I have been reading and collecting books about the Canadian fur trade and Indians living in western Canada. My oldest journal was written by Henry Kelsey during his 1691-1692 trip into the Canadian prairies. His purpose was to convince the western Indians to bring their furs to Hudson's Bay (up to 700 air miles away) to trade for European goods. As I read through my collection I am finding that all histories are written with a bias in favour of the author's personal beliefs.

The Sarcees of Southern Alberta are distant relations to the Northern Alberta Beaver Indians. Sarcee legend says that at one time their people lived in Northern Alberta. One spring they were walking across a lake when the ice broke and their ancestors could no longer follow. The lead group did not want to wait for the other group to join them so they became separated. The Beaver Indians remained in the north while the following group moved south and became a new tribe. The Beaver Indians tell a different story. They say one spring there was a fight in their group over eating a dog. While the Beaver Indians were not opposed to eating dogs, one family objected to eating one particular dog. A fight ensued and the group split into two.

Henry Kelsey spent a year travelling among the Souix and Assiniboines. In his journal he writes that the band he was living with held a council and made the decision to go to war with a neighboring tribe that they had just parted company with. The reason given was that they believed the other group placed a curse on them. This is because immediately after the two groups split up their chief got sick and died. Unfortunately there is no way of knowing how the other group would interpret an attack from people they recently considered friends.

Peter Skene Ogden was a fur trader in the Columbia and British Columbia regions in the early to mid 1800's. In his journal he tells of sitting in a house among a group of natives when suddenly a young man jumped up and killed an older woman with his knife. He uses this as an example of unprovoked violence to show how barbaric the people he lived among were. William Connolly was a fur trader from the same period. He tells us that the young man's wife had been sick and, unfortunately died while under the care of the old woman. Connolly writes that tribal custom gave the young man the right to kill her to avenge his wife's death. He received no retribution or punishment for his deed. I have read a recent history of the same Indian tribe that makes absolutely no mention of killing others as a form of retaliation. Instead the author writes that if a person died while under the care of a medicine man (or woman) the family of the deceased had the right to demand payment of goods to compensate for their loss.

Derek Pethick has written a number of books about the Pacific Northwest. In his book about Nootka Sound he writes of a midshipman on the HMS Endeavor who purchased two native slaves from the regional chief Maquinna. The sailor wrote in his journal that when he asked his slave how he felt about being taken aboard and leaving his homeland the slave responded that it was better for him as the Chief was going to eat him anyways. Pethick then makes the comment that while all of the early British Columbia historians agree that the Indians frequently practiced cannibalism, later ones deny it happened or downplay the practice to being a rare ceremonial event. Coastal Indians of today refuse to admit it ever happened.

Henry Dunn was a fur trader who worked in Northern British Columbia during the mid 1800's. In his journals he writes of how Indians in the interior would burn the bodies and possessions of their important chiefs. He also notes that any of the dead man's possessions could be claimed by any of the funeral party and taken off the pyre before it was lit, but an article of value, be it equal, greater or lesser, must be sacrificed to replace it. Daniel Harmon wrote his journal while he lived among the Carrier Indians at Fort St James, less than a decade after the Europeans first made contact with the local people. He writes of witnessing the funeral of a great chief where his relatives burned his body and all of his valued possessions. Two of the chief's wives were made to stand beside the fire and hit his burning body with their hands. When they backed away from the heat they were beaten and forced back the fire and continue. When they fainted from the pain from their burnt hands they were again beaten until they awoke and forced to continue. This went on until the women would no longer wake up. Connolly also wrote of witnessing the burning of a chief. During this event the dead man's family dragged one of the chief's wives and threw her on top of the burning pyre. When the woman managed to free herself from the fire the family would throw her back into the flames. This process was repeated until the widow no longer had the strength to remove herself from the fire and she burned to death. This barbaric practice was outlawed by the Hudson's Bay Company. While the traders could not prevent it from happening they would refuse to trade with any clan that participated in a burning. Today, almost 180 years later the same Indians who followed this practice now claim cultural genocide for abolishing it.

In "Outlaw Trapper," the story of Simon Gunanoot the author writes about events that happened near New Hazelton in the 1920's. Even this late in our history vengeance even for accidental deaths was still practiced. In the book the author tells us of a young boy who was killed by his friend's family. The reason given was because the boy's friend fell from a tree and died from a broken neck while the two were playing together. Tribal custom even this late in our history gave the grieving parents the right to kill their son's friend because his parents failed in their duty to protect the child.

Geronimo provided us with his autobiography before he died. He tells us of the raids that he made in Mexico and why he hated the Spanish. While his story gives much information about the raids he went on he conspicuously omits the number of people they killed, the captives they took and the tortures inflicted on his prisoners. The forward to his autobiography notes this and the author writes that Geronimo was aware of the outrage a true accounting of his deeds would create so purposely omitted them. Yet contemporary accounts of the time such as newspapers and journals recorded many of the horrors left behind after an Apache raid.

Hubert Bancroft was a historian who wrote many books about the history of British Columbia and its native inhabitants. For many years he was considered the ultimate source of information for the region. Yet contemporary authors such as Father Morice and later author such as Pethick and Akrigg find many errors in his work.

There have been vast volumes of historical books, journals and diaries written about native culture. When looking at them the reader should look for evidence of the author's personal biases and later keep an eye open for other materials that can confirm or dispute what they have read.

This is an incredibly generous reply. Thank you for taking the time to share, and my apologies for the delay in this response. My app didn't notify me.