August 9, 1956- Women's March Protesting Apartheid in South Africa

 

1956 Women’s March. Photographer unknown. https://artscomments.wordpress.com/2013/08/09/lillian-ngoyi-one-of-the-women-who-gave-us-womens-day/

For centuries the landmass that would become the nation of South Africa was home to a variety of indigenous African peoples. In the 1600s Dutch and British traders began to establish port communities to supply their ships. Many opted to stay after leaving employment with their trading houses rather than return to their homelands. As the British Empire grew, it came to dominate the region in its pursuit for gold and other valuable minerals. They fought several wars with African tribes, as well as Dutch-descended communities known as Boers. In the 20th century Boers and their descendants, Afrikaners, gained some independence as The Union of South Africa, a dominion of the British Empire. In 1931 it became fully independent.


In 1948 the National Party gained a political majority and began enacting the formal apartheid regime. This program was built on a foundation of long standing racial segregation and labor exploitation from the colonial era, but was designed to institutionalize these policies in a modern nation-state and control the movements and labor of Black, Indian, and mixed-race citizens and deny them any political power or cultural legitimacy within South Africa.


Resistance to such policies dated back to the colonial era but historically faced stiff resistance from White elites. As apartheid became entrenched, political and labor organizing intensified among communities of color and their allies. Black men seeking work in White communities had long been required to carry passbooks. Those who were caught without them were routinely jailed and fined. In the 1950s the government sought to extend the pass system to Black women as well, sparking more protest.


On August 9, 1956, a group of 20,000 dissident women marched to the capitol building in Pretoria to demonstrate against the laws and deliver their petitions directly to Prime Minister Johannes Strijdom. Strijdom was conveniently absent. While the march was a powerful demonstration of resistance and further legitimized the role of women in various political networks, pass laws were indeed imposed on women. It would take many decades of struggle before apartheid was dismantled in the 1990s.


August 9 is still celebrated as National Women’s Day in South Africa.

Sources:

South African Women Commemorate Historic 1956 March- CGTN Africa

The 1956 Women's March Pretoria 9 August-South African History Online

How did Apartheid Change South Africa?- Encyclopedia Britannica

Pass Law- Encyclopedia Britannica


Lillian Masediba Ngoyi- South African History Online

Helen Joseph- South African History Online

Rahima Moosa- South African History Online

Sophia Theresa Williams de Bruyn- South African History Online

Colonizing Hawai'i/Part 8 The Territory and the Big Five

 

Admission Day Ceremony of the Territory of Hawaii held on June 14, 1900. Author Unknown. Bernice P. Bishop Museum. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hawaii_Territory_Admission_Day_Ceremonies.jpg

Most of the wealthiest sugar planters were not dedicated annexationists, primarily because they feared being joined with the United States would put an end to importing Asian contract laborers, a cost saving measure that was necessary to make the sugar industry as profitable as it was. Nor were most of them supportive of enfranchising Asian workers or Native Hawaiians. The most militant annexationists tended to be lawyers and businessmen with some investments in various sugar plantations. The wealthier planters could afford to sit on the fence between the Hawaiian monarchy and the Annexationists.

The largest corporations which came to be known as the Big Five, were C. Brewer, Castle & Cooke, Alexander and Baldwin, Theo. Davies & Co., and Hackfeld & Co., which later became American Factors. These companies owned multiple plantations, as well as the companies that supplied them, the refineries and factories that processed and sold the sugar for them, as well as the banks that made it all possible.

They imported indentured servants and other coerced laborers in large groups by contract, first with Chinese, then Japanese and Portuguese, and then Filipino workers. Multiple anti-Asian laws of both Hawaiian and American origin prevented many of these people from naturalizing and earning citizenship. It would take these groups many decades to effectively organize for political rights.


The Big Five wanted to be wealthy and powerful enough to control or strongly influence politics, without being responsible for politicking. They wanted to provide jobs that made the majority of workers dependent on them without the responsibility of adhering to the prevailing labor laws of the day in their home countries. They poured money into schools for non-Whites but also supported stipulations that banned Hawaiian language and culture, and required a particular American ideology that institutionalized White supremacy and classism. 

The grassroots political organizations created by Native Hawaiians, the Hui Kālai ‘āina, and the Hui Aloha ‘Āina both vigorously protested American annexation. They both delivered petitions signed by a majority of the Native population. Queen Lili’uokalani also submitted a formal protest to the annexation and appropriation of her crown lands. Regardless of their clearly communicated legitimate claims or their allies in the US and around the globe, the McKinley administration pushed annexation through in the midst of the Spanish/American War. The majority of Americans and Europeans saw the Native Hawaiians, and Polynesians generally, the same way they saw all the indigenous peoples of the Americas, as “vanishing races” whose populations were rapidly decreasing and could be disregarded politically and socially. This prevalent racist worldview, combined with the strategic benefit of the Hawaiian islands’ location in the Pacific for a fledgeling empire made American politicians confident in seizing control of the kingdom along with the Philippines and other islands.

Seal of the Territory of Hawaii. Translation:

“The Life of the Land is Perpetuated in Righteousness.”

Following the formal annexation, all the laws of the illegally established Republic of Hawaii were left in place until Congress could establish a territorial government for the islands. Dole and Thurston were hard at work advocating for terms that would retain the privileged position of wealthy Whites and keep Asian laborers and Native Hawaiians politically sidelined. Robert Wilcox played a pivotal role in lobbying Congress to remove property requirements from voting rights, the main tactic that had kept Native Hawaiians from voting in their own country. He also worked to establish an Independent Home Rule Party that would challenge White rule in the legislature. Hawaiian language newspapers were already numerous, but they rapidly increased in number as a tactic for preserving Hawaiian language, culture, history and bolstering an indigenous nationalism in resistance to American hegemony. As a territory, Hawaii elected a non-voting delegate to the US Congress to represent them. Robert Wilcox was among the first to be elected to this post. 




Sources:

Hawai’i Plantation Museum

Hawai’i’s Territorial Period in Context- University of Hawai’i

History of Labor in Hawai’i- University of Hawai’i

Kihei Soli Niheu plays Robert Kalanihiapo Wilcox, Jan. 1993- Hawaiian Voice

Katrina-Ann, R. “The Hawaiian Language Revitalization Movement.” In A Nation Rising: Hawaiian Movements for Life, Land, and Sovereignty, edited by Goodyear-Kaopua, Noelani, Ikaika Hussey, and Erin Kahunawaika’ala Wright, 78-85. Duke University Press, 2024. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=m9LZBAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA26&dq=the+hawaiian+language+revitalization+movement+katrina-ann+r.&ots=yQzWC3dTuL&sig=XRtAkbjsBf99WICpEYyEP6eO8cw.

Silva, Noenoe K. “I Kū Mau Mau: How Kānaka Maoli Tried to Sustain National Identity within the United States Political System.” American Studies 45, no. 3 (2004): 9–31.

———. “Joseph Moku’ōhai Poepoe.” In The Power of the Steel-Tipped Pen: Reconstructing Native Hawaiian Intellectual History. 105-149. Duke University Press, 2017. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=L8LADgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT8&dq=Reconstructing+Native+Hawaiian+Intellectual+history:+joseph+mokuohai+poepoe&ots=1_dfQm4DtZ&sig=IVwOiUOJpgOMRcxTqDVOjMpN6WA.

Whitehead, John S. “Western Progressives, Old South Planters, or Colonial Oppressors: The Enigma of Hawaii’s ‘Big Five,’ 1898–1940.” Western Historical Quarterly 30, no. 3 (1999): 295–326.

Colonizing Hawai'i/Part 7- From Republic to Annexation

 

Temporarily thwarted in their bid for US annexation, the Provisional Government called a constitutional convention in June of 1894. 19 of its 37 delegates were selected by Sanford B. Dole, and the remaining 18 were elected. The constitution that was enacted, written primarily by Dole and Lorrin Thurston, established a president as the head of government, and converted the house of Nobles to a Hawaiian Senate, to more closely resemble the US government.



Voting rights were limited to male citizens of the Republic. Citizens naturalized before 1893 were excluded unless they were “a native of a country having, or have had, treaty relations with Hawaii.” This was designed specifically to exclude Chinese and Japanese citizens. Certain non-citizens could vote, if they received “certificates of service” or “letters of denization” from the Hawaiian government, provided they took an oath to support the constitution and republic, and to not aid any attempts to restore the monarchy. The vast majority of Native Hawaiians refused to take such an oath, leaving them ineligible to participate in elections or the government of their homeland.’



Following the forced adoption of the Bayonet Constitution in 1887, Native Hawaiian leaders formed the Hui Kālai ‘āina, roughly translated as “Hawaiian Political Association.” This group worked to organize petition drives to demand a new constitution. They remained active after the coup in petitioning the US to restore Queen Lili’uokalani. Another organization was formed after the overthrow by former Native Hawaiian legislators called the Hui Aloha ‘Āina, roughly translated to the “Patriotic league.” There were initially separate organizations for men and women. These groups were able to deliver petitions arguing against annexation and restoration of the monarchy with signatures of nearly all the 40,000 Native Hawaiians in the Republic. 



Queen Lili’uokalani traveled to Washington DC 1897 to petition the Congress against annexation and to restore her monarchy. During this time she wrote “Hawai’i’s story by Hawai’i’s Queen.” Agents of the Republic were also in the capital lobbying William McKinley’s administration for annexation. As in 1894, both parties were unsuccessful in their efforts, and so the Republic endured. However events in 1898 would tip the scales in the annexationists’ favor.

