USA > Wisconsin > Buffalo County > History of Buffalo County, Wisconsin > Part 8
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53
5
90
ON INDIAN HISTORY.
portunities of acquiring a through knowledge of language, man- ners, conditions, traditions and all the more obscure facts about Indians, such as would not, or but imperfectly, be observed in any other position. As far as opportunities were concerned, the trad- ers were in the most favorable situation; they were among the Indians, they had time, and their very existence depended mostly upon their intimate knowledge of Indian characteristics. But as to rendering a report on their experiences and observations the traders and their dependents were, as a class, but little fitted to produce anything reliable. Most of them were illiterate, some to the lowest possibility. We can not be surprised at that, when we consider that in the sixteenth, seventeenth and even the eight- eenth century popular education in France can not possibly have had any existence, that all literary education was confined to the higher classes the nobility, the clergy and the rich, and not even very creditable among the majority of these. The trader, that is the actual merchant, we may call him "Bourgeois," or " Sieur," or " Seignieur," had some knowledge of mercantile affairs, and may be generally credited with the accomplishments of reading and writing, though it was notorious that some of the class did not possess, and did not even value these accomplishments, which, at least in the immediate traffic, were of but little consequence.
Another cause, which prevented the reports from traders, was the natural tendency of mercantile operations to court secrecy, in order to elude competition. Possibly, though perhaps there was scarcely any occasion for it, reports from this quarter were sup- pressed by the national jealousy between the French and English, which was especially active in the French government of colonies,. and for which there was cause enough, on account of the adjoin- ing New England colonies. So we find that those who were in the best position to know, did not furnish much information, which is the more to be regretted, as there were numerous causes of prej- udice animating the other class of explorers, but which were less potent, or entirely absent among the traders.
MISSIONARIES.
Of these we must remember that they were French, Catholics, Clericals, and Celibates. The first two of these qualifications they had in common with the traders and their dependents, and these same qualifications placed the Missionaries under the gov-
91
ON INDIAN HISTORY.
ernment and protection of the Representatives of the Royal Power of France. The missionaries being professedly non-combatants, had to rely on that protection much more extensively than the traders, who were supposed to provide for themselves in cases of emergencies, and whose arms and combativeness probably furn- ished as much protection to the Lilies of the Bourbons, as the same flowers could be expected to afford to them. The character of the missionaries as Clericals and Celibates seems to have made them more independent of worldly affairs than the traders, and to have put them on a basis of impartial judgment. Yet, while they were on one point put on a more independent basis, they were, especially by being celibates, put at a disadvantage as far as observation was concerned. They were, in a somewhat opprobri- ous sense considered as intruders, who could not share, but might misrepresent, family life among Indians. Their aim was not so much to reform, but to overturn the entire fabric of what may have been superstitions, but were, nevertheless, actual parts, traits and motives of Indian life. How could they have reformed, what was to them an abomination? For many of these disadvantages their zeal and devotion supplied remedies, and if their theory was austere, their practice has been found to have been accom- modating itself to circumstances. A number of them had been people of the world and had made different kinds of experience before entering their orders; and such frequently found occasion to utilize their experience in the council of their convict, in their own conduct, and in regulating the conduct of their converts, and their zeal was not altogether without that discretion, which made them not only obedient instruments, but also close and able ob- servers. Yet, when we contemplate their preconceived ideas, their doctrinal obstinacy, and their ascetic tendency, according to which they sometimes condemned the most innocent manifestations of nature, we will feel inclined to look upon their reports and rela- tions of Indian life and manners with an eye of caution, if not actual suspicion. As far as their own personal sincerity is con- corned, at least as it relates to the earliest Jesuits in the New World, I am inclined to agree with Parkman, and concede the point. We find, however, that some of these monks, Jesuits and Franciscans, were not above a desire of appropriating to them- selves the achievements of others, Examples of this you will
92
ON INDIAN HISTORY.
