Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The Leatherstocking tales and Indian removal : a study of James Fenimore Cooper’s Leatherstocking tales… Manly, James Douglas 1976

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1976_A8 M35.pdf [ 8.56MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093795.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093795-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093795-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093795-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093795-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093795-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093795-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093795-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093795.ris

Full Text

THE LEATHERSTOCKING TALES AND INDIAN REMOVAL: A STUDY OF JAMES FENIMORE COOPER'S LEATHERSTOCKING TALES IN THE LIGHT OF UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARDS THE AMERICAN INDIAN by JAMES DOUGLAS MANLY B.A., U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1954 B.D., Union College of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1967 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department of English We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l , 1976 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of English The University of Brit ish Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 D a t e A p r i l 1 7 , 1976 ABSTRACT Because of h i s p o r t r a y a l of noble and h e r o i c Indians i n the L e a t h e r s t o c k i n g T a l e s , James Fenimore Cooper has o f t e n been regarded as a w r i t e r very sympath-e t i c t o the I n d i a n people i n t h e i r s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t d i s p o s s e s s i o n by white s o c i e t y . Because they i n c l u d e many statements which support concepts of a b o r i g i n a l land r i g h t s f o r the In d i a n s , the L e a t h e r s t o c k i n g Tales appear to support t h i s understanding of Cooper. However du r i n g the time i n which Cooper wrote and p u b l i s h e d the f i v e L e a t h e r s t o c k i n g T a l e s , Pioneers (1823), L a s t of the Mohicans (1826), P r a i r i e (1827), P a t h f i n d e r (1840), and Deerslayer (1841), the Uni t e d States debated and adopted a p o l i c y of I n d i a n removal. As a r e s u l t of t h i s p o l i c y , most Indian peoples l i v i n g east of the M i s s i s s i p p i were removed t o u n f a m i l i a r lands west of the M i s s i s s i p p i . While some Indians agreed to t h i s p o l i c y , o t h e r s , most no t a b l y the Cherokee, objected and t r i e d to maintain themselves as a people on t h e i r t r a d i t i o n a l l a nds. A t r e a t y , endorsed by an u n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e m i n o r i t y of the Cherokee people, ceded these lands and the Cherokee were e x p e l l e d from t h e i r homeland; some four thousand Cherokee people d i e d on t h i s " T r a i l of Tears" to t h e i r new home. Although Cooper was p o l i t i c a l l y a c t i v e and aware, he d i d not p r o t e s t the a c t i o n s of the government. In Notions of the Americans (1828), a f i c t i o n a l t r a v e l n a r r a t i v e , the presumed author, who, i n many r e s p e c t s , can be i d e n t i f i e d w i t h Cooper, speaks of removal as a "gr e a t , humane, and . . . r a t i o n a l p r o j e c t . " Otherwise, Cooper does not appear to have addressed h i m s e l f to the removal c o n t r o v e r s y . The t h e s i s , t h e r e f o r e , re-examines the Leather-s t o c k i n g Tales i n the l i g h t of the removal c o n t r o v e r s y ; i t seeks to determine what understanding these novels g i v e of the Indian people, of Indian-white r e l a t i o n s , and of Indi a n r i g h t s to the l a n d . The f i r s t t hree L e a t h e r s t o c k i n g novels were w r i t t e n d u r i n g the debate on Indian removal. Although Indian r i g h t s to the "land are f r e q u e n t l y mentioned, other aspects of these novels work to deny the v a l i d i t y of the Indian c l a i m . The l a s t two L e a t h e r s t o c k i n g n o v e l s , w r i t t e n a f t e r the removal p o l i c y had come i n t o e f f e c t , do not have as much r h e t o r i c about Indian land r i g h t s ; l i k e the e a r l i e r L e a t h e r s t o c k i n g T a l e s , however, they see the In d i a n and white c i v i l i z a t i o n as mutually e x c l u s i v e . Although Cooper presents good and noble I n d i a n s , i n o p p o s i t i o n to h i s Ind i a n v i l l a i n s , they l a c k the necessary q u a l i t i e s to become a happy and worthwhile p a r t of American l i f e and c u l t u r e . C r i t i c s accused Cooper of p a t t e r n i n g h i s Indians too much a f t e r those d e s c r i b e d by Rev. John Heckewelder, one of Cooper's major sources. However, as t h i s t h e s i s i v shows, Cooper s i g n i f i c a n t l y a l t e r e d Heckewelder's view of the Indians and of Indian-white r e l a t i o n s ; Cooper p l a y s down the importance of white savagery, which Heckewelder had s t r e s s e d and d e t a i l e d , and, i n c o n t r a s t , emphasizes and d e t a i l s I n d i a n acts of savagery and c r u e l t y . The t h e s i s concludes t h a t Cooper saw the I n d i a n p r i m a r i l y as m a t e r i a l f o r romance; wrongs done to the Indian and statements about Indian r i g h t s to the land are i n c l u d e d i n the novels because they added to the p i c t u r e of the I n d i a n as a romantic f i g u r e . B a s i c a l l y , Cooper d i d not have any p o l i t i c a l or s o c i a l commitment to the I n d i a n people. V TABLE OF CONTENTS chapter page I I n t r o d u c t i o n and H i s t o r i c a l Background . . . 6 I I The E a r l y L e a t h e r s t o c k i n g Novels 26 A. The Pioneers 26 B. The L a s t of the Mohicans 41 C. The P r a i r i e 60 D. Notions of the Americans 82 I I I The L a t e r L e a t h e r s t o c k i n g Novels 91 A. The P a t h f i n d e r 91 B. The Deerslayer 106 IV Cooper's Use of M a t e r i a l from Heckewelder 127 V Conclusions 142 Footnotes 160 S e l e c t e d B i b l i o g r a p h y 176 LEAVES 1-5 OMITTED IN PAGE NUMBERING. CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND This thesis examines the r e l a t i o n s h i p between two things: f i r s t , the protest i n James Fenimore Cooper's Leatherstocking Tales against white usurpation of Indian lands, and second, the removal by the United States government of Indian peoples from t h e i r ancestral lands i n the eastern United States to unfamiliar t e r r i t o r y west of the M i s s i s s i p p i River. This removal took place during the time when Cooper wrote the Leatherstocking novels. In s p i t e of protests i n the novels about white greed f o r land i n e a r l i e r periods of h i s t o r y , and i n spite of his involve-ment i n Jacksonian p o l i t i c s , Cooper made no public protest over the removal p o l i c y . Nor do the six volumes of i The Letters and Journals of James Fenimore Cooper in d i c a t e any private f e e l i n g s of concern or opposition. This curious gap between stated concern over i n j u s t i c e done to the Indians i n the past and a seeming i n s e n s i t i v i t y to s i m i l a r i n j u s t i c e i n Cooper's own time requires a re-examination of the Leatherstocking Tales. This thesis maintains that protests against dispossession of the Indian, and statements which support Indian land claims must not be taken at face value i n these novels, but must be examined i n terms of the t o t a l e f f e c t that the novels 7 make upon the reader. The Leatherstocking Tales w i l l be examined, not simply as romances of a passing f r o n t i e r , but as documents which p a r t l y r e f l e c t e d , and p a r t l y helped to shape, p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l a ttitudes towards the Indians i n the f i r s t h a l f of the nineteenth century. In one way or another, a l l l i t e r a r y art r e l a t e s to the p o l i t i c a l process; the a r t i s t , however, i s not always aware of the p o l i t i c a l implications of his a r t , which, very often, are quite d i f f e r e n t from, and even opposed to, his stated i n t e n t i o n s . These implications, therefore, cannot be understood through a study which i s l i m i t e d to overt p o l i t i c a l statements; rather, the t o t a l work of art must be considered: p l o t , c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n , imagery, and the imaginative world which the writer creates. In attempting to determine the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the Leatherstocking Tales and the removal p o l i c y of the United States government, t h i s t h e s i s asks, "What understanding of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between Indians and the r a p i d l y developing white society of e a r l y nineteenth-century America finds expression i n these novels?" Cooper did not create his f i c t i o n a l Indians wholly from his own imagination, nor from d e t a i l e d , f i r s t - h a n d memories of r e a l Indians; rather, as Roy Harvey Pearce 2 claims, he took them "as his culture gave them to him." 8 Gregory Lansing Paine quotes Cooper's remark to an acquaintance: "You have the advantage of me, f o r I never was among the Indians. A l l that I know of them i s 3 from reading and hearing my father speak of them." The author's daughter, Susan Fenimore Cooper, said i n her 1861 book, Pages and Pictures from the Writings of James Fenimore Cooper, with Notes: "His own opportunities of intercourse with the red men had been few; occ a s i o n a l l y some small party of the Oneidas, or other representatives of the Five Nations had crossed h i s path i n the v a l l e y of the Susquehanna, or on the shores of Lake Ontario, where he served when a midshipman i n the Navy. And more recently, since the idea of introducing these w i l d people i n t o h i s books had occurred to him, he had been at no l i t t l e pains to seize every opportunity offered f o r observation. Fortunately f o r h i s purpose, deputations to Washington from the Western t r i b e s were quite frequent at that moment; he v i s i t e d these d i f f e r e n t p a r t i e s as they passed through Albany and New York, following them i n several instances to Washington, and with a view also to gathering inform-ation from the o f f i c e r s and i n t e r p r e t e r s who accompanied them. " (Quoted by Paine, pp. 19-20) To compensate f o r t h i s lack of f i r s t - h a n d information, Cooper read widely i n the journals, reports, and t r a v e l narratives of explorers, missionaries, government agents, and t r a v e l l e r s who had spent time among d i f f e r e n t Indian peoples. Cooper's daughter gives an ambiguous, and sometimes wrongly spelled l i s t of some of the authors whom 9 Cooper consulted. Correcting Susan Fenimore Cooper's account, John T. Frederick i d e n t i f i e s these authors as follows: Rev. John Heckewelder, Rev. P.F.X. de Charlevoix, William Penn, Captain John Smith, Rev. John E l i o t , Cadwallader Colden, as well as accounts of the expeditions of Stephen H. Long, Lewis and Clark, and Alexander 4 Mackenzie. In addition to those writers named by Susan Fenimore Cooper, Frederick suggests that Cooper would also have read "others equally a v a i l a b l e and equally prominent. Among the most l i k e l y candidates are the l i v e l y narratives of Alexander Henry, John Long, and John Bradbury; the newly published works of James Buchanan and Joseph Doddridge; and the o f f i c i a l l y sponsored reports of Jedediah Morse and Henry Rowe Schoolcraft" (Frederick, pp. 1006-1007). Frederick shows the extent to which Cooper depended upon h i s sources f o r the f i g u r a t i v e expressions used by his Indian characters: "More than three-fourths of a l l the figures employed by Cooper appear also i n the sources, and . . . the remainder, with only the r a r e s t exceptions, are c l o s e l y modeled upon and harmonious with those f o r which he had the authority of f i r s t h a n d observers" (Frederick, p. 1009). 10 To understand how Cooper took the Indians "as hi s culture gave them to him", we must be aware not only of s p e c i f i c written sources which he consulted, but also of the t o t a l complex of popular American ideas about the Indian people. These can be understood most e a s i l y through a b r i e f h i s t o r i c a l survey. Among other charges which the Declaration of Independence brought against George III was the a l l e g a t i o n that: "He has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our f r o n t i e r s , the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare i s an undistinguished destruction of a l l ages, sexes and conditions." The image of the "merciless Indian savage", written i n t o the most revered and best known of a l l American documents, thus became a basic constituent of America's understanding of the Indian people. Thomas Jefferso n , although the author of the Declaration of Independence, had high hopes f o r the c i v i l i z i n g of the Indian people and looked f o r t h e i r eventual i n t e g r a t i o n into American soci e t y . During h i s years as president (1801-09), he customarily spoke of them as "our Indian neighbours" and emphasized the value of good r e l a t i o n s between Indians and white Americans. At the same time, Jefferson was committed to western expansion and did not deal adequately with the contra-d i c t i o n between such expansion and the desire to maintain 11 good r e l a t i o n s with the Indians. The i n e v i t a b l e c o n f l i c t between western expansion and Indian r i g h t s was largely-responsible f o r Indian h o s t i l i t y to the United States during the War of 1812. During t h i s war, when Cooper was i n his e a r l y twenties, o f f i c i a l attitudes again pictured the Indians as treacherous savages. In his messages to Congress i n 1812 and 1813, President Madison constantly r e f e r r e d to the Indians as "savages," "merciless savages," "bloodthirsty savages," and " h o s t i l e t r i b e s of savages" ( I s r a e l , I, 116-117, 124-125). Condemning the B r i t i s h f o r using Indian a l l i e s , Madison said, "the savages are employed with a knowledge . . . that t h e i r fury cannot be c o n t r o l l e d " ( I s r a e l , I, 116). Opposing the image of the Indian as a merciless savage, some people, from the very beginning of European settlements i n America, had hoped that Indians and whites could l i v e next to each other i n harmony. Admittedly, the p r i c e f o r such harmony was a high one f o r the Indian to pay: he would have to r e l i n q u i s h his own culture and accept the values of European c i v i l i z a t i o n . Such hopes were c o n t i n u a l l y f r u s t r a t e d , not only by the r e f u s a l of most Indians to pay such a p r i c e , but even more by the advancing f r o n t i e r which refused to respect e i t h e r the Indian r i g h t s to t h e i r land, or previous t r e a t i e s made 12 with Indian peoples. In the period following the War of 1812, the o f f i c i a l p o l i c y of the administration was one of encourag-ing the c i v i l i z a t i o n and a s s i m i l a t i o n of the Indians; t h i s was countered and opposed by the growing p o l i t i c a l power of the f r o n t i e r , which demanded ever-increasing cession of Indian lands. Andrew Jackson, who had already won fame as an Indian f i g h t e r i n the Creek War of 1813-14, emerged as a prominent spokesman f o r t h i s f r o n t i e r a t t i t u d e . When an 1816 treaty recognized Cherokee claims to land south of the Tennessee River, Jackson claimed that the government r was operating on a p r i n c i p l e "of so c a r e f u l l y avoiding i n j u s t i c e to these t r i b e s as even to be unjust to them-selves."^ At the same time, Governor McMinn of Tennessee began to promote s e r i o u s l y Jefferson's suggestion of removing eastern Indians to west of the M i s s i s s i p p i River (Horsman, p. 6). In h i s 1817 message to Congress, President Monroe pointed to several large land purchases "on conditions very favourable to the United States, and, as i t i s presumed, not less so to the t r i b e s themselves" ( I s r a e l , I, 152). In a passage that shows both a l i n g e r i n g awareness of o b l i g a t i o n to c i v i l i z e the Indian, and an ever-growing desire f o r Indian lands, Monroe 13 restated one of the c l a s s i c j u s t i f i c a t i o n s f o r taking those lands: In t h i s progress, which the r i g h t s of nature demand and nothing can prevent, marking a growth rapid and g i g a n t i c , i t i s our duty to make new e f f o r t s f o r the preservation, improvement, and c i v i l i z a t i o n of the native inhabitants. The hunter state can e x i s t only i n the vast uncultivated desert. I t y i e l d s to the more dense and compact form and greater force of c i v i l i z e d population; and of r i g h t i t ought to y i e l d , f o r the earth was given to mankind to support the greatest number of which i t i s capable, and no t r i b e or people have a r i g h t to withhold from the wants of others more than i s necessary f o r t h e i r own support and comfort. ( I s r a e l , I, 152) The debate over the place of Indians i n American society i n t e n s i f i e d i n 1820 when Georgia p e t i t i o n e d the f e d e r a l government to extinguish Indian claims to some ten m i l l i o n acres i n that s t a t e . Georgia had ceded western lands (now the states of M i s s i s s i p p i and Alabama) to the federal government i n 1802; i n return, the f e d e r a l government had promised to extinguish, as soon as possible upon peaceful and reasonable terms, Indian claims upon land s t i l l within the state (Horsman, p. 11). Thus, any claims that the government of the United States had a debt of honour to the Indian people as a r e s u l t of t r e a t i e s made a f t e r the War of 1812 were countered by the 14 claim that i t had a p r i o r debt of honour to one of i t s constituent s t a t e s . The f a c t that the Creek and Cherokee Indians of Georgia had gone further along the white man's road to c i v i l i z a t i o n than had any other group of Indians i n t e n s i f i e d the debate between those who desired to c i v i l i z e the Indian and those frontiersmen who wanted Indian lands. In 1823, the year i n which Cooper published The Pioneers, the Cherokee Indians refused f e d e r a l govern-ment proposals that they should give up t h e i r t r a d i t i o n a l lands and remove to the west of the M i s s i s s i p p i . When the Cherokees restated t h e i r r e f u s a l i n 1824, Governor Troup of Georgia asked f o r the use of force by the federal government, and the Georgia delegation i n Congress denounced the e n t i r e p o l i c y of the federal government i n attempting to c i v i l i z e the Indians (Horsman, pp. 13-14). In 1825, the pressure from Georgia, combined with that from other f r o n t i e r states, forced President Monroe to present a plan f o r the removal of a l l the eastern Indians (Horsman, p. 16). The removal question dragged on during the presidency of John Quincy Adams (1825-29). Adams, although no s p e c i a l f r i e n d of the Indians, was aware of American obli g a t i o n s and was not about to c a p i t u l a t e to the f r o n t i e r s p i r i t which had very nearly elected Jackson instead of himself. Within the cabinet there were deep d i v i s i o n s on the subject of Indian p o l i c y : Henry Clay, 15 the Secretary of State, said that "he did not think them as a race worth preserving" (Horsman, p. 17). On the other hand, Secretary of War, James Barbour, who was responsible f o r the administration of Indian p o l i c y , was concerned with the i n t e g r i t y of previous American promises to the Indian: "They now see that our professions are i n s i n c e r e ; that our promises have been broken; that the happiness of the Indian i s a cheap s a c r i f i c e to the a c q u i s i t i o n of new lands; and when attempted to be soothed by an assurance that the country to which we propose to send them i s d e s i r a b l e , they emphatically ask us, What new pledges can you give us that we s h a l l not again be e x i l e d when i t i s your wish to possess these lands? I t i s easier to state than to answer t h i s question." (Horsman, p. 17) During the 1820*s, not a l l advocates of Indian removal were land-hungry frontiersmen and t h e i r p o l i t i c i a n s . Many American people were concerned about the devastating e f f e c t s that more sophisticated culture and technology were having upon the ever-dwindling Indian population i n the older states. The idea of moving Indians away from the baneful influence of the surrounding whites appeared as a great philanthropic project. During the 1820's clergymen l i k e Jedediah Morse (1761-1826), Jeremiah Evarts (1781-1831), and Isaac McCoy (1784-1846) favoured removal f o r some of the Indian peoples, although t h e i r proposals d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from those of the frontiersmen. 16 The Rev. Jedediah Morse had been commissioned by President Monroe i n 1820 to conduct a survey and make a report on the condition of the Indians i n the United States. Throughout h i s report, Morse assumed that the object of the government was to c i v i l i z e the Indians, and often he e x p l i c i t l y linked t h i s with C h r i s t i a n conversion Morse favoured a l i m i t e d form of Indian removal which would bring together, f o r the purpose of education and c i v i l i z a t i o n , small t r i b e s and remnants of t r i b e s which had been surrounded and debauched by f r o n t i e r settlements I t i s hard to escape the l o g i c which Morse brought i n support of t h i s p o l i c y : surveying the Indian population he could point only to small, scattered bands of Indians i n the older states which had once possessed large Indian populations. He now saw other t r i b e s being engulfed i n the same process which had destroyed the Indians i n older settlements: "Where the white man puts down his foot, he never takes i t up again," i s a shrewd and c o r r e c t remark of an Indian Chief. The hunting grounds of the Indians on our f r o n t i e r s are explored i n a l l d i r e c t i o n s by en t e r p r i s i n g white people. Their best lands are selected, s e t t l e d , and at length, by treaty purchased. Their game i s e i t h e r wholly destroyed, or so diminished, as not to y i e l d an adequate support. The poor Indians, thus deprived of t h e i r accustomed means of subsistence, and of what, i n t h e i r own view, can alone render them 17 respectable, as well as comfortable, are constrained to leave t h e i r homes, t h e i r goodly lands, and the sepulchres of t h e i r father, and e i t h e r go back i n t o new and l e s s valuable wildernesses, and to mingle with other t r i b e s , dependent on t h e i r h o s p i t a l i t y f o r a meagre support; or, without the common aids of education, to change at once a l l t h e i r habits and modes of l i f e ; to remain on a pittance of the lands they once owned, which they know not how to c u l t i v a t e , and to which they have not a complete t i t l e . In these circumstances they become insulated among those who despise them as an i n f e r i o r race, f i t companions of those only, who have the capacity and the d i s p o s i t i o n to corrupt them. In t h i s degraded, most disconsolate, and heart sinking of a l l s i t u a t i o n s i n which man can be placed, they are l e f t miserable to waste away f o r a few generations, and then to become e x t i n c t forever! This i s no fancied p i c t u r e . In a few years i t w i l l be a sad r e a l i t y , unless we change our p o l i c y towards them; unless e f f e c t u a l measures be taken to bring them over t h i s awful g u l f , to the s o l i d and safe ground of c i v i l i z a t i o n . (Morse, pp. 65-66) Bel i e v i n g that the Indians were "an i n t e l l i g e n t and noble part of our race, and capable of high moral and i n t e l l e c t u a l improvement, Morse urged that they "ought to be saved from e x t i n c t i o n , i f i t be possible to save them" (Morse, p.73). Morse saw c l e a r l y , and f e l t keenly, that the national honour of the United States was involved i n i t s dealings with the Indian people; unless the government and people were w i l l i n g to l i v e up to t h e i r o b l i g a t i o n s , said Morse, "Let us leave them to the unmolested 18 enjoyment of the t e r r i t o r i e s they now possess, and give back to them those which we have taken away from them" (Morse, p. 80). He thought of removal as a means whereby smaller groups of Indians could be consolidated into l a r g e r groups and given protection from whites. Consistent with t h i s approach, and i l l u s t r a t i n g i t s d i f f e r e n c e from that of f r o n t i e r p o l i t i c i a n s , i s his statement that the large southern t r i b e s : Creeks, Cherokees, Choctaws, and Chickasaws, "are i n s i t u a t i o n s and circumstances very favourable to be educated where they are, r a i s e d to the rank and p r i v i l e g e s of c i t i z e n s , and merged i n the mass of the nation" (Morse, p. 32). His report, and the attached appendices, i n d i c a t e both p o s i t i v e and negative responses from d i f f e r e n t Indian leaders on the subjects of education, c i v i l i z a t i o n , and removal. Jeremiah Evarts, corresponding secretary of the American Board of Commissioners f o r Foreign Missions, had endorsed a l i m i t e d form of removal which would safeguard Indian r i g h t s . A f t e r Jackson was elected president i n 1828, Evarts became opposed to the government's removal p o l i c y when he saw that i t would deny those r i g h t s and involve f o r c i b l e expulsion of the southern Indians. Using the pseudonym of William Penn, Evarts produced a s e r i e s of a r t i c l e s f o r the National I n t e l l i g e n c e r which defended Indian t i t l e to t h e i r lands and opposed removal. 19 Isaac McCoy saw l i t t l e hope i n the c i v i l i z i n g a c t i v i t i e s of missionaries among Indians; he claimed that i n s p i t e of some i n d i v i d u a l successes, the t o t a l condition of the Indian t r i b e s was becoming "more and more miserable 10 every year". McCoy blamed t h i s s i t u a t i o n on the proximity of Indians to white settlements and urged removal as the only method of saving the Indians from per i s h i n g . McCoy, however, exempted the Cherokees and the other "progressive" Indians of the southeast from the necessity of removal. Lewis Cass (1782-1866), while Governor of Michigan T e r r i t o r y , became an outspoken advocate of Indian removal; l a t e r as Secretary of War under President Jackson, he was responsible f o r implementing the removal p o l i c y . In an unsigned a r t i c l e i n the North American Review, Cass presents a good summary of the main arguments i n favour of removal. In addition to r e s t a t i n g the issue as one of preserving a threatened Indian population from e x t i n c t i o n , Cass dwells on the incompatability of white c i v i l i z a t i o n and Indian savagery, the superior use of land by whites, and the doubtful status of Indian t i t l e to the land. In weighing the advance of white c i v i l i z a t i o n against the cost to Indian people, Cass leaves no doubt as to h i s p o s i t i o n : I t would be miserable a f f e c t a t i o n to regret the progress of c i v i l i z a t i o n and improvement, the ( 20 triumph of industry and a r t , by which these regions have been reclaimed, and over which freedom, r e l i g i o n , and science are extending t h e i r sway. But we may indulge the wish, that these blessings had been attained at a smaller s a c r i f i c e ; that the aboriginal population had accommodated themselves to the i n e v i t a b l e change of t h e i r condition, produced by the access and progress of the new race of men, before whom the hunter and his game were destined to disappear. But such a wish i s vain. A barbarous people, depending f o r subsistence upon the scanty and precarious supplies furnished by the chase, 11 cannot l i v e i n contact with a c i v i l i z e d community. Cass places the burden of accommodation between Indian and white society e n t i r e l y on the Indian; he takes Indian f a i l u r e to accommodate more r a p i d l y as evidence of some inherent character flaw. As c i v i l i z a t i o n shed her l i g h t upon them, why were they b l i n d to i t s beam? Hungry or naked, why did they disregard, or regarding, why did they neglect, those arts by which food and c l o t h i n g could be procured? E x i s t i n g f o r two centuries i n contact with a c i v i l i z e d people, they have r e s i s t e d , and success-f u l l y too, every e f f o r t to meliorate t h e i r s i t u a t i o n , or to introduce among them the most common arts of l i f e . Their moral and t h e i r i n t e l l e c t u a l condition have been equally stationary. And i n the whole c i r c l e of t h e i r existence, i t would be d i f f i c u l t to point to a s i n g l e advantage which they have derived from t h e i r acquaintance with the Europeans. A l l t h i s i s without a p a r a l l e l i n the h i s t o r y of the world. That i t i s 21 not to be a t t r i b u t e d to the i n d i f f e r e n c e or neglect of the whites, we have already shown. There must then be an inherent d i f f i c u l t y , a r i s i n g from the i n s t i t u t i o n s , character, and condition of the Indians themselves. (Cass, pp. 72-73) They would not, or rather they could not, coalesce with the strangers who had come among them. There was no point of union between them. They were as wild, and f i e r c e , and i r r e c l a i m a b l e , as the animals, t h e i r co-tenants of the f o r e s t s , who furnished them with food and c l o t h i n g . What had they i n common with the white men? Not his attachment to sedentary l i f e ; not h i s desire of accumulation; not h i s submission to law; not h i s moral p r i n c i p l e s , his i n t e l l e c t u a l acquirements, h i s r e l i g i o u s opinion. Neither precept nor example, neither hopes nor fears, could induce them to examine, much l e s s to adopt t h e i r improve-ments. The past and the future being a l i k e disregarded, the present only employs t h e i r thoughts. They could not, therefore, become an i n t e g r a l part of the people who began to press upon them. (Cass, p. 79) Cass states that the Indian had possession of, but not t i t l e to, that land over which he roamed as a hunter. Arguing from a confident understanding of the Divine Purpose, he j u s t i f i e s white appropriation of the land f o r the superior uses of c i v i l i z a t i o n (Cass, p. 77). Repeatedly, Cass reassures h i s readers that the removal p o l i c y would be implemented only with the consent of the 22 Indians themselves and that no force would be used (Cass, pp. 76, 90, 92, 120). Underlying a l l of the r h e t o r i c which r a t i o n a l -ized previous dispossession and which favoured the removal p o l i c y , the f i n a l j u s t i f i c a t i o n i s one of power: "Thus, without going back to the question of r i g h t derived from conquest or discovery, or r e s o r t i n g to the received doctrine respecting the duty of c u l t i v a t i n g the earth, i t i s enough f o r our present view, that we are here; and that, whether the o r i g i n a l system of c o l o n i z a t i o n were r i g h t or wrong, a j u s t regard to the safety of both requires that we should govern and they obey." (Cass, p. 94) Indian people, aware of developing threats to t h e i r ownership of land, t r i e d to protect themselves. The Cherokees, c o n t i n u a l l y pushed by the demands of the people and government of Georgia, adopted on J u l y 26, 182 7, a written c o n s t i t u t i o n which involved them i n l e g a l confrontation with the government of Georgia and 12 the Unxted States. In 1828 gold was discovered i n Cherokee t e r r i t o r y and white prospectors showed no regard f o r Cherokee r i g h t s . The State of Georgia passed l e g i s l a t i o n which denied the Cherokee people any e f f e c t i v e control over t h e i r own land or communities. When the Cherokee Indians brought t h i s l e g i s l a t i o n before the Supreme Court, that court denied the r i g h t of the Cherokees to appeal to 23 i t on the following grounds: An Indian t r i b e or nation within the United States i s not a f o r e i g n state i n the sense of the c o n s t i t -u tion, and cannot maintain an action i n the Courts of the United States . . . I f i t be true that the Cherokee nation have r i g h t s , t h i s i s not the t r i b u n a l i n which those r i g h t s are to be asserted. I f i t i s true that wrongs have been i n f l i c t e d , and that s t i l l greater are to be apprehended, t h i s i s not the t r i b u n a l which can redress the past or prevent the future. 