34 JBUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bull. 194 



or the matter was dropped. We find, for example, instances of peace 

 emissaries being received by the council but acceptance being delayed 

 until those households which had recently lost members in warfare 

 against the tribe had indicated their willingness to accept the peace 

 offerings. The council could not accept the peace plans if a household 

 refused to approve. Usually, families were given horses and other 

 goods in considerable quantities as symbols of respect to the dead 

 members of the households, at which time objections were withdrawn. 

 Although on the surface these gifts may appear to outsiders as bribes, 

 to these people the offering of gifts was a symbol of respect. If the 

 returned leader of an unsuccessful war expedition did not fast long 

 enough or inflict personal torture sufScient to console the families of 

 those killed, the council frequently was thwarted in its efforts to win 

 their approval of the matters under discussion. In the face of 

 continued resistance by the households, the council was unable to 

 function. Even as peace negotiations could not be completed except 

 with the approval of the interested households, neither could the 

 village function as a unit in other matters. Thus, at best, the council 

 was only as strong as the bond which held households together. The 

 council could not prevent households from withdrawing from the 

 village whenever they wished to establish independent villages. 

 Through the police, however, it could enforce rules of behavior as 

 long as the household groups remained in the village. 



The attitude of a dissatisfied group obviously took a different form 

 when enemies pressed them from all sides. On the other hand, a 

 group could lose prestige by making unreasonable demands. In- 

 formants will say that decisions were always unanimous and that de- 

 cisions were not made until a solution was reached that was acceptable 

 to all. Nevertheless, we have a number of council decisions which 

 were not unanimous and can observe the reactions that followed. 

 Since conditions of warfare were difficult during the winter due to 

 deep snows and the ease of tracking the enemy, pressures of enemy 

 groups were not as great. Under these conditions, the village group 

 was frequently unable to agree on a common winter camping area and 

 small segments of the population would break away against the better 

 judgment of the older and more experienced leaders. The council 

 could not exert physical force to drive them back into the group but 

 they could throw the weight of tradition against them by publicly 

 invoking the gods sending the winter buffalo to send them no buffaloes. 

 Cherry Necklace was selected by a majority of the combined Hidatsa, 

 Awatixa, and Awaxawi during the autumn of 1862 as "leader of the 

 winter camp" but was opposed by some households because he had 

 already served in that capacity a few years earlier during which time 

 members of these households died. These deaths were blamed on 



