Hubbry Logo
ShoshoneShoshoneMain
Open search
Shoshone
Community hub
Shoshone
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Shoshone
Shoshone
Shoshone
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Key Information

Neme / Newe
"People"
PeopleNeme
Newe
LanguageNeme Ta̲i̲kwappeh
Newe Ta̲i̲kwappe
CountryNeme Segobia
Newe Segobia

The Shoshone or Shoshoni (/ʃoʊˈʃoʊni/ ⓘ shoh-SHOH-nee or /ʃəˈʃoʊni/ ⓘ shə-SHOH-nee), also known by the endonym Newe, are an Indigenous people of the United States with four large cultural/linguistic divisions:

They traditionally speak the Shoshoni language, part of the Numic languages branch of the large Uto-Aztecan language family. The Shoshone were sometimes called the Snake Indians by neighboring tribes and early American explorers.[2]

Their peoples have become members of federally recognized tribes throughout their traditional areas of settlement, often co-located with the Northern Paiute people of the Great Basin.

Etymology

[edit]

The name "Shoshone" comes from Sosoni, a Shoshone word for high-growing grasses. Some neighboring tribes call the Shoshone "Grass House People," based on their traditional homes made from sosoni. Shoshones call themselves Newe, meaning "People".[2]

Meriwether Lewis recorded the tribe as the "Sosonees or snake Indians" in 1805.[2]

Language

[edit]

The Shoshoni language is spoken by approximately 1,000 people today.[1] It belongs to the Central Numic branch of the Uto-Aztecan language family. Speakers are scattered from central Nevada to central Wyoming.[1]

The largest numbers of Shoshoni speakers live on the federally recognized Duck Valley Indian Reservation, located on the border of Nevada and Idaho; and Goshute Reservation in Utah. Idaho State University also offers Shoshoni-language classes.[1]

History

[edit]
Rabbit-Tail or Moragootch (information varies[3][4]).
A Shoshone encampment in the Wind River Range of Wyoming, photographed by W. H. Jackson, 1870
Reported picture of Mike Daggett February 26, 1911
Sheriff Charles Ferrel with the surviving members of Mike Daggett's family (Daggett's daughter Heney (Louise, 17), and two of his grandchildren, Cleveland (Mosho, 8), and Hattie (Harriet Mosho, 4))
Daggett grandchild Mary Jo Estep (1909 or 1910 – 1992), age 5 in 1916

The Shoshone are a Native American tribe that originated in the western Great Basin and spread north and east into present-day Idaho and Wyoming. By 1500, some Eastern Shoshone had crossed the Rocky Mountains into the Great Plains. As one of the first northern tribes to incorporate horses and firearms into their economy, hunting and warfare, the Shoshone nation became a dominant power feared by their enemies. The Eastern Shoshone in particular expanded their territory well into the northern plains through mastery of horsemanship, while another Shoshone branch moved as far south as Texas, emerging as the Comanche by 1700.[2] After 1750, their advantage in warfare diminished, and pressure from the Blackfoot, Crow, Lakota, Cheyenne, and Arapaho pushed Eastern Shoshone south and westward to the Rocky Mountains, a situation that escalated until the establishment of the Shoshone Reservation on the Wind River in the 1860s.

As more European American settlers migrated west, tensions rose with the indigenous people over competition for territory and resources. Wars occurred throughout the second half of the 19th century. The Northern Shoshone, led by Chief Pocatello, fought during the 1860s against settlers in Idaho (where the city Pocatello was named for him). As more settlers encroached on Shoshone hunting territory, the natives raided farms and ranches for food and attacked immigrants.

The warfare resulted in the Bear River Massacre (1863) when U.S. forces attacked and killed an estimated 250 Northwestern Shoshone, who were at their winter encampment in present-day Franklin County, Idaho. A large number of the dead were non-combatants, including children, deliberately killed by the soldiers. This was the highest number of deaths which the Shoshone suffered at the hands of United States forces. 21 US soldiers were also killed.[5]

During the American Civil War travelers continued to migrate westward along the Westward Expansion Trails. When the Shoshone, along with the Utes participated in attacks on the mail route that ran west out of Fort Laramie, the mail route had to be relocated south of the trail through Wyoming.[6]

Allied with the Bannock, to whom they were related, the Northern and Western Shoshone fought against the United States in the Snake War from 1864 to 1868. They fought U.S. forces together in 1878 in the Bannock War. By contrast, from 1863 onward, the Eastern Shoshone led by Chief Washakie allied with the American government and secured treaties at Fort Bridger in 1863 and 1868. In 1876, Eastern Shoshone fought alongside the U.S. Army in the Battle of the Rosebud against their traditional enemies, the Lakota and Cheyenne.

In 1859 a band of approximately 300 Eastern Shoshone (known as "Sheepeaters") became involved in the Sheepeater Indian War. It was the last Indian war fought in the Pacific Northwest region of the present-day United States.

In 1911 a small group of Bannock under a leader named Mike Daggett, also known as "Shoshone Mike," killed four ranchers in Washoe County, Nevada.[7] The settlers formed a posse and went out after the Native Americans. They caught up with the Bannock band on February 25, 1911, and in a gun battle killed Mike Daggett and seven members of his band. They lost one man of the posse, Ed Hogle[8] in the Battle of Kelley Creek. The posse captured an infant named Mary Jo Estep, along with two children and a young woman. The three older captives died of diseases within a year; Mary Jo Estep survived, and died in 1992, around the age of 82.

A rancher donated the partial remains of two adult males, two adult females, two adolescent males, and three children (believed to be Mike Daggett and his family, according to contemporary accounts) to the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C., for study. In 1994, the institution repatriated the remains to the Fort Hall Idaho Shoshone-Bannock Tribe.[9]

In 2008 the Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation acquired the site of the Bear River Massacre and some surrounding land. They wanted to protect the holy land and to build a memorial to the massacre, the largest their nation had suffered. "In partnership with the American West Heritage Center and state leaders in Idaho and Utah, the tribe has developed public/private partnerships to advance tribal cultural preservation and economic development goals." They have become leaders in developing tribal renewable energy.[10]

Historical population

[edit]

The Shoshone were scattered over a vast area and divided into many bands, therefore many estimates of their population did not cover the entire tribe. In 1820 Jedidiah Morse estimated the Shoshone population at 60,000 and 20,000 Eastern Shoshone.[11] According to Alexander Ross the Shoshone were on the west side of the Rocky Mountains what the Sioux were on the east side - the most powerful tribe - and he estimated that in 1855 the Shoshone numbered 36,000 people.[12] They were much reduced in number after they had suffered infectious disease epidemics and warfare. According to Joseph Lane the Shoshone were divided into many bands and it was almost impossible to ascertain their exact numbers. According to Indian Affairs 1859 in Utah there were 4,500 Shoshones. Indian Affairs 1866 reported in Utah 4,500 eastern Bannock and Shoshone intermingled and 3,800 western and northwestern Shoshone as well as 2,000 Shoshone in Nevada and 2,500 Shoshone in Idaho, as well as an unspecified number in Oregon. The completion of the first transcontinental railroad in 1869 was followed by European-American immigrants arriving in unprecedented numbers in the territory. Indian Affairs 1875 gave the Shoshone as 1,740 in Idaho and Montana, 1,945 in Nevada, 700 in Wyoming and 244 (besides those intermixed with the Bannock) in Oregon. The census of 1910 returned 3,840 Shoshone.[13] In 1937, the Bureau of Indian Affairs counted 3,650 Northern Shoshone and 1,201 Western Shoshone. As of the 2000 U.S. census, some 12,000 persons identified as Shoshone. As of 2020 there were in the USA 17,918 Shoshone including 3,638 in Nevada and 3,491 in Wyoming.[14]

Bands

[edit]

Shoshone people are divided into traditional bands based both on their homelands and primary food sources. These include:

Tindoor, Lemhi Shoshone chief and his wife, ca. 1897, photographed by Benedicte Wrensted
  • Guchundeka', Kuccuntikka, Buffalo Eaters[2][15] This group is the namesake of Kuchunteka’a Toyavi, alternately spelled Guchandeka Doyavi, which means Buffalo Eaters Mountain, located in the Absaroka Range of northwest Wyoming.[16][17]
  • Tukkutikka, Tukudeka, Mountain Sheep Eaters, part of the Eastern Shoshone and Northern Shoshone[15]
  • Boho'inee', Pohoini, Pohogwe, Sage Grass people, Sagebrush Butte People[2][15][18]
  • Cedar Valley Goshute
  • Deep Creek Goshute
  • Rush Valley Goshute
  • Skull Valley Goshute, Wipayutta, Weber Ute[20]
  • Tooele Valley Goshute
  • Trout Creek Goshute[20]
  • Kuyatikka, Kuyudikka, Bitterroot Eaters, Halleck, Mary's River, Clover Valley, Smith Creek Valley, Nevada[20]
  • Mahaguadüka, Mentzelia Seed Eaters, Ruby Valley, Nevada[20]
  • Painkwitikka, Penkwitikka, Fish Eaters, Cache Valley, Idaho and Utah[20]
  • Pasiatikka, Redtop Grass Eaters, Deep Creek Gosiute, Deep Creek Valley, Antelope Valley[20]
  • Tipatikka, Pinenut Eaters, northernmost band[20]
  • Tsaiduka, Tule Eaters, Railroad Valley, Nevada[20]
  • Tsogwiyuyugi, Elko, Nevada[20]
  • Waitikka, Ricegrass Eaters, Ione Valley, Nevada[20]
  • Watatikka, Ryegrass Seed Eaters, Ruby Valley, Nevada[20]
  • Wiyimpihtikka, Buffalo Berry Eaters[20]

Reservations and Indian colonies

[edit]
"Shoshone at Ft. Washakie, Wyoming Native American reservation. Chief Washakie (at left) extends his right arm." Some of the Shoshones are dancing as the soldiers look on, 1892.