find in the histories of La Salle and Du Luth. In regard to liter- ary capability and preparation for their labor and especially the task now under consideration, they were widely different, the Jes- uits as a rule far superior to the Franciscans. The Jesuits being known and acknowledged as superior scholastics, we may turn to their opponents, the Franciscans, who were of the two peculiar degrees or sub-orders called Capuchins and Recollects. The Cap- uchins were professed "ignorantes," that is, they considered sec- ular knowledge as detrimental to supernatural virtue. They were an order of mendicants, subsisting ostentatiously upon charity. The Recollects or Recollets were similar, though probably of a different habit or mode of clothing. Of the latter we find that Hennepin, who belonged to that order, was the author of a book, .. hence they probably were themselves or admitted to their ranks, men of scholastic acquirements. Their religious tenets being alike, we may omit their discussion. It is worthy of remark, that there was a pronounced disinclination on the part of the traders towards the ecclesiastics, but more so towards the Jesuits than the Fran- ciscans. Devout Catholics they all were, at least professedly, and educated in the veneration of the priests or monks, and this dis- tinct antagonism is well worth contemplation, though the causes have nothing to do with this matter. As it was, it certainly in- fluenced their mutual relations to each other and the Indians, and possibly colored some of the narratives from either side. And, since the ecclesiastics were almost the only historians, we must bring this antagonism into account in the formation of our judg- ment regarding the Indians.
What has been said relates mainly to the very earliest peri- ods of exploration, and does not locally extend to our part of the country. It is, nevertheless, important as the most reliable source of a knowledge of the original Indian character, and of the habitat of some of the Indian tribes or nations, who subsequently were domiciled upon, or claimed prescriptive possession of, the very soil upon which we are now living. There was always a wide dif- ference in these reports, and although the older ones are certainly preferable, yet we must come to the conclusion, that most of them were written to support certain theories, and that the remarks of Parkman in regard to later writers on the subject might to a cer- tain degree be applicable to all these histories and not only to the
93
ON INDIAN HISTORY.
particular investigations concerning the religion of the Indians. He says:
"Many observers have interpreted the religious ideas of the Indians after preconceived ideas of their own, and it may safely be affirmed that an Indian will respond with a grunt of acquies- cence to any question whatever touching his spiritual state. Loskiel and the simple-minded Heckewelder write from a mis- sionary point of view; Adair to support a theory of descent from the Jews; the worthy theologian, Jarvis, to maintain his dogma, that all religious ideas of the heathen world are perversions of revelation; and so, in a greater or less degree, of many others. By far the most close and accurate observers of Indian superstitions (and character) were the French and Italian Jesuits of the first half of the seventeenth century. Their opportunities were un- rivalled; and they used them in a spirit of faithful inquiry, ac- cumulating facts, and leaving theory to their successors."
With this quotation I may dismiss the missionaries as ex- plorers. I think that in the above the 2d, 3d and 4th of my ques- tions have been, incidentally, but fully, answered.
PRONUNCIATION AND TRANSLATION.
We come now to a source of trouble originating in the dif- ference of languages, the French and the English on one side, and the different tongues and dialects of the Indians on the other. In the transitions from the Indian into the French and from that into the English the names of Indian tribes or nations have been so much disfigured, that it may be set down as a fact, that very often authors spoke of what they did but imper- fectly know, and what might have been something or some- body else. The Indians having no written language in the modern acceptation of the term, the French in writing about any particular nation or about its location and other things con- nected therewith, tried to imitate the sounds of the Indian names and as their language is almost devoid of any gutturals, they could not express such sounds very closely .
It does not possess, for instance, the sound or letter of W, but we find them trying to represent that sound by ou, which, how- ever, in most words of their own language has not a consonant but a vowel sound, the same as oo in boots, and was certainly a poor substitute in such words as Wisconsin = Ouis-con-sin. In
ON INDIAN HISTORY.'
same word the last syllable, according to their own language st be pronounced sang. We find in this one word an example of the transmission of Indian names, which convinces us that our present pronunciation of them is not at all reliable. We find another familiar instance in the word Sioux, in which even ac- cording to their own orthography the letter i is without any func- tion, and that Soux would answer the purpose as to pronuncia- tion, admitting the x as a silent sign of the plural. The difficulty thickens when we come to the interpretations. In such cases, however, the French circumvented the difficulty frequently by adopting the names suggested by localities or by the language of adjoining tribes. They, for instance, called the Winnebagoes, whose name in their own (the Winnebago) language is Ochunk- osaw, by a translation, or may be perversion, of the Algonquin word "Winebeg," meaning fetid water, naming them "Puants," that is "Stinkers," and, as the Winnebagoes at first lived near Green Bay, they called the place " Baie des Puants," though per- haps also "Baie Verte." Such instances might be multiplied.
