Pakt II 

 CHAPTER VIII 



SOCIAL ORGANIZATION— GENERAL DISCUSSION 



We are justified in assuming that the twofold division of the 

 Winnebago and the southern Siouan tribes, Dhegiha and Tciwere, 

 had a common historical origin. Our identification is based upon 

 the existence in these three tribal units of specific similarities apart 

 from those of social organization. Positive proof that the type of 

 social organization is historically identical among these tribes is not, 

 however, forthcoming. This will become even more apparent when 

 we consider the twofold division from the point of view of the names 

 they bear, the subdivisions within them, and their specific functions. 



According to our informants, the twofold organization among the 

 Dhegiha and Tciwere only existed upon specific occasions, when the 

 tribe was on the tribal hunt. We are in complete ignorance as to 

 whether in olden times this arrangement was reflected in the village, 

 but we know that whether it was or not, the twofold division was 

 present in a very definite manner in the consciousness of the people 

 themselves; that is, every individual definitely knew to which one of 

 the two divisions he belonged and that certain names and functions 

 were associated with them. The moment, however, that we stop to 

 analyze these names, functions, etc., we realize at once that to-day 

 they connote different ideas in the different tribes under discussion. 

 The names of the divisions seem particularly significant in this con- 

 nection. Among the Omaha they are known as Ictacunda and 

 Hanga, probably connoting Sky people and Leaders; among the 

 Ponca, as Wajaje and Tciju, Earth and Thunder; among the Kansa, 

 as Yata and Ictunga, Right side and Left side; among the Osage as 

 Tciju and Hanga, Peace and War side. The names for the Kwapa, 

 Oto, Missouri, and Iowa are not known. It will be seen at a glance 

 that the terms Tciju and Ictacunda are identical, and it will also be 

 noticed by reference to the monographs of J. O. Dorsey and Miss 

 Alice C. Fletcher and Francis La Flesche, that these names as well 

 as the name Hanga are names of subdivisions within these divisions. 

 Were these names first used to designate the two divisions or the 

 subdivisions? There seems to be no reason for believing that the 



181 



