What do you think?
Rate this book
The Divided Ground: Indians, Settlers, and the Northern Borderland of the American Revolution
From the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of William Cooper's Town comes a dramatic and illuminating portrait of white and Native American relations in the aftermath of the American Revolution.
The Divided Ground tells the story of two friends, a Mohawk Indian and the son of a colonial clergyman, whose relationship helped redefine North America. As one served American expansion by promoting Indian dispossession and religious conversion, and the other struggled to defend and strengthen Indian territories, the two friends became bitter enemies. Their battle over control of the Indian borderland, that divided ground between the British Empire and the nascent United States, would come to define nationhood in North America. Taylor tells a fascinating story of the far-reaching effects of the American Revolution and the struggle of American Indians to preserve a land of their own.
The Divided Ground tells the story of two friends, a Mohawk Indian and the son of a colonial clergyman, whose relationship helped redefine North America. As one served American expansion by promoting Indian dispossession and religious conversion, and the other struggled to defend and strengthen Indian territories, the two friends became bitter enemies. Their battle over control of the Indian borderland, that divided ground between the British Empire and the nascent United States, would come to define nationhood in North America. Taylor tells a fascinating story of the far-reaching effects of the American Revolution and the struggle of American Indians to preserve a land of their own.
560 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2006
33 people are currently reading
687 people want to read
About the author
Alan Taylor
205 books345 followersAlan Shaw Taylor is a historian specializing in early American history. He is the author of a number of books about colonial America, the American Revolution, and the Early American Republic. He has won a Pulitzer Prize and the Bancroft Prize for his work.
Taylor graduated from Colby College, in Waterville, Maine, in 1977 and earned his Ph.D. from Brandeis University in 1986. Currently a professor of history at the University of California, Davis, he will join the faculty of the Corcoran Department of History at the University of Virginia in 2014.
Taylor graduated from Colby College, in Waterville, Maine, in 1977 and earned his Ph.D. from Brandeis University in 1986. Currently a professor of history at the University of California, Davis, he will join the faculty of the Corcoran Department of History at the University of Virginia in 2014.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews
December 6, 2019
Impressively rich portrait of settler-native relations in 18th Century New York. Taylor (American Revolutions, etc.) examines the interplay between the British and American governments and the powerful Iroquois Confederacy, an alliance of six nations which alternately coexisted, fought and negotiated with their white rivals. He focuses on white political leaders like George Clinton (New York’s brilliant, devious governor), Philip Schuyler (general, Hamilton in-law and land-grabbing patroon) and Timothy Pickering (Washington’s frosty, arrogant Secretary of State), alongside more obscure figures like Samuel Kirkland, a missionary who spent his life in fruitless attempts to “civilize” the Natives through agrarian development and religious conversion. The Iroquois similarly field a variety of leaders, from the haughty Seneca Red Jacket, who mocked the presumptuous whites and encouraged Iroquois resistance (only to negotiate with them later), to Joseph Brant, the legendary Mohawk leader whose Christianity and friendships with whites proved both an asset and a burden. Taylor’s book traces their interactions through the political eruptions of the late 18th Century: the French and Indian War, the American Revolution, Britain’s agreement to protect Native settlements (ultimately a hollow one) and the feuds between America’s state and federal governments to negotiate land and trade agreements.
In all of this, Taylor borrows from Richard White’s similar study of Great Lakes nations and European colonizers, The Middle Ground. But his focus is different: where White’s interested in the affects of white-native relations on both cultures, Taylor emphasizes the disruption created by their prolonged interaction. In fact, Taylor’s through line is deliberate white misunderstanding of Native motives and intentions to further exploitation. Thus, records of councils between white and Iroquois leaders are entrusted to biased stenographers and untrustworthy interpreters; missionaries expend “civilizing” efforts on groups practicing native religions rather than those who’ve already embraced Christianity; whites encourage Iroquois men to abandon hunting and take up farming in a way that humiliates them (farming was traditionally women’s work in Iroquois societies, while also signalling that whites viewed Natives as the equals of black slaves in their capacity to work). Most of all, British and American negotiators distort the intricacies of Iroquois landowning, a communal enterprise allowing distribution of land among deserving clans. This, somehow, was seen as the Iroquois lacking any concept of property ownership - a wanton act of willful ignorance used, then and after, to justify stealing Native American land. After all, the logic went, if even a “civilized” confederacy of Iroquois doesn’t understand property rights, is forced occupation really stealing?
Yet Taylor doesn’t make the Iroquois passive victims, either. He shows Brant and others leveraging Iroquois resources, from warriors to trading goods and farmlands, to make themselves a third, and for a time co-equal, power in the Anglo-American border struggle. He also highlights disagreements between different peoples on responding to white advances, particularly after the Revolution. Where Brant counciled neutrality, allowing the Iroquois to exploit both Britain and America, others (particularly the pro-American Oneida) pushed to ally with one nation or the other to protect land claims; still more, though a minority, hoped for alliance with the Miami, Shawnee and other Midwestern nations to resist white encroachment. Disputes between Christianized Iroquois and those following Native religions hampered an effective response, as did personal disputes between Brant and other leaders. While the whites endured factional squabbles of their own, enough dominoes fell (several bad harvests in Iroquoia, the collapse of British support after the Jay Treaty, the Battle of Fallen Timbers and Thomas Jefferson’s supporting states over federal officials in Native negotiations) to render them victorious. The Iroquois either moved north into Canada or remained in New York, confined to reservations and subordinated to American rule. It’s a tragic tale of greed, conflict and misunderstanding, compellingly rendered by a gifted historian.
