RD> Cartier Met the Kanienkehaka.
RD> In the year 1497, John Cabot sailed under the
RD>English flag across the sea and landed in what is now
RD>called Newfoundland. He claimed Newfoundland for King
RD>Henry VII of England. In 1534 Jacques Cartier landed at
RD>Gaspe and claimed the territory for king Francis I of
RD>France. Cartier explored the gulf of the St. Lawrence as
RD>far as Anticosti Island. Guess Who he meet at Anticosti ?
RD>Kanienkehakwa.
This was Cartier's first visit, and he came in, as you say, to Gaspe
where he met some Iroquois (NOT Mohawk, nor even Five Nations Iroquois).
The Chief's name was Donnacona. They were, according to
reports, on a fishing/hunting trip from "upper St Lawrence" and were
exceedingly primitive, sleeping on the ground beneath their canoes by
night, and eating fish and meat raw, or almost raw. (This according to
Cartier's diary)
RD> He kidnapped two natives and sail back to France.
They were two of Donnacona's sons, and they left with Donnacona's
permission (although, admittedly, there are different versions of this.
In any event, he promised to return them and did that in 1535.). The
son's names were Taignoagny and Domagaya. Cartier was looking for a
passage to Asia and came in the Straits of Belle Isle, found the
Madeleines and PEI, then got lost in Chaleur Bay and Gaspe Bay. Heading
north again (with the two natives) he found Anticosti then headed home
to France. He never did find the way into the St Lawrence River on
that trip.
RD>His report to King Francis encourage the King of France to
RD>sponsor yet another expedition for Cartier. Cartier left
RD>for North America the following year, this time with the
RD>two natives as guides.
RD> The History of Iroqoian-European contact begins with this second
RD>voyage of Jacques Cartier. In 1535 with three ship, 110 of
RD>his men and two natives captives, Cartier sailed back up
RD>the Saint Lawrence.
Right on, except history refers to them as "guides", not "captives".
RD> He arrived at the Mohawk village of
RD>Stadacona near the present site of Quebec City. In
RD>September, Cartier travel up the Saint Lawrence to a
RD>village of Hochelaga where he was greeted by Kanienkehaka.
Again, pretty good. Quebec City now covers the site of Stadacona, I
think, and Hochelaga is on Montreal Island, thus is now covered by
Montreal. BUT - they were IROQUIOS villages, not MOHAWK. In
addition to the Five Nations, the "Iroquoian-speaking people" included
Hurons, Neutrals, and Eries, and a few others. By and large there was
hostility between the Five Nations and the other Iroquois nations. The
Hochelagans and the Stadeconas are thought to have been Hurons.
RD> Cliff, the Mohawk were in Quebec when they meet
RD>Cartier and the above is proof.
Sorry, Ron - this is not proof at all. After Cartier's 3rd visit, it
was, I think, some 70 years before the whites came back to the area, and
by then both Hochelaga and Stadacona were deserted. We may never
know for sure just what happened to the people, but historians and
anthropologists have pretty well agreed that they were all wiped out by
raids of the Five Nations.
RD>Also the word Kanienkehaka means anywhere the Mohawk people live. You
To be honest, Ron, I never heard the word before now. Isn't that a
strange name for an individual, though? Or even a people? (see your
uses of the word above). I have many old records here, and that
name does not appear in any of them. (I searched). There is no
record I know of that Cartier even explored Anticosti, but the Indians
he met were in the Gaspe, and were Iroquois under Chief Donnacona.
RD>can also look at the map of his voyage. Also look at early Dutch
maps and you find the words Maqvaa and Mahic
Since the name Mohawk is said to mean "cannibal" (I'm not sure in what
language, though), I don't find it surprising that it, or derivations of
it, would appear in lots of places. Remember, to those old
explorers, almost all natives were cannibals.
RD> Also New York state sold land in Northern New York, Macomb
on 1791. Strange when you claim we lived in Southern New York.
