Chapter Eight

New Mexico Before the Spanish

This chapter gives life to a rich history of the North American Continent Siberian Migrant Tribes (NACSMT) or what we call today Native Americans/Indigenous before and after the arrival of the Spanish and the de Riberas.  They came to a land untouched by European technology and ready for exploitation.  

Once again, our thanks to the many sources available through the Internet and the access to studies that it offers.  

Like a wide, deep, ocean history settles against the arid shores of the Southwest.  There in the high mountains of New Mexico water is a sacred thing, giving life to everything it touches.  And it gave life to generations of NACSMT.

The NACSMT had been good stewards of the water and the land.  They intended on leaving it as they found it.  

Pre-historic and later, historic events left their telltale signs on the windswept lands of New Mexico and its many peoples.  

Later on, those NACSMT that began invading from the north were considered by some to be warrior tribes.  

However, before beginning the subject at hand we must discuss humans, mankind, and its behavior as it relates to conduct and general relations between humans.  Why?  This is due to political correctness and its adherent’s sleight-of-hand.  It is one thing to accept as wrong what a group or groups of human beings have suffered at the hands of another.  It is quite a different thing to paint those offended groups as somehow more ethical or honorable than others, simply because they suffered these offenses.  After all, we are all humans and as such given to human failings. `  

As often happens, there are those who we read something and misunderstand or misinterpret the intent of the writer.  Therefore, let me state clearly and unequivocally that I do not condone what happened to any of the New World entrants, particularly the NACSMT.  War is an ugly, evil thing and so are its results.  Mistreatment of anyone at anytime under any circumstances is not acceptable and should not be tolerated. 

We humans are classed by our learned scientific community as a branch of the “Great Apes.”  They describe us as having erect posture, bipedal locomotion, with manual dexterity.  We are said to have increased the use of tools and exhibited a general trend toward larger, more complex brains.  As a result, the societies in which we have lived and worked are complex and ever changing.  This view of the human being is utilitarian and appears to be devoid of human essence.  This is to say that it doesn’t touch upon the Great Ape’s “humanity.”  Let us flesh out the deeper meaning of what it is to be the “Greatest of Apes.”  Now to the taking of a great leap for mankind!  

Our “Humanity” or our “human essence” is said to be a virtue associated with basic ethics of altruism derived from the human condition.  We are informed that humanity differs from mere justice in that there is a level of altruism towards individuals included in humanity more so than the fairness found in justice.  That is to say that humanity and acts of love, altruism, and social intelligence are typically person-to-person strengths, while human fairness is generally expanded and/or extended to all.  

This presupposes that we, the “Greatest of the Great Apes,” is capable of understanding the meaning of existence beyond the most basic aspects of that existence and is able to express this deeper meaning and understanding through positive attributes and interactions.  To this I say, where is this human and the humanity we speak of?  Can we name one human group capable of this “virtue”?  If history is any indicator of past Great Ape performance, that human does not, and has not resided on this planet.  In fact, the proposed virtue associated with basic ethics of altruism derived from the human condition has had little impact upon this entire blue ball found in our universe.  

Peterson & Seligman in Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook and Classification (2004) would have us believe that humanity is one of six virtues which are consistent across all cultures.  It is proposed that the concept began with the development of "humane" or "humanist" philosophy during the Renaissance.  Its predecessors are found in 13th-Century C.E. scholasticism which stresses a concept of basic human dignity inspired by Aristotelism.  It is also considered a part of the concept of humanitarianism in the early modern period, and resulted in modern notions such as "human rights."  

Peterson and Seligman have attempted to present a measure of humanist ideals of virtue in an empirical, rigorously scientific manner.  These define strengths and virtues as "core virtues" made up of twenty-four measurable character strengths.  They define character strengths as satisfying the majority of ten established criteria.  In essence they view character strengths as fulfilling and intrinsically valuable.  In an ethical sense they involve gifts, skills, aptitudes, and expertise which can be squandered.  However, character strengths and virtues supposedly cannot be.  

The following represents a grouping of those core virtues.  

1. Strengths of Wisdom and Knowledge: Cognitive strengths that entail the acquisition and skillful use of knowledge.  

1.1 Creativity & Imagination (originality, ingenuity): Thinking of novel and productive ways to conceptualize and do things.

1.2 Curiosity (interest, novelty-seeking, and openness to experience): Taking an interest in ongoing experience for its own sake; exploring and discovering.

1.3 Open-mindedness (holistic judgment, critical thinking): Thinking things through and examining them from all sides; weighing all evidence fairly.

1.4 Love of learning: Mastering new skills, topics, and bodies of knowledge, whether on one’s own or formally.

1.5 Holistic perspective (wisdom): Being able to provide wise counsel to others; having ways of looking at the world that make sense to oneself and to other people.


2. Strengths of Courage: Emotional strengths that involve the exercise of will to accomplish goals in the face of opposition, external and internal.  

2.6 Bravery (valor): Not shrinking from threat, challenge, difficulty, or pain; acting on convictions even if unpopular.

2.7 Persistence (perseverance, industriousness): Finishing what one starts; persisting in a course of action in spite of obstacles.

2.8 Integrity (authenticity, honesty): Presenting oneself in a genuine way; taking responsibility for one’s feeling and actions.

2.9 Vitality (zest, enthusiasm, vigor, energy): Approaching life with optimism and energy; feeling alive and motivated.


3. Strengths of Humanity: interpersonal strengths that involve supporting and befriending others.  

3.10 Love & Compassion: Valuing close relations with others, in particular those in which sharing and caring are reciprocated.

3.11 Kindness (generosity, nurturance, care, compassion, altruistic love, “niceness”): Doing favors and good deeds for others.

3.12 Social intelligence (emotional intelligence, personal intelligence): Being aware of the motives and feelings of other people and oneself.


4. Strengths of Justice:  strengths that underlie healthy and harmonious community life.  

4.13 Citizenship (social responsibility, loyalty, teamwork): Working well as a member of a group or team; being loyal to the group.

4.14 Fairness: Treating all people the same according to notions of fairness and justice; not letting personal feelings bias decisions about others.

4.15 Leadership: Encouraging a group of which one is a member to get things done and at the same maintain time good relations within the group.


5. Strengths of Temperance: strengths that protect against unhealthy excess and egotism.  

5. 16 Forgiveness and mercy: Forgiving those who have done wrong; accepting the shortcomings of others; giving people a second chance; not being vengeful.

5.17 Humility/Modesty: Letting one’s accomplishments speak for themselves; not regarding one’s self, as more special than one is.

5. 18 Prudence: Being careful about one’s choices; not taking undue risks; not saying or doing things that might later be regretted.

5.19 Self-regulation (self-control): Regulating what one feels and does; being disciplined; controlling one’s appetites and emotions (equanimity).


6. Strengths of Transcendence: strengths that forge connections to the larger universe and provide meaning in life.  

6. 20 Appreciation of beauty and excellence (awe, wonder, elevation): Appreciating beauty, excellence, and/or skilled performance in various domains of life.

6. 21 Gratitude: Being aware of and thankful of the good things that happen; taking time to express thanks.

6.22 Hope (optimism, future-mindedness, future orientation): Expecting the best in the future and working to achieve it.

6.23 Humor (playfulness): Liking to laugh and tease; bringing smiles to other people; seeing the light side.

6. 24. Spirituality (religiousness, faith, purpose): Having coherent beliefs about the higher purpose, the meaning of life, and the meaning of the universe.  


When one reviews the aforementioned, one must question what humanity the authors are referencing.  If the planet’s history of mankind is any indication of the virtue held by its humans, something is terribly wrong with this construct.  So, let us examine the virtuous humans.  