In all of this, Taylor borrows from Richard White’s similar study of Great Lakes nations and European colonizers, The Middle Ground. But his focus is different: where White’s interested in the affects of white-native relations on both cultures, Taylor emphasizes the disruption created by their prolonged interaction. In fact, Taylor’s through line is deliberate white misunderstanding of Native motives and intentions to further exploitation. Thus, records of councils between white and Iroquois leaders are entrusted to biased stenographers and untrustworthy interpreters; missionaries expend “civilizing” efforts on groups practicing native religions rather than those who’ve already embraced Christianity; whites encourage Iroquois men to abandon hunting and take up farming in a way that humiliates them (farming was traditionally women’s work in Iroquois societies, while also signalling that whites viewed Natives as the equals of black slaves in their capacity to work). Most of all, British and American negotiators distort the intricacies of Iroquois landowning, a communal enterprise allowing distribution of land among deserving clans. This, somehow, was seen as the Iroquois lacking any concept of property ownership - a wanton act of willful ignorance used, then and after, to justify stealing Native American land. After all, the logic went, if even a “civilized” confederacy of Iroquois doesn’t understand property rights, is forced occupation really stealing?
Yet Taylor doesn’t make the Iroquois passive victims, either. He shows Brant and others leveraging Iroquois resources, from warriors to trading goods and farmlands, to make themselves a third, and for a time co-equal, power in the Anglo-American border struggle. He also highlights disagreements between different peoples on responding to white advances, particularly after the Revolution. Where Brant counciled neutrality, allowing the Iroquois to exploit both Britain and America, others (particularly the pro-American Oneida) pushed to ally with one nation or the other to protect land claims; still more, though a minority, hoped for alliance with the Miami, Shawnee and other Midwestern nations to resist white encroachment. Disputes between Christianized Iroquois and those following Native religions hampered an effective response, as did personal disputes between Brant and other leaders. While the whites endured factional squabbles of their own, enough dominoes fell (several bad harvests in Iroquoia, the collapse of British support after the Jay Treaty, the Battle of Fallen Timbers and Thomas Jefferson’s supporting states over federal officials in Native negotiations) to render them victorious. The Iroquois either moved north into Canada or remained in New York, confined to reservations and subordinated to American rule. It’s a tragic tale of greed, conflict and misunderstanding, compellingly rendered by a gifted historian.
November 7, 2021
This is the perfect book to be reading right now as we struggle to come to terms with a non-mythologized version of the nation’s history that doesn’t center itself solely on the white man’s accomplishments or crimes. A friend to whom I recommended other Taylor books called me last week to say, I can see why you recommend this author so much; he takes really complicated ideas and breaks them down into something anyone could understand. That is his stock and trade, he makes you feel as if you are the historian discovering everything yourself. By the time he reframes the information at the end of a section with his perspective thrown in, you will have already arrived at that understanding on your own.
This book does that too, but it does take the patience of one’s pre-smart phone addled brain to arrive at that understanding. The first 100 pages you experience the historian’s experience in making sense of the complexity interplay of: British and American rivals; the changing dynamics before, during, and after the Revolutionary War; states trying to steal land from the Indians before the Federal government can; true believer religious folks who can’t decide between serving God and serving their own inevitable hunger for wealth and security; faux believer religious folks who seek to obtain money and land in the name of converting the Indians; Indians who work tirelessly to adapt and prosper within the framework of colonial power and settler invasion without sacrificing cultural traditions; Indians who can see the handwriting on the wall and give into despair and the colonial alcohol pushers offering them an escape from their loss of purpose,power and way of life; Indians aligning with the British, with the Americans, or both -depending on what looks best for their long-term survival; settlers who live to take down a people they consider inferior; settlers lured into buying stolen land whereby they become the prospector/capitalist’s soldier in the theft of land; Indians who become corrupt within the larger system of corruption and theft that defines the acquisition of farm land, waterways, and overland routes used to create the financial capital and power of our nation.
By the end of the book, I looked back at the beginning. What had seemed like almost too much information to manage a couple hundred pages before seemed as familiar as the day’s news by the end. Just as you understand the ongoing gambits of today’s wealthy and powerful to accrue more and more and more by any means necessary, so you will understand how that chess game played out at this earlier period of our history. The only difference being you know who prevailed then. We are still waiting to see how it will play out this time around.
The ending is stunning. In a meta experience, the reader, like the Indians, has put so much energy into understanding this world, and in a moment, poof…it’s done. Class dismissed.
This book does that too, but it does take the patience of one’s pre-smart phone addled brain to arrive at that understanding. The first 100 pages you experience the historian’s experience in making sense of the complexity interplay of: British and American rivals; the changing dynamics before, during, and after the Revolutionary War; states trying to steal land from the Indians before the Federal government can; true believer religious folks who can’t decide between serving God and serving their own inevitable hunger for wealth and security; faux believer religious folks who seek to obtain money and land in the name of converting the Indians; Indians who work tirelessly to adapt and prosper within the framework of colonial power and settler invasion without sacrificing cultural traditions; Indians who can see the handwriting on the wall and give into despair and the colonial alcohol pushers offering them an escape from their loss of purpose,power and way of life; Indians aligning with the British, with the Americans, or both -depending on what looks best for their long-term survival; settlers who live to take down a people they consider inferior; settlers lured into buying stolen land whereby they become the prospector/capitalist’s soldier in the theft of land; Indians who become corrupt within the larger system of corruption and theft that defines the acquisition of farm land, waterways, and overland routes used to create the financial capital and power of our nation.
By the end of the book, I looked back at the beginning. What had seemed like almost too much information to manage a couple hundred pages before seemed as familiar as the day’s news by the end. Just as you understand the ongoing gambits of today’s wealthy and powerful to accrue more and more and more by any means necessary, so you will understand how that chess game played out at this earlier period of our history. The only difference being you know who prevailed then. We are still waiting to see how it will play out this time around.
The ending is stunning. In a meta experience, the reader, like the Indians, has put so much energy into understanding this world, and in a moment, poof…it’s done. Class dismissed.
April 3, 2021
This book was a difficult read. Face it, a professor at UC Davis is going to write a history that has a slant against colonialism and the founding of America. Having said that, this is a very good book if you want to see how the Indian societies in the NorthEast dealt with the onslaught of colonists; the British and French Empires; and the early US, especially New York, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. I felt like I was doing homework but he does write well and keeps the story moving along. The clash of cultures was well presented. Clearly the Indians up to the 1760’s had a fierce reputation. The common thinking in the colonies about the Indians, in particular the Iroquois was that they were
our best friends, or most dangerous enemies.”’
