years under circumstances the most profligate. There has not been a
single campaign in which the army has not reaped a plentiful harvest of
mortification and disgrace. When brought into action both officers and
men fought valiantly, but the character of the country, its deep
morasses and swamps, and the ignorance of the troops of Indian warfare,
have uniformly tended to produce the most disastrous defeats.
"There is not to be found on the page of history, in any country, an
instance of a scattered remnant of a tribe, so few in number, defending
themselves against the assaults of a disciplined and numerous army, with
the same heroism and triumphant results with those of the Seminoles in
resisting the American troops. In every campaign the invaders have been
at least ten to one against the invaded. At no period have the Indians
been able to muster more than 700 or 800 warriors, and it is doubtful
whether they have ever had more than half that number, while the
American army, when in the field, has uniformly amounted to from 6,000
to 10,000 men."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1. Although the Federal Government has set its face against the
Indians making war with each other (or at least pretends so to do), it
would appear by the following notice, that, in their necessity, they
have not adhered to the following resolutions:--
_Extract of a Letter, date_:--
"Fort Brooke, Florida, June 14.
"The Cherokees and Choctaws are soon expected in this country, when
there will be a war of extermination and no quarter shown. The affairs
here are just the same as two years ago. The war is no nearer ended.
But we do hope that the offer of ten dollars for each Seminole scalp
will be a great inducement for the Cherokees and Choctaws to cut and
slash among them."
VOLUME THREE, CHAPTER ELEVEN.
REPLY TO THE EDINBURGH REVIEW.
The art of reviewing may be compared to French cookery; it has no
medium--it must either be first-rate or it is worth nothing: nay, the
comparison goes much further, as the attempt at either not only spoils
the meat, but half poisons the guests. The fact is, good reviewing is
of the highest order of literature, for a good reviewer ought to be
superior to the party whose writings he reviews. Such men as Southey,
Croker, and Lockhart on the one side, Brougham, Fontblanque, and Rintoul
on the other, will always command respect in their vocations, however
much they may be influenced by political feelings, or however little you
may coincide with them in opinion. But, passing over these, and three
or four more _cordons bleus_, what are reviewers in general? men of a
degree of talent below that of the author whose works they presume to
decide upon; the major portion of whom, having failed as authors, are
possessed with but one feeling in their disappointment, which is to drag
others down to their own debased level. To effect this, you have
malevolence substituted for wit, and high-sounding words for sense;
every paltry advantage is taken that can be derived from an intentional
misrepresentation of your meaning, and (what is the great secret of all)
from unfair quotations of one or two lines, carefully omitting the
context--an act of unpardonable dishonesty towards the author, and but
too often successful in misleading the reader of the Review. By acting
upon this last-mentioned system, there is no book, whatever its merits
may be, which cannot be misrepresented to the public: a work espousing
atheism may be made to appear wholly moral; or, the Holy Scriptures
themselves condemned as licentious and indecent. If such reviewing is
fair, a jury may, upon a similar principle, decide upon a case by the
evidence in favour of the prosecution; and beauty or deformity in
architecture be pronounced upon by the examination of a few bricks taken
out from different portions of a building.
That, latterly, the public have been more inclined to judge for
themselves, than to pin their faith upon reviews, is certain;
nevertheless, when what is termed a "_slashing article_" upon a popular
work makes its appearance, the public are too apt to receive it without
scrutiny. Satisfied with the general effect, as with that produced in a
theatrical representation, they do not bear in mind that that which has
the appearance of gold, would prove upon examination to be nothing more
than tinsel.
Were all reviewers to be reviewed by authors as well as all authors by
reviewers, the authors would have the best of it in the _melee_. Again,
were reviewers obliged to put their names to their several articles,
there would be a great difference in their style; but, secure in their
_incognito_ from the disgrace of exposure, they make no scruple to
assert what they well know to be false, and, coward-like, to assail
those who have seldom an opportunity, whatever may be their power, to
defend themselves. Never, perhaps, was there a better proof of the
truth of the foregoing observations than is afforded by the article in
the Edinburgh Review upon the first portion of my work on America; and
as I have some pages to spare, I shall now take the unusual liberty of
reviewing the Reviewer.
First, let me introduce to the public the writer of the article--Miss
Harriet Martineau. My readers may inquire how I can so positively make
this assertion? I reply that it is owing to my "craft." A person who
has long dealt in pictures will, without hesitation, tell you the name
of the painter of any given work: a shepherd with a flock of three or
four hundred sheep under his charge, will know every one of them
individually, although to people in general, one sheep is but the
counterpart of the others. Thus, there are little varieties of style,
manner, and handling of the pen, which become evident to practised
writers, although they are not always so to readers. But even if these
peculiarities were not sufficient, the manner in which the article is
managed (the remarks of Miss Martineau upon the merits of Miss
Martineau) in my mind establishes to conviction, that the major portion
of the article, if not the whole, has proceeded from her pen. This is a
matter of no consequence, and I only mention it that my readers may
understand why Miss Martineau, who forms so prominent a feature in the
Edinburgh article, will also occasionally appear in mine. My reply,
however, is not addressed to her, but to the Edinburgh Reviewer.
I have no doubt the Reviewer will most positively deny that Miss
Martineau had any thing to do with the Review of my work: that of
course. With his permission, I will relate a little anecdote. "When
the Royal George went down at Spithead, an old gentleman, who had a son
on board, was bewailing his loss. His friends came to console him. `I
thought,' observed one of them, `that you had received a
letter?'--`Yes,' replied the old gentleman, `but it was from _Jack
himself_.'--`Well, what more would you have?'--`Ah,' replied the old
gentleman, `had it been from the captain, or from one of his messmates,
or, indeed, from anybody else, it would have consoled me; but Jack,--he
is such _an incorrigible liar_, that his _very assertion_ that he is
safe, convinces me that he has gone to the bottom.'"
Now my opinion of the veracity of the Edinburgh Review may be estimated
by the above anecdote; the very circumstance of its denial would, with
me, be sufficient to establish the fact. But to proceed.
The Review has pronounced the first portion of my work to be light and
trifling, and full of errors; it asserts that I have been hoaxed by the
Americans; that I am incapable of sound reasoning; cannot estimate human
nature; and, finally, requests as a favour that I will write no more.
Such are the general heads of the Review.
Now here we have a strange inconsistency, for why should the Edinburgh
Review, if the work be really what he asserts it to be, "light and
trifling," etcetera, waste so much powder and shot upon a tomtit? Why
has he dedicated twenty-seven pages of ponderous verbosity to so light
and trifling a work? How seldom is it that the pages of the Quarterly
or Edinburgh condescend to notice even the very best of light
literature! Do they not, in their majesty, consider it _infra dig_. to
review such works, and have not two or three pages bestowed upon them
been considered as an immense favour on their part, and a high
compliment to the authors? Notwithstanding which, we have here
_twenty-seven pages of virulent attack_ upon my light and trifling work.
Does not the Edinburgh reviewer at once shew that the work is not light
and trifling? does he not contradict his own assertions, by the labour
and space bestowed upon it? nay, more, is it not strange that he should
think it necessary to take the unfair advantage of reviewing a work
before it is half finished, and pounce upon the first portion, with the
hopes of neutralising the effects which he evidently dreads from the
second.
I will answer the question for him. He indulges in his precipitate and
unmeasured attacks, because he feels that the work is written in a style
that will induce every one to read it; because he feels assured that the
occasional, and apparently careless hits at democracy, are only
preparatory to others more severe, and that these will come out in the
second part, which will be read with as much avidity as the first. He
perceives the drift of the work; he feels that it has been purposely
made amusing, and that it will be more injurious to the cause which the
Edinburgh Review upholds than a more laboured treatise; that those who
would not look at a more serious work will read this, and that the
opinions it contains will be widely disseminated, and impressed without
the readers being aware of it; moreover, that it will descend to a class
of readers who have hitherto been uninformed upon the subject: in short,
he apprehends the greater danger to his cause from the work having, as I
have said, been made amusing, and from its being in appearance, although
not in reality, "light and trifling."
I candidly acknowledge that the Reviewer is right in his supposition: my
great object has been to do serious injury to the cause of democracy.
To effect this, it was necessary that I should write a book which should
be universally read--not merely by the highly educated portion of the
community, for they are able to judge for themselves; but _read by every
tradesman and mechanic_; pored over even by milliners' girls, and boys
behind the counter, and thumbed to pieces in every petty circulating
library. I wrote the work with this object, and I wrote accordingly.
Light and trifling as it may appear to be, every page of it (as I have
stated) has been the subject of examination and deliberation: it has
given me more trouble than any work I ever wrote; and, my labour having
been so far crowned with success, I trust that I shall have "done the
State some service." [See Note 1.] The review in the Edinburgh will
neither defeat nor obstruct my purpose, as that publication circulates
chiefly among those classes who have already formed their opinions; and
I have this advantage over it, that, as for one that reads the Edinburgh
Review, fifty will read my work, so will fifty read my reply who will
never trouble themselves about the article in the Edinburgh Review.
And now let us enter a little into detail. The Reviewer finds great
fault with my introduction, as being wholly irrevelant to the Diary
which follows it. I admit, that if it were an introduction to the Diary
alone, there then would be some justice in his remark. But such is not
the case: an introduction is, I believe, generally understood to refer
to the _whole_ of the work, not a portion of it; and now that the work
is complete, I leave it to the public to decide whether the introduction
is suitable or not, as bearing upon the whole. I believe, also, it is
the general custom to place an introduction at the commencement of a
work; I never heard of one being introduced into the middle or at the
end of it. The fault, therefore, of its imputed irrelevancy is not
mine: it is the Reviewer's, who has thought proper to review the work
before it was complete. He quotes me, as saying, "_Captain Marryat's
object was to examine and ascertain what were the effects of a
democratic form of government upon a people which, with all its foreign
admixture, may still be considered as English_;" and then, without
waiting till I have completed my task, he says, that the present work
"has nothing, or next to nothing, to do with such an avowal." Whether
such an assertion has any thing to do with the work now that it is
completed, I leave the public to decide. The Reviewer has no excuse for
this illiberal conduct, for I have said, in my Introduction, "In the
arrangement of this work, I have considered it advisable to present to
the reader first, those portions of my Diary which may be interesting,
and in which are recorded _traits_ and _incidents_ which will _bear
strongly upon the commentaries I shall subsequently make_;"
notwithstanding which the reviewer has the mendacity to assert that,
"not until the last paragraph of the last volume, does he learn for the
first time that the work is not complete." I will be content with
quoting his own words against him--"_An habitual story teller_ prefers
_invention_ to description."
