Mary
Rowlandson’s Image of the Indians
In
A True History of the Captivity and Restoration of Mrs.
Mary Rowlandson
1
Table of Contens
1
1. Introduction
2
2.1. Mary Rowlandson’s Image of the Indians 3
2.2. Indian Society – a „Lawless Animality“?
5
2.3. Change of Mary Rowlandson’s Attitude
towards the Indians
7
3. Conclusion
9
4. Bibliography
11
1. Introduction
When the first Europeans began to settle permanently in the
New World at the beginning of the 17th Century, nobody would
have imagined how strong their influence on the Indians would be.
Quickly European settlements expanded, and the colonists came into
close proximity with Indian places. The result proved fatal: Indian
2
lands, then cultivated by the whites, became unsuitable, the number
of Indians decreased, there was less food and land, and many natives
became demoralized and desperate (Enduring Vision 63-65).
A conflict between the two ‘races’ was therefore unavoidable,
one example being King Philip’s War (1675-1676), in which the
Narragansett tribe fought against the whites. As a result, Lancaster,
a white settlement in Massachusetts, was attacked. Many white
settlers died, some were captured. Among them was Mary
Rowlandson, the wife of the town’s minister, who wrote a narrative
about her experience (Davis 50). Her text is not only of literary
value, but it is also a rare example of a publication by a Puritan
woman, which was rather rare during the early American period.
Her account became a bestseller overnight not only in America but
also in Great Britain (Derounian 94).
In the following study I address myself to Mary
Rowlandson’s attitude towards the Indians as displayed throughout
her narrative. The problem, however, is that many “captivity writers
approached the subject with strong biases, either negative or
positive, towards Indians, obtaining a realistic image of Indians
from the captivity narrative is extremely difficult.” Also,
observations “were recorded through the lens of their prejudices and
misunderstandings” (Derouninan 85). The same applies to Mary
Rowlandson’s narrative, which at least does not only portray
negative examples, (although she never reveals her judgment of the
“bloody heathen”); Rowlandson admits that there are positive
aspects in Indian society and describes them as far as they were
compatible with her Puritan life.
3
The chapters that follow are to convey her initial image of the
Indian and in how far it changes during captivity, as well as to
compare Indian society with her own.
2.1. Mary Rowlandson’s Image of the Indians
Mary Rowlandson is captured with her three children during
an attack by an Indian tribe on Lancaster. She watches her house is
burnt down and how many of her relatives and friends are wounded
or killed. Mrs. Rowlandson is shocked and perplexed by the coldbloodedness of the attackers and calls them “bloody” and “merciless
heathen” (Mary Rowlandson 299)1 or “hell-hounds” in contrast to
the “company of sheep”, the Christians. Such contrasts reappear
throughout the whole narrative:
“There was nothing but
Indians...and no Christian soul near me” (MR 307), or “I was not so
much hemmed in with the merciless and cruel heathen, but now as
much with pitiful, tender-hearted and compassionate Christians”
(MR 326).
During the first night of her captivity she is confronted with
unfamiliar ceremonies of the “black creatures” who are roaring,
singing and dancing; she describes the place to be a “lively
resemblance of hell” (MR 300). In her opinion Indians are not
human beings ; she rather describes them with animal-like qualities.
As a Puritan “goodwife” she feels herself superior and agrees with
the general Puritan view. Not being familiar with the Indian way of
life, she is unable to ride a horse without falling down. The
“inhumane creatures” (MR 302) laugh at her, which concerns her
very much, whereas other incidents do not seem to shock her that
much. Michelle Burnham points out that “it is striking that what
1
All page references are to the Norton Anthology of American Literature 5 th ed.
4
seems to most unnerve and upset Mary Rowlandson about the
Indians – far more than the bundle of bloodied Puritan garments [...]
are their laughter and celebration” (69). Mrs. Rowlandson applies a
different standard than the reader expects, but here it can be seen
how the narrator is driven by her subjective emotions and
impressions. Consequently, one has to be very careful with regard to
her judgment of the Indians.
A very sad experience is the death of Rowlandson’s six-yearold daughter Sarah, who, after the third remove, dies of a gunshot
wound that was inflicted on her during the attack in the Lancaster
settlement. Having lost her child, Rowlandson breaks down and
falls into a state of overpowering grief. She wants her child to be
buried in a dignified way; instead the little girl is left behind in the
wilderness (MR 303). Even though her two remaining children live
in the same settlement and mourn over their sister’s death,
Rowlandson is not allowed to comfort them. Emotionally and
physically weakened, she is not even able to harbor bitter
resentment for the Indians. Burnham summarizes correctly: “The
Indian habitat remains a desolate wilderness in which the Christian
woman recognizes no beauty or solace, territory foreign to
civilization.” The same can be said about the Indians themselves for
whom the narrator does not have any positive feelings; however,
slowly but steady, her attitude towards them is changing for the
better – at the beginning of her captivity she had no respect towards
the Indians. She considered them to be animals rather than to have
human features at all. While living with the tribe she starts to change
her point of view.
