INDIANS AND THEIR MEDICINE

Seventeenth-century Americans found the medical practices of the

Indians interesting enough to include descriptions of them in their

accounts of the New World. The attitude of the authors of these early

observations is a mixture of curiosity, wonder, and--on

occasion--admiration.

Henry Spelman, one of the early colonists, wrote of Jamestown and

Virginia as they were in 1609 and 1610. He described the manner of

visiting with the sick among the Indians. According to Spelman, the

"preest" laid the sick Indian upon a mat and, sitting down beside him,

placed a bowl of water and a rattle between them. Taking the water into

his mouth and spraying it over the Indian, the priest then began to

beat his chest and make noises with the rattle. Rising, he shook the

rattle over all of his patient's body, rubbed the distressed parts with

his hands, and then sprinkled water over him again.

Like the colonist, the Indian tried to draw out blood or other matter

from the sick or wounded person. The method often used for releasing

the ill humor from a painful joint or limb must have caused

considerable suffering but may have offered certain advantages in

preventing fatal infection. If the affected part could bear it, the

Indian thrust a smoldering pointed stick deep into the sore place and

kept it there until the excess matter could drain off. Another

technique for burning and opening had a small cone of slowly burning

wood inserted in the distressed place, "letting it burn out upon the

part, which makes a running sore effectually."

Still another method for treating a wound was for the priest to gash

open the wound with a small bit of flint, suck the blood and other

matter from it, and finally apply to it the powder of a root. A

colonist in describing the practice wrote that "they have many

professed phisitions, who with their charmes and rattels, with an

infernall rowt of words and actions, will seeme to sucke their inwarde

griefe from their navels or their grieved places." Judging by other

accounts written during the century concerning Indian medicine, the

powdered root may well have been sassafras, of which there was an

abundance in the Jamestown area. The priest dried the root in the

embers of a fire, scraped off the outer bark, powdered it, and bound

the wound after applying the powder.

Not only did the native American resort to a crude form of bloodletting

but he practiced sweating as well--which was also common to

seventeenth-century European medical practice. In Captain John Smith's

description of Virginia it was noted that when troubled with "dropsies,

swellings, aches, and such like diseases" the cure was to build a stove

"in the form of a dovehouse with mats, so close that a fewe coales

therein covered with a pot, will make the pacient sweate extreamely."

Before lighting his stove, the Indian covered his sweating place with

bark so close that no air could enter. When he began to sweat

profusely, the sick Indian dashed out from his heated shelter and into

a nearby creek, sea, or river. An Englishman commented that after

returning to his hut again he "either recover[s] or give[s] up the

ghost."

The Indians, like Moliere's stage physician, believed in the value of

the purge. Every spring they deliberately made themselves sick with

drinking the juices of a medicinal root. The dosage purged them so

thoroughly that they did not recover until three or four days later.

The Indians also ate green corn in the spring to work the same effect.

The Indian medicine man, like his European counterpart, frequently

dispensed medicines or drugs. As has been the custom among many men in

the medical profession, the medicine man would not reveal the secrets

of his medicines. "Made very knowing in the hidden qualities of plants

and other natural things," he considered it a part of the obligations

of his priesthood to conceal the information from all but those who

were to succeed him. On the other hand, the Indian priest showed his

concern for the health of his people--and the similarity of his

attitude to that of present day practices--by making an exception to

his canon of secrecy in the case of drugs needed in emergencies arising

on a hunting trip and during travel.

According to one early eighteenth-century history of Virginia, the

Indian in choosing raw materials for drugs preferred roots and barks of

trees to the leaves of plants or trees. If the drug were to be taken

internally it was mixed with water; when juices were to be applied

externally they were left natural unless water was necessary for

moistening. Whatever the drug and however utilized, the Indian called

it _wisoccan_ or _wighsacan_, for this term was not a specific herb,

as some of the earlier settlers thought, but a general term.

Besides sassafras, medicinal roots and barks, the Indian believed in

beneficial effects of a kind of clay called _wapeig_. The clay, in the

opinion of the Indians, cured sores and wounds; an English settler

marvelled to find in use "a strange kind of earth, the vertue whereof I

know not; but the Indians eate it for physicke, alleaging that it

cureth the sicknesse and paine of the belly." Insomuch as the Indian

priest preferred to keep his professional secrets, the colonist was

unlikely ever to learn the "vertue" of the clay.

If the Indian medicine man had not believed that his gods would be

displeased--or his prestige lowered--by revealing the nature of the

_wisoccan_ he prescribed, it would have been possible for the early

Virginians to have drawn upon the Indian knowledge of, and experience

with, the simples and therapies of the New World. (Perhaps the

"vertues" of the clay would have cured the "paines" of the Jamestown

bellies.) As it was, the settlers make little mention of a reliance

upon the Indians for medical assistance.

Medicine in Virginia, 1607-1699 · 第 12 / 37 题