After the conquest of Canada and its surrender to the English these names existed and were forthwith represented in English orthography, always with the evident intention of rendering them pronounceable, or rather easy of pronunciation. Naturally they were subjected to further transformations or di figurations. French and English orthography having during the term of a century un- dergone numerous changes, some of which were probably extended to proper nouns, we are at a loss to say which is which in the pro- nunciation of Indian names, and also in regard to their meaning or significance. Another great difficulty in the study of Indian history is the constant displacement of the tribes. So, for ins- tance, we find that after having established a temporary trading post at Green Bay, and having named the locality by the name they chose to give the first inhabitants they had met in the neigh- borhood, we find the French engaged in desperate feuds with the Foxes, a tribe not at all related to the Winnebagoes, but living upon the country actually occupied by the latter at an earlier date, these, the Winnebagoes, still occupying adjoining parts of the country, but whether in league with the Foxes, or with the French, we have to guess.
Similar to these dislodgements, and usually the cause of them
95
ON INDIAN HISTORY.
were the warlike excursions of some of the preponderating Indian nations .. The most conspicuous of these were the Iroquois of New York, a confederacy of five distinct nations, who came shortly after the visit of Jean Nicollet, up to Wisconsin and defeated the Winnebagoes, and, at the same or some later time, also the Foxes on Rock River. The same powerful confederacy had driven the Sacs and Foxes from their ancient possessions in the southern peninsula of Michigan.
These incidents are cited to give an idea of the tangled mass of facts, reports and traditions, of which what we term Indian history consists. Speaking of the three tribes or nations, which afterwards claimed or, after the Indian custom possessed the soil which now is within the boundaries of our county, and the adjac- ent parts of Wisconsin and Minnesota, I shall find occasion to point out other instances of uncertainties and contradictions. Some of the above remarks might have been made in the recital of specific explorations and settlements, and of lives of individual explorers, but in such cases we are in danger of wronging those who were probably sincere and might have been misrepresented, and we would not have established a standard of judgment or crit- icism by merely questioning individual assertions or character. I shall, therefore, apply but little criticism to the narratives of such authors, as have written about our own part of the country, un- less as far as they can not be included in the classes here enumer- ated. Of these exceptions are Du Luth, La Salle, and Capt. Jon- athan Carver the most conspicuons.
96
THE INDIANS.
THE INDIANS.
Whenever anybody begins to speak of Indians, that is of the population, which as an aggregate, was found in actual occupa- tion of the islands as well as of the continent of North America, it is supposed, mentally and unconsciously, that he is speaking of a homogeneous body, in which every individual is simply an Ind- ian, a barbarous, undeveloped being, who, for the very want of development, must be like every other individual of his nation and can not possibly be different. Some people, at least, have an idea, or pretend to know, that in Europe we have Russians, Swedes, Norwegians, Danes, Dutch, Germans, English, French, Spaniards, Italians, Greeks and Turks, Hungarians, Croatians, Boheinians, and Polanders, besides a number of small national- ities, such as Irish, Gæles, Basques and similar, but for most peo- ple it seems to be incomprehensible that there should be as many if not more, Indian nations as there are European ones. In the same way it might occur to most people, from analogy, that the Indian nations might be grouped by some common distinction of certain ones of them, not possessed by certain others. Without going any deeper than the most obvious differences, we find in Europe three or four principal groups of peoples or nationalities, distinguished from each other mainly by their languages. Philol- ogists may have conclusive proofs of a common origin of most European languages, but the distinctions still exist, between Rus- sian, Polish, Bohemian, and Croatian, as one group, the Slavonic; and the German, Dutch, Danish, Norwegian and Swedish, another, the Germanic or Teutonic; the French the Spanish, the Italian and the Greek, as the Grecco-Romanic; the Hungarian or Magyar, Turkish and Finnish as the Tartaric; with several languages, each made up principally of elements thrown together from two groups, as the English, from Germanic and Romanic elements, with a few others not conveniently to be arranged into either group. In a similar manner the Indian languages of this continent may be grouped and the tribes or nationalities arranged into the groups
97
THE INDIANS.
