4 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bull. 197 



i'or use in situations where individuals also participate to some extent 

 in non-Indian culture. Finally, any set of criteria which considers 

 biological and cultural factors both must recognize that these factors 

 are likely to vary independently to a considerable extent. 



The confusion that results from this duality of biological and 

 cultural criteria is familiar to all students of race. In the case of the 

 American Indian, the serious implications of this confusion are evi- 

 dent in the following quotation from the report of a congressional 

 committee investigating the Bureau of Indian Affairs : 



There has been no standardized definition of "Indian" suitable for all purposes. 

 It is quite evident that several ideas are involved iu this word. There is the 

 idea of biological descent or "degree of blood" as a definite something which 

 makes a person an Indian. This "something" would be generally based on 

 personal appearance plus local records such as the reservation or tribal roll 

 containing the name of the person and his degree of blood or those of his parents 

 or other relatives. Further, there is the cultural element, illustrated in the 

 ability to speak an Indian language or by the person's participating in the 

 customs and culture of some recognized Indian group, such as Indian arts and 

 crafts or taking an active part in the tribal ceremonies. Finally, there is the 

 "legal Indian" who is owner or part owner of "restricted" property and a 

 member of some tribal group holding such property. 



... A standard definition of Indian, applicable to all cases of Federal rela- 

 tionships with Indians, would require a special act of Congress. [Gilbert, 1953, 

 p. 138.] 



It is clear from the quotation above that the fundamental problem 

 of determining who is an "Indian" in our society permits of no easy 

 solution. With the biological and cultural admixture that has oc- 

 curred among Indians, Whites, and Negroes, especially in the eastern 

 part of the country, the existent statistics on the "Indian" population 

 are of dubious validity, however accurate their actual compilation 

 may have been. Even where the biological admixture is minimal, 

 as in the case of the Hopi and Navaho Indians, their increasing par- 

 ticipation in the general culture raises some questions as to the validity 

 of the current statistics pertaining to these groups.* 



With respect to the concept "Indian tribe," similar difficulties in 

 definition are evident. In their attempt to establish an "operational" 

 definition of the concept "tribe," Kelly and Hackenberg (n.d.) list 

 four conventional criteria of "tribalness" : a common language; a 

 common territory ; some degree of social solidarity ; and some degree 

 of political autonomy. The difficulties which arise in seeking to give 

 these conventional criteria "operational" significance can be well illus- 

 trated by reference to the Navaho. With respect to the first criterion, 

 the Navaho do speak a common language similar to that of the 

 Apache, and belonging to the Athapascan family of languages which 



* This problem is aptly summarized by Frank Lorimer (1942, p. 13). 