I assume you are speaking of the Caughnawaga land ceded to the NY State
in 1796.
But Ron, we have now jumped almost 200 years! Back in Cartier's
day your people did indeed live in what is now NY State. The Five
Nations all lived in that territory, all south of Lake Ontario, and all
roughly in a line stretching east from about Rochester to Albany; the
Mohawk were the most eastern, at (about) Albany. It was about 1667
that the Jesuits started bringing "christianized" Mohawks and other
Iroquois north to Montreal (I think I mentioned to you some time ago
that I have a copy of the original grant of the Seigniory of Sault St
Louis - includes Caughnawaga - by Loius XIV to the Jesuits back in
1680), in 1701 all of the Five Nations negotiated a peace treaty with
both French and English, but then relations soured again in the 1720
- 1740 period, with the Iroquois fighting the French.
About that time it all starts to get confusing, with the
"christianized" Iroquois in Canada (now called the French Mohawk)
usually fighting on the side of the French, and the U.S. Mohawk on the
side of the British. It was in 1777, I think, that Haldimand,
Governor of Quebec, gave a land grant to the Iroqouis (not Oka) and
resettled many other Mohawks (Jos Brant, et al) up from the US.
I could probably sort out the whole period, but it would take some
time and research, and it wouldn't change the fact that 200 years before
all the Mohawks lived in what is now NY State.
Check it all out Ron, and I think you'll find that the history books
all record it pretty much the way I have said.
I'm honestly not trying to pick a fight with you over this, but I
honestly think your information is somehow mistaken, and I'm afraid all
the history books agree with me. If you don't agree - please don't get
mad at me - tell me where you think I'm wrong and I'll do some more
research in that area.
Cliff
___
X SLMR 2.1a X
--- Maximus 2.00
* Origin: EXCESS BBS Calgary, Alta (403)285-7338 VHST SDS/PDN (1:134/17)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nachricht Nr. 0114 aus Area INDIAN_AFFAIRS Exportiert mit Yuppie! v2.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Datum: 17 Feb 92 20:52:00
Von : Ronald Deere
An : Cliff Shepstone
Betr.: Mohawk History
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Via SLMAIL v2.15B-M (#1349)
Cartier Met the Kanienkehaka.
In the year 1497, John Cabot sailed under the English flag across the
sea and landed in what is now called Newfoundland. He claimed Newfoundland
for King Henry VII of England. In 1534 Jacques Cartier landed at Gaspe and
claimed the territory for king Francis I of France. Cartier explored the gulf
of the St. Lawrence as far as Anticosti Island. Guess Who he meet at Anticosti
? Kanienkehakwa.
He kidnapped two natives and sail back to France. His report to King
Francis encourage the King of France to sponsor yet another expedition for
Cartier. Cartier left for North America the following year, this time with the
two natives as guides.
The History of Iroqoian-European contact begins with this second voyage
of Jacques Cartier. In 1535 with three ship, 110 of his men and two natives
captives, Cartier sailed back up the Saint Lawrence. He arrived at the Mohawk
village of Stadacona near the present site of Quebec City. In September,
Cartier travel up the Saint Lawrence to a village of Hochelaga where he was
greeted by Kanienkehaka.
Cliff, the Mohawk were in Quebec when they meet Cartier and the above
is proof. Also the word Kanienkehaka means anywhere the Mohawk people live.
You can also look at the map of his voyage. Also look at early Dutch maps and
you find the words Maqvaa and Mahic
Also New York state sold land in Northern New York, Macomb on 1791.
Strange when you claim we lived in Southern New York.
Anyway I know what I know and you can beleive what ever you want to
beleive. I am sorry if I can't bring back the dead to prove what I saying. I
am recommend you find a copy of the Seven Generation: A History of the
kanienkehaka, by David Blanchard. 1980 Church, and Baines, Montreal.
This is all I am going to say, because I have to leave room for you to
cut this up in small section.