The next instance of the Reviewer's dishonesty is, his quoting a portion
of a paragraph and rejecting the context. He quotes, "I had not been
three weeks in the country before I decided upon accepting no more
invitations, charily as they were made," and upon this quotation he
founds an argument that, as I did not enter into society, I could of
course have no means of gaining any knowledge of American character or
the American institutions. Now, if the reviewer had had the common
honesty to finish the paragraph, the reason why I refused the
invitations would have been apparent; "because I found that, although
invited, my presence was a restraint upon the company, and every one
_was afraid to speak_." Perhaps the sagacity of the Reviewer will
explain what information I was likely to gain from people who would not
open their mouths. Had he any knowledge of the Americans, he would
admit that they never will venture to give their opinions _in the
presence of each other_; it was not that they were afraid of _me_, but
of each other, as Monsieur de Tocqueville has very truly pointed out in
his work. Moreover, I have now, for the first time, to learn that the
best way of arriving at the truth is to meet people who are on their
guard, and whose object is to deceive.
There is a malevolent feeling in the assertion, that I have treated
_all_ other previous writers on America with contempt; and here again he
intentionally quotes falsely. My words are "the _majority_ of those who
have preceded me." As nearly as I can reckon, there have been about
fifty works published on America, out of which there are not _ten_ which
deserve attention; and the ample quotations I have made from Monsieur de
Tocqueville, Captain Hamilton, and others, in corroboration of my own
opinions, fully evince the respect I have for their writings. In fact,
the whole article is a tissue of falsehood and misrepresentation, and so
weak that hardly one of its positions is tenable. Can any thing be more
absurd, or more shallow, than to quote the Mississippi scheme and Mr
Law as a proof that the French are, as well as the English and
Americans, a _speculative nation_: one solitary instance of a portion of
the French having, about sixty or seventy years ago, been induced to
embark their capital, is brought forward, while the abject supineness of
the French population of Lower Canada, in juxta-position with the energy
and enterprise of the Americans, has for half a century stared us in the
face.
The Reviewer has the kindness repeatedly to inform me that I have been
hoaxed by the Americans, and, most unfortunately for himself, he has
brought forward the "Original Draft of the Declaration of Independence"
as a proof of it. That he would be very glad to prove it to be a hoax,
I believe; as it is a sad discovery, and one which the American
democrats should have kept secret. That the Americans did hoax Miss
Martineau, and that they would have hoaxed me if they could, I admit,
but even the Reviewer must acknowledge that they would not _hoax_
themselves. Now it so happens, that this document, which has not long
been discovered, is in the splendid public library of Philadelphia: it
has been carefully preserved in a double plate-glass frame, so as to be
read on both sides without handling; it is expensively mounted, and
shewn to every visitor as a great curiosity, as it certainly is, the
authenticity of it being undeniable, and acknowledged by the Americans.
The paragraph which was expunged is verbatim as I gave it--a paragraph
which affords more proof, if further proof were necessary, that
Jefferson was one of the most unprincipled men who ever existed. The
Reviewer recommends my perusal of the works of this "_great and good
man_," as Miss Martineau calls him. I suspect that I have read more of
Mr Jefferson and other American authors than ever the Reviewer has; and
I consider the writings of this Father of Democracy, opposed to his
private life, to be a remarkable _type_ of democracy in _theory_ and in
_practice_. To borrow a term from the Reviewer, those writings are
"_brave words_" to proceed from an infidel, who proved his ardent love
of liberty by allowing his own children to be put up to auction at his
death, and wear away their existence in misery and bondage. I cannot
help here observing a _trifling inconsistency_ on the part of the
Reviewer. After lauding the Father of Democracy, and recommending me to
read his works; after sneering at our aristocracy by observing, "that no
_kind_ of virtue that we have heard of can suffer much from the loss of
a _court_ and of an _hereditary nobility_;" after, in short, defending
and upholding democracy in every page, all of a sudden the Reviewer
turns round and says, "_We are no general admirers of democracy_."
Indeed! if not general, you certainly appear to be _particular_
admirers; and if neither general nor particular, may I inquire what the
Edinburgh Review has been frothing, fizzing, hissing, and bubbling
about, like a tea-kettle in a passion, for these last twenty years?
Never was there a more convincing proof of the boldness and arrogance
which Reviewers (trusting to the irresponsibility arising from their
concealment) assume, than is afforded by the following passage in the
Edinburgh article:--
"_An ardent pursuit of wealth and deep religious feelings go very well
together_."
It is not for me to reply to the Reviewer in this instance; I must hand
him over to higher authority. I must oppose the everlasting doctrines
of inspiration to the cold, heartless, and arrogant philosophy of an
Edinburgh reviewer. In vain are we again and again forewarned in the
Scriptures against the love of money; in vain has our Saviour denounced
it; in vain have the apostles followed in his steps. Let the Reviewer,
if he ever has looked into the Bible, refer to the epistles to the
Colossians and to the Ephesians. St Paul declares that covetousness is
_idolatry_. Hear also what he sayeth to Timothy:--
"But they that _wish to be rich_ fall into temptation and a snare, and
into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and
perdition." "For the _love of money is the root of all evil_."
Our Divine Master is even more explicit, for he says--"No servant can
serve two masters; for either he will _hate_ the one, and _love_ the
other; or else he will _hold_ to the one, and _despise_ the other. Ye
cannot serve _God_ and _Mammon_." Thus says our Lord--now hear the
Edinburgh Reviewer.--"An ardent _pursuit of wealth_ and _deep religious
feelings_ go very well together."
Here the Edinburgh Reviewer has placed himself on the horns of a
dilemma. The Holy Writings assert most positively and repeatedly one
thing, while he asserts another. If, therefore, he acknowledge the
Scriptures, he must at the same time acknowledge his own grievous error,
and, I may add, his deep sin: if, on the contrary, he still hold to his
own opinion, hath he not denied his faith, and is he not worse than an
infidel?
The reviewer sneers at my observation, that "Washington had no power to
control the nature of man." It may be, as he observes, a very _simple_
remark; but, at all events, it has one advantage over his own, which is,
that it is a very _true_ one. Miss Martineau makes an observation in
her book, which is quite as great a truism as mine; for she also says
that "Human nature is the same everywhere."
How far I have succeeded in my analysis of human nature it is not for me
to decide; but that it is the same every where I will now venture to
support by something more than _assertion_ on the part of Miss
Martineau.
When I was at Boston, in company with some of the young ladies, the
conversation turned upon Miss Martineau, with whom they stated that they
had been intimate. Naturally anxious to know more of so celebrated a
personage, I asked many questions. I was told much to interest me, and,
among other little anecdotes, they said that Miss Martineau used to sit
down surrounded by the young ladies, and amuse them with all the
histories of her former loves. She would detail to them "how Jack
sighed and squeezed her hand; how Tom went down on his knees; how Dick
swore and Sam vowed; and how--she was still Miss Martineau." And thus
would she narrate and they listen until the sun went down, and the
firefly danced, while the frogs lifted up their voices in full concert.
And I said to myself, "Who would have supposed that this Solon in
petticoats would ever have dwelt upon her former days of enthusiasm and
hope, or have cherished the reminiscences of love? How true it is that
_human nature is the same everywhere_."
Once more:--
I was conversing with a lady at New York, who informed me that she had
seen a letter from Miss M, written to a friend of hers, after her return
to England, in which Miss M declared that her door was so besieged with
the carriages of the nobility, that it was quite uncomfortable, and that
she hardly knew what to do.
Thinks I to myself, I recollect an old story.
"Oh! Grandmother," cried Tom, running in, out of breath, "there's at
least a thousand cats in our garden."--"No, no, Tom," quickly replied,
the old lady; "not a thousand, Tom."--"Well I'm sure there's five
hundred."--"No, nor five hundred," replied the old lady, not taking her
eyes off her knitting.--"Well, then, grandmother, I'm sure there's
fifty."--"I don't think there _are_ fifty, Tom."--"Well, at all events,
there's _our cat and another_."--"Ah! Tom," replied the old lady, "that
_may_ be."
I believe that the carriage of Lord Brougham is occasionally to be seen
at the door of Miss Martineau.
But when I heard this I was pleased, for I said to myself, "So, then,
this champion of democracy, this scorner of rank and title, is flattered
by the carriages of the nobility crowding at her door;" and, again I
said to myself, "_human nature is the same everywhere_."
But the Reviewer, in his virulence, has not been satisfied with
attacking me; he has thought it necessary to libel the whole profession
to which I have the honour to belong. He has had the folly and
impertinence to make the following remark: "No landsmen can have been on
board of a ship a week, without coming to the conclusion that a
_sensible house dog_ is more like the people he has left at home than
most of his new companions, and that it (the house dog) would be nearly
as _capable_ of solving problems on national character."
Indeed!!
Is it possible that the Reviewer should still remain the dupe of such a
vulgar error? That at one time it was the custom to send to sea _the
fool of the family_, is certain, and had the Reviewer flourished in
those days, he would probably have been the one devoted to the service--
but _tempora mutantur_. Is the Reviewer aware that one-half, and
certainly the most successful half, of English diplomacy, is now carried
on by the admirals and captains, not only in the Mediterranean, but all
over the world. Is he aware that when the Foreign Office wishes to do
its work cheaply and well, it demands a vessel from the Admiralty, which
is made over to that office, and is set down as employed on "particular
service:" that during that service the captain acts from instructions
given by the Foreign Office alone, and has his cabin piled with
voluminous documents; and that, like the unpaid magistracy of England,
we sailors do all the best of the work, and have nothing but our trouble
for our pains. Nay, even the humble individual who pens this
remonstrance was for months on this very service, and, when it was
completed, the Foreign Office expressed to the Admiralty its
satisfaction at his conduct during his short diplomatic career.
_House dogs_! Hear this, ye public of England! A sensible house dog is
to be preferred to St Vincent, Nelson, Collingwood, Exmouth, and all
those great men who have aided their country as much with their pen as
with their sword; as much by their acuteness and firmness in diplomacy,
as by their courage and conduct in action.
Now, Mr Reviewer, don't you feel a little ashamed of yourself? Would
you really like to give up your name as the author of this bare-faced
libel? Would you like openly to assert that such is your opinion, and
that you will stand by it?
