« PreviousContinue »
flags would destroy his own life, but he himself used the deer-horns, the instrument of death. After a two days' fight, the Good Mind slew his brother and crushed him in the earth; and the last words of the Bad Mind were that he would have equal power over men's souls after death; then he sank down to eternal doom and became the Evil Spirit. The Good Mind visited the people, and then retired from the earth.
This is a graphic tale. Its version of the cosmic myth of the World-Tortoise, and its apparent philosophical myth of fossil footprints, have much mythological interest. But its Biblical copying extends to the very phraseology, and only partial genuineness can be allowed to its main theme. Dr. Brinton has profitably criticized this, referring to early American writers to show how much dualistic fancy has sprung up since the times of first intercourse between natives and white men, and pointing out the habit of European narrators to make distinctions between good and evil spirits in ways foreign to Indian thought. When we compare this legend, he says, with the version of the same legend given by Father Brebeuf, missionary to the Hurons in 1636, we find its whole complexion altered; the moral dualism vanishes; the names of Good and Bad Mind do not appear; it is the story of Ioskeha the White One, with his brother Tawiscara the Dark One, and we at once perceive that Christian influence in the course of two centuries had given the tale a meaning foreign to its real intent.
Brinton's tracing of the myth to its earlier stage is quite just, and in great measure also his view as to the development of its dualism. Yet if we go back to the earliest sources and examine this myth of the White One and the Dark One, we shall find it to be itself one of the most perfect examples the world can show of the rise of primitive dualism in the savage mind. Father Brebeuf's story is as
1 Schoolcraft, Indian Tribes,' part v. p. 632 ; see part i, p. 316, part vi. p. 166; 'Iroquois,' p. 36, see 237 ; Brinton, Myths of New World,' p. 63.
follows: Aataentsic the Moon fell from heaven on earth, and bore two sons, Taouiscaron and Iouskeha, who being grown up quarrelled ; judge, he says, if there be not in this a touch of the death of Abel. They came to combat, but with very different weapons. Iouskeha had a stag-horn, Taouiscaron contented himself with some wild-rose berries, persuading himself that as soon as he should thus.smite his brother, he would fall dead at his feet; but it fell out quite otherwise than he had promised himself, and Iouskeha struck him so heavy a blow in the side that the blood gushed forth in streams. The poor wretch fled, and from his blood which fell upon the land came the flints which the savages still call Taouiscara, from the victim's name. From this we see it to be true that the original myth of the two brothers, the White One and the Dark One, had no moral element. It seems mere nature-myth, the contest between Day and Night, for the Hurons knew that Iouskeha was the Sun, even as his mother or grandmother Aataentsic was the Moon. Yet in the contrast between these two, the Huron mind had already come to the rudimentary contrast of the Good and Evil Deity. Iouskeha the Sun, it is expressly said, seemed to the Indians their benefactor; their kettle would not boil were it not for him; it was he who learnt from the Tortoise the art of making fire ; without him they would have no luck in hunting; it is he who makes the corn to grow. Iouskeha the Sun takes care for the living and all things concerning life, and therefore, says the missionary, they say he is good. But Aataentsic the Moon, the creatress of earth and man, makes men die and has charge of their departed souls, and they say she is evil. Iouskeha and Taouiskaron, the Sun and Moon, dwell together in their cabin at the end of the earth, and thither it was that the four Indians made the mythic journey of which various episodes have been more than once cited here ; true to their respective characters, the Sun receives the travellers kindly and saves them from the harm the beauteous but hurtful Moon would have done them. Another missionary of still earlier time identifies Iouskeha with the supreme deity Atahocan : “Iouskeha,” he says, “is good and gives growth and fair weather; his grandmother Eatahentsic is wicked and spoils.”] Thus in early Iroquois legend, the Sun and Moon, as god and goddess of Day and Night, had already acquired the characters of the great friend and enemy of man, the Good and Evil Deity. And as to the related cosmic legend of Day and Night, contrasted in the persons of the two brothers, the White One and the Dark One, though this was originally pure unethic nature-myth, yet it naturally took the same direction among the half-Europeanized Indians of later times, becoming a moral myth of Good and Evil. We have thus before us the profoundly interesting fact, that the rude North American Indians have more than once begun the same mythologic transition which in ancient Asia shaped the contrast of light and darkness into the contrast of righteousness and wickedness, by following out the same thought which still in the European mind arrays in the hostile forms of Light and Darkness the contending powers of Good and Evil.