Teionnion'kwata:se
Skennen ( Peace )
--- SLMAIL v2.15B-M (#1349)
* Origin: Igloo Station BBS (1:167/502)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 13/13 167/90 179 502 243/47 246/2 4 13 18 24
SEEN-BY: 24624/0
PATH: 167/502 179 90 12/12 13/13 243/47 246/2 18 13 24
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nachricht Nr. 0131 aus Area INDIAN_AFFAIRS Exportiert mit Yuppie! v2.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Datum: 23 Feb 92 11:38:00
Von : Ronald Deere
An : Cliff Shepstone
Betr.: Re: Mohawk History
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Via SLMAIL v2.15B-M (#1349)
Well I guess you had better stick to Western Canada History and read up
on Iroquois History before you correct me or any others. About six months ago
you told me I was mistaken and that I should read my History before I posted
anything with out facts.
Well after reading your messages, I can say that you don't know
anything about the Iroquois and are just blowing in the wind.
>RD> Cartier Met the Kanienkehaka.
>RD>far as Anticosti Island. Guess Who he meet at Anticosti ?
>RD>Kanienkehakwa.
You seem to try and give everyone the impression you know eveything about the
Mohawk, and just about everything this is about natives. Well, then can you
tell me who think the Mohawk are ? I mean where did they come from ? Did they
just show up one day in Iroquoian land a take it ? I guess you can't read
everything and so its time for a lesson. First I would like you to count the
and name the Nations in the Six Nation Conferacy ? Now when you have done
this list the names and tell me do you see a Iroquoian Nation or do you see a
Conferacy ? I think you find SIX, six is what I see. Do you see the Nation
called Iroquois ? No you don't, that because the Iroquois were the
Confereracy made up of the the SIX. Nations.
>This was Cartier's first visit, and he came in, as you say, to Gaspe
>where he met some Iroquois (NOT Mohawk, nor even Five Nations Iroquois).
>The Chief's name was Donnacona. They were, according to
>reports, on a fishing/hunting trip from "upper St Lawrence" and were
>exceedingly primitive, sleeping on the ground beneath their canoes by
>night, and eating fish and meat raw, or almost raw. (This according to
>Cartier's diary)
This is still done to day in North parts of Canada by both Natives and
Non-natives, so whats your point ? Once agian remember who wrote those
reports you speak of. After only the reports you read are true.
>RD> He kidnapped two natives and sail back to France.
>They were two of Donnacona's sons, and they left with Donnacona's
>permission (although, admittedly, there are different versions of this.
>In any event, he promised to return them and did that in 1535.). The
>son's names were Taignoagny and Domagaya.
What are the other version of this might I ask ? I have given you the Mohawk
version and since its the people that it happened to I would have to say I
would take it closer to heart. Oh, Yes they left willing just like the Blacks
in Africa and the Natives taken to England to work as Slaves from New
Foundland. You believe that they went willing ? If you do your a bigger fool
than I. Oh, and by the way they were Mohawk members of the Iroqouis Nation.
>RD>his men and two natives captives, Cartier sailed back up
>RD>the Saint Lawrence.
>Right on, except history refers to them as "guides", not "captives".
Right again, only its your History that tells us "guides" and its your
teachers in the past that have tried to wipe our History. Our history tells
us they were captives. ( Beleive what you want ). I once again must believe
my people and not those that tried to force us to forget our culture, language
and history.
>RD>He arrived at the Mohawk village of Stadacona near the present
>RD>site of Quebec City. In September, Cartier travel up the Saint Lawrence
>RD>to a village of Hochelaga where he was greeted by Kanienkehaka.
>Again, pretty good. Quebec City now covers the site of Stadacona, I
>think, and Hochelaga is on Montreal Island, thus is now covered by
>Montreal. BUT - they were IROQUIOS villages, not MOHAWK. In
>addition to the Five Nations, the "Iroquoian-speaking people" included
>Hurons, Neutrals, and Eries, and a few others. By and large there was
>hostility between the Five Nations and the other Iroquois nations. The
>Hochelagans and the Stadeconas are thought to have been Hurons.
