# Ancient Society/Part 2/Chapter 5: The Iroquois Confederacy

Layout 2
CHAPTER V
THE IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY
A tendency to confederate for mutual defense would very naturally exist among kindred and contiguous tribes. When the advantages of a union had been appreciated by actual experience the organization, at first a league, would gradually cement into a federal unity. The state of perpetual warfare in which they lived would quicken this natural tendency into action among such tribes as were sufficiently advanced in intelligence and in the arts of life to perceive its benefits. It would be simply a growth from a lower into a higher organization by an extension of the principle which united the gentes in a tribe.
As might have been expected, several confederacies existed in different parts of North America when discovered, some of which were quite remarkable in plan and structure. Among the number may be mentioned the Iroquois Confederacy of five independent tribes, the Creek Confederacy of six, the Otawa Confederacy of three, the Dakota League of the “Seven Council Fires,” the Moqui Confederacy in New Mexico of Seven Pueblos, and the Aztec Confederacy of three tribes in the Valley of Mexico. It is probable that the Village Indians in other parts of Mexico, in Central and in South America, were quite generally organized in confederacies consisting of two or more kindred tribes. Progress necessarily took this direction from the nature of their institutions, and from the law governing their development. Nevertheless the formation of a confederacy out ​of such materials, and with such unstable geographical relations, was a difficult undertaking. It was easiest of achievement by the Village Indians from the nearness to each other of their pueblos, and from the smallness of their areas; but it was accomplished in occasional instances by tribes in the Lower Status of barbarism, and notably by the Iroquois. Wherever a confederacy was formed it would of itself evince the superior intelligence of the people.
The two highest examples of Indian confederacies in North America were those of the Iroquois and of the Aztecs. From their acknowledged superiority as military powers, and from their geographical positions, these confederacies, in both cases, produced remarkable results. Our knowledge of the structure and principles of the former is definite and complete, while of the latter it is far from satisfactory. The Aztec confederacy has been handled in such a manner historically as to leave it doubtful whether it was simply a league of three kindred tribes, offensive and defensive, or a systematic confederacy like that of the Iroquois. That which is true of the latter was probably in a general sense true of the former, so that a knowledge of one will tend to elucidate the other.
The conditions under which confederacies spring into being and the principles on which they are formed are remarkably simple. They grow naturally, with time, out of pre-existing elements. Where one tribe had divided into several and these subdivisions occupied independent but contiguous territories, the confederacy re-integrated them in a higher organization, on the basis of the common gentes they possessed, and of the affiliated dialects they spoke. The sentiment of kin embodied in the gens, the common lineage of the gentes, and their dialects still mutually intelligible, yielded the material elements for a confederation. The confederacy, therefore, had the gentes for its basis and centre, and stock language for its circumference. No one has been found that reached beyond the bounds of the dialects of a common language. If this natural barrier had been crossed it ​would have forced heterogeneous elements into the organization. Cases have occurred where the remains of a tribe, not cognate in speech, as the Natchez, have been admitted into an existing confederacy; but this exception would not invalidate the general proposition. It was impossible for an Indian power to arise upon the American continent through a confederacy of tribes organized in gentes, and advance to a general supremacy unless their numbers were developed from their own stock. The multitude of stock languages is a standing explanation of the failure. There was no possible way of becoming connected on equal terms with a confederacy excepting through membership in a gens and tribe, and a common speech.
It may here be remarked, parenthetically, that it was impossible in the Lower, in the Middle, or in the Upper Status of barbarism for a kingdom to arise by natural growth in any part of the earth under gentile institutions. I venture to make this suggestion at this early stage of the discussion in order to call attention more closely to the structure and principles of ancient society, as organized in gentes, phratries and tribes. Monarchy is incompatible with gentilism. It belongs to the later period of civilization. Despotisms appeared in some instances among the Grecian tribes in the Upper Status of barbarism; but they were founded upon usurpation, were considered illegitimate by the people, and were, in fact, alien to the ideas of gentile society. The Grecian tyrannies were despotisms founded upon usurpation, and were the germ out of which the later kingdoms arose; while the so-called kingdoms of the heroic age were military democracies, and nothing more.
The Iroquois have furnished an excellent illustration of the manner in which a confederacy is formed by natural growth assisted by skillful legislation. Originally emigrants from beyond the Mississippi, and probably a branch of the Dakota stock, they first made their way ​to the valley of the St. Lawrence and settled themselves near Montreal. Forced to leave this region by the hostility of surrounding tribes, they sought the central region of New York. Coasting the eastern shore of Lake Ontario in canoes, for their numbers were small, they made their first settlement at the mouth of the Oswego river, where, according to their traditions, they remained for a long period of time. They were then in at least three distinct tribes, the Mohawks, the Onondagas, and the Senecas. One tribe subsequently established themselves at the head of the Canandaigua lake and became the Senecas. Another tribe occupied the Onondaga Valley and became the Onondagas. The third passed eastward and settled first at Oneida near the site of Utica, from which place the main portion removed to the Mohawk Valley and became the Mohawks. Those who remained became the Oneidas. A portion of the Onondagas or Senecas settled along the eastern shore of the Cayuga lake and became the Cayugas. New York, before its occupation by the Iroquois, seems to have been a part of the area of the Algonkin tribes. According to Iroquois traditions they displaced its anterior inhabitants as they gradually extended their settlements eastward to the Hudson, and westward to the Genesee. Their traditions further declare that a long period of time elapsed after their settlement in New York before the confederacy was formed, during which they made common cause against their enemies and thus experienced the advantages of the federal principle both for aggression and defense. They resided in villages, which were usually surrounded with stockades, and subsisted upon fish and game, and the products of a limited horticulture. In numbers they did not at any time exceed 20,000 souls, if they ever reached that number. Precarious subsistence and incessant warfare repressed numbers in all the aboriginal tribes, including the Village Indians as well. The Iroquois were enshrouded in the great forests, which then overspread New York, against which they had no power to contend. They were first discovered A. D. 1608. About 1675, they attained their culminat​ing point when their dominion reached over an area remarkably large, covering the greater parts of New York, Pennsylvania and Ohio, and portions of Canada north of Lake Ontario. At the time of their discovery, they were the highest representatives of the Red Race north of New Mexico in intelligence and advancement, though perhaps inferior to some of the Gulf tribes in the arts of life. In the extent and quality of their mental endowments they must be ranked among the highest Indians in America. Although they have declined in numbers there are still four thousand Iroquois in New York, about a thousand in Canada, and near that number in the West; thus illustrating the efficiency as well as persistency of the arts of barbarous life in sustaining existence. It is now said that they are slowly increasing.
​It is affirmed by the Iroquois that the confederacy was formed by a council of wise-men and chiefs of the five tribes which met for that purpose on the north shore of Onondaga lake, near the site of Syracuse; and that before its session was concluded the organization was perfected, and set in immediate operation. At their periodical councils for raising up sachems they still explain its origin as the result of one protracted effort of legislation. It was probably a consequence of a previous alliance for mutual defense, the advantages of which they had perceived and which they sought to render permanent.
The origin of the plan is ascribed to a mythical, or, at least, traditionary person, Hä-yo-went’-hä, the Hiawatha of Longfellow’s celebrated poem, who was present at this council and the central person in its management. In his communications with the council he used a wise-man of the Onondagas, Da-gä-no-we’-dä, as an interpreter and speaker to expound the structure and principles of the proposed confederacy. The same tradition further declares that when the work was accomplished Hä-yo-went’-hä miraculously disappeared in a white canoe, which arose with him in the air and bore him out of their sight. Other prodigies, according to this tradition, attended and signalized the formation of the confederacy, which is still celebrated among them as a masterpiece of Indian wisdom. Such in truth it was; and it will remain in history as a monument of their genius in developing gentile institutions. It will also be remembered as an illustration of what tribes of mankind have been able to accomplish in the art of government while in the Lower Status of barbarism, and under the disadvantages this condition implies.
Which of the two persons was the founder of the confederacy it is difficult to determine. The silent Hä-yo-went’-hä was, not unlikely, a real person of Iroquois lineage; but tradition has enveloped his character so ​completely in the supernatural that he loses his place among them as one of their number. If Hiawatha were a real person, Da-gä-no-we’-dä must hold a subordinate place; but, if a mythical person invoked for the occasion, then to the latter belongs the credit of planning the confederacy.
The Iroquois affirm that the confederacy as formed by this council, with its powers, functions and mode of administration, has come down to them through many generations to the present time with scarcely a change in its internal organization. When the Tuscaroras were subsequently admitted, their sachems were allowed by courtesy to sit as equals in the general council, but the original number of sachems was not increased, and in strictness those of the Tuscaroras formed no part of the ruling body.
The general features of the Iroquois Confederacy may be summarized in the following propositions:
I. The confederacy was a union of Five Tribes, composed of common gentes, under one government on the basis of equality; each Tribe remaining independent in all manners pertaining to local self-government.
II. It created a General Council of Sachems, who were limited in number, equal in rank and authority, and invested with supreme powers over all matters pertaining to the Confederacy.
III. Fifty Sachemships were created and named in perpetuity in certain gentes of the several Tribes; with power in these gentes to fill vacancies, as often as they occurred, by election from among their respective members, and with the further power to depose from office for cause; but the right to invest these Sachems with office was reserved to the General Council.
IV. The Sachems of the Confederacy were also Sachems in their respective Tribes, and with the Chiefs of these Tribes formed the Council of each, which was supreme over all matters pertaining to the Tribe exclusively.
​VI. In the General Council the Sachems voted by Tribes, which gave to each Tribe a negative upon the others.
VII. The Council of each Tribe had power to convene the General Council; but the latter had no power to convene itself.
VIII. The General Council was open to the orators of the people for the discussion of public questions; but the Council alone decided.
IX. The Confederacy had no chief Executive Magistrate, or official head.
X. Experiencing the necessity for a General Military Commander they created the office in a dual form, that one might neutralize the other. The two principal Warchiefs created were made equal in powers.
These several propositions will be considered and illustrated, but without following the precise form or order in which they are stated.
At the institution of the confederacy fifty permanent sachemships were created and named, and made perpetual in the gentes to which they were assigned. With the exception of two, which were filled but once, they have been held by as many different persons in succession as generations have passed away between that time and the present. The name of each sachemship is also the personal name of each sachem while he holds the office, each one in succession taking the name of his predecessor. These sachems, when in session, formed the council of the confederacy in which the legislative, executive, and judicial powers were vested, although such a discrimination of functions had not come to be made. To secure order in succession, the several gentes in which these offices were made hereditary were empowered to elect successors from among their respective members when vacancies occurred, as elsewhere explained. As a further measure of protection to their own body each sachem, after his election and its confirmation, was invested with his office by a council of the confederacy. When thus installed his name was “taken away” and that of the sachemship was bestowed upon him. By this ​name he was afterwards known among them. They were all upon equality in rank, authority, and privileges.
These sachemships were distributed unequally among the five tribes; but without giving to either a preponderance of power; and unequally among the gentes of the last three tribes. The Mohawks had nine sachems, the Oneidas nine, the Onondagas fourteen, the Cayugas ten, and the Senecas eight. This was the number at first, and it has remained the number to the present time. A table of these sachemships is subjoined, with their names in the Seneca dialect, and their arrangement in classes to facilitate the attainment of unanimity in council. In foot-notes will be found the signification of these names, and the gentes to which they belonged.
Table of sachemships of the Iroquois, founded at the institution of the Confederacy; with the names which have been borne by their sachems in succession, from its formation to the present time:
Mohawks. :
| I. | 1. Da-gä-e’-o-gǎ. | 2. Hä-yo-went’-hä. | 3. Da-gä-no-we’-dä. |
| II. | 4. So-ä-e-wä’ah. | 5. Da-yo’-ho-go. | 6. O-ä-ä’-go-wä. |
| III. | 7. Da-an-no-gä’-e-neh. | 8. Sä-da’-gä-e-wä-deh. | 9. Häs-dä-weh’-se-ont-hä. |
| Oneidas. ||||
| I. | 1. Ho-däs’-hä-teh. | 2. Ga-no-gweh’-yo-do. | 3. Da-yo-hä-gwen-da. |
| II. | 4. So-no-sase’. | 5. To-no-ä-ga’-o. | 6. Hä-de-ä-dun-nent’-hä. |
