Focus Topics- For Part 7 Conclusion March 18, 2003

This discussion is now open, LET'S DISCUSS!

I suggest that each of us begin by giving our impression of the book, the author, and the subject Iroquois. I will begin with the following comments.

As I said in an earlier post, I too had trouble reading this book principally because of the small, light print. I am, however, glad I stuck with it because long before the end, I began to realize how very interesting these people and their history really are. Though Francis Jennings tells us early in the book that it is neither the history of the Iroquois nor the history of the colonies, but the history of the Covenant Chain that bound the two diverse cultures together, he succeeded in giving us healthy portions of the history of both the native peoples and the colonies. In this respect the author seems to have well researched his subject and though this particular title addresses a specific aspect of the relations between the Native Americans and the Euramericans, we do get generations portions of the history of the two cultures.

Regarding the history of the colonies, I found this book has cleared up some of the ambiguity arising out of freshman American History 301a on the early history of the colonies. Could you not agree, did not the Mohawk and other Indian trade in the 17th a 18th century establish New York as the financial center of North America?

Regarding the history of the Iroquois, in my case previous reading of this culture was in connection with French exploration of the Mississippi valley. This was principally the story of the La Salle explorations including English translations of early journals as well as research history by historians from Francis Parkman to Robert Weddle. Since the French were most often in an adversary position with the Iroquois these accounts tended to describe the brutal aspects of Indian warfare including the torture of captives and the near genocide of the Illinois tribe by the Iroquois in the early 1680.s. While the Jennings book did not have much to say about this aspect of Iroquois warfare, his particular subject did not require it, and for me, the Jennings book has restored the perspective showing the Iroquois in their full light.

I was particularly impressed with the Iroquois in comparison to the Caddo Confederacy a similar culture here in Texas that I am more familiar with through my work at the ITC. Though the two were alike in many ways I think the Iroquois proved much more sophistication in dealing with the Europeans and their determination in maintaining their status as a sovereign power, which they were able to do over the century and a half time, period covered in the book. In any case the Iroquois in my judgment were more successful in maintaining their sovereignty and culture over a longer period of time than the Caddo whose strength quickly lapsed after regular European contact. began.

Please note the detailed schedule and the focus questions for the first week as shown in the headings. Regarding the schedule I have divided the discussion into 7 week long segments. This will require from less than 50 to a maximum of 72 pages in a single week. Se should try to maintain and to stay with in this schedule.

Regarding the focus questions these are simply my judgment concerning points particularly worthy of discussion. Everyone is free and are encouraged to initiate discussion of other points within the current discussion chapters that they want to question or discuss.

Harold my book is not scheduled for delivery till sometime toward the end of this week - they are saying the 7th the latest and so I will probably miss the first bit of the discussion - thank goodness you are not scheduling many pages to read this first week...

I have read the preface all the way through and starting on the remainder of the book. The print is really small and although I dont need glasses I need good light. I prefer reading just before I go to sleep but I think I need to get a better light or read in the daytime.

Will check back after I have read some more with some thoughts on your questions Harold...looking forward to this ..anna

Thank you for joinig us Barbara. I really enjoyed participating in your Walden discussion last year. And hello annafair thank you for checking in. Don't be intimadated by the book. It really tells quit a story.

As of tonight we are still missing four of the announced participants. Come on you guys and gals, let us hear from you too.

I have already expressed my concern about several things. The small print makes reading very difficult for me. I have no doubt that this is a deeply researched work by Mr. Jennings, who is quite a scholarly writer. I have struggled through the preface and first two chapters, and am not too sure of what I have learned. At this point it looks to me to be a very detailed treatise about the 5 original tribes that formed some sort of union to deal with the English and French settlers. I presume future chapters will indicate just what this loose organization was formed for. Maybe the author has already indicated this. If so I missed it.

I look forward to some input from the individual who suggested this book for discussion.

Some comments on the Preface:

The history of Euramericans and Amerindians in America is elegantly researched and told by Francis Jennings. I find his research technique of researching and documentating on a watershed basis to be quite logical for writing this complex history. (Of a side comment I have studied the Susquehanna and the Delaware river drainages extensively. Of interest all of the Indian villages of the Susquehanna drainage where protected with palisades. The Delaware River drainage just the opposite, to date, no archaeological excavations have reveled a single village that were palisaded). The Iroquois tribes recoginized rather quickly that if they were to survive they must terminate internecine warfare, which only depleted their resources and tribal population. This banding together ultimately became a confederation or the Covenant Chain The Amerindians rather quickley recognized the superior “tools” of the European traders_ steel, brass and gunpowder. This extensive development of trade for foreign products accelerated the “tribes” need to amalgamate, exerting more control of the source of furs and subsequent pricing in trade for the European supplies. The European trade goods quickly made the Indians dependant on this new technology for which they had to barter furs and ultimately their land to obtain. The Dutch West India company quickly dominated the Hudson River valley from land purchased from the Manhattan tribe at the rivers mouth to the confluence of the Hudson and Mohawk river ( Fort Nassau then Fort Orange). These two important anchor points contributed to the extensive Dutch settlements in the entire Hudson river valley.

The Covenant Chain tribes rather quickly developed a tenor for negotiation with the foreigners: many of their ideas appear too be very sophisticated as well as complex.

The very top of the of this page in large letters says FRANCES (FEMALE.)

Right below it in smaller letters it says Francis (male)

Which is correct?

My copy is being forwarded from the main library and I should get it this week.

Williewoody, I urge you to read the 61-page Iroquois History overview, the third link from the top in the heading. You can print this in the font size of your choosing. While it does not follow the points stressed in the book, it does provide a lot of information on the Iroquois.

Jennings’ purpose in this book as stated in the preface is to describe the history of the relations of the Amerindians and Euramericans through a system of alliance known as the Covenant Chain. He specifically said it was not a history of the Iroquois or the Colonies. Of course in describing the history of the Covenant Chain we got a lot of the history of the Iroquois and colonies, but it was less systematically fed to us. In my case I think I began to better understand the message being conveyed as I passed the half way mark and continued reading through the later chapters of the book. The overview history in the link was a help to me.

I can sympathize regarding the difficulty in reading this book. I found it tedious and very slow particularly during the first half. It required full concentration. It did go faster and easier during the second half, but nowhere near as easy or as a fast as Bob Woodward’s “Bush at War” that I acquire Saturday. I read it three times as fast as the Iroquois title.

I am going to suggest we sort of drag out the schedule a bit during this first week and maybe next week to give several of you the chance to receive the book. I can definitely add another week or two to the schedule though I am committed to helping Ella, DL “Abraham-A journey to the Heart of Three Faiths,” beginning March 1st (If we get a quorum).

Potsherd, thank you for coming aboard. You are right about the logic of the use of the watershed system in the northeast. Am I correct in my understanding the native peoples used these river systems in their canoes as highways? The rivers it would seem played a much more important role in the early development of the Northeast and southern part of the continent than they did in the west. One particularly valuable highway was the St Lawrence and the Great Lake system that provided quick access all the way to the center of the Continent and beyond. In 1797, 10-years before Lewis and Clark, Sir Alexander Mackenzie used an advanced mid continent trading post to launch a voyage to the pacific using western Canadian Rivers.(Click Here).Because the launch was from an advanced base beyond the center of the continent he was able to complete the trek to the pacific via Canadian rivers with just a short potage over the mountains and return to his starting point in a single season. While Jefferson was waiting for the outcome of the Election of 1800, he read Mackenzie’s Journal and immediately decided to send an American expedition up the Missouri. This was the Lewis and Clark expedition that took three years because the American River highway was not as well laid out as the northern Canadian one..

I think historians have neglected to stress the importance of trade to the native people of North America. Even before Europeans arrived trade played an important role in their lives. Again using Texas Indians as a reference (because they are the ones I know best) the pre-European country was criss-crossed with a network of well know Indian trade routes principally connecting East Texas to northern Mexico and west in the direction of New Mexico. It was these Indian trade route that became the first Spanish roads for passing through the country. Curiously though there are many Texas Rivers leading to the center and even the western part of the state, I know of no reference where any of the Texas tribes other than the costal Karankawa used canoes. Their travels prior to the late 17th century when they began to acquire the horse was on foot. We know that the Caddo had some horses probably acquired through trade with western tribes in 1685 when La Salle was able to acquire five through trade. The Karankawa made dugout canoes that they used in the many shallow back bays to acquire oysters and other seafoods.

After the Europeans arrived in North America trade played and even more important role. I like the way Potsherd put it, by noting how quickly the Indians accessed the superior value of European trade goods. Unfortunately this did lead to dependence. Jennings points out that this was a principal factor that gave Europeans essential control in trading with Indians. In 1686 when the French refugees fleeing the ill-fated French settlement passed the Caddo, the first goal of the Indians was to get the French to go on the warpath with them. They realized their guns would be devastating to their enemies. Several French from the group that had assassinated La Salle actually did go on the warpath with a Caddo war party. The Caddo were right; the French muskets quickly demoralized the enemy tribe and the war party returned with many scalps and prisoners.

But it was not only muskets and gunpowder that attracted the natives to the Europeans. There were many other products including iron points, knives, hatchets, cooking pots, wool blankets and blue beads. Was the Covenant Chain any thing more than a trade alliance made for the mutual benefit of the Iroquois and the Europeans? That is my interpretation of it, if you would an early version of the “North American Trade Treaty.”

Seldom 958, thank you for joining us and pointing out our gender error in spelling Francis with the female, “es.” It was spelled correctly in the Heading but in the heading title that is entered separately it was in error. I made the correction but dropped the authors name in the title to shorten the heading by one large font line. Thank you for calling the error to our attention. You are most certainly welcome to become an active part of the discussion!

I will try to have the heading shortened soon by putting the links in two parallel columns and eliminating the excess space between the questions, but I am a bit gun-shy after my experience in locking up the pre discussion heading a problem that even the techies have so far not resolved.

of this book. I feel like I am back in college!!

As to terminology, I believe that the word "Confederacy" is used to describe the Iroquois government (a loose union of the five, later, six nations). The participants were from West to East: the Seneca, the Cayuga, the Onondaga, the Oneida, and the Mohawk. The Tuscarora joined later when they were driven out of the South by European settlers. Their main settlements were on a line about where Route 20 is today, from Buffalo to Albany. That highway was built on a major Indian trail, later made into a wagon trail and finally paved. The NY State Thruway, (the Thomas E Dewey turnpike) was built much later.

The Confederacy Council still meets on the Onondaga Nation territory which is just south of the city of Syracuse.

The term "Covenant Chain" refers to the arrangements made between the Native Americans, at first the Mohawk, and the Dutch. At first it was envisioned as a rope to hold the Dutch ships close to the Native people.

After the Dutch were replaced by the English, the Covenant Chain agreements were renewed, and the concept became a chain instead of a rope....more lasting and secure.

There are wampum which were made and exchanged at these events. For a long time, these historical articles were in the Museum at Albany, NY.

The Iroquois for a very long time had requested that their wampum be returned, and it was in the 1980's and l990's.

Also returned were contents taken from grave sites, and sacred masks that had been in the museum. Some of these items are used in the ceremonies today, and the Iroquois people are glad to have them back.

Harold…you could equate the canoes to our 18 wheel haulers of today.

The rivers where throughways used for the movement of furs and return trips with trade items. While there where footpaths typically parallening rivers which it appears were also used the canoe was superior in load carring capacity. Also the Iroquios guarded paralleling foot paths of the rivers ( portage places) and hi jacked the Huron tribes fur cargos on their way to the French trading posts.

Hi everyone! After reading about the iroauois here, I looked up on ebay and ordered a Reader's Digest volume called "Through Indian Eyes" - the Untold Story of Native American People. It has a lot of beautiful pictures, which I love, and is about all Native Am. So I am kng of browsing through this book at this time and learning an awful lot. I am glad you pointed me in that direction.

In todays local paper under a continued story of America called Chester the crab was an cartoon type of story about the Iroquois federation. It showed a tree with an eagle as the head ..their choice to represent their new federation which was democratic. The women of the tribes chose the men who meet at the council and the fifty men had to agree on any change or suggestion. It showed them burying all of thier weapons knowing in order to survive they had to band together and stop fighting each other. It also showed a leader holding a sheaf of arrows and saying One arrow is easy to break but a whole pack nearly impossible. The comment at the end said it was the first working democracy in America. How about that ? Now I have to go and read some more...anna

Thank you Catbird for mentioning Wampum. This medium of exchanged used by Northeast Indians was not used by Western Indians and I had in my mind only the vaguest of and ideal as to what it really was or how it was used. I had been intending to do a Web search to learn more about it and its use. I used Google searching on the single word, “Wampum,” and of course there were many hits. Click here for a paper entitled, “The Significance of Wampum to Seventeenth Century Indians in New England” by Lois Scozzari, a Graduate Student in American Studies, Trinity College, Hartford, Connecticut. This paper was published in the “Connecticut Review.” Wampum as described in the article appears to have been used throughout New England as a store of value and as a medium of exchange. In other words it was very much money in the modern sense and even was used in colonial business transactions in the 17th century

Potsherd, I am sure you are right in using the word 18-wheeler to describe the Indian canoe. The Alexander Mackenzie Party was quite small not many over a dozen men. As I remember it they all traveled in a single large Indian canoe that carried the men and supplies including trade goods. I remember one of the limitations of the group was that they were short of trade goods for presents etc to Indians.

Thomas Jefferson originally planned the American Expedition along the same lines with a single officer, a sergeant and a squad of about a dozen men. During the Planning period the plans were enlarged principally to allow them to take a large supple of equipment and trade goods

Annafair, women in Iroquoia appear to have played a very significant role in tribal government. I think it was the third link in the heading that summarized their role. That source also mentioned that women chose the men who sat in the tribal council.

Mssuzy, have a good time browsing through the pages of ”Through Indian Eyes.” When you finish with the book you might continue browsing through the Web by a Google search (Click Here). Enter a tribal name or other word relative to Indians in the search box and you will have much to read and many pictures to enjoy.

Chapter 1 Jennings , makes a major, significant point in his first paragraph of this chapter: Europeans never had to worry about a retaliatory invasion from America as they certainly did from European and Asian countries. The technical superiority and their (French,English, Sweds, Dutch) enormous populations ultimately overwhelmed a declining Native American population.

The Amerindians soon recognized the significance of population numbers and attempted to stem the effects of “one way traffic” from Europe. The “League” used a “tributary system” the term Jennings uses to identify allied tribes who became affiliated with “The League.” Strength in numbers however was not to be as the diseases of the Europeans alone decimated major tribal populations.

The Iroquois soon recognized the importance of land holdings and maintaining a specific “territory” in which the people could live and maintain their identity. There was no significant crowding of the Iroquois for a half century until the 1720’s as they fended of squatters, and all types of land grabbers. This reflects on their the political and diplomatic skills.

Side subject_ Wampum ( an English given name):which the Dutch called zeewan[t] the French called porcelain and all Europeans called it valuable and referred to as “ Indian money.” The Wampum initially produced by coastal tribes could not meet the demand of the traders and a cottage industry developed by Europeans commercially producing ‘Indian money.” For the traders used to European currency systems wampum offered a familiar exchange system in that you could count and or measure the beads and establish rates of exchange against English pence. Wampum was portable and highly valuable to the Indians. The Europeans measured wampum in fathoms (6’) strung on hemp cord. Wampum beads being measurable and countable became a necessary media of the traders. In New Jersey Bergan county fronting on the Hudson river ( opposite Manhattan) became a major producer of wampum. The Campbell Wampum Mill ( through 1889) in Pascack ,NJ produced wampum as well as “wampum hair pipe” which the “Plains Indians” wore in rows as breast plates. While hard shell clam (Mercenaria,mercenaria) was the primary shell used to produce wampum the wampum hair pipe was produced from the center whorl of conch shells. Dutch traders would cross the Hudson river to purchase wampum for their trade requirements from the commercial wampum makers of Bergen county,.

Of interest John Jacobs Astor purchase wampum from the Pascack wampum makers.

Regarding the cross-importation of diseases (Europe to America/America to Europe) I note that the Amerindians seem to have received the bulk of the bargain. They received not just the real killer, smallpox but also other maladies such as chickenpox that killed the Indians lacking in natural immunity in large numbers. The only disease that I can think of that went the other way from America to Europe was syphilis. This too is a killer. The Durant’s in one of their later “Story of Civilization” volumes trace the spread of this disease in Europe. As I remember it they say it came to Europe when Columbus returned to Spain from his first voyage. Within a few years it appeared in France where it was called, “the Spanishpox.” It then proceeded on to England where the locals called in the Frenchpox.