Yes their were other Nation's but they were not part of the Confederacy. To
name a few others Wenros, Cherokee and Minquas and they all spoke a Iroqouian
laguage. Each Nation located in its own national territory and had trade
relations with the Iroquois and non-Iroquois neighbors. All Iroquoian people
were organized according to clan's Each following the same law of the Creator.
The law forbiddong marriage within the same clan. So with in Nation you had a
clan system. This is one of the cause of what was called the Blood Feud. I
sure you heard of the Blood Feud... As the Feud almost destroyed the
Iroquoian society. But before this could happen the Peace Giver, Tekanawita
brought the Great law and restored order to the Iroquois society. Onkwehonwe
had fought continous wars so long that the became lustful for war. At that
time they the nation fought together or amongest them selfs. Its was the
Onondaga people that could not endure Atotarho and so called a council. Anyway
after a few years they had the council and five Nation called the
Kenienkehaka, Oneidas, Onondagas, Senecas and Cayugas. This was the beging of
the Iroquoian Confedercacy. At the end of the council songs were sung and a
pledge to govern yourselfs by the Great Law of Peace, all authority shall come
from it. Tekanawita repeat all of the rules which he with Haionwatha had
devised for the establishment of the Great Peace. Then in the council of all
Five nations he repeated them and the Confederacy was established.
One of the featurs of the Great Law of P was Peace was that each Nation
maintained control over affairs within its onw territory.
The organnization of the Mohawk Nation within the Confederacy looked like
this.
Confededracy ===== Grand Council
Mohawk Nation ===== National Council
Mohawk Settlements ===== Kanhawake--Kaneaatake--Akwesasne--Canajoharie---
Tiononderoge ( All settlements with their own
local councils
Mohawk Clans ===== Turtle---Wolf---Bear
Individual
The Kanienkehaka occupied more than 9 million acres of territory at that time.
The Main areas being Hochelaga and Stadacona. Hochelaga had approximately
3500 residents and was at the base of Mount Royal. It contained about 50
houses. ( more information on thses houses can be found by a Jesuit Priest
call FR. Joseph Lafitau in his book Coutoms of the American Indians.
For more infromation, I would say start reading before you question the Mohawk
or the Confederacy.
>RD>Also the word Kanienkehaka means anywhere the Mohawk people live. You
>To be honest, Ron, I never heard the word before now. Isn't that a
>strange name for an individual, though? Or even a people? (see your
>uses of the word above). I have many old records here, and that
>name does not appear in any of them. (I searched).
No stranger than your name Shepstone, to the Mohawk its not strange and is not
taken lightly as a strange name. I told you what it meant and still you
question is like a slap in the face. So I to have looked up some old Mohawk
books and papers and can't find the name Shepstone any where, isn't a strange
name for an individual ?
>Since the name Mohawk is said to mean "cannibal" (I'm not sure in what
>language, though), I don't find it surprising that it, or derivations of
>it, would appear in lots of places. Remember, to those old
>explorers, almost all natives were cannibals.
What in Gods name in hell has the above got to anything I said ?????? In fact
I find it as racist remark form you because it has nothing to do with the
Mohawk meeting Champlain or anything i have said to you so far. To begin with
the Mohawk were not Cannibals.
>Are we speaking of the Caughnawaga land ceded to the NY State in 1796.
No, I am talking about Caughnawaga or Kahnawake 9 miles from the downtown
center of Montreal and 35 miles north of New York State. Why do you ask this
question and then write the following ? What are you trying to make me look
like some kind of fool ?
>CS>that the Jesuits started bringing "christianized" Mohawks and other
>CS>Iroquois north to Montreal (I think I mentioned to you some time ago
>CS>that I have a copy of the original grant of the Seigniory of Sault St
>CS>Louis - includes Caughnawaga - by Loius XIV to the Jesuits back in
>CS>1680),
This all I have to say for now.....