The defeat of the French in the French and Indian War (Seven Years’ War) was the end of Indian influence in the border regions.
No longer could the Indians play off the French against the British to maintain Iroquois independence, to maximize their presents, and to ensure trade competition. A British general explained, “They saw us sole Masters of the Country, the Balance of Power broke, and their own Consequence at an End. Instead of being courted by two Nations, a Profusion of Presents made by both, and two Markets to trade at, they now depend upon one Power’
I found the culture clash between European and Indian land use fascinating. But the writing was on the wall when approximately 400 Mohawks on reserved land were surrounded by 42,000 colonists searching for farmland.
The role of women in the Indian societies was very interesting and the women held power. In many cases, the women intervened to allow land purchases and gifts to the colonists to avoid conflict and save the villages.
Life in the village was different than what I might have imagined:
There is so much to this book. The impact of alcohol was devastating. The Indians who joined the British in the Revolutionary War were “sold down the river” by the Treaty of Paris while the Indians who fought for Independence often did not receive their promised reward. The Indians tried to remain a “free people” but both the Brits in Canada and the US tried to exercise control over the tribes—for use in future conflicts. This is not a pretty story as the land is “bought” from the natives, most were cheated. The premise of the book is to follow Brant (an Indian highly educated in a mission school) and his colonist classmate Kirkland, also well-educated and a missionary to the Iroquois. The book covered so much more. The Brant-Kirkland narrative doesn’t drive the entire period but does give some structure.
4 Stars
The defeat of the French in the French and Indian War (Seven Years’ War) was the end of Indian influence in the border regions.
No longer could the Indians play off the French against the British to maintain Iroquois independence, to maximize their presents, and to ensure trade competition. A British general explained, “They saw us sole Masters of the Country, the Balance of Power broke, and their own Consequence at an End. Instead of being courted by two Nations, a Profusion of Presents made by both, and two Markets to trade at, they now depend upon one Power’
I found the culture clash between European and Indian land use fascinating. But the writing was on the wall when approximately 400 Mohawks on reserved land were surrounded by 42,000 colonists searching for farmland.
The role of women in the Indian societies was very interesting and the women held power. In many cases, the women intervened to allow land purchases and gifts to the colonists to avoid conflict and save the villages.
Life in the village was different than what I might have imagined:
There is so much to this book. The impact of alcohol was devastating. The Indians who joined the British in the Revolutionary War were “sold down the river” by the Treaty of Paris while the Indians who fought for Independence often did not receive their promised reward. The Indians tried to remain a “free people” but both the Brits in Canada and the US tried to exercise control over the tribes—for use in future conflicts. This is not a pretty story as the land is “bought” from the natives, most were cheated. The premise of the book is to follow Brant (an Indian highly educated in a mission school) and his colonist classmate Kirkland, also well-educated and a missionary to the Iroquois. The book covered so much more. The Brant-Kirkland narrative doesn’t drive the entire period but does give some structure.
4 Stars
December 28, 2013
I've lived in western NY for over 30 years without understanding most of what preceded the modern era. This is revisionist in the sense that it's perspective is much more nuanced and balanced then typical milestone-based history that focus on battles and treaties - illuminating the conflicted motivations of both natives and settlers.
Taylor brings to life the humanity of many players - both Iroquois and European - but by focusing on two in particular gives us unique access to what lay behind the actions on both sides of the borderland in the 18th century.
Taylor brings to life the humanity of many players - both Iroquois and European - but by focusing on two in particular gives us unique access to what lay behind the actions on both sides of the borderland in the 18th century.
January 20, 2012
Pulitzer prize-winning author Alan Taylor has subtitled this scholarly yet accessible history “Indians, Settlers and the Northern Borderland of the American Revolution.” Beginning with the French and Indian war and concluding during the early nineteenth century, Taylor sheds new light upon European/Native relations by following the parallel careers of two men, the charismatic Mohawk Indian leader Joseph Brant, and Presbyterian missionary-turned-speculator Samuel Kirkland. The focus is New York State, and the attempts of the Iroquois Nation to preserve autonomy and prosperity by asserting title to their land. Hardly the doomed traditionalists of earlier histories, the Iroquois learned European ways rapidly. They managed for generations to maintain their sovereign status by exploiting their position as a buffer between the French and British. Unfortunately, the posture became increasingly irrelevant after the French lost Canada.
The American Revolution and a flood of land hungry immigrants was the coup de grace. Neither British nor Americans honored their treaties, and a weak federal government allowed states to violate these at will. Racism drew ever more votes for speculator-politicians, and Indian land illegally taken became the glue that held together the fragile American social experiment. This brilliant but melancholy social history is documented with copious chapter-by-chapter notes, and many maps and portraits. The Divided Ground represents a breakthrough in the historical analysis of postrevolutionary America.
(Review first posted in the magazine of The Historical Novel Society)
The American Revolution and a flood of land hungry immigrants was the coup de grace. Neither British nor Americans honored their treaties, and a weak federal government allowed states to violate these at will. Racism drew ever more votes for speculator-politicians, and Indian land illegally taken became the glue that held together the fragile American social experiment. This brilliant but melancholy social history is documented with copious chapter-by-chapter notes, and many maps and portraits. The Divided Ground represents a breakthrough in the historical analysis of postrevolutionary America.
(Review first posted in the magazine of The Historical Novel Society)
September 17, 2008
In the 20th century, American history shifted its focus away from Frederick Jackson Turner’s landmark “Frontier Thesis” towards “borderland,” studies, which focus on the fluidity of culture and power areas where national borders are yet well-defined. University of California-Davis Historian Alan Taylor’s latest book, The Divided Ground, is one such study. Its title purposefully recalls Richard White's The Middle Ground, a book that focused on the interactions and accommodations between cultures of the Great Lakes region (or the pays d’en haut) up until the early 19th century. Taylor less-emphasizes the temporary co-existence of Indian and Colonial cultures in the American northeast. Instead, he fixates on the breakdown of accommodation and the resulting dominance of colonial hegemony in the region.