I was surprised at the extent to which the Iroquois made-up their heavy losses from disease and battle by adopting members of the defeated tribes. I know of many cases where natives would adopt the children of their defeated enemy, but I think it was unusual to adopt defeated adult particularly men. The French Journals I have referred mention that the Iroquois stole the women and children of the Illinois after the destruction of their village on the Illinois River about 1682. The men were either killed or escaped to live in exile further west. In Texas the Karankawa killed all adults, men and women, when they destroyed the French colony on the Texas coast about 1687. They adopted 4 or 5 young children only who were later liberated by the Spanish. As I read the Jennings book he indicated the Iroquois adopted adult men as well as women and children. Apparently this adoption applied even to defeated non-Iroquoian tribes. Iroquoia must have been quite a 17th-18th century melting pot.

The beaded belts that were made to commemorate an occasion where not used for money as far as I know.

So we have two different uses of a similar item.

On the front cover of the book we are reading are two snippets of the type of belt that was made to seal treaties.

The Iroquois also had belts (six to eight inches high and three feet long) which were pictoral histories, and the most important of these were used in major ceremonies.

One ceremonial belt was used in the Condolence Ceremony, after a chief has died. The group is comforted (condoled), and the new chief is recognized (raised).

Some of the other large belts were used in sacred yearly ceremonies, like Mid Winter.

I've been reading the fabulous links which brought some issues to mind and off I went for more information that I thought I should share and a bit of realization that puts this book in context for me.

Information about The Seneca Indians from THIS Seneca's perspective
History of daily life for the Iroquois in ERIE COUNTY, NEW YORK

How the Native American by not taking up the yoke of slavery put a kink in the Crowns economic plan and what happened next.

The Myth of Thanksgiving

FOR a hundred years "The Leather-Stocking Tales" cast a spell over the reading public of America and Europe,
determined how the world was to regard the American Indian

In Chinua Achebe's book Things Fall Apart, he writes of of Nigerian tribal life before and after the coming of colonialism, published in 1958, just two years before Nigeria declared independence from Great Britain. The book could easily be describing the Native American with our obvious temptation of depicting pre-colonial life as a kind of Eden, peopled by the 'Noble Savage' or as a pre-historic state of barbarism and war.

Instead, Achebe in Things Fall Apart sketches a world in which violence, war, and suffering exist, but are balanced by a strong sense of tradition, ritual, and social coherence. This is probably a truer statement that could easily be said about the Native American.

only on page 7 and my mind is reeling - I wonder if that is why we have lumped all Muslims together - this ocean between works in the reverse along with their lack of advanced technology allows us to minimize them as an inferior people with an unacceptable religion and therefore that justifies our desire to control them.

I never understood before how allowing each the freedom of autonomy can be a detriment in times of war.

And the biggie how often you hear folks justifying the conquring of the Indians on the strength they were a waring people, waring with each other for centuries, forgetting completly that these European nations were also a waring people.

I could read this faster I think if it wasn't blowing me away and I had to stop and see the connections between these truths and our life today.

Catbird and Potsherd, do either of you have any comment on the Iroquois long house as a suitable shelter for the New England winter. Some of the Internet Links in the heading indicate that they might be from 60 to 200 feet long and about 18 feet wide. They were covered with Elm bark. That doesn’t seem to be too well insulated for a Northeast winter. Also apparently there were openings in the roof to allow smoke to escape. One accounts indicates there were no windows but had large open doors at each end. The Caddo beehives shaped roundhouses were 65 feet in diameter. They were windowless with multi level lofts and were covered with thatch. The smoke simply filtered through the thatch of the big dome. The early writers mention that they were very smoky and dark. Also they must have been quite hot in summer, as the fire was never allowed to die. I note that there are indications that the Iroquois to maintained a perpetual fire?

It is said the Caddo houses were community shelters occupied be as many as 10 families. The Iroquois houses were similarly in that respect. The Caddo slept in elevated beds a rather unique customs for North American Indians. Some early writes describe the beds as bedsteads but one describes them more like a hammock. I have seen no reference to the Iroquois custom in this regard?

Barbara, what do you think of the book? As you know a number of us, including me, have found it difficult. Perhaps this is largely, but not entirely, due to the small closely spaced type and light print. I remarked that it looked like it had been printed with an ink jet printer that was always low on ink. But I will say this, for me as I passé the half way mark the reading came easier and I am really glad I read it.

No problem with the physical book or print Harold, only the fact the author is rattling my preconceived concepts of so much more than I could have imagined. Here I thought I was accepting and that is it, I was accepting not looking at the Native American as an equal.

The link I shared really made sense opening my eyes to what should have been so apparent - settling the Americas was an economic endeavor that was supposed to be profitable. Prior to the machine age it was people that not only had to do the work as if they were machines and with little to no expense to their "owner" and therefore, if it wasn't a class system it was a caste system that Europeans assumed in order to obtain their free or nearly free labor - and the native American would not play along - Also, we use the expression tribes and that is another way we minimize their Nations - we would no more think of calling the French or the English a tribe.

When you think about it these longhouses are like dormitories - not much privacy but in the cold climate all that body heat would help wouldn't it.

When you visit these 'Country Houses' in England they explain how they started with the great hall that had an open fire in the middle and a place to prepare the meat seperated by the rood screen. That after time the lord and lady dined on a raised dais and still later a dining and then sleeping room was added on a second level with a window that we would think of as a bay window. That all entertaining was done on beds lined up along the walls of the great hall with bedcurtains used not only to keep out drafts but for privacy. And so those early Great Halls may have been made of stone but they were similar in theory to the longhouses.

I wonder if the Native American Community moved their longhouses around? I learned in England (I do not know about other areas of Europe) the Halls had to emptied, with everyone on the road to another Hall since the large population would deplete the game and the grounds would be filled with waste - so off they would go giving the Hall time to reclaim itself - and that is why there are so many paintings and drawings of households on the move in great long columns, it was a normal occurrence. This practice I am sure helped keep down decease and no different than the nomadic Indians who moved for better hunting.

Harold your description of a typical long house is correct. However how long is "long" for instance Dr Jim Tuck Syracuse University in his Ph.D. dissertation excavated a long house at the Howlett Hill site in NY state: this longhouse was 334'x23' it had center side doors as well as the typical end doors. Archaeologically this is determined as the overburden soil is scraped off a site the remains of the house structural members through time decompose into dark spots called "post molds." These 'molds" also detail the interior arrangement of the sleeping bed "apartments" of the occupants.

Wampum, when the Onondaga people joined the "Confederency' which completed the "longhouse" were designated "Keepers of the Wampum." A position which they continue to enjoy. Of interest we see the remains of long houses in northern NJ which represents a Mohawk influence.

Barbara, your question of did they move their homes. They abandoned their old homes and built new ones in varing distances from their original homes. The reason was they through time exhaust the supply of firewood and game. Also soil fertility became marginal. The Iroquois preferred hilltop locations, a source of water was essential.

Let me suggest two books which will be of further interest:

The Invasion of America: Indians, Colonialism, and the Cant of Conquest. Author is Francis Jennings.

Onondaga Iroquois Prehistory_ A Study in Settlement Archaeology. Author James A. Tuck This is the crème de crème of Iroquois archaeology.

Wow, that is one big long house. Potsherd, I wonder how many people it housed. One of those links I read used language that might be interpreted to mean a large house was intended to house the entire membership of one of the matrilineal clans in which each tribe was divided. It would seem that this could be up to several hundred people. Quite a crowd! I guess the bark siding seems so thin for the New England climate and the very though of the large open doors in the ends sends chills down my spine.

In East Texas our Caddo thatch seems better insulated. They too had to move their locations occasionally because of fertility exhaustion. Also the Caddo villages may have differed from the Iroquois scheme in another manner; they were spread out over maybe a 25-mile diameter in many small hamlets each with 4 to 6 round houses surrounded by their fields. Their area was the big thicket pine forest, and they would relocate to natural clearings or recent burned areas.

I am going to delay changing the heading for week 2 until the middle of next week to enable Williewoody, Barbara and others to catch-up with the reading of the book. We will then go to Chapters 4 –6 about Wednesday. In effect this will add about 1 week for an 8-week total with completion about March 1st. Do let’s have some more discussion on the organization of the Iroquois confederation, the developing strength of the Iroquois, and their interface with the newly arrived Europeans

What was the author’s purpose in writing the first three chapters? Of course they definitely set the stage as an introduction to the beginning of the Covenant Chain whose history is the subject of the book. That was an interesting story of how Deganawida and Hiawatha won approval of the alliance binding the five nations into a confederation. This was probably in the 15th or 16th centuries, and according to one legend required the blotting of the noonday sun to induce the agreement. This might suggest the date as 1451 a year when a solar eclipse darkened the N.Y. area.

Although alliances binding related Indian tribes were not uncommon, I think this one seems to be unique in many ways. Since the five Iroquois tribes were no longer fighting each other, they could direct their energy to exerting their influence in other areas enabling them to become the major native power over a large area of the northeast section of North America. How they did this is discussed in detail in a later chapter describing the so called “Beaver War.”

It would appear that the favored position of the Iroquois also related to their strategic geographical position that enabled them to control access to major colonial trading posts established in the 17 century. Not only did they have access to these European supermarkets, they also controlled the access of other Indians enabling them to collect tolls for their passage, or to serve as middlemen for the sale of the pelts of other tribes. This put the Iroquois in a position to be the prime beneficiary of the European trading posts. This was particularly true regarding the trade with the New Netherlands (later New York), New Sweden, and the English Colonies including those as far south as Maryland, Virginia, and even the Carolinas. The result was that it was the Iroquois who became the principal Indian party to the several treaties with Europeans described as the Covenant Chain.

In their relations with the Europeans the Iroquois always seemed to consider them selves a sovereign power. They always exerted their right to negotiate with what ever of the four European powers that they choose. This was not the position of the European Powers who choose to interpret their treaties in a manner that would make the Iroquois their subjects. This was particularly true of the English who in the early 17th century were located on the southern and eastern edge of Iroquoia in Maryland, Virginia, and the Carolinians. The English had not tried to explore or settle the area to the north and west. That was the settlements of the French Swedes and Dutch. But if the Iroquois owned real estate to the north and west, ie the Ohio and Mississippi valleys, and if the Iroquois were the subjects of the British Crown, then England had a vicarious claim to the Ohio and Mississippi valleys. Jennings writes many words in Chapters 2 and 3 explaining the legal source of the English claim to this North West real estate. Of course as the 17th and 18th century progressed, the English displaced first the Swedes, then the Dutch, and finally by 1755 the French. This left the English as the only European Power in the Northeast able to claim the Ohio and Mississippi areas as their own by right of conquest, leaving them the sole European Power to argue the sovereignty issue with the Iroquois.

Harold, I am reading all the posts with interest although I have no time to read the book! Why is the word "Ambiguous" in the title?

My memory is remarkable in some instances; deplorable in others, but I do remember in school studying Indians and the long houses that tribes used. They were not built to move - those were the teepees of the western Indians who roved over the plains. Weren't the long houses used for many purposes, one of which were council meetings?

Ella, yes the buffalo hunters chose the tepee as their shelter because it was portable and easily transported as required by their many moves. More sedimentary tribes whose subsistence was more centered on agriculture chose other more permanent shelters. I am impressed by the similarity of the shelters of these tribes in different parts of the country. In the Northeast we see the long house long rectangular structure covered with bark; in Texas it was a circular bee-hive structure 65 feet in diameter covered with thatch; on the upper Missouri the Mandan’s built a near square log, earth bream structure; and in the west along the Columbia River the natives lived in long houses built from materials available there.

Regarding the site of Iroquois Council meetings, the book mentions Council meetings in Long Houses. The book includes as Appendix A, a journal by Conrad Weiser of a Council at Onondaga in 1743. This was a delicate mission since Conrad had been sent by the Governor of Virginia to conduct peace negotiations after an incident in Virginia involving Iroquois and a Virginia Militia unit. His first session with a Chief he describes as a “meeting in the bushes” meaning it was a private meeting in which he explained the purpose of the meetings. The first session, Weiser tells us, was held in the house of a Principal Chief. He does not say that this was a private residence of the Chief and I suspect it was not, and it was shared with other families.

This journal also mentions “Town Houses” that may have been specifically built as public houses for public meetings, but this writing does actually say this. I know the Caddo in East Texas would build a special hut that was used by warriors while planning a specific operation against an enemy. When the operation was executed the hut was destroyed, but during the planning phase the men met there to condition their minds for the undertaking.

I urge you who are reading the book not to pass over Appendix A, because it gives a detailed picture of the council procedure and ritual conducted by the Indians far removed from European custom. I found it particularly interested because it mentioned the menu of two feasts; both involved hominy, dried eels and hominy and venison and hominy. Also mentioned was another feast, but there was no food item given, only 2 kegs of rum. So the council at remote Onondaga was not completely immune from European Influence.

Responding to Harold's question (posts 23, 26) about how suitable the Iroquois longhouse was for winters in upstate New York has made me think a lot. First I had to shovel the sidewalk to get a feel for the weather. Then I decided to compare the Iroquois housing with the housing of their contemporaries.

In the sixteen hundreds in Europe, no one had heat from a source other than fireplaces, and at bedtime, only a hot coal holder or a stone to warm the bed. There was no electricity, and no running water or indoors toilets. Many poorer people lived in huts with dirt floors. Even some castles had dirt floors...

I think one should note that in Europe at that time there was a well-developed class system which meant that some (the leaders) lived better and had more food and luxuries than the general populace. In Iroquois culture, the leaders lived in among the people, so they were absolutely aware of the problems faced by the individual and families.

And a bit about the geography of this area is important. Potsherd has mentioned the excavation of the longhouse on Howlett Hill. This is an upland area above the coastal plain of an ancient seabed---Lake Ontario and Lake Eire are the remnamts of those ancient lakes. The foothills, which were formed when the glaciers retreated, are drumlins. These are conglomerate piled high in long north-south furrows. The famous Finger Lakes of NY State lie in the valleys of these drumlins.

The Iroquois settled up in these foothills because the lowlands in those days was swampy and they believed it to be disease-producing. They did use the salt from the lake edge, with is why the early Europeans came here and started the city of Syracuse, naming the main street Salina. Where I live is 972 feet above sea level.

In addition to the Howlett Hill settlement, there was one in Jamesville which is east of the city of Syracuse. The settlements were moved from time to time, as Potsherd said because the site was becoming "used". It is interesting to note that once the people left, and settled elsewhere, Nature quickly restored the old used area.

On top of these drumlins, some of the area was also wet and boggy, but much of it is forested rolling farmland today. There are many natural springs, and creeks in the valleys. It was and is a lovely place to live.

Now, was the longhouse a suitable abode? I think that there must have been chinking of some sort--like that early European settlers chinked with moss and mud to make their log cabins more air-tight. And I envision sleeping platforms, with rabbit skin sleeping robes--with the furry side in against the skin. With an all-night fire going, and several people close by, I think it must have been cosy.

And think of all the lovely things in there. Personal possessions in leather bags, and clothing for special occasions with beading and quilling and fringing. And food hung high to dry and to be available for use during the winter months. And lacrosse sticks, and turtle rattles and drums and feathered headdresses.

This time of year (January) the snow usually is pretty deep. (It's up to my knees when I go out to fill the bird feeders!) So, hunting parties would have been less active unless they had been unsuccessful.

But just for a little while, in January, the people stay close in the Longhouse. Time hangs heavy, so the kids get a game of snow snake going. And the women do chores, and the men mend hunting equipment, and soon, the clan mothers announce that it is time for MidWinter Ceremonies.

I have always thought that there must have been a tremendous renewing of individual and collective spirit during these ceremonies. There was contact with the ancestors who had gone before, which made the present-day celebrants aware that it was possible to get through to spring; the ancestors had done it, they could do it too. And the dream-sharing and dream-guessing would have helped to ease tensions among individuals which had built up over the season, and perhaps were becoming intolerable with the close quarters and three feet of snow all around.

And when Midwinter Ceremonies were over, it was only a few short weeks until the sun growing stronger each day would make the sap rise in the sugar maples. Then everyone would be busy making sugar, and it would be time for the Thanks to the Maple ceremonies.

So, yes, I think it was suitable......what other choice was there?

