Canada
department ol Hines
Hon. LOUIS CODERRE, Minister;
R. G. McCONNELL, Deputy Minister.
(geological Surocij
Museum Bulletin No. 16
ANTHROPOLOGICAL SERIES, No. 6 JUNE 15, 1915
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN
MYTHOLOGY
by
Paul Rad in
OTTAWA
Government Printing Bureau
1915
No. 1535
.
CONTENTS.
PAGE
Introduction 1
Ehrenreich’s mythological theory and the assumption
of an historically primary version 3
Myth analysis 6
The plot ?
Plot elaboration 9
Dramatis personae 26
The episodes ■ 28
The motifs 30
The myth-complex as a unit 30
The myth as transmitted 35
The novelette as transmitted. 41
The novelette as remodelled by the author-raconteur 42
Psychological-literary elements in the plot 44
Diffusion of myths from the above point of view 47
The literary interpretation and the position of Ehrenreich . . 50
June 15, 1915.
Canada
Geological Survey
Museum Bulletin No. 16.
ANTHROPOLOGICAL SERIES, No. 6.
Literary Aspects of North American Mythology.
By Paul Radin.
INTRODUCTION.
The mythology of primitive people was for so long a time
identified with folk-lore and philosophy, that practically all the
problems discussed were those that developed from an exclusive
occupation with this aspect of the subject. Only within the
last two decades have ethnologists seriously applied themselves
to the examination of primitive mythology from its literary side.
Although it is no longer necessary to demonstrate the k priori
existence of literary elements in mythology, it appears to me
quite essential to demonstrate their precise nature. Certain
attempts in this direction have been made by Boas, Lowie,
Dixon, and Swanton. Ehrenreich and Boas have likewise
inspired a considerable amount of work in connexion with the
tabulation of motifs. 1 . All these studies have, however, for the
most part concerned themselves with a mechanical analysis of
myths and the tabulation of the motifs, episodes, and themes of
1 Boas, in numerous scattered papers; Lowie, “The test-theme in North American myth-
ology," Journ. Amer. Folk-lore. Vol. XXI, pp. 97-148; and “Catch-words for mythological
motives,” ibid, pp, 24-27; Dixon, “The mythology of the Central and Eastern Algonkins,”
ibid, Vol. XXII, pp. 1-10; Swanton, “Some practical aspects of the study of myths,” ibid., Vol.
XXIII, pp. 1-8; Ehrenreich, “Die Mythen and Legenden der Siidamerikanischen UrvOlker,”
1905; "GOtter and Heilbringer,” Zeitschrift filr Ethnologie, Vol. 38, pp. 536-610; and “All-
gemeine Mythologie," 1910.
2
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
which they consisted . 1 Most of these investigators seem, how-
ever, to have been quite oblivious of the implications necessarily
entailed by the recognition that in primitive mythology we are
often dealing with literature in the true sense of the word . 2
For, the moment such an admission is made, we are justified
in applying to this primitive literature, the same methods of
analysis and criticism that we apply to our own — paying due
regard to the personality of the author, or, if you will, the author-
raconteur ; to his literary peculiarity ; to the stylistic peculiarity
of the area, etc.
A preliminary step in such studies would have to be what
Prof. Boas has long proposed — the detailed characterization of
the different mythological areas. For the correct understanding
of the role of the author-raconteur, however, something else is
needed, something which, unfortunately, is most frequently
neglected, namely, a fairly extensive collection of variants of the
same tale. Only then will we really be in a position to determine
how great has been the play of imagination among different
author-raconteurs ; whether certain versions have originated in a
certain area or not, or whether they have been severally borrowed ;
and, finally, what is considered by the raconteur-authors to be
the difference between “folklore-mythology ” 3 and literature.
Variants also serve one other useful purpose, that of actually
demonstrating the existence of literary units.
With the exception of Boas, Lowie, and a few others, most
discussions, as noted above, have concerned themselves primarily
with problems suggested by regarding myths as the expressions
of primitive philosophy. But more important than this assump-
tion, which is apparently a heritage from the students of classical
mythology, is the attitude taken toward the myth-complex
itself. Almost all mythologists are aware of the different ele-
ments that go to form the myth-complex and of the fluctuations
between different versions of the same myth; yet in their dis-
1 Cf. especially Dixon's paper mentioned before and T. T. Waterman, "The explanatory
element in the Folk-lore of the North American Indians," Journ. Amer. Folk-lore, Vol. XXVII,
pp. 1-54.
1 This has, however, been frequently recognized by Prof. Boa3 in his lectures.
* I use this compound "folklore-mythology" advisedly. The specific meaning I attach to
It will be discussed later.
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
3
cussions myths are so frequently treated as simple units, that we
are immediately led to the conclusion that over and above their
analytical separation into constituent elements lie certain theo-
retical assumptions. What these are in the case of Ehrenreich,
Lowie has clearly demonstrated . 1 But Lowie was concerned
primarily with an examination of Ehrenreich’s mythological
theory as such and paid only passing attention to the manner in
which the latter may have justified his treatment of the myth.
It is, however, precisely by an analysis of Ehrenreich’s handling
of the myth that a refutation of his position is at all possible.
Such an analysis brings out quite clearly that he started with the
definite assumption that for every myth one correct and histori-
cally primary version existed. It is hardly necessary to go to the
trouble of proving this as a main element in Ehrenreich’s theory,
for it is quite transparent. Our line of argument will, therefore,
consist in examining, first, how Ehrenreich arrived at this con-
clusion, and then, in turn, to inquire whether it is tenable.
ehrenreich’s mythological theory and the assumption
of an historically primary version.
It would, I believe, be an injustice to assume that the thesis
of an historically primary version was based merely on k priori
reasoning. A study of the subject matter and dramatis personse
in many different areas seemed to point clearly to the fact that
myths are frequently concerned with phenomena of nature or
more specifically with the celestial bodies — sun, moon, and
stars. Again, it was noted that many non-celestial episodes and
actors were interpreted in terms of celestial phenomena. It was
thus easy enough to generalize and assume that myths originally
dealt with natural phenomena, further circumscribed to mean
specifically the sun, moon, and stars. Some students of myth-
ology went even further and attempted to prove that the myth
primarily dealt only with one of these luminaries. Into these
discussions we need not enter. All that we wish to point out is
that theoretically there exists a certain amount of justification
for the assumption of the naturalistic school of mythologists.
1 Lowie, ibid., pp. 97-106.
4
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
Having demonstrated the nature of the original subject-
matter of mythology, it was quite logical to argue that in those
cases where divergent versions of the same myth occurred, that
version which approached the original subject-matter most close-
ly, was historically the older. Where there existed clear-cut
references to celestial actors such an interpretation seemed natural
enough. But how are we to deal with those myths where the
references are either extremely attenuated or, to the naive eye,
even absent entirely ? For these Ehrenreich provided by predi-
cating certain criteria as distinctive of celestial actors and celestial
activities. It is in these criteria and the use made of them that
Ehrenreich seems at his weakest. Lowie has shown this quite
clearly. But, after all is said and done, Lowie’s analysis merely
makes it clear that Ehrenreich's position was not the only possible
one, and that, for instance, it was possible to reverse the inter-
pretation and insist that the activities of celestial heroes were but
the transferred activities of human heroes. Ehrenreich realized
this clearly and answered quite correctly that here we were dealing
with a matter of opinion. Speaking of certain phenomena of the
heavens, he says, "Fur manche Forscher, zu denen u.a. auch
Lowie zu gehoren scheint, sind derartige Vorkommnisse freilich
die natiirlichsten Dinge von der Welt, an dessen irdischer
Unterlage nicht zu zweifeln ist. Das ist eben Ansichtssache, die
keiner weiteren Diskussion bedarf .” 1 Ehrenreich, it seems to me,
had a much better answer, for he might easily have pointed to
the fact that celestial heroes and celestial events had of necessity
to be represented in terms of human heroes and human activi-
ties.
In fact, any general critique of a theory like Ehrenreich’s
hardly touches the core of his position. From his point of view
it would represent merely another position. Even a more specific
critique, like the demonstration of a literary tendency for a
specific area, as in the case of the Pawnee, where practically all
myths are interpreted as star myths, would fare no better, for
Ehrenreich would conceivably answer that in so far as you chose
to call this identification of myths with stars a literary tendency,
it was a matter of opinion; for him it was a survival.
1 “Allgemeine Mythologie,” pp. 104, 105.
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
5
In the critique of Ehrenreich ’s position his antagonists have
relied on arguments of too general a nature. The interpretation
of celestial activities is, after all, largely a matter of opinion,
and the unanimity of "star” interpretations among the Pawnee
might conceivably operate against its validity as a literary ten-
dency. On the other hand, the all important fact it demonstrates
to me, the existence of a definite literary tendency, does not
stand out as sharply as it should, just because it is here, first,
a characteristic of a general kind, and secondly, a characteristic
of a large area. In order to have an easily accepted proof of
literary elements in mythology, we must turn to something more
specific.
For Ehrenreich, as we have pointed out, there always existed
in each area a "correct” version of a myth. We have tried to
show in the preceding paragraphs in what way he may have
arrived at this assumption. However, we passed over one ele-
ment that, consciously or unconsciously, may have swayed him
in reaching his conclusions, namely, the evolutionary hypothesis
of a norm that diverges. Has he not to a certain extent recon-
structed certain norms, somewhat in the fashion of general
averages, and then predicated their former existence ? There
is, I believe, a certain justification for such an inference. Let us,
however, pass over this phase of his general theory and grant for
the present that the versions of the myths themselves, plus cer-
tain justifiable theoretical assumptions, one reinforcing the other,
led to the formulation of his views. What versions of myths
were at his disposal ? In the overwhelming majority of cases,
only one from each tribe. But that is not all. A selection had
set in at the very outset; for, partly due to informant, partly
to investigator, the version obtained was the one which the two
regarded as the "correct” one. An artificial selection had thus
begun in the field itself.
We have now, starting from two entirely different points,
found ourselves confronted with the notion of one "correct”
version for each myth. Ehrenreich ’s assumption of a "correct”
version can best be attacked after a critical examination of a
certain number of myths and their variants has been made, but
the field-worker’s and Indian’s assumption of such a version can
be examined directly.
6
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
The field worker, is, as a rule, guided by very vague con-
ceptions in predicating correctness for one version as against
another. In the main he depends upon his informant. The
informant has, it is true, very definite ideas on this subject.
But what exactly is the value of these ideas ? After analysing
the reasons advanced it will be found that in all cases the Indian
bases his concept of a correct version on individual circumstances:
the specific manner of narrating a certain myth, the individual
who narrates it, certain characteristic expressions and intona-
tions, etc. In the last analysis, then, the correct version of the
Indian is not a dispassionately formed opinion but merely the
expression of a purely local-emotional attitude.
MYTH ANALYSIS.
We will now turn our attention to the specific examination
of Ehrenreich’s concept of a correct version.
Let us assume for the sake of argument that only one correct
version of a myth exists and that the variants represent devia-
tions from this correct version. Are we to consider any constant
element appearing in the “original” version and the variants as
the essential nucleus of the myth, or are only certain common
elements to be regarded as significant ? If, for instance, we were
to find in a number of places a plot dealing with a warrior who
goes on a warpath, is captured, and informs his captors that on
a certain day, no matter how well he is guarded, he will escape—
the probability of such a plot developing in a number of North
American tribes quite independently is considerable. The
plot, consequently, must be of a specific nature. If, however,
we find in the same tribe two versions of a myth in which the
plots are identical but the episodes quite distinct, which are we
to regard as the original ? Or again, we may find two tales in
which the episodes are identical but the plots different ; or, finally,
two versions in which both plot and episodes are identical, but
where the plot is developed in characteristically different ways.
In other words, there are conceivably three kinds of identities:
that of plot, that of episodes, and that of plot elaboration.
What is the reason for this differentiation, and have we a right
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
7
to claim for any one of these three identities a special importance
in the development of the myth complex ? Can any of them be
used as criteria for determining which one of a number of versions
of a myth is primary ? These questions must be answered ten-
tatively, at least.
To me the reasons for the differences in the various versions
of the same myth are due mainly to certain literary tendencies
at work. To demonstrate this contention I shall discuss at some
length the nature of the plot and its elaboration, the episodes,
and the motifs, of a number of North American myths.