| III. | 7. Da-wä-dä’-o-dä-yo. | 8. Gä-ne-ä-dus’-ha-yeh. | 9. Ho-wus’-hä-da-o. |
| Onondagas. ||||
| I. | 1. To-do-dä’-ho. | 2. To-nes’-sa-ah. | 3. Da-ät-ga-dose. |
| II. | 4. Gä-neä-dä’-je-wake. | 5. Ah-wä’-ga-yat. | 6. Da-ä-yat’-gwä-e. |
| III. | 7. Ho-no-we-nă’-to. |
| IV. | 8. Gä-wă-nă’-san-do. | 9. Hä-e’-ho. | 10. Ho-yo-ne-ä’-ne. |
| | | 11. Sa-dä’-kwä-seh. |
| V. | 12. Sä-go-ga-hä’. | 13. Ho-sa-hä’-ho. | 14. Skä-no’-wun-de. |
| Cayugas. ||||
| I. | 1. Da-gä’-ă-yo. | 2. Da-je-no’dä-weh-o. | 3. Gä-dä’-gwä-sa. |
| | 4. So-yo-wasé. | 5. Hä-de-äs’-yo-no. |
| II. | 6. Da-yo-o-yo’-go. | 7. Jote-ho-weh’-ko. | 8. De-ä-wate’-ho. |
| III. | 9. To-dä-e-ho’. | 10. Des-gä’-heh. |
| Senecas. ||||
| I. | 1. Ga-ne-o-di’-yo. | 2. Sä-dä-gä’-o-yase. |
| II. | 3. Gä-no-gi’-e. | 4. Sä-geh’-jo-wä. |
| III. | 5. Sä-de-a-no’-wus. | 6. Nis-hä-ne-a’-nent. |
| IV. | 7. Gä-no-go-e-dä’-we. | 8. Do-ne-ho-gä’-weh. |
Two of these sachemships have been filled but once since their creation. Hä-yo-went’-hä and Da-ga-no-we’-​do consented to take the office among the Mohawk sachems, and to leave their names in the list upon condition that after their demise the two should remain thereafter vacant. They were installed upon these terms, and the stipulation has been observed to the present day. At all councils for the investiture of sachems their names are still called with the others as a tribute of respect to their memory. The general council, therefore, consisted of but forty-eight members.
Each sachem had an assistant sachem, who was elected by the gens of his principal from among its members, and who was installed with the same forms and ceremonies. He was styled an “aid.” It was his duty to stand behind his superior on all occasions of ceremony, to act as his messenger, and in general to be subject to his directions. It gave to the aid the office of chief, and rendered probable his election as the successor of his principal after the decease of the latter. In their figurative language these aids of the sachems were styled “Braces in the Long House,” which symbolized the confederacy.
​For all purposes of tribal government the five tribes were independent of each other. Their territories were separated by fixed boundary lines, and their tribal interests were distinct. The eight Seneca sachems, in conjunction with the other Seneca chiefs, formed the council of the tribe by which its affairs were administered, leaving to each of the other tribes the same control over their separate interests. As an organization the tribe was neither weakened nor impaired by the confederate compact. Each was in vigorous life within its appropriate sphere, presenting some analogy to our own states within an embracing republic. It is worthy of remembrance that the Iroquois commended to our forefathers a union of the colonies similar to their own as early as 1755. They saw in the common interests and common speech of the several colonies the elements for a confederation, which was as far as their vision was able to penetrate.
The tribes occupied positions of entire equality in the confederacy, in rights, privileges and obligations. Such special immunities as were granted to one or another indicate no intention to establish an unequal compact, or to concede unequal privileges. There were organic provisions apparently investing particular tribes with superior power; as, for example, the Onondagas were allowed fourteen sachems and the Senecas but eight; and a larger body of sachems would naturally exercise a stronger influence in council than a smaller. But in this case it gave no additional power, because the sachems of each tribe had an equal voice in forming a decision, and a negative upon the others. When in council they agreed by tribes, and unanimity in opinion was essential to every public act. The Onondagas were made “Keepers of the Wampum,” and “Keepers of the Council Brand,” the Mohawks, “Receivers of Tribute” from subjugated tribes, and the Senecas “Keepers of the Door” of the Long House. These and some other similar provisions were made for the common advantage.