Notable people

[edit]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Shoshone

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The Shoshone (also Shoshoni) are a Native American people indigenous to the of the , with traditional territories spanning the deserts, , and Wind River Mountains in present-day , , , , and . Their languages belong to the Central Numic branch of the Uto-Aztecan , encompassing dialects spoken by subgroups including the , , and , who adapted variably to arid foraging economies or, after acquiring circa 1700, to equestrian bison hunting on the Plains. Prior to extensive European contact in the , they subsisted as semi-nomadic hunter-gatherers, harvesting piñon nuts, roots, and small game in bands, with centered on rather than centralized chiefdoms. A defining episode in Shoshone-European interactions occurred during the of 1805, when woman , captured as a youth and later married to a French-Canadian trapper, facilitated of and passage through the Rockies from her natal band near the Continental Divide. Subsequent , overland migration, and U.S. military campaigns disrupted Shoshone resource access and sparked conflicts, culminating in treaties like the 1868 agreement that confined to the Wind River Reservation in , while pursued protracted legal claims against federal land encroachments under the Ruby Valley Treaty of 1863. Today, Shoshone descendants maintain tribal governments on reservations such as (Shoshone-Bannock) in and Duck Valley in , preserving cultural practices amid ongoing efforts to revitalize their .

Etymology

Origins and Variations of the Name

The name "Shoshone" derives from the Shoshone language term sosoni', the plural form of sonipe, denoting a species of high-growing grass prevalent in the and Rocky Mountain regions, such as certain bunchgrasses used for food and . This reflects the tribe's to environments where such was a key resource for subsistence, including seed gathering and material for shelters. The term entered English usage around 1805, initially applied by explorers like and to bands in eastern during the expedition. The Shoshone autonym is Newe, translating to "The People," a common self-designation among many Indigenous groups emphasizing communal identity over external labels. This contrasts with exonyms imposed by neighbors; for instance, some Plains tribes, including the Blackfeet and , referred to Shoshone bands as "" due to associations with the watershed or a sign-language mimicking a serpent's movement to denote their elusive raiding tactics or terrain. Other variations include "Grass House People," alluding to temporary dwellings constructed from woven grass mats, and spellings like "Shoshoni" in early anthropological records, which persist in some linguistic and legal contexts to distinguish dialects. These external names often carried connotations in intertribal conflicts, highlighting how reflected ecological, behavioral, and adversarial perceptions rather than self-identification.

Linguistic Classification

Language Family and Dialects

The Shoshoni language belongs to the Central Numic subgroup of the Numic branch within the Uto-Aztecan language family, a classification supported by comparative linguistic analysis of phonology, morphology, and vocabulary shared with other Numic languages like Comanche and Paiute. This placement reflects proto-Uto-Aztecan roots traceable to approximately 5,000 years ago, with Numic divergence occurring around 2,000 years ago based on glottochronological estimates from lexical retention rates. Shoshoni forms a dialect continuum across the Great Basin and adjacent regions, where mutual intelligibility decreases with geographic distance, allowing adjacent varieties to be comprehensible while distant ones require adaptation. Principal dialects include Western Shoshoni, spoken historically in central and eastern ; Gosiute, in western ; Northern Shoshoni, in southern and northern ; and Eastern Shoshoni, in and northwestern . These correspond roughly to Shoshone band territories, with Western and Gosiute dialects showing closer affinity due to shared Basin adaptations, while Eastern Shoshoni exhibits greater divergence in phonetics, such as vowel shifts and consonant innovations, potentially influenced by contact with Plains . Northern Shoshoni bridges these, retaining intermediate features like conservative verb morphology. Dialect boundaries are fluid, with historical records from the noting bilingualism among speakers facilitating cross-dialect communication during intertribal gatherings.

Current Status and Revitalization Efforts

The Shoshone language, part of the Central Numic branch of the Uto-Aztecan family, is classified as severely endangered, with fluent speakers numbering fewer than 200 across its primary dialects, predominantly among elders in their 80s and 90s. For the dialect spoken on the Wind River Reservation in , estimates indicate around 200 fluent speakers as of 2022, though recent assessments suggest fewer than 100 remain fully proficient, with five elders passing away since revitalization projects began in that period. Western Shoshone dialects, spoken in and , face similar vitality challenges, assessed as threatened with limited intergenerational transmission and reliance on elderly speakers. Self-reported from 2025 lists 420 Shoshoni speakers, but this includes partial proficiency and does not reflect fluent usage, underscoring the language's critical decline due to historical assimilation policies and English dominance. Revitalization efforts emphasize elder documentation, digital resources, and youth immersion to counter endangerment. The Eastern Shoshone Tribe's dictionary project, initiated in 2022, convened 21 fluent speakers in Fort Washakie to compile vocabularies, resulting in an online dictionary and mobile app launched by August 2024 for broader access and teaching. Supported by the National Science Foundation's Documenting Endangered Languages program, this work aggregates lexical data into databases for preservation. The Shoshoni Language Project at the , active since 2021, partners with tribal communities to document and disseminate materials, including a comprehensive dictionary drawing from multiple Shoshone and sources, alongside youth apprenticeship programs like the Shoshone/Goshute Youth Language Apprenticeship Program (SYLAP). Tribal initiatives include daily Shoshone language classes offered by the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes in since at least 2023, focusing on cultural integration, and immersion activities at Fort McDermitt Paiute-Shoshone Tribe, which incorporate crafts, field trips, and of historical audio since 2007 to engage younger generations. Community-driven efforts, such as those led by educator Lynette St. Clair since the 1990s, prioritize recording elders and promoting daily usage to foster speech communities, viewing these as acts of amid . Despite progress in resources, challenges persist, including speaker attrition and the need for sustained funding, with success hinging on rebuilding intergenerational transmission in reservation settings.

Traditional Territory and Adaptations

Geographic Extent and Environmental Challenges

The traditional territory of the Shoshone people spanned a vast intermountain region of the , encompassing the arid in the west and extending eastward into the and fringes of the . bands primarily occupied central and eastern , northwestern , southern , and the area of southeastern , adapting to desert valleys, mountain ranges, and scattered oases. territory, as acknowledged in the 1863 Treaty, covered approximately 44 million acres (about 178,000 km²) across , , , , and , including river basins and high plains suitable for bison hunting. and affiliated groups, such as the Shoshone-Bannock, ranged over southeastern , , northern , , , , and portions of , utilizing river plains and uplands for seasonal and . Environmental conditions in these lands were predominantly harsh, dominated by the Great Basin's internal drainage system, which lacked outlets to oceans and concentrated salts in soils and ephemeral lakes, restricting freshwater availability. Annual precipitation varied widely but averaged 150–300 mm (6–12 inches) across much of the basin, with recording as low as 37.5 mm in extreme lows, fostering semi-desert shrublands rather than dense forests or grasslands. extremes—scorching summers exceeding 40°C (104°F) in lowlands and subzero winters in mountains—combined with multi-year droughts and erratic wet-dry cycles challenged resource predictability, often forcing reliance on unpredictable game migrations or seed yields. Subsistence pressures intensified in the Great Basin's desert core, where seed scarcity could require full-day gathering efforts by women for a single family meal, and failed big-game hunts (e.g., or ) risked famine amid limited storable foods. Eastern and northern territories faced alpine challenges, including heavy snowfall in the Wind River Range (up to several meters annually) and isolation in high-elevation basins, which isolated groups during winters but supported and in summer ranges. Terrain variability—steep sierras, alkali flats, and fault-block mountains—hindered travel and amplified vulnerability to geological hazards like flash floods, underscoring the Shoshone's dependence on intimate landscape knowledge for survival.

Subsistence Strategies and Technological Innovations

The Shoshone employed diverse subsistence strategies tailored to the harsh environment and adjacent plains, primarily relying on and gathering rather than . Western Shoshone groups focused on intensive of pine nuts, seeds, roots, and berries, supplemented by small game such as rabbits through communal drives using nets and snares. These practices supported small family bands in arid regions where large game was scarce, with seasonal migrations to exploit ripening pinyon nuts, which could constitute up to 50% of annual caloric intake in some areas. Eastern Shoshone bands adapted differently by incorporating bison hunting on the plains, a shift facilitated by the adoption of horses around 1700, which enabled mounted pursuits and increased hunting efficiency. Prior to widespread horse use, they hunted deer, pronghorn, and smaller animals with bows and spears, while gathering persisted as a staple. Fishing occurred in rivers where accessible, using weirs and hooks, but overall, the economy remained non-agricultural, emphasizing mobility and resource opportunism. Technological innovations included finely crafted basketry for gathering and storage, stone grinding tools for processing seeds and nuts into meal, and the transition from atlatls to self-bows with sinew-backed for greater range and power in . Communal rabbit drives employed long nets woven from fibers, herding animals into enclosures for mass harvest, a labor-intensive method yielding substantial protein in lean seasons. The horse's integration represented a pivotal for eastern groups, allowing transport of tipis and , thus sustaining larger seasonal aggregations for buffalo surrounds or jumps. These tools and techniques reflected pragmatic responses to ecological variability, prioritizing and portability over complexity.