One source states that since the rise of the state some 5,000 years ago, military activity has occurred over much of the globe.  The advent of gunpowder and the acceleration of technological advances led to modern warfare.  According to Conway W. Henderson, "One source claims that 14,500 wars have taken place between 3500 B.C.E. and the Late-20th Century C.E., costing 3.5 billion lives, leaving only 300 years of peace (Beer 1981: 20)."  

Let us examine humans and their love of War.  For simplicity’s sake, a second source defines war as “an active conflict that has claimed more than 1,000 lives.”  The most pressing question becomes, has the earth ever had peace?  The answer might trouble you.  According to this source, only 268 out of the past 3,400 years have seen peace for humankind.  This represents just 8 percent of recorded history.  This begs the next question.  How many have died as a result of all wars?  There have supposedly been at least 108 million people killed in wars of the 20th Century C.E. alone.  The total number killed in wars throughout all of human history is estimated at 150 million to 1 billion.  

Statistics aside, wars have numerous effects upon populations including the decreasing of the birthrate.  This results when men leave their wives, they march off to war, and kill one another.  During World War II, it is estimated that the birthrate was reduced and caused a population deficit of more than 20 million people.  Obviously, there are many other negative impacts of war which we do not have time to explore at this juncture.  

Another important question to be considered is how many people around the world serve in the military?  One recent source estimates that the combined armed forces of the entire world stands at approximately 21.3 million.  It is China who has the world's largest army, with 2.4 million men and women under arms.  America comes in second at 1.4 million.  India maintains an army of 1.3 million.  North Korea stands at 1 million and Russia at over 900,000.  14 of the world's 20 largest militaries are in developing nations.  

Another important question is how many wars are taking place at any given time?  Sources provide that during the beginning of 2003, there were 30 wars going on around the world.  These conflicts included Afghanistan, Algeria, Burundi, China, Colombia, the Congo, India, Indonesia, Israel, Iraq, Liberia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, the Philippines, Russia, Somalia, Sudan, and Uganda.  That was just twelve years ago.  Can you imagine how many wars are happening today?  

People might question mankind’s aggressive nature and ask if there a genetic reason why we make war?  Experts say that the simple answer is there is no single "war gene" in humans.  However there are combinations of genes which might predispose an individual toward violence.  Scientists offer that aggression is a product of biology and environment.  In this so-called civilized world, sources of aggressive dispositions might include domestic violence, violence depicted in and by the media, threats from perceived enemies, and the nature of combat training.  

On might ask, is war essentially a male activity?  Some information provided claims that approximately 95-96 percent of today's worldwide military personnel are male.  It is thought that this is a reflection of modern culture and our biology.  Others claim that between fifteen and seventeen percent of American military personnel are females.  Here one might ask does a military support position held by females constitute an act of warfare.  

Many ask the question, can women fight as effectively and efficiently as men?  The answer is, yes.  First, it is suggested by some that fewer women are "natural killers."  Secondly, it is a fact that women on average are smaller than men.  However, there are many women who possess the psychological makeup and physical ability to make war.  And frankly, there are many men without these characteristics.  To be sure, women have in the past demonstrated valor in combat conditions.  

Given the ugliness and deprivations brought about by war, why are civilians attracted to it?  Some say that war is often characterized as honorable and noble.  It can be also be viewed by many as a contest between nations, a chance to compete and be declared the victor.  

To be sure, the basic outcomes of war and its associated violence can be applied to all tribes, cultures, and nations at one time or another.  It is brutal, ugly, and fruitless.  All have engaged in it and all guilty of these outcomes.  This includes the NACSMT.  

The term "Tribe" is contested by some as it is rooted in colonialism.  Herein is the problem for me as I write this chapter.  When histories of geographic areas are written, inevitably one must explain the peoples who live or lived there and under what conditions they did so.  If modern European states are or were involved in such geographic areas, there is a tendency to view their participation as strictly one of invasion and colonization of the place.  I can accept that the first wave of NACSMT would be seen as entering an empty place, therefore, migrants who settled there.  I can also accept that the next wave of NACSMT, the latest entrants, would be seen as invaders and colonizers, just as applied to Europeans.  I’m sure that some will call me anti-NACSMT for this view.  Oh well!  Let us proceed.  

As the term “Tribe” has no shared referent for what the word or phrase denotes or stands for, one is faced with a dilemma.  This includes whether the term is used in political form, kinship relations or shared culture.  Thus, the term becomes subjective and unreliable in its context.  Some argue that it conveys a negative connotation of a timeless unchanging past, as if the past and its experiences have no value.  This is the view of the modernist and his/her view of today’s mega-state environment.  To avoid these negative implications, there are those who have chosen to substitute the term with other terms such as "ethnic group", or “nation” as if this remedies the problems associated with context and non-objectivity.  In relation to this chapter, I have chosen to apply “NACSMT” to those called by others “Native-American” or “Indigenous.”  This I see as simple, correct, and acceptable.  

It was estimated recently that there were over one hundred and fifty million tribal individuals worldwide.  These constituted approximately forty percent of indigenous individuals at the time.  Post-colonial thinking and political correctness suggests that although nearly all tribal people are also indigenous, there are some who are not indigenous to the locals where they now live.  These suggest that it is important to make the distinction between tribal and indigenous because tribal peoples have a special status acknowledged in international law.  My preferred view is that all human tribes should have the same status.  Relative to this, one must ask the questions: Does anyone truly own the land?  When does a tribe lose the right of ownership of the land?  What of the concept of the right of conquest?  

Historically or developmentally, a tribe is viewed as a social group which existed before the development of, or outside of, today’s states.  Those that share this definition view a “tribe” as a distinct people, dependent on their land for their livelihood and who are largely self-sufficient, not integrated into a national society.  This definition begs the question does the definition still apply to modern changes to the status of the tribe?  What if the tribe is no longer largely self-sufficient or has become integrated into society, albeit, on a limited basis?  

The aforementioned description for the term is perhaps the most readily understood and used by the general public in America.  This definition is readily applied to those Siberian tribal peoples (NACSMT) that migrated to the North American Continent from Siberia and settled the land.  It is also applied to those later groups of NACSMT which entered under subsequent invasions (Migrations) and colonized (Settled) those regions already inhabited by earlier arriving NACSMT.  I find it odd that the second and third migration waves of NACSMT are referred to as migrants and not invaders/colonizers.  All other non-NACSMT tribes are referred to as invaders and colonizers.  Go figure.  

Survival International at one point in time stated that it was the world’s only organization dedicated to Indigenous rights.  It has its own definition for tribal people: "those which have followed ways of life for many generations that are largely self-sufficient, and are clearly different from the mainstream and dominant society".  This definition, however, would not apply in countries in the Middle East, where entire populations are members of one tribe or another and therefore tribalism itself is dominant and mainstream.  

Here I must offer that, how an organization wishes to apply a label to itself and others is its own business and concern.  However, every organization is formed with vision, mission, and values statements whether implicit or explicit.  These might not necessarily be fair or equitable to all involved.  One might say some organizations are self-serving and given to adjusting the truth to enable the proper interpretation of outcomes as they relate to their stakeholders.  This I find unfair to the other members of a society and/or the remainder of the human race.  

Many use the term "tribal society" to refer to societies organized largely on the basis of social, especially familial, descent groups.  A customary tribe in these terms would be one which is a face-to-face community, relatively bound by kinship relations, reciprocal exchange, and strong ties to a place.  Let me take only one element of this description and explore it.  I hold strong ties to Santa Barbara, California.  Does this make me a part of a tribe of others who also love Santa Barbara?  I would think not.  

In short, I view all groups of mankind as tribes of one kind or another.  No tribe should be held as above or below the others.  

One definition for tribalism is “the state of being organized in, or advocating for, a tribe or tribes.”  Relative to conformity, tribalism may also refer in popular cultural terms to a way of thinking or behaving in which people are more loyal to their tribe than to their friends, their country, or any other social group.  This appears logical to me.

