A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P R S T U V W X Z

The Jesuits in North America in the Seventeenth Century

F >> Francis Parkman >> The Jesuits in North America in the Seventeenth Century




[ The Jesuit Brébeuf, than whom no one knew the Hurons better, is very
emphatic in praise of their harmony and social spirit. Speaking of one
of the four nations of which the Hurons were composed, he says: "Ils ont
vne douceur et vne affabilité quasi incroyable pour des Sauuages; ils ne
se picquent pas aisément. . . . Ils se maintiennent dans cette si
parfaite intelligence par les frequentes visites, les secours qu'ils se
donnent mutuellement dans leurs maladies, par les festins et les
alliances. . . . Ils sont moins en leurs Cabanes que chez leurs
amis. . . S'ils ont vn bon morceau, ils en font festin à leurs amis, et
ne le mangent quasi iamais en leur particulier," etc.--Relation des
Hurons, 1636, 118. ]

Contrary to the received opinion, these Indians, like others of their
race, when living in communities, were of a very social disposition.
Besides their incessant dances and feasts, great and small, they were
continually visiting, spending most of their time in their neighbors'
houses, chatting, joking, bantering one another with witticisms, sharp,
broad, and in no sense delicate, yet always taken in good part. Every
village had its adepts in these wordy tournaments, while the shrill laugh
of young squaws, untaught to blush, echoed each hardy jest or rough
sarcasm.

In the organization of the savage communities of the continent, one
feature, more or less conspicuous, continually appears. Each nation or
tribe--to adopt the names by which these communities are usually
known--is subdivided into several clans. These clans are not locally
separate, but are mingled throughout the nation. All the members of each
clan are, or are assumed to be, intimately joined in consanguinity.
Hence it is held an abomination for two persons of the same clan to
intermarry; and hence, again, it follows that every family must contain
members of at least two clans. Each clan has its name, as the clan of
the Hawk, of the Wolf, or of the Tortoise; and each has for its emblem
the figure of the beast, bird, reptile, plant, or other object, from
which its name is derived. This emblem, called totem by the Algonquins,
is often tattooed on the clansman's body, or rudely painted over the
entrance of his lodge. The child belongs, in most cases, to the clan,
not of the father, but of the mother. In other words, descent, not of
the totem alone, but of all rank, titles, and possessions, is through the
female. The son of a chief can never be a chief by hereditary title,
though he may become so by force of personal influence or achievement.
Neither can he inherit from his father so much as a tobacco-pipe.
All possessions alike pass of right to the brothers of the chief, or to
the sons of his sisters, since these are all sprung from a common mother.
This rule of descent was noticed by Champlain among the Hurons in 1615.
That excellent observer refers it to an origin which is doubtless its
true one. The child may not be the son of his reputed father, but must
be the son of his mother,--a consideration of more than ordinary force in
an Indian community.

[ "Les enfans ne succedent iamais aux biens et dignitez de leurs peres,
doubtant comme i'ay dit de leur geniteur, mais bien font-ils leurs
successeurs et heritiers, les enfans de leurs sœurs, et desquels ils sont
asseurez d'estre yssus et sortis."--Champlain (1627), 91.

Captain John Smith had observed the same, several years before, among the
tribes of Virginia: "For the Crowne, their heyres inherite not, but the
first heyres of the Sisters."--True Relation, 43 (ed. Deane). ]

This system of clanship, with the rule of descent usually belonging to it,
was of very wide prevalence. Indeed, it is more than probable that close
observation would have detected it in every tribe east of the
Mississippi; while there is positive evidence of its existence in by far
the greater number. It is found also among the Dahcotah and other tribes
west of the Mississippi; and there is reason to believe it universally
prevalent as far as the Rocky Mountains, and even beyond them. The fact
that with most of these hordes there is little property worth
transmission, and that the most influential becomes chief, with little
regard to inheritance, has blinded casual observers to the existence of
this curious system.

It was found in full development among the Creeks, Choctaws, Cherokees,
and other Southern tribes, including that remarkable people, the Natchez,
who, judged by their religious and political institutions, seem a
detached offshoot of the Toltec family. It is no less conspicuous among
the roving Algonquins of the extreme North, where the number of totems is
almost countless. Everywhere it formed the foundation of the polity of
all the tribes, where a polity could be said to exist.

