What do you think?
Rate this book
New England Frontier: Puritans and Indians 1620–1675
In contrast to most accounts of Puritan-Indian relations, New England Frontier argues that the first two generations of Puritan settlers were neither generally hostile toward their Indian neighbors nor indifferent to their territorial rights. Rather, American Puritans-especially their political and religious leaders-sought peaceful and equitable relations as the first step in molding the Indians into neo-Englishmen. When accumulated Indian resentments culminated in the war of 1675, however, the relatively benign intercultural contact of the preceding fifty-five-year period rapidly declined. With a new introduction updating developments in Puritan-Indian studies in the last fifteen years, this third edition affords the reader a clear, balanced overview of a complex and sensitive area of American history.
492 pages, Paperback
First published February 1, 1980
2 people are currently reading
177 people want to read
About the author
Alden T. Vaughan
37 books7 followersAlden Vaughan has been an Affiliate Professor at Clark since 2002, and since 1994 a Professor Emeritus of History at Columbia University, where he taught for 33 years. His research examines British America in the sixteenth through eighteenth centuries, especially the interaction of Europeans, Native Americans, and Africans.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
July 28, 2012
A wonderful read. Vaughan has scrupulously researched this fascinating and often misunderstood time in American history. He dashes the much propagandized myth that relations between the Puritans and the Indians were poor and full of racial bigotry. You will not find in this book the typical PC rhetoric of "red man good and white man bad" that is found in most of the politicized history books of today. Rather, you will find a well written, balanced and highly acclaimed book. Enjoy!
January 25, 2011
This book is well written, though it leaves out some information I'd come across in other sources. (Vaughan was very impressed with one of the Puritan missionaries who translated the Bible into Algonquin. I could have sworn this had already been done in the early 1600s-teens in one of the Roanoke settlements.) Originally published in 1965, the photographs are pretty stale.
I liked the author's summary of the historiography related to Indian/English relations in the New England colonies. His contention that histories are often influenced by the present and his examples of race relations in the 60s was interesting.
The book really dragged (for me) toward the end. The whole missionary thing was really detailed and s-l-o-w. However, I think that's because he relies on much of the missionary work to bolster his main thesis that relations between the Indians and English were fair and humane.
He really breaks it all down in his conclusion. This part was excellent! It was concise and drew on the previous chapters to make his points. I think he did a fabulous job supporting the idea that "[w]hat occurred in the Puritan colonies was less a clash of cultural opposites than an inexorable expansion of one system at the expense--and sometimes the invitation--of the other." (323) I would put emphasis on the contrast between "clash" and "inexorable expansion." And for all that I know that Vaughn would think less of me for it, I can't help but sadly sigh that the Indians did "invite" Western changes into their lives. I don't say that from some romantic attachment to the "noble savage" as Vaughn would claim, but from a realization that the Native Americans had achieved homeostasis with their environment and Westerners never (and still haven't) mastered that. As a result, a 2010 reader looks back at missed opportunities that perhaps a 1960's writer didn't even recognize. Natural resources, clean air, soil and water seemed inevitable and limitless to lots of 1960s Americans, not unlike the limitless potential that North America offered Western colonists in the 1600s.
Ennehoo, Vaughn sets out to determine "how humanely and justly [the Puritans] introduced their brand of western civilization into the neolithic world of the American Indian." He thinks they did pretty darn well. And, yes, compared to the disasters of the Virginia colony, they look pretty good (aside from that "black blemish" of selling Puritan law defying Native Americans into slavery in the West Indies from time to time). Still, introducing literacy, offering educations at Harvard, teaching the use of Western technology... all that stuff is commendable.
Where I think Vaughn really misses the mark is best characterized by his statement that "[Indians of the 1620s-1675], unlike many of their descendants, saw that considerations of justice, religion, humanity, political policy, economic well-being, or even the lure of technological progress, were more valid reasons for determining actions and allegiances than the chance assignment to a particular ethnic category." (324) Oh, my. The cultural bias here is pretty overpowering. Particulary in the idea of "technological progress." In fact, the introduction of metal farming implements went a long way to stripping the land of its fertility for generations. Overhunting from the technologically advanced gun, also exacted a heavy price from the ecology. If it were true that these changes benefitted the Indian, I'd be all for it; however, we know it didn't. The land was gradually denuded and sterilized. Game was destroyed or dimished. And while Vaughn argues that the Indian was not dependent on meat for survival, animals played a huge role in their culture and lifestyle. Naw, I don't think the oldsters made a careful "consideration" in adopting those changes. I also don't fault their descendents for choosing a traditional lifestyle (that coincides with "ethnic category," though it isn't limited to it) over Western "progress."
