Governance Before Contact

How a Nation Chose Its Leaders

Before European ships reached the shores of this continent, the nêhiyawak, the Plains Cree, already had a system of government. At the centre of it stood the okimâw, the leader of a band. An okimâw's title was not passed down like a crown. A chief's son inherited nothing but the chance to prove himself. According to anthropologist David Mandelbaum, who studied nêhiyawak society, a man became okimâw by demonstrating the qualities his people expected of a leader: courage in battle, skill as a hunter, wisdom in council, and the ability to persuade others through speech rather than force.

Generosity mattered as much as bravery. Chief Thunderchild told the writer Edward Ahenakew, “There was no selfishness. It is an Indian custom to share with others. That has always been so; the strong take care of the poor; there is usually enough for all.” An okimâw was expected to feed and house visitors, give away his own possessions, and settle disputes through gifts rather than punishment. A leader who hoarded wealth or ignored the needs of his band lost the respect that gave him authority in the first place. This was accountability built directly into the role, long before written constitutions arrived on the plains.

Council, Consensus, and Shared Responsibility

An okimâw never governed alone. He relied on a council of respected men and elders, including headmen who carried his messages, advised his decisions, and represented the band when several groups gathered together. Major decisions, where to move camp, whether to go to war, how to settle a dispute, were worked out through discussion until the group reached an agreement everyone could accept. This is consensus decision-making, and it works differently from a vote, where one side wins and the other simply loses.

Order within the camp was the job of the okihtcitawak, warrior societies responsible for policing the buffalo hunt, guarding the camp during moves, and organizing ceremonies. Unlike the okimâw, whose position rested on accumulated prestige, the leader of the okihtcitawak was elected directly by the warriors themselves. Nêhiyawak governance combined several kinds of authority working side by side: inherited prestige, elected leadership, and communal counsel. None of these roles worked without the labour of women, who prepared camp, tanned hides, cooked for guests, and made the gifts that let an okimâw meet his obligations. A chief's authority rested on an entire community doing its part, not on one man ruling by decree.

Piapot and Governance in the Qu'Appelle Valley

Payipwât, known as Chief Piapot, shows what this system looked like in practice, close to home. Born around 1816, he became okimâw of the Young Dogs, a Cree-Assiniboine band whose territory stretched across the Qu'Appelle Valley into what is now Saskatchewan, Montana, and North Dakota. He earned that position the way nêhiyawak custom required: as a skilled hunter, a respected spiritual leader, and a man who could hold together a band that included both Cree and Sioux-speaking people.

Piapot's leadership was tested directly by the arrival of the Canadian government. He was away hunting when Treaty 4 was first negotiated at Fort Qu'Appelle in 1874, and he did not sign until 1875, after meeting Commissioner William Christie and demanding guarantees around farm instructors, tools, and medical assistance for his people. He believed he had negotiated a preliminary agreement open to change. The government disagreed, and many of the terms he asked for did not appear until Treaty 6 was signed the following year. Piapot spent the rest of his life pressing Ottawa to honour promises he believed it had made, refusing to abandon the Sun Dance even after it was banned in 1892, and accepting imprisonment in 1902 rather than give up a ceremony central to his nation's law and spiritual life.

Piapot First Nation, one of the Treaty 4 communities in the File Hills Qu'Appelle Tribal Council today, carries his name. That is not a coincidence. It is a record of a leader who was chosen, tested, and remembered by his own people for exactly the qualities nêhiyawak governance always demanded.

Systems like this are sometimes dismissed as informal or simple, especially when compared to European monarchies or parliaments on paper. But nêhiyawak governance had exactly what any functioning government needs: a method for choosing leaders, a process for making collective decisions, mechanisms for enforcing order, and standards a leader could fail to meet. It asked more of its leaders than many governments do today, since an okimâw who stopped being generous or stopped listening in council could simply lose the people willing to follow him. Recognizing this is part of recognizing First Nations in Treaty 4 territory, and across Canada, as self-determining nations that governed themselves long before contact and that continue to assert that same right today.