v ^ INDIAN- 01 'I III'. PLAINS 



since they have a common -perch and precisely similar 

 cultures, it is customary to ignore the political units 

 and designate them by the larger term. The Eiidatsa, 

 one of the Village group, have essentially the same 

 Language as the ('row, hut have many different trait- of 

 culture and while conscious oi a relationship, do not 

 recognize any political sympathies. Again, in the 

 Dakota, we have a more complicated scheme. They 

 recognize first seven divisions as " council fire-"' 

 Mdewakanton, Wahpeton, Wahpekute, Sisseton, Yank- 

 ton, Yanktonai. and Teton. These, as indicated by 

 separate fires, were politically independent, but did 

 not make war upon each other. To the whole, they 

 gave the name Dakota, or, "those who are our friends." 

 Again, they grouped the first four into a larger whole, 

 the Eastern Dakota (Isayanti), the Yankton and Yank- 

 tonai formed a second group, and the Teton a third. 

 However, the culture of the second and third group- i- 

 so similar that it is quite admissible to include them 

 under the title Teton-Dakota. All the seven divisions 

 were again subdivided, especially the Teton, which had 

 at least eight large practically independent divisions. 



Thus, it is clear, that no hard and fast distinctions 

 can be made between independent and dependent political 

 units, for in some cases the people feel as if one and 

 yet support what seem to be separate governments. 

 This is not by any means peculiar to the Plains. Since 

 anthropology, is, after all, chiefly a study of culture, 

 it is usual to place under one head all units having 

 exactly the same culture when otherwise closely related 



