In 1637, the English colonists had already had several encounters with the native inhabitants of New England. Most of them had taken place in a peaceful manner, with the exception of their encounter with the Pequots. Despite great efforts to negotiate for peaceful coexistence, the Pequots occasionally committed sudden assaults on the English colonists and thereby broke mutual agreements. The increasing Pequot aggressiveness soon exhausted the English endurance. As a consequence, the English decide to counterattack. John Mason, who commanded the Connecticut forces, focuses on the causes of war, while Captain John Underhill, commander of the Massachusetts Bay forces, relies on his theory of the successful massacre at God’s interaction. As a contemporary narrator, Philip Vincent relates on information of people who witnessed the occurrences. The applied cruelty and systematic annihilation of almost the whole Pequot tribe, of course, raise the question about justification of the reasons. Is it providence, as Underhill interprets it, that the Pequots were so cruelly attacked? Is it an act of self-preservation as Mason concludes? Or did the Pequots deserve to be massacred for their tenacious aggressiveness and insult against the English as Vincent claims? It is a fact that Mason, Underhill as well as Vincent endorse and defend the massacre from their own point of view. Since all three narratives are from the first-person point of view, the interpretations of the Pequot massacre are biased and reflect individual reasons and emotions. Religious-based racism using the Christian bible as reference; desperation and anger are the sources of the cruelty of the massacre. The strong desire for vengeance and the quest for Puritan identity cause the English describe the Pequots as God’s tool.
Table of Contents
1 Underhill’s and Mason’s account of the Pequot War compared to Philip Vincent, A True Relation of the Late Battell Fought in New England.
1.1 Introduction
1.2 The Natural Aggressive People – How the Pequots are presented as being unable to cooperate and be educated
1.3 The Success of the Initial Attack Animates the English to the Massacre
1.4 Setting Fire as Climax for the English Cruelty
1.5 Attempts to Explain the Violence
1.6 Conclusion
2 Representations of the Pequots and the Pequot War (Periodicals)
2.1 Introduction
2.2 The Initial Steps Towards the Cultural Clash
2.3 Stereotypes of the Pequots Sustain the Pequot’s Otherness
2.4 The Pequots as Threat
2.5 Lack of Impartial Narrations Distort the Pequot’s Image
2.6 Influences of Descriptions
2.7 Conclusion
Research Objectives and Core Themes
This work examines the biased nature of early English narratives regarding the Pequot War, comparing first-hand accounts with later historical representations found in periodicals. The study investigates how colonial writers constructed the "otherness" of the Pequots to justify systematic violence, maintain Puritan identity, and eventually support the development of a distinct American national identity post-independence.
- Analysis of contemporary personal accounts by Underhill, Mason, and Vincent.
- The construction of "religious-based racism" and the justification of violence as divine providence.
- The role of stereotypes in shaping the portrayal of the Pequot as a persistent, warlike threat.
- Examination of how late 18th and early 19th-century American periodicals repurposed these narratives to define national identity and "otherness."
Excerpt from the Book
1.3 The Success of the Initial Attack Animates the English to the Massacre
As the massacre was the result of oppressed anger and lacked preparation and analysis of the location behind the fort, the English acted by intuition. Whereas Mason spent little emotional narration on the initial shooting, Underhill revealed his marvellous observations as Providence and created the image of doomsday for the Pequots:
Giving a volley of shotte upon the Fort, so remarkable it appeared to us, as wee could not but admire at the providence of God in it, that soldiers so unexpert in the use of their armes, should give so compleat a volley, as though the finger of God had touched both match and flint.
Vincent’s narrative reveals far less amazement at the scene. Nevertheless, he creates an impressive, awesome image of the moment when the English started their assault by pointing out the number and simultaneousness of shooting soldiers: “70 English gave the Fort a Volly of shot” The rhetorical question Underhill asked his soldier, “What shall wee enter said Captaine Underhill? What come we for else”, was the first step towards the massacre, since afterwards the soldier Hedge, encouraged by his own boast, entered the fort. Mason, in comparison to Underhill, did not consult his soldiers to make the first step but marched ahead animating his soldiers to follow. Vincent describes the initial moments after entering the fort in great detail. He reveals images of elaborate killings by the English soldier Hedge, who demonstrates the violent, merciless but heroic character of his superiority: “He slasht the Salvage betwixt the arme and shoulder, who pressing towards the dore, was killed by the English.” Thereafter, an individual English soldier made the first step to burn a Wigwam when he was counterattacked by a Pequot, whom he immediately eliminated very brutally:
Summary of Chapters
1 Underhill’s and Mason’s account of the Pequot War compared to Philip Vincent, A True Relation of the Late Battell Fought in New England.: This chapter analyzes how contemporary narrators defended the massacre at Mystic Fort by framing their actions as justified by divine providence and self-preservation.
