UC-NRLF 98 $B ST 322 CO CO to 1 15 THE EXPLANATORY ELEMENT IN THE FOLK-TALES OF THE NORTH-AMERICAN INDIANS. BY T. T. WATERMAN. \ Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philo- sophy in the Faculty of Philosophy, Columbia University. Reprinted from The Journal of American Folk-Lore, Vol. XXVII, No. CHI, January-March, 19 14 lt& :. >\9 [Reprinted from The Journal of American FoLk-Lona, VoK X^Xyil., No. CJII. January-March, 1514 \ THE EXPLANATORY ELEMENT IN THE FOLK-TALES OF THE NORTH-AMERICAN INDIANS. BY T. T. WATERMAN. Conspicuous among the very striking features of primitive myth- ologies is the ingenious way in which tales are employed to explain the various facts and fancies fai i'iar to nrimitive folk. In our own European folk-tales this function has been to some degree lost; and in the cases where "explanations of phenomena" are a part of our folk-tales, the explanations themselves sometimes concern rather trifling things. For an example I might mention "The Story of the Straw, the Coal, and the Bean," — a favorite in Grimm's familiar "Household Tales," — which tells why the bean to-day has a curious seam around it. 1 With primitive folk the case is otherwise. In connection, perhaps, with a more solemn attitude toward folk-lore of all sorts, we find a large number of stories devoted to the explana- tion of serious matters, and we find such explanations treated with respect. I should like to give as an example one that is often quoted, from the folk-lore of British Columbia. The Black Bear and the Chipmunk once contended against each other, the former for darkness, the latter for light. The Bear cried, "Lipa, Lipa, Lipa!" and the Chipmunk, "Ma' a, ma' a, ma' a!" The Bear, finding that the Chip- munk was his equal in the possession of magic powers, finally became enraged, and would have killed his adversary; but the Chipmunk was too quick for him, and ran into his hole just as the Bear made a dash for him. The Bear scratched the Chipmunk when going into his hole. This is the origin of the present stripes on the chipmunk's back. If the Bear had managed to kill the Chipmunk, we should have had eternal darkness instead of day and night, as we have at present. 2 This myth has the outward appearance of having been devised to account for certain definite facts. I do not think, however, that we 1 See the numerous explanatory tales in Oskar Dahnhardt's Natursagen. 8 Thompson, 1, p. 61 (for full titles, see bibliography, pp. 50-54). VOL. XXVII. NO. IO3. — I. I 30585.3 2 .*.:;•: :*: r. -Journal df American Folk-Lore. need to assume that this tale, merely because it explains something very neatly, was consciously invented. Its undoubted literary merit as a tale, for instance, does not compel us to believe that its plot was consciously elaborated. In any case, however, the explanation certainly fits into the plot of the story as though it belonged there. We might very readily suppose that in this and similar cases the tendency to explain a certain thing has had something to do with the origin and the shaping of the tale. In most mythologies the number of tales in which, as in this one, the explanation is explicit and in- genious, is very large. Such tales form a very striking feature in the folk-lore of North America, and they are by no means unheard of elsewhere. It might readily be assumed, therefore, that the desire for explaining one thing or another may have played in general a con- siderable part in the formation of folk-tales. This is in fact the most popular method of explaining the "origin" of myths. The purpose of the present paper is to find out whether or not the "explanatory tendency" will account for the origin of the native folk- tales of North America. THE METHOD. It is rather evident that any discussion concerning the actual de- velopment of folk-tales must be based on something other than ascertainable historical data. A documentary history, even for the development of our own folk-lore during its literary period, is in all likelihood out of the question. This fact has been widely recognized ; and the writers who deal at all with the history of folk-lore attempt to reconstruct that history either on the basis of psychological prob- abilities, or on the study of folk-lore as it is found to exist among modern peoples. It is not altogether clear how far conclusions drawn from present conditions can be applied to the past stages of history. Until the contrary is proved, I think it is certainly a fair assumption, however, that any forces we may discover at work now have been at work probably also in the past. This idea is applicable, of course, to all branches of human activity. The products and expressions of human thought to-day are in general so obviously similar to the pro- ductions of former peoples, even those of long-past ages, that we may > assume a fundamental similarity of thought, a fundamental parallel- ^ ism of mental processes. The method, it seems to me, of learning about the past by studying the present, is especially applicable in the study of folk-lore. This is perhaps a good time to insist on the point that myths and folk-tales are certainly not altogether the product of "a kind of thought now extinct," as Lang puts it. On the contrary, myths are in process of formation to-day. 1 They are developing around 1 Van Gennep, in his Origines des Legendes (Paris, 1907), p. 261, refers to this point. Folk-Tales of the North American Indians, 3 such historical figures as Washington and Benedict Arnold. Abraham Lincoln, for that matter, is essentially a mythical character in the popular imagination. The Lincoln who is pictured in story certainly never had any objective existence. It seems