THE PLOT.
Only a detailed study of every mythological area in America
will enable us to decide whether there exist characteristic plots
for every definite area. Whether this can be demonstrated or
not, there can be no doubt that certain plots are found distributed
over enormous areas. Where these plots are of a very general
nature and refer to possible happenings within almost any tribe
in North America, there is no need of predicating either a com-
mon origin or diffusion. Where, however, we find specific types
of plot, such as, for instance, Blood-clot and Thrown-away or the
Twins; Turtle’s war party; Wi'sa'ka * 1 and his brother; Tar-
baby; etc., they must be regarded as either having sprung from
some older myth which was shared in common by all the tribes or
as having been diffused from some centre.
We shall give a brief summary of the contents of the myths
mentioned :
(A) Blood-Clot and Thrown-Away, or the Twins. A
woman is killed and twins are taken from her womb. One is
hidden but is found upon the return of the father; the other dis-
appears entirely. He reappears afterward as a playmate of his
brother and is finally captured by a stratagem. Then, in
disobedience to their father’s wish, they go out to seek ad-
ventures.
(B) Turtle's War Party. Turtle decides to go on the war-
path and wishes to obtain companions. Various animals ask
1 The culture hero of the Fox Indiana.
8
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO, 16
permission to go along and show him of what use they can be.
He refuses all except some small turtles who approach so noise-
lessly that he does not notice them. On the raid Turtle is cap-
tured and because of his professed fear of water is thrown into a
lake and thus escapes.
(C) Wi'sa'k a° and His Brother. Wi'sa'ka* tells his brother
never to cross a certain lake, but the brother disobeys and is
seized and killed by water-spirits. Wi’sa'ka* finds out what has
happened to his brother and is told by an animal who the mur-
derers are. Subsequently he meets a person who is hastening to
the aid of the wounded animals. He kills this person, dresses
himself in his skin, and, arriving at the home of the water-spirits,
kills them under pretense of trying to cure them. He then seizes
the skin of his brother, which was being used as a door-flap, and
succeeds in making good his escape. Then he endeavours to re-
store his brother to life but fails.
(D) Tar-haby. An animal commits depredations on a chile
field owned by an old woman who, after vainly trying to discover a
method of capturing him, hits upon the plan of putting a number
of decoys in the shape of tar or wax figures. The animal, ap-
proaching the following night, sees the decoys, and, in endeavour-
ing to push them aside, is held fast and captured, but succeeds
subsequently in making his escape . 1
With the possible exception of (D), the similarity of the plot
in the examples given above has led to the assumption of the
identity of the myths. Such an assumption is quite justifiable
if the myth is regarded as essentially a question of plot. For the
study of the specific significance of a myth, identity of plot is,
however, only one of a number of features to be considered.
Before proceeding to the discussion of plot elaboration, it
may be noted that the above analyses are to a certain extent
artificial, for certain episodes and motifs will probably be found
to be invariably associated with definite plots.
1 This is the Mexican version.
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
9
PLOT ELABORATION.
The action of a plot is generally developed in one of three
ways: either the sequence of events is brought about by the
actions of the actors themselves without the intermediation of a
figure foretelling the various episodes; or it is outlined before-
hand by some individuals and the episodes appear in full force
only then; or, finally, the plot is developed in the form of a
dialogue.
The first method is found exemplified in many of the trick-
ster cycles of North America, e.g., in the Nenebojo cycle of the
Ojibwa, the Icdinige cycle of the Omaha, the Wak'djurjk'a-'ga
cycle of the Winnebago, and the Rabbit and Coyote cycle of
the Zapotecan Indians of Mexico. The second method is found
in the legend of the origin of the Thunderbird war-bundle of
the Winnebago, 1 the Winnebago myth of “Holy-one and his
brother,” 2 the Omaha “Haxige,” 3 etc. The third method
is found in many Zapotecan myths. As an illustration of the
first method we will select the Ojibwa Nenebojo cycle; 4 as
examples of the second the Omaha Haxige, its Winnebago
version “Holy One,” and the Winnebago “The man who visited
the Thunderbirds;” and as an example of the third, the Zapotecan
Creation Myth. 6
“They (Nenebojo and his grandmother) walked along until
they came to the shores of Lake Erie. ... At Lake St.
Clair Nenebojo saw a number of ducks and he thought to him-
self, how am I going to kill them ?’ After a while, he took
one of his pails and started to drum and sing at the same time. . .
When the ducks saw Nenebojo standing near the shore, they swam
toward him and as soon as he saw this, he sent his grandmother
ahead to build a little lodge, where they could live. In the
meantime, he killed a few of the ducks, so, while his grandmother
started out to build a shelter, Nenebojo went towards the lake
i P. Radin, “Winnebago tales,” Jour. Amer. Folk-lore, Vol. XXII, 1909, pp. 288-313.
1 P. Radin, Winnebago MS,
1 J. O. Dorsey, “Dheglha Texts," Contributions to North American ethnology, Vol. VI,
p. 289.
« P. Radin, "Some myths and tales of the Ojibwa of southeastern Ontario," Geological
Survey of Canada, Memoir 48, Anthropological Series, No. 2, 1914, pp. 2, 3.
1 P. Radin, Zapotecan Myths (MS.).
10
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
where the ducks and geese were floating around and around.
Nenebojo jumped into a sack and then dived into the water.
The ducks and geese were quite surprised to see that he was
such an excellent diver, and came closer and closer. Then
Nenebojo challenged them to a contest at diving. He said that
he could beat them all. The ducks all accepted the challenge,
but Nenebojo beat them. Then he went after the geese and beat
them too. For a time he was alternately diving and rising to the
surface, all around. Finally he dived under the geese and started
to tie their legs together with some basswood bark. When the
geese noticed this, they tried to rise and fly away, but they were
unable to do so, for Nenebojo was hanging on to the other end
of the string. The geese, nevertheless, managed to rise, gradually
dragging Nenebojo along with them. They finally emerged
from the water and rose higher and higher into the air. Nene-
bojo, however, hung on, and would not let go, until his hand was
cut and the string broke.
“He fell down into the hollow of a big tree. There he lay
until he heard somebody chopping wood near by. . .
It will not be necessary to continue, for this short extract
exemplifies the method clearly.
Let us now turn to the Omaha Haxige, exemplifying the
second method.
“In the morning Haxige went hunting. When he was re-
turning, behold a person had gone across the road again. . . .
When he had come right upon him, Haxige stood up suddenly.
‘Really! the venerable man walks as if something was the
matter,’ said he, trying to draw him out. ‘Yes, very much like
it,’ said he. ‘How can it be that at this late day you have not
been hearing it in your travels ?’ ‘Why, venerable man, what-
ever may be the matter ? I have been walking without hearing
anything at all,’ said Haxige. ‘Yes, Haxige’s younger brother
having been killed, Haxige wounded two of the water-monster’s
most dearly beloved children. I have been going thither to
powwow over them,’ said he. ‘Really! venerable man, it may
be very desirable to witness the treatment,’ said Haxige. ‘Yes,
it is so,’ said the buzzard. ‘I make it a rule to have no witnesses
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
11
at all.’ 'Really! venerable man, it may be very desirable I may
witness you. I too walk hunting,’ said Haxige. ‘Yes, it is so.
You can see me perform,’ said the buzzard. ‘Yet, venerable
man, I will hear from you how you do every one of the deeds,’
said Haxige tempting him. ‘You shall gaze on me,’ said the
buzzard. Singing his song, he danced saying,
Heke tako, heke heke tako.
‘Well, venerable man, if it be always just so it looks very nice
to me. Venerable man, how do you usually perform it ? I
wish to hear the whole of it from you,’ said Haxige. ‘I said that
when I reached there this time I will perform the cure. There
are four peaks which are flat on top. When I reach the fourth,
they usually come thither for me. . . . They put me in a
robe and they carry me on if. When I get there this time, I
wilt say, “Let the water stand hot. When I heat two irons red-
hot and press them repeatedly against the wounds, they will
live.’
The following is the Winnebago account.
“Holy One heard some one singing and when he got nearer
he saw that the singer was chopping wood. Holy One went to
an old burnt stump and blackened his face. Then he approached
the singer and noticed that it was an old woman. She was
singing :
‘Chiefs, O ye chiefs!’
Holy One approached and said, ‘Grandmother, why are you
saying that ?’ ‘Oh,’ said the old woman, ‘grandson, are you
Holy One ?’
‘No, grandmother, I am not Holy One. I suppose he has
cried himself to death by this time.’ Then said the old woman,
‘Grandson, the two sons of the chief have been shot with arrows
and I am chopping wood for them.’ ‘Grandmother,’ said Holy
One, 'what are they going to do about it ?’ ‘Grandson, are you
Holy One?’ ‘Don’t be foolish, grandmother. I have been
1 J. O. Dorsey, ibid., p. 240.
12
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
fasting over yonder hill for some time, and as I heard you chop-
ping wood, I came here. I have not been to the village for
some time. That is why I am asking you these questions. As
for Holy One, he must be dead long ere this.’ ‘Grandson, you
are right,’ she said. ‘In the morning the water-spirits will go
after the hawk to cure their wounded relatives.’
“ ‘ If he comes in time, what will be the result ?’ said Holy One.
'If he comes in time, they will live.’ ‘Grandmother, at what
time will the hawk come ?’ ‘Oh grandson, are you Holy One ?’
'How can I be Holy One ? He must be dead long ere this.’
“ ‘Well, grandson, the hawk will be here at noon.’ ‘Grand-
mother, from what direction will he come?’ ‘He will come from
the east.’ ‘What will they do to Holy One ?’ he asked. ‘Grand-
son, they are going to kill him.’ 'Grandmother, how will they
kill him ?’ he asked. 'They will kill him by sending snakes after
him.’ ‘Grandmother, if they do that he will put on his turtle-
shell shoes and trample the snakes to death.’
“ ‘Surely, grandson, you are the Holy One who is talking ?’
‘‘No, grandmother, I am not the Holy One. What will they do
after he has killed the snakes ?’ ‘Grandson, they will make it
snow and have his lodge entirely covered with snow, and when he
has eaten up all his food and has begun to eat his bow-string, then
a four-cornered drove of buffalo will trample him to death.’
‘Grandmother, if they do that, he will kill many buffaloes and
obtain very much meat for eating.’ ‘Now, grandson, are you
not the Holy One ?’ ‘O, grandmother, how can I be the Holy
One ? If they fail in that, what will they do next ?’ ‘Well,
grandson, if they fail in that, they will cause a flood to come and
they will flood the world.’ ‘Well, grandmother, what will they do
if he gets into his metal boat ?’ ‘Well, grandson, the water-spirits
will then tip the boat over with their tails.’ ‘Now, grandmother,
if they do that, he will take his metal oars and amuse himself
cutting off the tails of water-spirits.’ ‘Grandson, are you really
not the Holy One ?’ 'Grandmother, how can you talk in that
way ? How can I be Holy One ? What wall they do then ?’
he asked. ‘My dear grandson, the spirit muskrats will chew a
hole through the bottom of his boat.’ ‘Well, grandmother, if
they do that, he will take his metal oars and cut the spirit musk-
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
13
rats in two.’ 'Grandson, are you not the Holy One ?’ she said.
'How can I be the Holy One, grandmother ?’ he answered.
‘Grandmother, is that all they will do ?’ ‘Yes, except that I
will be one of those to chew through the boat.’ ‘Grandmother,
you are quite old to do that. How are your teeth ? Won’t
you show them to me?’ 'Well, grandson, my teeth are thus,'
she said and, closing her eyes and opening her mouth very wide,
she showed him her teeth. He then took his bow and struck her
in the mouth, knocking out her teeth and killing her. Then
she fell to the ground an old female muskrat.”
As a last example of the second method we will quote from
“The Man who visited the Thunderbirds.”
“He took the trail of his brothers and followed it till he came
to two camps, a small and a large one. He entered the first one
and found a very old woman sitting there As soon as she saw
him, she addressed him thus: ‘My poor grandchild, sit down
here, I am very sorry for you.’ And then she went on to tell
him what had happened to his sister and brothers. She told
him that the person who had been talking to his sister the last
time was a bad spirit; but that the sister had mistaken him for
the father of her child and had accompanied him to his camp.
