COLONIALA Study of Virginia Indians and Jamestown: The First Century

CHAPTER 8:
Bacon's Rebellion, 1676: A Review of the Sources and Interpretations

Thane Harpole

Bacon's Rebellion has given rise to an extensive historiographical dialogue during the three centuries since the events so named transpired. Most sources agree on the character of the events themselves, and the primary participants, but there is little uniformity of agreement about the ultimate causes and effects of this episode, and the motives of the people involved. It has engendered wildly varying interpretations about the social, economic and political situation of Virginia during the 1670s, and equally disparate views about the impact of the rebellion on later generations. This depth of historical inquiry and popular interest underscores the importance of studying Bacon's Rebellion. Despite the extensive research, much remains to be discovered about these important events. The paucity of documentation relating to seventeenth century Virginia reiterates the need to examine all available sources of information, including public and family records, land patents and transactions, archaeological investigations, and oral history in order to arrive at a richer understanding of the events and implications of Bacon's Rebellion. The following paper summarizes the rebellion and reviews the available sources that interpret its events and impacts on Virginia's peoples.

There is little doubt that Bacon's Rebellion was a pivotal event in the history of Virginia. It has long been prominent in the annals of Virginia historiography. It has been memorialized in novels and hailed as an event that foreshadowed the American Revolution. Though the rebellion was short-lived, according to its many chroniclers it had rippling effects that variously changed the nature of Virginia colonial government, altered westward settlement practices, fostered ideas of democracy and English liberties that were drawn on during the American Revolution, and radicalized colonial relations with Virginia Indians. Most contemporary accounts of the rebellion were clearly biased, and many later histories were just as weighted towards one side or the other, casting doubts about their reliability. However, the rebellion probably dramatically altered the relationship between Virginia Indians and the colonists, deepening the mistrust and marginalization on the part of the surviving Indians, and exacerbating racial hatred and violence against Native groups by the colonists.

Ostensibly the events known as Bacon's Rebellion began in the spring of 1676, when Nathaniel Bacon, Jr. agreed, without obtaining a commission from Governor William Berkeley, to lead an attack on some Indian groups that had been raiding farmsteads along the fall lines of Virginia's rivers. However, a series of clashes between frontier colonists and several Indian tribes had begun in July 1675, and the violence was escalating. Both Indians and colonists led raids and attacks and committed atrocities for various reasons, emphasizing the fragility of their peaceful coexistence. It was a pattern continuously replayed during the seven decades of English settlement and expansion in Virginia. It was not an arrangement that could long endure. However, the events that become known as Bacon's Rebellion differed from earlier wars with the Indians.

Virginia's English population expanded rapidly during the 1650s and 1660s, with settlers pushing the borders in every direction. The economic motivations of the colonists and the continued influx of new arrivals ensured that conflict would occur. Once the raids began, both sides contributed to the violence, and the colonists often confused, or plainly disregarded the differences between friendly Indian tribes and those outside the bounds of any treaties. The Susquehannahs were ranging from the Potomac to the falls of the James River, displaced from their more northern territory, and colonists responded by attacking them, or sometimes friendlier tribes such as the Piscattaways, Appomattox, or Pamunkey. Governor Berkeley had authorized a force to deal with the problem on the Northern Neck, but the colonists murdered five chiefs who apparently had come out to make peace (Carson 1976:1-11; Morgan 1975:250-255).

Worried that more of this would cause a general rebellion among all the Indians, Berkeley was restrained in addressing the Indian threat at the falls of the James. He called a special session of the assembly and they took measures for the erection of several forts along the frontier to be manned with a standing force of 500 soldiers. These measures would be extremely costly, especially to the poor farmers, and many felt that they would be unlikely to have much effect on the Indians (Morgan 1975:253). Farmers on the Southside and on the upper parts of the James River requested a force to subdue the Indians, and when it was not forthcoming, they were compelled to take matters into their own hands.

When Bacon agreed to lead an angered band of settlers in an attack against the Indians in April 1676, he defied the governor, but seemed to be taking an action that many settlers on the periphery of English colonization felt was necessary. He may or may not have underestimated Berkeley's disapproval, but his actions led to an open war on Virginia Indians and an internal struggle for control of Virginia and its citizens. The subsequent events of 1676 are recounted in numerous sources and need not be detailed here. Bacon's untimely death in October allowed Berkeley to quickly recapture the reigns of power and launch a zealous campaign to punish the participants and recoup any losses. When the royal commissioners arrived in January 1677 order had largely been restored, but Berkeley's departure soon after marked the beginning of a new era.

The ultimate causes of this violent outbreak are numerous and necessary for understanding the reasons and implications of this conflict, and are also objects of contention among historians. The roots of the rebellion seem to have been borne of two primary forces: the continued expansion of English colonists onto Indian lands, and the economic and political oppression wrought by Virginia's wealthy planter elite upon the vast number of small farmers, servants and slaves comprising the bulk of the population. Expansion led to increased contact and increased friction with neighboring Indian tribes. Treaties were either poorly enforced, or flagrantly violated. Colonists living along the so-called frontiers balked at the low level of protection afforded them by the governor and his council, and resented the burden of levies and fees that fell disproportionately on them from the General Assembly, county courts, and vestries (Carson 1976:2-3; Morgan 1975:246-49). The policies that encouraged these results were those of Governor William Berkeley, who had ruled the colony for decades prior to 1676, as well as his small circle of long-serving members of the Council and General Assembly. Corruption and favoritism were key components of Virginia's seventeenth century government, and many in the colony had great cause for complaint. But did they have reason for rebellion?

