HISTORICAL SKETCHES OF THE LENAPE.
§ 1. The Lenape as "Women"
§ 2. Recent Migrations of the Lenape
§ 3. Missionary Efforts in the Provinces of Pennsylvania and New Jersey.
§ 1. _The Lenape as "Women."_
A unique peculiarity of the political condition of the Lenape was
that for a certain time they occupied a recognized position as
non-combatants--as "women," as they were called by the Iroquois.
Indian customs and phraseology attached a two-fold significance to this
term.
The more honorable was that of peace-makers. Among the Five Nations and
Susquehannocks, certain grave matrons of the tribe had the right to sit
in the councils, and, among other privileges, had that of proposing
a cessation of hostilities in time of war. A proposition from them
to drop the war club could be entertained without compromising the
reputation of the tribe for bravery. There was an official orator and
messenger, whose appointed duty it was to convey such a pacific message
from the matrons, and to negotiate for peace[172].
Another and less honorable sense of the term arose from a custom
prevalent throughout America, and known also among the ancient
Scythians. Its precise purpose remains obscure, although it has
been made the subject of a careful study by one of our most eminent
surgeons, who had facilities of observation among the Western
tribes[173]. Certain young men of the tribe, apparently vigorous and of
normal development, were deprived of the accoutrements of the male sex,
clothed like women, and assigned women's work to do. They neither went
out to hunt nor on the war-path, and were treated as inferiors by their
male associates. Whether this degradation arose from superstitious
rites or sodomitic practices, it certainly carried to its victims the
contempt of both sexes.
In their account of the transaction the Delawares claimed that they
were appointed as peace-makers in an honorable manner, although the
Iroquois deceived them as to their object.
The Lenape account is as follows:--
"The Iroquois sent messengers to the Delawares with the following
speech:--
"'It is not well that all nations should war; for that will finally
bring about the destruction of the Indians. We have thought of a means
to prevent this before it is too late. Let one nation be The Woman. We
will place her in the middle, and the war nations shall be the Men and
dwell around the Woman. No one shall harm the Woman; and if one does,
we shall speak to him and say, 'Why strikest thou the Woman?' Then all
the Men shall attack him who has struck the Woman. The Woman shall
not go to war, but shall do her best to keep the peace. When the Men
around her fight one another, and the strife waxes hot, the Woman shall
have power to say: 'Ye Men! what do ye that ye thus strike one another?
Remember that your wives and children must perish, if ye do not cease.
Will ye perish from the face of the earth?' Then the Men shall listen
to the Woman and obey her.'
"The Delawares did not at once perceive the aim of the Iroquois, and
were pleased to take this position of the Woman.
"Then the Iroquois made a great feast, and invited the Delawares, and
spoke to their envoys an address in three parts.
"First, they declared the Delaware nation to be the Woman in these
words:--
"'We place upon you the long gown of a woman, and adorn you with
earrings.'
"This was as much as to say that thenceforward they were not to bear
arms.
"The second sentence was in these words:--
"'We hang on your arm a calabash of oil and medicine. With the oil you
shall cleanse the ears of other nations that they listen to good and
not to evil. The medicine you shall use for those nations who have been
foolish, that they may return to their senses, and turn their hearts to
peace.'
"The third sentence intimated that the Delawares should make
agriculture their chief occupation. It was:--
"'We give herewith into your hands a corn pestle and a hoe.'
"Each sentence was accompanied with a belt of wampum. These belts have
ever since been carefully preserved and their meanings from time to
time recalled."[174]
Opinions of historians about this tradition have been various. It has
generally been considered a fabrication of the Delawares, to explain
their subjection in a manner consoling to their national vanity.
Gen. Harrison dismisses it as impossible;[175] Albert Gallatin says,
"it is too incredible to require serious discussion;"[176] Mr. Hale
characterizes it as "preposterous;"[177] and Bishop de Schweinitz as
"fabulous and absurd"[178].
