CULTURAL ASPECTS OF WARFARE: THE IROQUOIS INSTITUSION OF THE MOURNING WAR, continued ...
CANDICE CAMPBEL
The introduction of firearms proved detrimental to both Europeans as well as the Iroquois.
Paired with the introduction of more efficient weapons such as iron, copper, and brass arrow-heads, this new artillery increased the chances of fatalities and led to new developments in Iroquois tactics.
In the 1640s and 1650s, they defeated the Huron and Neutral nations due to their firepower.
Despite the advantages, there were many drawbacks.
According to Richter, firearms were more sluggish than bows and arrows and were slower to reload, their noise lessened the aspect of surprise, and ultimately it made the Indians completely dependent on Europeans for ammunitions, repairs, and replacements.
This use of firearms contradicted traditional warfare customs.
As early as 1643, notes Barr, the French estimated that nearly three hundred Mohawk were in possession of fire arms and a year later the Dutch signed a deal to send “firearms to the Mohawks for a full 400 men, with powder and lead.”
Only temporarily, the Iroquois enjoyed an advantage over other Indian tribes in battle.
Relations between the French and the Iroquois were anything but pleasant in the early seventeenth century.
In 1609 Samuel de Champlain introduced the effects of the firearm by killing three Iroquois chiefs.
By the 1640s the Iroquois were armed by Dutch supplied firearms and were ready to combat the French and her allies.
Attacks against the Huron began later in the 1640s with the intention of disrupting the fur trade.
By 1649 the Huron were driven away and provided an entrance for Iroquois involvement in the fur trade.
Within a decade the Iroquois began attacking the French themselves.
Although two Iroquois tribes (the Oneida and Onondaga) remained friendly with the French these intermittent wars continued.
After a failed peace treaty attempt, the Iroquois continued to invade northern parts of New France along Lake Champlain and the Richelieu River.
In each raid, the Iroquois captured female prisoners who would then be slated for adoption or males slated for execution.
The Mohawks were seen as the most militant of the Iroquois tribes in that their hunting grounds were the most depleted.
In1628, the Mohawks defeated the Mahicans and the Mohawks gained a monopoly in the fur trade with the Dutch at Fort Orange, New Netherland.
The Mohawks would not allow Canadian Indians to trade with the Dutch.
In 1649 during the Beaver Wars, the Iroquois attacked and destroyed the Hurons with recently purchased Dutch guns.
Also, the westernmost Senecas, who were still amply supplied with beaver pelts and obtained peace with the Huron, were disinclined to war.
In dire need of adoptees the Mohawk tribe in 16 March 1649, over 1,000 Seneca and Mohawk Indians raided a Huron town near present-day Toronto capturing prisoners and burning the village to the ground.
As a result, many Huron willingly offered themselves up for adoption and thus aided the Iroquois in replacing the lives lost in battle.
Destruction and warfare continued until tribes in the Ohio Valley were affected.
TO BE CONTINUED ...
IROQUOIS DESTRUCTION OF HURONS
Re: IROQUOIS DESTRUCTION OF HURONS
CULTURAL ASPECTS OF WARFARE: THE IROQUOIS INSTITUSION OF THE MOURNING WAR, continued ...
CANDICE CAMPBEL
The Ottawa, Illinois, Miami, and Potawatomi soon became victims of the Beaver Wars.
In the autumn of 1650, The Iroquois launched an attack against the Neutral Nation who tried to stay unallied in the bitter battle between the Huron and the Iroquois.
The initial attack destroyed a village of about 3000 to 4000 people.
A second attack occurred in the spring of 1651 where a second village was also attacked.
It is likely that the Senecas, the attacking tribe, adopted most if not all the survivors.
A census of the Neutral tribe in 1653 accounted for a mere 800 Indians whereas in the beginning of the seventeenth century there were about 10,000. 30
According to Axelrod, war even broke out among the Eries in1653.
Warfare was provoked by an argument between an Erie and a Seneca that resulted in the death of thirty members of the Erie treaty delegation.
The Erie in return, captured an Onondaga chief.
Following tribal custom, the Eries offered Onondaga to the sister of a member of the slain delegation, expecting adoption as a surrogate for her dead brother.
Instead, she had him executed.