13 The motion f o r an i n j u n c t i o n i s denxed. The e l e c t i o n of Andrew Jackson i n 1828 showed the p o l i t i c a l power of the f r o n t i e r and indicated that Indian r i g h t s would have low p r i o r i t y i n government p o l i c y r e l a t i n g to expansion. In his 1829 message to Congress, Jackson took a m i l i t a n t a ttitude towards the Cherokee people: I informed the Indians i n h a b i t a t i n g parts of Georgia and Alabama that t h e i r attempt to e s t a b l i s h an independent government would not be countenanced by the Executive of the United States, and advised them to emigrate beyond the M i s s i s s i p p i or submit to the laws of those States. ( I s r a e l , p. 310) In advocating removal, Jackson advanced the usual arguments i n i t s favour and disavows the use of f o r c e . However, h i s i n s i s t e n c e upon Indian obedience to discriminatory state laws, and his disparaging comments upon Indian land claims, l e f t the Indians l i t t l e 24 a l t e r n a t i v e to removal. In 1835 a small, unrepresentative minority of the Cherokees approved a treaty which ceded seven m i l l i o n acres of t r i b a l land i n return f o r a c r e d i t of four and one h a l f m i l l i o n d o l l a r s . The majority of the Cherokee people refused to recognize t h i s treaty and remained on t h e i r land. As a r e s u l t , i n 1838 General Winfield Scott went i n t o Cherokee t e r r i t o r y with seven thousand troops; the troops herded the people i n t o camps from which they were forced to begin the long mid-winter journey to t h e i r new "home" i n Arkansas. Livestock, farm and domestic goods were l e f t to the rabble of white camp-followers who had come with the army. some idea of the contrast between the r e a l i t y of Indian removal and the easy o p t i m i s t i c view of the s i t u a t i o n taken by the government: Of about 14,000 who were herded into t h i s " t r a i l of tears," as i t came to be c a l l e d , 4,000 died on the way. While a hundred Cherokees a day were perishing of exhaustion and cold on that dreadful road, President Van Buren on December 3, 1838 John C o l l i e r ' s summary of the r e s u l t s gives session have had the happiest e f f e c t s . . . . The Cherokees have emigrated without any apparent reluctance." The f i n a n c i a l costs of the t r a i l of tears were charged by the government against the 25 funds cre d i t e d to the t r i b e pursuant to the 14 fraudulent t r e a t y . I t was against t h i s background of events i n h i s own time that Cooper wrote the Leatherstocking novels. 26 CHAPTER II THE EARLY LEATHERSTOCKING NOVELS A. THE PIONEERS Cooper's Leatherstocking novels were published i n the following order: The Pioneers i n 1823, The Last of the Mohicans i n 1826, The P r a i r i e i n 182 7, The 1 Pathfinder i n 1840, and The Deerslayer i n 1841. The f i r s t three novels, therefore, were written during a time of intense debate about the place of the Indian v i s - a - v i s American society, while the l a s t two were written af t e r most of the t r a g i c events of the removal p o l i c y had taken place. As a s e r i e s , the novels span the period from the e a r l y 1740's, when h o s t i l i t i e s broke out between France and England, to 1805, when the United States was consolidating i t s hold on the newly purchased Louisiana T e r r i t o r y . Natty Bumppo, the l i n k i n g character i n a l l f i v e novels, i s known v a r i o u s l y as "Deerslayer," "Hawkeye," "Pathfinder," "Leatherstocking," and "the Trapper" i n accordance with the d i f f e r e n t phases of his career. Bumppo l i v e s on the f r o n t i e r , apart from the c i v i l i z a t i o n of h i s fellow whites, and associates most with I n d i a n s — some of whom he loves, tr u s t s and befriends, and others of whom he d i s l i k e s , d i s t r u s t s , and f i g h t s . In the i n t e r n a l chronology of the f i v e t a l e s , The Deerslayer comes f i r s t and t e l l s of Natty's entrance to manhood; next, The Last of the Mohicans and The 27 Pathfinder r e l a t e incidents from his mature l i f e ; The  Pioneers shows him when he i s old but s t i l l a g i l e and strong, while The P r a i r i e t e l l s of the i n f i r m i t y but independence of h i s extreme old age and of his eventual death. This t h e s i s , concerned with the r e l a t i o n s h i p between these novels and events i n Cooper's own time, w i l l examine the Leatherstocking Tales i n the order i n which Cooper wrote them rather than according to the i n t e r n a l order of events. Written about American f r o n t i e r society i n the secondary stage of development, The Pioneers i s concerned only p e r i p h e r a l l y with Indian-white r e l a t i o n s . The Indians have been dispossessed of t h e i r lands, and, apart from old Mohegan John, there are none l e f t to arouse the p i t y or censure, much less the fear, of the s e t t l e r s . As Mohegan himself said, "There w i l l soon be no red-skin i n the country. When John has gone, the l a s t w i l l leave these h i l l s , and his family w i l l be dead" (Pioneers, XXXVI, p. 419). The s e t t l e r s contend against the trees and birds which they see as obstacles to progress, even as an e a r l i e r generation of s e t t l e r s had seen the Indians. In t h i s s i t u a t i o n , Judge Temple reveals his ambivalent a t t i t u d e toward progress. Constantly he speaks f o r conservation; he warns his household against wanton destruction of the best trees f o r firewood; along 28 with Leatherstocking, he f e e l s the waste involved i n the mass slaughter of pigeons and i n the seining of f i s h which w i l l never be used; against popular opinion, he i s determined to enforce game laws which p r o h i b i t hunting out of season. At the same time, as the benevolent father f i g u r e of the settlement at Templeton, he looks forward to progress and development: "To his eye, where others saw nothing but a wilderness, towns, manufactories, bridges, canals, mines, and a l l the other resources of an old country were constantly presenting themselves"(Pioneers, XXIX, p. 331). The moral c o n f l i c t of the novel centers on Judge Temple's attempt to e s t a b l i s h the p r i n c i p l e s of an abstract l e g a l system i n a t e r r i t o r y where increasing population has rendered obsolete the old natural law as exemplified by Natty Bumppo. When he says to his daughter Elizabeth, "Laws alone remove us from the conditions of the savages" (Pioneers, XXXV, p. 397), Judge Temple not only shows the high regard i n which he held the law; he also reveals a fear that f r o n t i e r society could degenerate to a state of savagery, and a determination that t h i s should not happen. The establishment of law r e f l e c t s the economic change by which the vague t e r r i t o r y of the hunter i s transformed i n t o the surveyed f i e l d s of the farmer. The p l o t of the story depends on a case of 29 mistaken i d e n t i t y . The hero, Edward O l i v e r Effingham, d i s g u i s e s h i m s e l f as a hunter, and t a k i n g the name of O l i v e r Edwards, conceals the f a c t t h a t he i s the son of Judge Temple's c l o s e s t f r i e n d . In h i s r i g h t f u l person, Effingham has a st r o n g moral c l a i m to the thousands of acres which the Judge has been h o l d i n g i n t r u s t s i n c e the War of Independence. Because Mohegan John has s a i d t h a t Edwards has the blood of a Delaware c h i e f , i t i s assumed t h a t he has In d i a n ancestry; i n f a c t , h i s grandfather, Major Effingham, had been only an honourary member of the Delawares. Working on t h i s f a l s e assumption, the Judge and h i s h o u s e h o l d — a s w e l l as the r e a d e r — c o n s i d e r r e f e r e n c e s to Edwards' ownership of the land to be re f e r e n c e s to a b o r i g i n a l t i t l e . When Edwards r e f e r s t o L e a t h e r s t o c k i n g ' s c l a i m t h a t the whites u n j u s t l y obtained the land from the In d i a n s , the Judge dismisses the problem by r e f e r r i n g i t to the white man's law: "The Indian t i t l e was e x t i n g u i s h e d so f a r back as the c l o s e of the o l d war f i . e . the French and Indian War, 1754-1763]; and i f i t had not been at a l l , I h o l d under the patents of the r o y a l governors, confirmed by an act of our own State l e g i s l a t u r e , and no c o u r t i n the country can a f f e c t my t i t l e " ( P i o n e e r s , XXI, p. 241). C o n s i d e r i n g t h a t Edwards' own c l a i m would have depended upon the e x t i n c t i o n of the Ind i a n t i t l e and upon r o y a l patent, t h i s d i a l o g u e i s i n a p p r o p r i a t e to the development 30 of the p l o t . I t does add, however, to the reader's and to the Judge's misunderstanding of the nature of Edwards' claim. In a novel dealing with the establishment of abstract law, i t i s incongruous f o r a young, well-educated man, who gives no d e t a i l s of his l i f e , to maintain a claim upon the land without one piece of supporting information beyond Mohegan's statement that he has the blood of a Delaware c h i e f . Even within the novel there i s no question but that the a b o r i g i n a l t i t l e f o r t h i s p a r t i c u l a r land had been extinguished; as Mohegan John said to Leatherstocking, "The land was owned by my people; we gave i t to my brother, i n c o u n c i l — t o the F i r e - e a t e r ; and what the Delawares give l a s t s as long as the waters run" (Pioneers, XXVI, p. 299). On t h i s basis, Judge Temple rebukes Edwards a f t e r the young man's passionate outburst about the r i g h t f u l ownership of the land: "Oliver Edwards, thou f o r g e t t e s t i n whose presence thou standest. I have heard, young man, that thou claimest descent from the native owners of the s o i l ; but surely thy education has been given thee to no e f f e c t , i f i t has not taught thee the v a l i d i t y of the claims that have transferred the t i t l e to the whites." (Pioneers, XXXI, p. 35 7) By placing the discussion of aboriginal land r i g h t s within the context of a comic mistaken i d e n t i t y s i t u a t i o n , Cooper has denied, i n a very e f f e c t i v e manner, the 31 seriousness of the problem. He has i n v a l i d a t e d Natty Bumppo's concern f o r Indian r i g h t s by placing that concern within the context of Judge Temple's r e l a t i o n s h i p with O l i v e r Edwards where i t i s i r r e l e v a n t . Thomas P h i l b r i c k makes the i n t e r e s t i n g point that "By the end of the novel, O l i v e r i s not only the l e g a l h e i r to the estate which Judge Temple has held i n t r u s t f o r Edward Effingham, but symbolically he i s the i n h e r i t o r of the Indian's 2 moral claim to the land." Thus the dynamic of the novel suggests that whatever r i g h t s to the land the Indians may once have possessed have been extinguished i n a moral as well as a l e g a l sense. During the debate about removal, the American people discussed the extent to which the Indian could be " c i v i l i z e d . " The character of Mohegan John would ind i c a t e that Cooper f e l t that any such " c i v i l i z a t i o n " was only s u p e r f i c i a l and temporary. The Pioneers emphasizes Mohegan's ideas of revenge (XII, pp. 134, 136-138); and h i s speeches make constant reference to his b l o o d t h i r s t y past when he fought the Mingoes (XXXVIII, pp. 437-438; c f . XIV, p. 163; XXXVI, p. 416). The most r e a l i s t i c scene i n the novel d e t a i l s Mohegan's i n a b i l i t y to handle alcohol. While Judge Temple and his friends become properly j o l l y through drink, Mohegan progresses from melancholy, through 32 f e r o c i t y , to drunken stupor: Mohegan continued to sing, while h i s countenance was becoming vacant, though, coupled with his thick bushy h a i r , i t was assuming an expression very much l i k e b r u t a l f e r o c i t y . His notes were gradually growing louder, and soon rose to a height that caused a general cessation i n the discourse . . . . He shook h i s head, throwing his h a i r back from his countenance, and exposed eyes that were g l a r i n g with an expression of wild resentment. But the man was not himself. His hand seemed to make a f r u i t l e s s e f f o r t to release his tomahawk which was confined by i t s handle to his b e l t , while his eyes gradually became vacant. Richard at that instant thrusting a mug before him, his features changed to the gr i n of i d i o c y , and s e i z i n g the vessel with both hands, he sunk backward on the bench and drank u n t i l s a t i a t e d , when he made an e f f o r t to lay aside the mug with the helplessness of t o t a l i n e b r i e t y . (Pioneers, XIV pp. 163-64) At t h i s point, Natty, observing John's behaviour, generalized on the i n a b i l i t y of a l l Indians to handle l i q u o r : "This i s the way with a l l the savages; give them l i q u o r , and they make dogs of themselves" (Pioneers, XIV, p. 164). Since Mohegan i s at the outer f r i n g e of an exceedingly caste-conscious f r o n t i e r society, the concern that Elizabeth, Judge Temple's daughter, shows f o r his welfare i s quite remarkable: "I grieve when I see old Mohegan walking about 33 these lands, l i k e the ghost of one of t h e i r ancient possessors, and f e e l how small i s my own r i g h t to possess them . . . . "But what can I do? What can my father do? Should we o f f e r the old man a home and a maintenance, h i s habits would compel him to refuse us. Neither, were we so s i l l y as to wish such a thing, could we convert these clearings and farms again i n t o hunting grounds, as the Leather-Stocking would wish to see them." "You speak the truth, Miss Temple," said Edwards. "What can you do, indeed? But there i s one thing I am c e r t a i n you can and w i l l do, when you become the mistress of these b e a u t i f u l v a l l e y s — u s e your wealth with indulgence to the poor, and c h a r i t y to the needy; indeed, you can do no more." (Pioneers, XXV, pp. 287-88) This passage reveals that there are no e s s e n t i a l d i f ferences between the views of Edwards, Judge Temple, or h i s daughter. Between Edwards and the Judge there i s a c o n f l i c t over who owns the land--but none over the uses to which the land should be put. The Judge sees s o c i a l harmony i n terms of abstract laws which are tempered by benevolence, while E l i z a b e t h plays the t r a d i t i o n a l feminine r o l e which emphasizes c h a r i t y i n contrast to the demands of the law. A l l three, as Leather-Stocking well understands, are firm believers i n progress. Edwards' association with Leather-Stocking has done no more than to give him what 34 Judge Temple already had—a n o s t a l g i c appreciation f o r a way of l i f e that i s no longer possible. This n o s t a l g i a i s an ever-present part of the background which sets o f f the more immediate events of the novel. C e r t a i n l y , Mohegan would not wish to l i v e as a dependent upon Judge Temple and his family, and c e r t a i n l y , there can be no h a l t i n g or turning back of progress. Along with Governor Cass, Elizabeth Temple may "indulge the wish" that the blessings of progress "had been attained at a smaller s a c r i f i c e , " but she does not stoop to the "miserable 3 a f f e c t a t i o n " of r e g r e t t i n g that progress i t s e l f . Although Mohegan poses no threat to anyone i n Templeton, Louisa Grant, the naive daughter of the Anglican clergyman, does express fear of his looks, "'I am s t a r t l e d by the manner of that Indian. Oh! his eye was h o r r i d , as he turned to the moon'" (Pioneers, XII, p. 134). Cooper's d e s c r i p t i o n of Mohegan reveals contradictory attitudes at t h i s point and therefore requires attention: As his swarthy visage, with i t s muscles fi x e d i n r i g i d composure, was seen under the l i g h t of the moon, which struck his face obliquely, he seemed a p i c t u r e of resigned old age on whom the storms of winter had beaten i n vain, f o r the greater part of a century; but when, i n turning h i s head, the rays f e l l d i r e c t l y on his dark, f i e r y eyes, they t o l d a t a l e of passions  unrestrained, and of thoughts free as a i r . The s l i g h t person of Miss Grant, which followed next, and which was but too t h i n l y clad f o r the s e v e r i t y 35 of the season, formed a marked contrast to the wild a t t i r e and uneasy glances of the Delaware ch i e f (Pioneers, XII, p. 132, i t a l i c s mine). The c o n t r a d i c t i o n of " r i g i d composure" and "resigned old age" with "passions unrestrained," "thoughts free as a i r , " and "uneasy glances" i s the contr a d i c t i o n between the s u p e r f i c i a l appearance of the " c i v i l i z e d " Indian and the implied underlying r e a l i t y revealed by his " f i e r y eyes." Indeed those " f i e r y eyes" which s t a r t l e d Louisa that night are symbolically r e l a t e d to the " g l a r i n g eyes of a female panther" which caused the same Louisa to sink " l i f e l e s s to the earth" i n the following summer (Pioneers, XXVIII, p. 315). The threat i m p l i c i t i n the Indian became e x p l i c i t i n the panther; Leatherstocking had to k i l l the animal which threatened the innocent l i v e s of the two g i r l s i n the same way that he had k i l l e d many an Indian who had posed a s i m i l a r threat to innocence. In The Deerslayer one of the Indians k i l l e d by Natty Bumppo was known as "The Panther" (Deerslayer, XXVII, p. 492). The one c o n f l i c t i n v o l v i n g John i s s p i r i t u a l and not ph y s i c a l ; i t centres around John's adherence to Indian b e l i e f s which contradict his conversion by the Moravians. Rev. Mr. Grant, as Mohegan's antagonist i n t h i s struggle, expresses h i s horror at the Indian's notion of revenge: 36 "John, John! i s t h i s the r e l i g i o n that you learned from the Moravians? But no - I w i l l not be so uncharitable as to suppose i t . They are a pious, a gentle, and a mild people, and could never t o l e r a t e these passions." (Pioneers, XII, p. 134) The only a l t e r n a t i v e i s to suppose that John's conversion by the Moravians had not been complete; indeed, the language Cooper uses to describe that conversion would make i t remarkable i f i t had been: He had f o r a long time been an associate of the white man, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e i r wars; and, having been, at a season when hi s services were of importance, much noticed and f l a t t e r e d , he had turned C h r i s t i a n , and was baptized by the name of John . . . . From his long association with the white men, the habits of Mohegan were a mixture of the c i v i l i z e d and savage states, though there was c e r t a i n l y a strong preponderance i n favour of the l a t t e r . In common with a l l h i s people, who dwelt within the influence of the Anglo-Americans, he had acquired new wants, and his dress was a mixture of native and European fashions. (Pioneers, VII, pp. 77-78) Cooper bases John's conversion on a s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to white f l a t t e r y and thus i m p l i c i t l y denies the p o s s i b i l i t y of any but the most s u p e r f i c i a l changes from the state of "savagery." The concept of c i v i l i z i n g the Indians i s reduced to a pi c t u r e of Indians wearing a r i d i c u l o u s 37 mixture of both white and Indian c l o t h i n g . As John i s dying, the Anglican minister inquires of Leather-Stocking whether or not Mohegan's dying chants and songs are C h r i s t i a n ; Mr. Grant's horror at the idea of John's reversion to Indian b e l i e f s presents a dogmatic and ludicrous contrast to Leather-Stocking's more ph i l o s o p h i c a l and humane approach: "This i s the moment, John, when the r e f l e c t i o n that you d i d not r e j e c t the mediation of the Redeemer, w i l l bring balm to your s o u l . Trust not to any act of former days, but lay the burden of your sins at h i s fe e t , and you have h i s own blessed assurance that he w i l l not desert you." "Though a l l you say be true, and you have S c r i p t u r ' gospels f o r i t , too," said Natty, "you w i l l make nothing of the Indian. He hasn't seen a Moravian p r i e s t s i n ' the war; and i t ' s hard to keep them from going back to t h e i r native ways. I should think i t would be as well to l e t the old man pass i n peace." (Pioneers, XXXVIII, pp. 438-39) John himself shows the f u l l extent of h i s reversion when he says:-"Hawkeye! my fathers c a l l me to the happy hunting grounds. The path i s c l e a r , and the eyes of Mohegan grow young. I look, but I see no white skins; there are none to be seen but j u s t and brave Indians. Farewell, Hawkeye! you s h a l l go with the F i r e - e a t e r and the Young Eagle j^Major Effingham and his grandson, Olive r Edwards], to the white man's 38 heaven; but I go af t e r my fathers. Let the bow and tomahawk, and pipe, and the wampum of Mohegan be l a i d i n h i s grave; f o r when he s t a r t s 't w i l l be i n the night, l i k e a warrior on a war party, and he cannot stop to seek them." (Pioneers. XXXVIII, p. 439) This reference to a segregated heaven in d i c a t e s Mohegan's f e e l i n g that he had no r e a l place i n the white man's world and that he could f i n d f u l f i l l m e n t only among his own people - whether i n t h i s l i f e or the next. Small d e t a i l s i n d i c a t e that Cooper wished h i s readers to take a tolerant view of the Indian's dying return to the b e l i e f s of his people. The emotional balance of the book l i e s with Leather-Stocking's tolerance rather than with Mr. Grant's well-meaning but exclusive dogmatism. For example, i n h i s f i r s t sermon, several months e a r l i e r , Mr. Grant himself had commended to his congregation "'that f e e l i n g of universal philanthropy, which, by teaching us to love, cause us to judge with l e n i t y , a l l men; s t r i k i n g at the root of self-righteousness, and warning us to be sparing of our condemnation of others'" (Pioneers, XI, pp. 125-26). When Mohegan spoke his l a s t words to Hawkeye, Mr. Grant asked whether he was t r u s t i n g "'his s a l v a t i o n to the Rock of Ages'" (Pioneers, XXXVIII, p. 440). Although Hawkeye answers i n the negative, Mohegan, at the moment of death, i s described as "reposing 39 against the rock" (Pioneers, XXXVIII, p. 442). This tolerance, however, rested upon a "separate but equal" view of r a c i a l development; as such, i t l e f t very l i t t l e room f o r the p o s s i b i l i t y of genuine conversion to C h r i s t i a n i t y or c i v i l i z a t i o n (which were l a r g e l y synonymous i n Cooper's America). Consequently, i t provided very l i t t l e place i n c i v i l i z e d , C h r i s t i a n America f o r the Indian. Natty Bumppo's to l e r a n t attitude suggests that the most an advancing c i v i l i z a t i o n can do f o r the Indian i s to l e t him l i v e as best he can and die i n peace. Developments i n the nineteenth century showed that t h i s was not possibl e . The Pioneers shows that advancing c i v i l i z a t i o n could not l e t even Natty Bumppo l i v e and die i n peace. Mr. Grant's evangelical zeal saw p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r the eventual a s s i m i l a t i o n of a c i v i l i z e d and C h r i s t i a n Indian people; unfortunately, l i k e so many of h i s fellows who shared the same view, h i s devotion and concern were di r e c t e d towards the ideals of conversion and a s s i m i l a t i o n rather than towards the Indian people themselves. The a t t i t u d e f i n a l l y expressed by the novel therefore, i s that of E l i z a b e t h . Her sentimental c h a r i t y can only bewail the sad condition of Mohegan; i t was powerless to help him because, l i k e the c h a r i t y of the 40 American people i n the nineteenth century, i t was over-4 ridden by the more dominant commitment to progress. Edwards' epitaph f o r Mohegan, '"His f a u l t s were those of an Indian, and his v i r t u e s those of a man"' (Pioneers, XLI, p. 473), presents a good summary of the novel's understanding of the Indian. I t suggests that, as a race, the Indians had c e r t a i n defects p e c u l i a r to themselves but i t makes no suggestion that they had any unique v i r t u e s : t h e i r v i r t u e s were common to humanity. Thus, the Indian was defined negatively, i n terms of his f a u l t s . In Mohegan John's degradation, Cooper showed the f i n a l r e s u l t s of Indian-white r e l a t i o n s as he observed them i n the f i r s t quarter of the nineteenth century. As we have seen, many well-meaning white men, viewing such degradation i n the Indian peoples around them, espoused a removal p o l i c y as the one way by which the Indian peoples could be saved from complete e x t i n c t i o n . Cooper, by painting such a v i v i d picture of John's drunkenness, his marginal status as a part of white society, and h i s f i n a l reversion to Indian b e l i e f s , encouraged his readers to f e e l that the Indian had no place i n white c i v i l i z a t i o n ; i n doing so, he contributed to the growing sentiment f o r removal of the Indian people. Mohegan John and Leather-Stocking are i n c i d e n t a l 41 characters i n The Pioneers; however, as Marcus C l a v e l has shown, c r i t i c s expressed great enthusiasm for the portrayal of Leather-Stocking, and, to a l e s s e r extent, for that of Mohegan. No doubt t h i s enthusiasm encouraged Cooper to give h i s readers more of the same."* In h i s youth, Mohegan had been known as "Chingachgook," which meant "the Great Snake" (Pioneers, VII, p. 78); although Cooper presented Chingachgook as a much more heroic and romantic character i n The Last of the Mohicans, The  Pathfinder, and The Deerslayer, neither the reader nor the author can forget that the Indian's l a s t days had already been set f o r t h i n The Pioneers. The Pioneers, therefore, has primary importance f o r an understanding of the d i r e c t i o n i n which the other Leatherstocking novels must move: the younger Chingachgook of the l a t e r novels i s predestined to end his l i f e as Mohegan John. B. THE LAST OF THE MOHICANS The Last of the Mohicans, more than any of the other Leatherstocking Tales, focuses on Indians; against the background of the French and Indian War (1754-1763), and of the older c o n f l i c t between Huron and Delaware Indians, Hawkeye and his friends struggle against the e v i l Magua. Violence plays a large part i n the story, and the novel comes close to equating Indian culture with 42 a love of violence, revenge, and tort u r e . In order to understand i t s presentation of Indian l i f e we w i l l examine four d i f f e r e n t aspects of the novel: 1. Its picture of Indian character; 2. Its doctrine of race; 3. The discussion of Indian land r i g h t s ; and 4. The elegaic mood i t develops i n connection with the Indian. The t o t a l portrayal of Indians i n the novel i s great l y influenced by the predominant r o l e of the treacherous Huron, Magua. Magua speaks of h i s past contact with whites and blames the white man's alcohol f o r h i s depraved condition: "Magua was born a ch i e f and a warrior among the red Hurons of the lakes; he saw the suns of twenty summers make the snows of twenty winters run o f f i n the streams, before he saw a pale-face; and he was happy! Then his Canada fathers came into the woods, and taught him to drink the fire-water, and he became a r a s c a l . The Hurons drove him from the graves of h i s fathers, as they would chase the hunted b u f f a l o . . . ." "Was i t the f a u l t of Le Renard that his head was not made of rock? Who gave him the fire-water? Who made him a v i l l a i n ? 