Indian Captives

Subject: Indian Captives Mon 21 May 2007, 3:39 pm

Were there Indain captives besides Cynthia Anne Parker ? Did the Indians usually treat the children they took good or bad ? Was it just the Comanches that took captives or were there other tribes too?

Guest

There were a lot ocf captives besides Cynthia Ann PArker. In TExas and elsewhere.

Almost all tribes took captives on occaision, and how they were treated depended on circumstances. Age, circumstances, chance. Young girls (old enough to be useful working, not too old to be tamed and accultiurated; often enough - the right age to become sexual parteners for the captor) were especially prized. For a number of reasons.

Subject: Re: Indian Captives Mon 21 May 2007, 9:50 pm

I haven't given thought to Indian captives who were taken as children in quite a while, but am in concord with Clyde's view. Also, I think that the perspective of Roy D. Holt, author of the book, 'Children Indian Captives' (in the Eakin Press catalog; pasted below) sums up the situation quite accurately:

"On the Texas frontier of the 1800's, settlers and Indians were at war, and captives were very much 'prisoners of war.'" (quoted in the little blurb)

Here are some links to follow, beginning with the 'Handbook of Texas Online' entry for Indian captives:

http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/II/bxi1.html

http://www.historynet.com/culture/wild_west/6907062.html?page=1&c=y

http://www.thehewitt.net/Indian_captives.html

So as you can see, many children and young people were taken over the years by members of the Southern Plains tribes in Texas.

I had wanted to learn more about the Babb children and now, the little daughter who was adopted by Sul Ross.

Thanks for bringing this compelling subject to our attention, guys.

Holly

CHILDREN INDIAN CAPTIVES
By Roy D. Holt
On the Texas frontier in the 1800's, settlers and Indians were at war, and captives were very much "prisoners of war". Author Roy D. Holt relates 31 of the many stories of children taken captive by the Indians, weaving pathos, horror, heartache and humor into his bigger-than-life stories.
Life for Texas school children of more than a century ago was vastly different than it is today. Author Holt tells their stories as they really happened.
This book is now in its third printing $8.95 Paperback
ISBN 1- 57168-728-9
92 pages, illustrations bibliography, and footnotes
RL-5-7

Guest

One thing to remember about the Indians (most certainly including the Plains Indians such as the Comanche and Kiowa) is they lived a very hard life, and captives (who were by definition not "of the real people") lived an even ahrder one.

The Indians weren't some sort of romantic, tree-hugging, very spiritual and mis-understood by the white man bunch. They were stone age hunters or hunter-gatherers (or primitive farmers in some cases, who did supplemental hunting and gathering). The Comanches were raiders and theives. HArd-riding, hard fighting and quite cruel and harsh by modern standards. I admire them greatly, and have particular admiration for such leaders as Peta Nocona (husband of Cynthia Ann PArker and father of Quanah Parker), Iron SHirt and Quanah PArker to name just a few. If I'd lived in the Texas when "wild" Indians roamed - I'd have avoided contact if possible and shot on sight if that didn't work. The Plains Indians (such as Comanche, Kiowa, Cheyenne, etc) weren't very good neighbors in general. Esepcially if you were trying to make a living farming or ranching and ahppened to be in possession of something they thought would be either useful or jsut fun to have.

Subject: Re: Indian Captives Tue 22 May 2007, 4:58 pm

Mari and bunch: the families of Indians on the Southern Plains tended to be small. If a child had been lost previously by a Comanche or Kiowa family, a white child often was received with love and raised as a son or daughter.

Clyde ... I've read and thought for a long time about Anglo-Indian relations. In later years, I have been blessed to have friends who are Comanches. Even more than I was aware before, I realize the thruth of the old adage of there being 'two sides to every story.'

I believe that I mentioned previously on the DHS forum that my 3x-great-grandfathers (Elisha Whitley and Henry McCray) were scalped and killed by Indians in Medina County. Here is a link that a page which a lady generously has set up and which includes photos of the Evergreen Cemetery (at Devine) where my ancestors are buried, and the text of the historical marker placed there:

http://www.cemeteries-of-tx.com/Wtx/Medina/cemetery/Evergreen.html

According to our family tradition, Elisha and Henry were out butchering hogs when the war party arrived. Strangely, it was said that one of their members appeared to be a white man. While the men were murdered, the women and children were left unharmed. I realize that this was contrary to the usual practice of Indians on the frontier when they raided Anglo homesteads.

Later, my widowed, 3x-great-grandmother attempted to confuse another party of approaching Indians by wearing a big coat, donning several different hats and walking on tiptoe before her lone window. She did not want the Indians to know that she was alone in her little house with her children. Perhaps the tactic worked or perhaps this party bore no ill intent. Likely, we'll never know.

I need to look further into this incident. It might not be beyond the bounds of possiblility to uncover some information about the group that ended the lives of my male ancestors but spared those of their wives and children.

Would I have moved happily to Texas' western frontier ca. 1843-1875? No! At least not without a cannon ... Evil or Very Mad

Holly

Guest

You have to understand that my position on Indians is - they were competitors for the use of space and resources, and had a life-style completely incompatible with that of the in-comers. My feelings about them aren't hostile or dismissive (or at least that isn't what I intended to convey).

But I do know a bit about how they lived and (from literary sources and even a few discussions with modern descendants of the Indian groups who once roamed Texas) something of how they seemed to view things. I hesitate to say "how they thought".

Behavior on a raid or just a casual encounter was, well, unpredictable. The scene of the interaction of the boy (and his mother) with Mangas Colorado (I think the Apache chief in the book was Mangas - been a while since I read the book) in Louis L'Amour's book HONDO is not completely ahistoric. Unlikely, but not impossible. Indians (like Anglos) can and could be somewhat capricious.

The above said, and with full recognition that the Indians did indeed have a side, and one not without validity (or grounds for complaint about how Anglos held to - or failed to hold to - treaty obligations), I still say that during the time "wild" Indians roamed Texas my interaction would have generally been avoid if possible, and shoot if not. Obviously - there would be exceptions to that. Not so foolish as to not think there wouldn't be times, circumstances and places where any encounter would be peaceable. Consider the Comanche-German settler arrangements that led to each leaving the other alone and doing some trading around Fredericksburg and Gillespie County more generally.

But - the Plains tribes were predominantly hunters and raiders. A hard folk (of necessity) living a hard life and one that was incompatible with Anglo resource usage, and one that simply had to go away. In some ways, that was sad. In others - well, do you have any idea of what the infant mortality rate and average age at death was for a Comanche? Trust me - a LOT more unfavorable than it is now. There is a reason that there were probably no more than a few thousand (to a high degree of probability under ten thousand, probably more like five) Comanches, total, at the highest point their population ever reached during the pre-Reservation days.

As I say - I admire them extravagantly, would not want to live that way, and would have avoided them as much as possible in the old days. And would ahve expected the encounter to be violent if avoidance wasn't possible. Come to think of it - I felt that way about the VC and PAVN while I was in Vietnam...

Subject: Re: Indian Captives Wed 23 May 2007, 12:12 pm

Holly thank you !! We can't wait to get the book.
Love, Mari

Subject: Re: Indian Captives Fri 25 May 2007, 12:58 pm

Mari ...

Mary Hamleton was the girl whom I really was trying to remember. Here is the link to a page which holds her story:

http://www.forttours.com/pages/tochamil.asp

Be sure to browse through this 'Fort Tours' site if you have not already!

And thank you so much for bringing up the this topic. It was one which I left long ago with a lot yet to learn.

{{{Huggs}}} to you and yours I love you

Hollly

Subject: Re: Indian Captives Fri 25 May 2007, 1:10 pm

Clyde,

I haven't read the L'Amour title to which you referred, but hope to have the chance to.

A couple of novels relating to this subject that I can recommend are 'A Woman of the People,' and 'White Man's Road' -- both authored by Benjamin Capps (mentioned before).

Mr. Capps also wrote a work of non-fiction (along with several others) dealing with The Warren Wagontrain Raid, which led to the trials of Kiowas, Satanta and Big Tree, at Jacksboro. I have not read this book, unfortunately. General Sherman played a key role, in the events, I believe .... and the convictions of the two warriors curtailed Kiowa raiding greatly.

By the way, what does 'Hondo' mean? I assume that it is of Spanish origin, but have never checked. My grandmother spent a part of her girlhood near Hondo, Texas (in fact, she graduated from 'Hondo High' king

) .

Thanks!

Holly

Guest

Don't ahve a clue as to what (if anything) Hondo means.

The L'Amour book was made into a pretty good movie (in color AND 3-D) starring John Wayne as Hondo (civilian Army scout).

And on further consideration (not that it really amtters0, I think the Apache war leader who is one of the characters is Victorio rather than Mangas Colorado.

Teh book is typical L'Amour. Not that long, good, fast-moving story, if not all that likely to ahve happened in real life. Possible, but not likely. Teh movie is the same - a classic JW flic. I like it well enough that I acquired a DVD of it when it was released in restored form recently.

Subject: Re: Indian Captives Sat 26 May 2007, 11:02 am

Ever hear of those movies where the Induns were sposed to be talkin about a treaty or something while the Cavalry was listenin in? Those Inuns were usually Apaches and Geronimo was there. Only they were not talkin about the treaty and they were tryin real hard not toburst ou laughing lol!

Subject: Re: Indian Captives Sat 26 May 2007, 12:32 pm

Ha, ha

As a matter of fact, I have heard tell of those movies, but is not that all just a rumor regarding the misguided speech?

Guest

Mostly - no, it isn't a rumor. Where there were "real" Indians in Westerns (to a degree depending on where and when shot, of course) they were often Navajo playing some other tribe (Apache, Sioux/Dakota/Lakota, whatever) and if the sound was running they were often speaking the language of the Dineh. About about anything but the subject supposedly under discussion.

At least one movie about Custer had a bunch of Crow (Absaroka) playing the Lakota and Cheyenne who actually destroyed Custer's command. Teh Crow, of course, were deadly enemies of the Sioux back in the day...

Subject: Re: Indian Captives Sat 26 May 2007, 5:39 pm

Yes, Clyde ... I think that is what our Owl was trying to communicate jocolor

As you described the casting and performances is those old films is the way I've heard it, too. There were no subtitles provided, so the lines incomprehensible to the target audience served as comedy to a smaller percentage of viewers .... who did understand them.

Holly

A little of her story may be found on the Internet, but here is what 'First Ladies of Texas: The First One Hundred Years (1836-1936),' by M. Farrell and E. Silverstone* tells it thus:

In 1858, nineteen-year-old Sul Ross was asked by his ailing father -- who served as the United States agent at the Brazos Indian Reservation when located near Waco -- "to lead a company of his reservation Indians against the Comanches, who were causing a great deal of trouble. In a wild battle that took place in the Wichita Mountains, Ross rescued a little white girl of about eight years." Young Ross himself was seriously injured in this exchange.

"When he could be moved, they made a litter and carried him to transportation. He brought the little girl home to his mother to be raised. Having tried in vain to trace her family, the Rosses decided to adopt the child. She was christened Lizzie Ross in honor of Lizzie Tinsley [whom Sul Ross went on to marry].... Lizzie's namesake was educated and treataed by the Rosses as though she were one of their daughters. She later married a Los Angeles merchant and died in that city, never knowing who her real parents were nor how she came to be a Comanche captive." (page 184)

Does anyone think that, with the abundance of available, digitized records available today -- when paired with accounts of the Frontier wars and available lists of captives -- it might be possible to make an educated guess as to which family little Lizzie Ross might have been born to?

I'm not much of a sleuth, but thought I might begin at least to look through the census indexes on ancestry.com. Perhaps this little one was enumerated in the Census of 1850 with her birth family, which could be shown in the depridation narratives to have been casualties of an Indian attack.

If anyone else is interested in trying to make some connections in this case, please let me know.

Thanks!

Holly

*Stillhouse Hollow Publishers, Inc: Belton, Texas, 1976