Bands and Subgroups

Eastern Shoshone

The are a division of the Shoshone people whose traditional territory encompassed vast areas of the and , including parts of present-day , , , , and , originally spanning about 44 million acres as recognized in the 1863 Treaty of . Archaeological evidence, such as Dinwoody-style petroglyphs, supports their long-term presence in the Wind River Basin for over 12,000 years. After acquiring horses early on, they transitioned to a Plains-oriented culture focused on bison hunting, which provided them military advantages over rivals like the Blackfeet, , and , often allying with groups such as the Bannock and Flathead. Under the leadership of Chief Washakie, the signed the Treaty of Fort Bridger on July 3, 1868, which ceded much of their land but reserved the Wind River Indian Reservation—initially about 3.5 million acres, later reduced to roughly 2.2 million acres through subsequent allotments and cessions—as their permanent homeland in central . This reservation, now shared with the Northern Arapaho since the 1870s, covers more than 1.9 million acres held in trust and serves as the primary residence for the tribe. Chief Washakie, who emphasized education and adaptation to changing circumstances, led until his death in 1900 and is buried at Fort Washakie on the reservation. Traditional Eastern Shoshone culture emphasized horsemanship, communal bison hunts, and knowledge of regional plants for food and medicine, with figures like Sacajawea exemplifying their exploratory and survival skills during the ; her descendants continue to reside on the reservation. The tribe maintains a sovereign government that contracts services such as tribal courts, housing improvements, and education programs from the . As of recent records, the have over 3,900 enrolled members. Their language, a Central Numic of the Uto-Aztecan family, faces endangerment but is subject to active revitalization efforts, including community programs and digital resources aimed at preserving fluency among younger generations. These initiatives support cultural sovereignty and by reintegrating into education and daily life on the Wind River Reservation.

Western Shoshone

The , known to themselves as Newe, constitute a major division of the Shoshone people, with traditional territories encompassing approximately 24 million acres across the region, primarily in present-day , but extending into southeastern , southwestern , and south-central . Their aboriginal domain, known as Newe Sogobia, featured arid deserts, mountain ranges, and valleys where they subsisted on gathered piñon nuts, seeds, roots, and small game, supplemented by occasional large game hunts, reflecting adaptations to a resource-scarce environment distinct from the Plains-oriented . Western Shoshone society consisted of numerous small, autonomous bands named after predominant local food sources, such as the Tupatsega (sunflower seed eaters) or Kuyudikka (panic grass seed eaters), which operated independently but shared linguistic and cultural ties. In the , several bands consolidated under the federally recognized in 1938, comprising the Battle Mountain Band, Elko Band Colony, South Fork Band Reservation, and Wells Band Colony, each retaining local governance while subject to a tribal . Other independent entities include the Duckwater Shoshone Tribe, Ely Shoshone Tribe, Yomba Shoshone Tribe, and the Shoshone portion of the Fort McDermitt Paiute and Shoshone Tribes. The 1863 Treaty of Ruby Valley, signed on October 1 between Western Shoshone chiefs and U.S. representatives, established peace and friendship, granting the United States rights-of-way for roads, telegraph lines, and railroads across Shoshone lands in exchange for annual goods valued at $5,000, without ceding aboriginal title or territory. The U.S. failed to deliver most annuities, leading to settler encroachments by miners and ranchers from the 1860s onward, which diminished Shoshone access to traditional resources. A notable late resistance occurred in 1911 under Shoshone Mike (Mike Daggett, or Ondongarte), a band leader who, after leaving the Reservation with about 11 followers, was accused of cattle theft and killing four stockmen; a posse pursued them to Kelley Creek, , resulting in a February 25-26 clash where eight Shoshone (including Mike) were killed and three survivors captured, marking one of the final armed confrontations in the region. In the , the Indian Claims Commission awarded the approximately $26.1 million in 1962 for historical land takings up to 1872, but many bands rejected distribution, arguing it extinguished unceded aboriginal title recognized under the Ruby Valley Treaty, leading to ongoing assertions of rights over vast areas amid mining, nuclear testing at , and other federal uses. This stance has involved legal challenges, UN interventions, and activism by figures like Mary and Carrie Dann, emphasizing continuous occupancy rather than monetary settlement. Today, populations number around 4,000-5,000 enrolled members across entities, with efforts focused on cultural preservation, land defense, and on limited reservation lands.

Northern and Other Subgroups

The Northern Shoshone primarily occupied the of southern , extending into parts of northern , , and the mountainous regions of central and . Their bands adapted to diverse environments, from river valleys supporting fishing to high-elevation mountains favoring , acquiring horses by the early 18th century which enabled buffalo pursuits and seasonal migrations. Dialects of the Central Numic Shoshone language unified these groups, though they maintained distinct band identities based on primary food sources, such as for the Lemhi or sheep for the Tukudika. Key Northern bands included the (Agaidika, or "Salmon Eaters"), who ranged across the Lemhi and Salmon River valleys in east-central and aided the in 1805 under Chief ; their population reached about 500 by the mid-19th century before relocation to the Reservation after the Lemhi Agency closed in 1907. The Boise Shoshone, a mounted band in southwestern led by chiefs like Peiem and later Captain Jim, engaged in and faced displacement to by 1867 amid settler encroachments. Northwestern bands, such as those along Bannock Creek (including Pocatello's band of 101 individuals and Sagwitch's of 158 in 1873), occupied Cache Valley and Bear Lake areas straddling and Utah, adopting Plains bison-hunting practices post-1800 while clashing with emigrants on the Oregon Trail. The Tukudika, or Mountain Shoshone (Sheepeaters), represented a culturally conservative band in the Salmon River Mountains and Yellowstone region, relying on and maintaining traditional lifeways with an estimated 52 members by 1879; military campaigns that year forced survivors onto reservations, integrating them into Shoshone-Bannock communities. Other Northern bands like the Bruneau (south of the ) and Weiser (along the Weiser River) were smaller, often unorganized groups affected by the gold rushes, with many relocating to or Duck Valley Reservations by the late . These bands frequently allied with the Bannock (Northern Paiute speakers), sharing bilingual leadership and intermarrying, which facilitated joint treaty negotiations like the 1863 Treaty ceding vast territories for the Reservation established in 1869. Among other Shoshone subgroups not aligned with Eastern or Western divisions, the occupied arid valleys in western and eastern , subsisting on pine nuts, small game, and roots in a environment that limited horse use compared to Northern bands. Their territory, centered around Goshute Valley, supported populations of several hundred by the , with reservations like Skull Valley and Confederated Tribes of Goshute established post-contact amid pressures from Mormon settlers and mining booms. Today, descendants form part of the sovereign Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Reservation (encompassing eastern and western Northern bands across 1.2 million acres in southeastern ) and the Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation in , governing economic activities including gaming and resource management while addressing historical land losses from unratified treaties.

Pre-Contact History

Archaeological Evidence and Migrations

Archaeological indicates that human occupation in regions later associated with Shoshone bands dates to the Paleoarchaic period, with sites in the and adjacent yielding artifacts from at least 10,000 years (), including stemmed projectile points and ground stone tools consistent with early adaptations to arid environments. These early assemblages, found at open habitation sites and rock shelters, reflect a Desert Archaic tradition characterized by mobile foraging, pinyon nut processing, and basketry, without clear markers of later Numic-specific traits. The Shoshone, as Numic speakers within the Uto-Aztecan language family, are linked to the hypothesized Numic expansion originating from the southwestern around A.D. 1000, based primarily on glottochronological estimates of linguistic divergence and corroborated by radiocarbon dates from sites showing shifts in . This model posits a rapid northward and eastward spread of Numic groups, including proto-Shoshone, displacing or assimilating pre-Numic populations such as those associated with the Fremont culture in the eastern and . Supporting archaeological indicators include the post-A.D. 1000 appearance of flat-bottomed, coiled and intensified seed-grinding technologies in northern and eastern sites, traits ethnographically tied to Numic subsistence strategies emphasizing economies. However, the migration hypothesis faces challenges from of cultural continuity, with some scholars advocating an development of Numic traits over 5,000–7,000 years, citing gradual evolutions in styles and tool kits that lack abrupt discontinuities. analyses from prehistoric remains in the reveal genetic discontinuities between pre-Numic and modern Numic descendants, bolstering population replacement models, though sample sizes remain limited and interpretations debated. Oral traditions among Shoshone groups provide equivocal support, with few explicit migration narratives and more emphasis on longstanding territorial ties. Competitive advantages, such as efficient exploitation of patchy resources like piñon groves, may have facilitated any expansion without necessitating total replacement.

Social and Political Organization

The Shoshone maintained a decentralized composed primarily of small, autonomous family bands, reflecting adaptations to the resource-scarce environments of the and surrounding plateaus. The nuclear or served as the fundamental socioeconomic unit, handling daily , , and independently throughout most of the year. Larger composite bands, comprising multiple families related by or temporary , formed seasonally during periods of concentrated resources, such as pine nut gatherings in late summer or communal hunts in winter valleys, but these groupings were fluid and disbanded when resources dispersed. Anthropologist Julian H. Steward's ethnographic analysis in Basin-Plateau Aboriginal Sociopolitical Groups (1938) identified approximately 18 such sociopolitical units among groups, emphasizing patterns where related families clustered around reliable water or food sources, with group sizes rarely exceeding 20-50 individuals due to ecological limitations. Kinship ties were bilateral without formalized clans, moieties, or localized / rules, fostering flexible alliances rather than rigid lineages. Social roles were divided by gender and age, with men responsible for and defense, women for gathering and processing , and elders advising on resource knowledge; however, no institutional hierarchies like age-grade societies or secret orders existed. This egalitarian arrangement minimized conflict over scarce goods, as families could fission and relocate independently if disputes arose. Among Northern and Western subgroups, winter aggregations in sheltered valleys occasionally featured a nominal headman—typically an older male with proven prowess or spiritual insight from vision quests—but such leaders wielded influence through rather than , lacking enforcement mechanisms or hereditary succession. Political organization operated at the band level, with no overarching tribal councils or centralized spanning multiple bands; inter-band relations involved cooperation for raids against distant enemies like Ute or Paiute groups or shared access to migration routes, governed by consensus and reciprocal obligations rather than treaties or bureaucracies. Warfare was sporadic and small-scale, led by skilled individuals who rallied volunteers through personal reputation, often invoking power acquired via vision quests to legitimize actions. bands in riverine areas like the Wind River drainage exhibited slightly larger seasonal clusters pre-horse acquisition (before circa 1700), enabling coordinated pursuits on foot, yet retained the same loose, family-centric without formal chieftainships. This structure persisted as a rational response to environmental variability, where rigid hierarchies would have hindered mobility and resource exploitation, as evidenced by archaeological patterns of dispersed settlements and minimal evidence of monumental markers.

