MICHELSON. ] BIBLIOGRAPHY. 85 
McKenney and Hau. History of the Indian tribes of North America. Vols. 
1-111. Philadelphia, 1854. 
Especially good for Fox costumes; contains other valuable facts. 
Marsn, Currine. Letter to Rev. David Greene, dated March 25, 1835. Wis. 
Hist. Soc. Colls., vol. xv, pp. 104-155. 1900. 
Reprinted as far as concerns Fox ethnology, ete., in Harrington’s Sacred bundles. Information 
on the whole, good. 
MricHEtson, TrumMan. Notes on the social organization of the Fox Indians. 
Amer. Anthrop., n. s. 15, pp. 691-693. 1913. 
It is possible that the information given may have to be modified in some details, but not the rules 
given governing membership in the tribal dual division; and the general proposition that the dual 
division is for ceremonial as well as for athletic purposes stands. 
Terms of relationship and social organization. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 
vol. 2, pp. 297-300. 1916. 
General discussion of terms of relationship; and Algonquian ones in particular. Discussion of the 
Fox system is incidental. 
The owl sacred pack of the Fox Indians. Bull. 72, Bur. Amer. Hthnol. 
1921. 
An account of the ceremonies (Indian text and English translation) connected with a certain sacred 
pack of the Fox Indians; also the traditional origin of the pack. 
How Meskwaki children should be brought up. Jn American Indian 
Life, Dr. E. C. Parsons, ed., pp. 81-86. New York, 1922. 
A free translation of a Fox text written in the current syllabary. It is a brief summary of Fox 
ideals. On pp. 386-387 of the same volume there is a condensed statement of Fox ethnology anda 
short bibliography. 
On the origin of the so-called Dream dance of the Central Algonkians. 
Amer. Anthrop., n. ser. vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 277-278. 1923. 
Points out that supposed origin myth can be substantiated as history. 
Further remarks on the origin of the so-called Dream dance of the 
Central Algonkians. Ibid., n. ser. vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 293-294. 1924. 
Shows that Skinner is wholly mistaken in his statements as to when and under what cireumst ances 
the Dream dance arose. 
[Review of] Observations on the ethnology of the Sauk Indians, by 
Alanson Skinner. Ibid., no. 1, pp. 93-100. 1924. 
Points out that although Sauk and Fox data are often confused by older writers and some modern 
ones, still at times they are kept apart; shows that the lists of gentes given by both Morgan and 
Galland are presumably Sauk and not Fox; notes that certain data given as Sauk by older writers 
in reality is Fox so far as they can be sustained at all. 
Ethnological Researches among the Fox Indians, Iowa. Jn Explora- 
tions and Field Work of the Smithsonian Institution in 1924. Smithsonian 
Miscellaneous Collections, vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 183-136. 1925. 
Gives data on Fox social organization, etc., pointing out especially that some gentes have distinct 
subdivisions, and that in such eases one subdivision is considered as of higher rank than the other 
or others (e. g., the ‘‘ Black Bears’’ higher than the ‘‘ Brown Bears”’ in the case of the Bear gens). 
Mooney, James, and Tuomas, Cyrus. [Article] Foxes. Handbook of American 
Indians, Bur. Amer. Ethnol., Bull. 30, pt. 1, pp. 472-474. 1907. 
Morean, Lewis H. Systems of consanguinity, ete. Smithson. Cont. to Knowl- 
edge, vol. xvi. 1871. 
The “Sauk and Fox” system is from Sauk informants; some schedules are faulty; the Sauk and 
the Fox systems are identical. 
Ancient society. New York, 1877. 
Gives list of gentes, but whether Sauk or Fox is not stated, but probably is Sauk. The two 
tribes, though legally consolidated, are distinct ethnologically and linguistically. 
Owen, wlary Anicta. Folk-lore of the Musquakie Indians of North America. 
London, 1904. 
The ethnological data are untrustworthy: see the review by Michelson, Curr. Anthrop. Lit. 2: 
233-237; that of ““A. F.C. and I. C. C.”’ in Journ. Amer. Folk-lore 18: 144-146, is a bare enumera- 
tion of the contents of the volume without any attempt at criticism. 