President William McKinley and Vice President Theodore Roosevelt, circa 1900. Library of Congress

Spain had colonized islands in the Caribbean and Pacific for centuries. The country was wracked by internal and colonial revolutions throughout the 19th century. In Cuba, one in a long line of revolts had reached a critical mass in the 1890s. Subduing it required an economically suffering Spain to send more troops it could ill afford and use more brutal tactics than in the past. Notoriously, it sought to separate the general population of Cubans from the insurgents by removing them from their villages to several concentration camps. 



These tactics were seized on by Americans eager to keep expanding US territory throughout the Western Hemisphere. Pro-war newspapers waged a boisterous campaign depicting Spain as an imperialist tyrant and demanding military intervention. The prospect was not popular with the general public or enough mainstream politicians to affect any official actions. William McKinley’s administration sought to secure Spanish withdrawal through diplomatic measures. On February 15th, 1898 a major explosion occurred on the USS Maine, a warship that had been sent to Havana Harbor in preparation to protect any American property should it be endangered during the fighting between the Cubans and Spanish. The ship sank soon after, killing over 250 crewmen. Multiple investigations followed from both Spanish and American governments. Most found that the explosion was the result of an accident in the coal bunker or magazines for its cannon, but some American investigators claimed it was caused by a Spanish torpedo or mine. The verdicts remain a matter of debate to this day. 



The pro-war press and politicians used the incident to renew their cause, coining the rallying cry, “Remember the Maine! To Hell with Spain!” The incident did not immediately move the administration to declare war, but it provided enough pressure to sway public opinion and persuade a sufficient number of politicians. On April 20, McKinely signed a joint resolution drafted by Congress supporting Cuban independence and authorizing a naval blockade of Cuba. Spain responded by declaring war on the US. The US war effort included sending naval forces to all of Spain’s colonies, including Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. The Republic of Hawaii officially adopted a neutral stance in the conflict, but in reality made its harbors available for crucial feuling and resupply of the navy. Pro-annexationists in Hawai’i and the US used this to argue for the strategic necessity of US control of the islands. Spanish resistance was minimal and US casualties low, stoking the war fever throughout the country. 



In July the Newlands Resolution accomplished the annexation of Hawai’i and the end of the war saw the US gain possession of Puerto Rico, Guam, the Philippines, and Guantanamo Bay on the edge of Cuba. By 1900 Congress had passed the Organic Act, making Hawai’i an official US territory. 





Sources:

Queen Lili’uokalani- National Parks Service

Spanish American War in Hawai’i- Aloha Authentic

Joint Resolution to Provide for Annexing the Hawaiian Islands to the United States (1898)- National Archives 

25% of Hawaii's Land (Crown Lands) Taken Illegally (Who Benefited?) with Donovan Preza M.A.- Hawaiian Kingdom Academia

Colonizing Hawai'i/Part 6- The 1893 Coup, Lili'uokalani Overthrown

 
 

Robert Wilcox. 1900. Unknown author. Public Domain. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Robert_William_Wilcox_1900.jpg

The Bayonet Constitution all but nullified the political power of the Hawaiian monarchy, and assured White control of the legislature by disenfranchising Chinese and Japanese citizens and residents of the kingdom. 



In July of 1889 Robert Wilcox, a young teacher and representative from Maui, led a revolt in an attempt to force King Kalākaua to sign yet another constitution that would reverse the effects of Bayonet. Some believe he also intended to force the king to abdicate the throne in favor of his heir and sister Lili’uokalani. After a pitched battle with the Honolulu Rifles, Wilcox and his forces surrendered. He was charged with treason and tried, but a Hawaiian jury declined to convict him, indicating the widespread opposition to the Reform Party faction that had instituted the Bayonet Constitution. Wilcox returned to the legislature and worked to build political opposition.



In 1890 the United States passed the McKinley Tariff, which removed the tariffs on imported luxury goods such as sugar. This eliminated the economic advantage to sugar planters the Reciprocity Treaty had created. Hawai’i’s sugar barons grew increasingly worried about their profits and political power after this development. 

Queen Lili’uokalani. Stanislaw Julian Ostrorog. 1887. Public Domain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Liliuokalani_in_London_(PPWD-16-4.014).jpg

In January of 1891, King Kalākaua died while visiting San Francisco. Queen Lili’uokalani ascended to the throne. The legislature that assembled soon after was sharply divided among political factions and repeatedly voted to remove the Queen’s cabinet, a power created by the Bayonet Constitution. Meanwhile, the Queen was petitioned relentlessly by Hawiians to draft a new constitution that would curtail the power of the Reform Party and plantation owners. Once it became known to them that the Queen was in fact drafting such a document, the Hawaiian League devised a plot to depose the Queen, abolish the monarchy, and secure annexation of the islands by the United States. Largely led by Lorrin Thurston and Sanford Dole, they formed the Committee of Safety, officially chaired by Henry E. Cooper.




On January 17, 1893 a Hawaiian policeman named Leialoha was shot while investigating a wagon of weapons intended for the Committee of Safety. The Honolulu Rifles and other armed forces were mobilized to converge on ‘Iolani Palace and other key locations. John L. Stevens, the US minister to Hawai’i, authorized Captain Wiltse of the USS Boston to land marines and sailors to “secure American property.” The Committee demanded that Queen Lili'uokalani relinquish her throne and remain under house arrest. Seeing no alternative to widespread violence that would likely end in defeat, the Queen surrendered. In her written statement she formally protested all acts of the Committee of Safety and yielded to the “superior force of the United States of America.”




The Hawaiian League assembled a commission to travel to Washington DC to secure US annexation. As with the coup, this was facilitated by Minister Stevens. Lorrin Thurston headed the commission and made sure to leave before the Queen’s allies in order to head off their petitions. In the meantime, the League assembled a provisional government to manage the kingdom in the interim. 




President Harrison’s secretary of state helped the League’s commission draft an annexation treaty and submitted it to the US Senate. Perhaps because of the unusual circumstances, or because the Harrison administration was on its way out, the Senate declined to ratify the treaty before an investigation of the events. Within his first week in office, Grover Cleveland sent agents to Hawai’i to investigate the coup, the role of the US military, and the sentiment of the general population regarding the prospect of American annexation. 

President Grover Cleveland. Unknown author. National Archives. Public domain. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Grover_Cleveland_-_NARA_-_518139_(cropped)_(2).jpg

It was not hard to ascertain that the Provisional Government had little support from the people, and had improperly used the US military to bolster the illegal overthrow of a friendly nation. The Cleveland administration issued a demand to the Provisional Government that they restore the Queen to her constitutional authority. Outraged, Sanford Dole replied that the Provisional Government did not recognize the president’s authority to interfere with their domestic affairs. He charged the Queen with heading a corrupt government and stated that his government was the rightful authority of the islands and would continue to advocate union with the United States.




President Cleveland’s position was that the Queen should be restored and the Committee of Safety should be granted amnesty for the coup, that political matters should essentially revert back to the status quo before the occupation of Honolulu by US forces. Citing the limits of his office, Cleveland referred the matter to the Congress. It was accompanied by his formal recommendation and the official investigative report of Congressman Blount that charged the Committee of Safety and Minister Stevens with illegally using US forces to aid the overthrow of Hawai’i’s government. Senator John T. Morgan conducted his own investigation into the coup. Despite his 809-page manifesto arguing for annexation, the Senate resolved the matter with the Turpie Resolution which instituted a policy against both annexation and restoration of the Queen.




Resolved to wait for a more friendly US administration to pursue formal annexation, the Hawaiian League established the Republic of Hawaii on July 4, 1894. In the meantime, more revolts by Native Hawaiians were in the works. Robert Wilcox led the Hawaiian Counterrevolution in January of 1895. It consisted of 3 battles over 4 days, ending in defeat for the Hawaiians. Wilcox was tried for treason before a military tribunal and sentenced to death, commuted to 35 years imprisonment. A cache of weapons were discovered and attributed to the Queen who was arrested on January 16 and charged with “misprision of (aiding) treason.” During this confinement Queen Lili’uokalani abdicated her throne in writing, stating that she did so only in exchange for the lives of her supporters who had been sentenced to death. She was found guilty by a military commission of the Republic of Hawaii and sentenced to 5 years of hard labor and a $5000 fine. It was commuted to house arrest in ‘Iolani Palace. 




Sources:

Kūkahekahe: The Overthrow of Queen Lili’uokalani- Kamehameha Schools

Queen Lili’uokalani- Crown of Hawai’i

Hawaiian Situation: The President’s message to Congress- Library of Congress



Kualapai, Lydia. “The Queen Writes Back: Lili’uokalani’s Hawaii’s Story by Hawaii’s Queen.” Studies in American Indian Literatures 17, no. 2 (2005): 32–62.

Colonizing Hawai'i/Part 5- The Bayonet Constitution

 

Portrait of King Kalākaua. James J. Williams. Circa 1882. Public Domain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kingdavidkalakaua_dust.jpg

King David Kalākaua’s reign began in 1874 with a bitter election and accusations of corruption. His opponent Emma Rooke, the widow of Kamehameha IV, retained significant popular support among many indigenous Hawaiians. On the other end of the political spectrum, he was under intense pressure, like his predecessors, to facilitate the priorities of wealthy plantation owners whose ultimate goal was US annexation.



Most Hawaiians favored allying the kingdom closer to Britain, another monarchy. However, the US had long made it clear they saw the Hawaiian islands as crucial to US security and would not abide another European power taking possession of the kingdom. The large number of American plantation owners and businessmen working in the Hawaiian government helped bolster this claim. American and European businessmen had already accomplished the political goals of converting the kingdom’s land tenure system to one of private property and passing laws allowing immigrants to purchase land. 



The main plantation commodity on the islands was sugar. Hawaiian and American agents attempted to negotiate a reciprocity treaty in 1855 but Louisiana sugar planters blocked this threat to their profits. 7 years later Southern planters were at war with the United States and Hawaiian sugar saw a boom. After the war concluded these profits decreased and talks for a reciprocity treaty renewed. 