Mourning war still prevailed during Iroquois expansion northward and continued with simultaneous expansion westward.
Such affected tribes include the Algonquian and Lakota tribes.
In the 1660s the French began a counterattack against the Iroquois.
During the counterattack, the Iroquois would soon have to face a new foe — the English.
This entanglement in European affairs caused the Iroquois to sue for peace amid the destruction that plagued them.
This affair led to a mass starvation of Iroquois after a scorched earth policy was instituted by the French.
The English colonists soon prevailed as a new invading force in Iroquoia.
Between 1675 and 1676 war with the English, in what is known as King Philip’s War or Metacom’s War ensued.
This war pitted the English against the Algonquians in the summer of 1675.
Although the Iroquois were not involved, they were however influenced. 31
According to Snow, the governor of New York, Andros,wanted to exert his dominance over New York and New England while simultaneously enlisting the Iroquois to do the same over non-Iroquois tribes. 32
In April of 1677 Governor Andros proposed that the Mohawks and the Mahicans end raids against Indian allies of the English.
This agreement, commonly known as the Covenant Chain, bound the English and the Iroquois and created English dominion over Indian nations subordinate to the Iroquois.
The Covenant Chain, to the English, was a hierarchical system in which they were able to maintain control in New England.
To the Iroquois, however, this chain represented “a flat network of linked arms."
"The links all need each other, but need constant nurturing."
"Gift exchange...maintained the network and prevented it from dissolving into the normal human condition of constant war-fare.”[/b][/color] 33
The Covenant Chain continued until 1753, when disgruntled Mohawks declared that the chain was broken.
Conflicts that arose from the Beaver Wars were hardly triumphant.
Instead, they were part of the vicious cycle of the mourning wars: “economic demands led villagers...into battles with their native neighbors; epidemics produced deadlier mourning wars fought with firearms; the need for guns increased the demand for [beaver] pelts to trade for them; the quest for furs demanded expanded raids.” 34
In each turn of this never-ending spiral new motives were introduced.
The Beaver Wars therefore became an ineffective way to acquire innovative weaponry and captives to replace losses.
Jesuit documents detail the adoptions from the Beaver Wars that estimate that more than two-thirds of the population was adoptees. 35
Father Le Jeune, missionary of the Jesuit Order, believed that “more foreigners than natives of the country resided in Iroquoia.” 36
The influence of the Jesuits also affected the adoptions of captives.
TO BE CONTINUED ...
CANDICE CAMPBEL
The Ottawa, Illinois, Miami, and Potawatomi soon became victims of the Beaver Wars.
In the autumn of 1650, The Iroquois launched an attack against the Neutral Nation who tried to stay unallied in the bitter battle between the Huron and the Iroquois.
The initial attack destroyed a village of about 3000 to 4000 people.
A second attack occurred in the spring of 1651 where a second village was also attacked.
It is likely that the Senecas, the attacking tribe, adopted most if not all the survivors.
A census of the Neutral tribe in 1653 accounted for a mere 800 Indians whereas in the beginning of the seventeenth century there were about 10,000. 30
According to Axelrod, war even broke out among the Eries in1653.
Warfare was provoked by an argument between an Erie and a Seneca that resulted in the death of thirty members of the Erie treaty delegation.
The Erie in return, captured an Onondaga chief.
Following tribal custom, the Eries offered Onondaga to the sister of a member of the slain delegation, expecting adoption as a surrogate for her dead brother.
Instead, she had him executed.
Mourning war still prevailed during Iroquois expansion northward and continued with simultaneous expansion westward.
Such affected tribes include the Algonquian and Lakota tribes.
In the 1660s the French began a counterattack against the Iroquois.
During the counterattack, the Iroquois would soon have to face a new foe — the English.
This entanglement in European affairs caused the Iroquois to sue for peace amid the destruction that plagued them.
This affair led to a mass starvation of Iroquois after a scorched earth policy was instituted by the French.
The English colonists soon prevailed as a new invading force in Iroquoia.
Between 1675 and 1676 war with the English, in what is known as King Philip’s War or Metacom’s War ensued.
This war pitted the English against the Algonquians in the summer of 1675.
