THE MONTAGNAIS INDIANS, 1600-1640

Kenneth S. Lane

Physical and Mental Characteristics.............5
Foods.....eee.g.eegg.ecg                       g g. .6
Methods and Implements of Hunting and Fishing...7
Preparation of Foods.. ................... .**.      9
Annual Cycle..       .    .............0.....ll

Shelter...... ****...... eg.... 0.0...15

Miscellaneous Manufactures....................* .*** 17

Travel and Transportation.......................18
Arts and Amusements........ ...... ...... .9
Sweating and Medicines* .....................**.* .020
Warfare eeeceece .g..... e g..ee geeee.eeegee wee2l
Social Groups and Political Organization*...*. 25
Kinship, Descent, and Inheritance..............27
Life Cycle.......... ..... .....                     28
Etiquette and Daily Life      .     .   .   .    .32
Feasts and Ceremonies.ese.      ..*e**.e****e..... e**36
Religion and Belief................ ee       se   . .41
Shamanism and Witohoraft. ge..e.gese         e... e.. c47

Divination. g     ee e.e.ce.ee..c.eee. e.e .51
Mythology.. ........ e.... eec.. e...                54
Language e.e....e ceec.          e.eec. e g cc. e57

Endnotes ...... * + * * ~59
Bibliography.* ce...... ececece    e.g...... .*. **  060

INTRODUCTION

This paper is a description of the culture of the Montagnais Indians
during the first forty years of the 17th century-i.e., in the period

beginning with the first permanent French settlement of Canada and ending
with the outbreak of the Iroquois Wars. The study deals only with the

materials to be found in the contemporary sources, and no attempt has been
made to delineate Montagnais culture as it may have been before or after
the period named. We are therefore dealing with a culture which has

already been in intermittent contact with European influence for almost
a hundred years.

1

The Montagnais described are those who were accustomed to hunt and
camp around the Prench settlements on the lower St. Lawretce River-the
Montagnais of Tadoupisa, Quebec, and Three Rivers.

History

French, Spanish, and Portuguese fishermen had worked in. the waters

around Newfoundled since about 1510. Tadoussac, on the Saguenay river,
early became a favorite harbor and trading station of the French. By
1535, Cartier, and perhaps others, had visited the site of Quebec
(Thwaites, 1896, vol. 1, pp. 1-2, 15). As will be seen, by the

beginning of the 17th century the Montagnais along the St. Lawrence
were fairly well acquainted with French ways and goods.

The descriptions of the Montagnais deriving from the first part of
the 17th century provide a basis for comparison of Montagnais culture
at later periods in its history, although such a comparison is not
attempted in this paper. Prior to 1600 the writings of Cartier,

Roberval, and Thevet give descriptions which probably apply in part to
the Montagnais, but it would be necessary to correlate their tribal
names with those used in more recent times. After 1640 the Jesuits

began to penetrate the Montagnais country to the north and west of the
Saguenay, and fair descriptions of the culture of this area and period
are therefore probably available (Thwaites, 1896, vol. 1, p. 16).

Sources

The period covered here is one for which fairly complete descrip..
tions are available from people who, in a large number of cases, had
observed the Indians over a considerable span of time. Samuel de

Champlain fought several battles against the Iroquois with Indian war
parties in which the Montagnais were represented, and he seems to have
spoken their language. In 1615, Champlain brQught four Recollect
missionaries to Quebec. .Two of these, Father Joseph Le Caron and

Father John d'Olbeau, left descriptions of the Montagnais that have
been published in fragmentary form by a somewhat later Recollect

missionary, Father Chretien Le Clercq, who was in Canada from 1673-1687.
Le Caron wintered with the Montagnais near Tadoussac in 1618. Gabriel

Sagard, a lay brother of the Recollect order, arrived in Canada in 1623
and remained there one year. His account of a trip to the Huron

country contains some information on the Montagnais (Thwaites, 1896,
tol. 1, pp. 6-7; Le Clercq, 1881, vol 1, pp. 5-22, 31, 82; Sagard,
1939, pp. xiv-xvi).

Although some Jesuits, notably Father Jerome L'Allemant, were

aiding the Recollects by 1625, the British drove them out during their
oc?otpation of New Prance from 1629 to 1632. In 1632 three Jesuit

2

John

FR.

!ap of the lower St. Lawrence and strrounding environs, showing localities
frequented by the Montagnais.

3

missionaries returned to Quebec. Their superior, Father Paul Le Jeune,
remained in Canada for about twenty years, and his descriptions of
Montagnais life form the main source material for this paper.

Le Jeune was born in Prance in 1591, of Huguenot parents. He

later became a Catholic, and in 1613 a Jesuit. He taught in various

Jesuit schools, inoluding the one at Dieppe. When the French retturned

to Canada in 1632 he went along as the superior of the Canadian mission.
He retained this position until 1639, when he was replaced as buperior
by Father Barthelemy Vimont.   Le Jeune went to France in 1641, but

returned to Canada the next year and continued his missionary work at

Quebec, Three Rivers, and Montreal. In 1649 he returned to France and
became procuror of foreign missions. He went to Canada again in 1660
but did not remain. Le Jeune died at Paris in 1664 (Thwaites, 1897,
vrol. 5, p. 275, note 1; McDonnell and Labelle, 1948, p. 482).

Le Jeune spent the winter of 1633-1634 with a group of Montagnais

Indians and his Relation for that year contains a wealth of information
on Montagnais cul   c*As various events occurred he noted them down

in a kind of journal, which he later drew upon in preparing his report.
However poor this `field notebook" may have been, therefore, he did not
have to rely on memory alone (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 7, p. 117). In

his Relation of 1634 Le Jeune tells us the following about his sources
of inf'ormationX

All that I shall say regarding the Savages, I

have either seen with my own eyes, or have received
from the lips of the natives, especially from an
old man very well versed in their beliefs, and
from a number of others with whom I have passed
six months with the exception of a few days, '

following them into the woods to learn their lan-

guage. It is, indeed, true thiat these people have
not all the same idea in regard to their belief,

which will some day make it appear that those who
treat of their customs are contradicting each
other (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 111).

The implications of this last statement will be discussed under
"Religion."

Culture Change

During the period covered by this paper the Jesuits did their best
to change the ways of the Indians, especially the Montagnais, who were
nearest at hand. By 1638 to Jeune could write that the shamans had

lost all prestige among the Indians who frequented the French settle-
ments and that they no longer cured the sick or beat their drums in
the presence of the French. Eat-all feasts had ceased, as had

4

divinationi in the sntLking-terte. "The other supurstitionm -rill bv sup-
pressed little by little` (Le Jeuno, 1638b-tJR, vol. 14, p. 223).

When the Indinns did practice these custotas they tried to ke.,p the.
French from leerning of it for fear of losinE .t'ronch .ssistance.

Smallpox cpidemics, alonr with Jesuit teacbehir.gs, frmines, rnd a strosig
fear of the Iroquois had forced the Monta gnnis into at luast periodic
dcpcndincQ on the good wii.l of the French.  by 163b many' !iontagnais

were secking baptism, not only those living olong the St. Lawrenc;, but
also the Attikamegues of the upper St. Mbaurice river a.nd the "Porcupino
Nation" of Lake St. John, both of which were Mortagnais-specking groups
(Le Jeune, 1638b-JR, vol. 14, pp. 223-229, et pass.'rn), By 1639, due to
Jesuit influence, some of the baptized Montrgnais cnd A4Sonkins had
become sedentary af,ricultvrists at Sillory, near Three Rivers (Le
Joune, 1640-JR, vol. 16, pp. 75-111).

Throughout the Relations there occnsiontlly occur p.ssages con-

corning the "Savages    In these it is not always clear which tribe is
being referred to.  Le Joune usually uses this designation to refer to

the Montagnais-but somotimes it scoms to rofer to the Algonkins proper.
In a number of cascs the group can bo identified fvirly certainly from
its location. For example, except for occasional transionts the

Tadoussac natives wer.r apperently all Montagnais.  Thr3e Rivers was

frequented by both 1{onta^,nais and Algonkins.  The quebec villages SOem
to have been principally Montagnaise  All the authors, however, seem
to have made a sharp distinction in their minds betwoen the "nomadic"'
Montagnais and Algonkins on the one hand and the settled, village-

dwolling Hurons on the other. "Snvados" rarely seems to mean Hurons
in Le Jeune's usage.

Where there has been doubt as to whether the Yiontas nais or the
Algonkins were being reforrod to I have tried to indicate the fact.

A few statements intorpretod as applyying to the Montagnais werc prob-

ably actually written about the Algonkins, but this should not seriously
affect the general validity of this description of Montagnais culture.

The cultures of the Miontagnais and of the Algonkins, at least during the
period covered here, appear to have been very similar in religion,
social organization a.nd political orgnnization.

PHYSICAL AND MENTAL CHARACTERISTICS

The Fronch described the M4ontagrais as having been tall, strong
and well-proportioned. Their skin wvs dark and their long black hair
was greasy and shiny. Women were "well shapon, filled out and plump."
The younger Indians almost all had a skin disea se resemnbling serofu]oa
(Le Jeune, 1632-JR, vol. 5, pp. 23-25; 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 229, 2033;
L'Allemant, 1627-JR, vol. 4, p. 205; Champlain, 1922, p. 118).

5

Tho ?'rench sources depict some of the general personality traits
of the MontaSnaist These traits are somewha.t contradictory, and the

rather anti-Indian bias of the irench sources should be borne in mind.
Nevertheless, the French did see some good traits in the iiontagrais,
and their descriptions probably have some basis in fact.

The &iontagnais were happy, free from ambition and avarice, aon-
tented with a mere living* A culture pattern for the avoidance of

anger apparently preserved personal contentment as well as group har-

mony. They believed that no one should be contradicted and that overy-
one should be left to his own way of thinking. However, wrhen angered

they boeame dangerous and unrostrained. Under most hardships they were
patient and cheerful, but they were very saddened by death. During tho
famine of 1633-1634 they became sad and discouraged, walking about with
bowed heads. Toward their enemies, the Iroquois, thoy were vindictive
and cruel. Unlike the Huron, the Montagnais did not steal. They

laughed frequently but wore rather phlegmatic. On the other hand, thoy
were haughty and proud. They promised much but performed little and

were given to revenge (Le Joune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 123; 1635-JR, vol. 6,
pp# 229-233, 243; 1635-JIt, vol. 7, p. 173; Le Cleroq, 1881, vol. 1,

p. 221; Champlain, 1922, pp. 110-111; L'Allomant, 1627-JR, vol. 4, p. 199).

FOODS

The Montagnais ate elk, moose, beavers, seals, caribou, boars,
badgers, porcupines, foxes, ha.res, marmots, turtles, and squirrels.

For fish they ate salmon, pike, carp, sturgeon, `goldfish,t' whitefish,

a fish said to resemblo the European barbel, eels, lamprey, and smelt.

When these foods were scarce, rats and mice wvere huntod, shellfish were
gathered, and, in a severe famino, skin clothing and dogs wore eaten.

Normally there seems to have boen a religious taboo against eating dogs
(Le Joune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 267, 271; Champlain, 1925, pp. 46, 56).

For vegotable foods the iiontagnais gathored strawberrics, rasp-
berries, blueberries, nuts, cherries, wild grapes, and some kind of
wild apple. Red lily bulbs and various roots were oaten. The bark

of the sugar maple was split in the spring to obtain the sap. In timo

of famine, maplo bark was eaten (Lo Jeuno, 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 271-273).

The Montagnais used oil as a condiment on berries and other foods;
solid grease was considered a great delicacy.

In addition to eating foods found locally, the 1.iontagnais tradod

moose skins with the Huron in return for maize. The Huron came annually
to Three Rivers and to (Queboc for this purpose*. The Montagnais veroe
fond of     "     , mptoou,i a gruel or broth, Ospecially of ono madc with

cornnenl.  If cornmneni yls lacking they sometimes obtainod flour from

6

the French, boiling it in wrater to mak?. a kind of paste.  Soea biscuit,
broad, prunes, peas, roots and figs wore .also obtained through trade

with the French. By 1630, the Mfontagnais had bocome very fond of broad
,.and peas (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, pp. 97, 167; 1636-JR, vol. 6, p.

273).

IETHODS AND IMPLEMENTS OF EUNTING AND FISHIN1G

There seems to be no description of the Montagpais bow and arrow*
Their spears were made from sword blades bought from the French. The
blades wore fastened to long wooden shafts and wero used for hunting

and warfare by hurling thom rnstraight and herd" (Sagard, 1939, p. 155).

Tho Montagnais hunter knew that elk were in the vicinity when ho
saw a cortain kind of wood that had boon gnawed. Apparently this wood

was gnawed only by olk. If there was a little snow on the ground, elk
and moose woro stalked with the bow and arrow. Usually these animals

could scent the hunter at a great distanoo and osapo,, however, unless
the snow? was deep. Thon they wero e.asily killed with a thrown spear.
If the snow was frozon. after a slight rain or thaw, the lcgs of the
moose were cut by the ice and the animal could be dispatched oasily.
If tho sno7fall was light it was often necessary to pursue an elk or

moosc for sevoral days before k1illing it.  A warm wintor with a light

snowfall was usually the cause of the periodic fa.mines that harcssed the
Montagnais.

When an olk or moose was killed, part of the anima.l was taken back
to the camp and part was left buried under the snowv until the group

was ready for it (Lc Jouno, l6v1=-UJR, vol. 5, p. 167; 1635-JR, vol. 6,
.pp. 235, 295; 1635-JR, vol. 7, p. 163).

In the sprinlg, beavers wore takcon by means of deadfalls baited
with a piece of se-ma wood which they liked.  A hoavy log was made to
fall on the animal in order to kill it.  Dogs wec usJd to help run
down boavers and a good hunting dog was highly prized.

In winter, beavers woro caught in nots undor the icc. A holo or
slit wms made in the ice near the benvers' house and a not winOs pla ced
in the wcter along, with soe vrood to sorvo as bait.  The net -.-ras made

of a strong double cord. WiThen the beaver tried to emergo from the nct
through the hole in the ice it was killed with a large club.

Anothor method of catching beavcivrs under the ice w.as to uso a

hatchet to chop up the boavers' house, driving them out into the water
bonoath tho icoe  Thore they sought hollow places undor tho ico where
thoy could breathe. The Montagnais huntcr then walked ever thLo ico
carrying a long club, a chis3i-lik? iron blede, and a bone that Le

Jeune believed was a whnlobbno.  The bone vms used to sound the ico and

7

find hollow spots   Then the ice was cut with the chisel and the water

examined to see if the breathing or movement of a beaver could be detected.
If so, a ourved stick was thrust into the hole to feel for the beaver.

If found, the animal was killed with the large club (called oa ouikaohit).
If the beaver somehow escaped through the hole in the ioe, the waiting

dogs soon oaught it. If a river happened to be oonnected to the beavers'
pond by a stream, the beavers tried to swim from the pond to the river

in order to escape. To avoid this, the Montagnais blooked the stream by
breaking the ice and putting a number of stakes into the bed of the

stream. The hunting of begvers under air pockets in the ice was not suc-
cessful on. large lakes or ponds., sinoe the beavers had too many hiding
plaoes (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 299-303).

Another method of hunting beavers involved the use of a barbed iron
point fixed to a shaft. A string or oord was then attached to the shaft.
When the beaver was struok by this type of harpoon, it dove beneath the
surface of the water, taking the harpoon with it. The hunter held the

oord that was attaohed to the shaft until the beaver grew weak from loss
of blood. Then he drew the beaver out of the water by pulling in the
cord (Le Jeune 1632-JR, vole. 5 p. 61).

Poroupines were caught in traps (not described) or with the aid of
dogs. -Once the dogs had disoovered it the poroupine would usually be

killed by the hunters unless it could soramble beneath a large rook. In
winter poroupines were easily killed on the snow. In the spring, some

type of trap (also not described) was used for catohing bears.  In winter
the Montagnais looked for a hollow tree where a bear was hibernating, out
the tree down, and killed the bear as it started to emerge. Seals were

clubbed to death while they were sunning themselves on rocks or when they
were emerging from the water (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 305, 307,
313).

Hares, martens and squirrels were caught in nets (snares?) or killed
with bows or with some kind of dart (1) (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p.
307).

Birds were killed with bows, arrows, and "darts."  The Montagnais
obtained a few firearms during the Ehglish oocupation of Quebec (1629-

1632). A few hunters became skilled in using firearms to kill ducks, bus-
tards, and snipe. However, they were hindered by a lack of gunpowder (Le
Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 309).

Fishing was done with nets obtained through trade with the French and
the Hurons. Le Jeune mentions a special technique used to take salmon but
he does not describe it.

Eels were taken with harpoons or with weirs. The Montagnaist weirs
were capable of hclding five or six hundred eels. At lowr tide the weirs
were securely fastened in the sand in a somewhat protected spot so that

the tide would not carry them off. At each end of the weir a low wall of
chones ex-bended out from the shore so that the eels, which usually swam

8

near the bottom, were guided toward the weir. When the tide rose, it

oovered the weir and the eels apparently were carried over the top of it.
When the tide fell, the eels were trapped behind the weir.  Up to three
hdred eels were caught if the water was rough.

Weirs were ineffective in oalm water and then the MLontagnais re-
sorted to harpooning. The eel harpoon was a long pole, Sw6 or three

fingers thick, with a pointed pieco of iron fastened tio the end. On both
sides of this point two little curved sticke were fastened so that they
almost touohed at the end of the iron point. When an eel was struck,

the force of the thrust pushed the curved sticks apart, allowing the eel
to beoome fixed upon the iron point. Then the stioks snapped back, hold-
ing the eel on the point.

Eel harpooning was usually done at night on the St. Lawrenoe from a
canoe. One person paddled In the stern and another sat in the bow with
the harpoon. A bark torch was fastened to the prow. The canoe moved

slowly along the banks of the river and when the man in the bow spotted
an eel he thrust tho harpoon, without letting go of the shaft* Then he

raised the harpoon out of the water, removed the eel from the point, and
plaoed the eel in the canooe. Up to three hundred eels were taken in one
night by this method. According to Ie Jeune, eels were very numerous in
the St. Lawrence during September and October, even as far upriver as-
Quebec (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 309-311).

ThEIPARATION OF FOODS

The Montagnais preserved meat and fish by smoking and drying them.
When a number of elk or moose wore killed, several days were spent in

feasting. Then the meat was dried. The bones were removed and a whole

side of moose or elk was stretohed upon poles. The flesh was slashed or
out into strips so that the smoke would thoroughly penetrate the meat.