US generals visited the islands in 1872 to evaluate areas for military use, and found Pearl Harbor a prime location. Hawai’i’s government was initially willing to grant exclusive use of the harbor to the US in exchange for the ability to import sugar to the US free of tariffs, but public outrage forced the government to withdraw the offer.



After his election in 1874, King Kalākaua renewed efforts to secure a reciprocity treaty for Hawai’i’s sugar planters. The US settled for a clause that prevented the kingdom’s government from leasing territory to any foreign power for the life of the treaty. The act was signed in 1875. The subsequent boom in sugar production also dramatically affected the demographics of the kingdom as the planters imported Chinese and Japanese contract laborers in large numbers.



When the agreement came up for renewal in 1885, the US took a firmer position on demanding exclusive access to Pearl Harbor. The agreement had been a boon for the sugar producers, and by extension the royal family that taxed them, but most Hawaiians saw little benefit and many of the indigenous Hawaiians were still adamantly opposed to ceding Pearl Harbor to the Americans or any other foreign power. King Kalākaua resisted adding the clause guaranteeing US naval access to the harbor, heightening tensions between his administration and the planter class.



The treaty did not benefit the US economically, but Hawai’i’s sugar producers stood to lose substantial gains if it was not renewed, causing them to tighten their grip on the Hawaiian government. A group of American businessmen, many descended from missionary families, organized an anti-royalist, pro-US-annexation “Reform Party.” Many of these men were also part of a secret cabal known as the Hawaiian League that planned to hasten annexation by staging a coup.

Lorrin A. Thurston. Approx 1892. Author unknown. Public Domain.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lorrin_A._Thurston,_1892.jpg

Lorrin Thurston, the grandson of missionaries, took the lead in executing an insurrection. He commanded a 300-man militia called the Honolulu Rifles. They were almost exclusively White. On June 30, the Hawaiian League demanded that King Kalākaua dismiss his cabinet, headed by Walter M. Gibson, a White politician who opposed the goals of the Hawaiian League.



The next day the Honolulu Rifles took control of a large shipment of arms from an Australian ship, nearly lynched Gibson, exiling him to San Francisco at the last minute, and proceeded to join the members of the Hawaiian League as they informed the king that they would replace his cabinet with their own members, Thurston among them, and that they were drafting a new constitution that he would be signing into law. The king sought counsel from several American and British ministers not aligned with the League, but none were confident enough to oppose them and advised him to comply with their demands. This document was literally signed at gunpoint, earning it the name, the Bayonet Constitution. 



It removed most of the king’s authority by giving the legislature veto powers and stipulating that any official actions required the signature of at least 1 cabinet member. It also changed the voting rights of the kingdom by allowing male citizens and resident aliens of American, European, or Hawaiian descent to vote, provided they could pass a literacy test in a language of those races, and meet the property and income requirements. The literacy and property requirements were features of previous constitutions, but the racial language was used to disenfranchise Chinese and Japanese residents, most of whom were plantation laborers or formerly had been, and at the same time give the vote to Portuguese laborers largely controlled by members of the Reform Party. 



The Bayonet Constitution was never ratified by the Hawaiian Legislature, even after the snap election that brought in a largely Hawaiian League government. Later that summer, the king signed the renewal of the reciprocal agreement, with the clause that guaranteed the US exclusive use of Pearl Harbor for the length of the treaty. Kalākaua remained the head of state, but was sidelined politically. The government of the kingdom was taken over by the Hawaiian League, and the United States gained a valuable naval base in the Pacific region. Most indigenous Hawaiians had long suspected American planters and politicians planned on replacing their government and began organizing against it.


Sources: 

King David Kalākaua- wbur

The 1887 Bayonet Constitution: Beginning of the Insurgency- Hawaiian Kingdom blog

Lorrin A. Thurston- Encyclopedia Britannica

Robert William Wilcox- Crown of Hawai’i

La Croix, Sumner J., and Christopher Grandy. “The Political Instability of Reciprocal Trade and the Overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom.” The Journal of Economic History 57, no. 1 (1997): 161–89.

Moblo, Pennie. “Leprosy, Politics, and the Rise of Hawaii’s Reform Party.” The Journal of Pacific History 34, no. 1 (June 1999): 75–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223349908572892.

Osorio, Jonathan Kamakawiwo’ole. “‘ What Kine Hawaiian Are You?’: A Mo’olelo about Nationhood, Race, History, and the Contemporary Sovereignty Movement in Hawai’i.” The Contemporary Pacific 13, no. 2 (2001): 359–79.

Colonizing Hawai'i/Part 4- The Great Māhele

 

A view of 'Iolani Palace in Honolulu, Hawaii. 2021. Gage Skidmore. Cc-by-sa-2.0

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Iolani_Palace_(51872681413).jpg

The official Māhele took place in 1848 but the term is also used as a catch-all for a process that spanned 1845-55. The Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles was created in 1845. It was made to facilitate and arbitrate land claims by private individuals, native and foreign, that would ensue from the coming land reforms. Between January and March of 1848 the Māhele proper occurred as the King reached agreements with 240 ali’i and konohiki (Hawaiian chiefs) concerning their lands, after which they were to submit their claims to the Board.



The Hawaiian royal family and other indigenous elites throughout the islands had more access to the resources necessary to secure their land claims. Ordinary Hawaiians often did not. Language barriers, as well as the cost of surveyors, added to the challenge of navigating the Māhele’s legal requirements. By the 1848 claim deadline, many commoners had not filed either out of frustration, or outright resistance to what they saw as an alien system.

Also in 1848,  the king divided his own lands into those owned by the Hawaiian government, and those that were his own personal property. The last 2 major steps in the process of the Mālehe occurred in 1850. First the Legislature passed an act to allow foreigners to acquire land in “fee simple.” Fee simple, meaning as private property in the Euro-American fashion. Finally, the Kuleana Act of 1850 gave Hawaiian commoners who had acquired title to their lands by submitting claims, to sell it, completing their transition to fee simple ownership. 

black and white photograph of William Little Lee and Charles Reed Bishop in suits in 1846

Photograph of William Little Lee and Charles Reed Bishop. Photographer unknown. 1846. Public Domain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:William_Little_Lee_and_Charles_Reed_Bishop_1846.jpg

2 Americans who went on to serve in the Hawaiian government during this period were William Little Lee and Charles Reed Bishop. Both hailing from New York State, the young professionals had set out for Oregon in 1846, but found opportunities in Hawai’i before reaching the west coast of North America. 



Lee, a lawyer, was soon appointed as judge in O’ahu and made a member of Kamehameha III’s privy council. In 1848 he was appointed as Chief Justice of the Hawaiian Supreme Court. Lee was instrumental in drafting some of the laws of the newly formed constitutional monarchy and served on the land commission that facilitated the Great Mahele. He also helped draft the 1852 constitution which gave the other branches of government increased oversight over the king’s powers. Towards the end of his life, Lee was working on passing reciprocity treaties with the US. He died of tuberculosis in 1857 before the negotiations could be completed.



Charles Reed Bishop found work as a lawyer, then as an agent for the US consul, and then as a customs agent for the Kingdom of Hawai’i. He courted a member of the royal family, Bernice Pauahi Pākī. They were married in 1850. Bishop continued to prosper, founding a bank, and serving on the privy council to several Hawaiian monarchs. He was appointed to the House of Nobles by Kamehameha IV. He and his wife founded the Kamehameha Schools, a school system that educated children of Hawaiian ancestry. 

Black and white photo of King Kamehameha IV in military uniform

Kamehameha IV, born Alexander ʻIolani Liholiho Keawenui (1834–1863) Hawaii State Archives. Approx. 1863. Public Domain. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kamehameha_IV_(PP-97-8-002).jpg

Kamehameha IV reigned from 1855-1863 following the death of his predecessor. He worked to balance American subjects’ influence over the kingdom, as they were the largest landowners besides the Hawiian elite, and in many cases far wealthier. His successor, Kamehameha V went even further, refusing to uphold the 1852 constitution. He called a convention to draft a new one in 1864. This constitution abolished the office of kuhina nui, restored some of the king’s autonomy, and converted the House of Nobles and House of Representatives into a single Legislative Assembly. 

Black and white photograph of King Kamehameha V in a suit, seated.

King Kamehameha V. Charles Weed. 1865. Public Domain. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kamehameha_the_Fifth.jpg

Kamehameha V died without naming a successor. Choosing the new sovereign from eligible royal family members fell to a vote by the Legislative Assembly. King Lunalilo was elected in 1873, but fell ill with tuberculosis and died in January of 1874. 


Another election was held between David Kalakaua and the former queen and widow of Kamehameha IV, Emma Rooke. Kalakaua won the election amid much controversy, leading to the Honolulu Courthouse Riot. Rooke’s supporters targeted legislators that had supported Kalakaua, injuring many. British and American soldiers docked nearby were called in to restore order.


King Kalakaua was staunchly opposed to ceding any land to foreign nations. At the same time, he negotiated a reciprocity treaty with the US that enriched the owners of Hawai’i’s sugar plantations. Most of these were IS, many of whom advocated American annexation of the kingdom.

Sources:

Kamehameha IV

Kamehameha V

King Lunalilo

King Kalākaua


Banner, Stuart. “Preparing to Be Colonized: Land Tenure and Legal Strategy in Nineteenth-Century Hawaii.” Law & Society Review 39, no. 2 (2005): 273–314.

Kashay, Jennifer Fish. “Agents of Imperialism: Missionaries and Merchants in Early-Nineteenth-Century Hawaii.” The New England Quarterly 80, no. 2 (2007): 280–98.