rather important, then, in arranging our ideas about the origin of folk- tales, to discover, first of all, what is true of folk-lore to-day. This study is almost certain to supply some material for conclusions concerning the history of folk-lore in the past. The present paper is an attempt to investigate the condition of folk- lore in one part of the world only, — America north of Mexico. It is conceivable that conditions in other parts of the world are quite differ- ent. The North American field is so large, however, and the material so varied, that it seems plausible to suppose that the general tenden- cies found to operate here will probably be operative to a greater or less degree in the folk-lore of other regions. Even in dealing with the folk-lore of America north of Mexico, it seems advisable to narrow the discussion down to certain selected groups of people. The material which forms the basis for the study of American folk-lore has been very unevenly recorded. In some regions the native folk-lore has been preserved in fairly complete form. Many individual tribes, even where they are related to each other, are represented by rather full collections of tales. This is par- ticularly true along the Northwest coast and among certain tribes (especially the Caddoan) on the Southern plains. In other cases the folk-lore map is relatively bare for hundreds of miles. Tribe after tribe, some of them very important, has been ignored by the mycol- ogist, and in some cases the folk-lore has largely disintegrated. This is especially true of northeastern and southeastern North America, though perhaps considerable material may yet be obtained. No two tribes have been more important in historical and ante-historical times than the Sioux and the Iroquois, and yet there are no two tribes about whose mythology we have less information of a satisfactory sort. In view of this condition, there is no apparent reason why the present study should attempt to include material from all the tribes. It seems quite feasible, however, in the present state of the literature, and by proper selection, to make a study which will be fairly representative of the continent as a whole. Therefore, the effort in the following paragraphs will be, not primarily to include as much material as pos- sible, but to distribute the investigation among those tribes that may be considered typical. We ought, I think, to consider at least one, if possible more than one, mythology from each of the seven culture- areas into which the continent may be divided. The following list represents the tribes whose mythologfesliave been analyzed as a basis for the present paper. Journal of American Folk-Lore. I. Arctic. Dakota. 6. Plateau. Eskimo. Grosventre. Shoshoni. 2. Woodland. Arapaho. Thompson. Micmac. Omaha-Ponca. Shushwap. Abnaki. Pawnee. 7. North Pacific. Ojibwa. 4. Southwest. Chinook. Fox. Hopi. Bella Coola. 3. Plains. Jicarilla. Kwakiutl. Assiniboin. 5. California. Haida. Blackfoot. Yana. Tlingit. The writer may appear to have been moved by mere perversity in directing his choice in certain of the above instances. For example, the folk-lore of the Micmac, the second tribe in the list, is in a sad condition, — mixed with European elements, and apparently in large part recast to accord with a European taste. It would perhaps seem better to take up, in place of the Micmac, one of the numerous mythologies concerning which we have relatively complete data. The fourteen Dakota tales which have been analyzed in the present study represent only a small fraction of the mythology of the Dakota people, most of which could undoubtedly be obtained to-day by an observer in the field. There were reasons, however, why these mythologies should be con- sidered. The Micmac are so important from their geographical position , that their folk-lore, it seems, ought to be considered, even though it exists in incomplete or in garbled form. The Dakota are so important as a tribe, that it seems well to include their mythology in the present study, even though we must base our conclusions on only fourteen tales. A good many mythologies, on the other hand, have been omitted purposely. When we have analyzed a hundred and thirteen Pawnee (Skidi) myths and tales, it seems unnecessary to consider the myths of closely allied groups, such as the Chaui or Kitkehahki, or even more remote groups, such as the Wichita and Caddo. The present paper does not pretend to include all the available material, even in regard to the tribes considered. The literature worked over for each tribe may be regarded, however, as fairly representative, — a point which is perhaps, in this connection, more important than absolute completeness. Wherever possible, collec- tions of tales recorded in some one definite locality were considered, leaving aside such tales as were recorded elsewhere. By this method, even though the total number of tales on which the conclusions are based is reduced, we have the advantage of a complete cross-section through the mythologies of a number of localities. It ought to be clearly borne in mind that the whole body of myth material on which the following study is based has been sifted, and only those sources for any region brought into comparison, which, on account of their com- Folk-Tales of the North American Indians. 