The history of the Monacan tribes of Virginia belongs to two distinct periods, the colonization period and the colonial period. By the former we may understand the time of exploration and settlement from the first landing of the English in Virginia to the expeditions of Lederer and Batts, in 1670 and 1671, which supplied the first definite information in regard to the country along the base of the mountains. Under the colonial period we may include everything else, as after the Revolution the small remnant incorporated with the Iroquois in Canada virtually disappeared from history. Up to 1670 the Monacan tribes had been but little disturbed by the whites, although there is evidence that the wars waged against them by the Iroquois were keeping them constantly shifting about. Their country had not been penetrated, excepting by a few traders who kept no journals, and only the names of those living immediately on the frontiers of Virginia were known to the whites. Chief among these were the Monacan proper, having their village a short distance above Richmond. In 1670 Lederer crossed the country in a diagonal line from the present Richmond to Catawba river, on the frontiers of South Carolina, and a year later a party under Batts explored the country westward across the Blue ridge to the headwaters of New river. Thenceforward accounts were heard of Nahyssan, Sapona, Totero, Occaneechi, and others, consolidated afterward in a single body at the frontier, Fort Christanna, and thereafter known collectively as Saponi or Tutelo. The Monacan proper form the connecting link between the earlier and the later period. The other tribes of this connection were either extinct or consolidated under other names before 1700, or were outside of the territory known to the first writers. For this reason it is difficult to make the names of the earlier tribes exactly synonymous with those known later, although the proof of lineal descent is sometimes beyond question.
We shall deal first with the Monacan and confederated tribes mentioned by Smith. According to this explorer the Monacan confederacy in 1607 held the country along James River above the Powhatan, whose frontier was about the falls at which Richmond was afterward located. Among the tribes of the confederacy Smith enumerated the Monacan proper, the Mowhemenchugh, Massinnacack, Monahassanugh, and Monasickapanough, and says there were others, which he does not name. Like their neighbors, the cognate Manahoac on the Rappahannock, they were very barbarous and subsisted chiefly by hunting and by gathering wild fruits. They were in alliance with the Manahoac and at constant war with the Powhatan, and in mortal dread of the Massawomeke or Iroquois beyond. the mountains 1Smith, John. The true travels, adventures and observations of Captaine John Smith, etc. From the London edition of 1629, vol. i, p. 134. 2 volumes. Richmond, 1819. . He seems to imply that the Monacan tribes named spoke different languages, although in another place 2Ibid, vol. i, p. 120. we are led to infer that they had but one. The difference was probably only dialectic, although the cognate and confederate tribes farther southward probably used really different languages.
Strachey derives the name Monacan from the Powhatan word monohacan or monowhauk, “sword,” while Heckewelder, through the Delaware language, translates it “spade” or “digging instrument.” It is more probable that the word is not Algonquian at all, but that the tribal names given by Smith are approximations to the names used by the tribes themselves. The prefix ma, mo, or mon, which occurs in all of them, may be the Siouan ma’s, “earth” or “country.” Monahassanugh is the Nahyssan of Lederer, and Monasickapanough may possibly be the original of Saponi.
The principal village of the Monacan in Smith’s time was Rasauweak or Rassawek, located in the fork of James and Rivanna rivers, in what is now Fluvanna County, Virginia. The village known sixty years later as “Monacan Town” was identical with the Mowhem[en]cho or Massinnacack of Smith’s map 3Ibid, vol. i, p. 134 and map. .