The Franciscans and Jesuits, close students of the languages and
superstitions of the Indians, were by no means so zealous to analyze
their organization and government. In the middle of the seventeenth
century the Hurons as a nation had ceased to exist, and their political
portraiture, as handed down to us, is careless and unfinished. Yet some
decisive features are plainly shown. The Huron nation was a confederacy
of four distinct contiguous nations, afterwards increased to five by the
addition of the Tionnontates;--it was divided into clans;--it was
governed by chiefs, whose office was hereditary through the female;--the
power of these chiefs, though great, was wholly of a persuasive or
advisory character;--there were two principal chiefs, one for peace,
the other for war;--there were chiefs assigned to special national
functions, as the charge of the great Feast of the Dead, the direction of
trading voyages to other nations, etc.;--there were numerous other chiefs,
equal in rank, but very unequal in influence, since the measure of their
influence depended on the measure of their personal ability;--each nation
of the confederacy had a separate organization, but at certain periods
grand councils of the united nations were held, at which were present,
not chiefs only, but also a great concourse of the people; and at these
and other councils the chiefs and principal men voted on proposed
measures by means of small sticks or reeds, the opinion of the plurality
ruling.

[ These facts are gathered here and there from Champlain, Sagard,
Bressani, and the Jesuit Relations prior to 1650. Of the Jesuits,
Brébeuf is the most full and satisfactory. Lafitau and Charlevoix knew
the Huron institutions only through others.

The names of the four confederate Huron nations were the Ataronchronons,
Attignenonghac, Attignaouentans, and Ahrendarrhonons. There was also a
subordinate "nation" called Tohotaenrat, which had but one town. (See
the map of the Huron Country.) They all bore the name of some animal or
other object: thus the Attignaouentans were the Nation of the Bear.
As the clans are usually named after animals, this makes confusion,
and may easily lead to error. The Bear Nation was the principal member
of the league. ]


THE IROQUOIS.

The Iroquois were a people far more conspicuous in history, and their
institutions are not yet extinct. In early and recent times, they have
been closely studied, and no little light has been cast upon a subject as
difficult and obscure as it is curious. By comparing the statements of
observers, old and new, the character of their singular organization
becomes sufficiently clear.

[ Among modern students of Iroquois institutions, a place far in advance
of all others is due to Lewis H. Morgan, himself an Iroquois by adoption,
and intimate with the race from boyhood. His work, The League of the
Iroquois, is a production of most thorough and able research, conducted
under peculiar advantages, and with the aid of an efficient co-laborer,
Hasanoanda (Ely S. Parker), an educated and highly intelligent Iroquois
of the Seneca nation. Though often differing widely from Mr. Morgan's
conclusions, I cannot bear a too emphatic testimony to the value of his
researches. The Notes on the Iroquois of Mr. H. R. Schoolcraft also
contain some interesting facts; but here, as in all Mr. Schoolcraft's
productions, the reader must scrupulously reserve his right of private
judgment. None of the old writers are so satisfactory as Lafitau.
His work, Mœurs des Sauvages Ameriquains comparées aux Mœurs des Premiers
Temps, relates chiefly to the Iroquois and Hurons: the basis for his
account of the former being his own observations and those of Father
Julien Garnier, who was a missionary among them more than sixty years,
from his novitiate to his death. ]

Both reason and tradition point to the conclusion, that the Iroquois
formed originally one undivided people. Sundered, like countless other
tribes, by dissension, caprice, or the necessities of the hunter life,
they separated into five distinct nations, cantoned from east to west
along the centre of New York, in the following order: Mohawks, Oneidas,
Onondagas, Cayugas, Senecas. There was discord among them; wars followed,
and they lived in mutual fear, each ensconced in its palisaded villages.
At length, says tradition, a celestial being, incarnate on earth,
counselled them to compose their strife and unite in a league of defence
and aggression. Another personage, wholly mortal, yet wonderfully
endowed, a renowned warrior and a mighty magician, stands, with his hair
of writhing snakes, grotesquely conspicuous through the dim light of
tradition at this birth of Iroquois nationality. This was Atotarho,
a chief of the Onondagas; and from this honored source has sprung a long
line of chieftains, heirs not to the blood alone, but to the name of
their great predecessor. A few years since, there lived in Onondaga
Hollow a handsome Indian boy on whom the dwindled remnant of the nation
looked with pride as their destined Atotarho. With earthly and celestial
aid the league was consummated, and through all the land the forests
trembled at the name of the Iroquois.