No liberal, high-minded man, whatever his politics may have been, has
ever refused to do justice to a service which has been the bulwark of
England. Lord Brougham has lately published a work containing the lives
of celebrated persons in the reign of George the Third. I will just
quote a few passages from his life of Lord St Vincent.
"The present sketches would be imperfect if Lord St Vincent were passed
over in silence, for he was almost as _distinguished_ among the
_statesmen_, as the _warriors_ of the age.
"A _statesman_ of profound views and of penetration, hardly _equalled_
by any other man of his time.
"But the consummate vigour and wisdom of his proceedings during the
dreadful period of the mutiny, are no less a theme of wonder and of
praise.
"When the Addington ministry was formed, he was placed at the head of
the Admiralty; and now shone forth in all its lustre that great capacity
for affairs with which he was endowed by nature, and which ample
experience of men, habits of command, and an extended life of deep
reflection, had matured.
"The _capacity of a statesman_ and the valour of the hero, outshone by
the magnanimous heart which beats only to the measures of generosity and
justice."
Here, again, the Reviewer is in what the Yankees would call an
"everlasting awkward fix;" for he contradicts Lord Brougham, the patron
and sole supporter of his fast-waning review, without the aid of whose
admirable pen, it would long ago have gone to its proper place. He must
now either admit that he is himself wrong, or that it is Lord Brougham
who is in error. He has but to choose.
I have but one more remark to make upon the review itself. At the close
of it, the Reviewer observes, that my remarks upon the marine are
interesting and useful. How does he know? Upon his own argument, if we
house dogs are not competent upon shore matters, he must be equally
ignorant of anything connected with our profession; and I therefore
consider it a piece of unpardonable presumption on the part of a _land
lubber_ like him to offer any opinion on the subject.
The Reviewer, whoever it may be, has proved himself wholly incompetent
to his task; he has attacked, but has yet to learn the art of parrying,
as has been proved by his laying himself so open. His blows have been
stopped, and, without giving, he has received severe punishment. I am
the more surprised at this, as I really considered that there was a
certain tact in the Edinburgh Review, which enabled it to know where to
direct the blow, so as to make it tell; a species of professional
knowledge proper to executioners, reviewers, and cab-drivers, and which
may be summed up in the following axiom: "The great art of flogging is,
to know where to find a bit of _raw_."
So little have I felt the castigation intended, that I have had some
compunction in administering this discipline to the Reviewer in return.
Surely the _Edinburgh Review_ can put a better head on, when it takes
notice of this second portion of my work? I will give it an anecdote.
A lady of my acquaintance was blessed with a son, then about three years
old. She was very indulgent, and he was very much spoiled. At last he
became so unmanageable that she felt it was her imperative duty to
correct him. She would as soon have cut off her right arm, but that
would not have mended the matter, nor the child. So one day, when the
young gentleman had been more than usually uproarious, she pulled up his
petticoats and administered what _she_ considered a most severe
infliction. Having so done, with a palpitating heart she sat down to
recover herself, miserable that she had been compelled to punish, but
attempting to console herself with the reflection that she had done her
duty. What then was her surprise to have her reveries interrupted by
the young urchin, who, appearing only to have been _tickled_, came up to
her, and laying down his head on her lap, pulled up his coats, and
cried, "More whipping, Ma; please, more whipping." So weak has been the
wrist, whether it be feminine or not, that has applied the punishment,
that I also feel inclined to exclaim with the child, "More whipping,
(Miss Martineau?) please, more whipping."
The Reviewer has pronounced that "_no author is cleverer than his
works_." If no author be cleverer than his works, it is equally certain
that _no reviewer is cleverer than his review_. Does the Reviewer
recollect the fable of the jackass who put on the lion's skin? Why did
he not take warning from the fabled folly of his ancestor and _hold his
tongue_? He might still have walked about and have been supposed to be
a Reviewer.
He asserts that I am not capable of serious reflection: he is mistaken.
I have seldom cut the leaves of the _Edinburgh_, having been satisfied
with looking at its outside, and thinking how very appropriate its
colours of _blue and yellow_ were to the opinions which it advocates.
But at times I have been more serious. I have communed with myself as
it lay before me, and I have mentally exclaimed:--Here is a work written
by men whom the Almighty has endowed with talents, and who will, if
there be truth in Scripture, have to answer for the talents committed to
their keeping,--yet these men, like madmen, throw about fire, and cry it
is only in sport; they uphold doctrines as pernicious as, unfortunately,
they are popular; disseminate error under the most specious guise; wage
war against the happiness of their fellow-creatures, unhinging society,
breeding discontent, waving the banner of infidelity and rebellion, and
inviting to anarchy and bloodshed. To such prostitution of talent to
this work of the devil, they are stimulated by their pride and their
desire of gain! And I have surmised that hereafter they _will have_
their reward; but, remembering that we are forbid to judge, I have
checked my thoughts as they have turned upon what might hereafter be the
portion below of--an Edinburgh Reviewer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1. A very acute reviewer has observed of my first portion, that
there always appeared as if there was something _left behind and not
told_. He was right; I have entered into every subject just as deeply
as I dared to venture, without wearying the class of readers for whom,
although not avowedly, yet in reality, the work has chiefly been
written. The second portion will therefore be found almost as light and
trifling as the first.
VOLUME THREE, CHAPTER TWELVE.
DISCOURSE ON THE EVIDENCES OF THE AMERICAN INDIANS BEING THE DESCENDANTS
OF THE LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL.
Those who study the Scriptures, either as a matter of duty or pleasure--
who seek in them divine revelations, or search for the records of
history, cannot be ignorant of the fact that the Jewish nation, at an
early period, was divided into twelve tribes, and occupied their ancient
heritage under geographical divisions, during the most splendid periods
under the kingdoms of Judah and of Israel.
Their early history--the rise, progress, and downfall of the nation--the
proud distinction of being the chosen people--their laws, government,
and wars--their sovereigns, judges, and temples--their sufferings,
dispersions, and the various prophecies concerning this ancient and
extraordinary people, cannot be unknown to you all. For their history
is the foundation of religion, their vicissitudes the result of
prophecy, their restoration the fulfilment of that great promise made to
the Patriarch Abraham, almost I may say in the infancy of nature.
It is also known to you that the Jewish nation was finally overpowered,
and nine and a half of the tribes were carried captives to Samaria; two
and a half, to wit: Judah, Benjamin, and half Menassah, remained in
Judea or in the transjordani cities.
The question before us for consideration is, what has become of the
missing or dispersed tribes--to what quarter of the world did they
direct their footsteps, and what are the evidences of their existence at
this day?
An earthquake may shake and overturn the foundations of a city--the
avalanche may overwhelm the hamlet--and the crater of a volcano may pour
its lava over fertile plains and populous villages--but a whole nation
cannot vanish from the sight of the world, without leaving some traces
of its existence, some marks of habits and customs.
It is a singular fact that history is exceedingly confused, or rather, I
may say, _dark_, respecting the ultimate dispersion of the tribes among
the cities of the Medes. The last notice we have of them is from the
second Book of Esdras, which runs thus:
"Whereas thou sawest another peaceable multitude: these are the ten
tribes which were carried away prisoners out of their own land in the
time of Osea, whom Salmanazar, king of Assyria, led away captive, and he
carried them over the waters, so they came unto another land.
"They took this counsel among themselves that they would leave the
multitude of the _heathen_, and go into a further country wherein _never
mankind dwelt_, that they might there keep their statutes, which they
never kept in their own land (Assyria), and there was a great way to go,
namely, a year and a half."
Esdras, however, has been deemed apocryphal. Much has been said
concerning the doubtful character of that writer. He wrote in the first
century of the Christian church, and Tertullian, St Ereneus, Clemens
Alexandrius, Pico di Mirandola, and many learned and pious men, had
great confidence in his writings. Part of them have been adopted by
Protestants, and all considered orthodox by Catholics. With all his old
Jewish attachments to the prophecies and traditions, Esdras was
nevertheless a convert to Christianity. He was not an inspired writer
or a prophet, although he assumed to be one, and followed the course as
well as the manner of Daniel.
The Book of Esdras, however, is of great antiquity, and as an historical
record is doubtless entitled to great respect.
The precise number which left Babylon and other cities, and took to the
desert, cannot be accurately known; but they were exceedingly numerous,
for the edict of Ahasherus, which decreed their destruction, embraced
127 provinces, and reached from Ethiopia to the Indies. Benjamin of
Tudela, who travelled in the eleventh century through Persia, mentions
that in some of the provinces, at the time of that decree, the Jews
occupied forty cities, two hundred boroughs, one hundred castles, which
contained 300,000 people. I incline to the opinion that 300,000 of the
tribes left Persia.
There is no doubt that, in the march from the Euphrates to the
north-east coast of Asia, many of the tribes hesitated in pursuing the
journey: some remained in Tartary, many went into China. Alverez states
in his History of China, that the Jews had been living in that kingdom
for more than six hundred years. He might with great probability have
said 1,600 years. He speaks of their being very numerous in some of the
provinces, and having synagogues in many of the great cities, especially
in that of Hinan and in its metropolis Kai-tong-fu, where he represents
them to have a magnificent place of worship, and a repository, the Holy
Volume, adorned with richly embroidered curtains, in which they preserve
an ancient Hebrew manuscript roll.
They know but little of the Mosaic law, and only repeat the names of
David, Abraham, Isaiah, and Jacob. In a Hebrew letter written by the
Jews of Cochin-China to their brethren at Amsterdam, they give as the
date of their retiring into India, the period when the Romans conquered
the Holy Land.
It is clearly evident, therefore, that the tribes, in their progress to
a new and undiscovered country, left many of their numbers in China and
Tartary, and finally reached the Straits of Behring, where no difficulty
prevented their crossing to the north-west coast of America, a distance
less than thirty miles, interspersed with the Copper Islands, probably
frozen over; and reaching our continent, spread themselves in the course
of two thousand years to Cape Horn, the more hardy keeping to the north,
to Labrador, Hudson's Bay, and Greenland; the more cultivated fixing
their residence in the beautiful climate and rich possessions of Central
America, Mexico, and Peru.