Judging by such evidence as this, at once of the rudimentary dualism springing up in savage animism, and of the tendency of this to amalgamate with similar thought brought in by foreign intercourse, we may fairly account for many systems of this class found in the native religions of America. While the character and age of the evidence may lead us to agree with Waitz that the North American Indian dualism, the most distinct and universal feature of their religion, is not to be referred to a modern and Christian origin, yet we shall be cautious in claiming anything that may be borrowed civilized theology, as being genuine evidence of primitive development. The Algonquin's belief recognizes the antagonistic Kitchi Manitu and Matchi Manitu, the Great Spirit and Evil Spirit, who preside over the
1 Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jesuites dans la Nouvelle France,' 1635, p. 34, 1636, p. 100. Sagard, “Histoire du Canada,' Paris, 1636, p. 490. L. H. Morgan, • Iroquois,' p. 156.
spiritual contending hosts which fill the world and struggle . for the mastery over it. They are especially associated, the one with light and warmth, the other with damp and darkness, while some tribes identify them with Sun and Moon. Here the nature-religion of the savage may have been developed, but was not set on foot, by the foreigner. In the extreme north-west, we may doubt any native origin in the semi-Christianized Kodiak's definition of Shljem Shoá the creator of heaven and earth, to whom offerings were made before and after the hunt, as contrasted with Ijak the bad spirit dwelling in the earth. In the extreme south-east, we may find more originality among the Floridan Indians two or three centuries ago, for they are said to have paid solemn worship to the Bad Spirit Toia who plagued them with visions, but to have had small regard for the Good Spirit, who troubles himself little about mankind. On the southern continent, Martius makes this characteristic remark as to the rude tribes of Brazil: “All Indians have a lively conviction of the power of an evil principle over them; in many there dawns also a glimpse of the good; but they revere the one less than they fear the other. It might be thought that they hold the Good Being weaker in relation to the fate of man than the Evil.” This generalization is to some extent supported by statements as to particular tribes. The Macusis are said to recognize the good creator Macunaima, "he who works by night,” and his evil adversary Epel or Horiuch: of these people it is observed that “ All the powers of nature are products of the Good Spirit, when they do not disturb the Indian's rest and comfort, but the work of evil spirits when they do.” Uauuloa and Locozy, the good and evil deity of the Yumanas, live above the earth and toward the sun : the Evil Deity is feared by these
1 Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,' vol. iii. pp. 182, 330, 335, 345; La Potherie, * Hist. de l'Amér. Septentrionale,' Paris, 1722, vol. i. p. 121 ; J. G. Müller, p. 149, etc. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,' part i. p. 35, etc., 320, 412 ; Catlin, vol. i. p. 156 ; Greye, 'Commerce of Prairies,' vol. ii. Pp. 238, 305 ; Cranz, ‘Grönland,' p. 263.
savages, but the Good Deity will come to eat fruit with the departed and take their souls to his dwelling, wherefore they bury the dead each doubled up in his great earthen pot, with fruit in his lap, and looking toward the sunrise. Even the rude Botocudos are thought to recognize antagonistic principles of good and evil in the persons of the Sun and Moon.' This idea has especial interest from its correspondence on the one hand with that of the Iroquois tribes, and on the other with that of the comparatively civilized Muyscas of Bogota, whose good deity is unequivocally a mythic Sun, thwarted in his kindly labours for man by his wicked wife Huythaca the Moon. The native religion of Chili is said to have placed among the subaltern deities Meulen, the friend of man, and Huecuvu the bad spirit and author of evil. These people can hardly have learnt from Christianity to conceive their evil spirit as simply and fully the general cause of misfortune: if the earth quakes, Huecuvu has given it a shock; if a horse tires, Huecuvu has ridden him ; if a man falls sick, Huecuvu has sent the disease into his body, and no man dies but that Huecuvu suffocates him.
In Africa, again, rudimentary dualism is not ill represented in native religion. An old account from Loango describes the natives as theoretically recognizing Zambi the supreme deity, creator of good and lover of justice, and over against him Zambi-anbi the destroyer, the counsellor of crime, the author of loss and accident, of disease and death. But when it comes to actual worship, as the good God will always be favourable, it is the god of evil who must be appeased, and it is for his satisfaction that men
Mrtius, 'Ethnog. Amer.' vol. i. rp. 327, 485,583, 645, see 247, 393, 427, 616. See also J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrelig.' pp. 259, etc., 403, 423; D'Orbigny, L'Homme Américain,' vol. i. p. 405, vol. ii. p, 257; Falkner, *Patagonia,' p. 114; Musters, Patagonians,' p. 179; Fitzroy, Voy. of Adventure and Beagle,' vol. i. pp. 180, 190.
? Piedrahita, Hist. de Nuev. Granada,' part i. book i. ch. 3.
8 Molina, Hist. of Chili,' vol. ii. P. 84 ; Febres, 'Diccionario Chileno,