The meat was walked upon and pounded with stones to remove all moisture.
Then it was smoked, foldod, and arranged in paokages or bundles. Smoked
meat beeame almost as hard as wood (Le Jeuno, 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 265,
297).

Eels were apparently the only food besides elk and moose that the

Monagnais preservod. Eels were dried by w    nmn at the summer camp.  After
the oels had been brought to the camp thoy were allowed to drain for a
while. Then the heads and tail5 were cut off and they were slit up the

baok, emptied, and washod. Next they were suspended on poles outside the
cabin to drain and then hung up in the cabin to smoke. The flosh was

slit in a number of plaoes so that the smoke would penetrate. After be-
ing well smoked they wore piled together in large bundlos of about one
hundred.

9

Fresh ools formed the main food while they wero available. Thoy wore
cooked by roasting thom on a small wooden spit near the fire (Le Jouno,
1634-JR, vol. 5, pp. 89-91; 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 311-313).

In winter, fresh meat was ofton cooked by putting snow in a kettle

and placing it over the fire.  Thon largo piecos of meat were put in and

cooked until rare. So that no greaso would be lost, meat was never washed.
When one piece was cooked it was removed from the kettle and another pieoo
put in.  This was the usual mothod of cooking meat.   Beaver, and probably
most other meat, was sometimes roasted. Porcupines were singbd, scrapod,
and thon roasted or boiled (ILe Joune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 165; 1635-JR,
vol. 6, pp.. 291, 305)6.

Bulbs were cookod by boiling thom in a little wator. Soup was often
made by placing broken bones in a kottle, along with water or snow, and

boiling them. Grease was a favorito food. It was either skimmed from a
kottle of boiling meat by moans of a large wooden spoon and eaten from a

bark dish, or else it was eaten in a solid state aftor it had been cooled
with snovw. The broth rosulting from boiled meat was also eaten. The

Montagnais made no alcoholic beverages. Liquids were generally consumed

while hot or warm; oold water was believed to cause chills and to mako one
thin (Lo Jeuno, 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 103; 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 265, 267,
273-275).

The kettles of the Montagnais wore made of copper. Before the French
brought copper kettlos, or whenever these were broken, meat was cooked
by stone b6iling in..ha'rk baskets or dlshes called'6uregrua..  Meat and

water wore placed in the baskets.   Then five or six stones wore heated in
tho fire and put into the basket successively until tho moat was cooked,
eoch stone being returned to the fire as it cooled (Le Jeune, 1634-JR,
vol. 5, p. 97; 1635-JR, vol. 7, pO 53).

Intoxicants Obtained from the French

With the coming of the Europoans the Mrontagnais grow addicted to

brandy and wine. This was particularily true of those Indians who camped
near French settlements.  They liked to get drunk and to get others drunk.
Women and girls wore as fond of alcohol as wore mon. Whon drunk, the
Indians ofton fought among themselves; onco an Iroquois prisoner was

killed by a drunk Montagnais, onding peace negotiations that had been under
way.

The Montagnais blamed the Europoans, or tho wine itself, for whatevor
happend while they were drunk.   Some of the chiefs asked that the liquor
traffic be stoppod, and Champlain and other Fronch authoritios attemptod
to. prohibit the sale of intoxicants to tho Indians.  These attempts seem
to have boen unsucoessful (I. Jouno, 1632-JR, vol. 5, pp. 49-51; 1635-JR,
vol. 6, pp. 251-253; 1638a-JR, vol. 11, pp. 195-197).

10

Tobaooo and Smoking

The Montagnais were exceedingly fond of tobacco, which they ob-
tained from the 0urons who came to Three Rivers    Quebec to trade
for moose skins. Tobacco was believed to satisfy hunger. If no

game was found dwuing the day's hunting the Montagnais invited one

another to their oabins and passed around a little earthen dish con-
taining tobacco (2). Each person took a pipeful of tobabco and

smoked it, taking another if he wished.  Pipes were ma4e of reed and
wood. The Montagnais often smoked before going to sleep; sometimes

they arose at night to smoke* They usually smoked when returning to
their cabins after an absenoe and also while paddling a canoe. It

Is not olear whether or not women smoked (Le Jouno,, 1635-JR, vol. 7,
p. 137).

Nearly all the Indians living near Quebec had a small tobacco
pouch. Sometims these were made from a whole muskrat skin whose

original shape was preserved, except for a small opening in the head
that was made when the animal was skinned. Other animal skins were

also used. Ocoasionally, part of the arm or hand of an Iroquois was
made into a tobacco pouoh, complete with fingernails, 80 that when
it was filled with tobaoco it looked like a recently severed arm or
hand (Le Joumn, 164-JR, vol. 5, p. 131).

ANNUAL CYCLE

In September and October the Montagnais caught eels and smoked
them. They lived on fresh eels during that time.   In November,

December, and January they lived on smolked eels, and also on porw.

cupines and beavers which they caught during the lighter snowfalls*
During this early winter hunting they often left part of their

smoked eels and other baggage at the Frenoh settlements for' safe-
keeping. About February, they returned to the woods and stayed

ntil spring or summer, living on fresh moose and elk and also

drying some to use until September. Birds, bears, and beavers were

hunted in spring and simmer, or whenever they were available (Le Jouneo
1632-JR, vol. 6, pp. 69-61; 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 277; 1635-JR, vol. 7,
p. 107; Champlain, 1925, pp. 44-46).

During the six months, more or less, spent near the French settle-
ments on the St. Lawrence, the Montagnais traded the furs they took
during the winter. In return they got such French goods as cloakes,

blankets, nightoaps, hats, shirts, sheets, hatohets, iron arrowheads,

bodkins, swords, picks for breaking the ice in winter, knives, kettles,
prunes, raisins, Indian corn, peas, sea biscuit, and tobaoco. In ex-
change for these goods the Indians gave hides of moose, lynx, fox,

otter, marten, badger, muskrat, and, especially, beavwx Aooording to

11

L'Allemant, twelve or fifteen thousand furs were traded annually at
Tadoussac (ca. 1625) (LtAllemant, 1627-JR, vol. 4, p. 203).

The Montagnais were amused by the high value Europeans plaoed on

turs.  One man said that the English, during their occupation of Quebec,
gave t;wenty beautiful knives for one beaver skin (Le Jeune, 1635-JR,
vol. 6, pp. 297-299).

It seems certain that none of the Montagnais practiced &griculture
in the period 1600-1635. According to Champlain, the "Algonkins'l grew
Indian corn, like the Iroquois and the Hurons. This was probably true
of only a part of the Algonkins, and it may have been introduced by the
Recollect missionaries or other Frenchmn. Or, if it was pre-European,
it may be that Iroquois raids had forced the Algonkins to give up agri-
oulture in favor of a more mobile economy, for in the period 1630-1640
the sources depict the Algonklin economy as similar to that of the

Montagnais (Champlain, 1925, p. 57; L'Allemant, 1627-JR, vol. 4, p.' 195).

More certain is the fact that about 1637 some of the Montagnais
and Algonkins began to ask for French aid in setting up a permanent

village and in raising crops. They oomplained that their oountry was
becoming barren of elk and other animals. The Jesuits had long been

urging the nomadic tribes to adopt a settled eoonomy, since that would
faoilitate thoir missionization.  Also, by about 1637 the Iroquois were
beginning to raid around Three Rivers and the Montagnais there were in
oonstant fear of attaok. A fortified village would have given them

added proteotion. Eventually, a few families, mostly oonverts, began
farming. Many Montagnais strongly opposed the idea of giving up their
hunting econo0my (Le Jeune, 1638a-JR, vol. 11, p. 143; 1638a-JR, vol.
12, pp. 161-167).

During the winter the Montagnais hunted in groups of two or three
families or households. In sumer up to twenty or thirty households
came together and camped near settlements like Tadoussao and Quebec.

In spite of their summer proximity to the French, the souroes actually
give more information on the winter activities of the Montagnais than
on their summer routine (L'Allemant, 1627-JR, vol. 4, p. 203).

As stated above, Le Jeune spent the winter of 1633-1634 with a

group of Montagnais. This group went downstream from Quebec, crossed
the Sto Lawrence, and wintered on the east side of the river, south
of Gasp>. When the party set out there wore twenty individuals, in-

oluding men, women, and children.   The principal males or family heads
inoluded three brothers, one of' whom was a shaman, one a very poor

hunter, and the third a very skilled hunter. This last man seems to
have provided most of the food (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 7, pp. 47,
69-71).

By the time this group entered the forests for the winter they
had been joined by several other groups, so that there were three

"oabins" (households?) all told, composed of nineteen, sixteen, and

12

ten persons respectively,, or forty-five persons in all. The winter of
1633-1634 had a very light snowfall, so moose and elk were rarely ob-

taned.   The group usually had a little food to eat every two days, but
other nearby Montagnais groups sometimes found food only onoe in five
days (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 7, pp. 47, 107).

Le Jeunets party entered the forests on November 12,, 1633, and
returned to the St. Lawrenoe on April 4, 1634. While in the forests

they made about twenty sto.p&, camping in valleys, near rivers and lakes,
and in the mountains. To give some idea of the frequenoy of moving a

winter oamp, the following are the dates on whioh the group was in pro-
oess of moving (this was a winter of light snowfall and consequent

famine; the Montagnais no doubt remained longer in one plaoe during a
nprmal winter),  1633 - Nov. 20, Nov. 28, Dec. 3, Dee. 6, Dec. 20,

Dea. 24, Dec. 30; 1654 _ Jan. 4, Jan. 9, Jan. 16-29, Fob. 5, Feb. 9,

Feb. 14-15, Mar. 6 (food now became more plentiful), Mar. 18, Mr. 23,
Mar. 30, Apr. 1-2, Apr. 4. While on the mrch the Indians obtained

water by eating 8now or. by melting s-ow in a small kettle. While they
lasted, smoked eels served as food during a march (Le Jeuno, 1634-JR,
vol. 5, p. 165; 1635-JRE, vol. 7,, pp. 107-193, passim).

CLOTHING AND F RSONAL ADORNMENT

Clothing

By 1634 Montagnais clothing had become a mixture of native and
Frenoh-made garments. Both sexes wore red, green, or gray hoods if

they were available& Children sometimes wore large ooats of European
manufaoture, handed do   to them from their fathers.   Such coats were
gathered around the child's body.and tied up to make them fit. Women
were seen wearing long shirts. hooded cloaks, large coats, blankets,
or skin oapes, all tied in various ways to keep out the wind.   Man

sometimes wore one leather stccking and one made of cloth. Old gar-
mente were out up to make sleeves or stockings.

Except in the severest oold the Montagnais went bareheaded.   They
made no hats of their own, buying them ready-made or ready-cut from
the French; Le Jeune believed they had no hats before the Europeans

came. D'Olbeau indicates that in 1615 the Montagnais always went bare-
headed. Those of the Montagnais who could afford to bought shirts from
the Frenoh. These shirts were worn over their other o2othes and were
allowed to become very greasy so that water could not penetrate (Le

Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 7, pp. 9-13, 17-19; Le Clercq, 1881, vol. 1, p. 89).

In 1636 a Montagnais chief from Tadoussac passed through Quebec on
his way to raid the Iroquois. He was dressed like a Frenchman, "with a

very handsome coat under a scarlet oloak.a He wore a hat and bowed in tlh

13

Fronch fashion   (Le, Jeune, 1637-JR, vol. 9, p. 227).

However, the Montagnnais also made clothing themselves out of moose,
elk, beaver, bear, fox, or other skins. They preferred skins from "a
kind of little black animal found in the HIuron country; it is about

the size of a Rabbit, the skin is soft and shiny, end it takes about

sixty of them to make a robe` (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, volw 7, p. 13). A robe
of moose hide required only one animal; those of beaver requi-red five or
six pelts. Robes were nearly square in shape. Those made of' the pre-
ferred skins had the tails of the animls fastened to the bottom as a
fringe, with the heads fastened above as a border. The women painted
them w'ith colored stripes about "two thumbs "ride," the stripos running
from top to bottom.  Robes were worn With the fur side out.

In fairly warm weather men wore their robes over one arm and under
the other, or else like a cape, stretched across the back and tied over
the chest with two thonge.  When it was cold, both men and women wore
their robes under one arm and over the shoulder of the other, then

crossing the ends of the robe. A cord of dried intestine was worn a-
round the w*aist. The bottom of a robe vwas sometimes turned up and

fastened near the middle of the body to form a flap for oarrying small

belongings. Fur robes reached to the knees. The robes of men and women
were identical.

Sinlce robes did not cover the arms, separate sleeves were made of
the same skin as the robe. They were also painted with stripes, some-

times longthrvise and sometimes around. Sleeves wore quite broad at the
top so that they covered the shoulders and almost joined at the back.

They were fastened with thongs in front and behind. Sleoves were wvorn
only in colder weather. In warm tweather a man often discarded all

clothing except his breechclothD but women always retained their robes
(Le Jeune, 1632-JR., vol. 5, pp. 23-25; 1635-JR, vol. 7, pp. 11-16;
LtAllemant, 1627-JR, vol. 4, pp. 203-205).

A kind of inner boot or stocking was made of dehaired moose skin.
The seamwas along the inside of the leg.    Stockings were very long,

especially in front.where they covered the thigh. At the top of this
front part a thong rras attached for tying the stocking to a leather

bolt worn next to the body. Another thong fastened it around the foot.
The seam on this garment (and probably on others as vell) was made so

that an edge of the skin protruded. This was cut into fringes, to wJhich
beads, shells, or other ornaments were somotimes attached (Le Jeune,
1635-JR, vol. 7, p. 15).

In winter the Montagnnis wore soft moccasins of moose or elk skin.
Old robes, well-oiled, wrere used for making moccasins, so that thoy

would not shrink too much when placed near a fire. Moccasins wvere mado
very full, especially if they rere to be worn in winter, so that rabbit
skin, an old piece of blc,nket, or moose hair could be wrapped around
the Noot for added warmth.   Occasionally two pairs of moccasins were

14

worn. Moccasins were held on the foot by a thong wound around the ankle
and tied over the instep.

Moccasins were always used with snowshoes, but they quickly became

saturated in wet weather. In spring and summer the Montagnais went bare-
foot (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 127; 1635-JR, vol. 7, pp. 15-17).

Sometimes the Montagnais wore surprisingly little clothing, even in
coldest weather. All olothing, inoluding moccasins, was made by the
women (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 125; 1635-JR, vol. 7, p. 17).

Ornaments and Personal Adornment

The Montagnais often decorated the bottom of a garment with small

ornaments made from bears' claws.- This wa.s done so that boars could be

more easily and more safely kille-d.- Small red roots were used for dying
bead, shall, and other ornaments (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 7, p. 81;
1637-JR, vol. 9, p. 117).

Women rubbed themselves with an olive-colored pigment. It is

likely that this was done only when they were going visiAing. Women
painted their husbands' and children's faces red or grayish brown and

oiled their hair with bear or moose grease. Le Jeune saw some natives
at Tadoussao whose faces were highly decorated* Som had their noses
painted blue and their eyebrows and cheecks black, with the rest of

the face painted red. Others had black, red, and blue stripes drawn

from their ears to their mouths, and still others were painted entirely
black except for the upper part of their brows, around the ears and the
end of the chin. Another pattern had one black stripe drawn from ear
to ear aoross the eyes  and three little st-ripes on the cheeks* The
colors of these patterns were bright and shining (Lt Jeune, 1632-JR,

vol. 5, p. 23; 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 105; Champlain, 1922, pp. 118-119;
L'Allemant, 1627-JR, vol. 4, p. 205).

Montagnais men plucked their beards. Both sexes wore their hair
long, so that it fell to the shoulders. It was cut shorter in front
of the eyes. Wonen (and perhaps men) fastened their hair in bunches
at the back of the head, except during mourning. Women often orna-
mented these bunches of hair with shells (Le Jeune, 1632-JR, vol. 5,

p. 23; 1640-JR, vol. 16, p. 205; L'Allemant, 1627-JR, vol. 4, p. 205;
Sagard, 1939, p. 143).

SHELTER

The Montagnais winter dwelling, or cabin, was made by drawing the
floor plan in the snow and then clearing with a snowshoe the part

15

intended as the interior* Shovels, which the men made and carried for

the purpose, were also used to clear snow. Le Jeune speaks of this part
of the dwelling as "a great ring or square in the snow, two, three, or

four feet deep, acoording to the wveather or the place where they encamp"
(Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 7, p. 37). The snow formed the walls of the

cabin on all sides, except where it was broken through to form a door-
way. The framework of t'.3 cabin censi.sted of t;weiy or thirty poles,

depending on the e37e of the dllix      These poles were plaoed in the
snow, not in the ground, and converged somewhat at the top. then, be-

ginning at the bottom, two or three rolls of bark, sewed together, were
placed over this frame. Pine branches were spread on the dirt floor

and the snow walls were also covered with small branches, A skin was
fastened to two horizontal poles as a door, the snow walls se..ing as
doorposts* The cpbin roof was so low that a person couo.d not stand
uprighit; inside (3). The cabin was very narrow and had a smoke hole
at the top.

According to Le Jeune, Montagnais winter dwellings were very drafty
because the bark was loosely fitted, yet they were also filled with smole
from the fire.  Sometimes even the Indians had to put their faoes to the
ground in o-rder to b-eethe. The usua', positions of peopi.e in --he oabin
were sitting, crouching, or lying down.   People slept on the floor;

there were no beds or seats.  The heat from the fire was intense, but
it usually did not melt the snow walls. If the snow did soften, it

quickly froze into ice. The branches covering the floor soon became

covered with feathers, hair, and wood shavings or whittlings, but the
cabins were never cleaned (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 261; 1635-JR,
vol. 7, pp. 35-4l)o

Although they were more familiar with the summer houses than with

the winter dwellings of the Montagnais, none of the French writers gives
a very oomplete description of the former. Summer cabins were made of

poles, covered with rolls of barks. They were rather low, with a smoke
hole about one foot in diameter in the top, One, belonging to a chief,
is described by Le Jeune (1632) as being long and narrsw, with three
fires in the center.  The fires were f'ive or six f'eet apart from one
another. It must have been at least twenty feet long. Another Mon-

tagnais chiefts cabin, described by Champlain in 1603, contained eight
or ten kettles of meat, each on its own f ire# These fires were about
six paces apart.  However, Chamnplain describes the Montagnais summer

dwelling as having been built l.ke a tento  Assuming thet this structure
was more or loss Xc .^ular in o-an, it would have be3n c*:sidorably

smali-r than if the fires had been in a straight )i:?ie Vithin a long.

narrow, rectangular structure.  Also., this cabin had been erected at a

big irtertribal victory feast and it may have been somewhat larger than
usualo The Montagnais slept on skins in the summer cabins. Dogs were

kept inside at night (Le Jeune, 1632-JR, vol. 5, p. 27; Champlain, 1922,
pp. 101, 105)o

lthen travelli.ng from place to place, the Montagnais made less elab-
orate temporary shelters. A shelter of fir branches was made if no bark

16

was available. In mild weather people sometimes simply slept in the
open, using a pieoe of bark as a cover if it rained* WVhen a man was

travelling by canoe he made a temporary shelter by placing the canoe

behind him and putting a skin on some poles as a roof to keep out rain
(Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 7, pp& 77, 203).