The English having established themselves at Jamestown and explored the bay and the lower courses of the principal rivers, were anxious to penetrate the interior toward the head of the James, with an eye particularly to the discovery of minerals. In this connection it may be stated that coal was afterward discovered and worked with profit near the Monacan town. To accomplish their purpose the more readily they strove to obtain the aid of Powhatan under the specious pretext of revenging him upon the Monacan, but the proud chieftain, jealous of the encroachments of the strangers, replied that he could avenge his own injuries, and refused to lend them guides or assist them in any way. Finally, in the fall of 1608, a party of 120 men under Newport set out from the falls of the James and marched about 40 miles inland up the river, returning in about a week, after having discovered two of the Monacan villages, Massinacak and Mowhemenchouch. They evidently met no friendly reception from the Monacan, which is hardly to be wondered at in view of the fact that the whites were scheming to induce the Powhatan to make war upon that tribe in order to get possession of their country. As Powhatan had refused to furnish guides, they seized a Monacan chief, and, after tying him, forced him to go with them and point out the way, which was not conducive to friendlier feelings in future contacts. After making trial of several mineral deposits, they returned without having accomplished much in the way of either discovery or negotiation with the Indians 4Ibid, vol. i, pp. 195-7. . This was the first entry into the Monacan country.
In the next year (1609) the English made a settlement at the falls of the James, in the immediate vicinity of the principal residence of Powhatan. The site chosen proving unfavorable, they coolly proposed to Powhatan that he should surrender to them his own favorite village and further pay a yearly tribute of corn for the pleasure of their company, or else give them the Monacan country, as though it was his to give. The old chief made no bargain, but in a short time his people were loud in their complaints that the English, who had promised to protect them from their enemies, were worse neighbors than the Monacaw themselves 5Ibid, vol. i, pp. 208, 237. .
After this no more was heard of the Monacan for sixty years. The English were settled on their border, and of course were constantly encroaching upon them, and, like all the Virginia tribes, they rapidly wasted away. The Powhatan on the east probably kept up their desultory raids so long as they themselves were in condition to fight, and from numerous chance references we know that the Iroquois were constantly striking them in the rear. They probably suffered more or less by the relentless war waged by the Virginians against the Powhatan from 1622 to 1645, at one time during which it was enacted that there should be three annual expeditions to sweep the whole country from the sea to the heads of the rivers for the utter extermination of the Indians. They were also directly in the track of the Rechahecrian (Rickohockan, Cherokee), who in 1656 (or 1654) descended from the mountains and ravaged the country as far as the falls of the James, where they defeated the combined forces of the English and Pamunki in perhaps the bloodiest Indian battle ever fought on the soil of Virginia 6Neill, E. D. Virginia Carolorum: the colony under the rule of Charles the first and second, 1625-1685, based upon manuscripts and documents of the period, p. 325. Albany, 1886. 7Burk, John D. The history of Virginia from its first settlement to the present day. Petersburg, Va., 1804-1816. 4 volumes. [The original manuscript references Burk 2, at this point, but in the end notes fails to include a Burk 2 selection. I’ve included the reference to the book here, however the exact page at this time is not known.] . The traders were probably among them before this time, as we find that in 1643 a party was authorized to explore the country west and south of Appomattox river, with the right to trade with the Indians for fourteen years. In 1665 stringent laws were enacted for the government of the Indians, and they were no longer allowed to choose their own chiefs, but were compelled to accept chiefs appointed by the governor. It is quite plain that all the Virginia tribes alike had now become mere dependents of the English. A remark by Lederer indicates that the Saponi were at this time carrying on a war with the whites, and from the harsh regulations made by Virginia it is probable that the Monacan and others nearer home were also concerned.
In 1669 the Manachee, or Monacan, were reduced to 30 bowmen, with perhaps a total population of 100 or 120. No other tribe of the confederacy is named in the census of that year, the tribes known later being still beyond the borders of the settlements. In 1670 the German traveler, John Lederer, under a commission from the governor of Virginia, explored the country from the settlement at James falls (Richmond) southwestward through Virginia and North Carolina to Catawba river. Two days above the falls he came to the village of the Monacan, who receiued him with friendly volleys from their firearms. From this and other references it appears that the warriors of the Virginia frontier, although still called “bowmen,” were already pretty well supplied with guns. This village, known then and later as “Monacan Town,” was on the southern side of James River, about 20 miles above the present Richmond, and within the present limits of Powhatan county, Virginia. The Indian plantations extended for 3 miles along the river, between two small streams known as Monacan and Powick creeks. In 1699 a colony of French Huguenots took possession of the spot, which still retained the name of Monacan Town, although the Indians had disappeared 8Beverley, Robert. History of Virginia, in four parts, etc. By a native and inhabitant of the place, p. 245. Second edition, revised and enlarges by the author. london, 1722. (Copy in Library of Congress.) 9Virginia Historical Society. Collections of the Virginia Historical Society, New series, pp. 42-3, 51. Volumes iii-x, Richmond, 1883-1891. . The village seems identical with the Mowhem(en)cho of Smith’s map of 1609.
Near the village Lederer noticed a pyramid of stones, and was told that it represented the number of a colony which had left a neighboring country because of overpopulation, a condition easily reached among hunting tribes. The emigrants, having been chosen by lot, had come to their present location under the leadership of a chief called Monack, from whom they derived their name of Monacan 10Lederer, John. The discoveries of John Lederer, in three several marches from Virginia to the west of Carolina, and other parts of the continent. Begun in March, 1669, and ended in September, 1670. Together with a general map of the whole territory which he traversed. Collected and translated out of Latin from his discourse and writings, by Sir William Talbot, baronet, etc. London, etc. 1672, p. 9. Map and 33 pages. (Copy in Library of Congress.) . As the explorer stopped with them only long enough to learn the road to the next tribe, his version of their migration legend must be taken with due allowance.
In another place Lederer states that the country between-the falls of the rivers and the mountains was formerly owned by the “Tacci” or “Dogi,” who were then extinct, and their place occupied by the Mahoc (not identified), Nuntaneuck or Nuntaly (not identified), Nahyssan (Monahassano or Tutelo), Sapon (Saponi), Managog (Mannahoac), Mangoack (Nottoway), Akenatzy (Occaneechi), and Monakin. All these, he says, had one common language, in different dialects. This was probably true, except as to the Nottoway, who were of Iroquoian stock. He describes the region, the piedmont section of Virginia and Carolina, as a pleasant and fruitful country, with open spaces clear of timber and abounding in game. Farther on he says again that the Indians of this piedmont region are none of those whom the English removed out of Virginia, but that they had been driven by an enemy from the northwest and directed to settle here by an oracle, according to their story, more than four hundred years before. He also says that the ancient inhabitants of the region, presumably the Tacci, were far more rude and barbarous than the more recent occupants, and fed only on raw flesh and fish, until these latter taught them how to plant corn and instructed them in the use of it 11Ibid, pp. 2,3. . As Lederer’s narrative was written originally in Latin, his names must be pronounced as in that language.
In regard to the origin of these tribes, Lawson, speaking of the Indians of Virginia and Carolina, says that they claimed that their ancestors had come from the west, where the sun sleeps 12Lawson, John. The history of Carolina, containing the exact description and natural history of that country, etc., p. 82. (Reprint from the London edition of 1714.) Raleigh, 1860. . The Catawba, as will be shown later on, had a tradition of a northern origin. All these statements and traditions concerning the eastern Siouan tribes, taken in connection with what we know of the history and traditions of the western tribes of the same stock, seem to indicate the upper region of the Ohio – the Alleghany, Monongahela, and Kanawha country – as their original home, from which one branch crossed the mountains to the waters of Virginia and Carolina while the other followed along the Ohio and the lakes toward the west. Linguistic evidence indicates that the eastern tribes of the Siouan family were established upon the Atlantic slope long before the western tribes of that stock had reached the plains.
The Tacci or Dogi, mentioned as the aborigines of Virginia and Carolina, may have been only a mythic people, a race of monsters or unnatural beings, such as we find in the mythologies of all tribes. They have no relation to the Doeg, named in the records of the Bacon rebellion in 1675, who were probably a branch of the Nanticoke.