The Iroquois people was divided into eight clans. When the original
stock was sundered into five parts, each of these clans was also sundered
into five parts; and as, by the principle already indicated, the clans
were intimately mingled in every village, hamlet, and cabin, each one of
the five nations had its portion of each of the eight clans. [ 1 ]
When the league was formed, these separate portions readily resumed their
ancient tie of fraternity. Thus, of the Turtle clan, all the members
became brothers again, nominal members of one family, whether Mohawks,
Oneidas, Onondagas, Cayugas, or Senecas; and so, too, of the remaining
clans. All the Iroquois, irrespective of nationality, were therefore
divided into eight families, each tracing its descent to a common mother,
and each designated by its distinctive emblem or totem. This connection
of clan or family was exceedingly strong, and by it the five nations of
the league were linked together as by an eightfold chain.

[ 1 With a view to clearness, the above statement is made categorical.
It requires, however, to be qualified. It is not quite certain, that,
at the formation of the confederacy, there were eight clans, though there
is positive proof of the existence of seven. Neither is it certain, that,
at the separation, every clan was represented in every nation. Among the
Mohawks and Oneidas there is no positive proof of the existence of more
than three clans,--the Wolf, Bear, and Tortoise; though there is
presumptive evidence of the existence of several others.--See Morgan, 81,
note.

The eight clans of the Iroquois were as follows: Wolf, Bear, Beaver,
Tortoise, Deer, Snipe, Heron, Hawk. (Morgan, 79.) The clans of the
Snipe and the Heron are the same designated in an early French document
as La famille du Petit Pluvier and La famille du Grand Pluvier. (New
York Colonial Documents, IX. 47.) The anonymous author of this document
adds a ninth clan, that of the Potato, meaning the wild Indian potato,
Glycine apios. This clan, if it existed, was very inconspicuous, and of
little importance.

Remarkable analogies exist between Iroquois clanship and that of other
tribes. The eight clans of the Iroquois were separated into two
divisions, four in each. Originally, marriage was interdicted between
all the members of the same division, but in time the interdict was
limited to the members of the individual clans. Another tribe, the
Choctaws, remote from the Iroquois, and radically different in language,
had also eight clans, similarly divided, with a similar interdict of
marriage.--Gallatin, Synopsis, 109.

The Creeks, according to the account given by their old chief, Sekopechi,
to Mr. D. W. Eakins, were divided into nine clans, named in most cases
from animals: clanship being transmitted, as usual, through the female. ]

The clans were by no means equal in numbers, influence, or honor.
So marked were the distinctions among them, that some of the early
writers recognize only the three most conspicuous,--those of the Tortoise,
the Bear, and the Wolf. To some of the clans, in each nation, belonged
the right of giving a chief to the nation and to the league. Others had
the right of giving three, or, in one case, four chiefs; while others
could give none. As Indian clanship was but an extension of the family
relation, these chiefs were, in a certain sense, hereditary; but the law
of inheritance, though binding, was extremely elastic, and capable of
stretching to the farthest limits of the clan. The chief was almost
invariably succeeded by a near relative, always through the female,
as a brother by the same mother, or a nephew by the sister's side.
But if these were manifestly unfit, they were passed over, and a chief
was chosen at a council of the clan from among remoter kindred. In these
cases, the successor is said to have been nominated by the matron of the
late chief's household. [ Lafitau, I. 471. ] Be this as it may, the
choice was never adverse to the popular inclination. The new chief was
"raised up," or installed, by a formal council of the sachems of the
league; and on entering upon his office, he dropped his own name, and
assumed that which, since the formation of the league, had belonged to
this especial chieftainship.

The number of these principal chiefs, or, as they have been called by way
of distinction, sachems, varied in the several nations from eight to
fourteen. The sachems of the five nations, fifty in all, assembled in
council, formed the government of the confederacy. All met as equals,
but a peculiar dignity was ever attached to the Atotarho of the Onondagas.

There was a class of subordinate chiefs, in no sense hereditary, but
rising to office by address, ability, or valor. Yet the rank was clearly
defined, and the new chief installed at a formal council. This class
embodied, as might be supposed, the best talent of the nation, and the
most prominent warriors and orators of the Iroquois have belonged to it.
In its character and functions, however, it was purely civil. Like the
sachems, these chiefs held their councils, and exercised an influence
proportionate to their number and abilities.

