MORALS
The Eskimo has, of course, like every other race of men, his virtues and
his foibles; possibly with this difference from the civilised European,
that the former are more numerous in proportion to the latter. But, on
the other hand, neither his virtues nor his foibles are found in such
high development.
Even the earliest accounts of Greenland, however, such as Egede's,
Cranz's, Dalager's, and others, show clearly enough the falsity of
the frequent assertion that the Eskimo stands upon a low moral plane;
although in some of these writers, for example in Hans Egede, we
can trace an evident tendency to paint the Eskimo, individually and
socially, in as dark colours as possible, in order to prove how sadly
this people stood in need of the lights of religion, and how necessary
it therefore was that the Greenland mission should be supported.
One of the most prominent and attractive traits in the Eskimo's moral
character is certainly his integrity. If some Europeans have denied him
this virtue, it can only be, I am sure, because these gentlemen have
not taken the trouble to place themselves in sympathy with his modes of
thought, and to realise what he regards as dishonourable.
It is of special importance for the Eskimo that he should be able to
rely with confidence upon his neighbours and his fellow-men; and it is
the first condition of this mutual confidence, on which depends all
united action in the battle for life, that every man shall be upright
in his dealings with his neighbours. The Eskimo therefore regards it
as in the highest degree dishonourable to steal from his housemates or
from his fellow-villagers, and it is very seldom that anything of the
sort occurs. Even Egede tells us that they let their goods and chattels
'lie open to everyone without fear of anyone stealing or taking away
the least portion of them.... This misdemeanour is so repulsive to them
that if a girl is found stealing, she loses all chance of making a good
marriage.'
For the same reason they very seldom lie to each other--especially the
men. The following trait, related by Dalager, affords a remarkable proof
of this: 'In describing a thing to another person, they are very careful
not to paint it in brighter colours than it deserves; especially in the
sale of an object which the buyer has not seen, even although the seller
may be anxious to get rid of it, he will depreciate it rather than
overpraise it.'
When one owes another money, the creditor may, as a rule, be assured
that the debtor will pay up as soon as ever he can. The Danish merchants
confirm this trait. They have often told me that they lend with
confidence to the Greenlanders, because it very seldom happens that they
are not repaid in full.
The Eskimo's conception of his duties towards strangers, especially
towards people of another race, is not quite so strict. We must remember
that a foreigner is to him an indifferent object, whose welfare he has
no interest in furthering; and it matters little to him whether he can
rely on the foreigner or not, since he has not got to live with him.
Thus he does not always find it inconsistent with his interests to
appropriate a little of the foreigner's property, if he thinks it can be
of use to him.
The first Europeans who came to the country suffered a good deal from
this peculiarity. We cannot greatly wonder that the Eskimos stole
from them, when we consider how the European expeditions at first
conducted themselves, after the land had been discovered anew. They
often plundered the natives, maltreated their women, and what was worse,
tempted them on board their ships, set sail, and took them as prisoners
to Europe. Thus the Eskimos had from the first but little reason to
regard us as friends. Nor does it seem by any means irreconcilable with
European morality to plunder foreign peoples, if we may judge by the way
in which we deal with the native races in Africa and elsewhere. Or let
us suppose that it had been the Eskimos who came and planted themselves
upon our shores, and behaved to us as we did in Greenland--would it then
have been altogether inconsistent with our moral code to rob and filch
from them whatever we could?
It must also be taken into account that in comparison with the Eskimos
the Europeans possess property in superabundance. According to Eskimo
morality, therefore, it appears that we ought to be able to dispense
with some of our superfluity, and if we decline to do so it is because
we are miserly and selfish.
As the Europeans have gradually settled down in the country and ceased
to be regarded as foreigners, matters have altered a good deal, and
theft even from them is now rare. I believe, however, that when an
opportunity offers the natives are still inclined to appropriate trifles
which they think can never be missed. I have myself seen respectable
Greenlanders fill their pockets and gloves with meal from the barrels
in the store, quite unabashed by the fact of my observing them. In such
a case they no doubt think that it is the Royal Greenland Company from
whose superfluity they are helping themselves. The company will neither
be richer nor poorer for a few handfuls of meal, which for them are of
great moment--and in this comfortable conviction they go on their way
rejoicing. I am afraid that such modes of thought are not peculiar to
Greenland.
