[512]Ibid., pp. 111, 154; Winslow, p. 356; Wood, pp. 105-6. This interpretation of Wampanoag religious philosophy may reflect the bias of European observers conditioned by their own Christian beliefs and the desire to see parallels to them. In actual fact, Wampanoags seem to have had a concept of multiple souls, and the fate of all these was perhaps not the same, considering the fear they had of spirits of all the dead.
[512]Ibid., pp. 111, 154; Winslow, p. 356; Wood, pp. 105-6. This interpretation of Wampanoag religious philosophy may reflect the bias of European observers conditioned by their own Christian beliefs and the desire to see parallels to them. In actual fact, Wampanoags seem to have had a concept of multiple souls, and the fate of all these was perhaps not the same, considering the fear they had of spirits of all the dead.
[513]Wood, pp. 104-105.
[513]Wood, pp. 104-105.
[514]Ibid.; MOURT’S RELATION, pp. 130-33, 142-43;Williams, pp. 216-18; Willoughby, pp. 233, 237-39, 241-42.
[514]Ibid.; MOURT’S RELATION, pp. 130-33, 142-43;Williams, pp. 216-18; Willoughby, pp. 233, 237-39, 241-42.
[515]Winslow, p. 363.
[515]Winslow, p. 363.
[516]Williams, pp. 216-18.
[516]Williams, pp. 216-18.
[517]Winslow, p. 363; Morton, pp. 169-170.
[517]Winslow, p. 363; Morton, pp. 169-170.
[518]Willoughby, p. 233.
[518]Willoughby, p. 233.
[519]Williams, pp. 216-18.
[519]Williams, pp. 216-18.
[520]Morton, pp. 170-71.
[520]Morton, pp. 170-71.
[521]Ibid.; Wood, p. 104.
[521]Ibid.; Wood, p. 104.
[522]Williams, p. 214.
[522]Williams, p. 214.
[523]Wood, p. 104.
[523]Wood, p. 104.
[524]Morton, p. 133; Winslow, p. 363.
[524]Morton, p. 133; Winslow, p. 363.
[525]Williams, pp. 216-18. It is likely that considerable of this display was less of what we would call “grief” than an attempt to convince the spirit of the deceased not to linger and trouble those who were close to him in life. Malevolence on the part of spirits of the dead is a typical northern Algonquian pattern, and abandoning the house to trick the spirit of a dead relative is a very common practice in primitive groups throughout the world.
[525]Williams, pp. 216-18. It is likely that considerable of this display was less of what we would call “grief” than an attempt to convince the spirit of the deceased not to linger and trouble those who were close to him in life. Malevolence on the part of spirits of the dead is a typical northern Algonquian pattern, and abandoning the house to trick the spirit of a dead relative is a very common practice in primitive groups throughout the world.
[526]Morton, pp. 170-71; Williams, pp. 71, 214-15; Winslow, p. 362; Wood, p. 104.
[526]Morton, pp. 170-71; Williams, pp. 71, 214-15; Winslow, p. 362; Wood, p. 104.
[527]Williams, pp. 214-15.
[527]Williams, pp. 214-15.
[528]Winslow, p. 363.
[528]Winslow, p. 363.
[529]Morton, p. 133; Wood, p. 104.
[529]Morton, p. 133; Wood, p. 104.
[530]Morton, p. 133; Williams, pp. 35, 216.
[530]Morton, p. 133; Williams, pp. 35, 216.
[531]Williams, pp. 214-15.
[531]Williams, pp. 214-15.
[532]Ibid., p. 34.
[532]Ibid., p. 34.
[533]John Elliot and Thomas Mayhew, “Tears of Repentance, etc.,” Massachusetts Historical Society, COLLECTIONS, Ser. 3, IV (Boston, 1834) p. 202.
[533]John Elliot and Thomas Mayhew, “Tears of Repentance, etc.,” Massachusetts Historical Society, COLLECTIONS, Ser. 3, IV (Boston, 1834) p. 202.
[534]Williams, pp. 82, 150.
[534]Williams, pp. 82, 150.
[535]Ibid., pp. 114, 128; John Elliot, “The Day Breaking, if not the Sun Rising of the Gospell with the Indians of New England,” Massachusetts Historical Society, COLLECTIONS, Ser. 3, IV (Boston, 1834), p. 19; Elliot and Mayhew, pp. 186, 202; Winslow, pp. 357-58.
[535]Ibid., pp. 114, 128; John Elliot, “The Day Breaking, if not the Sun Rising of the Gospell with the Indians of New England,” Massachusetts Historical Society, COLLECTIONS, Ser. 3, IV (Boston, 1834), p. 19; Elliot and Mayhew, pp. 186, 202; Winslow, pp. 357-58.
[536]Elliot, “The Day Breaking—,” pp. 16, 19; Mayhew and Elliot, p. 186; Williams, pp. 48-49, 154.