'Twas the pale-faces." (Mohicans, XI, p. 116) Once, i n the service of the B r i t i s h , Magua had become drunk and insubordinate; the whipping which the B r i t i s h o f f i c e r , Major Munro, gave as punishment s t i l l offends 43 the Indian's sense of j u s t i c e : "'Is i t j u s t i c e to make e v i l , and then punish f o r i t ? Magua was not himself; i t was the fire-water that spoke and acted f o r him! but Munro did not believe i t . The Huron chief was t i e d up before a l l the pale-faced warriors, and whipped l i k e a dog'" (Mohicans, XI, p. 117). This whipping provides Magua with hi s deepest motivation: the desire f o r revenge; i n order to achieve t h i s revenge he seeks to enslave Munro's daughter, Cora, i n an Indian marriage. The major part of the novel describes the attempts by Hawkeye and h i s friends to free Cora and her s i s t e r , A l i c e , from Magua and his fellow Hurons. Magua's malignant q u a l i t i e s are superimposed upon the t r a d i t i o n a l picture of the Indian; Cooper describes his v i l l a i n with such stock words and phrases as " c h a r a c t e r i s t i c stoicism," " s u l l e n f i e r c e n e s s , " "swarthy lineaments," "native wildness," "cunning," and "disdain" (Mohicans, I, pp. 9-10). Cora's f i r s t sight of him c a l l e d f o r t h "an indescribable look of p i t y , admiration, and horror" (Mohicans, I, p. 11). These three emotions are not mutually exclusive, but neither are they i n easy harmony with one another; together, they form a complex emotional at t i t u d e which, perhaps, t y p i f i e d the 19th century response to the Indian. The Indian aroused p i t y because he stood i n the way of westward expansion and was doomed to see h i s own way of l i f e disappear. He was admired because of h i s physical grace, his closeness to nature, and because he was perceived to enjoy the kind of primal heroic society which was no longer possible f o r those people who l i v e d under the influence of a centuries-old c i v i l i z a t i o n . He i n s p i r e d horror i n border warfare because he often exacted a heavy p r i c e from those who, i n the vanguard of western expansion, were attempting to take h i s lands. The bloody q u a l i t y of his warfare produced an underlying a t t i t u d e of horror, so that Cooper had only to mention the word, "horror,'* to bring i t to the surface. Although Magua blames his moral f a i l u r e upon h i s weakness f o r the white-man's alcohol, Cooper shows that the Huron s u f f e r s from a much more basic corruption of s p i r i t . "Far above the more vulgar s u p e r s t i t i o n s of h i s t r i b e " (Mohicans, XXV, p. 315), Magua had not adopted any of the p o s i t i v e values of the white man as a replacement f o r the discarded reverence of h i s fellow tribesmen; on the contrary, as shown by h i s pious a t t i t u d e towards the beaver colony (Mohicans, XXVII, p. 342), he had developed a Machiavellian character which knew how to c o u n t e r f e i t b e l i e f f o r i t s own ends. On three d i f f e r e n t occasions, Magua makes cunning and a r t f u l speeches i n which he d e l i b e r a t e l y plays on the emotions of his Indian audience; on two of these occasions, 45 he s u c c e s s f u l l y seeks to arouse desire f o r revenge: They ["his Indian audienceJ had answered his melancholy and mourning by sympathy and sorrow; h i s assertions by gestures of confirmation;,and h i s boastings, with the e x u l t a t i o n of savages. When he spoke of courage t h e i r looks were firm and responsive; when he alluded to t h e i r i n j u r i e s , t h e i r eyes kindled with fury; when he mentioned the taunts of the women, they dropped t h e i r heads i n shame; but when he pointed out t h e i r means of vengeance, he struck a chord which never f a i l e d to t h r i l l In the breast of an Indian. (Mohicans, XI, p. 122) He paused, and looked about him i n affected veneration f o r the departed, but, i n t r u t h , to note the e f f e c t of his opening narrative . . . . Then Magua dropped hi s voice, which had h i t h e r t o been c l e a r , strong, and elevated, and touched upon the merits of the dead. No q u a l i t y that was l i k e l y to command the sympathy of an Indian escaped his notice . . . . He so managed his a l l u s i o n s , that i n a nation, which was composed of so few f a m i l i e s , he contrived to s t r i k e every chord that might f i n d , i n i t s turn, some breast i n which to v i b r a t e . . . . Magua had so a r t f u l l y blended the natural sympathies with the r e l i g i o u s s u p e r s t i t i o n of h i s auditors, that t h e i r minds, already prepared by custom to s a c r i f i c e a v i c t i m to the manes of t h e i r countrymen, l o s t - every vestige of humanity i n a wish f o r revenge. (Mohicans, XXIV, pp. 300-302) On the t h i r d occasion, when several of the younger Huron c h i e f s wished to launch an immediate 46 surprise attack on the Delawares, Magua had to persuade them to choose his more devious p o l i c y : When he perceived that, while the old men applauded his moderation, many of the f i e r c e s t and most distinguished of the warriors l i s t e n e d to these p o l i t i c plans with lowering looks, he cunningly led them back to the subject which they most loved. He spoke openly of the f r u i t s of t h e i r wisdom, which he boldly pronounced would be a complete and f i n a l triumph over t h e i r enemies. He even darkly hinted that t h e i r success might be extended, with proper ' caution, i n such a manner as to include the destruction of a l l whom they had reason to hate. In short, he so blended the warlike with the a r t f u l , as to f l a t t e r the propensities of both p a r t i e s , and to leave to each a subject f o r hope, while neither could say i t c l e a r l y comprehended h i s intentions . . . . A l l perceived that more was meant than was uttered, and each one believed that the hidden meaning was p r e c i s e l y such as his own f a c u l t i e s enabled him to a n t i c i p a t e . (Mohicans, XXVII, p. 340) 6 In Magua, therefore, Cooper presents the Indian not simply as a savage, but as a corrupt and even d i a b o l i c a l being: While others s l e p t , . . . he neither knew nor sought any repose. Had there been one s u f f i c i e n t l y curious to have watched the movements of the newly elected c h i e f , he would have seen him i n a corner of his lodge, musing on the subject of h i s future plans . . . . Occasionally, the a i r breathed through the crevices of the hut, and the low flame that f l u t t e r e d about the embers of the f i r e , threw t h e i r wavering l i g h t on the person of the 47 su l l e n r e c l u s e . At such moments, i t would not have been d i f f i c u l t to have fancied the dusky savage the Prince of Darkness, brooding on his own fancied wrongs, and p l o t t i n g e v i l . (Mohicans, XXVII, p. 341) Hawkeye's Indian friends d i f f e r from Magua c h i e f l y i n the f a c t that t h e i r association with white men has not corrupted them; they s t i l l r e t a i n the older Indian v i r t u e s . While Magua's treachery dominates his t o t a l personality and a l l of h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p s , the two Mohicans are treacherous only to that degree which Hawkeye would c a l l normal f o r an Indian. Thus, a f t e r Chingachgook had murdered and scalped a French sentry, Hawkeye comments p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y , "''Twould have been a c r u e l and an inhuman act f o r a white-skin; but ' t i s the g i f t and natur• of an Indian, and I suppose i t should not be denied!'" (Mohicans, XIV, p. 161). S i m i l a r l y , the f e e l i n g s of Duncan Heyward, Cora, and A l i c e , when they f i r s t meet Uncas, are that while he "might be a being p a r t i a l l y benighted i n the vale of ignorance," he "could not be one who would w i l l i n g l y devote his r i c h natural g i f t s to the purposes of wanton treachery" (Mohicans, VI, p. 54; i t a l i c s mine). P h y s i c a l l y , Uncas i s described i n terms which suggest the "noble savage": At a l i t t l e distance i n advance stood Uncas, his whole person thrown powerfully into view. The t r a v e l l e r s anxiously regarded the upright, f l e x i b l e 48 figur e of the young Mohican, graceful and u n r e s t r a i n -ed i n the attitudes and movements of nature. Though his person was more than usually screened by a green and fringed hunting-shirt, l i k e that of the white man, there was no concealment to h i s dark, glancing f e a r l e s s eye, a l i k e t e r r i b l e and calm; the bold o u t l i n e of h i s high, haughty features, pure i n t h e i r native red; or to the d i g n i f i e d e levation of his receding forehead, together with a l l the f i n e s t proportions of a noble head, bared to the generous scalping t u f t . I t was the f i r s t opportunity possessed by Duncan and his companions, to view the marked lineaments of e i t h e r of t h e i r Indian attendants, and each i n d i v i d u a l of the party f e l t r e l i e v e d from a burden of doubt, as the proud and determined, though wild expression of the features of the young warrior forced i t s e l f on t h e i r n o t i c e . . . . The ingenuous A l i c e gazed at his free a i r and proud carriage, as she would have looked upon some precious r e l i c of the Grecian c h i s e l , to which l i f e had been imparted by the intervention of a miracle; while Heyward, though accustomed to see the perfection of form which abounds among the uncorrupted natives, openly expressed his admiration at such an unblemished specimen of the noblest proportions of man. (Mohicans, VI, p. 54) Apart, however, from the hunting s h i r t , "the d i g n i f i e d e l e v a t i o n of h i s receding forehead," and "the generous scalping t u f t , " the picture i s altogether lacking i n s p e c i f i c s . For i t s e f f e c t i t depends upon the emotional appeal of adjectives such as: "graceful," " f e a r l e s s , " 4 9 " t e r r i b l e and calm," "bold," "haughty," " d i g n i f i e d , " "proud and determined, though wild," "uncorrupted," and "unblemished." Like Magua, Uncas i s no ordinary Indian; but whereas Magua i s described i n terms that suggest a repudiation of older b e l i e f s with nothing to put i n t h e i r place, Uncas i s said to be a person who has been raised above other Indians by the f i n e r q u a l i t y of h i s emotional l i f e — t h e very part of Magua's personality which had been so badly corrupted. Thus, Cooper speaks of a "sympathy that elevated him f a r above the i n t e l l i g e n c e , and advanced him probably centuries before the p r a c t i c e s , of h i s nation" (Mohicans, XII, p. 132). Again, however, apart from imputing to Uncas a romantic a t t r a c t i o n and devotion to Cora, Cooper shows nothing i n the Mohican's 7 conversation or action which j u s t i f i e s t h i s d e s c r i p t i o n . On the contrary, the a t t r a c t i v e q u a l i t i e s which Cooper depicts i n Uncas are p r e c i s e l y those heroic v i r t u e s t r a d i t i o n a l l y associated with Indian soci e t y : l o y a l t y , great physical endurance, and courage. Cooper gives no i n d i c a t i o n that Uncas could enter i n t o American c i v i l i z -ation on terms of d i g n i t y and equality; to the extent that Uncas became c i v i l i z e d he would become less than he already was. Uncas could have no d i g n i f i e d part i n American c i v i l i z a t i o n because of the novel's i m p l i c i t doctrine of 50 race. Of a l l the characters, Cora Munro presents the most l i b e r a l viewpoint on r a c e - r e l a t i o n s — a viewpoint which the p l o t of the novel i n v a l i d a t e s . When her s i s t e r , A l i c e , and t h e i r f r i e n d , Duncan Heyward, show t h e i r d i s t r u s t of Magua, Cora asks, "'Should we d i s t r u s t the man, because h i s manners are not our manners, and that his skin i s dark?'" (Mohicans, I I , p. 15). The reader, although responding p o s i t i v e l y to Cora's open attitude, i s aware that her confidence i s sadly misplaced because Magua has already been described i n negative terms. Cora wants-people to be judged on t h e i r own merits, rather than on the basis of race; as she had given the be n e f i t of t h i s doubt to Magua, so she demands i t for h e r s e l f when the Huron accuses the whites of destroying his character, "'Am I answerable that thoughtless and unprincipled men e x i s t , whose shades of countenance may resemble mine?'" (Mohicans, XI,. p. 116). S i m i l a r l y , i n her interview with Tamenund, the aged Delaware c h i e f , Cora introduces h e r s e l f as, '"A woman. One of a hated race, i f thou w i l t — a Yengee. But one who has never harmed thee, and who cannot harm thy people i f she could; who asks for succour'" (Mohicans, XXIX, p. 366). Since Cora, h e r s e l f , has mixed blood, the phrase, "hated race," has a double reference: as her white ancestry was hated by the Indians, so her black ancestry was hated by the whites. By speaking i n t h i s way, Cora 51 indicates awareness of a darker and more t r a g i c aspect of race; as the interview continues t h i s understanding comes to the fore, "'Like thee and thine, venerable c h i e f . . . the curse of my ancestors has f a l l e n h e a v ily upon t h e i r c h i l d ' " (Mohicans, XXIX, p. 368). Here race i s seen i n a d e t e r m i n i s t i c context; indeed, the l a t t e r part of the book i s overshadowed by the idea of divine displeasure at c e r t a i n races. The dynamics of the book a l l work to deny the l i b e r a l and o p t i m i s t i c view which Cora a r t i c u l a t e s at i t s beginning. In one s i t u a t i o n , r e l a t i n g to black-white rather than Indian-white r e l a t i o n s , Cooper indicates an under-standing of the deep roots of r a c i s t a t t i t u d e s . When Major Munro accuses Duncan Heyward of prejudice towards Cora because of her mixed race, the omniscient narrator comments on the young o f f i c e r ' s d e n i a l , "'Heaven protect me from a prejudice so unworthy of my reason!' returned Duncan, at the same time conscious of such a f e e l i n g , and that as deeply rooted as i f i t had been ing r a f t e d i n Q his nature" (Mohicans, XVI, p. 188). Cooper, however, does not pursue t h i s flaw i n Heyward's character, nor does he allow i t to influence the p i c t u r e of Heyward as a generally admirable character. The novel i t s e l f shares with Heyward t h i s concern for r a c i a l p u r i t y . Hawkeye repeatedly speaks of himself as 52 a "man without a cross." In h i s f i r s t "Preface" to the novel, Cooper explains that the Delawares, Mohicans, and other Wapanachki Indians c a l l e d themselves the "Lenni 9 Lenape" which means an "unmixed people." Against t h i s background, Duncan Heyward a r t i c u l a t e s the att i t u d e of the book as a whole when he says that the thought of Cora being forced i n t o marriage with Magua " * i s worse than a thousand deaths'" (Mohicans, XI, p. 125). Magua's desire to make Cora his wife, a mixture of sexual passion and the desire f o r revenge, contrasts with the love, devotion, and admiration which Uncas showed f o r her. But, i n s p i t e of his admirable q u a l i t i e s , any proposed union between Uncas and Cora would have caused Major Munro, Heyward, and Hawkeye almost as much anguish and disapproval as did the idea of her forced marriage to Magua. Hawkeye's opposition to a mixed marriage, even when i t involves Uncas whom he loves as his own son, reveals i t s e l f at the time of mourning for Cora and Uncas; when the Indian g i r l s h i n t strongly of t h e i r heavenly union and future happiness Hawkeye "shook his head, l i k e one who knew the error of t h e i r simple creed" (Mohicans, XXXIII, p. 416). Although Hawkeye i s the close f r i e n d of Chingachgook and Uncas, he constantly maintains the d i s t i n c t i o n between white man and Indian. Always 53 emphasizing that he himself i s a white man, he explains differences i n terms of his doctrine of d i v i n e l y appointed r a c i a l g i f t s . Thus he excuses Indian pra c t i c e s such as scalping by saying that t h i s i s i n accordance with Indian g i f t s (Mohicans, XIV, p. 161). While he uses the concept of r a c i a l g i f t s to j u s t i f y the action of h i s fr i e n d s , Hawkeye usually abandons such sophistry when he r e f e r s to his Huron enemies: "A Huron! . . . they are a t h i e v i s h race, nor do I care by whom they are adopted; you can never make anything of them but skulks and vagabonds." (Mohicans, IV, p. 35) "A Mingo i s a Mingo, and God having made him so, neither the Mohawks nor any other t r i b e can a l t e r him." (Mohicans, IV, p. 37) "*Tis a safe thing to c a l c u l a t e on the knavery of an Iroquois." (Mohicans, IV, p. 38) Through i t s emphasis on r a c i a l p u r i t y , i t s understanding of the deep roots of r a c i a l s t r i f e and prejudice, and i t s concept of r a c i a l g i f t s , therefore, the novel very strongly suggests that Indian and white races cannot e x i s t harmoniously i n close contact with each other. At the same time the ever advancing f r o n t i e r of white settlement made close contact between the two races more and more frequent. Throughout the novel several of the characters r e f e r to t h i s advancing f r o n t i e r and to the white man's i n s a t i a b l e greed f o r land. Cooper 54 introduces Natty Bumppo and Chingachgook as the two friends discuss the opposing r i g h t s of Indians and whites to the land. The physical s e t t i n g , within "that breathing s i l e n c e , which marks the drowsy s u l t r i n e s s of an American landscape i n J u l y " (Mohicans, I I I , p. 23), and the context of the p l o t , where the two friends use the discussion to pass time while they await the a r r i v a l of Uncas, give the discussion the atmosphere of an i n t e r e s t i n g debate rather than that of a v i t a l question of j u s t i c e . By accepting Chingachgook's t r a d i t i o n that the Mohican people had originated west of the M i s s i s s i p p i and had taken t h e i r land i n the east by conquest, Hawkeye attempts to j u s t i f y the white conquest: "'Your fathers came from the s e t t i n g sun, crossed the b i g r i v e r , fought the people of the country, and took the land; and mine came from the red sky of the morning, over the s a l t lake, and did t h e i r work much a f t e r the fashion that had been set them by yours; then l e t God judge the matter between us, and friends spare t h e i r words!" (Mohicans, I I I , pp. 25-26). The discussion then degenerates into an argument about the r e l a t i v e s u p e r i o r i t y of white over Indian weapons; when Chingachgook mentions the white man's fire-arms, Hawkeye r e p l i e s that an Indian with a bow and arrow was more dangerous than the average s e t t l e r with a 55 r i f l e . In a more generous mood, he then admits his own ignorance of white h i s t o r y and asks Chingachgook to t e l l him "'What passed, according to the t r a d i t i o n s of the red men, when our fathers f i r s t met'" (Mohicans, I I I , p. 27). Chingachgook's response brings an a i r of romantic pathos to the story of his people's d i s i n h e r i t a n c e : "The f i r s t pale-faces who came among us spoke no English. They came i n a large canoe, when my fathers had buried the tomahawk with the red men around them. Then Hawkeye,... we were one people, and we were happy. . . . The s a l t lake gave us i t s f i s h , the wood i t s deer and the a i r i t s b i r d s . We took wives who bore us c h i l d r e n ; we worshipped the Great S p i r i t ; and we kept the Maquas beyond the sound of our songs of triumph! . . . "The Dutch landed and gave my people the f i r e -water; they drank u n t i l the heavens and the earth seemed to meet, and they f o o l i s h l y thought they had found the Great S p i r i t . Then they parted with t h e i r land. Foot by foot they were driven back from the shores, u n t i l I, that am a c h i e f and a sagamore, have never seen the sun but through the trees, and have never v i s i t e d the graves of my fathers! . . . "Where are the blossoms of those summers!—fallen, one by one: so a l l of my family departed, each i n his turn, to the land of s p i r i t s . I am on the h i l l - t o p , and must go down int o the v a l l e y ; and when Uncas follows i n my footsteps, there w i l l no longer be any of the blood of the sagamores, 56 for my boy i s the l a s t of the Mohicans." (Mohicans, I I I , pp. 28-29) S i g n i f i c a n t l y , Chingachgook*s account gives very l i t t l e d e t a i l about the way h i s people were "driven back from the shores;" instead i t singles out t h e i r i n a b i l i t y to handle l i q u o r as the reason f o r t h e i r loss of the land. Emotionally, therefore, the passage arouses i n the reader a n o s t a l g i c sympathy f o r a dispossessed and dying race; t h i s sympathy, however, cannot become more than f a l s e sentiment since, i n t e l l e c t u a l l y , the reader has become aware that the Indians' own claim to the land i s based on past violence and the dispossession of other peoples, and f u r t h e r , that the Indians' weakness for alcohol was p a r t l y responsible for t h e i r loss of the land. In a moving speech Tamenund, the ancient Delaware c h i e f , states the f a c t of the white man's " t h i r s t " for land but does not condemn i t ; l i k e the dialogue of Hawkeye and Chingachgook, t h i s speech deals i n n o s t a l g i c pathos rather than i n d e t a i l e d assessment of Indian r i g h t s and white wrongs. Only the v i l l a i n , Magua, states the Indian case against the whites with any vigour, and t h i s i s done within the d i s c r e d i t i n g context of demagoguery: "With h i s tongue, he stops the ears of the Indians; h i s heart teaches him to pay warriors to f i g h t his b a t t l e s ; his cunning t e l l s him how to get together the goods of the earth; and his arms 57 enclose the land, from the shores of the s a l t water, to the islands of the great lake. His gluttony makes him s i c k . God gave him enough, and yet he wants a l l . Such are the pale-faces." (Mohicans, XXIX, p. 362) The death of Uncas at the end of the novel i l l u s t r a t e s the d i f f i c u l t y involved i n romanticizing the Indian i n Cooper's day. Magua died ignobly i n accordance with the d i c t a t e s of popular art; he was e v i l , and e v i l had to be vanquished. But Uncas was noble and heroic; he died because he was not c i v i l i z e d and could not become c i v i l i z e d without becoming le s s than he was. A c i v i l i z e d and educated Uncas, within the romantic t r a d i t i o n , could do no more than cry with Holderlin's Hyperion: "I r e f l e c t , and f i n d myself and I was b e f o r e — alone, with a l l the g r i e f s of mortality; and my heart's refuge, the world i n i t s eternal oneness i s gone; Nature closes her arms, and I stand l i k e an a l i e n before her and understand her not. Ah! had I never gone to your schools! The knowledge which I pursued down i t s tunnels and g a l l e r i e s , from which, i n my youthful f o l l y , I expected the confirmation of a l l my pure j o y — t h a t knowledge has corrupted everything f o r me. Among you I became so t r u l y reasonable, learned so thoroughly to d i s t i n g u i s h myself from what surrounds me, that now I am s o l i t a r y i n the b e a u t i f u l world, an outcast from the garden of Nature, i n which I grew and flowered, drying up 58 under the noonday sun." Indeed, the readers of Cooper are led to see themselves somewhat i n the nature of Hyperion—looking back at a natural childhood which has been l o s t forever i n the i n t e r e s t s of a more mature, i f less s a t i s f y i n g , adult-hood. Uncas appeals to us because he represents that childhood. In The Pioneers, Cooper attempted to j u s t i f y t h i s concept of maturity; i n The Last of the Mohicans, he t r i e d to show why childhood had to be l e f t behind. Uncas died i n accordance with h i s father's pathetic understanding of the demise of h i s people; at the time when Uncas i s introduced i n the novel, h i s father foreshadowed his death when he said that Uncas was the l a s t of the Mohicans—he does not suggest even the p o s s i b i l i t y that Uncas might have c h i l d r e n . Uncas had to die because, i n a growing America, there was no place f o r him which would not diminish h i s stature, make his n o b i l i t y i r r e l e v a n t , or pervert his generosity i n t o a meanness and contempt s i m i l a r to Magua*s. The only other p o s s i b i l i t y was that he might degenerate i n t o a drunken memory of things p a s t — a s Cooper had already shown his father to be i n The Pioneers. f Although i n his 1826 "Preface," Cooper r e f e r s to the Delawares as the "greatest and most c i v i l i z e d of the Indian nations, that existed within the l i m i t s of 59 the present United States, "J""L the book gives no evidence to support t h i s statement. Neither Chingachgook nor Tamenund make any references to f i e l d s or a g r i c u l t u r e ; the reader, therefore, i n f e r s that the "most c i v i l i z e d of the Indian nations" l i v e d e n t i r e l y by hunting. For a l l the n o b i l i t y which Cooper ascribes to him, Uncas remains a heroic savage whose p o l i t i c a l allegiance i s to the " r i g h t " cause f o r very inadequate reasons. In s p i t e of generalized statements about his n o b i l i t y , Uncas has no q u a l i t i e s which would allow him to become e i t h e r a happy, or a welcome, member of c i v i l i z e d American so c i e t y . We have looked at The Last of the Mohicans to examine i t s p i c t u r e of Indian character, i t s doctrine of r a c i a l p u r i t y , i t s discussion of Indian land r i g h t s , and the elegaic aura i t casts over the disappearance of Indian peoples. The discussion of land r i g h t s and the p i c t u r e of a dying t r i b e of Indians both help to generate a sympathetic understanding of Indian problems; however, both of these tend to vague f e e l i n g s of good w i l l rather than to any p o l i t i c a l commitment. At the same time they are overshadowed by the negative picture of Indian character and the emphasis upon r a c i a l p u r i t y ; these aspects of the novel i n d i c a t e that the Indian could not f i n d any f i r m place i n a t r u l y c i v i l i z e d s ociety. 60 C. THE PRAIRIE Published i n 182 7, s h o r t l y a f t e r Cooper went to France, The P r a i r i e has s p e c i a l s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r t h i s study since i t was the l a s t of the Leatherstocking Tales to be written before Indian removal became a b r u t a l f a c t . Although The P r a i r i e presents a l a t e r stage i n the h i s t o r y of Natty Bumppo, and of American development, than does The Pioneers, i t depicts a f r o n t i e r i n an e a r l i e r stage of development than does the 1823 novel. In The  Pioneers, the problem of Indian-white r e l a t i o n s h i p s has been solved—by the disappearance of the Indian; i n The P r a i r i e , the f r o n t i e r has s h i f t e d westward and a new cycle of Indian-white r e l a t i o n s has begun. This s h i f t corresponds to Frederick Jackson Turner's thesis that American h i s t o r y presents a s e r i e s of c o n t i n u a l l y advancing f r o n t i e r s . Important also i s the f a c t that t h i s novel deals with Indian-white r e l a t i o n s during a period of h i s t o r y which i s c l o s e r i n time to Cooper's wr i t i n g than that of any of the other Leatherstocking novels. The question of land use and ownership plays an important part i n t h i s novel, with f i v e d i s t i n c t i v e points of view represented by various characters: the Sioux Indians wish to keep the land to themselves and to drive out any encroaching whites; the Pawnee Indians see the necessity of accommodating themselves to the westward 61 expansion of American c i v i l i z a t i o n ; the Trapper, Natty Bumppo, wishes to leave the land undisturbed as a refuge from the uncongenial ways of the s e t t l e m e n t s ; Ishmael Bush, the s q u a t t e r , wants to occupy good t r a c t s of land w i t h no concern f o r l e g a l t i t l e ; and Captain M i d d l e t o n r e p r e s e n t s the a u t h o r i t y of the U n i t e d States over the newly acquired L o u i s i a n a T e r r i t o r y . A r a t h e r i m p l a u s i b l e p l o t b r i n g s these f i v e v i e w p o i n t s i n t o c o n t a c t w i t h each other . Thus, i n The P r a i r i e Cooper had a major o p p o r t u n i t y to d e a l w i t h d i f f e r e n t and c o n f l i c t i n g views of a f r o n t i e r l a n d . Our examination of The P r a i r i e w i l l concentrate on these viewpoints and then w i l l look b r i e f l y at other f a c t o r s i n the Indian-white r e l a t i o n s h i p . As i n the other L e a t h e r s t o c k i n g T a l e s , Natty Bumppo t h i n k s of Indians as good or bad and r e l a t e s t h i s goodness or badness to t h e i r t r i b a l a f f i l i a t i o n s . The Sioux are i d e n t i f i e d as bad Indians from t h e i r f i r s t appearance when the Trapper speaks of "'a bloody band of accursed Sioux'" and goes on to r e f e r t o them as "miscreants," " t h i e v e s , " " r e p t i l e s , " "knaves," " d e v i l s , " and "imps" ( P r a i r i e , I I I , pp. 34-37). The Trapper's a t t i t u d e i s a l s o t h a t of the book as a whole; Cooper d e s c r i b e s the r a i d i n g p a r t y as "a band of beings, who resembled demons r a t h e r than men, s p o r t i n g i n t h e i r n i g h t l y r e v e l s across the bleak p l a i n " ( P r a i r i e , I I I , p. 35). In another 62 e d i t o r i a l passage, Cooper, speaking of the Sioux as "The Ishmaelites of the American deserts," i m p l i c i t l y l i n k s them to Ishmael Bush and h i s kind: From time immemorial the hands of the Sioux had been turned against t h e i r neighbours of the p r a i r i e s , and even at t h i s day, when the influence and authority of a c i v i l i z e d government are beginning to be f e l t around them, they are considered as a treacherous and dangerous race. At the period of our t a l e , the case was f a r worse; few white men tr u s t i n g themselves i n the remote and unprotected regions where so f a l s e a t r i b e was known to dwell. ( P r a i r i e , IV, p. 3 9 ) 1 2 A twentieth century reader might suspect that the basic reason f o r regarding the Sioux as "bad Indians" lay i n t h e i r opposition to the westward movement of American settlement. Thus, although Cooper gives f u l l sentimental play to the idea of aboriginal t i t l e to the land, only the Sioux are w i l l i n g to carry t h i s idea beyond the l i m i t s of sentimentality. Old Le Balafre s c o r n f u l l y attacks the white man's i n s a t i a b l e appetite f o r land: "Why cannot h i s people see everything, since they crave a l l ? " ( P r a i r i e , XXVIII, p. 383). The Sioux c h i e f , Mahtoree, proposed that the Pawnee and the Sioux should no longer f i g h t each other but rather should act together to prevent further white encroachment on Indian land: "Does the wolf destroy the wolf, or the r a t t l e r 63 s t r i k e his brother? You know they do not; there-fore, Teton, are you wrong to go on a path that leads to the v i l l a g e of a Red-skin, with a tomahawk i n your hand" . . . . "The redman can never want an enemy: they are p l e n t i e r than the leaves on the trees, the birds i n the heavens, or the buffaloes on the p r a i r i e s . Let my brother open his eyes wide: does he nowhere see an enemy he would s t r i k e ? . . . . "Now, l e t not the mind of my brother go on a crooked path. I f a redskin s t r i k e s a redskin forever, who w i l l be masters of the p r a i r i e s , when no warriors are l e f t to say, 'They are mine?' Hear the voices of the old men. They t e l l us that i n t h e i r days many Indians have come out of the woods under the r i s i n g sun, and that they have f i l l e d the p r a i r i e s with t h e i r complaints of the robberies of the Long-Knives. Where a Pale-face comes, a redman cannot stay. The land i s too small. They are always hungry. See, they are here already!" ( P r a i r i e , XXX, p. 397-398) By l o c a t i n g the action i n Pawnee rather than Sioux t e r r i t o r y , Cooper e f f e c t i v e l y denies the r i g h t of trespassing Sioux to condemn s i m i l a r trespasses by the Americans. As the Trapper pointed out to Weucha, i f the land was Pawnee t e r r i t o r y , then the whites were no more trespassers than the Sioux ( P r a i r i e , IV, p. 44). Like the Sioux, the Pawnees do not l i k e white usurpation of t h e i r lands. Hard-Heart, the Pawnee•chief, shows h i s abused sense of j u s t i c e at the manner i n which 64 France had sold the Louisianna T e r r i t o r y to the United States; he asks "Where were the c h i e f s of the Pawnee-Loups when t h i s bargain was made? . . . Is a nation to be sold l i k e the skin of a beaver?" ( P r a i r i e , XVIII, p. 2 2 0 ) . In s p i t e of t h i s grievance the Pawnees were firm f r i e n d s of Captain Middleton and h i s men. Repeated emphasis on the might of the American people gives an a i r of i n e v i t a b i l i t y to the westward movement so that Hard-Heart appears to be the voice of reason as well as of honour to f r i e n d s , and h o s p i t a l i t y to strangers. Yet, however reasonable, honourable, and hospitable Hard-Heart may have been, D.H. Lawrence's comment i s most appropriate i n t h i s context: "The Red Man and the White Man are not blood-brothers: even when they are most f r i e n d l y . When they are most f r i e n d l y , i t i s as a r u l e the one betraying 13 hi s r a c e - s p i r i t to the other." Cooper was aware of t h i s betrayal and reveals i t i n one of the most pathetic statements i n the novel. As the v i c t o r i o u s Pawnee are escorting t h e i r white friends to the Pawnee v i l l a g e , Cooper says: "The v i c t o r s seemed to have l o s t every trace of f e r o c i t y with t h e i r success, and appeared disposed to consult the most t r i f l i n g of the wants of that engrossing people who were d a i l y encroaching on t h e i r r i g h t s and reducing the redman of the West 65 from t h e i r state of proud independence to the condition of f u g i t i v e s and wanderers." ( P r a i r i e , XXXIII, p. 436) Already, i n his r e l a t i o n s with h i s own t r i b e , Hard-Heart has reduced himself to the r o l e of a puppet apologist f o r the white man: He compared t h e i r countless numbers to the f l i g h t s of migratory birds i n the season of blossoms, or i n the f a l l of the year. With a del i c a c y that none knew better how to p r a c t i c e than an Indian warrior, he made no d i r e c t mention of the rapacious tempers, that so many of them had betrayed, i n t h e i r dealings with the redmen. Feeling that the sentiment of d i s t r u s t was strongly engrafted i n the tempers of h i s t r i b e , he rather endeavoured to soothe any j u s t resent-ment they might entertain, by i n d i r e c t excuses and apologies. ( P r a i r i e , XXXIII, p. 439) Thus, although The P r a i r i e ends with a picture of the v i c t o r i o u s Pawnees at peace with the white men, there i s no doubt that Hard-Heart and h i s tribesmen have nothing to which they can look forward except the degradation which characterized Mohegan John i n The Pioneers. Richard Chase has pointed out the autumnal mood of 14 The P r a i r i e . The elegiac tone which t h i s mood engenders r e l a t e s most d i r e c t l y to the f i n a l death of Natty Bumppo and to the unrealized dream, which he symboliz'ed, of white men l i v i n g i n harmony with nature and with the Indians. In addition to i t s r e l a t i o n to Natty Bumppo, 66 however, t h i s tone also r e l a t e s to the Indians and to the p r a i r i e which the reader begins to see as the l a s t l o c a l e i n which these Indians could be seen i n some of t h e i r o r i g i n a l heroic grandeur. The Trapper has no desire for e i t h e r ownership or possession of more land than was needed f o r his grave. As he said to Le Balafre, when the old Indian had accused a l l whites of possessing an i n s a t i a b l e greed f o r land: "I understand you, c h i e f ; nor w i l l I gainsay the j u s t i c e of your words, seeing that they are too much founded i n t r u t h . But though born of the race you love so l i t t l e , my worst enemy, not even a l y i n g Mingo, would dare to say . . . that I ever coveted more ground than the Lord has intended each man to f i l l . " ( P r a i r i e , XXVIII, pp. 373-74) In h i s ten years on the p r a i r i e , the Trapper had not upset e i t h e r the e c o l o g i c a l or the s o c i e t a l balance of the area. The a r r i v a l of Ishmael Bush and his family signals a decisive change i n t h i s b a l a n c e — with t h e i r axes as the symbols and agents of t h i s change. As the sons of Ishmael quickly cut down a small grove of trees, the Trapper "cast h i s eyes upwards at the vacancies they l e f t i n the heavens, with a melancholy gaze, and f i n a l l y turned away, muttering to himself, with a b i t t e r smile, l i k e one who disdained giving a more audible utterance to his discontent" ( P r a i r i e , I I , p. 13). To escape t h i s kind of destruction, 6 7 the Trapper had l e f t the state of New York: "They scourge the very •arth with t h e i r axes. Such h i l l s and hunting-grounds as I have seen stripped of the g i f t s of the Lord, without remorse or shame! I t a r r i e d t i l l the mouths of my hounds were deafened by the blows of the chopper, and then I came West in search of quiet. I t was a grievous journey that I made, a grievous t o i l to pass through f a l l i n g timber, and to breathe the thick a i r of smoky cl e a r i n g s , week a f t e r week, as I d i d . 