For the rest, it must be remembered as an extenuating circumstance
that the Eskimos were from the first, and even down to comparatively
recent times, shamelessly defrauded by the European traders, who used
false weights and measures, and gave them, in barter, wares of wretched
quality. I need only mention, on Saabye's authority, that the traders
of last century used excessively large four-bushel measures, which had,
in addition, no bottom, but were carefully placed over cavities in the
floor. These the natives had to fill with their blubber when they wanted
to sell it, so that what passed for four bushels was in reality at least
six. They knew and understood quite well that they were being cheated,
but they submitted uncomplainingly. Such practices are now, of course,
things of the past.
As a proof of the Eskimo's scrupulous respect for the moral law which
he recognises, I may remind the reader that he never touches drift-wood
which another has placed above high-water mark, though it would often
be so easy to appropriate it without fear of detection. And when we
Europeans break through this law, and help ourselves without ceremony to
their stored-up drift-wood--as we have often done, I am sorry to say,
intentionally or otherwise--have not the Eskimos, I wonder, at least as
good right to despise us as we have to look down upon them?
Fighting and brutalities of that sort, as before-mentioned, are unknown
among them, and murder is very rare. They hold it atrocious to kill a
fellow-creature; therefore war is in their eyes incomprehensible and
repulsive, a thing for which their language has no word; and soldiers
and officers, brought up to the trade of killing, they regard as mere
butchers.
It has, indeed, as Egede says, 'occurred now and then that an extremely
malicious person, out of rankling hatred, has killed another.' But when
he adds that 'this they regard with the greatest coolness, neither
punishing the murderer nor taking the thing to heart in any way,' I
believe that he is not quite just to them. They certainly abhor the
crime, and if they do not actively mix themselves up in the matter,
it is because they regard it as a private affair between the murderer
and his victim. It is not the business of the community, but simply of
the murdered man's nearest relatives, to take revenge for his death,
if they are in a position to do so; and thus we find, even among this
peaceable folk, traces of a sort of blood-feud, though the practice is
but slightly developed, and the duty does not, as a rule, seem to weigh
heavily upon the survivors. In cases of extreme atrocity, however,
the men of a village have been known to make common cause against a
murderer, and kill him.
Here, as elsewhere, women and love are among the most frequent causes of
bloodshed.
The attack often takes place at sea, the murderer transfixing his victim
from behind with his harpoon, or capsizing his kaiak and cutting a hole
in it. It does not accord with the Eskimo's character to attack another
face to face, not so much because he is afraid as because he is bashful,
and would feel it embarrassing to go to work under the other's eye.
They do not regard it as criminal to kill old witches and wizards, who,
they think, can injure and even kill others by their arts. Nor is it
inconsistent with their moral code to hasten the death of those who are
sick and in great suffering, or of those in delirium, of which they have
a great horror.
Of our commandments, the seventh is that which the Greenlanders are
most apt to break; for, as the reader may already have gathered from
the foregoing chapter, virtue and modesty are not held in high esteem
among them. This is especially the case among the Christian Eskimos of
the west coast, who have come much in contact with us Europeans. By many
of them it is not regarded as any particular disgrace for an unmarried
girl to have children. Of this I have seen frequent examples. While we
were at Godthaab, two unmarried girls of the neighbourhood who were
with child made no sort of attempt to conceal the fact, and even tied
up their top-knots with green ribbon[38] long before it was necessary,
seeming almost proud of this visible sign that they were not disdained.
I have seen green-tops who not only wore the colour in their hair, but
trimmed and embroidered their anoraks quite stylishly with ribbons
of the same hue, though such a proceeding is neither obligatory nor
customary.