Tribalism has been defined by one source in describing the engaged theory as a “way of being” based upon variable combinations of kinship-based organization, reciprocal exchange, manual production, oral communication, and analogical enquiry.   They offer that ontologically, tribalism is oriented around the valences (Attractive coverings) of analogy, genealogy and mythology.  This means that customary tribes have their social foundations in some variation of these tribal orientations, while at the same time often taking on traditional practices (including through religions of the book such as Christianity and Islam), and modern practices, including monetary exchange, mobile communications, and modern education.  

I have provided the aforementioned in an effort to offer a wider view of mankind, its varied living and cultural structures, its true face, and the face which many would like it to have.  As the facts suggest, its true face is one covered with war paint and given to actions that have often resulted in the death and destruction of others.  Further, I would suggest that each NACSMT migration following the first NACSMT entry into North America was in fact an invasion and colonialization of the lands held by those having lived there previously.  Therefore, this I see as the basis for further discussion of the NACSMT.  

I’m not a historian.  This provides me with tremendous freedom to research and present information based upon the facts, not what others want to hear.  This is my family history.  It involves my family and my Spanish progenitors.  Good or bad, their history is what it is.  They were of European tribes which migrated like other tribes into a geographic land mass (North America) and took possession of it.  This is no different from other human tribes that migrated into the North American Continent, settled, and exerted control over their environment.  Here, I suggest that one should apply the facts equally.  

Allow me to clarify my position on these matters lest the reader misinterpret my opinions.  The obvious questions are: Was the taking possession of the land done at the expense of other?  The answer is, yes!  Did they do things perfectly?  The answer is, no!  Were the other tribes that they were in competition with for those lands and its resources perfect humans devoid of evil and greed?  The answer is, no!  In essence, humans will be human.  After all, all tribes are human.  

Fortunately, I don’t have a publisher to which I’m responsible and accountable for a finished product in which they have the ultimate say-so.  I’m also not an academic teaching in an institution of higher learning.  Therefore, I have no pressures brought upon me by department chairs, college or university administrators, or other stakeholders to ensure that I remain politically correct.  There are no members of NACSMT (Native-American or Indigenous peoples) exerting undo pressure upon me or providing financial incentives (Casino owning tribes) with which to obtain concessions from me on presenting material in a way which is more palatable to them.  There are no individuals or groups of European extraction that have or are applying pressure of any kind on the input or outcomes of this chapter.  Finally, there are no Black tribes or other Asian tribal peoples exerting pressure upon me.  

To be sure, American history (History for dummies) is now often presented briefly and simplistically in order to accommodate the intended audience.  People no longer read with the intensity they once did.  Our culture is now less paper-based friendly and more digital “Internet” driven in informational delivery areas.  Unfortunately for all, this chapter will be neither, simple nor palatable for some.  So let us begin.  

Once upon a time there were no humans on the North American Continent.  None of the tribes of the earth had yet reached it.  It was beautiful and teeming with life.  Then, the NACSMT or those who are now called “Indigenous” or “Native-Americans” arrived.  

The term “Indigenous” is currently used when applying a label to “Native-Americans.”  In its strictest sense it means, “Originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native.”  Neither applies, as these originated in Siberia and either migrated to, or invaded and colonized the Americas.  

The term “Native” means, “Being the place or environment in which a person was born or a thing came into being: one's native land.”  Clearly the first portion would apply to all who have been born in North America.  However, I would argue that NACSMT did not come into being in the Americas.  They came into being in Siberia and migrated/settled or later invaded/colonized the Americas.  

To clarify, there are no Indigenous or Native peoples to the North American continent.  No human came into being there.  Instead, we are told by the scientific community that now specialize in the study of human DNA that peoples of many kinds migrated onto the continent from other places.  Therefore, we are all migrants.  However, to be fair, the first NACSMT did migrate and settle earlier, with the second and third waves of NACSMT invading and colonizing.  

These scientific specialists suggest that all humans on the planet result from coming into being in Africa.  We are told that they then migrating out of Africa, populating the entire planet.  Thus, we Americans are all the result of migrations/invasions from other places to this place.  

Genetic Studies and Fossil Evidence

Archaic Homo sapiens evolved to anatomically modern humans solely in Africa:

Between 200,000 and 60,000 years ago

Members of one branch of Homo sapiens left Africa (Over time these humans replaced other populations of the genus Homo such as Neanderthals and Homo erectus.):

At some point between 125,000 and 60,000 years ago

Migration out of the continent:

May have taken place as early as 125,000 years ago according to Arabian archaeological finds of tools in the region

The date of the earliest successful "out of Africa" migration (earliest migrants with living descendants):

Has generally been placed at 60,000 years ago based on genetics

Therefore, we must set aside the fact that some tribes migrated or invaded the North American Continent earlier than others.  It should not be necessary to give preferential treatment to any human tribe.  If this is not the case, all should return to Africa and end themselves there.  

The United States is a relatively new nation.  It is now in the throes of tribal finger pointing and blame for all of the current failings of the nation.  The European tribes are asked to accept blame for their inappropriate actions against the other non-European tribes.  These non-European tribes also claim that the European-based tribal advancements in technology and economic advancement are by and large due to their efforts as they were derived from slave labor and the taking of lands and property rightfully belonging to them.  

Those descendents of the European tribes counter with the response that without them, their technology, and expertise there would have been no progress.  Therefore, the fruits of that progress rightfully should remain with them, their offspring, and those others creating more wealth.  As the plot thickens, all of today’s American tribes (Both NACSMT and Non-NACSMT) continue to jockey for position using government institutions and the media to obtain what they see as their just rewards, even at the expense of others.  

As these solutions are not practical, America and its many tribes must attend to other solutions to resolve our longstanding differences.  It is also suggested that one must accept that for some problems there are no perfect solutions.  Thus, we might consider a series of accommodations to relieve the emotional and material aspects of those differences and move on with it.  Given the nature of the grievances, tribal competition, and reduced resources for which all vie the ultimate end-game appears to be that of an inevitable collision course.  In any event, we must push past these difficulties and continue with our chapter.

One study of DNA taken from dozens of human groups labeled as “Native-American” (Spanning from Canada to the tip of South America) has assisted in clarifying a question which has long puzzled scientists.  When did humans arrive in the Americas?  Harvard-led researchers have proven that they came in successive waves (Migrations/Invasions) more than 15,000 years ago.  

Note: Migration is the movement from one part of something to another.  

An international team of researchers including members of the Institute of Cytology and Genetics, a part of the Russian Academy of Sciences, has concluded that the genetic home of the first Americans was Altai in Central Asia, where Russia, China, Mongolia and Kazakhstan come together.  This would suggest that these NACSMT peoples were for a time indigenous to those regions.  Approximately 20-25 thousand years ago, the ancestors of what we call today, the Native-Americans, originated there.  They then migrated and colonized Siberia.  They later migrated/invaded the North America Continent and settled/colonized it.


Notes: Colonize: To move into and live in (a place) as a new type of plant or animal  

Further analysis reveals that “First Americans” (One population of NACSMT) crossed a land bridge from Siberia during the last Ice Age.  This approach would assume that there were other groups which became Americans through later invasions.  These Siberian Mongoloid tribes are descended from populations that lived in northern and central Asia about 15,000 to 20,000 years ago and through a series of migrations and invasions entered the North American Continent and then settled or colonized multiple areas across it.  

This group of Siberian tribes (NACSMTs) gave rise to most of those we today label as Native-Americans or Indigenous.  At this juncture, it might be said that one person’s indigenous are another person’s migrants or invaders.  I’m sure this would depend greatly upon one’s desired political and economic outcomes given a particular agenda.  

