78 
d'amour conjugal aux Dene-Dindjie”. And yet, as with most generalities, 
there are exceptions. There was little ceremony apparently, and divorce 
was easy and common. King (1836, vol. 2, page 43) records certain 
customs among the Yellowknives (?). He says that the father of the 
girl absented himself while a new tent was erected and then pretended 
astonishment on his return, that there was a formal announcement made 
by the mother at a feast, and that complimentary speeches were made. 
According to Petitot (1876, page 32), the northern Indian considered 
in marriage only the material characteristics of the woman, her aptitude 
for work, and potentiality for bearing children. 
At Good Hope it was said that when a young man wished to marry 
he went to the father of the girl he had picked out and asked him for his 
daughter. Then the father spoke to the suitor very roughly and tried 
to make him angry, even going so far as to threaten him with a club. 
This being expected, the boy continued patiently to ask for the girl. Some- 
times a year passed in this way, but eventually permission would be granted. 
The bridegroom then went to live with his father-in-law. In a case where 
the wife was of another band or tribe, the couple lived with the girl’s 
father for a year or two and then returned to the husband’s people. Parent- 
in-law taboos were unknown. Pike (1892, page 121) says that among 
the Yellowknives, a man is supposed to hunt for his father-in-law after 
marriage. 
Wives were also taken by capture, both from other tribes and one’s 
own, sometimes literally dragged away by the hair (See Keith, 1890, II, 
page 107). Medicine men are supposed to have been particular offenders 
since the parents dared not object through fear of spiritual attack. Rich- 
ardson (1852, pages 256, 296) gives several instances of a stronger man 
carrying off a weaker man’s wife among the tribes that frequented Great 
Bear lake. In one case the man who carried off the woman considered it 
a manly action, and in the other, the offended party took the situation 
as to be expected and went off to find another mate. Franklin (1828, 
page 290), however, remarks on the murder of a Great Bear Lake man 
by the husband whose wife he carried off. The woman saved herself 
by pushing aside the muzzle of the gun, whereupon her husband knocked 
her senseless with the stock. She was saved, the story goes, by the cries 
and entreaties of their only child. In cases of separation, the children 
followed the fortunes of the mother. 
Wives were also gained by wrestling, and accounts given to Richard- 
son on Great Bear lake were to the effect that any man had the right to 
challenge another, and if he won, to carry off the prize, who looked on 
with composure and impartiality. It is said that in this case the father 
might retain the children if he so desired, generally taking revenge by 
seeking the wife of another man weaker than himself ( See Richardson, 
1852, page 256). A further account of this custom, taken at the same 
place, is borrowed from Hooper (1853, page 303), who says: 
“With them, if a man desire to despoil his neighbour of his wife, a trial of strength, of 
a curious nature ensues: they seize each other by the hair, which is worn long and flowing, 
and thus strive for the mastery, until one or another cries, ‘peccavi.' Should the victor 
be the envious man, he has to pay a certain number of skins for the husband-changing 
woman, who has herself no voice in the matter, but is handed over like any other piece 
of goods, and generally with the same unconcern.’' 