There's a lot to consider in Vaughn's perspective that "[i]n choosing to live partly of wholly in the white man's way, the American Indian was being neither weak, nor disloyal to his heritage." I think, ultimately, I agree. That some Native Americans left their tribes and joined the settlers is in keeping with how people lived prior to the introduction of the European. From time to time, people would abandon one sachem and join another group for (I guess) political reasons. Why not do the same and try out the European option when it presented itself? There's no big leap, there.
I reject his statement that "there is no reason to expect the participants in those cultures to remain stagnant in the face of better alternatives." (326) Who is to say that the European alternative was, in fact, a "better" alternative? Then he proffers this one, which is not substantiated in his book that "[t]here is some evidence that a far greater number of them would have thrown of the shackles of the Stone Age if their sachems had not been so reluctant to jeopardize their own power and wealth." (326) Huh? I think V has an anti-sachem bias and I'm not sure where that comes from. Basically the acquisition of excess wealth was an introduction of Europeans. Before that, subsistence living was sufficient. It is news to me that sachems were rolling in it and reveled in their wealth and power. I don't suppose they did so any more than the Puritan leaders did. I'm left unconvinced on this one.
However, Vaughn did convince me that "the Puritan did not push the New England Indian off his land." (326) But the end result was the same. Still, during the period V describes, that intention was not there.
He says also that "The Puritan did not deplete the food sources of the natives." (327) Again, not directly. However, by limiting the hunting, fishing and agricultural areas available to the Native Americans, food would have been more difficult to get. And it isn't necessarily that Indians were not allowed on these lands, Vaughn proves that they were. The problem was that with fencing, domestic cattle, and compacted settlements, the whole ecology changed. The animals simply weren't there anymore. And certainly not in the quantity they were before. This would make subsistence that much harder to achieve.
I think he did prove, however, that "[t]he Puritan did not drive the Indian to despair through repeated injustices and cruelties." (330) I think the despair came from a slow but steady annihilation of a culture. And even Vaughn admits that the frequent occasions of alcoholism could be evidence of some kind of despair in the Natives who settled in Praying Indian towns.
Lots to think about by the end of this book. It's pretty thorough and certainly edifying. A bit slow in parts, but definitely helps to flesh out the picture of Indian and English relations during the colonial period.
I liked the author's summary of the historiography related to Indian/English relations in the New England colonies. His contention that histories are often influenced by the present and his examples of race relations in the 60s was interesting.
The book really dragged (for me) toward the end. The whole missionary thing was really detailed and s-l-o-w. However, I think that's because he relies on much of the missionary work to bolster his main thesis that relations between the Indians and English were fair and humane.
He really breaks it all down in his conclusion. This part was excellent! It was concise and drew on the previous chapters to make his points. I think he did a fabulous job supporting the idea that "[w]hat occurred in the Puritan colonies was less a clash of cultural opposites than an inexorable expansion of one system at the expense--and sometimes the invitation--of the other." (323) I would put emphasis on the contrast between "clash" and "inexorable expansion." And for all that I know that Vaughn would think less of me for it, I can't help but sadly sigh that the Indians did "invite" Western changes into their lives. I don't say that from some romantic attachment to the "noble savage" as Vaughn would claim, but from a realization that the Native Americans had achieved homeostasis with their environment and Westerners never (and still haven't) mastered that. As a result, a 2010 reader looks back at missed opportunities that perhaps a 1960's writer didn't even recognize. Natural resources, clean air, soil and water seemed inevitable and limitless to lots of 1960s Americans, not unlike the limitless potential that North America offered Western colonists in the 1600s.
Ennehoo, Vaughn sets out to determine "how humanely and justly [the Puritans] introduced their brand of western civilization into the neolithic world of the American Indian." He thinks they did pretty darn well. And, yes, compared to the disasters of the Virginia colony, they look pretty good (aside from that "black blemish" of selling Puritan law defying Native Americans into slavery in the West Indies from time to time). Still, introducing literacy, offering educations at Harvard, teaching the use of Western technology... all that stuff is commendable.
Where I think Vaughn really misses the mark is best characterized by his statement that "[Indians of the 1620s-1675], unlike many of their descendants, saw that considerations of justice, religion, humanity, political policy, economic well-being, or even the lure of technological progress, were more valid reasons for determining actions and allegiances than the chance assignment to a particular ethnic category." (324) Oh, my. The cultural bias here is pretty overpowering. Particulary in the idea of "technological progress." In fact, the introduction of metal farming implements went a long way to stripping the land of its fertility for generations. Overhunting from the technologically advanced gun, also exacted a heavy price from the ecology. If it were true that these changes benefitted the Indian, I'd be all for it; however, we know it didn't. The land was gradually denuded and sterilized. Game was destroyed or dimished. And while Vaughn argues that the Indian was not dependent on meat for survival, animals played a huge role in their culture and lifestyle. Naw, I don't think the oldsters made a careful "consideration" in adopting those changes. I also don't fault their descendents for choosing a traditional lifestyle (that coincides with "ethnic category," though it isn't limited to it) over Western "progress."
There's a lot to consider in Vaughn's perspective that "[i]n choosing to live partly of wholly in the white man's way, the American Indian was being neither weak, nor disloyal to his heritage." I think, ultimately, I agree. That some Native Americans left their tribes and joined the settlers is in keeping with how people lived prior to the introduction of the European. From time to time, people would abandon one sachem and join another group for (I guess) political reasons. Why not do the same and try out the European option when it presented itself? There's no big leap, there.
I reject his statement that "there is no reason to expect the participants in those cultures to remain stagnant in the face of better alternatives." (326) Who is to say that the European alternative was, in fact, a "better" alternative? Then he proffers this one, which is not substantiated in his book that "[t]here is some evidence that a far greater number of them would have thrown of the shackles of the Stone Age if their sachems had not been so reluctant to jeopardize their own power and wealth." (326) Huh? I think V has an anti-sachem bias and I'm not sure where that comes from. Basically the acquisition of excess wealth was an introduction of Europeans. Before that, subsistence living was sufficient. It is news to me that sachems were rolling in it and reveled in their wealth and power. I don't suppose they did so any more than the Puritan leaders did. I'm left unconvinced on this one.
However, Vaughn did convince me that "the Puritan did not push the New England Indian off his land." (326) But the end result was the same. Still, during the period V describes, that intention was not there.
He says also that "The Puritan did not deplete the food sources of the natives." (327) Again, not directly. However, by limiting the hunting, fishing and agricultural areas available to the Native Americans, food would have been more difficult to get. And it isn't necessarily that Indians were not allowed on these lands, Vaughn proves that they were. The problem was that with fencing, domestic cattle, and compacted settlements, the whole ecology changed. The animals simply weren't there anymore. And certainly not in the quantity they were before. This would make subsistence that much harder to achieve.
I think he did prove, however, that "[t]he Puritan did not drive the Indian to despair through repeated injustices and cruelties." (330) I think the despair came from a slow but steady annihilation of a culture. And even Vaughn admits that the frequent occasions of alcoholism could be evidence of some kind of despair in the Natives who settled in Praying Indian towns.
Lots to think about by the end of this book. It's pretty thorough and certainly edifying. A bit slow in parts, but definitely helps to flesh out the picture of Indian and English relations during the colonial period.
August 24, 2025
The history of the early Puritans is the story of two groups of people, English and Native American and their struggle to live together in peace. In the end the English simply over ran the indigenous people of New England because of disease, war, a sense of mission to create a new society in a foreign land, and sheer numbers of people.s1 Written in 1965. And revised in 1979and 1994 shows the care the author, Alden Vaughn, took in relating this story. He demonstrates a rich understanding of some of more prominent Native tribes - Pequot, Narragansett, Mohegan, Wampanoag- and the complex dynamics that led to the Pequot War and King Phillips war, both of which were critical events leading to the demise and shrinkage of the indigenous populations. While he generally paints a positive view of the English, he does acknowledge the great debate about the nature of their encroachment on the land and peoples of New England.
As a descendant of the Puritans,I read this book to gain sense of context of my ancestors as they arrived on these shores..While well intentioned in their efforts to befriend the indigenous peoples, they brought certain assumptions about themselves and God’ will for their community which may have constructed the tensions between groups that obviously arose. I found this book thought-provoking and complex, not subject to easy rationalizations or condemnations of Puritan life and practice. At the same time the author did not gloss over the elitist assumptions that may have contributed to the history he records.