This seems to be the last appearance of the Monacan in history under that name. Beverley, in his history of Virginia, published in 1722, makes no mention of them in his list of existing tribes, but in speaking of the Huguenot colony of 1699, already mentioned, says that these exiles settled on a piece of very rich land on the southern side of James river, about 20 miles above the falls, .” which land was formerly the seat of a great and. warlike nation of Indians called the Monacans, none of which are now left in these parts; but the land still retains their name, and is called the Monacan Town” 13Beverley, Robert, op. cit. . It is probable that between 1670 and 1699 the small remnant had removed westward and joined the Nahyssan (Tutelo) and Saponi.
On leaving the Monacan, Lederer passed through the territory of the Mahock, mentioned later on, and then, with a single Indian companion, left James River and turned southwestward. After traveling four days over a rough road without meeting Indians or signs of habitation, he arrived at “Sapon, a town of the Nahyssans,” situated on a tributary of the upper Roanoke. His estimates of distances are too great, but from a comparison of his narrative with that of Batts, written a year later, it seems probable that the Saponi village was on Otter river, a tributary of the Staunton, or Roanoke, southwest of Lynchburg, Virginia. He describes the village as situated on high land, by the side of a stately river, with rich soil and all the requisites for a pleasant and advantageous settlement. The name Sapon or Saponi may possibly have a connection with the Siouan (Dakota) word saps, “black.” The chief resided at another village, called Pintahæ, (p. 127), not far distant, and equally well situated on the same river.
Lederer states that the Nahyssan had been constantly at war with the whites for ten years past, notwithstanding which he ventured to go among them, trusting to the trading goods which he carried to procure him a welcome; for he had heard that they never offered any injury to a small party from which no danger could be apprehended. In another place he observes that Totopotomoi, the Pamunki chief, had been killed while fighting for the English against the Mahock and Nahyssan. This event occurred during the invasion of the Rechahecrian (Cherokee) in 1656, and if Lederer’s statement be true it would prove that the Siouan tribes of Virginia had aided the Cherokee in this invasion. This is quite likely, as we know that the upper tribes had always been the enemies of the Powhatan, living lower down. It is probable also that the war mentioned by Lederer had been inaugurated in that year. However, the event justified his calculations, for after questioning him closely as to whence he came, whither he went, and what his business was, his answers, with the trinkets which he presented them, satisfied them that he intended no mischief, and they welcomed him with every demonstration of friendship. They even went so far as to offer a “sacrifice” – probably a ceremonial dance – in his honor, and solemnly consulted their “medicine” to know whether they should not admit him to their council and adopt him into their tribe and induce him to stay with them by giving him for a wife the daughter of one of their principal men. With some difficulty he waived the honor and got away by promising to return to them before many months 14Lederer, John, op. cit., pp. 11, 12.Lederer, John, op. cit., pp. 11, 12. , a promise which, however, he failed to keep.
In Nahyssan we have the Monahassanugh of Smith, the Hanohaskie of Batts, and the Yesang of Hale. The last is evidently the generic root word, the prefix Ho, Mona, or Na in the other forms probably giving a specific local application to the common term. Thus from Lederer’s statement that Sapon was a Nahyssan town we understand that the Saponi were a subtribe or division of the people who knew themselves as Yesang. Pintahæ was the local name of another tribe or settlement included under the same generic designation. This is the first mention of the Saponi, the Tutelo being first named the following year by Batts.
The Nahyssan chief is described as an absolute monarch. The people were tall, warlike, and rich. Lawson also, thirty years later, describes them as tall and well built. In their little temples or medicine lodges they had large quantities of pearls, which they had taken in war from the southern tribes bordering on Florida, and which were as highly prized as among the whites. Their tribal ensign consisted of three arrows 15Ibid, pp. 4, 13. . In this connection Beverley states that the Indians of each Virginian tribe had a particular tribal mark painted on the shoulder to distinguish themselves when away from home. A common tribal mark consisted of one, two, or three arrows arranged to point upward, downward, or sidewise, and the Virginia assembly found this system of aboriginal heraldry of such practical use in distinguishing- friends from enemies that they had these designs stamped on metal badges which they distributed in quantities to each of the friendly tribes, and also enacted a law that no Indians should come among the settlements without them 16Beverley, op. cit., p. 160.Beverley, op. cit., p. 160. .