However, he was not the father of her child, as she afterward
found out. All his brothers had been killed by this bad spirit
and she did not believe that he, the youngest, would escape their
fate. The old woman then proceeded to tell him that his sister
was by this time so completely under the influence of this bad
spirit that she was as bad as he and preferred to help her husband
rather than her brother.
“ ‘Now, listen, my grandchild. The first thing that the bad
spirit will ask you to do to-night will be to prepare a sweatbath
for him, and in order to do that he will tell you to fetch a certain
stone. That stone belongs to him and was put there for a certain
purpose. Just as you touch it, it will begin to roll down hill
and you will roll with it. That is how some of your brothers met
their death. Now, you just take a pole, walk up the opposite
side of the hill, touch the stone with the pole, and it will then roll
down the hill. As soon as it has stopped rolling, you can pick it
14
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
up and take it home. When you have brought this home, your
brother-in-law will tell you to get the bark of a certain very large
tree. That tree belongs to him and it is there for a certain pur-
pose. Just as you touch the tree, it will fall upon you and
kill you. Some of your brothers met their death in that way.
Now you take a stick and go as near to the tree as you can and
throw the stick at it. It will hit the bark, which will fall off.
Then you take as much of it as you want and bring it to him.
When you have brought this, he will send you out again and tell
you to fetch the pole for the sweathouse. When you get to the
place where he has sent you, you will find four large rattlesnakes
lying curled up. These are what he meant you to get. Some
of your brothers met death there. They were killed by the snakes.
So now, my grandson, take some tobacco with you and give
it to them and tell them not to hurt you. I shall put in my
influence to help you with them. These snakes do not belong
to him; but he is more powerful than they and he keeps them
there as his slaves. He just gives them enough to eat and to drink.
However, they have never had anything to smoke, and they will
be glad to accept your gift and not molest you. When you
come to your brother-in-law’s place, put their heads in the ground
and twist their tails, and so you will have the finest kind of
lodge structure. After this has been done, he will tell you to
pick up the stone with your naked hand and burn you up. That
is how some of your brothers met their fate. Now, my grand-
son, when it comes to that point, try to find some excuse to leave
him and come over to see me before you pick up the stone.’ ”
In the cases cited, the figures of the buzzard and old woman
seem to exist for the sole purpose of foretelling what is to happen.
They seem to have no connexion whatsoever either with the
hero of the plot or his enemy. Their role is quite similar to that
of the good or bad fairy of European folklore, who turns up at the
opportune moment. How are we to explain their role ? If we
wish to remain on firm ground and eschew general assumptions
that can be neither proven nor disproven, the best procedure
would be to explain it by the function it fulfils. From this
point of view they are indisputable literary devices, at least
now. The plot demands them.
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
15
It is not only in so general a manner as is indicated by the
above selections that the second method of plot elaboration is
used. Even in myths where the first method is used for the
general elaboration of the plot, the second is frequently found
employed for specific episodes and motifs. For instance in the
Winnebago Twin myth, when the boys have to disguise them-
selves in order not to be detected by the giant who is carrying
the head of their slain uncle, instead of going to the scene of
action and disguising themselves there, an old man tells them
what to do, or, according to another version, one of the boys
disguises himself and the other judges of the adequacy of the
success.
For the third method of plot elaboration, I will select the
Zapotec legend of “The Rooster and the Bull.”
“A rooster, walking along in a happy frame of mind, chanced
upon a place so dreary-looking that it did not seem possible
that any other animal lived there. Our valiant rooster trudged
along singing with that sonorous voice that we know he possesses.
Coming after a while to a very beautiful place, he said, ‘How
beautiful is this earth! Why have I not a companion with whom
I might converse ? Indeed, I would like to know how it was
that the world was created.’ After he had spoken a good deal,
a bull who was sleeping there jumped up and said, ‘O my friend,
little rooster, it is but a moment since you asked why you had
no companion. Now listen. I have hastened to meet you
because your words made me feel a deep pity for you.’ The
rooster immediately said, ‘How fine this is! Where were you
when you heard my voice ?’ Ah, my friend, I was resting under
a tree which you may notice near here, but as soon as I heard
your sighs I hastened to meet you that I might talk with you.
But before I begin, tell me what you would like to have me speak
of.’ ‘My friend, I would like to have you tell me something
of how the world was created,’ answered the rooster. The bull
answered, ‘Very well, my friend, I will commence.’
“ ‘When I was a young child, I remember very well how
my father would speak of this at night, that is, of the creation
of the world. Our ancestors created the world. And how did
2
16
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
they create it ? Our ancestor, on a certain day, took a piece of
clay to form something like a stone. That was the first day
. . . “'But,’ said the rooster, ‘there are many things to be
seen in this world that our ancestors must have formed, for in-
stance the water, that the plants might grow * ”
This third method is found only in Mexico, as far as I know,
and it may represent a peculiar historical development. I do
not believe, however, that it is connected with European influence.
Whether any of these types of plot elaboration are distinctive
of certain areas, only future research can definitely determine.
It is, however, quite likely, to judge from the complete absence
of the second type of plot elaboration in all trickster myths, that
certain myths are traditionally elaborated according to one type
and others according to another. The type of plot elaboration
may also be utilized in determining more precisely the source
for certain versions of a myth. For instance, where, as in the
case of the Omaha Haxige and the Winnebago Holy One, not
only details but likewise plot elaboration are identical, there
is a strong presumption that the versions belong together.
Finally, though it be significant neither of an area nor a tribe,
plot elaboration may at times be a characteristic of individual
raconteurs and thus acquire considerable importance in the study
of myth variants.
The three types of plot elaboration are, however, of impor-
tance not merely because they represent different ways of un-
folding a plot, but because they indirectly regulate the relation
of the component elements of the plot to one another. In the
first type, where the plot is unfolded by the actions of the dra-
matis personae, the interest centres naturally on the separate
actions as such, whereas in the second and third type, the interest
lies in the descriptions of the actions. The various episodes
and motifs are in the latter type described in groups and
when subsequently the actions are performed they have a
tendency to be slurred over. At the same time the various
incidents are described with a precision and detail in type I
not to be found in type II, because the interest culminates at
the end of each incident. This is not true for type II, where the
literary purpose seems to be to incite interest up to a certain
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY,
17
point and then arrest it. As a result, the various episodes are
practically told in two unequal narrations, neither of which is
complete in itself, for all interest in future elaboration of the
plot would cease if the first description were complete in itself
and, on the other hand, the second description of the episode-
in which the action is performed — being the denouement,
cannot be stressed in the same manner as the first. A few
examples will bring this out clearly.
Let us compare, for instance, the episodes described by the
old woman on pages 13 and 14 with the following elaboration.
"Shortly after the old woman had finished speaking, the
sister entered and, seeing her brother, addressed him, ‘Brother,
I have brought you something to eat.’ Then she handed him a
wooden bowl containing a large amount of liver as dry as bone.
He took the bowl and as soon as he noticed its contents, threw
it straight into the face of his sister, saying, T am not accustomed
to food of this kind. My brothers, who brought me up, never
gave me any food like this.’ His sister then left the lodge and,
it being supper-time, the old woman cooked him a supper of
vegetables. After he had finished his supper his sister came in
again. 'Tenth-son, your brother-in-law wants you to prepare
his sweatbath. He is accustomed to using a certain stone which
you will find on yonder hill and which he wishes you to get for
him/ Then she left the lodge. Her brother went to the hill and,
following his grandmother’s advice, ascended it on the side
opposite the stone, touched it with his stick, and it rolled rapidly
down the hill. He then carried it to his brother-in-law’s lodge,
but left it outside. Then he went to inform the latter that he
had brought the stone. His brother-in-law merely nodded and
told him to bring the bark for the lodge structure. This he
set out to do, and when he came near the tree he carefully took
a place of safety and touched the bark with his stick. It fell
with a terrific crash. Then he took as much of it as he wanted
and carried it to his brother-in-law. The latter merely nodded
and sent him to get the lodge-poles. When he came to the
place where the snakes were confined he took some tobacco
and threw it to them. They accepted it and allowed him
to seize them and carry them to his brother-in-law. Having
18
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
arrived there, he stuck their heads into the ground and twisted
their tails, thus forming the poles of the sweatlodge. Then
he put the bark over these poles and the structure was complete.
“As soon as everything was in readiness, his brother-in-law
told him to place the stone in the lodge. Instead of doing this,
however, he got up some excuse and went to see his grandmother.
She prepared something for him, rubbed his arms with it thor-
oughly, and told him to return to the sweatbath immediately
and do as his brother-in-law had asked. This he did and,
much to the disgust of the latter, the stone did not burn in the
least. Indeed he got so provoked that he said to him ironically,
‘You think you are a clever fellow, don't you ? I don’t want
to take a bath at all . . . . ’ ”
Let us also compare the episodes described on pages 11-13
with the following elaboration.
“They (the water-spirits) caused the water to rush out
with them, but when it rushed up to Holy One, he would shoot
it back with his bow and arrows and go on. Finally the
spirits said, ‘Let us quit, as we are losing men.’ Thus they said
after he had killed a great many of them.
“One day the snakes began to come, but Holy One put
on his shoes which he had kept handy, and began to step on their
heads. Finally the snakes said, ‘Come, let us stop, for many of
us are getting killed.’
“Again some time after this it began to snow, but as Holy
One had known of this, he was prepared and had plenty of wood
and food set aside. He was now entirely covered with snow,
as the snow had fallen to a great depth, and he could only see
through a little hole in the top of the lodge. This was his situa-
tion. Finally one day the spirits said, ‘It is about time that some-
one should go and see how he is getting along. So let us send
our brother-in-law there! So the son-in-law who was a little
bird went there. He came a second and a third time to see
how Holy One was getting along. When he came the fourth
time, he peeped in through the hole and he heard Holy One say,
‘O my, if I could only have a little bird to eat I might be able
to live four days longer. Why should I say that ? I have
my bowstring still. I will eat that as a last resort.' So saying,
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
19
he took the bow and laid it upon some coals of fire. Then the
little bird went home and reported that Holy One was eating
his bowstring and that he had said that he wanted to eat the
bird. ‘Aha! It is about time,’ they said. Then, getting a
large drove of buffaloes together, they tried to trample him to
death. But he had gone out and was waiting for them, so
when they came and trampled all over the place where he was
supposed to be staying, he stood to one side and shot them,
killing a great many. After a while the buffaloes said, ‘Come,
let us get away, for we are being killed very fast.’ Then they
stopped and went away. Then Holy One discovered that the
snow was only on his lodge, and that in other places the ground
was dry. Then he began dressing the buffaloes and drying them
and packing them away.
“One day it began to rain and it did not stop until the earth
was flooded. Then Holy One got into a metal boat that he had
prepared and went floating around. Suddenly he heard some-
thing rap against his boat. He took his metal oar and struck
the edge of his boat and cut the water-spirit in two. Soon
another one rapped against his boat and still another one, and
Holy One amused himself all this time cutting off water-spirits’
tails. After a while he heard something chewing at the bottom
of the boat, and he took his metal oar and swung it around
the bottom and up came a spirit muskrat cut in two. Again
and again this happened, but he kept on cutting them with his
oars, until finally the spirits said, ‘Come, let us quit, for we
are being killed fast.’ ”
In both these examples the repetition of the episode is stressed
far more weakly and in both cases additions have been made
in the repetition in order that it may be strong enough for the role
it has been called upon to play in the plot. In the first example
these additions are apparently intended to set off the characters
of the sister and the brother-in-law, while in the second example
they are intended to set off one particular episode — that of the
snow storm and the attempt to starve Holy One — probably
to prevent a monotonous repetition of the episodes narrated
before. In using the word “additions,” we lay ourselves open
to the legitimate criticism that the first narration of the episode
20
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
may at times represent a slurring and the repetition be the com*
plete description. This may happen, and we have an example
of it in the above snow storm episode. The complete description
of the episode would, however, have been quite impossible
in the first part of the plot and we have here an admirable illustra-
tion of how a certain type of plot elaboration does necessitate
an alteration in the form of an episode. Why however, is the
episode given completely when repeated ? In addition to the
literary reason given above, two other reasons are possible.