European Contact and 19th-Century Interactions

Early Explorations and Trade

The Shoshone peoples' initial indirect contacts with Europeans occurred through Spanish traders and explorers in the Southwest, from whom they acquired horses by the late 17th or early via intermediary tribes, transforming their mobility and subsistence patterns without direct gun acquisition. Direct European exploration began with the in 1805, when the , seeking a route across the Continental Divide, first encountered bands near Lemhi Pass in present-day on August 13. Expedition member , a Shoshone woman captured and later married into the , recognized Chief as her brother and facilitated negotiations, enabling the party to trade for approximately 29 horses, pack saddles, and guides in exchange for knives, beads, and other manufactured goods. This exchange was critical for the expedition's survival, as the Shoshone provided canoes and intelligence on mountain passes, though Lewis issued unfulfilled promises of military aid against Blackfeet and other adversaries to secure cooperation. Subsequent trade intensified with the arrival of American and British fur trappers in Shoshone territories starting around , particularly in northwestern regions, marking the onset of sustained commercial interactions. Mountain men such as and ventured into areas like and the watershed from the 1820s, exchanging woolen goods, metal tools, firearms, and ammunition for pelts, horses, and provisions supplied by Shoshone hunters and herders. These exchanges peaked at annual sites, including the Green River gatherings from 1825 to 1840 in present-day , where Shoshone bands alongside Ute and other groups bartered furs trapped in the northern Rockies, fostering temporary alliances but also introducing alcohol and diseases that disrupted traditional economies. By the 1830s, overhunting depleted populations, shifting trade dynamics toward horses and mules, with Shoshone intermediaries facilitating routes between Plains tribes and Euro-American traders.

Conflicts, Alliances, and Key Events

The first interacted with Shoshone bands in August 1805 near the Lemhi River in present-day , where interpreter , captured from the tribe as a girl, reunited with her brother Chief of the ; the band supplied 29 horses and the services of guide Old Toby, enabling the expedition to cross the . Shoshone groups across the region traded furs, horses, and provisions with American and European fur trappers from the 1820s onward, fostering initial peaceful exchanges at posts like , established in 1843, though competition over resources with incoming emigrants along the and Trails began straining relations by the 1840s. Tensions escalated in the 1850s as Mormon settlers in appropriated Shoshone lands and water sources, prompting retaliatory raids; Utah officials sought federal military intervention, culminating in the on January 29, 1863, when Colonel Patrick Edward Connor's 200 California Volunteers attacked a Northwestern Shoshone encampment of about 450 people under war chief Bear Hunter at the Bear River-Beaver Creek confluence near the -Idaho border, killing approximately 250 Shoshone, including 90 women and children, in response to prior attacks on settlers. The U.S. suffered 23 casualties in the engagement, which was framed by military reports as a battle but involved systematic slaughter of non-combatants amid frozen terrain. In contrast, under Chief (c. 1804–1900) pursued strategic alliances with the U.S. Army starting in the 1850s, providing scouts and warriors against rival tribes such as the Lakota, , , and to secure territorial concessions and protect migration routes; 's band fought alongside federal forces in campaigns east of the Continental Divide during the 1860s, earning annuities and recognition in the 1863 and 1868 Treaties. Western and , allied with Bannock and Paiute bands, resisted settler expansion more directly in the from 1864 to 1868 across , , and , conducting raids on wagon trains and mining camps in retaliation for game depletion and land loss; U.S. forces, numbering over 2,000 at peak, subdued the "" through scorched-earth tactics, resulting in hundreds of Native deaths and confinement to reservations like by 1868. These events reflected broader patterns of Shoshone subgroups navigating encroachment through either accommodation or armed opposition, shaped by geographic divisions and leadership choices.

Treaties and Land Cessions

The negotiated initial treaties with Shoshone bands in to secure safe passage for emigrants, military forces, and settlers traversing the and Rocky Mountain regions amid the and routes. These agreements acknowledged Shoshone occupancy while permitting extensive non-Indian uses of territory, effectively facilitating land dispossession through implied cessions of hunting rights and access corridors, though explicit reservations were absent. Annuities in goods were promised but often underdelivered, exacerbating tribal hardships from resource depletion by overland traffic and . On July 2, 1863, the Treaty at with the and Bannock tribes required cessation of raids on emigrant trains and permitted free use of existing roads, construction of new trails, and mining operations across Shoshone country north of the and east of the Continental Divide, spanning roughly 44 million acres. In exchange, the U.S. pledged $10,000 annually in goods, provisions, and livestock for 20 years to offset lost game and access rights, with additional support for a and . No formal reservation was outlined, but the treaty's provisions prioritized federal expansion over exclusive tribal control. The contemporaneous Treaty of Ruby Valley, signed October 1, 1863, with bands in , mirrored these terms by affirming peace and authorizing overland stage lines, military posts, mining, ranching for hay, and telegraph lines across approximately 24 million acres of arid territory from the to the . Annual compensation was set at $5,000 in goods for 20 years, plus provisions for chiefs' salaries and schools, but federal payments totaled only about $1,700 by 1869, leading to disputes over fulfillment. Unlike later agreements, this treaty contained no explicit land cession clause; Western Shoshone leaders retained title while granting permissive uses, a distinction upheld in subsequent tribal claims that aboriginal rights persisted absent formal extinguishment or compensated transfer. A follow-up at on July 3, 1868, addressed territorial losses by designating an initial reservation of about 8,000 square miles in Wyoming's Wind River Basin for their "permanent home," ceding all prior claims outside this area—including hunting grounds in the and Sweetwater Valley—in return for perpetual annuities of $25,000 decreasing over 10 years, plus farming tools, schools, and . , leader of the , endorsed the boundaries after rejecting smaller proposals, securing federal protection against incursions by other tribes. This pact formalized the Wind River Reservation but invited later encroachments, as non-Indian settlement and resource extraction intensified. Subsequent 19th-century agreements effected further cessions from established reservations. An 1898 agreement with the Shoshone and Bannock at , —initially formed by in 1869—authorized sale of surplus lands outside allotments, yielding over 500,000 acres for irrigation and homesteading, with proceeds funding tribal infrastructure. On the Wind River Reservation, a 1896 cession surrendered southern tracts for railroad expansion, followed by the 1905 agreement under which leaders, amid financial distress and federal pressure, relinquished about 1.5 million acres (over half the remaining area) for $1.25 million, though ratification delays and disputes over consent reduced effective tribal benefits. These reductions, totaling over 3 million acres from Wind River by 1912, stemmed from allotment policies under the and demands for public domain expansion, often with incomplete payments and minimal tribal agency. Western Shoshone land claims diverged, with no reservation established and title disputes centering on the Ruby Valley Treaty's non-cession status; U.S. policy invoked "gradual abandonment" via settlement and an congressional appropriation of $7,500 as implicit compensation, but courts later adjudicated takings without consent, awarding payments in 1960s Indian Claims Commission rulings while tribes contested the framework's adequacy against ongoing resource extraction. Eastern Shoshone treaties, by contrast, involved clearer boundary demarcations but recurrent federal reinterpretations favoring diminishment, as evidenced in 1930s Supreme Court affirmations of reserved rights amid cession proceeds.
Key Shoshone Treaties and CessionsDateBands InvolvedPrimary ProvisionsLand Impact
TreatyJuly 2, 1863, BannockPeace, passage rights, $10,000 annual goods for 20 yearsImplicit of access to ~44 million acres; no reservation set
Ruby Valley TreatyOctober 1, 1863Peace, permissive uses (, ), $5,000 annual goods for 20 yearsNo explicit ; ~24 million acres opened to uses
TreatyJuly 3, 1868Reservation in Wind River (~8,000 sq mi), annuities, aid of all external claims; formalized ~44 million acres transfer
Agreement1898Shoshone-BannockSurplus land sales~500,000+ acres ceded for settlement
Wind River Cessions1896, 1905Tract sales under duress>3 million acres lost total

20th- and 21st-Century Developments

Reservation Establishment and Federal Policies

The , shared by and Paiute bands, was established on April 16, 1877, via by President , marking one of the earliest formal land bases allocated specifically for in and . This 289,820-acre tract was set aside amid pressures from settler expansion following the unratified aspects of the 1863 Treaty of Ruby Valley, providing a confined area for bands previously roaming the . Smaller allocations, such as the 51.61-acre Carlin Farms Reservation, were also created that year for other groups, reflecting a federal approach of minimal, piecemeal reservations rather than comprehensive territorial consolidation. Into the early 20th century, additional modest land holdings emerged, including the Elko Indian Colony, reserved at 160 acres by on March 25, 1918, for Shoshone and Paiute residing near . These fragmented sites underscored the absence of a unified reservation, with federal agencies like the Indian Agency—established in 1878—overseeing scattered populations through the 1950s. The Dawes Severalty Act of 1887 had limited impact due to sparse communal lands, but it contributed to further fragmentation by promoting individual allotments on existing bases, often resulting in non-Indian acquisitions via sales or tax forfeitures. The (IRA) of June 18, 1934, initiated a policy reversal from assimilationist land division to tribal revitalization, authorizing land purchases, ending allotments, and enabling constitutions for . bands leveraged the IRA to form the Te-Moak Tribe of Indians of , adopting a and bylaws ratified on December 12, 1938, which unified entities like the Battle Mountain Colony, Elko Colony, South Fork Reservation (established 1941 with supporting land buys from 1937), and later Wells Band (80 acres via congressional act in 1977). This organization facilitated federal trust status for colonies totaling under 1,000 acres collectively, emphasizing economic cooperatives over expansive territory, though implementation varied amid ongoing resource extraction on ancestral lands. Mid-century policies, including the short-lived termination era (1940s–1960s), spared groups from dissolution but intensified scrutiny on land use, with agencies like the asserting control over unoccupied areas via acts such as the 1934 Taylor Grazing Act. By the 1970s, initiatives under President Nixon's 1970 message to reinforced IRA frameworks, enabling Te-Moak and Duck Valley tribes to expand governance over their limited reservations, though without resolving broader territorial diminishment. These developments prioritized administrative consolidation over land restoration, shaping persistent economic reliance on federal programs.