'Tis a f a r country too, that state of York from t h i s ! " ( P r a i r i e , VII, p. 83) He had hoped that the p r a i r i e desert would deter further expansion of the f r o n t i e r but now wonders i f anything can stay the march of the "choppers". He does not love the p r a i r i e as he had once loved the f o r e s t , but he does take a grim d e l i g h t i n looking at the desolation of the land-scape as a sign of God's judgement on human waste: "I often think the Lord has placed t h i s barren b e l t of p r a i r i e behind the states, to warn men to what t h e i r f o l l y may yet bring the land! Ay! weeks, i f not months, may you journey i n these open f i e l d s , i n which there i s neither dwelling nor habitation f o r man or beast. Even the savage animals t r a v e l miles on miles to seek t h e i r dens: and yet the wind seldom blows from the east, but I conceit the sound of axes, and the crash of f a l l i n g trees, are i n my ears." ( P r a i r i e , I I , p. 19) "What w i l l the Yankee choppers say, when they 68 have cut t h e i r path from the eastern to the western waters, and f i n d that a hand, which can lay the 'arth bare at a blow, has been here and swept the country, i n very mockery of t h e i r wickedness. They w i l l turn on t h e i r tracks l i k e a fox that doubles, and then the rank smell of t h e i r own footsteps w i l l show them the madness of t h e i r waste." ( P r a i r i e , VII, p. 83) The Trapper's a t t i t u d e to the land does not represent a p o l i t i c a l option as do the other view-points expressed i n The P r a i r i e . Instead, his view, although i m p r a c t i c a l , stands i n judgement upon these other views. We must note, however, that the novel cannot be construed as embodying such a judgement; rather, i t remains i n the realm of u n f u l f i l l e d prophecy. In opposition to Ishmael Bush, who recognized no ownership but that of possession, the Trapper constantly affirmed that the Indians were the r i g h t f u l owners of the country ( P r a i r i e , I I , p. 23; V, p. 64; VII, pp. 84-86; XVIII, p. 220; XXV, p. 329). In s p i t e of t h i s view, he does agree that Bush should f i g h t rather than r e t r e a t from the Sioux and he d i r e c t s Bush to a rock which could be turned into a f o r t . In sp i t e of the Trapper's opposition to the western movement of American c i v i l i z a t i o n , he i s , i n the f i n a l analysis, on the side of that c i v i l i z a t i o n . He shows much les s h e s i t a t i o n to f i g h t the Sioux than he does to f i g h t 69 Ishmael. Although he bewails the f a c t that "color, and property, and tongue, and 1 1arning should make so wide a dif f e r e n c e i n those who, afte r a l l , are but the c h i l d r e n of one father!" ( P r a i r i e , V, p. 61), the Trapper i s not disposed to argue with Ishmael Bush's statement that "color should be something, when Ch r i s t i a n s meet i n such a place as t h i s " ( P r a i r i e , V, p. 65) . The Trapper's basic allegiance to the cause of the advancing whites i s shown by the f a c t that he had joined the army of "Mad Anthony" Wayne and helped to defeat the Indians of the Old Northwest. "I was passing from the states on the sea-shore int o these f a r regions, when I crossed the t r a i l of his army, and I f e l l i n , on his rear, j u s t as a looker-on; but when they got to blows, the crack of my r i f l e was heard among the r e s t , though to my shame i t may be said, I never knew the r i g h t of the quarrel, as well as a man of threescore and ten should know the reason of his acts afore he takes mortal l i f e which i s a g i f t he never can return!" ( P r a i r i e , V, p. 6 7 ) 1 5 The " r i g h t of the quarrel", which Bumppo had not bothered to i n v e s t i g a t e , concerned the r i g h t s of Indians to possession of t h e i r l a n d s — r i g h t s which had been set f o r t h i n the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 but never enforced by the American government. Following- the Revolutionary war, 70 s e t t l e r s had moved i n t o I ndian lands north of the Ohio r i v e r . In the face of Indian o p p o s i t i o n the Government sent i n e x p e d i t i o n s to p r o t e c t the s e t t l e r s . Under General Anthony Wayne, the Indians were defeated on August 20, 1794 and subsequently f o r c e d to cede almost t w o - t h i r d s of the present s t a t e of Ohio as w e l l as p a r t of Indiana. Apart from s u p e r f i c i a l s i m i l a r i t i e s such as having served w i t h "Mad Anthony" and a d i s l i k e of law c o u r t s , Ishmael Bush and Natty Bumppo had nothing i n common. Ishmael Bush and h i s f a m i l y are portrayed as d u l l , rough, i g n o r a n t , and l a w l e s s f r o n t i e r s m e n . Although Bush i s l a w l e s s , he i s not an advocate of chaos; throughout the n o v e l , one of h i s main concerns i s to m a i n t a i n order w i t h i n h i s own f a m i l y ( c f . P r a i r i e , V I I I , p. 100). But w h i l e he recognized the need f o r domestic or d e r , he was not aware of any l a r g e r s o c i a l u n i t which c o u l d make s i m i l a r claims upon h i s l i b e r t y . Ishmael Bush had no use f o r a l e g a l system which was i n o p p o s i t i o n to h i s own d e s i r e s . When a d i s p u t e arose between Abiram White and Ishmael's son, Asa, Ishmael promised j u s t i c e according t o the "law of n a t u r e " : "When the law of the land i s weak, i t i s r i g h t the lav/ of nature should be s t r o n g . You understand me, Asa; and you know me. As f o r you, Abiram, the c h i l d has done you wrong, and i t i s my p l a c e to see 71 you righted. Remember; I t e l l you j u s t i c e s h a l l be done; i t i s enough. But you have said hard things agin me and my family. I f the hounds of the law have put t h e i r b i l l s on the trees and stumps of the c l e a r i n g s , i t was f o r no act of dishonesty, as you know, but because we maintain the r u l e that 'arth i s common property." ( P r a i r i e , VIII, p. 103) S i m i l a r l y , i n an e a r l y dialogue with the Trapper, Bush asserted his a t t i t u d e to land ownership: "I am as r i g h t f u l an owner of the land I stand on, as any governor of the States! Can you t e l l me, stranger, where the law or the reason i s to be found, which says that one man s h a l l have a section, or a town, or perhaps a county to h i s use, and another have to beg f o r earth to make his grave in ? " ( P r a i r i e , V, pp. 64-65) Again, i n an argument with h i s son, Ishmael r e f e r s to t h i s lawless a t t i t u d e i n terms of a noble legacy: "The world i s wide, my g a l l a n t boy, and there's many a noble plantation on i t , without a tenant. Go; you have t i t l e deeds sign'd and seal'd to your hand. Few fathers portion t h e i r c h i l d r e n better than Ishmael Bush." ( P r a i r i e , VIII, p. 101) Basing his claim on occupancy, Ishmael makes a powerful 1 6 appeal to the law of nature. His squatter's mentality had already involved him i n trouble with the law i n more s e t t l e d regions; now i t involves him i n c o n f l i c t with Indians. He i s , therefore, a representative of those frontiersmen who so often brought American f r o n t i e r s ociety 72 int o bloody c o n f l i c t with Indian peoples and made necessary government intervention i n the form of both m i l i t a r y force and land purchase. I n t e l l e c t u a l l y , the book gives no sanction whatsoever to t h i s view; emotion-a l l y , however, The P r a i r i e demands from the reader a grudging admiration f o r Ishmael and his kind. At the end of the book Cooper gives Bush and his family a c e r t a i n t r a g i c grandeur as Ishmael dispenses j u s t i c e , purges himself of the e v i l influence of Abiram, and makes his way back to the moving edge of the a g r i c u l t -17 u r a l f r o n t i e r . Hope fo r the future i s suggested i n the l a s t reference to the family where the novel states that some of Bush's descendants "were reclaimed from t h e i r lawless and semi-barbarous l i v e s " ( P r a i r i e , XXXII, p. 326). The reader suspects that, i n another generation, the times w i l l be r i g h t f o r these descendants to take possession of the p r a i r i e . The general character of the American f r o n t i e r s -man i s further redeemed by Cooper's portrayal of the honest, open, and generous Paul Hover. Thus, although there might be occasional men l i k e Abiram White on the f r o n t i e r , men who f i n d the due reward f o r t h e i r misdeeds, Cooper's t o t a l p i c t u r e of the frontiersman i n The P r a i r i e i s not unfavourable. In an e d i t o r i a l passage, Cooper speaks of the f r o n t i e r and of frontiersmen as necessary 73 forerunners of the coming American c i v i l i z a t i o n : Here, and here only, i s to be found that widely spread though f a r from numerous cl a s s which may be at a l l likened to those who have paved the way f o r the i n t e l l e c t u a l progress of nations, i n the Old World. The resemblance between the American borderer and his European prototype i s singular, though not always uniform. Both might be c a l l e d without r e s t r a i n t ; the one being above, the other beyond the reach of the law—brave, because they were inured to danger—proud, because they were independent, and v i n d i c t i v e , because each was the avenger of h i s own wrongs. I t would be unjust to the borderer to pursue the p a r a l l e l much f a r t h e r . He i s i r r e l i g i o u s , because he has i n h e r i t e d the knowledge that r e l i g i o n does not e x i s t i n forms, and his reason r e j e c t s mockery. The f i n a l point of view with respect to owner-ship of the land i s that of Captain Middleton. As the symbolic representative of the government of the United States, Middleton has an importance i n The P r a i r i e which goes f a r beyond his i n s i g n i f i c a n t r o l e i n the development of the p l o t . Far from being an e f f e c t i v e force f o r the establishment of law and order, Middleton shows less i n i t i a t i v e than any other character i n the novel. At d i f f e r e n t times he i s prisoner of the Sioux and of Ishmael Bush; at other times Hard-Heart or the Trapper rescue him from d i f f i c u l t i e s . His most active q u a l i t y i s d i s t r u s t , d i s t r u s t even of a l l i e s l i k e Hard-Heart. 74 Middleton shows the deep roots of t h i s d i s t r u s t and the ease with which i t comes to the surface when, i n his o f f i c i a l capacity as an American s o l d i e r , he makes a f r i e n d l y return v i s i t to the Pawnee v i l l a g e . Because no welcoming party has been sent to meet him, he becomes suspicious and orders his men to be ready f o r trouble: "There i s something remarkable i n a l l t h i s , . . . yonder boy has heard of our approach, or he would not f a i l to n o t i f y his t r i b e ; and yet he scarcely deigns to favour us with a glance. Look to your arms, men; i t may be necessary to l e t these savages f e e l our strength." ( P r a i r i e , XXXIV, p. 451) In s p i t e of the assurances of Paul Hover, the Captain r e t a i n s his suspicion even a f t e r his f r i e n d l y but reserved meeting with Hard-Heart. Finding the whole v i l l a g e — i n c l u d i n g women and children—assembled i n an open space i n the town, Middleton becomes even more suspicious and concerned. The reason for the Pawnee f a i l u r e to provide a s u i t a b l e welcome was, of course, the impending death of t h e i r f r i e n d , the Trapper. Considering that the Pawnee horses had a l l been l e f t i n the care of one young boy, and that the e n t i r e t r i b e was assembled i n the open to meet a company of armed s o l d i e r s , the reader must think that Middleton's apprehension was a l i t t l e r i d i c u l o u s . In s p i t e of "the consummate manner i n which a savage could conceal his designs," ( P r a i r i e , XXXIII, p. 438) there was l i t t l e i n the s i t u a t i o n to suggest violence. 75 Middleton, however, cannot be considered a r i d i c u l o u s character; as we have said, he was the symbolic represent-ative of the American government and also of culture, education, and good breeding. His d i s t r u s t of even f r i e n d l y Indians must be regarded as having an importance which was appropriate to his symbolic r o l e . Middleton makes no d i r e c t statements about the land, or about land ownership, but his return to the p r a i r i e i n 1806 indicates the government's desire to e s t a b l i s h i t s authority over the newly acquired Louisiana Purchase. One of the major threats to that authority was the influence of French-Canadian fur traders, who usually had better r e l a t i o n s with the Indians than did the Americans. This influence had already been mentioned as a corrupting influence on Mahtoree's character and caused Middleton a d d i t i o n a l concern i n his meeting with Hard-Heart : The meeting was f r i e n d l y , though a l i t t l e r e strained on both sides. Middleton, jealous of his own consideration, no less than of the authority of h i s government, suspected some undue influence on the part of the agents of the Canadas; and, as he was determined to maintain the authority of which he was the representative, he f e l t him-s e l f constrained to manifest a hauteur that he was f a r from f e e l i n g . ( P r a i r i e , XXXIV, p. 452) The novel i t s e l f looks favourably at American 76 ownership and settlement of the p r a i r i e . The opening paragraph of the novel speaks of the wisdom of the Louisiana Purchase: While nature had placed a b a r r i e r of desert to the extension of our population i n the West, the measure had made us the masters of a b e l t of f e r t i l e country, which, i n the revolutions of the day, might have become the property of a r i v a l nation. I t gave us the sole command of the great thoroughfare of the i n t e r i o r , and placed the count-le s s t r i b e s of savages, who lay along our borders, e n t i r e l y within our c o n t r o l ; i t reconciled c o n f l i c t i n g r i g h t s , and quieted national d i s t r u s t s ; i t opened a thousand avenues to the inland trade, and to the waters of the P a c i f i c ; and, i f ever time or necessity s h a l l require a peaceful d i v i s i o n of t h i s vast empire, i t assures us of a neighbour that would possess our language, our  r e l i g i o n , our i n s t i t u t i o n s , and, i t i s also to be hoped, our sense of p o l i t i c a l j u s t i c e . ( P r a i r i e , I, p. 2; i t a l i c s mine) Although Cooper recorded the Trapper's judge-mental comments about the "choppers" advancing across the continent, his basic commitment i n The P r a i r i e was to the great task of b u i l d i n g a nation, and to the p o t e n t i a l greatness of that nation and i t s i n s t i t u t i o n s . This commitment can be seen i n an e d i t o r i a l passage where he e x t o l l s the noble ancestry of the American, outlines the need f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l development before the f u l l e r 77 attainments of c i v i l i z a t i o n can be reached, and then speaks of "those d i s t a n t , and ever-receding borders which mark the s k i r t s and announce the approach of the nation, as moving mists precede the signs of day" ( P r a i r i e , VI, p. 70). I f , i n those "moving mists," some values were l o s t , i t could be presumed that i n the l i g h t of the new day they would not be missed. Several other features i n The P r a i r i e need to be noted i n addition to the attitudes towards land and land ownership; these are: the Trapper's function as a bridge between the two races, his scornful r e j e c t i o n of education, the novel's double standard f o r describing "good" and "bad" Indians, and the concern f o r r a c i a l p u r i t y . Throughout The P r a i r i e , the Trapper functions as a bridge between the Indian and the white man; i n large measure, however, t h i s bridge c a r r i e s t r a f f i c i n only one d i r e c t i o n . That i s , the Trapper serves to place the Indian i n a context which can be understood by the white c h a r a c t e r s — a n d by white readers. He does not perform the s i m i l a r service of i n t e r p r e t i n g the whites to the Indians. Cooper does not encourage his white readers to f e e l any need to explain themselves to the Indians; white American culture i s taken as normal and requires no explanation or j u s t i f i c a t i o n . The burden of accommodation 78 between the two races i s placed e n t i r e l y on the Indian who, through the mediation of the Trapper, must be explained to the white. The Trapper makes no e x p l i c i t comments about the p o s s i b i l i t y of educating the Indians so that they could have a place i n American c i v i l i z a t i o n ; however, his comments on the l i m i t a t i o n s of education i n d i c a t e h i s b e l i e f that nothing can change nature: "That, f o r your education! The time has been when I have thought i t possible to make a companion of a beast. Many are the cubs, and many are the speckled fawns that I have reared with these old hands, u n t i l I have even fancied them r a t i o n a l and a l t e r e d b e i n g s — b u t what did i t amount to? The bear would b i t e , and the deer would run, notwithstanding my wicked conceit i n fancying I could change a temper that the Lord himself had seen f i t to bestow." ( P r a i r i e , XXII, p. 283) Lacking education himself, and yet being aware of his own worth, the Trapper had a great respect f o r what he c a l l e d "nature;" he looked askance at any attempt to change what he thought was the basic order of nature. Since the novel contains statements which equate Indians with wild beasts, we must read the Trapper's comment about h i s unsuccessful attempts to change the nature of beasts into " r a t i o n a l and altered beings" as an implied c r i t i c i s m of s i m i l a r attempts to educate Indians. Cooper maintains the a r t i f i c i a l d i s t i n c t i o n 7 9 between "good" and "bad" Indians p a r t l y through h i s use of language. Thus, i n the Sioux encampment, the scene i s dominated by "the withered and remorseless crones of the band . . . i n readiness to lend t h e i r f e l l voices, i f needed, to aid i n e x c i t i n g t h e i r descendants to an e x h i b i t i o n , which t h e i r depraved tastes coveted" ( P r a i r i e , XXV, p. 323). Among the Sioux, Cooper records long demagogic speeches, d e t a i l s t h e i r methods of torture, and describes Swooping Eagle's e x p l o i t when he beheads h i s fellow Sioux to prevent him from being scalped by the Pawnees: A few strokes of the tomahawk, with a c i r c l i n g gash of the k n i f e , s u f f i c e d to sever the head from the less valued trunk. The Teton mounted again, ju s t i n season to escape a f l i g h t of arrows which came from h i s eager and disappointed pursuers. F l o u r i s h i n g the grim and bloody visage, he darted away from the spot with a shout of triumph, and was seen scouring the p l a i n s , as i f he were a c t u a l l y borne along on the wings of the powerful b i r d from whose q u a l i t i e s he had received his f l a t t e r i n g name. ( P r a i r i e , XXX, p. 404-05) In contrast, he describes the Pawnee v i l l a g e when Hard-Heart and h i s men return a f t e r t h e i r v i c t o r y over the Sioux. Whereas he had described s p e c i f i c persons and v i v i d scenes i n h i s treatment of the Sioux encampment, Cooper i s now content to deal i n g e n e r a l i t i e s and euphemisms. There are no old crones exulting i n bloody 80 vengeance, no vain-glorious speeches recounting the bloody deeds of the Pawnee; the whole scene i s described i n favourable terms: The e x u l t a t i o n of the t r i b e was proportioned to i t s previous despondency. Mothers boasted of the honourable deaths of t h e i r sons; wives proclaimed the honour and pointed to the scars of t h e i r husbands; and Indian g i r l s rewarded the young braves with songs of triumph. The trophies of t h e i r f a l l e n enemies were exhibited, as conquered standards are displayed i n more c i v i l i z e d regions. The deeds of former warriors were recounted by the aged men, and declared to be ecli p s e d by the glory of t h i s v i c t o r y . While Hard-Heart himself, so distinguished for his e x p l o i t s from boyhood to that hour, was unanimously proclaimed and re-proclaimed the worthiest c h i e f and the stoutest brave that the Wahcondah had ever bestowed on his most favoured c h i l d r e n , the Pawnees of the Loups. ( P r a i r i e , XXXIII, p. 43 7) By speaking of "The trophies of t h e i r f a l l e n enemies" and comparing these to captured f l a g s , Cooper blurs the f a c t that these trophies were scalps. The f a c t i s , that apart from Hard-Heart himself, Cooper does not portray any of the i n d i v i d u a l Pawnees. The Pawnees shared with the Sioux a common attitude to such practices as torture and scalping, but t h i s could not be shown—except i n the b a t t l e scene—without destroying the dichotomy between good and bad Indians. The P r a i r i e , l i k e The Last of the Mohicans, 81 emphasizes the need f o r r a c i a l p u r i t y . Some s i t u a t i o n s , i n v o l v i n g white men and Indian women, place the question i n a comic perspective; others, inv o l v i n g the a t t r a c t i o n of male Indians f o r white women, are treated more s e r i o u s l y . Thus, when the Trapper jocosely suggests that Battius, because of his powers as a medicine man, would be married to one or more of the Sioux women, the s c i e n t i s t states his opposition "to a l l admixture of the v a r i e t i e s of species, which only tend to ta r n i s h the beauty and to in t e r r u p t the harmony of nature" ( P r a i r i e , XXI, p. 261). Esther Bush faces her husband with the same question a f t e r he has cast a fond eye on Mahtoree's discarded wife, Tachechana: "'Would ye disgrace c o l o r , and family, and nation, by mixing white blood with red, and would ye be the parent of a race of mules!'" ( P r a i r i e , XXVII, p. 254). At several points i n the novel, Cooper mentions the a t t r a c t i o n that the Indians, e s p e c i a l l y Mahtoree and Hard-Heart, had f o r Inez ( P r a i r i e , XVIII, p. 221-22; XX, p. 253-54; XXVI, p. 343; XXXIII, p. 4 3 8 ) . 1 8 In s p i t e of the comic r e l i e f , miscegenation remains a dreaded p o s s i b i l i t y i n The P r a i r i e . Although t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y i s not exploited to the same extent as i t had been i n The Last of the Mohicans, Cooper s t i l l uses i t and, i n doing so, strengthens b e l i e f that the two races must be kept apart from one another. 82 D. NOTIONS OF THE AMERICANS During the period between 1826 and 1833, when he was i n Europe, Cooper continued to be aware of major events i n America. In the year following the p u b l i c a t i o n of The P r a i r i e , Cooper wrote and published (1828) Notions 19 of the Americans: Picked up by a T r a v e l l i n g Bachelor. While Cooper's views cannot be i d e n t i f i e d completely with those of his f i c t i o n a l t r a v e l l i n g gentleman, there i s a great s i m i l a r i t y on most issues. Robert S p i l l e r comments as follows on Cooper's r e l a t i o n s h i p to the book: Cooper was c a r e f u l i n h i s f a c t s and studied r e l i a b l e sources i n preparation. He was one of the best informed men of his time on s o c i a l conditions i n his own New York State, and he tended to generalize f o r the nation i n terms of the p a r t i c u l a r l o c a l e which he knew. This prejudice somewhat detracts from his r e l i a b i l i t y ; but the more serious bias was h i s d e l i b e r a t e i n t e n t i o n to present things i n t h e i r most favorable l i g h t . The book may be accepted, however, not only f o r the value of i t s opinion, but f o r the l i g h t i t throws on actual s o c i a l conditions. The presumed author i s an enlightened Englishman, a man of sound learning and a r i s t o c r a t i c taste, but broad i n his sympathies, a character f a m i l i a r i n various guises throughout Cooper's novels and e a s i l y to be i d e n t i f i e d with his own i d e a l ? 