Notes on the State of Virginia (1853)/Query 11
QUERY XI.
A DESCRIPTION OF THE INDIANS ESTABLISHED IN THAT STATE?
When the first effectual settlement of our Colony was made,
which was in 1607, the country from the sea-coast to the
mountains, and from Patowmac to the most southern waters of James
River, was occupied by upwards of forty different tribes of
Indians. Of these the Powhatans, the Mannahoacs, and
Monacans, were the most powerful. Those between the sea-coast
and falls of the rivers, were in amity with one another, and
attached to the Powhatans as their link of union. Those
between the falls of the rivers and the mountains, were divided
into two confederacies; the tribes inhabiting the head waters
of Patowmac and Rappahanoc being attached to the
Mannahoacs, and those on the upper parts of James River to the
Monacans. But the Monacans and their friends were in amity
with the Mannahoacs and their friends, and waged joint and
perpetual war against the Powhatans. We are told that the
Powhatans, Mannahoacs, and Monacans, spoke languages so
radically different that interpreters were necessary when they
transacted business. Hence we may conjecture that this was
not the case between all the tribes, and probably that each
spoke the language of the nation to which it was attached,
which we know to have been the case in many particular
instances. Very possibly there may have been anciently three different stocks, each of which multiplying in a long course of
time, had separated into so many little societies. This practice
results from the circumstance of their having never submitted
themselves to any laws, any coercive power, any shadow of
government. Their only controls are their manners, and that
moral sense of right and wrong which, like the sense of tasting
and feeling, in every man makes a part of his nature. An
offence against these is punished by contempt, by exclusion
from society, or, where the case is serious, as that of murder,
by the individuals whom it concerns. Imperfect as this species
of coercion may seem, crimes are very rare among them: insomuch
that were it made a question, whether no law, as among
the savage Americans, or too much law, as among the civilized
Europeans, submits man to the greatest evil, one who has seen
both conditions of existence would pronounce it to be the last,
and that the sheep are happier of themselves than under
care of the wolves. It will be said that great societies cannot
exist without government: the savages, therefore, break them
into small ones.
The territories of the Powhatan confederacy south of the Patowmac, comprehended about 8,000 square miles, 30 tribes, and 2,400 warriors. Capt. Smith tells us, that within 60 miles of Jamestown were 5,000 people, of whom 1,500 were warriors. From this we find the proportion of their warriors to their whole inhabitants, was as 3 to 10. The Powhatan confederacy, then, would consist of about 8,000 inhabitants, which was one for every square mile: being about the twentieth part of our present population in the same territory, and the hundredth of that of the British Islands.
Besides these were the Nottoways, living on Nottoway River, the Meherrins and Tuteloes on Meherrin River, who were connected with the Indians of Carolina, probably with the Chowanocs.
| NORTH. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| WEST. |
|
EAST. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| SOUTH. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The preceding table contains a state of these several tribes, according to their confederacies and geographical situation, with their numbers when we first became acquainted with them, where these numbers are known. The numbers of some of them are again stated as they were in the year 1669, when an attempt was made by the assembly to enumerate them. Probably the enumeration is imperfect, and in some measure conjectural, and that a further search into the records would furnish many more particulars. What would be the melancholy sequel of their history may however be augured from the census of 1669; by which we discover that the tribes therein enumerated were, in the space of 62 years, reduced to about one-third of their former numbers. Spirituous liquors, the small pox, war, and an abridgment of territory, to a people who lived principally on the spontaneous productions of Nature, had committed terrible havoc among them, which generation, under the obstacles opposed to it among them, was not likely to make good. That the lands of this country were taken from them by conquest, is not so general a truth as is supposed. I find in our historians and records repeated proofs of purchase, which cover a considerable part of the lower country; and many more would doubtless be found on further search. The upper country we know has been acquired altogether by purchases made in the most unexceptionable form.