Economic Transitions and Self-Governance

The of 1934 marked a pivotal shift toward tribal for Shoshone groups, allowing reorganization into federally recognized entities with that restored some lost under prior assimilation policies. For example, the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Reservation adopted a in 1936, establishing a Council to oversee economic and political affairs independent of direct oversight where possible. This framework emphasized inherent tribal authority predating European contact, enabling decisions on and despite ongoing federal trust responsibilities. Economic transitions in the mid-20th century relied heavily on and ranching, supported by federal projects like the Duck Valley Indian Project, which became the primary income source for the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes through hay production and . However, high —often exceeding 70% on reservations like Wind River—persisted due to land from allotments and limited , prompting diversification into wage labor off-reservation and federal programs. By the 1980s, the of 1988 facilitated development, transforming economies; the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes' Fort Hall now supports 2,742 jobs and $450 million in annual output, bolstering self-sufficiency through tribal enterprises in retail and . In the , has enabled targeted economic initiatives, such as the Ely Shoshone Tribe's exercise of authority over health, safety, and welfare programs via compacts with federal agencies. The Shoshone-Paiute Tribes at Duck Valley pursued gaming by acquiring 557 acres in 2025 for a resort , while negotiating profit-sharing agreements with firms to align extraction with tribal priorities, potentially modeling revenue retention on ancestral lands. On Wind River, the and Northern secured a $36 million U.S. grant in 2024 for restoration, , and workforce training, addressing chronic disparities through indigenous-led sustainability rather than extractive dependency. These efforts, part of broader tribal impacts totaling $1.45 billion in sales and 12,571 jobs, underscore causal links between and adaptive economics amid federal policy evolution. The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Reservation maintain an enrollment of approximately 5,900 members, with services extending to a broader including non-residents. The Tribe of the Wind River Reservation reports 5,703 enrolled members, many of whom reside off-reservation due to economic opportunities in urban areas. Smaller Shoshone bands, such as the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of the , have tribal enrollments historically around 1,200, governed by criteria requiring at least one-quarter Shoshone or Paiute blood quantum, with applications processed through tribal offices to verify descent from base rolls. Enrollment across Shoshone tribes remains stable, influenced by strict lineage requirements rather than broader self-identification trends observed in U.S. Census data for Native Americans, where intermarriage and off-reservation migration contribute to gradual growth in affiliated descendants but limit official tribal membership. A key legal advancement in 2025 involved the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes' successful challenge to a U.S. Forest Service land exchange in the Caribou-Targhee National Forest, which the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on August 22 violated the Unlawful Inclosures of Indian Lands Act of 1900 and infringed on homelands reserved under the 1868 Treaty. The decision, affirming a district court from a 2020 supported by the Native American Rights Fund, prevented the transfer of approximately 10,000 acres adjacent to the Reservation, prioritizing over federal administrative actions. This ruling highlights persistent tribal assertions of treaty-protected rights amid federal resource management, contrasting with earlier 21st-century distributions of claims funds under the 2004 settlement, which some traditional members contested as extinguishing unceded lands without consent. Ongoing enrollment disputes and affirmations continue to shape tribal , with courts increasingly scrutinizing federal encroachments on reserved areas.

Cultural Practices and Society

Kinship and Social Structure

The Shoshone employed bilateral descent, reckoning kinship through both maternal and paternal lines without formalized clans, lineages, or descent groups beyond the extended family. This system emphasized flexible bilateral family groups as the foundational social and economic units, comprising parents, children, and often grandparents or siblings' families, which adapted to resource scarcity in the Great Basin environment. Kinship terminology followed a Hawaiian or generational pattern, equating parallel and cross-cousins with siblings using terms for older or younger brother/sister, with only four primary relational categories recognized; this classification reinforced close treatment of cousins as siblings, as exemplified in historical accounts like those of Sacajawea and her brother Cameahwait. Social structure centered on autonomous nuclear or expanded families that coalesced into fluid, small bands of 1–10 families for seasonal subsistence activities, such as harvesting or , rather than stable political entities. Among , these family bands lacked hereditary chiefs or centralized authority, with leadership emerging informally from capable individuals based on merit, such as prowess or , and decisions made by consensus within the group. Marriage practices supported this flexibility, often beginning matrilocally but shifting to bilocal or , sometimes involving (e.g., a man marrying sisters) or sororal to strengthen alliances and labor division, though predominated due to ecological pressures limiting group size. Eastern Shoshone bands, influenced by equestrian adaptations post-contact, exhibited slightly larger, more cohesive winter camps (up to 30 families) under merit-based , yet retained the primacy of family units without rigid territorial or political hierarchies. Overall, this decentralized structure prioritized survival in arid, low-resource settings, where families dispersed annually and recombined opportunistically, precluding larger tribal integrations until European influences introduced and networks in the early .

Religion, Ceremonies, and Worldview

The Shoshone worldview emphasized an animistic cosmology in which power, termed puha, permeated environment, including animals, , geological features, and atmospheric phenomena, enabling individuals to interact with and influence these elements through acquired spiritual alliances. This perspective fostered a pragmatic orientation toward survival in the arid , where personal efficacy derived from harmonizing human actions with ecological cycles rather than hierarchical deities or moral absolutes. Ethnographic accounts from the early document puha as fluid and adaptive, manifesting in dreams or visions that shaped identity and social roles, with power concentrations in specific locales like springs or mountains treated as sacred nodes of interaction. Vision quests formed a core rite for obtaining puha, typically involving solitary and in remote sites, often undertaken by adolescents or those seeking prowess, with success yielding a guardian spirit that conferred abilities such as curing illness or locating game. Shamans, known as puhagant, specialized in channeling puha for communal benefit, diagnosing ailments through states and employing songs, herbs, or manipulations to extract malevolent influences, though their authority stemmed from demonstrated efficacy rather than institutional sanction. Such practices reflected a causal realism wherein spiritual power directly correlated with observable outcomes, like successful hunts or averted famines, underscoring the Shoshone's empirical to environmental . Ceremonial life integrated puha-infused rituals with seasonal subsistence, including pinyon nut harvests in autumn, during which participants conducted prayers and offerings at revered groves to ensure abundance, viewing these sites as inherently powerful and integral to cultural continuity. The , or narayar (meaning "shuffling"), emerged as a shaman-led communal gathering featuring circular sidestepping to invoke renewal and social cohesion, often tied to prophetic visions or post-crisis thanksgiving. Among bands, the Sun Dance—borrowed from Plains neighbors in the mid-19th century—became prominent by the , entailing a four-day lodge enclosure for piercing, dancing, and vows aimed at individual prestige and group vitality, though Western groups retained more localized, less formalized observances. In response to reservation-era disruptions around 1890, many Shoshone adopted the , a prophetic originating among Northern Paiute prophet , which promised ecological restoration and ancestral resurgence through fervent singing and trance-induced visions, particularly resonating with Wind River Shoshone amid land loss and decline. This movement integrated Numic myths of cyclical renewal with messianic expectations, yet its intensity waned post-1900 as federal suppression and assimilation policies curtailed overt practice, shifting emphasis to private puha pursuits. Overall, Shoshone spirituality prioritized verifiable power dynamics over doctrinal orthodoxy, adapting to historical pressures while preserving a core grounded in experiential causality.

Material Culture and Arts

The material culture of the Shoshone peoples varied significantly between the of the , who relied on and maintained simple, portable items suited to a mobile lifestyle, and the of the Plains, who adopted horse-based nomadism and more elaborate buffalo-hide technologies post-contact. Western Shoshone dwellings typically consisted of temporary conical wickiups made from branches, , and bark slabs, often encircled by stones for stability and housing small family groups of about six individuals. In contrast, Eastern Shoshone utilized tipis constructed from wooden poles covered in tanned buffalo hides, facilitating rapid assembly and transport by for buffalo hunting camps. Clothing among the Western Shoshone was primarily crafted from readily available materials like bark for shirts and aprons, with men producing rabbitskin blankets by twisting and weaving pelts for warmth. Eastern Shoshone attire featured buckskin shirts, leggings, and moccasins derived from deer or buffalo hides, often painted or adorned for ceremonial purposes. Both groups employed digging sticks, chipped stone tools from quarries like Tosawihi for knives and points, and communal aids such as rabbit drives with corrals and rock blinds for game like . Subsistence implements included willow-twine traps, nets, and weirs for fish, alongside seed beaters for harvesting grasses like Indian ricegrass. Shoshone arts emphasized functional crafts with symbolic elements, including twined basketry for hats, cradles, beaters, and jugs among the Western groups, reflecting adaptations to gathering and storage needs. developed on dance regalia and belts using glass on brain-tanned hides, evolving from earlier techniques shared with Plains neighbors. forms, such as petroglyphs at sites like Grimes Point depicting narratives, served ceremonial and functions across subgroups. Pigments like red ochre and specularite were used for body paint and hide decoration, sourced from specific locales for ritual protection.