In case anyone is interested,there is a program about Benedict Arnold on A&E tonight (Mon Jan 13th). Of course it takes place in part of the time frame of history we are studying. Just thought you might be intersted in getting away for some laborious reading for a couple of hours.

Catbird, thank you for your comment concerning living in winter in up-state NY. I guess my concern about the suitability of the Iroquois long house in winter stemmed from my understanding of the open, apparently un-sealed door openings in both ends. This condition coupled with openings in the roof to exhaust smoke would seem to promote rapid circulation of outside frigid air through the house making the fire ineffective to heat anything more than a few feet from it. Also I suppose the size of the fire would have to be kept quite low. The severity of winter conditions make it easy to understand how important European trade would be to the Indians. Think how much warmer a thick woven, wool Hudson Bay blanket would be in comparison to a skin robe. The Plaines Indians in tepees faced this problem too, a factor that favored the use of buffalo chips since it is said that this fuel burns with a low hot flame with little smoke.

I note from the Jennings list of Iroquois villages that one in NY was named Schenectady that evolved into a colonial settlement and the modern city. Would snowshoes support you on the foot deep snow near your bird feeders? I know the Iroquois made extensive use of them in winter, as did other Indian. Lewis and Clark men participated in winter buffalo hunts with Mandan Indians using snowshoes

Thank you Williewoody for the info on the Benedict Arnold TV program. Incidentally, while at this point in history, I would have no problem in admitting descent from Benedict; alas I cannot since in his day, my Arnold Ancestors were still drinking their beer in their Rhine River home in the German principality of Baden. Benedict I feel sure came from the English Arnolds who today on the "Arnold" Genealogy Mailing list outnumber us German descendents by about 10 to 1.

Williewoody please continue to follow the discussion of the Jennings book and do posts here any comments you may care to make concerning them or related thoughts on the Iroquois or other Native Americans. We understand how difficult the reading of this small, light text would be for one with eye problems.

Harold would Hudson Bay blankets be traded back east - I guess I was under the impression they were traded on the West Coast of Canada -

I didn't know Hiawatha was a real person - I only recently purchased the complete Longfellow tale where for years I heard, read, or knew bits and pieces of it.

I see how the author is focusing on the rivers and streams as trade routes but from what I know after hiking deep in Mexico they were more important as areas to settle and I can't help think the Europeans needed these settlement sites equally therefore pushing the Natives further up stream.

In Mexico I hike about 100 miles south of Creel in very sparsely settle land where you come upon families that only once in their lives have been to the nearest town. They live from harvest to harvest on their corn crop and if there is a draught or other weather problems that bring on a crop failure some of the folks actually die. No running water and no electricity etc. dirt floors thatched roof huts which brings you easily back in time to what it was like living day to day in these circumstances. All to say, if we get lost all we do is hike till we hear chickens because every cluster of homes or village or single homestead is built on a stream or creek. The water is not only needed to drink but to wash, to bath, to cook, for the ducks and burros and to scoop enough for a kitchen garden so to speak. Unfortunatly they do not know to boil the water and that is something we teach when it is appropriate. The guy that runs this hiking expidition goes back to some of the areas with a new group so that he brings them a few things on his return trip. The most important thing he brings is the copy of the photos we take since these families have no likeness of their family members and treasure the snapshots we provide.

I can see after basic shelter and a cultivated field are established folks would be curious wanting to know what is further up or down stream and then visiting, later upon future visits this becomes a time for trading - although in Mexico I see the amount of work it takes to live off the land allows for little time to go galavanting up and down rivers much less visit towns that are about 15 miles away when you have to walk the entire way.

The Natives having lived along these rivers now for centuries they would have their basics down - but I wonder if their waring nature led them to search out the land or if they had organized themselves to more easily care for their basics so that there was the free time to explore the rivers and find other settlements. The Europeans would have had to build their shelter and assured food stock first - without running water or the where-with-all to dig wells I would think they also would need to be located near the rivers and streams and creeks that than the next step would be to explore and use more of this fertile river bottom for farming. With the rights that we are learning the European especially the British interpreted they had it was easy for a simple indentured servent who received his or her freedom after 10 years to believe they had the right to just fense in some river land and create a farm. But I can also see if they Europeans were busy establishing themselves and the Natives had been past this basic need the European simply piggy backed on the Native killing two birds at once - using their time and energy to establish their homes and villages and the natives to create commerce and exploration that the European simply picked up on.

Another button of memory this read prompted - I remember visiting a new museum about the Northwest Indians in Victoria back in the late 1970s - I would have been in my 40s and while there I observed an older lady, looked like she was in her 60s with a young boy about 12 or 13. She was explaning to him on the maps and about the displays where from the interior of Canada she was a child because she was captured by the people that she has been living with and married and he is her grandson who never knew she was a captured slave that only had her freedom after she married.

Interesting how the author is saying the simple expressions are what allowed the Europeans to assume the Natives were childlike - I often thought that about the way they tell their myths that are really as profound and in some ways similar to our Bible stories. But without a smite or two or a begot or some of the power words we are so used to hearing we think on these myths as tales or legends and not as Holy or profound or central to life as the Bible.

I keep forgetting these are really two mature cultures - the Native population has established their system of maintaining their home and food source so they do have the extra manpower and time to explore, visit and trade using the waterways that were necessary to their establishing their home - and the Europeans are not here establishing a home as a first priority - they established their homes back in Europe and not only were successful in establishing their system there to maintain shelter, food and clothing they have even gone past those basic needs to having individuals that have the time and resources to explore, visit and trade or can finance individuals to explore and trade as long as it is profitable. They can pool their extra resources and profits into manning an expedition either from a crown head who is doing it with the accumulated taxes or a group of entrepreneurs could privately fund an expedition as long as it was an opportunity for profit. No diffferent than today with factories in Mexico - the thing I do not see any of these for profit venues realizing that their representatives establish their homes and basic needs in this new area and in time their alligance is affected by those that are from the area. Maybe there is hope yet for the Mexicans being exploited by US corperations.

I know next to nothing about the Dutch and their role in settling this country. It sounds like they were here before the settlement at Plymouth - I am trying to remember history but wasn't the first settlement in Jamestown in 16 something or other and when the ships returned the settlement had disappreard? I remember we had to memorize the first European baby born was supposed to be Virgina Dare - I remember seeing all these signs while driving through the Islands off North and South Carolina that was saying it was the home of Virgina Dare and that is not Jamestown so I am confused about all these early settlements. I guess if you were just here trading it didn't count and since the Dutch were 'roped' into the Iroquios lands without land 'ownership' as Europeans legally valued 'ownership' there being here was not as big a blip in our history - Except for the fact that the Dutch were in New York City having purchased it from the Natives for some beads (I bet it was wampum) and bowled on greens established for entertainment I have no additional knowledge how they got there and how the British took over the area. Can anyone fill me in or suggest a link that would fill me in on what is all this about the Dutch.

I guess Rennseler (spell) Polytech was named because it was on this land the Dutch owned next to Fort Orange which is Albany.

Barbara: I believe Jamestown was founded in 1607. I don't recall when the Dutch came to New York, but according to ledgend they bought the land from the local indians (probably Mohawks). Seems like a paltry amount by today's standards. But then again, remember this was UNDEVELOPED land.

Regarding your comment about the Mexicans,while it has nothing to do with the subject of our discussion, I cannot let it pass without reminding you that there are millions of Mexicans who have crossed our borders illegaly and remain in our country taking advantage of every government program they can at the expense of taxpayers. Is this not exploitation?

Ella asked a good question that I completely ignored yesterday when I commented on her post. That question was, why was the word “Ambiguous” in the title? My on-line dictionary definition of this word is doubtful or uncertain especially from obscurity or indistinctness. In other words something capable of being understood in two or more possible senses or ways.

In using this word to modify the idea of an Iroquois Empire, I think Jennings meant to convey the uncertainty of an Iroquois Empire. From the European (particularly the British) view the Iroquois were the vassal Citizens of the European power, not a sovereign power in their own light and hence not an Empire at all. The Iroquois never accepted this status and continued to assert the right to negotiate with whatever European power that they choose. So the existence of an Iroquois Empire was non-existent to the Europeans though the Iroquois continued to act independently in dealing with whatever of the four European powers that they choose and for that matter the Europeans gave de facto recognition to the Empire by negotiating and making treaties with them.

Potsherd Barbara, catbird, any of you who are into this book, why do you think Jennings called it an “Ambiguous” Empire?

Barbara, I probably miss used the Words Hudson Bay Blanket in my post this morning. I have I guess used those words to mean any wool Indian trade blanket. I think I picked this up from the ITC Staff who as I remember called the red Blanket in the Lipan Apache mural a “Hudson bay trade blanket.” One thing for certain that Texas Lipan did not get that blanket from the Hudson Bay Company. I think this morning I should have said no more than woolen trade blanket. But wool blankets were a popular item in the Indian trade.

I too was unaware of Hiawatha’s existence as a historical character. I had always thought of him as a fictional product in the Longfellow poem that I remember from elementary school in Houston in the 1930’s. Click Here For The Song of Hiawatha, by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. It appears that what I got in the 2nd grade was a specially edited kids version, as this poem is certainly not 2nd grade material (at any rate not my 2nd grade). The material given by Jennings to me establishes Hiawatha’s claim to historical existence at least as firmly as King Author

That was quite a hike you described in Mexico. Do you have pictures? They would make an interesting web page!

The Iroquois hero, Hiawatha, is not the man described by Longfellow. The real Iroquois Hiawatha was a real person who was important in the establishment of the Iroquois Confederacy.

In the book, Jennings lists several trade items which the native people took to with great interest, as they solved some problems or made life more comfortable for them. One item was woven cloth, which was added to animal skins as a means of dressing oneself. I believe the other items were glass beads (for wampun/money/decoration), copper pots, steel hatchets, and guns.

The Dutch bought Manhattan Island from the "indians" for $24 dollars. I believe the indians who were there may have been one of the Long Island tribes, not the Mohawk. The Dutch set up patroonships in the Hudson valley, and many place names reflect Dutch influence. The Roosevelt family had the area which is known today as Hyde Park, where Eleanor and Franklin are buried. And the Dutch settlement on Manhattan was a walled village, with a road leading through the wall so the farmers could drive their animals to pasture. That road was and is called "Broadway". And where the wall was, is "Wall Street"!!

Later the English took the area from the Dutch in war, partly because of mismanagement by Dutch officials which was so bad that the local Dutch population practically gave the area to the English when they came calling in a warship.

I believe that Jennings calls the Iroquois government an "ambiguous" Empire, because it does not fit the definition of what is normally used when we refer to the "British Empire", for example. While the Iroquois had tremendous influence throughout the Northeast and into Canada, it was not a empire in the European sense. It was built on verbal face-to-face agreements which had to be continuously renewed by good will and behavior that merited continuing the friendly relationship.. European empires were built on subjugation of native peoples by superior firepower, and the goal in some cases was to eradicate the native culture. ( a la the USA in the 1800's after the Civil War)

The whole issue is very pertinent today, as many Native American groups claim that they are sovereign nations, and have rights over the reservation they live on. In some cases, this gets very murky, as some groups of native people are making claims on areas they have not lived on in many years. Their goal is to be recognized as a native entity so they can establish gambling casinos. This is a related topic, but out of the time period...and the issue of which government is "legitimate" is also very pertinent for native people trying to maintain their traditional way of life.

Some reference dates: 1609----Henry Hudson sails up the river to the present site of Albany and claims the area for The Netherlands..... 1626-----Peter Minuit comes with settlers, and buys Manhattan..... 1664-----England takes control of the area.

"Hiawatha " "Deganawidah teams up with a disturbed chief (Hiawatha) -himself a recidivist cannibal and victim of witchcraft"

Manhattan an Indian name may have been the name of the tribe who sold the land to the Dutch.

The Hudson Bay blankets became an extremely important trade product for the Hudson Bay company which was a British company located in Hudson Bay ,Canada. It seems to me the stripes on the blankets were referred to as "points" the more "points" the greater their cost/worth.

Some further research on the name Manhattan; Manhattan a linguistic term, 1655( Van der Donck 1841:206) for the variety of Delaware later called Munsee; from the name of the island. Also used generally for the Indians of the area, as Manhates, 1624 (Wassenaer 1909:68Primary reference Handbook of North American Indians Volume 15 Northeast Bruce G. Trigger, Volume Editor. See page 236.

The definition you gave for Hiawatha---is that from the Handbook of North American Indians, Vol.15?

I note the Hudson Bay Company was chartered in the 1670’s. Its activities centered on the fur trade in northwest Canada until near the end of the 19th century. Today I understand it has evolved into a Department store chain. I know from the Alexander Mackenzie account that by the late 18th century there was a competitor company in which Mackenzie was a principal. I think it was called the Northwest Company or something like that. In the 18th century did the Hudson Bay Company have posts in the northwest area that was became a part of the U.S? I expect they did because British traders remained active in the area through the 1790’s. Wasn’t the final British withdrawal was negotiated during the Adams Administration?

I will no longer refer to the blanket in our Texas Indian display as a Hudson Bay Blanket since that Company had nothing to do with it. From now on I will call it simply a woolen trade blanket.

We will get more into discussion of specific on the several trade arrangements involving the four European powers and the Iroquois as we move to the next group of chapters. Tomorrow I will try to change the heading and beginning Thursday; I suggest we move on to chapters 4 through 6. The delay will give the people just getting the book a chance to do some reading and I will revise the schedule to add another week. .

Correct, page 236. The specific section is on the Delawares and is authored by Ives Goddard( Yale or Harvard) his expertise is the Delaware Indian language of which he is the recognized authority .

I can't believe it - I lost my entire notebook - I was getting some information from it while on this site and bam something happened and shut me down and now my entire notebook is gone and no matter what I do it tells me I have no access - 73 pages of information, poems, booklists of not only books to read to where on the interenet I found information about the subject matter in the book, links to graphics I was saving for future discussions, I cannot believe this - ah so - maybe there is a guru that knows how to get it all back - you know it is buried there in the computer's memory someplace.

Well on this lost notebook were these links that support the information I learned after being so curious about the Dutch - I do not remember it all, since I was depending on these sites bu,t the information that astounded me is of course what I do remember best.

Evidently the Netherlands was not a nation until 1648 - up until that time there was a loose association of, now I do not remember what they called themselves, not states maybe cantons but you get the idea. And so the Dutch in America would have to have been a privately funded group without the same concern for legalities and land acquisition since it seems they were purely there for business.

Now I forgot what Minuet Did but it was a name I vaguely remember being bandied around when I was in elementary school studying this time in our nations history - was he governor of the New York fort - well whatever he was he was Dutch allright but since the Dutch were not yet a nation and Sweden wanted in on all this but Sweden was at war in Europe, and now I forgot who they were fighting, well Minuet came here under the flag and financed by Sweden.

This one site I found had a terrific map in color of lower New York when it was a Dutch Fort taken from a text that showed down to the houses that were numbered and a list in the book but not on the internet actually tells who lived in what house - I can begin to see the connections now because they evidently were settling two areas at the same time for the purposes of trade - the Delaware River and the Hudson River and places like Bergen New Jersey were Dutch names that they assigned at the time.

The purchase of Manhattan was 40 Gilders which equaled $24 - now I wonder when they worked that out since there was no dollars in existence. So what year does this exchange rate represent I wonder. But it did say Gilder on two sites not beads as I remember learning in grade school.

I also found my answer about Virginia Dare - she was born in the lost colony of Roanoke which is on the Island between North and South Carolina. I think they said that settlement was in 15 something -- gggrrrhh I am NOT going to look this stuff up again - and I do not remember the dates gggrrrrhhhhh. But to this day the mystery is being picked up as to what ever happened to Virginia and the lost colony.

And then Jamestown had two?!? settlements - again I did not read the whole thing carefully - something about the first in 1607 and it died out and another one followed some years later when a ship returns with 300+ people aboard.

Now this is not from the web sites I found and lost on my notebook but... I remember studying history from a totally different perspective some 25 years ago when I was heavily into the study of fabric, weaving, needlework - until there were windows, most cloth was decorated and woven by men in workrooms or as in India, men sitting outside their doorways. Few women did any needlework except some weaving (on simple ground looms) until the seventeenth century. (Dyes were not used to decorate cloth till the nineteenth century although, natural dyes were used to dye yarn that was woven in making the patterns very geometric)

All to explain that glass was very sought after by the lacemakers and the fine embroidery houses that could now employ women as cheap labor rather than use the guilds since girls could work where there were windows or glasses of water placed near a candle to fracture the candle light around the a room and each girl would locate a minute beam of light to work under. (Yes, they went blind at a very young age.) It takes charcoal and sand to produce glass.

