Huron-St. Lawrence Iroquois Relations in the Terminal Prehistoric ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

34 ONTARIO A RCHAEOLOGY NO. 44demonstrated in the body of this paper. She explains:"There are two possible explanations for thesimilarity of the animal pipes in the two regions. Thesouthwestern Ontario pipe traditions may have itsroots among the various St. Lawrence [Iroquois]people or, as all of the early dates overlap to someextent, the pipes may stem from a common traditionand appear in the two locations at about the sametime." (1980:298). In support of the first alternativeshe notes the presence of the St. Lawrence Iroquoison late prehistoric and protohistoric Huron sites onthe basis of their artifacts being present. Alternativelyshe notes the feasibility of postulating a diffusion ofpipe styles. While it seems probable that theseoptions are likely to em-brace the actuality, it will bedifficult to demonstrate one or the other withcredibility until St. Lawrence Iroquois archaeology,and Jefferson County archaeology in particular,reveals a dated ceramic pipe sequence.ChronologyReturning to the data set out in the body of thispaper. it is asserted that the concomitant sharing ofcertain material culture traits by the St. LawrenceIroquois in Jefferson County and the Huron hasbeen demonstrated. This situation is believed tohave prevailed as a result of these Iroquoiangroups having come into close contact during thelate prehistoric period while the St. LawrenceIroquois were still extant in Jefferson County.There is no evidence in Jefferson County toindicate this liaison continued into the protohistoricperiod. There are no protohistoric Iroquoissites in Jefferson County. The St. Lawrence Iroquoismaterial culture traits discerned later on protohistoricand historic Huron sites reflect thepresence of St. Lawrence Iroquois survivors onthese sites at a time when the St. Lawrence Iroquoisin eastern Ontario and Jefferson County hadceased to exist. A possible exception to this generalsituation could be the presence of the St. LawrenceIroquois from the lower St. Lawrence River whowere extant in the protohistoric and historic periodsfrom the time Europeans arrived in these regionsuntil circa 1580.The presence of St. Lawrence Iroquois material onthe Black Creek (Emerson 1954:142) and theParsons sites (Emerson 1968:37) on the HumberRiver axis; the Benson (Emerson 1954:203:Ramsden 1977) and the Trent sites (Burger andPratt 1973) on the Trent River axis and theCharlebois site (Latta 1976:356) in Huronia are examplesof very late prehistoric and protohistoricHuron sites on which St. Lawrence Iroquoismaterial culture items are found which may be attributed,in part at least, to St. Lawrence Iroquoissurvivors from Jefferson County. The historicWarminster site (MacNeish 1952:37), Cedar Point(Latta 1976:387) and Robitaille (Latta 1976:410) areexamples of historic Huron sites where the presenceof St. Lawrence Iroquois artifacts indicate thatsurvivors, or their descendants, were present longafter the St. Lawrence Iroquois had ceased to exist asa separate entity.Disappearance of the St. Lawrence IroquoisThe hypothesis which suggests the St. LawrenceIroquois in eastern Ontario and southern Quebecwere destroyed by the Huron circa 1580 is premised,in part, on our understanding of Iroquoianindustry and social practices. Because pottery isbelieved to have been made by females (Wrong1939:109) and pipe-smoking is believe to have beenpracticed by men alone (Biggar 1924:184; Wrong1939:149), it is concluded that the presence of theseartifacts indicate, as appropriate. the presence ofmale or female Iroquoians.Archaeology has revealed both Huron pipes andpottery on late prehistoric St. Lawrence Iroquoissites in eastern Ontario and southern Quebec; forexample the Dawson site (Hochelaga?) (Pendergastand Trigger 1972:234-235. 253-254) and at theGlenbrook site (Pendergast 1981:171, 175) and inJefferson County (Pendergast 1981). This suggeststhe presence of both Huron men and women in St.Lawrence Iroquois villages in eastern Ontario, JeffersonCounty and southern Quebec. ConverselySt. Lawrence Iroquois pottery occurs on a numberof late prehistoric Huron sites. for example thePayne, Waupoos (Pendergast 1963, 1964) andDraper sites (Pearce 1978). which indicates St.Lawrence Iroquoian women were present in theseHuron villages in the late prehistoric period.However it has not been demonstrated that the pipetypes used by St. Lawrence Iroquois men in easternOntario and southern Quebec, including BarredTrumpet and Vasiform pipes. occur on late prehistoricand protohistoric Huron sites. This hasbeen interpreted to indicate there were no lateprehistoric St. Lawrence Iroquois males fromeastern Ontario or southern Quebec in these Huronvillages. In concert these archaeological data andour understanding of Iroquois cultural practiceshave led to the conclusion that the St. LawrenceIroquois were engaged in a war with the Huronwhich, in part, led to their destruction; a war inwhich the Huron took female captives but no maleswhile the St. Lawrence Iroquois accepted both maleand female captives.The data presented in the body of this paperdemonstrates a different situation existed as regardsJefferson County St. Lawrence Iroquois and theHuron in the late prehistoric period when ceramicand stone pipe forms and pottery occur reciprocally.Huron pottery occurs on late prehistoric St.