While travelling in winter, a temporary camp might bo- made by clear-
ing a circular space in the snow with a snowshoe. A fire was built in

the center, and the snow wall helped to protect the camper from the wind.
A man travelling alone carried blankets with which to cover himself, but
little else if the journey was a short one, except perhaps some smoked
eel (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, pp. 161-165)1.

MI SCELLANEOUS MANUFACTURES

Each adult Montagnais seems to have had his own bark dish (ouragn)
and wooden spoon, but there is no description of these objects. Roasted
eel was served on a small piece of bark.  To drink water, a bark dish

or dipper was used (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, pp. 91, 97; 1635-JR, vol.
6, p. 279).

To wipe their hands the Montagnais used powdered rotten wood.   Moose
fur, pine branches, or the backs of the dogs were also used (Le Jeune,

1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 269). Packages to be stored were neatly wrapped in
bark. Trees were blazed to indicate the way when moving camp in winter.
but only before the snows got deep (Le Jeune, 1632-JR, vol. 5, p. 61;
1635-JR, vol. 7, p. 109).

The Montagnais made fire by striking together two "metallic stones."
Tinder was a dry, rotten wrood that burrd easily. When this caught a

spark it wvas placed in pulverized oodar bark and gently blown upon until
the bark caught fire. Fire was also made by twisting a small cedar

stick in a hearth until the friction caused sparks to light some tinder.
Le Jeune states that he never saw this done, and that this method of
drilling fire was more familiar to the Hurons than to the Nontagnais
(Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 217).

Some kind of torch or lamp was made from a wick and the down-

covered skin of an eaglets thigh. Wlhen a man got lost in the woods
such a torch was hung on a pole near his cabin to help him find his
way back (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 217).

The Montagnais drum was round; it varied in diameter from three or
four finger-lengths to two palm-lengths. It was made by tightly stretcoh
ing a skin over each edge of a circular frame.   Small pebbles were

placed inside the drum. Drums seem to have usually been used by shamans,
although others occasionally used them too. The drum was not struck
with a stick but was turned and shaken so that the pebbles within it

rattled. It was also hit against the ground, either on the edge of its
frame or on one of its faces.

During the singing and drumming at ceremonies, speotators often

held two sticks of wood and beat them on other pieoes of wood, on hatchet

handles, or on the bottom of their bark dishes (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6,
p. 187)o

TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION

The Montagnais travelled by canoe whenever the rivers were not

frozen. Canoos were eight or nine paces long and a pace or a pace and
a half wide amidship.  They were pointed at each end.   Little informa-
tion is given on their construction. They were made of birch bark,
strengthened within by "little circles of wood." The bark was sewn
with willow withes or with similar small woods. Canoes were easily
carried by one man, yet held about a thousand pounds.   The smallest

canoes carried four or five persons, plus a little baggage.   Montagnais
canoes were very swift. Ordinarily they were paddled by a man in the

bow and his wife in the stern (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 133; Champ-
lain, 1922, pp. 104-105; L'Allemant, 1627-JR, vol. 4, p. 205).

By 1634 the Montagnais sometimes attached a sail to their canoes.
Sails were used in addition to paddles, for added speed.   The Jesuits

gave a large sheet to overy native canoe carrying one of their priests,
so that the priest would not have to paddle so much (Le Jeune, 1635-JR,
vol. 7, p. 203) 1637-JR, vol. 9, p. 277).

Canoes oould not be used on the St. Lawrence in a strong wind.
When ice was floating in a river, the Montagnais left the canoe and

jumped onto the ice, hopping from floe to floe, pushing the ice aside

to make passage for the oanoe. If there was too much ice in the river,
they carried the canoe on their shoulders over the ice until the open

water was reached. Blocks of ice were tested with canoe paddles to see
if they would hold a mants weight (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 141;
1635-JR, vol. 7, p. 197).

If the bark of a canoe became cut or torn, by ice for example, the
canoe was drawn out of the water and turned upside dovrn?i  A fire was

built and the tear was sewed and smeared from a gum obtavned from trees.
This whole process took only a short time# Men sometimes had to repair
canoes in this manner during the spring when river ice wras breaking up
(Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 7, p. 195)o

The Montagnais made sledges (toboggans?) for moving sick people,

food, and other objeots over the snow. They were made from a wood that
split into long thin strips. Sledges were very narrow so that they

.oolfl4 be pullled through dense forests.  To make up for their lack of

18

width, they were quite long, sometimes extending twice as high as a man
oould reaoh when the sledge stood against a tree.  Sledges were pulled
by means of a cord passing around the ohest and attached to the front of
the sledge (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 7, p. 109).

For winter travel and hunting, snowshoes were always used by the

Montagnais   Champlain describes them as having been two.or three times
as big as those used in France (Champlain, 1922, p. 119).

Baggage was often arranged in long bundles oarried on the baok by
meane of a tump line. The forehead was padded with a piece of bark
(Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 7, p..li3.)

ARTS AND AMJSEMENTS

The Montagnais divided the year into ten moons. The "February"

moon was longer than the others and was called the great moon. Longer
periods of time, such as years, were called winters; shorter periods
were called nights. Thus, an event was said to have happened seven
winters ago, or six nights ago (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 223;
1635-JR, vol. 7, p. 181).

Montagnais children played hide-and-seek. They also played a game

in which a small bunch of pine sticks was thrown into the air and caught
on the end of a pointed stick (LcJeune, 1635-JR, vol.7, pp. 95-97).

Le Joune says that the natives of New France, presumably including
the Montagnais, were very fond of gambling, men as well as women. The
games themselves are not described. Sometimes they were religiously
motivated and were played to cure a sick person. People sometimes
staked themsolves in gambling. If such a person lost, he (or she)

acted as a kind of servant of the winner for one or trro years.  Ho was
employed in hunting, fishing, or doing household taskse  After a year
or two he was sot free again. Such bondsmen ware never maltreated.

The usual stakes in gambling were shells or shell necklaces, which
seem to have had considerable value ard to have functioned as a kind of
ourre?oy. After a gambling game the Indians never expressed joy in

winning or sorrow in losing. There was no choating (Lo Jeuno, 1640-JR,
vol. 16, pp. 197-201).

The Montagnais wore fond of singing and of hearing others sing.
They sang for secular entertainment and at religious ceremonies.

Seoular tunes were usually grave and heavy, although girls occasionally
sang something light and gay. There was no harmony in singing, and few
words were used, the tones instead of the words being varied (La Jeune,
1636-JR, vole 6, p. 183).

19

SWEATING AND IEDICINES

The three most common Montagnais curing methods were     ating,

covering the area of a pain with blood by cutting the skin, and drinking
an emetic made by scraping and boiling the inner bark of a certain, tree
(Le Joune, 1635-JR, vol. 7, p. 129).

The Montagnais sweat lodge was a low tent made by placing sticks in
the ground and covering this framo with skins, robes, or blankots.   They
seem to have been built inside the cabins. Sweat lodges were low, so
that the head of a tall man seated inside wvould have touched the top.

The Montagnais sweated completely naked* Women occasionally took sweat
baths also, usually together with the men. The sweat lodge was heated
with five or six red-hot stones that had been placed in a fire outside
the lodge. People stayed in the sweat lodge for about three hours.

The Montagnais believed that sweating would be useless unless it

were accompanied by singing. Besides singing, speeches were sometimes

made in the sweat lodge, and occasionally the shaman beat his drum while
sweating, in order to divine the whereabouts of games Sweating was done
to cure illness, to have a successful hunt, or to have mild weather.

In all cases, singing was essential. Le Jeune observed that when men

took a sweat bath they were reluctant to use woments robes as covers for
the lodge. Perhaps a fear of menstrual contamination was involved (Le
Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 105; 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 191; Le Clereq,
1881, vol.l, p. 196).

A sick person was sometimes bled by making a cut on his head. A
headache was cured by mking several cuts on the upper part of the

forehead.  One woman remained in her cabin and chewed a lump of snow
in order to cure a cold (Le Jeune, 1634-JIR, volo 5, p. 143).

The bark and leaves of a certain tree, callod annodda in Montagnais,
were boiled in water and used as a general internel med.chine. Also, the
dregs of this liquid were placed on the legs if they were swollen from
disease.  This medicine was used to cure a great variety of internal

and external ailments. Dysentery was cured by drinking a medicine made
from boiled cedar leaves (Le Jeune, 1638a-JR, vol. 12, p. 25; Sagard,
1939, p. 196).

Another method of curing the sick was to have a man, woman, or
child remain with the patient. This companion did nothing, simply

sitting idle beside the sick person. If a patient requested somoone to
do this, it was considered very impolite to refuse (Le Jeuno, 1638a-JR,
vol. 12, p. 25).

Shamannisti.a curing will be discussed under tShamanism and Witahw
crxf Ott

WARFARE

In warfare the Montagnais used shields, bows and arrows, clubs,

and spears mde by fastoning a sword to the ond of a pole. Ono shield
is described as having been long and wide, reaching from tho ground to
the chest* It was made   of a single pieco of light codar', somewhat

curved or bent to cover the body more effectively.   So that it would

hold together if split by an arrow, it was sewed at t.th top and bottom
with leather thonge. It vms hold on the body by means of cords passing
over the right shoulder, so that the shield protected the loft side.

After a weapon was discharged or hurled, the warrior could immediately
crouch behind his shield (Le Jeuno, 1634-JR, vol. 5, pp. 95-97).

Before going off to war, the Montagnais hold a feast or ceremony

at which there waA singinga%d 4anoingo    Everyone woro his best garments,
decorated with colorod bedds or writh necklaces. Each man apparently hed
a (war?) song of his own that no one else would sing. A manr sometimes
sang a song belonging to his onomios in ordor to insult thom.   During
the danoes tho older mon seem to have danced first, then the youths.

In one dance the varriors marohed in file vwith bows, arrows,
clubs and shields. They assumod various postures and attitudes,

imitating those of combat. Ordinary dancing followed, and then a foasto
After the feast, the women removed all their clothing, retaining only
their finest ornaments. They danced while nakod. Tho purpose of this
denco was to propitiato the Manitou. Thon they entorod canoes and

paddled out into the middle of the riwr where they hold a mock battle,
splashing water on ono another and striking blows with paddles. Then
the women roturned to their cabins and tho rwn went oif to attack the

Iroquois (Le Joune, 1637-JR, vol. 9, p. 111; Champlain, 1922, pp. 179-180).

Tho best account of an actual attack is Champlaints detailed

doscription of the ?cmous battle on Lake Champlain in July, 1609. In
this battle he and two other Frenchmen aided thc Huron, Algonkinr, and
Montagnais warriors.  Chomplaints doscription of how this raid was

carriod out presumable indicatos the genoral pattern of most Montagnais
warfare, which usually did involve Algonkin or Huron allios. Infor-
mation given by Le Joune and others holps to fill out Chanplaints
description.

lWYhen the 1609 raiding party began to ascend the Richelieu river,

sane of the Indians returned to their wn country because of a disputo
that had arison. Disputed of this kind wero frequent, and proposed

raiding parties ofton failed to materialize.   Sixty men in twenty-four
oanoes finally participated in this raid.

WJhen camping for thex night. the Indians cut troes and bark to make
shelters.  To avoid being surprised by the Iroquios, a barricade of

logs was constructed. It surroundod the camp on all eidos, oxoopt at

21

the river bank, where the canoes wore drawn up.  It took about two hours
to set up a camp.

Each time tho Indians campod, three canoes with three men in each
were sent a few leagues ahead to reconnoitre. These men stcyed out all
night; no guard was posted at the camp. During the day the raiding

party was divlided into three groups, one to hunt game, another .to scout
ahead for the enemy, and another , tho largost, remained roedy for
battle. Soouts looked for certain conventional signs by whioh the

chiefs of various tribes, both friondly and hostile, identified them..
selves to anyono who might pass by. The hunters stayod behind tho
soouts and behind the main body.

When the raiding prrty was within two or three days' tr.avel of the
onemyts territory it moved only at night, as one group, excopt for the
scouts. During the day everyone remained hidden in tho forests. No

oooking fires wore built; tho only fires were for smoking. The warriors
ate cornmeal cakes, saved until the group had neared the enemy. These
wore also eaten when the party hastily rotired after the attack.

At each stop someone entered the shaking tent to divine the outoomo
of tho raid. Tho chiefs gave most of the men a stick about a foot long;
the rest of the men wore given somewhat longor sticks which designated
them as leaders. Everyono retired to the woods where a space about six
foet square was cleared. Each loader arranged the sticks in the way his
men were supposed to arrange thomsAlves in combat. The men watched
closely and then arranged thomselvos in the order indicated by the

sticks. They mixed themselves up and again assumed their places, until
they knew thom perfcotly. Then they returned to the camp (4).

Dreams were carefully analyzod ec.h morning to determine the out-
come of the battle. The presence of three Frenchmen during the 1609
raid seoms to have given the Indians unusual confidence.

Finally, the war party encounterod some Iroquois. It wras night.
Champlain's group drew out into the lake. Both sides propcred their

weapons. The Iroquois landed and built a stockade. The invaders tied
their oanoes togethor with poles so as not to become separated and

then sent two canoes to ask the Iroquois if they would fight. Both
sides agreed to wait until daybreak.

Each group spont the night s8inging, dancing, and hurling insults

at the other. Champlain and his two oompanions kept out of sight until
the actual battle. Whon the Montagnnis and the-ir allies landod, about

two hundred Iroquois left their stockade. They wore led by three chiefs.
Both .groupe adv,noed to within thirty yards of oach other. The French-
men opened fire with their arquebuses. The three Iroquois chiefs were
slain, and the other Iroquois flod to tho woods. They were pursued.

and ten or twelve prisoners wore taken. Tho scalps of all those killed
in battle were cut off as trophies.

Aftor this viotory tho allios took tho corn and cornmeal loft

behind by the Iroquois. They also took the shields the Iroquois had
droppod in thoir flight. They feasted and danced for threo hours and
finally sot off with the prisoners.

Aocording to Le Jeune, whon the mombers of a war party began to

turn baok toward their own country, they hung to a tree as nmny small
sticks as there had boon warriors. This sign showed how many raidors

had been thero, and how far they had penotrated the IrQquois territory
(Lo Jeune, 1638a-JR, vol. 12, p. 27).

After going about eight leagues, Champlain's group stopped to

camp. One of the prisoners was tortured in the usual mannor (see below).
Champlain was finally allowed to shoot the oaptive, promaturoly ending
the prooeedings. The prisonor's intostines were thrown into the lalco

and his hoad, arms, and legs were sectterod about. His scalp was saved
as a trophy, and his heart was cut up and given to tho other prisoners
to eat. They refused to swallow it, spitting the pieces into the lako.

Then tho group continued on its homoward way. At the Richeliou

rivor the three tribes separated. Each tribe kept some of the prisoners.
Champlain returned with tho Montagnais. Whon someone droamed that the
Iroquois wore pursuing them, the Montagnais becam very frightoned and
moved their camp immediately, even though it was raining at the time.

When a war party nearod its home camp, tho scalps of the onemy wore
dooorated with beads and hung on long poles raised in the air, like

banners. The men began singing. As soon as tho women at the camp saw

the oanoes approaohing, they ran to the bank of tho river, removed their
olothing, and samm out to the canoes. There they fought to see who

could seizo one of the scalps. Later, they wore those scalps around

their nooks, sang and danced with them, and hung thom in their cabins.
Women who captured scalps in this way were very proud of the fact (Le
Jeune, 1637-JR, vol. 9, p. 253; Champlain, 1925, pp. 67-106).

As soon as the warriors' onoes lcnded, the prisoners wrere attaoked
by the women and children and the torturing began. Whenevor the Jesuits

or other Frenchmen rebuked the Montagnais for the cruel way in which they
tortured prisoners, the women roplied that the Iroquois did even worse
things to their husbands, fathers, and sons. The men a.nd womon who
performed most of the tortures wore those whoso husbands or close
relatives had been similarly trouted by the Iroquois. Womon gave

presents to the men to be allowed to torture prisoncrs. Prisoners wore
sometimes torturcd for several days before they finally diod or wore

killed. They wore sometimes scalpod after they died (LU Jeune, 1632-JR,
vol. 5, pp. 51-55; 1637-JR, vol. 9, pp. 257-259, 271, 299).

The Montagnais tortured prisoners by burning them with flaming

brands, whipping them, puncturing their skins or scalps with ..wls, and
by other mothods. Part of the time prisoners were bound to stakes.

23

.hon they soomed to fasint, cold water was throvm on them.  ThOir fingors
and ears wore out off and thoy were made to oct thom. Sinews wero torn
out of their arms cnd hot sand was thrown boneath their raisod scalps.
An Iroquois prisoner always tried to be as bravo as possible, singing
loudly and dancing when told to do so. Some prisoners never uttered a

cry of pain and sang continually until they died, to tho amazement of the
French. Women are consistently reported to have surpassed the moan in
their cruelty toward prisoners.

Eventually a prisoner's body bcame so roastod by the fires and hot
brands that the skin foll from him.  Whon ho finally died, his body was
pounded with clubs and cut into pieces. Every worthy person cut off a

piece and fed it to tho dogs. Occasionally, the Montagnais ate part of
of the corpse.  If a prisoner had been oxceptionally brave during the

torturos, his chest was cut open and his heart given to the children to
eat, while the rest of him was eaten by tho adults. The prisoner's

bones wore thrown into the river. (For more detailed descriptions of

Montagnais torture, see the following# Le Jeune, 1632-JR, vol. 5, pp  27-31,
51-55; 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 245; 1637-JR, vol. 9, pp. 297-299; Champlain,
1925, pp. 101-103, 134, 136-137; L'Allomant, 1627-JR, vol. 4, pp. 199-
201).