Further findings suggest that there were at least two subsequent migrations (invasions) by NACSMT.  These humans then mixed with the founding group (First Americans).  They left traces of their genes in the DNA of present-day populations in Alaska, Greenland, and Canada.  The two later groups of NACSMT would then become the 2nd and 3rd wave of North Americans.  

In order to pay proper respect to these early migrants to the Americas, I will now refer to them as the NACSMT rather than Indigenous or Native-American.  

There exist common themes in the major stages of the history of human migration and settlement of Siberia.  Unfortunately, current archeological, anatomical, linguistic and genetic data does not provide a complete story.  Precise findings related to the anatomically modern humans in the Old World Arctic are still not available.  However, it is proposed that the first people lived in Siberia during the Upper Paleolithic as early as 45,000 B.C.E.-40,000 B.C.E.  The Archaeological evidence indicates that the settlement of Siberia was a complex and lengthy process.  Migrations originating from southern Russia, Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and Mongolia are the most logical conclusions for the origin of these tribes.  

The term "mongoloid" was introduced by early ethnology primarily to describe various Central and East Asian populations.  It is one of the proposed three major races (Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid) of humanity.  Mongoloid is also used to refer to the general physical type of some or all of the populations of East Asia, Central Asia, Southeast Asia, Eastern Russia, the Arctic, the Americas, parts of the Pacific Islands, and parts of South Asia.  

As to those labeled, Native-Americans (NACSMT), Genetic studies strongly suggest the certainty of the Siberian Hypothesis.  Y-chromosome DNA analysis has revealed that a substantial majority of NACSMT belong to the otherwise fairly rare haplogroup Q.  Q also happens to be common in Siberia, especially among some of the smaller indigenous groups there.  Among the Ket, Haplogroup Q reaches a 95 percent frequency.  However, this could represent genetic drift, as the Ket population is very small at around 1,500.  

The Y-DNA Haplogroup R1 is the second most important haplogroup among those labeled “Indigenous” peoples of the Americas.  R1’s frequency is highest in the Americas among the Algonquian peoples of the northeastern United States and eastern Canada.  R1 is rare in eastern Siberia.  However, it is widespread among certain south-central Siberian groups.  It should be noted that Haplogroup R1 among certain NACSMT tribes is reported to have come from south-central Siberia.  However, it may be a result of recent European admixture and its origin remains uncertain.  

The third major Y-DNA haplogroup found among NACSMT tribes is Haplogroup C.  C is also relatively widespread in Siberia.  It is even more common in the Pacific and among indigenous Australians.  There are scholars who attribute Haplogroup C to the first out-of-Africa migration which took the coastal route along Southern Asia and into Southeast Asia and Australia some 50,000 years ago.  However, North American migrant Siberian tribes such as some Na-Dené, Algonquian, or Siouan-speaking populations, Siberians, and Central Asians share the more restricted C3 sub-haplogroup.  Many Pacific groups have the C2 sub-haplogroup.  Australians Aborigines are represented by the C4 sub-haplogroup.  

The first of three “NACSMT” migrations to the Western Hemisphere and initial settlement of the Americas appears to have been only from this ancestral Beringian population.  Other lines of evidence including linguistics and have long suggested that the Na-Dené people (those who speak Athabascan and related languages) arrived in a second wave.  This is set at around 8,000 B.C.E.  Linguist Edward Vajda has linked the Na-Dené languages to the Ket language of Central Siberia.  

The Dené-Yeniseian hypothesis remains controversial.  Genetically, the Na-Dené show some particularities that also indicate that their “migration occurred from the Russian Far East after the initial Paleo-Indian colonization.”  A third migration stream is suggested which originated in Siberia and ended in the Americas.  According to both linguistic and genetic evidence the ancestors of the “Eskimo-Aleut” peoples seems to date back to around 4,000 B.C.E.  

Some Y-DNA markers show a closer connection between NACSMT and the indigenous inhabitants of south-central Siberian than to those of the northern or eastern parts of the region.  In addition, it appears that certain mitochondrial DNA markers also show descent along the maternal line.  As stated earlier, one study specifically indicates strong genetic linkages between NACSMT and the indigenous inhabitants of the southern Altai Mountains, a rugged area situated near the intersection of southern Siberia, western Mongolia, and eastern Kazakhstan.  

This research would suggest that North America was reached by human populations by crossing the Bering land bridge during the last glacial period (Some contend that the end of the age is defined as 9,700 calendar years BCE (before the Common Era).  Others offer that the Pleistocene Epoch is typically defined as the time period that began about 1.8 million years ago and lasted until about 11,700 years ago.  The most recent Ice Age occurred then, as glaciers covered huge parts of the planet Earth. The so-called Paleo-Indian period is accepted to have lasted until about 10,000 years ago (The beginning of the Archaic or Meso-Indian period.).  Paleo-Indians are a classification term given to those first peoples (NACSMT) who migrated into the Americas during the final glacial episodes of the late Pleistocene period.  

From 16,500 B.C.E.-13,500 B.C.E., ice-free corridors developed along the Pacific coast and valleys of North America.  These corridors enabled animals to migrate south into the interior.  These were followed by humans.  The humans (NACSMT) walked or used primitive boats along the coastline.  

There is also evidence which suggests that big-animal hunters crossed the Bering Strait from Eurasia into North America over a land and ice bridge that existed between 45,000 B.C.E.-12,000 B.C.E.  These small, isolated groups of hunter-gatherers (NACSMT) migrated alongside herds of large herbivores far into Alaska.  There are stone tools, particularly projectile points and scrapers, which have come to be used as primary evidence of the earliest human activity in the Americas.  These crafted lithic flaked tools are currently used by archaeologists and anthropologists in order to classify cultural periods.  

To finalize, there exists scientific evidence which links NACSMT to Asian peoples, specifically to eastern Siberian populations.  These migrants/invaders (Labeled Indigenous peoples) to the Americas have been linked to Siberian populations by:

·       Linguistic factors

·       Distribution of blood types

·       Genetic composition (As reflected by molecular data, such as DNA)

The preceding clarification was necessary in order to contextualize the migration/invasion of various NACSMT human tribes onto the North American continent.


Notes: Tribe: A social division in a traditional society consisting of families or communities linked by social, economic, religious, or blood ties, with a common culture and dialect, typically having a recognized leader: "indigenous Indian tribes".  Synonyms: ethnic group, people, band, nation, family, dynasty, house.

First, the Folsom Paleo-Indigenous tribes arrived leaving behind the bones of the mighty bison they had hunted and killed with those now famous fluted projectile points that lay undiscovered until the early 1900s C.E.  After nine thousand years, modern man has begun to understand their life in the New World and their survival.  

Now we will discuss the United States’, Southwest.  It was here that my progenitors came in 1599 C.E.  As to the American Southwest, today's anthropologists use the term "Basketmakers" when they refer to these NACSMT or prehistoric desert dwellers.  Living in the Four Corners area they were influenced by the Mongollon people (Other NACSMT).  They lived in the Southwest from approximately 300 C.E. until sometime around 1300 C.E.  Mongollon people invaded the area 1300 years before the Spaniards.  It is reported that they left 300 years before Don Juan de Oñate y Salazar (1550 C.E.-1626 C.E.) and his Spaniards arrived to claim New Mexico for the Spanish Crown.  

To this point in the discussion, we can see that the NACSMT did what many other human tribes do, they migrated and/or invaded.  As we shall see, some ran from more hostile tribes (Other NACSMT), others migrated to where food was plentiful.  Still others migrated/invaded to explore and learn from their new surroundings.  

Now, we shall begin to explore those NACSMT which migrated/invaded to the areas in which the Spanish would also later invade.  

