GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS ON THE RED RACE.
Natural religions the unaided attempts of man to find out God,
modified by peculiarities of race and nation.—The peculiarities of
the red race: 1. Its languages unfriendly to abstract ideas. Native
modes of writing by means of pictures, symbols, objects, and
phonetic signs. These various methods compared in their influence
on the intellectual faculties. 2. Its isolation, unique in the
history of the world. 3. Beyond all others, a hunting
race.—Principal linguistic subdivisions: 1. The Eskimos. 2. The
Athapascas. 3. The Algonkins and Iroquois. 4. The Apalachian
tribes. 5. The Dakotas. 6. The Aztecs. 7. The Mayas. 8. The
Muyscas. 9. The Quichuas. 10. The Caribs and Tupis. 11. The
Araucanians.—General course of migrations.—Age of man in
America.—Unity of type in the red race.
When Paul, at the request of the philosophers of Athens, explained to
them his views on divine things, he asserted, among other startling
novelties, that “God has made of one blood all nations of the earth,
that they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him and
find him, though he is not far from every one of us.”
Here was an orator advocating the unity of the human species, affirming
that the chief end of man is to develop an innate idea of God, and that
all religions, except the one he preached, were examples of more or
less unsuccessful attempts to do so. No wonder the Athenians, who
acknowledged no kinship to barbarians, who looked dubiously at the
doctrine of innate ideas, and were divided in opinion as to whether
their mythology was a shrewd device of legislators to keep the populace
in subjection, a veiled natural philosophy, or the celestial reflex of
their own history, mocked at such a babbler and went their ways. The
generations of philosophers that followed them partook of their doubts
and approved their opinions, quite down to our own times. But now, after
weighing the question maturely, we are compelled to admit that the
Apostle was not so wide of the mark after all—that, in fact, the latest
and best authorities, with no bias in his favor, support his position
and may almost be said to paraphrase his words. For according to a
writer who ranks second to none in the science of ethnology, the
severest and most recent investigations show that “not only do
acknowledged facts permit the assumption of the unity of the human
species, but this opinion is attended with fewer discrepancies, and has
greater inner consistency than the opposite one of specific
diversity.”2-1 And as to the religions of heathendom, the view of
Saint Paul is but expressed with a more poetic turn by a distinguished
living author when he calls them “not fables, but truths, though clothed
in a garb woven by fancy, wherein the web is the notion of God, the
ideal of reason in the soul of man, the thought of the Infinite.”2-2
Inspiration and science unite therefore to bid us dismiss the effete
prejudice that natural religions either arise as the ancient
philosophies taught, or that they are, as the Dark Ages imagined, subtle
nets of the devil spread to catch human souls. They are rather the
unaided attempts of man to find out God; they are the efforts of the
reason struggling to define the infinite; they are the expressions of
that “yearning after the gods” which the earliest of poets discerned in
the hearts of all men. Studied in this sense they are rich in teachings.
Would we estimate the intellectual and æsthetic culture of a people,
would we generalize the laws of progress, would we appreciate the
sublimity of Christianity, and read the seals of its authenticity: the
natural conceptions of divinity reveal them. No mythologies are so
crude, therefore, none so barbarous, but deserve the attention of the
philosophic mind, for they are never the empty fictions of an idle
fancy, but rather the utterances, however inarticulate, of an immortal
and ubiquitous intuition.
These considerations embolden me to approach with some confidence even
the aboriginal religions of America, so often stigmatized as incoherent
fetichisms, so barren, it has been said, in grand or beautiful
creations. The task bristles with difficulties. Carelessness,
prepossessions, and ignorance have disfigured them with false colors and
foreign additions without number. The first maxim, therefore, must be to
sift and scrutinize authorities, and to reject whatever betrays the
plastic hand of the European. For the religions developed by the red
race, not those mixed creeds learned from foreign invaders, are to be
the subjects of our study. Then will remain the formidable undertaking
of reducing the authentic materials thus obtained to system and order,
and this not by any preconceived theory of what they ought to conform
to, but learning from them the very laws of religious growth they
illustrate. The historian traces the birth of arts, science, and
government to man’s dependence on nature and his fellows for the means
of self-preservation. Not that man receives these endowments from
without, but that the stern step-mother, Nature, forces him by threats
and stripes to develop his own inherent faculties. So with religion: The
idea of God does not, and cannot, proceed from the external world, but,
nevertheless, it finds its historical origin also in the desperate
struggle for life, in the satisfaction of the animal wants and passions,
in those vulgar aims and motives which possessed the mind of the
primitive man to the exclusion of everything else.
There is an ever present embarrassment in such inquiries. In dealing
with these matters beyond the cognizance of the senses, the mind is
forced to express its meaning in terms transferred from sensuous
perceptions, or under symbols borrowed from the material world. These
transfers must be understood, these symbols explained, before the real
meaning of a myth can be reached. He who fails to guess the riddle of
the sphynx, need not hope to gain admittance to the shrine. With
delicate ear the faint whispers of thought must be apprehended which
prompt the intellect when it names the immaterial from the material;
when it chooses from the infinity of visible forms those meet to shadow
forth Divinity.
Two lights will guide us on this venturesome path. Mindful of the
watchword of inductive science, to proceed from the known to the
unknown, the inquiry will be put whether the aboriginal languages of
America employ the same tropes to express such ideas as deity, spirit,
and soul, as our own and kindred tongues. If the answer prove
affirmative, then not only have we gained a firm foothold whence to
survey the whole edifice of their mythology; but from an unexpected
quarter arises evidence of the unity of our species far weightier than
any mere anatomy can furnish, evidence from the living soul, not from
the dead body. True that the science of American linguistics is still in
its infancy, and that a proper handling of the materials it even now
offers involves a more critical acquaintance with its innumerable
dialects than I possess; but though the gleaning be sparse, it is enough
that I break the ground. Secondly, religious rites are living
commentaries on religious beliefs. At first they are rude
representations of the supposed doings of the gods. The Indian
rain-maker mounts to the roof of his hut, and rattling vigorously a dry
gourd containing pebbles, to represent the thunder, scatters water
through a reed on the ground beneath, as he imagines up above in the
clouds do the spirits of the storm. Every spring in ancient Delphi was
repeated in scenic ceremony the combat of Apollo and the Dragon, the
victory of the lord of bright summer over the demon of chilling winter.
Thus do forms and ceremonies reveal the meaning of mythology, and the
origin of its fables.
Let it not be objected that this proposed method of analysis assumes
that religions begin and develop under the operation of inflexible laws.