According to Le Jeuno, one reason tho Montagnais feared the

Iroquois so greatly was that thoy knew they would be tortured in a
similar fashion if they wcre capturod. When a war party had been
defoetod, somoone was sent ahead to the comp in order to broek the

newse As soon as he reached the cabins ho shoutod tho na.mos of thoso
killed or captured. Tho   daughters and wives of those namod sproed

their hair over their feces, paintod the-mselves black, and began to weep
(Le Jeune, 1632-JR, vol. 5, p. 55; 1638a-JR, vol.12, p. 27).

The Montagnais did not usually harm women and children when they

raided the Iroquois, exc3pt during the first sudden battle. YWomen were

sometimes taken es captives, but they were not tortured as were the men.
Often a young Montagnais man married a female Iroquois prisoner if she
wes very industrious. She seems to havo then become a full member of

her husbandts group. Young Iroquois boys were occasionally adopted by
the Montagnnis. One such boy was treated just like the biological

childron of the family that adopted him (Lo Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p.
259; 1637-JR, vole 9, p. 255).

Le Joune was told that once a Montagnais chiof, spying on the

Iroquois, met an Iroquois spy face to fceo. To avoid a battlo botwvoon
their people, the Iroquois proposed a wrestling match to see which one

could carry off the other. Tho Montagnais won. He bound his onemy and
carried him off as a captive (Le Joune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, pp. 93-95).

There are many indications that the Algonkins and Montagnnis,

although supposedly allied against the Iroquois, nevertheless quarreled
frequently during their joint raids and wcre not strongly united.

24

About 1635, privats traders attompted to incite tho M"lontagnais to war on
the Hurons. The traders did this so that the Hurons would not be able

to trado with the French at Three Rivers and Queboc, whero all trade was
logally in the hands of the t'Compapio do la Nouvolle Franeo" (Le Joune,
1636-JR, vol. 8, p. 61; 1637-JR, vol. 9, pp. 245, 249 ,237

SOCIAL GROUPS AND POLITICAL ORGANIZATION

Some informtion concerning social and political groupings has

alroady been presented. That whioh remains is very sketchy, since the
sources give few descriptions of these aspects of Montagnnis culturo.

Montagnais ohiofs were apparently elocted or soloctod at some kind
of meeting or council. The only prorequisito to the office that is
mentioned in the sources is that a chief had to be a great orator.
Chiefs had littlo power. They wore obeyed in proportion to their

oloquencoe People did not hesitate to disrogerd the advice or instruc-
tions of their chief. No matter how much a chiof harangued, ho could
not obtain obedience unless what he said ploesed his people. The

Montagnis often laughed at their chiefs (Le Joune, 1634-JR, vol. 5,
pp. 139, 219; 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 243; 1636-JR, vol. 8, p. 55).

Nevertheless, a chief seems to have enjoyed a certain amount of
prestige and some prerogatives. Champlain describes some Algonkins

coming to a French settlement to barter furs. Beforo beginning to trado,
they offered some presents to the son of a recently deceased Montagnais
chief, in order to appease and comfort him.  In 1618, Lo Caron

wittnessed an argument betwoen a Montagnais chief and a French merchant.
The chief complained that the French were charging too much for their

goods, and the merchant offored to sell cheaper to the chief but not to
the rest of his people. The chief indignantly rofusod, saying that he
did not speak for himself but for his people (Le C>orcq, 1881, vol. 1,
p. -136; Champlain, 1925, p. 208 ).

What remains most obscure concerning Montagnais ohiefs is the size
and composition of the groups which they headed. Equally, it is not
olear just how, if at all, ohiefs functioned during the winter.

It wa,s a common practice for the Recollect missionaries working
cmong the Montagnais, at least prior to 1629, to sook out a prominent

chief who was well.disposod toward the Fronch. This chief then adopted
the missionary, either as a son or as a brother, depending on tho

Rooolleotts age and rank. The missionary then became a member of the
tribe and a relative of eaoh member of the chief's family. This

adoption took place at a special feast hold for the purpose. Thero is
no indication as to whether such a feoat was held in other cases of

adoption that did not involve ohiofs (Le Clercq, 1881, vol. 1, pp. 131-
132).

25

The Montagnais held councils at which proposed actions were discussed
and debated. These were attended by the principal men of the group, who
were the elders.  Women and children were never present.   In fa ct, young
unmarried women, and married women still without children, took io part

whatsoever in managing group affairs. They were said to have been treated
like children. Speeches at liontagnais councils were delivered in a slow,
deliberate style.  Singing was a part of all counoil meetings (Le Jeune,

1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 193; 1635-JR, vol. 7, p. 89; Champlain, 1922, p. 110).

The Montagnais, the Algonkins, and perhaps other tribed along the

St. Lawrence, had some kind of band or "tribal" territories#. WRhen people
arrived from other "nations,"they did not dare pass through one of these

territories without obtaining permission from the chief of the inhabitants
of the area. If the foreigners attempted to pass without this permission,
their canoes would have been smashed. They asked for such ipermission by
offering some presents to the chief. If he preferred not to let them

pass., he refused the gift, telling them he had stopped the way and they
could go no farther. At these words, the foreigners had to turn back
or run the risk of war. This custom may have only operated in summer,

but the information is not olear. lJhen Sagerd and some Xiurpns tried to
paddle past a Montagnais summer camp, located on a bank of 'the St. Law-.
rence above Quebec, the Montagnais chief and several other tnen came in
a canoe to meet the kurons.  The Montagnais tried to seize R portion of
the Huronst cornmeal, saying that their chief was entitled to such pay-
mont if the Hurons wished to pass through their territory.  There are
indications that by 1640, the lure of the fur trade was causing some

groups, notably the Abnaki, to ignore the demands and wishes of Montagnais
chiefs in regard to boundaries (Le Joune, 1638a-JR, vol. 12, pp. 187-189;
Sagard, 1939, p. 268).

Some information on the size of Montagnais hunting groups has already
been given* The size of a group living in one camp seems to have been
much larger during the summer than in the winter. In winter, it split
up into several smaller parties. Le Jeune states that the family, or
living group, of a certain Montagnias man consisted of two or three

households (minages).  Ordinarily, there seems to have been several fires
in each cabin, possibly one fire for each household.  Champlain, probably
speaking of the Montagnais summer cabins, states that sometimes ten

households lived in ono cabin (Le Joune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 103; 1635-JR.
vol. 6, p. 163; Champlain, 1922, p. 105).

Summer camps and social groupings could be larger than winter ones
due, it seems, to an abundance of eels and dried moose in sumner. Le
Jeune gives the impression that in the period 1630-1640, Montagnais

camp groups were much smaller thlan those described by Champlain in 1603,
having only two or three cabins with few households in each in the later
period.  There is no indicatioh as to how camp groups were related to

the "tterritories" described above, or to the institution of chieftain-
ship.

26

Camp groups were apparontly rathbr unstable in their composition.
There is some evidenoo that by 1635, people hunted more or less wvherc
they pleasod in winter, at least in tho St. Lawrenoe area. When the
group Le Jouno wintered with learned that there already wore many

Montagnais near the-. place they had intended to pass tho winter, they
deoided to go elsewhere so that the several hunters would not cause

one another to starve.   Furthermore, at the height of tba 1633'1634
famine there wore only nineteon members left in LA Jeunets party, tho
rest of the original forty-five havin? gono elsewhere to seek food
(Le Jouno, 1635-JR, vol. 7, pp. 47,97).

The Montagnais settled intragroup murders by blood feuds or by
oompensation.   If a man killod or wounded another of his group, the
relatives and friends of tho injured person would kill the murderer,
thus starting a feud. However, the killer was released from all

punishment by offering presents to tho friends and relatives of the
dead or injured party.   Thero is no information on the form or size
of these gifts (Le Jeune, 1654,JR-vol. 5, p. 219; 1638a-JR, vol. 12,
p. -169; Champlain, 1929, p. 19 1)

If a Montagnais man was wounded in a raid on the Iroquois and

later died, his kin would have to avenge his death, unless the chiefs

gave them presents.  Otherwise, they would have taken revenge by killing
someon8 e of anbther tribe, or even of their awn, according to Champlain
(Champla in, 1922, pp. 178_179).

KINSHIP, DESCENT, AND. IIMERITANCE

The Montagnais seem to have preferred, at least in theory, tint a
child inherit from his motherts brother rather thhn-fromWhis father.
Le Jeune attributes this to their dcubt as to the true paternity of
a child, due to ""loose morals" of the Montagnais (Lo Joune, 1635-

JR, vol. 6, p. 255).   Probably speaking of the Montagnais, le Jeune

also says that if a father had two children, they wore called "brother.
and sister."  Their children were also "called brothers arxl sisters,
and the descdndants of these will bear the same title of brothers and
sisters, and will never intermarry, if they follow the good customs of
their nation..w"  (Le Jeune, 1640-JR, vol. 16, p. 205).

This latter statement seems to imply that kinship was reckoned

bilaterally but no further information is given.  The rule of inheri-
tanoe has a matrilineal emphasis, but it is not clear how strictly
this was adhered to, since the relatives of the decoeasod are also

said never to have used anything that had been used by the deceased.

27

LIFE CYCLE

Birth to Puberty

Montagnais women usually had no difficulty in being delivered

of a child. Women were seen to gather fi-ec-ood two hours after giving
birth (L'Allemnt, 1627- RR, vol. 4, p. 205).

Small children were cleaned with powdered, rotten woQd. Some
kind of birch bark cradle was used.   If a child's mother died while

giving birth, or when the child was still young. the child was sometimes
kil).1do The Montaognais said that such a person (ie,, an orphan) would
be abandoned by evoryone during his lifetimne   HC.ever, the child mnight
also be raised by one of his ttncles or othcr relatives (Le Joune,
1634-JR, vol. 5,  pp. 91, 137; 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 117).

It is repeatedly stated that the Montagnais never chastised their
children, and would not permit the Jesuits to do so.    Only a simple
repri'nand was allcwed.  This treatment seems to have been the ideal,

and also the usuat. practi-e.  However, a man who got angry at his wife
was seen to throw their three or four year old child to the ground in
in order to kill it   (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 197; 1635-JR, vol.
6, p. 127).

Montagnais children were taught to be brave in time of famine

and not to complain or cry when there was no food. When a group moved
camp in winter, the children were given a load to carry.     The adults
encouraged children to compote in carrying or dragging baggage when
moving camp (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 7, pp. 111, 127).

Girls (and women?) did not live in the cabin with the others

when they were menstruating, the men fearing even to meet them.     One
Indian attributed his illness to the glance of a menstruating girl
(Le Jeune, 1637-JR, vol. 9, p. 123).

The Montagnais   did-'lot like to tell their names to other people,

but a person would freely tell what someon3. else's name was.    Individuals
were naine4. at birth.  Anotim r name was taken in manhood, but it is

not clear whether any puberty rites wore involved.     Still anothor name
was taken in old ago.    If a person was very ill and did not improve,
he sometimes changed his namo Lor a luckicr one (La Jounc, 1634-JR,
vol. 5, p. 93; 1640-JR, vol. 16, p. 203).

Marriage and Divorce

Champlain describes what were. probably the marritge customs of

the Montagnais and Algonkins.   Other authors help fill out the picture.
When a girl was fourteen or fifteen years old she could have se-veral
suitors.   She saw whichever of them she wished.   At the end of five

28

or six years, shc c;ose one of thom r.s her husband.  Thu husband gavc
presents to the father or rolativos of the girl ho married. If the
couple lived together for some timo and had no ohildren,

the man left his wife end married another woman.    Husbands wore

jealous, and the sexual freedom of marriod womon was more limited
than that of younger girls (Champlain, 1922, pp. 119-120).

When a girl agreed to marry one of hor suitors, she had her hair

out so that it was "hanging over her forchead."   If she left her husband
after marriage, or if she refused to marry a man after having accepted
gifts from him, the jilted man might cut off port of her hair.    This
dpoilod her appearance and prevented her from getting another husband

for a while.  Lo Joune states that this oustom was more closely followed
by the Algonkins than by the Montagnais (Le Joune, 1640-JR, vol. 16,
p. 205).

Young men scmeti.mes went two or throo months after marriage without
approaching thoir wives sexually. The Jesuits were told this while
thoy were teaching some baptized Ind.1ans the virtues of chastity.

The Indians said they already had such a custom (Vimont, 1641-JR, vol.
19, p. 69).

Le Joune was not certain of all the degrees of relationship
within which marriage was prohibited, but ideally none of those

calling each other brother and sister could marry.   However, if more
remote cousins did marry, even though calling one another by these

torms, they wore merely said to have no sense; no further action was
talken (Le Joune, 1640-JR, vol. 16, pp. 205-207).   One man at Quebec
was said to have married his own daughter, oven though the others

strongly disapproved. It seems doubtful that this was his biological
offspring. It may have been his stop-daughtor, since divorce and

romarriage were fairly common   (LIAllemant, 1627-JR, vol. 4  p. 199

Polygyny was practiced.    One chief had throe wives at the same
time.  Sororal polygyny was probably preforrod, two sisters boing

married at the same time.    If a man had already married one sister,
he could marry another during the lifetime of his first wife, tfor

if ho waited until after her death he must reckon hcr as his niece,
and could not marry her without reproach"' (Le Joune, 1640-JR, vol.

16, p. 207; LU Jeune, 1638a-JR, vol. 11, p. 167, L'Allemarnt, 1627-JR,
vol. 4, p. 199).

Men sometimes married women from anothenr tribe, or "nation."

One such woman, dying of smallpox at Tadoussac, told Le Jeune she was
origi-ally from the interior below Tadoussac, on the west side of the
St. Lawrence.   She said her people still used stone hatchets.

They spoke the Montagnain language. They did not come to trade with
the French because the Montagnais of Tadoussac killed theor on sight
(Le Joune, 1635&JR, vol. 7, p. 69; 1636-JR, vol. 8, p. 41).

If a woman became dissatisfied with her husband she left him and,

presumably, dissatisfied husbands simply left thoir wives. The Indians

told the Reoollects that if a coupld did not get along, tih only sensible
thing to do was to separate   and marry elsewhere.  Divorce was fairly

frequent unless a oouple had several children; thel they did not separate
so readily (Le Jeuno, 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 111; Le Clercq, 1881, vol. 1,
p. 221).

A person was not supposed to remarry within three years of the death

of a spouse, or the relatives of the dead person regarded it as an affront.
If a woman remarried within three years without the permission of the dead
mants relatives, they not only bore her ill-will, but also took the shell
necklaces and everything eise of value belonging to tho womants new hus-
band.  He had to submit to this without protest.   Le Jeune saw such an
event happen  (Le Joune, 1640-JR, vol. 16, pp. 203-205).

Old Age, Dedth, Burial

The .!Aontagnais gave the sick or feeble only what they asked for;

no extra attention was paid them. If a siak person did not want to eat

at mealtime, a share was not saved for him.   But if he grew hungry later
he was given whatever food was at hand, such as smoked meat.   As long as
a patient could eat, he was oarried or dragged (on a sledge) with the
group.  If ho stopped eating, and tho others believed he was about to
dio, they usually killed him, both to relieve him of his suffering and
to relieve themselves of an added burdon   (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6,
p. 245; 1635-JR, vol. 7, p. 53).

Occasionally old peoplo wore treated rather harshly. One man rolled
his aged mother down a snow-covered bank beoause he could not convoniont-
ly oarry her down on a sledge.  When food was scarce, or a long journey
was to be made, old people wore often abondoned in the woods, or simply
killed with a hatchet. This was regarded as a servico, sinlce otherwiso

they would die of starvation if they wore unable to keep up with a rapidly
moving group (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, pp. 103, 141-143; L'Allemant,
1627-JR, vol. 4, p. 199)o

About 1635, a groat many Montagnais living nkiar the French settle-
ments died in a smallpox epidomic. Almost all thoso around Throo Rivers
were sick and a great many diod (Brobouf, 1636-JR, vol. 8, p. 87).

When a person diod, the people at the camp took sticks and struck
his cabin and shouted, in order to drive his soul wcir&y. yIi' the soul'of
a dead person came near a child, the child would die. The soul was

believed to leave tho oabin through the smoke hole. It remained around
the camp for a tim after the death. A few of tho best pieeos of meat

were thrown into the fire to toed the soul of tho doceased. The corpse
was not taken out the oabin door; instead, the bark at one side of tho
cabin was raised and the body was removed that way. The doorway was

believed to be for the living; consaquently the dead should not uso it

30

(Le Jeune 1634-JR, vol. 5, pp. 129-131; 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 209-211;
LU Cleroq, 1881, vol. 1, p. 218).

The corpse was wrapped in robes. One dead child was wrapped in

beaver skins. over whioh a large piece of linen cloth was placed. Final-
ly, a double piecoe of bark was wrapped around the other materials.  A

oorpse was placed on a high scaffold made of wood until it-as to be bur-
ied. Burials apparently did not take place in the winter.

Aside from his clothes, a person was buriod with most of his belong-

ings, such as candlosticks, furs, knives, blankets, tobacco pouch, dishes,
kettles, bowls, spoons, and, if a man, bow and arrows. Le Clercq also'

mentions the placoing of food with the body. However, thore seems to have
been considerable variation in the number of grave goods placed with a

corpse. One young child that died was placed in its grave with a cradle
and a few other items. At the burial, the mother drew soXle milk into a
little bark ladle and burned it in tho fire. This was to provido milk

for the soul of the dead child. Grave goods were for the use of the soul
of the deceased in the other world. It was not the objects themselves

whioh were used, but their spirits or souls  (Le Joune, 1634-JR, vol. 5,

p. 129; 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 125, 129-131; 1637-JR, vol. 9, p. 47; L'Alle-
ment, 1627-JR, vol. 4, p. 201; Sagard, 1939, pp. 208-209; Le Clercq, 1881,
vol. 1, p. 218).

The Montagnais buried their dead in the woods near a large tree or
other recognizable spot. The corpse was placed in a crouohing position,
like a.person `seated upon his heels." The head faced west so the soul

of the deceased would know the direction it should takb to reach tho land
of the dead. A bit of hair was cut from the dead person's head and given

to the nearest relatives.  When two related Montagnais children died about
the same time, they were placed in the same grave. Bark, logs, and earth
wore put over the grave. If anyone was found ransacking a grave the rela-
tives of the deoeased became very angry. Anyone caught doing this would
be killed (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 211; 1637-JR, vol. 8, p. 253;
1640-JR, vol. 16, p. 207; Sagard, 1939, pp. 208-209).