There were several Mogollon groups (NACSMT) clustered within roughly one hundred miles east and west of the New Mexico and Arizona border and extending some distance southward into Chihuahua and Sonora.  These westernmost groups with their Brownware Ceramics gave one definition to the Mogollon culture.  Another of their groups which was closely related culturally, the Jornado Mogollon, spanned another two hundred miles eastward, very near to the Great Plains.  They also extended themselves some distance southward, into Chihuahua.  These Mogollon groups were then widely separated into different environments.  They progressed at different rates through three basic phases of cultural development (Others might say savagery, barbarism, and civilization).  Later, they became known as the Anasazi.  

By 500 C.E., the Anasazi (Also NACSMT) would invade areas with more predictable water supplies.  These included the Rio Grande Valley, along the Pecos River.  They also conquered the present-day Zuni and Acoma lands of west central New Mexico.  To be sure, these NACSMT did in fact invade and war against one another.  Later, the Anasazi would move from their high-walled towns to become the Pueblo Indians.  

The peoples (Also NACSMT) of the nineteen New Mexico Indian pueblos can trace their beginnings to the Anasazi.  This word "pueblo" refers to a unique Indian culture of the Southwest.  They shared common cultural elements with them.  New Mexico prehistoric treasures are their creations.  

Each pueblo presided over its own government.  Each of the nineteen pueblos had their own social order and religious practices.  The most obvious link that the peoples of the pueblos shared was language.  When the Spanish arrived they found one of five distinct languages Tewa, Tiwa, Towa, Keresan or Zunian, being spoken at each pueblo.  My Spanish ancestors, the De Riberas, understood that the word “Pueblo” referred to a group of tribes.  

As the Four Corners Anasazi cultures declined, the river valleys west of their hunting grounds became flooded with Anasazi refugees.  Sometime after 1130 C.E. and before 1180 C.E., the "Ancient Ones," or "Anasazi" the Navajo developed into a vast, civilized culture.  Their world stretched from northern Mexico to southern Colorado.  

When the Spanish arrived, they found permanent mud-brick settlements all along the Rio Grande and near other waterways.  Calling them "pueblos," after the villages or pueblos they left behind in Spain, the Spanish dedicated each one to a Catholic saint.  In this way each village had patron saint for protection and worship. These amazing Pueblo cliff dwellings, pit houses, ancient kivas, and abandoned cities litter the ancient trade routes of the Southwest.  They exist today as mysterious symbols etched in rock standing as monuments to a glorious past of highly developed native cultures.  

It is estimated that around the 1100s C.E. or almost five hundred years before the Spaniards arrived, the first Puebloans began building rock and mud villages in the Pecos valley.  Over the next two centuries, more than two dozen villages were erected including one where the Pecos Pueblo stands today.  By the 14th Century C.E., small villages were abandoned and the Pecos Pueblo expanded.  By the year 1450 C.E., the complex was a well-planned frontier fortress, five stories high, with a population of approximately two thousand Puebloan (NACSMT) members.  

It must be noted here that a few NACSMT (Indigenous) societies in the regions of North America closest to the Mesoamerican and South American cultures practiced human sacrifice.  Mesoamerica is the region and cultural area in the Americas, extending approximately from central Mexico to Belize, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and northern Costa Rica.  There, pre-Columbian societies flourished before the Spanish colonization of the Americas in the 15th and 16th centuries C.E.  

Archaeologists have found evidence of human sacrifice among the Anasazi at Chaco Canyon, New Mexico and Cahokia, Illinois.  Archaeologists working at Chaco Canyon have found evidence that the elite (who appeared to be Mesoamericans, not Indigenous) butchered humans and boiled them into stews.  

The Pueblo Indians, who are most probably descendants of the Anasazi, have expressed their outrage at the thought of being accused of cannibalism.  However, in fairness to the archaeologists involved, they were theorizing that the Pueblo’s ancestors had been the victims of human sacrifice, not the practitioners.  Unfortunately, scientists are forced by their scientific educational discipline to report the findings of their research.  At times, this reporting may cause some discomfort to those who may have ancestors impacted by those findings.  As politically incorrect as this is, these poor unfortunates are duty bound to report the facts.  As much as this distresses the adherents to the “Noble Savage” scenario, those facts are a necessary part of modern scientific study and research.  

Also, archaeologists working at Sleeping Ute Mountain in Colorado excavated an Anasazi site, found signs of cannibalism, a stone tool kit possibly used to remove human flesh from bones, and preserved human fecal matter possibly containing human blood from victims.  The final determination has not been made on this matter.  One can only guess what the future holds for the final results of this research.  

From the north, came the Southwest's latest-arriving human tribes, the Athapascans or Apachean family (Also NACSMT).  They invaded into a relatively placid land where they were divided into two related groups: Modern-day, Apache and Navajo.  These tribes fought out territorial differences and colonized.  

The Apachean family is also known as ápachu, means “Enemy.”  These migrating Athabascan-speaking peoples invaded the American Southwest from the far north of Canada sometime in the Late-1300’s C.E. and early 1400’s C.E. or some three hundred years before the Spanish  These tribal groups both hunted and gathered.  Most scholars agree that the ancestors of the Navajo and Apache originally lived in western Canada, probably on the northern Plains of Alberta before invading south and colonizing the Southwest.  

Findings from archaeology suggest four different migration routes used by these NACSMT: An intermountain route through western Colorado and eastern Utah; A Rocky Mountain route through central Colorado; A High Plains route through eastern Colorado; and a Plains border route through Kansas.  

Their newly colonized American home territories included Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, and the Great Plains.  Their languages became known as Chiricahua, Jicarilla, Lipan, Plains Apache, Mescalero and Western Apache.  The Zuni, a Pueblo people, gave them the name “Enemy.”  

Here, I must defend the NACSMT.  Their reasons for killing or making war were simple. They raided each other for horses, women, and sometimes over control of lands.  Later, the NACSMT would develop and enlarge their living areas and create national boundaries.  In order to defend these, border wars would arise.  

By 1599 C.E., their chief enemies were the Spanish.  Later, the Comanche (Also NACSMT), Mexicans, and Americanos began to make war against them.  This was no easy matter for these new invaders as the Apache were known as great warriors and intelligent tacticians in battles.  

The Navajo and Apache colonists, as well as, other nomadic and semi-nomadic groups enriched New Mexico's NACSMT legacy.  The word Navajo for this NACSMT tribe comes from the phrase Tewa Navahu, meaning “highly cultivated lands.”  The Navajo reside in New Mexico and Arizona.  Archaeologists believe that the Navajo people first invaded what they now consider their ancestral homeland around 1025 C.E.  When the Navajo first invaded they survived as hunters and gatherers.  Before long they joined the Apaches and began raiding the Pueblo Indians for food, women, and slaves.  When the Spanish invaded the area they called them Apaches de Navajo.  This was in an attempt to distinguish the Navajo from their neighbors the Apaches.


Notes: The Pueblo peoples (NACSMT) are believed to be descended from the three major cultures that dominated the region before European contact:

  • Mogollon, who occupied an area near the Gila Wilderness
  • Hohokam, the archaeological term for a settlement in the Southwest
  • Ancestral Puebloans (or the Anasazi).  This term was coined by the Navajo, a traditional enemy of the Pueblo peoples.  

The Mogollon were an ancient NACSMT culture which migrated into the present-day United States-Mexican border region of southern New Mexico and Arizona and northern Sonora and Chihuahua states in Mexico.  These NACSMT are one of the four major archaeological Prehistoric Southwestern cultural divisions of the American Southwest and Northern Mexico.  They lived in the southwest from approximately 300 C.E. until sometime around 1300 C.E.