The soul is shackled by no fatalism. Formative influences there are,
deep seated, far reaching, escaped by few, but like those which of yore
astrologers imputed to the stars, they potently incline, they do not
coerce. Language, pursuits, habits, geographical position, and those
subtle mental traits which make up the characteristics of races and
nations, all tend to deflect from a given standard the religious life of
the individual and the mass. It is essential to give these due weight,
and a necessary preface therefore to an analysis of the myths of the red
race is an enumeration of its peculiarities, and of its chief families
as they were located when first known to the historian.
Of all such modifying circumstances none has greater importance than the
means of expressing and transmitting intellectual action. The spoken and
the written language of a nation reveal to us its prevailing, and to a
certain degree its unavoidable mode of thought. Here the red race offers
a striking phenomenon. There is no other trait that binds together its
scattered clans, and brands them as members of one great family, so
unmistakably as this of language. From the Frozen Ocean to the Land of
Fire, without a single exception, the native dialects, though varying
infinitely in words, are marked by a peculiarity in construction which
is found nowhere else on the globe,6-1 and which is so foreign to the
genius of our tongue that it is no easy matter to explain it. It is
called by philologists the polysynthetic construction. What it is will
best appear by comparison. Every grammatical sentence conveys one
leading idea with its modifications and relations. Now a Chinese would
express these latter by unconnected syllables, the precise bearing of
which could only be guessed by their position; a Greek or a German would
use independent words, indicating their relations by terminations
meaningless in themselves; an Englishman gains the same end chiefly by
the use of particles and by position. Very different from all these is
the spirit of a polysynthetic language. It seeks to unite in the most
intimate manner all relations and modifications with the leading idea,
to merge one in the other by altering the forms of the words themselves
and welding them together, to express the whole in one word, and to
banish any conception except as it arises in relation to others. Thus in
many American tongues there is, in fact, no word for father, mother,
brother, but only for my, your, his father, etc. This has advantages and
defects. It offers marvellous facilities for defining the perceptions of
the senses with the utmost accuracy, but regarding everything in the
concrete, it is unfriendly to the nobler labors of the mind, to
abstraction and generalization. In the numberless changes of these
languages, their bewildering flexibility, their variable forms, and
their rapid deterioration, they seem to betray a lack of individuality,
and to resemble the vague and tumultuous history of the tribes who
employ them. They exhibit an almost incredible laxity. It is nothing
uncommon for the two sexes to use different names for the same object,
and for nobles and vulgar, priests and people, the old and the young,
nay, even the married and single, to observe what seem to the European
ear quite different modes of expression. Families and whole villages
suddenly drop words and manufacture others in their places out of mere
caprice or superstition, and a few years’ separation suffices to produce
a marked dialectic difference. In their copious forms and facility of
reproduction they remind one of those anomalous animals, in whom, when a
limb is lopped, it rapidly grows again, or even if cut in pieces each
part will enter on a separate life quite unconcerned about his fellows.
But as the naturalist is far from regarding this superabundant vitality
as a characteristic of a higher type, so the philologist justly assigns
these tongues a low position in the linguistic scale. Fidelity to form,
here as everywhere, is the test of excellence. At the outset, we divine
there can be nothing very subtle in the mythologies of nations with such
languages. Much there must be that will be obscure, much that is vague,
an exhausting variety in repetition, and a strong tendency to lose the
idea in the symbol.
What definiteness of outline might be preserved must depend on the care
with which the old stories of the gods were passed from one person and
one generation to another. The fundamental myths of a race have a
surprising tenacity of life. How many centuries had elapsed between the
period the Germanic hordes left their ancient homes in Central Asia, and
when Tacitus listened to their wild songs on the banks of the Rhine? Yet
we know that through those unnumbered ages of barbarism and aimless
roving, these songs, “their only sort of history or annals,” says the
historian, had preserved intact the story of Mannus, the Sanscrit Manu,
and his three sons, and of the great god Tuisco, the Indian Dyu.9-1 So
much the more do all means invented by the red race to record and
transmit thought merit our careful attention. Few and feeble they seem
to us, mainly shifts to aid the memory. Of some such, perhaps, not a
single tribe was destitute. The tattoo marks on the warrior’s breast,
his string of gristly scalps, the bear’s claws around his neck, were not
only trophies of his prowess, but records of his exploits, and to the
contemplative mind contain the rudiments of the beneficent art of
letters. Did he draw in rude outline on his skin tent figures of men
transfixed with arrows as many as he had slain enemies, his education
was rapidly advancing. He had mastered the elements of picture
writing, beyond which hardly the wisest of his race progressed. Figures
of the natural objects connected by symbols having fixed meanings make
up the whole of this art. The relative frequency of the latter marks its
advancement from a merely figurative to an ideographic notation. On what
principle of mental association a given sign was adopted to express a
certain idea, why, for instance, on the Chipeway scrolls a circle means
spirits, and a horned snake life, it is often hard to guess. The
difficulty grows when we find that to the initiated the same sign calls
up quite different ideas, as the subject of the writer varies from war
to love, or from the chase to religion. The connection is generally
beyond the power of divination, and the key to ideographic writing once
lost can never be recovered.
The number of such arbitrary characters in the Chipeway notation is said
to be over two hundred, but if the distinction between a figure and a
symbol were rigidly applied, it would be much reduced. This kind of
writing, if it deserves the name, was common throughout the continent,
and many specimens of it, scratched on the plane surfaces of stones,
have been preserved to the present day. Such is the once celebrated
inscription on Dighton Rock, Massachusetts, long supposed to be a record
of the Northmen of Vinland; such those that mark the faces of the cliffs
which overhang the waters of the Orinoco, and those that in Oregon,
Peru, and La Plata have been the subject of much curious speculation.
They are alike the mute and meaningless epitaphs of vanished
generations.
I would it could be said that in favorable contrast to our ignorance of
these inscriptions is our comprehension of the highly wrought
pictography of the Aztecs. No nation ever reduced it more to a system.
It was in constant use in the daily transactions of life. They
manufactured for writing purposes a thick, coarse paper from the leaves
of the agave plant by a process of maceration and pressure. An Aztec
book closely resembles one of our quarto volumes. It is made of a
single sheet, twelve to fifteen inches wide, and often sixty or seventy
feet long, and is not rolled, but folded either in squares or zigzags in
such a manner that on opening it there are two pages exposed to view.