0 conception of himself. One e n t i r e l e t t e r of t h i s book i s given over to a discussion of the Indian problem, and there are other 83 references to Indians i n an e a r l i e r l e t t e r about the v i s i t to Cooperstown. This material furnishes both a confirm-ation of, and a c o r r e c t i v e to the views which we have found expressed i n the f i r s t three of the Leatherstocking Tales. Trying to explain the degree of c i v i l i z a t i o n to be found i n New York State, the t r a v e l l i n g gentleman remarks on the confusion of ideas about America i n popular European imagination; i n t h i s confusion "churches, academies, wild beasts, savages, b e a u t i f u l women, steam-boats, and ships" are brought in t o "strange and f a n t a s t i c c o l l i s i o n . " He then goes on to set the record s t r a i g h t with regard to the presence of Indians: Once fo r a l l , dear Waller, I wish you to understand t h a t — a few peaceable and h a l f - c i v i l i z e d remains of t r i b e s , that have been permitted to reclaim small portions of land, excepted—an inhabitant of New-York i s a c t u a l l y as f a r removed from a savage as an inhabitant.of London. . . . A few degraded descendants of the ancient warlike possessors of t h i s country are indeed seen wandering among the settlements, but the Indian must now be c h i e f l y sought west of the M i s s i s s i p p i , to be found i n any of h i s savage grandeur. (Notions, p. 245) In the l e t t e r r e l a t i n g to Indians, the gentleman points out how f a r the removal p o l i c y has already been effected f o r most of the Indians of the North-eastern st a t e s : The l i n g e r i n g fragments of a hundred t r i b e s are 84 c e r t a i n l y seen scattered over the immense surface of t h i s country, l i v i n g on greater or l e s s t r a c t s that had been secured to them, or dwelling by sufferance i n the woods; but the only people now r e s i d i n g east of the M i s s i s s i p p i who can aspire to the names of nations, are the Creeks, the Choctaws, the Chickasaws, the Cherokees, and the Seminoles. As a r u l e , the red man disappears before the superior moral and physical influence of the white. . . . In nine cases i n ten, the t r i b e s have gradually removed west; and there i s now a confused assemblage of nations and languages c o l l e c t e d on the immense hunting grounds of the P r a i r i e s . (Notions, pp. 277-78) For those Indians who did not remove, the l e t t e r had l i t t l e hope: Many l i n g e r near the graves of t h e i r fathers, to which t h e i r s u p e r s t i t i o n s , not less than a f i n e natural f e e l i n g , lend a deeper i n t e r e s t . The fate of the l a t t e r i s i n e v i t a b l e ; they become victims to the abuses of c i v i l i z a t i o n , without ever a t t a i n i n g to any of i t s moral e l e v a t i o n . (Notions, p. 2 78) I t goes on to describe the condition of an old Indian, known as "King Peter", who made his l i v i n g by s e l l i n g brooms and baskets i n much the same way as did Mohegan John i n The Pioneers: I found t h i s Indian, dwelling with h i s family, i n a wigwam of a most p r i m i t i v e construction. . . . The door was a covering of mats, and the f u r n i t u r e consisted of a few rude c h a i r s , baskets, and a bed, 85 that was neither savage, nor yet such as marks the c i v i l i z e d man. The a t t i r e of the family was p a r t l y that of the one condition, and p a r t l y that of the other. The man himself was a full - b l o o d e d Indian, but his manner had that species of s u l l e n deportment that betrays the d i s p o s i t i o n without the boldness of the savage. (Notions, pp. 280-81) While there i s an admission that Indians i n the older coastal areas have made some progress i n c i v i l i z a t i o n , t h i s i s overshadowed by an e a r l i e r comment that Indians seen i n the i n t e r i o r were a l l a "stunted, d i r t y , and degraded race" (Notions, p. 281). I saw reservations i n which no mean advances had been made i n c i v i l i z a t i o n . Farms were imperfectly t i l l e d , and c a t t l e were seen grazing i n the f i e l d s . S t i l l , c i v i l i z a t i o n advances slowly among a people who consider labour a degradation, i n addition to the bodily d i s l i k e that a l l men have to i t s occupations. (Notions, p. 282) The l e t t e r maintains that the intentions of the government are honest and r e s u l t i n p o l i c i e s which are " s u f f i c i e n t l y humane" for the Indians: A great, humane, and, I think, r a t i o n a l project, i s now i n operation to bring the Indians within the pale of c i v i l i z a t i o n . . . . Most, i f not a l l of the Indians who reside east of the M i s s i s s i p p i , l i v e within the j u r i s d i c t i o n of some State or of some t e r r i t o r y . In most cases they are l e f t to the quiet enjoyment of the scanty r i g h t s which they r e t a i n ; but the people of t h e i r 86 v i c i n i t y commonly wish to get r i d of neighbours that retard c i v i l i z a t i o n , and who are so often troublesome. The p o l i c y of States i s sometimes adverse to t h e i r continuance. Though there i s no power, except that of the United States, which can e f f e c t t h e i r removal without t h e i r own consent, the State a u t h o r i t i e s can greatly embarrass the control of the general government. A question of p o l i c y , and, perhaps, of j u r i s d i c t i o n , l a t e l y arose on t h i s subject between Georgia and the general government. In the course of i t s d i s p o s a l , the United States, i n order to secure the r i g h t s of the Indians more e f f e c t u a l l y , and to prevent any future question of t h i s sort, appear to have h i t on the following plan. West of the M i s s i s s i p p i they s t i l l hold large regions that belong to no State or t e r r i t o r y . They propose to several t r i b e s (Choctaws, Chickasaws, Cherokees, &c.) to s e l l t h e i r present possessions, improvements, houses, fences, stock, & c , and to receive, i n return, acre f o r acre, with the same amount of stock, fences, and every other a u x i l i a r y of c i v i l i z a t i o n they now possess. The inducements to make t h i s exchange are as follow:--Perpetuity to t h e i r establishments, since a pledge i s given that no t i t l e s h a l l ever be granted that may r a i s e a pretext f o r another removal; an organization of a republican, or, as i t i s termed, a t e r r i t o r i a l government fo r them, such as now e x i s t i n F l o r i d a , Arkansas, and Michigan; protection, by the presence of troops; and a r i g h t to send delegates to Congress, s i m i l a r to that now enjoyed by the other t e r r i t o r i e s . I f the plan can be e f f e c t e d , there i s reason to 87 think that the constant diminution i n the numbers of the Indians w i l l be checked, and that a race, about whom there i s so much that i s poetic and f i n e i n r e c o l l e c t i o n , w i l l be preserved. . . . Should such a t e r r i t o r y be formed, a nucleus w i l l be created, around which a l l the savages of the west, who have any yearnings f o r a more meliorated state of existence, can r a l l y . (Notions, pp. 285-87) These are Cooper's most d i r e c t comments on the subject of removal; he looks on t h i s p o l i c y as one that w i l l b e n e f i t the Indian people as well as removing them from the older states as impediments to c i v i l i z a t i o n . He does not deal with the d e t a i l s of removal, however, and i s content to repeat the platitudinous hopes of other more involved advocates of the p o l i c y . The a t t i t u d e towards the Indian expressed i n t h i s l e t t e r d i f f e r s i n only one place from the attitude we have found i n the novels; the t r a v e l l i n g gentleman takes a complacent view of miscegenation: As there i s l i t t l e reluctance to mingle the white and red blood, (for the physical d i f f e r e n c e i s f a r less than i n the case of the blacks, and the Indians have never been menial slaves,) I think an amalgamation of the two races would i n time occur. Those f a m i l i e s of America who are thought to have any of the Indian blood, are rather proud of t h e i r descent, and i t i s a matter of boast among many of the most considerable persons of V i r g i n i a , that they are descended from the renowned Pocahontas. (Notions, p. 287) 88 This passage gives some c r e d i b i l i t y to George Dekker's contention that Cooper, personally, was not opposed to 21 miscegenation. While admitting that The Last of the  Mohicans expresses a horror of i n t e r - r a c i a l marriage, Dekker thinks, contrary to most c r i t i c s , that The Wept  of Wish-ton Wish presents i t i n favourable terms. His i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of that novel i s not convincing. Quite possibly, Cooper was not completely sure of his own thoughts and emotions on t h i s subject. Thus, on the i n t e l l e c t u a l l e v e l , Cooper could agree with h i s t r a v e l l i n g gentleman wr i t i n g i n an urbane manner about i n t e r - r a c i a l marriage. On an emotional l e v e l , he appears to be shocked at the idea of such marriage; i t i s t h i s sense of shock which we f i n d i n The Last of the Mohicans and, to a le s s e r extent, i n The P r a i r i e . In summary, when we consider the t o t a l view of the early Leatherstocking Tales, and combine i t with that expressed i n Notions of the Americans, we can conclude that Cooper saw no reason to oppose the concept of removal. We have already noted the implied threat to the Indians i n President Jackson's f i r s t annual Message to Congress i n 1829. Cooper, w r i t i n g to h i s a r t i s t f r i e n d , Horatio Greenough, on January 28th, 1830, comments: "Well, what do you think of old Hickory's Message? I t i s a c a p i t a l one—sound from beginning to 89 end" ( L e t t e r s and J o u r n a l s , I , 402). In another l e t t e r , dated A p r i l 9th, 1830, to Charles Wilkes a banker f r i e n d who had helped him n e g o t i a t e w i t h E n g l i s h p u b l i s h e r s , Cooper r e f e r r e d t o Jackson's message as "sound, c o n s t i t u t i o n a l , democratic and i n t e l l i g i b l e " ( L e t t e r s and  J o u r n a l s , I , 411). Obviously, the t h r e a t to the r i g h t s of I n d i a n peoples d i d not d e t r a c t from Cooper's a p p r e c i a t i o n f o r the message. Cooper's p i c t u r e of the Indian d i d not r i s e above c u r r e n t stereotypes of the Indian as savage; h i s I n d i a n heroes are as l i m i t e d by the savage aspects of t h e i r l i f e as are h i s Indian v i l l a i n s . Cooper was never i n doubt, and never l e f t h i s readers i n doubt, about the i n f e r i o r i t y of savage l i f e compared to t h a t of c i v i l i z a t i o n . The v i l l a i n s , Magua and Mahtoree, along w i t h the p a t h e t i c c h a r a c t e r of Mohegan John, a l l i l l u s t r a t e the c u r r e n t i d e a t h a t c o n t a c t w i t h whites tended to the d i s i n t e g r a t i o n of the Indian c h a r a c t e r r a t h e r than to any p o s i t i v e changes i n the d i r e c t i o n of c i v i l i z a t i o n . Nowhere does Cooper show i n these novels any I n d i a n who has b e n e f i t e d e i t h e r from c a s u a l c o n t a c t w i t h whites or from white education. Nowhere does he i n d i c a t e t h a t he thought Indians and whites could l i v e i n happy and prosperous p r o x i m i t y to each other. Nowhere does he s e r i o u s l y d i s p u t e the p r a c t i c a l n e c e s s i t y of American advancement 90 to the west. Concerning the p o s s i b i l i t y of a s s i m i l a t i n g Indians i n t o American l i f e , Lewis Cass i n 1830 asked a r h e t o r i c a l q u e s t i o n , and then proceeded t o give a s e r i e s of very negative answers: What had they i n common w i t h the white man? Not h i s attachment to sedentary l i f e ; not h i s d e s i r e of accumulation; not h i s moral p r i n c i p l e s , h i s i n t e l l e c t u a l acquirements, h i s r e l i g i o u s o p i n i o n s . N e i t h e r precept nor example, n e i t h e r hopes nor f e a r s , could induce them to examine, much l e s s to adopt t h e i r improvements. The past and the f u t u r e being a l i k e d i s r e g a r d e d , the present o n l y employs t h e i r thoughts. They co u l d not, t h e r e f o r e , become an i n t e g r a l p a r t of the people who began to press 22 upon them. Of Cooper's Indians a l s o we can ask, "What had they i n common w i t h the white man?" The answer must be the same as t h a t which Lewis Cass gives above. 91 CHAPTER I I I THE LATER LEATHERSTOCKING NOVELS A. THE PATHFINDER T h i r t e e n years i n t e r v e n e d between the p u b l i c a t i o n of The P r a i r i e i n 182 7 and the p u b l i c a t i o n of the l a s t two novels of the L e a t h e r s t o c k i n g saga (The P a t h f i n d e r , p u b l i s h e d i n 1840, and The De e r s l a y e r , p u b l i s h e d i n 1841). In t h i s p e r i o d , Cooper had ret u r n e d to America, become embroiled i n pers o n a l l i t i g a t i o n , grown i n c r e a s i n g l y unpopular w i t h the reading p u b l i c , and rethought many of h i s e a r l i e r , more o p t i m i s t i c views concerning American democracy. Indian removal had moved beyond a t h e o r e t i c a l d i s c u s s i o n concerning I n d i a n land r i g h t s ; i t was now a f a c t of h i s t o r y . During t h i s p e r i o d , however, the Semin-o l e s , a F l o r i d a group of Creek Indians who had i n t e r -married w i t h escaped negro s l a v e s , continued t o oppose removal i n what has been c a l l e d the Second Seminole War (1835-42). American t r e a c h e r y d u r i n g t h i s war was e x e m p l i f i e d by the s e i z u r e of the Seminole l e a d e r , Osceola, d u r i n g a peace p a r l e y . Although Osceola d i e d i n p r i s o n e a r l y i n 1838, the v/ar continued u n t i l 1842. A f t e r more than two thousand American s o l d i e r s had been k i l l e d and between f o r t y and s i x t y m i l l i o n d o l l a r s had been spent, enough of the Seminoles surrendered and agreed to go west f o r the U n i t e d States government to 92 f e e l that i t had won a moral v i c t o r y . ^ Our examination of the l a s t two Leatherstocking novels w i l l ask whether the unfortunate r e s u l t s of the removal p o l i c y had any e f f e c t s on Cooper's perception of Indian-white r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The Pathfinder contains many features which we have already noticed i n The Last of the Mohicans and The P r a i r i e : a treacherous Indian guide, male Indian a t t r a c t i o n f o r a white g i r l , scenes of Indian savagery, the presence of "good" Indians, and the f i n a l v i c t o r y of Natty Bumppo, or Pathfinder, and his f r i e n d s . The Pathfinder d i f f e r s from the other Leatherstocking novels i n that much of the action takes place on the water instead of the land; i t emphasizes white rather than Indian treachery; and the ce n t r a l concern of the novel i s Natty Bumppo1s love f o r , and unsuccessful proposal to, Mabel Dunham, the daughter of an old army f r i e n d . I t i s to t h i s l a s t feature that we w i l l d i r e c t our attention since the story of t h i s courtship and i t s conclusion have important implications fo r our understanding of Cooper's hero and h i s function in the Leatherstocking saga. We w i l l then look b r i e f l y at the novel's presentation of Indians and t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p to whites. As Natty symbolizes the f r o n t i e r , so Mabel Dunham symbolizes the growing c i v i l i z a t i o n and culture of the eastern states which were being r a p i d l y transformed 93 from t h e i r rude beginnings. On t h i s l e v e l , t h e r e f o r e , the r e l a t i o n s h i p between Natty and Mabel can be understood i n terms of the c o n t i n u i n g p o l i t i c a l d i a l o g u e between the e a s t e r n s t a t e s and the f r o n t i e r . Mabel, although the daughter of an e n l i s t e d s o l d i e r , had r e c e i v e d t r a i n i n g which tended t o r a i s e her above the c l a s s i n t o which she had been born ( P a t h f i n d e r , V I I I , pp. 111-112). This s u p e r i o r t r a i n i n g r e s u l t e d i n a squeamishness which d i d not accept the n e c e s s i t y f o r armed c o n f l i c t . During her time on the f r o n t i e r , Mabel i s able to maintain t h i s a t t i t u d e only through ignorance; " I know nothing of arms, and wish to l i v e i n ignorance of them" ( P a t h f i n d e r , I , p. 12). When Mabel's f a t h e r i s i n danger from an Indian ambush, Mabel t a l k s w i t h her I n d i a n f r i e n d , Dew of June, about p o s s i b l e courses of a c t i o n ; June suggests t h a t i f Mabel had the nerve, or the "he a r t , " she c o u l d s c a l p the I n d i a n w a r r i o r s when they got drunk: " I f L i l y l i k e June, might do much f o r her people." " I am l i k e you, June, i f a wish to serve my countrymen can make a resemblance w i t h one as courageous as y o u r s e l f . " "No, no, no." muttered June i n a low v o i c e ; "no got h e a r t , and June no l e t you, i f had. June's moder p r i s o n e r once, and w a r r i o r s got drunk; moder tomahawk'd 'em a l l . Such the way r e d s k i n women do, when people i n danger and want s c a l p . " 94 "You say what i s true," returned Mabel, shuddering, and unconsciously dropping June's hand. "I cannot do that. I have neither the strength, the courage, nor the w i l l , to dip my hands i n blood." (Pathfinder, XXII, pp. 380-381) Cooper thus presents the bloody act of toma-hawking and scalping captors as an act which could be performed by an Indian, but not by a white, woman. H i s t o r i c a l l y , of course, as the story of Hannah Duston shows, white women had proven themselves quite capable of 2 t h i s f e a t . On the symbolic l e v e l , however, Cooper i s quite r i g h t i n asc r i b i n g t h i s squeamishness to Mabel. By the middle of the eighteenth century, people l i v i n g on the eastern seaboard had passed the period i n which Hannah Dustons were necessary. In Cooper's own time the major opposition to mistreatment of the Indians came from New England and other eastern states; these areas no longer recognized the necessity f o r the violence of Indian wars, or f o r i n j u s t i c e s i m i l a r to that which had been practiced by t h e i r own ancestors. Thus, Mabel represents the point of view of those who had opposed f o r c i b l e removal of the Indians. Mabel l i k e d and respected Pathfinder, but she did not love him. The novel indicates that any marriage between them would be not only unwise,.but, i n Mabel's 95 own word, "unnatural" (Pathfinder, XVIII, p. 287). As we have noted before, Natty Bumppo placed a great deal of stress upon conformity to the demands of nature; the d e s c r i p t i o n of a marriage as "unnatural", therefore, must be taken as a very serious c r i t i c i s m of such a match. The unnatural element lay not i n the age d i f f e r e n c e between Natty and Mabel but i n the incompata-b i l i t y of two ways of l i f e . Love for Mabel causes Pathfinder to lose a l l sense of value; thus, i n a desire to show Mabel his s k i l l with the r i f l e , Pathfinder, i n a most wanton and useless manner, k i l l s two g u l l s . The Deerslayer r e l a t e s the only other time i n the Leatherstocking novels when Natty Bumppo k i l l s birds or animals i n such a senseless, destructive manner; Natty, as a young man, i s given his f i r s t chance to use Hutter's famous r i f l e , " K i l l d e e r " . He shoots f i r s t a duck and then an eagle and immediately repents, f e e l i n g that he i s not worthy of such a weapon (The Deerslayer, 3 XXVI, p. 463). Pathfinder confesses that since he has known and loved Mabel he has become in c r e a s i n g l y d e r e l i c t i n his duties as a scout: "I'm sometimes afeared i t i s n ' t wholesome for one who i s much occupied i n a very manly c a l l i n g , l i k e that of a guide or scout, or a s o l d i e r even, to form friendships for women—young women i n 96 p a r t i c u l a r — a s they seem to me to lessen the love of enterprise, and to turn the f e e l i n g s away from t h e i r g i f t s and natural occupations." "Before we became so intimate, as I may say, I loved to think of my scoutins, and of my marches, and outlyings, and f i g h t s , and other adventures; but now my mind cares less about them; I think more of the barracks and of evenings passed i n discourse, of .feelings i n which there are no wranglings and bloodshed, and of young women, and of t h e i r laughs, and t h e i r cheerful, s o f t voices, t h e i r pleasant looks, and t h e i r winning ways. I sometimes t e l l the sergeant, that he and his daughter w i l l be the s p o i l i n g of one of the best and most experienced scouts on the l i n e s ! " (Pathfinder, XIII, p. 199) By spending time with her he had allowed French and Indian spies near the English f o r t . Thus, Cooper presents Mabel, the symbolic representative of c i v i l i z a t i o n , as a s i r e n l u r i n g Pathfinder away from his true vocation. The i n h i b i t i o n s which Mabel arouses i n Pathfinder are revealed i n a dream which has d e f i n i t e implications for our understanding of Pathfinder's s e l f - p e r c e p t i o n : "The very l a s t night we stayed i n the garrison, I imagined I had a cabin i n a grove of sugar maples, and at the root of every tree was a Mabel Dunham, while the birds that were among the branches sang ballads, instead of the notes that natur' gave, and even the deer stopped to l i s t e n . I t r i e d to shoot a fa'n, but K i l l d e e r missed f i r e , and the creatur* laughed i n my face, as pleasantly as a young g i r l 97 laughs i n her merriment, and then i t bounded away, looking back as i f expecting me to follow." (Pathfinder, XVIII, pp. 291-92) While not attempting a d e t a i l e d Freudian analysis of Pathfinder's dream, I do not think i t too much to suggest that i t symbolizes a moment of extreme s e l f doubt about 4 h i s manhood i n r e l a t i o n to Mabel Dunham. As seen i n the Leatherstocking t a l e s , Pathfinder's r o l e i n l i f e i s to make America safe for Mabel Dunham and her kind. Nevertheless, he i s completely abashed i n her presence; he f e e l s that h i s way of l i f e i s not good enough fo r her. He knows that he could provide a good subsistence l i v i n g ; at the same time he also knows that he could not provide those opportunities for growth and development fo r which he thought Mabel was destined: "'When a l l i s remembered, age, looks, l'arning and habits, Mabel, conscience t e l l s me I ought to confess that I'm altogether u n f i t f o r you, i f not downright unworthy; and I would give up the hope t h i s minute, I would, i f I didn't f e e l something p u l l i n g at my heart-strings which seems hard to undo'" (Pathfinder XXIX, p. 487). The dream of impotence has two references: f i r s that Bumppo could not be a complete man i n any s i t u a t i o n but that of the f r o n t i e r . We have already seen that i n th Templeton of The Pioneers he had l o s t a great deal of stature which he only regained on the f r o n t i e r of The 98 P r a i r i e . Second, i f he married Mabel, he would not be able to function f u l l y as a man on the f r o n t i e r since he would be completely i n h i b i t e d by Mabel's more squeamish values. If we can ant i c i p a t e our discussion of The Deerslayer, we w i l l notice that Bumppo was o r i g i n a l l y known as "Deerslayer". Thus, the image of Mabel as a "fawn", which he could not k i l l , questions Natty's e n t i r e understanding of himself as a man. Also i n The Deerslayer, Cooper described Natty Bumppo's f i r s t human k i l l as h i s entrance into manhood; again, Mabel's ignorance and d i s l i k e of arms questions t h i s i d e a l of masculinity. As we look at t h i s abortive romance i n terms of the larger pattern of the Leatherstocking Tales, we must ask what s i g n i f i c a n c e i t has f o r Cooper's understanding of American development and expansion. The answer which I would suggest i s found i n a saying of Jesus: "There are some eunuchs which were so born from t h e i r mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs f o r the kingdom of heaven's sake." (Matthew 19:12) This i s the c l a s s i c a l text used i n the j u s t i f i c a t i o n of monkish celibacy; i n the context of the Leatherstocking Tales, we see Natty Bumppo as a man who has made himself a monk for the sake of the kingdom of heaven which was to be i n America. For Natty, marriage would have been a f a l l i n g away from his c a l l i n g as a man of the f r o n t i e r . 99 Cooper very e f f e c t i v e l y leads the reader to sympathize with Pathfinder i n his loneliness and i n h i s awkward attempts at love, even as he has led the reader to recognize that i t i s best f o r Pathfinder to remain s i n g l e , and f o r Mabel to marry Jasper. The f a i l u r e of Pathfinder's romance suggests a necessary d i v i s i o n i n American l i f e between the v i r t u e s of c i v i l i z a t i o n and those of the f r o n t i e r . Each way of l i f e has i t s own i n t e g r i t y ; the violence of the f r o n t i e r cannot be judged by the laws of c i v i l i z a t i o n any more than Pathfinder's way of l i f e can be judged by Mabel's more d e l i c a t e values. Cooper leads the reader to see how marriage would have destroyed Pathfinder as well as Mabel; thus, he affirms the e s s e n t i a l value of the scout's f r o n t i e r way of l i f e even while he denies i t any permanence or p o s t e r i t y . Mabel's marriage to Jasper, and Jasper's subsequent career as a merchant, suggest that the values of the f r o n t i e r w i l l gradually give way to the superior values of c i v i l i z a t i o n . In the context of a t r a n s i t o r y and ever-receding f r o n t i e r the place of the Indian i s tenuous indeed. On one occasion, Pathfinder t e l l s a story which symbolizes the Indians' continuing struggle f o r existence; Pathfinder and Chingachgook, along with a young Delaware had v i s i t e d Niagara F a l l s ; i n spite of t h e i r advice the young man ventured onto the r i v e r i n a canoe: 100 " A l l we could say did not change h i s mind, and the lad had his way. To me, i t seems, Mabel, that whenever a thing i s r e a l l y grand and potent, i t has a quiet majesty about i t , altogether unlike the frothy and f l u s t e r i n g manner of smaller matters, and so i t was with them rapids. The canoe was no sooner f a i r l y i n them, then down i t went, as i t might be, as one s a i l s through the a i r on the 'arth, and no s k i l l of the young Delaware could r e s i s t the stream. And yet he struggled manfully f o r l i f e , using the paddle to the l a s t , l i k e the deer that i s swimming to cast the hounds. At f i r s t , he shot across the current so s w i f t l y that we thought he would p r e v a i l , but he had miscalculated his distance, and when the truth r e a l l y struck him, he turned the head up stream, and struggled i n a way that was f e a r f u l to look at. I could have p i t i e d him even had he been a Mingo! For a few moments h i s e f f o r t s were so f r a n t i c , that he a c t u a l l y prevailed over the power of the cataract; but natur' has i t s l i m i t s , and one f a l t e r i n g stroke of the paddle set him back, and then he l o s t ground, foot by foot, inch by inch, u n t i l he got near the spot when the r i v e r looked even and green, and as i f i t were made of m i l l i o n s of threads of water, a l l bent over some huge rock, when he shot backwards l i k e an arrow and disappeared." (Pathfinder. XIX, pp. 303-304) 5 There was something " r e a l l y grand and potent" about the expansion of the United States; no Indian, or group of Indians, no matter how v a l i a n t l y they struggled against that stream, could deny i t s force. The image of the Indian, paddling against the force of Niagara, i s a tr i b u t e to the desperate courage of the Indian people as they continued to struggle against dispossession; at the 101 same time, the image underlines the f u t i l i t y of such a struggle. This image from The Pathfinder bears a s t r i k i n g s i m i l a r i t y to one found i n The Last of the Mohicans; Natty Bumppo has shot a Huron who had climbed out onto the branches of an oak tree: A f t e r a few moments of vain struggling, the form of the savage was seen swinging i n the wind, while he s t i l l grasped a ragged and naked branch of the tree, with h i s hands clenched i n desperation. . . . A l l eyes, those of friends as well as enemies, became f i x e d on the hopeless condition of the wretch who was dangling between heaven and earth. The body yielded to the currents of a i r , and though no murmur or groan escaped the v i c t i m , there were instants when he grimly faced his foes, and the anguish of cold despair might be traced, through the intervening distance, i n possession of his swarthy lineaments. . . . At length one hand of the Huron l o s t i t s hold, and dropped exhausted to his side. A desperate and f r u i t l e s s struggle to recover the branch succeeded, and then the savage was seen for a f l e e t i n g i n s t a n t , grasping w i l d l y at the empty a i r (Mohicans, VIII, pp. 82-83). 6 The p i c t u r e of the Indian going over Niagara F a l l s encapsulates the o v e r - a l l e f f e c t of The Pathfinder on the reader's understanding of Indian-white r e l a t i o n s . The three Indian characters of the novel, Arrowhead, June, and Chingachgook, are a l l separated from t h e i r t r i b e s . They serve as pawns i n the power p o l i t i c s of the English 102 and French rather than as independent actors who have t h e i r own p o l i t i c a l o bjectives. Arrowhead, acting as a double agent f o r the French while i n the pay of the English, unsuccessfully t r i e s to manipulate the s i t u a t i o n to his own advantage. Because he lacked t r i b a l roots, as well as the demonic q u a l i t y of Magua, Arrowhead's defeat and death has neither h i s t o r i c nor mythic s i g n i f i c a n c e . This lack of t r i b a l roots, and the absence of Indian p o l i t i c a l goals contrast sharply with the s i t u a t i o n i n The P r a i r i e where the p o l i t i c a l scene i s dominated by the struggle between the Sioux and Pawnee people. The Pathfinder, through a series of comments, mostly from Natty Bumppo, sets f o r t h a doctrine of race that stresses the exclusive nature of Indian and white. Thus, at the beginning of the novel, Pathfinder says: "Every skin has i t s own natur', and every natur' has i t s own laws, as well as i t s own s k i n . I t was many years afore I could master a l l them higher branches of a f o r e s t edication; f o r redskin knowledge doesn't come as easy to white-skin natur' as what I suppose i s intended to be white-skin knowledge. . . . The white man has his d i f f i c u l t i e s i n getting redskin habits, quite as much as the I n j i n i n getting white-skin ways. As f o r the r e a l natur', i t i s my opinion that neither can a c t u a l l y get that of the other." (Pathfinder, I I , p. 23) At a l a t e r point i n the story, Pathfinder remarks, '"I 103 t e l l the Sarpent, that no C h r i s t i a n i z i n g w i l l ever make even a Delaware a white man; nor any whooping and y e l l i n g convart a pale-face into a redskin'" (Pathfinder, VIII, p. 100). The implications of such a doctrine of r a c i a l exclusiveness are two-fold. I t allows Pathfinder to accept Chingachgook*s love of revenge, his b l o o d t h i r s t , and his desire f o r scalps as being somehow r i g h t and na t u r a l . Thus, when Chingachgook runs what Jasper considers unnecessary r i s k to obtain Iroquois scalps, Pathfinder remarks: "Chingachgook i s not a C h r i s t i a n white man, l i k e ourselves, but a Mohican c h i e f , who has his g i f t s and t r a d i t i o n s to t e l l him what he ought to do. . . . "'Tis h i s g i f t , and l e t him enjoy i t . We are white men, and cannot mangle a dead enemy; but i t i s honour i n the eyes of a redskin to do so. . . . "I have passed days thinking of these matters, out i n the s i l e n t woods, and I have come to the opinion, boy, that as Providence rule s a l l things, no g i f t i s bestowed without some wise and reasonable end." (Pathfinder, VI, pp. 77-78) Pathfinder's convictions about what a white man could and could not do sometimes lead him int o a form of-c a s u i s t r y which detracts from the picture of him as a n a t u r a l l y good man. For example, he t e l l s of a time when he came across s i x Mingos sleeping i n the woods. Pathfinder r e s i s t e d both the temptation to scalp them, as Chingachgook would have done, and also the temptation to s t e a l t h e i r 104 weapons: "No, no; I did myself, and my c o l o r , and my r e l i g i o n , too, greater j u s t i c e . I waited t i l l t h e i r nap was over, and they well on t h e i r war-path again; and, by ambushing here, and flanking them there, I peppered the blackguards i n t r i n s i -c a l l y l i k e . . . that only one ever got back to his v i l l a g e ; and he came into his wigwam limping. L u c k i l y , as i t turned out, the great Delaware had only halted to jerk some venison, and was follow-ing on my t r a i l ; and when he got up he had f i v e of the scoundrels' scalps hanging where they ought to be; so you see nothing was l o s t by doing r i g h t , e i t h e r i n the way of honor or i n that of p r o f i t . " (Pathfinder, XXVII, p. 465) Although Pathfinder had maintained the l i n e between what he and what an Indian could honourably do, he did so i n such a l e g a l i s t i c and mechanical manner that any moral d i s t i n c t i o n was completely l o s t . The novel makes pointed comments about English and French use of Indians i n warfare, and the f a c t that once aroused, the Indians could 7 not be r e s t r a i n e d . On a personal l e v e l , however, Path-fi n d e r follows the same p r a c t i c e i n his r e l a t i o n s with Chingachgook. Cooper i s inconsistent at t h i s point since he does not go beyond mild irony i n his treatment of Pathfinder's apology for Chingachgook. Pathfinder's doctrine of exclusive r a c i a l g i f t s seems to make possible a c u l t u r a l pluralism which modestly declines to judge Indian people on the basis of American 105 protestant standards. Thus, Pathfinder refuses to stand i n judgement on his foes and dismisses them by saying, "'I never knew an honest-minded Mingo; one that you could put f a i t h i n , i f he had a temptation to deceive you. Cheatin' seems to-be t h e i r g i f t , and I sometimes think they ought to be p i t i e d for i t , rather than parsecuted'" (Pathfinder, XIV, p. 222). We should notice, however, that Pathfinder u s u a l l y applies his c u l t u r a l r e l a t i v i s m to actions such as scalping and double-dealing, which Cooper's middle class white readers would f i n d abhorrent. Path-finder's doctrine of g i f t s , therefore, does not lead to a true c u l t u r a l pluralism, but rather to a perception of the Indian as a dehumanized being i n a state of nature who cannot be changed by eit h e r C h r i s t i a n i t y or c i v i l i z a t i o n . I f , i n the l i g h t of the events surrounding the removal of the eastern Indians, Cooper had an uneasy mind about e a r l i e r o p t i m i s t i c statements favouring removal i n Notions of the Americans, nothing i n The Pathfinder indicates t h i s . The novel contains less r h e t o r i c about the r i g h t s of Indian people to the land, and, at the same time, i t presents less j u s t i f i c a t i o n for t h e i r dispossession than do the previously written Leatherstocking novels. In his "Preface" to the novel, Cooper spoke of "the wonderful means by which Providence i s c l e a r i n g the way f o r the advancement of c i v i l i z a t i o n across the whole American continent" (Pathfinder, VI). 