5 pleteness, offer this cross-sectional view. Thus, out of a number of important sources for the folk-lore of the Eskimo, only the tales of the Cumberland Sound tribes have been considered, and selected for com- parison with those of other peoples. The reason for this is, that the series of tales from Cumberland Sound l is so long that we can be fairly certain that every important tale known to the group is represented in it. In similar fashion the mythology of the Haida Indians of the Queen Charlotte Islands is represented by a single series of tales recorded in the Skidegate dialect. The reason here is, that the tales there recorded represent the most complete, if not the largest, single series of Haida myths so far extant. In cases where we have no long series of tales recorded in one village or among one definite local group, it is necessary to fall back on the less satisfactory collections the provenience of which is not specifically recorded. It might be re- marked finally, before passing on to other matters, that by choosing certain complete and representative sources for this study, in place of including all the possible material, the tabulations in the following pages were reduced to a reasonable compass. It also seems necessary to say a word about certain terms commonly employed in mythological discussions. I believe that in the study of folk-lore, more perhaps than in many other subjects, it is well to reach an understanding concerning the terms employed, before a discussion rather than after it. It is obvious, of course, that folk- tales, to take up merely one branch of folk-lore, may be analyzed and classified under several different headings. A number of terms have come into use in connection with the different varieties of narrative which result from such a classification, — terms such as "myth," "folk- tale," "legend," "tradition," and a number of other less common- place ones, such as "saga," "Marchen," "conte," and others. Within recent years especially, some effort has been made to restrict the appli- cation of certain of these words to some one subdivision of the general subject. Thus the suggestion has been put forward that all stories with a definite hero should be described as "sagas," while those in which the hero is anonymous should be classified as "Marchen" or "contes." 2 This suggestion has been matched with another one, that "saga" should imply a story which is held to be true, stories which are told merely for amusement being referred to as "Marchen." 3 In regard to the most important and most widely used term of all, "myth," there has been, unfortunately, no uniformity of usage. To illustrate this point, a few of the current definitions of "myth" might be cited. 1 Eskimo, 2, pp. 163-305, 518-535. * Van Gennep, Les Origines des Legendes, pp. 21 et seq. Compare Macculloch's Childhood of Fiction, p. 450. 3 Gomme, Handbook of Folk-Lore, London, 1890 (Publications of the Folk-Lore So- ciety, vol. xx), p. III. 6 Journal of American Folk-Lore. Thus Jevons says 1 that "myths are narratives in which the doings of some god are related." Van Gennep understands the word " myth " to imply "stories which are objects of belief, and which are handed down through the medium of magic and religious ceremonies," 2 whether or not they have to do with gods. The term "myth" is often applied loosely to any tale of the marvellous. When, for example, Dixon calls his well-known volume "Maidu Myths," he does not mean to include any one type of tale to the exclusion of the others. In the opinion of Rivers, the term "myth" should be restricted to those tales which are the subject of the present paper, — tales with an explanatory func- tion. 3 Perhaps the best usage is this, that literature becomes mythical /when it reflects or refers to the operations of nature. In this sense ' the word is used, among other writers, by Boas. 4 Admitting that usage in the matter of these terms has not become settled, it seems necessary for the student, first of all, to avoid using them arbitrarily in more than one sense. One distinction that must, however, be observed, has a quite dif- ferent basis from those mentioned, and is rendered necessary by the present state of the literature. It must be remarked that a difference exists between what we might call mythical tales on the one hand, and mythical ideas or concepts on the other. This distinction is useful, because we have a great deal of information about the mythical tales of various peoples, but very little about their mythical notions. There exists a large and rapidly multiply- ing body of material concerning mythical tales, not only from North America, but from all over the world, and running back in some instances to a considerable antiquity. On the other hand, our in- formation about the mythical notions, particularly of modern un- civilized peoples, is very incomplete, and often lacking altogether. In the North American field especially, the works which preserve the mythical tales of the native peoples, taking into account only pub- lished books and monographs, number well up toward a hundred. The papers, on the other hand, which systematically discuss the mythical notions of the Indian tribes, might almost be counted on one hand. As examples merely of what is meant by a " discussion of mythical ideas," reference might be made to the discussion of Bella Coola religion by Boas and of Haida religion by Swanton. 5 To make the distinction between mythical notions and mythical tales perfectly clear, it might be well to consider a few definite cases. 1 Idea of God in Early Religions (Cambridge, 1910), p. 33. 8 Les Origines des Legendes, p. 28. 1 W. H. R. Rivers, "The Sociological Significance of Myth" (Folk-Lore, vol. xxiii [1912], p. 310). 4 The Mind of Primitive Man (New York, 1910), p. 230. 6 Bella Coola, 1, pp. 28-48; Haida, 1, pp. 11-37. Folk-Tales of the North American Indians. 