There are dozens of books and articles addressing the issues of Bacon's Rebellion, but only during the latter half of the twentieth century have historians seriously probed the underlying causes and effects of these key events. The contemporary accounts are strongly biased and influenced by the opinions and atmosphere of Virginia during the 1670s. Historical works of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries tended to either criticize Bacon for subverting the rightful authority of the governor, or conversely praise him for rebelling against tyrannical leadership, without objectively balancing all the evidence on hand. Several of the modern sources have been examined in depth to summarize the dominant viewpoints and interpretations.

In her detailed overview of sources both historical and fictional concerning Bacon's Rebellion, Jane Carson thoroughly reviews the various contemporary accounts, historical works, plays, and novels, analyzing their diverse opinions and conclusions regarding the events and implications of the rebellion. Though not an exhaustive bibliography, Carson's work comes closer than any other to assembling and categorizing the rich literature concerning the events of 1676, and provides the reader with an indispensable tool for conducting further research. Carson provides a fair and objective account of the sources, but stops short of synthesizing the motives of those involved and the legacy of Bacon's Rebellion.

Wertenbaker, in Bacon's Rebellion, 1676, and other books, places much of his emphasis on the actions of Governor Berkeley, and his role as servant of the king and leader of the colony. He places blame for much of the discontent on the Navigation Acts, which limited colonial trade and decreased the profitability of tobacco. He also blamed Berkeley for reinforcing a system of political favoritism that enriched a few select men through political positions, lucrative fees and levies, and large tracts of land. Wertenbaker concludes that this forced many small farmers, who did not want to work as servants, to acquire property on the frontier and encroach on Indian lands (1957:2-16). Though Bacon took up arms against the Indians, and then led an assault against Berkeley and his supporters, he is commended as a reformer who sincerely wanted to redress the grievances and oppression of Berkeley's administration. Wertenbaker concludes that the rebellion was "a landmark in the development of self-government in Virginia," and that is persuaded future governors and kings to act cautiously in their management of colonial government, lest they awaken the supporters of "English liberty" yet again (1957:58).

In American Slavery American Freedom, Edmund Morgan devotes more than a chapter to the rebellion, from its origin to its implications. His analysis of wealth and social class and structure revealed a number of grievances among the poorer farmers and servants that, if not addressed, could and did threaten the security of the colony. He concludes that the rebellion began as a campaign against Indians that morphed into a rebellion and civil war, and then mostly a looting fest. It did not have many immediate results, but it eventually helped people realize that "resentment of an alien race might be more powerful than resentment of an upper class" (Morgan 1975: 269-270). It influenced the notion of white solidarity against and racism towards other races, namely Indian and African, in order to undermine any feeling of class similarities among the laboring multitude. Racism legitimized slavery and enforced the hegemony of the planter class by labeling poor, Euro-American colonists as better than non-Europeans. It eventually created a cause and an enemy that most white, Euro-Americans could rally around. For Indians and Africans, this realignment of views marginalized them even further, and helped foster an intense emotional enmity towards these groups that continues to be a factor in American society today. The previous system of order in seventeenth century Virginia, based primarily on enforcing deferential attitudes towards the ruling class and created to legitimize its narrow hold on Virginia's economy, was a precarious position which, as Bacon proved, could easily fall to rebellion.

1676, The End of American Independence charts a different course in its explanation of the events of that year. Stephen Webb writes that Bacon's Rebellion was in fact a revolution against the old order, and that its failure ended an era of political independence that would not be achieved again until the American Revolution. He argues that Bacon's Rebellion and other significant events ranging up and down the eastern seaboard, such as King Phillips War, were part of a much more extensive realignment of power between the imperial forces of the Iroquois Confederacy and England, through the administration of Edmund Andros in New York. The Indian tribes caught between the two opposing powers were largely destroyed or subjugated, and the intensity of the conflict wreaked havoc on all sides. It took several generations to return to a level of prosperity that had been achieved by 1676 Webb 1984:xv-xviii, 3-7). His emphasis on the larger sphere of English imperialism seeks to locate Bacon's Rebellion within a more holistic framework of the struggle for control of eastern North America, and emphasizes the roles of both the English and the numerous Indian tribes.

There are many other histories which discuss Bacon's Rebellion, beginning with a lengthy treatment by Robert Beverly in 1705. Most of the early histories are critical of Bacon, but after the American Revolution, numerous nineteenth century American historians praise Bacon's actions and see in him a foreshadowing of 1776 and an independent United States. For a thorough review of these many histories see Carson's, Bacon's Rebellion, 1676-1976. Carson chronicles each work, summarizing the viewpoints they express and the origins of their various conclusions.

In addition to historical works, soon after the conclusion of the rebellion, fictional works began to fill the popular imagination with stories of Bacon and Berkeley. As with nonfiction works, early plays, poems, and stories were often critical of Bacon. With the formation of the United States, authors began to see in Bacon's Rebellion an earlier source for patriotic fervor, and Nathaniel Bacon was turned into a popular hero. They draw a common thread linking Bacon's Rebellion directly to the American Revolution and the ideals of liberty and democracy. A surge of novels appeared in the late nineteenth and first half of the twentieth century, all of which, in one way or another, praised Bacon. These romanticized views of colonial life often utilize real characters and events, but most of the stories are highly imaginative. Details of seventeenth-century life, settlement, warfare, and government, are generally inaccurate and have helped to distort the events in the popular imagination. With some exceptions, many of these works also present unflattering views of the Indians and African slaves. In his preface to The Birth of Liberty , Lane summarizes some of this sentiment when he states that Bacon was "a patriot of the highest order, and a born leader of men (Lane 1909:3). Again, Carson provides a very thorough overview of the fictional literature concerning Bacon's Rebellion.