Lederer gives some general information in regard to these interior tribes which may be of interest here. In his hints to traders he advised them to carry, to those nearest the frontier, trading cloth (of which a yard and a half sufficed to make an Indian matchcoat or mantle), together with axes, hoes, knives, scissors, and all kinds of edged tools. Arms and ammunition would be eagerly purchased, but this trade was contraband, notwithstanding which it appears from various statements that some of the tribes were already well supplied in this respect. For the remoter tribes the best trading articles were small mirrors, pictures, beads, bracelets, knives, scissors, and all kinds of gaudy trinkets and toys that were light and easily carried. The goods were frequently paid for by the Indians with their native wampum, which he describes as their current coin, or with pearls or vermilion, or sometimes, in the south, with pieces of silver obtained from the Indians adjoining the Spaniards. He shows himself informed in all the methods of wheedling an Indian, even to making him drunk preparatory to a trade, and lays down the cardinal principle, as good now as then, that in dealing with the Indians you must be positive and at a word.” On approaching an Indian village the traveler was advised to first learn through his smuts whether the tribe held any communication with the Susquehanna, in which ease he should give notice of his approach by firing a gun. With other tribes this was to be avoided, as these were ignorant of the use of firearms, and would thus be frightened and disposed to some treacherous act. From this it would seem that the Susquehanna, living at the head of Chesapeake Bay, were the medium through which the Virginia and Carolina Indians obtained firearms. Lederer’s guide on this journey was himself a Susquehanna. On entering the settlement the traveler was not to go into any house until invited, when he would be led in bound like a prisoner, a curious custom, which they applied to friends and foes alike. An invitation from the old men should be accepted in preference to one from the younger warriors, and the guest was advised to be careful to refuse nothing that was set before him, or in any other way to slight their courtesy in the least, as they were jealous of their dignity and revengeful when angered. Traders were enjoined not to fail to go the rounds of their camp at the close of the evening, for it was then, and early in the morning, that danger was to be anticipated; in the night time the Indians never made an attack. This applies also to our modern prairie tribes, arising from a belief common among them that an Indian killed at night will be forever in darkness in the spirit world. It is plain from Lederer’s account that traders generally were as unscrupulous, and Indians as uncertain, two centuries ago as today.
For counting, they used pebbles, or bundles of short reeds or straws. Heaps of stones indicated the number of persons killed on a battleground, or of emigrants to some distant region. Time was measured, and a rude chronology was arranged by means of strings of leather with knots of various colors, very much as in Peru. This system proved so convenient in dealing with Indians that it was adopted for that purpose by a governor of South Carolina, as shown by an incidental reference in Lawson. At certain ceremonies reeds or straws were arranged in a particular order, and left thus in place after the ceremony as a record of the character of the performance there enacted. They were never disturbed, as it was deemed a sacrilege to interfere with them. If the explorer’s account can be believed they had a highly developed pictograph system, by means of which they symbolized not only physical things but also mental qualities. Thus, swiftness was indicated by the figure of a deer, wrath by that of a serpent, courage by the picture of a lion (panther), and fidelity by that of a dog. The English were symbolized under the figure of a swan, on account of their white complexion and their power of flight across the sea, Lederer’s account of their religion is too general to be definite, and he neglects to state to what particular tribal language the Indian names quoted belong. They believed in a supreme creator (1) under various names, to whom only the high priest offered sacrifice. This Supreme Being, however, was supposed to pay no heed to any earthly matters; so these were committed to the care of lesser spirits, good or bad as the case might be, to whom the ordinary medicine-men offered prayers and ceremonial propitiation. By Lederer’s supreme god, to whom only the high priest sacrificed, may perhaps be understood the special palladium or “medicine” of the tribe, in the keeping of a priest of a particular family or order.
