The colonists were participants in what has been labeled as King Philip's War for several essential core belief systems that characterized who they were, what they stood for and how they behaved.
During the 17th century religion dictated how the English Colonists lived their lives and was the initial motivation for their relocation to the coast of North America. Their journey was in fact part of English expansion movement, but it also was a way to avoid the religious persecution they faced in England. Increase Mather, a notorious Puritan Minister, preached that King Philip’s War was a form of Divine Judgment sent upon the second generation of Puritans for having failed to follow “the blessed design of their fathers”. Mather was not a direct participant, but was an associate of most of the colonial leadership and a spiritual advisor to the war effort. He preached, and advised the Puritan Government of Massachusetts that God was punishing them for their behavior, and they needed repentance and reformation.
Mather blames the English colonists for their neglect of religion, including efforts to Christianize the natives, among other sins. Collectively the colonists were not the most tolerant of Indian culture and therefore forced Indians to recognize their English sovereignty and attempted to Christianize willing Indians. Over time however, colonists efforts and attitudes towards the indigenous people began to change. Early settlers were able to coexist and initially allowed Indians to practice their own beliefs, but with time campaigns to convert the Indians were initiated. Christianizing Indians was a more subtle effort by the puritans to extend their power in the region. By, the mid-seventeenth century, a growing number of Natives around Boston, Plymouth and Martha’s Vineyard were embracing the colonists’ religion. Some of these efforts included the establishment of “Praying Towns”, where Indians were expected to assimilate into Colonist culture and practices through language, apparel, and religion. This expansion of Christian influence, even by Indian agents, was seen by both Natives and colonists as an extension of colonial authority, threatening Native sovereignty and leadership and facilitating English land purchases. This sense of purpose instilled a sense of entitlement which would be the driving force behind the reluctance to accept or understand Indian culture and participation in the bloodiest war in American History.
Increase Mather
With time a general fear and hatred of the Native Americans began to manifest. There was a skepticism from the onset of their arrival as the way of life between both differed greatly. Early moments of harmony between both sides took place as seen as with the amiable relations between Metacom’s father and the Mayflower pilgrims. However with the increase of conflict and tensions, a notion of colonial supremacy emerged. Although the English had various Native allies at one point or another only the Christian Indians supported their cause, yet the colonists had suspicions about where Native true loyalties lay.
As depicted through descriptions of captivity stories and primary sources, a romanticized image of the native American was created and depicted to be barbaric and grotesque. Mary Rowlandson's captivity memoir account in particular, which was read by the masses, made significant references to the differences between the cultures of the “savagery’ of the Indians and the “holiness” of the English settlers. In the opening section of her narrative she describes the chaos and devastation of the Indian attack on Lancaster, “It was a solemn sight to see so many Christians lying in their blood, some here and some there, like a company of sheep torn by wolves.” In Christian imagery, Jesus is traditionally compared to a shepherd, and his followers are a flock of innocent sheep. By drawing from this imagery, Rowlandson situates her narrative in a biblical framework. By then comparing the Indians to wolves, Rowlandson introduces opposition and conflict into her text. The Puritans are innocent, civilized, and domesticated, while the Indians are wild animals. Rowlandson’s description of cultural difference is not evidence of an attempt to see Indians in an other-than- Puritan light; rather, she offers this description as proof that Indian converts are not to be trusted. The liberty that she ascribes to Metacom, is consistent with the negative liberty imagined by New England’s most orthodox Puritans. As a result of her account, and others like hers common terms and conceptions emerged, (savages etc.). Eventually this fear got to the point where Puritans abandoned their commitment to a society shared with Christian Indians, as war made them weary and fixed their minds that all Indians are alike and savage in nature. Scalping and a violent attitude toward these “barbaric creatures” became the attitude that justified all of the manipulation, and fighting that would take throughout the events that took place during this deadly war.
How were the Colonists able to eventually force out the Native Americans, and contribute to their annihilation? Several major factors have been identified, and are inherently attributed to their “success”.
