What do you think?
Rate this book
Massacre of the Conestogas: On the Trail of the Paxton Boys in Lancaster County
A blow-by-blow account of the Conestoga Indians massacre, the aftermath and how the perpetrators got away with it. On two chilly December days in 1763, bands of armed men raged through camps of peaceful Conestoga Indians and killed 20 women, children and men to effectively wipe out the tribe. These murderous rampages by Lancaster County's Paxton Boys were the culminating tragedies in a series of traded atrocities between European settlers and native tribes. Lancaster journalist Jack Brubaker allows the bloody trail left by the killers through the Pennsylvania countryside.
192 pages, Paperback
First published November 26, 2010
15 people are currently reading
38 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
April 28, 2024
The general structure and flow of this book is very good, as well as the thorough coverage of what is known (including much modern research, and the now-accepted debunking of various 19th C. falsities). While the bibliography is comprehensive, however, I would have appreciated more specific footnote citations to many of the statements and facts presented. While they may not be needed for a casual reader, they would elevate the usefulness of this book for some historians (professional or amateur).
That said, I find certain authorial voice and opinions presented a little too strongly at times, and sometimes neglecting a historical perspective. The need to name names (especially when the actual perpetrators remain frustratingly anonymous) and apportion blame leads many, including Brubaker here, to imply if not outright state that the magistrates, et al., were guilty of malfeasance and are culpable. Misfeasance, certainly, but without travelling down the road of conspiracy theories which is paved by the perverse modern trend to see one in every event, it is much more likely that the officials were simply lazy, incompetent, uncaring, and in any event probably lacked the capability to do much about it in any event. President Bush ignored warnings of an impending terrorist attack, and was reading children's books to student when 9/11 occurred, but that doesn't make him guilty of of conspiring with, or aiding and abetting the attackers, and he then used the events to invade a different country. Similarly, Shippen's failures and the fact that he happened to be at a church service when the attack occurred do not necessarily equate to conspiracy or culpability, though they nevertheless can be deemed misfeasance.
More importantly, it is easy to forget that in 1763 there were no local police forces to keep the peace in a town, let alone the FBI, and it is doubtful the compulsory militia would have been available to provide constant security. The only regularly trained and experience forces were soldiers of the Crown, and they didn't answer to local magistrates (even if the magistrates had tried to rouse them, which at best is unknown, and at worst doubtful here). Were individual townspeople going to patrol the streets 24/7 on the chance that something might happen some day? During Christmas week in cold weather? Not likely. Were individual townspeople going to rush out into the streets and confront 50+ armed men on horseback? Not likely. Were Hay and Slough, each probably unarmed, somehow going to give up their own lives in a fruitless attempt to stop the 50+ armed men? Not likely. None of that implies that all or any of those people were conspiring with the men who actually committed the massacre, even if they did turn a blind eye to events.
I also feel Brubaker falls a bit into the same trap as so many others who have written about this, focusing on this one instance of massacre, and its publicity, as if it was a major escalation or turning point in relations, when in fact it was neither the beginning nor end of continuous back and forth series of atrocities. I have a couple theories on why people focus on it in that manner, but there is no need to go into them here. But all one need do is review the past 80 years of Israel/Palestine confrontations, including the most recent heinous events, for an instructive comparison in never-ending, self-perpetuating, hatred and violence, where no single event is necessarily more instructive than another, and certainly cannot be understood outside the context of the generations-long conflict.
As to the subject matter - yes, absolutely it remains disheartening that so few know about this history which occurred in their own back yard.
That said, I find certain authorial voice and opinions presented a little too strongly at times, and sometimes neglecting a historical perspective. The need to name names (especially when the actual perpetrators remain frustratingly anonymous) and apportion blame leads many, including Brubaker here, to imply if not outright state that the magistrates, et al., were guilty of malfeasance and are culpable. Misfeasance, certainly, but without travelling down the road of conspiracy theories which is paved by the perverse modern trend to see one in every event, it is much more likely that the officials were simply lazy, incompetent, uncaring, and in any event probably lacked the capability to do much about it in any event. President Bush ignored warnings of an impending terrorist attack, and was reading children's books to student when 9/11 occurred, but that doesn't make him guilty of of conspiring with, or aiding and abetting the attackers, and he then used the events to invade a different country. Similarly, Shippen's failures and the fact that he happened to be at a church service when the attack occurred do not necessarily equate to conspiracy or culpability, though they nevertheless can be deemed misfeasance.
More importantly, it is easy to forget that in 1763 there were no local police forces to keep the peace in a town, let alone the FBI, and it is doubtful the compulsory militia would have been available to provide constant security. The only regularly trained and experience forces were soldiers of the Crown, and they didn't answer to local magistrates (even if the magistrates had tried to rouse them, which at best is unknown, and at worst doubtful here). Were individual townspeople going to patrol the streets 24/7 on the chance that something might happen some day? During Christmas week in cold weather? Not likely. Were individual townspeople going to rush out into the streets and confront 50+ armed men on horseback? Not likely. Were Hay and Slough, each probably unarmed, somehow going to give up their own lives in a fruitless attempt to stop the 50+ armed men? Not likely. None of that implies that all or any of those people were conspiring with the men who actually committed the massacre, even if they did turn a blind eye to events.