The forests of Europe were being depleted - later in history there are large mobs crashing around France during their Revolution for Independence who were charcoal makers not able to ply their trade for lack of forests. Of course this was the kings fault?!?

Well, there are ship manifests and other documents that show some of the early, privately funded British settlements were funded to develop a ready supply of glass - America had great forests and sandy beaches and Britain had too many people in work houses that would become debt free after their service. The tax on Lace was extraordinary at the time so that even the crown was delighted and supported their effort.

The granddaughter of Governor John White, Virginia Dare was the first child born of English parents in the new world. The child's mother was White's daughter Eleanor. Her father, Ananias Dare, served as one of the Governor's assistants. Virginia was born on August 18, 1587, days after the colonists arrival on Roanoke Island. Her baptism on Sunday following her birth was the second recorded Christian sacrament administered in North America. The first baptism had been administered a few days earlier to Manteo, an Indian chief who was rewarded for his service by being christened and named ''Lord''.

When Governor White was forced to return to England for supplies, Virginia Dare was less than a month old, and he left with heavy heart, never realizing that he would never see her or any of the other colonists who remained behind again. Leaving the new world and his family behind must have been difficult for White. A secret code had been worked out, that should they leave Roanoke Island, they were to carve their new location on a conspicuous tree or post. If the move had to be made because of an attack, either by Indians or Spaniards, they were to carve over the letters or name a distress signal in the form of a Maltese cross.

Three years to the month later, White returned to find the word ''Croatoan'' without any cross or other sign of distress. To this day, no one is certain were the lost colony went, or what happened to them.





W

ah ha thanks seldom958 - I guess with as much research been done about the lost colony they must know what natives were in the area - you just have to wonder if there is a trace of white blood within a tribe that are the decendents of those assimilated from the lost colony - capturing slaves seemed more important as we have read than just killing at this time of Indian/European relations.

OK Harold - found your blankets - someplace, I do not have the page the author speaks of trade with duffle or maybe he did spell it duffel and so I looked it up in my Dictionary of Fabric...

DUFFLE: Duffel is a small town south of Antwerp Belgium and it was here that this fabric was first made. The term is used for a heavy woolen cloth woven in 2 and 2 twill weave, heavily milled and raised with a dense nap on both sides. Best wools need not be used for this type of fabric. It is a very heavy cloth and made famous during WW 2 when used extensively to produce bulky weatherproof hooded coats, known as duffel coats, for sailors. ( I remember them being called Pee jackets) Other types of this fabric, such as down and flushing are produced, duffel being the lowest quality. The term duffel is also applied to a low grade blanket and a duffel bag is the name given to a cylindrical canvas bag with a draw string at one end, originally used by sailors to carry their bankets and clothes.

Here is a link that furthers that Duffle has been made in the town of Duffel since the seventeenth century. And so now Harold you have even more history to share when you speak to visiters.

P.S. found a photo of the WW2 Duffel coat and it was those knee length toggled and hooded coats that the English navy officers wore rather than the Pee coat that I remembered.

Barbara sorry to hear you lost your note data. I presume this was a folder on your computer. Perhaps you should post on one of the Seniorsnet computer forums. Perhaps one of the gurus there can suggest methods for recovery. And thanks also for the information on blankets and duffels. During WWII my experience with the word. “duffel” was that it was the duffel bag that I carried my worldly possessions in. If I had been asked the name of the material it was made of, I would have answered, “canvas.”

And seldom 98 thank you for your information on the Roanoke Colony that preceded the Jamestown colony by about 20 years. I read an interesting book about1995 on the history of Jamestown during its first 100 years. The truth is that during the early years Jamestown came close to a similar ending. The English Stock Company, however, each year always sent a new shipment of settlers to replace the 50% causalities of the preceding year. After the first quarter century it began to make headway and its survival was assured..

Yep, that is what most of us think, a duffle bag made of canvas but I remember now a duffle coat - in fact I think they were popular again just recently, maybe 5 or 6 years ago - I saw them in out door catalogues like the LL Bean catalogue. I think we have shortened calling a duffle bag saying just my duffle because the concept of a duffle bag is what some lugage types are fashioned after but you do remember the duffle coats don't you - if you watch any WW 2 movies in the European theater with English service men you can't miss them - an army brown as if coffee was spilled on cloth to dye it and a rough looking wool knee length coat with usually a hood and those toggles that closed it in front which gave the coat a double breasted look and few every had those toggles closed.

If the cloth was first made in the seventeenth century than the duffel blankets would have been a new product. And so you have to wonder if the manufacturer was anxious to see them used as trade goods since it would boost his production. Wasn't Belgiam Nazi controlled territory during WW2 - I wonder how they got so many duffel coats out unless it is cloth that is now made whereever there are wool looms and the type woven wool cloth simply carries the name, like we still call most copiers zerox machines.

It is on page 52 that the Duffel cloth is mentioned.

found it...photo of the Hooded Duffle Coat

Wow...really found it...Canadian Sailors in their WW2 wool Duffle coats photos load slowly

Looks like it would be a warm coat for sailors but to my knowledge the U.S. navy did not use it. I may not be a good authority since I never had a ship assignment (Shore base at Ulithi Atol and Guam). I am a frequent user of L.L. Bean but don' remember any in their catalogs. thanks for the links Barbara.

The “Ambiguous” Iroquois Empire Mr Webster says_ “Ambiguous “ can be defined as: of doubtful purport; open to various interpetions; having a double meaning. The Iroquois tribes or nations response to the European invasion was: The tribal typical kinship organization was somewh diluted by the need to band together to strengthen their position The concept of ‘tributary” tribes to affiliate with the League did increase the Leagues population and negotiating strengths. The Invaders through their history of “diplomatic slight hand” such as : “right of discovery”, “right of possession” “sovereignty”; ‘right of conquest’.. Britains proceeding action in a plan to displace the French and gain the Leagues lands: “upon mature consideration we have thought fit to own the Five Nations or Cantons of the Indians’ as our subjects , and resolve to protect them as such. Thus claiming Sovereignty over the five Nations. Jennings says : this is a model how ‘thin” facts can be stretched by ignoring evidence that confutes them. The British action upon the five Nations may be ‘ambiguous” it certainly has implications for the Five Nations, Britain as well and France. Certainly, it would appear to have a double meaning for the League.

I am and have been impressed with the elegant speeches and skillful negotiations of the Indians. These thoughts and skills where undoubtedly honed through the centuries as well as “The Peoples” rather expeditious comprehension of much of the Invaders rhetoric.

As an old navy sailor we wore Alpaca lined foul weather jackets aboard ship. The Alpaca was a synthetic of some sort. I can tell you the jackets were weather proof and very warm. Navy Pea jackets were wool and used only for dress occasions such as liberty.

Yes, I remember having a Pee Jacket as a teen since directly after the war they were inexpensive and available at most army and navy stores. The Duffel coat as I understand and see on most WW2 movies was a British worn coat that evidently the Canadians also wore.

I remember before WW2, in the 1930s, wool was the cloth for warmth since there was not a lot of synthetic cloth - even our bathingsuits were made from wool (itchy) - the stockings I wore to school were cotton that got runners just like the silk stockings the older girls wore.

With industry in the war effort I remember the Sail Lofts making parachutes using nylon. My Aunt worked at the Sail Loft and brought home the scrapes of nylon. Some nylon was light as a wisp and other heavy like canvas. My sister and I made doll clothes with the scrapes. And some of the larger pieces of the very light nylon we used to make kerchiefs that we wore on our heads.

My cousin married an English Sailor, which at the time was a huge family embarrassment. She moved to England and lived there during most of the war. Ken also wore a coat that looked much like our Pee Coats. Your parka with the acrylic lining was probably some our first warm clothing made from material other than wool.

I think the Duffle cloth coat is a coat (not one that uses toggles to close it but that buttons) that reminds me more of the photos I've seen of soldiers in the First World War. Having learned now that this cloth was made since the seventeen hundreds it gives me a better picture of the kind of cloth of these Indian Blankets.

Interesting in the book where they say after time because so much attention or time and energy was put toward trapping and trading furs that some of the Natives actually lost the skills necessary to live as they did before the arrival of the Europeans. I wondered what skills were lost that would have made it difficult for them to resume their former life.

I could easily identify with this remark because the year before last at Christmas I fixed a huge family dinner. It has been 20 years since the children were all home here at Christmas for dinner. I have been in the habit of visiting them in their homes and had gotten out of the habit of cooking for so many. In addition, I've been working outside the house since 1980 and so my focus has not been on household activities. It was a nice dinner but not nearly as elaberate or as easily put together as I was able back years ago when my main job was homemaking.

Along these same lines my sister is trying to learn to knit and we live very far from each other - I am trying to help her with directions using email since she can find no one, no neighbor nor is there a knit shop in her area that can help her with what used to be such a basic skill. I remember as a child if you were sick in bed you didn't just lay there you were expected to help knit the socks and my grandmother would come and turn the heels. And so it looks like it doesn't take too much time to loose skills.

Somewhere in the back of my closet, my old Pea Coat still lives. Even so I could not begin to wear it to day. When I joined the Navy, I was still 17 with a 30-inch waist and maybe a size 34 coat. Today it’s a 38-inch waist and a size 44 coat. The pea coat is the last piece of my uniform remaining. The dress whites acquired a mold and were thrown out about 10 years ago

Every time I get upset with our Government and others relative to what is going on in our world, I tell my wife maybe I need to get into my Marine uniform and volunteer to go somewhere and settle some of this mess.

Well right off she says "No way Jose!" I have gained 60 pounds since I last wore that uniform. As a matter of fact those uniforms long ago went to the Salvation Army.

It is of interest how quickly the native Americans took to the use of Europeans cloth for clothing . Tells you that wearing those animal pelts were not very comfortable, particularly in the hot summer months. Also how quickly they adapted to the use of guns, which were not very easy to operate in those times.

You will note the heading has been changed for part 2 which are Chapters 4 through 6. Much of this material covers the development of inter-societal trade, the establishing of trade patterns, and the effect of trade on the Native Peoples and Europeans, particularly the former. We should have no problem completing the discussion of this chapter in 7 days allowing a move to Part 3, Chapters 7 through 9, next Thursday, Jan 23rd. Since part 3 is the longest (72 Pages) we can allow 10 days moving us to part 4 beginning Sunday Feb 1st. The remaining parts 5,6, and 7 can be allowed one week each completing the discussion March 1st.. Effectively this is adding one week to the total discussion. I will change the dates in the heading as soon as I can

Williewoody, I don’t think skins would be very warm particularly wet ones. In areas where there were buffalo that hide was the choice for winter survival. The hide would be brain-tanned with the hair left on. Such a skin could be worn by an individual as a cape or used as a blanket or mattress. I can certainly sense the superior of woolen cloth for both of these purposes.

Potsherd, did New England Indians have any access to Buffalo? I know buffalo were prairie animals and were not available in heavily forested areas. In Texas the Caddo hunters would travel some 70 miles to where their forest thinned for their meat and skins. I understand that in the 17th century buffalo were east of the Mississippi in the south. Instinctively I would think they were not in New England, but the fact that a prominent modern city bears that name suggests otherwise?

Looking good... No Problems for me.

Access Looking good No Problems for me on Webtv either.

Yes, I too, can load with IE so maybe Netscape is the problem.

Netscape 7.1 and 4.78, neither one will load this page on a PC... for me

The discovery of “the Hudson river” in early Dutch exploration resulted in profound cultural changes to the Indian tribes of this great watershed and tributaries. The European Invasion signaled the beginning of great change for the Iroquois people from their tradional “old ways “with an introduction to a foreign culture and ways. Their lives would be changed forever. The aboriginal peoples initially refused to sell land to the early traders however allowed them to live in their villages on a guest basis. However in time the Dutch would build a trading center called Fort Nanassu which was abandoned 7 years later and replaced with Fort Orange.The Hudson river at its head in present Albany, NY offered transport north to the St Lawrence valley and the Mohawk river valley on a east west axis offered access to rich western trade. The succession of Dutch forts supplied their Manhattan town with furs with Manhattan rapidly became a major trade center. As the Iroquoin/European trade and relationships progressed Iroquois metaphors became an important aspect of the language. A rough Iroquoian translation of the word “chain” would mean something like “arms linked together.” In initial trade contacts at Fort Nasasu a treaty of friendship was initiated by the Machicans in which they tied Dutch ships to their shores “with a rope.” The Iroquoian chain metaphors progressed in importance from rope, to iron, silver and gold. Rope appeared to represent the initial and simplest form of a treaty. The “iron chain” connecting the Mohawks with all the Dutch of New Netherland in a bilateral mutual assistance alliance. The chain became “silver” as a multilateral , bicultural confederation of the Iroquois League and certain English colonies and thus began the Covenant Chain proper. The “gold” chain was a metaphor of the Massachusetts Bays attempt to gain primacy in the chain. It did not succeed

Harold, I am not aware of modern day (versus pre-historic) buffalo east of Ohio in my general area. Seems to me there was buffalo in some parts of Kentucky notably around large salt licks.

I'm in I'm in I'm in - sorry Postsherd - here you are sharing some interesting insights and a drama has been taking place all around you - starting yesterday I could not access the discussion and everyone at seniornet has been working frantically to solve the riddle - I'll be back to the book later Harold -

Potsherd, what size ship would have been tied to the trees at Fort Nassau? Were they 18th century ocean sailing ships that far up stream from the coast or large canoes of long boats?

Also some other wonderful examples of Iroquois use of metaphor in speech and treaty language is the use of family terms to denote the type of relationship between non-related parties. A reference as brothers implied equality. A party addressed as “father” carried an indication not just respect but a duty to obey. An address by the term, “uncle,” implied respect, but no particular duty to obey. The word “Children” implied an inferior position. Note that the United States through out the 19th century used these metaphors; hence they were “the great white father” and the Indians his “children.”

Regarding the chain metaphor to describe the intensity of Iroquois-European trade relation as a progression from a chain of rope, to one of iron, to one of silver, Jennings on page 55 interprets original rope chain as what nowadays would be called a non-aggression pact sufficient to permit trading relationships. The metaphor continued through its iron stage to silver that he equates to a modern mutual aid agreement. In my mind’s eye I have added my own interpretation of the gold or maybe the platinum stage as a modern regional and or worldwide international cooperation and trade pact.

Another example of Iroquois metaphor was metaphorical names assigned to the Governors of New York and Pennsylvania. The governor of New York was “Corlaer,” and Pennsylvania was “Onas. The “Corlaer” title was the name of an early Dutch governor, but the tital was quickly bestowed on Governor Andros and later English Governors of New York. I wonder If Governor Pataki would recognize address by that name today; probably not. The “Onas” title bestowed on Pennsylvania was an early Indian name for William Penn. I do not find any explanation as to how it came about. For an early example of the color of language and custom in an Iroquois conference with Europeans, Jennings has included as Appendix A an 18th century account of a writing by Conrad Weiser describing a 1743 negotiation at Onondaga.

Barbara, welcome back! I am sorry for your access problem that I don't understand. The staff did a fine job in fixing it so promptly. Thanks a million guys and gals. I note the schedule table in the heading now has straightened out with the title centered on the screen, which is the way it originally appeared in my Front Page draft. Lets hope those troubles are behind us now.

Yes, yes! I got in also, with Netscape 4.79 on a MAC. So what am I doing here? I don't have any idea. I started reading the posts and now can't quit. What an interesting discussion. Wish I had read the book and started at the beginning of this. Will come back when I have more time and just read, read, and read!

Ann, you are welcome to lurk. The Iroquois is an interesting people and while Jennings is no MacCullough or Ambrose he has a lots of history here. If you get a chance read the 61 Page Iroquois history link and maybe the one on Iroquois Dreamworks and Spirituality. The history link is the third link from the top in the heading.

Harold based on my present day knowledge of the Albany area and river I would believe the ocean sailing vessels did draw enough water they would anchor off the river bank in deeper water. This would also allow the crew to better control and protect the ship. Movement from the ship to shore and transport of supplies would be by small craft.

Potsherd, Thanks for the comment on the logistics of bring trade goods up-river.

Potsherd and Catbird: I have been probing the internet sources to find out how the city of Buffalo got that name. I have found nothing. Instively I don't think buffalo were found in the New York-New England area. I suppose further west in the Illinois and maybe even the Ohio river valleys. Perhaps Mohawk hunting parties like the Caddo traveled long distances principally for hides. Do either of you have information on this?