Thin wooden boards are fastened to each of the outer leaves, so that the
whole presents as neat an appearance, remarks Peter Martyr, as if it had
come from the shop of a skilful bookbinder. They also covered buildings,
tapestries, and scrolls of parchment with these devices, and for
trifling transactions were familiar with the use of slates of soft
stone from which the figures could readily be erased with water.11-1
What is still more astonishing, there is reason to believe, in some
instances, their figures were not painted, but actually printed with
movable blocks of wood on which the symbols were carved in relief,
though this was probably confined to those intended for ornament only.
In these records we discern something higher than a mere symbolic
notation. They contain the germ of a phonetic alphabet, and represent
sounds of spoken language. The symbol is often not connected with the
idea but with the word. The mode in which this is done corresponds
precisely to that of the rebus. It is a simple method, readily
suggesting itself. In the middle ages it was much in vogue in Europe for
the same purpose for which it was chiefly employed in Mexico at the same
time—the writing of proper names. For example, the English family
Bolton was known in heraldry by a tun transfixed by a bolt.
Precisely so the Mexican emperor Ixcoatl is mentioned in the Aztec
manuscripts under the figure of a serpent coatl, pierced by obsidian
knives ixtli, and Moquauhzoma by a mouse-trap montli, an eagle
quauhtli, a lancet zo, and a hand maitl. As a syllable could be
expressed by any object whose name commenced with it, as few words can
be given the form of a rebus without some change, as the figures
sometimes represent their full phonetic value, sometimes only that of
their initial sound, and as universally the attention of the artist was
directed less to the sound than to the idea, the didactic painting of
the Mexicans, whatever it might have been to them, is a sealed book to
us, and must remain so in great part. Moreover, it is entirely
undetermined whether it should be read from the first to the last page,
or vice versa, whether from right to left or from left to right, from
bottom to top or from top to bottom, around the edges of the page toward
the centre, or each line in the opposite direction from the preceding
one. There are good authorities for all these methods,12-1 and they
may all be correct, for there is no evidence that any fixed rule had
been laid down in this respect.
Immense masses of such documents were stored in the imperial archives of
ancient Mexico. Torquemada asserts that five cities alone yielded to the
Spanish governor on one requisition no less than sixteen thousand
volumes or scrolls! Every leaf was destroyed. Indeed, so thorough and
wholesale was the destruction of these memorials now so precious in our
eyes that hardly enough remain to whet the wits of antiquaries. In the
libraries of Paris, Dresden, Pesth, and the Vatican are, however, a
sufficient number to make us despair of deciphering them had we for
comparison all which the Spaniards destroyed.
Beyond all others the Mayas, resident on the peninsula of Yucatan, would
seem to have approached nearest a true phonetic system. They had a
regular and well understood alphabet of twenty seven elementary sounds,
the letters of which are totally different from those of any other
nation, and evidently original with themselves. But besides these they
used a large number of purely conventional symbols, and moreover were
accustomed constantly to employ the ancient pictographic method in
addition as a sort of commentary on the sound represented. What is more
curious, if the obscure explanation of an ancient writer can be depended
upon, they not only aimed to employ an alphabet after the manner of
ours, but to express the sound absolutely like our phonographic signs
do.13-1 With the aid of this alphabet, which has fortunately been
preserved, we are enabled to spell out a few words on the Yucatecan
manuscripts and façades, but thus far with no positive results. The loss
of the ancient pronunciation is especially in the way of such studies.
In South America, also, there is said to have been a nation who
cultivated the art of picture writing, the Panos, on the river Ucayale.
A missionary, Narcisso Gilbar by name, once penetrated, with great toil,
to one of their villages. As he approached he beheld a venerable man
seated under the shade of a palm tree, with a great book open before him
from which he was reading to an attentive circle of auditors the wars
and wanderings of their forefathers. With difficulty the priest got a
sight of the precious volume, and found it covered with figures and
signs in marvellous symmetry and order.14-1 No wonder such a romantic
scene left a deep impression on his memory.
The Peruvians adopted a totally different and unique system of records,
that by means of the quipu. This was a base cord, the thickness of the
finger, of any required length, to which were attached numerous small
strings of different colors, lengths, and textures, variously knotted
and twisted one with another. Each of these peculiarities represented a
certain number, a quality, quantity, or other idea, but what, not the
most fluent quipu reader could tell unless he was acquainted with the
general topic treated of. Therefore, whenever news was sent in this
manner a person accompanied the bearer to serve as verbal commentator,
and to prevent confusion the quipus relating to the various
departments of knowledge were placed in separate storehouses, one for
war, another for taxes, a third for history, and so forth. On what
principle or mnemotechnics the ideas were connected with the knots and
colors we are totally in the dark; it has even been doubted whether they
had any application beyond the art of numeration.14-2 Each combination
had, however, a fixed ideographic value in a certain branch of
knowledge, and thus the quipu differed essentially from the Catholic
rosary, the Jewish phylactery, or the knotted strings of the natives of
North America and Siberia, to all of which it has at times been
compared.
The wampum used by the tribes of the north Atlantic coast was, in many
respects, analogous to the quipu. In early times it was composed chiefly
of bits of wood of equal size, but different colors. These were hung on
strings which were woven into belts and bands, the hues, shapes, sizes,
and combinations of the strings hinting their general significance. Thus
the lighter shades were invariable harbingers of peaceful or pleasant
tidings, while the darker portended war and danger. The substitution of
beads or shells in place of wood, and the custom of embroidering figures
in the belts were, probably, introduced by European influence.
Besides these, various simpler mnemonic aids were employed, such as
parcels of reeds of different lengths, notched sticks, knots in cords,
strings of pebbles or fruit-stones, circular pieces of wood or slabs
pierced with different figures which the English liken to “cony holes,”
and at a victory, a treaty, or the founding of a village, sometimes a
pillar or heap of stones was erected equalling in number the persons
present at the occasion, or the number of the fallen.
This exhausts the list. All other methods of writing, the hieroglyphs of
the Micmacs of Acadia, the syllabic alphabet of the Cherokees, the
pretended traces of Greek, Hebrew, and Celtiberic letters which have
from time to time been brought to the notice of the public, have been
without exception the products of foreign civilization or simply frauds.
Not a single coin, inscription, or memorial of any kind whatever, has
been found on the American continent showing the existence, either
generally or locally, of any other means of writing than those
specified.