Land Rights Disputes and Controversies

Historical Claims and Treaty Interpretations

The Treaty of Ruby Valley, signed on October 1, 1863, between the and bands, acknowledged U.S. sovereignty over their territory in present-day while explicitly reserving Shoshone rights to occupy and use the land, including "visible deposits" of , silver, and other minerals. The treaty permitted U.S. construction of wagon roads, telegraph lines, and railroads but did not include language of land cession or extinguishment of , as confirmed by its text and contemporary negotiations aimed at securing safe passage for emigrants rather than territorial transfer. Western Shoshone traditional councils have consistently interpreted the treaty as affirming their exclusive possession, rejecting subsequent U.S. encroachments like ranching and as violations, a position rooted in the document's failure to specify compensation for land loss. U.S. courts, however, have interpreted the narrowly, ruling in Shoshone Indians v. United States (1945) that it neither recognized nor extinguished Indian title, thereby allowing the Indian Claims Commission to treat subsequent federal takings as compensable under statutory frameworks rather than breaches. This led to a 1962 Commission award of over $1 million (plus interest) for alleged land value as of 1872, which divided Shoshone factions: traditionalists refused distribution, arguing it undermined rights and implied acceptance of title loss, while others accepted funds under congressional acts like the 1978 Western Shoshone Claims Distribution Act. Such interpretations reflect U.S. doctrines prioritizing federal discretion over original intent, as evidenced by the Commission's reliance on post-treaty settlement patterns to deem title "lost" without Shoshone consent. For the Eastern Shoshone, the Treaty of Fort Bridger, concluded on July 3, 1868, involved cession of vast territories in , , and in exchange for a reservation initially encompassing approximately 44 million acres centered on the Wind River watershed, with provisions for perpetual U.S. protection, annuities, and Shoshone retention of hunting rights on ceded lands until game depletion. leaders, including Chief , viewed the treaty as securing a permanent amid settler pressures, but subsequent congressional acts diminished the reservation to 2.2 million acres by 1905, prompting claims that these reductions violated the treaty's unratified boundary protections and ignored Shoshone occupancy rights. Judicial interpretations, such as in United States v. Shoshone Tribe of Indians (1938), upheld U.S. authority to adjust boundaries via but affirmed Shoshone equitable title to unoccupied reservation lands, awarding compensation for water and timber takings while rejecting broader aboriginal claims outside cessions. Disputes persist over hunting and fishing rights under Article IV, with the Ninth Circuit in 2023 remanding claims by the Northwestern Band that off-reservation access was guaranteed absent explicit extinction by game scarcity or reservation confinement, challenging federal management under the Endangered Species Act. These cases highlight interpretive tensions: tribal assertions of priority against evolving U.S. policies versus court deference to congressional intent, often substantiated by historical settlement data rather than negotiation records. Conflicts arising from treaty disputes, such as the 1911 involving resistors, illustrate enforcement of U.S. interpretations equating non-cession with compensable takings, where federal forces targeted bands asserting traditional land use amid expanding ranching. Overall, Shoshone historical claims emphasize treaties as relational covenants preserving , whereas U.S. readings subordinate them to statutory compensation models, perpetuating litigation over unextinguished rights in resource-rich areas.

Western Shoshone Litigation and Divisions

The initiated formal land claims against the through the Indian Claims Commission (ICC), established by the Act of August 13, 1946, to adjudicate tribal grievances for taken lands and resources. In 1951, the Te-Moak Bands of Indians of filed claims under Dockets 326-A, 326-K, and others, asserting aboriginal title to approximately 24 million acres in present-day , , , and , which had not been ceded by . The ICC process determined that title was progressively extinguished through settler encroachment and military presence, valuing the loss at 1872 prices rather than current market value, leading to an initial award offset by prior payments. By 1972, the ICC finalized an award of $26,145,189.89 for the identifiable group, which was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Claims in and deposited into a trust account accruing interest, eventually exceeding $250 million. Many rejected the monetary settlement, arguing it failed to recognize ongoing or return land, and viewed the ICC as a mechanism to extinguish claims without consent, prioritizing compensation over restitution. This stance contrasted with federal policy, which treated the award as , barring further assertions in U.S. courts. Litigation intensified in the 1970s and 1980s, exemplified by the case of sisters Mary Dann and Carrie Dann, ranchers who grazed cattle on disputed lands without Bureau of Land Management permits, asserting unextinguished title. In United States v. Dann (1985), the U.S. ruled 8-1 that the ICC judgment precluded relitigating title, affirming federal authority over the lands and upholding trespass penalties. The Danns pursued remedies internationally, filing a petition with the in 2001, which in 2006 found U.S. actions violated rights to and cultural integrity by presuming title extinguishment without evidence of or , though the finding lacked enforcement power and was contested by the U.S. as inconsistent with domestic law. These disputes fractured Western Shoshone unity, creating divisions between federally recognized entities like the Te-Moak Tribe of Indians, which accepted ICC funds and pursued distributions under the Western Shoshone Claims Distribution Act of 2004, and traditionalist groups such as the National Council and Dann Band, who renounced settlements as betraying ancestral land stewardship. The Te-Moak Tribe, representing about 6,000 members, litigated for from federal land uses post-1979, as in Te-Moak Bands of Indians v. (2011), where the Federal Circuit rejected claims for ongoing royalties. Traditionalists, numbering in the hundreds, faced internal tribal opposition and federal enforcement, including livestock impoundments in the 2000s, exacerbating rifts over governance, with some viewing acceptance of funds as forfeiting while others saw it as pragmatic economic relief. A 2002 saw over 1,800 enrolled members vote on distributing $120 million in accrued funds, but results deepened schisms without resolving title claims.

Broader Implications and Unresolved Issues

The Western Shoshone land claims litigation, particularly through the Indian Claims Commission (ICC) process culminating in a 1979 award of approximately $26.1 million based on 1872 land values, has set precedents favoring monetary compensation over territorial restoration, influencing federal handling of aboriginal title claims across other tribes by prioritizing fiscal settlement and "gradual encroachment" doctrines that deem title extinguished via administrative or settler actions without formal treaty cession. This framework undermines assertions of ongoing Indigenous sovereignty by equating cultural and ancestral land ties to depreciated economic value, enabling federal allocation of vast Nevada territories—spanning over 24 million acres—for military testing, mining, and ranching without tribal consent, as evidenced by the Nevada Test Site's establishment on claimed Shoshone lands in the 1950s. These disputes highlight tensions in federal trust responsibilities, where court rulings like United States v. Dann (2003) affirmed title extinguishment upon ICC fund acceptance by the Department of the Interior, despite tribal objections, thereby eroding mechanisms for enforcing treaty-era rights under the 1863 Ruby Valley Treaty and fostering precedents that prioritize U.S. resource interests over Indigenous . Broader ramifications extend to , as unreconciled claims have facilitated —responsible for over 900 detonations between 1951 and 1992—and extractive industries on sacred sites, contributing to ecological degradation and health impacts documented in tribal testimonies, while challenging the viability of domestic remedies for international standards. Unresolved issues persist in the undistributed ICC funds, held in since 1979 without congressional approval for allocation plans, which has deepened intratribal divisions between traditionalist factions rejecting monetary resolution in favor of title quieting and pragmatists advocating distribution, as seen in stalled legislative efforts like the Claims Distribution Amendment Act proposals. Federal enforcement against traditional practices, including grazing impoundments and access restrictions exemplified by the Dann sisters' 2001-2004 confrontations leading to $3 million in assessed fees (later litigated), remains contentious, with no comprehensive negotiation framework despite UN Committee on the Elimination of recommendations in 2006 and 2013 for culturally sensitive resolutions. These standoffs underscore ongoing uncertainties in reconciling U.S. with Indigenous customary tenure, potentially inviting future congressional interventions or Inter-American Commission petitions that could redefine extinguishment standards.

Demographics and Population Dynamics

Pre-Contact and Historical Estimates

Estimating the pre-contact of the Shoshone remains challenging due to their nomadic, small-band organization adapted to the resource-scarce environment, which left limited archaeological traces of large settlements, and the absence of indigenous census records. Anthropologists have relied on extrapolations from territorial , band sizes observed in ethnographic studies, and ecological models, yielding low-density figures consistent with subsistence patterns centered on , small-game , and pine nut gathering. For the , who occupied much of and parts of and , Julian Steward's analysis in his 1938 ethnographic survey approximated an aboriginal of around 5,000 to 6,000, based on 30-40 identified bands averaging 100-200 members each, with adjustments for pre-1860s conditions before major settler incursions. These estimates assume minimal depopulation prior to direct Euro-American contact in the , though indirect transmission via Southwestern networks may have reduced numbers earlier. Northern Shoshone groups, spanning southeastern , western , and northern , similarly maintained dispersed family bands, with early 19th-century explorer accounts suggesting populations in the low thousands per subgroup; for instance, Lewis and Clark's 1805 encounters with bands indicated groups of 200-500 individuals reliant on salmon fishing and bison hunting in river valleys. , in the Basin and adapting to proto-Plains bison economies before widespread horse diffusion around , supported somewhat denser populations, estimated at 10,000-20,000 aboriginal individuals based on linguistic and archaeological distributions of Numic-speaking groups. Overall pre-contact totals for all Shoshone divisions likely ranged from 15,000 to 30,000, reflecting the arid constraints of the region compared to more fertile areas like the Plains or Southwest. Historical estimates from the early post-contact era provide benchmarks but indicate declines from epidemics and warfare. Jedidiah Morse's 1822 report to the U.S. Secretary of War tallied approximately 60,000 Shoshone across divisions, including 20,000 , drawing from trader and missionary reports up to 1820. By 1845, Northern and numbers had fallen to about 4,500, attributed to infectious diseases like introduced via routes and intertribal conflicts over resources. An 1861 U.S. for territories, encompassing and Northern Paiute, recorded around 7,000 survivors, underscoring rapid depopulation in the core. These figures highlight how Shoshone adaptability to marginal lands buffered but did not prevent losses, with band-level fissioning further complicating counts.