Westward of all these tribes, beyond the mountains, and extending to the great lakes, were the Massawomecs, a most powerful confederacy, who harrassed unremittingly the Powhatans and Manahoacs. These were probably the ancestors of the tribes known at present by the name of the Six Nations.
Very little can now be discovered of the subsequent history of these tribes severally. The Chickahominies removed, about the year 1661, to Mattapony River. Their chief, with one from each of the tribes of the Pamunkies and Mattaponies, attended the treaty of Albany in 1685. This seems to have been the last chapter in their history. They retained however their separate name so late as 1705, and were at length blended with the Pamunkies and Mattaponies, and exist at present only under their names. There remain of the Mattaponies three or four men only, and they have more negro than Indian blood in them. They have lost their language, have reduced themselves by voluntary sales to about fifty acres of land, which lie on the river of their own name, and have, from time to time, been joining the Pamunkies, from whom they are distant but 10 miles. The Pamunkies are reduced to about 10 or 12 men, tolerably pure from mixture with other colors. The older ones among them preserve their language in a small degree, which are the last vestiges on earth, as far as we know, of the Powhatan language. They have about 300 acres of very fertile land, on Pamunkey River, so encompassed by water that a gate shuts in the whole. Of the Nottoways, not a male is left. A few women constitute the remains of that tribe. They are seated on Nottoway River, in Southampton county, on very fertile lands. At a very early period, certain lands were marked out and appropriated to these tribes, and were kept from encroachment by the authority of the laws. They have usually had trustees appointed, whose duty was to watch over their interests, and guard them from insult and injury.
The Monacans and their friends, better known latterly by the name of Tuscaroras, were probably connected with the Massawomecs, or Five Nations. For though we are told[1] their languages were so different that the intervention of interpreters was necessary between them, yet do we also learn[2] that the Erigas, a nation formerly inhabiting on the Ohio, were of the same original stock with the Five Nations, and that they partook also of the Tuscarora language. Their dialects might, by long separation, have become so unlike as to be unintelligible to one another. We know that in 1712 the Five Nations received the Tuscaroras into their confederacy, and made them the Sixth Nation. They received the Meherrins and Tuteloes also into their protection; and it is most probable that the remains of many other of the tribes, of whom we find no particular account, retired westwardly in like manner, and were incorporated with one or other of the Western tribes.[3] (5.)
I know of no such thing existing as an Indian Monument; for I would not honor with that name arrow points, stone hatchets, stone pipes, and half-shapen images. Of labor on the large scale, I think there is no remain as respectable as would be a common ditch for the draining of lands, unless indeed it be the Barrows, of which many are to be found all over this country. These are of different sizes, some of them constructed of earth, and some of loose stones. That they were repositories of the dead has been obvious to all; but on what particular occasion constructed was matter of doubt. Some have thought they covered the bones of those who have fallen in battles fought on the spot of interment. Some ascribed them to the custom, said to prevail among the Indians, of collecting, at certain periods, the bones of all their dead, wheresoever deposited at the time of death. Others again supposed them the general sepulchres for towns, conjectured to have been on or near these grounds; and this opinion was supported by the quality of the lands in which they are found, (those constructed of earth being generally in the softest and most fertile meadow-grounds on river sides) and by a tradition, said to be handed down from the Aboriginal Indians, that, when they settled in a town, the first person who died was placed erect, and earth put about him, so as to cover and support him; that, when another died, a narrow passage was dug to the first, the second reclined against him, and the cover of earth replaced, and so on. There being one of these in my neighborhood, I wished to satisfy myself whether any, and which of these opinions were just. For this purpose I determined to open and examine it thoroughly. It was situated on the low grounds of the Rivanna, about two miles above its principal fork, and opposite to some hills, on which had been an Indian town. It was of a spheroidical form, of about 40 feet diameter at the base, and had been of about twelve feet altitude, though now reduced by the plough to seven and a half, having been under cultivation about a dozen years. Before this it was covered with trees of twelve inches diameter, and round the base was an excavation of five feet depth and width, from whence the earth had been taken of which the hillock was formed. I first dug superficially in several parts of it, and came to collections of human bones, at different depths, from six inches to three feet below the