To narrate this supposedly theoretical look at the devolution of Indian power in the region, Taylor chooses two interesting characters to represent Native and Colonial interests. The first, Joseph Brant, was a Mohawk Indian; the second, Samuel Kirkland, was white and the son of a nearby minister. These two individuals met at the school of Reverend Eleazar Wheelock in Connecticut in 1761. In the years that followed, the two men would act as examples of the growing divisions between Indian and colonial worldviews. Politics would trump personal loyalties and friendships, allowing Taylor to show his readers that in the face of growing nationalism—and more precisely, Federalism—co-existence was never an option. In short, borderlands quickly dissolve into clearly delineated borders.
Whites attempted to re-educate and assimilate tribes of the Iroquois confederacy. Yet, whites failed to recognize the cultural divides not just between native groups, but between Anglo and Native worldviews. Natives scoffed at suggestions by whites that they become sedentary farmers, noting that such work was “women’s work.” To natives, not hunting posed a direct threat to their manhood and way of life. Yet, when native worldviews aligned with whites—most notably through rent seeking aspirations—attempts to purchase land from whites were flatly denied. In time, whites assumed ownership of the rest of upstate New York, displacing would be-rent seeking tribes and further hurting any far-fetched odds of assimilation.
Taylor's two polarizing characters remain useful representations. Kirkland attempted to build a school with the express purpose of civilizing native peoples, while Brant assimilated so successfully that he lost much of his native authenticity, hurting his special place within the tribe. Brant’s life becomes especially revealing, as it is meant to act as a microcosm of Taylor’s “borderland” analysis of the region. He lived as a part-native, part-Anglo whose contradictions could not be reconciled. In short, Brant could not remain native in a white world, just as borderlands must in time become borders.
Taylor has undoubtedly performed extensive research and brought to life the intricate aspects of these men’s lives, yet his analysis falls short of any sort of meaningful borderlands analysis. Borderland narratives are reliant on cultural analysis, and this does not seem to be the core of Taylor’s work. To be sure, the anecdotes included in The Divided Ground might have added much to his narrative (if only there weren’t so many), yet anecdotes do not constitute cultural analysis per se. This is a political history, one with a clear Federalist bend. Brant and Kirkland, characters Taylor so clearly focuses on in the introductory chapter, seem to be lost in a forest of historical quips and unnecessary recaps of the Revolutionary period. If one does find their way out of the forest of unnecessary information, than it is only to discover a path leading towards a seemingly obvious conclusion: namely, that frontier men had little agency in an inexorable Federalist process.
For Richard White, the “middle ground” explained how cultures could—and for nearly 150 years did—intermingle successfully. For Taylor, such cooperation seems unsustainable and outright preposterous. The issues which might have revealed the methods through which borderlands dissolved—namely, through rent schemes, the temporary advent of Federalism in New York, the political cultures of Anglos and Natives, and the use of Alcohol as both a gift and a weapon—are left muddled in a sea of trivial anecdotes wordy asides. Such misappropriation of emphasis and energy makes The Divided Ground not simply a difficult read; it makes this a good book where it might have been a great one.
To narrate this supposedly theoretical look at the devolution of Indian power in the region, Taylor chooses two interesting characters to represent Native and Colonial interests. The first, Joseph Brant, was a Mohawk Indian; the second, Samuel Kirkland, was white and the son of a nearby minister. These two individuals met at the school of Reverend Eleazar Wheelock in Connecticut in 1761. In the years that followed, the two men would act as examples of the growing divisions between Indian and colonial worldviews. Politics would trump personal loyalties and friendships, allowing Taylor to show his readers that in the face of growing nationalism—and more precisely, Federalism—co-existence was never an option. In short, borderlands quickly dissolve into clearly delineated borders.
Whites attempted to re-educate and assimilate tribes of the Iroquois confederacy. Yet, whites failed to recognize the cultural divides not just between native groups, but between Anglo and Native worldviews. Natives scoffed at suggestions by whites that they become sedentary farmers, noting that such work was “women’s work.” To natives, not hunting posed a direct threat to their manhood and way of life. Yet, when native worldviews aligned with whites—most notably through rent seeking aspirations—attempts to purchase land from whites were flatly denied. In time, whites assumed ownership of the rest of upstate New York, displacing would be-rent seeking tribes and further hurting any far-fetched odds of assimilation.
Taylor's two polarizing characters remain useful representations. Kirkland attempted to build a school with the express purpose of civilizing native peoples, while Brant assimilated so successfully that he lost much of his native authenticity, hurting his special place within the tribe. Brant’s life becomes especially revealing, as it is meant to act as a microcosm of Taylor’s “borderland” analysis of the region. He lived as a part-native, part-Anglo whose contradictions could not be reconciled. In short, Brant could not remain native in a white world, just as borderlands must in time become borders.
Taylor has undoubtedly performed extensive research and brought to life the intricate aspects of these men’s lives, yet his analysis falls short of any sort of meaningful borderlands analysis. Borderland narratives are reliant on cultural analysis, and this does not seem to be the core of Taylor’s work. To be sure, the anecdotes included in The Divided Ground might have added much to his narrative (if only there weren’t so many), yet anecdotes do not constitute cultural analysis per se. This is a political history, one with a clear Federalist bend. Brant and Kirkland, characters Taylor so clearly focuses on in the introductory chapter, seem to be lost in a forest of historical quips and unnecessary recaps of the Revolutionary period. If one does find their way out of the forest of unnecessary information, than it is only to discover a path leading towards a seemingly obvious conclusion: namely, that frontier men had little agency in an inexorable Federalist process.
For Richard White, the “middle ground” explained how cultures could—and for nearly 150 years did—intermingle successfully. For Taylor, such cooperation seems unsustainable and outright preposterous. The issues which might have revealed the methods through which borderlands dissolved—namely, through rent schemes, the temporary advent of Federalism in New York, the political cultures of Anglos and Natives, and the use of Alcohol as both a gift and a weapon—are left muddled in a sea of trivial anecdotes wordy asides. Such misappropriation of emphasis and energy makes The Divided Ground not simply a difficult read; it makes this a good book where it might have been a great one.
