Talk:Navajo people

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, which collaborates on Native American, First Nations, Inuit, Métis and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet been rated on the assessment scale.
Suggested article edit guidelines:

Please rate this article and leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Contents

[edit] Do Not Merge

User:Hottentot wrote "(this article should be merged into the main one: Navajo Nation)."
I disagree with this. Please see what I, Robotbeat, said in the Talk:Navajo Nation section. Robotbeat 19:35, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] History Sections

Now we need a strong expansion into the post contact conflicts between Mexico, the US, and the Navajo people, as well as the problems with their Pueblo neighbors. I would like both an Early history and a European contact section. I've started the second section with several paragraphs. WBardwin 04:52, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Spanish Church Records

Re-reading David Brugge's research paper "Navajos in the Catholic Church Records of New Mexico 1694 - 1875" (1968) is a real academic eye opener. His preface starts off with a decree of Governor and Captain-General of Kingdom and Province of New Mexico, J.I. F. Mogollon in 1714. The decree points out that as soon a slave ship full of Negroes arrives in the Indies ports of the Kingdom, they are first baptised and then pass to their owners. The decree commands that all Apaches as they are found should be taken for baptism just like the Negroes. Not doing so will result in losing the Apache and of not permitting their owner to trade in Apaches in the future. 4,300 baptism records of Indians are examined, sorted by date, type, recorded tribe, and commented upon. Then the 160 paper quotes Spanish reports in chronological order and ties Spanish conflicts to the church baptismial records.

What is really interesting to me is the period between 1800 and 1868, especially what happened after US took control of the area. Brugge indicates that the Spanish/Mexican and "New Mexico Volunteers" practice was that anyone capturing an Indian got to keep them as their property. The vast majority of baptisms of Navajos took place in the 1860s. In short, Navajos were still being captured by non-Navajos (Utes and Commanche as well as Mexican-Americans) and sold/traded according to US New Mexico District, US Military and church records, through the Long Walk period. In June 1865 President Johnson ordered the slave trade in Indian captives suppressed. Ironically, records indicate all Navajos were ordered Ft. Sumner and this extended to at least 95 Navajo being held by New Mexican citizens.

This is not to say that the Navajo and Apache were the total victims of what we would call slave trade today, but it does shed some light on the times from contemporary written records that span 175 years. --Rcollman 14:13, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Code Talkers"

There should be some reference to the use of Code Talkers in World War II and Korea Mullhawk (talk) 04:31, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Historical Speculation about migration

I started a series of edits in the History section. Reguarding the Southwest, the Spanish in the 1500s only provided a written record of what either they saw or what they wanted Spain to know. For example, it is not clear if the Spanish ever had reason to enter the heart of Dineta before 1740, so they would not know Navajo settlement patterns there. On the other hand, the Spainish did record lots of commercial activity by those who could have been Navajo with the Hopi, Acoma and Tewa pubelos. So in my first series of edits, I kept most of the information and dates but changed the words so the reader can draw their own conclusion. --Rcollman 14:08, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Deleted Coranado reference to Plains Apache groups and references to dogs. The 1540 quote says this group was to the East of the Pubelos (not West), living in tents, eating bison (not using corn). Sorry, inclusion here implies that these people were Navajo. It maybe that Apachean groups used dogs to assist in their semi nomadic movements, prior to sheep, goats and horses. My opinion willing to listen and accept changes --Rcollman 14:58, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I am not sure that the 1541 reference to Navajo is more than speculation. I am willing to be enlightened. Another reference on this page's links say they came down the Rocky Mountains, just a little different than the plains. The statement is not unreasonable speculation but why so much space? More interesting speculation would be 1) Why the Navajo were returned to their lands and 2)why their reservation size increased after the the Long Walk. Are these unique happenings in North American history? Chris Collman 3 March 2006

