Talk:Wampum

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Numismatics Mid‑importance

	Numismatics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Numismatics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of numismatics and currencies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NumismaticsWikipedia:WikiProject NumismaticsTemplate:WikiProject Numismaticsnumismatic articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tori... huh?[edit]

"Musician Tori Amos composed a short Prayer on her Scarlet's Walk album, which is thematically very Native-oriented. The song briefly addresses the Trail of Tears, as well as the importance of prayer to the Aboriginal American peoples"

What does this have to do with Wampum? --babbage 19:37, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, it's Wampum Prayer. Fair enough, and fixed. --babbage 19:40, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Energies?[edit]

Can anyone explain exactly how wampum is related to these vague mystical energies? Is this a historical fact, or a modern use of wampum? What groups or individuals use or view it that way?

Wampum represents something, a memory, an agreement, etc. Perhaps it was more like a contract than money, since it was more specific. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.191.8.192 (talk) 05:56:47, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

William Sidis said that these were traditionally used as documentation, going so far as saying they used a language where beads represented definite ideas which was known among all the tribal nations so treaties could be formed between people who could not communicate otherwise. He heavily researched this leading to his 10000 year history of America "The Tribes and the States", available online. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.244.44 (talk) 18:28, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chiming in many years later... I believe that perhaps the reason you are confused is that not mentioned in this article is that there are feelings similar to the Roman gravitas and auctorictas that walk with wampum. You do not just pick it up and hold wampum; you EARN wampum from saying the hard thing instead of the easy thing. So some people that tend to do this are authority and spiritual figures. So perhaps this is what was meant by "mystical." Abesottedphoenix (talk) 03:57, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment culled from article[edit]

Please note: This illustration differs from the photo at The National Museum of the American Indian, NYC: http://americanindian.si.edu/searchcollections/item.aspx?irn=57011&&objmatbroad=Beads&objmatspec=Whelk%20shell%20beads%20(white%20wampum)

Before or after European contact?[edit]

The article says "... it is the belts in total that are wampum. Belts of wampum were not produced until after European contact," but it also says "When Europeans came to the Americas, they realized the importance of wampum to Native people." Those two statements seem contradictory to me. If wampum was important before the Europeans arrived, then it must have been produced before the Europeans arrived. I'm not seeing a citation for the "not produced until" sentence, which seems oddly out of place in its section, and the rest of the article seems to me to imply in various ways that wampum was part of a long-established tradition before the Europeans arrived. So I kinda suspect that the "not produced until" sentence isn't true. I've marked it as "citation needed," but figured I'd also post here to see if anyone had sources or info. --Elysdir (talk) 18:03, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ooooh this is hard. My inclination is not to agree, too. Perhaps this might help: before there were loom woven belts, there were individual beads. Before there were individual beads, there were simple drilled shells. All of these are wampum. (If they're white, technically. Though that term was expanded in meaning over time to mean both white and all shell colours.) The simplest form certainly predated Colonisation. I am not sure I believe that belts were not produced before Europeans. There would be no technical reason they could not have predated Colonials. I say this because the technology one needed for production of the belts already existed before the Colonists. Think about it. You need: shells, sinew, leather, and summat to drill the shells (Usually bone, mebbe quartz, unusually metal, hard wood in a pinch {not very effective}.) to produce a belt. We are not known for being reserved in our arts: we are known for being ornate. That said, I think that it is very safe to say that the drill technology and availability DID change with Colonisation. The introduction of metals into the trade routes would have made for easier construction of drills. It's not that there *wasn't* metal before the Colonists, there was just much less uncovered. Does this make more sense to you? (Whoops, not logged in. XD) Abesottedphoenix (talk) 03:56, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation in 'origin' section[edit]

I have had to remove the existing 'origin' section, as it was a blatant copyright violation of material from the Smithsonian's website [1] (dated 2009 - there is no possibility that it was copied from here). For the moment, I've restored the section as it was in August 2014, prior to the copy-pasting of material by IP 67.246.181.163. Clearly we can cite the Smithsonian source, and update the section accordingly, but the copy-pasted material must not be restored - Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:31, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removed "clams" claim[edit]

I removed the uncited claim "The slang phrases "clams" and "shelling out" come from wampum." The Historical Dictionary of American Slang shows the first citation of "clam" in this sense from 1886. It seem highly dubious that this was derived from wampum, which had not been used for money for nearly two hundred years at that time. This can be reinstated if a citation is found. Mnudelman (talk) 20:57, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Wampum/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

In the article it is stated that Wampum is still used as currency. It would interest me to have this statement expanded to include where this is and what unit value system is used.