It may be a true episode and not merely a motif, as the pursuit
with water which is shot back and the snakes unquestionably
are, or the author-raconteur did not feel that he could take the
liberty of slurring it and, since it could not possibly be grouped
with the other motifs and episodes in the first part of the plot,
it had to be given afterwards. But why was the flood episode
slurred both in the first description and in the repetition ? It
cannot, therefore, be hesitancy on the part of the author-
raconteur which has preserved the complete account of the snow
storm, but really his realization of its necessity from a literary
view-point. A complete narration of the flood incident would
have been ridiculous and, consequently, it is not given. The
same point comes out admirably in the following episode of the
Holy One.
(It will be remembered that the old woman has told Holy
One that the hawk is to cure the wounded water-spirits).
“Then he (Holy One) went home. The next morning, at
noon, he went to the place that the old woman had mentioned as
the place where the hawk would come. Just at noon the hawk
came in sight. The hawk was singing:
‘Hawk, they went after you as a doctor.
Hawk, what will you do ?
Hawk, you may carry your gourd,
Hawk, you may carry your gourd,
Hawk, you may carry your gourd.
Aho!’
“Thus the hawk sang as he went along carrying on his back
a black sack with a gourd on top of it. As he turned from side
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
21
to side the gourd would rattle, keeping time with his song.
When the hawk came to the place where Holy One was waiting,
the latter said, ‘Grandfather, how pretty you look!’ The hawk
stopped and then Holy One said again, ‘Grandfather, why are
you travelling around ?’ He answered, ‘Grandson, the sons
of the chief have been shot with arrows and it is to their place
that I am going.’ ‘Grandfather, what will you do when you get
there ?’ ‘Well, grandson, I will go on singing as I have been doing
and when I get there they will open the door for me and I will
go in.’ ‘You look very pretty, grandfather. Would you mind
going back a little bit and coming again ? But turn from side to
side a little more and come down lower.’ ‘All right,’ said the
hawk, and he went back a little way and started again, singing
as he went. ‘Grandfather, make a few more turns and come
down a little bit lower,’ said Holy One. The hawk did as he
was told and came down a little lower. As he went by, Holy
One caught him and killed him. Then he skinned him and put
the skin on himself and acted exactly as the hawk had done.”
There are two literary reasons why this hawk episode
is repeated and given in detail. First, because Holy One has
to reach the home of the water-spirits in disguise; secondly,
because the episode of the killing of the water-spirits, owing
to its importance, has to be carefully motivated.
It is quite interesting to note the different way in which
the incidents have been grouped in the various tales cited as
illustrative of the second type of plot elaboration. In the tale
of Holy One, the whole plot is foretold in part by the wood-
pecker and in part by the old woman. In the case of the tale
of Haxige, it is only in one of J. O. Dorsey’s versions that a large
portion of the plot is foretold, while in the tale of “The man who
visited the Thunderbirds” only that part of the plot which refers
to the various tests of the hero is foretold. In the last tale the
old woman foretells the various tests in three instalments instead
of one. In a Mixe and Huave myth obtained in the state of
Oaxaca, Mexico, in two versions, the incidents are in one version
foretold in a single instalment and in the other in three. How
are we best to account for this variability ? It is certainly not
due to mere chance. It can, we believe, be best explained,
in the main, by literary considerations.
22
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
It is quite clear that the raconteur who told the version of
Holy One quoted above was desirous of not only carefully moti-
vating the main elements of the plot, but also of clearly centring
interest upon them, and he accomplished the latter by attracting
and at the same time arresting the attention of the listener.
Take, for example, the following starting point of the myth.
“Once there lived a person together with his younger brother.
One day the older brother said, ‘Brother, you need not fear any-
thing, for I am the holiest person in existence and am very power-
ful.’
“One day, all the spirits in the heavens and all the spirits
on earth held a council about this man, because he had said
he was the only holy person. There was a lake near his place
and a water-spirit village not far off. The water-spirits were
the people chosen to do the deed (i.e., kill the younger brother).
Holy One did not know of this at all.
“One day his younger brother did not return and Holy One
waited for him in vain. Then he went in search of him. During
his search he wept and wherever he stopped and wept, there a
large lake would be formed from his tears. Whenever he sobbed,
the hills would tumble down and valleys would form in their
place.”
Here we have the initial incident, the death of Holy One’s
brother, stated in the briefest and barest manner. Our ra-
conteur was apparently not interested in particularly motivating
this episode. He was, however, concerned with the search for
the murderers, as can be seen by the following detail.
“In his search he came across the wolf. Said he to the wolf,
‘Little brother, do you happen to know anything about my brother
who is lost ? I feel that he is dead somewhere.’ Then the
wolf said, ‘Brother, I go all over the earth, but I have no knowl-
edge of him.’ ‘All right, all right,’ said the Holy One, and started
to walk away. Just then the wolf said, ‘Holy One, I am not the
one to look after your brother.’ ‘Oh,’ said Holy One, ‘is that
it ?' and raced after him. The wolf ran with all his might but
Holy One overtook him, and, taking his bow, broke open his
jaws and killed him, saying, ‘I suppose you too took part in the
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
23
conspiracy against me.’ Then he hung him on a tree and went
on.
"As he was going along he came across the fox and he ad-
dressed him, saying, 'Little brother, I feel that something has
befallen my brother. Now you are a cunning fellow; perhaps
you know something of his whereabouts.’ Then the fox re-
plied, ‘Brother, I go all over the earth, but I have not heard
anything about him.’ Then Holy One started to walk away,
but just then the fox said, ‘Holy One, I am not supposed to take
care of your brother.’ Then he ran away. ‘Ho’, said Holy
One, ‘is that it ? I suppose you too are one of those who con-
spired against me.’ Then he ran after the fox, overtook him,
broke open his jaws, and killed him, hanging his body on a tree.
‘‘Thus he went along encountering different animals. The
next one he met was the raven and he addressed him, saying,
‘Little brother, you are a cunning fellow; perhaps you know what
has befallen my brother ?’ ‘Brother,’ said the raven, ‘I roam all
over the world and the heavens, but I have not seen your brother.’
Then, as Holy One started to go away, the raven said, ‘Holy
One, I am not supposed to take care of your brother.’ There-
upon Holy One said, ‘What! you little rascal. I suppose that
even such little fellows as you were present at the conspiracy.’
Then he knocked him down just as he started to fly away. He
pulled his jaws open and hung him on a tree.
‘‘It was now getting toward evening and Holy One was going
home. On the way home a little bird crossed his path, almost
hitting him in the face. Again and again this happened. The
fourth time the bird did it Holy One said, ‘Ho!’ and looked up
to see who it was. It was the woodpecker. Then Holy One
said, ‘I wanted to cry here in peace, but what little bird is it
that peeks into my face ?’ Then the woodpecker said, ‘Oh, I
have news for you, my grandson.’ ‘My, my, said Holy One,
‘I did not know it was you, grandmother, or I would not have said
that. Please do tell me all you know and I will give you my paint
so that you can paint your face, and my awl so that you can use
it for your bill.’ ‘All right, grandson, your brother is used as a
door-flap by the chief of the water-spirits, who lives yonder in
the lake near your place. Every one of the spirits was called
24
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
to the council in order to conspire against you, but my husband
and myself were not invited, and that is why I am telling you
this. Furthermore, at the sand-bar south of the lake is a place
where some of the water-spirits go to bask in the sun on nice
days.' ‘Grandmother, it is good,’ said Holy One, and he took
the paint which was red and painted the woodpecker’s face and
then took his awl and placed it in her bill. Thereupon she flew
away to a hardwood tree and pecked into it, sending her bill
clear through. She felt very proud of her new bill.”
The disguise of Holy One and the wounding of the
water-spirits follows, then the meeting with the old woman
then the various incidents of which she has spoken, and finally
Holy One’s attempt to restore his brother to life. The motiva-
tion of the search and the incidents connected with the water-
spirits’ pursuit of Holy One occupies fully one-half of the entire
tale. The incident of the death of the brother and the attempt
to restore him to life have become dwarfed. The type of plot
elaboration demanded first a heaping up of incidents to be fore-
told and then their actual occurrence, and this naturally crowded
out other things. In both versions of the Haxige tale 1 (12) the
episode of the buzzard hurrying to cure the wounded water-
spirits is strongly stressed and he tells Haxige all that the latter
desires to know about the whereabouts of the wounded animals
and how to approach them, but the pursuit of Haxige, after he
has killed the water-spirits, is dismissed in the following manner.
“They went homeward to attack him. When they had
come very close to their home, Haxige went rushing homeward,
carrying his brother on his arm. . . . But though they
became all kinds of animals, they did not overtake Haxige and
his brother. ‘There is cause for anger! Make ye an effort.
You will be apt to fail,’ said they. They went along after him.
It happened that Haxige, when on his way home, drew near a
spring which boiled up repeatedly. It was a very dense forest
at the foot of a cliff, a very high hill, whose perpendicular sur-
face was concave. ‘Do ye make an effort. You have almost
overtaken him,’ said they. At length Haxige became a bullet.
1 J. O. Dorsey, ibid., pp. 226-253.
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
25
He had gone headlong into the water, ‘tcu.’ In a moment he
made himself become a stone beneath the water. And they went
homeward, having failed in attacking him. . . .**
(In the second version Haxige is not pursued at all).
The role of the old woman, which is so important in Holy
One, has become changed in the following manner in Haxige:
“Haxige departed. At length there was an aged beaver-
woman making a boat. ‘Hu,’ said she, ‘there is a very strong
Haxige odor.’ ‘Old woman, there is no cause for complaint, as
his brother was killed by the water-spirits, that Haxige is wander-
ing around at random and is killing himself by crying,’ said he.
‘Old woman, are you not indeed making a boat ?’ said Haxige.
‘Yes. Have you not been hearing it up to this time ?’ said the
old woman. ‘As his younger brother was killed, Haxige killed
two of the chief water-monsters; and as they have failed to kill
him, they have threatened to make the whole earth full of water.
And I am making a dug-out for myself,’ said she. He said as
follows: ‘Old woman, Haxige ever wishes to have an abundance
of sense. He has made a dug-out and if he pile up wood at the
bow, filling the bottom with earth, he will sit by a fire blazing
very brightly; and, seizing the animals that come floating along,
he will continue eating them.’ ‘Even if they fail so, they speak
of making an abundance of snakes on the earth,’ said the old
woman. ‘He will put shells of red-breasted turtles on his feet
and will cover his hands in like manner. So when the snakes come
to bite, having made a thick skin for himself, he will continue to
crush in their heads by treading on them.’ . . . ‘Even if
they fail so, they threaten to make darkness over the whole earth.
They say that if he get himself in a gorge unawares, he will die
from the fall,’ said the old woman. . . . ‘Old woman, when
he sits in a gorge and fills it with wood, he will sit by a very good
fire. What animal reaches him by leaping, will lie dead from the
fall, and he will take it and sit eating it.’ ‘Even if they fail so,
they threaten to make a deep snow over the whole earth. They
say that he will die from the snow that will press down on him,’
said she. ‘Having made a very large grass-lodge, he will make a
very high pile of wood for himself, and then he will make snow-
shoes. What animals get buried unawares in the deep snow,
26
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. l6.
having killed them at his pleasure, he will stand eating them,’
said Haxige. ‘What sort of person are you that you despise
Haxige ?’ he said, and, crushing her head many times with an
axe, he killed her.”
(In the second version the old woman is given far less space.)
Both versions of the tale practically end with the old woman's
narration. None of the things she speaks of take place. Why,
then, does the old woman appear and speak of these things ?
The best answ r er seems to be that they originally formed incidents
of the tale, as it was told among the Omaha, and that their simple
enumeration is a secondary feature that developed in conse-
quence of the prominence of the type of plot development used.
However, the prominence of this type of plot development is
not due to any general preference on the part of the raconteur
but apparently to his artistic belief that in such a way certain
episodes in his plot could best be motivated.
Summing up, we can say that a certain amount of the
variability found in versions of the same myth or tale is due to
the influence of different types of plot elaboration, which in
turn is due to the artistic individuality of the raconteur.
DRAMATIS PERSONS.
The nature of the actors in myths has, we know, played a
considerable part in discussions. The German school sought to
interpret them all as impersonations of the forces of nature.
We will not go into an analysis of their point of view, but instead
approach the problem in another way. To what extent, let us
inquire, is the specific character of the actor essential to the plot ?