surface. These were lying in the utmost confusion, some vertical, some oblique, some horizontal, and directed to every point of the compass, entangled, and held together in clusters by the earth. Bones of the most distant parts were found together, as, for instance, the small bones of the foot in the hollow of a scull, many sculls would sometimes be in contact, lying on the face, on the side, on the back, top or bottom, so as on the whole to give the idea of bones emptied promiscuously from a bag or basket, and covered over with earth, without any attention to their order. The bones of which the greatest numbers remained were sculls, jaw bones, teeth, the bones of the arms, thighs, legs, feet, and hands. A few ribs remained, some vertebræ of the neck and spine, without their processes, and one instance only of the bone[4] which serves as a base to the vertebral column. The sculls were so tender, that they generally fell to pieces on being touched. The other bones were stronger. There were some teeth which were judged to be smaller than those of an adult; a scull, which, on a slight view, appeared to be that of an infant, but it fell to pieces on being taken out, so as to prevent satisfactory examination; a rib, and a fragment of the under jaw of a person about half grown; another rib of an infant, and part of the jaw of a child, which had not yet cut its teeth. This last furnishing the most decisive proof of the burial of children here, I was particular in my attention to it. It was part of the right half of the under jaw. The processes, by which it was articulated to the temporal bones, were entire, and the bone itself firm to where it had been broken off, which, as nearly as I could judge, was about the place of the eye-tooth. Its upper edge, wherein would have been the sockets of the teeth, was perfectly smooth. Measuring it with that of an adult, by placing their hinder processes together, its broken end extended to the penultimate grinder of the adult. This bone was white, all the others of a sand color. The bones of infants being soft, they probably decay sooner, which might be the cause so few were found here. I proceeded then to make a perpendicular cut through the body of the barrow, that I might examine its internal structure. This passed about three feet from its centre, was opened to the former surface of the earth, and was wide enough for a man to walk through and examine its sides. At the bottom, that is, on the level of the circumjacent plain, I found bones; above these a few stones, brought from a cliff a quarter of a mile off, and from the river one-eighth of a mile off; then a large interval of earth, then a stratum of bones, and so on. At one end of the section were four strata of bones plainly distinguishable; at the other three; the strata in one part not ranging with those in another. The bones nearest the surface were least decayed. No holes were discovered in any of them, as if made with bullets, arrows, or other weapons. I conjectured that in this barrow might have been a thousand skeletons. Every one will readily seize the circumstances above related, which militate against the opinion, that it covered the bones only of persons fallen in battle; and against the tradition also, which would make it the common sepulchre of a town, in which the bodies were placed upright, and touching each other. Appearances certainly indicate that it has derived both origin and growth from the accustomary collection of bones, and deposition of them together; that the first collection had been deposited on the common surface of the earth, a few stones put over it, and then a covering of earth, that the second had been laid on this, had covered more or less of it in proportion to the number of bones, and was then also covered with earth, and so on. The following are the particular circumstances which give it this aspect: 1. The number of bones. 2. Their confused position. 3. Their being in different strata. 4. The strata in one part having no correspondence with those in another. 5. The different states of decay in these strata, which seem to indicate a difference in the time of inhumation. 6. The existence of infant bones among them.[5]
But on whatever occasion they may have been made, they are of considerable notoriety among the Indians; for a party passing, about thirty years ago, through the part of the country where this barrow is, went through the woods directly to it, without any instructions or enquiry, and having staid about it some time, with expressions which were construed to be those of sorrow, they returned to the high road, which they had left about half a dozen miles to pay this visit, and pursued their journey. There is another barrow, much resembling this in the low grounds of the South branch of Shenandoah, where it is crossed by the road leading from the Rockfish Gap to Staunton. Both of these have, within these dozen years, been cleared of their trees and put under cultivation, are much reduced in their height, and spread in width by the plough, and will probably disappear in time. There is another on a hill in the Blue Ridge of mountains, a few miles North of Wood's Gap, which is made up of small stones thrown together. This has been opened, and found to contain human bones, as the others do. There are also many others in other parts of the country.