The missionaries have, of course, been vehement in their denunciations
of the prevalent laxity in this direction, and have tried to inculcate
a stricter morality upon the youth of both sexes, from their schooldays
onwards; but they do not seem to have succeeded in inducing their flocks
to regard the matter from a higher standpoint, for things grow worse
rather than better. When a young woman stands in an illicit relation to
a man, she attempts no concealment; if the man be a European, indeed,
she positively glories in it, and it seems to procure her additional
consideration among her female friends. For this state of things the
Europeans themselves are chiefly to blame. In the first place, the young
men who have come to Greenland have often behaved ill to the native
women, and set a bad example; and, in the second place, the Europeans
have on the whole managed so to impose upon the natives that the women
will now prefer the commonest European sailor to the very best Eskimo
hunter. The result is that during the century and a half since we
settled in the country, the race has suffered so large an admixture
of European blood that it is now extremely difficult to find a single
pure-bred Eskimo on the whole west coast.[39] And this although the
Europeans form but a small fraction of the population of the country, a
few hundred as against ten thousand.
It is obvious that the proneness of the Europeans to this form of
immorality has not made it any easier for the missionaries to vindicate
the sanctity of the seventh commandment. My experience, and I believe
that of most observers, is that the native women of the colonies,
where many Europeans reside, are much more immodest than those of the
villages where there are no Europeans. For example, I may mention that
the women at Sardlok, Kornok, Kangek, and Narsak made an altogether
better impression than those at Godthaab and New Herrnhut, where their
behaviour was often the reverse of discouraging towards young men who
happened to take their fancy.
Sexual morality seems to have been considerably higher among the heathen
Eskimos before the Europeans came to the country. Even Hans Egede,
who does not, as a rule, depict their moral qualities in too bright
colours, says in his 'New Perlustration': 'Young girls and maidens, on
the other hand, are modest enough. We have never seen them conducting
themselves wantonly with the young men, or making the least approach to
such conduct, either in word or deed. During the fifteen years I was in
Greenland, I knew of only two or three unmarried girls who gave birth to
children; for this they regard as a great disgrace.'
Dalager's general testimony to the national character in this respect
is that 'the Greenlanders are certainly inclined to the sin of
incontinence, but not so much so as other nations.' Of the girls he
says that 'in their first years of maturity they bear themselves very
chastely, for otherwise they are certain to spoil their chances in
marriage.'
Among the heathens of the east coast at the present day, the matter does
not seem to be regarded so seriously; for Holm assures us that 'it is
not considered any disgrace for an unmarried girl to have children.'
The strict morality which obtained among the unmarried youths and
maidens of the west coast in the heathen days, seems to have been very
considerably relaxed when once they were married. The men, at any rate,
had then the most unrestricted freedom. Egede says that for long 'he
could not ascertain that men had to do with other women than their own
wives, or wives with other men; but at last we discovered that they were
none too particular in this respect.' He describes, among other things,
a remarkable game for which 'married men and women come together,
as though to an assembly.' The men stepped forth by turns, and, to
the accompaniment of a drum, sang songs in honour of women and love;
whereupon shameless license became the order of the day for all present.
'But in this game the young and unmarried are forbidden by modesty to
take part; married people see in it nothing to be ashamed of.'
Egede also remarks that women regard it as a great honour and happiness
to become the concubine of an angekok--that is, 'one of their prophets
and learned men.' 'Many husbands even regard this with favour, and will
sometimes pay the angekoks to lie with their wives, especially if they
themselves have no children by them.'
The Eskimo women, then, are allowed far greater freedom in this respect
than women of Germanic stock. The reason probably is that whereas
inheritance, and the continuance of the race and name, have been matters
of supreme importance to the Teutons, the Eskimos have had little or
no property to transmit from father to son, while for them the great
consideration is simply that children shall be born.
With reference to the above-mentioned game, however, Dalager declares
that it is of very rare occurrence, 'and that it is to be observed that
a married woman who has duly become the mother of a family never takes
part in it.'
On the other hand, he tells us that widows and divorced wives are not so
particular. While it is very seldom that 'a young girl has a child, one
sees older women bearing just as many children as if they were living in
wedlock. If they are reproved for this, even by their own countrymen,
they will often answer that their conduct does not proceed from mere
wantonness, but from a natural longing to bear children, which leads
them to seduce many a worthy man.'