Conclusion

In summary, most sources agree on the general chain of events and immediate implications of Bacon's Rebellion. However, there are vastly disparate views about the substance and long-term effects of this event. Some argue that is was struggle for power between the old governing class and a new group of landowners. Others say it was more of a class struggle between the rich and the masses. Warfare with the Virginia Indians played a major role in the conflict, and the struggle may have been about English dominance over a perceived lesser race, and the lands on which they lived. Finally, some view Bacon's Rebellion as a wellspring of democratic principals and the antecedent to events and ideas that would eventually lead to a much larger rebellion and the formation of the United States. These views often have more to say about the authors and the times in which they lived, than they do about Bacon's Rebellion itself. One viewpoint that is largely lacking in the literature, however, is the role that the Virginia Indians played in this conflict, and the effects that this had on their culture and settlements.

Most of the works written about Bacon's Rebellion are Euro-centric, and they take for granted the ultimate control of the land by European-Americans and the diminishing importance of Indians in colonial and later society. This view minimizes and marginalizes the critical role of Indians in the processes of settlement and conflict, and has allowed historians to largely ignore their contributions. As colonial and American expansionism manifested itself across North America, the Indian inhabitants were removed, either in fact or in print, erasing their roles from the American cultural consciousness. The Euro-centric viewpoint distorts, to some extent, the actual events and fails to show how Bacon's Rebellion affected all of Virginia's cultural and economic groups. The economic exploitation of land and people that drove European colonization of the New World was antithetical to the way of life of most Native Americans. On a smaller scale, many English settlers who came to Virginia for land and profit, settled in a frontier zone where interaction with Indians was commonplace. Differences in language, appearance, foodways, religion, and especially land use and economic motivation, were readily apparent, and perhaps inevitably led to conflict between the different groups.

Based on this review, it appears that there is a lack of consensus among historians about the effects of Bacon's Rebellion. On the one hand, it did usher in a new era of imperial control, but it did not radically change the power structure within the colony. The frontiers shifted further west and Virginia Indians lost more of their lands, power and independence. Though it imparted a disastrous toll on the lives, crops, and livestock of colonial Virginians, Bacon's Rebellion quickly receded behind waves of new English settlement.

Bibliography

Andrews, Charles M., ed.
1915 Narratives of the Insurrections, 1675-1690. Scribner, New York.

Bayne, Howard R.
1904 "A Rebellion in the Colony of Virginia." Historical Papers of the Society of Colonial Wars in the State of New York, No. 7. New York.

Berry, Sir John, Francis Moryson, and Herbert Jeffreys
1677 "A True Narrative of the Rise, Progresse, and Cessation of the Late Rebellion in Virginia, Most Humbly and Impartially Reported by His Majestyed Commissioners Appointed to Enquire into the Affaires of the Said Colony." Reprinted in Andrews, Narratives of the Insurrections, 1675-1690 (Scribner, New York 1915), p. 105-41.

Beverly, Robert
1705 The History and Present State of Virginia. London.

Billings, Warren M.
1968 "Virginia's Deplored Condition," 1660-1676: The Coming of Bacon's Rebellion. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northern Illinois University.

1975 The Old Dominion in the Seventeenth Century: A Documentary History of Virginia, 1606-1689. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Blathwayt, William
1649?-1717"The William Blathwayt Papers at Colonial Williamsburg, 1631-1722." Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, Williamsburg, Virginia.

Burk, John Daly
1804-16 The History of Virginia. Petersburg.

Carson, Jane
1976 Bacon's Rebellion, 1676-1976. The Jamestown Foundation, Jamestown, Virginia.

Cotton, Ann
1676 "An Account of Our Late Troubles in Virginia, Written in 1676, by Mrs. An. Cotton, of Q. Creeke," in Peter Force, ed., Tracts and Other Papers Relating Principally to the Origin Settlement and Progress of the Colonies in North America from the Discovery of the Country to the Year 1776 (Washington D.C., 1836), I, No. 9.

Cotton, John?
1677 "The History of Bacon's and Ingram's Rebellion in Virginia, in 1675 and 1676." Massachusetts Historical Society, Proceedings (1866), 299-342. Reprinted in Andrews, Narratives of the Insurrections, 1675-1690 (New York, 1915), p. 47-98.

Craven, Wesley Frank
1949 The Southern Colonies in the Seventeenth Century. Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

1968 The Colonies in Transition 1660-1713. New York.

Dowdey, Clifford
1957 The Great Plantation: A Profile of Berkeley Hundred and Plantation Virginia from Jamestown to Appomattox. Berkeley Plantation, Charles City, Virginia.

Duck, Lloyd
1966 Indian Relations in Virginia during Bacon's Rebellion. Unpublished Honors Thesis, College of William and Mary.

Finestone, Harry
1956 Bacon's Rebellion, The Contemporary News Sheets. University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville, Virginia.

Flannagan, Roy
1952 The Forest Cavalier: A Romance of America's First Frontier and of Bacon's Rebellion. The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Indianapolis.

Force, Peter
1836-46 Tracts and Other Papers Relating Principally to the Origin Settlement and Progress of the Colonies in North America, from the Discovery of the Country to the Year 1776. Washington, D. C. 4 vols.

Frantz, John B.
1969 Bacon's Rebellion; Prologue to the Revolution? Heath, Lexington, Massachusetts.

Fuller, Hulbert
1897 Vivian of Virginia; Being the Memoirs of our First Rebellion, by John Vivian, esq., of Middle Plantation, Virginia. Lamson, Wolffe and Company, Boston.

Grantham, Sir Thomas
1716 "An historical account of some memorable actions, particularly in Virginia; also against the admiral of Algier, and in the East Indies." J. Roberts, London. Reprinted with an introduction by R. A. Brock, by C. McCarthy & Co., Richmond, Virginia, 1882.

Hamlin, P. G.
1940 "Pathological Implications in Bacon's Rebellion." Virginia Medical Monthly, Vol. 67, Feb. 1940.

Harrah, Madge
1997 My brother, my enemy. Simon & Schuster Books for Young Readers, New York.

Hening, William Waller
1809-23 The Statutes at Large: Being a Collection of All the Laws of Virginia. 13 volumes. Richmond.