Mogollon origins are a matter of intense research.  One view holds that the Mogollon emerged from a preceding "Desert Archaic" tradition that links Mogollon ancestry with the first (late Pleistocene) prehistoric human migration into, and occupation of, the area around 9000 B.C.E.  This model suggests that cultural distinctions emerged in the region when these NACSMT populations grew large enough to establish villages, and later, larger communities.  A second hypothesis suggests that the Mogollon were descendants of early farmers who invaded from farming regions in Central Mexico around 3500 B.C.E. and displacing descendants of the antecedent Desert Archaic peoples.  A third view suggests that during the time of the shift from hunter/gather society to agriculture the Cochise culture (the early pit-house, late Desert Archaic, antecedents of the Mogollon) had been invaders into the area about 5000 B.C.E.  This view would suggest that they were not linked to the earlier inhabitants, but were receptive to cultural dissemination from other NACSMT tribes.  

Gradually, through contact with the Pueblo Indians the Navajo learned to farm, weave, paint, and make both pottery and baskets.  They lived in small homes called hogans.  At this time they were generally cone shaped and held up by logs and poles.  

The Navajo originally began their tribes in the 1500’s C.E.  They traded maize (corn crops) and woven cotton items such as blankets for items such as bison meat and various materials that they could use to make tools and weapons.  

As stated earlier, Apaches and the Navajos (NACSMT) shared a common Athapascan heritage.  Among New Mexico's non-Pueblo Indians, the Navajo Nation was by far the largest group of NACSMT in New Mexico.  Most of these lived on the almost 7,500 square miles of surreal mesa lands in the State's northwestern quadrant.  

These mastered the loom and became proficient silver workers, while the Apaches became skilled at basket weaving.  

The Navajo homes were very simple, just a small shelter of wooden sticks, mud, and tree bark.  Known as hogans, these homes and their doors faced the east to ensure an abundance of sunshine.  


From the beginning of their invasion, the Diné (Navajo) and their fellow NACSMT neighbors engaged in ongoing trading and raiding (War), with and against, their neighbor.  This occurred even after their colonization was complete.  There were, however, periods of relative peace.  These periods allowed for trade and social exchange with their Ute, Hopi, Zuni, Acoma, Jemez, Zia, and Santa Ana (Also NACSMT) neighbors.


Over time, with environmental or other stresses, it is suggested that warfare (Raiding and retaliation for raids) became commonplace, considered an almost a normal occurrence.  Typically, this involved the capture of horses, sheep, and women which enhancement the status of each tribe.  

When the Spaniards arrived (Invaded) the NACSMT territory in the 1600’s C.E., the Navajo began using the Spanish Churra sheep for clothing and food.  They also strategically placed trading posts within the Spanish towns to barter with their handmade items, to obtain items they needed, and gather intelligence on their Spanish guests which they would use for war.  

As the Navajo raids continued on the camps of the Spaniards (Late- 16th Century C.E. through 1821 C.E.), and later the Mexicans (1821 C.E. through 1846 C.E.), the Spaniards took military action against this NACSMT tribe.  Spanish warfare was used to intimidate them.  Eventually, approximately two thirds of Navajo surrendered.  These enforced actions by the Hispanos caused the Navajo to move to new territories including Utah.  Those who refused to surrender hid in the mountains and the canyons to avoid being detained and restrained.  

Later (1846 C.E. to Present), the Americanos would invade and colonize the land.  This NACSMT tribe eventually settled into a reservation on Fort Sumter in the Late-1800’s C.E.  By then, they had begun raising sheep, providing them with a prosperous and profitable life.                                                 

Another of the NACSMT, the Apachean tribes, was very powerful.  These people known today as the Apache were first encountered by the soldiers of the Spanish Crown.  Thus the term Apache has its roots in the Spanish language.  The first known written record of this NACSMT in Spanish is by de Oñate in 1598 C.E.  The Spanish first used the term "Ápachu de Nabajo" (Navajo) in the 1620s C.E., in reference to people in the Chama region east of the San Juan River.


The most widely accepted origin theory suggests Apache was borrowed and transliterated from the Zuni word ʔa·paču meaning "Navajos" (the plural of paču "Navajo").  A second theory suggests the term comes from Yavapai ʔpačə meaning "enemy."  The Zuni and Yavapai sources are less certain because de Oñate used the term before he had encountered any Zuni or Yavapai.  By the 1640s C.E., the Spanish applied the term to southern Athabaskan peoples from the Chama on the east to the San Juan on the west.  The ultimate origin is uncertain and lost to Spanish history.

For centuries, these were constantly at enmity with the Spaniards and later the Mexicans.  The first Apache raids on Sonora took have taken place during the Late-17th Century C.E. against the Spanish Empire.

The Jicarilla Apache Nation is located in the mountains and rugged mesas of northern New Mexico.  The Mescalero Apache Tribe has three sub-bands that comprise the Tribe: the Mescalero Apache, the Chiricahua Apache, and the Lipan Apache.  Prior to the Americano Reservation Period, the Mescalero people were nomadic hunters and gathers and roamed freely across the Southwest.  

Another of the NACSMT, the Cheyenne, would come onto the scene.  Their language is of the Algonquian language family.  They comprise two Native American groups, the Só'taeo'o or Só'taétaneo'o (more commonly spelled as Suhtai or Sutaio) and the Tsétsêhéstâhese (also spelled Tsitsistas).  

Their oral tradition offers that they lived far to the northeast in what is now known as Canada.  It would appear that there was a time of great sickness causing this people to leave their homeland and invade south.  This NACSMT refers to this as the “ancient time.”  It was a period when they were happy in their native lands but were decimated by terrible disease.  

They next invaded and colonized the marshy areas between Ontario and what is now known as Minnesota. According to their tradition, they were living by a large body of water.  Prior to living in Minnesota, they did not farm instead this tribe lived by fishing, hunting, and gathering wild plant foods.  It was there that they learned farming from the other NACSMT in the area.  The tribe called this the “time of the dogs.”  This was when dogs were used as beasts of burden.  

It was while in Minnesota that the Cheyenne made one of their first contacts with Europeans.  The earliest known written historical record of the Cheyenne comes to us from the Mid-17th Century C.E., when a group of Cheyenne visited the French Fort Crevecoeur, near present-day Peoria, Illinois.  The Cheyenne at this time lived between the Mississippi River and Mille Lacs Lake in present-day Minnesota.  

By about 1635 C.E., the tribe began its slow invasion westward toward the Great Plains.  Their invasion may have been motivated in part by the westward expansion of the neighboring Sioux, Iroquois, and Anishinaabe tribes.  However, the many villages that made up the Cheyenne did not move all at once, rather they invaded piecemeal.  Archaeological data offers that it may have taken over two centuries for the different groups to invade west of the Mississippi River and into the Great Plains.  

Notes: From early records of Jesuit explorers it is known that the Sioux once dominated the territory that now comprises the southern two-thirds of Minnesota, as well as nearby parts of Wisconsin, Iowa, North Dakota, and South Dakota by the 1600s C.E.  The Sioux originally lived as Woodland Indians along the upper Mississippi River.  By the Mid-1700s C.E., some Sioux were invading westward toward and across the Missouri River.  The reason supposed that their traditional enemies, the Chippewa, were by then armed with French guns.  This made the making of warfare with them much more dangerous.  

The Sioux continued attacking their traditional enemies, the Pawnee tribes.  These had been reduced in numbers by a series of disasters (Cholera, drought, etc.).  Pawnee women, who did most of the farming, were in constant danger of attack while attending their fields.  The Pawnee Nation could at one time boast of a population of some 10,000, in three tribal sections.  These were considered among the most advanced of the Nebraska Indian peoples in farming, handicrafts, music, medicine and religion.  

The Pawnee tribal land had at one time included most of what is now Nebraska.  It had been reduced to only the land between the Platte the Republican Rivers.  The right to this land was challenged by the larger Plains tribes, the Comanche, Cheyenne, Utes, Arapahoes, and especially the Sioux.  By the 1870's C.E., the Pawnee Nation numbered approximately 4,000.  