Would it make any difference, for instance, if we substituted
one character for another ? In other words, what we will try
to examine is whether the nature of the actor and his acts flow
from the myth-content or not. Let us look at a few examples.
No one would, for instance, hesitate to identify the Haxige
myth given above with the Holy One, merely because the Omaha
have the duck and the buzzard where the Winnebago have the old
woman (muskrat) and the hawk. It seems, rather, reasonable
to suppose that the exact animal nature of these intermediaries is
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
27
of little importance, as far as the story itself is concerned, al-
though it may be of importance in studying the diffusion of
versions. The fact that in these two myths the animals that
act as intermediaries, although different, belong to the same type,
being water animals in the one case and birds of prey in the other,
indicates, in all probability, that the Omaha and Winnebago
versions are rather closely related.
If, again, in identical plots the heroes are regarded as human
beings until the very end of the myth, where we discover that
they are really either animals or celestial objects, it does not
disturb us if the explanation is clearly an after-thought. If,
however, in the plot itself there are indications of the animal or
celestial nature of the hero, are we to regard his human nature
as secondary or not ? It is quite likely that if a tendency to
identify heroes with stars, for instance, exists that it would
influence the type of actions he performs. On the other hand, the
nature of an originally celestial hero might become so attenuated
that but for the survival of certain “celestial” episodes, it mer-
ges completely into a human being. Perhaps the voracious hero
who turns out to be the child of the sun and moon represents such
a merging of celestial into human hero. It is naturally rather
difficult to be certain of the latter process, whereas for the
former, the extension of a specific interpretation over all the
features of a hero’s activities, examples can be easily found, as
the following will show.
The Winnebago have a rather popular myth called “Brother
and Sister,” with the following plot: A man living with his sister
is one day challenged to a fight by a stranger and defeated.
His head is then cut off and taken away. His body goes on
living, however, and is taken care of by his sister. His sister
gives birth to two boys who succeed in killing the conqueror of
their uncle and restore the head to the latter's body. Two
versions of this myth were obtained. Version A is summarized
above; version B was identical with that of A, but the uncle is
supposed to be the evening star, the mother the moon, the
father the sun, and the children show their parentage in the dis-
guises they assume, such as that of vibrating light and heat.
At the same time, the boys have become identified with the twins
28
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
who play so great a part in Winnebago mythology, and the
entire myth appears in an epic about their adventures. Indeed
it may very well be that originally it was connected with them.
In the above we have, then, a clear illustration of how the
heroes of a certain myth have been consistently interpreted in
a certain way and how figures like the twins, who could by no
manner of means ever be regarded as celestial beings, have been
remoulded so as to fit into the general scheme. Now, such a
process, it would be fair to assume, must have occurred often,
and a careful study and analysis of a body of myths that show
a marked preference for "celestial’ ’ interpretations, like the
Pawnee, would probably bring to light a large number of in-
stances.
In addition to the above causes for variation, one other may
be pointed out. In every cultural area or tribe, certain animals
or beings have become traditionally associated with certain
definite characteristics; one is the fool, another the sloven, a
third the humorist, a fourth the boaster, a fifth the fop, a sixth
the gossip, etc. Whenever these respective characters are
needed, they are supplied from the stock-in-trade of the particu-
lar tribe. If a certain myth is borrowed, certain figures are,
therefore, likely to be displaced even if the myth content is in
no way altered.
It must be quite clear, then, from the above discussion, that
neither the animal, human, or celestial nature of the hero,
nor the type or kind of his activities can throw much light on the
history of a given myth; that the essential thing to grasp is
that to-day the myth is a literary unit that requires a hero whose
specific nature and activities will be determined by a large
number of factors; that these factors are, in the main, the char-
acteristics of a hero as told by different families in a tribe, the
influence of some raconteur, and, lastly, the traditional associa-
tion of certain figures with definite traits, episodes, and motifs.
THE EPISODES.
We have, up to the present, been treating of the general
plot of the myth analytically, separated from those other ele-
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
29
ments that go to form the entire myth-complex. We shall now
treat the episodes in the same manner.
Would we equate two myths merely on the basis of similarity
in certain episodes ? Given a general culture-area such as that of
the Woodlands or Woodland-Plains, would similarity in certain
of the episodes be sufficient to identify two myths ? The answer
to this question is of fundamental importance.
When, indeed, are two episodes identical ? When the general
plot is the same or when the plot plus its motivation is the same ?
Generally speaking, we seem to regard the similarity of the plot
as sufficient. Take, for example, the well-known episode of
the trickster and the ducks he wishes to capture. Here the
episode consists of the tying of the ducks’ legs. That is the
essential object. How it is accomplished varies according to
the version obtained. In spite of the variability of the moti-
vation, we feel confident, nevertheless, that we are always
dealing with the same episode. Or, take the episode of the hero
in “Haxige” and “Holy One” and the animal who informs
him what has become of his brother. Here the essential thing
is that the hero obtain the required information. How he act-
ually obtains it varies widely. The divergence in motivation
may bring in a large amount of detail of a different kind for each
version, so that externally the episodes may appear quite dif-
ferent. If, for instance, the information is obtained from the
woodpecker, the author-raconteur may bring in the whole story
of how the woodpecker obtained his present characteristics,
whereas if he obtained it from some animal who had been slighted
by those who had killed the hero’s brother, the whole story
of how he had been insulted might be brought in.
Finally, let us take the Mexican-Indian tale of the rabbit
committing depredations on the chile-field of an old woman.
The essential feature of the plot is how to catch the rabbit and
drive him away. This, according to many versions of the tale,
is accomplished by distributing tar-baby decoys over the field.
From a New Mexican informant, however, I obtained a version
in which the rabbit was driven away by the owner of the chile-
field paying insects to crawl into the rabbit’s anus. The tar-baby
as a decoy, on the other hand, I found in a Mexican-Zapotecan
version of Grimm’s story of the Golden Apple tree.
30
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
No further illustrations are needed. They can be found in
any collection of North American myths. What we discover
in every case is that the motivation of the episode is extremely
variable and that the constant element is always the plot.
THE MOTIFS.
The motifs form the last unit into which the myth-complex
can be analytically separated. Every cultural area seems to have
a large although by no means unlimited assortment. The ex-
treme variability with which one, then another, is used in dif-
ferent versions of the same myth seems difficult to explain unless
we assume that they are more or less free elements whose use
depends in some respects on traditional association with certain
episodes or actors, but mainly on the selective powers exercised
by the author-raconteur and on the psychological-literary
necessities of the plot.
Summing up the results of our inquiry into the nature of the
myth-complex, we may say that there are, broadly speaking,
five units; the type of plot elaboration, the dramatis personae,
the episodes, the motivation of the episodes, and the
motifs; that one or more of these may vary in different
versions of the same myth; and that, finally, the main
problem we have to solve is to explain this variability.
We have sought to indicate that the explanation lay in the
manifold literary tendencies at work, particularly in the literary
individuality of the author-raconteur. The proof of our conten-
tion we will furnish in detail in another part of this essay.
THE MYTH-COMPLEX AS A UNIT.
We have discussed in the above sections the separate units
of the myth-complex. Our separation was, however, admittedly
arbitrary except from a purely analytical point of view. Let us
now, therefore, look at the myth-complex as a unit.
If we examine a number of myths, such as the Trickster
cycle of the Winnebago, the Wrsa'ka* cycle of the Fox, the
Nenebojo cycle of the Ojibwa, and the Coyote cycle of the Mexi-
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
31
can Indians, and compare them with the Twin cycle of the
Winnebago, the Wi-sa'ka® myth of the origin of the Fox Midewi-
win, the cycle of Haxige of the Omaha, and with numerous
origin myths of ceremonials, a great difference will be found to
exist in the way in which the different elements of the myth-
complex have been welded together.
In the Trickster cycle of the Winnebago and of the Ojibwa
of southeastern Ontario and in the Fox Wrsa'ka* cycle there is
practically no general plot, but merely a sequence of episodes
strung together either without a connecting link or by means
of a very vague general theme. Frequently this theme consists
simply in regarding the episodes as various stages in a journey.
Such, for instance, is the case in the Winnebago cycle and in the
Nenebojo cycle of southeastern Ontario. In the Mississauga
version the theme is the bungling host. The latter is also found
in the Wi-sa'ka a cycle. Whatever unity is found in this last-
mentioned cycle consists in the characteristics of the host.
Each episode is in itself a unit with this proviso — that some are
probably grouped together, in the minds of the people, with other
themes, different heroes, and different psychological-literary
situations.
In order to test the constancy of the association of a definite
series of episodes in a given story, I had two brothers, among the
Winnebago, tell me a myth which they had both derived from
the same source, and subsequently I had an individual tell me
the same myth at different intervals. The result showed a
marked variability in the selections of the episodes.
Such is the situation we find in the general trickster cycles.
The moment, however, we turn to myths like that of the Winne-
bago 4 Twins” and the others mentioned above which have be-
come associated with rituals, an entirely different condition con-
fronts us. There is, first, a more or less marked unity of plot.
Episodes are held together by reference to some literary unit,
actions are fairly well motivated, and there is a gradual unfolding
of a plot. It is quite apparent immediately that we are dealing
with a literary unit. Take for example the Twin cycle. It
consists of more than half a dozen myths, but they have, on
the whole, been so artistically woven together by general themes,
3
32
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
unity in the characterization of the heroes and their activities,
and by skilful motivation, that one hardly realizes the mosaic
nature of the whole. We are here clearly in the presence of an
epic. I secured practically all the separate myths found in the
epic separately, and a comparison of these separate versions
with the versions in the epic showed most illuminatingly the
manner in which the author of the epic had subordinated the
separate elements of his tale to the unity of the plot.
The same evidence of literary remodelling is to be seen in
the majority of origin myths of rituals. Here even the loose
Trickster cycle has become unified and coherent. Compare in
this respect the figure of the hare in the Winnebago Hare cycle
in general with the same figure in the origin myth of the Medicine-
Lodge, or that of the Fox Wi*sa'ka a in the Trickster cycle with
the same figure in the origin myth of the Midewiwin.
It will, I hope, be understood that the unity predicated of
these versions is not perfect. As a matter of fact, if we look
at these myths in great detail and analyse them in the way we
are accustomed to analyse our own literary productions, a con-
siderable amount of the unity disappears. The motivation is
not always skilful, sometimes indeed there is no motivation at
all, and on the other hand certain episodes, motifs, themes, and
characterizations seem at variance with the general character of
the plot or the hero. Occasionally one finds a myth perfect from
the literary point of view, that is, our literary point of view . 1
As such, for instance, I regard the Winnebago myth of “The
Traveller.” Very few perfect ones, however, were obtained.
In the main we find quite a large number of defects of detail
interfering with the unity of the plot. It is, however, just these
defects that are of the greatest significance in a discussion of
Indian mythology, as we will now try to show.
Many of the myths obtained in North America are, as we
have seen, found in two distinct types of versions, one in which
they have not, to any appreciable extent, been subjected to
1 The Indian's point of view differs, of course, markedly from our own in a number of re-
spects. These will be discussed in the section on "The novelette as remodelled by the author-
raconteur.” It should, however, be borne in mind that in many essential respects the art
of story-telling is alike among all mankind.
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
33
literary workmanship and one in which they have. What signi-
ficance is there in the existence of these two types ? Why has
not one, for instance, displaced the other, and what exactly is
the relation of the one to the other ? It seems to me that the
answer to this question is simple, the one represents the myth as
folk-lore, the other as literature. The one is static, of the nature
of formulae toward which the individual takes a passive attitude;
the other is dynamic, of the nature of free elements with which a
specially gifted individual plays and which he endeavours to weld
into a literary unit. In other words, the first type of version
represents our fairy tale. Fairy tales we know have no real
plot, but consist of a series of incidents strung together in an
indefinite way. All the incidents, themes, and motifs which
belong to the general foikloristic background are to be found in
them. Owing to the fact that they have become largely for-
mulaic in character, they are handed down in much the same
way from generation to generation.
The relation of the myth as such to the myth as novelette is a
very direct one. J ust as among the Greeks, so among the Indians,
the main subject matter of their literature is based on their my-
thology. There is, it is true, a not inconsiderable bodvofreal tales
among the Indians, consisting of specific happenings that have been
cast into a literary mould, but with these we have no concern here.