Last edited at 22:10, 13 April 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 10:12, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Another incorrect claim[edit]

Quote: "The clams and whelks used for making wampum are found only along Long Island Sound and Narragansett Bay. "

Obviously wrong -- easily disproved. It's a shame this article is so unreliable. This is a very important historical topic.

Also basically absurd: "Cayuga, Shinnecock, Wampanoag, and other Northeastern Woodland tribes still use wampum today."

Badiacrushed (talk) 13:02, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ Badiacrushed: I deleted the second sentence re: tribes still using it today, considering that the Wampanoag and Shinnecock tribes don't even exist today; not sure about Cayuga. As to the source being only in Narragansett Bay, that is in fact a local tradition, widely claimed in New England. If you can "easily disprove" it, please do so and make the article more accurate. —Dilidor (talk) 12:11, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok....contrary to your certain knowledge, the Shinnecock group continues..and so also the Cayuga. (Perhaps look it up on Wikipedia)....whether wampum is actually useful as currency out in the Hamptons of Long Island (Shinnecock's location)....I'd be cautious....

As for notion that quahogs and welks exist ONLY in Narragansett Bay, well, I think I'll just clam up on that.....(try a little research).

Badiacrushed (talk) 15:34, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quick googling shows that the Mashpee Wampanoag held a powwow in Falmouth, Massachusetts last July. The Aquinnah Wampanoag are active on Martha’s Vineyard.

Wikipedia tells me that the distribution of Mercenaria mercenaria extends from Prince Edward Island to the Yucatan peninsula, with a distinctive strain of quahog around Wellfleet, a fair distance from Narragansett Bay. Just plain Bill (talk) 17:17, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ Badiacrushed: "Try a little courtesy." Your ignorance is exceeded only by your belligerence. At no time have I asserted anything concerning the quahogs of Narragansett Bay; the only assertions made here have come from you. I politely made the edit concerning modern use of wampum, and you use that as an opportunity to pontificate and posture. Spare me any further spewings. —Dilidor (talk) 19:39, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you're figuring it out. So sorry about my ignorance!

Badiacrushed (talk) 01:25, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

David Graeber Source[edit]

I just added several paragraphs and quotations from Toward an Anthropological Theory of Value by David Graeber. It is a wonderful source, and includes an entire chapter on the Wampum. To fully utilize the source, however, the section "Among the Iroquois" should be split apart to include his sections on the Wampum and dreams, etc. could be included.

EverydayEditor (talk) 16:50, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Wampum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:53, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Economic uses among Indians[edit]

@EverydayEditor and Dilidor: As it currently stands, this article describes cultural uses of Wampum among natives and economic uses among Europeans, but not economic uses among natives. A hasty glance indicates that David Graeber basically seems to say that native uses weren't economic, but Economy of the Iroquois seems to suggest otherwise. Additional material should be added to this article to clarify the issue, even if it is only to say that scholars disagree. (I haven't checked.) Whoever edits this should certainly be familiar with the notion of a gift economy. Daask (talk) 17:01, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wampum not always beads[edit]

The article describes wampum as a system of beads, and of writing conveying social messages. This is indeed accurate. It helped delineate a formal system of friendship, treaties and other social customs and needs. In most cases, it was In the context of how wampum was delivered or socially given that defined its purpose. For example, wampum of long, black, ratty coarse hair from an old woman or tail hair from animals could be woven into a loose weave. A warrior would approach the opposing sachem in his wigwam and thrown down such wampum, thus 'the war wampum was delivered' before storming out. ```` ItsACityOfApes (talk) 03:28, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]