The cohesive principle of the confederacy did not spring exclusively from the benefits of an alliance for ​mutual protection, but had a deeper foundation in the bond of kin. The confederacy rested upon the tribes ostensibly, but primarily upon common gentes. All the members of the same gens, whether Mohawks, Oneidas, Onondagas, Cayugas, or Senecas, were brothers and sisters to each other in virtue of their descent from the same common ancestor; and they recognized each other as such with the fullest cordiality. When they met the first inquiry was the name of each other’s gens, and next the immediate pedigree of their respective sachems; after which they were usually able to find, under their peculiar system of consanguinity, the relationship in which they stood to each other. Three of the gentes, namely, the Wolf, Bear and Turtle, were common to the five tribes; these and three others were common to three tribes. In effect the Wolf gens, through the division of an original tribe into five, was now in five divisions, one of which was in each tribe. It was the same with the Bear and the Turtle gentes. The Deer, Snipe and Hawk gentes were common to the Senecas, Cayugas and Onondagas. Between the separated parts of each gens, although its members spoke different dialects of the same language, there existed a fraternal connection which linked the nations together with indissoluble bonds. When the Mohawk of the Wolf gens recognized an Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga or Seneca of the same gens as a brother, and when the members of the other divided gentes did the same, the relationship was not ideal, but a fact founded upon consanguinity, and upon faith in an assured lineage older than their dialects and coeval with their unity as one people. In the estimation of an Iroquois every member of his gens in whatever tribe was as certainly a kinsman as an own brother. This cross-relationship between persons of the same gens in the different tribes is ​still preserved and recognized among them in all its original force. It explains the tenacity with which the fragments of the old confederacy still cling together. If either of the five tribes had seceded from the confederacy it would have severed the bond of kin, although this would have been felt but slightly. But had they fallen into collision it would have turned the gens of the Wolf against their gentile kindred, Bear against Bear, in a word brother against brother. The history of the Iroquois demonstrates the reality as well as persistency of the bond of kin, and the fidelity with which it was respected. During the long period through which the confederacy endured, they never fell into anarchy, nor ruptured the organization.
The “Long House” (Ho-de’-no-sote) was made the symbol of the confederacy; and they styled themselves the “People of the Long House” (Ho-de’-no-sau-nee). This was the name, and the only name, with which they distinguished themselves. The confederacy produced a gentile society more complex than that of a single tribe, but it was still distinctively a gentile society. It was, however, a stage of progress in the direction of a nation, for nationality is reached under gentile institutions. Coalescence is the last stage in this process. The four Athenian tribes coalesced in Attica into a nation by the intermingling of the tribes in the same area, and by the gradual disappearance of geographical lines between them. The tribal names and organizations remained in full vitality as before, but without the basis of an independent territory. When political society was instituted on the basis of the deme or township, and all the residents of the deme became a body politic, irrespective of their gens or tribe, the coalescence became complete.
The coalescence of the Latin and Sabine gentes into the Roman people and nation was a result of the same processes. In all alike the gens, phratry and tribe were the first three stages of organization. The confederacy followed as the fourth. But it does not appear, either among the Grecian or Latin tribes in the Later Period of barbarism, that it became more than a loose league ​for offensive and defensive purposes. Of the nature and details of organization of the Grecian and Latin confederacies our knowledge is limited and imperfect, because the facts are buried in the obscurity of the traditionary period. The process of coalescence arises later than the confederacy in gentile society; but it was a necessary as well as vital stage of progress by means of which the nation, the state, and political society were at last attained. Among the Iroquois tribes it had not manifested itself.
The valley of Onondaga, as the seat of the central tribe, and the place where the Council Brand was supposed to be perpetually burning, was the usual though not the exclusive place for holding the councils of the confederacy. In ancient times it was summoned to convene in the autumn of each year; but public exigencies often rendered its meetings more frequent. Each tribe had power to summon the council, and to appoint the time and place of meeting at the council-house of either tribe, when circumstances rendered a change from the usual place at Onondaga desirable. But the council had no power to convene itself.
Originally the principal object of the council was to raise up sachems to fill vacancies in the ranks of the ruling body occasioned by death or deposition; but it transacted all other business which concerned the common welfare. In course of time, as they multiplied in numbers and their intercourse with foreign tribes became more extended, the council fell into three distinct kinds, which may be distinguished as Civil, Mourning and Religious. The first declared war and made peace, sent and received embassies, entered into treaties with foreign tribes, regulated the affairs of subjugated tribes, and took all needful measures to promote the general welfare. The second raised up sachems and invested them with office. It received the name of Mourning Council because the first of its ceremonies was the lament for the deceased ruler whose vacant place was to be filled. The third was held for the observance of a general religious festival. It was made an occasion for the confederated tribes to ​Page:Ancient society; or, Researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization (IA cu31924014466134).pdf/159 ​Page:Ancient society; or, Researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization (IA cu31924014466134).pdf/160 ​Page:Ancient society; or, Researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization (IA cu31924014466134).pdf/161 ​Page:Ancient society; or, Researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization (IA cu31924014466134).pdf/162 ​Page:Ancient society; or, Researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization (IA cu31924014466134).pdf/163 ​Page:Ancient society; or, Researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization (IA cu31924014466134).pdf/164 ​Page:Ancient society; or, Researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization (IA cu31924014466134).pdf/165 ​Page:Ancient society; or, Researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization (IA cu31924014466134).pdf/166 ​Page:Ancient society; or, Researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization (IA cu31924014466134).pdf/167 ​Page:Ancient society; or, Researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization (IA cu31924014466134).pdf/168 ​Page:Ancient society; or, Researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization (IA cu31924014466134).pdf/169 ​Page:Ancient society; or, Researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization (IA cu31924014466134).pdf/170 ​Page:Ancient society; or, Researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization (IA cu31924014466134).pdf/171 ​Page:Ancient society; or, Researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization (IA cu31924014466134).pdf/172 ​Page:Ancient society; or, Researches in the lines of human progress from savagery, through barbarism to civilization (IA cu31924014466134).pdf/173 ​requirements of society as it approached civilization. Glimpses of a state, founded upon territory and property, were breaking upon the Grecian and Roman minds before which gentes and tribes were to disappear. To enter upon the second plan of government, it was necessary to supersede the gentes by townships and city wards—the gentile by a territorial system. The going down of the gentes and the uprising of organized townships mark the dividing line, pretty nearly, between the barbarian and the civilized worlds—between ancient and modern society.