PENDERGAST: HURON-ST. LAWRENCE RELATIONS 35Lawrence Iroquois sites in Jefferson County and St.Lawrence Iroquois pottery which can he attributedto Jefferson County is present on late prehistoricHuron sites. On the basis of the concept describedabove, this suggests Huron men and women werepresent in late prehistoric St. Lawrence Iroquoisvillages in Jefferson County. And St. LawrenceIroquois men and women lived in late prehistoricHuron villages.This is quite unlike the situation which prevailedwith regard to the St. Lawrence Iroquois in easternOntario and southern Quebec. Their men were notpresent in late prehistoric and protohistoric Huronvillages.However, the condition which permitted St.Lawrence Iroquois males from Jefferson County tobe present in Huron villages and not those fromeastern Ontario and southern Quebec should not betaken to indicate amicable relations prevailedbetween the Jefferson County Iroquois and theHuron. It seems more likely that the reciprocaldistribution of artifactual traits demonstrated hererepresent a phase in the conflict when both maleand female captives were acceptable on each side.Certainly the changes in the conduct of the war,which was fought initially under prehistoric conditionswhen the St. Lawrence Iroquois in JeffersonCounty and eastern Ontario were destroyed and later,circa 1580, under historic conditions when the St.Lawrence Iroquois in southern Quebec weredestroyed, strongly suggests there were phases inthis war when the rules differed.Huron WarInteresting observations have been raised regardingthe movement of the Huron from the regionadjacent to Lake Ontario to the hinterland betweenLake Simcoe and Nottawasaga Bay. The hypothesiswhich attributes the destruction of the St. LawrenceIroquois to the Huron appears inconsistent with theHuron withdrawal from their traditional territoryalong the north shore of Lake Ontario, some ofwhich was adjacent to the St. Lawrence Iroquois.Withdrawal from traditionally held territory is amark of defeat and the Huron, the hypothesisalleges, were the victors, not the losers.Archaeological evidence indicates the late prehistoricHuron sites on the Trent River axis inPrince Edward and Hastings counties, theWaupoos, Payne and Lite sites (Pendergast 1963,1964, 1972), were in contact with the St. LawrenceIroquois. But there is no evidence of a sequence ofHuron sites in this region which continues throughto the protohistoric period. Protohistoric Huron siteson the Trent River axis, Benson and Trent(Emerson 1954; Ramsden 1977: Burger and Pratt1973 and personal communication), first occur wellnorth in Victoria County immediatelyeast of Huronia. This suggests the Huron on theTrent River axis adjacent to St. Lawrence Iroquoisterritory did withdraw as a result of St. LawrenceIroquois pressure in the late prehistoric period. Thisis in sharp contrast to the Huron adjacent to LakeOntario west of the Trent River axis. The Drapersite (Finlayson 1985) and others in that clusterwhich were in contact with the St. Lawrence Iroquoisremained adjacent to Lake Ontario in the lateprehistoric period. Other Huron also in contact withthe St. Lawrence Iroquois, Parsons and BlackCreek (Emerson 1954; 1968), remained on in theToronto area well into the late prehistoric period.It is noteworthy that the Huron in the region westof the Trent River axis remained in the region afterthose on the Trent River axis adjacent to LakeOntario, closer to the St. Lawrence Iroquois territoryin eastern Ontario and Jefferson County, hadmoved northward into Victoria County immediatelyeast of Huronia. Presumably St. Lawrence Iroquoispressure on these Hurons was greater than itwas on the more remote Huron to the west of theTrent River. The eastern Huron were forced tomove northward in late prehistoric times while theHuron west of the Trent remained adjacent to LakeOntario. This interpretation of currentarchaeological data would deny the premise thatthere was a monolithic one-time movement of theHuron from the region adjacent to Lake Ontarionorthward to Huronia.ConclusionThe above interpretation does not deny thehypothesis that the Huron destroyed the St.Lawrence Iroquois. Rather it suggests that theHuron adjacent to St. Lawrence Iroquois wereforced to react to St. Lawrence Iroquois pressures,as reflected by their move northward to VictoriaCounty, before the St. Lawrence Iroquois weredefeated. A corollary of this interpretation suggeststhat the Huron west of the Trent River axis werenot forced to move northward by Five Nation Iroquoisuntil after the late prehistoric Parsons andBlack Creek sites were occupied. That is, after theSt. Lawrence Iroquois had ceased to exist, apartfrom the remnants who remained until circa 1580on the St. Lawrence River east of Hochelaga wherethey met Cartier and the Frenchmen who followedhim in the 16th century. Then they too succumbedto many pressures including the Five Nation Iroquois,the Huron, and European disease.At present the hypothesis which suggests thathostilities with the Huron were, in part, responsiblefor the elimination of the St. Lawrence Iroquois ineastern Ontario, and later on the St. LawrenceRiver in southern Quebec circa 1580, has beenneither refuted nor improved upon. The
Page 2 and 3: 24 ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGY NO. 44auspic
Page 4 and 5: 26 ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGY NO. 44Roebuc
Page 6 and 7: 28 ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGY NO. 44Fig. I
Page 10 and 11: 32 ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGY NO. 44Bone T
Page 14: 36 ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGY NO. 44data s
Page 17: PENDERGAST: HURON-ST. LAWRENCE RELA

Huron-St. Lawrence Iroquois Relations in the Terminal Prehistoric ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?