On the other hand, it is vouched for by Zeisberger, who furnished the
account to Loskiel, and who would not have said that the wampum belts
with their meaning were still preserved unless he knew it to be a
fact. It is repeated emphatically by Heckewelder, who adds that his
informants were not only Delawares but Mohegans as well, who could not
have shared the motive suggested above[179].
There can be no question but that the neutral position of the Delawares
was something different from that of a conquered nation, and that
it meant a great deal more. They undoubtedly were the acknowledged
peace-makers over a wide area, and this in consequence of some formal
ancient treaty. This is distinctly stated by the Stockbridge Indian,
Hendrick Aupaumut, in his curious Narrative:--[180]
"The Delawares, who we called _Wenaumeen_, are our Grandfathers,
according to the ancient covenant of their and our ancestors, to which
we adhere without any deviation in these near 200 years, to which
nation the 5 nations and British have commit the whole business. For
this nation has the greatest influence with the southern, western and
northern nations."
Hence Aupaumut undertook his embassy directly to them, so as to secure
their influence for peace in 1791.
To the fact that they exerted this influence during the Revolutionary
War, may very plausibly be attributed the success of the Federal cause
in the dark days of 1777 and 1778; for, as David Zeisberger wrote: "If
the Delawares had taken part against the Americans in the present war,
America would have had terrible experiences; for the neutrality of
the Delawares kept all the many nations that are their grandchildren
neutral also, except the Shawanese, who are no longer in close union
with their grandfathers."[181]
When at the close of the French War, in 1758, the treaty of Easton
put a stop to the bloody feuds of the border, "the _peace-belt_ was
sent to our brethren, the Delawares, that they might send it to all the
nations living toward the setting sun,"[182] and they carried it as the
recognized pacific envoys.
The Iroquois, however, assumed a most arrogant and contemptuous tone
toward the Delawares, about the middle of the eighteenth century. In
1756 they sent a belt to them, with a most insulting message:[183] "You
will remember that you are our women; our forefathers made you so, and
put a petticoat on you, and charged you to be true to us, and lie with
no other man; but now you have become a common bawd," etc.
Two years later, the Cayuga chief, John Hudson, said, at a council at
Burlington,[184] "The Munseys are women, and cannot make treaties for
themselves."
These were but repetitions of the famous diatribe of the Onondaga
chieftain, Canassatego, at a council at Philadelphia, in 1742. Turning
to the representatives of the Lenape, he broke out upon them with the
words:--
"How came you to take upon you to sell land? We conquered you. We made
women of you. You know you are women, and can no more sell land than
women. * * * We charge you to remove instantly. We don't give you the
liberty to think about it. We assign you two places to go to, either
Wyoming or Shamokin. Don't deliberate, but remove away; and take this
belt of wampum."
And as he handed the belt to the Lenape head chief he seized him by his
long hair and pushed him out of the door of the council room!
It was notorious at the time, however, that this was a scene arranged
between the Governor of the Province, Mr. George Thomas, and the
Iroquois deputation. The Lenape had been grossly cheated out of their
lands by the trick of the so-called "Long Walk," in 1735, and they
refused to vacate their hunting grounds. The Governor sent secret
messengers to the powerful and dreaded Six Nations to exert their
pretended rights, and paid them well for it.[185]
What could the Lenape do? They were feeble, and undoubtedly had been
brought under the authority of their warlike northern neighbors. They
found themselves in the position of the Persian chieftain Harmosar,
as he stood before the caliph Omar, and heard the latter revile the
patriot cause:
"In deinen Händen ist die Macht,
Wer einem Sieger widerspricht, der widerspricht mit Unbedacht."
--_Van Platen-Hallermunde_.
Such were the respective claims of the Lenape and Iroquois. Instead
of discussing the antecedent probability of one or the other being
true, I shall endeavor to ascertain from the early records the precise
facts about this curious transaction. It is certain that toward
the close of the sixteenth century the unending wars between the
Delaware confederacy and the Iroquois had reduced the latter almost
to destruction. The Jesuit missionaries tell us this.[186] The turning
point in their affairs was the settlement of the Dutch on the Hudson.