Teionnion'kwata:se Warrior.
--- SLMAIL v2.15B-M (#1349)
* Origin: Igloo Station BBS (1:167/502)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 13/13 167/90 179 502 243/47 246/2 4 13 18 24
SEEN-BY: 24624/0
PATH: 167/502 179 90 12/12 13/13 243/47 246/2 18 13 24
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nachricht Nr. 0144 aus Area INDIAN_AFFAIRS Exportiert mit Yuppie! v2.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Datum: 22 Feb 92 17:43:00
Von : Rato:rats
An : Cliff Shepstone
Betr.: Re: Mohawk History
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Via SLMAIL v2.15B-M (#1349)
I been reading your messages for the past months and people have been
trying to teach you the real fact about the Kanienkehaka, (which means People
of The Flint), who also are the Mohawk People. The Six Nations or some times
called the Iroquois are made up of the following nations Kanienkahaka, Oneida,
Onondaga, Cayuga, Seneca and the Tuscaroras.
D> Also New York state sold land in Northern New York, Macomb >on 1791.
Strange when you claim we lived in Southern New York.
>
>I assume you are speaking of the Caughnawaga land ceded to the NY State
>in 1796.
You sure have your fact WRONG on Caughnawaga. Do you know where Kahnawake is?
Well if you know where it is, then you know it is in Quebec, and that Quebec
is in Canada. You follow me so far? Caughnawaga and Kahanawak are the same
piece of land and therefore I don't live in New York. Caughnawaga is the
French or Dutch spelling of Kahnawake. I am a KANIENKAHAKA of the Six Nation
Confederacy.
Oh,and one other thing all the above information is correct!
onen ki wahe
Rato:rats
Kahnawake (where the true facts come from!!)
The Eastern Door of The Six Nations (we are a Nation!)
--- SLMAIL v2.15B-M (#1349)
* Origin: Igloo Station BBS (1:167/502)
SEEN-BY: 12/12 13/13 167/90 179 502 243/47 246/2 4 13 18 24
SEEN-BY: 24624/0
PATH: 167/502 179 90 12/12 13/13 243/47 246/2 18 13 24
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nachricht Nr. 0203 aus Area INDIAN_AFFAIRS Exportiert mit Yuppie! v2.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Datum: 25 Feb 92 02:25:08
Von : Cliff Shepstone
An : Rato:Rats
Betr.: Re: Mohawk History
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MSGID: 1:134/17.0 29a9fd64
Hi, Rato:Rats
RA> I been reading your messages for the past months and
RA>people have been trying to teach you the real fact about
RA>the Kanienkehaka, (which means People of The Flint), who
RA>also are the Mohawk People.
I know, but it seems they are all SO confused. For example:
RD>Also the word Kanienkehaka means anywhere the Mohawk people live. You
this is what Ronald Deere said it means. Who is right?
RA>The Six Nations or some times
RA>called the Iroquois are made up of the following nations
RA>Kanienkahaka, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, Seneca and the
RA>Tuscaroras.
I know - what's your point?
RA>D> York, Macomb >on 1791. Strange when you claim we lived in
RA>D> Southern New York.
Southern, central, northern - what I said was "in the Albany area", and
I was talking about back in Cartier's day - circa 1534! Don't
confuse that fact with what the situation was 250 years later - I have
also said many times that the first Mohawks were moved up to the
Montreal area by the Jesuits, circa 1640 - 1650.