June 9, 2018
The Divided Ground is an in-depth history of how the Haudenosaunee confederacy (referred to throughout the book as the Iroquois or the Six Nations) lost their homelands in the decades following the Revolutionary War.
Focusing largely on the Mohawk, Oneida, and Seneca, Taylor examines the roles played by rapacious land speculators, Christian missionaries, the state of New York, and the British administration in Upper Canada in dispossessing the Six Nations and undermining their power.
The Six Nations fought hard to retain their sovereignty, as demonstrated by their determination to exert customary law in cases involving Indian murder suspects. They proposed leasing some of their land to white settlers rather than selling it at prices far below market value. But, as Taylor argues, when neither the British nor the Americans no longer needed strong alliances with Haudenosaunee confederates, they stopped treating the Six Nations with respect and sought to reduce them to the status of landless dependents. Taylor's detailed description of this process is heartbreaking.
The Divided Ground is a powerful reminder that the wealth of the United States and Canada is built upon the forcible dispossession and disempowerment of both countries' first peoples.
Focusing largely on the Mohawk, Oneida, and Seneca, Taylor examines the roles played by rapacious land speculators, Christian missionaries, the state of New York, and the British administration in Upper Canada in dispossessing the Six Nations and undermining their power.
The Six Nations fought hard to retain their sovereignty, as demonstrated by their determination to exert customary law in cases involving Indian murder suspects. They proposed leasing some of their land to white settlers rather than selling it at prices far below market value. But, as Taylor argues, when neither the British nor the Americans no longer needed strong alliances with Haudenosaunee confederates, they stopped treating the Six Nations with respect and sought to reduce them to the status of landless dependents. Taylor's detailed description of this process is heartbreaking.
The Divided Ground is a powerful reminder that the wealth of the United States and Canada is built upon the forcible dispossession and disempowerment of both countries' first peoples.
March 5, 2017
Taylor argues that Native Americans didn't stubbornly cling to their old views of land ownership in the face of settler expansion. Rather, by looking at Upstate NY, Iroquois, Taylor shows how they adapted their views to preserve their traditional lifestyle by leasing directly to nearby land buyers to preserve their traditional lifestyle which gave them an annual revenue replacing losses in animal population. A la The Middle Ground, Iroquois wanted to preserve a middle position between Britain and the US (replacing old French/UK division). This book is depressing b/c it's the story of why that didn't happen. NY state monopolized land sales so Iroquois were forced into low prices that were final. Britain tries to control Iroquois by putting them solidly within Canada, Iroquois live in hostile US initially to preserve border position--power broker.
Broadly I saw the result of this story as mostly about raw power--and a worthy comparison to the Palestine situation right now. The Iroquois were smart and well aware of their position, but because they are so outnumbered the US can ignore their sovereignty and gradually erode it in the face of native, white, even strangely French intervention. Enough Americans interpreted the Revolution as securing white rights and unifying the colonies, so there was no room in that view for an Iroquois state. Iroquois tried to assert their independence in the face of the 1783, their power position just didn't lead to anything.
This book was kind of boring to read at times, and the Kirkland/Brant narrative arc Taylor tries to drive, although cool, didn't really hit home for me.
Read
August 13, 20182006-07 - The Divided Ground: Indians, Settlers, and the Northern Borderland of the American Revolution. Alan Taylor. Alfred A Knopf, NYC, NY. 2006. 542 pages.
A very good “social history”. It highlights the tale of Iroquia through the lives of two men; Joseph Brant (Mohawk, loyalist, British commander) and Samuel Kirkland (Calvinist missionary, American army chaplain-Sullivan Campaign, Congressional Indian agent, worked w/ Oneida) They went to school together.
The first 150 pages or so do an excellent setting of the stage and culture and to the end of the American Revolution. The rest is a very detailed story about the Iroquois at the hands of the British, Americans (Feds), and New York State. A four way battle for supremacy and land. The internal struggle in Iroquia for top spot between Mohawks (favored by British), Oneida (favored by Americans) and Senneca (most numerous tribe in the confederation).
The goals of each group are laid out as well as the methods used and results. I was surprised at the very early struggle between Federal and State goals though I was not surprised to find that New York’s motivation to grab land was to prevent the Yankees of New England, especially MA from doing so first. Sort of a softer non-fighting version of the Yankee-Pennamite Wars (1769-1807).
A very good “social history”. It highlights the tale of Iroquia through the lives of two men; Joseph Brant (Mohawk, loyalist, British commander) and Samuel Kirkland (Calvinist missionary, American army chaplain-Sullivan Campaign, Congressional Indian agent, worked w/ Oneida) They went to school together.
The first 150 pages or so do an excellent setting of the stage and culture and to the end of the American Revolution. The rest is a very detailed story about the Iroquois at the hands of the British, Americans (Feds), and New York State. A four way battle for supremacy and land. The internal struggle in Iroquia for top spot between Mohawks (favored by British), Oneida (favored by Americans) and Senneca (most numerous tribe in the confederation).
The goals of each group are laid out as well as the methods used and results. I was surprised at the very early struggle between Federal and State goals though I was not surprised to find that New York’s motivation to grab land was to prevent the Yankees of New England, especially MA from doing so first. Sort of a softer non-fighting version of the Yankee-Pennamite Wars (1769-1807).
Read
June 7, 2009While reading "The World of Odysseus," I came across a footnote concerning the matriarcal society of the Iroquois. I was aware of this but knew little else. Intrigued, and wanting to learn more, I found the only book at our local library on the subject.
OK, I was mistaken. It seams to be just another dry, scholarly history. Besides, summer's comin' so why waste my time on something I'm b=not enthusiastic about. You know what I want to read....
OK, I was mistaken. It seams to be just another dry, scholarly history. Besides, summer's comin' so why waste my time on something I'm b=not enthusiastic about. You know what I want to read....
December 14, 2009
Everyone living in the upstate New York area should read this book. We need to know the real history of our land. The relations between the European-Americans and the Native Americans between 1750 and 1820 is the focus of this book. It is a story far more interesting than what we have all learned in school. This books makes that history seem important and fascinating. The characters of the major players are vividly sketched.
