[If the above is to be regarded, as it clearly must, as an allegory of sickness and famine, it would have put Greek fancy to the task, to have concentrated the matter in a smaller compass, or to have exhibited it in a more striking light.]
[f.] Allusion to the siege of Fort-Stanwix and the Battle of Oriskany.
Seneca tradition is rife on this subject. Tetayoah says that they lost thirty-three chiefs in the battle of Oriskany.
Jacob Blacksnake adds, that he has seen a book in which it was stated that the Senecas had burned eight officers taken at this battle, in revenge for their losses. This he contradicts, on the authority of his father, Governor Blacksnake, who was there. The officers had been asked for after the battle, by the British; but they were refused, on account of their great losses. They were not, however, burned at the stake. It was decided that they should run the gauntlet, and they were killed by clubs, &c. in this ordeal.
[g.] Defeat of the Kah-Kwahs on Buffalo creek.
Some of the Senecas affirm, that it is ninety years since the battle with the Kah-Kwahs, on the site of the grave yard, on the Buffalo creek reservation, was fought. This would place the event in 1755, a date so modern, and so well known, in our colonial history, as to prove what a poor figure they make in attempts to adjust chronology. If 190 years [and, perhaps, such should be the tradition,] be taken, the event (allowing two years for their defence) would assume the precise time [1655] indicated for it, by one of Le Moyne’s missionary letters, in which he says, that the war with the Eries had broken out afresh in 1653.
[h.] Era of the Confederation.
There is a tradition among portions of the Senecas, that the present confederation took place four years before Hudson sailed up the river bearing his name. This gives A. D. 1605. This question has been examined in its general bearings in a prior paper. All other authorities indicate an earlier date.
[i.] Some passages of the traditions of their wars with monsters, giants and supernatural phenomena.
It is proposed to narrate a few passages of their early wars with monsters and giants, the two prominent objects in the foreground of their traditions. If it be thought, in perusing them, that mythology and superstition mingle too freely with real events or actions, to which the mind makes no exception, that is a matter upon which we have nothing to offer. Let it rather be considered as a proof of the authenticity of the narrative; for certainly there could be no stronger indication of a contrary character, than to find the Indian narrator relating a clear, consistent chain of indisputable facts and deductions, to fill up the foreground of his history. What is said of such creations tallies admirably with their belief, at the present day, and harmonizes with itself, and with that state of proud heathendom, adventurous idolatry, and wild and roving independence in which they lived. Who but an Aonaod? who but an Iroquois? could enact such a part, or believe that his ancestors ever did? To be great, and admired and feared, they roved over half America in quest of beasts and men. Surely, the man should be allowed to tell his own story in his own way, with all the witchcraft and spirit-craft he has a mind to bring to bear upon it.