However, in thus bodily taking over their mythology for their
literary themes, the Indian author-raconteurs took with them a
large amount of the lack of coherence and poor motivation of the
myths and only in cases of fairly perfect workmanship has this
been eliminated. Similar things have taken place in our own
literature. In the dramas of Shakespeare, especially in his early
work, we find at times a number of situations that are quite
out of place and poorly motivated, explained when recourse is
had to the sources from which he drew his plots . 1
The novelette, then, is generally only a myth cast in an im-
perfect literary mould. The contrast between the myth and its
novelette form is not anything like as great as that which existed,
1 Two such situations come to my mind: one, the seemingly incongruous fact that Romeo
is represented as being in love when the play opens; the second, Hamlet’s failure to kill his
uncle when he finds him in prayer. Both these situations are poorly motivated and can be
most intelligibly explained when the original sources of the plots are consulted.
34
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
for instance, between Greek mythology and the subject-matter
of the Greek plays. Just as among the latter, however, so among
the Indians, incidents, episodes, etc., have in the hands of skilful
author-raconteurs become entirely subordinated to a general
theme. The Wrath of Achilles finds its counterpart in the Twins’
Search for their Blankets, in the Enmity of the Water-spirit
and the Thunderbird, and in the Hare’s Succour of the Human
Race.
It is perhaps along these lines — the lack of complete liter-
ary remodelling — that the figure of the trickster can best be
explained. Assuming the original existence of a series of clown-
ish adventures grouped around an indefinite personage, all that
is needed for an understanding of the trickster’s r61e in North
America, with its apparent contradictions of buffoon and bene-
factor, is to imagine a partial literary remodelling of the older
myth. It is quite clear from myth collections made among the
Winnebago, Sauk and Fox, Ojibw'a,and others that Wak'djuk'a-'ga,
Wi'sa'kS.®, and Nenebojo have, in the main, become different
personages in the ritualistic myths. They have become con-
scious benefactors. But as this character has merely been added
to the older conception without any systematic attempt having
been made always to harmonize the older with the newer con-
ception, a peculiar incongruity has resulted which has sorely
puzzled mythologists. The interpretation I have ventured to
give here explains, it seems to me, the nature and significance of
this incongruity in conception in a simple and adequate manner
and does not leave as many inexplicable features as the interpre-
tations of Brinton and Boas.
Although I have rather insisted upon the association of the
trickster with a ritual as the reason for the development of his
r61e as benefactor, such a rdle may have developed in a number of
other ways. The possibility for such a growth is given in the
fact that the trickster is one of the very oldest figures in the myth-
ology of the human race and must have, in almost all cases,
become identified with the race of heroes and creators.
In speaking before of the myth as static, as a cultural ele-
ment toward which the individual assumed a passive attitude, we
did not have in mind so much the myth as the myth elements.
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
35
There are innumerable variants of the trickster cycle, but this
variability in the selection of episodes, motifs, dramatis personae,
etc., is not really conditioned by literary considerations. It is
due mainly to two facts; first, to a lack of definite association
between episodes and motifs, it often being of little consequence
what particular ones are selected from the vast stock-in-trade of
any given folkloristic background; and, secondly, to borrowing
both from within the tribe itself and from without. What we
find here are passive accretions, losses, readjustments, etc., not
really comparable to the conscious subordination of the parts
to the whole or to the specific '‘thematic” developments of liter-
ary productions . 1
THE MYTH AS TRANSMITTED.
The Indian has a firm belief in the existence of a “correct’*
version for each myth, which seems to evidence itself in his re-
fusal to tell a myth unless he knows it perfectly. The moment
1 Swanton has discussed some of these problems in his paper entitled "Some practical
aspects of the study of myths,” Joum. of American Folk-Lore, Vol. XXIII, pp. 5,6, in a general
but very suggestive manner. He says, “Broadly we may distinguish between those myths
which appear to be the special property of the people among whom they are found, and those
which may be shown to be exotic. When a myth is learned by an individual belonging to
another tribe, but still located in the country from which it was obtained, we have simple repe-
tition of that myth. When, however, it is applied to some place or people within the limits
of the tribe borrowing, it may be said to be 'adopted;' and, if the scene of it is laid at some
particular place, it may be said to be ‘relocalized.’ When it is taken into an older story of the
tribe borrowing it, we have ‘incorporation.’ This incorporation may be due to one of several
causes. Stories referring to the origin of any natural feature or custom would by a Haida
or Tlingit naturally be incorporated into the Raven story, because the larger number of such
stories are gathered there. In other cases two stories are combined merely because they present
certain superficial similarities, and we then have ‘combination on account of similars.’ Two
stories resembling each other closely may in certain details become fused and reduced to one,
or there may be ‘transfusion of elements' between them. In still another case we have a kind
of ‘myth metathesis,’ the hero of one narrative having become a monster overcome by the
hero in the other. 'Alteration of motive’ occurs where a myth told for one purpose in one place
Is given a different explanation in another, here accounting for a certain crest, there for a place
name, a custom, or the origin of a secret society. ‘Mythification’ might be applied to that
presented by an historical Haida war-story into which has been implanted the common mythic
story of a man ascending to the sky-world and throwing down timbers or coals thence. More
important is the process by which a tale is rendered more and more consistent either (1) to
agree with altered tribal circumstances, or (2) to keep pace with a rising level of intelligence and
a consequently greater demand for consistency. The first of these is that process which gives
rise to many folk-etymologies, explanations of names and things which have nothing to do
with their real origin; while the second results in those elaborate attempts to explain myths
as allegorical representations of real events. ‘Ritualization of myths’ takes place when an
attempt Is made to weave together the sacred legends into a consistent tribal, clan, or society
story, the telling of which is frequently accompanied by external ceremonies. . .
36
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
we try, however, to control this belief by comparing different
versions of the same myth, this belief does not seem justified.
As a matter of fact, among the Winnebago I have called an
informant’s attention to the difference between his version and
another one obtained and he expressed no surprise, saying that
there were different ways of telling this particular myth, depend-
ing upon the band in the Medicine-Dance to which he belonged.
Such instances as this make it seem probable that the Indian
does not really postulate a tribal version, but one associated with
much smaller units. Among tribes living in definite village groups
we might expect to have a myth vary from village to village;
among other tribes from camp to camp or even from family
to family. The question that we have to answer then is how,
in myth collections obtained to-day, we are to interpret our
variants. Let us first discuss intertribal variants.
There seems to be little doubt that a number of distinct
myth -centres existed in North America, between which dif-
fusion has taken place from time immemorial. In addition to
these large centres there also grew up smaller areas with charac-
teristic ways of telling certain myths and with a marked tendency
toward grouping together certain episodes, toward using certain
motifs and dramatis personae, and even, it may be said, toward
employing a definite type of plot elaboration. It is with these
smaller centres and the variability within them, that we wish to
deal specifically. Dixon has summarized the data for one such
area in his paper entitled “The Mythology of the Central and
Eastern Algonkins,” and as it is of considerable importance for
our discussion, we will quote it in extenso . 1
“At the outset we may divide the whole mass of these
tales into two parts — those which form a more or less connected
series recounting the birth and adventures of the two brothers,
ending with the deluge and the re-creation of the world; and,
on the other hand, those other tales which recount the exploits
of the culture-hero alone, some of which are of the trickster
type.
“Taking this more or less connected cycle, we may separate
it, for purposes of comparison, into four portions — the origin
1 Journal of American Folk-Lore, Vol. XXII, pp. 6-8.
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
37
and birth of the hero and his brother or brothers, the brother’s
death, the deluge, and the re-creation of the world. As a whole,
the cycle as told shows two contrasting forms, an Eastern and a
Western. Considering the latter of these, it is evident, that so
far as the first part is concerned, there is considerable variation.
The Ojibwa, Menominee, Pottawatomi and Ottawa have in
common two incidents of the virgin or abnormal birth and the
death of the mother. These features are lacking in the Fox,
while there are no tales relative to the origin of the culture-hero
given from the Cree and Saulteaux. While the Ojibwa, Menomi-
nee and Ottawa agree in there being but two brothers, Fox and
Pottawatomi both speak of four. Menominee and Ottawa agree
in associating the younger brother with the wolf, whereas the
former stands alone in having one of the brothers die at birth,
to be later resuscitated as a companion for the other. The
most noteworthy difference, however, in this first portion of the
cycle, lies in the appearance among the Pottawatomi and Ottawa
of the Flintman as one of the brothers: of his opposition and
enmity to the culture-hero; and final destruction by the latter,
as a result of what may be called the “deceitful confidence.”
These various elements are typically Iroquoian, and are found
most fully developed, apparently among the Wyandot-Huron,
“The second part of the cycle also shows variety. Among
the Menominee and Pottawatomi, the Ojibwa and the Ottawa,
the culture-hero’s brother is killed by evil water-frequenting
manitous, when the brother, neglecting his elder brother’s warn-
ing, crosses a lake on the ice. The Menominee and Pottawatomi
agree in the return of the brother in the form of a ghost, and in
his departure westward to be the guardian of the land of the dead.
These elements do not appear in the Ojibwa or Ottawa, however.
A somewhat similar combination appears in the Fox, where the
incident of the lake does not occur, the manitous killing the cul-
ture-hero’s brother, after decoying him away to a distance.
The incident of the ghost’s return is, however, present. The
affiliation of the Cree-Saulteaux in this portion of the cycle
is again unknown, for lack of data.
“For the third part there is fuller material, as, although
the incidents are not available from the Pottawatomi, both
38
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
Cree and Saulteaux may here be taken account of. As far as
regards the incident of the “bird informant” Cree, Saulteaux,
Ojibwa and Fox stand together. In the “stump disguise”
and the wounding of the manitous, all are in accord except
the Fox, which here has the unique incident of the floating
spider-web. The Menominee has also a special incident in the
introduction of the ball game. In the impersonation of the Frog
shaman by the culture-hero, and his subsequent completion of
the revenge by killing the manitous, all are in accord except the
Ottawa, which lacks this incident. All in all, the Cree, Saulteaux,
Ojibwa, and Menominee are in closest agreement in this part of
the cycle.
“In the essential elements of the deluge, the escape from it,
the “earth -diver” and the reconstruction of the world, all the
tribes are in substantial accord. The Menominee-Ojibwa alone
have the incident of the stretching tree, and the Cree-Ojibwa
alone tell of the measuring of the new earth by the wolf. Taken
as a whole, all the members of the Western and Central groups
form a fairly accordant body. The Fox, having several unique
features, stands somewhat apart, as does the Pottawatomi, by
reason of its strong Iroquoian element.
“Turning now to the Eastern tribes, it appears at a glance
that there is little in common with the tribes just discussed.
There is here the incident of the abnormal birth, but this is also
found among the Iroquois and widely elsewhere. Among
the Abnaki there is the association of the culture-hero’s brother
with the wolf, but all the remainder of the cycle is missing.
The only other points of contact with the cycle as described,
lie in the opposition of the two brothers, and the slaying of one
by the other as a result of the “deceitful confidence.” These
incidents are, however, typically Iroquoian, and are found only
in the Ottawa and Pottawatomi farther west. Practically,
therefore, we may say that the cycle found in fairly accordant
form through the west is here wholly lacking.
“In a consideration of the other incidents relating to the
culture-hero, we unfortunately have little information relating
to the Pottawatomi or the tribes of the central group, and must
thus confine the comparisons largely to the other western tribes
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
39
and those of the east. Of incidents not falling into the con-
nected cycle just discussed, there are about eighteen, an investi-
gation of whose distribution reveals the following points. About
half of these, including such as the “hoodwinked dancers,”
“stolen feast,” “rolling rock,” “body punished,” “reflection
devices,” “tree holds prisoner,” and “sun trap,” are common to
a group composed of the Cree, Saulteaux, Fox, and Menominee,
the Ojibwa having but three out of eight. The other half,
including the “wolf companions,” “Jonah,” “Hippogrif,”
"caught by the head,” “visit to the culture-hero,” and “bungling
host,” are common to the group made up of the Saulteaux,
Ojibwa, Fox, and Menominee. In other words, the Saulteaux-
Menominee-Fox have a series of about eighteen incidents in
common, one-half of which are also found among the Cree,
and the other half among the Ojibwa.