Quick to appreciate the value of firearms, they bought guns and powder
at any price, and soon had rendered themselves formidable to all their
neighbors.[187] About 1670 they attacked successfully that family of
the Minsi called the _Minisink_.
This was probably the victory to which the Five Nations referred at a
treaty at Philadelphia, in 1727, when they stated that their conquest
of the Delawares was about the time William Penn first landed, and
that he sent congratulations to them on their success--an obvious
falsehood.[188]
They were certainly at that period pressing hard on the Susquehannocks
and destroying their remnant in the valley of that river. Mr. William
P. Foulke is quite correct in his conclusion that, "Upon the whole we
may conclude that the Lancaster lands fell into the power of the Five
Nations at some time between 1677 and 1684."[189]
Yet their conquest of the Minsi was not complete. The latter had the
mind and the will to renew the combat. In 1692 they appealed to the
government of Pennsylvania to aid them in an attack on the Senecas,
but the Quakers declined the foray. The next year the Minsi asked
Governor Benjamin Fletcher at least to protect them against these
Senecas, adding that with assistance they were ready to attack them,
for "although wee are a small number of Indians, wee are Men, and know
fighting."[190]
Evidently there was neither subjection nor womanhood with the Minsi at
that date.
There is also positive evidence that the Five Nations at that time
regarded the Delawares as a combatant nation, and worthy of an
invitation to join a war. On July 6th, 1694, Governor Wm. Markham met
in conference the famous chief Tamany and others; and the Delaware
orator, Hithquoquean, laid down a belt of wampum, and said:--[191]
"This belt is sent us by the Onondagas and Senecas, who say: 'You
Delaware Indians do nothing but stay at home and boil your pots, and
are like women; while we, Onondagas and Senecas, go abroad and fight
the enemy.'"
"The Senecas would have us Delaware Indians to be partners with them,
and fight against the French, but we, having always been a peaceful
people, and resolving to live so; and being but weak and verie few in
number, cannot assist them, and having resolved among ourselves not to
go, doe intend to send back, this their Belt of Wampum."
The Lenape, therefore, did not, at that date, occupy any degrading
position, although they were under the general domination of the
Iroquois League.
Both these points are proved yet more conclusively by the proceedings
at a conference at White Marsh, May 19th, 1712, between Governor C.
Gookin and the Delaware chiefs. Gollitchy, orator of the latter,
exhibited thirty-two belts of wampum, which they were on their way to
deliver to the Five Nations, adding "that many years ago they had been
made tributaries to the Mingoes." He also shewed "a long Indian pipe,
with a stone head, a wooden shaft, and feathers fixt to it like wings.
This pipe, they said, upon making their submission to the Five Nations,
who had subdued them, and obliged them to be their tributaries, those
Nations had given to these Indians, to be kept by them." All the
tribute belts, however, were sent by the women and children, as the
speaker explained at length, "as the Indian reckons the paying of
tribute becomes none but women and children."[192]
Fortunately, however, we are able to fix the exact date and
circumstances of the political transformation of the Delawares into
women. It is by no means so remote as Mr. Heckewelder thought, who
located the occurrence at Norman's Kill, on the Hudson, between 1609
and 1620;[193] and it was long after 1670, which is the date assigned
by Mr. Ruttenber,[194] from a study of the New York records.
It was in the year 1725, and was in consequence of the Delawares
refusing to join the Iroquois in an attack on the English settlements.
These data come to light in a message of the Shawnee chiefs, in 1732,
to Governor Gordon, who had inquired their reasons for migrating to the
Ohio Valley.
Their reply was as follows:--
"About nine years agoe the 5 nations told us att Shallyschohking, wee
Did nott Do well to Setle there, for there was a Greatt noise In the
Greatt house and thatt in three years time, all Should know whatt they
had to Say, as far as there was any Setlements or the Sun Sett."
"About ye Expiration of 3 years affore S^{d}, the 5 nations Came and
Said our Land is goeing to bee taken from us, Come brothers assistt us
Lett us fall upon and fightt with the English. Wee answered them no,
wee Came here for peace and have Leave to Setle here, and wee are In
League with them and Canott break itt."