Kessler, Lawrence H. “A Plantation upon a Hill; Or, Sugar without Rum: Hawai ‘i’s Missionaries and the Founding of the Sugarcane Plantation System.” Pacific Historical Review 84, no. 2 (2014): 129–62.

Colonizing Hawai'i/Part 3- The 1840 Constitution

 
painted portrait of Kamehameha III in a suit

Portrait of Kamehameha III, painted in Boston from a daguerreotype, by an unknown artist

For centuries the Hawaiian islands were ruled by various Ali’is (ah-lee’-ee), a Hawaiian word for chief or leader. In 1795, after many wars, mostly among relatives, the islands were united under the rule of Kamehameha the Great (ka-may-ha-may-ha). Like many of his rivals, he had sought military help from Western sailors, particularly the British, mostly in the form of guns and cannons. After establishing his dynasty, Kamehameha continued to engage with Western powers in order to learn and profit from them, but also to protect his kingdom from them. His descendants continued this balancing act through the 1800s as commerce grew, and Western diseases and planters took an increasing toll on the Native population, their lands, and their labor. 


On June 7, 1839, Kamehameha III published the Hawaiian Declaration of Rights, also known as the 1839 Constitution. The following 1840 Constitution more comprehensively established the Kingdom as a constitutional monarchy with a bicameral (2 houses) parliament.


Kamehameha III’s intent was always to secure the Hawaiian people’s lands and rights, but we will see in coming weeks how this proved to be a continuous struggle as the kingdom modernized.


Sources:

Kamehameha the Great- US National Park Service

Kamehameha II- Royal Family of Hawaii

Kamehameha III- Royal Family of Hawaii

Forming the Hawaiian State- Punahou School

1839 and 1840 Constitutions- Hooilina.org

Colonizing Hawai'i/Part 2- Americans Immigrate

European merchants made frequent visits to the Hawaiian islands once Captain James Cook documented its location in 1778. Not only was it an ideal source of resupply for whaling ships, it was also a convenient stop gap between Canton, China and the western coast of the Americas, major nodes in a prestigious and growing trade network. Merchant ships traded furs, sugar, and coffee for Chinese items like silk, tea, silver, and spices. 




Agents of these trade corporations, like the Hudson’s Bay Company, as well as their suppliers, set up shop in Hawai’i throughout the late 1700s and early 1800s. Unlike many of the lands Europeans rediscovered around the globe, the Hawaiian islands were consolidated politically under a single royal government. Merchants made deals with the royal family or Ali’i or Konohiki (subordinate chiefs), to acquire land. This property was revocable at any time and was still technically owned by the Hawaiians they’d contracted with. 




Missionaries, as in other frontier regions of Euro-American societies, were not far behind the merchants. The first missionaries arrived in the 1810s and 20s. As in other locales, their method of Christianizing indigenous populations centered around European style agriculture and property ownership. In these early decades of the 19th century there was much antagonism between merchant and missionary communities, each blaming the other for encouraging vice and discouraging proper industriousness among the Hawaiian commoners. After the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions (ABCFM) revoked funding for the Hawaiian missionaries after an economic downturn in 1837, they became more amenable to large scale plantations, rather than the small scale farming they had administered previously. 

Queen Ka'ahumanu sitting on a rug

Queen Ka’ahumanu. 1822. Jean-Pierre Norblin de la Gourdaine after painting by Louis Choris. Public Domain.

Kamehameha the Great had several wives. The most influential was Ka'ahumanu. She was born on the island of Maui to an elite family. Upon the king’s death, she informed his council that the king had wished her to rule alongside his named successor. The council created the title of kuhina nui, a sort of prime minister position. Kamehameha II, the former king’s firstborn son (not with Ka’ahumanu) reigned from 1819-1824. He died of measles while visiting London. As his brother and successor, Kamehameha III was only 10 at the time of his ascension, Ka’ahumanu continued her role as regent of the kingdom until her death in 1832. She was one of the primary elite Hawaiians to embrace Christianity and instigate reforms of traditional practices. This was not universally welcomed among Hawaiians, elite or commoners, but she had considerable influence over enough of the population that her leadership in this area was either accepted or cautiously tolerated. 

Kamehameha III in military uniform. Alfred Thomas Agate. 1838-42. Public Domain.

Kamehameha III hired numerous European and American advisors to assist him with foreign trade and increasingly became convinced it was in his kingdom’s and his people’s interests to reform his dynasty as a constitutional monarchy modeled on the British system with a 3-branch government system. It is impossible to say for certain why he took this course, but there were many possibilities.  As he came of age, many islands in the Pacific, such as New Zealand and Tahiti were claimed by the British and French Empires. Kamehameha III had his own brush with a hostile takeover when Lord George Paulet was sent to secure British possessions on the islands, and instead took the opportunity to claim the islands themselves for Britain. The king explained that he had already sent emissaries to settle these disputes, but Paulet was unmoved and threatened to open fire on the island. Under duress, the King yielded to Paulet, who raised the British flag over Hawaii. This episode only lasted 5 months, as Paulet’s superiors were outraged by the act and soon restored Hawai’i’s sovereignty. 



Many historians argue that incidents like these, as well as the high mortality of native Hawaiians to European diseases, convinced Kamehameha III and much of the Hawaiian elite that colonization was inevitable and that the best way to safeguard their land was to convert the kingdom to a constitutional monarchy with a system of land ownership that a colonizing Western power would recognize. Most of the king’s British and American ministers encouraged this view. It should be mentioned that they and other White residents stood to gain immensely by such changes, whether colonization occurred or not.



The Constitution of 1840 formally converted Hawai’i to a constitutional monarchy. In 1845 a land commission was established to process land claims by all of Hawai’i’s residents, native and foreign. This process took until 1855 to complete. It is known as the Great Māhele (ma-hail-ay). While intended to safeguard the lands of all Hawaiians, we will take a closer look at how the Māhele fell short of its goal.


Sources:

Ka’ahumanu- Punahou School

Paulet Episode 1843- Ka’iwakīloumoku 

Aftermath: the 1840s and Resistance- Punahou School

Colonizing Hawai'i/Part 1- The Polynesian Triangle

 

The Polynesian Triangle. Kahuroa. 2013. Public Domain. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pacific_Culture_Areas-de.png

The people who would become the Polynesians are believed to have migrated to New Guinea from Southeast Asia around 2000 BC. It is estimated they settled the island of Tonga around 1500 BC and Samoa around 1000 BC. Over the next thousand years they settled islands throughout the Pacific as far east as Rapa Nui (Easter Island) and as far north as Hawaii. Around 950 AD, the Māori (mow’-ray) settled New Zealand in the south. Within this triangle were hundreds of smaller islands.


The history and skills of Polynesian navigators astounded the European sailors they encountered in the 18th century. The great distances between Polynesian lands kept them from becoming a single political entity. Instead, multiple Polynesian societies developed on different islands or island groups. However, religious, linguistic, and economic ties preserved a distinct Polynesian culture in these various locales for centuries. 


There are many stories about the first Polynesian people to discover and populate Hawaii. As with all ancient cultures and nations, there is controversy and disagreement. European colonization in the 19th Century has further confused the historical record, but Natives and non-Natives continue to study and retrieve the history of Hawaii.

Sources:

Native Hawaiians Arrived on the Islands Centuries Ago- KHON2 News

South Pacific Migration History- Travel Video Source

Expansion across the Polynesian Triangle- National Library of Australia 

The Discovery and Settlement of Polynesia- University of Hawaii 

The Menehune: A True Race of People- Ka Wai Ola

HST 116- The American Revolution

 

Dr. Joanne B. Freeman

The American Revolution and the Revolutionary War are difficult events to teach. First of all, most treatments fail to establish sufficient context for Europeans in the Americas, the various cultures of the different British colonies and how they related to each other, as well as their mother country. 


The French and Indian War (1754-1763), a part of the 7 Years War between Britain and France that set off conflicts between several European powers throughout the continent and numerous colonial sites around the globe, is too often glossed over. 


Finally, as with many historical subjects, there is so much myth and political rhetoric heaped upon the actual history of these events that it can be arduous to find information that has not been sensationalized and oversimplified.


Joanne B. Freeman’s course on the topic, available as a podcast by Open Yale Courses, begins by clarifying that the Revolutionary War and the American Revolution were related, but distinct things. The lectures that make up the course are detailed, but listenable. They do an excellent job of presenting the subject to a modern audience by delving into the contexts of place, people, and events. Freeman presents at a brisk pace, but repeats and emphasizes points that provide greater clarity. 


Figures of the Revolutionary Era that often suffer from dull, overly-reverent descriptions are examined with diligence, humor, and a critical eye. Historians often rely too heavily on dates, figures, and theoretical analysis without doing the historical-imaginative work of painting a portrait of the past that gives their audience a rich sense of time and place, allowing them to see historical figures as flesh and blood people, and events as chaotic contingencies, rather than rigid inevitabilities. 


Rather than teaching the American Revolution as a propaganda exercise meant to instill national pride, or countercultural antipathy, Freeman presents it as a phenomenon to be investigated culturally and politically, and related to earlier and later eras, including our own.



Sources:

The American Revolution- Open Yale Courses

Joanne B. Freeman


May 17, 1756- England declares War on France (7 Years War)

 

Colonial claims in North America, 1854.

Winston Churchill called the 7 Years War the “First World War.” While it was primarily a conflict between Great Britain and France, it also drew in the Prussian, Austrian, and Russian Empires. The war contained theaters in Europe, North America, Africa, India, and beyond, as Britain sought to hobble the French colonial empire using its navy. 


Most of the nations involved, whether allied or opposed to Britain, record their own part in the war under more descriptive names. In the US it is commonly referred to as the “French and Indian War.” This conflict featured traditional European-style battles between French and British armies in North America, as well as North American tribes on both sides. It was also distinguished by guerrilla-style fighting throughout the borderlands of the colonial rivals.


In the spring of 1753 the French sent a colonial officer into the Ohio Valley to secure French forts that had long been disputed by British colonists and some of the local Native tribes. In the fall of 1753 Virginia’s governor ordered his provincial militia, led by 21 year old Major George Washington, to deliver a written order for the French to leave their territory. Washington did so while dining with the French commander at Fort Le Boeuf. He was unmoved and told Washington that France’s claim to the region was older and that he was not obliged to obey the order.


Washington took the message back to Virginia, but was soon dispatched back into the Ohio Country. An ambush on a French force led to international outrage and Washington’s famous surrender at Fort Necessity. The conflict intensified faultlines between European states, which led to a major political realignment known as the Diplomatic Revolution. Britain allied itself with Portugal and former French allies Prussia and Saxony. France, in turn, allied itself with Austria, Russia, and eventually Spain. 


Britain ultimately won the war, reaped numerous French colonial territories, and established  the dominance of its Naval infrastructure. However the costs of the war had put the Empire in serious debt. Over the next decade, as Britain sought to balance its books by taxing its colonies, separatist  movements in North America gained steam and led to the American Revolution. 


The Seven Years War was not declared until May 17, 1756, but the conflict had its roots in the French and Indian war in North America. For this reason Washington is often said to have set the war in motion with his attack on French forces in the Ohio Country. However, events may have exploded the way they did due to Washington’s Mingo ally Tanaghrisson killing the French commander Ensign Joseph Jumonville. Tanaghrisson executed him with a tomahawk to the skull.



Sources:

French and Indian War/7 Years War- Office of the Historian

Seven Years War- American Revolution Institute

Seven Years War and the Great Awakening- Crash Course

Tanaghrrison, the Half King- National Parks Service

Dangerous Subjects

 

James D. Saules was one of the earliest Black residents of Oregon’s Willamette (Walamt) Valley and the first to be exiled by the use of racial legislation in the region. Saules arrived in 1841, when the Pacific Northwest was under “Joint Occupation” by the United States and Great Britain. 


At the time the region was sparsely populated by immigrants, mostly French-Canadian fur-traders working for or retired from the Hudson’s Bay Company headquartered at Fort Vancouver on the north side of the Columbia River. These men, as well as maritime traders of various outside nations, had already brought enough foreign diseases to drastically reduce the population of Chinook, Kalapuyan, and other indigenous peoples. 


Most Americans were Protestant missionaries in small communities along the main rivers, the largest being in the Willamette Valley, just south of the Columbia River. US immigrants outside the missionary system began arriving in larger numbers in the early 1840s, sparking the creation of the Provisional Government. Its main purpose was to formalize settler’s land claims and send representatives back to the US to argue for making the “Oregon Country” an official territory. 


After Saules was involved in a dispute with neighboring settlers and a Wasco man named Cockstock, the Provisional Government used the event as a pretext for passing a law excluding Black people from the region. Saules left no records or statements of his own, a common problem  historians face when trying to create narratives to explain past events. Author Kenneth Coleman does an excellent job of telling the story of Saules’ life in Oregon with the primary sources available. 


In so doing, he demonstrates a rigorous and readable approach to history that confronts the omissions and biases of the sources and provides necessary context that allows the reader to better understand the experiences and actions of individuals from the past that have been underrepresented in historical accounts. 


Sources:

Dangerous Subjects- OSU Press

Racial Exclusion in pre-statehood Oregon- Kenneth Coleman

May 10, 1775- The Green Mountain Boys take Fort Ticonderoga

 

The Flag of the Green Mountain Boys, predating the Vermont Republic.

The Republic of Vermont was born out of land disputes between the colonies of New York and New Hampshire. Both claimed the territory but New Hampshire’s governor started making land grants for colonists in 1749. New York started issuing land grants in 1765. Many of the grants were for the same land, leading to violence between rival claimants. The New Hampshire colonists organized a militia known as the Green Mountain Boys in 1770 to defend beneficiaries of the New Hampshire grants and run off colonists from New York. Sporadic conflicts continued until Vermont was established as an independent republic in 1777. It was not until 1791 that Vermont joined the United States as the 14th state. 


The Green Mountain Boys also played a role in some of the early battles of the American War of Independence. Underground organizations like the Sons of Liberty had long been agitating, often through mob violence, against British soldiers and other authorities and arguing for American Independence. These conflicts led to the appointment of General Thomas Gage as the Royal governor of Massachusetts. When he ordered British forces to seize the military stores of Lexington and Concord, they were repelled by a number of local militia. This marked a turning point in the agitation for American independence as more colonists in New England and beyond began to rally around the besieged colony of Massachusetts.


On May 10, 1775, the Green Mountain Boys, along with some other colonial militiamen led by Benedict Arnold, conducted a surprise attack and successfully seized Fort Ticonderoga. They went on to assist with the seizures of Crown Point and Fort George, all British forts located in New York. 

Sources:

Green Mountain Boys- Wikipedia 

The Capture of Fort Ticonderoga- Fort Ticonderoga

The Vermont Republic- The History Guy 

GMNF- The Original Vermonters- US Forest Service

Matoaka's Story/Part 9 Matoaka and Pocahontas

 

The Mattaponi River, upstream of its confluence with the South River. Antepenultimate, CC BY-SA 4.0. Wikimedia Commons. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mattaponi_River_20170218.jpg

Everyone knows the name Pocahontas, but her story is usually remembered in pieces. Most people will guess that Pocahontas saved John Smith from being executed by her father and that they were married, bringing peace between the English and the Powhatan Nation. This is the residue of a more detailed myth, that Pocahontas recognized the superiority of the English society and enthusiastically chose to marry an Englishman, convert to Christianity, and renounce her own people. This legend was created to glorify one culture, and justify the conquest of another. 


As the English colonies that would become the United States grew, they created laws that helped them control Native, Black, and mixed-race people. These laws excluded them from voting, from juries, from owning property, and above all, from socializing with or marrying White people. It is darkly ironic then that the descendents of John Rolfe would long celebrate their relation to Pocahontas, the “Indian Princess.” As wealthy Virginia elites, they were immune to the stigma of Indian blood that marked so many in their community as outsiders and subhumans. 


The true story of Matoaka is short and tragic.


Matoaka’s father, Wahunsenaca, made Captain John Smith a werowance in an attempt to assimilate the English into the Powhatan Nation. She was a frequent visitor to Jamestown when she was between 10-13, accompanying delegations that brought food to the colonists. She learned English from Smith and others, probably most from the English boys left with her people to learn their language and customs. As relations between the Powhatan and the English soured, she became a target for abduction. She married a young Patawomeck man named Kakoum and lived with his people in the north of Tsenacomoco. They had a son together. In 1613 she was kidnapped by Captain Samuel Argall. 


Argall coerced the Patawomeck werowance into helping him and demanded as her ransom, the return of all English weapons and prisoners from Wahunsenaca, as well as large amounts of corn to feed the fort. Though Wahunsenaca agreed to these terms, the colony’s governor, Thomas Gates found excuses to claim it was not paid and kept Matoaka prisoner. After an initial captivity in Jamestown, Matoaka was sent to Henrico where the Reverend Alex Whitaker instructed her in Christianity and urged her to convert. The tobacco planter John Rolfe assisted Whitaker with teaching her English here. Rolfe claimed to have fallen in love with Matoaka and proposed to marry her. The colony’s governors forwarded his proposal to her father, while also threatening war with him if their demands for a regular supply of food were not met. Wahunsenaca consented to the marriage, hoping to secure his daughter’s safety and a beneficial peace with the English. Matoaka and John Rolfe had a son named Thomas. Most sources claim the child was Rolfe’s, conceived soon after their marriage. However the Mattaponi Oral History records that Matoaka revealed to her sister she was raped soon after being taken hostage. The Mattaponi therefore suspect that Thomas Rolfe was not John Rolfe’s biological son, and that his marriage to Matoaka may have been orchestrated by the colony’s governors. 


Once the tentative peace had been agreed to, Matoaka converted to Christianity, took the name Rebecca, and married Rolfe. Hostilities continued to erupt. Colonists raided for food in lean times, and took land Native people had cleared for crops along the riverbanks as opportunities arose. Those who strayed from the forts were often robbed and murdered. Outright war, though, was averted. 


In 1616, the Virginia Company sent Matoaka and Rolfe to England to publicize the colony and present an image of peaceful relations with “civilizable” Indians. Matoaka and her entourage became minor celebrities in London. She was entertained in the homes of English elites, met King James I and Queen Anne, attended a Royal Masque, and had a last meeting with Captain John Smith, who she scolded for breaking the bond he had entered into with her Father in 1607 when he was made werowance of the English.


As the party prepared to set sail back to Virginia, Matoaka became ill. Most sources note only that Matoaka began feeling ill, some say it was only her, others that all of the Powhatans were suffering from sickness. The Mattaponi Oral History records that Matoaka told her sister that she believed she was poisoned while dining with Rolfe and Captain Argall, and that she died on the ship. Most sources claim she died at an inn in the town of Gravesend, where the ship stopped. All agree she was buried at St. George’s church nearby.


It is tempting, especially this far removed from the events, to rewrite Matoaka’s story yet again. To cast her as a shrewd victim of circumstance, who attempted to sacrifice herself to bring peace between her people and an invading tribe. However, no one can know Matoaka’s thoughts, or her motivations. The little documentation we have of her life comes from other, mostly European, sources. Filling the empty spaces in that story with drama and speculation without acknowledging the lies and uncertainties does her memory further disservice. 


Camille Townsend ends her book, “Pocahontas and the Powhatan Dilemma,” with a sobering thesis that I believe avoids the common overreaches of most histories: 


“The destruction of Virginia’s Indian tribes was not a question of miscommunication and missed opportunities. White settlers wanted the Indians’ land and had the strength to take it; the Indians could not live without their land. It is unfair to imply that somehow Pocahontas, or Queen Cockacoeske, or others like them could have done more, could have played their cards differently, and so have saved their people. The gambling game they were forced to play was a dangerous one, and they had one hand, even two, tied behind their backs at all times. It is important to do them the honor of believing that they did their best. They all made decisions as well as they could, managing in what were often nearly unbearable situations. There is nothing they could have done that would have dramatically changed the outcome: a new nation was going to be built on their people’s destruction– a destruction that would be either partial or complete. They did not fail. On the contrary, theirs is a story of heroism as it exists in the real world, not in epic tales. Their dwindling people did survive, against all odds.”

Sources:

Images of a Legend - PBS
Pocahontas: Her Life and Legend- National Parks Service

Matoaka’s Story 

Bibliography

Custalow, Linwood “Little Bear” and Angela L. Daniel “Silver Star.” The True Story of Pocahontas: The Other Side of History. Downloadable ebook. Chicago: Fulcrum Publishing, 2007.

Downs, Kristina. “Mirrored Archetypes: The Contrasting Cultural Roles of La Malinche and Pocahontas.” Western Folklore 67, no. 4 (2008): 397–414.

Freund, Virginia, and Louis B. Wright. The Historie of Travell into Virginia Britania (1612), by William Strachey, Gent. Hakluyt Society, Second Series, v. 103. London: Taylor and Francis, 2011.

Gilliam, Charles Edgar. “His Dearest Daughter’s Names.” The William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine 21, no. 3 (1941): 239–42.


Hamor, Ralph, Thomas Harriot, George Percy, and John Rolf. Virginia; Four Personal Narratives. Research Library of Colonial Americana. New York: Arno Press, 1972.

Heuvel, Lisa. “The True Story of Pocahontas: The Other Side of History. By Linwood ‘Little Bear’ Custalow and Angela L. Daniel ‘Silver Star.’” American Indian Culture and Research Journal 31, no. 3 (June 1, 2007). https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8pq8q3m8.

Kupperman, Karen Ordahl. Pocahontas and the English Boys: Caught between Cultures in Early Virginia. New York: New York University Press, 2019.

Kupperman, Karen Ordahl, and Karen O. Kupperman. Captain John Smith: A Select Edition of His Writings. Published for the Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture, Williamsburg, Virginia Ser. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2012.


LeMaster, Michelle. “Pocahontas: (De)Constructing an American Myth.” Edited by Camilla Townsend, Helen C. Rountree, Paula Gunn Allen, and David A. Price. The William and Mary Quarterly 62, no. 4 (2005): 774–81. https://doi.org/10.2307/3491451.


Lopenzina, Drew. “The Wedding of Pocahontas and John Rolfe: How to Keep the Thrill Alive after Four Hundred Years of Marriage.” Studies in American Indian Literatures 26, no. 4 (2014): 59–77. https://doi.org/10.5250/studamerindilite.26.4.0059.


Rountree, Helen C. “Powhatan Indian Women: The People Captain John Smith Barely Saw.” Ethnohistory 45, no. 1 (1998): 1–29. https://doi.org/10.2307/483170.


Strachey, William, Silvester Jourdain, Louis B. Wright, and Alden T. Vaughan. A Voyage to Virginia in 1609: Two Narratives. 2nd ed. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2013.


“The True Story of Pocahontas-C-SPAN.Org.” Accessed February 8, 2024. https://www.c-span.org/video/?202747-2/the-true-story-pocahontas.

Townsend, Camilla. “Pocahontas and the Powhatan Dilemma.” New York: Hill and Wang, 2004.


Wood, Karenne. “Prisoners of History: Pocahontas, Mary Jemison, and the Poetics of an American Myth.” Studies in American Indian Literatures 28, no. 1 (2016): 73–82. https://doi.org/10.5250/studamerindilite.28.1.0073.


Working, Lauren. Review of Review of Pocahontas and the English Boys: Caught between Cultures in Early Virginia, by Karen Ordahl Kupperman. The William and Mary Quarterly 77, no. 1 (2020): 138–43.

Matoaka's Story/Part 8 The Powhatan Wars and the End of tsenacomoco

 

“The manner of their attire and painting them selves when they goe to their generall huntings or at theire solemne feasts.” Watercolor. John White. 1585. Public Domain.

John Rolfe returned to Jamestown a widower for the second time. He soon remarried and became a leading figure in the colony. He is one of the sources who wrote about the first enslaved Africans brought to an English colony in North America in 1619. They were seized from a Portuguese slave ship by Dutch privateers and sold as indentured servants in Jamestown. Rolfe died in 1622 but the cause is unknown. It is possible he was killed in what became known as the “Indian Massacre” of the same year, but that has never been verified.


Wahunsenca abdicated the role of Paramount Werowance soon after learning of Matoaka’s death. The Mattaponi Oral History records that her abduction had thrown him into a deep depression that left him increasingly indecisive about how to proceed against the English. He could no longer lead and died in April of 1618, roughly a year after his daughter. His brother Opitcham became the official Paramount Werowance, but Opechancanough (O-pee-ken’-can-oo), the Powhatan War Werowance, began to take a larger role in the Powhatan Nation’s governance. He maintained the official peace with the English, though disputes over land and trade, as well as violent incidents, continued. But secretly, Opechancanough was planning a concerted assault on nearly all of the colonies. On March 22nd, 1622, multiple parties visited English settlements and forts as usual, but at an appointed time, began executing English men, women, and children. Jamestown itself was secured in time to stave off a direct assault thanks to Native people, some Powhatans, some of other tribes, who warned them just in time. 


The 1622 Massacre killed a quarter of the colonists in Tsenacomoco (350-400). Another 400 would die in the following year as food became increasingly scarce. One of the retaliatory tactics of the English was to burn Native crops and villages. Guerrilla warfare raged on and off for the next 10 years. Opechancanough sued for peace in 1632, citing starvation among the Powhatan. Hostilities officially ended, but Anglo-Native relations were much more tense and micromanaged afterward. Most colonists were forbidden from trading or socializing with the Natives. All communication was to be handled by the governing council and their agents. Native people were required to carry an official pass to travel through English territory.


In 1644, the now elderly Opechancanough launched another concerted offensive against English settlements. Though they inflicted more casualties than in 1622, there were so many more English colonists by this time that it had less of an impact. The fighting went on for a year until the War Werowance himself was captured and brought to Jamestown to be imprisoned in public. He was soon shot in the back by one of his guards. 


In the aftermath of this last war, The Powhatan Nation began to collapse. Famine and disease hastened the process as its member tribes struggled to adapt to a new reality. Some tribes died out altogether, their surviving members seeking refuge with neighbors. Some allied with the English, some maintained hostilities, but eventually all were subjugated to English rule. 


Thomas Rolfe, Matoaka’s son, returned to Tsenacomoco as a teenager in 1635 to take up his father’s lands. He requested permission to visit his Powhatan relatives, including Opechancanough. It is unknown if any such meeting took place. Ultimately, Thomas chose the side of the British. It was the only world he truly knew, and by this time the world of his mother’s people had suffered drastic decline. Thomas was assigned to man and lead Fort James in the Chickahominy territory and fought against various Native tribes. By 1646 he held the rank of lieutenant and was rewarded with more lands surrounding the fort that he spent his life cultivating. He married Jane Poythress and had several children, many who would count among the colony’s future elite. The circumstances of his death are unknown.


The history of the English and the peoples of Tsenacomoco is one of scattered, broken sources, myths, and distortions. It is very much like the history of most colonial encounters. Regardless of the smaller players' intentions and actions, the larger powers behind the colonists were attempting to administer a project of wealth creation that depended on appropriating the land and labor of others. While officially forbidding violence against the Native peoples, they explicitly instructed their colonial agents to aggressively negotiate the Natives’ land from them, make their political leaders vassals of their own monarchs, and subject them to unequal trade and labor relations. The idea that these programs would be implemented without resulting in violence was ludicrous. Once the Powhatan had attacked the English in their homes, outright warfare was authorized and the security of Native people throughout the region, regardless of affiliation, was critically jeopardized. 


Next week, we’ll conclude Matoaka’s Story with a look at the legacy and memory of this most famous Powhatan woman.

Sources:

22nd March 1622- History Pod

Primary Source: De Bry's "A weroan or great Lorde of Virginia"- Jamestown/Yorktown Foundation

Weroansquas and Four Centuries of Female Powhatan Leaders- Jamestown/Yorktown Foundation

Virginia Company- Virginia Encyclopedia

Matoaka's Story/Part 7 The Death of Matoaka

 

“Princess Pocahontas.” Base of statue by William Ordway Partridge. Memorial at St. George Church, Gravesend, England. Photo: Tracy Jenkins, Art UK. CC.

The Virginia Company’s publicity tour had been a success. Plans were made to send more colonists to Jamestown and to establish schools for religious and English instruction among Native children in Virginia.


Arrangements were made for the party to return to Virginia in the spring of 1617. As the ship set sail, Matoaka and John dined with Captain Argall in his quarters. She became sick soon after. Argall docked the ship at the town of Gravesend. Matoaka died at the Gravesend Inn and was buried at the nearby Church of St. George. Many myths have grown up around her last words, but nothing is known for certain. The party held a funeral for her at the church before setting sail again. Fearing he would not survive the journey, John Rolfe left their son Thomas with relatives.