They had a system of four gentes (as before remarked, it is impossible to know how many or to what particular tribes this statement applies), called by the names of four women, Pash, Sepoy, Askarin, and Maraskarin, from whom they derived their origin, and who were believed to be the common ancestors of the human race. They had a strict marriage and kinship system, based on this clan division, with descent in the female line. Marriage within the clan was regarded as incest and was punished with great severity. Even in death this division was followed out and separate quarters of their burial places were assigned to each of the four clans. The dead were wrapped in skins of animals and buried with food and household properties deemed necessary for the use of the ghost in the other world. When a noted warrior died, prisoners of war were sometimes killed at the grave to accompany him to the land of the dead. Their spirit world was in the west, beyond the mountains and the traditional western ocean.
Their traditional history was delivered in the form of long narratives from the fathers to the children, who were obliged to learn them by heart. Although ignorant of books and letters, they were trained in expression and oratory, and their speakers were frequently men of much judgment and eloquence. Children were ruled by persuasion instead of command, and were never punished. On one occasion, while among the Sara, a little boy shot an arrow at Lederer’s horse, and when the traveler spurred the animal out of his reach, the young savage tried to send his next arrow through the body of the rider. With much trouble the explorer was able to pacify him with small trinkets, but the affair roused such a commotion that the old men had to take the white man and his horse under their protection to save them from injury 17Lederer, John, op. cit., pp. 3-5, 17, 25-27. .
Beverley gives several additional facts in regard to the customs and beliefs of the tribes of this section, with more particular reference to the Occaneechi, whose dialect was the common language of trade and religion. Strangers were received with the pipe of peace, which was made larger than the ordinary pipe and adorned with the wings and feathers of birds, or with other ornaments. The chief of the village filled and lighted the pipe and handed it to the visitor who, if on a friendly errand, accepted it and took a few whiffs and then returned it to the giver, who, after drawing a few puffs himself, passed it over to the second man of the delegation, and so on. A refusal to smoke on the part of the stranger was regarded as a sign of hostility. They were said to believe in a good spirit and an evil one. To the former they paid but little attention, considering it a waste of effort, but took particular pains to conciliate the other with prayer and sacrifice. The medicine-men had great influence, and used the Occaneechi in their ceremonies as a sacred language. Years were counted by winters and were divided into five seasons-the budding or blossoming, the ripening, the midsummer, the harvest or fall, and the winter. Months were counted by moons, and the day was measured by sunrise, noon, and sunset 18Beverley, op. cit., pp. 157, 181-2. .
General accounts of the arts, customs, and ceremonies of these tribes will be reserved for another occasion, and attention may be confined in this paper to the more specific references. Before going further it may be observed that the attempted identification of Lederer’s route by Hawks, in his history of North Carolina, seems to be entirely incorrect. After making him swing around a narrow circle instead of proceeding along the lines of the trading path toward a definite point, he leaves the traveler floundering in the marshes of Albemarle sound, when in fact he must have been on Catawba river on the border of South Carolina, and finally gives up the identification in despair with the statement that ” Lederer’s itinerary presents difficulties which we confess we can not satisfactorily solve.”
From the Nahyssan and Saponi Lederer went on into Carolina. In the next year, 1671, an exploring party under Thomas Batts, with two Indian guides, left the Appomattoc village (now Bermuda Hundred, Virginia), at the mouth of the Appomattox, to discover what lay beyond the mountains. Traveling nearly due westward about 140 miles according to their estimate they arrived at the “Sapong Town” (misprint for Sapony), where they were welcomed with firing of guns and plenty of provisions, and were kindly entertained. It is evident that Lederer’s visit the year before had left behind a favorable impression toward the whites instead of the former hostility. According to the best study of their route, this village was probably on Otter River, a northern tributary of the Roanoke, in what is now Campbell County, Virginia, nearly south of Lynchburg. It was off the line of the Occaneechi trading path, which they had left behind them the first day.
Procuring a Saponi guide they went on to the village of the “Hanohaskies,” which was estimated as 25 miles distant north of west, at no great distance from the mountains, and situated on an island in the “Sapong river.” This was probably the northern branch of Staunton river, in the present Bedford County, Virginia. The Hanohaski (probably a misprint for Manohaski) are the Monahassanugh of Smith’s map of 1609, on which they are located indefinitely southwest of the junction of the James and the Rivanna. From this tribe they met the same friendly reception. Leaving there a sick man of their party, they started on again the next day toward the “Tolera town” in the mountains. After going, according to their estimate, about 100 miles in a general southwesterly direction, crossing the “Sapong river” several times and climbing several smaller mountain ridges, they came to the Tolera (misprint for Totera or Tutelo) village located on the headwaters of the Roanoke (Dan) and encircled by mountains. The site was probably about the present state line southwest of Stuart, in Patrick County, Virginia, or possibly within the limits of North Carolina. Here again they were “exceedingly civilly entertained,” and having rested a few days they pushed on across the Blue ridge and came down on the other side to the headwaters of New river. After making some further explorations in that direction, they re-crossed the mountains and came back as they went, meeting from Tolera, Hanohaski, and Sapong the same kind treatment that they had experienced on their outward journey, and at last arrived at the Appomattoc town after an absence of exactly one month. From their narrative it is evident that the three tribes mentioned, all of whom had already obtained firearms, were in alliance and were also friendly with the Mohetan, living west of the Blue Ridge 19New York. Documents relative to the colonial history of the state of New York. Procured in Holland, England, and France, by John Romeyn Brodhead, etc. Edited by E. B. O’Callaghan, Batts (1671), vol. iii, p. 194-197. Albany, 1856-’77. 12 vols. .
The Hanohaskie village of Batts may be the Pintahæ of Lederer. The latter did not meet the tribe here desigated as the Tolera, as they were far remote from the regular lines of travel, and after leaving the village which he calls Sapon he turned off to strike the trail which crossed the Roanoke at the Occaneechi village about Clarksville, Virginia. The chief difficulty in comparing the narratives arises from the fact that the names Yesang and Tutelo, in their various forms, are used both specifically and collectively.
Manacans.-Smith (1629), Virginia (reprint of 1819), vol. i, p. 136.
Manachees. -Neill, Virginia Carolorum, 1886, p. 325.
Manakan.-Document of 1701 in Virginia Historical Collections, new series, 1886, vol. v, p. 42.
Manakins.-Stith (1747) quoted in note by Burk, Virginia, 1804, vol. i, p. 128.
Manikin.-Document of 1700 in Va. Hist. Coll., op. cit., p. 48.
Mannacans.-Strachey (about 1612), Virginia, 1849, p. 41.
Mannachin.-Document of 1701 in Va. Hist. Coll., op. cit., p. 45.
Mannakin.-Lawson (1714), History of Carolina, reprint of 1860, p. 187.
Manskin.-Herrman map, 1670, in Report Comrs. on Boundary between Virginia and Maryland, 1873 (misprint).
Manycan.-Document of 1700 in Va. Hist. Coll., op. cit., p. 51.
Monacans.-Smith, Virginia, op. cit., vol. i, p. 116.
Monacans.-Beverley, Virginia, 1722, p. 245.
Monachans. -Yong (1634), in Mass. Hist. Coll., 4th series, 1871, vol. ix, p. 112.
Monakins.-Lederer, Discoveries, 1672, p. 9.
Monocans.-Strachey, Virginia, op. cit., p. 27.
Mehemenchoes.-Jefferson (1781), Notes on Virginia, 1794, p. 134.
Mowhemcho.-Smith, Virginia, op. cit., vol. i, map (misprint).
Mowhemenchouch.-Ibid., p. 196.
Mowhemenchughes.-Ibid:, p. 134.