Great question has arisen from whence came those aboriginal inhabitants of America.[6] Discoveries, long ago made, were sufficient to shew that a passage from Europe to America was always practicable, even to the imperfect navigation of ancient times. In going from Norway to Iceland, from Iceland to Groenland, from Groenland to Labrador, the first traject is the widest; and this having been practised from the earliest times of which we have any account of that part of the earth, it is not difficult to suppose that the subsequent trajects may have been sometimes passed. Again, the late discoveries of Captain Cook, coasting from Kamschatka to California, have proved that, if the two continents of Asia and America be separated at all, it is only by a narrow strait. So that from this side also inhabitants may have passed into America; and the resemblance between the Indians of America and the Eastern inhabitants of Asia would induce us to conjecture, that the former are the descendants of the latter, or the latter of the former, excepting indeed the Eskimaux, who, from the same circumstance of resemblance, and from identity of language, must be derived from the Groenlanders, and these probably from some of the Northern parts of the old continent. A knowledge of their several languages would be the most certain evidence of their derivation which could be produced. In fact, it is the best proof of the affinity of nations which ever can be referred to. How many ages have elapsed since the English, the Dutch, the Germans, the Swiss, the Norwegians, Danes and Swedes have separated from their common stock? Yet how many more must elapse before the proofs of their common origin, which exist in their several languages, will disappear? It is to be lamented then, very much to be lamented, that we have suffered so many of the Indian tribes already to extinguish, without our having previously collected and deposited in the records of literature the general rudiments at least of the languages they spoke. Were vocabularies formed of all the languages spoken in North and South America, preserving their appellations of the most common objects in Nature, of those which must be present to every nation, barbarous or civilized, with the inflections of their nouns and verbs, their principles of regimen and concord, and these deposited in all the public libraries, it would furnish opportunities to those skilled in the languages of the old world to compare them with these, now, or at any future time, and hence to construct the best evidence of the derivation of this part of the human race. It will be seen that in several of these vocabularies there is a remarkable resemblance in the numbers when there is not a trace of it in the other parts of the languages. When a tribe has gone farther than its neighbors in inventing a system of numeration, the obvious utility of this will occasion it to be immediately adopted by the surrounding tribes with only such modifications of the sounds as may accommodate them to the habitual pronunciations of their own language.
But imperfect as is our knowledge of the tongues spoken in America, it suffices to discover the following remarkable fact.[7] Arranging them under the radical ones to which they may be palpably traced, and doing the same by those of the red men of Asia, there will be found probably twenty in America for one in Asia of those radical languages so called, because, if they were ever the same, they have lost all resemblance to one another. A separation into dialects may be the work of a few ages only, but for two dialects to recede from one another till they have lost all vestiges of their common origin, must require an immense course of time; perhaps not less than many people give to the age of the earth. A greater number of those radical changes of language having taken place among the red men of America, proves them of greater antiquity than those of Asia.
I will now proceed to state the nations and numbers of the Aborigines which still exist in a respectable and independent form. And as their undefined boundaries would render it difficult to specify those only which may be within any certain limits, and it may not be unacceptable to present a more general view of them, I will reduce within the form of a catalogue all those within, and circumjacent to, the United States, whose names and numbers have come to my notice. These are taken from four different lists, the first of which was given in the year 1759 to General Stanwix by George Croghan, deputy agent for Indian affairs under Sir William Johnson; the second was drawn up by a French trader of considerable note, resident among the Indians many years, and annexed to Colonel Bouquet's printed account of his expedition in 1764. The third was made out by Captain Hutchins, who visited most of the tribes by order, for the purpose of learning their numbers in 1768. And the fourth by John Dodge, an Indian trader, in 1779, except the numbers marked *, which are from other information.
| TRIBES. | Croghan. 1759. |
Bouquet. 1764. |
Hutchins. 1768. |
Dodge. 1779. |
Where they reside. | |||||||||||||||
| Northward and Westward of the United States. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Oswegatchies | — — | — — | 100 | — | At Swagatchy, on the river St. Laurence | |||||||||||||||
| Connasedagoes | — — |
|
300 | — | Near Montreal | |||||||||||||||
| Cohunnewagoes | — — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Orondocs | — — | — — | 100 | — | Near Trois Rivieres | |||||||||||||||
| Abenakies | — — | 350 | 150 | — | Near Trois Rivieres | |||||||||||||||
| Little Algonkins | — — | — — | 100 | — | Near Trois Rivieres | |||||||||||||||
| Michmacs | — — | 700 | — — | — | River St. Laurence | |||||||||||||||
| Amelistes | — — | 550 | — — | — | River St. Laurence | |||||||||||||||
| Chalas | — — | 130 | — — | — | River St. Laurence | |||||||||||||||
| Nipissins | — — | 400 | — — | — | Towards the heads of the Ottawas River | |||||||||||||||
| Algonquins | — — | 300 | — — | — | Towards the heads of the Ottawas River | |||||||||||||||
| Round heads | — — | 2500 | — — | — | Riviere aux Tetes boules on the East side of Lake Sup'r | |||||||||||||||
| Messasagues | — — | 2000 | — — | — | Lakes Huron and Superior | |||||||||||||||
| Christinaux; Kris | — — | 3000 | — — | — | Lake Chris | |||||||||||||||
| Assinaboes | — — | 1500 | — — | — | Lake Assinaboes | |||||||||||||||
| Blancs, or Barbus | — — | 1500 | — — | — | ||||||||||||||||
|
10,000 |
|
10,000 | — |
| |||||||||||||||
| — | ||||||||||||||||||||
| — | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Ajoues | — — | 1100 | — — | — | North of the Padoucas | |||||||||||||||
| Panis; White | — — | 2000 | — — | — | South of the Missouri | |||||||||||||||
| Panis, Freckled | — — | 1700 | — — | — | South of the Missouri | |||||||||||||||
| Padoucas | — — | 500 | — — | — | South of the Missouri | |||||||||||||||
| Grandes eaux | — — | 1000 | — — | — | ||||||||||||||||
| Canses | — — | 1600 | — — | — | South of the Missouri | |||||||||||||||
| Osages | — — | 600 | — — | — | South of the Missouri | |||||||||||||||
| Missouris | 400 | 3000 | — — | — | On the river Missouri | |||||||||||||||
| Arkansas | — — | 2000 | — — | — | On the river Arkansas | |||||||||||||||
| Caouitas | — — | 700 | — — | — | East of the Alibamous | |||||||||||||||
| Within the Limits of the United States. | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
— — | 160 | 100 | Mohocks River | |||||||||||||||
| — — |
|
400 | E. side Oneida L. and head branches of Susquehanna | |||||||||||||||||
| — — | Between the Oneidas and Onondagoes | |||||||||||||||||||
| 1550 | 260 | 230 | Near Onondago L. | |||||||||||||||||
| — — | 200 | 220 | On the Cayuga L., near the N. branch of Susquehanna | |||||||||||||||||
| — — | 1000 | 650 | On the waters of Susquehanna, of Ontario, and the heads of the Ohio | |||||||||||||||||
| Aughquàgahs | — — | — — | 150 | — | East branch of Susquehanna, and on Aughquagah | |||||||||||||||
| Nánticocs | — — | — — | 100 | — | Utsanango, Chaghtnet, and Owegy, on the East branch of Susquehanna. | |||||||||||||||
| Mohìccons | — — | — — | 100 | — | In the same parts | |||||||||||||||
| Conòies | — — | — — | 30 | — | In the same parts | |||||||||||||||
| Sapòonies | — — | — — | 30 | — | At Diahago and other villages up the N. branch of Susquehanna | |||||||||||||||
| Mùnsies | — — | — — | 150 | *150 | At Diahago and other villages up the N. branch of Susquehanna | |||||||||||||||
| Delawares, or Linnelinopies | — — | — — | 150 | At Diahago and other villages up the N. branch of Susquehanna | ||||||||||||||||
| Delawares, or Linnelinopies | 600 | 600 | 600 | *500 | Between Ohio and L. Erie, and the branches of Beaver Creek, Cuyahoga and Muskingham | |||||||||||||||
| Shàwances | 400 | 500 | 30 | 300 | Sioto and the branches of Muskingham | |||||||||||||||
| Mingoes | — — | — — | — — | 60 | On a branch of Sioto | |||||||||||||||
| Mohìccons | — — |
|
*60 | |||||||||||||||||
| Cohunnewagos | — — | 300 | — | Near Sandusky | ||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
180 | |||||||||||||||||
| Near Fort St. Joseph's and Detroit | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Twightwees | 300 | — — | 250 | — | Miami River, near Fort Miami | |||||||||||||||
| Miamis | — — | 350 | — — | 300 | Miami River, about Fort St. Joseph | |||||||||||||||
| Ouiàtonons | 200 | 400 | 300 | *300 | On the banks of the Wabash, near Fort Ouiatonon | |||||||||||||||
| Piànkishas | 300 | 250 | 300 | *400 | On the banks of the Wabash, near Fort Ouiatonon | |||||||||||||||
| Shàkies | — — | — — | 200 | — | On the banks of the Wabash, near Fort Ouiatonon | |||||||||||||||
| Kaskaskias |
|
600 | 300 | — | Near Kaskaskia | |||||||||||||||
| Illinois | 300 | — | Near Cahokia. Qu. If not the same with the Mitchigamis? | |||||||||||||||||
| Piorias | — — | 800 | — — | — | On the Illinois R., called Pianrias, but supposed to mean Piorias | |||||||||||||||
|
— — | 350 | 300 | 450 | Near St. Joseph's and Fort Detroit | |||||||||||||||
|
— — |
|
*300 | Near St. Joseph's and Fort Detroit | ||||||||||||||||
|
— | On Saguinam Bay of Lake Huron | ||||||||||||||||||
| — | On Saguinam Bay of Lake Huron | |||||||||||||||||||
| — — | — | Near Michillimakinac | ||||||||||||||||||
| 5900 | 5450 | Near Michillimakinac | ||||||||||||||||||
| Near Fort St. Mary’s, on Lake Superior | ||||||||||||||||||||
| — — | — | Several other villages along the banks of Lake Superior. Numbers unknown | ||||||||||||||||||
| — — |
|
— — | — | Near Puans Bay, on Lake Michigan | ||||||||||||||||
| 200 | 550 | — | Near Puans Bay, on Lake Michigan | |||||||||||||||||
| Mynonàmies | — — | — — | — | Near Puans Bay, on Lake Michigan | ||||||||||||||||
| Ouisconsings | — — | 500 | — — | — | Ouisconsing River | |||||||||||||||
| Kickapous | 600 |
|
— — |
|
On Lake Michigan, and between that and the Missisipi | |||||||||||||||
| Otogamies; Foxes | — — | — — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Màscoutens | — — | 4000 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Miscòthins | — — | |||||||||||||||||||
| Outimacs | — — | — — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Musquakies | 200 | — — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Sioux; Eastern | — — | — — | — — | 500 | On the Eastern heads of Missisipi, and the islands of Lake Superior | |||||||||||||||
| Galphin. 1768. |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Cherokees | 1500 | 2500 | 3000 | — | Western parts of North Carolina | |||||||||||||||
| Chickasaws | — — | 750 | 500 | — | Western parts of Georgia | |||||||||||||||
| Catawbas | — — | 150 | — — | — | On the Catawba River in South Carolina | |||||||||||||||
| Chacktaws | 2000 | 4500 | 6000 | — | Western parts of Georgia | |||||||||||||||
| Upper Creeks | — — |
|
3000 | — | Western parts of Georgia | |||||||||||||||
| Lower Creeks | — — | |||||||||||||||||||
| Natchez | — — | 150 | — — | — | ||||||||||||||||
| Alibamous | — — | 600 | — — | — | Alibama River, in the Western parts of Georgia | |||||||||||||||
The following tribes are also mentioned:
| Croghan's catal. |
Lezar | 400 | From the mouth of Ohio to the mouth of Wabash. | |||
| Webings | 200 | On the Missisipi, below the Shakies. | ||||
|
4000 | On White Creek, a branch of the Missisipi. | ||||
| Linways | 1000 | On the Missisipi. | ||||
| Bouquet's. | Les Puans | 700 | Near Puans Bay. | |||
| Folle avoine | 350 | Near Puans Bay. | ||||
| Ouanakina | 300 |
| ||||
| Chickanessou | 350 | |||||
| Machecous | 800 | |||||
| Souikilas | 200 | |||||
| Dodge's. | Mineamis | 2000 | Northwest of L. Michigan, to the heads of Missisipi, and up to L. Superior. | |||
|
800 | On and near the Wabash, towards the Illinois. |
But apprehending these might be different appellations for some of the tribes already enumerated, I have not inserted them in the table, but state them separately, as worthy of further inquiry. The variations observable in numbering the same tribe may sometimes be ascribed to imperfect information, and sometimes to a greater or less comprehension of settlements under the same name. (7.)
- ↑ Smith.
- ↑ Evans.
- ↑ See Maps No. 3, 4, Appendix iv., left by the author with the notes for the present edition, and apparently intended for this portion of it.
- ↑ The os sacrum.
- ↑ The custom of burying the dead in barrows was anciently very prevalent.
Homer describes the ceremony of raising one by the Greeks.
ἀμφ᾽ αὐτοῖσι δ᾽ ἔπειτα μέγαν καὶ ἀμύμονα τύμβον
χεύαμεν Ἀργείων ἱερὸς στρατὸς αἰχμητάων
ἀκτῇ ἔπι προὐχούσῃ, ἐπὶ πλατεῖ Ἑλλησπόντῳ,
ὥς κεν τηλεφανὴς ἐκ ποντόφιν ἀνδράσιν εἴη
τοῖς οἳ νῦν γεγάασι καὶ οἳ μετόπισθεν ἔσονται.
And Herodotus 7, 117, mentions an instance of the same practice in the army of Xerxes on the death of Artachæas.
- ↑ In the notes on Virginia, the great diversity of languages appearing radically different, which are spoken by the red men of America, is supposed to authorize a supposition that their settlement is more remote than that of Asia by its red inhabitants; but it must be confessed that the mind finds it difficult to conceive that so many tribes have inhabited it from so remote an antiquity as would be necessary to have divided them into language so radically different. I will therefore hazard a conjecture as such, and only to be estimated at what it may be worth. We know that the Indians consider it as dishonorable to use any language but their own. Hence in their councils with us, though some of them may have been in situations which, from convenience or necessity, have obliged them to learn our language well, yet they refuse to confer in it, and always insist on the intervention of an intepreter, though he may understand neither language so well as themselves; and this fact is as general as our knowledge of the tribes of North America. When therefore a fraction of a tribe from domestic feuds has broken off from its main body, to which it is held by no law or compact, and has gone to another settlement, may it not be the point of honor with them not to use the language of those with whom they have quarreled, but to have one of their own. They have use but for few words, and possess but few. It would require but a small effort of the mind to invent these, and to acquire the habit of using them. Perhaps this hypothesis presents less difficulty than that of so many radically distinct languages, preserved by such handfuls of men, from an antiquity so remote that no data we possess will enable us to calculate it.
- ↑ Lettere di Amer. Vesp. 81.—Ib. 11, 12. 4. Clavigero, 21.