But it may here be asked, could the scattered remnants of Israel have
had the courage to penetrate through unknown regions, and encounter the
hardships and privations of that inhospitable country? Could they have
had the fortitude, the decision, the power, to venture on a dreary
pilgrimage of eighteen months, the time mentioned by Esdras as the
period of their journey? Could they not? What obstacles had hitherto
impeded their progress, that had broken down their energies, or impaired
their constancy and fidelity?
They knew that their brethren had severed the chains of Egyptian
bondage; had crossed in safety the arm of the Red Sea; had sojourned for
years in the wilderness; had encamped near Mount Sinai, and had
possessed themselves of the Holy Land.
They remembered the kingdoms of Judah and Israel in all their glory;
they had witnessed the erection and destruction of their Temple; they
had fought and conquered with the Medes, the Assyrians, the Persians,
the Greeks, and the Romans. They had encountered sufferings upon
sufferings unmoved; had bowed their necks submissively to the yoke.
Kings, conquerors, nations, Christians, Mahometans, and Heathens, all
had united in the design of destroying the nation; but they never
despaired--they knew they were the elect and chosen of the Lord. The
oath, that He never would abandon his people, had been fulfilled 3,500
years, and, therefore, with the cloud by day and the pillar of fire by
night, they abandoned the Heathens and the Persian territory, passed the
confines of Tartary and China, and, no doubt, through great sufferings,
reached the north-eastern coast of Asia, and came in sight of that
continent, wherein, as they had reason to believe, "mankind never before
had dwelt."
On the discovery of America by Columbus, and the discoveries subsequent
to his time, various tribes of Indians or savages were found to inhabit
this our continent, whose origin was unknown.
It is, perhaps, difficult for the human mind to decide on the character
and condition of an extreme savage state. We can readily believe that
children abandoned in infancy in a savage country, and surviving this
abandonment, to grow up in a state of nature, living on herbs and
fruits, and sustaining existence as other wild animals, would be stupid,
without language, without intellect, and with no greater instinct than
that which governs the brute creation. We can conceive nothing reduced
to a more savage condition; with cannibal propensities, an ungovernable
ferocity, or a timid apprehension, there can be but a link that
separates them from other classes of animal creation. So with herds of
men in a savage state, like herds of buffalo or wild horses on our
prairies, they are kept together by sounds common amongst themselves,
and are utterly unacquainted with the landmarks of civilisation.
This, however, was not the condition of the American Indians when first
discovered. They were a singular race of men, with enlarged views of
life, religion, courage, constancy, humanity, policy, eloquence, love of
their families; with a proud and gallant bearing, fierce in war, and,
like the ancients, relentless in victory. Their hospitality might be
quoted as examples among the most liberal of the present day. These
were not wild men--these were a different class from those found on the
Sandwich and Feegee Islands. The red men of America, bearing as they do
the strongest marks of Asiatic origin, have, for more than two thousand
years (and divided as they are in upwards of three hundred different
nations) been remarkable for their intellectual superiority, their
bravery in war, their good faith in peace, and all the simplicity and
virtues of their patriarchal fathers, until civilisation, as it is
called, had rendered them familiar with all the vices which distinguish
the present era, without being able to enforce any of the virtues which
are the boast of our present enlightened times.
It is, however, in the religious belief and ceremonies of the Indians
that I propose showing some of the evidences of their being, as it is
believed, the descendants of the dispersed tribes. The opinion is
founded--
1st. In their belief in one God.
2nd. In the computation of time by their ceremonies of the new moon.
3rd. In their divisions of the year in four seasons, answering to the
Jewish festivals of the feast of flowers, the day of atonement, the
feast of the tabernacle, and other religious holidays.
4th. In the erection of a temple after the manner of our temple, and
having an ark of the covenant, and also the erection of altars.
5th. By the divisions of the nation into tribes, with a chief, or grand
sachem at their head.
6th. By their laws of sacrifices, ablutions, marriages; ceremonies in
war and peace, the prohibitions of eating certain things, fully carrying
out the Mosaic institutions;--by their traditions, history, character,
appearance, affinity of their language to the Hebrew, and finally, by
that everlasting covenant of heirship exhibited in a perpetual
transmission of its seal in their flesh.
If I shall be able to satisfy your doubts and curiosity on these points,
you will certainly rejoice with me in discovering that the dispersed of
the chosen people are not the lost ones--that the promises held out to
them have been thus far realised, and that all the prophecies relative
to their future destination will in due time be strictly fulfilled.
It has been the general impression, as before mentioned, that great
resemblance existed between some of the religious rites of the Jews, and
the peculiar ceremonies of the Indians; and the belief in one Great
Spirit has tended to strengthen the impression; yet this mere
resemblance only extended so far as to admit of the belief, that they
possibly may have descended from the dispersed tribes, or may have been
of Tartar or Malay origin.
It was, however, a vague and unsatisfactory suspicion, which, having no
tangible evidence, has been rejected, or thrown aside as a mere
supposition. All the missionaries and travellers among the Indian
tribes since the discovery of America--Adair, Heckwelder, Charliveux,
Mckenzie, Bartram, Beltrami, Smith, Penn, Mrs Simon, who has written a
very interesting work on this subject, etcetera, have expressed opinions
in favour of their being of Jewish origin--the difficulty, however,
under which they all laboured was simply this; they were familiar with
the religious rites, ceremonies, traditions, and belief of the Indians,
but they were not sufficiently conversant with the Jewish rites and
ceremonies to show the analogy. It is precisely this link in the chain
of evidence that I propose to supply.
It has been said that the Indians, believing in one great Spirit and
Fountain of Life, like the Jews, does not prove their descent from the
missing tribes, because in a savage state their very ignorance and
superstition lead them to confide in the works of some divine superior
being. But savages are apt to be idolaters, and personate the deity by
some carved figure or image to whom they pay their adoration, and not,
like the Indians, having a clear and definite idea of one great Ruler of
the universe, one great Spirit, whose attributes are as well known to
them as to us.
But if the continued unerring worship of one God like the Jews prove
nothing, where did they acquire the same Hebrew name and appellation of
that deity? If tradition had not handed down to them the ineffable name
as also preserved by the Jews, how did they acquire it in a wilderness
where the word of the Lord was never known?
Adair, in whom I repose great confidence, and who resided _forty_ years
among them, in his work published in 1775, says, "The ancient heathens
worshipped a plurality of gods, but these Indians pay their devoirs to
_Lo-ak_ (Light) _Ish-ta-koola-aba_, distinctly Hebrew, which means the
great supreme beneficent holy Spirit of Fire who resides above."
"They are," says Adair, "utter strangers to all the gestures practised
by the Pagans in their religious rites--they kiss no idols, nor would
they kiss their hands in tokens of reverence or willing obedience."
"These tribes," says Adair, "so far from being Atheists, use the great
and dreadful name of God, which describes his divine essence, and by
which he manifested himself to Moses! and are firmly persuaded that they
now live under the immediate government of the Almighty Ruler. Their
appellative for God is _Isto-hoolo_, the Hebrew of _Esh-Eshys_, from
_Ishto, Great_, but they have another appellative, which with them, as
with us, is the mysterious essential name of God, which they never
mention in common speech, and only when performing their most sacred
religious rites, and then they most solemnly divide it in syllables,
with intermediate words, so as not to pronounce the ineffable name at
once."
Thus, in their sacred dances at their feast of the first-fruits, they
sing _Aleluyah_ and _Mesheha_, from the Hebrew of _Masheach_, Messiah,
the anointed one.
"Yo mesheha", "_He_ mesheha", "_Wah_ meshehah," thus making the
_Alleluyah_, the Meshiah, the Yehovah.
Can we, for a moment, believe that these sacred well-known Hebrew words
found their way by _accident_ to the wilderness? Or can it be doubted
that, like the fire of the burning bush, which never is extinguished,
those words of religious adoration are the sacred relics of tradition,
handed down to them from generation to generation? "In the same
manner," says Adair, "they sing on certain other religious celebrations,
_ailyo ailyo_, which is the Hebrew _el_ for God, by his attribute of
omnipotence." They likewise sing _hewah, hewah_, He chyra, the
"immortal soul." Those words sung at their religious rejoicings are
never uttered at any other time, which must have occasioned the loss of
their divine hymns. They on some occasions sing _Shilu yo_--_Shilu
he_--_Shilu wah_. The three terminations make up in their order the
four lettered divine name in Hebrew. _Shilu_ is evidently _Shaleach_,
_Shiloth_, the messenger, "the peace maker."
The number of Hebrew words used in their religious services is
incredible; thus, in chiding anyone for levity during a solemn worship,
they say, _Che hakeet Kana_, "you resemble those reproved in Canaan,"
and, to convey the idea of criminality, they say _Hackset Canaha_, "the
sinners of Canaan." They call lightning _eloah_, and the rumbling of
thunder _rowah_, from the Hebrew _ruach_, "spirit."
Like the Israelites, they divide the year into four seasons, with the
same festivals; they calculate by moons, and celebrate, as the Jews do,
the _berachah halebana_, the blessing for the new moon.
The Indians have their prophets and high-priests, the same as the Jews
had; not hastily selected, but chosen with caution from the most wise
and discreet, and they ordain their high-priests by anointing and have a
most holy place in their sanctuaries, like the Holy of Holies in the
temple. The archimagus, or high-priest, wears, in resemblance to the
ancient breast-plate, a white conch-shell ornamented so as to resemble
the precious stones on the _Urim_, and instead of the golden plate worn
by the Levite on his forehead, bearing the inscription _Kodish
Ladonaye_, the Indian binds his brows with a wreath of swan's feathers,
and wears a tuft of white feathers, which he calls _Yatira_.
