means "big" in French, and "petite" small.

Tetons?

Tits.

Yes, the nameless French fur trapper who came through and named the Grand Tetons was naming it "Big Tits" or "Big Boobs", depending upon how you want to translate it.  Perhaps he went on to also name the nearby Gros Ventre, which means "big belly".  

Anyway you look at it, the name is actually pornographic.  He was wondering around out there and decided that the majestic mountains in what is now northwest Wyoming reminded him of big boobs, and he so named them that.  Apparently the suggestion having been made, it stuck, perhaps causing other displaced Québécois to recall mammaries as well.  It clearly displayed a prurient interest.

Which the suggestion by the Wyoming ranchers, with land in Colorado, does not. They want to honor the mountain while getting rid of a name that they've come to regard as inappropriate.  And why not name it after the majestic Wyoming mountain rage.  What is now called Little Squaw Mountain has a certain majesty of its own.

Well, such efforts are fraught with difficulties and dangers, and here we find a couple.

We don't really know, in most cases, what the people who named places "squaw" had in mind.  There are all sorts of places named after women, but we often don't know why.  There are the "Three Sisters" peaks, for example, also in Wyoming. Why are they named that?  I think simply as they're three hills.

The term "squaw", which as noted we examined in this context at length, has become to be regarded as offensive in our day and age. At one time, it both was and wasn't, simultaneously. Early on, it doesn't appear to have been.  Times have changed, of course, and it now is.

But could you come out and call a mountain range "The Big Boobs"?  

Most certainly not, and for good reason.

But that's exactly what the Grand Tetons are called, albeit in French.

Does that make it okay?

Well, no, but we're used to the name and most of us don't speak French, so no doubt we'll stick with it. . . at least for the time being.

But should we rename a mountain named, basically, "little Indian woman" "small tits"?

I'd prefer that we didn't.

And should Colorado get a Tetons mountain of its own? The range is a distinct Wyoming land feature.

And the Law of Unintended Consequences reigns on.

Today In Wyoming's History: Wyoming has 43 federal places with 'squaw' in the name. A recent order will change that. Taking a closer look.

Today In Wyoming's History: Today In Wyoming's History: Wyoming has 43 federal...: 

Today In Wyoming's History: Wyoming has 43 federal places with 'squaw' in the name. A recent order will change that. Taking a closer look.

Arapaho woman (Hisei), late 19th Century.

Today In Wyoming's History: Wyoming has 43 federal places with 'squaw' in the ...:   Wyoming has 43 federal places with 'squaw' in the name. A recent order will change that.

So, what are they?

Takluit woman, 1910.  The coins are Chinese.

First, a precautionary note. Even setting the word squaw aside, some of these could legitimately be regarded as otherwise offensive.  I.e., if you edit "squaw" out and substitute for Indian Woman, or Native American Woman, some would still be offensive.

Hopi woman, 1900.

Okay, according to the Federal Government, this is the list in Wyoming.

I'll note right away that I know this list to be inaccurate at least in so far as what things are apparently actually called, as the clearly offensive "Squaw Teat" actually also applies to a peak, or high hill, in Natrona County.

Mohave woman, 1903.

And the last item, in case anyone wonders, is listed there as it was renamed recently from a name that formerly included the word squaw in it.

And we'd also note that one is a historical place name of a now abandoned settlement.  You probably can't, or at least shouldn't, do something in regard to that.

So let's next start first with the ultimate question  Is it offensive?

Native American woman in Oklahoma, 1939.

Let's take a look at an article recently published in Indian Country Today on that question, here's what they partially had to say on that.  For the full article, you should go to Indian Country Today.

Some historical connections

According to Dr. Marge Bruchac, an Abenaki historical consultant, Squaw means the totality of being female and the Algonquin version of the word “esqua,” “squa” “skwa” does not translate to a woman’s female anatomy. 

Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary defines the term as “often offensive: an American Indian woman” and “usually disparaging: woman, wife.”

The Urban Dictionary paints a different picture. It says the word squaw “Does not mean vagina, or any other body part for that matter. The word comes from the Massachusett (no S) Algonquian tribe and means: female, young woman. The word squaw is not related to the Mohawk word ‘ojiskwa’: which does mean vagina. There is absolutely no derogatory meaning in the word ‘squaw.’ ‘Squaw’ has been a familiar word in American literature and language since the 16th century and has been generally understood to mean an Indian woman, or wife.” It is worth noting the Urban Dictionary is not an authoritative Native source.

In her article “Reclaiming the word ‘Squaw’ in the Name of the Ancestors,” Dr. Bruchac wrote the following excerpt about the meaning of squaw.

“The word has been interpreted by modern activists as a slanderous assault against Native American women. But traditional Algonkian speakers, in both Indian and English, still say words like ‘nidobaskwa’=a female friend, ‘manigebeskwa’=woman of the woods, or ‘Squaw Sachem’=female chief. When Abenaki people sing the Birth Song, they address ‘nuncksquassis’=‘little woman baby’.”