[536]Elliot, “The Day Breaking—,” pp. 16, 19; Mayhew and Elliot, p. 186; Williams, pp. 48-49, 154.
[537]Williams, pp. 149-50.
[537]Williams, pp. 149-50.
[538]Elliot and Mayhew, p. 202.
[538]Elliot and Mayhew, p. 202.
[539]Ibid., pp. 186, 202; Williams, p. 152; Winslow, pp. 357-58.
[539]Ibid., pp. 186, 202; Williams, p. 152; Winslow, pp. 357-58.
[540]Williams, pp. 114, 128.
[540]Williams, pp. 114, 128.
[541]Elliot and Mayhew, p. 202.
[541]Elliot and Mayhew, p. 202.
[542]Morton, pp. 167-68, Williams, pp. 114, 148-49; Winslow, pp. 355-56.
[542]Morton, pp. 167-68, Williams, pp. 114, 148-49; Winslow, pp. 355-56.
[543]Williams, p. 111.
[543]Williams, p. 111.
[544]Winslow, pp. 355-56; Wood, p. 86.
[544]Winslow, pp. 355-56; Wood, p. 86.
[545]Williams, pp. 157-58; Winslow, pp. 355-56. Morton, pp. 167-68, also recounts a creation story, in which the people so anger Kiehtan that he destroys all that are evil in a flood. Morton’s version sounds like a re-make of the flood story in Genesis. However, a common tale in North American Indian mythology involves the existence of the world in some other state, its destruction and subsequent transformation into its present form. It is impossible to tell from the evidence at hand the extent to which the story’s aboriginal content has been altered through contact with Christian mythology.
[545]Williams, pp. 157-58; Winslow, pp. 355-56. Morton, pp. 167-68, also recounts a creation story, in which the people so anger Kiehtan that he destroys all that are evil in a flood. Morton’s version sounds like a re-make of the flood story in Genesis. However, a common tale in North American Indian mythology involves the existence of the world in some other state, its destruction and subsequent transformation into its present form. It is impossible to tell from the evidence at hand the extent to which the story’s aboriginal content has been altered through contact with Christian mythology.
[546]Williams, p. 114.
[546]Williams, p. 114.
[547]Ibid., p. 148-49; Winslow, pp. 355-56.
[547]Ibid., p. 148-49; Winslow, pp. 355-56.
[548]Williams, pp. 148-49.
[548]Williams, pp. 148-49.
[549]Ibid., p. 151; Winslow, pp. 355-58; Wood, p. 92.
[549]Ibid., p. 151; Winslow, pp. 355-58; Wood, p. 92.
[550]Williams, p. 94.
[550]Williams, p. 94.
[551]Ibid, p. 151; Gookin, p. 153; Winslow, pp. 355-56.
[551]Ibid, p. 151; Gookin, p. 153; Winslow, pp. 355-56.
[552]Winslow, p. 358-59.
[552]Winslow, p. 358-59.
[553]Ibid.
[553]Ibid.
[554]Wood, p. 92.
[554]Wood, p. 92.
[555]Williams, pp. 48-49.
[555]Williams, pp. 48-49.
[556]Ibid., pp. 34-35.
[556]Ibid., pp. 34-35.
[557]Ibid.
[557]Ibid.
[558]Ibid., p. 152.
[558]Ibid., p. 152.
[559]Ibid., pp. 152, 212-13; Winslow, pp. 357-58.
[559]Ibid., pp. 152, 212-13; Winslow, pp. 357-58.
[560]Elliot, “The Day Breaking—,” pp. 19-20.
[560]Elliot, “The Day Breaking—,” pp. 19-20.
[561]Morton, pp. 150-52; Winslow, p. 366; Wood, pp. 92-93.
[561]Morton, pp. 150-52; Winslow, p. 366; Wood, pp. 92-93.
[562]Some of the historical sources and the example of other Algonquian groups suggest that this power varied in its nature from one powow to another, depending upon the kind of spirit which gave it, thus the abilities of powows would vary accordingly as to what sorts of things they were able to do. This in turn was displayed in various individualized types of tricks.
[562]Some of the historical sources and the example of other Algonquian groups suggest that this power varied in its nature from one powow to another, depending upon the kind of spirit which gave it, thus the abilities of powows would vary accordingly as to what sorts of things they were able to do. This in turn was displayed in various individualized types of tricks.
[563]Elliot “The Day Breaking—,” pp. 19-20; Elliot and Mayhew, p. 186. As far as can be ascertained, the role of the powow was not formally hereditary. In practice the office probably remained closely tied to certain families, if only because association and heredity stimulated the appropriate dreams in the offspring of those who were powows.
[563]Elliot “The Day Breaking—,” pp. 19-20; Elliot and Mayhew, p. 186. As far as can be ascertained, the role of the powow was not formally hereditary. In practice the office probably remained closely tied to certain families, if only because association and heredity stimulated the appropriate dreams in the offspring of those who were powows.