Modern Population and Distribution

The Shoshone people maintain distinct tribal identities across several federally recognized entities, with enrolled members primarily concentrated on reservations and colonies in , , , , and adjacent states. Enrolled populations vary by band and tribe, reflecting historical divisions into Eastern, Northern, Western, and Northwestern groups, though exact totals are not centrally tracked and depend on tribal criteria such as blood quantum or descent. Significant numbers also reside off-reservation, including in urban centers like , and , Utah, where economic opportunities draw families away from traditional lands. The Tribe, centered on the Wind River Indian Reservation in central , reports over 3,900 enrolled members served by the ' Wind River Agency. This reservation, encompassing about 2.2 million acres shared with the Northern Tribe, hosts the largest single concentration of Eastern Shoshone, though only a portion of enrollees live on-site due to and migration. Northern Shoshone descendants form the core of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes on the in southeastern , spanning roughly 521,000 acres with approximately 6,000 enrolled members, including allied Bannock bands. Tribal services extend to about 8,700 individuals, encompassing both on- and off-reservation residents, with the majority of Shoshone-affiliated members tracing to historical bands in the and vicinity. The Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation, federally recognized in 1987, enrolls around 400 members primarily in northern and southern , with administrative headquarters in , and no contiguous reservation but rather trust lands and allotments. This band maintains cultural ties to the Bear River Valley region, where historical populations were decimated in the 1863 . Western Shoshone bands occupy fragmented colonies and small reservations across , , and , with no unified enrollment figure but individual bands numbering in the hundreds; for instance, the Ely Colony reports 763 members, the South Fork Band of Te-Moak 260, and the shared Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of Duck Valley (Idaho-Nevada) around 1,300 residents including Paiute. These groups, numbering several thousand collectively, preserve Newe (Shoshone) identity amid dispersed lands totaling over 3 million acres historically claimed but often under federal or private control.

Notable Individuals

Historical Leaders and Warriors

Chief Washakie (c. 1804–1900) emerged as the preeminent leader of the Eastern Shoshone, renowned for his exceptional skills as a warrior and strategist. Born in the Bitterroot Mountains among the Salish, he joined the Shoshone early in life and gained prominence through raids against tribal enemies such as the Blackfeet, Crow, and Sioux, amassing a reputation for personal bravery in combat. By the mid-19th century, Washakie had unified bands under his leadership, allying with the United States military in campaigns against mutual foes, including scouting for the U.S. Army during the 1860s and participating in battles that secured territory for his people. His diplomatic acumen complemented his martial record, as evidenced by his negotiation of the 1868 Treaty of Fort Bridger, which established the Wind River Reservation, though he continued leading warriors in defensive actions into the 1870s. Chief Pocatello (c. 1815–1884), known in Shoshone as Tondzaosha or "Buffalo Robe," led the Northwestern Shoshone during the influx of Mormon settlers into starting in the late 1840s. Initially heading a small band of about 15 families by 1847, his following expanded to roughly 400 by 1857 amid escalating tensions over resources and emigrant trails. Pocatello authorized raids on settlements and wagon trains in response to encroachments, including attacks that contributed to the of 1857–1858 and ongoing skirmishes through the 1860s, reflecting his role as a defender of traditional hunting grounds against rapid colonization. Despite his warrior activities, he engaged in sporadic peace talks, signing treaties like the 1863 Treaty of Box Elder that ceded lands but preserved some band autonomy until his death. Chief Tendoy (1834–1907), also called Tin Doi, headed the Lemhi Shoshone from 1863 onward, blending warrior heritage with efforts to avert full-scale conflict during Idaho's mining boom. Born near the Boise River to a Shoshone-Bannock family, Tendoy inherited leadership after his uncle's death and maintained a band that scouted for U.S. forces against Nez Perce and other groups while fending off intrusions in the Lemhi Valley. His tenure saw the establishment of the Lemhi Reservation in 1875 following negotiations, though he resisted forced relocation, leading delegations to Washington, D.C., in 1879 and 1889 to advocate for his people's rights amid declining bison herds and settler pressures. Tendoy's approach emphasized survival through alliance rather than open warfare, distinguishing him from more confrontational leaders. In the early 20th century, Shoshone Mike (d. 1911), or Mike Daggett, represented a final wave of armed resistance among Western Shoshone-Bannock holdouts unwilling to adapt to reservation confinement. Departing the Reservation in 1910 with a band of 11, including family members, Mike's group subsisted by hunting and occasional wage labor but clashed with ranchers over livestock, killing four in separate incidents between 1910 and 1911. Pursued across , the band evaded capture through guerrilla tactics in rugged terrain until the on February 26, 1911, where a posse ambushed their camp, killing Mike and eight others, with only a woman and child surviving. This encounter marked one of the last armed conflicts between Native resisters and authorities in the , underscoring persistent cultural defiance against assimilation policies.

Modern Figures and Contributions

Darren Parry, former chairman of the Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation, has contributed to the preservation of Shoshone history through authorship and education. In 2021, he published The Bear River Massacre: A Shoshone History, detailing the 1863 event where approximately 400 Shoshone were killed by U.S. forces, drawing on oral traditions and archival records to provide a tribal perspective. Parry also teaches Native American history at and advocates for cultural sites, including efforts to restore the site acquired by the tribe in 2023. Ronald "Snake" Edmo (1945–2021), an enrolled member of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, advanced Shoshone linguistic and literary traditions as a poet and anthropologist. He authored Spirit Rider: A Collection of Contemporary Poetry in the Shoshoni Language (2002), blending oral histories with modern expression to maintain the Newe language. Edmo, a U.S. Army Green Beret veteran, also educated on Shoshone ethnonyms, clarifying that "Snake" derives from a mistranslation of self-referential terms rather than reptilian symbolism. Ivan Posey, an leader, has focused on tribal and since serving on the Business Council. As Tribal Education Coordinator for Central Wyoming College, he promotes initiatives integrating Shoshone cultural knowledge into contemporary curricula on the Wind River Reservation. His leadership emphasizes and youth programs, building on historical alliances while addressing modern reservation challenges.