Wow suggesting we find info on the net is like raising a red flag in front of me - I've just spent a few hours finding all sorts of wonders - asking about Buffalo as in the animal was an easy one - it looks like there were some Buffalo around the St. Lawrance early on but not anywhere near the numbes as those in the plains. From what I found it appears you would have to have tracked and mapped the sites where pitures on rocks and in caves would let you know what was in the area. Really good web page about the range of Buffalo

In the seventeenth century, French explorers in North America referred to the new species they encountered as “les boeufs,” meaning oxen or beeves. The English, arriving later, changed the pronunciation to “la buff.” The name grew distorted as “buffle,” “buffler,” “buffillo,” and, eventually, “buffalo.” (from The American Buffalo in Transition, by J. Albert Rorabacher.)

Although this web page is about another area of northern America it does give us a picture of what the book is saying about change in the lifestyle of the Native American because of the fur trade. The landscape of the Upper St. Croix River was changed in subtle ways by the growth of the fur trade among the Chippewa and the Dakota. The presence of herds of elk and buffalo in the region declined dramatically as more hunters sought these large game animals with more effective weapons.

Now we really get into it - by asking about the origins of the name Buffalo for that city was asking the million dollar question it seems - I will be so glad to see what you have found Harold but I found every thing that tied into all that we are reading about how the Seneca memeber of the Iroquios Five Nations and the Europeans exploited each other. How much of this is tainted by the white man's view I cannot tell. But it looks like the name of the city of Buffalo has nothing to do with the animal.

On August 7, 1679, the Griffon, named in honor of Count Frontenac, the governor of New France Dawing of the first white man built ship to sail the Great Lakes sailed into Lake Erie carrying La Salle and his men westward on the first leg of their expedition down the Mississippi. On the return journey to Niagara, laden with furs, the ship mysteriously disappeared without a trace and thus has been dubbed "the Ghost Ship of the Great Lakes " La Salle died in Texas in 1687.

Baron La Honton marked the Buffalo site on his 1687 exploration map as "Fort Suppose." The early village was briefly known as "New Amsterdam." and in 1808, the Village of New Amsterdam was officially named Buffalo. The name may have been adopted from a local Indian word, "Buffaloe." Or perhaps it came from "beau fleuve," French for beautiful river.

The early French settlement of Joncaire, established in 1758 Daniel Joncaire Sieur de Chabert, French explorer builds a trading post that lasts for one year, on the south bank of the Buffalo River (Riviere aux Chevaux) - all the sites speak of a Buffalo Creek noted here on this 1804 survay map of the 'Village of New Amsterdam'

Another web page giving the history of West Seneca speaks of the purchase of 2.6 million acres in 1790s from Chief Cornplanter of the Seneca Tribe Keepers of the Western Door by the Holland Company and the Buffalo Creek Indian Reservations was formed on the site of what is today the Town of West Seneca. The Indians migrated to the Cattaraugus Reservation and German Lutherans moved into the Reservations lands paying $10.50 an acre. Map of Western New York including the Holland Purchase

According to this web page, the Holland Land Company purchased the land from Robert Morris a Philadelphia banker who had financed the Revolutionary War and in 1797 purchased all the land from the Onterio to Pennsylvania in what was the Treaty of the Big Tree and sold the land to the Holland Land Company for $4 million. Before the sale was complete Red Jacket, originally named Sagoyewatha who recieved a medal from Washington. He was given this name becuse of his eloquence explaing the friction between western Indians and the government. He was proud of his medal and his British red coat. Red Jacket had opposed the treaty. Red Jacket withdraws and Cornplanter opens the proceedings. The bargain struck, and the Senecas were left with $10,000 and three reservations on the Niagara Frontier. The outcome was the defeat of the western Indians and erosion of the Iroquois lands.

These two web pages are great speaking to Black Joe the earliest (white) man who was a Black Man and settled on the Buffalo Creek in what was later New Amsterdam and still later Buffalo. Black Joe and the other which also has several great pages to additional early Buffalo history. Another great Black Joe page

And then this - cannot believe what is on the net - but we have first hand - the White Mans version in the written word in this complete copy of the Colden, Cadwallader, 1688-1776 515 page book, published in 1747 explaining the (his version) history of --- The history of the Five Indian Nations of Canada, which are dependent on the province of New-York in America, and are the barrier between the English and French in that part of the world:

The book includes: accounts of their religion, manners, customs, laws, and forms of government;

their several battles and treaties with the European nations ; particular relations of their several wars with the other Indians; and a true account of the present state of our trade with them:

in which are shewn the great advantage of their trade and alliance to the British nation, and the intrigues and attempts of the French to engage them from us; a subject nearly concerning all our American plantations, and highly meriting the consideration of the British nation at this juncture: to which are added acc.

I attended an Elderhostel on Yellowstone National Park last summer which was held in Buffalo Bill's hunting lodge two miles east of the eastern entrance.

One of the many things we learned is that there are no buffalo or antelope in the western hemisphere; only pronghorn and bison. Some wiseacre said ..."but Bison Bill just doesn't sound right."

In chapter 4, “An Iron Dutch Chain” Jennings provides us with a sketch of the beginning of the concept of the inter-societal trading relationship called the “Covenant Chain.” The following is my interpretation of Jennings’ account of this relationship that is the subject of our book.

Inter-societal trade between Native American and European colonies began almost as soon as the Europeans landed on North American soil. I know this was case at early Jamestown, (The English had to trade for corn and other foods), and I think both history and legend shows an early colonial dependence on Indian support a few years later at Plymouth. The Indians as we discussed last week quickly realized the utility of European goods and were anxious to trade for woven cloth, firearms and ammunition, iron and copper kettles, and iron knives, tomahawks and arrow points. And the Indians had access to a products valued by the Europeans, principally hides and furs from various animals. This lead to the unique inter-societal trade alliance called the “Covenant Chain” that is the focal point of the Jennings book.

Though the “Covenant Chain” seems to have been a developing process evolving over nearly two centuries of time, perhaps its first indication of a beginning was the Dutch trading ships on the upper Hudson anchored by rope to the shore. Jennings quotes the Indian interpretation of this early contact metaphorically as a “Chain of rope” (P54) binding the two societies. There may have been one or more early 17th century treaties concerning Indian trade with these Dutch ships, but the more formal beginning came with the signing of the Dutch Mohawk treaty of 1643. Though this treaty made no specific mention of a “Covenant Chain” its terms began the evolution of the inter-societal trade relationship describe in the metaphor of the rope as progressing from rope to iron to silver and beyond. Its evolution was to continue for another century or more to adapt for the changing circumstances effecting both the European and Indian components..

Though the Dutch did not intend the treaty of 1643 to favor the Mohawks or any other particular tribes, in effect it did favor the Mohawks through a combination of conditions and events. The principal Dutch trading point was Fort Orange, which was located in Mohawk controlled territory. This put the Mohawks in a position to control the access of other Indians to the trade. The Mohawks either as looters, purchasers, middlemen, or as the collector of access tolls became effectively the representative of other Indians in their dealings with Europeans. Though the five tribes of the Iroquois generally were able to remain friendly, the intense inter-tribal trade competition contributed to inter-tribal conflict and war between the Iroquois and other Indian tribes. It put the Iroquois in a favored position to prevail in the resulting intertribal warfare. .

Please let’s hear your ideals on the Covenant Chain and its meaning and effect to both the Indian and colonial interests.

Consequences of Trade:

The primary effect of “consequences of trade” for the AmerIndian was the beginning of and further loss of their resourcefulness and culture. Examples of their skills which were degraded and ultimately lost were: Flint knapping /working of lithic materials such as the manufacture of arrow heads, stone axes - replaced with steel, copper and bronze tools Ceramics- replaced with brass kettles and ceramic salt ware Bows- replaced with “trade” muskets which were “less robust” then the Europeans muskets Skin garments- gradualally replaced with wool fabrics Shell/bone beads- replaced with glass colered beads as well as copper/brass and German silver The Indians quickly recognized the superiority of the musket except the necessary musket components: gunpowder, lead, firelock flints, and access to musket repair was to become a major enigma for the Indian and aadditional dominate control factor for the Europeans and their traders.

European manufactured and marketed trade goods guaranteed control for Europe and excluded any semblance of AmerIndian control of this new important aspect to their culture.

They importance of “water sheds” presented the logical means of transport communication. The European ocean vessels typically traveled up bay or river until shallow water or other impediments prevented further travel. In essence the watershed presented the line of lease resistance for travel to the interior lands. The feeder streams (tributaries) draining into the major rivers were also of prime importance. Small boats launched from the ships would initiate the trading process and the construction of buildings would further encourage and support the European trade efforts.

The Indians attempted with some degree of success to control access and develop competition between the Europeans for their trade goods as well as fur pricing. This competition affected not only the Europeans but many tribes as well. All in all this presents numbers of disruptive factors in trade and allegiances as well.

I wonder though if it was just recognizing superior goods or if part of it was the depletion of game as the fur trade gobbled it up rather quickly as compared to the rate wildlife was being used before trading with the Europeans and therefore, the Indian had to become more dependent on European made goods for survival.

A fur coat is a lot warmer and more snugly then any old wool coat and I can't help think the same goes for the blankets - and soft Suede for cloths and other items is still sought after today as superior to cloth but, the scarcity drives up the price so that most of us cannot afford even good leather shoes any longer.

It would have been quicker and easier to hunt and trap with the metals brought by the Europeans rather than the stone, flint, ceramics and I am sure the Indians quickly realized how superior the metals were during their warfare. This makes me wonder just how much having these new tools of warfare prompted additional numbers of confrontations.

Now that I understand how a tribe would replace a lost member with someone captured from another tribe I can see some of these forays on individual cabins, where some member of a family was taken was really just the Indian way - it doesn't make it any less painful or horrible for the European but if understood by the average white man at the time it could have been an issue of treaty making rather than escalating the event to greater warfare by the whites and misunderstanding that led to greater unacceptance of the Indian.

Learning how far back in our history Reservations were established is putting a whole new slant on the establishments of the Western Reservations. Except for the Cherokee Many of the western tribes are sequester in a smaller area of the very land they were inhabiting which is similar to what seems to have happened when the early Iroquois sold off their lands. I have not followed the story and do not know if this book gets into it or not but I want to learn more about how the sovereignty of these Reservations has not been upheld.

Jennigs has opened my eyes to much but I do not always agree with all of his conclusions - no, I do not disagree I just think there is more rational for what happened at the time.

This link between these Indian tribes is reminding me of the union of nations during WW2 - we stayed as one front against Germany and Italy, finding Italy to be a softer enemy but after the war the true alliances became visiable when Germany (after WW1 the Austrian Empire) was cut up.

I know that some local Onondaga people believe that there was a "buffalo" here in the eastern forests---perhaps a smaller version of the western bison, before the Europeans came.

As part of the renewal of their traditional culture, buffalo are being raised on the Reservation south of Syracuse. In the past, there have been some times (usually during mating season) when the buffalo get out of their fenced in areas, and it makes the local news.

And a "rancher" raised buffalo in LaFayette. He also owned a resturant called "Scotch and Sirloin" in Syracuse, At one time, he added buffalo steak to his menu. I haven't seen the buffalo at the farm in LaFayette in several years, so don't know what's on the menu now at S&S....

I think Jennings implies that the Mohawk may have had their own dreams of Empire, and thought that they were using the Europeans to fulfil this goal. As for the beaver, they were hunted (trapped) to the edge of extinction in this area. That would not have happened if the rage for beaver hats had not existed in Europe, and the native people had not been so eager for "modern conveniences".

In a way, the natives were done in by their straying from their own ethical principles--namely, that the earth is our mother, and all the other living creatures must be treated with respect, and killed only when necessary for survival.

I had a student once who told me in a paper that his people would have been better off if they had killed every white European who landed on these shores.....

Catbird that would be in keeping with that article I linked to about the Buffalo - in it they say there were some Buffalo in the woodlands of the Northeast but not near the numbers as on the Plains - they say the Buffalo were in the area around the St. Lawrance - I wonder what the Indians called the Buffalo before the Europeans arrived in that the naming of the animal was a European, in particular French, core word of describing the animal.

Just north of Austin is a community called Geargetown - back in the mid 1960s the major interstate I-35 was being built and someone lost their jackhammer as the earth opened - in their efforts to retrieve the jackhammer they found caves with not only many thousands of years of dead animal skelatons as they fell into this totally black area and died but they found at one time the caves must have been accessable since the some of the walls of the cave are covered with paintings of animals - rather good likenesses as compared to some of the cave paintings I have seen - some of the animals are hard to describe since they no longer exist but the Buffalo was among the animals painted.

I believe that there is a typographical error on page 89, as follows:

First line, last paragraph of the main body of text:

"In 1741 the Mohawks journeyed to......"

Should that not be "1641"??

What do you think?

Here is a different discription of Hiawatha, the Iroquois who worked with the Peacemaker to found the League.

"Skennenrahawi (the Peacemaker) also met Aiionwatha, a Mohawk-Onondaga man who was searching for an alternative to the chaos within Iroquois society. Aiionwatha (also referred to as Hiawatha) was articulate and courageous in his determination to bring Skennenrahawi's ideas to fruition. He met considerable resistance to his efforts. When his seven daughters were killed at Onondaga, he experienced such great despair that he wandered throughout the land, inconsolable."

Above quote is from "Iroquois Culture and Commentary" by Doug George-Kanentiio. p.25.

As you may know from reading some of the links above, the Peacemaker and Hiawatha went on to "comb the snakes from the head of the Onondaga leader" and found the League of Peace.

Puts one in mind of Job and the ancient Greek "myths", which of course are poetic language to tell of real experiences of other peoples.

the fort on Lake Onondaga, started by the French missionaries. There is on that site a teaching museum called, St Marie Among the Iroquois. It was a little slice of what life was like, similar to Plymouth Plantation and Williamsburg.

Unfortunately, it has had to close its doors to the school groups who came on field trips (and other visitors) because of cut-backs in government funding....

Potsherd The Spanish in the early 18th century found the Caddo people well supplied with French guns. They also found that these French guns had a greater range and were more accurate than there own weapons of Spanish origin. Jennings says that English Goods was cheaper than French goods I don’t recall him saying which of the goods were the best? He pointed out that the Europeans continued to exercise effective control over inter-societal trade by virtue of the fact that it was they who had the Manufactured goods.

Of course in the northeast it was the watersheds that defined trade routes. The river systems were the highways. The Amerindians used canoes to move themselves and goods over long distances. How about overland trails, was there a network of trails running through the countryside? In Texas only the Karankawas on the coast use canoes. Despite the fact that numerous rivers run into the heartland, I know of no use of canoes. There was, however, a real network of overland trail used by the natives for trade, hunting and war. When the Spanish began sending expeditions to East Texas with Indian guides in 1689 they used these same trails. During the 18th century several had been designated as “Camino Real’ complete with markers and designated named campgrounds. Many of these trails by the 20th century had become U.S and State highways. For example I-35 between San Antonio and Austin follows the old Indian road.

Catbird and Barbara regarding the Buffalo, I find there are references on the Internet to “wood buffalo.” There is a Canadian Wood Buffalo National Park in the Northwest Territory. I did not find any information on the range of this animal or indication that it was ever in N.Y. State. Perhaps I can get to San Antonio later in the week and see what I can find in the ITC library there.

Catbird I suspect the Northeast Indian interest in beaver and other fir bearing animals greatly increased with the coming of the Europeans when they found out that it was these firs that interested the Europeans and made it possible for them to buy desired goods. As beaver populations declined the trade moved west and by the 19th century was in the Rocky Mountains. I understand today the beaver has been restored in much of this area. I know this is true in East Texas where there is an interesting beaver colony on a little creek (complete with beaver dam and pond) on my brother’s place there

Catbird, I think you are right about the typo on p89, 1641, not 1741. I remember when I was reading the text, I found one that I marked in my book, but couldn’t find it after a short search. And regarding French missionary work among the Iroquois the French Jesuits seems to have had a limited success as Jennings notes a group of Catholic Iroquois in Canada. I suspect that the Iroquois like our Caddo were sufficiently secure in their own identity and not too interested. The Caddo wanted trade but were not to be interested in making the lifestyle changes required by the missionaries. The Franciscan Missions in east Texas were abandoned in 1731 and moved to San Antonio where the economically poor gathering tribes harassed by Comanche and Apache found the economic and physical security of the missions a sufficient inducement.