principally according to their languages or dialects, for in our stage of actual knowledge possessed of any of the Indian languages, defunct, or still existing,. it is probably not safe to draw a very sharp line between language and dialect. In the investigations incident to procuring a sufficient knowledge of those Indian tribes or nations, whom I shall have to mention at some length, I have discovered, that in this as in every other matter " doctors disagree."
In regard to such disagreements there is but little chance for a successful appeal, as the material for investigation is rapidly disappearing, and I have therefore concluded to adhere to such distinctions for the formation of the groups, as are least disputed and easiest of understanding, and shall use for the different na- tions or tribes such names as are generally accepted. Leaving out the Southern Indians, those who usually dwelt below the line drawn from the headwaters of the southern branch of the Ohio River, the Monongahela, to the northern end of Chesapeake Bay, and designating those who dwelt up North from that line, and a line formed by the Ohio, the Missouri and the Platte River, and between the Atlantic Ocean and the Rocky Mountains, as Northern Indians, we may, by affinity of language, divide them into the following four groups:
I. Algonquins, originally along the coast of the ocean, along both sides of St. Lawrence River up to the Sorel, thence only on the northside and thence on the eastside of the lakes, probably in the northern peninsula and the greater part of the southern pen- insula of Michigan, thence to the Wisconsin River and below that on the east side of the Mississippi, down to the Ohio and up the Alleghany River to the mouth of French Creek, thence up that creek to Chautauqua Lake not far from the southern shore of Lake Erie, about one fourth of the whole length of that shore west from Buffalo, and from that point east parallel to the former line. The tribes or nations belonging to that group were the following:
a. In the East: Abenakis, Mohigans, Wampanogs, Pequods, Narragansetts, and Micmacs.
b. Upon the St. Lawrence: Montagnais, (somewhere on the lower stream on either side,) Ottawas, on that river and its islands, the Nipissings around the lake of the same name, and further north on the east side of the lake the Ojibways of Sault Ste. Mary.
c. On the Upper Lakes, that is, Lake Superior and Lake Mi-
98
THE INDIANS.
chigan: North of Lake Superior and towards Hudson's Bay the Knistenau, on the Upper Peninsula some Ojibways, and on the river of the same name the Menomonees.
On the Lower Peninsula the Sacs and Foxes and possibly the Miamis. On the westside of Lake Michigan, south along shore, the Patawattomies, and further west the Mascoutins and Kikapoes, south of them the Illinois, who are supposed to have been a con- federation of numerous tribes speaking Algonkin dialects; farther east in Indiana and Ohio were probably the original quarters of the Miamis.
d. From the headwaters of the Ohio to the Atlantic east, were the Shawanese, the Powhattans and the Leni Lenape or Dela- wares.
II. The Iroquois-Huron-Nation.
They were located within the circle formed by the Algonquin tribes enumerated above, and distinct from them in language, manners of living, government and customs. They consisted of five distinct tribes, the Mohawks, Onondagas, Oneidas, Cayugas, and Senecas. The Eries and the Kat-Kaws or Neutrals spoke the same language or some dialect of it, but did not belong to the confederacy. The same may be said of the Hurons, who lived beyond the Iroquois boundary, on the eastern shores of the straits connecting Lake Huron with Lake Erie, mostly on the shores of Georgian Bay. This group does not materially interfere with Indians living on or in the neighborhood of our territory, and are only remarkable as furnishing a precedent of Indian government and clanship which repeated itself among other groups, notably among the Dakotas.
III. The Dakotas or Sioux. This group of which there will be occasion to speak at length hereafter, was situated mostly on the westside but contiguous to the Mississippi.