The Indians have their ark, which they invariably carry with them to
battle, well guarded. In speaking of the Indian places of refuge, Adair
says, "I observed that if a captive taken, by the reputed power of the
holy things of their ark, should be able to make his escape into one of
these towns, or even into the winter house of the _Archima gun_, he is
delivered from the fiery torture, otherwise inevitable. This, when
taken in connection with the many other faint images of Mosaic customs,
seems to point at the mercy-seat of the sanctuary. It is also worthy of
notice, that they never place the ark on the ground. On hilly ground,
where large stones are plenty, they rest it thereon, but on level
prairies, upon short logs, where they also seat themselves. And when we
consider," continues Adair, "in what a surprising manner the Indians
copy after the ceremonial law of the Hebrews, and their strict purity in
the war camps; that _opae_, "the leader," obliges all during the first
campaign which they have made with the beloved ark, to stand every day,
they are not engaged in warfare, from sunrise to sunset, and after a
fatiguing day's march and scanty allowance, to drink warm water
embittered with rattle-snake root very plentifully, in order to
purification; that they have also as strong a faith in the power of
their ark as ever the Israelites had in theirs, ascribing the success of
one party to their stricter adherence to the law, than the other, we
have strong reason to conclude them of Hebrew origin. The Indians have
an old tradition, that when they left their own native land, they
brought with them a _sanctified rod_, by order of an oracle, which they
fixed every evening in the ground, and were to remove from place to
place on the continent, towards the sun rising, till it budded in one
night's time. I have seen other Indians," says the same writer, "who
related the same thing." Instead of the miraculous direction to which
they limit it, in their western banishment, it appears more likely that
they refer to the ancient circumstance of the rod of Aaron, which, in
order to check the murmur of those who conspired against him, was, in
his favour, made to bud blossoms and yield almonds at one and the same
time. It is a well attested fact, and is here corroborated by Adair,
that in taking female captives, the Indians have often protected them,
but never despoiled them of honour.
This statement of Adair, in relation to the ark, is corroborated by
several travellers. Major Long, a more recent traveller, in his
expedition to the Rocky Mountains, says, in relation to the ark, "It is
placed upon a stand, and is never suffered to touch the earth. No
person dare open all the coverings. Tradition informs them that
curiosity induced three different persons to examine the mysterious
shell, who were immediately punished for their profanation by instant
blindness." This is the Jewish punishment pronounced for looking on the
holy of holies--even now for looking on the descendants of the high
priest who alone have the privilege of blessing the people.
The most sacred fast day uniformly kept by the Jews is the day of
atonement, usually falling in the month of September or early in
October. This is deemed in every part of the world a most solemn fast,
and great preparations are made for its celebration. It is in the
nature of expiation of sin, of full confession, penitence, and prayer;
and is preceded by ablution and preparation of morning prayer for some
time.
It is a very sacred fast, which lasts from sunset on one day until the
new moon is seen on the succeeding evening. It is not in the nature of
a gloomy desponding penance, but rather a day of solemn rejoicing, of
hope and confidence, and is respected by those most indifferent to all
other festivals throughout the year.
Precisely such a fast, with similar motives, and nearly at the same
period of the year, is kept by the Indian natives generally.
Adair, after stating the strict manner in which the Indians observe the
revolutions of the moon, and describing the feast of the harvest, and
the first offerings of the fruits, gives a long account of the
preparations in putting their temple in proper order for the great day
of atonement, which he fixes at the time when the corn is full-eared and
ripe, generally in the latter end of September. He then proceeds:
"Now one of the waiters proclaims with a loud voice, for all the
warriors and beloved men whom the purity of their law admits, to come
and enter the beloved square and observe the fast. He also exhorts the
women and children, with those who have not been initiated in war, to
keep apart according to the law.
"Four sentinels are now placed one at each corner of the holy square, to
keep out every living creature as impure, except the religious order,
and the warriors who are not known to have violated the law of the first
fruit-offering, and that of marriage, since the last year's expiation.
They observe the fast till the rising of the second sun; and be they
ever so hungry in the sacred interval, the healthy warriors deem the
duty so awful, and disobedience so inexpressibly vicious, that no
temptation would induce them to violate it. They at the same time drink
plentifully of a decoction of the button snake root, in order to vomit
and dense their sinful bodies."
"In the general fast, the children and men of weak constitutions, are
allowed to eat, as soon as they are certain that the sun has begun to
decline from his meridian altitude.
"Now every thing is hushed. Nothing but silence all around. The great
beloved man, and his beloved waiter, rising up with a reverend carriage,
steady countenance and composed behaviour, go into the beloved place, or
holiest, to bring them out the beloved fire. The former takes a piece
of dry poplar, willow, or white oak, and having cut a hole, but not so
deep as to reach through it; he then sharpens another piece, and placing
that in the hole, and both between his knees, he drills it briskly for
several minutes, till it begins to smoke--or by rubbing two pieces
together for a quarter of an hour, he collects by friction the hidden
fire, which they all consider as proceeding from the holy spirit of
fire.
"The great beloved man, or high priest, addresses the warriors and
women; giving all the particular, positive injunctions and negative
precepts they yet retain of the ancient law. He uses very sharp
language to the women. He then addresses the whole multitude. He
enumerates the crimes they have committed, great and small, and bids
them look at the _holy fire_ which has forgiven them. He presses on his
audience, by the great motives of temporal good and the fear of temporal
evil, the necessity of a careful observance of the ancient law, assuring
them that the _holy fire_ will enable their prophets, the rain makers,
to procure them plentiful harvests, and give their war leaders victory
over their enemies. He then orders some of the fire to be laid down
outside of the holy ground, for all the houses of the various associated
towns, which sometimes lay several miles apart."
Mr Bartram, who visited the southern Indians in 1778, gives an account
of the same feast, but in another nation. He says, "that the feast of
first-fruits is the principal festival. This seems to end the old and
begin the new ecclesiastical year. It commences when their new crops
are arrived to maturity. This is their most solemn celebration."
With respect to the sacrifices, we have had none since the destruction
of the temple, but it was customary among the Jews, in the olden time,
to sacrifice daily a part of a lamb. This ceremony is strictly observed
by the Indians. The hunter, when leaving his wigwam for the chase, puts
up a prayer that the great spirit will aid his endeavours to procure
food for his wife and children, and when he returns with the red deer,
whatever may be the cravings of hunger, he allows none to taste until he
has cut part of the flesh, which he throws in the fire as a sacrifice,
accompanied with prayer. All travellers speak of this practice among
the Indians, so clearly Hebrew in its origin.
The bathings, anointings, ablutions, in the coldest weather, are never
neglected by the Indians, and, like the Jews of old, they anoint
themselves with bear's oil.
The Mosaic prohibition of eating unclean animals, and their enumeration,
are known to you all. It would be supposed that, amidst the uncertainty
of an Indian life, all kinds of food would be equally acceptable. Not
so: for, in strict conformity with the Mosaic law, they abstain from
eating the blood of any animal, they abominate swine flesh, they do not
eat fish without scales, the eel, the turtle or sea-cow: and they deem
many animals and birds to be impure. These facts are noticed by all
writers, and particularly by Edwards in his History of the West-Indies.
The latter able historian, in noticing the close analogy between the
religious rites of the Jews and Indians, says, "that the striking
conformity of the prejudices and customs of the Caribbee Indians, to the
practices of the Jews, has not escaped the notice of such historians as
Gamella, Da Tertre, and others;" and Edwards also states, that the
Indians on the Oroonoke, punished their women caught in adultery, by
stoning them to death before the assembly of the people.
Among the Mosaical laws is the obligation of one brother to marry his
brother's widow, if he die without issue. Major Long says, "if the
deceased has left a brother, he takes the widow to his lodge after a
proper interval and considers her as his wife."
This is also confirmed by Charliveux.
It would occupy a greater space of time than I can afford, to trace a
similitude between all the Indian rites and religious ceremonies, and
those of the Jewish nation. In their births, in their separation after
the births of their children, in their daily prayers and sacrifices, in
their festivals, in their burials, in the employment of mourners, and in
their general belief, I see a close analogy and intimate connection,
with all the ceremonies and laws which are observed by the Jewish
people; making a due allowance for what has been lost, and
misunderstood, in the course of upwards of 2,000 years.
A general belief exists among most travellers, that the Indians are the
descendants of the missing tribes.
Menassah Ten Israel wrote his celebrated treatise to prove this fact, on
the discovery of America.
William Penn, who always acted righteously to wards the Indians, and had
never suspected that they had descended from the missing tribes, says,
in a letter to his friends in England, "I found them with like
countenances to the Hebrew race. I consider these people under a dark
night, yet they believe in God and immortality, without the aid of
metaphysics. They reckon by moons, they offer their first ripe fruits,
they have a kind of feast of tabernacles, they are said to lay their
altars with twelve stones, they mourn a year, and observe the Mosaic law
with regard to separation."
Emanuel de Moraez, in his history of Brazil, declares that America has
been peopled by the Carthaginians and Israelites, and as to the
Israelites he says, nothing is wanting but circumcision, to constitute a
perfect resemblance between them and the Brazilians.
The Reverend Mr Beatty, a very worthy missionary, says, "I have often
before hinted, that I have taken great pains to search into the usages
and customs of the Indians, in order to see what ground there was far
supposing them to be part of the ten tribes, and I must own, to my no
small surprise, that a number of their customs appear so much to
resemble those of the Jews, that it is a great question with me, whether
we can expect to find among the ten tribes, wherever they are at this
day, all things considered more of the footsteps of their ancestors than
among the different Indian tribes."
Monsieur de Guignes, an old French historian, in speaking of the
discoveries made in America, before the time of Columbus, says, "These
researches, which of themselves give us great insight into the origin of
the Americans, lead to the determination of the route of the colonies
sent to the continent;" and he proceeds to give reasons for his belief,
that the greater part of them passed thither "by the most eastern
extremities of Asia, where the two continents are only separated by a
narrow strait, easy to cross."
Beltrami, in his discovery of the sources of the Mississippi, after a
full and interesting account of the Indians, says, "Different authors
have brought them hither from all parts of the world. I was at first
induced to join with those who derived them from the Hebrews. It seemed
impossible for me to doubt that, by so doing, I should be building on an
impregnable foundation." He then proceeds to prove their Asiatic origin
by many interesting facts.
The late Earl of Crawford and Lindsay, published his travels in America,
in 1801. "It is curious and pleasing," says he, "in reading the travels
of those who have been among these people, to find how their customs
comport with the laws of Moses;" and after describing at length their
religious rites and ceremonies, his lordship emphatically observes, "It
is a sound truth, that the Indians _are_ descended from the ten tribes;
and time and investigation will more and more enforce its
acknowledgment."
It is, however, in Mexico and Peru, that we must look for the most
enlightened and the most wealthy of the Indian race. On the
representations of Montesini, who travelled in South America, the
learned Rabbi Menassah Ten Israel, as I have said before, wrote his
famous work _La Esperanza de Israel_, which he published in Amsterdam,
in _1650_, endeavouring with great zeal to prove, that the Indians in
North and South America were the descendants of the missing tribes; and
Cromwell, to whom the work was dedicated, was greatly interested in the
evidences produced on that occasion. Montesini, travelling through the
province of _Quif_ found that his Indian guide was a Jew, and pursuing
his inquiries, discovered that immense numbers lived behind the
Cordilleras. Francis, the name of his guide, admitted to Montesini,
that his God was called _Adonal_, and that he acknowledged Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob, as his ancestors, and they claimed to have descended
from the tribe of Reuben.