January 6, 2015
The Divided Ground tells the story of a Mohawk and and a colonial clergyman who's friendship helped redefine colonial America. It was skillfully written shifting back and forth between examining the friendship on a micro-level and the relationship between Europeans and Native on a whole. While cooperation might I have worked on a singular level, it becomes clear that with the American Revolution, and the struggle of Native to preserve their own land, cooperation could not last.
Read
August 18, 2009Reads a little too much like a doctoral dissertation turned into a book. I'm not opposed to exhaustive detail, but this just didn't keep my attention to all the detail. Even though I read it as background for a very interesting workshop, I kept wishing the author had paid more attention to giving the reader a reason to keep on reading!
November 8, 2010
I wish everyone I knew who lives in this area would read this book. Not only historically fascinating, the arguments about native creativity in dealing with new and unjust legal decisions is as relevant as ever, especially when you look at what's going on with the Cayuga Nation work to have land put into trust.
August 8, 2012
A quite complex examination of the wars fought for my old neighborhood (upstate New York) during the American Revolution. It examines the different understandings of this borderland region that the British, the Americans, and the Native Americans (specifically, the Haudonosee People/the Iroquois)held.
January 14, 2013
Excellent book describing early American history focusing on the Iroquois. The book told me more about land dealings than I really wanted to know, but the accumulation of detail was probably necessary to convince the reader of the accuracy of the revisionist history. It changed my ideas about the founding of the United States and taught me a lot about the Iroquois.
July 1, 2017
Definitely not a quick read. I read this book in preparation for a summer workshop offered at Niagara University sponsored by the National Endowment for the Humanities. Chock full of information that must be slowly savored in order to fully appreciate the detail.
October 5, 2011
A powerful, sad story of how the Iroquois lost most of their lands and were forced on to reservations in the decades following the American Revolution. In part the story is told through the lives of Mohawk leader Joseph Brant and Samuel Kirkland, a white missionary to the Oneida.
March 10, 2013
Taylor’s history of the many treaties and alliances of the new nation after the Revolution shuns non of the complexity of the story. Thoroughly researched and well told.
November 26, 2017
No one can fault Taylor's research, but this book isn’t strong enough to make readers care about the anecdotal minutiae The Divided Ground spends much time discussing
July 27, 2025
The author writes of the fate of the Iroquois tribes in Upper New York State - before, during, and after the American Revolution in 1776.
He recounts the lives of two very different players in this history – Samuel Kirkland, a zealous Calvinist missionary who learnt the Iroquois language and Joseph Brant, an Iroquois, who went to English schools, became an Anglican and was proficient in the English language. Joseph Brant was able to move between the two worlds of Indian and white. He also went to England on a few occasions.
It is an over-simplification to say that both Kirkland and Brant moved in two worlds. There were many divisions within the different Iroquois tribes. And then there was the American Revolution, where many white people remained loyal (Loyalists) to the British Empire and moved north to Canada.
Joseph Brant and many Iroquois also sided with the King (they had made treaties with the King of England) and moved to what is now southwestern Ontario – between Toronto (at that time called York) and Detroit.
One reason for the American Revolution was the settlers in New York State wanting to acquire (steal would be more accurate) land from the Iroquois Nation. To a degree they were prevented from doing so by treaties signed with the British. The British had allied with the Iroquois when France occupied Quebec, but the British defeated the French in Quebec City in 1759 – and the Treaty of Paris in 1763 formalized British power over New France.
Page 78 (my book)
The Patriot cause [the Americans] merged a frontier hunger for Indian land with a dread of British power…Patriot leaders despised the Iroquois as an unjust impediment to settler expansion.
Page 80
Noting the Patriots’ sense of racial entitlement and lust for native lands, the Mohawks [an Iroquois tribe], feared dispossession and enslavement.
There was also a policy of divide and subdue by the British towards Indian tribes. They became adept at playing one chief against another. But the Iroquois were also doing this – Joseph Brant, in particular, with his knowledge of the English language, was very astute in acquiring land, arms, and money from the British.
It must also be remembered that the Iroquois were [page 119] greatly outnumbered by the 2,500,000 Americans in 1783, the 100,000 British subjects in Canada needed Indian allies [much like the French did]. This also drew the Loyalists and Iroquois tribes in Canada closer together.
Page 81
Rejected as full partners in the British Empire, the Patriots sought their own "empire of liberty" premised on the majority’s rights to hold private property (including slaves) and to make new property by dispossessing Indians.
Settlers and speculators bought up Indian lands for just a fraction of their actual value. New York State made millions of dollars this way. States’ rights took precedence over a weak federalist government – at that time in Philadelphia. States, like New York, listened to the demands of their male citizens (settlers) who wanted land expansion and voted.
Joseph Brant prospered in Ontario (at that time called Upper Canada), but as the author describes, he, too, had to endure much racial animosity. Samuel Kirkland temporarily abandoned his Calvinist preaching and became a land-grabber at Iroquois expense.
We are told of the supremacist attitude of the white settlers in land acquisition. Sometimes the author goes into minute detail of leases and rents. Liquor was used as a bargaining tool to get Indian land as cheaply as possible – and then alcoholism sadly took hold of many Iroquois people, now deprived of their land and livelihood. They had lost their way of life.
Page 281
Only the continual consumption of Indian land to make private property could sustain the American social order that combined inequality with opportunity.
Page 321 Thomas Jefferson, 1803
We presume that our strength and their [the Indians] weakness is now so visible that they must see we have only to shut our hand to crush them.
Page 183 Good Peter, Oneida chief
It is just so with your People. As long as any Spot of our excellent Land remains, they will covet it, and if one dies, another will pursue it, and will never rest till they possess it.
He recounts the lives of two very different players in this history – Samuel Kirkland, a zealous Calvinist missionary who learnt the Iroquois language and Joseph Brant, an Iroquois, who went to English schools, became an Anglican and was proficient in the English language. Joseph Brant was able to move between the two worlds of Indian and white. He also went to England on a few occasions.
