DORSET.) THE author's REPLY. 521 



THE author's reply. 



§ 36] . But what do we tiud prevalent among the tribes under consid- 

 eration iu this paper ? 



I. Idea of God. — The Siouau tribes considered in tliis jiaper were not 

 monotheists (§§ 26, '.)i, 95, 311). The statement recorded in § 21 about 

 a crude belief iu a Supreme Being, which the Omaha called Wakauda, 

 was accepted by the author as thebeliefof hisiutbrmauts; but we must 

 remember that the Omaha tribe has been in a transition state for many- 

 years, certainly since 1855, and possibly since the days of Maj. Long's 

 visits to them. (2) That these Indians believed in a G-reat Spirit who 

 was supreme over all other superhuuuin powers needs more evidence. 

 The only assertion of such a beUef which the author has gained was ob 

 taiued from an Omaha (see § 22), but this assertion was denied by two 

 other members of that tribe. (3) In those cases alleged as proving a 

 belief in one Great Spirit, a closer study of the language emxjloyed 

 reveals the fact that a generic term lias been used instead of a specific 

 one, and, in almost every instance, the writer who tells of one Great 

 Spirit supplements his account by relating what he has learned about 

 beliefs in many gods or spirits. (1) These tribes bad cults of many 

 powers ; everything animate and inanimate was regarded as having a 

 "shade." 



II. Belief in immortality. — The author finds no traces of a belief in the 

 immortality of human beings. Even the gods of the Dakota were 

 regarded as being mortal, for they could be killed by one another (§ 91). 

 They were male and female ; they married and died, and were succeeded 

 by their children. But if for" immortality" we substitute " continuous 

 existence as shades or ghosts" there will be no ditidculty in showing that 

 the Siouan tribes referred to held such abelief respecting mankind, and 

 that they very i^robably entertained it in a criule form prior to the 

 advent of the white race to this continent (§§ G7-71, 91, 338). 



III. Idea of sin. — The scriptural idea of sin seems to be wanting 

 among these tribes. There have been recorded by the author and others 

 many acts which were deemed violations of religious law, but few of 

 them can be compared with what the Bible declares to be sins. It was 

 dangerous to make a false report to the keeper of the sacred tent of war 

 or to the directors of the bufl'alo hunt, in the estimation of the Omaha, 

 for the ofl'euder was sure to be struck by lightning or bitten by a snake 

 or killed by a foe or thrown by a horse or have some other disaster 

 befall him.' It Avas dangerous to Vu-eak the taboo of any gens or subgens, 

 or to violate any other ancient custom.- (See §§ 15, 68, 222, and 286 of 

 this paper.) 



IV. Idea of sacrifice. — The idea of sacrifice as atoning for sin has 

 not yet been found by the author among these Siouau tribes. In no 



'Cm. Soc, 3d Ann. Eept. Bur. Ethnol., 55>136, 137. 

 =Ibid., §5. 19, 21, 31, 97, etc. 