The Mattaponi Oral History records a different version of the events. It claims that shortly after the dinner with Captain Argall, Matoaka told her sister Mattachana that she thought “the English” put something in her food. Mattachanna tried to care for her, but her condition worsened. She left to get Rolfe and when she returned, Matoaka was dead. The Oral History records that Mattachanna and Uttamatomakkin told Wahunsenaca that Matoaka had been in good health in England, and had not become sick until boarding the ship to return home.


It is impossible to know the whole truth of Matoaka’s final days. Oral traditions were long seen by Western scholars as mere folklore without reliable information. That has changed somewhat, but even scholars who argue for their indispensability point out that they are a different kind of history that, taken out of their oral medium, lose much of their nuance and meaning. As the authors of “The True Story of Pocahontas” state, “There are attributes of oral traditions that are not obtainable in a written format… There is a living connection between the oral historian and his or her ancestors.”

The lethality of eastern diseases to indigenous Americans is well documented and so European and American historians have rarely questioned the circumstances of Matoaka’s death. More skeptical writers have speculated that she may have soured on supporting the Virginia Company’s plans for large-scale conversion of Powhatan children to Christianity, or that her experience in London had not made her the enthusiastic advocate of “civilization” they had expected. Perhaps with her tour of London completed, she was no longer seen as crucial to the company’s plans. Like so much of Matoaka’s life, her death is impossible to be certain about. 

Back in Tsenacomoco, the tenuous peace between the English and the Powhatan would endure for a few more years. But the death of Matoaka left Wahunsenaca stricken with grief. He turned over the leadership of the Powhatan Nation to his brother, Opitchapum. He died in 1618, roughly a year after his daughter.


Sources:

Pocahontas and Gravesend Jamestown/Yorktown Museums

“Indian Princess” sculpture- Pocahontas Archive

Matoaka's Story/Part 6 A Powhatan Lady in London

 

Inner Court of the Bell Savage Inn. 1889. Public Domain.

The Virginia Company hoped that keeping Matoaka among them would secure some form of peace with the Powhatan until they could increase their numbers in Virginia. However they also had concerns back in England. The company was involved in several lawsuits against past investors over various sums of money. With Rolfe’s latest tobacco crop being favorably compared to the Spanish product, the company was ready to aggressively pursue new investors. To this end, as well as putting a sunny face on Anglo-Indian relations, they planned to send Matoaka and Rolfe to England along with Thomas Dale and other company officials. Approximately 10 other Powhatan people accompanied Matoaka, including her sister Mattachanna and her husband, Uttamatomakkin, a high-ranking quiakro. Company officials were notoriously stingy when it came to expenses, so it seems likely that the additional Powhatans were insisted on by Matoaka, possibly acting on her father’s wishes. Uttamatomakkin was quoted by several sources as declaring he was instructed by Wahunseneca to count the Englishmen he found across the sea and provide information about their country.

The Virginia Company worked to make Matoaka a celebrity in London- a model of the “civilized Indian” they planned to reproduce throughout Virginia. In England, she was paraded before crowds, introduced at numerous homes, and invited to an audience with the King and Queen. She and Rolfe attended a Masque called “The Vision of Delight” where they were “well placed,” meaning their seats were near the King’s, ensuring a superior view of the performance. The Rolfe’s stayed at The Bell Savage Inn in the heart of London, a crossroads of high and low society, where players and performers often gathered and caroused. Uttamatomakkin was also a highly-sought dinner guest among Englishmen interested in the customs of Virginia’s Native cultures. He was described as happy to answer questions and demonstrate some of his protocols, warning his hosts that he was too old to convert, and that their efforts would be better spent on Powhatan children. Captain John Smith wrote about an exchange with him wherein he expressed disbelief that the man he had met was King James, as the sovereign had offered him no gift. Powhatan elites, like many other Native American societies, used the custom of gift-exchange to demonstrate prestige and cement peaceful relations between groups and individuals.


The Virginia Company commissioned an engraved portrait of Matoaka that they mass produced and circulated as widely as possible. This portrait remains the most credible likeness of the adult (19-21) Matoaka, as most other depictions of her were crudely Europeanized. The artist, Simon Van de Passe drew her with high cheekbones, dark hair and dark eyes. She wore a felt hat, long-sleeved gown, and lace collar, epitomizing the Puritan English middle-class wife. Most English Lady’s portraits depicted them looking to the side or down. In Van de Passe’s portrait, Matoaka stares boldly out of the frame to meet the viewer’s gaze. In a ribbon surrounding the portrait, the engraved words translate to:


“Matoaka als [alias] Rebecca, daughter to the mighty Prince Powhatan, Emperour of Attanoughskomouck als [alias] Virginia, converted and baptized in the Christian faith and wife to the worthy Mr. John Rolfe” (Attanoughskomouck was likely a mispronunciation of Tsenacomoco).

Engraved portrait of Matoaka. Simon Van de Passe. 1616. Public Domain.

After spending several months in crowded London where the air did not agree with Matoaka, the Virginia Company relocated her lodgings to a country setting in nearby Brentford. It is here that Captain John Smith called on her. In response to his greeting, Matoaka “turned about, obscured her face, as not seeming well contented.”* Smith, Rolfe, and a few unnamed others excused themselves for 2-3 hours, after which Matoaka rejoined the party and addressed Smith directly:

“You did promise Powhatan what was yours should bee his, and he the like to you, you called him father being in his land a stranger, and by the same reason so must I doe you.”*

Smith interrupted to say he could not allow her to address him as such, being that she was the daughter of a “King,” referencing the strict class culture of Europe. Matoaka scoffed in reply:

“With a well set countenance she said, Were you not afraid to come into my fathers countrie, and cause feare in him and all his people (but mee) and feare you here I should call you father, I tell you then I will, and you shall call me childe, and so I will bee for ever and ever your Countrieman.”*


Smith did not comment on this exchange with Matoaka in his publication; he briskly moved on to describe his conversation with Uttamatomakkin. Though it supported some of the claims made in his Virginia stories, it did not cast him in the favorable light of most of his writings. And yet it was long held up as evidence of Matoaka’s romantic infatuation with him. Modern readers, less likely to buy into the colonial mythology, tend to see it as a clear rebuke of a man she believed had broken an oath to her father. Her parting words suggest her time in London may have left her less than enthused about English intentions towards her homeland.


“They did tell us alwaies you were dead, and I knew no other till I came to Plimoth, yet Powhatan did command Uttamatomakkin to seeke you, and know the truth, because your Countriemen will lie much.”*


Sources:

Images of a Legend- PBS

The Virginia Company of London- Encyclopedia Virginia

*Circular of “A Generall Historie of Virginia, New England, and the Summer Isles…”- John Smith, HathiTrust

Matoaka's Story/Part 5 Captivity and Second Marriage

 

Haupt, Joe. "John Rolfe Tobacco." World History Encyclopedia. Last modified February 16, 2021. https://www.worldhistory.org/image/13445/john-rolfe-tobacco/

Who was John Rolfe, the Englishman who would be Matoaka’s second husband?

He was from a middle-class merchant family in England, and his goal was to make his fortune by joining the Virginia Company as a trader. Tobacco was one of the many resources the Spanish reaped from their Caribbean conquests and sold throughout their empire. Rolfe, like many Englishmen, sought to create a competitive English trade. He and his recently married wife joined the ship that wrecked in the Caribbean with Sir Thomas Dale and arrived with him to find Jamestown in ruins. They were among the dismayed colonists who decided to return to England, only to be turned back by the arrival of Lord De La Warre and his reinforcements. Rolfe’s pregnant wife (name unknown) gave birth to a daughter in Bermuda. The child, named after the island on which the colonists had found refuge from the storm, did not survive. Not long after settling in Jamestown, Rolfe’s wife died as well. The cause was not recorded, but the ordeal of her pregnancy at sea and miscarriage on a small island, had likely left her too weak to survive the hardships of life in the colony.

In addition to his agricultural work, Rolfe became the colony’s secretary, and assisted the Reverend Alex Whitaker in teaching Matoaka English and the bible. The letter wherein he revealed his love for Matoaka and requested permission to marry her from the colony’s new governor, Thomas Dale, is the main primary source that mentions their relationship. It was largely a defense of his feelings for a non-Christian woman wherein he sought to refute any assumption that he acted from lust, and declared that his motivation was for the good of Matoaka’s soul and the prosperity of the colony. 

We have no such documentary evidence from Matoaka herself. Some scholars have argued that she was awed by English civilization and rushed to embrace it, while others have claimed she was simply forced to convert and marry an Englishman by the colony’s governors for their own ends. Modern readers truly interested in the answer can only read the sources and retellings and speculate for themselves what may have happened. 

Most indigenous women throughout the Americas were raised with knowledge that they might be targeted by other tribes for kidnapping and could possibly have to resign themselves to an “adoption.” Matoaka’s situation was no different. Her “willingness” to learn the language, religion, and customs of her captors were measures of survival. She may have hoped to contribute to peace between her people and the English, or she may simply have been making the best of her own circumstances. 

In 1614, Thomas Dale resolved to confront Wahunseneca and force the Paramount Werowance into recognizing the English as an independent regional power and renewing tribute in corn from Powhatan villages. The region had suffered a drought and the English were finding it harder and harder to coerce food out of their neighbors, by both trade and force. There were simply not enough resources to meet the demand. Argall ferried Dale and an armed force up the river again, taking Matoaka and John Rolfe along. The Mattaponi Oral History claimed that the expedition was largely designed to convince Matoaka that her father had abandoned her in favor of keeping English weapons and continuing his policy of starving the colonists out. 

Argall’s ship was heckled throughout its journey by Native warriors eager for a fight. Matoaka witnessed the burning of several villages. At the town of Matchut, Dale sent a message demanding the unreasonable amount of corn, any remaining English prisoners and arms, as well as Rolfe’s marriage proposal. Rolfe himself, along with translator Rob Sparkes, carried the message to Wahunseca’s brother Opechancanough, who consented to the marriage on his brother’s behalf. He also committed to delivering the demanded corn and any remaining arms. Any English prisoners, he reported, had either died or ran away. Declaring themselves victorious, the English sailed back down the river to Jamestown.

