Each totem of the Lenape recognized a chieftain,âpé called sachem, _sakima_, a word found in most Algonkin dialects, with slight variations (Chip. _ogima_, Cree, _okimaw_, Pequot, _sachimma_), and derived from a root _ôki_, signifying above in space, and by a transfer frequent in all languages, above in power. Thus, in Cree,[78] we have _sâkamow_, "il projecte, il montre la tête," and in Delaware, _w'ochgitschi_, the part above, the upper part (Zeisberger), etc.
It appears from Mr. Morgan's inquiries, that at present and of later years, "the office of sachem is hereditary in the gens, but elective among its members."[79] Loskiel, however, writing on the excellent authority of Zeisberger, states explicitly that the chief of each totem was selected and inaugurated by those of the remaining two.[80] By common and ancient consent, the chief selected from the Turtle totem was head chief of the whole Lenape nation.
These chieftains were the "peace chiefs." They could neither go to war themselves, nor send nor receive the war belt--the ominous string of dark wampum, which indicated that the tempest of strife was to be let loose. Their proper badge was the wampum belt, with a diamond-shaped figure in the centre, worked in white beads, which was the symbol of the peaceful council fire, and was called by that name.
War was declared by the people at the instigation of the "war captains," valorous braves of any birth or family who had distinguished themselves by personal prowess, and especially by good success in forays against the enemy.[81]
Nor did the authority of the chiefs extend to any infringement on the traditional rights of the gens, as, for instance, that of blood revenge. The ignorance of this limitation of the central power led to various misunderstandings at the time, on the part of the colonial authorities, and since then, by later historians. Thus, in 1728, "the Delaware Indians on Brandywine" were summoned by the Governor to answer about a murder. Their chief, Civility, answered that it was committed by the Minisinks, "over whom they had no authority."[82] This did not mean but that in some matters authority could be exerted, but not in a question relating to a feud of blood.