"Aboutt a year after they, ye 5 nations, Told the Delawares and us,
Since you have nott hearkened to us, nor Regarded whatt we have said,
now wee will pettycoatts on you, and Look upon you as women for the
future, and nott as men. Therefore, you Shawanese Look back toward
Ohioh, The place from whence you Came, and Return thitherward, for now
wee Shall Take pitty on the English and Lett them have all this Land."
"And further Said now Since you are Become women, He Take
Peahohquelloman, and putt itt on Meheahoaming and He Take Meheahoaming
and putt itt on Ohioh, and Ohioh He putt on Woabach, and thatt shall
bee the warriours Road for the future." (_Penna Archives_, Vol. I.)
The circumstances attending the ceremony were probably pretty much as
Loskiel relates.
The correctness of this account is borne out by an examination of law
titles.
That the river tribes at the time of Penn's treaties (1680-1700)
could not sell their lands without the permission of the Iroquois
has never been established. Mr. Gallatin states that William Penn
"always purchased the right of possession from the Delawares, and that
of sovereignty from the Five Nations."[195] This may have been the
case in some later treaties of the colony, but certainly there is no
intimation of it in the celebrated "First Indian Deed" to Penn, July
15th, 1682.[196] Furthermore, in the Release which the Iroquois did
give of their Pennsylvania lands in 1736, the boundaries are defined
as "Westward to the Setting of the Sun, and Eastward to the furthest
springs of the Waters running into the said River," _i. e._, the
Susquehannah;[197] and to do away with any doubt that the tract thus
defined included all the land in this part to which they had a claim,
the Release goes on to recite that "our true intent and meaning was
and is to release all our Right, Claim and Pretensions whatsoever to
all and every the Lands lying within the Bounds and Limits of the
Government of Pennsylvania, Beginning Eastward on the River Delaware,
as far Northward as the s^{d} Ridge or Chain of Endless Mountains." In
other words, although the Six Nations advanced no claim to land east
of the Susquehanna watershed, the Proprietors chose to include the
Delaware watershed so as to avoid any future complication. It seems
to me this Release does away with any "right of sovereignty" of the
Iroquois over the Delaware Valley south of the mountains, and brands
Canassatego's remarks above quoted as braggart falsehoods.
As for land east of the Delaware river, Mr. Ruttenber correctly
observes: "The Iroquois never questioned the sales made by the Lenapes
or Minsis east of that river. * * The findings of Gallatin in this
particular are confirmed by all the title deeds in New York and New
Jersey."[198]
It was only to the Susquehannock lands, purchased by Penn in 1699, that
the confirmation of the Iroquois was required.[199]
The close of this condition of subjection was in 1756. In that year
Sir William Johnson formally "took off the petticoat" from the Lenape,
and "handed them the war belt."[200] The year subsequent they made the
public declaration that "they would not acknowledge but the Senecas as
their superiors."[201]
Even their supremacy was soon rejected. At the Treaty of Fort Pitt,
October, 1778, Captain White Eyes, when reminded by the Senecas that
the petticoats were still on his people, scornfully repudiated the
imputation, and made good his words by leading a war party against them
the following year.
The Iroquois, however, released their hold unwillingly, and it was
not until 1794, shortly before the Treaty of Greenville, that their
delegates came forward and "officially declared that the Lenape were no
longer women, but _men_," and the famous chief, Joseph Brant, placed in
their hands the war club.[202]
§ 2. _Historic Migrations of the Lenape_.
It does not form part of my plan to detail the later history of the
Lenape. But some account of their number and migrations will aid in the
examination of the origin and claims of the WALUM OLUM.