Champlain describes the burial practioes of the Indians he knew in
1603. It is not clear whether his description aotually applies to the
Montagnais or not, but it agroes fairly well with information given by

other authors. However., Champlain states that tho grave was covered with
earth and that many large pieoes of wood were then put over its A stake,

painted red noar its top, was placed at one end of the grave* None of the

other authors mention such a stake or grave post (Champlain, 1922, p. 120).

There is an account of burial practices in Le Clereq, taken from the
1624 memoirs of Father Le Caron. This acoount is unclear as to meaning
and describes burial practioes not mentioned by any other authors$

They take the body from the villa&, and bones,
which they call bundles of souls,   nd change them

from one tomb to another adorned with skins, beads,

51

bolts,  nd other like riches of the country, believing
that all this serves to ronder the dead more happy
(Lo Cleroq, 1881, vol. 1, p. 218).

The dead were not referred to, bocause doing so would renew the griof
of the living relatives and cause them to cry. The relatives of a dead
person never used anything that the decoased had used (5)   (Le Jeune,
1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 135).

ETIQUETTE AND DAILY LIFE

The sexual division of labor among the Montagnais made for inter-
personal harmony. Mon and women onch had their tasks and never inter-
fered with one another in thoir work. Men made canoe frames and women
sewed the bark; men made snowshoe frames and women put in the netting.
Men did the hunting, fighting, and trading; women skinned animals and

dressed hidos. A man who did a womants work, when it was not absolutely
necessary, was laughod at.   One mn, whoso wife was sick, went in search

of firewood at night, so the other men would not see him. Women frequently
wore not invited to foasts, yet they never complained about not getting tho
good pieces of meat or about having to work oontinually, gathering firewood,
building cabins, dressing skins and doing other laborious tasks (Le Joune,
1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 133; 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 233-235; LtAllemant, 1627-JR,
vol. 4, p. 205).

Although many people might be living in one oabin, harmony was presor-
ved.  They aided and helped one another generously, expecting similar

treatment in return. When a person gave a present, he expected to roceive
one himself at a later date. If such reciprocity was not forthcoming, a
person lost all prestigeo The Montagnais made a point of not seeming to
be attached to anything, so that wrhatever they lost would not be missed.
It was a great insult to say that a man liked everything and was stingy.
Ideally, people oared for relatives, friends, widows, and orphans when

necessary, treating them as one of the family   (Le Joune, 1634-JR, vol. 5,
p. 105; 1635-JR, vole 6, pp. 237-239, 259).

However, there appears to have been a strong undercurront of hosti-

lity and ill-feeling boneath the more superficial cooperation and friend-
liness of Montagnais life. Le Joune, speaking of malevolent magic, says
it was t"strange to see how these people agree so well outwardly and how
they hate each other within." He adds that, while they raroly got angry

and fought, in their hearts they intended one another a groat deal of harm.
He was puzzled at how to reconcile this hostile undercurrent with the out-
ward show of kindness and assistance (Le Jeune, 1638a-JR, vol. 12, p. 13).

Among themselves the Montagnais were prone to snoor and banter, but
this did not disturb their outward peace and harmony. Slander was fre-

quent. If a person learned that anothor had slandered him, he said nothing.

32

If the two met, they acted as if nothing had happened (Le Jeune, 1635-OR,
vol. 6, pp. 237, 243, 247).

Unlike the Hurons, the Montagnais wre not usually given to steal-
ing, not even from the French. A man who stole a large piece of moose

meat during a  famine was only sneered at, in his absence.   Later he was
even invited to live with the family he had previously robbed (Le Jeune,
1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 235-237, 249).

A good hunter among the Montagnais gained considerable prestige. A
poor hunter was mocked by men and women alike, but not usually to his

face. Such a person was regarded as something of a burden and he had no
prestige. Poor hunters had difficulty in finding wives, and still

greater difficulty in keeping them. One very unskilled hunter had four

or five wives at different times, his brothers having helped him to secure
them. All his wives left him. Women are said to have possessed `great

power" among the Montagnais. A man often promised something and then ex-
oused himself by saying that his wife would not agree to it (Le Jeune,
1634-OR, vol. 5, p. 181; 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 241; 1635-JR, vol. 7, pp.
173-176).

The Montagnais entered a dwelling unannounced and without any word
of greeting. When a man returned from hunting he sometimes dropped his
kill outside the cabin and went in. No one spoke a word. He sat near
the fire and undressed. His wife took his stockings (inner boots) and
moccasins, wrung them out, and put them aside to dry.   The man threw a

robe over his shoulders, all this taking place in silence. If his wife

had saved anything for him to eat she gave it to him on a bark dish, still
without speaking.   He ate in silence and afterwards smoked.  Only then

did he begin to speak. If' no one had looked outside to see what game he
had killed, he informed those present of his luck. The Montagnais said
that a hunter had more need of rest than of talk when he returned to his

oabin (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. .123; 1638a-JR, vol. 11, pp. 211-213).

When the Montagnais awoke in the morning each person took his bark
dishful of meat and began eating. After breakfast, they apparently ate
periodically during the day. Just. before retiring they had a last bite

to eat or smoked a pipeful of tobacoo (Le Jeune, 1635-OR, vol. 6, p. 251).

At meals, the kettle was removed from the fire and each person was

given his share. Meat was placed in bark dishes by hand, or with a small
pointed stick. It was eaten by holding it in the hands and cutting

pieces from it, or by holding one end in the teeth and the other end in
the left hand, while a knife held in the right hand was used to cut it.

In the absence of a knife, chunks were simply torn off the meat with the

teeth. The Montagnais ate with their mouths closed. After a greasy meal
a person wiped his hands on his hair, on the dogs, on his moccasins, or
on some pulverized, rotten wood. Young women did not eat from the same

dish as their husbands (Le Jeuno. 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 91; 1635-JR, vol. 6,
pp. 267-269, 291; 1635-JR, vol. 7, p. 89).

Eating and drinking were not done at tho same time during a meal.
After the meat was distributed and eaten, the broth was divided. Some-

times eaoh person went to the kettle after eating the meat and took what
broth he wanted.  No one complained if his food was hot or cold.   Maat

was divided without waiting for anyone not present, not even the head of
the household. A share was reserved for him and served cold when he ar-
rived (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 239, 275).

The Montagnais told Le Jeune that for a group of about thirty

people to eat well during the winter, it was necessary to kill a large

moose or elk every two days. When there was plenty of food the Montag-

nais ate "continually," even though there would be nothing left the next
day. During a famine they often had to go two or three days without
meat, hunting and working all the while. At suoh times they ate eel

.skins, old moose skins, and the bark of trees (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol, 5,
pp. 165-167; 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 239; 1635-JR, vol.7, pp. 47, 181).

Le Jeune says that if the Indians began to die of starvation (which
did not happen in the group he wintered with), they fell into a state of
despair, threw away their household utensils and abandoned all interest

in the common welfare. Eaoh person tried to find food for himsolf; women,
children, and all who could not hunt, died of cold and hunger.   Before

they were reduced to suoh a state, one of the three cabins in Le Jeune's

group moved elsewhere because not enough game for so many people could be
found in one area. Even people from the same cabin sometimes separated
for a period of time during the winter, in order to obtain more food.

Later, they reumited at an appointed rendezvous. During a very severe
famine in the winter of 1634-1635, many Montagnais near Tadoussac and

Gaspe' were said to have resorted to cannibalism and then to have hidden

in the woods, not daring to appear before their people (Le Jeune, 1635-JR,
vol. 7, pp. 47, 145, 185; 1636-JR, vol. 8, pp. 29-31).

When visitors appeared at a oamp they were usually greeted with a
meal, everyone immediately setting about preparing it.   If there was

game available, they were invited to remain a few days, and were given
food to take along when they departed. Even during a famine, if 'visi-

tors from nearby Montagnais camps arrived they were fed as long as there
was anything at all to eat. It was an insult to refuse food when it was
offered and a sign of good will and friendship to eat everything served.
A host was highly complimented if a guest told him after a meal that he

was really full. If a stranger joined a hunting party for a short period,
he was treated just like a member of the group (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5,
pp.. 95, 165-167; 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 249-251, 259; 1635-JR, vol. 7, p.
177).

When a visitor arrived from another camp he often entered the cabin
in silence and made himnself comfortable, like a man returning from the
hunt. Knowing he brought news, people came and sat near him. No one

said a word. It was up to him to begin speaking. After resting for a

while, he spoke without being questioned or interrupted. After he related
his news, the older men asked questions and conversed with him. Young men

34

spoke with youthful visitors but did not question older ones (Le Joune,
1638a-JR, vol. 11, p* 213).

When there was no longer any game within three or four leagues of
a winter camp, a man well aoquainted with tho next stop called out that

he was going to mark the way, so that the others could break camp at sun-
rise the next day. He then took a hatchet and set out, blazing trees so
that the others could follow. The next day everyone ate breakfast, if
there was any, and then arranged his baggage on sledges or tump lines.

The women struck the cabins to remove the snovr from the bark. Then they
rolled the bark into bundles. When everyone was loaded, snowvshoes were

put on and they set out. A sick porson who could not walk might be car-
ried on a stretcher made of poles. The children went on ahead, starting
early and often arriving quite late. Children were given a load to carry
or a sledge to pull in- order to accustom them to the work. Water was ob-
tained on the march by breaking the ice in a brook.   After breakfast,
nothing was eaten during a one-day mrch until the destination was

reached and the cabins were erected. It took about three hours to build
a oabin (Le Joune, 1635-JR, vol. 7, pp. 109-116).

lWJhen there was much meat to be moved the women pulled it on sledges.
According to L'Allemant, the women did most of the work in moving a camp.
When the group arrived at its new oamp the women took hatchets and went
into the forests to cut the poles for cabins.   The men drew the floor

plan of the cabins in the snov and then cleared away the snow (Le Jeune,
1635-JR, vol. 7, pp. 35-37; LtAllemant, 1627-JR, vol. 4, p. 205).

Champlain describes the moving of a large camp of Montagnnis, Al-

gonkins, and Etecheyr; ns in the summer of 1603.  At daybreak the principal

chief, or "grand Sagamore" (a Montagnais), left his cabin and shouted that
they should break camp and go to Tadoussao.   The cabins wrore taken down
and each man got into his canoe with his wife, children, and furs (for

bartering). Thero were about one thousand people at this camp and about
two hunared canoes were launched, averaging five people to each canoe,
plus a little baggage (Champlain, 1922, pp. 104-105).

The Montagnais had no word or phrase of greeting. To rejoice or to
express thanks or approval they said 11ho X ho V" VWhen making a speech, es-
pecially at councils, they spoke slovrl7 an7ddeliberately, stopping often
to reflect.  One person spoke at a tine, while the others listened

patiently. There was no feeling that the parts of the body should not bo

mentioned and Le Jeune was often shocked by their "'obsco-i%ty and lewvdness.tt
But only the shaman performed any "brutal action" (a.pparertly a sexual

act) in his presence (Le Jeune, 1632-JR, vol. 5, p. 25; 1634-JR, vol. 5,
p. 165; 1635.JR, vol. 6, pp# 253-255; Champl.in, 1922, p. 110).

To drive away mosquitoes the Montagnais built a smoky fire. They

ate lice and other vermin that they found on their bodies. They said thoy
did this to avenge themselves by eating those that ato them (Le Jouno,

1632-JR, vol. 5, p. 31; 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 153; L'Allemant, 1627-JR, vol.
4, p. 199).

35

Although the muskrat was important in their roligion, the Montag-
nais disliked the odor of musk and the smell of the muskrat. An old
piece of fat was thought to have a pleasant odor (Lo Jeune, 1634-JR,
vol. 5, p. 153)o

The dogs of the Montagnais are described as having bebn large and
numerous. They were kept inside the cabins at night. Since they-were

usually hungry, they ran around the cabin chewing things and tried to get
at the food in the bark dishes at mealtime (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 7,
pp* 43-45).0

FEASTS AND CEREMONIES

Singing was an important part of MFontagnnis ceremonial and religion.
During a famine they stayed in their cabins, drumming and singing in or-

der to find food, The Indians said that once when two men wore unable to
find food and were almost dead from starvation, they wore advised to sing.
When they had sung they immediately found food. Sinceo that time, sing-
ing was a basic part of their religious coremonies.   According to Le

Jeune, they did not undorstand the words of their religious songs but only
those of socular songs. Songs wore accompanied by a drum (Le Jouno, 1635-
JR, vol. 6, p. 193).

Feasts

Champlain refors to a Montagnais feast by the word tabu io, but it
is not clear whether this was the Montagnais word for feast, or whother
it was from another language. Roligious coremonios and feasts often

lasted four hours or more. According to Le Caron, they lasted "days and
nights" (Le Joune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 193; Champlain, 1922, p. 99; Le
Clercq, 1881, vol. 1, p. 222).

Usually, only actual hunters or thoso who had been hunters wore in-
vited to a fousto VATidors wore often invited if it was not to bo an "eat-
all" foust.  Girls, married women, and children wore usually excluded.

But there were feasts, called acoumagouchannl, to which evoryone was in-
vited, including childron.  At those foeasts -,o food was supposod to be

left unoaten. When there was a groat deal of gamc, the women sometlmos
hold a feast of their own at which men wero not present.

No one was invited to a fo-st until all the food wns cooked and

ready to eat.  Then the host went through the cabins of those he invited,
or else called out an inv.itation from the cabin whero the foest was being
hold. Each man answvered ho l ho X, and then took his dish and spoon to the
cabin of the host. WYhen =1 the mon in the camp were not invited, thoso
desired were called by name.

56

Apparently there were two general types of feasts.   At one, the

guests ate only what they wished and took whatever remained home, to di-
vide with their wives and children. The other type of feast was called

an "eat-all" or "lleave-nothing"l feast by the French.  Its purpose was to
bring suocessful hunting. The Montagnais were very careful that the dogs
did not get any of the food at an eat-all feast. If that happened, hunt-
ingwould have been fruitless. Onoe, Le Jeune secretly tried to throw

some meat to the dogs at an eat-all feast. He was deter'ted and the Mon-

tagnais were extremely angry, believing they would be, unable to find more
food.

The greater the amount of food consumed at an eat-all feast, the

better the results would be. A person was permitted to have another help
him if he could not eat his entire share, but nothing should be left un-

eaten.  After the feast, anything that remained was thrown into the fire.
Ibn boasted about the quantity and parts of an animal they had eaten at
these feasts (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 213, 283; 1635-JR, vol. 7,
p. 163; L'Allemant, 1627-JR, vol. 4, p. 201).

When guests arrived at a feast they entered the host's cabin with-
out ceremony, each taking his place around the kettle, which hung over

the fire. Each guest turned his dish upside down before him. They sat on
pine branches that were spread on the floor. No rigid order or procedure
was observed. Everyone sat in a circle with his legs against his thighs,
"like a monkey."

If the feast was an eat-all, there usually was singing, accompanied
by the drum of a shaman if one was present. Occasionally a little omn-

versation was allowed. If it was not an eat-all feast, the guests talked
about their hunting or about their jokes and pranks.

After some preliminary conversation the server of the feast, usually
the man who was giving it, took the kettle (or kettles) from the fire and
placed it before him. Then he made a speech or began a song and the

others joined in. Sometimes he skipped these formalities and simply ut-
tered the words that were always used to open a formal feast: he stated

who was giving the feast, and the foods of which it was composed. As each
dish was enumerated the guests exclaimed ho I At less formal feasts, the
host addressed each of his friends or relatives, stating what would be

eaten. Then everyone started to eat. At a feast where moose was served,
the person who killed the moose (i.e., delivered the fatal blow with a
club) was host. After distributing7the meat he threw some grease into

the fire. saying papuekou,          ' kou, ttmake us find something to eat"
(Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 283-287, 291)o

If a feast contained liquid foods, such as a gruel of flour or

cornmeal, the server divided the contents of the kettle as evenly as he
could into the bark dishes of each guest. There was neither honor nor
disgrace in being served first or last. If there was meat, the server
drew it from the kettle with a pointed stick and placed it in bark

dishes. Then he noted the number of guests and distributed it as he

37

pleased. Everyone was given a large portion but the portions were not

of equal size. Single chunks of meat were not divided, so that only two
or three people got the best parts.

The best pieces of meat were called mascanou, "the chief's part."
These inoluded the  tongue and giblets of a moose, and the head and tail
of a beaver. The fat intestines of the moose were also highly prized.
They were usually roasted, and everyone was given a taste.    The same
was true of another favorite dish made from the large intestine of a

moose.  It was filled with grease and roasted by fastening it to a cord
hanging near the fire. Only the better parts of an animal were served
at a feast, the remainder being saved for ordinary meals.

The most desirable pieoes of meat were given to the best friends
of the host., beginning with those who did not live in his cabin. The

host often served these friends a second or even a third helping, while
the other guests were only served onceo No one was offended at this,

for it was the customary thing to do. Meat was offered on the end of a
stick, the host calling out; the name of the reoipient and the part of

the animal he was getting (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 283, 289-291)9

The person giving and se'rving a feast took no food for himself.

However, if game had been soarce, as soon as the meat was removed from
the kettle a neighbor or friend set aside the best pieces and gave them
to the host after he had served everyone else (Le Jeune, 1635_JR, vol.
6, pp. 289-291).

When the food was something especially good, a guest would compli-
ment his host by saying tapoue'nimitisou, "I am really eating." If the
feast was not an eat-all, the bones were broken, sucked, and gnaLwed to
get out the marrow. Then they were put back in the kettle of broth un-
til it was served. At an eat-all feast there were no bones (Le Jeune,
1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 293).

After the meat had been served, the broth was poured from the

kettle, each person drinking his fill.   If it was an eat-all feast, no

broth could be left. The feast continued until the host spoke the words
used to terminate it:   "Now you will go away; return this feast when you
please.," Some of the guests usually remained to chat, while others left
immediately without a word. Some simply said they were going to leave,
and did so (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 293).

After the words ending a feast were pronounced, the server some-

times collected the grease from the kettles and ate it all himself; or,

he might offer a large, deep dish of this grease to the guests, each eat-
ing his share in turn (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 287).

Usually all the guests retired to their cabins after a feast. It
was very rare for a person to become sick, even after an eat-all feast.
Feasts took place very frequently. According to Le Caron, there were

farewell, complimentary, war, peace, death, health and marriage feasts.

38

During a famine, if a man finally caught a few beavers, day or night
he immediately held a feast for all his neimhbors in the camp. If any

of the other hunters had been successful, they too gave a feast, so that

up to four feasts might be given in succession (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6,
pp. 283, 285; Le Cleroq, 1881, vol. 1, p. 222).

Bear Ceremonialism

When someone killed a bear he left it in the woods and returned to
his camp to get some of the other men to go and see the prize. Then the
bear was brought to the camp. All the girls above the age of puberty

and all the married women without children were excluded from the cabins.
They took no part in the feast but built little temporary shelters away
from the camp and stayed in them until the feast and the ceremony were
over. The dogs were sent away so that they could not lick the bear's
blood or eat any part of it whatsoever.

The person who killed the bear roasted the entrails over some pine
branches, uttering words that Ie Jeune did not understand.   The bear's

killer kept tlhe Itheart bone" of the animal, carrying it in a little pouch
hung around his neck.

Part of the meat was cooked and the men and older women (i.e., those
with children) were invited to the feast. When this feast wffas over, the
_women left.   Then the rest of the meat, which had been cooking in a sep-

arate kettle, was taken down and used for an eat-all feast at which only
the men were present. The next day the remainder of the bear was eaten.

The bones were buried under the hearth and any scraps of meat were burned.
Only then did the young women and girls return.

Le Jeune says the Montagnais preferred bear meat to all other foods
because it was fatter (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 217-219, 291).

Feasts for the Dead

Some kind of feast and accompanying ceremony were held when a chief
or other man of influence died, but the descriptions are somewhat vague

as to just what took place and why. Champlain mentions such feasts, with
singing and dancing at the grave of the deceased. At these feasts a por-
tion of food was set aside for the soul of the dead person and throym

into the fire. The Mlontasnais were careful to prevent the dogs from get-
ting any of the food at such a feast. Anything left over, including

bones, was thrown into the fire. At a feast for a very prominent dead
chief, the chief's son was about to commit some kind of "brutal action"
(sexual act) when two Jesuits drove him away, apparently with the ap-
proval of the other lIontagnais present (Le Jeune., 1634.<R, volo 5,

p. 131; 1637-JR, vol. 9, pp. 79-81; Champlain, 1W25, po 50; L'Allemant,
1627-JR, vol. 4, p. 201).

39

Probably speaking of the Algonkins as well as the Montagnais, Le
Jeune says that when someone died, especially a man of influence, his

name was transferred to another person at a great feast. This seems to
have involved the idea that the dead man was in some way brought back to
life by this method; at least that is how Le Jeune interpreted it. The
relatives or friends of the deceased offered a gift at this time, and

whoever accepted the gift and the name of the deceased obligated- himself
to take charge of the dead person's family. His wards called-him their
father after that time.

This same ceremony was observed when a brave man was slain in war-

fare. If the dead man had a shell necklace or other valuable object, his
friends and relatives offered it to a good warrior. If necessary, they
made a present from their own possessions. If the warrior accepted the

gift and the dead man's name at this ceremony, he was bound to go to war
and kill some of the enemy (Le Jeune, 1640-JR, vol. 16, pp. 201-203).

Le Jeune gives a rather vague description of a ceremony called

ouechibouan. It was performed for a dead person. The shaman assembled
the people"and then went behind some blankets and robes in a quarter of
the cabin, so that he could not be seen. A great many songs were sung*
A woman marked a triangular stick half a spear in length each time a
song was completed. This continued for five hours. Then the shaman

made a pattern for a little sack, in the form of a log, and gavo it to a
woman to use in making such a sack out of leather. This leg-shaped

leather saok was filled with what Le Jeune believed to be soft hair, but
he was unable to learn the purpose of the object. It was called

manitoukathi, "the leg of Manitou."   For a long time it was hung in the
cabin at the place where the shaman had been seated.   Afterwards it was
given to a young man who hung it around his neck (Le Jeune, 1635-JR,
vol. 6, pp. 205-207).

Victory Feasts

Champlain witnessed a victory feast and accompanying ceremony held
by a large group of Montegnais, Algonkins, and Etechemins in 1603, after
a successful raid against the Iroquois. The feast was composed of moose,
bear, seal, beaver, and a great quantity of fowl. The men sat on both
sides of the kettles, each with his own bark dish. Vfghen the meat was
cooked it was portioned out to each man. WAThile they were wJaiting for

the meat to cook a man rose, picked up a dog, and ran (danced?) around
the kettles from one end of the cabin to the other. He threw the dog

down when he arrived in front of the chief. Everyone exclaimed hol hot
Then other men did the same thing until the meat was cooked.

After eating, the men danced with the scalps of the Iroquois, which
had been hanging behind them. A few men sang, striking their hands on
their knees in time to the music. The three tribes had taken about one
hundred scalps. Champlain says there were approximately one thousand
men, women, and children in this camp, which was near Tadoussac (Cham-
plain, 1922, pp. 101-103).

40

After the feast the Algonkins gave a victory dance in w.hich the

women and girls danced naked, except for their ornaments made of dyed

porcupine quills. This dance was probably similar to the victory dances
of the Mlontagnais. The women danced in place, lifting one foot and then
the other, stamping the ground and making various gestures. They sang

while dancing. After this dance the Montagnais men removed their robes,
but not their breecholoths, and presented the Algonkins vdith gifts of
hatchets, swords, kettles, pieces of fat or meat, ornaments, and other
items* Finally there was a foot race between two of the best runners
from each of the three tribes (Champlain, 1922, pp. 107-109).

RELIGION AND BELIEF

Descriptions of Montagnais religion and belief that are given in the
early souroes are sometimes rather vague or even contradictory. One

reason for this soems to be that iontagnais belief was not highly sys-
tematized, but actually was rather vague in many respects. Another

reason is that several versions of similar beliefs seem to have been
current among different groups of Montagnais. Some Indians appear to
have had more knovrledge about supernatural matters than others.

However, the main point to be held in mind concerning Montagnais

religion is that most of the information presented here was obtained by
zealous Jesuit missionaries who strongly scorned the native tsupersti-

tions."  It is very obvious in Le Jeune's accounts of Montagnais religion
the.t he often tried to argue points of theology with the Indians. In

the course of his arguments he more or less forced them to answer ques-
tions they ordinarily gave no thought to* In a sense, some of the Mon-
tagnais tbeliefst  presented here are individually invented answers that
the Indians were prodded into producing through the supercilious ques-
tioning of the missionaries. Nevertheless, they could only give these
answers in terms of their own culture.   In this sense, such answers
actually were a part of Montagnais religion.

An old Montagnais man and a shaman, both questioned by Le Jeune,
told him they were not certain who had first created the wRrorld.  They

thought that perhaps it was Atachocam (also given as Atahocham, Atahocam,
and Atahauta).  They said one only spoke of AtaChocam us one does of

things so c; stant that certain knowledge about them is impossibleo  A

being named Messou restored the world after it was destroyed by a flood
(Le Jeune, i634-JR, vol. 5, pp. 153-155; 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 157; Le
Clereq, 1881, vol. 1, p. 217).

As described by Le Jeune, tManitou" meant some kind of supernatural
beings who lwere at best slightly danger6us and at worst very malicious.
As Le Jeune understood it, the Manituou `himself`t was not very evil and
did not hate mankind. He was prosent only in war and combat. Those
whom he looked upon were protected in warfare, while the others were

41

killed. One Montagnais man said he prayed daily to the Manitou not to

cast his eyes upon the Iroquois and to give the Montagnais some Iroquois
in all their wars.

The "twife" of the Manitou, according to Le Jeune, was thoroughly
evil. It was she who oauiertmhe diseases in the world and killed men.
Otherwise they vwould not die. She fed upon their flesh, gnawing them
from the inside and making them emaciated in th-eir illnesses.  She had
a robe made of the most beautiful hair of the men and women qwhom she
had killed. She sometJmes appeared In the form of a flame, and was
heard rearing in the fire, but her language could not be understood
(Le Joune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 175)o

On the other hand, Le Jeune also says that the Montagnais believed

there were good and bad Manitous. In their oonversations with the Jesuits,
the Montagnais associated the good Manitou with the Christian God and the
bad lMnitou with the Christian devil.   Somewhat later during his stay in
Canada Le Jeune writes that the Montagnais gave "the name Manitou to all
Nature superior to man, good or bad" (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 157;
1638a-JR, vol. 12, p. 7). Le Caron gave this same interpretation to the
word "'Manitou" in 1624G According to him, the Montagnais understood by

1Manitou onIl a kind of material mainspring, giving being and movement
to all things...t   (Le Clercq, 1881, vol. 1, p. 217).

The Montagnais were displeased when anyone spoke of death, misfortunee,
er sickness, beoause the Manitou might hear such talk and cause the people
to become ill or to die.T     word for death was avoidedos Sometimes a few
eels were thrown into the fire to feed the Manitou so he (she?) would not
harm people. The wife of a sick Indian, probably a Montagnais or

Algonkin, burned a pieoe of hide and rubbed it on his head so that the
odor would drive away the Manitou (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 157;
1635-JR, vol. 7, pp. 85-877I17mJR, vol. 9, p. 1171 Vimont, 1641-OR,
vol. 19, p. 71).

The Montagnais believed in spirits of the light or of the air,
called khiohikouai (from khichikouj, "light," or "the air"). These
spirits were able to see far into the future and were consulted by

diviners (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 173; Le Cleroq, 1881, vol. 1,
p. 135).

One man said that when still a young boy he had seen one of the

khichikouai. The boy was alone in the forests. Tp spirit was dressed

like an Iroquois and floated through the airo It stopped a short distance
from him and the earth began to shake. The spirit told him not to be

afraid for he would not die, although his people would not be so lucky.

Then the spirit rose in the air and disappearedo The boy returned to his
cabin and told the others what he had seen. They took it as a bad sign
meaning that someone would be killed by the Iroquois. Soon after this,
a member of the boyts group was surprised and slain by the Iroquois
(Le Jeune, 1638a-JR, vol. 12, pp. 15-17).

42

One Indian said they believed that the eyes of the khichikousi were
in an oblique line, one above and the other below.   At feas- tbt

Montagnais sometimes threw a few spoonfuls of grease into the fire,

saying papeouekou, ppeouku, "make us find something to eat."      Le Jeune
surmised that these offerings were for the khiohikouai (Le Jeune,
1655-JR, vol. 6, p. 175; 1638a-JR, vol. 12,TI'777

The M.ntagnais believed that all things, animate or inanimate, had
souls or spirits. These souls were pictured as shadows of the real

objects or beings. The soul of a man was a dark image of the living
person.  It had feet, hands, a mouth, and other bodily parts.   When a

person died, a piece of the best meat was throwm into the fire for his

soul to eat. The Montagnais said that the next morning they found that
the meat had been nibbled (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 175-1771
Le Cleroq, 1881, vol. 1, pp. 218, 220).

The world of the Montagnais was flat.   It was cut off perpendicularly
at the ends. After death, the spirits or souls of all creatures went to
the land of the dead, a large village loeated where the sun sets. There,
the human souls built cabins on the edge of the precipice. At the base
of the precipice there was nothing but water. The souls spent much of

their time dancingo Fish, game, and tobacco were all abundant. Although
there wnrere trees along the edge of the precipice, they were slippery, and
some of the souls oocasionally fell into the abyss. They were immediate-
ly changed into fish.

Aftdr a person died, his soul went on foot to the land of the dead.
It had to ford rivers in some places; it ate bark and old wood whi.le

traveling through the forests.   In the land of the dead, the diys and
nights were the opposite of those in the living world, so that daytime

among the living was night among the dead. The souls worked and hunted
during their daylight hours; at night they sat with their elbows upon

their knees and their heads betweentheir hands. The souls of dead human
beings hunted the souls of dead beavers and other animals, using the
spirits of ltdead" snowshoes and other implements.

Souls were believed to eat, dtiink, and even to marry in the land of
the dcad. Children who died in this vrorld became the children of married
souls and grew up in the land of the dead. Every soul went to this same
place.

The milky way was celled tchipai moskonau, ttthe path of souls,"

because the bMontagnais belieoved that souls passed along it on their way
to the land of the dead. They said that the souls of two of their

people had returned oneo from the land of the dead and described it;
that was how the living knew what it was like   (Le Jeune, 1635-JR,

vol. 6, pp. 177-179; 1638&-JR, vol. 12, pp. 27-29; 1640-JR, vol, is,
p. 193).

The Indians greatly feared the souls of their dead and tried to
frighten them away from the cabins. If the soul of a dead person

43

lingerod around the cabins of the living it tried to take someone away
wvith it to the land of the dead (Le Jeune, 1640-JR, vol. 16., p. 197).

When a sick person could no longer speak, or had fainted or had
any kind of a fit, the Montagnais believed that his soul had left his
body. If the *person recovered his normal behavior or faculties, it

meant that his soul had returned   (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 7, 'p 125).

The Montagnais placed great importance on what they dredmed.

Dreams wero believed to foretell the future or to indicate actions that

must be performed. A person had to do whatever he dreamed about; other-
wise he would die. Once a sick Montagnais tried to kill a Frenchman

because he dreamed that doing this would cure him. Dreaming of animals

meant that game would be found (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, pp. 159-1611
1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 181-183),

Lucky hunting objeots, such as stones, were sometimes revealed in

dreams. These dreams wore believed to come from the Manitou. The lucky
objeot was carried in a little bag. No o#e was supposed to look in the
bag or its owner would be very angry, perhaps even killing the person
who did so (Le Jeune, 1638a-JR, vol. 12, pp. 13-15).

The Montagnais believed that all animals had an elder brother who
was the source or origin of their species* These elder brothers were

larger than the ordinary animal.  The elder of the beavers was as large
as a cabin.  The elders of all the animals were the junior brothers of
Mossou; Messou was the elder brother of all species of animals.

If anyone saw the elder brother of an animal in his dreams, it

meant that he would be successful in hunting that species. It was through
the favor of the elder, who appeared to him in his dream, that tho hunter
obttined the actual animal*

The Montagnais were not oertain where these elder brothers were,
but thought that the elders of the birds wore in the sky and those of
the other animals were in the water (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6,
pp. 159-161)*

The Montagnais did not throw away certain bones of elk, porcupine,
bouaver4 and lacustrine birds. They wore partioularly careful that the
dogs did not get tihse bones; otherwise those animals whose bones the

dogs ate would become difficult or impossible to catch.   It did not matter
if the vertebrae or rump of the animals wore given to tho dogs, but the
otihr bones wore carefully burned in the fire. The bones of boavers

that hld boen taken in traps were somotimes thrown into a river. The

Montagnais also believed that the blood of a beavor must not be spilled
upon the ground, or thin too it would be very difficult to catch
beavers.

Before .a beaver (and perhaps elk and other animals as well) wrras
entirely dead, it was believed that its soul inspocted the cabin of

44

the person who killed it. It ca.refully noticed the disposition of its

bones.  If they wore given to tho dogs, the othor beavers would be told
of it and would make themselves hard to capture, both in this world and
in the land of the dead.  But the beat#er, or the trap which caught it,
was vory glad to have the bones thrown into the fire or into the river
(Le Jeuno, 1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 179; 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 211-213;
Le Cleroq, 1881, vol. 1, p. 220).

One Montagnais man cut off the end of the tail of every boaver he

killed. He strung these together, because of a resolution or promise ho
had made in order to take many boavers (Le Joune, 1635-JR, vol. 6,
p. 213).

Moose embryos taken from the womb of the mother wore not eaten
except at the end of the moose season. This was because moose 0would
become difficult to oapture if their offspring wore eaton so young.
The Montagnais (perhaps the Algonkins) did not catch salamanders

because they caused the wind to blori.  Young women and girls did not eat
the hoads of pike for fear of not having children. A bird resembling
a magpie was driven away if it tried to get into the cabins because it
gave people headaches. The Montagnais did not eat the marrow in the

vertebrae of animals because it caused backaches. If a stick were thrust
into a vortobra, the person doing this would fool a pain in his back,

just as if the stick had boon thrust into his ow   backbone  (Le Jeue,
1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 219-223; 1637-JR, vol. 9, p. 119).

During the famine of 1633-1634, the Montagnais Le Jeuno had accom-
panied would not eat their dogs. They said that if dogs wore killod to
be eaten, a mn would be killed by blows from an ax    (Lo Jouno, 1635-JR,
vol. 6, p. 221).

The Montagnais apparently recognized two seasons, one consisting of
spring and summer, the other of autumn andwinter.    These seasons were
oaused by two supernatural beings.  Nipinoukhe (from nipin, `spring`)
brought the warm season    Pipounokfro        i       tiwintor") brought
the cold season. The Montagnais dldanot know just what form these

supernatural beings had, but were sure they wore alive, for they heard
then talking or rustling when they came. What they said could not be
understood. Those t-wo beings shared the world betreen them, one

keeping on one side and the other on the opposite side. Vt1hen his

period of stay at one end of the world wn s over, oach went to thi place
formerly occupied by the other. This cycle was callod aohitescatouoth,
meaning, according to Le Jeune, "they pass reciprocally to each other's
places"% (Lo Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 161-163).

If a wintor was especially cold and severe, so that it was

impossible to hunt, all those who were born in the summer left their

cabins. Thoy carried blazing torohes whioh thr throw at P1pounoukhoe

This caused the winter to be loss severoe   But if anyone born  nin tor
mingled with the others, thc cold would increase rathor than decroase
(Le Joune, 1637-JR, vol. 9, p. 121).

45

The Indians around Quebec believed that there was a hole pierced
through the earth, and that when the sun set it wont into this holo,
emerging the next morning from the other end (LtAllenant, 1627-JR,
vol. 4, pc 203).

One Mentagnais verston of the cause of an oclipso of the sun waTs
that a certain being whC was wall disposed. toward nmrank5d got angry at
a wickod woman, and even desirod to kill hero  This wonian was tht wife
of the Manitou; sho caused men to dieo The sun was her heart, and the
being who was friendly toward men did not kill her bocause it ivould

h?ve caused an  otornal night en the earth. But somotimes he grew very
angry and threatened her with deaths so that her liart trembled and grow
we-ak.  This caused the siun to ecli3ezoo At this point La Joune adds*
tiThey -vary so greatly 4n their booliof that one can have no certainty
about it` (Lo Jeuno, 1638a-JR, vol. 12, p. 3X).

The Montagnais believed the moon was a woman. Lunar eclipses came

when this woman held her son in her arms, provmting her light from being
seen. The sun was the moon's husband# Ho walked all day and she walked
all night.  In this version, the sun was oclipsed because he also

occasi.onally carriod their offspring in his arms. The arms of the sun

md moon were said not to be visible beceXusc they always held their drawn
bows before them. The spots on the moon were believed to be a cap which
she wore. The Montagnais said that the son of the moon cnd the sun

(i.e., the darkness of an eclipse) sometimes came upon the earth. Many
poplo died when he walkod about in their country.

