Moreover, had he taken the words from such sources, he would in his translation have given their correct meanings; but in many instances he is absurdly far from their sense. Thus he writes: "The word for angels, angelatawiwak, is not borrowed, but real Linapi, and is the same as the Greek word angelos;"[256] whereas it is a verbal with a future sense from the very common Delaware verb angeln, to die. Many such examples will be noted in the vocabulary on a later page.
In several cases the figures or symbols appear to me to bear out the corrected translations which I have given of the lines, and not that of Rafinesque. This, it will be observed, is an evidence, not merely that he must have received this text from other hands, but the figures also, and weighs heavily in favor of the authentic character of both.
That it is a copy is also evident from some manifest mistakes in transcription, which Rafinesque preserves in his printed version, and endeavored to translate, not perceiving their erroneous form. Thus, in the fourth line of the first chant, he wrote owak, translating it "much air or clouds," when it is clearly a mere transposition for woak, the Unami form of the conjunction "and," as the sense requires. No such blunder would appear if he had forged the document. It is true that a goodly share of the words in the earlier chants occur in Zeisberger. Thus it seems, at first sight, suspicious to find the three or four superlatives in III, 5, all given under examples of the superlatives, in Zeisberger's Grammar, p. 105. It looks as if they had been bodily transferred into the song. So I thought; but afterwards I found these same superlatives in Heckewelder, who added specifically that "the Delawares had formed them to address or designate the Supreme being."[257]
If we assume that this song is genuine, then Zeisberger was undoubtedly familiar with some version of it; had learned it probably, and placed most of its words in his vocabulary.
Some other collateral evidences of authenticity I have referred to on previous pages ([pp. 67], [89], [136]).
From these considerations, and from a study of the text, the opinion I have formed of the Walam Olum is as follows:—
It is a genuine native production, which was repeated orally to some one indifferently conversant with the Delaware language, who wrote it down to the best of his ability. In its present form it can, as a whole, lay no claim either to antiquity, or to purity of linguistic form. Yet, as an authentic modern version, slightly colored by European teachings, of the ancient tribal traditions, it is well worth preservation, and will repay more study in the future than is given it in this volume. The narrator was probably one of the native chiefs or priests, who had spent his life in the Ohio and Indiana towns of the Lenape, and who, though with some knowledge of Christian instruction, preferred the pagan rites, legends and myths of his ancestors. Probably certain lines and passages were repeated in the archaic form in which they had been handed down for generations.
Phonetic System.
The phonetic system adopted by the writer, whoever he was, is not that of the Moravian brethren. They employed the German alphabet, which does not obtain in the present text. On this point Rafinesque says: "The orthography of the Linapi names is reduced to the Spanish or French pronunciation, except sh, as in English; u, as in French; w, as in how."[258] A comparison of the words with their equivalents in Zeisberger's spelling shows that this is generally true.
It is obvious that the gutturals are few and soft, and that the process of synthesis is carried further than in the Minsi dialect. For this reason, from the introduction of peculiar words, and from the loss of certain grammatical terminations, the Minsi Delawares of to-day, to whom I have submitted it, are of the opinion that it belongs to one of the southern dialects of their nation; perhaps to the Unalachtgo, as suggested by Chief Gabriel Tobias, in his letter printed on a preceding page ([p. 88]).