On the east coast, too, the morality of married people seems to leave
a good deal to be desired, according to our ideas. I have mentioned,
for instance, that the men often exchange wives; but the exchange is
strictly a personal matter, and the husband will usually resent any
unfaithfulness on the wife's part to the man to whom he has lent her, he
himself, however, claiming full liberty. While living in their winter
houses they often play a wife-exchanging or lamp-extinguishing game,
like that above-mentioned; but in this the unmarried also take part.
Holm tells us that 'a good host always has the lamps put out at night
when there are guests in the house.'
So far as I know, this game is no longer practised on the west coast.
Married Christian Greenlanders, however, do not seem to have any
overweening respect for the seventh commandment, and irregularities of
conduct are far from uncommon.
The morals above described seem to us very bad on the whole; but it does
not follow that the Eskimos share this feeling. We should beware how we
fix ourselves at one point of view, and unsparingly condemn ideas and
practices which the experience of many generations has developed among
another people, however much they may conflict with our own. There may
be underlying reasons which do not at once meet the eye, and which place
the whole matter in a very different light.
The conceptions of good and evil in this world are exceedingly
divergent. As an example, let me cite the case of the Eskimo girl who,
when Niels Egede spoke to her of love of God and her neighbour, said to
him: 'I have given proof of love for my neighbour. Once an old woman
who was ill, but could not die, offered to pay me if I would lead her
to the top of the steep cliff from which our people have always thrown
themselves when they are tired of living; but I, having ever loved my
neighbours, led her thither without payment, and cast her over the
cliff.' Egede told her that this was ill done, and that she had killed
a fellow-creature. 'She said no; but that she was filled with pity for
her, and cried after she had fallen over.' Are we to call this a good or
an evil deed?
Another time, when Egede was explaining how God punishes wicked people,
an Eskimo remarked that in that respect he was like God, for he had
killed three old women who were witches.
The same divergence of judgment makes itself felt with regard to the
seventh commandment. To the Eskimo the other exhortation to increase and
multiply seems to be of greater weight. The reason may partly be that
his race is by nature unprolific.
Like many other peoples, the Eskimos found it strange that we should not
regard polygamy with warm approval. Among them, a man was held in esteem
in proportion to the number of wives he possessed, and they therefore
thought the Old Testament patriarchs more reasonable than we. This,
however, is a view which we find prevailing among our own forefathers,
until well on in historical times.
When Paul Egede was remonstrating with the Greenlanders one day upon
their polygamous proclivities, one of them fell to eulogising his own
wife for her 'good humour in never being angry because he loved strange
women.' Egede said that 'women in our country could not endure that
their husbands should care for others; they would turn them out of their
houses.' 'It is no praise to your women,' replied the Eskimo, 'that they
want to have their husbands all to themselves and to be masters over
them; we hold that a fault.'
Their way of thinking in these matters is less ideal and more practical
than ours, and their point of view entirely different. Their habit of
exchanging wives, for example, and their treatment of barren women,
seems to us wanton and immoral; but when we remember that the production
of offspring is the great end and aim of their conduct, and reflect what
an all-important matter this is for them, we may perhaps pass a somewhat
milder judgment.
If a Greenlander's wife does not bear children, his marriage fails of
its chief purpose, and it is quite natural that he should try to find
a remedy. A young man whose wife had no children once offered Niels
Egede a fox-skin either to come to his aid himself in the matter, or to
order one of his sailors to do so, and was much astonished to find Egede
indignant at the proposal. 'There would be no disgrace,' he said, 'for
she is married, and she could have one of your married sailors.'
It appears, however, that even the married Greenlanders are not by
nature devoid of what we understand as moral feeling, for their everyday
behaviour is, as a rule, quite reputable and void of offence; on that
point all travellers must agree.