The 1741 date maybe valid based on some side research as follows

1740 September_ Representatives of the five nations met with Montreal’s Governer Beaucours at Montreal. They rekindled the treaty fire etc.. They also requested that Philippe Thomas and a blacksmith be sent to them. You can bet the blacksmith would be busy repairing guns for openers. 1741 March_Sachems from the Six nations came to NY to refute rumors and explain the Onondaga chiefs’ visit Canadian conference in 1740. 1741 June_ Famine among the Iroquois. 1741 August_Message exchange between Governor Beaucours and separate Iroquois parties, Issues rival French an English trading posts in Iroquois territory. Professions of friendship, Beaucours urged continuation of war against southern Indians. 1741 August_ Onondaga and Cayuga sachems talked with NY commissioners of Indian affairs. They reported a general meeting of the Six Nations which resolved to protect the trading house at Oswego against French attack Reported also peace with the French and their Indian allies unless Iroquois blood should be shed. Urged peace between France and England 1741 A Caughnawaga delegation invited by the commissioners of Indian affairs arrived in numbers too few to do business. Commissioners though them evasive about neutrality in case of Anglo-French War.

Above extracted from the History and Culture of Iroquois Diplomacy: An Interdisciplinary Guide to the Treaties of the Six Nations and Their League Editor F.Jennings; W. Fenton, Joint Editor: Mary Druke, Associate Editor; David Miller, Research Editor

 See Chapter 8,Descriptive Treaty Calender, page 179

Howard, the Susquehanna and Delaware River valleys were honeycombed with Indian trails inner connecting these major water sheds. Typically they would follow major as well as minor tributaries. The literature describes shelters for travelers using the trails. It appears the shelter areas were considered sanctioned neutral territory when occupied by differing occupants.

On pages 92 through the top of 95, Jennings discusses “”Mohawk Aims” and “”The Iroquois Melting Pot.” It seems that the ideal of the Iroquois as one people, in one land was a constant theme appearing throughout Iroquois history from the earliest days to the present time. It was this concept that led to the original five Nation confederation and the propagation of the Great Law of the Iroquois league “which still today to assert the principle that alien people must bow to Iroquois terms” (P-93). Today “the Iroquois Grand Council still meets making it the oldest governmental institution still maintaining its original form in eastern North America” (P-94). Jennings does not elaborate further on what other older governmental might still exist elsewhere in North America?

Despite the acceptance of the chosen people concept, the Iroquois were pragmatic enough to accept other conquered people as adopted Iroquois. This acceptance was necessary to make up heavy Iroquois losses from European diseases and war casualties. I think this adoption of conquered people was quite unique among the Amerindians. While other tribes would often adopt small children and some times enslave adult prisoners, I do not know of other cases where unrelated people were accepted as equals unless it was in the final days when circumstance resulted in unrelated peoples sharing the same reservation (Example the Alabama and Coshada in Texas)

Jenning brings up another interesting social custom of the Iroquois that was widely shared with other native cultures, that is, the social status of Iroquois chiefs. The custom that frowned on capital accumulation “demanded of leaders that they impoverish themselves for the benefit of their people.” As Jennings puts it, “whoever heard of emperors in rags? Mohawk chieftains were seen so, even at the height of their tribe’s ascendancy” (P-94 - 95)

This custom was also a factor in plains Indian society. While Jennings does not elaborate further, the early writers emphasize the importance of a large blood related family to support a leadership position. I wonder if immediate family might have been less important in Iroquois society because of the emphasis on Clan structure, which is a larger extended family (rather than close blood relationship) to support its candidate for leadership.

Please what dows the word 'sachems' mean- I saw the word used in relationship to Red Jacket getting the Indian name he owned prior to this Red Jacket name and that name was only received after he insisted on joining the 'sachem' = prior to that he had another Indian name. I forgot now what tribe he was born into.

Sachem is an Agonquian term for the chief of the tribe or a cofederation.

The Beaver Wars was a series of inter-tribal wars between about 1625 until almost 1700 for the control of the European fur trade. Though much of the fighting was intertribal each of the four European were involved at one time or another. As I interpret the Jennings Chapter 6 that is entitled, “The Beaver Wars” this chapter covers only the first phase through about 1660. Jennings continues his coverage of the war through its later phases until about 1700 in the following chapters.

One of the principal causes of the Beaver Wars was certainly inter-tribal competition to get the benefits of European trade. The Mohawks offer a good example of tribal incentive to better their position to profit from the trade. The fur of most value was beaver and the Mohawk territory, never overly stock with the animal quickly became exhausted creating an incentive for the Mohawks to acquire other sources. This led to war against their neighbor particularly those to the northwest and northeast.

By the end of the first faze (Covered in Chapter 6) about 1664 the Mohawks had both won and lost. They had won control of the Indian trade going to Fort Orange. This included trade coming from other tribes on their northern perimeter as middlemen, or through the extraction of tolls, or by pillage. But the Mohawks and other Iroquois lost their hoped for a special relationship with the French at Montreal. Though the Mohawks and Seneca’s had succeeded in destroying the Huron and their special trade relationship with the Montreal, there were many other tribes to the north west with great beaver resources. The trade of the Ojibwas, Chippewa, Ottawa, and other northwest tribes remained with the French and was lost to the Iroquois. But in all the Iroquois retained a powerful voice in determining inter-tribal and inter-colonial affairs.

In their intersocietal relations the Iroquois used the terms Brother and Sister for the people the European designated in their society as cousins......

It seems to me that in European-American sociey, (at least in my family's version of that) there is the greatest obligation to siblings. There is a lesser degree of obligation to cousins. In Iroquois society of old, there was the same obligation to all those related as what we would call cousins.

Add to this the clan structure, and that meant that the individual Iroquois was obligated to help at least half of all the other individual Iroquois. And all children were considered to be the children of each and every individual.

In meeting, the clans also related to each other as big and little brothers. These obligations created a web of safety for every individual. And there was the obligation to offer food to every stranger.

The European system of individual obligation had developed out of the feudal system and had a hierarchy. It created classes of people who had limited help only within their social group after feudalism was replaced by centralized governments and contractual obligations.

Today we have pre-nuptial agreements, contract of all sorts, wills, adoptions throught court action, and the government funding programs to suppposedly keep the individual afloat. And "charities" also help the individual. I think there is always the implied social hierarcy of giver over receiver in these exchanges. And there is the attendent guilt on the part of the giver that one has enough to become a "giver" and the other has less, and must be a "receiver".....Lady Bountiful complex...

I think the original Iroquois was more just. The relationship and obligations were lateral, not hierarchical. In theory at least everyone was equal, including the leaders. They were chosen not for their material wealth, but for their proven abilities, and could be removed by the clan mothers when they went against the wishes of the people.

Catbird: thank you for your comment on Iroquois metaphor. Metaphors certainly appear to have been a constant part of Native American expression. Their favorite metaphors were drawn from their own experience. Family life being a prominent part of tribal life experience, were natural choices. The Jennings book notes many and discusses the intricate details of their significance and meaning. The reader’s understanding of the intended meaning of these metaphors is essential to the understanding of many of the events the book describes.

The Iroquois were not alone in giving the metaphor and particularly family related ones a prominent part in their expressive speech patterns. Other Amerindians used the same metaphors, as did many other cultures including our Judaic-Christian –Islamic cultures that refer to the faithful as the children with the father role assigned to their deity. Also the successor power to the 16th/17th century Colonies, the United States continued at least through most of the 19th century to style the President of the United States as the “Great White Father” and the Indians as “his children.”

I think Catbird is generally right in noting the absence of a class structure in Iroquois society. The Jennings account noting the status of Iroquois chiefs as one of relative poverty illustrates this point. I think this condition might generally apply in much of North American Indian Society. Of course looking south to some of the Central and South American Cultures this is not the case as there where well defined noble and priestly classes. Also I think I might see vestiges of this class division emerging in our Caddo culture in Texas.

Note that I have changed the heading questions for part 3. This includes Chapters 7, 8, and 9. We will stay with this slightly longer reading assignment for about 10 days until February 1st.

Chronologically this part begins about 1660. The several Amerindian people continued to be influenced by the intertribal competition for European trade and the resulting warfare. During this period much of the intertribal war moved south to the Susquehanna and Delaware River Valleys where the Iroquois, Susquehannocks, and Delaware were prominent players. Among the European players great changes occurred with conflict between New Netherlands and New Sweden that resulted in the Dutch acquisition of the Swedish territory. This was followed by the English conquest of the New Netherlands, and the emergence of New York and its first English Governor, Andros, as a major Colonial force. In fact do we see in the New York role in the further development of the Covenant Chain, the first indication of New York’s future role as a North American Commercial and Financial leader

The 1741 date maybe valid based on some side research as follows

1740 September_ Representatives of the five nations met with Montreal’s Governer Beaucours at Montreal. They rekindled the treaty fire etc.. They also requested that Philippe Thomas and a blacksmith be sent to them. You can bet the blacksmith would be busy repairing guns for openers. 1741 March_Sachems from the Six nations came to NY to refute rumors and explain the Onondaga chiefs’ visit Canadian conference in 1740. 1741 June_ Famine among the Iroquois. 1741 August_Message exchange between Governor Beaucours and separate Iroquois parties, Issues rival French an English trading posts in Iroquois territory. Professions of friendship, Beaucours urged continuation of war against southern Indians. 1741 August_ Onondaga and Cayuga sachems talked with NY commissioners of Indian affairs. They reported a general meeting of the Six Nations which resolved to protect the trading house at Oswego against French attack Reported also peace with the French and their Indian allies unless Iroquois blood should be shed. Urged peace between France and England 1741 A Caughnawaga delegation invited by the commissioners of Indian affairs arrived in numbers too few to do business. Commissioners though them evasive about neutrality in case of Anglo-French War.

Above extracted from the History and Culture of Iroquois Diplomacy: An Interdisciplinary Guide to the Treaties of the Six Nations and Their League Editor F.Jennings; W. Fenton, Joint Editor: Mary Druke, Associate Editor; David Miller, Research Editor

 See Chapter 8,Descriptive Treaty Calender, page 179

Potsherds posts #84 and 93 both represents answers to Catbird’s post #80 calling attention to a possible typo error by Jennings on p-89 of the book. The apparent error resulted from a discussion of events occurring on the bottom of the page about 1638. Suddenly without explanation the last paragraph says:

In 1741 the Mohawks journeyed to Trois Riveréres in New France to propose peace with the French and all their allied tribes and to request that the French set up a trading post in Iroquoia. They addressed the French as Uncles and offered to -----------------

It would appear from the Potsherd research message (#93) that Jennings did really mean 1741 and therefore there is probably no typo error. I would, however, be critical of the authorship that suddenly switched his readers from a 1638 event to a conclusion over a century later without any explanation of the cause for the long delay.

Thank you Potsherd for your comment on this matter.

I sit corrected. Maybe Jennings is just trying to give us the full benefit of his superior knowledge! LOL

I was intending to work yesterday with the Iroquois discussion, but I ended up letting my attention be diverted by a flock of robins outside my home office window scratching for bugs. My camera batteries were low and the wire mesh screen was on the windows but I diverted to make pictures and put them on a web page. Later I removed the screen and after the birds returned, I took additional better pictures. Click Here.

Back to the book, I suppose the failure of the Swedes and Dutch in North America was to be expected from the beginning. So far as the Swedes were concern, there was never very many of them though they were competitive traders in their at their Delaware River stations. Their big mistake came in 1652 when after a war broke out between the Netherlands and England the Swedes seized the opportunity to expel a few Dutch traders who were operating in the Swedish area. Unfortunately the Dutch/English war ended quickly and the Dutch promptly moved against the Swedes and succeeded in taking over the Swedish trading operation in 1654. One result of the Dutch victory was that the Susquehannocks lost their previous source of European goods making them dependent on the Iron Dutch Chain involving the Mohawks or the English from Maryland and Virginia.

In the early 1660’s a large Iroquois force laid siege to the principal Susquehannock village but the Susquehannock defense held and the Iroquois were forced to withdraw. Other Iroquois military operations further to the northwest were also unsuccessful resulting in heavy Iroquois losses. To add to their troubles there was another devastating outbreak of small pox among the Iroquois. Jennings describing the Iroquois condition about this time as, “Far from being the savage rulers of a wilderness empire, the Iroquois now came within two fingers breath of total destruction from the accumulated effects of famine, disease and war.”

The Dutch to were the next to go. A stock company, The Dutch West India Co, conducted Dutch trading and colonial operations in the new world. The Company’s interests were commercial. There were no real imperial instincts in the company or the Dutch Government comparable to those of the English, and the West India Co. was more interested in the West Indies trade than the less profitable North American traffic.

In 1660 Charles Stuart, the pretender son of the beheaded Charles I was restored to the English Throne as Charles II. In 1664 the restored monarch granted his brother and heir presumptive, the Duke of York the rights to the New Netherlands. The Duke sent a small fleet that cowed the settlements on Manhattan and Fort Orange at Albany to surrender. Since the Duke of York was much involved in the governance of England he appointed Edmund Andros as Governor of New York. It was then, New York and its Governor who inherited the Dutch Covenant Chain. How the English transformed this metaphorically iron chain into a silver one is the subject of the coming chapters.

The Susquehannocks and Delawares The two tribes and the rivers of their names represent two diametrically opposed peoples: the Susquehannocks- “war like” and the Delawares-”peaceful.” The Susquehanna river valley consisted of protective palisaded villages and the Delaware River Valley with not a single palisaded village noted through the present. The closeness and geographical distances presented by the two valleys created commutation and trade advantages to these two peoples. The origin of the Susquehannocks remains clouded with some hint of roots with the Cayuga/Seneca peoples: a number of hypotheses suggest some affiliation to the Hurons. In the archaeological tracking of the Susquehannocks it is interesting from 1680-1690 they disappeared from the radar screen and finally surfaced in 1690 at Conestoga in Lancaster County, PA,by 1763 they were few in number and had integrated with other tribes. Captain John Smith in 1608 encountered the Susquehannocks at the mouth of the Susquehanna river. Smith was surprised that they already had steel tools as well as the Tockwehogles of the upper Chesapeake bay with steel tool which had been obtained in trade with the Susquehannock people The Dutch and Swedish traders of the Delaware drainages call the Susquehannocks “Minqua”, the French used the Huron term “Andaste”, and the English used the Algonquian name Susquehannock. Peter Minuit when he purchased land in the Delaware Valley it is noted the occasion was attended by a number of Susquehannock sachems and with their 1634 victory over the Delawares suggested they became tributary to the Susquehannocks. However it became clear that the Delawares were “the landlords” of the Delaware Valley which was recognized by Dutch,Swedes,English, and Suesquehannocks

Potsherd what were the palisades made from? Were they logged walls or earthen bream defense works or something else entirely?

Our Texas Caddo villages were quite different being spread out in something like a 25 mile diameter circle consisting of many small 4 or 5 hut hamlets taking advantage of natural clearings or recent burns where they could plant their corn, beans, squash, melons and sunflowers. Their area was the great southern pine forest in corners of 4 present U.S. States, Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Arkansas. In this respect they were not so well defended as the Susquehannocks. I have never seen any reference to palisades or other defensive structure at Caddo sites yet they were quite warlike and certainly had their enemies. When the first Franciscan Missionaries came in the 1690's they wanted the Caddo to centralize their villages at the mission sites. The Caddo had better sense since they realized the centralized population could not grow the crops necessary for their support. The Caddo never accepted the Missionary message and in 1731 the Spanish gave up and moved the missions to south Texas where the local Indians had more incentive to accept required lifestyle change.

Harold, the palisades were typically small diameter -4/8" timbers. On many palisades there was a ditch which would make it even more difficult to attack the walls. Interesting many of the Chesapeake Bay villages were also palisaded. I have a site in the upper Delaware River on the Pennsylvania side of the river in which I have studied the pottery types, sorting them by the cardinal points of the compass. From the Wyoming Valley (west) in which the site contained four types of pottery from the Susquehanna/Wyoming valley . It is interesting that this represents the singular site in the entire Delaware valley with this number of pottery types. Also the site contained a large quantity of pipes ( meetings?). The site is in close proximity to four major paths over the Pocono mountains from the Wyoming valley. I suspect the site may have been used for R&R by the people from the west who got tired of living behind palisades. Either that or it represented an early Motel 6 !!!!!!