Acosta contends that they have a tradition relative to the deluge; that
they preserve the rite of circumcision; they offer the first-fruits, and
in Peru they eat the Paschal Lamb; they believe in the resurrection, and
clothe the dead with the richest equipage. Lopez de Gomara says, that
some of them, and not all, are circumcised. Acosta continues, "the
Mexicans point out the various stations as their ancestors advanced into
their country, and it is precisely the route which they must have held,
had they been emigrants from Asia."
Menassah Ten Israel declares, that the Indians of Mexico had a
tradition, that their magnificent place of worship had been built by a
people who wore their beards, and were more ancient than their Incas.
In the Universal History of 1748, it is affirmed, that the Mexicans and
other American Indians rend their garments, in order the more
effectually to express grief--the Hebrew custom at this day.
Lopez de Gomara states, that the Mexicans offer sacrifices of the
first-fruits, and, when Cortez approached Mexico, Montezuma shut himself
up for the space of eight days in fasting and prayer. Emanuel de Moreas
and Acosta say, that the Brazilians marry in their own tribes and
families; and Escorbatus affirms, that he frequently heard the southern
tribes repeat the sacred notes _Ha-le-lu-yah_. Malvenda states, that
several tomb-stones were found in St Michael's, with ancient Hebrew
characters.
When the Spaniards invaded Mexico, the Cholula was considered a holy
city by the natives, with magnificent temples, in which the High Priest
Quetza-colt preached to man, and would permit no other offerings to the
Master of Life than the first-fruits of the harvest. "We know by our
traditions," said the venerable Prince Montezuma to the Spanish General
Cortez, "that we who inhabit this country are not the natives but
strangers who come from a great distance."
Don Alonzo Erecella, in his history of Chili, says, the Araucanians
acknowledge one Supreme Being, and believe in the immortality of the
soul; and the Abbe Clavigero declares, that they have a tradition of the
great deluge. The laws and ceremonies of the Peruvians and Mexicans
have, no doubt, been corrupted in the course of many ages, both in their
sacrifices and worship.
Their great and magnificent temple, evidently in imitation of that
erected by Solomon, was founded by Mango Capac, or rather by the Inca
Vupanque, who endowed it with great wealth. Clavagero and De Vega, in
their very interesting account of this temple say, "what we called the
altar was on the east side of the temple. There were many doors to the
temple, all of which were plated with gold, and the four walls the whole
way round were crowned with a rich golden garland, more than an ell in
width. Round the temple were five square pavilions, whose tops were in
the form of pyramids. The fifth was lined entirely with gold, and was
for the use of the Royal High-Priest of sacrifices, and in which all the
deliberations concerning the temple were held. Some of the doors led to
the schools where the Incas listen to the debates of the philosophers,
sometimes themselves explaining the laws and ordinances."
Mexico and Central America abound in curiosities, exemplifying the fact
of the Asiatic origin of the inhabitants; and it is not many years ago,
that the ruins of a whole city, with a wall nearly seven miles in
circumference, with castles, palaces, and temples, evidently of Hebrew
or Phoenician architecture, was found on the river Palenque. The
thirty-fifth number of the Foreign Quarterly Review contains an
interesting account of those antiquities.
The ruins of this city of Guatemala, in Central America, as described by
Del Rio in 1782, when taken in conjunction with the extraordinary, I may
say, wonderful antiquities spread over the entire surface of that
country, awaken recollections in the specimens of architecture which
carry us back to the early pages of history, and prove beyond the shadow
of doubt, that we who imagined ourselves to be the natives of a new
world, but recently discovered, inhabit a continent which rivalled the
splendour of Egypt and Syria, and was peopled by a powerful and highly
cultivated nation from the old world. When we speak of what is called
Mexican antiquities, we must not confound the rude labours of modern
times, with the splendid perfections which distinguished the efforts of
those who reared the Egyptian pyramids, and built the temples of Thebes
and Memphis. It is not Mexican antiquities, but the antiquities of
Tultecan; and in addition to the ruins of Palenque, on this _our_
continent, there are pyramids larger than those of Sachara in Egypt, at
Cholula, Otamba, Paxaca, Mitlan, Tlascola, and on the mountains of
Tescoca, together with hieroglyphics, planispheres and zodiacs, a
symbolic and Photenic alphabet; papyrus, metopes, triglyphs, and temples
and buildings of immense grandeur; military roads, aqueducts, viaducts,
posting stations and distances; bridges of great grandeur and massive
character, all presenting the most positive evidences of the existence
of a powerful enterprising nation, which must have flourished two
thousand years before the Spanish conquest. Take, for example, the
description of the temple at Palenque, which Lord Kingsborough, in his
travels, not only declares _was_ built by the Jews, and is a copy of
Solomon's temple, but which, no doubt, is precisely the model of the
temple described by Ezekiel. Travellers speak of it in the following
terms:
"It may be appropriately called an ecclesiastical city, rather than a
temple. Within its vast precincts there appear to be contained (as
indeed was, in some measure, the case with the area that embraced the
various buildings of Solomon's temple) a pyramidal tower, various
sanctuaries, sepulchres; a small and a large quadrangular court, one
surrounded, as we have said, by cloisters; subterranean initiatory
galleries beneath; oracles, courts of justice, high places, and cells or
dwellings for the various orders of priests. The whole combination of
the buildings is encircled by a quadrilateral pilastered portico,
embracing a quadrangular area, and resting on a terraced platform. This
platform exhibits the same architectural model, which we have described
as characterising the single temples. It is composed of three graduated
stuccoed terraces, sloping inwards, at an angle of about seventy
degrees, in the form of a truncated pyramid. Four central staircases
(one facing each of the cardinal points) ascend these terraces in the
middle of each lateral facade of the quadrangle; and four gates fronting
the same cardinal points, conduct from the top of each staircase into
the body of the building, or into the great court. The great entrance,
through a pilastered gateway, fronts the east, and descends by a second
flight of steps into the cloistered court. On the various pilasters of
the upper terrace are the metopes, with singular sculptures. On
descending the second staircase into the cloistered court, on one side,
appears the triple pyramidal tower, which may be inferred, from the
curious distribution of little cells which surround the central room of
each story, to have been employed as a place of royal or private
sepulture. It would be pronounced a striking and tasteful structure,
according to any architectural rule. On another side of the same
cloistered court is the detached temple of the chief god, to whom the
whole religious building appears to have been devoted, who appears to
have been the great and only god of the nations who worshipped in this
temple. Beneath the cloisters, entered by staircases from above, are
what we believe to be the initiatory galleries. These opened into
rooms, one of which has a stone couch in it, and others are
distinguished by unintelligible apparatus carved in stone. The only
symbol described as found within these sacred haunts is, however,
perfectly Asiatic, and perfectly intelligible; we mean two contending
serpents. The remnant of an sitar, or high place, occupies the centre
of the cloistered quadrangle. The rest of the edifice is taken up with
courts, palaces, detached temples, open divans, baths, and streets of
priestly cells, or houses, in a greater or less degree of dilapidation."
...
"It is perfectly clear, from the few records of their religious rites
which have come down to us, and which are principally derived from the
extraordinary rolls of American papyrus, [formed of prepared fibres of
the Maguery] on which their beautiful hieroglyphical system is preserved
(there is one of considerable extent in the Dresden Museum), that they
were as simple, perhaps we may add with propriety, as innocent. Not
only does it appear that they had no human sacrifices, but no animal
sacrifices. Flowers and fruits were the only offerings made to the
presiding divinity of their temples."
But who were the Tultequans and Azeteques, the founders of this empire
in America; who built the pyramids of Cholula and city of Palenque?
_Not the Jews_.
Here we have a most singular diversion from the path on which we
originally set out--another extraordinary discovery, marked, too, by
events no less extraordinary than amazing.
They were the Canaanites, the scriptural Titans, who, according to the
sacred historian, built with walls and towers reaching to the heavens.
The builders of the Tower of Babel, the family of the shepherd kings who
conquered Egypt, and built the pyramids, and were driven from Syria by
Joshua. The men who finally founded Tyre and Carthage, navigated round
the continent of Africa, and sailed in their small craft across the
Atlantic, and landed in the Gulf of Mexico.
The _Phoenicians_ were the founders of Palenque, Mitlan, Papantla.
Quemada, Cholula, Chila, and Antiquerra.
When I studied the history of these people, on the ruins of Carthage, it
was said by antiquarians present, that the Carthaginians had a colony at
a considerable distance, which they secretly maintained; and when I was
at Tangiers, the Mauritania Tangitania of the ancients, I was shown the
spot where the pillar was erected, and was standing at the time of Ibnu,
the Moorish historian, on which was inscribed, in the Phoenician
language, "We are the Canaanites who fled from Joshua, the son of Nun,
that notorious robber." From that spot, then ... the pillars of
Hercules, now known as the Straits of Gibraltar, they crossed to our
continent, and founded a great empire of the Ophite worship, with Syrian
and Egyptian symbols. Now, mark the issue. Fifteen hundred years after
the expulsion of the Canaanites by Joshua, the ten tribes pass over the
Straits of Behring to the continent of America, and poured down upon
these people like the Goths and Vandals. The descendants of Joshua a
_second_ time fell on the Canaanites on another continent, knowing them
well as such, and burn their temples, and destroy their gigantic towers
and cities.
When Columbus discovered America, he found an innocent people in a
demi-savage state, with Jewish traditions, and the only reference to
early times was a vague impression that the ruins they saw were built by
giants, and a people called wandering masons.
I have the most settled conviction of this theory. The magnificent
ruins which are to be seen at this day in Mexico and Central America,
were the works of the Phoenicians, and the irruption of the wandering
tribes from the north-west coast of America swept that nation away, and
have ever since maintained possession of this country, until white men
have thinned their ranks, and gradually encroached upon, and usurped a
great part of their territory.