Massinacacs.-Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, p. 134.
Massinacak.-Smith, op. cit., p. 196.
Massinnacacks.-Ibid., p. 134.
Flanahaskies.-Fernow, Ohio Valley, 1890, p. 219 (misprint).
Hanahaskies.-Batts (1671), New York Documentary Colonial History, 1853, vol. iii, p. 197 (misprint).
Hanohaskies.-Ibid., p. 194 (misprint).
Monakasanugh.-Smith, Virginia, op. cit., map.
Monahassanoes. -Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, p. 134.
Monahassanughes-Strachey, Virginia, op. cit., p. 102.
Nahyssans.-Lederer, Discoveries, 1672, p. 9.
Nobissan.-Lederer, map in ibid (misprint).
Yesán.-Hale MS. (Bureau of Ethnology), 1877 (name used by themselves).
Yesah.-Hale, in Proc. Am. Philosoph. Soc., 1883-’84, vol. xxi, p. 11. (See Tutelo.)
Monasiccapanoes.-Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 134.
Monasickapanoughs.-Smith, Virginia, vol. i, 134.
Footnotes: [ + ]
|1.||↩||Smith, John. The true travels, adventures and observations of Captaine John Smith, etc. From the London edition of 1629, vol. i, p. 134. 2 volumes. Richmond, 1819.|
|2.||↩||Ibid, vol. i, p. 120.|
|3.||↩||Ibid, vol. i, p. 134 and map.|
|4.||↩||Ibid, vol. i, pp. 195-7.|
|5.||↩||Ibid, vol. i, pp. 208, 237.|
|6.||↩||Neill, E. D. Virginia Carolorum: the colony under the rule of Charles the first and second, 1625-1685, based upon manuscripts and documents of the period, p. 325. Albany, 1886.|
|7.||↩||Burk, John D. The history of Virginia from its first settlement to the present day. Petersburg, Va., 1804-1816. 4 volumes. [The original manuscript references Burk 2, at this point, but in the end notes fails to include a Burk 2 selection. I’ve included the reference to the book here, however the exact page at this time is not known.]|
|8.||↩||Beverley, Robert. History of Virginia, in four parts, etc. By a native and inhabitant of the place, p. 245. Second edition, revised and enlarges by the author. london, 1722. (Copy in Library of Congress.|
|9.||↩||Virginia Historical Society. Collections of the Virginia Historical Society, New series, pp. 42-3, 51. Volumes iii-x, Richmond, 1883-1891.|
|10.||↩||Lederer, John. The discoveries of John Lederer, in three several marches from Virginia to the west of Carolina, and other parts of the continent. Begun in March, 1669, and ended in September, 1670. Together with a general map of the whole territory which he traversed. Collected and translated out of Latin from his discourse and writings, by Sir William Talbot, baronet, etc. London, etc. 1672, p. 9. Map and 33 pages. (Copy in Library of Congress.|
|11.||↩||Ibid, pp. 2,3.|
|12.||↩||Lawson, John. The history of Carolina, containing the exact description and natural history of that country, etc., p. 82. (Reprint from the London edition of 1714.) Raleigh, 1860.|
|13.||↩||Beverley, Robert, op. cit.|
|14.||↩||Lederer, John, op. cit., pp. 11, 12.Lederer, John, op. cit., pp. 11, 12.|
|15.||↩||Ibid, pp. 4, 13.|
|16.||↩||Beverley, op. cit., p. 160.Beverley, op. cit., p. 160.|
|17.||↩||Lederer, John, op. cit., pp. 3-5, 17, 25-27.|
|18.||↩||Beverley, op. cit., pp. 157, 181-2.|
|19.||↩||New York. Documents relative to the colonial history of the state of New York. Procured in Holland, England, and France, by John Romeyn Brodhead, etc. Edited by E. B. O’Callaghan, Batts (1671), vol. iii, p. 194-197. Albany, 1856-’77. 12 vols.|