4 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bull. 194 



Hidatsa at a moment in time. However, as the study progressed 

 and as I became aware that my informants all recognized marked 

 changes in their way of life from that of their grandparents, I decided 

 to deviate from that plan wherever there was pertinent and authentic 

 knowledge of historic cultural changes. My employment of the 

 diachronic approach was especially applicable to particular aspects 

 of their culture such as the age-grade system. In other areas of their 

 culture, such as their kinship system, there was little evidence of 

 cultural change. 



Extensive use has been made of the voluminous source material on 

 the Hidatsa. I have tried to combine all that has been written about 

 them with my personal observations of their ancient sites and culture 

 and what information I was able to glean from native informants. 

 My aim has been to produce a study of the personal and intimate 

 relationships of individuals and organized groups living together 

 within a complexly integrated social-ceremonial system that was 

 undergoing significant cultural enrichment under the influence of 

 their agricultural neighbors until terminated by the heavy losses 

 suffered during the smallpox epidemic of 1837 and the destructive 

 influences of subsequent White encroachments upon their community 

 and ancient wildlife resources. 



The Hidatsa were not a homogeneous people. The knowledge 

 of one was not that of another, save as exists between individuals 

 as to sex and age, so characteristic of very primitive hunters and 

 gatherers. The Hidatsa had a firm economy based on hunting and 

 primitive hoe gardening. There was much specialization; one could 

 have learned this from the literature. 



My first problem was to select informants who possessed special 

 knowledge. I had become acquainted with most of them beforehand 

 while making the Mandan study with the help of Tom Smith, who 

 was in their age-group and knew each of them well. We had antic- 

 ipated difficulty in getting informants to reveal certain religious lore, 

 and it was necessary, in some instances, to assure the informant 

 that what he told us would not be revealed in his lifetime so that 

 we would not be interfering in the orderly transfer of this knowledge 

 to Indian purchasers. This rule was never broken. When what we 

 recorded of a religious nature was not repeated by us, or informants 

 learned that we never talked about what they told us should be treated 

 secretly, confidence between us grew. When resistance was met in 

 securing sacred lore and the informant was otherwise well informed, 

 we would work with him on routine social patterns and try again. 

 Usually, after getting acquainted with each other, the informant 

 would slowly edge into the sacred area of his experiences and submit 

 to detailed inquiry. Eventually there was not an informant that 