IV. The Winnebago Confederation.
This nation may be said to have occupied, in general terms, the country between the Wisconsin, the Chippewa, and the Mis- sissippi rivers. They called themselves O-chunk-o-saw and claimed relationship with the Iowas, the Omahas and the Ponkas. By some writers they are classed with the Dakotas, but they denied the relationship. I find that by a late philologist they are classed with the Dakota stock, their language being by him called Hot-
99
THE INDIANS.
can'gara, a name not too remote from the other to confirm their own appellation of O-chunk-o-saw, the word Hotcan'gara, being a Dakota corruption. This nation being one of the three demand- ing especial notice, it may here be passed over. In the above enumeration I do not mean to claim I exhausted the subject, nor that I could not have made some mistakes. The location of niost Indian tribes was uncertain. The weaker ones especially, were constantly wandering, and in their continual warfare they some- times made astonishing excursions, gained and lost in one short summer campaign sometimes more land than is included in our whole state. It is, however, to be remembered, that Indians of any name but seldom went to war for the purpose of acquiring or extending territory, unless entirely expatriated by a superior force.
INDIAN MANNER OF LIVING.
According to accepted definitions the Indians were savages; they lived by hunting and fishing almost exclusively. That they were roving and had no permanent habitation was but the result of their mode of subsistence. Game of any kind will become scarce if constantly exposed to destruction. Some of the game animals are regular migrators, as for instance, the buffalo, others shifted their haunts to elude pursuit and destruction. This mode of life and way of subsistence, however, was more compulsory on the northern Indiaus than on those farther south. Not only was game more abundant in the genial climate, more prolific and less ex- posed to suffering from want of nourishment, but the productions of the soil were more numerous and various, more reliable in their annual crops, and vastly more abundant in these. But how could Indians, savages as they were called, have any crops ? Beyond any question or doubt they did have crops, not only of such fruits and grains as might be considered growing wild, such as berries, plums, nuts, and wild rice, but they also had crops of Indian corn or maize. Not only in the warmer parts but also in the most northern latitudes inhabited by them, did they cultivate this kind of grain, in the high latitudes with very many risks and failures. They also raised other crops, some for subsistence, as squashes and pumpkins, and one, notably, for mere enjoyment, a crop of tobacco. Maize and tobacco were unquestionably of American origin, though perhaps native to the warmer climes to Central-America
100
THE INDIANS.
and the West-Indies. The cultivation of both extends far back of the discovery of the New World by Columbus or by the North- men. But though roving, the Indians. were never truly nomadic. With them the usual order of development had been reversed, or interrupted. The Indians were still hunters and fishers when they practiced agriculture, and they never were herdsmen. Their only domestic animal was the dog, and even this one they had not yet learned to use for many things. Although hunting and war led the Indians sometimes far away, the feeble attempts at agriculture made by them, or for them by their women, induced them always to return to certain localities. It is strange that the cow and the horse were entirely absent when the Europeans began to plant colonies along the coasts. Thus the Aborigines missed the one in- termediate step between the savage hunter and the cultivator of the soil, who is at the foundation of civilization. The use of the milk of certain animals, which leads to the care and protection of such animals, and to the dependence upon the products afforded by them, they had never known. Nor had they ever learned to domesticate and to propagate an animal which exceeded them- selves in strength, and which could transport themselves and their effects with a speed exceeding their own greatly. It may be ques- tioned whether the buffalo could have been domesticated and the milk of the cows might have been used in the same way as that of the common cow; if possible, it was never attempted, or at least no trace of such an attempt is known. There is no question, how- ever, in regard to the horse and its congeners; none of them were present at the first landing of eastern people. As to means of subsistence the Indians had yet to rely almost entirely upon prim- itive and natural resources, and as to transportation, they had to rely upon the means furnished directly by nature, their own legs and the waterways. It is a remarkable fact, that, though the Indians were by dint of constant and exhaustive practice, very fleet walkers and runners, they still preferred the travel in canoes, whenever it was possible to make use of them. This sort of loco- motion, which can hardly claim the title of more than the lowest degree of navigation, coasting, in fact afforded to them the only convenient mode of travel and of transportation. Not that it was in itself an easy task, but it relieved one pair of limbs by em- ploying the other.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.