Читать книгу Great Events in the History of North and South America - Charles A. Goodrich - Страница 22

Table of Contents

Various speculations on the subject—Opinions of Voltaire—Of Rev. Thomas Thorowgood—Dr. Boudinot—Roger Williams—Hubbard—Thomas Morton—John Josselin—Cotton Mather—Dr. Mitchell—Dr. Swinton.

Although not in precise accordance with the plan of this work, yet, on account of the interest which attaches to the subject, we devote a few pages to an exposition of the various theories advanced in relation to the origin of the Indian tribes existing at the time the English settled the country. These theories have been various, according to the whims or predilections of the authors. Some have seen in them an original species of the human race, unconnected with any of the nations or tribes of the old world. Others have fancied their resemblance to this or the other people, ancient or modern, of the eastern continent—as Hebrews, Trojans, Tartars, and the like.

Voltaire, and other skeptical writers, have accounted for their origin, according to the first-named theory. They have considered the Indian placed in America by the hand of the Creator, or by nature—just as the buffalo, or the tortoise, or any other animal, was placed there—or just as trees and other products of vegetation, that are indigenous to the soil. Thus they make no account of the apparent scriptural doctrine of the unity of the human race—the common descent from Adam.

The identity of the Indian with the Hebrew or the Israelite has been conjectured by many. Rev. Thomas Thorowgood, an author of the seventeenth century, held that opinion, and endeavored to prove that the Indians were the Jews, who had been lost in the world for the space of near two thousand years. Adair, who claims to have resided forty years among the southern Indians, published a large quarto upon their origin, history, &c. He endeavors to prove their identity with the Jews, by showing the similarity of their customs, usages, and language to those of the latter. The author of the Star in the West, Dr. Boudinot, has followed the same thing, and thinks assuredly that the Indians are the long-lost ten tribes of Israel.

Roger Williams, at one time, expressed the same opinion. He writes, in a letter to friends in Salem, that the Indians did not come into America from the north-east, as some had imagined, for the following reasons: 1, Their ancestors affirm that they came from the south-west, and return thence when they die; 2, Because they separate their women, in a little wigwam by themselves, at certain seasons; and 3, Beside their god Kuttand, to the south-west, they hold that Nanawitnawit (a God overhead) made the heavens and the earth; and he avers, also, that he (the writer) had found "some taste of affinity with the Hebrew."

The similarity of practices, or even of a number of terms in a language, can, however, be no conclusive proof of sameness of origin. It may be merely accidental, or in respect to customs more particularly, may be owing to similarity of circumstances. "Who will pretend that different people, when placed under similar circumstances, will not have similar wants, and hence similar actions? that like wants will not prompt like exertions? and like causes produce not like effects?" The slight resemblances existing, or fancied to exist, between the Indians and the Israelites, may be owing to a cause like the one pointed out. As to the language of the Indians, Mr. William Wood, an old writer, says: "Some have thought that they might be of the dispersed Jews, because some of their words be near unto the Hebrew; but, by the same rule, they may conclude them to be of the gleanings of all nations, because they have words after the Greek, Latin, French, and other tongues."

Hubbard, an American historian, who wrote about 1680, has this among other passages on the subject: "If any observation be made of their manners and dispositions, it is easier to say from what nations they did not, than from whom they did derive their original. Doubtless their conjecture, who fancy them to be descended from the ten tribes of the Israelites, carried captive by the Salamaneser and Esarhaddon, hath the least show of reason of any other, there being no footsteps to be observed of their propinquity to them more than to any other of the tribes of the earth, either as to their language or manners."

Thomas Morton, an early New England historian, refers their origin to the scattered Trojans, observing, "for after that Brutus, who was the fourth from Æneas, left Latium, upon the conflict held with the Latins, where, although he gave them a great overthrow to the slaughter of their grand captain, and many others of the heroes of Latium, yet he held it more safely to depart unto some other place and people, than by staying to run the hazard of an unquiet life or doubtful conquest; which, as history maketh mention, he performed. This people was dispersed there is no question, but the people that lived with him, by reason of their conversation with the Grecians and Latins, had a mixed language that participated of both." Morton maintains the great similarity of the languages of the Indians to the Greek and Roman, as an instance of which, he fancied he heard among their words Pasco-pan, and hence thinks without doubt their ancestors were acquainted with the god Pan!

A writer, Mr. John Josselin, who resided some time in New England, towards the middle part of the seventeenth century, pronounces the speech of the Mohawks to be a dialect of the Tartars. He says "the north-east people of America, that is, New England, &c., are judged to be Tartars, called Samoades, being alike in complexion, shape, habit and manners."

That the Indians were Scythians, is an opinion expressed in a decided manner by Cotton Mather. He was confirmed in it, on meeting with this passage of Julius Cæsar: "Difficilis invenire quam interficere," rendered by him, "It is harder to find them than to foil them." Cæsar was speaking of the Scythians, and the aptness of the language, as expressing one peculiarity of the Indians in their warfare—their sudden attacks and retreats—is noticeable.

Dr. S. L. Mitchell, of New York, a voluminous writer in his day, thought that he had settled the question of the origin of the Indians. They came, in his opinion, from the north-east of Asia, and that is now, perhaps, the more common belief. He thinks that they possessed originally the same color, as that of the north-eastern nations of Asia.

Dr. Swinton, author of many parts of the Universal History, after stating the different opinions of various authors, who have advocated in favor of "the dispersed people," the Phœnicians and other eastern nations, observes, "that, therefore, the Americans in general were descended from a people who inhabited a country not so far distant from them as Egypt and Phœnicia, one will, as we apprehend, readily admit. Now, no country can be pitched upon so proper and convenient for this purpose, as the north-eastern part of Asia, particularly Great Tartary, Siberia, and more especially the peninsula of Kamschatka. That probably was the tract through which many Tartarian colonies passed into America, and peopled the most considerable part of the new world."[17]