1.1 Introduction: An overview of the strained relationship between English colonists and the Pequots, highlighting the shift toward armed conflict.
1.2 The Natural Aggressive People – How the Pequots are presented as being unable to cooperate and be educated: Examines how the colonists rationalized their aggression by depicting the Pequots as inherently hostile and incapable of coexistence.
1.3 The Success of the Initial Attack Animates the English to the Massacre: Discusses the tactical initiation of the massacre and the specific, biased observations of the narrators regarding the onset of the violence.
1.4 Setting Fire as Climax for the English Cruelty: Analyzes the pivotal role of fire in the destruction of the fort and how narrators used the imagery to convey God's will versus human cruelty.
1.5 Attempts to Explain the Violence: Explores the rhetorical strategies used by Underhill, Mason, and Vincent to justify extreme brutality against non-combatants.
1.6 Conclusion: Summarizes the consensus among the three narrators to advocate for the necessity of the massacre based on religious prejudices.
2 Representations of the Pequots and the Pequot War (Periodicals): This chapter investigates how later American publications maintained these biased narratives to serve new political purposes.
2.1 Introduction: Introduces the challenge of finding impartial records in historical databases and the shift toward constructing a new national American identity.
2.2 The Initial Steps Towards the Cultural Clash: Looks at historical letters and testimonies to show how anti-Pequot sentiment persisted long after the war.
2.3 Stereotypes of the Pequots Sustain the Pequot’s Otherness: Details the recurring characterizations of the Pequots as a "warlike" people to justify colonial expansion.
2.4 The Pequots as Threat: Discusses how authors emphasized Pequot strength to frame the English as heroic "deliverers" for other tribes.
2.5 Lack of Impartial Narrations Distort the Pequot’s Image: Addresses the scarcity of indigenous perspectives and the erasure of Pequot cultural identity through the destruction of their historical records.
2.6 Influences of Descriptions: Analyzes specific cases where individuals, such as the wife of Mononotto, are portrayed in ways that contradict established stereotypes, creating historical ambiguity.
2.7 Conclusion: Reflects on how the colonial need to define "otherness" fundamentally shaped early American identity and national self-perception.
Keywords
Pequot War, Puritanism, Colonialism, Massacre, Providence, Narratives, Cultural Identity, Otherness, Stereotypes, Historical Bias, Indigenous People, John Mason, John Underhill, Philip Vincent, American History.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research?
The research explores how the Pequot War was documented in contemporary first-person accounts and how these portrayals were later reused in American periodicals to justify colonial violence and establish a national identity.
What are the central themes discussed in the book?
The central themes include the construction of religious-based racism, the use of stereotypes to alienate indigenous people, the intersection of divine providence and colonial violence, and the role of "otherness" in nation-building.
What is the primary goal of the author?
The goal is to demonstrate how historical narratives are inherently biased and were used by European settlers (and later Americans) as a tool for political and social justification.
What methodology is employed in this study?
The author employs a comparative textual analysis of primary contemporary accounts (Underhill, Mason, and Vincent) and secondary historical representations found in 18th and 19th-century periodicals.
What topics are covered in the main section of the work?
The work covers the initial justifications for war, the specific brutal tactics used during the massacre, the rhetoric of religious necessity, and the long-term historical distortion of Pequot culture.
Which keywords characterize this work?
The work is characterized by terms such as colonial identity, religious justification, Pequot massacre, historiography, and the construction of the "other."
How does the author interpret the mention of the Pequot woman in Chapter 2.6?
The author views this as an ambiguous historical anecdote where the narrators contradict their own established stereotypes, potentially attempting a facade of impartiality while still reinforcing colonial superiority.
Why is the concept of "otherness" significant to the work's conclusion?
The author concludes that colonial and early American identity was not defined by internal development alone, but was primarily shaped by contrast to the "other" (the indigenous population) in order to maintain a sense of superiority and unified purpose.
- Quote paper
- Gerlinde Didea (Author), 2007, Underhill’s and Mason’s account of the Pequot War compared to Philip Vincent, "A True Relation of the Late Battell Fought in New England", Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/120726