Here is a question for you Potsherd, or whoever might have an answer to it. When did the Northeast Amerindians first begin to use the Horse? Perhaps they did not have the incentive of the western Indians to use them, but as the 17th century progressed many tribes north and east of the Spanish settlements at Santa Fe began to use the animal. We know the Caddo in far East Texas had horses in 1685 because LaSalle was able to trade for 5 animals in that year. The Caddo like the Northeast people were forest Indians but still found the animal useful and began to acquire them quite early.

Jennings tells us that after Maryland’s governor Lord Calvert in 1675 invited the Susquehannocks to move to Maryland they accepted the invitation and suddenly appeared (Jennings says all of them) at the colonial capitol, St Mary’s on the eastern shore. How did they get there? There must have been over a thousand of them, men women and children with all their possessions. Did they carry everything on their backs or in dog-pulled Travois, or did they have the Horse?

After much deliberation the colony assigned the tribe land on the Potomac above the falls and the tribe departed for their new home moving into an abandoned Piscatawa stockaded village.

Regarding the Maryland Governor involved in the Susquehannock relocation, he was Philip Calvert and his remains have been the subject of a recent archeology investigation involving 4 lead Coffins found at the site of the colonial capital. The Investigation using DNA identified the burial as Governor Philip Calvert, his 2nd wife and 2 young children. Click Here for more information

Harold, I am not aware of horses in the NE until the Invaders arrived. DeSota trapsed 3,000 miles through the southeast on horses which I would believe may have been the first exposure of this mode of transportation to the Indigenous people.

The barrier islands of the SE to the present have wild horse populations and the books/ literature suggest they arrived as survivors of Spanish coastal ship wrecks.

Jennings is not real clear in his Chapter 8 account of the development of the Silver English Chain. I would like to hear other reader's interpretation of the development of these events, but my interpretation is summarized as follows:

My interpretation of the continuing developments in the 1670’s as given by Jennings in Chapter 8 of, “A Silver English Chain,” is that the settlement of a war between the Susquehannocks and Maryland and Virginia played a major role. It seemed Maryland sought to establish its control over the lower Delaware River valley, an area that New York and its Governor, Edmund Andros claimed based on its previous connection to the New Netherlands.

A great multi tribal Indian conference was held in Feb 1777 at the Delaware village of Shackamaxon where Philadelphia now stands that was attended by representatives from both Maryland and New York. As a result of this treaty the majority of the Susquehannocks agreed to move to land in New York proper as offered by Governor Andros.

Apparently the fine print details of the treaty were unfavorable to Maryland and another conference followed in Albany. The results of the final treaty were that the Iroquois as the adopters of the bulk of the Susquehannocks acquired the recognized rights to most of the Susquehanna Valley. The Susquehannocks were not mentioned by name as a party to the treaty leaving the Iroquois as the spokesmen for all Indian tribes in dealing with all of the English colonies. The real diplomatic winners of the treaty were New York and the Iroquois particularly the Mohawks because of their proximity to Albany.

Perhaps Jennings instead of naming Chapter 8 “A Silver English Chain” might more properly have named it “A Silver New York Chain.” I think we see hear the beginning of the New York role as the center of North American (later the World) finance and commercial activities

Been so busy haven't kept up with the group but I will get back - interesting to me - I was reading something else last week about New Amsterdam and I had no realization that some of the early Dutch in New Amsterdam as Dutch investors were Jewish - I never think of our nation in its early infancey being settled by Jewish folks and yet, I knew that at this time in history there were many Jews in what later became the Netherlands.

Because of different laws in Europe established from the 12th century on that addressed the Jewish population, European nation states for the most part prohibited Jewish people from owning land and they were limited in the number of cattle they could own, therefore, they were in other trades including banking and lending. With Hollond not having a unified nation till much later there had been for 100 or more years a large population of Jewish people in the area we call Holland, who were successful investors and lenders.

In this book we have learned how the early Dutch were here for business reasons not to settle because of an economic plight or religious reasons and therefore now when you think about it of course there would be a goodly number of Dutch Jews in this early trading experiment in the Americas.

Barbara, I think you are correct in noting the role of Dutch Jews in Dutch business and trading operations in the 17th century, certainly in Europe and perhaps also in the New Netherlands. The Jews had been forcibly exiled from Spain at the end of the 15th century but were less persecuted in the Netherlands. Their presence there a century later was a source of borrowed money for the North American English revolutionaries.

I would like to hear from all of you (catbird, Barbara, Potsherd and all) your comment on my post #102, my interpretation of the events leading to the creation of the “Silver English Chain."

In 1665 Louis XIV of France sent a crack French Army Regiment to New France with orders to resolve in Jennings’ words the Final solution to the Iroquois Problem. In the first sortie in the winter of 1665-66 one account I read had the unit lost in the woods, Even so the four Western Nations of the Iroquois negotiated a treaty agreeing to accept French Jesuit missionaries and send Iroquois families to live in New France. The Treaty specifically excluded the Mohawks.

The French later in that winter tried again and on snowshoes penetrated to within 20 leagues (about 50 miles) of the Mohawk village at which point they concluded that was close enough, and they returned to Montreal. The nest year, in Oct 1666, the French again advanced on the Mohawks and burned a Mohawk village and crops stored there. The Mohawks who thought they had a treaty with the French had received intelligence of the pending French attack and had left the area. The operation was painful for the Mohawks but did not inflict any fatal injury upon them. The principal long-term effect seems to have been that the Mohawks learned they could not trust the French a remembrance that probably assured their continued participation in the English Chain

Apparently the French did not understand the true comprehensive nature of the Mohawk (Iroquois)/English trade relationship. In Jennings” words for the French the English Covenant Chain was a nullity, a simple treaty between the Mohawks and New York. For the Mohawks on the other hand the chain confirmed their control of western Indian access to Albany enhancing their status with the other Iroquois and other western tribes.

If we decide to continue this discussion to the fourth section of the schedule we will see the beginning of a new colonial power, the William Penn Proprietary colony, Pennsylvania. One of the unique and most interesting thing about William Penn was his method of dealing with the Indians. He actually negotiated with them for land and paid them for the land to be used by the Colonist. One of the principal instruments relative to Penn’s purchase of land was a 1701 treaty with the Delaware tribe creating the land sale In 1771 the early American Artist, Benjamin West (living in England) painted what is perhaps his major work of art entitled, “Penn’s Treaty with the Indians.”

Click Here for the best internet copy that I found. Note you can load this picture into your photo editor and improve its quality by increasing contrast and brightness. Benjamin West is an interesting early American. Though he was born in the colonies he went to England to study and remained there through the revolution and his later life. He was a favorite of King George III who commissioned him to do art works at Windsor and other Royal palaces. He was an early President of the Royal Society. Despite his long association in England he is said to have retained his American roots and refused the knighthood offered by the king

I liked this picture and thought you too might enjoy it!.

Click Here for another U.S. Capitol Art representation of The 1701 Treaty.

Daniel Garacontie ( Sagochiendagehte ) an Onondaga Iroquois who was chief diplomat ‘the Prince and Orator” of the Five Nations from the moment of the Iroquois decision to spare New France in 1654 through 1677 in the last negotiations of his lifetime. He linked the Five nations to the English empire in the Covenant Chain. Garacontie’s goal was to make actual the Onondaga’s titular leadership of the Iroquoian League and to secure control of the Great Valley of the Susequehanna. Garacontie achieved his ambition of making peace with the French, and alliance with the English and waging war with the Eire. Mahican, Susquehannocks, Shawnee, and the Illinois peoples. The Iroquoian raiders triumphed and an ensuing partnership of necessity between English imperialists and overextended Iroquois - the Covenant Chain agremments of 1675-1676-1677 served booth the English and Iroquoia for a century to come. On 21 July 1677 in Albany Garacontie now referred to as “ the Old Man,” the Elder,” “ the Man of Note’ spoke first for the Onondaga and then the Five Nations replying to Corleaer and Coursey. This time the Iroquoian treaty “framed a supremely significant agreement.” It determined the present disposition and future development of mideastern America. Proposals by Corleaer and Coursey (long and involved) were accepted by Garacontie for all four nations of the upper Iroquois. It was now conclued in July,1675 with Garacontie’s proclamation of the covenant Chain. The origin of the Chain metaphor appeared to take place in Albany with the Iroquois impressed by the Dutch ships anchor cables. Subsequently the Mohawk said they were linked to the Albany Dutch by an iron chain. But in July, 1677,Garacontie defined the “Covenant Chain” and it was a chain of silver.

Side note: Daniel Garacontie (Sagochiendagehte ) had been for twenty-two years, the senior sachem of his clan, his nation, and his confederation. Daniel Garacontie, the Onondaga author of the diplomatic revolution of 1676 was seen by his contemporaries as “the most noted man among all the Iroquois.” The name that he was given was the senatorial “Sagochiendagehte,” the title of that lord of the Longhouse League. He may represent the greatest American diplomat of the seventeenth century.

Trying to understand what happened in North America between the European settlers, their governments, and the Native people takes a lot of digging through old records. Jennings certainly has done his work. As I was reading on page 139, the description of the colonial legislature making a decision by rearranging the evidence to fit the conclusion made me think to myself "there is nothing new under the sun"! ("Having made its findings so conveniently, the assembly voted a supply for the expenses of either peace or war").

In reading the questions in the heading for this segment of our discussion, I decided to not answer them separately. So here are some thoughts prompted by the questions above.

I keep wondering what was going on within the Iroquois Confederacy.

The creation of the Confederacy (League) gave the keeping of the council fire to the Onondaga, geographically in the center of the Iroquois territory. Yet all the action seems to be taking place between the Mohawk and the Dutch/English Europeans and later the governor of New York.

I think the Onondaga may have taken a run at making peace with the French because of internal considerations within the Confederacy. Maybe the Mohawk had been a little too independent, and the Onondaga wanted to shift power within the Confederacy back to the center.

That would have made the Covenant Chain a three-way agreement and perhaps the Onondaga had the backing of the western nations (Cayuga and Seneca) to do that. It might have made them all safer from attack by both European powers.

Another point which is important in the land claims and treaty issues which are in the courts today is the fact that the Iroquois firmly state that they are free and equal to the French and to the English. The Covenant Chain is an agreement between equals.

I think that the Iroquois are beginning to see that the Europeans are bringing more than trade goods to be exchanged for furs. Within the Confederacy there probably was much discussion on how to deal with these intruders.

And as we read on, I think we'll see that the native people almost are lost before they find a way to resist effectively.

Catbird, as we see history does repeat however we seem bound too ignore and repeat historical misadventures.

The Iroquois named Governor-General Andros_ "Corleaer". He was named by the Mohawk: the name bestowed commemorated Arent Van Culer, an Albanian who had died in the diplomatic service of the Iroquois in 1669.

Thank you Potsherd for your outline of the career of The Iroquois chief Sagochiendagehte and his linking of the Five Nations to England rather than France.

In Chapter 10, “They Flourish and We Decrease” Jennings brings us up on Iroquois relations with New France during the 3rd quarter of the 17th century. During this time Denonville, the Governor of New France tried to establish a stronger trade relationship with the Iroquois. Dongan as Governor of NY was successful in keeping the Iroquois in the English camp, and often at War with the French or particularly their Indian allies during the remaining years of the 17th century.

I think the Iroquois alliance with the English held through out the 18th century and into the 19th. And was not it the Iroquois who Thomas Jefferson was referring to when he included in his charges against King George III,

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

Even after the turn to the 19th century the New Republic faced its Iroquois problem But also lthough the Iroquois were generally allied to the English, they nevertheless maintained there sovereign right to negotiate with whatever power they choose. There are several instances describe in the Jennings Book of Iroquois negotiations with the French that were certainly inconsistent with the English view of the Iroquois as their subjects..

Isn’t the use of metaphorical names for the Governors of New York and Pennsylvania an interestingly colorful use of language? As Potsherd points out the New York Governor was "Corleaer," the name of an early Dutch Governor. Governor Andros and subsequent English Governors were referred to by this metaphorical tile. I wonder if today Governor Pataki would recognize an address by this ancient title?

And the Pennsylvania Governor was “Onas.” From a comment in the Jennings index I deduce that this word means “feather” in the Iroquois language. Somehow Onas became the Iroquois word for William Penn. Perhaps at an early meeting Penn wore a plumed hat that impressed the Iroquois negotiators. At any rate again the term Onas was the Iroquois title for subsequent Governors of Pennsylvania.

Catbird you brought up a good point when you mentioned Jennings sources and how scattered they are among Colonial Government, Church, and private records. He research for this book and his other Iroquois titles took much of his lifetime. I note that Jesuit records out of French Canada were one of the major sources just as the Franciscan records are a principal source for the Spanish colonial expansion in Northern Mexico, New Mexico, and Texas.

There was certainly friction between the Mohawks and the Onondaga and for that matter between other components of the Five Nations (just as there is friction today between allies in various international causes). The Mohawk advantage appears to me primarily the result of their geography that gave them control of access to Albany and New York. This fact made the Onondaga and other Iroquois Nations as well as other tribes subject to greater or lesser control by the Mohawks. Yet the Onondaga position, of influence and as the Five Nation Capitol seems to have held even until today.

And Catbird regarding your last paragraph, “as we read on, I think we'll see that the native people almost are lost before they find a way to resist effectively,” I think I see the same theme unfolding. In my view I see the existence of Iroquois Unity as the force that enabled their survival. As imperfect as it was the Iroquois Confederation presented the semblance of a united front confronting the Europeans. Also they were pragmatic enough to adopt people of their conquered nations to make up their losses. I think this degree of unity in marked contrast to general Native American disunity is a factor that enabled them to maintain a position of influence right up to the present time.

As I had mentioned previously the Iroquois became very dependent on European trade goods and as a result the strength of the Covenent Chain became gradually diluted for the Iroquois. They became addicted to gun powder and lead and English cloth. The days of the bow and arrow and buckskin disappeared into their past.

I just revised the Focus Points to cover Part four. While we have had some discussion the past days on this section we still have some remaining points to mentioned. I will therefore keep this part of the discussion open for several more days.

I think we have already pretty well covered Chapter 10 concerning the Iroquois and their relations with New France and their acceptance of their prominent role in the English Silver Covenant Chain. We now see the induction of another English Colonial power in the William Penn settlement of Pennsylvania. From Chapter 11 on Pennsylvania is a prominent player through the end of the book. The emergence of Pennsylvania and the development of its role in the ensuing drama require further discussion.

Much of the unique colonial policy of Pennsylvania stems from the character of William Penn and his Quaker religion. Most important William Penn upon his arrival in the new world negotiated with the Indians to purchase the land used by his colony. I have previously provided a link to the Benjamin West painting of the negotiations of the Great Treaty of Friendship with the Delawares. This openness on Penn’s part seems to have impressed the Indians and it took the doings of several of his lieutenants and successors over a number of years to undo the favorable reputation established by him.

I note that some of the Jennings language describes the Penn Indian policy as the establishment of “a Chain of Friendship.” The text specifically states that this “chain of friendship” has nothing to do with the Covenant Chain. I am confused by Jennings, title of his Chapter 12, “A Link Lost.” This chapter begins describing the details of how Penn’s lieutenants and successors estranged Indian/Pennsylvanian friendship. Potsherd, am I correct in interpreting the “Link Lost” title for Chapter 12 as referring to a link lost from the Friendship Chain rather than in the Covenant Chain?

I believe the "Link Lost" would refer to the scandalous dishonesty of Thomas and John Penn as well as James Logan. These three people and their outright dishonesty was responsible for tarnishing and diminishing the relationship and prior trust demonstrated by William Penn. The two Penn sons and Logan were involved in the "Walking Purchase" scandal as well as the three had built the Durham Iron furnace in Durham PA and later tried to steal forested land in the furnace area from Nutimus a Delaware Chief who owned much of the a joining land which the Durham furnace required for fuel. All of this + additional events diluted the trust of the Delaware nation.and its people

We are now moving to Part 5 of the discussion. and I have changed the Focus points for Chapters 13, 14, and 15. Potsherd in his message 115 mentions the Walking Purchase Scandal. Do note that Jennings includes documents arising from the “Walking Purchase” in Appendix B.

These chapters raise questions in my mind that perhaps Potsherd might comment on:

Do you agree with my characterization in the heading of the Tuscarora admittance as the sixth nation of the Iroquois Confederation as something less than full voting membership? Apparently the Tuscarora had no council vote while the original 5 nations each had well defined by custom, but unequal council voting privileges. I understand this unequal council voting procedure is still followed today?