If a heathen--and in many cases even a Christian--Greenlander refrains
from having to do with another man's wife, whom he has looked upon
with favour, it is generally, no doubt, more because he shrinks from
quarrelling with the husband than because he regards adultery as
morally wrong; but we may gather from the following saying, current at
Angmagsalik, that even on the east coast there is a vague feeling that
it is not the right thing. 'The whale, the musk-ox, and the reindeer,'
so the saying runs, 'left the country because men had too much to
do with other men's wives.' Many men declared, however, that it was
'because the women were jealous of their husbands.' The jealousy of the
women was also alleged as a reason for the fact that the channel which
formerly went right through the country, from the Sermelik Fiord to the
west coast, had been blocked with ice.[40]
Egede relates that, strangely enough as he thought, the women before
his arrival had felt no jealousy when their husbands had more wives
than one, 'and got on very well with each other'; but as soon as he had
preached to them the wickedness of such proceedings, they began to show
much annoyance when their husbands wanted to take second wives. 'When
I have been reading with them,' he says, 'and instructing them in the
Word of God, they have often urged me to bring the seventh commandment
sharply home to their husbands.' The men, as may be supposed, did not
at all approve of the missionaries' influence over the women in this
respect, and one of them, whose two wives had fallen by the ears, said
angrily to Niels Egede: 'You have spoiled them with your teaching, and
now they're jealous of each other.' It appears to me that the man's
anger was not without justification. What should we say if Greenlanders
came to our country, forced themselves into our houses, and preached
their own morality to our wives?
Before we utterly condemn the morality of the Eskimos, we ought also,
perhaps, to remember the golden maxim that those who live in glass
houses should not throw stones. European morality is in many respects of
such doubtful value that we have scarcely the right to pose as judges.
After all is said and done, it is possible that the most essential
difference between our morality and that of the Eskimos is that with us
the worst things take place behind the scenes, in partial or complete
secrecy, and therefore produce all the more demoralising effect, while
among the Eskimos everything happens on the open stage. The instincts
of human nature cannot be altogether suppressed. It is with them as
with explosives: where they lie unprotected on the surface, they may
be easily 'set off,' but they do little mischief; whereas when they
lie deeper and more concealed, they are perhaps less easily kindled,
but when once they take fire the explosion is far more violent and
destructive, and the greater the weight that is piled upon them, the
greater havoc do they work.
According to the Eskimo code, marriage between first cousins, or between
any near relations, is prohibited. Even foster-children, who happen to
have been brought up in the same household, cannot marry. A man should,
if possible, seek his wife in another village.
This rule answers to the so-called law of exogamy, or prohibition of
marriage with blood relations, with people of the same family name, or
even belonging to the same clan (among the Chinese), gotra (among the
Hindus), or gens (among the Romans?), which is also found in slightly
different forms in the Greek, and formerly in the Catholic, Church,
among the Slavonic and Indian races, and in many other quarters.
Plutarch says of the Romans that in earlier times they no more thought
of marrying women of the same stock than they would in his day think
of marrying aunts or cousins. Our own forefathers, in long past ages,
probably observed the law of exogamy, which, however, stands in sharp
opposition to the feeling now dominant in Norway, that natives of the
same place should be chosen in marriage, and if possible near relatives,
even first cousins. It seems to be the general rule that we find the
widest circles of prohibition against marriage among savage peoples,
while among modern and civilised nations a greater freedom prevails.
Exogamy would thus appear to be a relic of barbarism from which we
Norwegians have very thoroughly freed ourselves. It is very difficult
to explain the origin of this law. Many writers, as we know, seek to
trace it to the primitive conception of woman as a chattel, and commonly
as a captive of the spear, whence it followed that a wife ought not to
be taken from among relations or friends, but should be carried off
from another tribe. Although the scientific authorities are against
me, it appears to me by no means impossible that we may also find at
the root of the custom the belief that marriage between near relations
produces a weakly progeny. This belief, at any rate, prevails among
almost all nations in the form of a dread of incest. It is true that
modern research has sought to show that marriage between kinsfolk is
not injurious; but whether well-founded or not, the contrary belief
has undoubtedly been entertained, and from it the law of exogamy would
naturally follow. The fact that among the Greenlanders it goes the
length of forbidding marriage between people of the same village is
easily explicable when we think of the above-mentioned customs, which
render it impossible to be sure who may or may not be half-brothers and
sisters.