2.2. Indian Society – a “Lawless Animality”?
5
Having lived in Puritan society all her life, Mary Rowlandson
does not know anything else. When captured by the Indians, she is
confronted with a totally different way of life. First she does not
even want to regard the Indian group as a society; she calls them
“inhuman creatures”, as they are found to be not properly human
(MR 301). Having no real home but wandering around in the
wilderness provides the impression that the Indians are uncivilized.
The first remove is a shock to her:
This was the dolefulest night that ever my eyes saw. Oh the
roaring, and singing and dancing, and yelling of those black
creatures in the night, which made the place a lively
resemblance of hell. And as miserable was the waste that was
there made of horses, cattle, sheep, swine, calves, lambs,
roasting pigs and fowl (which they had plundered in the
town), some roasting, some lying and burning, and some
boiling to feed our merciless enemies: who were joyful
enough, though we were disconsolate (MR 300).
It takes time until Mary Rowlandson “sees the Indians not as simple
‘savages’ but as possessing a social structure with a hierarchy that,
at least in her eyes, bears similarities to her own” (Toulouse 657).
The Puritans teach that the wife “accepts all males as
authorityfigures”. Rowlandson soon realizes that “males hold power
in Indian society just as in her own” (Davis 54). Therefore she tries
to stay in favor with those who control her life, whereas she is not
willing to respect and obey the female members as ling as she is not
threatenend.
Her master Quannopin, whom she even calls “the best friend I
had of an Indian” (MR 312), treats her in a kind way, promising that
she will return home soon. So, too, does King Philip who consoles
6
her with the words “two weeks more and you shall be Mistress
again” (MR 319), knowing how difficult the situation for a Puritan
woman must be. Also, it is a male person who gives her the Bible
(MR 304), whereas a female snatches it from her and throws it
away. When she refuses to give away a pieces of her apron, she is
insulted and threatened until she gives in (MR 314). In a nutshell it
can be said that Rowlandson “taking great pains to portray Indian
women as cruel and capricious creatures, she names their offences
more frequently and their kindnesses less often than those of the
males” (Davis 55).
Furthermore, the longer Mrs. Rowlandson is among the
Indians, the more she joins in their daily lives. As she has skills in
sewing and knitting, she begins to assume a distinct role in the
Indian community. Her interaction with the natives increases
because of her production of clothes and places her in a “defined
position within their economy” (Burnham 66). She either receives
money or trade goods for her work, which she again reintroduces
back to the Indians. Mitchell Breitwieser notes that “Rowlandson’s
mourning leads her towards recognizing Indian society as a society,
rather than a lawless animality” (148/149).
2.3. Change of Mary Rowlandson’s attitude towards the
Indians
The impression Mary Rowlandson has of the Indians at the
beginning of her captivity and the one she has adopted by its ending
differs very much. Whereas she first sees the Indians as inhuman,
bloody and merciless pagans, her vies changes the longer she stays
7
with the Indians. “over the nearly three-month period of her
captivity, Mary Rowlandson undergoes a gradual process of
acculturation,” Michelle Burnham notes (66), as can be observed in
all areas of life, food, trade, discourse, language, etc.
In the second week of her captivity, Mary gets food and
although she is very hungry, it is hard for her to swallow the “filthy
trash”. It only takes another week until she changes her mnd and
describes the food as “sweet and savory to my taste” (MR 306).
Later on, after the eighteenth Remove Mary gets boiled horses feet.
She is so hungry, that she takes away the portion of one English
child because it could not have eaten the tough meat anyway.
Derounian interprets it this way:
Indoctrinated by her Puritan background to hate Indians,
Rowlandson had difficulty consciously admitting a certain
respect for her Indian captors. She therefore displaces her
gradual acceptance of Indian culture onto her description of
Indian foods (92).
I do not agree with Derounian’s statement because it seems to
be far-fetched to me. I agree that Mrs. Rowlandson more and more
subconsciously identifies herself with her captors but I do not think
she expresses her acceptance through the description of meals. In
my opinion she just gets used to the Indian food because she has no
other possibilities. Her Identification with the captors can be
observed differently.
Soon the captive participates in the Indian community; she
has skills in sewing and knitting and is therefore asked to produce
clothes for the families. In return she is given money, food or other
goods which she again reintroduces back; “Her entry into exchange
lifts her out of the abjection of being on the dole, and thus creates a
8
measure of equality between herself and the captors” (Breitwieser
146). During the seventh remove she already starts to identify with
her captors. She notes ”we had a wearisome time of it the next day,”
(MR 307) but when seeing English paths and fields she is aware of
her situation and speaks about the Indians as “they”.
After the seventeenth Remove the reader learns that Mary has
become used to communicating with the natives, so that it almost
seems normal for her. After an exhausting journey the group comes
to an Indian town where they all sit down and start discoursing, “but
I was almost spent, and could scarce speak” (MR 318). During the
nineteenth Remove, Mary is called to council where she is asked to
sit down among them “as I was wont to do, as their manner is [...]
they bid me speak” (MR 320). The precondition that she can
communicate with the Indians is that she has to learn their language.
And in learning a people’s language one becomes automatically
involved. A language characterizes a people and makes it feel as one
group.
Although the Indians captured Mary Rowlandson, they do not
only behave towards her in a negative way. She wonders,
“Sometimes I met with favor, and sometimes with nothing but
frowns” (MR 311). Although this is a flat statement, because does
not seem to think about the reasons for this, it brings the Indian’s
behavior to the point. Sometimes the captors are very friendly: they
offer her food (MR 306), comfort her when she is sad (“I fell
aweeping [...] the old squaw told me, to encourage me, that fi I
wanted some victuals; I should come to her [...] the first time I had
such kindness showed me” MR 319.), give her a Bible (MR 304), let
her join the community, etc. On the other hand Rowlandson is a
prisoner of war. Thus it is not surprising that she is confronted with
9
violence and that she is treated badly. Her youngest child Sarah is
dead which of course causes great affliction to her. She therefore
hates the Indians, and this makes an approach extremely difficult.
Sometimes she does not get food, she is threatened frequently, and
she is often not allowed to see her children. Nevertheless she admits
and writes down when something positive happens. This approach
shows a women’s insight, which one did probably not come across
very often during that period of time due to the patriarch system
which did not gave women much freedom.
3. Conclusion
As we have seen in the above mentioned aspects, the image of
the Indian plays an intrinsic role in Mary Rowlandson’s captivity
narrative. It should be pointed out that her account is not a typical
captivity text that describes and promotes the fixed negative
stereotype of Indians. Instead, also a positive image is conveyed. Of
course, it cannot be said that Rowlandson provides an overall
positive image of the tribe; at least she does not deny and relate
contrary experiences she has had. She never really reveals her
picture of the “bloody heathen” because there are points she could
have never agreed with as a Puritan woman, such as their exercise of
religion or the ceremonies.
In fact, she created a great work – which was rather unusual
for a woman, who were prevented by many circumstances during
the colonial period to express themselves. By this piece of literature
she presents a step forward tolerating Native Americans whose
homelands and holy grounds were increasingly taken by whites. Her
narrative may thus be seen as a first approach between the Indians
10
and the whites. It developed into a cherished and frequently-read
classic that is still worth being read even nowadays.
4. Bibliography
Boyer, Paul S. et al. The Enduring Vision: A History of the
American People. 3rd ed.. Lexington, MA: Heath, 1996.
Breitwieser, Mitchell R. American Puritanism and the Defense of
Mourning: Religion, Grief and Ethnology in Mary White
11
Rowlandson’s Captivity Narrative. Madison: U of Wisconsin
P, 1990.
Burnham, Michelle. “The Journey Between: Liminality and
Dialogism in Mary White Rowlandson’s Captivity Narrative.”
Early American Literature 28:1 (1993) 60-75.
Davis, Margaret H. “Mary White Rowlandson’s Self-Fashioning as
Puritan Goodwife.” Early American Literature 27:1 (1992):
49-60.
Derounian-Stodala, Kathryn Zabelle & James A. Levernier. The
Indian Captivity Narrative, 1550-1900. New York: Twayne,
1993.
Logan, Lisa. “Mary Rowlandson’s Captivity and the ‘Place’ of the
Woman Subject.” Early American Literature 28:3 (1993): 255277.
Rosenmeier, Jesper. “Text and Context in Mary Rowlandson’s
Captivity Narrative.” American Quarterly 44:2 (1992): 255261Rowlandson, Mary. “A Narrative of the Captivity and Restoration of
Mrs. Mary Rowlandson.” The Norton Anthology of the
American Literature. Gen. ed. Nina Baym. 5th ed. Vol.I New
York: Norton, 1998. 298-330Toulouse, Teresa A. “’My Own Cretid’: Strategies of (E)Valuation
in Mary Rowlandson’s Captivity Narrative.” American
Literature 64:4 (1992): 655-676.
12
13