The only opposition made to the general declaration of travellers, that
the Indians are of Jewish descent, is, that they are red men, and are
beardless. Now, take the olive complexion of the Jews in Syria, pass
the nation over the Euphrates into a warmer climate, let them mingle
with Tartars and Chinese, and after several generations reach this
continent, their complexion would undergo some shades of hue and colour;
and as to beards, they cannot grow while they are continually plucked,
as is the Indian custom. The colour proves nothing against their
origin. Take our fellow-citizens on our eastern borders, and compare
their florid colour with the sickly hue and sallow complexions of those
living on the southern shores, in the palmettoes and everglades, and we
shall see a marked distinction, and yet they are members of the same
family.
Du Pratz, speaking of the traditions of the Natches tribe, relates that
in answer to the question, "Whence come you?" their reply was, "All that
we know is that our fathers, to come hither, followed the sun, and came
from the place where he rises. They were long in their journey; they
were nearly perishing; and were brought to this wilderness of the sun
setting without seeking it." Souard says of the Indians of Surinam, on
the authority of Nasci, a learned Jew residing there, that the dialect
of those Indians common in Guinana is soft, agreeable, and regular, and
their substantives are Hebrew. "Their language, in the roots, idioms,
and particular construction, has the genius of the Hebrew language, as
their orations have the bold, laconic, and figurative style of the
Hebrew prophets."
The Reverend Mr Chapman says of the Osages, "it is their universal
practice to salute the dawn of every morning with their devotion." A
custom always prevailing among pious Jews.
Malvenda and Acosta both affirm, that the natives had a tradition of a
jubilee, according to the jubilee of Israel.
Dr Beatty, in speaking of the festival of the first-fruits by the
Indians west of the Ohio, says, "at this ceremony _twelve_ of their old
men divide a deer into twelve parts, and these men hold up the venison
and fruits with their faces to the east, acknowledging the bounty of God
to them. A singular and close imitation of the ceremonies and
sacrifices of the temple." The doctor further says, "they have another
feast which looks like the Passover."
Sir Alexander Mackenzie, in his tour to the north-west coast, says, that
"the Chepewyan Indians have a tradition among them, that they originally
came from another country, inhabited by very wicked people, and had
traversed a great lake which was in one place narrow and shallow, and
full of islands, where they had suffered great misery; and a further
tradition has it that nine parts of their nation out of ten passed over
the river. The Mexicans affirm, that seven tribes or houses passed from
the east to the wilderness."
Beltrami says, that the skeletons of the mammoths found in Kentucky and
Missouri, and other parts of America, have been ascertained to resemble
precisely those which have been found in Siberia and the eastern part of
Asia, showing the facility of communication between the two coasts. And
here it may be well to state a fact, which is strongly corroborative of
the view we have taken, not only of the possibility of passing from one
continent to the other, but of the actual and probably constant
communication between them. Charlevoix, says, he knew a Catholic
priest, called Father Grilion, in Canada, who was recalled to Paris
after his mission had been ended, and who was subsequently appointed to
a similar mission in China. One day in Tartary, he suddenly encountered
a Huron woman with whom he had been well acquainted in Canada, and who
informed him that she had been captured, and passed from nation to
nation, until she reached the north-west coast, when she crossed into
Tartary.
Since delivering the present lecture, I have received a letter from Mr
Catlin, the celebrated painter, who for the last five years has been
residing among the Indians. Mr Catlin says:
"The first thing that strikes the traveller in an Indian country as
evidence of their being of Jewish origin, (and it is certainly a very
forcible one,) is the striking resemblance which they generally bear in
contour, and expression of head, to those people. In their modes and
customs, there are many striking resemblances, and perhaps as proof,
they go much further than mere personal resemblance. Amongst those
customs, I shall mention several that have attracted my attention,
though probably they have never before been used for the same purpose;
and others I may name, which are familiar _to you_, and which it may not
be amiss to mention, as I have seen them practised while in their
country.
"The universal custom among them of burying their dead with feet to the
east, I could conceive to have no other meaning or object than a journey
to the east after death--like the Jews who expected to travel under
ground after death to the land of Canaan. On inquiry, I found that
though they were all going towards the `setting sun,' during their
life-times, they expected to travel to the east after death.
"Amongst the tribes, the women are not allowed to enter the medicine
lodge; as they were not allowed in Judea to enter the court of Israel.
Like the Jewish custom also, they are not allowed to mingle in worship
with the men; and at meals, are always separated.
"In their modes, fastings, feastings, or sacrifices, they have also a
most striking resemblance. Amongst all the western tribes, who have not
been persuaded from those forms by white men, they are still found
scrupulously and religiously adhering to, and practising them to the
letter. The very many times and modes of sacrificing, remind us
forcibly of the customs of the Israelites; and the one in particular,
which has been seen amongst several of the tribes, though I did not
witness it myself, wherein, like the manner of the `peace-offering,' the
firstling and that of the male is offered, and `_no bone is to be
broken_.' Such circumstances afford the strongest kind of proofs. All
the tribes have a great feast at the dawn of spring, and at those feasts
their various sacrifices are made. At the approach of the season of
green corn, a feast of the first ears are sacrificed with great
solemnity, followed by feasting and dancing: so at the ripening of
different kinds of fruit. The first and best piece that is cut from a
buffalo is always _Deo Dante_.
"Over the medicine lodge, and also over the lodges of the most
distinguished chiefs, are hung on high poles large quantities of fine
cloth, white buffalo robes, or other most costly articles which can be
procured, there to decay, an offering to the Great Spirit.
"The bunch of willow boughs with which each dancer is supplied, in the
Mandan religious ceremonies, the sacrificing and other forms therein
observed, certainly render it somewhat analogous to the Israelitish
feast of tabernacles.
"The universal practice of `_solus cam solo_' of the women, ablution and
anointing with bear's grease, is strikingly similar to the Jewish
custom. Every family has a small lodge expressly for this purpose, and
when any one of the family are ready for it, it is erected within a few
rods, and meat is carried to her, where she dwells, and cooks and eats
by herself, an object of superstitious dread to every person in the
village.
"The absence of every species of idolatry amongst the North American
Indians, affords also a striking proof of the ceremonial law, and stamps
them at once, in one respect, at all events, differing from all other
savage tribes of which we have any knowledge."
What are, I may ask, the characters of these people? On the discovery
of America by Columbus, nearly 2,000 years after the dispersion of the
Hebrew tribes, the whole continent is found peopled, not with a race of
wild men, of cannibals, of savages, but with a race of intellectual,
moral, innocent persons, divided into many hundred nations, and spread
over 8,000 miles of territory. "I swear to your majesties," said
Columbus, writing to Ferdinand and Isabella, "that there is not a better
people in the world than these; more affectionate or mild. They love
their neighbours as themselves; their language is the sweetest, the
softest and the most cheerful, for they always speak smilingly." Major
Long says, "they are the genuine sons of nature; they have all the
virtues nature can give, without the vices of civilisation. They are
artless, fearless, and live in constant exercise of moral and Christian
virtues, though they know it not."
Charlevoix gives his testimony in their behalf. "They manifest," says
he, "much stability in their engagements, patience in affliction, and
submissive acquiescence in what they apprehend the will of Providence.
In all this they display a nobleness of soul and constancy of mind, at
which _we_ rarely arrive, with all our philosophy and religion."
Du Pratz contends that they have a greater degree of prudence,
faithfulness, and generosity than those who would be offended with a
comparison with them. "No people," says he, "are more hospitable and
free."
Bartram, who lived many years in the Creek nation, says, "Joy,
contentment, love and friendship without guile or affectation, seem
inherent in them, or predominant in their vital principle, for it leaves
them but with their breath. They are," says he, "just, honest, liberal
and hospitable to strangers considerate and affectionate to their wives,
children, and relations; frugal and persevering, charitable and
forbearing."
_Who are they_? Men do not grow up like stones or trees or rocks; they
are not found in herds like wild animals. God, that made man in his own
image, gave to the Indians an origin and parentage, like unto the rest
of the great family of mankind, the work of his own almighty hand. From
whom, then, did our red brethren, the rightful owners of this continent,
descend?
There seems to be no difference of opinion that they are of Asiatic
origin, and not indigenous to our soil. Nearly all writers and
historians concur on this point--they _are_ Asiatic--they crossed to the
continent of America from Asia; but who are they, and from whom have
they descended?
Eldad, who wrote learnedly of the twelve tribes, in 1300, contends, that
the tribe of Dan went into Ethiopia, and pretends that the tribes of
Naphtali, Gad, and Asher, followed. That they had a king of their own,
and could muster 120,000 horse and 100,000 foot. In relation to part of
these three tribes, there might have been some truth in it, for Tigleth
Pelieser did compel them to go into Ethiopia. Issachar, he contends,
remained with the Medes and Persians. Zebulon extended from the
mountains of Pharan to the Euphrates. Reuben dwelt behind Pharan, and
spoke Arabic. Ephraim and half Manasseh were thrown on the southern
coast. Benjamin of Tudela places Dan, Asher, Naphtali, and Zebulon on
the banks of the river Gozan. In the midst of all these contradictory
and vague statements, two opinions prevail among Jews and Christians, in
early and late periods. One is, that the ten tribes went into Tartary,
where they remained; the other, that from Tartary they penetrated into
America.
Manasseh Ten Israel, the most learned of the nation, declares that they
passed into America. Lescarbot believes that the Indians are the
posterity of Ham, expelled by Joshua, and who passed out of the
Mediterranean, and were driven by storms to the American coast. Grotius
contends, that the inhabitants of the new world were originally from
Greenland; and while Basnage frankly admits, that manifest tracts of
Judaism are to be found in America, he contends, that the tribes could
not have overcome the warlike Scythians and penetrated to this
continent, and that they remained in Halak and Heber, and in the cities
of the Medes.
Truth, no doubt, lies between these opinions. Many of the tribes passed
into Egypt and Ethiopia, many remained in Persia and Tartary; all did
not make for the north-west coast, nor was it necessary that all should
do so. There were degrees of piety and condition then as now. Restore
Jerusalem tomorrow, and all the Jews will not return there. Rabbi Akiba
contends, that all the noble families remained in Persia. A number, a
considerable number, no doubt, impressed with a solemn belief that if
they remained in Persia they would in time become idolators, and lose
all the landmarks of their ancient faith, resolved, like those who went
out of Egypt, to remain no longer in bondage, and, as Esdrass says, they
departed for a country "wherein mankind never before had dwelt"--and the
resolution was perfectly feasible. It was a thickly populated country,
and by keeping on the borders of China, they would, within the time
prescribed, namely, eighteen months, have reached our continent. At
this day there is a constant intercourse between the continents, and a
trip to the Rocky Mountains, once so terrifying, is now a mere summer's
journey.