Although the Iroquois were not involved, they were however influenced. 31
According to Snow, the governor of New York, Andros,wanted to exert his dominance over New York and New England while simultaneously enlisting the Iroquois to do the same over non-Iroquois tribes. 32
In April of 1677 Governor Andros proposed that the Mohawks and the Mahicans end raids against Indian allies of the English.
This agreement, commonly known as the Covenant Chain, bound the English and the Iroquois and created English dominion over Indian nations subordinate to the Iroquois.
The Covenant Chain, to the English, was a hierarchical system in which they were able to maintain control in New England.
To the Iroquois, however, this chain represented “a flat network of linked arms."
"The links all need each other, but need constant nurturing."
"Gift exchange...maintained the network and prevented it from dissolving into the normal human condition of constant war-fare.”[/b][/color] 33
The Covenant Chain continued until 1753, when disgruntled Mohawks declared that the chain was broken.
Conflicts that arose from the Beaver Wars were hardly triumphant.
Instead, they were part of the vicious cycle of the mourning wars: “economic demands led villagers...into battles with their native neighbors; epidemics produced deadlier mourning wars fought with firearms; the need for guns increased the demand for [beaver] pelts to trade for them; the quest for furs demanded expanded raids.” 34
In each turn of this never-ending spiral new motives were introduced.
The Beaver Wars therefore became an ineffective way to acquire innovative weaponry and captives to replace losses.
Jesuit documents detail the adoptions from the Beaver Wars that estimate that more than two-thirds of the population was adoptees. 35
Father Le Jeune, missionary of the Jesuit Order, believed that “more foreigners than natives of the country resided in Iroquoia.” 36
The influence of the Jesuits also affected the adoptions of captives.
TO BE CONTINUED ...
Re: IROQUOIS DESTRUCTION OF HURONS
CULTURAL ASPECTS OF WARFARE: THE IROQUOIS INSTITUSION OF THE MOURNING WAR, continued ...
CANDICE CAMPBEL
The conversion of Native Americans to Catholicism disintegrated the adoptions in that “beginning in the late 1660s, missionaries encouraged increasing numbers of Catholic Iroquois - particularly Mohawks and Oneidas - to desert their homes for the mission villages of Canada; by the mid-1670s well over two hundred had departed...."
"Many-perhaps most- were recently adopted Huron and other prisoners, an indication that the Iroquois were unable to assimilate effectively the mass of new-comers their mid-century wars had brought them.” 37
These problems were broadened in 1670 when the mourning war began to crumble.
In the late 1670s the mourning war initiative began to disintegrate in that it failed to stabilize population levels.
The Mohawk, for example, the number of warriors declined from seven hundred or eight hundred in the 1640s to approximately 300 in the late 1670s. 38
Simply, even with the institution of adoption, the Mohawk population did not achieve stabilization.
The mourning war, in its original purpose and function, was no longer serving as a tribal power supply.
Despite the weakening of the mourning war, it still maintained some important factors: a steady supply of furs, frequent campaigns that displayed the heroism of the warriors, and the security of captives for adoption.
The functional aspect of mourning war would soon become even more dysfunctional with the Anglo-French struggle for control of the North American continent.
Towards the end of the Beaver Wars (1680s) North America and Britain was enthralled in the War of the League of Augsburg (King William’s War 1689–1697).
Simultaneously the French, English and the Iroquois are campaigning for lands 39 in the west.
Unfortunately, the Iroquois would soon be trapped in Anglo-French aspirations.
Until King William’s War the main foe for the Iroquois was the French.
The English, beginning in 1674, used the Iroquois as a tool to devastate neighboring Native American tribes.
Sir Edmund Andros, the governor of New Netherland, sought to encourage the Iroquois to fight along the British and their allies in King Philip’s War (1675-1676).
By the beginning of the eighteenth century, Iroquois warfare and culture had drastically changed.
Until 1675 the intention of mourning war still served its original purposes - their benefits out-weighed the costs.
Afterwards, the Anglo-French expansionist initiatives ended in disaster for the Iroquois.
The mounting conflict in the west cut off supplies to the Iroquois and created economic hardships.
Physically, they suffered far more devastating effects of the Europeans in that “all of the Iroquois except for the Cayuga had seen their villages and crops destroyed by invading armies, and all five nations were greatly weakened by loss of members to captivity, to death in combat, or to famine and disease.” 40
The function of the mourning war was therefore ineffective symbolically or physically.