Poor as these substitutes for a developed phonetic system seem to us,
they were of great value to the uncultivated man. In his legends their
introduction is usually ascribed to some heaven-sent benefactor, the
antique characters were jealously adhered to, and the pictured scroll of
bark, the quipu ball, the belt of wampum, were treasured with provident
care, and their import minutely expounded to the most intelligent of the
rising generation. In all communities beyond the stage of barbarism a
class of persons was set apart for this duty and no other. Thus, for
example, in ancient Peru, one college of priests styled amauta,
learned, had exclusive charge over the quipus containing the
mythological and historical traditions; a second, the haravecs,
singers, devoted themselves to those referring to the national ballads
and dramas; while a third occupied their time solely with those
pertaining to civil affairs. Such custodians preserved and prepared the
archives, learned by heart with their aid what their fathers knew, and
in some countries, as, for instance, among the Panos mentioned above,
and the Quiches of Guatemala,16-1 repeated portions of them at times
to the assembled populace. It has even been averred by one of their
converted chiefs, long a missionary to his fellows, that the Chipeways
of Lake Superior have a college composed of ten “of the wisest and most
venerable of their nation,” who have in charge the pictured records
containing the ancient history of their tribe. These are kept in an
underground chamber, and are disinterred every fifteen years by the
assembled guardians, that they may be repaired, and their contents
explained to new members of the society.17-1
In spite of these precautions, the end seems to have been very
imperfectly attained. The most distinguished characters, the weightiest
events in national history faded into oblivion after a few generations.
The time and circumstances of the formation of the league of the Five
Nations, the dispersion of the mound builders of the Ohio valley in the
fifteenth century, the chronicles of Peru or Mexico beyond a century or
two anterior to the conquest, are preserved in such a vague and
contradictory manner that they have slight value as history. Their
mythology fared somewhat better, for not only was it kept fresh in the
memory by frequent repetition; but being itself founded in nature, it
was constantly nourished by the truths which gave it birth.
Nevertheless, we may profit by the warning to remember that their myths
are myths only, and not the reflections of history or heroes.
Rising from these details to a general comparison of the symbolic and
phonetic systems in their reactions on the mind, the most obvious are
their contrasted effects on the faculty of memory. Letters represent
elementary sounds, which are few in any language, while symbols stand
for ideas, and they are numerically infinite. The transmission of
knowledge by means of the latter is consequently attended with most
disproportionate labor. It is almost as if we could quote nothing from
an author unless we could recollect his exact words. We have a right to
look for excellent memories where such a mode is in vogue, and in the
present instance we are not disappointed. “These savages,” exclaims La
Hontan, “have the happiest memories in the world!” It was etiquette at
their councils for each speaker to repeat verbatim all his predecessors
had said, and the whites were often astonished and confused at the
verbal fidelity with which the natives recalled the transactions of long
past treaties. Their songs were inexhaustible. An instance is on record
where an Indian sang two hundred on various subjects.18-1 Such a fact
reminds us of a beautiful expression of the elder Humboldt: “Man,” he
says, “regarded as an animal, belongs to one of the singing species; but
his notes are always associated with ideas.” The youth who were educated
at the public schools of ancient Mexico—for that realm, so far from
neglecting the cause of popular education, established houses for
gratuitous instruction, and to a certain extent made the attendance upon
them obligatory—learned by rote long orations, poems, and prayers with
a facility astonishing to the conquerors, and surpassing anything they
were accustomed to see in the universities of Old Spain. A phonetic
system actually weakens the retentive powers of the mind by offering a
more facile plan for preserving thought. “Ce que je mets sur papier, je
remets de ma mémoire” is an expression of old Montaigne which he could
never have used had he employed ideographic characters.
Memory, however, is of far less importance than a free activity of
thought, untrammelled by forms or precedents, and ever alert to novel
combinations of ideas. Give a race this and it will guide it to
civilization as surely as the needle directs the ship to its haven. It
is here that ideographic writing reveals its fatal inferiority. It is
forever specifying, materializing, dealing in minutiæ. In the Egyptian
symbolic alphabet there is a figure for a virgin, another for a married
woman, for a widow without offspring, for a widow with one child, two
children, and I know not in how many other circumstances, but for
woman there is no sign. It must be so in the nature of things, for the
symbol represents the object as it appears or is fancied to appear, and
not as it is thought. Furthermore, the constant learning by heart
infallibly leads to slavish repetition and mental servility.
A symbol when understood is independent of language, and is as
universally current as an Arabic numeral. But this divorce of spoken and
written language is of questionable advantage. It at once destroys all
permanent improvement in a tongue through elegance of style, sonorous
periods, or delicacy of expression, and the life of the language itself
is weakened when its forms are left to fluctuate uncontrolled. Written
poetry, grammar, rhetoric, all are impossible to the student who draws
his knowledge from such a source.
Finally, it has been justly observed by the younger Humboldt that the
painful fidelity to the antique figures transmitted from barbarous to
polished generations is injurious to the æsthetic sense, and dulls the
mind to the beautiful in art and nature.
The transmission of thought by figures and symbols would, on the whole,
therefore, foster those narrow and material tendencies which the genius
of polysynthetic languages would seem calculated to produce. Its one
redeeming trait of strengthening the memory will serve to explain the
strange tenacity with which certain myths have been preserved through
widely dispersed families, as we shall hereafter see.
Besides this of language there are two traits in the history of the red
man without parallel in that of any other variety of our species which
has achieved any notable progress in civilization.
The one is his isolation. Cut off time out of mind from the rest of
the world, he never underwent those crossings of blood and culture which
so modified and on the whole promoted the growth of the old world
nationalities. In his own way he worked out his own destiny, and what he
won was his with a more than ordinary right of ownership. For all those
old dreams of the advent of the Ten Lost Tribes, of Buddhist priests, of
Welsh princes, or of Phenician merchants on American soil, and there
exerting a permanent influence, have been consigned to the dustbin by
every unbiased student, and when we see such men as Mr. Schoolcraft and
the Abbé E. C. Brasseur essaying to resuscitate them, we regretfully
look upon it in the light of a literary anachronism.
The second trait is the entire absence of the herdsman’s life with its
softening associations. Throughout the continent there is not a single
authentic instance of a pastoral tribe, not one of an animal raised for
its milk,21-1 nor for the transportation of persons, and very few for
their flesh. It was essentially a hunting race. The most civilized
nations looked to the chase for their chief supply of meat, and the
courts of Cuzco and Mexico enacted stringent game and forest laws, and
at certain periods the whole population turned out for a general crusade
against the denizens of the forest. In the most densely settled
districts the conquerors found vast stretches of primitive woods.