To what extent do you consider the new colony of Pennsylvania a competitor to Albany and New York? Jennings tells us after the Treaty of 1722 the Iroquois considered Pennsylvania a member with themselves retaining their preferred position as the representative of all Indian tribes in relations with the Colonies. Do you see Pennsylvania as recognizing their Covenant Chain membership?

Was the Iroquois situation at the time of the 1722 Treaty really so bad as to warrant Jennings judging their situation in the Chapter Title as “desperate?” Though I’m sure they were feeling the effects of their heavy losses from war and disease, they seem to have represented themselves very well in the negotiation of the Treaty and it would seem were generally successful in protecting their vital interests.

Barbara, and Catbird, what are your thoughts on these questions?

On of the most interesting American history books I have read during the last decade was the Stephanie Grauman Wolf Colonial social history, “As Various As Their Land.” Click Here For Information.

This book describes life in the English colonists as they evolved from its beginning in the 17th century until the revolution at the end of the 3rd quarter of the 18th century. In particular it traces the evolution of how the colonists thought of themselves from their beginning as English men and women living in North America but other wise still essentially English, and how this outlook suddenly changed after the French Indian war until by 1776 they realized they were in fact a very different people. I think we see in Jennings Chapter 14, “A Vise Made In Europe” an earlier differentiation of the English Colonists view of themselves as different from the English. In the first quarter of the 18th century they were already coming to understand that the imperial interests of the English Crown and its London Government were different from their own interests which was their individual opportunity for profits that could only come through autonomy.

The story of the Tuscarora is tragic at best. Their northward migration from the North Carolina was the result of European confiscation of their lands and traditional hunting territories their women and children captured and sold into slavery ; the wars of 1711-1713. They became a decimated people and ultimately fled north as refugees for survival and protection. They were “taken under the wing” of the Oneida nation of the League and became the Sixth member. The following ‘Cradle board” metaphor explains the Tuscarora status as the Sixth member. The Cradle board is typically a symbol of childhood, however it also applied to a nation in which it meant the nation had not achieved full political maturity . So, the Tuscarora people were received into the League as the Sixth Nation on “the Cradle board” with the right to speak but not to vote. In 1755 when the League could not agree in participation in the American Reveloutation the League “ covered the fire”: the Oneida and Tuscarora joined the patriots cause and remaining League members joined the British.

As I've been reading, I've noticed that Jennings repeatedly makes the point that the Delaware were not conquered by the Iroquois, and that they were not thought of as "Women", that is, conquered people.

I get the impression that there must be another historian who takes the view that the Delaware WERE conquered. Jennings seems to be constantly refuting someone's argument!

I wonder if they have both presented papers on this topic at a symposium? I'm very far removed from the academic world, but I think there's a breath of controversy here.

Anyone else notice this emphasis by Jennings on the falseness of the myth of the Delawares being conquered?

(also, I am scurrying to catch up with the schedule of reading....more later)

Delawares-as women

The following quoting and para-phrasing from Anthony F. C. Wallaces book the King of The Delawares_ Teedyuscung 1700-1763. Wallace says: “ the Delawares-as women business is obscure but intriguing.” His explanation is the most plausible explanation I have seen in the literature to date. Wallace says,”Some time in the seventh century, probably at the close of the Five Nations’ war with the Susquehannocks, the Delawares, in order to avoid continuous warfare with hostile Iroquois tribes seem to have petitioned to become sustaining but not active members of the League. By calling them “women,” the Six Nations in the eighteenth century were popularly supposed to have meant that the lowly, effeminate Delawares were henceforth not allowed to own their own land or to make war.” Wallace says what the actual “Women” metaphor actually symbolized is not altogether clear; but certainly it did not originally refer to a blanket prohibition of all military activity and land ownership on the part of the Delawares.” “The Six Nations had other things to do besides exercising a gratuitious and unprofitable tyranny over neighboring Algonkian tribes.” “The Delawares were not given the privilege of speaking in the Great Council except on specific invitation: they were enjoined not to engage in irresponsible warefare.” The Delawares were not the single tribe to be called “women” the term also applied to the Mahicans, Nanticokes,Tuteloes and the Sixth Nation Tuscaroras. “ Thus it would seem that the “women’ metaphor meant at first, for the Delawares as well as for the other “ props of the confederacy,” simply a non-voting membership in the League

Catbird, thank you for your bringing up the Delawares. I think they did manage to remain relatively independent of the Iroquois. Jennings spent some time in his book refuting the idea that the Delaware were defeated in a battle with the Iroquois. His well-sustained argument was that the rumored battle never took place at all. I think other historians as you note have accepted this rumored Delaware defeat as a fact with out real evidence of its occurrence.

Also the “Women” metaphor did not always mean weak, it might more often imply a role as mediators. I remember at least one occurrence when the Delaware did not support an Iroquois war proposal that did evoke the “women” brand in a way that the weak interpretation was most certainly intended.

My interpretation is that the Delaware did retain a greater of independence from the Iroquois than some other tribes. Yet they to were subject to the lead role assigned the Iroquois by the Covenant Chain.

HAROLD: Again I must apologise for not participating in this discussion as much as I had anticipated, but as I have mentioned the small print of the book has given me problems. When it gave me headaches from eye strain I decided that was enough. But still I have been checking in ocassionaly to see what is going on. A recent comment you made about the English colonists reminded me of what was an interesting revalation, to me at least, in John Hancock's biography. At the time of the revolution, most of the American colonists still favored King George. Their real gripe was with the English Parliment, which was overtaxing their colonies. If the Parliment had backed off we still today might have been a part of the English nation. So how would the Iroquois fitted into that scenario.Since England had long before outlawed slavery, we might not have even had a Civil War. All kinds of different things could have happened. Oh well. who knows. Just a bunch of possibilities to stimulate discussion. Not that you have needed any stimulation.

It’s always good to hear your comment. The apology is not necessary, as others (myself included) have had trouble both in the mechanical act of reading the book and in the understanding of the message of this book. Next week as we conclude I will make further comments on my thoughts on it. Also I hope others will then comment also, including Barbara, Catbird and Potsherd. You to williewoody, might make further comments at that time.

You bring up an interesting “historical if;” indeed, how different the world certainly would have evolved had all of North America remained British? While speculation on the differences is of no historical value today, you are right in noting the plight of many loyalists among the revolting colonies. It is not hard to find historical evidence of many lynching including reference in a little book by an 18th century relative of mine (later a prominent US. Episcopal Bishop) who describes a family dinner at the Baltimore County home of my ancestor, Alexander Wells, at which the dinner conversation included comment on the recent hanging of local Tories. A few years ago I attended a professional meeting at St Andrew, New Brunswick. This was a site of refuge for many loyalists from the colonies further south. Across the street from the hotel was the Loyalists Burial Grounds wherein many of the tombstones carried messages noting their persecution by the revolutionists and their continual loyalty. Our American Revolution, like all others before and after, had its innocent victims!

I have changed the heading to begin the penultimate part of our discussion, Part 6. Here the subject centers on William Penn’s heirs and their efforts to avoid bankruptcy (The prospects of time in an 18th century debtor’s prison made the avoidance of bankruptcy far more necessary than it would appear today to a modern credit card abuser).

The only way for the Penn’s to increase their income from the colony was to obtain more Indian land for sale to new European colonies. This they accomplished largely at the expense of the Delawares. After the completion of the “walking purchase,” (Chapter 17 and Appendix they were forced to petition the Iroquois for land in Iroquoia. The process lessened their tribal Independence metaphorically reducing their status from cousins to children. It also broke forever the Chain of Friendship that William Penn had forged in his early emphasis on “fair dealings” with the Indians. The Iroquois continued their position of relative strength with in intertribal society as well as with the Covenant Chain.

Potsherd I remain confused about Pennsylvania’s position within the Covenant Chain. Some of the Jennings language seems to picture Pennsylvania relatively independent to pursue their own trade with the various Independent tribes. Was the William Penn “Chain of Friendship” really Penn’s own version of the Covenant Chain?

I have just finished reading the story of the Walking Purchase. It makes me ill. The fair dealings of the first Penn have been abandoned, and the greedy ones make deals that are immoral.

And of course, much of the relations between the euro-Americans and the indigenous people will follow the new pattern.

In my mind, I can't help thinking of parallels to current events.

I find that reading Jennings is a pleasant relief from the world news.

Harold , I see the message of two cultures>>>the stone culture and the metal culture. The meeting and acculturation of the stone culture. The superiority of the metal culture over the stone culture is obvious. The metal culture employed simply by contact the devastating weapon of European diseases ( I do not think this was really a known or intentional ). The control of metals technology by the Europeans denied to the Americans equated to total dependence of these people with never an opportunity to participate, grow in and prosper in the higher technology. The day the Europeans landed in America spelled the passing of the native people. The ultimate demise of the fur business and the loss of their native lands became the end point of the native cultures and a way of life never to be seen or experienced again. As an advocational researcher I most appreciate Francis Jennings tremendous amount of research and documentation as established in this history of the Iroquoian people.

Am presently trying to help save the last remaining town of the Susquehannocks in York county, Pennsylvania. The site tentatively ( based on some long time ago excavations) contains a palisaded town of 20>>>>20 x 60' longhouses and an estimated 4 cemeteries with 200 burials. Of interest the site was probably destroyed in 1680 by Iroquois. The site also contains a settlement initially deeded by Lord Baltimore in 1729 an action that precipitated the Pennsylvania /Maryland Border war. The property is to become a 600+ housing subdivision. If the site can not be saved I hope the Susquehannock spirts haunt the people who live over the graves.

Hello Catbird and Potsherd; I suppose the “Walking Purchase” event was the final refutation of the original William Penn, fairness policy. It seems to have set the tone for future Euro-American dealings with Native Americans for the next century and a half and more. Perhaps I should have said for the next two and a half centuries.

Potsherd, I am sure we all support your interest in the prevention of the destruction of the remains of the Susquehannock cultural site. ThanK you for your effor there. Instead of a 600 unit housing development this should become a National Monument under the National Park Service such as the Bandelier Nataional monument in New Mexico, Click Here</a<.

And Click here for Pictures at Bandelier Site. I took these pictures last October and am in the process of preparing a web essay entitled “New Mexico Revisited” that will include this Bandelier page

Harold, thanks for the picture taken at the Bandelier site. The Anasazi ( present day Hopi) are one of my favorite tribes. Have you read a rather recent study of the Anasazi title is " Man. Corn' This long term study rather convincingly presents evidence that the Anasazi practiced cannibalism; as you would expect it is quite controversial. The Hopi have been through time quite passive: primary antagonists have been the Navaho and the Spaniards. The Hohokam people were also quite interesting and advanced in technology for instance: the Germans have been credited with developing the etching process however the Hohokam beat them by 500 years. The Hohokam etched designs on marine shell obtained in trade from the West coast. The process is quite amazing: they coated the marine shell with pinion pine pitch, then incised their designs on the prepared shell, they then immersed the shell in an acid which they produced by fermenting cacti. The fermentation was an acid pH which reacted with the akaline base of the exposed incised design on the shell. The pine pitch acted as a mask in which the acid did not penetrate. Neat process!!!

Potsherd, apparently the present residents of the San Ildefondo Pueblo also claim descent from the Anasazi by traditions that their ancestors moved to the present San Ildefondo site from the nearby Bandelier site when that location was abandoned in the 16th century. The reason for the abandonment of the site is un-known as is there reason for the abandonment of the older four-corners sites four centuries earlier. It might have been as simple as the lost of fertility of the soil and shortage of game animals or more complex such as plague or susceptibility to attack by enemy tribes.

In West Texas near El Paso we have a village farming culture quite possibly of Anasazi origin living in adobe longhouses, growing corn beans and squash, and hunting rabbits between about 1100 and 1350. Their reason for abandonment of the site too is unclear but probably was related to climate changes making it too dry for successful agriculture. It is thought that when the site was abandoned the survivors began the wandering/gathering lifestyle that was characteristic in the area two centuries later when the first Spanish arrived. Click Here For Picture From ITC Exhibit.

Regarding your Susquehannock site, are there any visible relics of the walled palisades and town or other above ground physical ruins remaining today?

Interesting to read your information about the digs. I guess I take a different approach to Native American history. I know there is such a lot of conflict over the excavating and display of Native things. Did any one ever see a special, probably on PBS, called "In Search of the First Americans"? I taped it about 20 years ago, and used to show it to my classes as a way to help them understand what the social sciences were all about. The story showed a dig in the upper midwest, and the difficulty of telling if a fossilized bone's marks were made by ancient tools or by animal teeth.

The show included a discussion by two anthropologists of the date in which the first Natives were on the North American continent. One had evidence he said showed the date as 60,000 years ago. The other felt that the evidence was not conclusive.

Some of my students felt the whole argument was moot, as they knew that their people had originated here. To them the Bering Strait theory was wrong.....their oral traditions were correct.

Anyway, I finished Jennings. It was well worth the effort. Most of the information I have had about the Iroquois is after the time when Sir William Johnson became the British agent to the Indian, so this was new to me.

When I did a book report for an American History course back in l970, I read the story of Conrad Weiser, and was glad to set it in its place in history.

The best part of the book for me is the last page (375). Jennings makes an argument that the way we have viewed the history of the European contact with the Natives of North America is not correct, and that the view that there was armed conflict along a frontier (Turner) has led us to believe that this is the only way that an encounter between different cultures can happen.

He suggests and presents evidence that there was cooperation and accommadation between many different parties. I like his view better. His concluding paragraph points to a possibility of a way to live that is not nation-states in competition and at war with one another. In view of the current news, I found this hopeful.

Harold regarding the Susquehannock village site, The remains are a typical archaeological site: the remains are represented by post molds, hearths, living areas, burial shafts and artifacts. The plow zone must be carefully stripped away which then revels patterns, etc. The soil of the plow zone is screened to recover for any artifacts. It appears we may be on the verge of saving 7/9 acres which would not be developed and be under the future control of the sub divisions home owners assoc.

I owe this discussion an apology for my long absence but after a very necessary hiatus to accumulate my accounts for my CPA and the unexpected discovery of some continuing problems plus the beginning of “Abraham” I have neglected this board. It was just the other day that I changed the heading for the concluding chapters and perhaps now we can proceed with the finish. Again I apologize for my absence.

Catbird I note that during the past decade the reports concerning the dating of the migrations from Siberia to North America have lengthened.. Previously the relatively recent date of 15 to 20 thousand years ago was mentioned. Yet just within the past year I have seen reports of an archaeological site in Southern Chili, almost in the Tierra de Fuego region dated within this range. Surely it would have taken many years, perhaps thousands of years for people to disperse so far. I note that many scholars are now thinking 60,00 or more years are reasonable.

I to am very glad I made the effort to read this book. I am very impressed by the magnitude of the research that went into it. Yet it was the most difficult history book I have ever read to follow and understand. A part of this was due to the small light print that made it difficult to read with my eyes in their current state, but I do feel Jennings writing style was very much a negative factor. Somehow I found it very difficult to follow and pick out the most significant points connecting the evolving history. Somehow he neglected to keep his readers informed regarding the date of events he was describing. Of great significance is the series of treaties from the earliest days in the 17th century to the Treaty of Lancaster in 1744. Yet it was always difficult to follow Jennings account of them. Their importance never seemed to have received the emphasis necessary for the understanding of the novice reader. Despite the difficulty I valued the reading experience and the overview history of a Native People I was previously unfamiliar. Also Jennings deserves much credit for his research showing the Historical significance of the Covenant Chain, a significance that previously had been lost from our knowledge base.

Potsherd, do you now see evidence that the signifiance of the Covenant Chain is now being recognized by other historinas as the result of the Jennings research and writings?

I do believe the Treaty of Lancaster was very significant in the opening of the West to European Settlement (there went the Neighborhood). As I understand it, the Iroquois interpreted it to be their giving up land in the Susquehanna Valley. Actually by its words the Iroquois gave up much more, the entire Ohio Valley west of the mountains. I note that a few years after this in the early 1760’s my ancestor, Alexander Wells begin acquiring land in what later became Washington County Pennsylvania but what Virginia then claimed. His early grants were issued by the Royal Governor of Virginia pursuant to a decree awarding land to colonials serving the British in the French Indian War. Alexander Wells like other land speculators purchased these rights from veterans. Thomas Jefferson as Governor of Virginia signed later grants under the same authority early in the Revolution. By the end of the revolution this area had an active American population and an economy based on turning corn into alcohol that participated America's first Constitutional crisis, the Whiskey Rebellion