﻿334 
  THE 
  OMAHA 
  TRIBE 
  [eth. 
  ann. 
  27 
  

  

  Etiquette 
  

  

  In 
  the 
  tent 
  and 
  in 
  the 
  earth 
  lodge 
  the 
  fire 
  was 
  always 
  in 
  the 
  center 
  

   and 
  was 
  the 
  point 
  from 
  which 
  certain 
  lines 
  of 
  etiquette 
  were 
  drawn. 
  

   The 
  space 
  back 
  of 
  the 
  fire, 
  opposite 
  the 
  entrance, 
  was 
  the 
  place 
  of 
  

   honor. 
  It 
  was 
  therefore 
  the 
  portion 
  of 
  the 
  tent 
  given 
  to 
  guests, 
  to 
  

   which 
  they 
  always 
  directed 
  their 
  steps 
  w 
  r 
  hen 
  entering 
  a 
  lodge; 
  it 
  

   answered 
  to 
  the 
  reception 
  room 
  or 
  parlor 
  of 
  a 
  white 
  man's 
  dwelling. 
  

   Skin 
  robes 
  were 
  spread 
  here 
  to 
  make 
  the 
  visitor 
  comfortable 
  and 
  wel- 
  

   come. 
  The 
  guest 
  on 
  entering 
  must 
  never 
  pass 
  between 
  his 
  host 
  and 
  

   the 
  fire. 
  When 
  the 
  guest 
  was 
  seated 
  no 
  one, 
  not 
  even 
  a 
  child, 
  

   would 
  pass 
  between 
  him 
  and 
  the 
  fire. 
  If 
  by 
  any 
  chance 
  it 
  became 
  

   necessary 
  to 
  do 
  so, 
  notice 
  was 
  given 
  to 
  the 
  person 
  passed 
  and 
  an 
  

   apology 
  made. 
  This 
  etiquette 
  applied 
  to 
  the 
  members 
  of 
  the 
  family 
  

   as 
  well 
  as 
  to 
  guests. 
  When 
  a 
  guest 
  arrived 
  he 
  took 
  his 
  seat 
  quietly 
  

   and 
  remained 
  quiet 
  for 
  a 
  little 
  time, 
  no 
  one 
  addressing 
  him. 
  This 
  

   was 
  for 
  the 
  purpose 
  of 
  giving 
  him 
  time 
  to 
  "catch 
  his 
  breath" 
  and 
  

   "compose 
  his 
  thoughts." 
  When 
  conversation 
  opened 
  it 
  was 
  genial, 
  

   although 
  formal, 
  and 
  if 
  there 
  was 
  any 
  matter 
  of 
  importance 
  to 
  be 
  dis- 
  

   cussed 
  it 
  was 
  never 
  hastily 
  or 
  quickly 
  introduced. 
  Deliberation 
  was 
  

   a 
  marked 
  characteristic 
  of 
  Indian 
  etiquette. 
  

  

  When 
  a 
  guest 
  was 
  ready 
  to 
  leave, 
  he 
  rose 
  and, 
  using 
  the 
  proper 
  

   term 
  of 
  relationship, 
  added, 
  Sho 
  n 
  pa'xeha 
  ("I 
  have 
  finished," 
  i. 
  e., 
  

   my 
  visit), 
  or 
  he 
  said, 
  te 
  ha 
  ("permit 
  me") 
  and 
  without 
  further 
  cere- 
  

   mony 
  departed. 
  

  

  There 
  was 
  a 
  peculiar 
  courtesy 
  practised 
  toward 
  the 
  parents 
  of 
  a 
  

   man 
  by 
  his 
  wife 
  and 
  toward 
  the 
  parents 
  of 
  a 
  woman 
  by 
  her 
  husband. 
  

   A 
  man 
  did 
  not 
  directly 
  address 
  his 
  wife's 
  father 
  or 
  mother, 
  nor 
  did 
  

   any 
  of 
  his 
  brothers 
  do 
  so. 
  If 
  the 
  parents 
  were 
  visiting 
  in 
  the 
  same 
  

   tent 
  with 
  their 
  son-in-law 
  or 
  any 
  of 
  his 
  brothers, 
  conversation 
  could 
  

   be 
  carried 
  on 
  but 
  it 
  was 
  generally 
  done 
  indirectly, 
  not 
  directly 
  be- 
  

   tween 
  these 
  persons. 
  A 
  wife 
  did 
  not 
  directly 
  address 
  her 
  husband's 
  

   father 
  but 
  this 
  did 
  not 
  apply 
  to 
  his 
  mother. 
  This 
  custom 
  has 
  been 
  

   explained 
  by 
  old 
  Omaha 
  men 
  to 
  mean 
  that 
  respect 
  was 
  thus 
  shown 
  by 
  

   the 
  younger 
  to 
  the 
  elder 
  generation. 
  This 
  rule 
  of 
  conduct 
  was 
  not, 
  

   however, 
  rigidly 
  practised. 
  There 
  are 
  stories 
  told 
  in 
  which 
  a 
  man 
  and 
  

   his 
  son-in-law 
  were 
  very 
  close 
  friends, 
  living 
  and 
  hunting 
  together. 
  

  

  Mention 
  has 
  been 
  made 
  of 
  the 
  custom 
  of 
  never 
  addressing 
  an 
  indi- 
  

   vidual 
  by 
  his 
  personal 
  name; 
  etiquette 
  demanded 
  also 
  that 
  a 
  per- 
  

   son's 
  name 
  should 
  not 
  be 
  mentioned 
  in 
  his 
  presence. 
  It 
  may 
  be 
  

   recalled 
  that 
  a 
  man's 
  name 
  referred 
  to 
  the 
  rites 
  in 
  charge 
  of 
  his 
  gens 
  

   or 
  to 
  some 
  personal 
  experience 
  — 
  a 
  dream 
  or 
  a 
  valorous 
  deed. 
  The 
  

   personal 
  name 
  sustained 
  therefore 
  so 
  intimate 
  a 
  relation 
  to 
  the 
  indi- 
  

   vidual 
  as 
  to 
  render 
  it 
  unsuitable 
  for 
  common 
  use. 
  It 
  is 
  doubtful, 
  

   however, 
  whether 
  this 
  characteristic 
  was 
  the 
  fundamental 
  motive 
  

  

  