Cliff
___
X SLMR 2.1a X
--- Maximus 2.00
* Origin: EXCESS BBS Calgary, Alta (403)285-7338 VHST SDS/PDN (1:134/17)
SEEN-BY: 13/13 134/1 17 209/209 243/47 246/2 4 13 18 24
SEEN-BY: 24624/0
PATH: 134/17 1 209/209 13/13 243/47 246/2 18 13 24
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nachricht Nr. 0204 aus Area INDIAN_AFFAIRS Exportiert mit Yuppie! v2.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Datum: 26 Feb 92 02:26:10
Von : Cliff Shepstone
An : Ronald Deere
Betr.: Re: Mohawk History
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MSGID: 1:134/17.0 29ab4f22
Hello Ron;
RD>can't read everything and so its time for a lesson. First
RD>I would like you to count the and name the Nations in the
RD>Six Nation Conferacy ? Now when you have done this list
RD>the names and tell me do you see a Iroquoian Nation or do
RD>you see a Conferacy ? I think you find SIX, six is what I
RD>see. Do you see the Nation called Iroquois ? No you
RD>don't, that because the Iroquois were the Confereracy made
RD>up of the the SIX. Nations.
Boy - have YOU led a sheltered life! Of course there is no "Iroquois
Nation", and of course there is a "Six Nation Confederacy" (also called
the "Iroquois Confederacy"). This simply means that six nations of
the Iroquois people banded together to form a confederacy. (More
accurately, FIVE nations formed the confederacy - the Tuscarora were
admitted only in 1722, thus changing the original Five Nations to what
is now called the Six Nations). Now, are you suggesting that these
six nations were all the Iroquois people in North America? Of course
not - it was only these six who banded together.
RD> >This was Cartier's first visit, and he came in, as you say, to Gaspe
RD> >where he met some Iroquois (NOT Mohawk, nor even Five Nations Iroquois).
RD> >The Chief's name was Donnacona.
I was just trying to correct your message, wherein you said that Cartier
met Mohawks and "Kanienkehake". Also that they met at Gaspe, not on
Anticosti as you said.
RD> >reports, on a fishing/hunting trip from "upper St Lawrence" and were
RD> >exceedingly primitive, sleeping on the ground beneath their canoes by
RD> >night, and eating fish and meat raw, or almost raw. (This according to
RD> >Cartier's diary)
RD>This is still done to day in North parts of Canada by both
RD>Natives and Non-natives, so whats your point ?
The latter part I only filled in as an item of interest - it had no
significance.
RD> >In any event, he promised to return them and did that in 1535.). The
RD> >son's names were Taignoagny and Domagaya.
RD>What are the other version of this might I ask ? I have
RD>given you the Mohawk version and since its the people that
RD>it happened to I would have to say I would take it closer
RD>to heart.
No Ron - it did NOT happen to the Mohawks, but anyway, the point is
completely irrelevant.
RD>Slaves from New Foundland. You believe that they went
RD>willing ? If you do your a bigger fool than I. Oh, and by
RD>the way they were Mohawk members of the Iroqouis Nation.
I don't know - I only read the history books (you should try that). I
do know that Cartier promised to return them, and he did just that the
following year. Why would he even return to Hochelaga's people if he
did not intend to keep that word; if they had not parted on friendly
terms? More - he picked them up out in the Gulf of St Lawrence (on
the gaspe coast), yet he went right up the St Lawrence to return them to
their people. Sorry again, Ron - your version just doesn't hold up
under scrutiny.
RD> >Right on, except history refers to them as "guides", not "captives".
The difference is, Ron, that in 1534 Cartier wrote down everything that
he experienced, as did many others. Those records have been preserved
through the years, and we now have an accurate record, as it was seen by
Cartier, of what happened. Since Donnacona and his people
disappeared from the face of the earth just a few short years after
that, I suggest that the Cartier record is the ONLY existing record
today.
RD> >RD>He arrived at the Mohawk village of Stadacona near the present
RD> >RD>site of Quebec City. In September, Cartier travel up the Saint
Lawrence
RD> >RD>to a village of Hochelaga where he was greeted by Kanienkehaka.