It is an over-simplification to say that both Kirkland and Brant moved in two worlds. There were many divisions within the different Iroquois tribes. And then there was the American Revolution, where many white people remained loyal (Loyalists) to the British Empire and moved north to Canada.
Joseph Brant and many Iroquois also sided with the King (they had made treaties with the King of England) and moved to what is now southwestern Ontario – between Toronto (at that time called York) and Detroit.
One reason for the American Revolution was the settlers in New York State wanting to acquire (steal would be more accurate) land from the Iroquois Nation. To a degree they were prevented from doing so by treaties signed with the British. The British had allied with the Iroquois when France occupied Quebec, but the British defeated the French in Quebec City in 1759 – and the Treaty of Paris in 1763 formalized British power over New France.
Page 78 (my book)
The Patriot cause [the Americans] merged a frontier hunger for Indian land with a dread of British power…Patriot leaders despised the Iroquois as an unjust impediment to settler expansion.
Page 80
Noting the Patriots’ sense of racial entitlement and lust for native lands, the Mohawks [an Iroquois tribe], feared dispossession and enslavement.
There was also a policy of divide and subdue by the British towards Indian tribes. They became adept at playing one chief against another. But the Iroquois were also doing this – Joseph Brant, in particular, with his knowledge of the English language, was very astute in acquiring land, arms, and money from the British.
It must also be remembered that the Iroquois were [page 119] greatly outnumbered by the 2,500,000 Americans in 1783, the 100,000 British subjects in Canada needed Indian allies [much like the French did]. This also drew the Loyalists and Iroquois tribes in Canada closer together.
Page 81
Rejected as full partners in the British Empire, the Patriots sought their own "empire of liberty" premised on the majority’s rights to hold private property (including slaves) and to make new property by dispossessing Indians.
Settlers and speculators bought up Indian lands for just a fraction of their actual value. New York State made millions of dollars this way. States’ rights took precedence over a weak federalist government – at that time in Philadelphia. States, like New York, listened to the demands of their male citizens (settlers) who wanted land expansion and voted.
Joseph Brant prospered in Ontario (at that time called Upper Canada), but as the author describes, he, too, had to endure much racial animosity. Samuel Kirkland temporarily abandoned his Calvinist preaching and became a land-grabber at Iroquois expense.
We are told of the supremacist attitude of the white settlers in land acquisition. Sometimes the author goes into minute detail of leases and rents. Liquor was used as a bargaining tool to get Indian land as cheaply as possible – and then alcoholism sadly took hold of many Iroquois people, now deprived of their land and livelihood. They had lost their way of life.
Page 281
Only the continual consumption of Indian land to make private property could sustain the American social order that combined inequality with opportunity.
Page 321 Thomas Jefferson, 1803
We presume that our strength and their [the Indians] weakness is now so visible that they must see we have only to shut our hand to crush them.
Page 183 Good Peter, Oneida chief
It is just so with your People. As long as any Spot of our excellent Land remains, they will covet it, and if one dies, another will pursue it, and will never rest till they possess it.
August 20, 2020
DG has many features of a scholarly book one would like to see. First, it is based on a review of dozens of primary and secondary sources. Thus, there are almost 100 pages of footnotes and a 21 page bibliography.
Second, Taylor describes the complex interactions which went on between the leaders of the Mohawk, Oneida, and Seneca nations of the so called Iroquois Confederacy and the British, a few French, and later American leaders. He covers the time period leading up to and through the Seven Years War, the American Revolution, the American Confederacy, and the early years of the American national government. With very careful attention to detail and a liberal use of quotations he provides a comprehensive and highly nuanced account of the alliances and the struggles which went on between the various parties.
Third, this is accomplished in a highly organized and, in some ways, a reader friendly manner. Chapters are subdivided into sections. As Iroquois cultural norms and expectations are described and contrasted to those of the EuroAmericans at timely points in the narrative one can get a very clear sense of just how different from each other the two were. There are reproductions of paintings of some of the various individuals discussed and maps from the era are provided. Some background information about some of the more important individuals, many of whom are not included in the standard faire about this period, is also provided. Ie, I learned about many men I had never heard of before. And one woman in the epilogue as well.
If anything the thoroughness with which Taylor presents the information gradually becomes a drawback IMHO. Sometimes there is so much detail and so many lengthy quotes that it gets to be slow going. Some careful editing might have helped it to move along more quickly without sacrificing too much information overall. Eg, not all of the quotes are necessary.
One other aspect of the narrative adds to its slowness: Taylor sometimes writes in complex, compound sentences. This kind of prose makes it even more challenging to assimilate what are complicated matters anyway.
Finally, it struck me that the author made no reference to whether or how illnesses like small pox, measles, etc introduced by the Europeans affected the Iroquois. Other books I have read about different NA nations have noted how severely such illnesses impacted their members. I have not read enough about the Iroquois to know about this issue. But I suspect they were also affected by such diseases.
For the two reasons noted above I would rate DG as 4 stars. It is a highly informative study which teaches the reader that the NA nations in that region were anything but passive victims of the EuroAmerican settlers who entered and eventually dominated their world by the late 18th century.
For those who wish to read other books which depict the NA’s as active agents in their dealings with EuroAmericans I suggest the following: An Infinity of Nations by Michael Witgen, The Native Ground by Kathleen DuVal, and/or Facing East from Indian Country by Daniel K Richter. All of them offer thorough and highly textured accounts that give the NA peoples a significant role in how the EuroAmerican colonial project unfolded.
Second, Taylor describes the complex interactions which went on between the leaders of the Mohawk, Oneida, and Seneca nations of the so called Iroquois Confederacy and the British, a few French, and later American leaders. He covers the time period leading up to and through the Seven Years War, the American Revolution, the American Confederacy, and the early years of the American national government. With very careful attention to detail and a liberal use of quotations he provides a comprehensive and highly nuanced account of the alliances and the struggles which went on between the various parties.
Third, this is accomplished in a highly organized and, in some ways, a reader friendly manner. Chapters are subdivided into sections. As Iroquois cultural norms and expectations are described and contrasted to those of the EuroAmericans at timely points in the narrative one can get a very clear sense of just how different from each other the two were. There are reproductions of paintings of some of the various individuals discussed and maps from the era are provided. Some background information about some of the more important individuals, many of whom are not included in the standard faire about this period, is also provided. Ie, I learned about many men I had never heard of before. And one woman in the epilogue as well.
If anything the thoroughness with which Taylor presents the information gradually becomes a drawback IMHO. Sometimes there is so much detail and so many lengthy quotes that it gets to be slow going. Some careful editing might have helped it to move along more quickly without sacrificing too much information overall. Eg, not all of the quotes are necessary.
One other aspect of the narrative adds to its slowness: Taylor sometimes writes in complex, compound sentences. This kind of prose makes it even more challenging to assimilate what are complicated matters anyway.
Finally, it struck me that the author made no reference to whether or how illnesses like small pox, measles, etc introduced by the Europeans affected the Iroquois. Other books I have read about different NA nations have noted how severely such illnesses impacted their members. I have not read enough about the Iroquois to know about this issue. But I suspect they were also affected by such diseases.
For the two reasons noted above I would rate DG as 4 stars. It is a highly informative study which teaches the reader that the NA nations in that region were anything but passive victims of the EuroAmerican settlers who entered and eventually dominated their world by the late 18th century.
For those who wish to read other books which depict the NA’s as active agents in their dealings with EuroAmericans I suggest the following: An Infinity of Nations by Michael Witgen, The Native Ground by Kathleen DuVal, and/or Facing East from Indian Country by Daniel K Richter. All of them offer thorough and highly textured accounts that give the NA peoples a significant role in how the EuroAmerican colonial project unfolded.
August 2, 2019
Though this book ostensibly is about the two major characters depicted on the cover: Joseph Brant (Native bridging two cultures) and Samuel Kirkland (minister, would-be "civilizer") the real story here is an engaging look at the borderland culture and what that entailed in the period leading up to and following the American revolution in the western NY region.
In short, Taylor depicts an interesting location at an interesting period in its history. Native leaders in this formative period are depicted fighting an ultimately losing battle to keep a unique, unconquered state in-between the two states that would eventually solidify around them as New York and Upper Canada.
As Taylor depicts here, and as was common elsewhere, the Native groups were at their most advantaged early, when the French joined the English as potential allies against the colonials. Once the number of pieces on the board were reduced and the borders made more solid, so did their options for maintaining true independence. Not that this was for lack of trying, Taylor also does an effective job illustrating how the Iroquois nations did their best to adapt: by adapting to a more agriculturally-based existence (to some extent) and by finding alternate forms of income through utilization of their land resources by attempting to lease (with little success, as their right to lease and control the land was consistently narrowed or nullified to the benefit of the settlers).
This is the kind of work that, I think, has a style that could be appreciated by casual readers, though a more than passing familiarity with the time period and location would help. Again though, be aware that it isn't so much about the two men on the cover (though they do play prominent roles) but more about the period and place. Also, this is a very male-driven narrative, and though the role of women in a general sense is emphasized repeatedly, the only real major female actor is reserved for the epilogue. This was common for the period in which the text was written, but it is a limitation.
In short, Taylor depicts an interesting location at an interesting period in its history. Native leaders in this formative period are depicted fighting an ultimately losing battle to keep a unique, unconquered state in-between the two states that would eventually solidify around them as New York and Upper Canada.
As Taylor depicts here, and as was common elsewhere, the Native groups were at their most advantaged early, when the French joined the English as potential allies against the colonials. Once the number of pieces on the board were reduced and the borders made more solid, so did their options for maintaining true independence. Not that this was for lack of trying, Taylor also does an effective job illustrating how the Iroquois nations did their best to adapt: by adapting to a more agriculturally-based existence (to some extent) and by finding alternate forms of income through utilization of their land resources by attempting to lease (with little success, as their right to lease and control the land was consistently narrowed or nullified to the benefit of the settlers).
This is the kind of work that, I think, has a style that could be appreciated by casual readers, though a more than passing familiarity with the time period and location would help. Again though, be aware that it isn't so much about the two men on the cover (though they do play prominent roles) but more about the period and place. Also, this is a very male-driven narrative, and though the role of women in a general sense is emphasized repeatedly, the only real major female actor is reserved for the epilogue. This was common for the period in which the text was written, but it is a limitation.
January 20, 2023
This book was hard to get through. Not just because it is long and dense, but also because every dozen or so pages I would be incandescent with rage. Everyone who lives between Albany and Buffalo should have to read this in school. Taylor makes it quite clear that the wealth and power of New York State was built on the exploitation, theft, manipulation, inebriation, and containment of the Haudenosaunee people. "Empire" state indeed.
I do think the jacket copy/design makes too much of the relationship between Samuel Kirkland and Joseph Brant as an organizing concept for the book. This book isn't really about them, but about the way the Six Nations were exploited as as allies during the Revolutionary War, and then turned against each other while settlers and state government officials swindled them out of their land.
I do think the jacket copy/design makes too much of the relationship between Samuel Kirkland and Joseph Brant as an organizing concept for the book. This book isn't really about them, but about the way the Six Nations were exploited as as allies during the Revolutionary War, and then turned against each other while settlers and state government officials swindled them out of their land.
January 27, 2019
This isn't the type of book that most people will enjoy reading. There's a ton of trivia to dig through for just a handful of useful themes but as a history book there isn't really much to complain about. If you're looking for a lot of specific details on Iroquois and settler relations in upstate New York during the 1700's and early 1800's then this is definitely the book for you. For the average person though, a shorter summary would probably be a better option.
May 1, 2024
I read this at the same time as Taylor's American Revolution as part of research for a class. It was fascinating to see so many perspectives and the complexity of this era for the colonists, the British, and especially all the Native American Nations. Taylor is a fantastic writer and blends the narrative with solid research for an engaging read.
January 21, 2022
This had a lot of rich and important information presented but it was a bit of a grind to read. Fascinating and depressing account of how the Native Americans lost their land in NY state during the post-Revolutionary War period.
April 7, 2021
Required reading for a graduate seminar, Historians debate the American Revolution
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews