HURON
572
HURON
Hurons seem to have held but one opinion concerning
their belief in a Supreme Being. Champlain says
that they acknowledged no deity, that they adored
and believed in no god. They lived like brute beasts,
holding in awe, to some extent, the Devil, or beings
bearing the somewhat equivalent name of Oqui
(Oki). Still, they gave this same name to any extraor-
dinary personage — one endowed, as they believed,
with preternatural powers like their medicine-men.
Sagard is at one with Champlain in his deductions,
though he adds that they recognized a good and a
bad Oki, and that they looked upon one louskeha as
the first principle and the creator of the universe,
together with Eataentsic, but they made no sacrifice
to him as one would to God. To their minds the
rocks, and rivers, and trees, and lakes, and, in fine, all
things in nature, were associated with a good or bad
Oki, and to these in their joumeyings they made
offerings. Father Jerome Lalemant incidentally
states: " They have no notion of a Deity who created
the world or gives heed to its governing." Father
Jean de Brebeuf, who, during his long stay among the
Hurons, had leisure and every opportunity to study
their beliefs, customs, and codes, and consequently
may be quoted as by far the best authority on all such
matters, has this to say, which seems to put the
question in its true light: "It is so clear and manifest
that there is a Deity who created heaven and earth
that our Hurons are not able wholly to disregard it;
and though their mental vision is densely obscured
by the shadows of a long-enduring ignorance, by
their vices and sins, yet have they a faint glimmering
of the Divine. But they misapprehend it grossly and,
having a knowledge of God, they yield Him no hon-
our, nor love, nor dutiful service; for they have no
temples, nor priests, nor festivals, nor any cere-
monies." This passage is to be found in the Rela-
tion of 1635 (Queb. ed., 34, 1; Clev. ed., VIII, 117).
He proceeds immediately to explain briefly their be-
lief in the supernatural character of one Eataentsic,
or Aataentsic, and that of her grandson louskeha.
But this myth with its several variants is developed
at much greater length in the Relation of 1636
(Queb. ed., 101; Clev. ed., X, 127), where many more
particulars are added illustrative of their belief in
some Deity.
From a perusal of these two accounts, it may be gathered that the myth of Aataentsic and louskeha was accepted by the Hurons as accounting satisfac- torily for their origin ; that the former, who had the care of souls, and whose prerogative it was to cut short the earthly career of man, was reputed ma- levolent, while louskeha, presiding over the living and all that concerned life, was regarded as beneficent. They believed in the survival of the soul and its prolonged existence in the world to come — that is to say, in a vague manner, in its immortality — but their concept of it was that of something corporeal. .Most of what might be called their religious observances hinged on this tenet of an after life. Strictly speak- ing, they counted on neither reward nor punishment in the place where the souls went after death, and between the good and the bad, the virtuous and the vicious, they made no distinction, granting like hon- ours in burial to both.
De Brebeuf detected in their myths, especially in that of Aataentsic and louskeha, some faint traces of the story of Adam and Eve much distorted and all but faded from memory in the handing down through countless generations; so also, that of Cain and .\bel, in the murder of Taouiscaron by his brother louskeha, who, in one variant, figures asthe son of Aataentsic. In the apotheosis of Aataentsic and louskeha, the former was considered and honoured as the moon, the latter as the sun. In fact all the heavenly bodies were revered as something Divine; but in the sun, above all, was recognized a powerful and benign influence
over all animate creation. As for the great Oki in
heaven — and it is not clear if he were regarded or
not as a personality distinct from louskeha — the
Hurons acknowledged a power that regulated the
seasons of the year, held the winds in leash, stilled the
boisterous waves, made navigation favourable — in
fine, helped them in their every need. They dreaded
his wrath, and it was on him they called to witness
their plighted word. In so doing, as de Brebeuf
infers, they honoured God unwittingly.
Since the object (objectum materiak) of the theo- logical virtue of religion is God, the claim that the reverential observances of the Hurons, as de.-icribed by de Bri^'beuf, should be deemed sufficient to con- stitute religion properly speaking, must be set aside, as there was a great admixture of error in their con- cept of a Supreme Being. But as the object {objectum materiale) of the moral virtue of religion is the com- plex of acts by which God is worshipped, and as these tend to the reverence of God Who, in relation to the virtue of religion, thus stands as its end, such acts, if practised among the Hurons, should be considered. Devotion, adoration, sacrifice, oblations, vows, oaths, the uttering of the Divine name, as in adjuration or invocation, through prayer or praise, are acts per- taining to the virtue of religion. It is not necessary for the present purpose to insist on each particular act of the series, but only on the most important, and such as fell under de Brebeuf's observation, and are recorded by him.
^fonhia was the word used by them for heaven, the heavens, sky; and from the very beginning was used by the missionaries in Christian prayers to designate heaven, as may be seen in the Huron or Seneca Our Father by de Carheil. "Now", de Brebeuf writes, "here are the ceremonies they observe in these sacri- fices [of impetration, expiation, propitiation, etc.]. They throw jxtiai (tobacco) into the fire, and if, for example, they are addressing Heaven they say: ' Aron- hiatc, onnc aonMayiioiias taitenr ', ' Heaven, here is what I offer you in sacrifice, have mercy on me, help me ! ' or if it be to ask for health ' laenguiaens ', ' cure me '. They have recourse to Heaven in almost' all their wants". When they meant to bind themselves by vow or by most solemn promise to fulfil an agreement, or observe a treaty, they wound up with this formula: " Heaven is listenmg to [or heeding] what we are now doing", and they are convinced, after that, says de Brebeuf, that if they break their word or engagement Heaven will indubitably punish them. Were some one accidentally drowned, or frozen to death, the occurrence was looked upon as a visitation of the anger of Heaven, and a sacrifice must be offered to appease its wrath. It is the flesh of the victim which is used in the ofl'orinf;. The neit;hl)ouring villages flock to the banquet which is heUl, and the usual presents are made, for the well-being of the country is at stake. The lio<ly is borne to the burial place and stretched on a mat on one side of the grave, and on the other a fire is kindled. Young men, chosen by the relatives of the victim, armed with knives, are ranged around. The chief mourner marks with a coal the divisions to lie made and the.se parts are severed from the trunk and thrown into the fire. Then, amidst the chants and lamentations of the women, especially of the near relatives, the remains are buried, and Heaven, it is thought, is pacified.
Thus far, among the oblations to a supernatural being, no mention has been made of bloody sacrifices. Sacrifice, at least on account of the significance which is attached to it by usage among all nations (the acknowledging of the supreme dominion over life and death residing in the one for whom it is intended), may be offered to no creature, but only to the C)ne Being to whom adoration (ctiltux hitria) in its strictest .sense is due. Such sacrifices of living animals were also in vogue among the Hurons. There was no day nor sea-