Comets were thought to be animals with long tails, four feet, and

heads. At one time some Montagnais to1d Le Jeune that they wore not sure
what animal the thunder was, bat that it ate snakes and sometimes trees.
They said the Huron bolievied it to be a large bird (Le Jeune, 1635-JR#
vol. 6, pp. 223-225). Another montagnais (possibly Plgor?k1r). version

of thunder was that it came from the attempts of the Manitou to vomit up
a great snake which he had swallowodo Flashes of lightning wore serpents
falling to the ground. The serpentino shape of tho marks on lightning-
struck trees was ovidence of the presence of these snakes (Le Jeune,
1638a-JR, volo 12, p. 27).

Spears were placed with their points up when around the cabins so
that the thunder, seeing theso bare points, would not come near.

Flashos of light that seemed of too long duration to be lightning were
interpreted by the Montagnais as a bad omen and a sign of doath. They
believed that the hail disliked light, and that if torches were carried
outside at night, which was when it usually hailed, the hail would stop.
They preferred the hail to continue boat,use it helped them catch mooso.
They did not work when the sky was very red, believing that the wind
would blow if one did not remain at rest   (Le Joune, 1634-JR, vol. 5,
p. 151j 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 115, 213; 1638a-JR, vol. 12, p. 25).

As a kind of prayKVr, upon leaving their cabins in the morning

little Montagnais children shouted for the porcupines, beavers, and elk

46

to como that day. When someono snoozed ho c. llod out thot he would be

very glad to see the spring.  Tho Montagnais prayed at various timos for
the spring, for deliverance from evils. and for similar things.   ThesQ

prayors were expressed as desiros, a person oalling out very loudly that
he would be very glad if such-and-such would happon. No one could tell

Le Jeune to whom these prayers were addrossod   (Le Joune, 1635-JR, vol. 6,
pp. 203-205).

The mothers of Montagnais or Algonkin. childron (or of both-tho
reforence is not clear) hung a pisoe of tho child's uxnbilici.1 cord

around its neck so that it would not grow up to be stupid. In order to
have a long life, coertain peoplo observod a rigorous fast from time to
time.  They went alono into a little cLbin set apart from the othors.
Sometimos they remained eight or ton days without oeting or drinking.

Occasionally the Montagnais put a little elk or moose moat under the fire

in order to bring about the recovery of a siok person (Le Jouno, 1634-JR,
vol. 5, p. 157; 1635-JR, volp 6, p. 209   1640-JR, vol. 16, p. 197).

Le Jouno discovered that the. Montagnais language lacked a word for

11snl Tho only vaguely similar word was used to moan wickodness, malice,
or a violation of purity  (Le Jouno, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 137).

SHAMANISM AND WITCHCRAFT

During the winter of 1633-1634 Lo Jouno had frequent and bitter

controversies with the shaman who was a member of his group.   Le Jeuno

tried to ttexpose" the "tricks and nonsense" of thci shaman and  continually
heckled him. Almost every passage dealing with his adventures during that
winter expresses his hatred for the shamn    (Le Jouno, 1635-JR, vol. 7,

pp. 55-63). Part of this animosity sooms to have arisen from the shaman's
insistence on the validitEy of native beliefs and customs. T he other

Montagnais in the group wore not so quick to defend their culture when
Le Jeune criticized it.

This shaman was sick, but not soriously so, throughout the winter.

2very night he sang and beat his dru  in order to cure himself. Ho told
Le Joune that he had great influence and authority ovor his fellow

tribesmen and that overyono followed his advice. But he admitted that in
spite of all his powor, his patients often died and ho wa s .unable to cure
himself. Howevor, his pationts, and tho Montagnais in goneral, wore

dying like flios from diseases introduced by the Europeans. His cures

migt have been more successful under pro-oontact conditions    (Lo Jouno,
1635-JR, vol. 7, pp. 129, 133).

Shamcns wore callod manitousiou or manitouisiouokhi. They wore said
to kill one another with tho aid of tho Manitou, with charms, with impre-
cations, and with "tpoisons which they concoct." Some were supposed to

be able to walk upon cabins without broaking thom, to become "1-possessod`

47

and strike hard blows without injuring their bare hands, and to cover them-
selves with blood and be healed in a moment.   One Montagnais shaman drew a

stone from his bag of paraphernalia, placed it upon a shield, and burned it.
The Jesuits believed that shamans communicated with the devil.

The ,&ontagnais generally attributed sickness to witchcraft, and a

death was usually thought to have been caused by malevolent ma&i6. Shamans
were employed to defeat the efforts of those trying to bring about a

person's death.  Since shamans could kill by magic, they were greatly
feared. But they were also sought after, since a shaman could cure a

disease caused by another shaman. Shamans also interpreted dreams; appar-
ently certain conventional symbols were recognized. Dreaming of a lot of
moose meat was a sign of life; dreaming of a bear was a sign of death.

Shamans sang and beat their drums in order to cure the sick, to kill their
enemies in war, and to control the success of the hunt. One shaman,

possibly an Algonkin however, said he had learned a lucky hunting song in

a dream. Shamans also claimed to be able to control the weather (Le Jeune,
1634-JR, vol. 5, p. 159; 16365--JR  volo 7, p. 69; 1638a-JR, vol. 12, pp. 7-
11, 21; L'Allemant, 1627-JR, vol. 4, p. 203; Le Clereq, 1881, vol. 1,
p. 219).

Since shamans were potentially dangerous, the Montagnais greatly
feared them and are said to have done whatever they wished. According

to Le Jeune, when the shaman called the people to assemble, day or night,
in time of plenty or famine, they came willingly. Champlain says that
pe5ple did whatever a shaman said must be dme.    Le Caron confirms this
(Le Jeune, 1635-JR, volo 6, p. 227; Champlain, 1922, p. 118; Le Clereq,
1881, vol. 1, p. 219).

According to Le Caron, shamans did nothing without "presents and

recompense."  He says that shamans were very clever at turning failures
in prediction or curing to good account. This was a necessary talent,

apparently, because otherwise the shaman might be "executed on the spot,
without any other formality" (Le Clercq, 1881, vol. 1, p. 219).

The shaman often addressed the people while he was lying down. He

drew up one leg and put the other on the knee of the first.   He wore only
his breechcloth. The others listened in a similar position (Le Jeune,
1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 263).

Le Jeune gives no definite information on how a person became a

shaman. One shaman, possibly an Algonkin rather than a Montagnais, said-

that in order to become a manitousiou he had spent five days and nights in
an isolated cabin in the woods, without eating or drinking (Le Jeune,
1638a-JR, vol. 11, p. 265).

Shamans seem to have used several methods for curing sickness.   Drums,
songs, and beating sticks were usually. involved, and a great deal of noise
was made. Le Jeune describes an Algonkin shaman's attempt to cure a child.
Montagnais procedures were probably very similar. The child lay naked
upon some powdered, rotten wood in a bark cradle. The shaman beat and

48

shook his drum and sang.  He approached the child and blew all over its

body, beating his drum in the child'e ears. The others in the cabin re-

mained silent. The shaman said he believed something black in the child's

body was causing the illness (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol. 5, pp. 235-237; 1635-
JR, vol. 6, p. 187).

Onoe when a Montagnais youth, the son of a dead chief, was ill, two
shamans worked to cure him. They had -him close his eyes and then they
examined his body. They drew a large knife from a bag and seemed to

open his side and probe inside him. Iext, they produced a small knife
covered with blood and showed it to those present, saying it had been
placed in the boy's body by the Manitou and was causing the illness.
The patient immediately said he felt better.   The two shamans mixed

some ashes and water and covered the side of the patient at the place
where they had seemed to cut it open. They forbade the child and his

mother to touoh this application, which they said would cure him of his-

illness. A Jesuit uncovered the spot and showed those present that there
was no wound. He tried to convince the people that the shamans were

faking. However, the mother of the boy told the missionary that this was
the surprising thing:  the operation had been done so skillfully that the
boy had been relieved, but in no way injured (Le Jeune, 1637-JR, vol. 9,
pp. 81-83) .

Le Jeune describes how the shaman of his group attempted to cure him-
self. This description is presented here as a quotation because it seems
to give something of 'the spirit of shamanistic procedure, although it is
that spirit as perceived by a missionary.

Occasionally this man would enter She cabin] as
if in a fury, singing, orying and howling, making his

drum rattle with all his might; while the others howled
as loudly as he, and made a horrible din with their

sticks, striking upon whatever was before them; they
made the little children dance, then the women; he

lowered his head and blew upon his drum, then blew to-
ward the fire; he hissed like a serpent, drew his drum
under his chin, shaking and turning it about; he struck
the ground with it with all his might, then turned it

upon his stomaoh; he closed his mouth with the back of
one hand, and then with the other; you would have said
that he wanted to break the drum to pieces, he struck
it so hard upon the ground; he shook it, he turned it

from  one side to the other, and, running around the fire
several times, he went out of the cabin continuing to

howl and bellow; he struck a thousand attitudes, and all
this was done to cure himself. This is the way they
treat their sick (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 189).

Le Jeune witnessed a feast at which this shaman seemed to become

possessed or to have fallen into some sort of frenzy. When everyone was
seated around the fire, waiting for the feast to begin, the shaman, who

49

had been lying silent, arose suddenly and began breaking the poles of the
cabins He rolled his eyes, cried that he had lost his mind, and asked

that the hatchets and spears be kept from him for he was out of his senses.
He shouted, fell silent, began to cry, and then to laugh. He sang, hissed,
howled like a dog, and screeched like an owl. All the while he rolled his
eyes and seemed to be looking for something to throw. He acted the same

way the next evening. During this behavior the other Indians.merely lowered
their eyes. Le Jeune, thinking the shaman might have a fever, felt his

pulse and found it normal; his forehead was cool (Le Jeune,. 1635-JR, vol. 7,
pp. 117-121).

One shaman was said to have been seen to enter a state of frenzy, to
be lifted up, and to disappear before the eyes of the onlookers. Later

that day his robe was found. A few days later he returned, exhausted and
unable to say where he had been or what he had done (Le Jeune, 1638a-JR,
vol. 12, p. 21).

Occasionally a shaman erected a oabin nearby the camp and stayed in

it for eight or ten days. He sang and beat his drum day and night. Others
went in to help him sing.  Le Jeune believed that igreat licenttiousness
'was carried on, but this is doubtful. He does not give the purpose of
this retreat; it may have been some kind of purificatory rite, or part
of the shamants attempts to cure himself (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6,
p. 209)*

Witchcraft

A rival shamn in Gaspe had threatened to kill the shaman of Le

Jeune's group, and this was what was causing his illness. He believed

he would die in two days if he did not prevent it through his own magic.
The shaman had all the women and children leave the cabin, except one
woman who sat near him. All the men from the other cabins assembled
and everyone sat down. A young man brought in two sharply pointed

stakes. Another man prepared little pieces of wood sharpened at both
ends.  He also took iron arrow points, pieces of broken knives, bits
of iron bent like big fish hooks, and similar items, and wrapped them
in a piece of leather.

The shaman began to drum and everyone sang loudly. After a few

songs, the woman arose and went all around the cabin, passing behind the
backs of the men. and then resumed her seat. The shaman took the two
pointed stakes and indioated a space on the ground, saying it was the
head of his onemy at GaGp6. Then the man who had Drepared thl little

pieces of wood dug a rather deep ditch in the grou.nd, using the stakes

to dig with. Meanwhile, the singing continued. The stakes were placed
in the ground and the shaman was given a sword, with which he struck
one of the stakes. Then he got into the ditch and began stabbing the
ground with the sword ar?d with the knife. He took the objects wrapped
in leather and put this packet in the ditch, continuing to stab the

50

ground. The singing increased in volume. Finally ho drew out the sword
and knife, covered with blood, and throw them down before the others.

The ditch was immediately covered. The shaman said that his rival
had been struck and would soon die.  He asked if anyone had heard the
victim's cries. Two young men said they had heard some very muffled

wails, as if from afar. The shaman was highly pleased. The Montagnais
said that the 1Manitou" had carried the rival shaman's blood under the
earth.

Les Jeune observed this rite several times.  The only variation lay
in what they placed in the little leather packet or "charm." Sometimes

parts of poroupines or other animals were included. The shaman's assis-
tant, who had prepared the charm, beat the drum while the shaman was in
the ditch (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, pp. 195-203).

Another method the shaman used to kill his enemies was to enter the
shaking tent and summon the spirits of light, or khichikouai (see under
ttDivinationtt).  When the spirits oame, he sent thi-   ft the soul of
the person, or persons, he wished to kill. If his enemies belonged to
another "Nation" the shaman changed his name. Otherwise his enemy's

relatives, learning of his actions, would take vengeance on him. The

spirits brought the soul of his enemy in the form of a stone or similar
object which the shaman struck with a spear or hatohet until blood ran
from it and the weapon was covered with blood. Then the person whose
soul was struck fell ill and died. A man who hated another sometimes
employed a shaman to. kill his enemy in this way (the type and amount

of payment is not mentioned). But if the victim happened to see in a

dream who was bewitching him, he would recover and the shaman would die
(Le Jeune, 1638a-JR, vol. 12, p. 11).

Le Cleroq oites a case in which a man consulted a famous shaman

to determine what was causing his brother to be ill.  The shaman entered
the shaking tent and finally divined that the illness was being caused
by an Indian living about sixty leagues away. The people present then

decided that the sick man's brother should kill the guilty party at once.
Apparently this was done, in spite of the objections of the Recollect

missionary witnessing the whole event (Le Cleroq, 1881, vol. 1, pp. 192-

19).

DIVINATION

The Montagnais divined future events by means of the shaking tent

rite. Le Jeune gives a detailed description of one of these performances
which he witnessed in 1634. The shaking tents were called apitouaga

51

Toward nightfall several young men erected the "tent" in the middle

of the cabin by placing six poles deep into the ground so that they formed
a cirole. The poles were held in place at the top by a large ring which

completely enciroled them. Then the tent was covered with woolen blankets,
except at the top. A tall man could barely reaoh to the top of the cylin-
drical tent; it was large enough to hold five or six men standing up.

The cabin fires were put out and the embers were thrownbutdoors so

that the flames would not frighten the khichikouai. The diviner, a young
man, entered the tent by turning up theTooveing at the bottom. The

Indians were oareful that the only opening in the tent was at the top.
The diviner began to murmer softly; the tent shook gently. A hollow,

whistling sound was heard, as if from afar, and then a hollow voice and
a sound like the screech of an owl* Then singing was heard. The voice

was not that of the diviner.   The tones were varied and ended in syllables
such as ho  ho, hi, hi, gui, gui, nioue.    Sometimes the words were

Algonkin desoribed by Le Jeune as more "vivacious" than Montagnais).
As the singing continued the tent shook more and more violently until

it seemed about to break. Le Jeune was astonished that a man could have
such strength. Once the shaking began, it did not stop until the whole
performance was over, three hours later.

Whenever the voice in the tent changed, the spectators cried moa,
moa ("listen"); then, as an invitation to the spirits, they cried

pitoukhecou, pitoukhecou ("enter").   At the sound of a certain voice,
the spectators gave a shout of joy, saying that one of the spirits had
entered. They said tepouaohi, to ouachi ("call"), meaning that it

should call its companonse Then the new voice began to call for the
others. The spirits sometimes spoke in a language not understood by
the speotators sitting around the tent (Champlain, 1925, po 88). In

the meantime, a shaman who was present took his drum and sang with the

voice in the tent, while the others answered, The shaman had some young
men dance.

lWVhen the spirits were all in the tent the shaman consulted them.

He enquired about his health and that of his wife (both were ill). The

spirits replied by stating what the outcome of these illnesses would be.
The spirits were then asked if there would be snow, if there would be
good hunting, and similar things. They were asked vrhere many animals
would be found. The voices of the spirits (not the voice of the di-

viner) answered each time. Some of the answers were vague or ambiguous.
At the end of the consultation the diviner quickly left the tent and the
cabin. Some sparks had been seen to fly out of the tent during the per-
formance and the spectators were greatly impressed, since the diviner

seemed to enter the tent without fire. Some of those who witnessed the
performance said that the diviner's body had been carried out of the
tent; others said his body was lying on the ground and his soul was

above the tent, calling the spirits and throwing sparks of fire from
time to time (Le Jeune, 1656-JR, vol. 6, pp. 163-169, 173; 1638a-JR,
vol. 12, p. 19).

52

A shaking tent observed by a Recolleot missionary in 1622 is describod
in Le Clercq. This description agrees well with that of Le Jeune, except

that the tent was covered with birch bark and "adorned with hideous figures
representing the devil." During the divination the person in the tent

rattled a drum. "The earth trembled under his leaps and bounds, while he
shook with his hands the posts of his oabin till he sweated blood and

water, without taking a moment's rest" (Le Cleroq, 1881, vol. I, p. 193).

Both men and women entered the shaking tent. Once a man had been

unable to summon the spirits and he left the tent. Then a woman entered
the tent and it began to shake. Soon the spirits came. They vere being
summoned to determine whether or not a sick person would die. They an-

swered in the affirmative, indicating rwhom the sick man had insulted and
who, therefore, was taking revenge by sending the wife of the Manitou
to devour the inside of the patient's body. The spirits advised the
people to make war on the Iroquois. One spirit said that it, or else

Atchon (a kind of werewol-f, according to Le Jeune), would come and devour
them if they built a village and settled down to farming as they had con-
templated (6) (Le Jeune, 1637-JR, vol. 9, pp. 113-117).

The Montagnais practioed other types of divination in addition to
that done in the shaking tent. Once, at a gathering to determine the
success that their hunting was likely to have, a shaman took a spear

and turned its point downward. He put a hatchet near it, beat his drum#
sang, danoed, and walked around the fire. Then he took a nightcap and
removed a "grinding stone` from it. He placed the stone in a wooden

spoon, wiped for the purpose. Then he lit a bark toroh and passed the
torch, spoon, and striped stone from hand to hand. All those present

carefully examined the stone, but there is no indication as to how the
omens were read (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 193)o

Sometims the throat of a bird that resembled a magpie was split
open and examined. This bird was believed to eat everything; if a

beaver bone, a bear bone, or the bone of another animal was found inside
the bird, it meant that the bird's captor would kill that particular
animal (Le Jeune, 1635-OR, vol, 6, p. 221).

The Montagnais put a oertain flat bone of the porcupine (scapula?)
on the fire and then carefully examined it to determine whether they
would be successful in hunting porcupines. The gall of a bear was

thrown into the fire to see if it would crackle. From the sounds pro-
duced, it was determined whether or not other bears would be killed.

Once a man threw some pine branches into the fire and carefully listened
to their noise in burning, pronouncing some words. The purpose of this

was to capture some porcupines (La Joune, 1635-JR, vol. 68, pp. P15, 221;
1638aWJR, vol.. 12, p. 25.

Some of the Montagnais believed they could tell when someone was

about to appear from elsewhere by a beating or throbbing in their chests.
One Montagnais chief stated that his grandfather had predicted that black

robes (i.e*, Jesuits) would come and would be the cause of their death
(Le Jeune, 1637-JR, vol. 9, p. 117; 1638a-JR, vol. 11, p. 239).

MYTHOLOGY

Both Le Jeune and Champlain heard the Mlontagnais relate some of their
myths. These myths help to clarify Montagnais religious belief. But it
is obvious that even in the longer myths recouted by Le Jeune, he did

not feel like writing down the whole of any myth that he heard and remem-
bered. Therefore these are abridged versions.

One myth concerns the flooding of the earth and its subsequent restora-
tion* Messou was going hunting. He hunted with his brothers the lynxes,
instead of with dogs. He was warned that it would be dangerous for his
lynxes to go to a certain lake nearby. One day when Messou was hunting
an elk, his lynxes chased it into this lake and followed it into the

water. When they reached the center of the lake they sank beneath the

water. Messou arrived and sought his brothers everywhere, but he failed
to find them. A bird told him that certain animals or monsters held his
lynxes under the lake. Messou jumped into the lake to rescue them, but
instantly the lake overflowed and the waters increased until the whole'
earth was f looded0

Messou was greatly astonished. He began thinking about creating the
world anew. He sent a raven to find a small piece of earth with whhich he
could rebuild the world. The raven found none, because the whole earth
was covered with waters   1hssou had an otter dive doym to get some mud,
but the waters were too deep for it to reach the bottom. At last, a
muskrat descended and brought back some mud.

With this bit of dirt Messou restored everything. He remade the

tree trunks and shot arrows against them; the arrows chatiged into branches.
He reestablished everything and took vengeance on the monsters that had
captured his lynxes. While doing this he transformed himself into many
kinds of animals in order to fool the monsters. Finally he married a
muskrat. The children of this union repeopled the earth (Le Jeunee,
1634-JR, vol. 5, pp. 155-157).

A Montagnais chief told Champlain a shorter version of what may be

the same myth. After some supernatural being (called "God` by Champlain)

had made the world, he took a number of arrows and put them in the grounds
Then he drew out men and women, who multiplied from that time up to the
present (Champlain, 1922, p. 111).

54

Le Jeune gives the following mnyth. A man and a woman were in the
woods when a bear came and strangled the man. Then the bear ate him.

A very large hare attaoked and devoured the woman. But it did not touch
the child in her womb. A woman passed this place soon after and saw this
child, still alive. She took him and raised him as her son, but called
him her little brothers She named him Tohakabech. The child always
kept his original stature, but he became so strong that lie used tree

trunks as arrows for his bow. After various adventures (not related by
Le Jeune), Tohakabeoh killed the bear that had eaten his father.   In its

stomach he found some of his fatherts hair. He also killed the large hare
which had eaten his mother, and found a bunch of her hair in its stomach.
This great hare was one of the spirits of light. It was called Michta-

bouchiou, "great hare."  It was supposed to have been a skilled orator (7).

Tchakabech wished to go to the sky.   He climbed a tree. When he had
almost reached the top he blew upon the tree, which then grew taller. He
continued climbing and blowing on the tree. Finally he reached the sky*

The sky was the most beautiful country in the world. After viewing every-
thing, Tchakabeoh climbed down the tree, building cabins at intervals in
its branches. He brought the news to his sister, so that she might go to
the sky to stay forever. At first she would not oonsent, but he described
so strongly the beauty of the sky-land that she decided to undertake the
difficult journey. She took one of her little nephews with her and went
up the tree, Tohakabech going behind to catch them if they fell. At

every halt they found a cabin ready. Finally they reached the sky* That
no one else might follow them, Tohakabeoh broke off the top of the tree
just low enough so that no one could reach the sky from it.

After they had admired the sky-country, Tohakabech went to set some
snares. In the night he arose to look at his snares. He found them on
fire and did not dare approach. He returned to his sister and told her
what he had seen. She suspected what it was. She told him that it was
a great misfortune, for he had caught the sun. She advised him to free
it, saying that perhaps it had stumbled into the snares while walking
in the nighte Greatly surprised, Tchakabeoh went back. After looking
carefully he saw that he really had caught the sun in his snares. Then
he noticed a small mouse, took it, blew upon it, and made it become so
large that he could use it to extend his snares and let the sun out.

The sun, finding itself free, continued on its usual course. While it
was caught in the snares, there was no light here on earth (Le Jeune,
1638a-JR, vol. 12, pp. 31-35).

The Montagnais told Le Jeune about a voyage taken by a Nipisirinien
(Nipissing).  This man traveled a long distance and finally reached the

cabin of a supernatural being who gave him something to eat. This being
was alone, but his daughter soon entered. It was not known how he came
by this girl, for he had no wife. He was surrounded by all kinds of

animals which allowed him to touch them without running off. This being
did not eat, and henoe did not kill animals.   He asked the Nipisirinien

55

what he would like to eat. The man wanted a beaver, which the supernatural
easily caught for him. He asked the Indian when he intended to depart;
the man said in two nights#

These two nights were two years, for what was a year to ordinary
people was only one day or one night to the being who procured food for

them. A person was so contented with this being that two winters seemed

like two nights. When the Nipisirinien returned to his people he was sur-
prised at how long he had been gone. The Montagnais said that there was

only one person who could occasionally go to this place, according to what
the Nipisirinien had said (Le Jeune, 1637-JR, vol. 9, pp. 123-125).

A Montagnais chief said that in olden times five men went -toward the

setting sun. They met a supernatural being who asked them where they were
going. The men said that they were looking for a livelihood. The super-

natural replied that they would find it there, but the men went on without
regard to what they were told. The supernatural touched two of the men
with a stone and they were turned into stone. Again he asked them where
they were going and was given the same reply; again he advised them to
go no farther, saying they would find a livelihood there. But seeing
that no food came to them, the men went on. The supernatural took two

sticks and touched the first two men with them, turning them into sticks.
The last man halted and would go no farther. Again, there was the same

exchange of questions and answers.   This man stayed there, without going
on. The supernatural being gavo the man meat, which he ate. Then the
man returned to his people and told them what had occurred (Champlain,
1922, pp. 113-114).

The Montagnais believed that a certain man had received the gift of
immortality from Messou. It was in a little package. The man was told
never to open it. WVhile it was closed, the man was immortal. His wife,
being curious, wished to see what was inside the package. She opened it
and it flew away. Since then, the Indians have been subject to death
(Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 6, p. 159).

A Montagnais chief told Champlain that once there was a man who had
a good supply of tobacco. A supernatural being (htGod") came to this man
and asked him where his tobacco pipe was. The mn gave his pipe to the
supernatural and the latter smoked it for a while. Then it broke the
pipe in many pieces. The man asked why it had broken the pipe, since
he had no other. The supernatural took one of its own pipes and gave

it to the man, saying that he should take it to his chief and tell him
to keep it. If the chief kept it carefully, he and his people would

never want for anything. The man took the pipe and gave it to his chief.
As long as the chief kept it, the Indians had plenty of everything. But

later the chief lost the pipe. Since that time, periodic famines had come
to the Indians (Champlain, 1922, pp. 114-115).

56

A lontagnais said that once two Indians were consulting the

khichikouai at the same time, but in different tents. One of these
diviners had treacherously killed three men with his hatchet. The

khiohikouai came and killed this man. Then the spirits crossed to the
other tent to kill his companion, but he defended himself so success-

fully that he killed one of the spirits. This spirit remained where it

had been killed, so that the Indians found out how the spirits were made.
It was as large as a fist, rather long, and with a somewhat cone-shaped
body made of stone. There was flesh and blood in its 1?odr, for the

hatchet which killed it was covred with blood (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol.
6, pp. 171-173).

LANGUAGE

By 1632, a kind of jargon had grown up between the Montagnais and

the French. It was neither one language nor the other. This is probably
the language Le Jeune used when talking to the Montagnais, although he

certainly knew Montagnais far better than most of the Frenchmen then in
Canada. Le Jeuno says that Algonkin differed from Montagnais to the
same degree that Provencal differed from Norman French (in the 17th

century).  He found that the Nibrisiriniens (Nipissings) could under-

stand his Montagnais, imperfect though it was (Le Jeune, 1634-JR, vol.
5, pp. 113-115; 1637-JR, vol. 9, p. 193).

Le Jeune lists some traits of the Montagnais languages. ile it is
far from clear or complete, his description may give some idea of early
17th coentury Montagnais as it was spoken around Quebec and Tadoussac.

Montagnais had an "inf inite" number of proper nouns. It had verbs

which Le Jeune calls "absolute," used when there was no specified objoot
to an action. These were replaced by other verbs if the object of the
action was specified (8). Different verbs were used to signify an ac-

tion toward an animate or an inanimate object, although animate objects

included such things as tobacco. Verb forms changed if an action termin-
ated on several animate objects, instead of on just one. The verb also
changed according to whether the action was a continuing one without

specified object, whether it was directed toward objects belonging to
the speaker, or whether toward objects belonging to the person spoken
to. Actions performed upon land required different verbal forms from
actions performed upon water. Again, if the object of the action in

either place was animate or inanimate, different forms had to be used.

Different forms of "adjectives" were used according to the type

of substantive and whether the substaitive was large or small. Adjec-
tives indicated whether the condition existed in the present, in the
past, or in the future.

57

Many words indicated an action on several things together, even though
these things were represented by different words at other timrs. Sometimes
these combined forms bore no resemblance to the words used for these things
at other times.

Phonetioally, Montagnais had fewer `letters" in its talphabet" than
did 17th century French* B and P were not distinguished, nor wore C, G,
and K. There were no sounds for the French letters F, L, Vj, X, and Z.

When pronouncing French personal nanms, the Montagnais substituted R for
L, and P for V (Le Jeune, 1635-JR, vol. 7, pp. 21-23).

Le Jeune gives twro Christian prayers in Montagnais, with interlinear

translations in French* The letters used for the Montagnais probably have
French phonetic va).ues, These prayers are to be found in Le Jeune, 1635-
JR, vol. 7, pp. 152-156.

58

ENDNOTES

10 The French word used by Le Jeune is matras, which was the name
given to a type of dart used with cross-bows. But there is no mention
ef the cross-bow, nor is there any indication that the atlatl was known
or used.

2.  If these dishes were not obtained by trade, this is the only in-
dication that the Montagnais made pottery during the period from 1600 to
1640.

3.  But see under "Divination," p. 100, where the cabin must have
been much higher.

4.  It is doubtful- that this high degree of organization and planning
was characteristic of most Montagnais-Algonkin raids.

5. It seems likely that this was an ideal pattern. Otherwise, the
rule of inheritance mentioned previously would be meaningless.

6. As mentioned previously, there are other indications that about
this time (1636) some of the M.Iontagnais near Three Rivers and Quebec were
contemplating adopting agriculture and a sedentary life, as the Jesuits

had long urged. Many of the Montagnais strongly opposed giving up the old
way nf life.  The woman diviner was apparently one of these opponents.

7. A letter written by Le Caron in 1618 mentions `michabocheo" in
connection with the creation of tho earth, in a story resembling `the

deluge."  No other  authors allude to this, and in a later memoir, written
in 1624, Le Caron states that Messou restored the earth after the deluge,
and no montion is made of Michaboohe (Le Clereq, 1881, vol. 1, pp. 135,
217).

8.  Ofton, it is not clear when a "verb" was actually replaced by
another stem, or when the form alone was changed, the stem remaining the
Same .

59

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brebouf, Fathor Joan do

1636      "tRelation do ce qui stost pass6 avx Hvrons on ltannoo 16350

Enuoyoo a Kobec au Pore le Ioune, par le P. Brobeiuf.t" In
Le Jeune, 1636, pp. 113-205.   (Roprinted with translation
in JR, vol. 8, pp. 68-155).

Champlain, Samuol do

1922-     The Works of Samuol de Champlainr...eprinted, translated
1936      and annotatod by six Canadian scholars under the

editorship of H. P. B     r.., Tho Chamapin Society,
Toronto.  6 voTs   and    as.

1922      "Of Savages, Or Voyage of Samuel Champlain of Brouaga, Made

to New France, in tho year one thousand six hundred and

throo...."' The Works of Samuel do Champloinz..., vol. 1, pp.
1-189, translatod and odited by H.H. Langton and W.F.
Ganong. The Champlain Society, Toronto.

1925      `The Voyages to the Great River Sto Lawronce by the Siour

do Champlain, Captain in the Royal Navy, from the year

1608 until 1612...Second Booket"   ,Works of Samuel de
Calns            vol. 2, pp. xiii-236, translated by Je
Squair.  The Champlain Sooiety, Toronto.

1929      "Vbrages and Disooveries Made in New France, from the Yoar

1615 to the End of the Year 1618.   By the Siour de

Champlain, Captain in Ordinary for the King in the Western
Ocean....t $he Works of Samuel do Champlain..., vol. 3,

pp. 1-230, translated and editod by H.H. Langton and W.F.
Ganonge The Champlain Sooiety, Toronto.

JR

1896-     The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documontse.., edited by
1901      Rouben G. Thwaites.   The Burrows Bros. Co., Cleveland.

73 vols.

L'Allomant, Father Charles

1627      Lottre dv Pere Charles LtAllomant, S?orievr do la Mission do

Canadas; do ln Compgi     do Iosvs.        e au Pere Hierosme
l'Allemant, son frero  do la mosme Cs         0   Ioan

60

Boveher, Pcris.   (Roprinted wvith translation in JR,
vol. 4, pp. 184-227).

Le Cleroq, Father Chretien

1691      Premier Etablissement de la F     dans la   uvelle France,

oontenant la Publioation de 1'Evan&i      l'Histoire des

& lea                       aeuses deoouvertes depuis
le Fleuv   el aitLaurent, la Eou"iisanT      eTFeuve

___   us__            X___     ____       osI0nut

eoer                  he G xiM ue, achevees sous     nduite

de feu Monseur de !a Salle..., Amable Auroy, Paris.      2 vols.

1881      First Establishment of' the Faith in New France, edited and

and trasated by John G. Shea.      John G. Shea, New York.
2 vols.

Le Jeune, Father Paul

1632      Brieve Relatim   dv voyage de la Novvelle France, Fait au

mois djAurrl"dernier Ele P. Paul le Ieune de la

Compagne Ie V                au   Re P              Ia   oq

Prouincial deTleame Compagnie en la Prouince de France,
Sebastien Cramoisy,, Pari     Reprinted with transTation in
JR, vol. 5, pp. 5-75).

1634      Relation de oe      Bl 8est passe en la Novvelle France en

1Ta1633.        Enuoyee av R. P. Barth. Iacqvinot,

Prouincial de la Compaie    de IeSaV en Ta'Prouice de

France..., Sebastien Cramoisy, ParisF (Reprinted with

translation in OR, vol. 5, pp. 77-267; and vol. 6, pp. 5-31).
1635      Relation de oe gvi stest passe en la Novvelle France, en

l'ann   1634. Enuo4T    au R. Pere Fovinol*ad      la

io         dee Iesve en la Prouince de France..., Sebastien

Cramoisy   Paris    (Reprinted with translation in JR, vol. 6,
pp. 91-317; and vol. 7, pp. 5-235).

1636      Relation de ce     stest passe en la Novvelle France en

71    1635* Enu       au R.ere Provincoia    d;Tla

a eIesvs en laPFoune de F       .., Sebastien

Cramoisy,. Paris     (Reprinted with translation in JR, vol. 7,
pp. 247-303; and vol. 8, pp. 7-197).

1637      Relation de ce qvi Stest passe en la Novvelle France en

P'a6L    1U67 Suoyee au      re r    oevincial de la

Compatie de Ie       ena Prouince de France..,    Sebastien

Cramoisy, Paris     Reprinted with translation in JR, vol. b,
pp. 199-281; and vol   9, pp. 5-303).

01

Le Jeune, Father Paul

1638a     Relation de ce qvi stest passe en la Novvelle France en

tameei 163i7. Eniuoe au R.Tere        ovincial dela

Compa_eie de Iesvs enTla Province de France..., lean le

vllenger, Roven. TReprinted with translation in JR, vol.
11, pp. 23-269; vol. 12, pp. 5-2673 vol. 13, pp. 5-267;
and vol. 14, pp. 5-111).

1638b     Relation de ce      &lest passe en la Novvelle France en

a'Iinee 1U8T Enuoyde au R. Pere Provincial de l

Compaeie de Isvs en laPr-ouince deo Fr.nce.., Sebastien
Cramoisy, Parice   (Reprinted with translation in JR, vol.
14, pp. 113-279; and vol. 15, pp. 9-145).

1640      Relation de ce      stest passe en la Novvelle France en

Tilannee 1639.  E       au R.* F ere FovinciaI do la

Comgie de Iesvs en la Prouinoe de France..., Sebastien
Cramoisy, Paris.   (Reprinted with translation in JR, vol.

15, pp. 203-2371 vol. 16, pp. 7-253; and vol. 17, pp. 7-215).

Sagard (-Theodat), Gabriel

1632      Le grand voyage dv   sy des Hvrons, situe en l'Amerique,

vers la Mer douce, MY erniers confins de la Nouuelle
France, dite Canada..., Denys Moreav, Paris.

1939      The       Journ   to the Country.of the Hurons, by Father

Gabriel Sagard, edited by George M. Wrong, translated by
H. H. Langton. The Champlain Society, Toronto.

Thwaites, Reuben G. (editor)

1896-     The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents..., The
1901      Burraws Bros. Co., Cleveland.73 volso

Vimont, Father Barthelemy

1641      Relation de ce qvi s'est passe en la Novvelle France en

1 nneeidM. DC. XL. Enuoyea au Re P. Prouincial dea

Compagnie de Iesvs de     Prouince de France.. e  Sebastien
Cramoisy, Paris .   Reprin      i   transton in JR# vol.

18, pp. 47-249; vol. 19, pp. 7-267; and vol. 20, pp. 17-85).
Written by Le Jeune and Jerome Lalemant, but forwarded to
France by Vimont (Thwaites, 1898, vol. 18, p. 2).

62