The first estimate of the whole number of native inhabitants of the
province was by William Penn. He stated that there were ten different
nations, with a total population of about 6000 souls.[203]
This was in 1683. Very soon after this they began to diminish by
disease and migration. As early as 1690, a band of the Minsi left for
the far West, to unite with the Ottawas.[204] In 1721 the Frenchman
Durant speaks of them as "exceedingly decreased."[205] Already they had
yielded to the pressure of the whites, and were seeking homes on the
head-waters of the Ohio, in Western Pennsylvania. Their first cabins
are said to have been built there in 1724.[206]
All that remained in the Delaware valley were ordered by the Iroquois,
at the treaty of Lancaster, 1744, to leave the waters of their river,
and remove to Shamokin (now Sunbury) and Wyoming, on the Susquehanna,
and most of them obeyed. The former was their chief town, and the
residence of their "king," Allemœbi.
When the interpreter, Conrad Weiser, visited their Ohio settlements, in
1748, he reported their warriors there at 165, which was probably about
one-fourth of the nation.
In the "French War," 1755, the Delawares united with the French against
the Iroquois and English, and suffered considerable losses. At its
close they were estimated to have, both on the Susquehanna and in Ohio,
a total of 600 available fighting men.[207]
After this date they steadily migrated from the Susquehannah to the
streams in central and eastern Ohio, establishing their chief fire
on the Tuscarawas river, at Gekelemukpechunk, and hunting on the
Muskingum, the Licking, etc.[208]
When the war of the Revolution broke out, Zeisberger used all his
efforts to have them remain neutral, and at least prevented them from
joining in a general attack on the settlements. Their distinguished
war-chief, Koquethagachton, known to the settlers as "Captain White
Eyes," declared, in 1775, in favor of the Federal cause, and renounced
for himself and his people all dependence on the Iroquois. These
friendly relations were confirmed at the treaty of Fort Pitt (1778),
and the next year a number of Delawares accompanied Col. Brodhead in an
expedition against the Senecas.
The massacre of the unoffending Christian natives of Gnadenhütten, in
1788, was but one event in the murderous war between the races that
continued in Ohio from 1782 to the treaty of peace at Greenville, in
1795.
To escape its direful scenes, a part of the Delawares removed south,
to upper Louisiana, in 1789, where they received official permission
from Governor Carondelet, in 1793, to locate permanent homes.[209]
Zeisberger also, in 1791, conducted his colony of Christian Indians
to Canada, and founded the town of Fairfield, on the Retrenche river.
Thus, in both directions the Delawares were driven off the soil of the
United States. Yet those that remained in Ohio, if we may accept the
account of John Brickell, who was a captive among them from 1791 to
1796, attempted to live a peaceable and agricultural life.[210]
Peace restored, the Delawares made their next remove to the valley
of White Water river, Indiana, where they attempted to rekindle the
national council fire, under the head chief Tedpachxit. They founded
six towns, the largest of which was _Woapikamikunk_ or _Wapeminskink_,
"Place of Chestnut Trees." This tract was guaranteed them "in
perpetuity" by the treaty of Vincennes, 1808.[211] Nevertheless, just
ten years later, at the treaty of St. Mary's, they released the whole
of their land, "without reserve," to the United States, the government
agreeing to remove them west of the Mississippi, and grant them land
there.
At this time they numbered about 1000 souls, of whom 800 were
Delawares, the others being Mohegans and Nanticokes.[212] Their head
chief was Thahutoowelent, of the Turkey tribe, Tedpachxit having been
assassinated, at the instigation of Tecumseh.
They are described as "having a peculiar aversion to white people,"
and "more opposed to the Gospel and the whites than any other
Indians,"[213] which is small matter of wonder, when they had seen the
peaceful Christian converts of their nation massacred three times, in
cold blood, once at Gnadenhütten, in Pennsylvania (1756); again at
Gnadenhütten, in Ohio (1788), and finally at Fairfield, Canada (1813).
The Rev. Isaac McCoy, who visited them on the White Water, in the
winter of 1818-19, states that they lived in log huts and bark
shanties, and were fearfully deteriorated by whisky drinking.[214]
The last band of the Delawares that appeared in Ohio was in 1822.[215]
The location assigned to the Delawares was near the mouth of the
Kansas river, Kansas. They were reported, in 1850, as possessing there
375,000 acres and numbering about 1500 souls. Four years later they
"ceded" this land, and were moved to various reservations in the Indian
Territory.