If the Indians of America are not the descendants of the missing tribes,
again I ask, from whom _are_ they descended? From the Egyptians?
Wherein, in their belief, is there the least resemblance to the worship
of Isis and Osiris, or the Hieroglyphics or historical reminiscences of
that very ancient people? Are they a part of the fierce Scythians?
Their warlike propensities would prove them to be so; but where among
those barbarians do we discover the belief in one Great Spirit, together
with the softer virtues, the purity and talents of the Indians? Are
they of the Tartar race? Their complexion, "the shadowed livery of the
burning sun," might be offered in evidence; they have not the flat head,
the angular and twinkling eye, nor the diminutive figure of the Chinese
or Tartars.
The Indians have distinct Jewish features, and neither in mind, manners,
nor religion, bear any affinity to the Tartar race. I have endeavoured
to show this by their traditions, by their religion, by their
ceremonies, which retain so much of the ancient worship. But there is
one proof more, which, in my mind, removes all doubt. Sir Alexander
MacKenzie, in his journal of a tour to the north-west continent of
America, declares from his own observation, that the Chippewa Indians
practise circumcision, which fact is corroborated by several other
travellers amongst the various tribes.
It will scarcely be necessary for me to refer you to the many prophetic
warnings relative to the sins, the denunciations, the promises, the
dispersion and redemption of the Jewish people, which we find throughout
the Bible. With that good book you all are or should be familiar--it is
a delightful book, view it in any manner you please. Let the unbeliever
sneer and the philosopher doubt, it is certain that the most important
events predicted by the prophets _have_ come to pass, giving an
assurance which is stripped of all doubt, that what remains to be
fulfilled, _will_ be fulfilled. In what direction are we to look for
the missing tribes according to the prophets? From Jeremiah we learn
that they are to come from a country north and west from Judea. From
Isaiah, "it is a country far from Judea," and answering also "from the
ends of the earth."
In Zachariah we are told, it must be in the western regions, or the
country of the going down of the sun; and according to the historian,
Esdras, it must be a land wherein mankind never before had dwelt, and,
of course, free from the residence of the heathen.
Our prophet Isaiah has a noble reference to the dispersed tribes and
their redemption, which may be here appropriately quoted. I use his
language, the Hebrew, which from its peculiar associations should be
always interesting to you.
And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand
the _second_ time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be
left from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and
from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the
sea.
And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the
outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah, from the
four corners of the earth.
"And there shall be a highway for the remnant of his people, which shall
be left from Assyria, like as it was to Israel, in the day that he came
up out of the land of Egypt."
May I not with propriety refer, among other evidences, to the cruel
persecutions which have uniformly been practised towards the Indians of
this continent, not unlike those which the chosen people have suffered
for the last eighteen centuries?
"What makes you so melancholy?" said General Knox to the chief of an
Indian deputation, that he was entertaining in this city, at the close
of the revolutionary war. "I'll tell you, brother," said the aged
chief; "I have been looking at your beautiful city--the great water full
of ships, the fine country, and see how prosperous you all are. But,
then, I could not help thinking that this fine country _was ours_. Our
ancestors lived here. They enjoyed it as their own in peace. _It was
the gift of the Great Spirit to them and their children_. At last,
white men came in a great canoe. They only asked to let them tie it to
a tree, lest the water should carry it away. We consented. They then
said some of their people were sick, and they asked permission to land
them, and put them under the shade of the trees. The ice then came, and
they could not go away. They then begged a piece of land to build
wigwams for the winter. We granted it to them. They then asked for
corn to keep them from starving. We furnished it out of our own scanty
supply. They promised to go away when the ice melted. When this
happened, they, instead of going, pointed to the big guns round the
wigwams, and said, `we shall stay here.' Afterwards came more: they
brought intoxicating drinks, of which the Indians became fond. They
persuaded them to sell their land, and, finally, have driven us back,
from time to time, to the wilderness, far from the water, the fish, and
the oysters. They have scared away our game--my people are wasting
away. We live in the want of all things, while you are enjoying
abundance in our fine and beautiful country. This makes me sorry,
brother, and I cannot help it."
These persecutions and repeated acts of cruelty and injustice appear to
have no termination--the work of destruction, commenced with the
Narragansetts, will extend to the Ceminoles, and gradually to the blue
waters of the Pacific. Look even now at the contest maintained by a
handful of Indians in the everglades of Florida. Do they war against
unequal numbers for a crown--for a part of that immense surplus which
overflows from the coffers of a country which was once their own? No--
they fight for the privilege of dying where the bones of their ancestors
lie buried: and yet we, Christians as we call ourselves, deny them that
boon, and drive the lords of the soil into the den of the otter.
In referring to the splendid specimens of Indian oratory, where, I would
ask, can you find such wisdom, such lofty and pure eloquence, among the
Chinese and Tartars, even at this day?
The Indians, like the Hebrews, speak in parables. Of their dialects,
there is no doubt that the Algonquins and Huron are the parents of five
hundred Indian tongues--they are copious, rich, regular, forcible, and
comprehensive; and although here and there strong Hebrew analogies may
be found, yet it is reasonable to suppose, that the Indian languages are
a compound of all those tongues belonging to the various Asiatic nations
through which they passed during their pilgrimage.
Firmly as I believe the American Indian to have been descended from the
tribes of Israel, and that our continent is full of the most
extraordinary vestiges of antiquity, there is one point, a religious as
well as an historical point, in which you may possibly continue to
doubt, amidst almost convincing evidences.
If these are the remnants of the nine and a half tribes which were
carried into Assyria, and if we are to believe in all the promises of
the restoration, and the fulfilment of the prophecies, respecting the
final advent of the Jewish nation, what is to become of these our red
brethren, whom we are driving before us so rapidly, that a century more
will find them lingering on the borders of the Pacific Ocean?
Possibly the restoration may be near enough to include even a portion of
those interesting people. Our learned Rabbis have always deemed it
sinful to compute the period of the restoration; they believe that when
the sins of the nation were atoned for, the miracle of their redemption
would be manifested. My faith does not rest wholly in miracles--
Providence disposes of events, human agency must carry them out. That
benign and supreme power which the children of Israel had never
forsaken, has protected the chosen people amidst the most appalling
dangers, has saved them from the uplifted sword of the Egyptians, the
Assyrians, the Medes, the Persians, the Greeks, and the Romans, and
while the most powerful nations of antiquity have crumbled to pieces, we
have been preserved, united, and unbroken, the same now as we were in
the days of the patriarchs--brought from darkness to light, from the
early and rude periods of learning to the bright reality of
civilisation, of arts, of education and of science.
The Jewish people must now do something for themselves; they must move
onward to the accomplishment of that great event long foretold--long
promised--long expected; and when they _do_ move, that mighty power
which has for thousands of years rebuked the proscription and
intolerance shown to the Jews, by a benign protection of the _whole_
nation, will still cover them with his invincible standard.
My belief is, that Syria will revert to the Jewish nation by _purchase_,
and that the facility exhibited in the accumulation of wealth, has been
a providential and peculiar gift to enable them, at a proper time, to
re-occupy their ancient possessions by the purse--string instead of the
sword.
We live in a remarkable age, and political events are producing
extraordinary changes among the nations of the earth.
Russia, with its gigantic power, continues to press hard on Turkey. The
Pacha of Egypt, taking advantage of the improvements and inventions of
men of genius, is extending his territory and influence to the straits
of Babelmandel on the Red Sea, and to the borders of the Russian empire;
and the combined force of Russia, Turkey, Persia, and Egypt, seriously
threaten the safety of British possessions in the East Indies. An
immediate and balancing power is required to check this thirst of
conquest and territorial possession, and to keep in check the advances
of Russia in Turkey and Persia, and the ambition and love of conquest of
Egypt. This can be done by restoring Syria to its rightful owners, not
by revolution or blood, but as I have said, by the purchase of that
territory from the Pacha of Egypt, for a sum of money too tempting in
its amount for him to refuse, in the present reduced state of his
coffers. Twelve or thirteen millions of dollars have been spoken of in
reference to the cession of that interesting territory, a sum of no
consideration to the Jews, for the good-will and peaceable possession of
a land, which to them is above all price. Under the co-operation and
protection of England and France, this re-occupation of Syria within its
old territorial limits is at once reasonable and practicable.
By opening the ports of Damascus, Tripoli, Joppa, Acre, etcetera, the
whole of the commerce of Turkey, Egypt, and the Mediterranean will be in
the hands of those, who, even now in part, control the commerce of
Europe. From the Danube, the Dneister, the Ukraine, Wallachia, and
Moldavia, the best of agriculturists would revive the former fertility
of Palestine. Manufacturers from Germany and Holland; an army of
experience and bravery from France and Italy; ingenuity, intelligence,
activity, energy, and enterprise from all parts of the world, would,
under a just, a tolerant, and a liberal government, present a formidable
barrier to the encroachments of surrounding powers, and be a bulwark to
the interests of England and France, as well as the rising liberties of
Greece.
Once again unfurl the standard of Judah on Mount Zion, the four corners
of the earth will give up the chosen people as the sea will give up its
dead, at the sound of the last trumpet. Let the cry be `Jerusalem,' as
it was in the days of the Saracen and the lion-hearted Richard of
England, and the rags and wretchedness which have for eighteen centuries
enveloped the persons of the Jews, crushed as they were by persecution
and injustice, will fall to the earth; and they will stand forth. The
richest, the most powerful, the most intelligent nation on the face of
the globe, with incalculable wealth, and holding in pledge the crowns
and sceptres of kings. Placed in possession of their ancient heritage
by and with the consent and co-operation of their Christian brethren,
establishing a government of peace and good-will on earth, it may then
be said, behold the fulfilment of prediction and prophecy: behold the
chosen and favoured people of Almighty God, who, in defence of his unity
and omnipotence, have been the outcast and proscribed of all nations,
and who, for thousands of years, have patiently endured the severest of
human sufferings, in the hope of that great advent of which they never
have despaired;--and then, when taking their rank once more among the
nations of the earth, with the good wishes and affectionate regards of
the great family of mankind, they may by their tolerance, their good
faith, their charity, and enlarged liberal views, merit what has been
said in their behalf by inspired writers, "Blessed are they who bless
Israel."
THE END.