Months of the Lakota Year as told to Rev Peter Rosen

Months of The Lakota Year
As Told to Rev. Peter Rosen
Edited by Dakota Wind
Rev. Peter Rosen was a Catholic missionary for seven years in the Black Hills beginning with his first placement at St. Andrew’s Parrish in Deadwood, Dakota Territory, 1882. Rosen collected any writing he could to acquaint himself with the Black Hills. He collected newspapers, books, copies of government records, church records including the manuscripts of Fr. Pierre DeSmet, and oral stories on his many various trips in and around the ‘Hills.

In 1895, Rosen published Pa-ha-sa-pah, or, The Black Hills of South Dakota: A Complete History. It was a series of six books published as one volume, with the first three focusing on the indigenous occupation of the Black Hills, their mythologies, and long associations with the ‘Hills.

Amongst Rosen’s work is a collection of Lakȟóta names for the twelve months of the year. The Lakȟóta employ a thirteen-month lunar calendar, not a twelve-month astrological one. Rosen recording offers readers a glimpse of both Lakȟóta and Dakhóta names for the times of year, with a few variant names. These month names have been re-written using the Standard Lakota Orthography which was developed by the Lakota Language Consortium; some of these month names appear in the LLC’s New Lakota Dictionary.

January

Theȟí Wí (Difficult Moon)

February

Wičhítegleǧa Wí (Racoon Moon)

March

Ištáwičhayazaŋ Wí (Sore Eye Moon)

April

Maǧáokada Wí (Moon When Geese Lay Their Eggs)
Watópȟapi Wí (Moon When They Paddle Their Canoes)

May

Wóžupi Wí (The Planting Moon)

June

Wažúštečaša Wí (Ripe Strawberry Moon)

July

Čhaŋpȟásapa Wí (Ripe Chokecherry Moon)
Wašúŋpȟa Wí (When The Geese Shed Their Feathers Moon)

August

Wasútȟuŋ Wí (Moon When Things Ripen)

September

Psiŋ’hnáketu Wí (Moon When They Lay Up Rice [To Dry])

October

Wážupi Wí (Drying Rice Moon)

November

Thakíyuȟa Wí (Deer Rutting Moon)

December

Tȟahékapšuŋ Wí (Moon When Deer Shed Their Horns)

A Resolution To Study A Dichotomy Of Archaeology & Indigenous History

Aerial view of North Dakota State Capitol, Bismarck, N.D. Digital Horizons. 2004-P-19-0014.

A Resolution To Study A Dichotomy

Archaeology & Indigenous History
By Dakota Wind

I attended a committee hearing this morning for Senate Concurrent Resolution 4017 at the North Dakota State Legislature. The summary of the bill is:

“A concurrent resolution directing the Legislative Management to consider studying the dichotomy between the archaeological discipline on cultural resources and the knowledge and expertise of tribal elders and tribal historic preservation officers to educate local, state, and federal agencies and the public; and the facilitation of effective consultation and cooperation for historic and prehistoric site identification and registration and the betterment of North Dakota and its citizens.”

I understand the language of this bill to mean that this is a study only, to begin a dialog between State Historic Preservation Office of North Dakota, the Tribal Historic Preservation Offices and tribal expertise to articulate the importance of known, recorded, sacred, and unrecorded historic sites to the people of North Dakota.

The sponsors of this bill are Sen. Joan Heckaman, Sen. Jordan Kannianen, Sen. Richard Marcellais, Sen. Dave Oehike, Rep. Ruth Buffalo, and Rep. Gretchen Dobervitch.

Sen. Marcellais and Rep. Buffalo introduced the resolution and public testimony followed almost unanimously in favor of this bill.

North Dakota Indian Affairs Commissioner Scott Davis spoke about his boots on the ground approach to meeting with energy interests about the importance of indigenous heritage sites in North Dakota. “It is what it is,” said Commissioner Davis regarding the development of energy resources, even as he spoke of the necessity of dialog between tribes, the state, and energy interests.

Dr. Erich Longie, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer of Spirit Lake began by greeting everyone, “Hiháŋna wašté!” he said. Dr. Longie spoke of the challenges and milestones all of the North Dakota’s citizens have made together in the name of progress while sharing the challenges he faced growing up in North Dakota. He urged the committee to support the concurrent resolution.

Mr. Calvin Grinnell spoke eloquently in support of this resolution. Former Sen. Tracy Potter took the mic and encouraged a change in wording from “dichotomy” in this study to something else, that the most important tool he learned in his political career was to listen, then he promptly left. Two more spoke in support of the resolution, then Fern Swenson took the stand.

I offered testimony in support of the resolution. I shared that there is more to the discussion than the physical record – archaeology – and we need to include the historical record. I then cited a dozen primary historic examples for the failure of the Dakota Access Pipeline’s Class III Survey, information that is completely missing from the report; and cited primary historical documents relating to the prison camp history of the Nez Perce at Fort Abraham Lincoln.

Swenson, the Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer at the State Historic Preservation Office, gave a most tepid oration that, as it turns out, was neither in support or against the resolution. She just wanted the committee to know how many thousands of sites the SHPO manages, how they work with the tribes of North Dakota, and how they assist the tribes “if they ask for it.”

When the committee asked if there were any who opposed the resolution, no one came forward.