7 Among the Indians of North America there is a widespread belief in a bird which produces thunder by clapping its wings, and lightning by winking its eyes. I do not mean to say that this is exclusively an American belief. It is of course found elsewhere; for example, among the Zulu. In America, particularly in northern and western America, this belief plays a very important part in the life of many different tribes, and is a favorite subject for representation in art. This is true, for example, on the Plains and on the North Pacific coast. At the same time, this thunder-bird does not appear very generally as an actor in the mythical tales. 1 It therefore supplies an example of what is meant by a mythical belief or notion. The wide r / currency of this concept, moreover, makes clear the point that a mythical belief can develop and become important independently of any connection with any particular story. A further example of the distinction between tales and concepts is found in the belief, appar- ently of universal acceptance, that the sky is a solid vault, and that beyond or upon the sky is a flat country very much like this one, with vegetation and inhabitants. This conception, while not itself a tale, affords a background for many tales. While this concept may serve indirectly to explain many things to the Indian, such as rain, the movement of the sun, and the like, it has of course no basis in fact, and is another example of a mythical belief. A folk may be provided with quite a series of such ideas, embodying notions not only of a sky country, but of worlds underneath this one, or of a world of the dead, to which spirits go at death. They may also have quite definite even though absolutely mistaken notions of the forces which produce such events as eclipses or earthquakes. The point I wish to emphasize is, that at the present time there are hardly enough complete accounts^ of these mythical notions accessible to render possible a discussion of them, or to afford a basis of study. The present investigation at least has to do only with the question of the part played by explanations in the formation of tales or stories. Only that part of folk-lore has been considered which consists of tales having definite plots. WHAT IS EXPLAINED BY FOLK-TALES. Returning now to the subject of inquiry ,?namely, the part played by the explanatory tendency in the growth of folk-tales, several points seem to stand out especially as subjects for investigation. I think the first question to suggest itself might be worded somewhat as follows : " If there are a large number of explanatory tales in various mythologies, 1 It is found in the stories of the Ojibwa, Bella Coola, Kwakiutl, Tillamook, Thompson, Shuswap, and Assiniboin, and perhaps elsewhere. As a mythical idea and in artistic representations, however, it is found among practically all the tribes of northern and central North America. 8 Journal of American Folk-Lore. what do they explain?" The mere variety of objects accounted for through the medium of folk-tales is a study which must throw light of a more or less direct sort on the psychology of the myth-makers. 1 I suggest this, therefore, as the first appropriate topic for investi- gation. Unfortunately, as soon as we begin to study primitive folk- tales with a view to seeing in this way what is explained, we are confronted with the absolute necessity of deciding what is to be con- sidered as an explanation. It is often hard to tell whether a given passage constitutes an explanation of a given subject, or is merely a passing reference to it. It is, to be sure, easy enough to find a great number of tales which in their present form are unmistakably explan- atory. In trying to find out the total range of explanation, — that is, in trying to bring together all the cases of explanation for study and comparison, — the occurrence of these doubtful cases offers a genuine obstacle. It is actually impossible to decide in some cases whether a given tale explains anything or not. The form of the "explanatory" passage may, in the first place, be equivocal. In some cases the native informant may feel very clearly that a given tale is explanatory, without saying so in so many words. It is obvious at once that an informant might have felt, possibly, that the explanatory sense of a tale was so evident that comment on it would be unneces- sary. In such cases, where an explanation seems to be clearly implied, are we justified in assuming that an explanation is present? This ele- ment of doubt enters into our considerations quite frequently. On the other hand, an informant might conceivably cast a tale into the form of an explanation without deliberately intending anything of the sort. An actual example may make clear the nature of this latter difficulty. We have three passages in North Pacific coast folk-lore which deal, in almost the same words, with the origin of fire. The first of the passages runs as follows : — Raven came to a place where he saw something floating not far from shore. . . . Toward evening he looked at the object, and saw that it resembled fire. So he told a Chicken-hawk,which had a very long bill, to fly out to it, saying, "Be very brave ! I f you get some of that fire, do not let go of it. " The Chicken- hawk reached the place, seized some of the fire, and started back as fast as it could fly; but by the time it got the fire to Raven, its bill was burned off. That is why its bill is short.* This passage, beyond all question, is explanatory. It gives a very definite reason why the chicken-hawk has a short beak. Compare with it another version of the tale from a different locality. 3 1 Use has been made of this method by Rivers in the article referred to above (Folk- Lore, vol. xxiii [1012]). 2 Tlingit, 1, p. II. » Ibid., p. 83. Folk-Tales of the North American Indians. 