The heavy death toll robbed the tribes of head-men as well as warriors who were the backbone of the clan.
Hope for the Iroquois lay only in peace - a peace that would end all wars and devastation.
4 August 1701 the Grand Settlement or Great Peace of Montreal was negotiated between the Iroquois Confederacy and New France.
This treaty ended over one hundred years of warfare between the Iroquois, Hurons, Algonquians, English, and the French.
TO BE CONTINUED ...
CANDICE CAMPBEL
The conversion of Native Americans to Catholicism disintegrated the adoptions in that “beginning in the late 1660s, missionaries encouraged increasing numbers of Catholic Iroquois - particularly Mohawks and Oneidas - to desert their homes for the mission villages of Canada; by the mid-1670s well over two hundred had departed...."
"Many-perhaps most- were recently adopted Huron and other prisoners, an indication that the Iroquois were unable to assimilate effectively the mass of new-comers their mid-century wars had brought them.” 37
These problems were broadened in 1670 when the mourning war began to crumble.
In the late 1670s the mourning war initiative began to disintegrate in that it failed to stabilize population levels.
The Mohawk, for example, the number of warriors declined from seven hundred or eight hundred in the 1640s to approximately 300 in the late 1670s. 38
Simply, even with the institution of adoption, the Mohawk population did not achieve stabilization.
The mourning war, in its original purpose and function, was no longer serving as a tribal power supply.
Despite the weakening of the mourning war, it still maintained some important factors: a steady supply of furs, frequent campaigns that displayed the heroism of the warriors, and the security of captives for adoption.
The functional aspect of mourning war would soon become even more dysfunctional with the Anglo-French struggle for control of the North American continent.
Towards the end of the Beaver Wars (1680s) North America and Britain was enthralled in the War of the League of Augsburg (King William’s War 1689–1697).
Simultaneously the French, English and the Iroquois are campaigning for lands 39 in the west.
Unfortunately, the Iroquois would soon be trapped in Anglo-French aspirations.
Until King William’s War the main foe for the Iroquois was the French.
The English, beginning in 1674, used the Iroquois as a tool to devastate neighboring Native American tribes.
Sir Edmund Andros, the governor of New Netherland, sought to encourage the Iroquois to fight along the British and their allies in King Philip’s War (1675-1676).
By the beginning of the eighteenth century, Iroquois warfare and culture had drastically changed.
Until 1675 the intention of mourning war still served its original purposes - their benefits out-weighed the costs.
Afterwards, the Anglo-French expansionist initiatives ended in disaster for the Iroquois.
The mounting conflict in the west cut off supplies to the Iroquois and created economic hardships.
Physically, they suffered far more devastating effects of the Europeans in that “all of the Iroquois except for the Cayuga had seen their villages and crops destroyed by invading armies, and all five nations were greatly weakened by loss of members to captivity, to death in combat, or to famine and disease.” 40
The function of the mourning war was therefore ineffective symbolically or physically.
The heavy death toll robbed the tribes of head-men as well as warriors who were the backbone of the clan.
Hope for the Iroquois lay only in peace - a peace that would end all wars and devastation.
4 August 1701 the Grand Settlement or Great Peace of Montreal was negotiated between the Iroquois Confederacy and New France.
This treaty ended over one hundred years of warfare between the Iroquois, Hurons, Algonquians, English, and the French.
TO BE CONTINUED ...
Re: IROQUOIS DESTRUCTION OF HURONS
CULTURAL ASPECTS OF WARFARE: THE IROQUOIS INSTITUSION OF THE MOURNING WAR, concluded ...
CANDICE CAMPBEL
REFERENCE
Gallay, Alan, ed. “Iroquois Wars 1641-1701.” Colonial Wars of North America 1512-1763. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1996. 317-319.
Kessel, William B. and Wooster, Robert, eds. “Beaver Wars: Iroquoian Beaver Wars.” Encyclopedia of Native American Wars and Warfare. New York: Book Builder, LLC. 2005. 37-38.
