218 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [bull. 43 



tlioir fame. The massacre of a post as large and as important as that 

 of Natchez and the subsequent war to the death with the Natchez, 

 which folloAved, as well as the Chickasaw war to which it gave birth, 

 could not fail to create a profound impression at the time, both in the 

 region where these events took place and in Europe, and upon their 

 ashes all kinds of rumors and stories arose, some containing an ele- 

 ment of truth, some grossly exaggerated. 



The principal outside authority, the one with the best official and 

 documentary information, was Father Charlevoix, the statements in 

 whose " History of New France '' can only be supplemented or 

 checked by means of some of the official letters of Perrier and 

 D'Artaguette contained in Gayarre's History of Louisiana. More 

 direct and detailed information regarding the massacre itself and the 

 causes which led up to it is to be found in our two principal ethno- 

 logical authorities, Dumont and Du Pratz. The wife of the former 

 Vvas held captive among the Natchez at that time, while the latter 

 was thoroughly familiar with the post and the Indians near it and 

 was still in the colony when the outbreak occurred. He also claims 

 to have obtained much of his information from a woman who had 

 been captured by the Natchez and was afterward governess in his 

 family, aiid from Tattooed-arm, mother of the great Sun, while she 

 was a captive at New Orleans." These may be supplemented by short 

 accounts in Bartram '' and Adair,'' and an interview of a supposed 

 Natchez Indian by Col. Anthony Hutchins.'^ 



Several different reasons have been assigned for the Natchez out- 

 break, and it is probable that there is truth in each. At the same time, 

 as in most important movements, we may suspect that there were 

 olckn- influences which had been working up toward it for many years, 

 influences j^erliaps traceable from the period of earliest white con- 

 tact. A short resume of what some of these may have been will, 

 perha]:>s, be of interest. 



On his descent of the ]\lississippi in 1682, La Salle and his com- 

 panions came as the allies, or at least friends, of the Quapaw.^ They 

 were therefore well received by the Taensa, the allies of the latter 

 people, and concluded a treaty with them. The explorers noted the 

 fact that the Indians on one side of the river were at enmity with 

 those on the other; the Tunica, at any rate, being hostile to the Qua- 

 ])aw and Taensa. The Natchez were on the same side of the river as 

 the Tunica, but we do not know whether the general remark above 

 referred to applied to them or not. La Salle was greeted in a friendly 



" Du Pralz, Hist, do La LouLsianc, iii, 261, 326-327 

 "P.artrain, Travels Uirough N. .Xmcr.. 4;?l-432, 1792. 

 '■Aflair, Ilisl. Amor. Uid.. •.\r>:>,'-:\:,4 . 1775. 

 ''('lailjornc, Ilisl. Miss., i, 4,S-4l). 

 <^ Sec ijp. -^i'K 201. 