Heslep, James William
2001 The development of slave participation in Bacon's Rebellion of 1676 . Unpublished Honors Thesis, College of William and Mary.

Jones, Spotswood Hunnicutt
1991 The World of Ware Parish in Gloucester County, Virginia: A Chronicle of an Episcopal Community in Tidewater Virginia from the Mid-Seventeenth Century to the Present. The Dietz Press, Richmond, Virginia.

Kennedy, J. P. and H. R. McIlwaine, eds.
1905-15 Journal of the House of Burgesses. 12 volumes. Richmond.

1909 The Birth of Liberty; a story of Bacon's Rebellion. The Hermitage Press, Richmond.

McCartney, Martha W.
2001 Jamestown An American Legacy. Eastern National, Hong Kong.

McIlwaine, H. R., ed.
1924 Minutes of the Council and General Court of Colonial Virginia. Richmond.

Middlekauff, Robert
1964 Bacon's Rebellion. The Berkeley Series in American History. Rand McNally, Chicago.

Morgan, Edmund S.
1975 American Slavery American Freedom: The Ordeal of Colonial Virginia. W. W. Norton & Company, New York.

Morton, Richard L.
1960 Colonial Virginia. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Neville, John D.
1976 Bacon's Rebellion: abstracts of material in the Colonial Records Project. The Jamestown Foundation, Jamestown, Virginia.

Osgood, Herbert L.
1904-7 The American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century. New York.

Scruggs, Philip Lightfoot
1942 Man cannot tell. The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Indianapolis.

Silver, Timothy
1990 A New Face on the Countryside: Indians, Colonists, and Slaves in the South Atlantic Forests, 1500-1800. Cambridge University Press, New York.

Sherwood, William
1676 "Virginia's Deploured Condition: Or an Impartiall Narrative of the Murders commited by the Indians there, and of the Sufferings of his Majesties Loyall Subjects under the Rebellious outrages of Mr. Nathaniell Bacon Junior to the tenth day of August Anno Domini 1676." Published in Collections, Massachusetts Historical Society, 4^th ser., 9 (1871), pp. 162-76.

Smith, James Morton, ed.
1969 Seventeenth Century America. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Sprinkle, John Harold
1992 Loyalists and Baconians: the participants in Bacon's Rebellion in Virginia, 1676-1677. Unpublished Thesis (Ph. D.), College of William and Mary.

Stanard, Mary Newton
1907 The Story of Bacon's Rebellion. Neale Publishing Co., New York.

Sublette, C. M.
1926 The Bright Face of Danger; a Tale, wherein are related the adventures of Captain Francis Havenell, of Hookset Hundred in Henrico County, Virginia, during the days of Bacon's Rebellion. Little, Brown and Co., Boston.

Swem, E. G., and John M. Jennings
1957 A Selected Bibliography of Virginia, 1607-1699. Historical Booklet, Number 1. Virginia 350^th Anniversary Celebration Corporation, Williamsburg, Virginia.

Tate, Thad and David Ammerman, eds.
1979 The Chesapeake in the Seventeenth Century. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.

Trigger, Bruce, ed.
1978 Northeast. Volume 15 of the Handbook of North American Indians, edited by William C. Sturdevant. Washington.

Tucker, St. George
1857 Hansford: a Tale of Bacon's Rebellion. G. M. West, Richmond, Virginia.

Unknown
1677 "Strange news from Virginia: being a full and true account of the life and death of Nathaniel Bacon, who was the only cause and original of all the late troubles in the Country. With a full relation of all the accidents which have happened in the late War there between the Christians and Indians." William Harris, London. Reprinted in Finestone, Bacon's Rebellion, The Contemporary News Sheets (Charlottesville, Virginia 1958).

1677 "More News from Virginia, Being a True and Full Relation of all Occurrences in that Countrey, since the Death of Nath. Bacon. With An Account of thirteen Persons that have been tryed and Executed for their Rebellion there." William Harris, London. Reprinted in Finestone, Bacon's Rebellion, The Contemporary News Sheets (Charlottesville Virginia 1958).

Warner, Charles Willard Hoskins
1961 Road to Revolution; Virginia's Rebels from Bacon to Jefferson, 1676-1776. Garrett and Massie, Richmond, Virginia.

Washburn, Wilcomb E.
1957 The Governor and the Rebel: A History of Bacon's Rebellion in Virginia. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.

1962 "The Effect of Bacon's Rebellion on Government in England and Virginia." Contributions from the Museum of History and Technology, Paper 17, United States National Museum Bulletin 225. Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C.

Webb, Stephen Saunders
1984 1676, The End of American Independence. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.

Wertenbaker, Thomas. J.
1914 Virginia Under the Stuarts. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

1940 Torchbearer of the Revolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

1957 Bacon's rebellion, 1676. Historical Booklet, Number 8. Virginia 350th Anniversary Celebration Corporation, Williamsburg, Virginia

COLONIALA Study of Virginia Indians and Jamestown: The First Century

CHAPTER 9:
Pocahontas: A Reflection of Powhatan Culture

Angela L. Daniel

Introduction

>Based on Native oral tradition, [1] Pocahontas, the daughter of the paramount Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca, [2] was a reflection of her Powhatan culture, not an exception, as promoted by the English, many Euro-American scholars, and popular myth. These entities portray Pocahontas to be different, exceptional, extraordinary, a spiritual leader and a peacemaker, beyond the confines of her own people. For example, Lyon G. Tyler, in Pocahontas, Peace and Truth, states:

With these divine attributes she could have never have been really a savage Indian, but, like Joan of Arc, she stood apart from the ordinary conditions of the life to which she was born, the incarnated figure of a lofty and noble civilization (Tyler 1915:8).

¹This version focuses on the oral traditions held by the Mattaponi Tribe, and does not claim to represent the oral traditions of all Virginia Indian tribes.

