The Name of War

Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 1998

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Download PDF

Summary

Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Introduction-Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4-Epilogue

Key Figures

Themes

Index of Terms

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Tools

Beta

Discussion Questions

Themes

The Effect of Bias on War

When a people feel superior to a neighboring population, they treat the others with disdain and are likely, if the opportunity presents itself, to take advantage of them. If conflicts erupt between two such groups, either side or both will regard the other’s concerns as venal or moronic and unworthy of consideration.

In these situations, both sides feel frustrated, and war becomes more likely. When war breaks out, each group regards the other as the instigator, either by forcing the issue or by an outright attack. The two sides also see each other as bad, wrong, and inferior, and thus not entitled to fair or respectful treatment, especially in war.

The English colonists’ disrespect and distaste for their Algonquian neighbors leads to the settlers’ becoming unfair in dealings with them. This exacerbates problems between the groups until the Indians, who are outnumbered, feel their culture in peril, and have had much of their land taken already, strike back. The English, convinced that they are the superior party and have done no wrong, are aghast at the vehemence of the Indian attacks. Blaming their opponent, the settlers break their own rules of warfare to answer the Indian attacks with equally savage reprisals.

Much of the disaster that ensues might have been avoided had each side, but especially the English, simply treated the other with the respect of equals. Sadly, this is not possible under the English belief system, which respects only English values and deplores those of indigenous groups.

How Words Change History

Winners write the histories, and, in the case of King Philip’s war, that history in print has only one source, the English version of events. It is that version that survives to the present day and blames the Indians for the problem, excuses colonial excesses, and validates English dominance over indigenous people.

Native Algonquians, a non-literate civilization, have no tradition of thinking in historical terms; even those who learn to read and write English have little incentive to generate written narratives about the conflict. Thus, the colonists have the verbal field of battle to themselves.

Despite the many volumes of written justifications, American descendants develop a nagging sense of guilt about King Philip and the decimation of his people and their civilization. Thus, when the play Metamora premieres in 1829, lead actor Edwin Forrest’s compelling portrayal of doomed leader Philip strikes a chord in the American psyche, and people begin to romanticize Philip and Indians in general. The play and related written works encourage a backlash by Indian groups against the majority viewpoint; over the next two centuries, Native peoples gradually build up support for a campaign to recover their cultures and at least part of their homelands.

How Identity is Shaped by Belief

Algonquians in New England during the 1600s suffer from imported diseases and population pressure from newly arriving English immigrants. These settlers convince many Indians that their religion and culture are inferior and that they should accept English ways and beliefs. The policy laid out by the Department of the Interior to take as many Native children as possible into white boarding schools meant to indoctrinate them into white culture makes this process explicit. Even when Natives give up their traditions to try to assimilate, however, they are still regarded as inferior by the English.

The whitewashing is as devastating to the Natives as are the diseases and war losses. Overwhelmed and defeated by the Europeans, surviving Algonquians—and, in later centuries, other Native American groups—attempt to adopt European ways instead of remaining marginalized and oppressed. However, those who are literate read that they are inferior and are consistently objectified and mistreated due to American ignorance; those who venture into town find themselves belittled and mistreated by settlers.

In recent decades, Native groups have been revitalizing a sense of pride in their culture and history and have made strides in recovering some of their lands and ways of life. Money has begun to flow into reservations from tourism, gambling, and mining rights. Natives have begun to enter the national conversation as uniquely worthy contributors to their own well-being and, more generally, to America at large.