Native Nations of the Northeast: Algonkians and Iroquois

In Chapter 3 of Native Nations, Bonvillain describes the practices of the Algonkians. Bonvillain recalls the classic tale of European injustice in regard to land, trade, and overall relations. One thing I always thought was oxymoronic is when I read about things such as the "Mashantucket Pequot Land Claims Settlement Act" of 1983, which grated Pequots federal recognition and funds for land acquisition - so the Pequots had to pay for their land with funds provided by the government that initially stole their land in the first place? It just doesn't make much sense. If anything, the Pequots should be given back their land and compensated moreso for the grief they suffered because of it. I liked reading about the different moeties, or descent groups, because it reminded me of the Cahuilla, who I just studied in field school. The Cahuilla were divided into bobcats and coyotes. Due to the limited numbers of individuals for the gene pool, it made me think of another society limited in numbers - the Amish. I haven't read much about inbreeding within these smaller societies, but it appears that Native Americans had a higher awareness of these consequences, such as by taking actions to ensure no mixing within the clan itself, who were considered siblings. All too common in Amish societies are genetic mutations, such as polydactyly, which are caused by the small gene pool and therefore, Amish have had to bring in members of society from other states to increase the genetic variation.

Bonvillain transitions over to the Iroquois by stating the structure of the Iroquois Confederacy. The Iroquois consist of five nations: the Mohawks, Oneidas, Onondagas, Cayugas, and Senecas. I will probably often refer to Native Americans' egalitarian societal structure and all of the benefits reaped on account of it throughout this blog. I like the fact that the clan chiefs were chosen by leading women of their group, and impeachment could be implemented if deemed necessary because this provides a much more even keeled stance on politics. It makes a lot of sense to create the political structure like this because then the women make their best choice known, and the men respect and work with the women's decision. All decisions of the Confederacy must be unanimous. When I first heard this, I thought how hard that would be for American society with people pulled in all different directions, but again, on a smaller scale of individuals, it's a lot easier to come to a unanimous decision. Not only do the limited numbers assist this unanimous decision, but the fact that Iroquois practice entails creating a sound and dignified solution come about through peace and understanding is a powerful thing. "One heart, one mind, one law."

Also, I enjoyed reading about the "mourning wars" as I flashed back to a class I took on Colonial America. During raids, the Iroquois would take captives to replace the losses suffered during these times. The Iroquois literally couldn't afford to lose any bodies, so they had to replenish their numbers. More often than not, when Europeans would attempt to gain back their stolen people, the captives didn't want to return to European society! I'm a little ambivalent about this - I'm not sure whether to think that would be a shock or a no-brainer. The shock aspect entails wondering why these captives would be so eager to stay, given their ethnocentric upbringing. The no-brainer aspect entails complete understanding as to why these captives would want to stay given the peaceful, egalitarian nature of the Iroquois. I suppose each case would be different, however.