As a descendant of the Puritans,I read this book to gain sense of context of my ancestors as they arrived on these shores..While well intentioned in their efforts to befriend the indigenous peoples, they brought certain assumptions about themselves and God’ will for their community which may have constructed the tensions between groups that obviously arose. I found this book thought-provoking and complex, not subject to easy rationalizations or condemnations of Puritan life and practice. At the same time the author did not gloss over the elitist assumptions that may have contributed to the history he records.
September 23, 2022
An excellent survey of what life was like for English newcomers and indigenes in New England from the late sixteenth to late seventeenth centuries, Alden Vaughan's main argument is that relations between the English and the Natives were not as bad as we have been led to think. While he does concede that there was certainly some racially discriminatory practices and even some mild racism, it was largely done out of concern for the Natives on account of their Stone Age or Neolithic (at best) states. As to John Eliot's missionization from midcentury, Vaughan seems to be under the impression that such behavior was the result of several factors at play, such as increased contact between Englishpersons and Natives alike, in addition to closer relations between the two groups brought about in large part by trade and general interest among whites in New England and in the Imperial metropole in gaining an understanding of an altogether alien people. Interesting points as well on the widespread Puritan belief that the Natives were somehow descendants of Jewish castaways who had, over time, gone astray (this is echoed by Eliot himself and others in the primaries I have read). I like his detail and easy pace. Five stars. I am using this for a historiography on how scholars and others have viewed Eliot and his work since the seventeenth century.
October 15, 2019
This is a very well researched and well written book on the origins of the European colonization of what we know today as New England.
Vaughan succeeds in providing the context of the early exploration efforts to the area prior to 1620, covers the arrival of the Mayflower and Plymouth colony well and shows the growth of the "United Colonies" and the impact on the native inhabitants of the area.
His narrative flows through the Pequot War and then breaks apart. When John Eliot appears, the focus of the book shifts entirely to the missionary efforts from 1650-1675 and covers little about other topics like trade and relations with England, that also changed at that time. He rebounds in the conclusion when he discusses the causes of King Philip's War.
Also, the colonial narrative begins in Plymouth, but after the increase in size and population of the Massachusetts Bay colony, Plymouth is essentially forgotten.
Still, the author did a fantastic job with his research and wide range of resources and will enlighten anybody who picks up this book (once you get through the 50 pages of introductions).
Vaughan succeeds in providing the context of the early exploration efforts to the area prior to 1620, covers the arrival of the Mayflower and Plymouth colony well and shows the growth of the "United Colonies" and the impact on the native inhabitants of the area.
His narrative flows through the Pequot War and then breaks apart. When John Eliot appears, the focus of the book shifts entirely to the missionary efforts from 1650-1675 and covers little about other topics like trade and relations with England, that also changed at that time. He rebounds in the conclusion when he discusses the causes of King Philip's War.
Also, the colonial narrative begins in Plymouth, but after the increase in size and population of the Massachusetts Bay colony, Plymouth is essentially forgotten.
Still, the author did a fantastic job with his research and wide range of resources and will enlighten anybody who picks up this book (once you get through the 50 pages of introductions).
June 16, 2024
I read the first edition of this perspective on the relationship between the Puritans and many New England tribes and left with newfound respect for the Puritans. Of all the colonists that came to the New World in the 17th and 18th centuries, not many treated the natives with almost equality as the Puritans did. This book tells the story of the two groups with extremely readable and enjoyable rhetoric and appeals to not just experts on the subject, but anyone slightly interested in America's foundations. It leaves the reader saddened at the events that followed this period, but also a hope that we, as humans today, can treat others with the utmost respect and lovingkindness.
February 4, 2021
Nicely written book that focuses on the relationship between the Puritans of Plymouth and the Native-Americans. It's a good read, but it is totally focused on the relationship between the two people, and necessarily between the natives and everybody else. It argues the relationship between the white folks of Plymouth and the natives was mostly good for the first two generations after the founding of Plymouth.
March 18, 2022
Lots of detail. Bit of a difficult/long read for me. Selected the book because my maternal ancestors settled in the original Rhode Island area in the 1600s. One direct ancester killed on first night of King Philip's War in June 20th of 1675. Not much at all written in this book about that particular war. A very thorough writing concerning the relationships between the natives and the Puritan settlers.
December 14, 2017
An excellent book on the Pilgrims and New England Purtians and their interactions with the native peoples.
May 5, 2010
A good "101" of colonial New England.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews