Unsettling the West

Home > Other > Unsettling the West > Page 17
Unsettling the West Page 17

by Rob Harper


  despite their differences, both White eyes and guyasuta used the revolutionary

  crisis to defend national sovereignty. above al , they aimed to secure their re-

  maining territory from colonization. round Face, another seneca who spoke on

  behalf of warriors and women, berated the commissioners for allowing surveys

  on a nearby island. “you know the Boundary,” he scolded.49 delaware and shaw-

  nee speakers, while disputing six nations supremacy, echoed this emphasis on

  enforcing established borders. Familiar chains of patronage had col apsed, but

  congress’s need for allies offered the chance to cultivate new ones. guyasuta

  aimed to restore the old covenant chain partnership, while White eyes and

  cornstalk sought a new union of confederations, but all sought some means of

  cementing sovereignty within the coming postrevolutionary order.

  This desire to exploit the imperial crisis also transcended divisions be-

  tween moderates and militants. White eyes and cornstalk may have champi-

  oned diplomacy in part for spiritual reasons— both men had ties to the

  pacifist moravians— but their strategy reflected above all a pragmatic assess-

  ment of political opportunity. similarly, pluggy and his allies sought to ex-

  ploit Britain’s war effort to halt colonial expansion. militants drew on a

  tradition of nativist spirituality, but their case hinged on the expectation of a

  British alliance.50 Both moderates and militants sought first and foremost to

  secure their nations’ territories against the colonial invasion already sweep-

  ing over Kentucky. They recognized that they could do so only by forging a

  lasting relationship with an anglo- american state, even as that state shat-

  tered and reassembled itself in the throes of revolution. in the bloody years to

  come, these parallel strategies facilitated mutual support and peacemaking

  among Ohio indians, while undercutting British and congressional attempts

  to control their nominal allies.

  By late 1776, the peoples of the Ohio Valley had ample reason to fear war.

  Though still sporadic, indian attacks on colonists were becoming more fre-

  Opportunity, 1775–76

  93

  quent. The organization of militia in frontier counties raised the possibility of

  large- scale retaliation. in Ohio, rumors of Virginian invasion grew ever more

  alarming, thanks to the heated rhetoric of congressional envoys and the re-

  building of forts along the Ohio river. indian diplomats had promised to pun-

  ish those who broke the peace, but they worried that colonial strikes against

  pluggy and his supporters would threaten their own communities as wel .

  even so, as 1776 came to a close Ohio indian militancy appeared to be

  waning. Just a few months after dunquat sang his war song at detroit, his wife

  spent christmas at a newly established moravian mission, where she showed

  a keen interest in the differences between the german pietists and the French

  priests who taught her own people at detroit. she brought along trader alex-

  ander mccormick, a rebel sympathizer whom Wyandot militants had cap-

  tured a few months before. rather than handing mccormick to hamilton, she

  had adopted him as her brother and now returned him to his delaware wife at

  assünnünk, where he soon became one of congress’s more useful western

  informants. The visit convinced even the missionary david Zeisberger— who

  seldom gave non- moravian indians the benefit of any doubt— that the Wyan-

  dot and Odawa were now “almost inclin’d to lay down the hatchet & to live in

  friendship with the americans.” The following spring, two moravian indian

  leaders visited sandusky to promote an upcoming treaty council with the

  United states. They reported back that the Wyandots “received them wel ,

  were willing to listen to them, and [we]re inclined to accept peace.”51

  as Wyandots and moravians celebrated christmas, several midwinter

  war parties crossed the Ohio to attack Kentucky colonists. pluggy and his

  allies had no qualms about hamilton’s contradictory messages, taking in-

  struction instead from his gifts of gunpowder. On the Kanawha, a shawnee

  band killed three colonists and took one prisoner; they carried out more such

  attacks in the weeks that followed. By march, their numbers reportedly ex-

  ceeded sixty. paying no heed to formal leaders like cornstalk, they declared

  themselves “free men that had no King nor chief,” confident that “detroit

  would provide them with ammunition.” But such freedom came at a price.

  pluggy’s party killed four men on licking river, then moved on to a walled

  outpost called mcclel and’s station. With too few men to storm the fort, and

  no heavy guns to topple its wooden wal s, they soon retreated. pluggy him-

  self fell during the assault, having fatal y overestimated his men’s military ca-

  pability.52 however much terror they caused, and however much gunpowder

  hamilton gave them, the militants still lacked the numbers and resources to

  overcome even a makeshift stockade.

  94

  chapter 3

  meanwhile, cornstalk and a younger shawnee man visited point pleasant

  with messages for the Virginian garrison of a newly built fort. The shawnees

  camped across the Ohio; on 29 november a Wyandot man joined them. The

  next day, they conferred as best they could with the Virginian commander

  matthew arbuckle, despite knowing little of one another’s languages. soon

  afterward haudenosaunee warriors seized one of arbuckle’s men and es-

  caped into the woods. in retaliation, the Virginians set out to seize the Wyan-

  dot stranger. cornstalk, afraid for his guest’s life, tried to hide the man, but

  the Virginians found him and imprisoned him in the chil y fort. Three weeks

  later, a group of indians appeared with the captured militiaman in tow. some-

  how, cornstalk and the prisoner’s Wyandot kin had found the young Virgin-

  ian and persuaded his captors to hand him over. placated, arbuckle released

  his own hostage in exchange. no one died.53

  These dissimilar encounters, characterized by misunderstanding, dis-

  trust, and the near- constant threat of violence, exemplified the early years of

  revolution in the Ohio Valley. For a year and a half after dunmore’s War, in-

  tercultural violence largely ceased. it resumed with pluggy’s raids in 1776, but

  on a much smaller scale. The col apse of state authority deterred indians and

  colonists from waging war. arbuckle’s small garrison was short on food, gun-

  powder, and blankets; cornstalk’s shawnees keenly remembered the invasion

  of 1774; and pluggy’s raiders struggled against even rudimentary colonial de-

  fenses. meanwhile, imperial crisis fostered political and diplomatic creativity.

  Both indians and colonists labored to shape a new political order, often by

  cultivating new coalition partners. Virginians and pennsylvanians, loyalists

  and rebels, all sought indians’ friendship. Both the militant pluggy and the

  more moderate dunquat pressed hamilton for support, recognizing that

  their political and military prospects hinged on British backing. White eyes

  and cornstalk, meanwhile, sought new patrons in the emerging revolution-

  ary regime. distrust an
d hatred remained, but political expediency prevailed.

  instead of fostering chaos, state failure had brought relative peace.

  Chapter 4

  reluctance, 1777– 79

  in early august 1777, dunquat, the half- King of the sandusky Wyandots,

  took a detour off the road to war. he had set out with two hundred warriors

  to attack Virginian forts on the Ohio, but he stopped en route to visit the

  resolutely neutral muskingum Valley delaware. dunquat, while proudly call-

  ing himself “a man of war,” praised their neutrality as well as the pacifism of

  the neighboring moravian mission of lichtenau. more remarkably, the Wy-

  andot embraced the missionary david Zeisberger as a “father,” pledged to

  treat him “as my own body,” and promised to protect the moravians against

  other indians. For the following two weeks, the delawares listened to dun-

  quat’s doubts about the war he had set out to fight. Just a few months before

  he had been “inclined to accept peace.” he now went to fight only “as a favor”

  to henry hamilton, the British commander at detroit. he repeatedly post-

  poned his army’s departure, declared he did not plan “to do much harm,” and

  hoped the troublesome conflict would end soon. he berated impatient allies

  for wanting “to go kill innocent women and children,” and he refused to let

  them leave without him. The constant arguing convinced Zeisberger that

  “they had not yet decided for sure what they would do.” Then delaware mes-

  sengers reported the approach of a large army from Fort pitt. The news

  proved false, but the specter of invasion brought debate to a halt. dunquat

  attacked Wheeling and killed fifteen men but, to his surprise, found the gar-

  rison well prepared. he retreated to goschachgünk with his wounded, where

  he declared he was “happy to see” Zeisberger again. at the time, he did not

  know that his new “father” had almost certainly warned the Virginians of his

  plans.1

  This half- hearted campaign began the revolutionary War in the Ohio

  Valley. in his landmark history of the region, richard White dubs this

  96

  chapter 4

  struggle “a contest of vil agers”: independent indians and colonists with only

  loose ties to British and revolutionary armies.2 This interpretation contains

  some truth: time and again fighting men chose to kil , or not, with scant re-

  gard for the orders of government- appointed commanders. like dunquat at

  lichtenau, Ohio Valley inhabitants mobilized haltingly, foiling attempts to

  launch major campaigns. in consequence, those who went to war usual y tar-

  geted noncombatants. British- allied indians assailed colonial homesteads

  and stockades, while revolutionary expeditions torched indian towns and

  murdered indian prisoners and allies. But however much gentlemen officers

  wrung their hands, their allies’ brutality hinged on the gunpowder, provi-

  sions, and coordination that their governments provided. indian- hating mili-

  tiamen ignored orders routinely, but, when deprived of government support,

  their companies col apsed and colonists fled in droves. indian war parties

  acted more independently, but their coalition’s strength nonetheless hinged

  on British backing.

  rather than a determined struggle of indians and colonists eager to shed

  each other’s blood, the war of the late 1770s exuded uncertainty, hesitation,

  and failure. its intermittent ferocity resulted less from intercultural hatred

  than from British and revolutionary governments’ determination to control

  the Ohio Valley. in 1775, imperial col apse had left the region’s peoples to fend

  for themselves, yielding relative peace. shortages of food and ammunition, as

  well as the memories of dunmore’s War, deterred all but the most militant

  from renewing hostilities. Then, beginning in 1777, British and revolutionary

  officials funneled resources into the region, each hoping to build a western

  bulwark against the other. This material support only partial y and erratical y

  addressed local needs, but it helped win over pragmatists and undercut

  peacemakers, tipping the political balance toward militancy.

  yet even as bloodshed escalated, opportunities remained to slow or even

  halt the killing. The Wyandot, central players in the British great lakes alli-

  ance, repeatedly offered to make peace with the United states. The delaware

  of goschachgünk and lichtenau acted as intermediaries, even as both the

  British and americans pressured them to go to war. This Wyandot- delaware

  col aboration reflected shared goals: protection for people and crops, state

  recognition of territorial sovereignty, and peace with their indian neighbors.

  The two nations cultivated warring state patrons, but they simultaneously

  held to an older and deeper friendship with one another. By 1780, their bids

  for peace had failed, in large part because of the arrogance and ineptitude of

  american commanders.

  reluctance, 1777–79

  97

  * * *

  On 18 June 1777, about six weeks before dunquat’s visit to lichtenau, henry

  hamilton shed his usual garments and donned something resembling the

  garb of a great lakes indian warrior. he painted his face and torso and

  picked up a large belt of wampum beads, colored red to represent blood.

  Thus adorned, he and his officers walked to the council house, stood before a

  large assembly of western indians, and gave their best impression of a tradi-

  tional “War song.” This singular performance had dramatic implications. For

  the first time since the beginning of the revolutionary War, a British com-

  mander had openly asked great lakes indians to wage war against the amer-

  ican rebels. The audience joined in the singing, accepting the call to arms,

  though some, like dunquat, did so half- heartedly. after the council, hamil-

  ton rewarded his new allies with weaponry, laying a strong foundation for the

  new military alliance.3

  some in the audience were fighting already, with hamilton’s tacit encour-

  agement. For the past year and a half, hamilton’s orders had barred him from

  calling indians to war, but he had regularly offered militants gunpowder

  while publicly deriding his king’s enemies. By late 1776 small bands of Ohio

  indians had begun attacking colonial outposts in Kentucky, reasoning cor-

  rectly that hamilton would continue to supply them with gunpowder. By

  march 1777, sixty- four shawnees had reportedly gone to war, together with

  perhaps a few dozen haudenosaunees and Wyandots. Through the spring

  they repeatedly attacked Ohio Valley colonists from grave creek to harrods-

  burg, killing about fifteen, capturing a woman and seven children, burning

  houses, and slaughtering livestock. a shawnee community condemned one

  captive militiaman to death by ritual burning. But even as these horrors

  mounted, they remained limited in scale. Warriors attacked in parties of a

  few dozen at most; by contrast, perhaps eight hundred shawnees had fought

  at the 1774 Battle of point pleasant. some Ohio indian towns supported the

  attacks, but others opposed them. equal y important, the anishinaabeg to

  the north, and the miami and other Wabash
nations to the west, stayed out of

  the fighting.4

  Then British secretary of state george germain ordered hamilton to

  raise parties of western indians to “excit[e] an alarm upon the frontiers of

  Virginia and pennsylvania.” With these orders, and the resulting “War song,”

  the shape and scale of fighting changed dramatical y. The call to arms won

  over moderates like dunquat and expanded the militant coalition to include

  the anishinaabeg and Wabash nations as wel . in the months that followed,

  98

  chapter 4

  hundreds went to war and returned carrying scalps and captives. in just two

  summer days, warriors killed and scalped a woman and her child on the

  upper monongahela, captured a family of seven near raccoon creek, and

  killed a militia sergeant and captured two young men on the Ohio river. at

  Kittanning, on the allegheny, an Ojibwe war party ambushed a group of mi-

  litia, killing three. nearly three hundred miles to the south, on the greenbrier

  river in southwest Virginia, another group killed three men, wounded an-

  other, and captured one woman. dunquat failed to capture Wheeling, but a

  few weeks later his Wyandots ambushed forty- six militia downstream from

  the fort. Fewer than half the Virginians escaped alive. By early 1778, warriors

  supplied at detroit had captured 73 prisoners and taken 129 scalps. in the fall

  of 1778, more than four hundred shawnee warriors set out against Kentucky;

  one report estimated that eight hundred to one thousand warriors were at-

  tacking frontier Virginia and pennsylvania.5

  But if those warriors took up arms at hamilton’s urging, they fought on

  their own terms and for their own reasons. in many respects, they held to

  long- standing patterns of great lakes warfare, favoring ambushes that mini-

  mized their own casualties and enabled them to take captives, especial y

  women and children, to be adopted into their communities. They wreaked

  havoc on isolated homesteads and unwary militia patrols, but usual y failed

  to overcome stockade defenses. resentment of colonial expansion motivated

  many, especial y those who had gone to war before hamilton’s song, but po-

 

‹ Prev