²The English often called him "Chief Powhatan" or "Powhatan." However, "Chief Powhatan" or "Powhatan" is a positional name, such as "President," to denote a role in society. Chief Powhatan's personal name was "Wahunsenaca." (Custalow Personal Communication Fall 2003; Strachey: 1849 [1612]: 48) Many Powhatan Algonquian words have various English spellings. In this chapter, "Wahunsenaca" the preferred spelling of Dr. Custalow is utilized.

Scholar Robert S. Tilton, in Pocahontas, The Evolution of an American Narrative, provides an historical account in some of the changes in the Pocahontas myth over the preceding centuries. [3] Regardless of the variations in the narrative, both popular myth and English-biased scholarship have propagated long held negative stereotypes about Virginia Indians, such as depicting them as uncivilized savages. Generally, these underlining assumptions have been accepted without critical analysis.

³Recent scholarship that places Pocahontas more in line with her own culture, see Richter 2003 and Townsend 2004.

Three aspects are critical in discussing the life of Pocahontas. Pocahontas's life was ultimately intertwined with that of her father, Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca, Powhatan culture, and the arrival of the English in the early seventeenth century. Because the English did not understand the Powhatan culture, they misinterpreted the actions of the Powhatan Indians, Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca, and Pocahontas. Pocahontas was a Powhatan, living in accordance to her culture. Pocahontas reflects Powhatan culture. She did not transcend her Powhatan culture. She did not betray her Powhatan heritage. Understanding the Native eastern Virginian Indian [4] perspective of the history of the contact period between the Powhatan Indians and the English, requires perceiving Pocahontas as a reflection of her own culture. To remove Pocahontas from her Powhatan heritage distorts history of the contact period between the Powhatan people and the English. According to Native oral tradition, Pocahontas remained loyal to her Powhatan heritage until her death (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003).

⁴The Monacan Nation did not have much initial contact with the English in the early seventeenth century. The Monacans lived beyond the fall line of the present-day James River and "are believed to have been a Siouan-speaking group, distinct from the Algonquian- and Iroquoian-speaking groups who surrounded them (Hantman, 1993:95)."

Oral tradition disputes many of the presumptions made by the English in the seventeenth century, which are the foundation blocks of standard American history and myth surrounding the contact period. Two primary presumptions disputed are: 1.) Pocahontas was the sole peacemaker and different from her own people; and 2.) the Powhatan people were violent and attacked the English mercilessly. In place of the English assumptions, Native oral tradition shows that one aspect of Powhatan culture, under the political leadership of Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca, was the desire for peace. In concise terms, the English-biased versions of history and myth are built on the presumption that Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca and the Powhatan Indians were violent and savage-like. Native oral tradition states the contrary. There appears to be a general consensus, among contemporary eastern Virginia Indians that the Powhatan people welcomed the English upon their arrival in Powhatan territory, with statements such as, "We welcomed the English; we fed them." The English at Jamestown would not have survived without aid from the Powhatan Indians (Fieldwork 2003). This position is in direct opposition to the Euro-American versions that have been perpetuated throughout the years. The Euro-American narrative states that the English survived in spite of the hardships, disease, starvation and Indian attacks. In contesting the English-biased versions, the seventeenth century writings, such as those of Captain John Smith, can be used to validate the Native oral perspective of Virginia Indians. In doing so, Pocahontas emerges not as person totally different from her people, but a person like her people.

More by Love

"Why should you take by force that from us which you can have by love? Why should you destroy us, who have provided you with food? What can you get by war?" — Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca, 1608 (Moquin and Doren 1973:111: Edited from John Smith's The General History, Book 3, Chapter 8 [1624].)

Captain John Smith's quote of Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca appears to reflect an underlining philosophy of the Powhatan society that one can receive more through friendship and positive relationships, than by force, and warfare. In Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca proposals to Captain John Smith, there is no denial of human needs for the English colonists. The English needed food to survive and land to live on. Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca offered both to the English (Smith 1998a [1608]: 165). Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca desired trade exchange for European goods, such as guns and metal hatchets. He also needed an ally with compatible weaponry to that of the Spanish (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003). The political Powhatan leader sought peace and friendship with the English colonists.

However, Euro-American scholarship and popular myth have credited Pocahontas as providing food to the English colonists and as being the peacemaker. Pocahontas, a child of ten years of age [5] when the English arrived in 1607, did not have the ability to accomplish such a task. There was a firm division in Powhatan culture between adults and children, a barrier even the paramount chief's daughter, Pocahontas, could not penetrate (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003).

⁵In A True Relation, Smith states: "Powhatan, understanding we detained certain savages, sent his daughter, a child of ten years old, ..." (Haile 1998:181 [Smith: A True Relation, 1608])

Granted Powhatan children matured early and took on more responsibilities at younger ages than most children in twenty-first century America, but Powhatan children were still closely watched over and protected. They did not "run wild" as the stereotype of Indian children suggests. The perception projected by Euro-American narratives of Pocahontas running freely to Jamestown from her home at the Powhatan political capital, Werowocomoco, is preposterous. Mattaponi historian, Dr. Linwood "Little Bear" Custalow explains, "Pocahontas would not have been able to handle a nearly four hundred pound canoe all by herself to cross the wide present-day York River." [6] Pocahontas did not move outside the realm of restrictions placed on children in Powhatan society. She did not have command over adults (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003).

⁶The present-day York River was called the Pamunkey River by Powhatan Indians.

As the favorite daughter of Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca, [7] Pocahontas enjoyed certain degrees of privileges and status, such as being allowed to travel with the Powhatan envoy to the English fort at Jamestown, but not alone. While Pocahontas's freedoms may have been slightly greater than some children, in other ways, her freedoms were more restrictive. Due to Pocahontas's status in Powhatan society, she was under more security and scrutiny. The priests watched over her closely (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003).