PRIMARY
De Champlain, Samuel. Original Narratives of Early American History: Voyages of Samuel de Champlain 1601-1618. Edited by W.L. Grant, M.A. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons,1907.
Parkman, Francis. Historic Handbook of the Northern Tour: Lakes George and Champlain; Niagara; Montreal; Quebec. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1885.
The Jesuits in North America in the Seventeenth Century. France and England in North America. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1900.
Schiavo, Claudio R. Salvucci and Anthony P. Iroquois Wars 1: Extracts from the Jesuit Relations and Primary Sources from 1535 to 1650. Bristol: Evolution Publishing, 2003.
Sylvester, Herbert Milton. Indian Wars of New England, vol. 2. New York: Arno Press, 1979.
SECONDARY
Axelrod, Alen. Chronicle of the Indian Wars From Colonial Times to Wounded Knee. New York: Prentice Hall General Reference, 1993.
Brandao, Jose A. “Your Fyre Shall Burn no More”: Iroquois Policy toward New France and its Native Allies to 1701. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1997
Barr, D.P. Unconquered the Iroquois League at War in Colonial America.
Westport: Praeger, 2006. Cultural Aspects of Warfare: The Iroquois Institution of the Mourning War
Haan, Richard L. “Covenant and Consensus: Iroquois and English, 1676-1760.”
Beyond the Covenant Chain: The Iroquois and Their Neighbors in Indian North America, 1600-1800. Eds. Daniel K. Richter and James H. Merrell. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press,1987.
Holm, Tom. “American Indian Warfare: The Cycles of Conflict and the Militarization of Native North America.” A Companion to American Indian History Edited by Philip J. Deloria and Neal Salisbury. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2002.
Hunt, G. The Wars of the Iroquois: A Study in Intertribal Trade Relations. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press,1940.
Marrin, Albert. Struggle for Continent: The French and Indian Wars 1690-1760. New York: Atheneum, 1987.
Oberg, Michael L. Dominion and Civility: English Imperialism and Native America, 1585-1685. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999.
Snow, Dean R. The Peoples of America: The Iroquois. Malden: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 1996.
Snyderman, George Simon. “Behind the Tree of Peace: A Sociological Analysis of Iroquois Warfare.” Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, 1948.
Washburn, Robert M. Utley and Wilcomb E. The American Heritage History of the Indian Wars. New York: Barnes and Noble Books. Inc, 1977.
JOURNAL
Abler, Thomas S. “Iroquois Cannibalism: Fact not Fiction.” Ethnology 27, no. 4 (Autumn, 1980): 309-316.
Blick, Jeffrey P. “The Iroquois Practice of Genocidal Warfare (1534-1787).”
Journal of Genocide Research3, vol. 3 (2001): 405-429.
Keener, Craig S. “An Ethnohistorical Analysis of Iroquois Assault Tactics Used Against Settlements of the Northeast in the Seventeenth Century.” Ethnohistory 46,no. 4 (1999): 777-807.
Otterbein, Keith F. “Why the Iroquois Won: An Analysis of Iroquois Military Tactics.” Ethnohistory 11, no. 1 (Winter 1964): 56-63.
Richter, Daniel K. “War and Culture: The Iroquois Experience.” The William and Mary Quarterly 40, no. 4 (October 1983): 528-559.
BIBLIOGRAPHY REFERENCE
Dupuy, Ernest R. and Trevor N. The Harper Encyclopedia of Military History. New York, New York: Harper Collins Books, 1993.
Eggenberger, David. An Encyclopedia of Battles. New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1985.
Gallay, Alan, ed. “Iroquois Wars 1641-1701.” Colonial Wars of North America 1512-1763. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1996. 317-319. Holmes, Richard, ed.
The Oxford Companion to Military History. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Kessel, William B. and Wooster, Robert, eds. “Beaver Wars: Iroquoian Beaver Wars.” Encyclopedia of Native American Wars and Warfare. New York: Book Builder, LLC. 2005. 37-38.
https://www.lagrange.edu/resources/pdf/ ... ARFARE.pdf
CANDICE CAMPBEL
REFERENCE
Gallay, Alan, ed. “Iroquois Wars 1641-1701.” Colonial Wars of North America 1512-1763. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1996. 317-319.