As the colonial population increased, the New Englanders expanded their settlements along the region's coastal plain and up the Connecticut river. This rapid increase places much pressure on the Native American relations, as colonists needed more land for continue growing and wanted to establish their sovereignty. With this population growth, land accumulation gradually increased along with the amount of english cattle. The cattle and colonist’s fences became a massive point of cultural tension as they were symbolic of the colonial political, economic, and ecological intrusions that had transformed the area in just a few decades. King Philip’s War erupted over sovereignty and power, but it was also driven by deep-hearted conflicting systems of landholding and land use.
King Philip’s War was a confused and unstructured war that had no front lines but was overall a fight for territory. Except for the Pequot War, the Indians and the English had gotten along reasonably well until the 1660s. The Indians did not own individual land plots, but had a strong sense of collective tribal territory. For a half-century the groups lived in proximity to each other, and the relationship remained stable, but as Colonist populations increased, they wanted more land to accommodate for their growth. Therefore a cultural tactic that the colonists utilized to acquire land was the formality and finality they associated with land treaties. Such negotiations were fruitless to prevent the larger war because Metacom and the colonies could not agree on whether Native leaders were sovereigns and whether their people were autonomous or under colonial authority. This relates back to the notion of Western superiority over the Native Americans, as this was a practice new to the Native Americans.
To the colonists law was an instrument of cultural control. They saw a formal treaty that, as in the European tradition of diplomacy, bound the signatories, their successors and their people in perpetuity. They had the clear upper hand in negotiations as documents were written in English, which many Indians could not read or write in. These land treaties were not diplomatic in nature, but a tool employed by the colonists to swindle Native Americans. Even though the Native Americans began to recognize they were being cheated, at times had no other option than to engage in these acts of “diplomacy”.
The Plymouth colonists had put in place laws making it illegal to do commerce with the Wampanoags. When they found out that Wamsutta, Metacoments brother, had sold a parcel of land to Roger Williams the governor of the Plymouth Colony, Josiah Winslow, had Wamsutta arrested even though Wampanoags that lived outside of colonist jurisdiction were not accountable to Plymouth Colony laws. The colonists ignited a massive tension point with Wamsutta’s arrest and eventual death as he had been visiting the Marshfield home of Josiah Winslow, the governor of the Plymouth Colony, for peaceful negotiations. Although Wampanoag’s lived outside jurisdiction lines, colonist’s used what they viewed as violations in land treaty’s as an entry point into the prosecution of Native Americans.
Much like the land trials, court proceedings were an extension of how colonists capitalized on their upper hand in diplomatic practices to take advantage of the native Americans. Settlers assumed that Indians had the same cultural standards and expected that any colonists would be settled in the colonial courts. Colonists were able to begin to develop a group identity, through their self- recognized trials, which lacked in English support, but allowed them to establish a distinct identity from those in Britain.
Metacomet unwillingly signs a peace treaty that includes the surrender of Native American owned firearms, Taunton Massachusetts 1671
Metacom (King Philip), Wampanoag sachem, meeting settlers, illustration c. 1911.
Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. (Digital file no. cph 3c00678)
A prime example of a court proceeding that enabled the Colonists to deploy their dominance, and served as the act that provoked and justified this war, was the trial that preceded the murder of Sassaman, a Native American Convert to Christianity. Metacom, was brought before a public court to testify on the events and his possible involvement in the affair. However court officials admitted they had no proof, but warned that if any future reports against him were to appear then the colonist would confiscate Wampanoag lands and guns. Not long after, Sassamon's body was found in Assawompset Pond. Whether his death was the result of accident, suicide or murder was disputed at the time and since. Plymouth colony officials arrested three Wampanoag, including one of Metacom's counselors. The trial took place before the Plymouth General court and included eight judges headed by Governor Josiah Winslow, and paneled by twelve english men, with six Christian Indians who would “help to consult and advise with”- and perhaps defect criticisms that the colonists were treating the defendants unfairly. The jury believed the doubtful evidence and chose to ignore the biblical standard usually accepted in New England that two witnesses were required for conviction of a capital offense. The accused natives were executed by hanging on June 8, 1675 at Plymouth. Both the trial and the court's sentence infringed on Wampanoag sovereignty, as was bias and unethical, but was nonetheless a formal ritual that colonists used and believed in.