“I understand the concern of Indian women who feel insulted by this word, but I respectfully suggest that we reclaim our language rather than let it be taken over,” wrote Bruchac.

The first recorded version of squaw was found in a book called Mourt’s Relation: A Journey of the Pilgrims at Plymouth written in 1622. The term was not used in a derogatory fashion but spoke of the “squa sachim or Massachusets Queen” in the September 20, 1621 journal entry.

Though the earliest historical references support a non-offensive slant on the meaning of squaw and support Bruchac’s claims, there are also several literary and historical instances of squaw being used in a derogatory or sexually connotative way.

According to some proponents on the inflammatory side of the words meaning, squaw could just as easily have come from the Mohawk word ojiskwa’ which translates politely to vagina.

In the 1892 book An Algonquin Maiden by Canadian writer Pauline Johnson, whose father was a Mohawk Chief, the word squaw indicates a sexual meaning.

“Poor little Wanda! not only is she non-descript and ill-starred, but as usual the authors take away her love, her life, and last and most terrible of all, reputation; for they permit a crowd of men-friends of the hero to call her a ‘squaw’ and neither hero nor authors deny that she is a squaw. It is almost too sad when so much prejudice exists against the Indians, that any one should write up an Indian heroine with such glaring accusations against her virtue…”

So, what can we say?

Well, not knowing for sure, as I'm certainly not a linguist with a knowledge of any of these languages, and it's clear that linguist don't agree themselves, I suspect that Dr. Burchac is correct. The origin is likely from a native language and unlikely to have had an offensive origin.

But that doesn't really fully answer the question, and it's a really touchy one, which I'd bet Dr. Burchac will acknowledge.

At its bare root, the word means an Indian, or perhaps more accurately now, a Native American, woman, the same way that "papoose" has been used in the past to describe a Native American baby, and "brave" has inaccurately been used to describe all Native American men (although also the much more offensive "buck" also shows up in that use).  Simply left at that, it's probably no more offensive than the word "Frau" and "Fräulein" are to describe German women, or Madam and Mademoiselle, or Señora and Señorita are in French and Spanish respectively.

Two Charger Woman, a Brule Sioux, 1907.

Indeed, in a certain context, maybe even less so, as it at least is an acknowledgement to culture.  And that sort of seems how the original use was.  The 1622 use is not only amazingly early, it was an attempt at being descriptive and providing an honorific, the "Massachusetts Queen".  In that context, the early use of the work seems to have conveyed gender and ethnicity at the same time.

Woman Of Many Deeds, the granddaughter of Red Cloud, 1907.  Note the crucifix, she was Catholic, as the Red Could family was.

It's later uses that become the problem.  And that takes us quite a ways back in and of itself.

European colonization of the New World can really be viewed as colonization by three different ethnic groups for the most part, two Catholic and one Protestant.*  While early on the original European view seems to have been largely similar among all three groups, by the mid 1600s this was changing.  It would not be fair, we'd note, to really lump this into two groups, as it wouldn't be fair to compare the Spanish with the French.  And from the lens of 2021 looking at things that occurred in 1621 is fraught with dangers inherent in misconceptions and filtration through current views.

Dusty Dress, 1910.

Very generally, however, English colonists had a fascination with Native Americans when they first landed in North America, and were pretty open to the native cultures.  French colonization started at just about the same time as the English, for all practical purposes, and the French had a highly open view of the Native populations.  The Spanish started almost 3/4s of a century earlier, and their early interactions are considerably more complicated.  All three populations were not averse to mixing with Native populations at first, with the French and Spanish being very open to it, particularly in the case of the French whose Catholic faith had instructed them that the Natives were just as much children of God as they were.  This was also true of the Spanish, but the Spanish had met with considerably more armed resistance even by the 17th Century than either the English or the French had.

Papago woman, 1907.

Things really began to fall apart, however, for the English with King Philips War, which broke out in 1675 and ran through 1678.  Hard and brutally fought, the English began to pretty quickly modify their view of Native Americans in general. While, from our prospective, the war was a cleverly fought and logical Native reaction to an invasion, from the English prospective of the period it was a bitter betrayal by a heathenous people.

Lucy  Coyote

From that point on the English, and soon we might say the American, view of Native Americans was much different than the French or the Spanish one.  The French had their run-ins with native bands, but having colonized New France to a much smaller degree, they also tended to engage the Natives in commerce really quickly and their Catholicism caused them to regard the Natives in their region as souls to be brought into the Church, with intermarriage soon to be common.  The Spanish largely took the same view, although in their case they also ran into some large, and well organized, bands that put up fierce resistance to their presence, giving them, as previously noted, a more nuanced view. Nonetheless, the view of Spanish colonists is perhaps best reflected in that the populations of much of South and Central America today are from mixed Spanish and Native heritage.  In what became Canada it gave rise ultimately to the Métis, a recognized "native", but in fact mixed heritage, group of people with their own unique history.

In the Thirteen Colonies it gave rise to pretty bitter struggles which merged into bitter American ones with native bands once the Crown was ejected from what became the United States.  The intent here isn't to give a legal or military history of the events, but to only note it in the context of what's being discussed.

Alice Pat-E-Wa, 1900.

Humans being human, the ethnic struggle did not prove to be a bar to intermixing. This occurred simply naturally, and violently.  And this resulted in an interesting and opposing set of views.

"The Trapper's Bride" by Alfred Jacob Miller.  Miller painted versions of this scense at least three times, probably by request.

On the frontier, which was male dominated, frontiersmen fairly routinely began to take Native American wives.  For those of French origin this was highly common, but it was quite common for those of English heritage, or "American" heritage as well. At the same time, however, Native Americans were a looked down upon minority class who were in the way of what was regarded as progress, even though they were simultaneously celebrated as "noble savages".  Reconciling these views is difficult to do, but they were held be Americans simultaneously.  

Annie Kash-Kash, 1899.

What we can say, however, is that these relationships were likely as varied as any other, but we shouldn't presume by any means that they were forced.  In some instances, they likely were, or were relationships darned near akin to slavery.  An earlier article on Sacajawea we published here discussed a circumstance that certainly raises such questions.  At the same time, however. you can find such as Wyoming frontiersman John Robinson who married Native women twice and genuinely.  Famed scout Kit Carson had more than one Native bride.  And an extended view may be given of a Swiss artists, whose name I have forgotten, who went West to sketch Plains Indians and returned to Switzerland with a Native bride, an illustration of whom shows upon the book Man Made Mobile.

An historically important example is given in the example of William Bent and Owl Woman, the latter of whom was a Cheyenne.  Bent, who together with his brother Charles, were very successful traders in Colorado and New Mexico ultimately ended up with three Cheyenne wives, as he followed a Cheyenne custom and married Owl Woman's two younger sisters.  Charles became Governor of New Mexico.  William Bent and Owl Woman had a large, and historically significant family, although she died when some of their children were still quite young and her sister Island became their surrogate mother.  His two Cheyenne wives ultimately abandoned him, and then he married a "mixed" Indian/European woman of age 20, when he was 60, dying the following year.

George Bent and his wife Magpie.  Bent served as an underaged cavalryman in the Confederate Army before he was captured and paroled.  Upon his return to Colorado his father sent him to live with his aunt with the Cheyenne and he was at Sand Creek when it was attacked by Colorado militia.  Ironically, a brother of his was serving with the militia as a scout.  Bent was married three times, with all of his wives being Native Americans.

All of this is noted as William Bent's marriage into a Cheyenne family worked enormously to his advantage.  At the same time, his children lived in both worlds, taking part in the Plains struggle largely on the Cheyenne side.  George Bent contributed to one of the great accounts of the period.  William Bent's marriage into a Native family was not held against him.

Native woman from Pacific Northwest.

These matches show how complicated such things can become in some ways, and how simple in others.  They were mostly men taking Native women as brides, but there are few examples at least that are the other way around.    Nonetheless, at the same time, European Americans could dismiss Native brides pretty condescendingly as well as their husbands, who ended up with the pejorative "Squaw Men".

This, then is what gives rise to the problem.  By the late 19th Century if not considerably earlier, the use of the word "squaw" could mean simply a woman of Native ethnicity, or it could be a slam on the woman herself and her entire ethnicity.  And of course, for most Native women the word was not one from their own languages and therefore only had the meanings that others from the outside attributed to it.

Cheyenne woman, 1910.

That legacy has continued on, although the word simply isn't used now, at least not without intending to convey a shocking insult.

Be that as it may, that leaves us with the over 40 place names that bear that name in Wyoming and numerous others in other states. What did those people mean?  At the time they named them, they may have simply been so acclimated to the term that they meant nothing in particular. "Squaw Creek", for example, displays an obvious intent to name a creek after an Indian woman or women, but why?  Most of the others are the same way. The odd exception may be the ones named after breasts, but then the Grand Tetons are as well, and it isn't really clear whether we should regard the nameless French trapper who termed them that as of a higher mind, for naming the mountains after breasts in general, rather than after those for women who happened to be around, or whether we ought to simply dismiss all such names as of an excessively prurient nature, which would probably be more accurate, really.

Cayuse woman, 1910.

So what to do?

Well, whatever is done, I hope they don't scrub the women out of the names.  Squaw Creeks, for example, were named after Native women for some reason. That ought to be preserved.

And beyond that, there's a terrible tendency to treat these matters, which are cosmetic, as if they really pay attention to deeper problems that face Native Americans today.  Far too often those who seek to "help" Native Americans imagine them as a people of the past, when in fact they're very much a people of the present.  Ignoring that fact does no good for them at all.

Footnotes:

*This obviously omits the Russians, who were the original colonizers of Alaska and who had a settlement as far south as California, and it unfairly lumps the English and Scottish together, even though they are seperate people and that reflected itself in early immigration to North America.