9 After this the Raven saw a fire way out at sea. Tying a piece of pitch-wood to a chicken-hawk's bill, he told it to go out to this fire, touch it with the pitch- wood, and bring it back. When he had brought it to him, Raven put it into the rock and the red cedar, etc. We know from the former tale that this Tlingit tribe sometimes tell this story to explain chicken-hawk's beak. I should say that the chances are great that some such idea was present also in the story- teller's consciousness when the version just above was related. He merely took it for granted that its explanatory force would be felt, and did not feel obliged to point it out. Nevertheless, as the passage stands, it is not an explanation of chicken-hawk's beak; and a person reading this passage without an acquaintance with Northwest coast mythology would hardly suspect that the story would so much as lend itself to the explanation of this particular point. Consider, finally, the following from Haida mythology. 1 After a while, Raven came to one who had a fire in his house. And he did not know how to get his live-coals. And somebody had bought a deer-skin. "Say, cousin, I want to borrow your deer-skin for a while." And he lent it to him. It had a long tail, they say, and he tied a bundle of pitch-wood to the end of the tail. Then he came in and danced before him. As he danced, his face was turned toward the fire only. After he had danced for a while, he struck his tail into the fire, and the pitch-wood burned. Then his tail was burned off, they say. That is why the deer's tail is short. Then he went into his own skin and flew away with the live-coals. His beak, too, was burned off. And they pursued him. They could not catch him, and turned back. He got the coals neatly. I should like to point out that even this passage, though it actually goes so far as to point out that Raven's beak was burned off, is not in such form that we can be sure that the native story-teller felt it to be an explanation of the shortness of the raven's beak at the present time. The setting for an explanation is all there, but is the explana- tion actually present or not? The question is, of course, whether the > native informant feels it as an explanation. So much, then, for theh/S difficulty of recognizing the explanations which appear in the text. The obstacles which arise in dealing statistically with such material are obvious. Owing to the "endless uncertainty which would result from any other method, only those tales have been reckoned as ex- planatory in which, on somebody's authority, the statement is made that something is explained. It is quite possible that many explana- tions have been ignored. The present paper, however, must be recog- nized as a study of what is explained by those passages which are definitely labelled as explanatory by the native informant. All other passages and all other explanations have been ruled out. 1 Haida, i, p. 135- \ 10 Journal of American Folk-Lore. We have not only the difficulty of recognizing explanations when we see them; but the explanations show amazing variability as regards their connection with the story-plot. In some cases the two seem to be indissolubly connected. For example, it is almost impossible to conceive of the Tlingit myth of the theft of daylight by Raven 1 as anything else than at bottom an explanation of daylight on earth. We do, however, find explanatory tales where the explanation is very loosely attached to the subject-matter. I think a good example of this would be the tales with a ceremonial ending, of the type which is very common on the Northwest coast of America. There is, for exam- ple, the much-loved tale of the person who meets a cannibal spirit, and escapes after a remarkable and perfectly definite series of adven- tures, which are repeated in various forms by a great many tribes. On the Northwest coast such a tale ends very often by referring the use of some ceremonial object to this adventure. 2 Here the "conclu- sion" or "explanation" has little real connection with the story-plot. In the case of some tales the explanation is so inappropriate, that the casual reader could almost suggest a better one, — one more in keeping with the incidents in the plot. In the matter of unity between the plot and the explanation, the variation is simply enormous. The explanations occurring in folk-tales differ endlessly in regard to style. A favorite type of myth in America is one in which the cul- ture-hero comes along and teaches the people, for example, to make baskets, — an art unknown till that time. Or, for that matter, he teaches them to hold sexual intercourse, or how to plant crops. This niight be called the "pedagogical" type of explanation. Another very important type of tale in America is one in which the culture-hero transforms somebody or something into some permanent feature of the landscape or into some well-known animal. Every such story is in a sense explanatory. A few examples may be given to illus- trate this. Raven, for instance, among the Tlingit, is pictured com- ing down-river with the daylight, which he had succeeded in stealing from Raven-at-head-of-Nass. Angered at certain beings who were fishing at the mouth of the river, he releases the daylight, trans- forming them into animals, each according to the type of the blanket he was wearing at the time. This tale is in a sense an "expla- nation" of the animals on earth and their appearance. Tales of this type are too numerous to mention, and make up a very considerable bulk of American mythology. As far as they explain anything at all, they involve what might be called an explanation by "transforma- tion." In the following an attempt has been made to assemble all the explanatory passages, no matter what the type of explanation. 