Kerry Nelson wrote about inference of Christian influence in the Mohawk
Iroquois arcaheological record:

>... later eighteenth century sites produced Native American
>graves containing burials interred in the European style (in wooden coffins,
>extended, laying on the back) as opposed to the traditional Native style
>(flexed).  Grave goods at the earlier sites included a mixture of Native
>American and European trade articles like turtle effigy pendants, projectile
>points, trade beads, and Jesuit religious objects while the later sites
>contained more European and fewer Native American objects.  These sites
>represent early conversion of Mohawk Indians to Catholicism by Jesuits with
>evidence of the retention of some Native material culture.  It is well known
>that the Jesuits were more tolerant of Native culture than were other
>Christians (see "The Invasion Within" by Axtell).  I would be interested in
>learning whether differences between these and other Christian-Indian sites
>exist (i.e. evidence of less tolerant English Protestants, perhaps in the
>exclusion of Native grave goods from early Christian Indian graves).
>


In a research paper that I did a few years ago on the Patterns of Iroquois
Burial http://users.erols.com/weiskotten/BurialPatterns.html, I concluded
that such changes in grave offerings, burial behavior, and settlement
pattern data as Kelly Nelson and other researchers had attributed to
Christian influence might not reflect Christianization, but actually
represent simply the natural evolution of behavior and the presence of a
wealthy European material culture and the changes that it brought to society.

The peak of missionary influence in Iroquoia is between the 1650s and the
late 1690s when the Jesuits were most active.  There had been occasional
contact with Christianity before that time through men like Fr. Isaac
Jogues as early as 1643 but sustained influence came when the a number of
Jesuits established missions in the Iroquois villages following a peace
declaration in 1667.  As usual, the priests were the first to enter the
village and placate the former enemies into accepting governmental
emissaries and traders.

Other influence came with Huron adoptees, eastern refugees who had been
under the wing of New England's ministers, and in the late 18th and early
19th century a large number of resident missionaries of New Light and
Wesleyan backgrounds ruled the lives of entire villages but had little
individual success.  The early 18th century to post-American Revolution was
a time of little influence from proselytizers and the major contacts with
European culture were the governments of New France and colonial New York
who vied vehemently for Iroquois alliances and allegiance - usually by
trying to out-do each other in pouring huge quantities of trade and
material goods into the Iroquois villages.

The patterns of burial and inclusion of goods that Nelson describes started
long before the arrival of missionaries into the New York Iroquois area,
and was developing out of the prot-historic patterns of the late 16th
century.

In Oneida, the next nation to the west from the Mohawks, Fr. Milet noted in
1674 that,  although the Indians recited prayers over the dead, he still
had hopes "that, in time, we shall introduce Christian burial" (JR 58:191).
 That was 25 years after the end of the influx of adopted and captured
Hurons (who had known Christianity for a generation) into Iroquoia (1649),
20 years after the first sustained Jesuit mission to Onondaga (1656) and 7
years after Fr. Bruyas and then Fr. Milet had erected the Mission of St.
Xavier and begun living full-time at Oneida (1667-1684).

That is not very influential, I'd say.

In looking at the larger patterns, the Iroquois across the face of what is
now New York state had been placing their dead in extended good-filled
burials for several generations before the Jesuits came to their
communities.  Even after they had been present for a generation there is
little empirical evidence of Christian burial behavior in the available
data and we are in most cases mistaking European material culture
influences for Christian influences.  Jesuit items such as rings and
crucifi are far more likely to be found in refuse pits throughout this
period so are we to interpret that as a disdain for things Christian?
Perhaps not, as all sorts of other items that appear to us today to be
still serviceable, such as beads, blades, and other tools, are found in the
middens along with the rings and such.

While the Jesuits were profoundly influential in modifying the behavior of
their Iroquois hosts, this was, as religion should be, on a very personal
level.  While there may have been many converts there were always many more
who did not convert and who were constantly at odds with the priests to
continue and protect their heritage and culture.  In that often hostile
environment the priests encouraged converts to move to Christian refuge
villages along the St. Lawrence where they could be among people of like
mind and spirit (and of course close to the French and away from the
meddling paws of colonial New York.), thus removing their influence from
the general population of the ancestral village.

Conversely, and the major theme of my research project, is that perhaps
there were other behavior patterns at play.  There are huge unnatural and
unexplained gaps in the mortuary record and perhaps the lack of solid
evidence for Christian influenced burials (as opposed to European
influenced burials) and mid-17th century Christian burials may be
reflective of an unidentified behavior in which Christian burials might
have been carried out in a manner that has left us no trace in the
archaeological record.

Of course, we would expect the priests and the most incredibly devout
converts would be buried in a recognizably "Christian" form, but just how
did regular Christians like to be buried - and is that any different than
how non-Christians of the same community would be interred?

        Dan W.