If we consider the life of a hunter, pitting his skill and strength
against the marvellous instincts and quick perceptions of the brute,
training his senses to preternatural acuteness, but blunting his more
tender feelings, his sole aim to shed blood and take life, dependent on
luck for his food, exposed to deprivations, storms, and long
wanderings, his chief diet flesh, we may more readily comprehend that
conspicuous disregard of human suffering, those sanguinary rites, that
vindictive spirit, that inappeasable restlessness, which we so often
find in the chronicles of ancient America. The law with reason objects
to accepting a butcher as a juror on a trial for life; here is a whole
race of butchers.
The one mollifying element was agriculture. On the altar of Mixcoatl,
god of hunting, the Aztec priest tore the heart from the human victim
and smeared with the spouting blood the snake that coiled its lengths
around the idol; flowers and fruits, yellow ears of maize and clusters
of rich bananas decked the shrine of Centeotl, beneficent patroness of
agriculture, and bloodless offerings alone were her appropriate dues.
This shows how clear, even to the native mind, was the contrast between
these two modes of subsistence. By substituting a sedentary for a
wandering life, by supplying a fixed dependence for an uncertain
contingency, and by admonishing man that in preservation, not in
destruction, lies his most remunerative sphere of activity, we can
hardly estimate too highly the wide distribution of the zea mays. This
was their only cereal, and it was found in cultivation from the southern
extremity of Chili to the fiftieth parallel of north latitude, beyond
which limits the low temperature renders it an uncertain crop. In their
legends it is represented as the gift of the Great Spirit (Chipeways),
brought from the terrestrial Paradise by the sacred animals (Quiches),
and symbolically the mother of the race (Nahuas), and the material from
which was moulded the first of men (Quiches).
As the races, so the great families of man who speak dialects of the
same tongue are, in a sense, individuals, bearing each its own
physiognomy. When the whites first heard the uncouth gutturals of the
Indians, they frequently proclaimed that hundreds of radically diverse
languages, invented, it was piously suggested, by the Devil for the
annoyance of missionaries, prevailed over the continent. Earnest
students of such matters—Vater, Duponceau, Gallatin, and
Buschmann—have, however, demonstrated that nine-tenths of the area of
America, at its discovery, were occupied by tribes using dialects
traceable to ten or a dozen primitive stems. The names of these, their
geographical position in the sixteenth century, and, so far as it is
safe to do so, their individual character, I shall briefly mention.
Fringing the shores of the Northern Ocean from Mount St. Elias on the
west to the Gulf of St. Lawrence on the east, rarely seen a hundred
miles from the coast, were the Eskimos.23-1 They are the connecting
link between the races of the Old and New Worlds, in physical appearance
and mental traits more allied to the former, but in language betraying
their near kinship to the latter. An amphibious race, born fishermen, in
their buoyant skin kayaks they brave fearlessly the tempests, make long
voyages, and merit the sobriquet bestowed upon them by Von Baer, “the
Phenicians of the north.” Contrary to what one might suppose, they are,
amid their snows, a contented, light-hearted people, knowing no longing
for a sunnier clime, given to song, music, and merry tales. They are
cunning handicraftsmen to a degree, but withal wholly ingulfed in a
sensuous existence. The desperate struggle for life engrosses them, and
their mythology is barren.
South of them, extending in a broad band across the continent from
Hudson’s Bay to the Pacific, and almost to the Great Lakes below, is the
Athapascan stock. Its affiliated tribes rove far north to the mouth of
the Mackenzie River, and wandering still more widely in an opposite
direction along both declivities of the Rocky Mountains, people portions
of the coast of Oregon south of the mouth of the Columbia, and spreading
over the plains of New Mexico under the names of Apaches, Navajos, and
Lipans, almost reach the tropics at the delta of the Rio Grande del
Norte, and on the shores of the Gulf of California. No wonder they
deserted their fatherland and forgot it altogether, for it is a very
terra damnata, whose wretched inhabitants are cut off alike from the
harvest of the sea and the harvest of the soil. The profitable culture of
maize does not extend beyond the fiftieth parallel of latitude, and less
than seven degrees farther north the mean annual temperature everywhere
east of the mountains sinks below the freezing point.25-1 Agriculture
is impossible, and the only chance for life lies in the uncertain
fortunes of the chase and the penurious gifts of an arctic flora. The
denizens of these wilds are abject, slovenly, hopelessly savage, “at the
bottom of the scale of humanity in North America,” says Dr. Richardson,
and their relatives who have wandered to the more genial climes of the
south are as savage as they, as perversely hostile to a sedentary life,
as gross and narrow in their moral notions. This wide-spread stock,
scattered over forty-five degrees of latitude, covering thousands of
square leagues, reaching from the Arctic Ocean to the confines of the
empire of the Montezumas, presents in all its subdivisions the same
mental physiognomy and linguistic peculiarities.25-2
Best known to us of all the Indians are the Algonkins and Iroquois, who,
at the time of the discovery, were the sole possessors of the region now
embraced by Canada and the eastern United States north of the
thirty-fifth parallel. The latter, under the names of the Five Nations,
Hurons, Tuscaroras, Susquehannocks, Nottoways and others, occupied much
of the soil from the St. Lawrence and Lake Ontario to the Roanoke, and
perhaps the Cherokees, whose homes were in the secluded vales of East
Tennessee, were one of their early offshoots.25-3 They were a race of
warriors, courageous, cruel, unimaginative, but of rare political
sagacity. They are more like ancient Romans than Indians, and are leading
figures in the colonial wars.
The Algonkins surrounded them on every side, occupying the rest of the
region mentioned and running westward to the base of the Rocky
Mountains, where one of their famous bands, the Blackfeet, still hunts
over the valley of the Saskatchewan. They were more genial than the
Iroquois, of milder manners and more vivid fancy, and were regarded by
these with a curious mixture of respect and contempt. Some writer has
connected this difference with their preference for the open prairie
country in contrast to the endless and sombre forests where were the
homes of the Iroquois. Their history abounds in great men, whose
ambitious plans were foiled by the levity of their allies and their want
of persistence. They it was who under King Philip fought the Puritan
fathers; who at the instigation of Pontiac doomed to death every white
trespasser on their soil; who led by Tecumseh and Black Hawk gathered
the clans of the forest and mountain for the last pitched battle of the
races in the Mississippi valley. To them belonged the mild mannered
Lenni Lenape, who little foreboded the hand of iron that grasped their
own so softly under the elm tree of Shackamaxon, to them the restless
Shawnee, the gypsy of the wilderness, the Chipeways of Lake Superior,
and also to them the Indian girl Pocahontas, who in the legend averted
from the head of the white man the blow which, rebounding, swept away
her father and all his tribe.27-1
Between their southernmost outposts and the Gulf of Mexico were a number
of clans, mostly speaking the Muscogee tongue, Creeks, Choctaws,
Chikasaws, and others, in later times summed up as Apalachian Indians,
but by early writers sometimes referred to as “The Empire of the
Natchez.” For tradition says that long ago this small tribe, whose home
was in the Big Black country, was at the head of a loose confederation
embracing most of the nations from the Atlantic coast quite into Texas;
and adds that the expedition of De Soto severed its lax bonds and shook
it irremediably into fragments. Whether this is worth our credence or
not, the comparative civilization of the Natchez, and the analogy their
language bears to that of the Mayas of Yucatan, the builders of those
ruined cities which Stephens and Catherwood have made so familiar to the
world, attach to them a peculiar interest.27-2
North of the Arkansas River on the right bank of the Mississippi, quite
to its source, stretching over to Lake Michigan at Green Bay, and up the
valley of the Missouri west to the mountains, resided the Dakotas, an
erratic folk, averse to agriculture, but daring hunters and bold
warriors, tall and strong of body.28-1 Their religious notions have
been carefully studied, and as they are remarkably primitive and
transparent, they will often be referred to. The Sioux and the
Winnebagoes are well-known branches of this family.
We have seen that Dr. Richardson assigned to a portion of the Athapascas
the lowest place among North American tribes, but there are some in New
Mexico who might contest the sad distinction, the Root Diggers,
Comanches and others, members of the Snake or Shoshonee family,
scattered extensively northwest of Mexico. It has been said of a part of
these that they are “nearer the brutes than probably any other portion
of the human race on the face of the globe.”28-2 Their habits in some
respects are more brutish than those of any brute, for there is no
limit to man’s moral descent or ascent, and the observer might well be
excused for doubting whether such a stock ever had a history in the
past, or the possibility of one in the future. Yet these debased
creatures speak a related dialect, and are beyond a doubt largely of the
same blood as the famous Aztec race, who founded the empire of Anahuac,
and raised architectural monuments rivalling the most famous structures
of the ancient world. This great family, whose language has been traced
from Nicaragua to Vancouver’s Island, and whose bold intellects colored
all the civilization of the northern continent, was composed in that
division of it found in New Spain chiefly of two bands, the Toltecs,
whose traditions point to the mountain ranges of Guatemala as their
ancient seat, and the Nahuas, who claim to have come at a later period
from the northwest coast, and together settled in and near the valley of
Mexico.29-1 Outlying colonies on the shore of Lake Nicaragua and in
the mountains of Vera Paz rose to a civilization that rivalled that of
the Montezumas, while others remained in utter barbarism in the far
north.
The Aztecs not only conquered a Maya colony, and founded the empire of
the Quiches in Central America, a complete body of whose mythology has
been brought to light in late years, but seem to have made a marked
imprint on the Mayas themselves. These possessed, as has already been
said, the peninsula of Yucatan. There is some reason to suppose they
came thither originally from the Greater Antilles, and none to doubt but
that the Huastecas who lived on the river Panuco and the Natchez of
Louisiana were offshoots from them. Their language is radically distinct
from that of the Aztecs, but their calendar and a portion of their
mythology are common property. They seem an ancient race of mild manners
and considerable polish. No American nation offers a more promising
field for study. Their stone temples still bear testimony to their
uncommon skill in the arts. A trustworthy tradition dates the close of
the golden age of Yucatan a century anterior to its discovery by
Europeans. Previously it had been one kingdom, under one ruler, and
prolonged peace had fostered the growth of the fine arts; but when
their capital Mayapan fell, internal dissensions ruined most of their
cities.
No connection whatever has been shown between the civilization of North
and South America. In the latter continent it was confined to two
totally foreign tribes, the Muyscas, whose empire, called that of the
Zacs, was in the neighborhood of Bogota, and the Peruvians, who in their
two related divisions of Quichuas and Aymaras extended their language
and race along the highlands of the Cordilleras from the equator to the
thirtieth degree of south latitude. Lake Titicaca seems to have been the
cradle of their civilization, offering another example how inland seas
and well-watered plains favor the change from a hunting to an
agricultural life. These four nations, the Aztecs, the Mayas, the
Muyscas and the Peruvians, developed spontaneously and independently
under the laws of human progress what civilization was found among the
red race. They owed nothing to Asiatic or European teachers. The Incas
it was long supposed spoke a language of their own, and this has been
thought evidence of foreign extraction; but Wilhelm von Humboldt has
shown conclusively that it was but a dialect of the common tongue of
their country.31-1
When Columbus first touched the island of Cuba, he was regaled with
horrible stories of one-eyed monsters who dwelt on the other islands,
but plundered indiscriminately on every hand. These turned out to be the
notorious Caribs, whose other name, Cannibals, has descended as a
common noun to our language, expressive of one of their inhuman
practices. They had at that time seized many of the Antilles, and had
gained a foothold on the coast of Honduras and Darien, but pointed for
their home to the mainland of South America. This they possessed along
the whole northern shore, inland at least as far as the south bank of
the Amazon, and west nearly to the Cordilleras. It is still an open
question whether the Tupis and Guaranis who inhabit the vast region
between the Amazon and the Pampas of Buenos Ayres are affined to them.
The traveller D’Orbigny zealously maintains the affirmative, and there
is certainly some analogy of language, but withal an inexplicable
contrast of character. The latter were, and are, in the main, a
peaceable, inoffensive, apathetic set, dull and unambitious, while the
Caribs won a terrible renown as bold warriors, daring navigators,
skilful in handicrafts; and their poisoned arrows, cruel and disgusting
habits, and enterprise, rendered them a terror and a by-word for
generations.32-1
Our information of the natives of the Pampas, Patagonia, and the Land of
Fire, is too vague to permit their positive identification with the
Araucanians of Chili; but there is much to render the view plausible.
Certain physical peculiarities, a common unconquerable love of freedom,
and a delight in war, bring them together, and at the same time place
them both in strong contrast to their northern neighbors.33-1
There are many tribes whose affinities remain to be decided, especially
on the Pacific coast. The lack of inland water communication, the
difficult nature of the soil, and perhaps the greater antiquity of the
population there, seem to have isolated and split up beyond recognition
the indigenous families on that shore of the continent; while the great
river systems and broad plains of the Atlantic slope facilitated
migration and intercommunication, and thus preserved national
distinctions over thousands of square leagues.
These natural features of the continent, compared with the actual
distribution of languages, offer our only guides in forming an opinion
as to the migrations of these various families in ancient times. Their
traditions, take even the most cultivated, are confused, contradictory,
and in great part manifestly fabulous. To construct from them by means
of daring combinations and forced interpretations a connected account of
the race during the centuries preceding Columbus were with the aid of a
vivid fancy an easy matter, but would be quite unworthy the name of
history. The most that can be said with certainty is that the general
course of migrations in both Americas was from the high latitudes toward
the tropics, and from the great western chain of mountains toward the
east. No reasonable doubt exists but that the Athapascas, Algonkins,
Iroquois, Apalachians, and Aztecs all migrated from the north and west
to the regions they occupied. In South America, curiously enough, the
direction is reversed. If the Caribs belong to the Tupi-Guaranay stem,
and if the Quichuas belong to the Aymaras, as there is strong
likelihood,34-1 then nine-tenths of the population of that vast
continent wandered forth from the steppes and valleys at the head waters
of the Rio de la Plata toward the Gulf of Mexico, where they came in
collision with that other wave of migration surging down from high
northern latitudes. For the banks of the river Paraguay and the steppes
of the Bolivian Cordilleras are unquestionably the earliest traditional
homes of both Tupis and Aymaras.
These movements took place not in large bodies under the stimulus of a
settled purpose, but step by step, family by family, as the older
hunting grounds became too thickly peopled. This fact hints unmistakably
at the gray antiquity of the race. It were idle even to guess how great
this must be, but it is possible to set limits to it in both directions.
On the one hand, not a tittle of evidence is on record to carry the age
of man in America beyond the present geological epoch. Dr. Lund examined
in Brazil more than eight hundred caverns, out of which number only six
contained human bones, and of these six only one had with the human
bones those of animals now extinct. Even in that instance the original
stratification had been disturbed, and probably the bones had been
interred there.35-1 This is strong negative evidence. So in every
other example where an unbiased and competent geologist has made the
examination, the alleged discoveries of human remains in the older
strata have proved erroneous.
The cranial forms of the American aborigines have by some been supposed
to present anomalies distinguishing their race from all others, and even
its chief families from one another. This, too, falls to the ground
before a rigid analysis. The last word of craniology, which at one time
promised to revolutionize ethnology and even history, is that no one form
of the skull is peculiar to the natives of the New World; that in the
same linguistic family one glides into another by imperceptible degrees;
and that there is as much diversity, and the same diversity among them in
this respect as among the races of the Old Continent.35-2 Peculiarities
of structure, though they may pass as general truths, offer no firm
foundation whereon to construct a scientific ethnology. Anatomy shows
nothing unique in the Indian, nothing demanding for its development any
special antiquity, still less an original diversity of type.
On the other hand, the remains of primeval art and the impress he made
upon nature bespeak for man a residence in the New World coeval with the
most distant events of history. By remains of art I do not so much refer
to those desolate palaces which crumble forgotten in the gloom of
tropical woods, nor even the enormous earthworks of the Mississippi
valley covered with the mould of generations of forest trees, but rather
to the humbler and less deceptive relics of his kitchens and his hunts.
On the Atlantic coast one often sees the refuse of Indian villages,
where generation after generation have passed their summers in fishing,
and left the bones, shells, and charcoal as their only epitaph. How many
such summers would it require for one or two hundred people to thus
gradually accumulate a mound of offal eight or ten feet high and a
hundred yards across, as is common enough? How many generations to heap
up that at the mouth of the Altamaha River, examined and pronounced
exclusively of this origin by Sir Charles Lyell,36-1 which is about
this height, and covers ten acres of ground? Those who, like myself,
have tramped over many a ploughed field in search of arrow-heads must
have sometimes been amazed at the numbers which are sown over the face
of our country, betokening a most prolonged possession of the soil by
their makers. For a hunting population is always sparse, and the
collector finds only those arrow-heads which lie upon the surface.
Still more forcibly does nature herself bear witness to this antiquity
of possession. Botanists declare that a very lengthy course of
cultivation is required so to alter the form of a plant that it can no
longer be identified with the wild species; and still more protracted
must be the artificial propagation for it to lose its power of
independent life, and to rely wholly on man to preserve it from
extinction. Now this is precisely the condition of the maize, tobacco,
cotton, quinoa, and mandioca plants, and of that species of palm called
by botanists the Gulielma speciosa; all have been cultivated from
immemorial time by the aborigines of America, and, except cotton, by no
other race; all no longer are to be identified with any known wild
species; several are sure to perish unless fostered by human care.37-1
What numberless ages does this suggest? How many centuries elapsed ere
man thought of cultivating Indian corn? How many more ere it had spread
over nearly a hundred degrees of latitude, and lost all semblance to its
original form? Who has the temerity to answer these questions? The
judicious thinker will perceive in them satisfactory reasons for
dropping once for all the vexed inquiry, “how America was peopled,” and
will smile at its imaginary solutions, whether they suggest Jews,
Japanese, or, as the latest theory is, Egyptians.
While these and other considerations testify forcibly to that isolation
I have already mentioned, they are almost equally positive for an
extensive intercourse in very distant ages between the great families of
the race, and for a prevalent unity of mental type, or perhaps they hint
at a still visible oneness of descent. In their stage of culture, the
maize, cotton, and tobacco could hardly have spread so widely by
commerce alone. Then there are verbal similarities running through wide
families of languages which, in the words of Professor Buschmann, are
“calculated to fill us with bewildering amazement,”38-1 some of which
will hereafter be pointed out; and lastly, passing to the psychological
constitution of the race, we may quote the words of a sharp-sighted
naturalist, whose monograph on one of its tribes is unsurpassed for
profound reflections: “Not only do all the primitive inhabitants of
America stand on one scale of related culture, but that mental condition
of all in which humanity chiefly mirrors itself, to wit, their religious
and moral consciousness, this source of all other inner and outer
conditions, is one with all, however diverse the natural influences
under which they live.”38-2
Penetrated with the truth of these views, all artificial divisions into
tropical or temperate, civilized or barbarous, will in the present work,
so far as possible, be avoided, and the race will be studied as a unit,
its religion as the development of ideas common to all its members, and
its myths as the garb thrown around these ideas by imaginations more or
less fertile, but seeking everywhere to embody the same notions.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE.
As the subject of American mythology is a new one to most readers,
and as in its discussion everything depends on a careful selection
of authorities, it is well at the outset to review very briefly
what has already been written upon it, and to assign the relative
amount of weight that in the following pages will be given to the
works most frequently quoted. The conclusions I have arrived at are
so different from those who have previously touched upon the topic
that such a step seems doubly advisable.
The first who undertook a philosophical survey of American
religions was Dr. Samuel Farmer Jarvis, in 1819 (A Discourse on the
Religion of the Indian Tribes of North America, Collections of the
New York Historical Society, vol. iii., New York, 1821). He
confined himself to the tribes north of Mexico, a difficult portion
of the field, and at that time not very well known. The notion of a
state of primitive civilization prevented Dr. Jarvis from forming
any correct estimate of the native religions, as it led him to look
upon them as deteriorations from purer faiths instead of
developments. Thus he speaks of them as having “departed less than
among any other nation from the form of primeval truth,” and also
mentions their “wonderful uniformity” (pp. 219, 221).
The well-known American ethnologist, Mr. E. G. Squier, has also
published a work on the subject, of wider scope than its title
indicates (The Serpent Symbol in America, New York, 1851). Though
written in a much more liberal spirit than the preceding, it is
wholly in the interests of one school of mythology, and it the
rather shallow physical one, so fashionable in Europe half a
century ago. Thus, with a sweeping generalization, he says, “The
religions or superstitions of the American nations, however
different they may appear to the superficial glance, are
rudimentally the same, and are only modifications of that primitive
system which under its physical aspect has been denominated Sun or
Fire worship” (p. 111). With this he combines the favorite and (may
I add?) characteristic French doctrine, that the chief topic of
mythology is the adoration of the generative power, and to rescue
such views from their materializing tendencies, imagines to
counterbalance them a clear, universal monotheism. “We claim to
have shown,” he says (p. 154), “that the grand conception of a
Supreme Unity and the doctrine of the reciprocal principles existed
in America in a well defined and clearly recognized form;” and
elsewhere that “the monotheistic idea stands out clearly in all
the religions of America” (p. 151).
If with a hope of other views we turn to our magnificent national
work on the Indians (History, Conditions, and Prospects of the
Indian Tribes of the United States: Washington, 1851-9), a great
disappointment awaits us. That work was unfortunate in its editor.
It is a monument of American extravagance and superficiality. Mr.
Schoolcraft was a man of deficient education and narrow prejudices,
pompous in style, and inaccurate in statements. The information
from original observers it contains is often of real value, but the
general views on aboriginal history and religion are shallow and
untrustworthy in the extreme.
A German professor, Dr. J. G. Müller, has written quite a
voluminous work on American Primitive Religions (Geschichte der
Amerikanischen Ur-religionen, pp. 707: Basel, 1855). His theory is
that “at the south a worship of nature with the adoration of the
sun as its centre, at the north a fear of spirits combined with
fetichism, made up the two fundamental divisions of the religion of
the red race” (pp. 89, 90). This imaginary antithesis he traces out
between the Algonkin and Apalachian tribes, and between the Toltecs
of Guatemala and the Aztecs of Mexico. His quotations are nearly
all at second hand, and so little does he criticize his facts as to
confuse the Vaudoux worship of the Haitian negroes with that of
Votan in Chiapa. His work can in no sense be considered an
authority.
Very much better is the Anthropology of the late Dr. Theodore Waitz
(Anthropologie der Naturvœlker: Leipzig, 1862-66). No more
comprehensive, sound, and critical work on the indigenes of America
has ever been written. But on their religions the author is
unfortunately defective, being led astray by the hasty and
groundless generalizations of others. His great anxiety, moreover,
to subject all moral sciences to a realistic philosophy, was
peculiarly fatal to any correct appreciation of religious growth,
and his views are neither new nor tenable.
For a different reason I must condemn in the most unqualified
manner the attempt recently made by the enthusiastic and
meritorious antiquary, the Abbé E. Charles Brasseur (de Bourbourg),
to explain American mythology after the example of Euhemerus, of
Thessaly, as the apotheosis of history. This theory, which has been
repeatedly applied to other mythologies with invariable failure, is
now disowned by every distinguished student of European and
Oriental antiquity; and to seek to introduce it into American
religions is simply to render them still more obscure and
unattractive, and to deprive them of the only general interest they
now have, that of illustrating the gradual development of the
religious ideas of humanity.
But while thus regretting the use he has made of them, all
interested in American antiquity cannot too much thank this
indefatigable explorer for the priceless materials he has unearthed
in the neglected libraries of Spain and Central America, and laid
before the public. For the present purpose the most significant of
these is the Sacred National Book of the Quiches, a tribe of
Guatemala. This contains their legends, written in the original
tongue, and transcribed by Father Francisco Ximenes about 1725. The
manuscripts of this missionary were used early in the present
century, by Don Felix Cabrera, but were supposed to be entirely
lost even by the Abbé Brasseur himself in 1850 (Lettre à M. le Duc
de Valmy, Mexique, Oct. 15, 1850). Made aware of their importance
by the expressions of regret used in the Abbé’s letters, Dr. C.
Sherzer, in 1854, was fortunate enough to discover them in the
library of the University of San Carlos in the city of Guatemala.
The legends were in Quiche with a Spanish translation and scholia.
The Spanish was copied by Dr. Scherzer and published in Vienna, in
1856, under the title Las Historias del Origen de los Indios de
Guatemala, por el R. P. F. Francisco Ximenes. In 1855 the Abbé
Brasseur took a copy of the original which he brought out at Paris
in 1861, with a translation of his own, under the title Vuh Popol:
Le Livre Sacré des Quichés et les Mythes de l’Antiquité
Américaine. Internal evidence proves that these legends were
written down by a converted native some time in the seventeenth
century. They carry the national history back about two centuries,
beyond which all is professedly mythical. Although both
translations are colored by the peculiar views of their makers,
this is incomparably the most complete and valuable work on
American mythology extant.
Another authority of inestimable value has been placed within the
reach of scholars during the last few years. This is the Relations
de la Nouvelle France, containing the annual reports of the
Jesuit missionaries among the Iroquois and Algonkins from and
after 1611. My references to this are always to the reprint at
Quebec, 1858. Of not less excellence for another tribe, the Creeks,
is the brief “Sketch of the Creek Country,” by Col. Benjamin
Hawkins, written about 1800, and first published in full by the
Georgia Historical Society in 1848. Most of the other works to
which I have referred are too well known to need any special
examination here, or will be more particularly mentioned in the
foot-notes when quoted.