There still remain about sixty natives at New Westfield, near Ottawa,
Kansas, under the charge of the Moravian Church. The same denomination
has about 300 of the tribe on the reservation at Moraviantown, in the
province of Ontario, Canada. A second reservation in Canada is under
the charge of the Anglican Church. The majority of the tribe are
scattered in different agencies in the Indian Territory.
§ 3. _Missionary Efforts in the Provinces of New Jersey and
Pennsylvania_.
None of the American colonies enjoyed a more favorable opportunity to
introduce the Christian religion to the natives than that located on
the Delaware river. What use was made of it?
The Rev. Thomas Campanius, of Stockholm, a Lutheran clergyman, attached
to the Swedish settlement from 1642 to 1649, made a creditable effort
to acquire the native tongue and preach Christianity to the savages
about him. He translated the Catechism into the traders' dialect of
Lenape, but we have no record that he succeeded in his attempts at
conversion.
One might suppose that so very religious a body as the early Friends
would have taken some positive steps in this direction. Such was not
the case. I have not found the record of any one of them who set
seriously to work to learn the native tongue, without which all effort
would have been fruitless.
William Penn was not wholly unmindful of the spiritual condition of
his native wards. In 1699 he offered to provide the Friends' Meeting
at Philadelphia with interpreters to convey religious instruction
to the Indians. But the Meeting took no steps in this direction. He
himself, when in the colony in 1701, made some attempts to address
them on religious subjects, as did also Friend John Richardson, who
was with him, availing themselves of interpreters. The latter reports
a satisfactory response to his words, but not being followed up, their
effect was ephemeral.[216]
Nothing further was done for nearly half a century, and when the
enthusiastic young David Brainerd began his mission in 1742, he
distinctly states that there was not another missionary in either
province.[217] His labors extended over four years, and were productive
of some permanent good results among the New Jersey Indians, and this
in spite of the suspicions, opposition and evil example of the whites
around him. The little society of Christian Indians which he gathered
in Burlington County, New Jersey, was even reported as a congregation
of rioters and enemies of the State![218]
Nor was the province of Penn inclined to greater favors toward
Christianized natives. When the Indians were cheated out of their lands
by the "Long Walk," a few who had been converted, among others the
chief Moses Tatemy, petitioned the Council to remain on their lands,
some of which were direct personal gifts from the Proprietaries. Their
request was refused, and Moses Tatemy, who did remain, was shot down
like a dog, in the road, by a white man.[219]
Unknown to Brainerd, however, the seeds of a Christian harvest had
already been sown, in 1742, in the wilderness of Pennsylvania, by the
ardent Moravian leader, Count Nicholas Lewis Zinzendorf; already, in
1744, the fervent Zeisberger, prescient of his long and marvelous
service in the church militant, had registered himself as _destinirter
Heidenbote_--"appointed messenger to the heathen"--in the corner-stone
of the Brethren's House, at Bethlehem; already the pious Rauch had
collected a small but earnest congregation of Mohegans at Shekomeko,
who soon removed to the Lehigh valley, and pitched the first of those
five _Gnadenhütten_, "Tents of Grace," destined successively to
mark the unwearied efforts of the Moravian missionaries, and their
frustration through the treachery of the conquering whites.[220]
It is not my purpose to tell the story of this long struggle. Its
thrilling events are recounted, with all desirable fullness, in the
vivid narrative of Bishop Edmund de Schweinitz, grouped around the
marked individuality of the devoted Zeisberger--pages which none can
read without amazement at the undaunted courage of these Christian
heroes, without sorrow at the sparse harvest gleaned from such
devotion.[221]
When, after sixty-two years of missionary labors, the venerable
Zeisberger closed his eyes in death (1808), the huts of barely a score
of converted Indians clustered around his little chapel. His aspiration
that the Lenape would form a native Christian State, their ancient
supremacy revived and applied to the dissemination of peace, piety and
civilization among their fellow-tribes--this cherished hope of his life
had forever disappeared. He had lived to see the Lenape, a mere broken
remnant, "steeped in all the abominations of heathenism, eke out their
existence far away from their former council fires."