In several respects the morality of the heathen Eskimos stands
considerably higher than that which one generally finds in Christian
communities. As I have already pointed this out (in Chapter VIII.),
I will here only remind the reader of their self-sacrificing love of
their neighbour and their mutual helpfulness, to which, indeed, we
find no parallel in European society. These virtues, however, are not
unfrequently to be found among primitive peoples, and are probably in
the main due to the simpler structure of society. A more developed and
consequently more complicated social order leads to the decline of many
of the natural virtues of humanity.
But the Eskimo's love of his neighbour goes the length of restraining
him from slandering him, and even from any sort of evil-speaking,
especially in the case of a neighbour in the literal sense of the word.
Scandal and malice are inconsistent with his peaceable and kindly
disposition. As before remarked, the women do not seem to be quite so
exemplary in this respect; but we know that such weaknesses are commonly
attributed to the softer sex all the world over.
Reverence for the aged is not a prominent feature of the Eskimo
character. They are honoured, indeed, so long as they are able to work,
and if they have in their younger days been good hunters, and have sons,
they may retain great influence and be regarded as the head of the
household. A woman who has able-bodied sons may also be treated with
reverence, even should she attain a great age. A widow especially has
often great power, governing the house as long as she lives, and having
the upper hand of her daughters-in-law. But, as a rule, when people
grow so old that they cannot take care of themselves, they are apt to
be treated with scant consideration, especially women. Sometimes the
younger generation will even go the length of making fun of them, and to
this the poor old people submit with great patience, regarding it simply
as the way of the world.
That the reader may form some conception of a primitive Eskimo's habits
of thought on moral questions, I quote the following letter from a
converted Greenlander to Paul Egede.[41] I reproduce it here, because it
in many respects bears out the views above expressed, and Egede's book
'Accounts of Greenland,'[42] in which this translation is printed (pp.
230-236) is now not easily obtainable. The writer was a heathen who had
been baptised by Paul Egede's father, Hans Egede. The letter, which was
of course written in Eskimo, gives evidence not only of a peculiar moral
point of view, but also of a keen understanding, and of feelings which,
as Paul Egede says, one would scarcely expect 'in so stupid a people as
we have hitherto taken them to be.' It is, as will be seen, an answer to
an epistle of Egede's, and runs as follows:--
Amiable Pauia![43]
You know how precious and agreeable your letter is to me; but how
appalled I was when I read of the destruction of such multitudes of
people in the great earthquake,[44] inconceivable to us, which you say
devoured in one moment more people than there are in all our country. I
cannot tell you how this moved me, or how frightened we were, so that
many fled from the place where they lived to another, which was quite
as unsafe, though it was on a rock; for we see even here that rocks
have been split open from the top to the very depths, though when it
happened none of us know. Granite rocks, such as our land consists of,
and sand-hills like your land, are equally easy for God to overthrow,
in whose power the whole world stands, and we poor little animals are
easily buried in the ruins. You give me to understand that with you
there have been neither snow nor great cold this winter, and conclude
that it must have been all the severer with us; but we, too, have had
an unusually mild winter. I hear that your learned men are of opinion
that this mild weather has been caused by the warm vapours emanating
from the earth at the time of the earthquake, which have warmed the
air and melted the snow-material. But if I had not heard that this
was the opinion of the learned, I should have thought that the warmth
of the earth would avail little to heat the height and breadth of the
air--as little as a man's breath avails to warm a large house in which
he simply breathes for a moment and then goes out again. The south
winds, which are always warm, and have blown all the year through with
us, are the cause of the moderate cold we have had; but why the south
wind blew I cannot tell, nor the learned either, perhaps. Were these
wretched people killed by the heat, or did the earth swallow them up,
or were they shaken to death? Skipper B. thought that their own houses
must have fallen upon them and killed them. Your people do not seem
to care very much about it; for they are not only cheerful and merry,
but they relate that the two nations[45] who come here whale-fishing,
not your countrymen, but of the same faith as you, are fighting with
and shooting each other both by land and sea, hunting each other as we
hunt seals and reindeer, and stealing and taking away ships and goods
from each other, from people they have never seen or known, simply
because their lord and master will have it so. When I asked the skipper,
through an interpreter, what could be the cause of such inhumanity, he
answered that it was all about a piece of land right opposite ours,[46]
so far away that it could only be reached after three months' sailing.