⁷Both the English writings and oral tradition agree that Pocahontas was considered Powhatan's favorite child (Strachey 1849 [1612]: 111; Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003).

Living in the midst of Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca and the political elite at Werowocomoco greatly, affected the stature and character of Pocahontas. Many of the individual characteristics of Pocahontas, such as her wit and intelligence, were enhanced by the fact she was living in the highest social-political realm of her society. In addition to increased confidence, Pocahontas was instilled with an enormous sense of responsibility to her people. Living with her father, Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca, produced a stronger, more intensified Powhatan perspective of life within Pocahontas (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003).

Even with all of Pocahontas's natural and enhanced characteristics, she was still considered and treated as a child, according to Powhatan cultural standards. It was Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca who sent the food to the English colonists. Pocahontas was only allowed to go with the entourage. She neither traveled alone nor ordered adults to take her to Jamestown. Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca would not have permitted Pocahontas to go to Jamestown, if he perceived her to be in immediate danger, by so doing. Pocahontas was continually watched and guarded for her protection (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003).

English writings by Captain John Smith plainly state that it was Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca providing the food, not Pocahontas:

The Emperor Powhatan each week one or twice sent me many presents of deer, bread, raugroughcuns [raccoons], half always for my father [Captain Newport], whom he desired to see, and half for me, and so continually importuned by messengers and presents that I would come to fetch the corn and take the country their king [Chief Powhatan] had given me [Capahowasick] [8], as at last Captain Newport resolved to see him (Smith 1998a [1608]: 165).

⁸Capahowasick was the name of the area that Chief Powhatan had given werowance Captian John Smith to oversee, as a Chief.

Likewise, contrary to the popularized myth of the Euro-Americans that Pocahontas was the sole peacemaker among the Powhatan people, Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca was the one extending the peace to the English colonists. Again, Captain John Smith provides evidence of such. According to Smith, he became anxious of what he thought was suspicious looking Powhatan Indians close to Jamestown Fort. Smith subdued the Powhatan Indians and put them in confinement (Smith 1998a [1608]: 178). In an attempt to have the Powhatan warriors released, Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca sent Pocahontas with an envoy to Jamestown. According to Dr. Custalow, Pocahontas was placed in front of the posse to communicate a peaceful gesture. A female child, ten-years-old, is not a threatening sign. Pocahontas represented the Powhatan symbol of peace (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003). However, it was Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca, the paramount chief, not the ten-year-old child, who was extending peace. Pocahontas did not negotiate with the English. Instead, according to Smith, a Powhatan ambassador, Rawhunt, negotiated on behalf of Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca:

This he [Powhatan] sent his most trusty messenger, called Rawhunt, as much exceeding in deformity of person, but of a subtle wit and crafty understanding. He with a long circumstance told me how well Powhatan loved and respected me and, in that I should not doubt any way his kindness, he had sent his child [Pocahontas], which he most esteemed, to see me, [and] a deer and bread besides for a present...(Smith 1998a [1608]:181).

Overall, the English held no trust in Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca, regardless of the fact that he was providing them with food. The praise for this kindness and humanitarian gestures went to their God. The English did not acknowledge the compassionate character of the Powhatan people providing them food. For example, George Percy writes:

It pleased God, after a while, to send those people which were our mortal enemies to relieve us with victuals, as bread, corn, fish and flesh in great plenty, which was the setting up of our feeble men; otherwise we had all perished. Also we were frequented by divers kings in the country, bringing us store of provision to our great comfort (Percy 1967 [1607]: 26-27).

???Captain John Smith expresses a similar view, in The Generall Historie of Virginia, when he writes that God "changed the hearts" of the Powhatan Indians so "that they brought such plenty of their fruits, and provision, as no man wanted" (Smith 1986b[1624]:143). Although both Percy and Smith admit that the Powhatan Indians supplied the English with food, keeping them alive, they did not credit the Powhatan people for these generous acts of kindness. Instead, credit was bestowed onto the Christian God of the English. Later, Pocahontas would be given the credit for the actions and political directives of Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca and the Powhatan people.

An English Werowance

hief Powhatan Wahunsenaca's welcome to the English was also expressed by attempting to incorporate the English into Powhatan society by making Captain John Smith a sub chief, a werowance . It was through werowance Smith that Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca planned to trade with the English (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003). He offered Smith land for the English colonists to live on, in addition to providing them the food (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003, Smith 1998a [1608]: 165).

It was during Captain John Smith's initiation as a werowance in the Powhatan society, in the winter of 1607, that Smith alleges Pocahontas saved his life. However, Smith does not mention Pocahontas saving his life during the ceremony in his first written account of the event, in A True Relation [1608]. It is not until Smith's Generall Historie is published in 1624 that Pocahontas is credited for saving his life:

[T]wo great stones were brought before to them, and thereon laid his [Smith's] head, and being ready with their daughter, when no intreaty could prevaile, got his head in her arms, and laid her owne upon his to save him from death.... (Smith 1986b[1624]:151).

According to Smith's writings, he was going through a ceremony initiating him into the Powhatan society as a werowance. Smith was being welcomed into the Powhatan society. Since chiefdom passed through kinship lineages in Powhatan society, it is reasonable to presume that the ceremony was that of adoption (Moretti-Langholtz Personal Conversation 10/2003). [9] If Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca was initiating Smith into a position as a werowance , his life was not endangered.

⁹Scholars favoring the ceremony as an adoption ritual which was misinterpreted by Captain John Smith, include: Philip Barbour, Francis Mossiker, Karen Ordahl Kupperman, Jean Fritz, Peter Hulme, and J.A. Leo Lemay. Helen C. Rountree is one of the few exceptions, arguing that there is not enough information to support such a claim (Tilton 1994:5).