1 See B, p. 311; Tlingit, X, p. 3. 1 Kwakiutl, 1, pp. 87, 513. Folk-Tvles of the North American Indians. n Without attempting to assume that all should be given equal weight in forming our conclusions, it may nevertheless be said that such an accumulation of explanatory passages of all kinds will at least illustrate the range of primitive speculation. An attempt has been made, however, to distinguish between inclusive and particularistic explanations. For example, the myth recounting the adventures and career of some culture-hero may include the statement that "he taught the people all the arts." Or a creation myth may involve the mere statement that the creator "made all the animals." Some other incident, like that of the burning of the world, may account for the fact that "there are stars" in the heavens. Such explanations are certainly to be distinguished psychologically from the minute and carefully localized tales which account for some one definite fact, like the topography of a certain familiar cliff, or the peculiar markings on some definite animal, or the movement and appearance of some definite constellation. It would seem that the distinction in such cases must have been present also in the native mind, whatever may be said of the other instances previously referred to. It seems well to pass over for the present any distinctions which might be drawn between the explanations which are casual and those which are really the motive of the stories in which they occur, and also to ignore for our present purpose the type of the explanation ; that is, whether it is pedagogical, or based on the idea of transforma- tion. The study merely of the popularity of one or the other type of explanation would itself be an interesting undertaking, and would shed some light on primitive psychology. It cannot, however, be under- taken here. The difference just mentioned between the broad and the particularistic explanations, is, however, so fundamental, that the two types of explanation have been indicated in the following study by different symbols. The total range of things explained, and the curious way in which these explanations are distributed over the face of nature, are shown briefly in the following tabulation. In this table an asterisk indicates a generalized explanation. Numerals show the number of explana- tions of individual or particular phenomena under each general head. For example, opposite the heading "Culture," in the Abnaki column, the asterisk stands for the statement, "The hero taught the people all the arts;" in the Ojibwa column, the numeral I means that a hero established one element of culture (in this case, wampum); in the Blackfoot column, the asterisk followed by the numeral 3 indicates that a being arranged for "everything in the life of the people," and, further, that three additional explanations account for the origin of three individual cultural phenomena (in this case, quill- work, etc.). 12 Journal of American Folk-Lore. •^bAio^ 1 ■ : « ' M M M 1 H •aatp^nqo H h m m : * m : w fo ! '. * M * •ijSunx mm ; H « 1 M : - J M M M Tt M M M * M * M • O • M CO • N °° :* • . . * . . m m ro n • * • * •^oouiq3 M ! ro « o : ro . M * vN M •dBMqsnqg : m : : M M M CS M O M CS N M »o ; ;h« •s 'i saDjnog J « ro m 'uosdinoqj. M * • « •BOUOtJ-Bq-BUIQ M M \ M M ! * H * M ! «i ! M M . M * ' * M J •oqBdBjy : M M CO m co . m * m ro : rj- '. ro « . M ; m * t^ w n m •3JJU3ASOJQ M M M M M M M j M n n ; ! •-« ; « '. •z 'I SSDJTlOg 'BJOJJBQ w : M M M * # M 00 V5M-3-M ;Mt^«lOM M * CO •uioqiuissy M M . H M M | M M M O M M Tf M M * * •xoj j c* : M NO M M . : t : •BAVqifQ M j M M M M n ; co tn '. W * ro | •ppsuqy \ M | m ; * CO m a : M . * ! •otjraDij\[ : M H oo I O M ' * ! •£ aojnog 'ouipisg punog pu-BjJ3qran3 M M N H M * M I ITi M U*3 M O ! Ci M ; m w E Ej 8 S : > w 3 ll o 9 UP J • W G ■ ■ T B C L •§1 o 05 cr. I X H I rt 5 E X c 3 > M X E q i X E % C B Plants Death 1 C > e id E c C c H i 3 • C o w •r a E Z a E | E < ll It 0«H 1 0) h 6 ** rt •a 3 I | ]B rt | U * .S W C o E I i 3 E UU "w 03 a I Folk-Tales of the North American Indians. 13 This tabulation involves a number of interesting points. Perhaps these points will come out most clearly if we consider the mythologies one by one. Taking up first the folk-lore of the Eskimo, we find that the group which we have chosen for study possesses only one tale which explains the first phenomenon on the list, the sun. This seems at once rather extraordinary, in view of the fact that there are nine tales which explain the traits of animals. There are, however, many animals, and only one sun. The traits of all the different animals, that differ from each other in appearance and in habits, offer a better field for explanation than does the sun, which is simple in outward appearance, and regular in its movements. One explanatory tale might, after all, in the case of the sun, be considered to meet the situation fully; while, in the case of animals, each species demands an explanation to itself. Nevertheless, I am convinced that certain con- clusions concerning the interest of the Eskimo are deducible from a consideration of what their tales explain. It is at once obvious, for example, that they find animal traits more interesting than they do the topography of their country, and are in turn more interested in topography than they are in ceremonies or in the peculiarities of the state of culture in which they live. I am inclined, moreover, in a general way, to extend this conclusion to their interest in earthly as opposed to heavenly or celestial matters. The topics in the first column of the tabulation are so arranged that the first sixteen terms refer to things in the heavens, or, more generally speaking, to cosmic forces. The last seventeen, on the other hand, appearing toward the bottom of the column, constitute a list of the things on earth which appear in the tales as the object of explanation. If we now consider the total number of heavenly phenomena which are explained in tales, we find that they amount, in the case of Eskimo mythology, to only six in all ; while in the same mythology the tales which explain earthly matters reach a total of twenty-six. I see no reason why, if a people were interested in the heavens, they should not find as many things transpiring there which demand explanation as they would find on the earth. This is especially true of the heavens in the arctic regions. The absence of the sun from the sky during long periods, the amazing display of the Northern Lights, seem calculated in them- selves to attract comment and speculation. If a student approached the subject without a previous acquaintance with Eskimo mythology, arguing from purely psychological probabilities, he would certainly expect to find in Eskimo tales, if tales are ever used for explanation, some reference to the sudden and furious arctic storms, which are a matter of extreme personal interest to every Eskimo, from their effect on the food-supply. 1 I am therefore disposed to think that the dis- 1 See Eskimo, 2, pp. 460, 603. 14 Journal of American Folk-Lore. tribution of explanations in the case of the Eskimo reflects some very real psychological bias. I think it is important to see whether this tendency to limit speculation largely to earthly matters finds wide expression in primitive folk-lore. Eskimo folk-tales as recorded in Cumberland Sound would certainly indicate that the heavenly bodies and cosmic forces are not matters of most immediate interest to primitive folk. It is not proper, of course, to base any far-reaching conclusions on the study of one mythology, or on the occurrence of one phenomenon in various mythologies. I think, however, that if a consideration of all twenty-six of the mythologies which are here the object of analysis, bears out the conclusions we made concerning Eskimo mythology, we shall have established a fact which, however it may be explained, must at all events be recognized. The total number of tales which explain the various phenomena in the twenty-six mythologies here dis- cussod, is shown in the following table. In order to bring out the con- trast referred to above between the comparative number of celestial and earthly "explanations," the material has been arranged in parallel columns. SUMMARY SHOWING THE TOTAL NUMBER OF TALES WHICH EXPLAIN THE VARIOUS PHENOMENA LISTED ABOVE. CELESTIAL OR COSMIC. Phenomtna. Sun Moon Stars Milky Way Constellations. . . . Day and night Seasons Clouds Thunder Weather Snow Tides Earthquakes Sky Land Water Number of Tales. 18 20 19 3 14 5 5 2 11 10 1 3 1 6 13 7 Total 138 EARTHLY OR LOCAL. Phenomena. Mankind Plants Animals Death Fire Topography Echo Human traits Animal traits Plant traits Tribal groups Tribal traits Languages Culture Customs Ceremonies Number of Tales. 15 17 45 14 6 174 1 58 356 32 14 28 6 81 15 191 Total . 1053 From this table it is clear, that, in twenty-six mythologies, the total number of tales explaining the heavenly bodies and meteorological and hydrographic phenomena is 138, while the total number referring to earthly or local matters is 1053. In other words, conclusions based on twenty-six separate mythologies quite bear out those based on Eskimo alone. The total number of "celestial" explanations is only one-eighth of the total number of "terrestrial" explanations. Folk-Tales of the North American Indians. 15 I should like now to look at our material from the point of view of the number of individual mythologies, among the total of twenty-six, as contrasted with the number of tales, which contain explanatory tales relating to the various heavenly bodies and cosmic forces. Let us consider, for example, the importance in folk-tales of one celestial body, the sun, this time from the point of view of the num- ber of mythologies in a given area in which he occurs as the object of explanation. Arranged across the top of our tabulation, in a hori- zontal line, will be found a list of mythologies so far analyzed. If we look along the line following "sun," and read the figures which appear in connection with the names of the various tribes, we see that only certain tribes explain the sun at all in their folk-tales. The Micmac tribe, for example, or the Blackfoot, have no story at all explaining the origin or appearance of the sun, as far as can be ascertained from their folk-lore in its present form. Out of twenty-six represen- tative American mythologies, about which we have fairly complete information, the sun is explained in only thirteen. I am inclined to think that this fact, if it can be substantiated by the study of myth- ologies in other parts of the world, renders necessary a reconsidera- tion of those mythical theories which would make the heavenly bodies the fountain and source of primitive myth and folk-tale. Sun in 13 mythologies. Moon "15 Stars "11 Milky Way " 3 Constellations " 9 Day and Night " 4 Seasons " 5 Clouds " 2 Thunder " 10 Weather " 9 Snow " 1 Tides " 3 Earthquakes " 1 Sky " 6 Land "10 Water " 7 Mankind in 14 mythologies. Plants "11 Animals "20 Death "11 Fire " 6 Topography "22 Echo " 1 Human traits "18 Animal traits "25 Plant traits "15 Tribal groups " 7 Tribal traits "n Languages " 5 Culture "18 Customs "12 Ceremonies "21 It is a fact of some significance that such important and conspic- uous phenomena as the sun, the Milky Way, the seasons, the clouds, the over-arching sky, are explained in the folk-tales of a few tribes only here and there. The tales of many tribes ignore them com- pletely, as far as making any attempt to explain them through the medium of tales is concerned. Even such all-important objects as the sun and the moon, about whose place in mythology volumes have been written, are explained in only half the mythologies we are considering. The table, therefore, quite bears out the preceding one in two important points. In the first place, it gives us a right to 1 6 Journal of American Folk-Lore. suspect that something is wrong with those mythical hypotheses which lay all the emphasis on the heavenly bodies as the basis of folk-tales. It seems quite plausible that, if the mythology of primitive people were in any sense based on the heavenly bodies and cosmic forces, these bodies and forces ought to appear constantly as the objects of the speculative tendency. We have every reason, on the basis of our present material, to withhold concurrence on this point and to investigate it more fully. The second point, which comes out in even clearer light, is the interest shown by primitive people in the traits of animals and in topography. We saw from the former tabula- tion that animal traits are a very popular subject of explanation in mythical tales, from the point of view of the number of tales devoted to them. We see now that they occur with great regularity as the object of explanation, appearing in almost every mythology of the whole twenty -six here investigated. I should like to refer also to the extreme interest in ceremonial matters indicated by the tabula- tion. Ceremonial explanations in certain cases exceed in number even the explanations of animal traits (see p. 12). This is true of no other element. Reference might be made particularly to the case of the Kwakiutl and the Blackfoot. Ceremonial explanations also are a very considerable element in explanatory tales, taking all the myth- ologies together (see p. 14). They also come prominently to the front in the case of almost every mythology. Adding together the explanations which concern ceremonies, animal traits, and topography, — all of them "earthly" phenomena, — we reach a total which makes the number of "celestial " explanations seem inconsiderable. The evi- dence so far considered would, in brief, seem to indicate that primitive folk, at least in North America, are certainly not interested in celestial phenomena to the exclusion of everything else. Their interest in the heavens seems to be of a very casual sort. It seems rather important to check up these results, however, by some further considerations, before placing implicit reliance on them. I should like now to bring out the contrast between the celestial and the terrestrial elements in folk-tales from another point of view; namely, from the point of view of the actors who appear in tales. The tabulation opposite indicates this briefly. In working out this tabulation, also a certain amount of difficulty was encountered. Various categories had to be devised to include the large number of characters which appear, and these categories overlap to a cer- tain degree. This fact implies, that, in placing an actor in one or the other of these categories, we must, in certain cases at least, be somewhat arbitrary. To give an example, animals are almost everywhere thought to have supernatural power. In those tales in which they appear as benefactors or supernatural helpers of human Folk-Tales of the North American Indians. 17 •JIBAJO^ ^ M 1 M co m CO M M H 00 •aaqojinqo M m • m m CO CO O co M M •uosdnioqx fO^Ol N M 00 ro •moqsoqg w m ; m : '. co •BUB A tO'tH fO CS CO W : •BqiJBDlf M Ci m Tl-00 ro m •ido H ro M ; m ro fO '(iPPIS) aaaAVM vO CO m l-l «o ; ! O (IN rf 10 CO "BOUOjJ-BqBUIO ro w ; m to : m CO M H •oqBdBjy «H Tt M C< M M >o ! co > w 6 s a| 8 IS a 5 C s 8 ►? 2 5 g£ _L l It « ■a «»29 fiJ M o St 44 U ° •• 3 • _L ' - r — A « '53 liti w ■sill' ■° -S * : I S • - s § 1 8 w § '§» T3 O 5* 3 © S 5 H h 3 .a o o U — M « ^ w ji MO rt rt o _I ^ o o x: a o o U « a iSe? 7i«l O o •o o o ^ _- P •" bo Folk-Tales of the North American Indians. 29 •a a . Sal I s 1 1*1 W> (fl •c s- «-a S Hi co .9 *Mf 8 «OT3 £ ^~^ .« a CD M C CO O © CO > p. b -° 9 « o A. o I M °5 5 .d a c m BfiS-iM ° CO -»-< UP • co a) 8 « * to «« > s ^-v CD — »* g- I ^ "S 8 So CO « . d m CO 1 3 fc 2 I ® H fa b 3 m —■'jQ jr.d o § P=h d ti 3 £ ' ot%c to ^« d bo a o dp £-^ ft •• O "-■ ',3 c -<: "" Si Ph 5 5. o "C 1. UP S o /-* ■d Ji H d (|| £ cu > W BO Ml 2 d * TJ ^ CD rti a d S ^ >-. cu cu M | O Brff H w s fa w • d gv, | SI ft d ^ d £ 9 «-. o. 3 2.5 o, a $ 8 4J a w 3 ^ a ^ «, O O OQ •<-> C a i & § i la &I 3 ,3 5 3 ccj 4) oo £ 6 i m Co "3 '3 2 3 ■4-> '—» J4 £ '•S - 13 > ^« •o . a ^ 4> 5* ..s o « ^a 4> O lH . A £ fttoo (J O J) btJ a -is • CO. wT3 Z v*t .3 °*£ "55 o 2 Sf h P t) £ 5 S •fix "2 a •; o% *"S< > s -' 'm > ■J 5 cu v -' V * 2 o '5? 72 -3 in 2's. * p. 3 P. 1 1 Pi w bfi > O -a ^ 03 < S o S3 * S -S v ' ► ?» D, Q < Q S 5 K Cfi P o x^ Pd 6 o Q enne (i aho (i) >\ Ot 3 S 4 / -^ B *i H 3 a fl o • Si S-9 1* u < V o b I* - q OT3 3 5 IN PROCESS 9 ■Renewal Req : l(-?wDut?Da te s le N o r t h - A m e r i c & y of California T COMPLIANCES IINSURANCE: SYNCOA-liyPRISM itSi-i I L L r e c o r d u p d a t e d . ILL Pending 930514 CAN YOU SUPPLY ? YE s ILL: 4313610 : sOCLC: BB3BB39 s L e n d e r s * Z A P ? Z A P .> sCALLNO: : AUTHOR: Waterman, ;: TULEs The expla 1 1 id ians » : IMPRINT: [Boston, : VERIFIED: OCLC : PATRON: ELSTER,A sSHIP TO: ILL /Cent Diego/ 9500 Gil man D s BILL TO: same :SHIP VIA: Library s BORROWING NOTES: Z : LENDING CHARGES: s LEND IMG RESTRICT 10 : LENDING NOTES:;