Then I thought that there must be great scarcity of land where these
people dwell; but he said no, that it was only because of the great
lords' greediness for more riches and more people to rule over. I was
so astounded by this greediness, and so terrified lest it should fall
upon us too, that I was almost out of my mind; but I presently took
heart again, you will scarcely guess why. I thought of our snow-clad
country and its poor inhabitants, and said to myself: 'Thank God! we are
poor and possess nothing which these greedy Kablunaks [so they call all
foreigners] can desire. What we have upon the earth they do not care to
possess, what we require for food and clothing swims in the great sea;
of that they may take as much as they can, there will always be enough
for us.' If only we have as much food as we can eat, and skins enough to
keep us from the cold, we are quite contented; and you know very well
that we let to-morrow take care of itself. Therefore we will not fight
with anyone, even if we were strong enough; although we can as justly
say that the sea belongs to us as the believers in the East can say of
the unbelievers in the West that they and their possessions belong to
them. We can say it is our sea which surrounds our land, and that the
whales, cachalots, grampuses, porpoises, unicorns [that is, narwhals],
white whales, seals, halibuts, salmon, cod, and sea-scorpions which
swim in it belong to us too; but we willingly allow others to take of
this great store as much as they please. We are happy in that we have
not so great a natural covetousness as they. I have often wondered at
the Christians, and have not known what to think about them--they leave
their own beautiful land, and suffer much hardship in this country,
which is to them so rough and disagreeable, simply for the sake of
making us good people; but have you seen so much evil in our nation,
have you ever heard such strange and utterly senseless talk among us?
Their teachers instruct us how we are to escape the devil, whom we never
knew; and yet the roystering sailors pray with the greatest earnestness
that the devil may take them, or may split them. I daresay you remember
how I, in my youth, learned such phrases from them to please them,
without knowing what they meant, until you forbade me to use them.
Since I have come to understand them myself, I have heard more than I
wanted of them. This year in particular I have heard so much of the
Christians, that if I had not, in the course of long familiarity with
them, known many good and worthy men among them, and if Hans Pungiok
and Arnarsak, who have been to your country, had not told me that there
were many pious and virtuous people there, I could have wished that we
had never set eyes upon them lest they should corrupt our people. I
daresay you have often heard how my countrymen think of you and yours
that you have learned good behaviour among us; and when they see a pious
person among you, they will often say, 'He is like a human being,' or
'a Greenlander.' You no doubt remember that funny fellow Okako's idea
of sending angekoks [that is, medicine-men] to your country to teach
the people to be good, as your king has sent preachers hither to teach
us that there is a God, which we did not know before. But I know that
your people do not lack instruction, and therefore that proposal is of
no use. It is strange enough, my dear Pauia!--your people know that
there is a God, the creator and upholder of all things, that after this
life they will either be happy or miserable, according as they shall
have conducted themselves here, and yet they live as if they were under
orders to be wicked, and it was to their honour and advantage to sin. My
countrymen, on the other hand, know nothing either of a God or a devil,
believe neither in punishment nor in reward after this life; and yet
they live decently, treat each other kindly, and share with each other
peaceably when they have food to share. There are, of course, bad people
among us too, which proves that we must be of one stock; and perhaps
we must thank our barren land for the fact that most of us are above
reproach. (You do not think, I hope, that I am talking hypocritically
about my countrymen, for you know by experience that what I say is
true.) When I have heard accounts of your pleasant country I have often
envied its inhabitants; for they have great abundance of the delicious
fruits of the earth, and of animals, birds, and fishes of innumerable
sorts, fine large comfortable houses, fine clothes, a long summer, no
snow or cold, no midges, but everything pleasant and desirable; and this
happiness, I thought, belonged to you alone because you were believers,
and, as it were, God's own children, while we, as unbelievers, were
placed in this country as a punishment. But, oh, we happy Greenlanders!
