96 The Winning of the West 



tainly greatly exaggerated their numbers, and their 

 modern followers show a tendency to fall into the 

 opposite fault, the truth being that any number of 

 isolated observations to support either position can 

 be culled from the works of the contemporary trav- 

 elers and statisticians. 6 No two independent ob- 

 servers give the same figures. One main reason for 

 this is doubtless the exceedingly loose way in which 

 the word "tribe" was used. If a man speaks of the 

 Miamis and the Delawares, for instance, before we 

 can understand him we must know whether he in- 

 cludes therein the Weas and the Munceys, for he 

 may or may not. By quoting the numbers attrib- 

 uted by the old writers to the various sub-tribes, and 

 then comparing them with the numbers given later 

 on by writers using the same names, but speaking of 

 entire confederacies, it is easy to work out an ap- 

 parent increase, while a reversal of the process shows 

 an appalling decrease. Moreover, as the bands 

 broke up, wandered apart, and then rejoined each 

 other or not as events fell out, two successive ob- 

 servers might make widely different estimates. 

 Many tribes that have disappeared were undoubt- 

 edly actually destroyed; many more have simply 

 changed their names or have been absorbed by other 

 tribes. Similarly, those that have apparently held 

 their own have done so at the expense of their 

 neighbors. This was made all the easier by the fact 



6 See Barton, the Madison MSS., Schoolcraft, Thos. Hutch- 

 ins (who accompanied Bouquet), Smythe, Pike, various re- 

 ports of the U. S. Indian Commissioners, etc., etc. 