References

  1. https://historytogo.utah.gov/uhg-first-peoples-shoshone-indians/
  2. https://nwbshoshone.com/about/history/
  3. https://www.ethnologue.com/language/shh/
  4. https://www.temoaktribe.com/history.shtml
  5. https://education.byu.edu/sites/default/files/media/arts_lesson_plan/files/2023/NSF_Shoshone_Information_Paragraphs.pdf
  6. https://highways.dot.gov/highway-history/general-highway-history/back-time/native-american-heritage-month-sacagawea-shoshone
  7. https://www.nps.gov/lecl/learn/historyculture/sacagawea.htm
  8. https://www.sbtribes.com/
  9. https://plainshumanities.unl.edu/encyclopedia/doc/egp.na.105.html
  10. https://www.etymonline.com/word/Shoshone
  11. https://www.californiatrailcenter.org/western-shoshone/
  12. https://www.nps.gov/jeff/learn/historyculture/shoshone.htm
  13. https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1525/aa.1909.11.2.02a00090
  14. https://glottolog.org/resource/languoid/id/shos1248
  15. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Shoshonean-languages
  16. http://www.native-languages.org/shoshone.htm
  17. https://www.omniglot.com/writing/shoshone.htm
  18. http://freebooks.uvu.edu/native_american_culture/02_Shoshone_Culture.php
  19. https://history.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/0484_Shoshoni-and-Northern-Paiute-Indians-in-Idaho.pdf
  20. https://www.wyomingnewsnow.tv/news/we-re-survivalists-revitalizing-the-shoshone-language/article_7ac12f6c-b4c7-53f1-8bee-fe9b0a0493b1.html
  21. https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/open-spaces/2022-01-21/just-keep-saying-it-we-will-understand-elders-compile-shoshone-dictionary
  22. https://www.cwc.edu/2024/03/13/native-languages/
  23. https://sciendo.com/pdf/10.2478/eas-2021-0003
  24. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2025/06/native-american-language-use.html
  25. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0F1qoGBhqfw
  26. https://easternshoshone.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/eastern-shoshone-working-dictionary2.pdf
  27. https://shoshoniproject.utah.edu/
  28. https://shoshoniproject.utah.edu/about/
  29. https://shoshoniproject.utah.edu/language-materials/shoshoni-dictionary/
  30. https://www.sbtribes.com/language-culture/
  31. https://roundhousefoundation.org/grant-stories/fort-mcdermitt-paiute-shoshone-tribe-language-revitalization/
  32. https://cowboystatedaily.com/2025/03/08/wyoming-woman-on-a-mission-to-not-let-her-shoshone-language-and-culture-die/
  33. https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/items/73a188e7-6989-46e1-bf39-90a020330c7b
  34. https://easternshoshone.org/about/
  35. https://www.sbtribes.com/about/
  36. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2017JD026682
  37. https://www.doi.gov/ocl/hearings/110/ThreatToTheGreatBasin_101107Pellant
  38. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/17272663.pdf
  39. https://historytogo.utah.gov/uhg-first-peoples-shoshone-northern-utah/
  40. https://www.blm.gov/sites/default/files/documents/files/Library_Nevada_CulturalResourceSeries12.pdf
  41. http://freebooks.uvu.edu/NURS3400/index.php/ch09-shoshone-culture.html
  42. https://escholarship.org/content/qt4p2708zf/qt4p2708zf_noSplash_79ee2ce019fffacda4b74e08d732d045.pdf
  43. https://warmvalley.health/history
  44. https://classroom.synonym.com/tools-weapons-of-the-shoshone-indians-12083553.html
  45. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5038&context=etd
  46. https://allaboutbison.com/natives/shoshone/
  47. https://easternshoshone.org/fort-bridger-treaty-of-1868/
  48. https://www.wyohistory.org/encyclopedia/coming-wind-river-eastern-shoshone-treaties-1863-and-1868
  49. https://www.bia.gov/regional-offices/rocky-mountain/wind-river-agency
  50. https://nevadasindianterritory.com/nevada-tribes/newe/
  51. https://www.temoaktribe.com/
  52. https://www.bia.gov/regional-offices/western/tribes-served
  53. https://2009-2017.state.gov/documents/organization/83519.pdf
  54. https://earthworks.org/blog/western_shoshone_nation/
  55. https://www.gbcnv.edu/howh/ShoshoneMike.html
  56. https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/shoshone-mikes-story-endures-after-a-century/
  57. https://www.congress.gov/committee-report/108th-congress/house-report/299/1
  58. https://2009-2017.state.gov/j/drl/rls/cerd_report/83406.htm
  59. https://nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/grba/hrs.pdf
  60. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.an.07.100178.000443
  61. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271689494_Dating_Paiute-Shoshoni_Expansion_in_the_Great_Basin
  62. https://escholarship.org/content/qt7sb0j0t9/qt7sb0j0t9_noSplash_ddad7e8609b152c32cf81e744de310fd.pdf
  63. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25667452
  64. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/12024360_Ancient_mitochondrial_DNA_evidence_for_prehistoric_population_movement_The_Numic_expansion
  65. https://www.jstor.org/stable/280231
  66. https://archive.org/download/bulletin1201938smit/bulletin1201938smit.pdf
  67. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/646607
  68. https://www.everyculture.com/North-America/Western-Shoshone-Sociopolitical-Organization.html
  69. https://anthropology.ua.edu/theory/ecological-anthropology/
  70. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/language-and-linguistics/shoshone
  71. https://lewis-clark.org/native-nations/lemhi-shoshones/
  72. https://lewis-clark.org/native-nations/lemhi-shoshones/promises-to-keep/
  73. http://exhibits.lib.usu.edu/exhibits/show/foodwaste/timeline/fur-trappers-traders-mountain-
  74. https://history.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/0444.pdf
  75. https://www.wyohistory.org/encyclopedia/fur-trade-wyoming
  76. https://www.wyohistory.org/encyclopedia/trade-among-tribes-commerce-plains-europeans-arrived
  77. https://www.uen.org/utah_history_encyclopedia/f/FUR_TRADE.shtml
  78. https://historytogo.utah.gov/bear-river-massacre/
  79. https://www.yellowstonepark.com/park/history/chief-washakie-a-voice-for-the-people/
  80. https://history.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/0236.pdf
  81. https://www.legendsofamerica.com/na-indianwartimeline/
  82. https://treaties.okstate.edu/treaties/treaty-with-the-eastern-shoshoni-1863-0848
  83. https://treaties.okstate.edu/treaties/treaty-with-the-western-shoshoni-1863-0851
  84. https://treaties.okstate.edu/treaties/agreement-with-the-shoshone-and-bannock-1898-22399
  85. https://www.wyohistory.org/encyclopedia/tribes-sell-more-land-1905-agreement
  86. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/304/111/
  87. https://shpo.nv.gov/nevadas-historical-markers/historical-markers/duck-valley-indian-reservation
  88. https://www.energy.gov/indianenergy/shoshone-paiute-tribes-duck-valley-reservation-2003-project
  89. https://www.gbcnv.edu/gbia/manuscripts/del_cohen/7_shoshone_paiute_tribes_history_links.pdf
  90. https://www.temoaktribe.com/elko.shtml
  91. https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/Western_Shoshone_Indian_Agency_%28Nevada%29
  92. https://www.bia.gov/sites/default/files/dup/assets/bia/wstreg/Te-Moak_Tribe_of_Western_Shoshone_508.pdf
  93. https://www.energy.gov/indianenergy/te-moak-tribe-western-shoshone-battle-mountain-colony-2012-project
  94. https://www.temoaktribe.com/southfork.shtml
  95. https://www.temoaktribe.com/wells.shtml
  96. https://www.temoaktribe.com/battlemountain.shtml
  97. https://freedomarchives.org/Documents/Finder/DOC35_scans/35.1992Tribunal.CaseofWesternShoshone.pdf
  98. https://www.bia.gov/bia/history/IndianLawPolicy
  99. https://www.sbtribes.com/government/
  100. https://www.congress.gov/committee-report/110th-congress/house-report/815/1
  101. https://ictnews.org/archive/shoshone-and-arapaho-of-wind-river-seek-economic-growth/
  102. https://www.sbtribes.com/economic/
  103. https://www.elyshoshonetribe.com/
  104. https://tribalbusinessnews.com/sections/gaming/15099-shoshone-paiute-tribes-acquire-557-acres-for-first-casino-project
  105. https://grist.org/indigenous/how-a-profit-sharing-agreement-could-be-a-new-model-for-mining-on-indigenous-land/
  106. https://wyofile.com/wind-river-reservation-embarks-on-possibly-largest-economic-development-effort-in-its-history/
  107. https://idahocapitalsun.com/2024/08/20/study-shows-idahos-native-american-tribes-have-nearly-1-5b-economic-impact/
  108. https://www.sbtribes.com/police/
  109. https://mnisose.org/profiles/eshone.htm
  110. https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/Shoshone-Paiute_Tribes
  111. https://www.doi.gov/tribes/enrollment
  112. https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2025/08/22/23-35543.pdf
  113. https://narf.org/ncai-amicus-shoshone-bannock/
  114. https://www.everyculture.com/North-America/Northern-Shoshone-and-Bannock-Kinship.html
  115. https://escholarship.org/content/qt1837x9bg/qt1837x9bg.pdf
  116. https://history.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/0489_Northern-Shoshoni-Family-Organization-and-Culture.pdf
  117. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/38884/38884-h/38884-h.htm
  118. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=12842&context=etd
  119. https://www.studiesincomparativereligion.com/Public/articles/browse_g.aspx?ID=131
  120. https://repository.si.edu/bitstream/handle/10088/22082/bae_bulletin_151_1953_41_397-484.pdf
  121. http://freebooks.uvu.edu/native_american_culture/01_Ute_Culture.php/02_Shoshone_Culture.php
  122. https://escholarship.org/content/qt7n6509pn/qt7n6509pn_noSplash_bd5221fe7a3a9635e891e46b1cb25331.pdf?t=krni40
  123. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6383&context=etd
  124. https://www.bigorrin.org/shoshone_kids.htm
  125. https://solareis.anl.gov/documents/ethnographic/EthnographicAnalysis_Millers.pdf
  126. https://centerofthewest.org/2014/12/28/points-west-online-art-beadwork/
  127. https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep324/usrep324335/usrep324335.pdf
  128. https://www.sbtribes.com/fort-bridger-treaty/
  129. https://peterderrico.substack.com/p/the-western-shoshone-struggle-with
  130. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/324/335/
  131. https://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/federal/documents/western_shoshone.html
  132. https://jacksonholehistory.org/learn/archives-research/wind-river-treaty-documents/
  133. https://www.courthousenews.com/ninth-circuit-revives-treaty-hunting-claims-from-the-northwestern-band-of-the-shoshone-nation/
  134. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24497466
  135. https://law.arizona.edu/western-shoshone
  136. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/470/39/
  137. https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/470/39
  138. https://hrlibrary.umn.edu/cases/75-02a.html
  139. https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/cafc/07-5020/07-5020-2011-03-27.pdf?ts=1411144728
  140. https://www.hcn.org/issues/issue-231/land-or-money/
  141. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/federal-claims/cofce/1:2006cv00896/21866/216/
  142. https://www.hrw.org/report/2025/02/06/the-land-of-our-people-forever/united-states-human-rights-violations-against-the
  143. https://cidh.oas.org/annualrep/99eng/admissible/U.S.11140.htm
  144. https://ictnews.org/archive/for-the-western-shoshone-theft-is-theft-even-when-by-congress/
  145. https://ictnews.org/archive/western-shoshone-land-fight-heads-to-congress/
  146. https://www.adobegallery.com/origin/Shoshone
  147. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/06/complete-2020-census-count-vital-for-tribal-areas.html
  148. https://indian.utah.gov/northwestern-band-of-shoshone/
  149. https://www.elyshoshonetribe.com/about
  150. https://ballotpedia.org/Shoshone-Paiute_of_the_Duck_Valley_Indian_Reservation
  151. https://jacksonholehistory.org/learn/archives-research/chief-washakie-of-the-shoshone-a-photographic-essay-by-henry-e-stamm-iv-ph-d/
  152. https://www.wyominghistoryday.org/theme-topics/chief-washakie
  153. https://historytogo.utah.gov/pocatello-chief/
  154. https://www.thelatinlibrary.com/chron/civilwarnotes/pocatello.html
  155. https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/show/archives-on-the-air/2025-01-07/chief-tendoy-454-blanche-schroer-papers
  156. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1193&context=msr2
  157. https://extension.usu.edu/sustainability/blog/interview-with-darren-parry
  158. https://www.hcn.org/issues/56-2/social-justice-the-northwestern-shoshone-are-restoring-the-bear-river-massacre-site/
  159. https://search.worldcat.org/title/Spirit-rider-:-a-collection-of-contemporary-poetry-in-the-Shoshoni-language/oclc/49899815
  160. https://www.hawkerfuneralhome.com/obituaries/Ronald-Snake-Edmo
  161. https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/thinkwy-radio/2019-04-05/eastern-shoshone-tribal-leader-ivan-posey-born-to-lead-on-the-reservation
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.