Tooker] 



ETHNOGRAPHY OF THE HURON 43 



what they say is believed. Hence, I shall make a better report of your doc- 

 trine, when I return to my country, than will the children that you seek. 

 [ JR 16 : 169-171.] 



Certain of these men were chiefs. These were of two types : those 

 concerned with affairs of state, with the affairs of both Huron and 

 foreigners, as, for example, feasts, dances, games, lacrosse matches, 

 and fmieral ceremonies, and those concerned with affairs of war ( JE 

 10 : 229-231 ; 16 : 229) . The councils of war were held in the house of 

 the war chief, a house called otinontsiskiaj ondaon, "the house of cut- 

 off heads." Councils held to govern the country and relating to the 

 maintenance of order were held in the endionrm ondaon^ "house of 

 the council" ( JK 13 : 59) . The latter councils, councils of peace, were 

 called endionraondaone ( JE 10 : 261-263) .^^ 



There were as many kinds of chiefs as there were "affairs." In the 

 large villages, there were sometimes several administrative and war 

 chiefs who divided among them the families of the village as into so 

 many chieftainships." Most of these cliieftainships belonged to cer- 

 tain families, but there were certain chiefs whose influence was de- 

 rived from their intellectual superiority, popularity, wealth, or other 

 such quality ( JE 10 : 231) , or bravery ( C 157) .^* No chief by virtue 



M In the 19th century, the Wyandot stiU were reported as having tribal and war conn- 

 cils (Powell 1881: 61. 68). Apparently, the same distinction held among the Iroquois, 

 although Morgan (1901 (1) : 67-68) states that "The Iroquois had no distinct class of 

 war-chiefs, raised up and set apart to command in time of war." The Iroquois did, how- 

 ever, have two hereditary chieftainships, held by the Seneca, whose function, the general 

 management of military affairs (Morgan 1901 (1) : 69-71), was probably similar to that 

 of the Huron. Parker (1916: 34, 41) says that war chieftainships were held by those 

 families who also held head League chieftainship titles and Hewitt (1918 : 531 ; 1932 : 486) 

 says that the clan or the lineage in the clan had a war chieftain. But as these men 

 worked some years after war had ceased to be important among the Iroquois, it seems 

 likely that there once was more organization concerning war activities. The League 

 organization, concerned with the affairs of state, has had a greater chance of survival than 

 the organization for war and has survived, although in somewhat modified form, on the 

 various reservations. 



. BSThis description probably indicates that the inheritance of the Huron chieftainships 

 was In the clans, as is the inheritance of tribal and war chieftainships among the Wyan- 

 dot, although sometimes the rule of matrilineal inheritance was not followed (Powell 

 1881: 61-62, 68; Connelley 1899 b : 30 : 1899 c: 107, 120-121). Similarly, among the 

 Iroquois, the inheritance of the tribal chieftainships and the two war chieftainships is 

 within the clan (Morgan 1901 (1) : 57-71 ; cf. Beauchamp 1907 : 346-347 ; Shimony 1961 a : 

 passim). Although it is commonly said that the chieftainships belong to a clan, it is more 

 accurate to say, of course, that they belong to a lineage within the clan. The Iroquois 

 word for lineage, as well as matrilocal extended family, is ohwachira, or in the r-Iess 

 Iroquois languages ohwachia (Hewitt 1918: 530-532; 1932: 476-478; 1944 : 82; Shimony 

 1961 a : 20, 26-27). The chieftainship title in the Iroquois League is also associated with 

 a tribe, for each title belongs to a particular clan in a particular tribe. 



"Among the Wyandot, the tribal council might confer a special name on a man for 

 distinguished services to the tribe (Connelley 1899 c: 109). And, among the Iroquois, 

 such chiefs whose position is not contingent on membership in a particular clan, called 

 "Chiefs" by Morgan and "Pine Tree Chiefs" by others, have some Influence- In Iroquois 

 councils. They are selected on the basis of personal ability and renown alone, and some 

 such chiefs attained this recognition on the basis of their ability to lead in war (Morgan 

 1901 (1): 66-68, 94; Beauchamp 1907:347; Parker 1916:11, 41; see also Jackson 

 1830 b: 30-31). 