Oh, dear native land! How well it is that you are covered with ice and
snow; how well it is that if in your rocks there are gold and silver,
for which the Christians are so greedy, it is covered with so much
snow that they cannot get at it! Your unfruitfulness makes us happy
and saves us from molestation! Pauia! we are indeed contented with our
lot. Fish and flesh are our sole food; dainties seldom come in our way,
but are all the pleasanter when they do. Our drink is ice-cold water;
it quenches thirst and does not steal away the understanding or the
natural strength like that maddening drink of which your people are so
fond. Our clothing is of unsightly thick-haired skins, but it is well
suited to this country, both for the animals, while the skins are still
theirs, and for us when we take them from them. Here then, thank God,
there is nothing to tempt anyone to come and kill us for its sake. We
live without fear. It is true that here in the North we have the fierce
white bears; but to deal with them we have our dogs, which fight for us,
so that we do not run the slightest risk. Murder is very seldom heard
of among us. It does not happen unless someone is suspected or accused
of being a magician and of having killed someone by his witchcraft, in
which case he is killed without remorse by those whose duty it is, who
think they have just as good right as the executioner in your country
to take the lives of malefactors; but they make no boast of it, and do
not give thanks to God for it like the great lords in your country,
when they have killed all the people of another land, as D. has told
me. It surely cannot be to the good God of whom you teach us, who has
forbidden us to shed blood, that they give thanks and praises; it must
be to another who loves slaughter and destruction. I wonder if it is not
to the Tornarsuk [the devil]? Yet that cannot be either; for it would
be flying in the face of the good God to give any honour to Satan. I
hope you will explain this to me at your convenience. I promise not to
tell my countrymen about it. It might lead them to think like Kaua, who
dared not become a Christian for fear he should come to be like the
wicked sailors. I will not tell you anything about the conversion of my
countrymen, for I know that our teacher has given you all information.
The thing you desired me to look into I will, as far as I am able,
attend to. I have not been able to make the experiment with the compass,
since the cold this year has been only moderate. The cause of the two
conflicting currents is no doubt what you say. Since you value so much
the two fishes almost turned to stone, I shall try to procure more for
you; they are found in clay beds, as you suppose. Now I seem to have
been speaking to you and you to me--now I must close my letter. The
skipper is ready and the wind is fair. The mighty Protector of all
of us guide them over the great and perilous sea, and preserve them,
especially from the wicked men-hunters, of whom I see they are most in
dread, so that they may come scatheless to their fatherland and find
you, my beloved, with gladness.
PAUL GREENLANDER.
_Greenland, 1756._
This letter, as well as what has been stated in the earlier part of this
chapter, surely justifies us in saying that the primitive morality of
the Eskimo stands in many respects close to that of ideal Christianity,
and is even in one way superior to it; for, as the letter-writer says,
the Greenlanders 'know nothing either of a God or a devil, believe
neither in punishment nor in reward after this life, and yet they live
virtuously' none the less.
Many people will, no doubt, think it astonishing that we should find so
highly developed a morality among a race so uncultivated, and so unclean
in their outward habits. Others will perhaps find it more surprising
that this morality should have been developed among a people who have
no religion, or at any rate a very imperfect one, as we shall presently
see. Such facts are inconsistent with the theory which is still held in
many quarters, that morality and religion are inseparable. A study of
the Eskimo community shows pretty clearly, I think, that morality to a
great extent springs from and rests upon natural law.
Footnotes.
[38: As stated on p. 28, green top-knots are worn by unmarried women
who have had children.]
[39: One reason of this is also to be found in natural selection,
for the half-castes are now generally regarded as handsomer than
the pure-bred Eskimos, and are consequently apt to be preferred in
marriage.]
[40: Holm: _Meddelelser om Grönland_, pt. 10, p. 100.]
[41: Paul Egede was for many years a missionary in Greenland, but had
at this time (1756) returned to Copenhagen.]
[42: _Efterretninger om Grönland._]
[43: Pauia or Pavia is the Eskimo corruption of Paul.]
[44: [Evidently the earthquake at Lisbon.--_Trans._]]
[45: Probably the Dutch and English.--[Surely rather the French and
English.--_Trans._]]
[46: Doubtless America.]