Wahunsenaca agreed to the union, but did not attend the wedding himself, believing the English intended to take him prisoner as well. Instead he sent several of Matoaka’s uncles to represent him. 

In the legend of Pocahontas, she was dismayed that her father would not pay the ransom and came to love the English even more. In reality she likely knew the ransom was impossible to meet. It is telling that Matoaka did not convert to Christianity until after the truce between her people and the English was reached, despite having been a prisoner at Henrico, receiving instruction from Reverend Whitaker for over a year. Far from being awed by English religion and technology, she may have been seeking to play her part in binding the English to her people, either independently, or in concert with her father.

There are several primary sources that record colonial governors and their messengers conducting business with the Paramount Werowance after this point, wherein he mentions that his “dearest daughter” lives with the English. They also record Thomas Dale’s request to marry another of his daughters, Wahunseneca’s refusal, along with his displeasure that the English refused to meet unarmed or to leave any Englishmen in his village as they had in the past. These exchanges depict one side of diplomatic discussions and do not provide any insight into Wahunseneca’s thinking, but they do imply a tense and fragile peace very different from the sunny reports most of the colonists sent back to England. Did he genuinely hope Matoaka’s marriage to a colonist would create a lasting peace? Was he simply buying time? Or was he crushed by indecision, seeing no way to secure his daughter’s release, or his people’s position in the region in the long run as the colonists’ numbers grew?

The Mattaponi Oral History recorded Matoaka’s captivity and marriage very differently. Again, this information was derived from the testimony of her sister Mattachanna. Early in her captivity, Matoaka became so depressed that Gates requested Wahunsenaca send a few of her relatives to comfort her. When her sister arrived, Matoaka told her she had been raped and that she believed she was pregnant. 


The Oral History contends that Rolfe was likely not the father at all, and that Matoaka was sent to Henrico where there were no Native people, unlike Jamestown where many Native women lived with Englishmen, in order to hide her pregnancy while her conversion and marriage were arranged. 


The name of her attacker was either not revealed, or not shared in the 2007 transcription of the oral history. But the fact that her mixed-race son was named Thomas has led some to speculate that Thomas Dale, Gate’s right hand man who ruled Jamestown under martial law when Matoaka was imprisoned there, may have been the boy’s biological father.


Matoaka was renamed Rebecca after her baptism, a name likely suggested by the Reverend Whitaker, referring to a biblical story wherein a woman gives birth to twin sons of different “nations,” ultimately favoring the fairer-skinned child. Rolfe’s tobacco venture was eventually successful, almost certainly as a direct result of his marriage to Matoaka, after gaining knowledge in curing the plant from her or her relatives. Once his product could compete with Spanish tobacco, the colony could make a credible claim to its investors that their money was sure to earn dividends. Predictably, colonists raced to plant their own and get in on the profits. The governing council mandated that they plant food for their own sustenance before the new cash crop. The tobacco trade flourished in Virginia, but due to the toll it took on farmland, it produced as many losers as winners in its economic boom. Nevertheless, the Virginia Company now had a product to ensure its future growth throughout Tsenacomoco.

Sources:

John Rolfe- Historic Jamestown

Pocahontas’ Marriage and Death- Henricus Historical Park

March 29, 1973- Last US Combat Troops Leave Vietnam

 

Hõ Chí Minh, President of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. Public Domain.

The Vietnam War was one of the most unpredictable events in American history. No one believed that communist guerrillas could defend their country against the US military and no one predicted the explosion of the anti-war movement within the US. It is still hotly debated why the war was lost. Some point to specific aspects of the Cold War, of anti-war activism, and the politics within Vietnam. Others point to larger trends that had less to do with the conflict, such as electronic media and the decline of colonial projects throughout the world.

The US began bombing targets in Vietnam in 1964 after US ships in the Gulf of Tonkin were attacked. US troops began being deployed in 1965.

However, US involvement began long before this and included supporting the French colonial project there, as well as many missions by US special forces against communist guerrillas.

The first Americans were drafted for the conflict near the end of 1969.

On March 29th, 1973, the last US combat troops left Vietnam.

North Vietnam captured the South Vietnamese capital, Saigon, in April of 1975, ending the civil war and establishing the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

The video below is a short interview with James Arnold, a historian who wrote a book called The First Domino, about the actions taken by US officials in the decades before the 1960s that contributed to the conflicts in Vietnam.

Sources:

History of American Involvement in Vietnam- C-Span interview with James Arnold, Historian

Matoaka's Story/Part 4 War and Peace in Tsenacomoco

 

The Abduction of Pocahontas, copper engraving by Johann Theodore de Bry, 1618. Public Domain.

Not everyone remembered John Smith as fondly as later generations. George Percy, Smith’s successor as president of the colony, described him as an “Ambityous unworthy and vayneglorious fellowe” who tried to “ingrose all authorety into his owne hands.” Percy’s report of his time in office, “A Trewe Relacyon of the Proceedings and Ocurrentes of Momente which have happened in Virginia from …1609, until…1612,” remains one of the most examined primary resources regarding the colony’s early years. In it he recounts some of the more macabre incidents of “the Starving Time” in Jamestown. 

Soon after Smith’s departure, the English found Werowocomoco deserted, just as Wahunsenaca had threatened. A succession of Virginia Company governors took a heavy handed approach in trying to restore communications. The Paramount Werowance did not take kindly to being treated as a subject by immigrants and made it clear that the English should either leave his country or confine themselves to Jamestown. He warned that any Englishmen found beyond the fort were not safe. This did not discourage the English from raiding and often confiscating the cleared fertile lands along the rivers, which in turn sparked more attacks from the Powhatan and other tribes. 

In 1609 George Percy sent Captain John Ratcliffe to trade for corn with the Powhatan. This incident is most often portrayed as a trap set by an invitation from Wahunseneca, however that is not entirely clear from Percy’s account, which also mentioned that Radcliffe had “Powhatans sonne and dowghter [no names mentioned] aboard his pinesse [small boat].” Percy commented that Radcliffe unwisely let these supposed hostages flee too early, resulting in the death of most of his company. Radcliffe himself was bound to a tree and tortured to death. This method was generally used to execute enemy warriors, giving them the opportunity to display their bravery before death. 

Battles with the Natives outside of the forts, and theft and murder within them, marked the next year of the colony’s existence. Percy’s report recorded several instances of cannibalism as well.

In 1610 Sir Thomas Gates arrived from Bermuda where he had been shipwrecked on his way to take over the governorship of the colony. Finding Jamestown’s population drastically reduced and the survivors malnourished, they resolved to abandon the colony and return to England. On their way down the river they were intercepted by a ship carrying Lord De La Warr, yet another new governor for the colony, as the Virginia Company had believed Gates dead. De La Warr brought enough new men and supplies to replenish the colony, so it was decided to reclaim Jamestown. The remainder of Percy’s “Relacyon” recounts numerous acts of revenge on neighboring villages led by Percy, Gates, and others. The English burned the crops and homes of any tribes they felt had wronged them. Native people who visited the fort under the guise of trade were subjected to closer scrutiny, the colonists suspecting them of being sent as spies. One Native man found guilty had his hand severed as a warning to others. 

Mattaponi Oral History recorded that the intention of the English to capture royal hostages became known to the Powhatan. For this reason, Matoaka’s marriage to a Patawomeck warrior named Kakoum was a far more discreet affair than it would have been normally. They had a son together and lived in a Patawomeck village. 

In 1612 Captain Samuel Argall, a Virginia Company rising star, discovered Matoaka was living in a Patawomeck village on one of his many trading expeditions. In his own words he recorded that he became committed to capturing her “by any stratagem.” 


Argall told the village werowance, Japazaw, that he knew “Pocahontas” was in his village and that he demanded his help in getting her on his ship. Japazaw refused initially, stating that such an act would incur the wrath of Wahunseneca and his people would be destroyed. Argall replied that that he and the English could protect him from Wahunsenaca, and furthermore, would destroy Japazaw’s people themselves if he refused again. Japazaw was resigned to play his part in the charade. He enlisted the aid of his wife, who pretended the next day to want to visit the English ship docked outside the village. She, Japazaw, and Matoaka all boarded and dined with Captain Argall. When Matoaka excused herself to leave, Argall informed her that she was his prisoner. 

Japazaw and his wife feigned surprise and Argall directed him to send a message to Wahunsenaca demanding the release of all English prisoners and arms, with a shipment of corn in return for his daughter. 

The Paramount Werowance responded that he would submit to the demands and invited Argall to bring his ship to the Pamunkey River to collect the ransom. Confident in having the upper hand, Argall instead sailed to Jamestown to deliver his prisoner to Thomas Gates. The Mattaponi Oral History recorded that Argall sent men to kill Matoaka’s husband and son before departing, and without her knowledge. 


When the ransom arrived, Gates still declined to release his hostage, sending her instead to the nearby colony of Henrico. Gates intended to keep her prisoner to wring concessions from the Powhatan, or at least stave off a full-on attack on the English colonies, which they continued establishing, largely by confiscating land the Natives had already cleared for their own crops. 


Numerous Virginia Company men reported to their superiors in England that Matoaka’s capture had secured a solid peace and that the colony had since flourished. This was only the first concern the colonists needed to lay to rest- they had still not found minerals or crops that could be cultivated to produce a profit for their investors.

Sources:

Pocahontas and the Powhatan Dilemma- Kirkus Reviews

Powhatan War Clubs- Jamestown Yorktown Museum

Jamestown: Primary Source Set- Library of Congress