Kessel, William B. and Wooster, Robert, eds. “Beaver Wars: Iroquoian Beaver Wars.” Encyclopedia of Native American Wars and Warfare. New York: Book Builder, LLC. 2005. 37-38.
PRIMARY
De Champlain, Samuel. Original Narratives of Early American History: Voyages of Samuel de Champlain 1601-1618. Edited by W.L. Grant, M.A. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons,1907.
Parkman, Francis. Historic Handbook of the Northern Tour: Lakes George and Champlain; Niagara; Montreal; Quebec. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1885.
The Jesuits in North America in the Seventeenth Century. France and England in North America. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1900.
Schiavo, Claudio R. Salvucci and Anthony P. Iroquois Wars 1: Extracts from the Jesuit Relations and Primary Sources from 1535 to 1650. Bristol: Evolution Publishing, 2003.
Sylvester, Herbert Milton. Indian Wars of New England, vol. 2. New York: Arno Press, 1979.
SECONDARY
Axelrod, Alen. Chronicle of the Indian Wars From Colonial Times to Wounded Knee. New York: Prentice Hall General Reference, 1993.
Brandao, Jose A. “Your Fyre Shall Burn no More”: Iroquois Policy toward New France and its Native Allies to 1701. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1997
Barr, D.P. Unconquered the Iroquois League at War in Colonial America.
Westport: Praeger, 2006. Cultural Aspects of Warfare: The Iroquois Institution of the Mourning War
Haan, Richard L. “Covenant and Consensus: Iroquois and English, 1676-1760.”
Beyond the Covenant Chain: The Iroquois and Their Neighbors in Indian North America, 1600-1800. Eds. Daniel K. Richter and James H. Merrell. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press,1987.
Holm, Tom. “American Indian Warfare: The Cycles of Conflict and the Militarization of Native North America.” A Companion to American Indian History Edited by Philip J. Deloria and Neal Salisbury. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2002.
Hunt, G. The Wars of the Iroquois: A Study in Intertribal Trade Relations. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press,1940.
Marrin, Albert. Struggle for Continent: The French and Indian Wars 1690-1760. New York: Atheneum, 1987.
Oberg, Michael L. Dominion and Civility: English Imperialism and Native America, 1585-1685. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999.
Snow, Dean R. The Peoples of America: The Iroquois. Malden: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 1996.
Snyderman, George Simon. “Behind the Tree of Peace: A Sociological Analysis of Iroquois Warfare.” Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, 1948.
Washburn, Robert M. Utley and Wilcomb E. The American Heritage History of the Indian Wars. New York: Barnes and Noble Books. Inc, 1977.
JOURNAL
Abler, Thomas S. “Iroquois Cannibalism: Fact not Fiction.” Ethnology 27, no. 4 (Autumn, 1980): 309-316.
Blick, Jeffrey P. “The Iroquois Practice of Genocidal Warfare (1534-1787).”
Journal of Genocide Research3, vol. 3 (2001): 405-429.
Keener, Craig S. “An Ethnohistorical Analysis of Iroquois Assault Tactics Used Against Settlements of the Northeast in the Seventeenth Century.” Ethnohistory 46,no. 4 (1999): 777-807.
Otterbein, Keith F. “Why the Iroquois Won: An Analysis of Iroquois Military Tactics.” Ethnohistory 11, no. 1 (Winter 1964): 56-63.
Richter, Daniel K. “War and Culture: The Iroquois Experience.” The William and Mary Quarterly 40, no. 4 (October 1983): 528-559.
BIBLIOGRAPHY REFERENCE
Dupuy, Ernest R. and Trevor N. The Harper Encyclopedia of Military History. New York, New York: Harper Collins Books, 1993.
Eggenberger, David. An Encyclopedia of Battles. New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1985.
Gallay, Alan, ed. “Iroquois Wars 1641-1701.” Colonial Wars of North America 1512-1763. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1996. 317-319. Holmes, Richard, ed.
The Oxford Companion to Military History. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Kessel, William B. and Wooster, Robert, eds. “Beaver Wars: Iroquoian Beaver Wars.” Encyclopedia of Native American Wars and Warfare. New York: Book Builder, LLC. 2005. 37-38.
https://www.lagrange.edu/resources/pdf/ ... ARFARE.pdf