“With the Eastern group there is almost as slight an agree-
ment in the class of incidents as in the connected cycle. Four
incidents only are found to agree — the “hoodwinked dancers,”
the “rolling rock,” “visit to the culture-hero,” and the “bungling
host.” The latter, at least, is of such wide distribution that its
importance in this case may be regarded as slight.”
The variability in the versions of this Two-Brother myth
is, after all, inconsiderable. Let us see of what type they are.
We have first the abnormal birth of the hero, present in some and
absent in others; then a variability in the number of dramatis
personae and in the nature of their relation to one another,
whether friendly or inimical; third, differences in the fate of the
brother; and fourth, differences in the nature of the hero’s dis-
guise when seeking revenge.
The abnormal birth is part of the usual formula for the hero.
It may, however, disappear if of little importance for his char-
acterization. In the Fox version used by Dixon we are dealing
with a ritualistic myth that has undergone marked literary
remodelling where the author-raconteur seems to have had two
marked themes, revenge for the death of the hero’s brother, and
the succour of the human race, and everything has been subor-
dinated to these themes. The retention of the entire folk-lore
hero formula was quite unnecessary. Among the Winnebago,
40
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
in the origin myth of the Medicine Dance, the hero, although
regarded as a creation of Earthmaker, still retains in vestigial
form this part of the old hero formula, although it has been
skillfully motivated.
In the death of the mother we are probably dealing with the
persistence of a motif that is of considerable importance in the
separate myth of the birth of Nenebojo. There is also present
an evident assimilation here with the Twin myth, where the
mother is generally killed by an ogre. We may also be dealing
with part of the hero formula, for not only must the hero be born
of a virgin, but he must be born before his time, generally in
seven months with the consequent death of his mother.
The variability in the number of heroes is probably due to
a partial confusion of this myth with the independent myth
of the birth of the hero, where he is regarded as one of the four
cardinal points. It is the confusion with the same myth that
probably accounts for the change from a friendly to an inimical
attitude of the heroes.
The association of the brother with the land of the dead
is constant for all these tribes, it having been recently found
among the Ojibwa too, but apparently only among those tribes
where a ritual is connected with it, like the Menominee, Pot-
tawatami, Fox, and Winnebago, is it particularly motivated.
That the hero’s disguise should in all but one case be a
“stump,” shows how closely this particular motif was associated
with the Two-Brother myth in this particular area.
Summing up, we may say that we are dealing here with a
version of the Two-Brother myth that is fairly constant within
a restricted area, that the differences found are of an accidental
nature or are connected either with the incomplete use of the
hero formula or with ritualistic associations. Nowhere, the
Fox version always excepted, have they resulted from attempts
at literary remodelling.
All the foregoing changes have arisen during the trans-
mission of the myth from one generation to another, and we
may, therefore, assume that in the transmission of this particular
version of a folk-lore-myth, not only has the plot been kept
practically intact in most of its details, but that even a constancy
LITERARY ASPECTS OP NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
41
may exist in the details and the sequence of the episodes and
motifs. Such a fixity in the associations of plot, episodes,
and motifs, with an apparent absence of literary remodelling,
is, however, not common. We would ordinarily expect to find
only a few episodes or motifs definitely associated, as in the differ-
ent folk-lore versions of the “Twins.”
THE NOVELETTE AS TRANSMITTED.
The literary remodelling of the folk-lore myth or novelette,
as we will now call it, has certainly gone on for many generations,
longer in some tribes, of course, and shorter in others. A num-
ber of myth versions will consequently represent in reality
novelettes that have deviated so far from the original folk-lore-
myth on which they were based that it is as impossible to re-
construct this original myth with their help, as it would be to
reconstruct the primitive versions of the Greek myths from the
literary versions known to us. However, we are much better
off among the Indians than among the Greeks in this respect —
that folk-lore versions of the myths have been transmitted with
which these literary versions may be, at times, compared.
We have, then, one means of determining, within certain limits,
the changes a novelette has undergone. The study of these
changes will also be facilitated as soon as we know first, in more
detail the role of the author-raconteur, who unquestionably
represents the main agency in the remodelling, and secondly,
their approximate number in different tribes and different
generations.
The general opposition against change is perhaps more
marked in the case of the novelette than in that of the folk-lore-
myth and is evidenced at times in a contemptuous attitude
toward the “radicals” who tell myths differently from their
fathers. It should also be remembered that the novelette was
on the whole neither as generally known nor as popular as the
myth and was probably transmitted along distinct family
lines. This is particularly true of adventures of ancestors
and fasting experiences that have been cast into a literary
mould, and it may also be true of the common realistic tale
t
42
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
not based on mythological subject matter. If to the above
reasons we add the fact that in the novelette the different ele-
ments of the plot form a more or less fixed unit, we should expect
to find a fairly intact transmission, in some cases. Some of the
versions must then represent old literary forms and old literary
interests. In order to determine this an exhaustive study would
have to be made of the mythology-literature of a tribe and a large
number of variants of each myth would have to be collected . When
this has been done, we will, I am certain, be in a better position
to judge of the significance of such features as the star inter-
pretations of the Pawnee, the human heroes of the Eskimo,
the explanatory element, etc.
THE NOVELETTE AS REMODELLED BY THE AUTHOR-RACONTEUR.
It was formerly assumed that the Indian’s reverence for
the past bound him in shackles that only the very few could
break; that cultural possessions were transmitted just as they
had been received. The apparent deviations were supposed
to be due to unevenness in the power of transmitting exactly
what had been heard. This factor in cultural changes has been
vastly overrated, it seems to me. On no theory of unevenness
in transmission can certain of the differences between versions
of the same myth or novelette be accounted for. Even a cursory
study must make it clear that we are dealing here with factors
of a very specific kind. Let us see what they are.
Any one who has spent any time among Indians must have
been impressed by the fact that only a few Indians in any tribe
have the reputation of being excellent raconteurs. And it is a
different kind of excellence with which each raconteur is credited,
if we are to judge from the Winnebago and Ojibwa. Among
the former, where I made definite inquiries, one man was famous
for the humorous touches which he imparted to every tale;
another, for the fluency with which he spoke and the choice
of his language; a third, for his dramatic delivery; a fourth,
for the radical way in which he handled time-worn themes;
a fifth, for his tremendous memory; a sixth, for the accuracy
with which he adhered to the “accepted” version; etc. As
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
43
born raconteurs, with a different type of genius, they told the
story for the sake of story telling, as raconteurs have done in all
ages. They used their specific gifts to attain the greatest effect.
For most of them it would be wholly impossible to tell a tale
exactly in the same way, even if it had been obtained from a skil-
ful raconteur. We know that the artist who has obtained
complete mastery over his technique invariably plays with his
art. In a similar way the raconteur who has obtained complete
mastery over his technique plays with his material and it is this
play that becomes an important factor in the origin of different
versions.
The forms in which this play instinct will manifest itself
are, of course, manifold. It may lie in the characterization of
different personages by special phonetical devices; by gestures;
by exaggerating certain incidents or overdrawing certain traits
of the characters; and finally — and for our purposes, of para-
mount importance— it may lie in the substitution of one episode
for another, one theme for another, or one motif for another.
Even granted that older literary models and other causes hold
him in check, the changes that will take place in the novelette,
under the influence of the factors enumerated above, are consider-
able.
One might suppose that such a conception of the role of the
author-raconteur would imply tremendous changes in the novel-
ette, as it passes from generation to generation. Theoretically
this is true and if we do not find as great departures from the
normal version of a given novelette as anticipated, this is due
to the improbability of a line of skilful author-raconteurs apply-
ing themselves to any given novelette, reinforced by the conser-
vative tendency of a group which will not countenance any
marked originality in the handling of traditional themes.
Every generation will, I think, have its original author-
raconteurs, although unquestionably their most original treat-
ment of myths will not survive them. A number of these are,
however, likely to fall into the hands of investigators, who
must consequently remember that these deviations hardly
44
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
represent the rate of variability of any given myth from gener-
ation to generation . 1
PSYCHOLOGICAL-LITERARY ELEMENTS IN THE PLOT.
The preceding discussion was concerned with the probability
of the origin of the many different versions of myths through
the free exercise of the author-raconteur’s play instinct. We
shall now discuss the probability for still further divergence
through the exercise of the author-raconteur’s literary-psycho-
logical instinct.
The Indian author-raconteur must have realized as much as
any of our own novelists that the effective telling of a story
depended on a number of devices, the development of a denoue-
ment, cumulative effect, etc.; also that he was dealing with cer-
tain psychological situations. It certainly is not presuming
too much to say that he had sufficient power to analyse his
myths and separate them in a rough way into the component
elements of which they were formed. Let us illustrate this by
examining the plot of the Winnebago myth of “Holy One.”
What the author-raconteur had in mind was clearly the following
plot and the following psychological situations.
Scene I. Holy One’s brother must die. He is warned not
to take a certain road.
Scene II. The slayers of Holy One’s brother must be dis-
covered and punished. Holy One must discover their identity
from some unwilling agent. He must transform himself, wound
but not kill the slayers. Then he must find out what has become
of the slayers, again from an unwilling agent, kill the agent,
disguise himself in his shape, and finally kill the slayers of his
brother.
Scene III. He must be pursued and escape.
Scene IV. He must attempt to restore his brother to life
and fail.
1 1 know particularly of two Winnebago who have the reputation of telling myths remark-
ably well, but of deviating considerably from the older versions. The older people look askance
at them, but the younger, especially the members of the family, seem to show no displeasure.
Under ordinary conditions, we might here have a test case of the perpetuation of markedly
divergent versions.
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
45
The death of Holy One is not directly motivated in all
versions of this myth, his death, however, being assumed. 1
Let us see how certain of the above themes are treated in
detail; for instance, the manner in which Holy One discovers
the slayers of his brother. The motivation is various. The
following is the Omaha version.
“On the bank of the stream the grass was lying in good
condition. There he (Haxige) lay down. As he lay two ducks
came to him. They went diving. And they came up again.
One said as follows: ‘My friend, when Haxige ’s younger brother
was killed, I had a great abundance of food. How was it with
you ?’ ‘My friend, I did not have a good time. Only the little
finger was left for me; and I said that no matter when I saw
him, I would tell him (Haxige) about his own,’ said the duck.
“When Haxige heard it he became a leaf. Having fallen
on the water, the leaf went floating in the space between the ducks.
When he reached the very place he seized the ducks by the neck/’ 2
The following is the Ojibwa version obtained at Rama,
Ontario:
“As he (Nenebojo)was walking along the shore of a lake, he
saw a Kingfisher sitting on a branch of a tree, that was bending
over the lake, intently looking at something in the water. ‘What
are you looking at ?’ asked Nenebojo. The Kingfisher pretended
not to hear him. Then Nenebojo said again, ‘If you will tell
me what you are looking at, I will make you look very beautiful.
I will paint your feathers.’ The bird gladly accepted the offer,
and as soon as Nenebojo had painted his feathers, he said,
‘I am looking at Nenebojo’s brother whom the water-spirits
have killed and whose skin they are using as a door-flap.” 3
The Winnebago version is given on pages 22-24.
In the next episode Holy One must wound the water-spirits
and thereupon disguise himself in such a way that the water-
1 Cf., for instance, the first part of the Fox origin myth of the Midewiwin and the end of
the Omaha myth of Haxige's Adventures. In the Fox version we have both a specific moti-
vation — the spirits’ enmity against Wi'sa'ka's — and the traditional belief that Wi.sa.ka’s
brother is the ruler of the realms of the dead.
1 J. O. Dorsey, ibid., p. 240.
* P. Radin, “Some myths and tales of the Ojibwa of southeastern Ontario," pp. 19, 20.
46
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
spirits who know they are being pursued are nevertheless de-
ceived.
This is the Omaha motivation.
"Haxige became an eagle and departed. Behold, the mon-
sters lay flat on their backs . . . ‘Haxige is coming towards
you,’ was said. He failed . . . 'What shall I do to get even
with them ?* Haxige thought. Then he became a leaf again . . .
'Haxige is coming toward you,’ was said. He failed. Then he
became like a blue-backed bird-hawk . . 'Haxige is coming
toward you,’ he said. He failed ... i\t length when the
fourth day arrived he became a grass-snake, etc.”
Among the Ojibwa of southeastern Ontario we find the fol-
lowing commonly used motivation:
"He (Nenebojo) first pondered about what disguise heshould
take, so that he could approach them (the water-spirits) without
being detected. ‘Well, ’ said he to himself, 'I think I’ll change
myself into an old rotten stump.’ This he immediately did
by means of a long rod that he always carried with him.
"When the lions came out of the water to sun themselves,
one of them noticed the stump and said to one of the others,
'I never saw that old stump there before. Surely it can’t be
Nenebojo ?’ But the one he was addressing said, ‘Indeed I have
seen that stump before.’ Then a third one came over to look,
in order to make certain. He broke a piece off and he saw
that it was rotten. So they were all satisfied .” 1
The Winnebago motivation shows a modification of the
Omaha.
"The next morning Holy One started for the place where
the water-spirits bask in the sun. On the way he caught some
mice and carried them along with him. He went to the sand-bar
and there he turned himself into an old stump of a willow-tree
full of mice’s nests and mice. Suddenly the lake began to roar
and the tw r o spirits floated to the surface in the middle of the lake.
Suddenly one of them said, ‘Look, there is Holy One!’ Then
both dived back into the water again. After a while they came
up again, but quickly dived back. A third and fourth time they
1 P. Radin, "Some myths and tales of the Ojibwa of southeastern Ontario," p. 20.
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY. 47
did this. Finally one of them said, 'Oh, that is merely an old
stump. It has always been there.’ 'Well, if that is the case,
you had better go and look at it.’ Then one of them went over
to inspect it and the mice ran out in every direction. He then
said, 'Surely, this can’t be Holy One, for if it were he would
not have changed himself into a stump with living mice in it.
Besides that, I told you it always stood there, but you wouldn’t
believe me.”
In a similar way it could be shown by comparing other episodes
and themes that the motivation is characteristically different
in different versions of the same myth. How are we to explain
this variety in motivation ? All we have to assume is a skilful
raconteur-author who seizes the different moments of importance
in a plot and plays with them, now motivating one in one way,
now in another, so that he may best fix the listener’s attention
and derive the greatest artistic pleasure. In other words,
over and above the precise form in which he obtains a myth
stands his relation as an artist to the dramatic situations
contained in it and to his audience.
With the psychological situations firmly in his mind the
author-raconteur selects from the relatively large stock-in-trade
of themes, episodes, and motifs belonging to his cultural back-
ground, those he cares to use for developing his plot, showing
in some cases a conservative, in others a radical tendency. He
may even add entirely new motifs, but this does not seem to be
common. As this selection is intimately bound up with the
individuality of the author-raconteur, it is presumably im-
possible to tell exactly what he is likely to select . 1
DIFFUSION OF MYTHS FROM THE ABOVE POINT OF VIEW.
Let us now see what bearing our analysis has upon the
problem of myth diffusion. Is it, for instance, the whole myth-
complex or the plot that is borrowed as such, or are the episodes,
motifs, or themes borrowed separately ? No thorough study
1 I am leaving out entirely the important subject of the literary devices used in the nove-
lette, reserving a discussion for a separate paper. Suffice it to say that this aspect of the myth-
complex more than corroborates the importance assigned to the author-raconteur in the literary
remodelling of the myth.
4
48
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
of this aspect of myth diffusion has as yet been made ; but the
general impression one gets from a comparison of the similarities
of the mythology of the different areas in North America is that
while whole myth complexes or very general plots may at times
be borrowed in toto, this is rare. The similarities seem to be
confined generally to specific themes, motifs, and episodes.
Investigations of the influence of European on Indian myth-
ology ought to furnish us with excellent test cases. Take, for
example, the Tar-baby episode or the Race of the Tortoise and
the Deer, both of which are probably of European origin. Does
their presence in a myth indicate that the entire myth was origin-
ally of European origin and has been completely assimilated by
the Indians, leaving but these two vestiges ? If these two epi-
sodes generally were found in association with other episodes of
a myth-complex of unquestioned European origin, there might
be some justification for this assumption. But this is not the
case, the tar-baby episode or some close variant of it apparently
occurring as a free unit in a number of myths. The same is
true of the wishing-table motif, which occurs in a Winnebago
myth that is clearly aboriginal. A study of Rand's collection of
Micmac myths would yield a large number of additional examples.
In Prof. Boas’ discussion of the tale of John the Bear and the
Seven Heads, the diffusion of individual episodes as such is in-
dicated again . 1
What still further militates against the assumption that
myth complexes may be borrowed and then degenerate, leaving
only a few vestiges behind, is the fact that in those cases where
we know that myths have been borrowed in toto there seems to
be no degeneration even when the myth has been almost com-
pletely remodelled in terms of the specific Indian culture. I
obtained for instance a version of Snow-white among the Ojibwa
of southeastern Ontario which had been completely “indianized”
yet which retained all the episodes and motifs of the Grimm
version. It seems also likely from a study of the Zapotecan
myths collected in Mexico that a European myth was at times
borrowed in toto and that some striking episode was subsequently
1 F. Boas “Notes on Mexican folk-lore.” Journal of American Folk-Lore, Vol. XXV,
1912, pp. 204-260.
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
49
detached from it and used as a free element. This seems to be
true, for instance, of the robbers’ cave of the Ali Baba tale.
What it is that determines the introduction of a new myth
or of new episodes, etc., it is somewhat difficult to say before
specific investigations have been made. It depends very likely
largely on chance, the individuality of the borrower, the nature
of the specific mythology, and the duration and intimacy of the
contact between tribes. In some cases, notably in Spanish
America, we seem to have a complete or at least almost complete
displacement of the Indian mythology by that of the Spaniards.
To ascribe that solely to the intimacy of the contact between the
Spaniards and the Indians and the duration of that contact seems
to me hasty. The Aesopian fables and the riddles found in
Mexico are unquestionably European, yet some significance may
attach to the fact that they were so readily adopted by the In-
dians. Similarly, if the Coyote and the Rabbit cycle found in
Mexico turn out eventually to be of unquestioned European
origin, the fact that the ancient Mexicans undoubtedly possessed
a Coyote and Rabbit cycle may have some bearing upon the
fact that the European cycle displaced the older Indian one. In
other words, there is likely to be as much significance in the dis-
placement of older myths by newer ones as in the rejection of
newer ones.
In the majority of cases, where diffusion occurred in a nor-
mal way, we may, therefore, assume that the separate units of the
myth were borrowed. Now the borrowing of a myth is, of course,
rarely an inert transmission of a tale. An individual brings
back to his tribe not simply what he has heard but what has
struck his fancy. He naturally interprets the story in terms
of his own mythology. He will probably instantaneously asso-
ciate some of his episodes with his trickster, others with his trans-
former, etc. When he subsequently narrates his own trickster or
transformer cycle, what more natural than that he substitute
this new episode, etc., for the older one or simply add it to the
older ?
We have, then, in myth-borrowing to distinguish in alt
cases what has been borrowed, whether the complete myth or
individual component elements, and we have always to bear in
50
MUSEUM BULLETIN NO. 16.
mind that borrowing is a selective process. The problems con-
nected with myth borrowing thus assume a far greater complexity
than we are apt to give them . 1
THE LITERARY INTERPRETATION AND THE POSITION OF EHREN-
REICH.
In a previous section we pointed out that the position of
Ehrenreich and the German theorists in general centred prin-
cipally on their conception of a single original and correct version
of every myth . 2 Their prime object was to discover a way in
which they could reconstruct these primary versions from the
divergent versions with which they were acquainted. To
Ehrenreich that seems to have been a comparatively easy matter
and could be accomplished by the proper interpretation of certain
motifs. “Die Motive geben den urspriinglichern Inhalt des
Mythes an, weil sie dasjenige Element sind, das auf konkreter
Grundlage beruhend am festesten mit der urspriinglichen Natu-
ranschauung verbunden bleibt, ungeachtet aller sekundaren
Formveranderungen .” 3
It is rather significant that Ehrenreich resorts to ultimate
psychological proofs to establish his position. In many places
of his work it is indeed impossible to determine how intimately
connected his specific mythological data are with his psychologi-
cal formulation . 4 In this respect his treatment resembles that of
1 Perhaps a critical examination of myth-borrowing may show that the greater the diver-
gence of a given myth complex from the type prevalent in the recipient culture, the greater the
tendency to borrow the myth as a unit; and the greater the similarity, the greater the ten-
dency of the selective agency to begin synchronously with the hearing of the myth.
2 I do not know whether Erhenreich would have admitted this, but it seems to me to be
an implied corollary of his position. On page 36 of his "Allgemeine Mythologie” he says,
“Jede mythische Handlung besteht aus einer ursachlich verkniipften Folge von Einzelziigen,
Situationen und Akzidenzen, die aus der Naturgrundlage abgeleitet, meist sogar geradezu real
daraus abgesehen sind. Diese Motive entsprechen den einzelnen Phasen des Naturvorgangs,
dem sie den Character einer menschlichen Handlung verleihen.”
As I assume that Ehrenreich is not reasoning on purely a priori grounds, he must have
found corroboration for the above from a study of the contents of the myths.
8 Ibid.
4 “Die Form des Mythus hangt hauptsachlich ab von den Ideenassoziationen die sich auf
der Grundvorstellung entwickeln. Sie setzen sich night ins ungemessene fort, sondern be-
wegen sich innerhalb des Anschauungskreises der Grundvorstellung, d. h. sie bleiben mit dem
Naturkern begrifflich verbunden. So erzeugt die Vorstellung des Mondes als Sichelschwert,
zugleich die der Handhabung dieser Waffe als Enthauptung oder Abhauung eines Wesens,
untersttitzt durch die Auffassung der Aurora als Blut des Verletzten” (p. 39).
LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY.
51
Schurtz in his “Altersklassen und Geheimbiinde.” In the main
the same critique that I have applied to the latter 1 can be applied
to Ehrenreich.
The motifs, according to Ehrenreich, are conditioned by
man’s apperception of the phenomena of nature and what he
associates with these phenomena. They thus serve as demon-
strations that the myths were originally concerned with these
phenomena. As a proof of this, a number of myths were pointed
out that still possessed all the features of a nature-myth. Taking
these, then, as a starting point and as reinforcing his primary
assumption of a single original and correct version, Ehrenreich
reconstructed primitive mythology.
As we have repeatedly pointed out, it is quite essential for
Ehrenreichs’ theory that motifs and episodes serve as a means
for reconstructing his original versions, and it is just here that
the importance of the literary analysis becomes apparent;
for we have shown that the motifs, themes, and episodes are
used as free elements and are altered not through accidental
causes but by the exercise of an author-raconteur’s artistic instinct.
Consequently, even if many of these motifs did conceivably be-
long to old versions of a myth, there is no possible way of dis-
covering that now. We know, of course, that nature-myths
exist, but, considering the nature of the literary tendencies at
work, it seems quite justifiable to assume that certain author-
raconteurs showed a preference for developing nature-myths
or for interpreting any myth in terms of natural phenomena.
There is abundant evidence for such a tendency in the mythol-
ogies of many North American tribes. Among the Pawnee, for
instance, the identification of heroes with stars has become almost
a formula.
It will thus be seen that the discussion of North American
mythology from a literary point of view presents the problems
customarily dealt with in an entirely different light, and, if it
does nothing else, it demonstrates at least how intricate are the
facts involved and how great the data still to be obtained before
ultimate problems can be attacked.
1 Cf. P. Radin, “The Ritual and significance of the Winnebago medicine dance,” Journal
of American Folk-Lore, Vol. XXV, 1911, pp. 149-208.
The first number of the Museum Bulletin was entitled, Victoria Memorial
Museum Bulletin No. 1.
The following articles of the Anthropological Series of Museum Bulletins
have .been issued.
A nthropological Series.
1. The archeology of Blandford township, Oxford county, Ontario; by W. J.
Wintemberg.
2. Some aspects of puberty fasting among the Ojibwas; by Paul Radin.
3. Pre-historic and present commerce among the Arctic Coast Eskimo; by
V. Stefansson.
4. The glenoid fossa in the skull of the Eskimo; by F. H. S. Knowles.
5. The social organization of the Winnebago Indians; by Paul Radin.
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11