I also feel Brubaker falls a bit into the same trap as so many others who have written about this, focusing on this one instance of massacre, and its publicity, as if it was a major escalation or turning point in relations, when in fact it was neither the beginning nor end of continuous back and forth series of atrocities. I have a couple theories on why people focus on it in that manner, but there is no need to go into them here. But all one need do is review the past 80 years of Israel/Palestine confrontations, including the most recent heinous events, for an instructive comparison in never-ending, self-perpetuating, hatred and violence, where no single event is necessarily more instructive than another, and certainly cannot be understood outside the context of the generations-long conflict.
As to the subject matter - yes, absolutely it remains disheartening that so few know about this history which occurred in their own back yard.
May 30, 2023
A good forensic analysis of a notorious atrocity that, despite its distance, ever seems blood-fresh in the American conscience. It first served as a prototype of the American frontier, with academic lines drawn between sympathizers for settlers or Indians. Its ghost hovered over subsequent lynching history and atrocities like My Lai in stark symmetry.
Brubaker examines both incidents, at the village and town workhouse, delving into the perpetrators and abettors within Pennsylvania and the Indians' few advocates. Benjamin Franklin - otherwise highly critical of white immigrants like Germans and Scotch-Irish - was the most famous of Paxton Boy critics, sounding much like the 1960s "anti-war liberal."
This raises the subtext of the massacres: not just as lesson to the Indians, but to the liberal elites (mostly Quaker "pacifists") who protected them; an indirect civil war that almost morphed into a real one with threatened marches on Philadelphia. It also helped stoke anti-British feeling: the Proclamation Line of 1763 was a direct response to Pontiac's War responsible for so many white deaths on the frontier.
Perhaps the most salient question is, were the Conestogas actually as "friendly" as they claimed? Were "hostiles" abusing Quaker liberality, using the Conestoga camps as R&R stops and gathering intelligence? That can never be known, but one must put one's self in Conestoga moccasins to hint at an answer: to survive as a neutral means an open wigwam to all who pass, always seen as a hostile act to those demanding alignment. To welcome fellow Indians may have been necessary hospitality, or "Indian trickery," and the Paxton Boys resolved to take neither chances nor prisoners.
Brubaker follows the story/bloodlines through its historiography and remembrance to the present day. Although "celebrations" and "reconciliations" make good theater, the dark legacy does not go away. The "Paxton riots" will always be the go-to metaphor as an American foundation stone as solid as Plymouth Rock.
Brubaker examines both incidents, at the village and town workhouse, delving into the perpetrators and abettors within Pennsylvania and the Indians' few advocates. Benjamin Franklin - otherwise highly critical of white immigrants like Germans and Scotch-Irish - was the most famous of Paxton Boy critics, sounding much like the 1960s "anti-war liberal."
This raises the subtext of the massacres: not just as lesson to the Indians, but to the liberal elites (mostly Quaker "pacifists") who protected them; an indirect civil war that almost morphed into a real one with threatened marches on Philadelphia. It also helped stoke anti-British feeling: the Proclamation Line of 1763 was a direct response to Pontiac's War responsible for so many white deaths on the frontier.
Perhaps the most salient question is, were the Conestogas actually as "friendly" as they claimed? Were "hostiles" abusing Quaker liberality, using the Conestoga camps as R&R stops and gathering intelligence? That can never be known, but one must put one's self in Conestoga moccasins to hint at an answer: to survive as a neutral means an open wigwam to all who pass, always seen as a hostile act to those demanding alignment. To welcome fellow Indians may have been necessary hospitality, or "Indian trickery," and the Paxton Boys resolved to take neither chances nor prisoners.
Brubaker follows the story/bloodlines through its historiography and remembrance to the present day. Although "celebrations" and "reconciliations" make good theater, the dark legacy does not go away. The "Paxton riots" will always be the go-to metaphor as an American foundation stone as solid as Plymouth Rock.
June 12, 2019
This is a very well researched book on the subject of the Massacres of the Conestoga Indians. The book is easy to read and to follow. A compelling case is made for the identity of the main players in this massacre which essentially eliminated the Conestoga tribe.
There is no proof of who was in the Paxton gang, the lack of anyone being identified makes an interesting statement on the settlers opinion of the Indians and the complicity of the government at the time. The local church clergy and congregations felt the need to defend the frontier settlers, their families, to the extreme of riding into Lancaster and killing all the Conestoga's they could find living among the whites.
Having grown up in the area it was interesting to see how eastward the frontier edge was at the time, my house was about 4 miles from Paxton Church however we never learned of this history in school, nor that the state government offered a bounty for scalps.
Over all I found the book very interesting and a good attempt to keep track of history that has not been documented in detail but the over all story of the Paxton Boys remains on every historians thoughts. This book should be read.
There is no proof of who was in the Paxton gang, the lack of anyone being identified makes an interesting statement on the settlers opinion of the Indians and the complicity of the government at the time. The local church clergy and congregations felt the need to defend the frontier settlers, their families, to the extreme of riding into Lancaster and killing all the Conestoga's they could find living among the whites.
Having grown up in the area it was interesting to see how eastward the frontier edge was at the time, my house was about 4 miles from Paxton Church however we never learned of this history in school, nor that the state government offered a bounty for scalps.
Over all I found the book very interesting and a good attempt to keep track of history that has not been documented in detail but the over all story of the Paxton Boys remains on every historians thoughts. This book should be read.
December 31, 2019
A great read about our own little genocide here in Lancaster County. In the wake of the French and Indian war, December of 1763, the Paxton Boys, a group of Scottish Presbyterians that Ben Franklin would later describe as "white Christian savages", rode down from Paxton and Donegal on two separate occasions to wipe out the peaceful Conestoga Indians. The author describes the historical context of the massacre and tries to finger the most responsible parties.
Great book; would recommend.
Great book; would recommend.
March 29, 2020
I've lived my whole life in Lancaster and never heard of this part of our history until I stumbled upon a plaque on the backside of the Fulton a few years ago. This book is incredibly well researched, but in some spots it seems the author's words are just filler to get to the next quote from another book or pamphlet. It was definitely interesting to learn a little more about the storied history of this City/County.
October 6, 2025
i need everyone in my home county to read this fr …
July 25, 2019
Well-researched examination of the dark blot on Lancaster history and on Pennsylvania history. The massacre of the Conestoga ultimately lead to the complete collapse of any treaty negotiations or any pretense of the state to respect existing treaties. An entire tribe was effectively eliminated with not a single perpetrator ever being brought to justice. Brubaker completely examines the historical records, including some that were purposefully faked in order to justify the massacre and exonerate the Paxton boys, and identifies those who most certainly were guilty, if not in carrying out the actual murders, in instigating them and protecting those who did. Local persons of interest include Thomas Barton, Edward Shippen, Matthias Slough, John Harris, John Elder, and Susanna Wright. Even Benjamin Franklin found himself entangled in the debate that followed this act. In addition to the historical investigation, Brubaker follows through with recent reconciliation acts that have taken place and notes places of interest that can still be found in present day Lancaster city and county.
I find it ironic that after noting that one of the most famous illustrations depicting the violent massacre is anachronistic and incorrect, it was nevertheless used on the cover of the book. I think it is regretful to have included Barry Kent's comment that "oral traditions are... largely fabrications" in reference to claims by some individuals that they are descendants of the Conestogas. Oral tradition in cultures where that is the primary means of remembrance are often just as accurate as written history (I think Alex Haley proved that long ago) and written history is no guarantee of accuracy as noted with Redmond Conyngham's faked documents that over time became accepted as truth.
I find it ironic that after noting that one of the most famous illustrations depicting the violent massacre is anachronistic and incorrect, it was nevertheless used on the cover of the book. I think it is regretful to have included Barry Kent's comment that "oral traditions are... largely fabrications" in reference to claims by some individuals that they are descendants of the Conestogas. Oral tradition in cultures where that is the primary means of remembrance are often just as accurate as written history (I think Alex Haley proved that long ago) and written history is no guarantee of accuracy as noted with Redmond Conyngham's faked documents that over time became accepted as truth.
April 18, 2014
A most interesting story of what really happened - to the best that anyone can know, and the cover up of the guilty parties, who remain a mystery to this day, as well as the fabrications published regarding this atrocity. It is appalling to know what happened, and that it was allowed to happen, and that those in high level positions at the time turned a blind eye so that none of the perpetrators were ever identified or brought to justice. Some of the reading is a bit slow, in the quotes from various publications of the time, but the book is extremely well researched. Definitely of interest to history buffs, and to anyone who has ever lived in or visited this area.
January 9, 2020
On two chilly December days in 1763, bands of armed men raged through camps of peaceful Conestoga Indians. They killed twenty women, children and men, effectively wiping out the tribe. These murderous rampages by Lancaster County's Paxton Boys were the culminating tragedies in a series of traded atrocities between European settlers and native tribes. Lancaster journalist Jack Brubaker gives a blow-by-blow account of the massacres, examines their aftermath and investigates how the Paxton Boys got away with murder. Join Brubaker as he follows the bloody trail left by the killers through the Pennsylvania countryside.
March 25, 2013
Excellent overview of the Conestoga Indian massacre by the Paxton Boys and discussion on the revisionist analysis of this event that has occurred over the years.
November 2, 2015
Very interesting - very well researched.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews