secrets of the society be revealed to the uninitiated. The myth of the origin of the medicine related many weird occurrences that contributed to the magic efficacy of the medicine. A ritual must be performed at meetings in the dead of night to acquire and preserve unimpaired the power of the medicine. The medicine alone was not efficacious; its healing power depended upon the continued performance of a ritual. The society, as a member relates, was "instituted primarily to preserve and perform the ancient rites deemed necessary for preserving the potency of the . . . little waters, . . . and the method of its administration." The administration of the medicine necessitated acts that are recognized as religious. The patient must be purged. He must eat only white meat. The house must be rid of all uncleanly things, uncleanly animals and women in periodic condition. Now the medicine man comes. He repeats an ancient formula and casts some tobacco into the fire. Then he is given a cup containing water that was dipped only from a running stream and with the current. He drops the secret medicine, a powder, thrice into the water, forming a triangle. If the powder floats the patient will recover; if it clouds, the case is doubtful; but if it sinkshe dies. If it should happen that the patient is wounded, the medicine is sprinkled on the wound and is taken internally. After this, the doctor sings a chant and the matter is concluded with a feast of fruit.3 30 RELIGION AND PERSONAL MORALITY. Among the Iroquois such duties as truth-telling and respect for the life, liberty and property of others were not universal obligations but held only for members of the group, except where treaties guaranteed a wider application on a reciprocity basis. The very name "Ongwe-honwe" which was applied to themselves by the Iroquois signified a unique people, a people who were apart from others, a people who had obligations one to another but who did not of necessity owe them to strangers. It is from this point of view that personal ethics among the Iroquois must be examined. What may be called the Iroquois 30 Converse, 149-183, discusses secret societies; cf. Parker in Am. Anthr., n. s., XI, 161-185; also Lafitau, I, 373 and Heckewelder, ch. XXXI. code of morality has been stated by several writers. Canfield has given a summary for the nineteenth century, which, when stripped of Christian accretions, may be taken as an ideal statement of Iroquois moral rules, ideal because violations were known among them even as they are among us. It was wrong "To neglect the old in any manner, or to refuse to share with them the fruits of the chase or the products of the fields," and it was especially wrong to neglect or disregard aged or infirm parents. "To speak in derision or slightingly of anyone who might be lame, blind, idiotic, insane-crippled in any manner or unfortunate in any degree, or to refuse them (sic) aid or shelter. "To refuse to share food or shelter with anyone who might apply for either, or to fail to care for the sick and for orphan children and widows. “To break any treaty or agreement made at the council-fire when the peace-pipe had been smoked, or after parties making the treaty had partaken of food together. To violate the chastity of any woman. "To kill animals for any other purpose than for food and covering, and for the protection of growing crops and human life. "To tell a falsehood, even though it might be of the most innocent character. "To show cowardice in meeting any kind of danger or to shrink from exposure, pain, suffering, sickness or death. "To take human life unless the person killed was a member of a tribe with which the Iroquois was at war.”31 The Iroquois have been characterized frequently as more fierce and relentless than other peoples; as more revengeful and as rarely forgetting their revenge; as more uniformly merciless and cruel.32 The Jesuits said not simply that they would do all they could for the Indians but that they would do it "in spite of all the rage of hell, and the cruelties of the Iroquois, who are worse than the demons of hell." An Iroquois did not condemn these dispositions in a warrior so long as they were controlled by the ideas and customs of the tribe. They were part of the warrior's outfit and were vented only upon strangers. The Iroquois who was not fierce, cruel and relentless permitted an enemy to live and perhaps thereby encompassed his own death; for the interminable Indian wars 31 172-173. Cf. Loskiel, Pt. I, 13-18; Stites, 144-146. 32 Cf. XXIV J. R. (1642-1643), ch. XII. Also XXXIV J. R. (1649), 25-37; XLIII J. R. (1656-1657), 271. A full account of the treatment of condemned captives is given in XXXI J. R. (1647), ch. IV. 2 developed these dispositions in all warriors. The only religious influence connected with cruel practices was the exaction of torture and sacrifice by Agreskoue. It was recognized by the older Iroquois that evil consequences resulted from the rash conduct of loosely controlled young men. Wars, heart-burnings and other troubles came in the train of such behavior. Education did not teach selfcontrol, and the loose government together with the emphasis upon the warrior ideal constantly led young men to make outbreaks.33 Games of chance were enthrallingly interesting to the Iroquois. In fact so great a hold did some games have that they were played regularly at religious festivals. The Great Spirit himself, as announced by his emissary Handsome Lake, sanctioned some of these ancient games. But the Iroquois was so enamored of the game that often he staked his all, the loss of which brought hardship upon him and his.34 In a letter35 written in January of 1668, Father Bruyas related what seemed to him to be the vices of the Iroquois. As a cultivated Frenchman he found only four, namely, lust for war, drunkenness, dreams and inchastity. "I have not observed," he continued, "any other vices in our Iroquois. They do not know what Cursing is.3 36 I have never seen them become angry, even On occasions when our frenchmen would have uttered a hundred oaths, . . . As they live only from Day to Day, they do not desire much; and all their wishes end in having something to eat. . . . For my part, I compare them to our peasants in France, and I do not think that they are more intelligent. Morgan, writing almost two hundred 1737 33 XXXI J. R. (1647), ch. V, 87; XLIII J. R. (1656-1657), 101, 103, 115, 137, 215. 34 On games among the Iroquois see Hewitt: "Iroquois Game of La Crosse,” Am. Anthr., V, 189–191. A general discussion of Iroquois games is given by Morgan, I, bk. ii, ch. V. A complete discussion of Indian games is given by Culin, S.: Games of the North American Indian, Bur. Am. Ethn., Rep., XXIV, 3-809 (1902-1903). 35 LI J. R. (1666–1668), 137 sq. 36 Cf. Loskiel, Pt. I, 14. 37 Cf. ib., 13. years later, also gave a favorable summary.38 He noted that among the Iroquois crimes were so infrequent that no special machinery was needed. The Iroquois regarded theft from a tribesman as wrong, but thieves hardly were known among themselves. The Iroquois doors never were locked. Murder of a tribesman was a crime for which the criminal paid with his own life, if the matter could not be adjusted with the injured kin by means of composition. Adultery was a crime for which the erring wife was whipped. Witchcraft was criminal and witches were put to death. Dissimulation was not and Iroquois habit. In 1742, in point of time midway between Bruyas and Morgan, Canassatego said, "The Indians know no Punishment but Death; they have no such Thing as pecuniary Mulets; if a Man be guilty of a Crime, he is either put to Death, or the Fault is overlook'd." In the Deganawida Myth is the command that a sachem should be deposed without warning if found guilty of murder, rape or theft.40 An Iroquois appreciated goodness of heart and justice; he treated peaceable strangers well; he relieved the afflicted, the sick and the poor; and he was sympathetic, respectful, generous, honest, grateful, faithful, industrious, patient, brave, daring and possessed of fortitude. Of course these dispositions were developed in his own way and according to his own customs and notions. Some of these attractive traits have been illustrated. A few additional examples will give body to the above enumeration. One indication of the care given the sick is the following custom. If, among the group of women who worked the fields, there were some who were ill or otherwise incapacitated, help was given them in the performance of their work. Such aid was given freely. It was not given as charity but as a right and was performed as a duty.* 41 When in 1690 the French surprised the inhabitants of Schenectady, the Mohawk sachems came to Albany to condole with their friends. One of the sachems spoke thus: 38 I, 321-326. 39 Statement made before a council held July 9. Quoted by Colden, II, 95. 40 Scott, 231; cf. Parker: Constitution, 34-36. 41 Parker: Maize, 32. "Brethren, the Murder of our Brethren at Schenectady by the French grieves us as much, as if it had been done to our selves, for we are in the same Chain (i. e., are friends). . . . Be not therefore discouraged. We give this Belt to wipe away your Tears. Brethren, we lament the Death of so many of our Brethren, whose Blood has been shed at Schenectady. . . . But now we gather up our Dead, to bury them, by this second Belt. "Great and sudden is the Mischief, as if it had fallen from Heaven upon us. Our Forefathers taught us to go with all Speed to bemoan and lament with our Brethren, when any Disaster or Misfortune happens to any. Brethren be patient, this Disaster is an Affliction with has fallen from Heaven upon us. The Sun, which hath been cloudy, and sent this Disaster, will shine again with its pleasant Beams. Take Courage. "942 A less formal expression of the sense of loss was couched in the words of a sachem irritated by Sir William Johnson who was pressing the Iroquois for aid in King George's War just at a time when small-pox was raging among them. "You seem to think that we are Brutes, that we have no Sense of the Loss of our dearest Relations, and some of them the bravest Men we had in our Nation: You must allow us Time to bewail our Misfortune."43 44 Canassatego, speaking at a great council held in the summer of 1742, exhibited rare fineness of feeling when in the course of his speech he craved pardon for the Iroquois' uncleanliness and offered recompense in the form of presents for having inconvenienced the white people. On the same occasion he gave evidence that the Iroquois appreciated the efforts made in their behalf. Conrad Weiser had acted as an interpreter and they were grateful therefor. "He has had a great deal of trouble with us, wore out his Shoes in our Messages, and dirty'd his Clothes by being amongst us, so that he is become as nasty as an Indian. In return for these Services, we recommend him to your Generosity; and on our own Behalf, we give him Five Skins to buy him Clothes and Shoes with."45 Another instance of such feeling is the following. A nephew 42 Colden, I, 142–145. 43 Beauchamp: History, 287. 44 Colden, II, 110. 45 Ib., 111. |