FOOTNOTES:
[172] H R Schoolcraft, _Notes on the Iroquois_, pp. 135-36.
[173] _The Disease of the Scythians (Morbus Feminarum) and Certain
Analogous Conditions._ By William A. Hammond, M. D. (New York, 1882).
Dr. Hammond found that the _hombre mujerado_ of the Pueblo Indians "is
the chief passive agent in the pederastic ceremonies which form so
important a part in their religious performances," p. 9.
[174] Loskiel, _Geschichte der Mission, etc._, s. 161-2.
[175] Wm. Henry Harrison, _A Discourse on the Aborigines of the Valley
of the Ohio_, pp. 24, 25 (Cincinnati, 1838).
[176] Gallatin, _Trans. Amer. Antiq. Soc._, Vol. II, p. 46.
[177] Horatio Hale, _The Iroquois Book of Rites_, p. 92.
[178] Edmund de Schweinitz, _Life and Times of David Zeisberger_, p. 46.
[179] Heckewelder, _Indian Nations_, pp. xxxii and 60.
[180] _Narrative of Hendrick Aupaumut, Mems. Hist. Soc. Pa._, Vol. II,
pp. 76-77. Wenaumeen for Unami, the Mohegan form of the name. This
seems to limit the peace making power to that gens. He may mean, "Those
of the Delawares who are called the Unamis are our Grandfathers," etc.
The Chipeways, Ottawas, Shawnees, Pottawattomies, Sacs, Foxes and
Kikapoos, all called the Delawares "Grandfather", J. Morse, _Report
on Indian Affairs_, pp. 122, 123, 142. The term was not intended in a
genealogical, but solely in a political, sense. Its origin and precise
meaning are alike obscure.
[181] _History of the Indians_, MS., quoted by Bishop Schweinitz, _Life
of Zeisberger_, p. 444, note.
[182] The words are those of George Croghan, Esq., at the treaty of
Pittsburgh, 1759, with the Six Nations and Wyandots. _History of
Western Penna._, App. p. 135.
[183] _Records of the Council at Easton_, 1756, in Lib. Amer. Philos.
Soc.
[184] Smith, _History of New Jersey_, p. 451 (2d ed.)
[185] See the _Narrative of the Long Walk_, by John Watson, father
and son, in Hazard's _Register of Penna_, 1830, reprinted in Beach's
_Indian Miscellany_, pp 90-94; also the able discussion of the question
in Dr. Charles Thompson's _Inquiry into the Causes of the Alienation of
the Delaware and Shawnee Indians_, pp. 30-34 and 42-46. (London, 1759.)
[186] _Relations des Jesuites_, 1660, p. 6. Some confusion has arisen
in this matter, from confounding the Susquehannocks with the Iroquois,
both of whom were called "Mengwe" by the Delawares, corrupted into
"Mingoes." Thus, a writer in the first half of the 17th century says of
the "Mingoes" that the river tribes "are afraid of them, so that they
dare not stir, much less go to war against them." Thomas Campanius,
_Description of the Province of New Sweden_, p. 158.
[187] See Mr. E. M. Ruttenber's able discussion of the subject in his
_History of the Indian Tribes of Hudson's River_, p. 66 (Albany, 1872).
[188] Dr. Charles Thompson, _An Inquiry into the Causes of the
Alienation of the Delaware and Shawnee Indians_, pp. 11, 12. (London,
1759.)
[189] See his "Notes Respecting the Indians of Lancaster County,
Penna.," in the _Collections of the Historical Society of Penna._, Vol.
IV, Part p. 198.
[190] _Minutes of the Provincial Council of Pennsylvania_, Vol. I, p.
333.
[191] Ibid, Vol. I, p. 410-11.
[192] _Minutes of the Provincial Council_, Vol. II, pp 572-73.