I too have been interested in the answers to those two questions. The only answers I have found seem like speculation. As far as I know the Navajo Nation is the only reservation that has repeatedly expanded from an early time period. Others gained lands in the late 20th century after changes in politics, attitudes and many law suits. An example is Blue Lake gained by th Taos tribe under Nixon and the Havasupai gained back some of thier upper rim traditional lands. The Navajo however expanded again and again. Many other tribes lost lands starting in the 1890s (?) after the Dawes act started aportioning the land to individuals and taking the rest. Why didn't this happen much to the Navajo? They did lose one big gain when the checkerboard lands were created in NM. Those lands were given by a president but the NM senator was powereful and congress passed an act to prevent the pressident from doing that in the future. I think the reason is that Navajo culture was uniquely attractive to powerful adminstrators who lived near or with them. Also there was little interest in settling those areas and the coal gas and oil weren't useable yet. Perhaps because they were not aculturated by the spanish they were in a more powerful mental state, also they were a large group and a large area so people in the BIA and it's predisessors might have tended to be more powerful within the goverment. They did cause a fairly big scandle when the conditions at Bosque Redondo came to light. They did refuse to go anywhere else and said they would rather die but so did many others. I have always thought it was a very interesting problem about why they have been so succesful and most other groups have not. In fact many peoples like the Lakota seemed to have been hated by they indian agents at the sme time that the Navajo were being helped.ErikP 23:57, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

My interest in and research on the Navajo Indians began with my interest in Kit Carson who "rounded them up" in the 1863-64 war. That led me to 3 books: Navajo Wars by Frank McNitt, 1972, Univ. of New Mexico; Navajo Roundup by Lawrence Kelly, Pruett Pub. Co. 1970 and Indian Depredations in New Mexico by John Watts, 1858. My research ends in about 1868. If you want more info post 1868, go eleswhere for other books; and be sure to see: The Second Long Walk : The Navajo-Hopi Land Dispute by Jerry Kammer, which I have not read. Many Navajo today have a false and mistaken view of Kit Carson. See my extensive discussions on Kit in his talk page. Cazedessus 17:25, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Excellent discussions. Sometimes modern historians have to go with the close orginal. Most histories are initiated as oral and then they are translated to the written page :) Praise be to Navajo Community College that has published oral histories. Time gaps do not bother me, after all I can not prove where my ancestors lived in 1890 because of a fire that destroyed the 1890 US Census, as a genealogist am guilty of filling in the gaps with some oral history. On a slightly different subject, I think what some call "The Navajo Way" had a lot to do with their post long walk expansion. The oral history and facts say 8,000 Navajo speakers came together in close proximity to each other for 3 or 4 years for the first time. My crude characterization is that the cultural effect was like a big long Sing. I went through the material photocopied by the National Archives for the Navajo Land claims case that was stored in Window Rock page by page (that was 1973 or so). I was interested in Army and Indian Scout references, so I read just about every US Army report there after 1868. I would go so far to say that the Military at Ft. Wingate when compared (completely subjective opinion) to other forts tended to be pro Navajo, especially when it came to encroachment by non-Navajos. I think they even smoothed things over when some Navajo groups would sort of forget that their traditional raids when supplies were low was no longer permitted! From the US Gov perspective the reservation went from 3.5 to 16 million acres. Interesting --Rcollman 15:10, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Revert done 26-Mar-2006

While reading this article I noticed some vandalism which had somehow survived recent reversions, so I've reverted all the way back to User:71.116.151.109's edit of March 23rd. Chris Chittleborough 12:53, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Historical section/ time of entry to SW

From a class I had with Witherspoon at U of Washington, Seattle and a book on the archeology of the Navajo (I'll have to find the reference) I think the 1540 date is very late. I know this is in dispute, but I believe the earliest remains of a male hogan are tree ring dated to around 900- 1100. That would make them entering the area, asimilating some of the pueblo /anaasazi culture and growing corn much earlier. The area was ESE of four corners. This is not coinsidently far from the traditional emergence site north orf the confluence of the San Juan and the Animas ( now under navajo lake). It also is similar to the traditional generations from emergence if you count by navajo ideas of a generation. This would also explain the myths that include people that sound like the anasazi at Chaco canyon. In any case the changes from Apache culture and language to one that was more settled with corn fields and weaving and pottery and cosmology that borrows more from the nieghboring Pueblos must have taken a little longer.ErikP 01:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC) Erik

I have also heard of earlier evidence but have been unable to come up with a reference earlier than the one cited. I have no doubt that the Apache/Navajo people came in and out of the area for several hundred years before settling into lands that had become largely vacant. So, if you can find your source, let's put the information in. Best wishes. WBardwin 04:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Minor point, not sure Navajo recognize a "male" hogan. In 1973, an upset Navajo really bent my ear about "some anthropologist" who wrote there were such things male hogans. 'Sometimes people just make up things because that is what they do with strangers,' or words to that effect. These statements were really about anthropologists. I was ignroant then and never looked for the reference. Was that Witherspoon? --Rcollman 21:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Religon of Navajo People

How do you add to the main heading at the top? The one that is under the photo with the pop. figures etc. The listing under religon should definetly mention Native American Church (NAC). I have heard that about one third of the Dine on the rez practice it to some degree. ( personal experience and lecture by Witherspoon). At least half of all practitioners of NAC are said to be Navajo. As with most things adopted by the Dine it is being heavly "navajoized". There is much overlap and some compitition and sometimes hosiltiy towards it from both Navajo Way and Christianity. Historicaly the BIA police persecuted it. It came in to the area probably from the Utes in the Tees Nos Pos area and then spread. Later a new group of practictioners came accociated with the AIM people and Lakota activists. Northern plains sweat lodges came the same way at the same time and happen, though much more rarely. Anyway, I think it should be added. ErikP 18:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I added Native American Church (NAC) to the religion list. What heading are your concerned about? The article title? The template box title? The photo title? WBardwin 23:54, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

That's what I meant. Sorry I didn't know terminology. Thanks, ErikP 21:54, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Navajo Marine article and hand trembling

Perhaps something to consider for inclusion in some fashion, if only as a spur to expand the vanishingly small reference to the practice of hand trembling: Fonseca, Felicia. "Navajo Marine who says he discovered gift as healer granted conscientious objector status", Earthlink News (reprinted from the Associated Press), 27 January 2007. Retrieved on 2007-01-27. . --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 19:17, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trail of tears

Were the navajo's involved in the trail of tears? G man yo 03:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

No. I believe this is a translation of the Cherokee name for their forceable removal in 1838. The Navajo refer to their removal as "The Long Walk". --Rcollman 12:22, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "related groups" info removed from infobox

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 17:09, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Source for recent edit on Navajo name

Do you have a source for this change? Most of my books, admittedly somewhat dated, go with the previous version. I will not revert/change the edit for now, but would like to see the source of your info. Thank you. WBardwin 01:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

The name "Navajo" comes from the late 18th century via the Spanish (Apaches de) Navajó "(Apaches of) Navajó", which was derived from the Tewa navahū "fields adjoining a ravine". The Navajo call themselves Diné, which is often translated to mean "the people" (most Native American groups call themselves by names that mean "the people"). Nonetheless, most Navajo now acquiesce to being called "Navajo."

[edit] Citations and references

This article has sources listed at the bottom, but it doesn't actually cite references. The one instance in this article where a reference is cited, it is used like a footnote, which is absolutely NOT how references are meant to be used. Please fix this! --Luai lashire 20:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] -archy?

They're matrilocal, but are/were they matriarchal or patriarchal? Badagnani (talk) 08:30, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, they are traditionally matrilocal, but to my knowledge also patriarchal, as with most other Nad,.ngm.s/gwkjtrl;eqjda/ksfkwqllllllllllllllllllwwwwwwhrqlnfjk;a fdhjs; wgfu ;fu;d fhd;a uiwer tive American tribes. LotR (talk) 15:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Huh?

In the 1846-1863 section it states: "Officially, the Navajos first came in contact with European Americans in 1846" In the preceding section, "1550 to 1845 AD", it states that the Navajo had contact with the Spanish in the 1600's. Is not Spain a part of Europe? It's certainly not in Africa or Asia. Would someone please fix this? 24.160.241.39 (talk) 06:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] fhshtew

wetbherh w yuw uy85 ru85e yue hreu5j iyjgd etrsng ghre jytd hje u yeu ue u euetuy yue uu uye u t ltkto tyiy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.74.28.76 (talk) 23:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Largest or second largest?

It don't make me no nevermind. But any superlative claim must be backed by an authoritative citation. If you find a better reference than the 2000 US Census, this article and the Cherokee article must agree. --Kbh3rdtalk 02:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Independence and sovereignty

How does the Navajo nation have a "independant government body" as the article claims, when still having to operate under the BIA of the Ministry of the Interior? And having practically no say about companies that mine for uranium on their land? Real independence and sovereignty I think can only be achieved by what the Lakota Nation has been doing recently. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.162.133.112 (talk) 11:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)