By 1873 C.E., a Sioux war party ambushed a Pawnee hunting party in southern Nebraska.  They killed approximately 150 of their enemy, including Sky Chief, before an army detachment was able to come to their rescue.  The site is known as Massacre Canyon.  

The Cheyenne is one of the groups of indigenous people of the Great Plains and their language is of the Algonquian language family.  They were at times allied with the Lakota and Arapaho.  

Nothing in the Cheyenne legends recalls migration to the North American Continent. Oral tradition offers that the first Cheyenne lived under ground and were led to the surface by one of their more adventuresome people, who, following a small source of light, discovered the world above them.  

It is suspected that the Cheyenne were originally from North of the Missouri River on a large lake.  They lived in the area of what is now Minnesota at the time they first came in contact with Europeans.  The Cheyenne occupied a region populated by the Algonquin speaking people.  It is reported that they began their tribal invasions from the shores of the Great Lakes or the upper Mississippi River area.  They appear in historical records on a map attributed to Joliet and drawn about 1673 C.E.  More definite is a visit of a group of Indians, named "Chaa" or Cheyenne to the LaSalle Expedition while they were building Fort Crevecoeur on the Illinois in February, 1680 C.E.  

They invaded west across the Mississippi River and into North and South Dakota in the Early-18th Century C.E.  The Cheyenne Nation or Tsêhéstáno was at one time composed of ten bands which spread across the Great Plains from southern Colorado to the Black Hills in South Dakota.  By 1700 C.E., many of the Cheyenne bands were living in the Sheyenne River Valley in eastern North Dakota.  More bands continued invading west across the Mississippi River and into North and South Dakota in the Early-18th Century C.E.  Here, they further adopted a farming life-style of the tribes of that region planting corn, beans, and squash.  There they lived in villages constructed of semi-subterranean earth lodges.  

The Plains Cree, Plains Ojibwa, and Assiniboine began forcing the Cheyenne farther west by the Mid-1700s C.E.  The Cheyenne then re-established themselves in the Black Hills area of South Dakota and the Powder River Country of present-day Montana.  While there it has been noted that they acquired more horses and became nomadic buffalo hunters from the first American Indian groups to adopt the horse who acquired horses from the Spanish in exchange for buckskins and or slaves for buffalo hunting.  

Notes: In 1539 C.E., Hernando de Soto and Vasquez de Coronado operated as explorers for the Spanish Empire in North America.  For ease of travel they brought with them horses.  Some horses escaped and became wild.  But, the Indians did not seem to have done much with these wild horses.  The Plains tribes would originally obtain their first horses from tribes that had stolen them from the Spanish.  The tribes of the time do not appear to have done much with these wild horses.  They did not start riding or using horses until much later.  

By the 1600s C.E., there were Spanish missions and settlers living on ranches in New Mexico just to the west of Texas.  There the Pueblo and Navaho Indians also lived.  The Spanish of New Mexico allowed the Indians to learn about horses working on the Spanish ranches.  The Spanish government had laws making it illegal for an Indian to own a horse or a gun.  Yet, the Indians learned how to train and ride a horse.  They also learned how to use horses to carry packs.  

In 1680 C.E., the Pueblo Indians revolted against the Spanish was savage and well-planned, driving the Spanish from New Mexico.  This forced the Spanish to leave quickly, leaving behind many horses.  It is reported that the Indian nations obtained their horses by the 1680s C.E.-1690s C.E.  With horses they were able to move out of the Great Plains to live and to hunt more easily.  The Spanish did not return to New Mexico until the year of 1694 C.E.  While the Spanish were gone the Pueblo Indians raised large herds of these horses and began selling and trading them to other tribes such as the Kiowa and Comanche.  The Pueblo Indians also taught the other Indian tribes how to ride and properly raise the horses.  The use of horses by the various tribes spread across the Southern Plains very quickly.  French traders reported that the Cheyenne Tribe in Kansas got their first horses in the year of 1745 C.E.  

Horses transformed life for the tribes of the Great Plains.  They were able to give up framing in the river valley and rely upon hunting on the plains instead.  The evidence of this is in the Cheyenne legends which recalls the times when they “lost the corn.”  Also, before obtaining horses they hunted buffalo on foot.  The Buffalo were not easy to hunt on foot, as they sped away faster than the human hunter could run after them.  With a horse, the hunters could give chase and keep up with the buffalo.  Groups of hunters would ride horses up to a heard of buffalo.  Once close enough, and before the buffalo run away they shot arrows at them.  

In addition, many tribes used buffalo traps to catch large numbers of the animals.  Even the Blackfeet women aided in the hunt.  Sometimes they made a semi-circular fence out of their dog travois and the braves chased a herd into the trap. They then dispatch them with arrow and lance.   Another technique involved stampeding a herd over a cliff, with hunters stationed below.  These finished-off the buffalo.  This method continued after the use of the horse because a huge supply of meat and skins could thus be acquired in a very short time.  One of the favorite spots used by Platte River Indians for buffalo chase was the bluffs near present Interstate 25 in Wyoming's Chugwater Valley.  

With the help of horses the Plains Indians became more nomadic.  As nomads they always moved from place to place looking for food.  They carried everything they owned with them.  Before horses, these Indians carried everything on foot or used dogs as beasts of burden.  The dogs were fitted with travois and carrying packs which acted as saddlebags.  Both aided in the carrying of belongings.  As they moved out onto the plains they migrated southwestward.  

By the 1700s C.E., the Cheyenne acquired horses from the Spanish and became expert buffalo hunters and raiders.  

In 1717 C.E., the Cheyenne Indian Chief Orejas de Conejos (Rabbit Ear) and his warriors roamed the area around Clayton, New Mexico.  Historians tell us that representatives from the areas surrounding Santa Fe, the most northern part of New Spain (Now New Mexico) met in Santa Fe with the purpose of wanting the Cheyenne to release the Spanish prisoners they held as slaves.  There, they organized a volunteer army.  Chosen to command the army was Don Juan de Padilla, Carlos Fernandez, and Padro Pino.  500 young men armed, mounted, and with pack mules were selected.  They assembled for the expedition carrying firearms, lances, and bows and arrows.  

The Spanish military expedition left Santa Fe heading for the Orejas de Conejos to engage the Comanche tribe in battle.  As the Spaniards knew this mountain by name, it must have been named before the date the great Cheyenne Chief was killed in battle and buried on top of the mountain that bears his name.  This defeat of the Comanches was to be one of the bloodiest battles against southwestern Indians in western history.  

The expedition camped the first night at the Pueblo of Pecos.  It then moved by way of Anton Chico to the plains in what is now North-western Texas.  There they learned that the Comanches were camped a few leagues ahead.  Preparations were made to attack at daylight.  The Spanish found an undefended path to the teepee camp of the Comanches.  Once there, they attacked killing hundreds, taking 700 prisoners, and liberating the Spanish captives.  So severe was the punishment of the punitive Spanish expedition that the Comanches never again went on the warpath against the Spaniards.  

Having settled the Black Hills, they introduced the horse culture to Lakota bands about 1730 C.E.  Allied with the Arapaho, the Cheyenne pushed the Kiowa to the Southern Plains.  In turn, they were pushed west by the more numerous Lakota.  

While in the Black Hills, they encountered the Arapaho who had already moved from Minnesota into the Black Hills in the Dakotas and Wyoming first.  The Arapaho did not view the Cheyenne as intruders instead welcoming them as friends. In time, the tribes intermarried and became confederated.  