[193] _History of the Indian Nations_, p. xxix.
[194] _The Indian Tribes of Hudson's River_, p. 69.
[195] _Trans. Am. Antiq. Soc._, Vol. II, p. 46.
[196] _Pennsylvania Archives_, Vol. II, p. 47.
[197] _Pennsylvania Archives_, Vol. I, p. 498.
[198] _The Indian Tribes of Hudson's River_, p. 69.
[199] See _Penna. Archives_, Vol. I, p. 144, and Du Ponceau, _Memoir on
the Treaty at Shackamaxon, Collections of the Penna. Hist. Soc._, Vol.
III, Part II, p. 73.
[200] _New York Colonial Documents_, Vol. VII, p. 119.
[201] Thompson, _Inquiry into the Causes of the Alienation of the
Delaware and Shawnee Indians_, p. 107.
[202] Heckewelder, _Indian Nations_, p. 70; E. de Schweinitz, _Life of
Zeisberger_, pp. 430, 641.
[203] Janney, _Life of Penn_, p. 247.
[204] Ruttenber, _Indians of the Hudson River_, p. 177.
[205] Durant's _Memorial_, in _New York Colonial Documents_, Vol. V, p.
623.
[206] _Early History of Western Pennsylvania_, p. 31 (Pittsburgh, 1846);
and see _Penna. Archives_, Vol. I, pp. 322, 330.
[207] Loskiel, _Geschichte der Mission_, p. 54. The treaty of
Lancaster, 1762, was the last treaty held with the Indians in eastern
Pennsylvania.
[208] Schweinitz, _Life of Zeisberger_, p. 90.
[209] _New York Colonial Documents_, Vol. VII, p. 583.
[210] On the locations of the Delawares in Ohio, and the boundaries of
their tract, see Ed. de Schweinitz, _Life of Zeisberger_, p. 374, and
an article by the Rev. Stephen D. Peet, entitled "The Delaware Indians
in Ohio," in the _American Antiquarian_, Vol. II.
[211] The position of the Delawares in Indiana is roughly shown on
Hough's Map of the Tribal Districts of Indiana, in the _Report on the
Geology and Natural History of Indiana_, 1882.
[212] J. Morse, _Report on the Indian Tribes_, p. 110.
[213] Mr. John Johnston, Indian Agent, in _Trans. of the Amer.
Antiquarian Society_, Vol. I, p. 271.
[214] _History of the Baptist Indian Missions_, p. 53, etc.
[215] _Captivity of Christian Fast_, in Beach, _Indian Miscellany_, p.
63.
[216] See the work entitled, _Account of the Conduct of the Society of
Friends toward the Indian Tribes_, pp. 55 seq. (London, 1844.)
[217] "I have likewise been wholly alone in my work, there being no
other missionary among the Indians, in either of these Provinces." He
wrote this in 1746. _Life of David Brainerd_, p. 409.
[218] See "A State of Facts about the Riots," in _New Jersey Archives_,
Vol. VI, pp. 406-7, where the writer speaks with great suspicion of
"the cause pretended for such a number of Indians coming to live
there is that they are to be taught the Christian religion by one
Mr. _Braniard_." Well he might! Any such occurrence was totally
unprecedented in the annals of the colony.
[219] See _Minutes of the Provincial Council of Penna._, Nov., 1742,
Vol. IV, 624-5, Further, on Tatemy who had been converted by Brainerd
and served him as interpreter, see Heckewelder, _Indian Nations_,
second edition, p. 302, note of the editor.
[220] The Heckewelder MSS., in the library of the Am. Philos Society,
give the results of the first twenty years, 1741-61, of the labors of
the Moravian brethren. In that period 525 Indians were converted and
baptized. Of these--163 were Connecticut Wampanos; 111 were Mahicanni
proper; 251 were Lenape. Some of the latter were of the New Jersey
Wapings.
[221] _The Life and Times of David Zeisberger, the Western Pioneer and
Apostle of the Indians_. By Edmund de Schweinitz, Philadelphia, 1871.