There was another council, between which and that of the subordinate
chiefs the line of demarcation seems not to have been very definite.
The Jesuit Lafitau calls it "the senate." Familiar with the Iroquois at
the height of their prosperity, he describes it as the central and
controlling power, so far, at least, as the separate nations were
concerned. In its character it was essentially popular, but popular in
the best sense, and one which can find its application only in a small
community. Any man took part in it whose age and experience qualified
him to do so. It was merely the gathered wisdom of the nation. Lafitau
compares it to the Roman Senate, in the early and rude age of the
Republic, and affirms that it loses nothing by the comparison. He thus
describes it: "It is a greasy assemblage, sitting _sur leur derrière_,
crouched like apes, their knees as high as their ears, or lying, some on
their bellies, some on their backs, each with a pipe in his mouth,
discussing affairs of state with as much coolness and gravity as the
Spanish Junta or the Grand Council of Venice." [ Lafitau, I. 478. ]

The young warriors had also their councils; so, too, had the women; and
the opinions and wishes of each were represented by means of deputies
before the "senate," or council of the old men, as well as before the
grand confederate council of the sachems.

The government of this unique republic resided wholly in councils.
By councils all questions were settled, all regulations established,--
social, political, military, and religious. The war-path, the chase,
the council-fire,--in these was the life of the Iroquois; and it is hard
to say to which of the three he was most devoted.

The great council of the fifty sachems formed, as we have seen, the
government of the league. Whenever a subject arose before any of the
nations, of importance enough to demand its assembling, the sachems of
that nation might summon their colleagues by means of runners, bearing
messages and belts of wampum. The usual place of meeting was the valley
of Onondaga, the political as well as geographical centre of the
confederacy. Thither, if the matter were one of deep and general
interest, not the sachems alone, but the greater part of the population,
gathered from east and west, swarming in the hospitable lodges of the
town, or bivouacked by thousands in the surrounding fields and forests.
While the sachems deliberated in the council-house, the chiefs and old
men, the warriors, and often the women, were holding their respective
councils apart; and their opinions, laid by their deputies before the
council of sachems, were never without influence on its decisions.

The utmost order and deliberation reigned in the council, with rigorous
adherence to the Indian notions of parliamentary propriety. The
conference opened with an address to the spirits, or the chief of all the
spirits. There was no heat in debate. No speaker interrupted another.
Each gave his opinion in turn, supporting it with what reason or rhetoric
he could command,--but not until he had stated the subject of discussion
in full, to prove that he understood it, repeating also the arguments,
pro and con, of previous speakers. Thus their debates were excessively
prolix; and the consumption of tobacco was immoderate. The result,
however, was a thorough sifting of the matter in hand; while the
practised astuteness of these savage politicians was a marvel to their
civilized contemporaries. "It is by a most subtle policy," says Lafitau,
"that they have taken the ascendant over the other nations, divided and
overcome the most warlike, made themselves a terror to the most remote,
and now hold a peaceful neutrality between the French and English,
courted and feared by both."

[ Lafitau, I. 480.--Many other French writers speak to the same effect.
The following are the words of the soldier historian, La Potherie,
after describing the organization of the league: "C'est donc là cette
politique qui les unit si bien, à peu près comme tous les ressorts d'une
horloge, qui par une liaison admirable de toutes les parties qui les
composent, contribuent toutes unanimement au merveilleux effet qui en
resulte."--Hist. de l'Amérique Septentrionale, III. 32.--He adds: "Les
François ont avoüé eux-mêmes qu'ils étoient nez pour la guerre, &
quelques maux qu'ils nous ayent faits nous les avons toujours estimez."--
Ibid., 2.--La Potherie's book was published in 1722. ]

Unlike the Hurons, they required an entire unanimity in their decisions.
The ease and frequency with which a requisition seemingly so difficult
was fulfilled afford a striking illustration of Indian nature,--on one
side, so stubborn, tenacious, and impracticable; on the other, so pliant
and acquiescent. An explanation of this harmony is to be found also in
an intense spirit of nationality: for never since the days of Sparta were
individual life and national life more completely fused into one.

The sachems of the league were likewise, as we have seen, sachems of
their respective nations; yet they rarely spoke in the councils of the
subordinate chiefs and old men, except to present subjects of discussion.
[ Lafitau, I. 479. ] Their influence in these councils was, however,
great, and even paramount; for they commonly succeeded in securing to
their interest some of the most dexterous and influential of the conclave,
through whom, while they themselves remained in the background, they
managed the debates.

