Joseph-François Lafitau

Lafitau’s comparative method (method of reciprocal illumination) rests on his "system" which is a compendium of his theoretical presupposition. He believed that man was created equal by God and was given a set of divine moral principles. These principles were gradually violated due to the inherited sinfulness of man—a consequence of the penalty of Original Sin. All men originally shared one religion with one God but over time people migrated to separate margins of the earth where they then lost touch with the values and traditions of this one "true religion" and culture.[13] Therefore, Lafitau believed in the "psychic unity of mankind" and the doctrine of primitive monotheism. Lafitau strove to find traces of this degenerated "true faith", of which Christianity was the highest form, among the Native Americans.

Lafitau’s version of these theories differed from that of his predecessors and contemporaries. Pierre Daniel Huet, for example, believed that the pagan gods and goddesses dated back to Moses and Zipporah. Lafitau was aware of this and he mentions Huet in his work.[14] Nevertheless, for Lafitau, this theory was flawed and vulnerable to the attacks of the atheists who claimed that religion was the invention of man and the work of politics. If Christianity originated from Moses, then all the peoples before this time would have had pagan religions, religions that were older than Christianity. This would further imply that there is no one underlining religion whose traces can be found in all the peoples of the world. This, which goes against Lafitau’s "system", would make it possible for atheists to attack the Christianity’s claim of being the "one true religion" .[15] Lafitau strove to find these traces of degenerated faith in a hope of proving his theory of unitary faith and unitary humanity.[16]

Lafitau believed that all cultures change over time, and that they will eventually reach the European level of civility. The Native Americans, according to him, were at a lower stage of development than the Europeans. They were at the same stage as the peoples of the Ancient Times, hence their customs could be juxtaposed with the disregard of time and place. This is the basis out of which his method emerges. What sets Lafitau apart from his predecessors and contemporaries, was the formulation of his method of reciprocal illumination. By juxtaposing one type of behavior, or a set of beliefs and customs, to those of other cultures who have reached the same level of developmental history, their similarities and differences would reveal information about both.[17]

For example, Lafitau describes the process of making celts by Native Americans, i.e. crude axes, by rubbing flint and rock against abrasive sandstone. This empirical information can then be juxtaposed against the European belief that relics similar to those were "thunder stones" deposited by bolts of lightning. Based on the empirical knowledge it can be extrapolated that the "thunder stones" were not deposited by lightning, rather they were made and used by the Gallic hunters, much in the same way as Native Americans use Celts.[18] In Lafitau’s words:

I have not limited myself to learning the characteristics of the Indian and informing myself about their customs, vestiges of the most remote antiquity. I have read carefully [the works] of the earliest authors who treated the customs, laws, and usages of the peoples of whom they had some knowledge. I have made a comparison of these customs with each other. I confess that, if the ancient authors have given me information on which to base happy conjectures about the Indians, the customs of the Indians have given me information on the basis of which I can understand more easily and explain more readily many things in the ancient authors.[19]

According to Anthony Pagden, Lafitau argued for the possibility of translating all human behavior, especially religious, into a language which he called "Symbolic Theology", which would explain the universal cultural patterns such as marriage, government and religion.[20] To achieve this, Lafitau emphasized the factual account of the evidence. By using field observations of the "savage" (Lafitau’s contemporary "savage"), he would compare them to the historical sources, on the peoples from antiquity. In so doing, Lafitau strove to reveal an underlining cultural pattern; a universal human culture and universal human system of belief.[21] In short, Lafitau wanted to establish the "science of manners and customs".[19]

Comparing Native American customs to those of the Ancients was a rhetorical strategy that was used for centuries before Lafitau, and as late as the 19th century. The Ancients, as well as people from the Bible, served as a source of anthropological knowledge, and as a model of admirable humanity.[22][23] It was used to create a more favorable image of alien peoples by comparing them to the "wise and enlightened" Ancients. The outlandish characteristics and customs of the Native Americans, when compared to similar, sometimes just as strange, costumes of the Ancients, would then become more acceptable. It would familiarize and elevate the image of the Native Americans by making them share in the qualities of the cultures that were still held in high esteem among the Europeans. For example, when describing Iroquois chieftains names, Lafitau warns that names such as Hoghouaho (the Great Wolf) or Hoskereouak (the Great Bear), might sound strange to his fellow Europeans, however, he points out that in antiquity people’s names were names of divinities, and they, in turn, were names of animals as well.[24] In short, the comparative method made the strange custom more familiar and the "savage" more human.

Lafitau is remembered for applying the comparative method with a greater level of competency than any of his contemporaries. Through original field observations, he was able to critique the works of earlier writers on Primitive peoples.[25] By using the Comparative Method, Lafitau rejected all theories of social and cultural change and instead used his study to demonstrate the similarities in customs, practices, and usages of the Native North Americans with diverse peoples from different continents and centuries.[26]

His major work, written in French, was first published in 1724 in Paris.[28] It is entitled Customs of the American Indians Compared with the Customs of Primitive Times (Moeurs des Sauvages Amériquains, Comparées aux Moeurs des Premiers Temps) and is 1,100 pages in total.[29] In 1974, Dr. William Fenton and Dr. Elizabeth Moore translated and edited the work as part of the Champlain Society's General Series.[30]

Daily lives of Indians in New France (eighteenth century).[31]

Manufacture of maple syrup by Native Americans in New France (eighteenth century).[32]

Volume I

1. Design and Plan of the Work
2. The Origin of the peoples of America
3. Idea or Character of Primitives Peoples in General
4. Religion
5. Political Government
6. Marriage and Education

Volume II

1. Occupations of the Men in the Villages
2. Occupation of the Women
3. Warfare
4. Embassies and Trade
5. Hunting and Fishing
6. Games
7. Sickness and Medicine
8. Death, Burial and Mourning
9. Language

The length of each section reflects Lafitau’s disproportionate devotion to specific aspects of the Iroquois. His 350-page chapter on religion accounts for his personal role as a missionary in Canada. Chapters on government, marriage, education, death, and burial are all roughly 70 pages in length. The longest chapters in Volume II on Occupation of the Women and Warfare is related to the importance of these subjects in Iroquois culture.[33]

Aside from Moeurs des Sauvages Amériquains Lafitau wrote two other books:

• Histoire de Jean de Brienne, Roy de Jérusalem et Empereur de Constantinople was released in Paris before his return to Canada, 1727. However, the subject matter of this book is not widely known and very few copies are in circulation.[8]
• In Histoire des découvertes et conquestes des Portugais dans le Nouveau Monde, Lafitau wrote two volumes in an attempt to make available to French readers details of exploration and adventure that were unknown to them. These commonly read and used chronicles of customs were published in 1733. Continuing with the same development of customs discussed in his first major work Moeurs des Sauvages Amériquains, Lafitau maintains that customs can only be understood in the original language of those who practice them.[8]