He was greeted by the Stadaconas and the Hochelagas, two Huron tribes
(also an Iroquois people, but NOT Mohawks, nor one of the Six Nations)
RD>Yes their were other Nation's but they were not part of the
RD>Confederacy. To name a few others Wenros, Cherokee and Minquas and
RD>they all spoke a Iroqouian laguage. Each Nation located in its own
RD>national territory and had trade relations with the
I'm not sure about the other two, but I don't think the Cherokee were
Iroquois, were they? But anyway, yes, there were others, as I have
said before. There were Erie, Neutral, Andaste, HURON, and others - I
mentioned these as they were all wiped out as nations by the Six
Nations. Just as historians are pretty certain that the Stadaconas
and Hochelagas were Huron and were wiped out by the Six Nations.
RD>Kenienkehaka, Oneidas, Onondagas, Senecas and Cayugas. This was the
RD>beging of the Iroquoian Confedercacy.
I agree with almost everything you say here, Ron, except you ignore the
fact that there were MANY Iroquois nations, and only five of them
formed the confederacy.
I've finally got that "Kenienkehaka" name! Rato:rats gave me a
clue when he defined it as "the Flint People", and it has been bothering
me since. It is the name of a Tuscorara tribe, not Mohawks at all!
BTW, it is actually spelled "Kaniekehaka", and it does indeed mean
"flint people".
RD>Confededracy ===== Grand Council
RD>Mohawk Nation ===== National Council
RD>Mohawk Settlements ===== Kanhawake--Kaneaatake--Akwesasne--Canajoharie---
RD> Tiononderoge ( All settlements with their own
RD> local councils
RD>Mohawk Clans ===== Turtle---Wolf---Bear
RD>Individual
At what point in time was this organization true, Ron? I suspect it
was this (as it pertains to Mohawks), in the 1700's and later, but I
seriously doubt if this describes the Mohawk of the 1500 -1600 eras.
RD> >RD>Also the word Kanienkehaka means anywhere the Mohawk people live. You
RD> >To be honest, Ron, I never heard the word before now. Isn't that a
RD> >strange name for an individual, though? Or even a people? (see your
RD> >uses of the word above).
RD>No stranger than your name Shepstone, to the Mohawk its not strange
No, you misunderstood again. I questioned the name only in view of the
three uses you had made of it. I don't have the precise references
now, but you used it once to define the people who met Cartier, again as
the name of the Chief of those people, and the use quoted above. Take
a look at your previous message - I can't quote it to you as I didn't
bother keeping it.
And comparing it to Shepstone shows that you are STILL confused!
Shepstone is the name of an individual, not a whole people. It was
your confused use of it before that made me question it.
Cliff
___
X SLMR 2.1a X
--- Maximus 2.00
* Origin: EXCESS BBS Calgary, Alta (403)285-7338 VHST SDS/PDN (1:134/17)
SEEN-BY: 13/13 134/1 17 209/209 243/47 246/2 4 13 18 24
SEEN-BY: 24624/0
PATH: 134/17 1 209/209 13/13 243/47 246/2 18 13 24
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nachricht Nr. 0260 aus Area INDIAN_AFFAIRS Exportiert mit Yuppie! v2.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Datum: 28 Feb 92 20:37:12
Von : Kahonwes Deere
An : Cliff Shepstone
Betr.: Re: Mohawk History
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EID:a952 185ca4a6
MSGID: 1:321/110.0 29aee3c8
REPLY: 1:134/17.0 29ab4f22
Hello Cliff
Its your friendly neighbor. Dont worry about your message you sent me, the
professor in the history department is about to blow your little trickles of
info out of the BBs. Since I haven't been on in a while and have little time
left I'll make this short. You say Ron Deere is confused in using the word
Kanienkehaka. Well since you dont know diddly about the Kanienkehaka language
I'll tell you. Just like any other language in the world we have words that
mean several things. It just so happens your the confused one and do not
understand about language very much. Nor would I expect you to understand any
Kanienkeha. Now that that settled maybe you can then take lessons on how to
say it.