[ The following from Lafitau is very characteristic: "Ce que je dis de
leur zèle pour le bien public n'est cependant pas si universel, que
plusieurs ne pensent à leur interêts particuliers, & que les Chefs
(sachems) principalement ne fassent joüer plusieurs ressorts secrets pour
venir à bout de leurs intrigues. Il y en a tel, dont l'adresse jouë si
bien à coup sûr, qu'il fait déliberer le Conseil plusieurs jours de suite,
sur une matière dont la détermination est arrêtée entre lui & les
principales têtes avant d'avoir été mise sur le tapis. Cependant comme
les Chefs s'entre-regardent, & qu'aucun ne veut paroître se donner une
superiorité qui puisse piquer la jalousie, ils se ménagent dans les
Conseils plus que les autres; & quoiqu'ils en soient l'ame, leur
politique les oblige à y parler peu, & à écouter plûtôt le sentiment
d'autrui, qu'à y dire le leur; mais chacun a un homme à sa main, qui est
comme une espèce de Brûlot, & qui étant sans consequence pour sa personne
hazarde en pleine liberté tout ce qu'il juge à propos, selon qu'il l'a
concerté avec le Chef même pour qui il agit."--Mœurs des Sauvages,
I. 481. ]

There was a class of men among the Iroquois always put forward on public
occasions to speak the mind of the nation or defend its interests.
Nearly all of them were of the number of the subordinate chiefs. Nature
and training had fitted them for public speaking, and they were deeply
versed in the history and traditions of the league. They were in fact
professed orators, high in honor and influence among the people. To a
huge stock of conventional metaphors, the use of which required nothing
but practice, they often added an astute intellect, an astonishing memory,
and an eloquence which deserved the name.

In one particular, the training of these savage politicians was never
surpassed. They had no art of writing to record events, or preserve the
stipulations of treaties. Memory, therefore, was tasked to the utmost,
and developed to an extraordinary degree. They had various devices for
aiding it, such as bundles of sticks, and that system of signs, emblems,
and rude pictures, which they shared with other tribes. Their famous
wampum-belts were so many mnemonic signs, each standing for some act,
speech, treaty, or clause of a treaty. These represented the public
archives, and were divided among various custodians, each charged with
the memory and interpretation of those assigned to him. The meaning of
the belts was from time to time expounded in their councils. In
conferences with them, nothing more astonished the French, Dutch, and
English officials than the precision with which, before replying to their
addresses, the Indian orators repeated them point by point.

It was only in rare cases that crime among the Iroquois or Hurons was
punished by public authority. Murder, the most heinous offence, except
witchcraft, recognized among them, was rare. If the slayer and the slain
were of the same household or clan, the affair was regarded as a family
quarrel, to be settled by the immediate kin on both sides. This, under
the pressure of public opinion, was commonly effected without bloodshed,
by presents given in atonement. But if the murderer and his victim were
of different clans or different nations, still more, if the slain was a
foreigner, the whole community became interested to prevent the discord
or the war which might arise. All directed their efforts, not to bring
the murderer to punishment, but to satisfy the injured parties by a
vicarious atonement. [ Lalemant, while inveighing against a practice
which made the public, and not the criminal, answerable for an offence,
admits that heinous crimes were more rare than in France, where the
guilty party himself was punished.--Lettre au P. Provincial, 15 May,
1645. ] To this end, contributions were made and presents collected.
Their number and value were determined by established usage. Among the
Hurons, thirty presents of very considerable value were the price of a
man's life. That of a woman's was fixed at forty, by reason of her
weakness, and because on her depended the continuance and increase of the
population. This was when the slain belonged to the nation. If of a
foreign tribe, his death demanded a higher compensation, since it involved
the danger of war. [ Ragueneau, Relation des Hurons, 1648, 80. ]
These presents were offered in solemn council, with prescribed
formalities. The relatives of the slain might refuse them, if they chose,
and in this case the murderer was given them as a slave; but they might
by no means kill him, since, in so doing, they would incur public censure,
and be compelled in their turn to make atonement. Besides the principal
gifts, there was a great number of less value, all symbolical, and each
delivered with a set form of words: as, "By this we wash out the blood of
the slain: By this we cleanse his wound: By this we clothe his corpse
with a new shirt: By this we place food on his grave": and so, in endless
prolixity, through particulars without number.

Copyright (c) 2007. famouswriterz.com. All rights reserved.