Captain John Smith's writings are full of his paranoia of being killed. However, it does not mean, in reality, his life was literally in danger. According to Smith's first account of the ceremony, written in 1608, Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca told Smith that he would be released in four days:

He [Chief Powhatan] kindly welcomed me with good words and great platters of sundry victuals, assuring me his friendship and my liberty within four days (Smith 1998a[1608]:161).

Still, Smith was constantly afraid Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca was going to kill him. The validity of Smith's fear, expressed in his writings, cannot be completely trusted. They make for an interesting adventure story (Allen Lecture 10/22/03), but they do not necessarily convey an accurate view of what was happening. Since Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca told Smith he would be released in four days, there was no need to be "saved" by Pocahontas.

Path of Least Violence

The Powhatan people, contrary to the English perception and report of them, preferred not to engage in warfare unless necessary. There was a concept within Powhatan culture, which still remains today, that encourages the avoidance of violent conflict if possible (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003). An Example of this can be seen in the English kidnapping of Pocahontas.

Captain Samuel Argall, an English navigator and administrator, arrived in the Jamestown Colony in 1612. At this time, Pocahontas had come of age and was married to a Powhatan warrior, named Kocoum (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003, Strachey 1849 [1612]:54). After Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca become aware of an English plot to kidnap Pocahontas, he sent Pocahontas and Kocoum to live among Kocoum's people, the Patawomecks (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003). Captain Argall learned of Pocahontas's whereabouts (Neill 1869:7 [Argall]). [10] He quickly sailed his ship to the Patawomeck Tribe on the Potomac River. [11] In April 1613, Captain Argall kidnapped Pocahontas by demanding that the Patawomeck Chief Japazaws (Iopassus) turn Pocahontas over to him. After Pocahontas was delivered to Captain Argall, he gave Chief Japazaws and his wife a copper pot (Neill 1869:12 [Harmor]). This parting gesture by Captain Argall has led many to believe that Pocahontas was betrayed by her own people into the hands of the English for a copper pot (Smith 1986b[1624]: 243; Bailey 1956:40; Sheppard 1907:12). However, Native oral tradition does not concur with this view (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003).

¹⁰In "Argall's Account of the Capture of Pocahontas," Argall writes: I was told by certaine Indians y friends that the great Powhatan's daughter Pokahunits was with the great King Patawomek whether I presently repaired resolving to possesse myselfe of her by any stratagem that I could use for the ransoming of so many Englishmen as were prisoners with Powhatan as also to get such armes and tooles as hee and other Indians had got by murther and stealing some others of our nation, with some quantity of corne for the colonies reliefe.

¹¹The present-day Potomac River was called the Patawomeck River by the Powhatan Indians, and the Elizabeth River by the English, in the early 1600s (Strachey 1849 [1612]:38).

There is no record of the Patawomeck Tribe being punished or attacked by Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca for handing Pocahontas over to Captain Argall, implying that Chief Powhatan did not ascertain the action as a betrayal of his favorite daughter for a copper pot. Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca understood the reasoning of Chief Japazaws and the Tribal Council as choosing the path of least violence (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003). Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca likewise chose the least violent response by promptly offering to pay the ransom demanded by Captain Argall. [12] Captain Argall refused the offer and took Pocahontas to Jamestown (Neill 1869:8 [Argall]).

¹²Argall's writings reveal: This very much grieved this great King [Powhatan], yet without delay he returned the messenger with this answere that he desired me to use [treat] his daughter well and bring my ship into his river and then he would give me my demands, which being performed I should deliver his daughter and we should be friends.

Likewise, Pocahontas chose the path of least violence for the sake of the safety of her own people (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003). In captivity, Pocahontas attempted to make the most of a difficult situation. She learned the English language. Within a year, Pocahontas apparently converted to Christianity and married Englishman John Rolfe (Smith 1986b[1624]:245-6).

The English hoped that the captivity and later marriage between Pocahontas and Rolfe would maintain peace between them and the Powhatan Chief (Quarles 1939:23-24). [13] However, in the act of kidnapping Pocahontas, the English were trying to obtain what they wanted through force. "The English stole Chief Powhatan's beloved daughter, Pocahontas, the peace symbol of the Powhatan people," states Dr. Linwood "Little Bear" Custalow (Personal Conversation Fall 2003).

¹³Marguerite Stuart Quarles quotes Governor Dale's writing: She is since married to an English gentleman of good understanding, and his letter to me contained the reason of his marriage to her. You may perceive another knot to bind the peace stronger.

Conclusion

Mainstream American historical narratives and myths about Pocahontas, with their variant twists, over the last four hundred years are predicated on the inhumanness, or savageness, of the Powhatan people. Unlike the mainstream American popular legends of Pocahontas and the national origin myth, the Native oral tradition version of Pocahontas portrays the humanitarian and peace-loving aspects of the Powhatan people. Thus, the Native oral tradition version of Pocahontas puts a damper on the popularized and national myth centering on Pocahontas as a person who transcended her Powhatan culture. Pocahontas cannot be saving people who are not being threatened. She cannot be exalted above her own culture, as a savior of the English, if she is truly a reflection of her own people. Pocahontas's people have been portrayed in an extremely negative light in order for the Euro-American historical narrative and popular myths to resonate with strong emotions.

Strong emotions resonate among Virginia Indians, as well. They know that Pocahontas was kidnapped, that she was never free to return home to her people, husband or father. As the historical narrative developed and myths arose around Pocahontas's life, she was portrayed as being different from her people. According to a popular Euro-American thought, if all Powhatan people had been like Pocahontas, there would have been peace between the English and Powhatan Indians. This is not true because Pocahontas was like her people; she acted and responded according to Powhatan customs and philosophy. The historical narratives and popular myths, which portray her as exceptionally different from her Powhatan heritage, still hold Pocahontas in captivity today.