* ↑ They were admitted into the Creek Confederacy after their overthrow by the French.
* ↑ About 1651-5, they expelled their kindred tribes, the Eries, from the region between the Genesee river and Lake Erie, and shortly afterwards the Neutral Nations from the Niagara river, and thus came into possession of the remainder of New York, with the exception of the lower Hudson and Long Island.
* ↑ The Iroquois claimed that it had existed from one hundred and fifty to two hundred years when they first saw Europeans. The generations of sachems in the history by David Cusik (a Tuscarora) would make it more ancient.
* ↑ My friend, Horatio Hale, the eminent philologist, came, as he informed me, to this conclusion.
* ↑ These names signify as follows: 1. “Neutral,” or “the Shield.”
* ↑ “Man who Combs.”
* ↑ “Inexhaustible.”
* ↑ “Small Speech.”
* ↑ “At the Forks.”
* ↑ “At the Great River.”
* ↑ “Dragging his Horns.”
* ↑ “Even-Tempered.”
* ↑ “Hanging up Rattles.” The sachems in class one belonged to the Turtle gens, in class two to the Wolf gens, and in class three to the Bear gens.
* ↑ “A Man bearing a Burden.”
* ↑ “A Man covered with Cat-tail Down.”
* ↑ “Opening through the Woods.”
* ↑ “A Long String.”
* ↑ “A Man with a Headache.”
* ↑ “Swallowing Himself.”
* ↑ “Place of the Echo.”
* ↑ “War-club on the Ground.”
* ↑ “A Man Steaming Himself.” The sachems in the first class belong to the Wolf gens, in the second to the Turtle gens, and in the third to the Bear gens.
* ↑ “Tangled,” Bear gens.
* ↑ “On the Watch,” Bear gens. This sachem and the one before him, were hereditary councilors of the To-do-dä’-ho, who held the most illustrious sachemship.
* ↑ “Bitter Body,” Snipe gens.
* ↑ Turtle gens.
* ↑ This sachem was hereditary keeper of the wampum; Wolf gens.
* ↑ Deer gens.
* ↑ Deer gens.
* ↑ Turtle gens.
* ↑ Bear gens.
* ↑ “Having a Glimpse,” Deer gens.
* ↑ “Large Mouth,” Turtle gens.
* ↑ “Over the Creek.” Turtle gens.
* ↑ “Man Frightened,” Deer gens.
* ↑ Heron gens.
* ↑ Bear gens.
* ↑ Bear gens.
* ↑ Turtle gens.
* ↑ Not ascertained.
* ↑ “Very Cold,” Turtle gens.
* ↑ Heron gens.
* ↑ Snipe gens.
* ↑ Snipe gens.
* ↑ “Handsome Lake,” Turtle gens.
* ↑ “Level Heavens,” Snipe gens.
* ↑ Turtle gens.
* ↑ “Great Forehead,” Hawk gens.
* ↑ “Assistant,” Bear gens.
* ↑ “Falling Day,” Snipe gens.
* ↑ “Hair Burned Off,” Snipe gens.
* ↑ “Open Door,” Wolf gens.
* ↑ The children of brothers are themselves brothers and sisters to each other, the children of the latter were also brothers and sisters, and so downwards indefinitely; the children and descendants of sisters are the same. The children of a brother and sister are cousins, the children of the latter are cousins, and so downwards indefinitely. A knowledge of the relationships to each other of the members of the same gens is never lost.