Horses had spread across the southern Plains rapidly.  French traders reported that the Cheyenne Indians in Kansas obtained their first horses in the year of 1745 C.E.  Before horses, the Cheyenne had hunted deer and grew crops, such as squash, beans, and corn.  When they grew crops, the Cheyenne lived in wigwams made out of birch-bark and dirt.  When they didn't have horses they used dogsleds instead.  

Once they gave up farming, the Cheyenne traded animal hides with other tribes for fish, corn, tobacco, and fruit.  After they became nomads, meaning that they never lived in one place for a long time but kept moving instead, they lived in tepees, which were easy to break down and rebuild.  

Toward the end of the 18th Century C.E., pressure from the Teton Sioux pushed more of the Cheyenne farther west.  This migration was also carried out piecemeal.  It is also reported that one reason why the Cheyenne and others moved to the Great Plains is to escape from the ravages of European diseases.  By 1795 C.E., a smallpox epidemic wiped out 30 of the 32 Arikara villages, killing approximately 3500 of their 4000 warriors.  

At some point, the Tribe moved further west along the Cheyenne River, finally settling in two areas on the Great Plains the Northern Cheyenne near the Platte River and the Southern Cheyenne near the Arkansas River.  The Great Plains is the broad expanse of flat land, much of it covered in prairie, steppe and grassland that lie west of the Mississippi River tallgrass prairie states and east of the Rocky Mountains in the United States and Canada.  This would include the Woodland areas of the Mississippi River Valley.  These areas covered parts, but not all, of the states of Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming, and the Canadian provinces of Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan.  

The Southern Cheyenne allied with their neighbors the Arapaho, and they fought the Kiowa, Comanche, and Apache.  But later, the five tribes made peace and became allies.  The Southern Cheyenne joined with the Arapaho, forming a large tribe that spread out over a large area.  When American settlers arrived, the Cheyenne territory covered Oklahoma, Montana, South Dakota, parts of Wyoming, Nebraska, Colorado, and Kansas.  

By the 19th Century C.E., as a result of adopting the horse culture they soon developed ritual ceremonies and tribal structures which resulted in a more centralized approach to authority.  The Cheyenne are reported to have still maintained some villages which were planting corn along the Missouri River in 1800 C.E.  

Their tribal existence was well adapted to life on the plains.  Tribal institutions were both meaningful and well-integrated.  They implemented a practical government system and a religion or super naturalism related directly to the environment in which they lived.  They had a satisfying economy, maintained orderly family and kinship systems, and made alliances with other powerful, friendly tribes.  

There were rivalries which developed between bands as their numbers increased which developed into antagonism between band members and chiefs.  These finally led to the tribe dividing being into the Northern and Southern divisions.  

By the Early-1800's C.E., the Cheyenne ranged widely to the southwest of the Missouri River.  A French trader, Persine duLuc’ noted that, although the Cheyenne wandered the greatest part of the year, they sowed, near their "cottages" (the Cheyenne built earth lodges to live in, some more than 40' in diameter) maize (corn) and tobacco, which they came to reap at the beginning of autumn.  

About 1804 C.E., when the Lewis and Clark Expedition came upon the Cheyenne along the Missouri River their numbers were estimated at about 300-400 fighting men.  However, Clark did not come in contact with the entire tribe.  It is estimated that the tribe actually numbered between 1400 and 1600 persons.  He described the Cheyenne as "rich in horses and dogs, the dogs carry a great deal of their light baggage.  They confess to be at war with no nation, except the Sioux" against whom they had been fighting wars for as long as they could remember.  

Rapid cultural changes took place once the Cheyenne were on the plains.  After only two generations, Cheyenne living in 1804 C.E.-1806 C.E. near present day Scott's Bluff, NE, on the North Platte River had completely adjusted to the new environment.  

After 1825 C.E., the Cheyenne began to divide into a Northern tribe and a Southern tribe.  The Southern Cheyenne continued their close association with the Arapaho while the Northern Cheyenne developed a close association with the Sioux.  

When they gathered, the bands leaders would meet in formal council, performing an annual Arrow Renewal ceremony, and the Sun Dance.  The military societies of the Cheyenne conducted ceremonial functions such as their participation in the Sun Dance.  However, more importantly they were also largely responsible for protecting the tribes and maintaining tribal discipline.  The societies organized themselves either on an age-grade basis or by continuous membership in a specific society such as, Wolf Soldiers, Fox soldiers, Dog Soldiers, Red Shields or Bull Soldiers.  Later, the Thunder Bows also known as the Bowstrings were created.  

The Cheyenne removal to the Arkansas River did not bring peace to the tribe.  The Early-and-Mid 1830's C.E. were a time of widespread intertribal wars on the southern and central plains, in which the Cheyenne frequently participated.  It was about this time frame the Cheyenne and Arapaho formed an alliance.  The Cheyenne had large horse herds and animosity grew between the Cheyenne and Pawnee over the years.  

There was no cessation of hostilities between the 2 tribes during the 1850's C.E.  About 1851 C.E.-1852 C.E., Alights on the Cloud, a prominent Cheyenne chief, was killed by the Pawnee.  The Cheyenne gathered their allies, the Arapaho, Brule' Sioux and smaller numbers of Kiowa, Kiowa -Apache, and Crow and followed their sacred Medicine Arrows and Buffalo Hat into battle against the Pawnee.  The 1853 C.E. war against the Pawnee ended in disaster for the Cheyenne.  

We are told that the warriors of the combined tribes could not drive the Pawnee from a strong defensive position.  The battle supposedly raged indecisively for hours.  Then a body of horsemen appeared.  He was a Pottawatomie and armed with new rifles.  The Pottawatomie alternately advanced by platoons, firing and retreating.  The Plains Indians were no match for the well organized Pottawatomi warriors, so the former left the battlefield.  In 1854 C.E., the Cheyenne avenged their defeat.  They and the Kiowa attacked 113 Pawnee and killed almost all of them.  

They also continued to war against their traditional enemies, the Crow.  Later (1856 C.E.-1879 C.E.) they fought the United States Army forces.  By the Mid-19th Century C.E., the bands began to split.  Some bands chose to remain near the Black Hills, while others chose to remain near the Platte Rivers of central Colorado.  

The tribes continued to be restless.  By the winter of 1863 C.E.-1864 C.E., Governor Evans of Colorado Territory was convinced Indian hostilities would begin again in the spring.  He felt tribes could be defeated and hostilities in the Colorado Territory would be ended.  However, by March of 1864 C.E., Major General Samuel R. Curtiss was forced to withdraw every available soldier from the Indian frontier to meet an advancing Confederate force which was by then gathered on the Arkansas River.  Governor Evans had reason to worry about the settlements in the Colorado Territory.  

These NACSMT and others from Siberia provide a rich legacy for the Southwest.  Like all humans tribes they migrated or invaded the lands for many purposes.  They then settled or colonized those regions starting new lives.  The NACSMT worked the land or hunted for survival.  They built homes large and small.  They also traded and raided.  While trading they acquainted themselves with one another.  These provided on another with what was needed or wanted.  

Warfare for the NACSMT became a way of life.  In the beginning, they fought each other.  This continued even after the first Europeans arrived.  When the Spanish invaded and colonized in 1599 C.E., the NACSMT sought their goods and animals.  War was the easiest way to obtain them.  By 1821 C.E., the Mexicans exerted control after Spain left its areas of New Spain and the lands fell under the flag of a newly minted nation called “Mexico.”.  War continued the new invaders and colonizers.  When the Americanos defeated the Mexicans and took the lands in 1848 C.E., they invaded and colonized the Southwest.  The NACSMT than began to war against them.  

It was the Americanos that would finally defeat them.  They were imprisoned on reservations as part of the continuation of the English Plantation System Policy which had been so effective and efficient on the eastern side of the continent.

From this time forward, life for the NACSMT would never be the same.


10/29/2015 02:02 PM