Pocahontas was indeed a symbol of peace, but she was not the peacemaker many Euro-American narratives and myths indicate. The peacemaker attributes, which have been ascribed to Pocahontas, were actually an extension from Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca and the Powhatan culture, which Pocahontas became a symbol of. The English stole that peace symbol, claiming it would bring peace between them and the Powhatan Indians (Custalow Personal Conversation Fall 2003). But, how can peace be established through a violent act against a symbol of peace? The Powhatan peace symbol, Pocahontas, needs to be returned to her people, for true peace to come about.

It has been nearly four hundred years, now. The Native community is still waiting.

Bibliography

Abbot, William W.
1970 [1957] A Virginia Chronology 1585-1783. Charlottesville: The University Press of Virginia.

Barbour, Philip L.
1969 Pocahontas and Her World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Bridenbaugh, Carl
1980 Jamestown 1544-1699. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

Deetz, James and Patricia
2001 The Times of Their Lives, Life, Love, and Death in Plymouth Colony. New York: Anchor Books.

Edmunds, Pocahontas Wight
1956 The Pocahontas-John Smith Story, ed. by James H. Bailey. Richmond, VA: the Dietz Press, Inc.

Gleach, Frederic W.
1995 Powhatan's World and Colonial Virginia, A Conflict of Cultures. Lincoln and London: The University of Nebraska Press.

Green, Barbara
1987 Virginia's Indians: Bridging the Centuries. Reprinted from The Richmond New Leader.

Haile, Edward Wright, ed.
2001 Jamestown Narratives, Eyewitness Accounts of the Virginia Colony, The First Decade: 1607-1617, first printing in 1998. Champlain, Virginia: RoundHouse.

Hantman, Jeffrey L.
1993 "Powhatan's Relations with the Piedmont Monacans" in Powhatan Foreign Relations 1500-1722, Rountree, Helen C. ed. Charlottesville and London: University Press of Virginia.

Hatch, Charles E., Jr.
1993 The First Seventeen Years, Virginia, 1607-1624, first printing 1957. Baltimore, Maryland: Clearfield Company, Inc.

Johnson, Robert,
1897 [1612] "The New Life of Virginia: Declaring the former Success and Present Estate of that Plantation, Being the Second Part of Nova Britannia," in Colonial Tracts, vol. 1, no. 7 first printing 1612. Rochester, N.Y.: George P. Humphrey.

Lemay, J.A. Leo
1992 Did Pocahontas Save Captain John Smith? London: The University of Georgia Press.

Moquin, Wayne and Charles Van Doren, ed.
1973 Great Documents in American Indian History. New York: Praeger Publishers.

Mossiker, Frances
1976 Pocahontas, The Life and the Legend. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Neill, Rev. Edward D.
1869 Pocahontas and Her Companions. Albany, N.Y.: Joel Munsell.

Percy, George
1967 [1607] Observations Gathered out of "A Discourse of the Plantation of the Southern Colony in Virginia by the English, 1607, ed. by David B. Quinn. Charlottesville: The University Press of Virginia.

Quarles, Marguerite Stuart
1939 Pocahontas (Bright Stream Between Two Hills). The Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities.

Richter, Daniel K.
2003 Facing East from Indian Country: A Native History of Early America. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Rountree, Helen C.
1990 Pocahontas's People, The Powhatan Indians of Virginia Through Four Centuries. Norman and London: University of Oklahoma Press.

1989 Powhatan Indians of Virginia, Their Traditional Culture. Norman and London: University of Oklahoma Press.

1995Young Pocahontas in the Indian World. Yorktown, VA: J&R Graphic Services, Inc.

Smith, John
1986a [1608] A True Relation. In The Complete Works of Captain John Smith (1580-1631) Volume 1, ed. by Philip L. Barbour. Chapel Hill, N.C.: The University of North Carolina Press, 1986.

1986b [1624] The Generall Historie of Virginia. The Complete Works of Captain John Smith (1580-1631) Volume 2, ed. by Philip L. Barbour. Chapel Hill, N.C.: The University of North Carolina Press, 1986.

1998a [1608] A True Relation. In Jamestown Narratives, Eyewitness Accounts of the Virginia Colonly, The First Decade: 1607-1617, ed. by Edward Wright Haile. Champlain, VA: Roundhouse.

1998b [1624] The General History. In Jamestown Narratives, Eyewitness Accounts of the Virginia Colonly, The First Decade: 1607-1617, ed. by Edward Wright Haile. Champlain, VA: Roundhouse.

Strachey, William
1967 [1612] The Historie of Travell into Virginia Britania (1612), ed. by Louis B. Wright and Virginia Freund, 2^nd printing, 1^st printing 1953. Germany: Nendeln/Liechtenstein.

Tilton, Robert S.
1994 Pocahontas, The Evolution of an American Narrative, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Townsend, Camilla
2004 Pocahontas and the Powhatan dilemma: an American portrait. New York: Hill and Wang.

Tyler, Lyon G.
1915 Pocahontas, Peace and Truth.

Personal Interviews and Communication

Allen, Paula Gunn Dr., Author of Pocahontas, Medicine Woman, Spy, Entrepreneur, Diplomat
10/22/03 Lecture at the College of William & Mary, Anthropology Department.

Custalow, Dr. Linwood "Little Bear," Historian of the Mattaponi Indian Tribe
Fall 2003 Series of interviews, filmed, and written notes. Williamsburg, VA.

Daniel, Angela L. Daniel "Silver Star"
2003 Fieldwork with various representatives of eastern Virginia Indian tribes. State of Virginia.

Moretti-Langholtz, Danielle Dr., Director of American Indian Resource Center
10/2003 Personal Communication. Williamsburg, VA.

Videos

"Pocahontas"
1996 Walt Disney Pictures, produced by James Pentecost, directed by Mike Gabriel and Eric Goldberg.