106 As the r e l a t i o n s h i p between Mabel and Pathfinder and the underlying symbolism of that r e l a t i o n s h i p suggests, t h i s novel shows the need f o r frontiersmen who must k i l l at times i n order to lay the foundation f o r future c i v i l i z a t i o n . That most frontiersmen were of an e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t character from that of Pathfinder did not take away from t h i s need, any more than did the protests of a more genteel and c i v i l i z e d eastern seaboard. I f , as The Pathfinder showed, the f r o n t i e r was necessary, then i t was also necessary and i n e v i t a b l e that the Indian people must give way to the advancing whites. Thus, at the end of the novel, Arrowhead i s k i l l e d , June dies because she has nothing l e f t f o r which to l i v e , while Chingachgook, without family or t r i b e , has only h i s f r i e n d l y r e l a t i o n s h i p to Pathfinder as a f r a g i l e contact with human societ y . B. THE DEERSLAYER The Deerslayer, published i n 1841, the l a s t written novel of the Leatherstocking s e r i e s , deals with g the e a r l i e s t h i s t o r i c a l period, and celebrates Natty Bumppo's entrance into manhood. The action i s episodic rather than being t i g h t l y connected to a p l o t ; throughout the story, however, there i s c o n t i n u i t y of theme. The moral concern of the novel centres around Bumppo's, or 107 Deerslayer*s, search for a "true wilderness heart" (Deerslayer, V, p. 83), that i s , an ethic which would allow him to survive on the f r o n t i e r without l o s i n g h is sense of honour. Faced by the d i f f e r e n t moral standards represented by the other characters, Deerslayer seeks to pl o t h is own course which, however, must harmonize with the values he was taught i n his childhood and youth. Of a l l the Leatherstocking novels, The Deerslayer i s the only one i n which Natty i s not the s o c i a l i n f e r i o r of some of the other major characters; here, apart from Captain Warley and the other s o l d i e r s who make a b r i e f appearance at the end of the novel, Natty Bumppo i s the s o c i a l equal of Hurry Harry, Tom Hutter and his two daughters, Judith 9 and Hetty. Early i n the novel, i t becomes quite apparent that he neither accepts, nor i s tempted by, the ethic of Hurry Harry. Although Harry i s a blatant r a c i s t , he does not scruple to adopt the Indian p r a c t i c e of scalping. Deerslayer, by maintaining that God has given d i f f e r e n t g i f t s to d i f f e r e n t races, i s able to respect the Indians without adopting t h e i r p r a c t i c e of scalping. In an ea r l y dialogue between Harry and Deerslayer, Cooper shows the diff e r e n c e between the two p o s i t i o n s : "Here's three colors on 'arth: white, black, and red. White i s the highest c o l o r , and therefore the best man; black comes next, and i s put to l i v e 108 i n the neighborhood of the white, man, as t o l e r a b l e , and f i t to be made use of; and red comes l a s t , which shows that those that made * em never expected an Indian to be accounted as more than h a l f human." "God made a l l three a l i k e , Hurry." "Alike! Do you c a l l a nigger l i k e a white man, or me l i k e an Indian?" "You go o f f at half-cock, and don't hear me out. God made us a l l , white, black, and red; and, no doubt, had h i s own wise intentions i n c o l o r i n g us d i f f e r e n t l y . S t i l l , he made us, i n the main, much the same i n f e e l i n ' s ; though I ' l l not deny that he gave each race i t s g i f t s . A white man's g i f t s are C h r i s t i a n i z e d , while a redskin's are more for the wilderness. Thus, i t would be a great offence f o r a white man to scalp the dead; whereas i t ' s a s i g n a l vartue i n an Indian. Then ag'in, a white man cannot amboosh women and c h i l d r e n i n war, while a redskin may. 'Tis c r u e l work, I ' l l allow; but for them i t ' s lawful work; while f o r us, i t would be grievous work." "That depends on your inimy. As f o r scalping, or even skinning a savage, I look upon them pretty much the same as c u t t i n g o f f the ears of wolves f o r the bounty, or s t r i p p i n g a bear of i t s hide." (Deerslayer, I I I , p. 36) When Hurry points to the c o l o n i a l lav/ which places a bounty on Indian scalps and thus makes the p r a c t i c e l e g a l , Deer-slayer places the law within a r e l a t i v i s t i c context subject to the absolute laws of God: "Laws don't a l l come from the same quarter. God 109 has given us his'n, and some come from the colony, and others come from the King and Parliament. When the colony's laws, or even the Kings laws, run ag* i n the laws of God, they get to be onlawful, and ought not to be obeyed. I hold to a white man's respecting white laws, so long as they do not cross the track of a law comin' from a higher authority; and f o r a redman to obey his own redskin usages, under the 10 same p r i v i l e g e . (Deerslayer, I I I , p. 37) Harry, who i s twenty-six or twenty-eight years of age and several years older than Deerslayer, constantly urges the younger man to prove his manhood. He f i r s t of a l l suggests i n a good-natured way that Natty do t h i s by eating: " ' F a l l to, lad, and prove your manhood on t h i s poor d e v i l of a doe with your teeth, as you've already done with your r i f l e ' " (Deerslayer, I, p. 6). When Natty objects that "'there's l i t t l e manhood i n k i l l i n g a doe'", Hurry asks i n a more challenging manner, "'Did you ever h i t anything human or i n t e l l i g i b l e : did you ever p u l l t r i g g e r on an inimy that was capable of p u l l i n g one upon you?'" (Deerslayer, I, p. 7). Deerslayer was forced to answer that he had never k i l l e d a man. Because of Deerslayer's lack of experience and his objection to scalping Indians for the bounty, Tom Hutter suggests that the young man does not yet have a "true wilderness heart" (Deerslayer, V, p. 83). S i m i l a r l y , when Hutter and Hurry are captured and Hutter wants Deerslayer to look a f t e r his daughters by f o r t i f y i n g 110 himself i n the " c a s t l e " , Hurry Harry objects that Deer-slayer would not be of much use because he was "settlement-conscienced" (Deerslayer, VI, p. 102). Thus, i n the minds of Hutter and Harry, the moral standards of the settlements are simply not applicable on the s h i f t i n g f r o n t i e r . This i s shown also by Hutter's comment to Hetty: "'Your heart i s good, c h i l d , and f i t t e r f or the settlements than f o r the woods; while your reason i s f i t t e r f o r the woods than f o r the settlements'" (Deer- slayer , V, p. 83). Deerslayer's understanding i s completely d i f f e r e n t , but rather inconsistent; on the one hand, he believes that Indian g i f t s , such as scalping, are "more for the wilderness" (Deerslayer, I I I , p. 36); on the other hand, he maintains that the beauty of the wilderness should develop moral character i n the whites who l i v e i n i t . Thus, when he f i r s t sees Lake Glimmerglass, he remarks to Hurry, "'Your Judith ought to be a moral and well-disposed young woman, i f she has passed h a l f the time you mention i n the centre of a spot so favored'" (Deerslayer, I I , p. 22). When Hurry r e f e r s to Judith's f a i l i n g s , Deerslayer responds, " ' I f she h a s — i f she has, Hurry, t h i s i s a school to set her mind r i g h t again'" (Deerslayer, I I , p. 22). In the same way, Hetty says, "•I don't l i k e settlements; they are f u l l of wickedness and heart-burnings, while God dwells unoffended i n these I l l h i l l s ! ' " (Deerslayer, XXII, pp. 387-88). The book shows that Deerslayer i s mistaken i n his b e l i e f that a wilderness state of nature automatically promotes morality. L i v i n g i n the midst of wild beauty has not been s u f f i c i e n t to prevent Judith's f a l l from innocence, and both Hurry Harry and Tom Hutter d i s p l a y a v i o l e n t and crudely m a t e r i a l i s t i c disregard for a l l human values. Although the novel shows the naivety of Deer-slayer's b e l i e f i n the moral beneficence of the wilderness, i t does not e n t i r e l y d i s c r e d i t that b e l i e f . Rather, by contrasting Deerslayer's appreciation of natural beauty with Hurry's complete disregard f o r i t , the novel suggests that, where the heart and mind of man are open to receive i t s influence, nature i s able to a f f e c t man's morality f o r the better. Thus, i n the following passage, Cooper states that Deerslayer's moral stature was strengthened by h i s open a t t i t u d e to nature: Untutored as he was i n the learning of the world, and simple as he ever showed himself to be i n a l l matters touching the s u b t l e t i e s of conventional taste, he was a man of strong, native, p o e t i c a l f e e l i n g . He loved the woods for t h e i r freshness, t h e i r sublime s o l i t u d e s , t h e i r vastness, and the impress that they everywhere bore of the divine hand of t h e i r Creator. He r a r e l y moved through them without pausing to dwell on some pec u l i a r beauty that gave him pleasure, though seldom 112 attempting to investigate the causes; and never did a day pass without h i s communing i n s p i r i t , and t h i s , too, without the aid of forms or language, with the i n f i n i t e Source of a l l he saw, f e l t , and beheld. (Deerslayer, XVI, p. 283) In contrast to Deerslayer's enthusiasm for Lake Glimmerglass, Hurry reveals his i n s e n s i t i v i t y and lack of imagination when he observes i n a matter of f a c t manner: '"Lakes have a general character, as I say, being pretty much water and land, and points and bays'" (Deerslayer, I I , pp. 30-31). Later, Cooper describes the e a r l y morning upon the lake; h i s d e s c r i p t i o n uses s p e c i f i c a l l y r e l i g i o u s terminology as he sets out the powers that such a scene should have upon those who witnessed i t : I f any ear t h l y scene could be presented to the senses of man that might soothe his passion and temper his f e r o c i t y , i t was that which grew upon the eyes of Hutter and Hurry as the hours advanced, changing night to morning. There were the usual s o f t t i n t s of the sky i n which neither the gloom of darkness nor the b r i l l i a n c y of the sun p r e v a i l s , and under which objects appear more unearthly, and we might add, holy, than at any other portion of the twenty-four hours. . . . A l l t h i s , however, Hutter and Hurry witnessed without experiencing any of the calm d e l i g h t which the spectacle i s wont to bring when the thoughts are j u s t , and the aspirations pure. . . . The whole was l o s t on the observers, who knew no f e e l i n g of 113 poetry, had l o s t t h e i r sense of natural devotion i n l i v e s of obdurate and narrow s e l f i s h n e s s , and had l i t t l e other sympathy with nature than that which originated with her lowest wants. (Deerslayer, XIX, pp. 3 31-32) But i f the frontiersmen remained b l i n d to t h i s beauty, Chingachgook and H i s t give themselves to a quiet enjoyment and appreciation of the scene: " I t disposed the young warrior to peace; and never had he f e l t less longings fo r the glory of combat" (Deerslayer, XIX, p. 340). The moral influence of the wilderness, therefore, i s purely subjective; at the same time the wilderness lacks the l e g a l r e s t r a i n t which i s to be found i n the 11 settlements. Thus, while Deerslayer finds that nature supports his moral character so that he i s able to depend upon his understanding of the natural law, frontiersmen l i k e Hutter and Hurry are completely lawless. Hurry i s amazed at Deerslayer's confession that he had never k i l l e d a man: "What! did you never f i n d a fellow thieving among your traps and skins, and do the law on him with your own hands, by way of saving the magistrates trouble i n the settlements, and the rogue himself the cost of the s u i t ? " (Deerslayer, I, p. 7) He suggests that i f some other s u i t o r had the temerity to marry Judith, he himself would k i l l that man: "When we l i v e beyond the law, we must be our 114 own judges and executioners. And i f a man should be found dead i n the woods, who i s there to say who slew him, even admitting the colony took the matter i n hand and made a s t i r about i t ? " (Deer- slayer, I, p. 13) For frontiersmen l i k e Hurry Harry, the phrase "beyond the law" had metaphoric as well as geographic meaning. Speaking of trappers and hunters as a c l a s s , Deerslayer says, "'Take 'em as a body, Judi t h , •arth don't hold a set of men more given to t h e i r s e l v e s , and l e s s given to God and the law'" (Deerslayer, XXIV, p. 388). For J u d i t h , the wilderness has come to symbolize a l l of her l o s t innocence and v i r t u e ; i t represents that happy and virtuous state of being i n which she now can have no place except through the mediation of a strong and virtuous man l i k e Deerslayer. Thus her proposal to Deerslayer i s more than simply a proposal of marriage; i t i s a plea f o r l i f e , "a desperate e f f o r t to rescue h e r s e l f from a future that she dreaded with a horror as v i v i d as the d i s t i n c t n e s s with which she fancied she foresaw i t " (Deerslayer. XXXII, p. 566). The a t t i t u d e of the white characters towards nature corresponds with t h e i r a t t i t u d e towards the Indians. Hutter and Hurry share a complete contempt f o r a l l Indians and f e e l no qualms about k i l l i n g and scalping Indian women and c h i l d r e n i n order to obtain the scalp bounty. Hurry's 115 reputation as one of the strongest men on the f r o n t i e r gives him a contempt for the Indians, who are his physical i n f e r i o r s . A f t e r Hurry had thoughtlessly shot a young Huron g i r l , Cooper says of him that " i t was the habit of his mind to regard a l l Indians as being only a s l i g h t degree removed from the wild beasts that roamed the woods, and to f e e l disposed to t r e a t them accordingly" (Deerslayer, XIX, p. 330). Hutter, l e s s impulsive, and more concerned about p r o f i t , i s annoyed at the useless shooting. During his f i f t e e n year residence on the lake, he had learned to avoid needless r i s k ; at the same time he was w i l l i n g to take chances i f there was an opportunity f o r p r o f i t . Thus, he plans to take Indian scalps i n order to get the bounty. " ' I f there's women, there's c h i l d r e n ; and big and l i t t l e have scalps; the colony pays f o r a l l a l i k e ' " (Deerslayer, V, p. 77). Hetty Hutter, on the other hand, i s incapable of e i t h e r thinking or doing harm to anyone. Her approach to the Indians, however, i s s i m p l i s t i c and moralizing. She does not i n t e r a c t with the Indians but simply comes and goes among them as an ethereal presence with an uncom-promising message of peace and forgiveness. Hetty functions i n the novel as a C h r i s t i a n missionary; thus, her f a i l u r e to a l t e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y the conduct of e i t h e r the white or the Indian characters must be understood as 116 a comment upon the r e l a t i v e i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s of actual missionaries upon the f r o n t i e r . Innocent, harmless, and l i k a b l e , she comes and goes among the Indians i n the same manner as she avoided mishap when she met a bear wi cubs: It quitted the honey, and advanced to a place within twenty feet of her, where i t r a i s e d i t s e l f on i t s hinder legs, and balanced i t s body i n a sort of angry, growling discontent, but approached no nearer. Happily, Hetty did not f l y . On the contrary, though not without t e r r o r , she knelt with her face towards the animal, and with clasped hands and u p l i f t e d eyes, repeated the prayer of the previous night. . . . As the g i r l arose from her knees, the bear dropped on i t s feet again, and c o l l e c t i n g i t s cubs around her, permitted them to draw t h e i r natural sustenance. (Deerslayer, X, pp. 169-70) The bears then accompanied Hetty f o r nearly a mile as she made her way to the Huron camp. The e n t i r episode i s reminiscent of the famous eschat a l o g i c a l passage i n Isaiah 11:6-7: The wolf also s h a l l dwell with the lamb, and the leopard s h a l l l i e down with the k i d , and the c a l f and the young l i o n and the f a t l i n g together; and a l i t t l e c h i l d s h a l l lead them. And the cow and the bear s h a l l feed; t h e i r young ones s h a l l l i e down together: and the l i o n s h a l l 12 eat straw l i k e the ox. Cooper, i n his d e s c r i p t i o n of Hetty and the bears, and 117 i n the i m p l i c i t comparison of t h i s event with her r e l a t i o n s with the Indians,'suggests that she was not subject to the usual l i m i t a t i o n s of nature or h i s t o r y . Consequently, Hetty's r e l a t i o n s h i p to the Indians would be an appropriate model f o r other people to follow at the same time as--and no sooner than--her r e l a t i o n s h i p to the bears would be. In other words, Hetty functions i n the novel as an esc h a t a l o g i c a l , rather than as a h i s t o r i c a l , character. While Deerslayer maintained that d i f f e r e n t " g i f t s " made i t lawful for Indians to scalp, Hetty holds to an absolute and uncompromising morality. As she says to H i s t at t h e i r f i r s t meeting, "'God w i l l not pardon i n a redman what he w i l l not pardon i n a white man'" (Deerslayer, X, p. 174). Within the Huron camp, Hetty reads to the Indians those passages from the Bible which enjoin forgiveness and love f o r the neighbour. To t h i s , H i s t , who has been t r a n s l a t i n g f o r the other Indians, responds: "'Neighbor f o r I n j i n no mean pale-face. . . . Neighbor mean Iroquois f o r Iroquois, Mohican f o r Mohican, pale-face f o r pale-face. No need to t e l l c h i e f anything e l s e ' " (Deerslayer, XI, p. 191). When Hetty p e r s i s t s , Rivenoak, the Huron c h i e f , asks the i n e v i t a b l e questions about the white-man's f a i l u r e to l i v e up to the precepts which he t r i e s to teach the Indian: If he i s ordered to give double to him that asks 118 only for one thing, why does he take double from the poor Indians who ask for no thing? He comes from beyond the r i s i n g sun, with his book i n his hand, and he teaches the redman to read i t ; but why does he forget himself a l l i t says? When the Indian gives, he i s never s a t i s f i e d : and now he of f e r s "gold f o r the scalps of our women and ch i l d r e n , though he c a l l s us beasts i f we take the scalp of a warrior k i l l e d i n open war." (Deerslayer, XI, p. 193) When Hetty meets her father and Hurry Harry who are being held captive by the Hurons, the older man t e l l s her: "'Preaching and the Bible are not the means to turn an Indian from h i s ways'" (Deerslayer, XI, p. 196). On th i s occasion, Tom Hutter a r t i c u l a t e s the general a t t i t u d e of the book. As Cooper says i n an e d i t o r i a l passage, Hetty's preaching of love and forgiveness was "thrown away on beings trained i n violence from infancy to manhood" (Deerslayer, XI, p. 196). Hetty i s quite consistent i n her a p p l i c a t i o n of absolute C h r i s t i a n p r i n c i p l e s to the f r o n t i e r . Thus, she opposes Hutter and Hurry i n t h e i r plans to scalp Indians: "Why should you and Hurry k i l l p e o p l e — e s p e c i a l l y women and children?" "Peace, g i r l , peace; we are at war, and must do to our enemies as our enemies would do to us." "That's not i t , father! I heard Deerslayer say how i t was. You must do to your enemies as you wish your enemies would do to you. No man wishes his 119 enemies to k i l l him!" (Deerslayer, V. p. 81) Nor i s Deerslayer exempt from Hetty's moral censure. When the Panther, one of the Huron c h i e f s , hurled a tomahawk at Deerslayer, the white man caught i t i n mid-air and threw i t back, k i l l i n g the Indian. Hetty's comment on t h i s was a reproachful question: "Why did you k i l l the Huron, Deerslayer? . . . Don't you know your commandments, which say, 'Thou shalt not k i l l ! ' They t e l l me you have now s l a i n the woman's husband and brother." "It ' s true, my good Hetty, ' t i s gospel truth, and I ' l l not deny what has come to pass. But you must remember, gal, that many things are lawful i n war, which would be onlawful i n peace. The husband was shot i n open f i g h t ; or open so f a r as I was consarned, while he had a better cover than common; and the brother brought his end on himself, by casting his tomahawk at an unarmed prisoner. Did you witness that deed, gal?" "I saw i t , and was sorry i t happened, Deerslayer; for I hoped you wouldn't have returned blow f o r blow, but good f o r e v i l . " "Ah, Hetty, that may do among the missionaries, but 'twould make an onsartain l i f e i n the woods." (Deerslayer, XXVIII, pp. 506-507) Deerslayer's answer r e f l e c t s h is concern to f i n d a code of ethics f o r wilderness s u r v i v a l . He r e j e c t s the heartless barbarism of Hutter and Hurry, but, at the same time, he also r e j e c t s the s i m p l i s t i c C h r i s t i a n i t y of Hetty. L i f e i n the woods was "onsartain" at the best of times; 120 Deerslayer f u l l y r e a l i z e d the dangers involved and wished to avoid them. By placing the Quaker and Moravian doctrines of non-resistance to e v i l on the l i p s of Hetty, Cooper has denied, i n a very e f f e c t i v e manner, that these doctrines could have any v a l i d i t y i n a wilderness s i t u a t i o n . In conversation with Hurry Harry, Deerslayer set f o r t h his understanding of what the Moravians taught: "Some of t h e i r teachers say, that i f you're struck on the cheek, i t ' s a duty to turn the other side of the face, and take another blow, instead of seeking revenge, whereby I understand—" "That's enough!" shouted Hurry; "that's a l l I want, to prove a man's doctrine! How long would i t take to kick a man through the c o l o n y — i n at one ind, and out at the other, on that p r i n c i p l e ? " "Don't mistake me, March," r e p l i e d the young hunter with d i g n i t y ; "I don't understand by t h i s any more than that i t ' s best to do t h i s , i f pos s i b l e . Revenge i s an I n j i n g i f t , and forgiveness a white man's. That's a l l . Overlook a l l you can i s what's meant; and not revenge a l l you can." (Deerslayer, V, pp. 78-79) As he attempts to p r a c t i c e t h i s e t h i c , Deerslayer i s nearly k i l l e d i n his f i r s t encounter with a Huron; a f t e r the Indian had f i r e d from ambush and was reloading his gun, Deerslayer had an opportunity to k i l l h is opponent; But every f e e l i n g of Deerslayer revolted at such a step, although his own l i f e had ju s t been attempted from a cover. He was yet unpracticed i n the ruthless 121 expedients of savage warfare, of which he knew nothing except by t r a d i t i o n and theory, and i t struck him an as un f a i r advantage to a s s a i l an unarmed foe. . . . "No, n o — t h a t may be redskin warfare, but i t ' s not C h r i s t i a n g i f t s . Let the miscreant charge, and then we'll take i t out l i k e men." (Deerslayer, VII, pp. 108-09) Instead of f i r i n g , therefore, he allowed the Indian to reload and advance into the open, at which point Deer-slayer hailed him and the two men had an amicable conversation i n which Deerslayer asserted h i s b e l i e f that "'war i s n ' t needfully massacre'" (Deerslayer, VI, p. 110). A f t e r peacefully parting, the Indian once again t r i e d to shoot Deerslayer from ambush; t h i s time Deerslayer did not stop to consider the e t h i c a l implications of h i s action; he f i r e d and gave the Indian a mortal wound. As the Indian was dying, Deerslayer said to him, "I overlook altogether your designs ag'in my l i f e ; f i r s t , because no harm came of 'em; next, because i t ' s your g i f t s , and natur', and t r a i n i n ' , and I ought not to have trusted you at a l l ; and, f i n a l l y and c h i e f l y , because I can bear no i l l - w i l l to a dying man, whether heathen or C h r i s t i a n . " (Deerslayer, VII, p. 115) This passage reveals some of the implications of Natty Bumppo's doctrine of g i f t s . Because of the Indian's g i f t s , nature, and t r a i n i n g , Deerslayer says, "'I ought not to have trusted you at a l l . ' " Thus, instead of leading to a healthy c u l t u r a l pluralism, the doctrine promotes a r a c i s t 122 view of the Indian as a person who cannot be trusted. Deerslayer did not again make the mistake of t r u s t i n g an unknown Indian; by the end of the book he i s quite w i l l i n g to be the f i r s t man to f i r e upon helpless Hurons t r y i n g to escape from the encirclement of the B r i t i s h s o l d i e r s . Although f e e l i n g that "'war i s n ' t needfully massacre,'" Deerslayer plays h i s f u l l part i n the r e s u l t a n t massacre of the Hurons. At the end of the novel, Deerslayer has also modified his understanding of the Golden Rule. When Sumach r e v i l e s him f o r k i l l i n g her husband and brother, Deerslayer r e p l i e s , "'I raised my hand ag'in 'em on account of what they were s t r i v i n g to do, rather than what they d i d . This i s n a t ' r a l law, 'to do l e s t you should be done by''" (Deerslayer, XXVIII, p. 515). Thus a few days experience has taught Deerslayer to repudiate his e a r l i e r opposition to Hurry Harry's "Do as you're done by" e t h i c ( c f . Deerslayer, V, p. 79). When we consider a l l points of view we see that the novel, taking the experience of Deerslayer as paradigmatic, accepts the p o s s i b i l i t y of a " j u s t war" between whites and Indians. Deerslayer r e j e c t s the p o s s i b i l i t y of t o t a l amity and avoidance of violence i n the same way as he r e j e c t s the notion that white men should engage i n the more bloody practices of Indian 123 warfare. In many ways The Deerslayer presents a more favourable view of Indian l i f e and Indian people than does any other of the Leatherstocking Tales. Rivenoak, the Huron c h i e f , combines a basic commitment to j u s t i c e and f a i r play, with h i s p o l i t i c a l cunning. Thus, while he, l i k e Magua and Mahtoree, uses demagoguery to bring about h i s purpose, these purposes are not debased and treacherous as were those of the other two Indian leaders. John P. McWilliams, J r . underlines t h i s d i f f e r e n c e between The Deerslayer and the other Leatherstocking Tales: Rather than scalping t h e i r white captives, the Hurons honourably ransom them f o r chessmen. The Mingos venerate Hetty Hutter; Hurry and Tom condescend toward her. When the Hurons declare war, they give forewarning through a bundle of bound pine knots. Hurry shoots i n d i f f e r e n t l y and without warning. Harry and Hutter are the f i r s t to seek scalps; t h e i r method i s to skulk a f t e r women and c h i l d r e n during the night. In no previous t a l e has Cooper portrayed whites organizing a scalping expedition, invading Indian 13 camps, or shooting an Indian maiden. The reader should note however, that Cooper does not allow these two renegades to scalp any Indians; although they are debited with the e v i l i n t e n t i o n , i t i s l e f t to the Indians to capture the reader's horror with an actual s c a l p i n g — t h a t of Hutter himself: He was seated, r e c l i n i n g i n a corner of a narrow 124 room, with h i s shoulders supported by the angle, and his head f a l l e n heavily on his chest. Judith moved forward with a sudden impulse, and removed a canvass cap that was forced so low on his head as to conceal his face, and, indeed, a l l but h i s shoulders. The instant t h i s obstacle was taken away, the quivering and raw f l e s h , the bared veins and muscles, and a l l the other disgusting signs of mortality, as they are revealed by tearing away the skin, showed that he had been scalped, though s t i l l l i v i n g . (Deerslayer, XX, p. 364) Cooper's comment on the s i t u a t i o n e x p l o i t s a basic fear and disgust of Indian warfare: "Hutter was simply scalped, to secure the usual trophy, and was l e f t to die by inches, as has been done i n a thousand s i m i l a r instances by the ruthless warriors of t h i s part of the American continent" (Deerslayer, XXI, p. 366). Unfortunately, Deerslayer i s not present to comment that the act was " i n accordance with t h e i r g i f t s . " By describing the e f f e c t s of scalping i n such d e t a i l , Cooper repudiates Natty Bumppo's easy tolerance of the Indian p r a c t i c e . Neither the f a i l u r e of Hutter and Hurry Harry to scalp Indians, nor the actual scalping of Hutter, appreciably a f f e c t the p l o t of The Deerslayer; however, they do a f f e c t the reader's perception of Indian and white-man. Cooper has l e f t i n the reader's mind a picture of Indian barbarity and c r u e l t y which i s not balanced by his e d i t o r i a l comments upon the crude violence and m a t e r i a l i s t i c greed of the two frontiersmen. 125 The question of abo r i g i n a l land claims i s not ce n t r a l to The Deerslayer anymore than i t was to The Pathfinder. Deerslayer and Hurry Harry e s t a b l i s h the fa c t that Mohican, Mingo and white frontiersman a l l claim the land around Lake Glimmerglass; when Deerslayer r a i s e s the further question of formal ownership, Hurry r e p l i e s , "'Not a human being, the Lord excepted, owns a foot of s i l e i n t h i s part of the country. Pen was never put to paper consarning e i t h e r h i l l or v a l l e y hereaway, as I've heard old Tom say time and ag'in, and so he claims the best r i g h t to i t of any man 14 breathing.'" (Deerslayer, I, p. 8) In the f i r s t three of the Leatherstocking Tales, Cooper had developed considerable r h e t o r i c about Indian r i g h t s to the land. As we have seen, the face value of t h i s r h e t o r i c was ser i o u s l y undermined by the t o t a l e f f e c t of the books. In The Deerslayer, the disputed claim f o r the t e r r i t o r y around Lake Glimmerglass subordinates the question of ownership to that of possession. Written i n the 1840s, with the perspective of a century, the novel does not question the continuing advance of American possession and Indian dispossession. Instead i t poses the question, "What kind of American i s f i t to enter i n and take possession of t h i s land?" The novel implies that Hutter and Harry with t h e i r v i o l e n t and lawless materialism are as unequal to the task as are Judith with her corrupted longing for luxury and Hetty with her simple-minded p i e t y . 126 Only Deerslayer had the r e q u i s i t e strength of body, mind and s p i r i t to survive i n the land. 127 CHAPTER IV COOPER'S USE OF MATERIAL FROM HECKEWELDER We can often get an understanding of an author's i n t e r e s t and concern by examining his source material and the way he uses i t . The Rev. John Heckewelder (1743-1823) provided Cooper with his most important written source of background information for the w r i t i n g of the Leatherstock-ing Tales. In his 1826 Preface to The Last of the Mohicans, Cooper refe r s to "the pious, the venerable, and the experienced Heckewelder" as a major source of information about the d i f f e r e n t groups of Indians who f i g u r e so prominently i n that novel. A general review a r t i c l e i n the North American Review, a t t r i b u t e d to Lewis Cass, had already made the s a r c a s t i c observation that "'the l a s t of the Mohegans' i s an Indian of the school of Mr. Heckewelder, and not of the school of nature." A l a t e r a r t i c l e , also attributed to Cass, i s more e x p l i c i t i n i t s condemnation of Heckewelder•s influence on Cooper: and r e f e r s s p e c i f i c a l l y to Uncas and Hard-Heart, the Indian heroes of The Last of the Mohicans and The P r a i r i e . His Uncas, and his Pawnee Hard-Heart, f o r they are both of the same family, have no l i v i n g prototype i n our f o r e s t s . They may wear leggins and moccasins, and be wrapped i n a blanket or a bu f f a l o skin, but they are c i v i l i z e d men, and not Indians. . . . They are the Indians of Mr. Heckewelder, 128 and not the f i e r c e and c r a f t y warriors and hunters, 2 that roam through our f o r e s t s . In the Preface to the 1850 e d i t i o n of the f i v e Leatherstock-ing novels, Cooper, rather than denying Heckewelder•s influence, accepts and j u s t i f i e s i t : It has been objected to these books that they give a more favorable p i c t u r e of the red man than he deserves. . . . One of his c r i t i c s , on the appearance of the f i r s t work i n which Indian character was portrayed, objects that i t s "characters were Indians of the school of Heckewelder, rather than of the school of nature." These words quite probably contain the substance of the true answer to the objection. Heckewelder was an ardent, benevolent missionary, bent on the good of the red man, and seeing i n him one who had the soul, reason, and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of a fellow-being. The c r i t i c i s understood to have been a very distinguished agent of the government, one very f a m i l i a r with Indians, as they are seen at the councils to t r e a t for the sale of t h e i r lands, where l i t t l e or none of t h e i r domestic q u a l i t i e s come i n play, and where, indeed, t h e i r e v i l passions are known to have the f u l l e s t scope. As just would i t be to draw conclusions of the general state of American society from the scenes of the c a p i t a l , as to suppose that the negotiating of one of these t r e a t i e s i s a f a i r p icture of Indian l i f e . (Deerslayer, v i - v i i ) Heckewelder, when he was i n his l a t e seventies, wrote two books, An Account of the History, Manners, and Customs, of the Indian Nations who once Inhabited Pennsy-129 l v a n i a and the Neighbouring States (1819) , and Narrative  of the Mission of the United Brethren Among the Delaware  and Mohegan Indians (1820). 4 In these books, Heckewelder, who had been a Moravian Missionary to the Delaware Indians, sets out his understanding of Indian h i s t o r y , language, customs, and progress i n c i v i l i z a t i o n . Cass dismisses Heckewelder's work as that of an old man "at the extremity of a long l i f e , " who had "enfeebled f a c u l t i e s . " 5 However, although the accuracy of Heckewelder•s knowledge may be questioned, the f a c t which concerns t h i s study i s that Cooper gre a t l y depended upon his books. The most obvious feature of Heckewelder's History, i s the author's p a r t i a l i t y towards the Delaware Indians and h i s antipathy to the Indians of the Six Nations. This p a r t i a l i t y was adopted by Cooper, who used i t as a convenient schema by which a l l Indians could be recognized as "good" or "bad", depending upon t h e i r t r i b a l a f f i l i a t i o n . Thus, i n The Pioneers, The Last of the Mohicans, The  Pathfinder, and The Deerslayer, he pictures the Delawares as "good" Indians, while showing the I r o q u o i s — includ i n g t h e i r enemy cousins, the Hurons—as "bad". In The P r a i r i e he transposes t h i s schema to the Plains Indians so that the Pawnees are "good" and the Sioux are "bad". From Heckewelder, Cooper took the account of 130 Delaware o r i g i n s , the story of how the Iroquois made the Delawares "women", and Heckewelder 1s understanding of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between d i f f e r e n t t r i b e s . Heckewelder stressed that the Indians whom he describes i n such glowing colours are not to be equated with those who would be seen at the time when he wrote: This h i s t o r y , l i k e other h i s t o r i e s of former times, w i l l not i n every respect comport with the character of the Indians at the present time, since a l l these nations and t r i b e s , by t h e i r intercourse with the white people, have l o s t much of the honourable and virtuous q u a l i t i e s which they once possessed, and added to t h e i r vices and immorality. Of t h i s , no one can be a better judge than a missionary r e s i d i n g among them. (History, p. 7) As we have seen t h i s emphasis on past n o b i l i t y , as compared with present degeneracy, i s also an important feature of the Leatherstocking Tales. Beginning with the degenerate Mohegan John i n The Pioneers, Cooper was able to project backwards to a time when t h i s same person had been the Great Serpent, or Chingachgook. Even the name, "Mohican John," which Cooper adapted to "Mohegan" i n The Pioneers, comes from Heckewelder (History, p. 77). S i m i l a r l y , Cooper shows that Magua, Mahtoree, and Arrowhead had a l l been corrupted by contact with whites, while Rivenoak, l i v i n g i n an e a r l i e r period, s t i l l r etained his native sense of d i g n i t y and honour. 131 Heckewelder does not deny the c r u e l t y of Indian l i f e : I t cannot but be acknowledged that the Indians are i n general revengeful and c r u e l to t h e i r enemies. That even a f t e r the b a t t l e i s over, they wreak t h e i r d eliberate revenge on t h e i r defenceless prisoners; that i n t h e i r wars, they are i n d i f f e r e n t about the means which they pursue for the annoyance and destruction of t h e i r adversaries, and that surprise and stratagem are as often employed by them as open fo r c e . (History, p. 91) He does, however, attempt to play down, explain, and even j u s t i f y conduct which other writers had magnified as a c e n t r a l constituent of Indian character and society. In one passage he places the question of b a r b a r i t y i n a context of c u l t u r a l pluralism which we more often associate with twentieth century anthropology than with the nineteenth century missionary movement: They have a strong innate sense of j u s t i c e , which w i l l lead them sometimes to acts which some men w i l l c a l l heroic, others romantic, and not a few, perhaps, w i l l designate by the epithet barbarous; a vague i n d e f i n i t e word, which i f i t means anything, might, perhaps, be best explained by something not l i k e ourselves. (History, p. 89) Although there are a number of c r u c i a l incidents i n which Cooper shows the Indian p r a c t i c e of t o r t u r i n g prisoners at the stake, t h i s emphasis i s not something he found i n Heckewelder, who denied the frequency of 132 such p r a c t i c e : I t i s but seldom that prisoners are put to death by burning and t o r t u r i n g . I t hardly ever takes place except when a nation has suffered great losses i n war, and i t i s thought necessary to revenge the death of t h e i r warriors s l a i n i n b a t t l e , or when w i l f u l and deliberate murders have been committed by an enemy of t h e i r innocent women and ch i l d r e n , i n which case the f i r s t prisoners taken are almost sure of being s a c r i f i c e d by way of r e t a l i a t i o n . (History, p. 211) Heckewelder also gives examples of Indian opposition to whites who t r i e d to i n c i t e them to wanton c r u e l t y (History, pp. 337-8). While i t i s important to examine the Heckewelder material which Cooper used, i t i s equally important to examine material which he ignored. While s t r e s s i n g the primacy of game i n the Indian d i e t , Heckewelder also mentions "the maize, potatoes, beans, pumpkins, squashes, cucumbers, melons, and occ a s i o n a l l y cabbages and turnips, which they r a i s e i n t h e i r f i e l d s " (History, p. 184).^ In 1742, at the beginning of the Moravian Mission at Nazareth, Pennsylvania, there was, says Heckewelder "a fi n e large peach orchard" i n the possession of the Indians (History, p. 336). This peach orchard shows that the Delawares had adopted some features of white ag r i c u l t u r e at the e a r l i e s t point i n time of the Leatherstocking saga. Cooper's c l o s e s t approach to i n d i c a t i n g that Indians grew 133 crops i s a reference i n The Pioneers to f r u i t trees "of Indian o r i g i n " (Pioneers, I I I , p. 30), and three casual references to crops i n The Deerslayer (Deerslayer, XXIII, p. 409; XXVI, p. 471; XXVIII, p. 511). In 1772, Moravian missionaries, with f i v e Indian f a m i l i e s , moved to Shonbrun on the Ohio r i v e r . Because of d i f f i c u l t i e s occasioned by the Revolutionary War, they were compelled to abandon t h i s s i t e a few years l a t e r . Heckewelder's d e s c r i p t i o n of the v i l l a g e , however, gives an i n d i c a t i o n of the degree to which these Indians were adapting to the demands of white c u l t u r e : Shonbrun had been the l a r g e s t and handsomest town the C h r i s t i a n Indians had h i t h e r t o b u i l t ; containing upwards of s i x t y dwelling houses, most of which were of squared timbers. The s t r e e t , from east to west, was long, and of a proper width; from the centre, where the chapel stood, another s t r e e t run o f f to the north. The inhabitants had, for the greatest part, become husbandmen. They had large f i e l d s under good r a i l fences, well pailed gardens, and f i n e f r u i t trees; besides herds of c a t t l e , horses and hogs. (Narrative, p. 15 7) Nowhere i n the Leatherstocking Tales does Cooper give evidence of any but the most s u p e r f i c i a l attachment of Indians to white c i v i l i z a t i o n . Obviously, i t did not s u i t h i s purpose to follow Heckewelder at t h i s point. While d e t a i l i n g the opposition of some Indians to the work of the Moravians, Heckewelder also lays a 134 great deal of s t r e s s on the o p p o s i t i o n of white f r o n t i e r s m e n who saw the Indians as the Canaanites of the New I s r a e l : fjMoraviansJ were censured f o r endeavouring to c i v i l i z e the savages, a race of being, which, ( i n t h e i r o pinion) had no c l a i m to C h r i s t i a n i t y , and whom to de s t r o y , both r o o t and branch, would not only be doing God a s e r v i c e , but a l s o be the means of a v e r t i n g h i s wrath which they otherwise might i n c u r by s u f f e r i n g them to l i v e , they being the same as the Canaanites of o l d , an accursed r a c e , who by God's command were to be destroyed. ( N a r r a t i v e , p. 42) While not ce n s u r i n g the Moravians f o r t h e i r m i s s i o n a r y a c t i v i t i e s , the L e a t h e r s t o c k i n g Tales suggest t h a t such work was f u t i l e because of the Ind i a n s ' involvement i n c u l t u r a l , i n t e l l e c t u a l and moral darkness. Because of the importance which Cooper gives to scenes of Indian savagery, we should n o t i c e Heckewelder's d e s c r i p t i o n of s i m i l a r a t r o c i t i e s by wh i t e s . A f t e r f o u r Sandusky w a r r i o r s k i l l e d a white woman and c h i l d i n 1781, a group of between one and two hundred Ohio f r o n t i e r s m e n came upon a group of C h r i s t i a n Indians who had returned to t h e i r o l d v i l l a g e t o o b t a i n c o r n . The whites assured the Indians of t h e i r good i n t e n t i o n s u n t i l the l a t t e r were i n a p o s i t i o n where they could not f i g h t back. The whites then began a systematic massacre which Heckewelder d e s c r i b e s as f o l l o w s : "—One of the p a r t y now t a k i n g 135 up a cooper's mallet, which lay i n the house (the owner being a cooper) saying: 'how exactly t h i s w i l l answer for the business', he began with Abraham, and continued knocking down one af t e r the other, u n t i l he had counted fourteen, that he had k i l l e d with his own hands" (Narrative, p. 319). Heckewelder points out that the white f r o n t i e r s -men on t h i s occasion murdered some ninety people, one t h i r d of whom were c h i l d r e n . In addition to the mass murder of the Muskingum River i n 1782, Heckewelder d e t a i l s other incidents of wanton c r u e l t y by whites. He t e l l s of drunken m i l i t i a o f f i c e r s and men murdering an Indian man, two women and a c h i l d i n order to get t h e i r horses (History, pp. 333-34). He r e l a t e s a white man's boastful story about a war party which included both whites and Indians: The party with which he was, having taken a woman prisoner who had a sucking babe at her breast, he t r i e d to persuade the Indians to k i l l the c h i l d , l e s t i t s c r i e s should discover the place where they were; the Indians were unwilling to commit the deed, on which the white man at once jumped up, tore the c h i l d from i t s mother's arms, and taking i t by the legs dashed i t s head against a tree, so that the brains flew out a l l around. The monster i n r e l a t i n g t h i s story said "The l i t t l e dog a l l the time was making wee!" (History, p. 339) Heckewelder quotes an eye-witness d e s c r i p t i o n of the 1763 murder by the Paxton Boys of the peaceful Conestoga Indians who f o r t h e i r own protection had been placed i n the 136 Lancaster, Pennsylvania gaol: "—Near the back door of the prison, lay an old Indian and his squaw, (wife) p a r t i c u l a r l y well known and esteemed by the people of the town, on account of h i s p l a c i d and f r i e n d l y conduct. His name was W i l l Sock; across him and his squaw lay two c h i l d r e n , of about the age of three years, whose heads were s p l i t with the tomahawk, and t h e i r scalps a l l taken o f f . -Towards the middle of the gaol yard, along the west side of the wall, lay a stout Indian, whom I p a r t i c u l a r l y noticed to have been shot i n the breast, his legs were chopped with the•tomahawk, his hands cut o f f , and f i n a l l y a r i f l e b a l l discharged i n his mouth; so that his head was blown to atoms, and the brains were splashed against, and yet hanging to the w a l l , for three or four feet around. This man's hands and feet had also been chopped o f f with a tomahawk. In t h i s manner lay the whole of them, men, women and c h i l d r e n , spread about the prison yard: s h o t — s c a l p e d — hacked—and cut to pieces." (Narrative, p. 80) We see, therefore, that Heckewelder, i n his account of Indian-white r e l a t i o n s , gives an important place to d e t a i l s of white savagery. Cooper, however, does not use t h i s type of material; i f a c h i l d ' s brains are to be knocked out, we can be sure that the c h i l d i s white and the murderer Indian. As we have noticed, Cooper did not develop the p o t e n t i a l f o r white savagery which he ascribed to Tom Hutter and Hurry Harry. He describes t h e i r b r u t a l characters, speaks of t h e i r e v i l i ntentions, 137 and records conversation i n which they plan wanton murder; apart from describing Hurry Harry's random shot which k i l l e d the Indian g i r l , Cooper does not show the whites acting out the savagery within them. In contrast, he pictures Indian savagery i n i t s r e a l i z e d form rather than leaving i t i n the realm of p o t e n t i a l i t y . This r a c i s t bias becomes c l e a r when we compare Cooper's v i v i d p o r trayal of the Indian massacre of whites at Fort William Henry i n The Last of the Mohicans with his more generalized d e s c r i p t i o n of the white massacre of Hurons in The Deerslayer. Cooper begins his account of the Fort William Henry massacre by focussing on a s p e c i f i c act of Indian b r u t a l i t y : As the female crowd approached them, the gaudy colours of a shawl attracted the eyes of a wild • and untutored Huron. He advanced to seize i t , without the l e a s t h e s i t a t i o n . The woman, more i n t e r r o r than through love of the ornament, wrapped her c h i l d i n the coveted a r t i c l e , and folded both more c l o s e l y to her bosom. Cora was in the act of speaking, with an intent to advise the woman to abandon the t r i f l e , when the savage relinquished his hold of the shawl and tore the screaming i n f a n t from her arms. Abandoning everything to the greedy grasp of those around her, the mother darted with d i s t r a c t i o n i n her mien, to reclaim her c h i l d . The Indian smiled grimly, and extended one hand, i n sign of willingness to exchange, while with the other he 138 f l o u r i s h e d the babe above hi s head, holding i t by the feet, as i f to enhance the value of the ransom. " H e r e — h e r e — t h e r e — a l l — a n y — e v e r y t h i n g ! " exclaimed the breathless woman; tearing the l i g h t e r a r t i c l e s of dress from her person, with i l l - d i r e c t e d and trembling f i n g e r s — " t a k e a l l , but give me my babe!" The savage spurned the worthless rags, and perceiving that the shawl had already become a pr i z e to another, his bantering, but s u l l e n smile, changing to a gleam of f e r o c i t y , he dashed the head of the infant against a rock, and cast i t s quivering remains to her very f e e t . (Mohicans, XVII, p. 207) When the Huron continued the horror of his work by tomahawking the mother, Magua gave a whoop c a l l i n g some 2000 of his brothers to j o i n i n the carnage: We s h a l l not dwell on the r e v o l t i n g horrors that succeeded. Death was everywhere, and i n his most t e r r i f i c and disgusting aspects. Resistance only served to inflame the murderers, who i n f l i c t e d t h e i r furious blows long a f t e r t h e i r victims were beyond the power of t h e i r resentment. The flow of blood might be likened to the outbreaking of a gushing torrent; and as the natives became heated and maddened by the sight, many among them even kneeled to the earth, and drank f r e e l y , e x u l t i n g l y , h e l l i s h l y , of the crimson t i d e . (Mohicans, XVII, p. 208) In contrast to the s p e c i f i c act of Indian c r u e l t y 139 at Fort William Henry, there i s a vague and i n d e f i n i t e q u a l i t y to the account of the trooper's massacre of Huron women and c h i l d r e n i n The Deerslayer. Rather than dealing i n s p e c i f i c s , Cooper emphasizes the confusion of the scene; he focuses attention on Deerslayer's concern for Judith, H i s t , and Hetty, rather than on the slaughter of the Indians. "The scene that followed i s not e a s i l y described. I t was one i n which wild confusion, despair, and frenzied e f f o r t s were so blended as to destroy the unity and directness of the action" (Deerslayer, XXX, p. 544). As the English troops, with t h e i r "steady measured tramp" blocked the Huron's only way of escape, Deerslayer began the shooting by k i l l i n g two Hurons with a sing l e shot. This drew a general f i r e from the Hurons, and the r i f l e and war-cry of the Serpent were heard i n the clamor. S t i l l , the trained men returned no answer-ing v o l l e y , the whoop and piece of Hurry alone being heard of t h e i r side, i f we except the short, prompt word of authority, and that heavy, measured, and menacing tread. Presently, however, the shrieks, groans, and denunciations that usually accompany the use of the bayonet, followed. That t e r r i b l e and deadly weapon was glutted i n venegeance. The scene that succeeded was one of those, of which so many have occurred i n our own times, i n which neither age nor sex forms an exemption to the l o t of a savage warfare. (Deerslayer, XXX, p. 545) 140 By describing the scene i n terms of Indian confusion, contrasted to English m i l i t a r y d i s c i p l i n e , and by avoiding d e s c r i p t i o n of the actual massacre, Coopers blurs the picture of white barbarity i n war. Although he mentions the bayonet and i t s horror, Cooper does not make the reader an eye-witness of i t s use; any d e t a i l s appeal to the ear rather than the eye. His general statement about the terrors of a savage warfare attempts to place the e n t i r e episode within the normal bounds of f r o n t i e r c o n f l i c t . At t h i s point he ends the chapter. He opens the following chapter by saying that the f o r e s t , the smoke, and the approach of night a l l tended to make obscure a picture which Cooper had no i n t e n t i o n of showing to the reader. Proceeding to describe the beauty of the following morning, he implies that the slaughter of a few Indians could not s i g n i f i c a n t l y a l t e r the beneficent scheme of things: When the sun rose on the following morning, every sign of h o s t i l i t y and alarm had vanished from the basin of the Glimmerglass. The f r i g h t f u l event of the preceding evening had l e f t no impression on the p l a c i d sheet, and the u n t i r i n g hours pursued t h e i r course i n the p l a c i d order prescribed by the powerful Hand that set them i n motion. The birds were again skimming the water, or were seen poised on the wing high above the tops of the t a l l e s t pines of the mountains, ready to make t h e i r swoops i n obedience to the i r r e s i s t i b l e laws of t h e i r nature. (Deerslayer, XXXI, pp. 546-47) 141 Even the reference to the c a r r i o n birds which gather a f t e r a b a t t l e lacks any v i v i d or immediate q u a l i t y . The en t i r e account, from the "steady, measured tramp" of the English s o l d i e r s , to the obedience of the birds "to the i r r e s i s t a b l e laws of t h e i r nature" suggests the i n e v i t a -b i l i t y — a n d r i g h t n e s s — o f the Indian defeat. When we consider Heckewelder 1s reticence i n mentioning, l e t alone d e t a i l i n g , scenes of Indian barbarity, and compare t h i s with the frequency of de t a i l e d descriptions of such scenes i n Cooper, we must conclude that Cooper's Indians were not altogether "of the school of Mr. Heckewelder." While Cooper often r e f e r s to the i n j u s t i c e that whites have done to the Indians, these references are usually vague, i n d e f i n i t e , and abstract. When he r e f e r s to instances of Indian savagery, he i s usually s p e c i f i c and v i v i d . The question of Heckewelder's accuracy does not concern us i n t h i s study. C r i t i c s , such as Cass, long ago pointed out the inaccuracy of some of the d e t a i l s which Cooper took from Heckewelder. What does concern t h i s study i s the f a c t that while Cooper took a great deal of general information and s p e c i f i c d e t a i l from Heckewelder, he ma t e r i a l l y a l t e r e d Heckewelder's t o t a l p i cture of the Indians. He altered t h i s p i c t u r e to bring i t more into conformity with the then current stereotypes of Indian savagery. 142 CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS From t h i s survey, I conclude that although the Leatherstocking Tales acknowledge i n j u s t i c e toward the Indians i n the past, e s p e c i a l l y with regard to t h e i r land r i g h t s , t h i s acknowledgement i s peripheral to the novels' dominant perception of Indian-white r e l a t i o n s and would not, therefore, lead to active p o l i t i c a l concern for the problems of Indians i n Cooper's own time. As we have seen, none of the discussion about Indian r i g h t s to the land i s completely serious. In The Pioneers Indian r i g h t to the land i s a pseudo-issue which obscures the r e a l issue of Oliver Edwards' claim to the land. The Last of  the Mohicans presents Indian land r i g h t s i n three context a drowsy afternoon dialogue, a rabble-rousing speech by Magua, and a n o s t a l g i c speech by Tamenund which sees the en t i r e question as being predestined. In The P r a i r i e the incursion of the Sioux i n t o Pawnee t e r r i t o r y not only destroys Sioux arguments against white i n t e r l o p e r s , i t also suggests that the Pawnees did not have e f f e c t i v e sovreignty, or even possession, of t h e i r lands; thus the Sioux presence r a i s e s questions about the Trapper's defense of Indian land r i g h t s . Neither The Pathfinder nor The Deerslayer give more than cursory attention to Indian ownership of the land. 143 A l l f i v e novels present other aspects of Indian l i f e and of Indian-white r e l a t i o n s which tend to dominate the reader's understanding and also to n e u t r a l i z e any suggestion of white i n j u s t i c e . Thus, The Pioneers emphasizes Mohegan's drunkenness and degradation and h i s very imperfect a s s i m i l a t i o n i n t o white c u l t u r e . The Last  of the Mohicans h i g h l i g h t s the massacre of women and ch i l d r e n at Fort William Henry, Magua's treacherous and vengeful character, the fear and p o s s i b i l i t y of miscegen-ation, the fore-ordained death of "the l a s t of the Mohicans" by the hand of another Indian, and the pathos of Tamenund. The P r a i r i e presents Indian l i f e i n terms of i n t e r - t r i b a l warfare, Sioux c u p i d i t y , thievery, and treachery, c r u e l preparations f o r t o r t u r e , and Pawnee accommodation to the i n t e r e s t s of the United States. The Pathfinder stresses Indian treachery, blood-lust, and drunkenness, while The Deerslayer also presents pictures of Indian treachery, the g r i z z l y r e s u l t s of scalping, and preparations f o r , and the beginnings of t o r t u r e . The l a s t four of the Leatherstocking novels, of course, also show the good and noble Indian: Chingachgook, Uncas, or Hard-Heart; i n no way do they i n d i c a t e that even these good Indians could f i n d a useful or happy place i n white s o c i e t y . In a l l of the Leatherstocking novels, Natty Bumppo i s presented as a mediator between the two races. George Dekker claims that Natty i s "uniquely equipped to 144 bridge" the gap between Indian and white. "He can act as i n t e r p r e t e r , he can serve as an example to both races of the good q u a l i t i e s of both. Indeed, he i s l i v i n g proof that the Indians and the white C h r i s t i a n s are fundamentally more l i k e than u n l i k e . " In a c t u a l i t y , Bumppo i s a very imperfect bridge which can handle only one-way t r a f f i c ; he i s able to help the white characters meet the Indians but does not and cannot help the Indians to meet the whites. In addition, the understanding of the Indians which he gives his fellow whites i s d i s t o r t e d ; he presents a surface account of t h e i r actions and words but does not communicate the underlying meaning. A symbol of Natty's t o t a l function i n the novel i s found i n The Last of the Mohicans when he escorts his white friends to a hidden cave behind the w a t e r f a l l at Glenns. Natty had learned of the cave from the Delawares by sharing i t with the other whites he opens i t to 2 discovery by h o s t i l e Indians. S i m i l a r l y i n The P r a i r i e he leads Ishmael Bush and his family to an i d y l l i c campin s p o t — a spot which the Bush family proceeded to v i o l a t e ; l a t e r he r e l u c t a n t l y d i r e c t s them to the rock formation which they turn i n t o a f o r t r e s s . By sharing Indian l i f e , Natty Bumppo i s able to discover t h e i r secrets, which he l a t e r reveals to the whites; i n the truest sense of the word he i s a pathfinder. He reveals the secrets of the 145 Indians and t h e i r land, but he does not help whites to understand the meaning of these secrets. I f Natty helps whites i n t h e i r encounter with Indians, he cannot help Indians i n t h e i r encounter with whites. Even where Natty Bumppo accepts white ways, b u r i a l customs f o r example, he does not appear to understand the inner meaning of these. As The Pathfinder and The Deerslayer show, Natty was unable to r e l a t e to white women i n any manner except that of knight defender; t h i s f a i l u r e i s both cause and r e s u l t of his lack of deep r e l a t i o n s with white s o c i e t y i n general. In The Deerslayer, Natty, i n his l a t e teens or ea r l y twenties, points out that he has been with Chingachgook and the Delawares f o r some ten years. We are never t o l d why "providence" placed Natty among the Delawares at such an early age; probably he was e i t h e r l e f t as an orphan and adopted, or captured i n a r a i d . In either case he was separated from white society when he was at a very impressionable age, and, as a r e s u l t , his r e l a t i o n s to other whites, to Indians, to women, and to C h r i s t i a n i t y 3 have been f i x a t e d at a juvenile l e v e l . In spite of his good intentions therefore, Natty i s unable to provide a bridge between Indian and white peoples. This means that i n the Leatherstocking Tales there can be no e f f e c t i v e communication between the two races, no p o s s i b i l i t y of dialogue. Natty, f a r from being an e f f e c t i v e bridge between the two races, belongs to neither and i l l u s t r a t e s 146 i n h i s own person, the b e l i e f of many people t h a t the two races were i n c o m p a t i b l e . In t h i s , and i n other ways, Cooper portrayed the Indians as being more a l i e n to white c i v i l i z a t i o n than Heckewelder, one of h i s major sources, had i n d i c a t e d . He portrayed them as more a l i e n to white c i v i l i z a t i o n than they were i n a c t u a l i t y . I g noring any Indian developments i n a g r i c u l t u r e , Cooper p o r t r a y s them as almost e n t i r e l y dependent upon hunting, a s t a t e which one of h i s contemporaries d e s c r i b e d as "the zero of 4 s o c i e t y . " Natty Bumppo's understanding of g i f t s i m p l i e s a c u l t u r a l chasm between the two races which cannot be b r i d g e d . Charles Boewe p o i n t s out t h a t i n The L a s t of the Mohicans and The P r a i r i e " g i f t s " are h e r e d i t a r y i n nature; i n The P a t h f i n d e r and The Deerslayer the emphasis i s s h i f t e d to environmental and c u l t u r a l f a c t o r s . 5 Natty's d o c t r i n e of " g i f t s " enables Cooper to present u n c i v i l i z e d and even inhumane I n d i a n behaviour as a f u n c t i o n of e i t h e r race or c u l t u r e . T h i s double standard suggests to the reader t h a t Indians cannot l i v e i n harmony w i t h white s o c i e t y which f o l l o w s d i f f e r e n t g i f t s . Because "the g i f t s of the whites are mostly v i r t u e s , those of the Indians mostly v i c e s " (Boewe, p. 29), the burden of accommodation between the two races i s placed e n t i r e l y on the I n d i a n s . When Hutter and Hurry Harry p l a n a 147 scalping r a i d , Natty condemns t h i s i n terms of whites misappropriating Indian g i f t s , rather than as a function of t h e i r own greed. I t i s important to note that a great many of Cooper's Indian characters are i s o l a t e d i n d i v i d u a l s rather than persons f i r m l y rooted i n t h e i r t r i b a l t r a d i t i o n s . Chingachgook, Uncas, Magua, Arrowhead, Dew of June, and H i s t are a l l separated from t h e i r own people; even Hard-Heart i s apart from h i s fellow tribesmen f o r most of the action i n The P r a i r i e . White characters who l i v e and act apart from white society u s u a l l y represent a form of rugged individualism, and are, i n e f f e c t , the vanguard of that society; the i s o l a t e d Indian, however usually represents e i t h e r a t r i b a l remnant, or else an element of personal degradation and shame.^ As a r e s u l t of t h i s i s o l a t i o n , the reader does not think of the Indians as a people. Throughout the t a l e s , f i v e scenes give the reader b r i e f glimpses of Indian s o c i e t y . Three of these scenes, the Huron v i l l a g e i n The Last of the Mohicans, the Sioux encampment i n The  P r a i r i e , and the Huron camp i n The Deerslayer, show the Indians as they prepare to torture prisoners; blood-t h i r s t y crones, self-seeking demagogues, and cowardly braggarts dominate each of these scenes. Nostalgic r e c o l l e c t i o n of past glory and preparation f o r war 148 dominate the fourth scene, that of Tamenund's Delaware v i l l a g e i n The Last of the Mohicans. We have already noted that the f i f t h scene, showing the Pawnee v i l l a g e i n The P r a i r i e , lacks concrete and v i v i d d e t a i l , and that, even here, the suspicions of Captain Middleton arouse a great deal of anxiety i n the sympathetic reader. In addition to showing the Indians as i s o l a t e d i n d i v i d u a l s and g i v i n g only very d i s t o r t e d glimpses of Indian society, Cooper shows contact with whites to have had a d i s i n t e g r a t i n g e f f e c t upon the Indian people. Mohegan John, Magua, Mahtoree, and Arrowhead have a l l been corrupted by t h e i r contact with whites. In each of these cases, Indian weakness fo r white man's l i q u o r i s shown as a dominant factor; t h i s implies that the Indian character was already flawed and unable to withstand the pressures exerted by a changing s i t u a t i o n . Conversely, Cooper does not show any s i t u a t i o n where contact with the whites has been of l a s t i n g value to the Indian, or where the Indian character has been able to grow and develop under the stimulus of white c u l t u r e . In The Deerslayer, Hi s t remarked that although the Moravians had t r i e d to teach her to s p e l l , she had r e s i s t e d because i t i s "'No good for Delaware g i r l to know too much'" (Deerslayer, X, p. 176). Chingachgook had been h a l f converted by the Moravians but relapsed 149 in t o his old b e l i e f s as he approached death. Like the Indians characterized by Lewis Cass, the Indians of the Leatherstocking Tales can neither learn nor p r o f i t from t h e i r contact with the whites. Cooper's Indian characters, although they possess splendid physiques, heroic v i r t u e s such as courage, s t o i c endurance to pain, and l o y a l t y to f r i e n d s , lack p r e c i s e l y those q u a l i t i e s which Cooper and his contemporaries thought necessary for p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c i v i l i z e d l i f e : t h r i f t , prudence, l i t e r a c y , adherence to C h r i s t i a n i t y , possession of private property, l i f e i n s e t t l e d communities with an a g r i c u l t u r a l base, the habit of empirical thinking, and the willingness to do routine physical labour. Thus, i n spite of the f a c t that they can be separated into "good" and "bad" categories, Cooper's Indians are a l l e s s e n t i a l l y b arbaric. Chingachgook, Uncas, and Hard-Heart show no more p o s s i b i l i t y of adapting to white society than do Magua and Mahtoree. In each of the Leatherstocking Tales some of the Indian characters indicate that they l i v e d better and happier l i v e s before they came into contact with white men and white s o c i e t y . As the novels move backward into h i s t o r y from The Pioneers to The Deerslayer, Cooper i s able to portray h i s Indians with more v i r t u e s and fewer 150 v i c e s ; thus, Rivenoak's character i n The Deerslayer i s presented quite favourably even though he i s an enemy of Natty Bumppo and Chingachgook. Rivenoak's character i s much closer to that of Chingachgook than i t i s to Cooper's e a r l i e r drawn p o r t r a i t s of l a t e r v i l l a i n s : Magua, Weucha, and Mahtoree. By suggesting that the Indians themselves are happier away from white society, Cooper contributed to those forces favouring Indian removal as a way of saving the Indians. In addition to presenting a picture of the Indians which saw them as a l i e n to white c i v i l i z a t i o n , the Leatherstocking Tales also emphasize the i n e v i t a b i l i t y and rightness of American expansion. The rightness of t h i s expansion i s brought out by the portrayal of characters such as Judge Temple, Paul Hover, Jasper Western, Duncan Heyward, and Captain Middleton. In The Pioneers, Leatherstocking himself i s r e f e r r e d to as "the foremost i n that band of Pioneers, who are opening the way f o r the march of our nation across the continent" (Pioneers, XLI, p. 477). At the same time, emphasis on the rightness of expansion i s q u a l i f i e d throughout the Leatherstocking Tales by numerous f a c t o r s : pictures of waste and spoilage i n The Pioneers and The P r a i r i e ; Natty Bumppo's comments about s e t t l e r s and t h e i r "'wasty ways'" (Pioneers, XXXII, p. 369); and the 151 p o r t r a y a l of m a t e r i a l i s t i c and i n s e n s i t i v e frontiersmen l i k e Ishmael Bush, Thomas Hutter, and Hurry Harry March. Roy Harvey Pearce gives a h e l p f u l perspective.on Cooper's attitude to the f r o n t i e r : Throughout his career, even as his s p e c i f i c p o l i t i c a l alignment changed, he held to a b e l i e f that society must progress toward the (perhaps unattainable) goodness of complex ( i . e . , c i v i l i z e d ) forms and usages. . . . C i v i l i z a t i o n meant a devotion to higher c u l t u r a l forms, never a turning away from those forms to a rude, down-to-earth eg a l i t a r i a n i s m . S p e c i f i c a l l y , the f r o n t i e r . . . represents one stage i n our movement toward the  best l i f e . . . . The f r o n t i e r of the Leatherstocking Tales i s not something to which Cooper would recommend that men r e t r e a t ; the good l i f e of an agrarian, a r i s t o c r a t i c a l l y dominated, i n t e l l e c t u a l l y developed society was not to be retreated from. It was a goal which Americans, above a l l , might achieve. In t h i s perspective, The Pathfinder can be seen as a v i n d i c a t i o n of the f r o n t i e r and. of frontiersmen who, l i k e Natty Bumppo, must engage i n bloody practices which would not be acceptable i n a more advanced state of soci e t y . The Deerslayer, contains no such v i n d i c a t i o n . If the English s o l d i e r s , with t h e i r steady and d i s c i p l i n e d march, represent the coming of order to the wilderness, i t i s an order which i s destructive and a n t i - l i f e . This l a s t novel does not question the i n e v i t a b i l i t y of American 152 expansion--for that also i s symbolized i n the measured tramp of the s o l d i e r s — b u t i t does question the manner in which that expansion i s c a r r i e d out. I t questions not the "American dream" but whether the people are worthy of the dream. The Deerslayer, therefore, indicates something of Cooper's pessimism about America; the f r o n t i e r i s not vindicated but neither are the Indians. While the Leatherstocking Tales recognize the i n j u s t i c e by which the Indian people had been dispossessed of t h e i r land, t h i s recognition did not lead to active p o l i t i c a l concern f o r Indians who were threatened with removal i n Cooper's time. Although Cooper was p o l i t i c a l l y aware and active, t h i s awareness and a c t i v i t y was not dir e c t e d toward the question of j u s t i c e for the Indian people. On March 15, 1840, Cooper wrote to President Martin Van Buren warning of a possible Indian u p r i s i n g about which he had heard from a Cooperstown Indian: "He then t o l d me that his brother at Green Bay had sent him word that B r i t i s h Agents had been sounding the t r i b e s i n that v i c i n i t y , to know i f they would f i g h t the Americans. The argument was, the Americans keep d r i v i n g you o f f your lands, whereas the English w i l l permit you to remain" (Letters and Journals, IV, p. 25). This l e t t e r represents Cooper's most d i r e c t p o l i t i c a l involvement with Indian concerns. 153 On June 17th, 185 1, three months before his death, Cooper wrote i n answer to a Mr. George Copway (1818-c.-1863) who was planning to publish a weekly concerned with Indians. Although, because of his health, Cooper could not promise any contributions, he did say, "The red man has a high claim to have his cause defended, and I t r u s t you w i l l be able to do much on his behalf" (Letters and Journals, VI, p. 274-5). This expression of mild i n t e r e s t represents the l i m i t of Cooper's concern g to see j u s t i c e done fo r the Indian people. Like other Americans of his time, Cooper was committed to the idea of western expansion; l i k e other Americans of his time he thought of American h i s t o r y i n three-dimensional terms, "progressing from past to present, from east to west, from lower to higher" (Pearce, Savages  of America, p. 49). Committed as he was to t h i s expansion, his concern f o r the i n t e g r i t y of his nation found expression not by questioning expansion i t s e l f , but only by questioning the way i t was taking place. The Deerslayer represents a r e j e c t i o n of method and not of goal. If we are to understand why Cooper, p o l i t i c a l l y aware and concerned about the i n t e g r i t y of the United States, could write so much about Indians i n his novels and ignore them so completely i n current events, we must examine the way Cooper saw and used Indians i n his novels. 154 Thus, although Cooper was aware of America's e t h i c a l problem i n the dispossession of the Indian, he did not give t h i s awareness a c e n t r a l place i n his thinking. He saw the Indian as a f o i l f o r white humanity. As Eearce says, the early English writer saw i n the American Indian "what he himself would become did he not l i v e according to his highest nature. The Indian became important to the English mind, not f o r what he was i n and of himself, but rather for what he showed c i v i l i z e d men they were not and must not be" (Savages of  America, p. 5). In the same way, Cooper's i n t e r e s t was not " i n the Indian as Indian, but i n the Indian as a v e h i c l e for understanding the white man, i n the savage defined i n terms of the ideas and needs of c i v i l i z e d l i f e " (Savages of America, p. 202). In addition, Cooper saw the Indian as authentic American material for romance. G. Harrison Orians has outlined "the demand for l i t e r a r y productions of grandeur and power equal to the p o l i t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s f o r which the 9 republic stood." The nationalism a r i s i n g from the War of 1812, coupled with enthusiasm for Scott's Waverley novels, the f i r s t of which was published i n 1814, led Americans to look to t h e i r past for indigenous romantic material. In t h i s search, attention was soon directed to the Indians; Orians quotes from an o p t i m i s t i c a r t i c l e of 1820: 155 "From i t s o f f e r i n g so many advantages to the writer of imagination," the reviewer declared, "the h i s t o r y of the Indian w i l l , hereafter, undoubtedly form the c l a s s i c lore of American l i t e r a t u r e , " an o p t i m i s t i c utterance he reinforced by perceiving i n the border struggles occasions "for the most i n t e r e s t i n g and ingenious development of incident, and f o r the most s t r i k i n g and vigorous grouping of characters, and for the most splendid and glowing d e s c r i p t i o n of landscape ever offered to the imagination by the h i s t o r y of any people." (Orians, p. 418) Cooper's Leatherstocking novels, therefore, as well as hi s novels of the sea, and of the Revolution, attempted to meet t h i s growing American need for a romantic past. Interest i n the Indians was developed for t h i s purpose and did not r e f l e c t concern f o r the Indians as people. Cooper was not g r e a t l y interested i n Indians except as they served his needs for romantic subject matter. Thus, i n r e ply to a request for some information about the Indians i n north-eastern New York, the l o c a l e of The Last of the Mohicans, Cooper said, "'My acquaintance with your part of the State i s very s l i g h t , nor am I very conversant with Indian h i s t o r y . I would recommend Mr. Schoolcraft to you'" (Letters and Journals, V, p. 401). In other words, Cooper exploited the Indian f o r his own uses i n exactly the same manner that Judge Temple planned to e x p l o i t the land around Templeton. Neither Indian nor 156 land had value i n themselves; t h e i r value lay i n the use to which a c i v i l i z e d gentleman, such as Cooper or Judge Temple, might wish to put them. With t h i s i n mind, we must r e j e c t as nonsense the claims of c r i t i c s such as Dekker, who s a y s — a f t e r acknowledging the moral issue of d i s p o s s e s s i o n — t h a t Cooper "was the greatest advocate the American Indian ever had p r e c i s e l y because he was a great p a t r i o t — o n e whose love for his country embraced the continent as well as the nation, i t s past as well as i t s future" (Dekker, p. 66). Cooper was thought of as pro-Indian only because of his controversy with Lewis Cass about the nature of Indian l i f e and society. Cass's basic disagreement, as we have seen, was with Heckewelder; Cooper became involved when Cass suggested that Cooper, i n his portrayal of Mohegan John, had been overly influenced by Heckewelder, But, as we have seen, Cooper did not present as favourable a view of the Indians as did Heckewelder; i t i s only i n comparison with someone l i k e Lewis Cass, who had a very low opinion of Indians, that Cooper can i n any way be considered pro-Indian! Given Cooper's use of the Indians as raw material f o r romance, and given his commitment to westward expansion, along with his concern for the i n t e g r i t y of the United States of America, i t i s not unnatural that 157 his novels should r e f l e c t the uneasy tension between the r e a l and the i d e a l i n his perception of America. State-ments about the i n j u s t i c e which deprived the Indian people of t h e i r ancestral lands express an uneasy conscience on the part of the author and appeal to such a conscience i n h i s readers. But acknowledging such i n j u s t i c e does not expiate the sense of g u i l t which has developed i n white society. D. H. Lawrence put the s i t u a t i o n most c l e a r l y : Not that the Red Indian w i l l ever possess the broad lands of America. At l e a s t I presume not. But his ghost w i l l . . . . The Red Man i s dead, d i s b e l i e v i n g i n us. He i s dead and unappeased. Do not imagine him happy i n his Happy Hunting Ground. No. Only those that die i n b e l i e f die happy. Those that are pushed out of l i f e i n chagrin come back unappeased, f o r revenge. (Studies In C l a s s i c American L i t e r a t u r e , p. 44) I believe that i n t h i s passage Lawrence speaks a great truth although i t cannot be v e r i f i e d by empirical data. For t h i s reason, I disagree with McWilliams and his apparent endorsation of what Cooper "knows": Within the larger context of American h i s t o r y , however, Cooper knows that questions of Indian conquest, t r i b a l d i f f e r e n c e s , and the v a l i d i t y of Indian law are not of ultimate, continuing importance. Without f o r g e t t i n g white i n j u s t i c e s and white slaughter, Cooper recognizes that, for the nation as a whole, the problem posed by the 158 Indian w i l l s t e a d i l y diminish i n importance. The larger question of p o l i t i c a l j u s t i c e that i s argued i n these novels i s the kind of j u s t i c e that the white man i s bringing to the wilderness. In the t o t a l configuration of Cooper's border romances, the Indian per se i s not as important as the white man's treatment of him. (McWilliams, pp. 241-42) If McWilliams here gives a f a i r c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of Cooper's p o s i t i o n i n the Leatherstocking Tales, as I think he does, then Cooper i s able to a f f i r m the westward movement of American c i v i l i z a t i o n even while he acknowledges the i n j u s t i c e which i t has l e f t i n i t s wake. The f i c t i o n a l t r a v e l l i n g gentleman speaks f o r Cooper himself when he describes Indian removal as a "great, humane, and . . . r a t i o n a l project . . . to bring the Indians within the pale of c i v i l i z a t i o n " (Notions, p. 285). In the f i n a l analysis the Leatherstocking Tales must be seen as a sentimental and romantic r e t r e a t from the r e a l i t i e s of United States p o l i c y towards Indian people. Instead of dealing with the concrete s i t u a t i o n of the Indian v i s - a - v i s white society, they deal with the psychological s i t u a t i o n of the white American; the novels seek to give the assurance "that men i n becoming c i v i l i z e d had gained much more than they had l o s t ; and that c i v i l i z a t i o n , the act of c i v i l i z i n g , f or a l l of i t s destruction of p r i m i t i v e v i r t u e s , put something higher and greater i n t h e i r place" (Pearce, Savages of America, 159 p. 85). The Leatherstocking Tales helped people to accept the proposition that Indians had t h e i r place i n America's past but not i n the present. When a l l fac t o r s i n Cooper's depiction of Indians and t h e i r r e l a t i o n s with whites were taken into account the average reader i n Cooper's time would conclude that nothing needed to be or could be done about t h e i r contemporary s i t u a t i o n . 160 FOOTNOTES: CHAPTER I 1 The L e t t e r s and Journals of James Fenimore  Cooper, ed. James Fr a n k l i n Beard, 6 v o l s . (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press, 1960-68). Hereafter c i t e d as Let t e r s and Journals. 2 Roy Harvey Pearce, The Savages of America, rev. ed. (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1965), p. 201. 3 Gregory Lansing Paine, "The Indians of the Leather-Stocking Tales," Studies i n Philology, 23 (1926), 19. 4 John T. Frederick, "Cooper's Eloquent Indians," PMLA, 71 (1956), 1006. 5 The State of the Union Messages of the  Presidents: 1790-1966, ed. Fred L. I s r a e l (New York: Chelsea House, 1966), ,1, 58, 64, 82, 85, 96. ^ Reginal Horsman, The Origins of Indian Removal  1815-1824, (East Lansing: Michigan State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 19 70), pp. 5-6. 7 This claim of Georgia, however, was not p r i o r to the Treaty of Hopewell (1785) and the Treaty of Holsten (1791), both of which guaranteed federal government protection for Cherokee lands and r i g h t s . See "Worcester v. Georgia: Majority Opinion of Chief J u s t i c e John Marshall ( O f f i c i a l Summary)," This Country Was Ours, ed. V i r g i l J . Vogel (New York: Harper and Row, 1972), pp. 127, 129. 161 ° Jedediah Morse, A Report to the Secretary of  War of the United States on Indian A f f a i r s (New Haven: S. Converse, 1822), pp. 35, 61, 75, 78-9. o Robert F. Berkhofer, J r . , Salvation and the  Savage, (Lexington Ky.: U n i v e r s i t y of Kentucky Press, 1965), p. 103. 10 McCoy i s quoted at length i n an unsigned a r t i c l e , "Documents and Proceedings, Relating to the Fromation and Progress of a Board i n the C i t y of New York, for the Emigration, Preservation, and Improvement of the Aborigines of America, July 22, 1829," North American  Review, 30 (January-April, 1830), pp. 113-114. Authorship of the a r t i c l e i s attributed to Lewis Cass by William Cushing, Index to the North American Review, Volumes  I-CXXV: 1815-1877 (Cambridge, Mass.: John Wilson and Son, 1878), pp. 54, 123. 11 "Documents and Proceedings," North American Review, 30 (January-April, 1830), p. 64. 12 Francis Paul Prucha, American Indian P o l i c y i n  the Formative Years, (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1962), p. 231. 13 "Opinion of Chief J u s t i c e Marshall i n Cherokee Nation v. Georgia," This Country was Ours, p. 118. 14 John C o l l i e r , Indians of the Americas, (New York: New American Library, 1948), p. 124. 162 CHAPTER II i The f i v e novels were published as follows: The Pioneers, or the Sources of the Susquehanna: A  Descriptive Tale by the Author of "Precaution," 2 v o l s . (New York: Charles Wiley, 1823); The Last of the Mohicans: A Narrative of 175 7, 2 v o l s . (Philadelphia: Carey and Lea, 1826); The P r a i r i e : A Tale, 2 v o l s . (Philadelphia: Carey, Lea, and Carey, 1827); The Pathfinder; or, The Inland Sea, 2 v o l s . (Philadelphia: Lea and Blanchard, 1840); The  Deerslayer, or, The F i r s t War-Path, 2 v o l s . (Lea and Blanchard, 1841). There are no d e f i n i t i v e e d itions of Cooper; except where otherwise noted, t h i s thesis uses "The Works of James Fenimore Cooper," Mohawk e d i t i o n (New York: G.P. Putnam's Son's, 1895-1896, 1900), 33 v o l s . The Mohawk e d i t i o n i s based on the Townsend text (1859-61), which incorporates Cooper's r e v i s i o n s f o r twelve of the novels, including the f i v e Leatherstocking Tales; these had been published as "The Author's Revised E d i t i o n " (New York: George P. Putnam, 1849-1851). The Mohawk e d i t i o n i s the most accessible e d i t i o n of Cooper's f i c t i o n . B i b l i o g r a p h i c information i s a v a i l a b l e i n Robert E. S p i l l e r and P h i l i p C. Blackburn, A Descriptive  Bibliography of the Writings of James Fenimore Cooper (New York: R. R. Bowker Company, 1934). See also James Fr a n k l i n Beard, "James Fenimore Cooper," F i f t e e n American 163 Authors Before 1900: Bi b l i o g r a p h i c Essays on Research and C r i t i c i s m , ed. Robert A. Rees and E a r l N. Harbert (Madison: U n i v e r s i t y of Wisconsin Press, 1971). A l l page references to the Leatherstocking Tales are c i t e d i n the text, which uses the following short t i t l e s : Pioneers, Mohicans, P r a i r i e , Pathfinder, and Deerslayer. 2 Thomas P h i l b r i c k , "Cooper's The Pioneers: Origins and Structure," PMLA 79 (1964), 593. 3 See pp. 13-14 above. 4 Roy Harvey Pearce claims that one of the tasks of authors i n nineteenth century America was at once p u b l i c l y to admit that the Indian had been c r u e l l y destroyed and to s a t i s f y themselves and t h e i r readers that that destruction was part of a universal moral progress which i t was the spe c i a l destiny of America to manifest. The myriad Indian f i c t i o n s a f t e r 1823 are so many attempts to expiate the s i n r i s i n g from the cru e l t y which was a necessary q u a l i t y of American progress westward. In the f i c t i o n s of the Indian, American p i t y and censure came to f i n d t h e i r f u l l e s t and most public expression. . . . A story of an Indian, then, as i n Cooper, would be meaningful p r i m a r i l y as a story of the tension between savagism and c i v i l i z a t i o n (The Savages of  America, p. 112). 5 Marcus C l a v e l , Fenimore Cooper and His C r i t i c s : (Aix-en Provence: Imprimerie 1938), pp. 141-162. Universataire de Provence, 164 Cooper projected on Magua a l l of his own d i s l i k e and d i s t r u s t of the demagogue. The Indian demagogue, found also i n The P r a i r i e and, to a le s s e r extent, i n The Deerslayer, i s a counterpart to such unlikeable white characters as Steadfast Dodge and Aristabulus Bragg i n Home As Found (1838). In The  American Democrat (1838), Cooper describes the demagogue as follows: The p e c u l i a r o f f i c e of a demagogue i s to advance his own i n t e r e s t s , by a f f e c t i n g a deep devotion to the i n t e r e s t s of the people. Sometimes the object i s to indulge malignancy, unprincipled and s e l f i s h men submitting but to two governing motives, that of doing good to themselves, and that of doing harm to others. . . . The demagogue i s usually s l y , a detractor of others, a professor of humility and disinterestedness, a great s t i c k l e r f o r equality as respects a l l above him, a man who acts i n corners, and avoids open and manly expositions of his course, c a l l s blackguards gentlemen, and gentlemen f o l k s , appeals to passions and prejudices rather than to reason, and i s i n a l l respects a man of i n t r i g u e and deception, of s l y cunning and management, instead of manifesting the frank, f e a r l e s s q u a l i t i e s of the democracy he so pr o d i g a l l y professes. (The American Democrat, Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1969~| , pp. 154-56) . 7 An 1826 review of The Pioneers and The Last of the Mohicans i n the North American Review, which 165 Cushing a t t r i b u t e s to W. H. Gardiner, comments sarcast-i c a l l y on Uncas's romantic attachment: No flower of ancient c h i v a l r y was ever possessed of more r e s p e c t f u l devotion to his lady love than Uncas; no modern carpet knight ever expressed his sublimated a f f e c t i o n s by more d e l i c a t e and r e f i n e d attentions. . . . Instead of scalping the dead, whom he had conquered i n b a t t l e , he leaves i t to hi s father to gather a l l the trophies of the f i e l d , and f l i e s 'with i n s t i n c t i v e d e l i c a c y ' accompanied by Heyward, to the assistance of the s i s t e r s , and quickly r e l e a s i n g A l i c e , placed her i n the open arms of Cora. The i n s t i n c t i v e d e l i c a c y of an Indian i s romantic enough, to be sure; but i t w i l l not serve f o r 'narrative.' (North American Review, 23 [ J u l y 1826^, 167-68). It i s highly i r o n i c a l that Major Munro should accuse Heyward of such prejudice when Munro himself had barely f i n i s h e d speaking about the "curse e n t a i l e d on Scotland, by her unnatural union with a foreig n and trading people" (Mohicans, XVI, 188; i t a l i c s mine). 9 This Preface can be found i n The Last of the  Mohicans, "Introduction" by Van Wyck Brooks (New York: C o l l i e r Books, 1962), p. 14. Hereafter c i t e d as C o l l i e r e d i t i o n . 10 F r i e d r i c h H o l d e r l i n , Hyperion, or The Hermit i n Greece, trans. W i l l a r d R. Trask (Toronto: New American L i b r a r y of Canada Ltd., 1965), p. 23. 166 11 C o l l i e r e d i t i o n , p. 15. 12 In an 1826 review which attacked Cooper's dependence upon Heckewelder, Cass says of the Osage Indians, "They are the Ishmaelites of the Trans-M i s s i s s i p p i country. Their hand i s against every man, and every man's hand i s against them" (North American Review, 22 [january, 1826^ , 102). 13 D. H. Lawrence, Studies In C l a s s i c American  L i t e r a t u r e (1923; r p t . New York: Doubleday Anchor, 1953), p. 60. Richard Chase, The American Novel and i t s T r a d i t i o n (New York: Doubleday Anchor, 1957), p. 57. 15 From the context of the novel, I would i d e n t i f y t h i s event with the "Battle of F a l l e n Timbers," fought on August 20, 1794, i n north-western Ohio. This involves some d i f f i c u l t i e s with Cooper's chronology; according to The Pioneers (XLI, 466), Leatherstocking did not leave Templeton u n t i l October of that year. John P. McWilliams, J r . understands Leatherstocking's comment as r e f e r r i n g to the Revolutionary War ( P o l i t i c a l J u s t i c e i n a Republic: James Fenimore Cooper's America ^Berkeley: U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1972^, p. 266). However, both Natty's age at the time, "three score and ten," and the f a c t that he was leaving the older states argue against such an early date. 167 1 0 McWilliams points out that while Cooper affirmed a d i v i n e l y implanted moral sense, t h i s was completely absent from many of h i s Indian and f r o n t i e r characters: In work a f t e r work, Cooper shows how unrealizable i s h is own hope that man's moral sense i s s u f f i c i e n t to govern him. The necessity of having the c i v i l law, Cooper i n s i s t s , a r ises from man's f a i l u r e to l i v e within the moral or divine law. Cooper i s a l l too aware of the ease with which man misinterprets or perverts the terms "moral law" or "natural law." For Hurry Harry or Thousandacres, "moral law" s i g n i f i e s whatever he thinks i s r i g h t and "natural law" whatever laws he cares to observe i n nature. In Cooper's eyes, such misuses l e t down a l l b a r r i e r s against personal r e l a t i v i s m . Thus, Cooper's Yankees claim natural law as a sanction for squatter's r i g h t s , Natty refe r s to natural law to support h i s doctrine of use, but a Li t t l e p a g e c i t e s natural law i n defense of property r i g h t s . ( P o l i t i c a l J u s t i c e i n a Republic, pp. 20-21) 17 McWilliams also recognizes Cooper's p a r t i a l r e h a b i l i t a t i o n of Ishmael Bush: It i s Ishmael Bush, not Natty Bumppo, who restores s o c i a l order at the end of The P r a i r i e . Because Ishmael belongs to society, even i n i t s lowest form, he•can bring rudimentary forms of c i v i l j u s t i c e to the barbarous wilderness. . . . He openly d e l i v e r s impartial j u s t i c e according to a fixe d and stated p r i n c i p l e of moral law. . . . 168 Bush gains stature because the j u s t i c e he provides i s t r u l y d i s i n t e r e s t e d . He adheres to his conception of p r i n c i p l e even aft e r he recognizes that following that p r i n c i p l e i s no longer i n his s e l f - i n t e r e s t . ( P o l i t i c a l J u s t i c e i n a Republic, pp. 268-69) Kay Seymour House, taking an opposite view, says that "Understanding only one rul e from the Bible ('an eye for an eye 1 ) , Ishmael embodies the great American nightmare of the ear l y nineteenth century" (Cooper's Americans Columbus: Ohio State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1965 , p. 298). With r e t r i b u t i o n as the only p r i n c i p l e for dispensing j u s t i c e , many nineteenth century Americans feared that a f r o n t i e r oriented society would break up into a number of h o s t i l e armed bands. 18 When Cooper r e f e r r e d to Inez as a "Creole" ( P r a i r i e , XV, 144), that term did not connote mixed blood. I t was a term often used i n Louisiana, the West Indies, and Spanish America to r e f e r to a person of pure French or Spanish ancestry. See H. L. Mencken, Supplement One: The American Language (New York: A l f r e d A. Knopf, 1945), p. 597; see also OED. 19 Notions of the Americans: Picked up by a  T r a v e l l i n g Bachelor, with an Introduction by Robert E. S p i l l e r (New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., 1963); hereafter c i t e d i n the text as Notions. 169 Robert E. S p i l l e r , James Fenimore Cooper: Representative Selections, with Introduction, Bibliography  and Notes (New York: American Book Company, 1936), p. xx x i . George Dekker, James Fenimore Cooper: The  Novelist (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1967), pp. 67-80. 22 "Documents and Proceedings", North American  Review, 30 (January-April, 1830), p. 79. CHAPTER III A l v i n M. Josephy, J r . , The Indian Heritage of America (New York: A l f r e d A. Knopf, 1970), p. 324. 2 L e s l i e A. F i e d l e r , The Return of the Vanishing American (New York: Stein and Day, 1969), pp. 99-100. 3 Cf. Pioneers, I, p. 9. 4 Annette Kolodny, The Lay of the Land, (Chapel H i l l : The U n i v e r s i t y of North Carolina Press, 1975), pp. 106-07. ^ Natty had used the same image of going over Niagara to describe his r e l a t i o n s h i p to Mabel (Pathfinder, XXVIII, p. 476). Accepting Mabel as a symbol of the developing c i v i l i z a t i o n of the eastern colonies, we see that Natty saw c i v i l i z a t i o n ' s threat to himself i n the same terms as i t s threat to Indian people. ^ Cooper, himself, thought enough of t h i s l a t t e r 170 image to r e c a l l i t i n The P r a i r i e (XXII, 2 7 4 ) . 7 These comments, however, lose some of t h e i r force because they are made by Mabel, who i s shown to be very naive about the nature and necessity of border warfare (XIX, 3 2 6 ) . g Cooper places the story i n the years between 17 4 0 and 1 7 4 5 (The Deerslayer, I, 2 ) ; t h i s brings him i n t o some d i f f i c u l t y with his chronology. The novel presupposes well established Moravian missionary a c t i v i t y among the Delawares and Mohicans, but 1 7 4 0 was the e a r l i e s t date of the Moravian mission to the Mohicans on the Connecticut River (John Heckewelder, Narrative of the Mission of the  United Brethren among the Delaware and Mohegan Indians ^Philadelphia: M'Carty and Davis, 182OfJ, p. 3 2 ) . 9 " ' See, however, the passage where Judith discovers that she i s not Hutter's natural daughter and where Natty i n return speaks of his own low s t a t i o n i n comparison to hers (Pathfinder, XXIV, 4 3 9 - 4 0 ) . 10 McWilliams claims that t h i s " i s the one passage i n Cooper's writings i n which the author seems e x p l i c i t l y to sanction c i v i l disobedience. . S i g n i f i c a n t l y , however, c i v i l disobedience i s condoned by a character who does not n e c e s s a r i l y represent Cooper's opinion, and i t i s applied only to a law that antedates the American Co n s t i t u t i o n " ( P o l i t i c a l J u s t i c e i n a Republic, p. 2 8 1 ) . 171 11 ' In t h i s sense, perhaps, Cooper sees the wilderness as a symbol f o r America i n general. In his 1822 "Preface" to the t h i r d e d i t i o n of The Spy (New York: Wiley and Halstead, 1 8 2 2 ) , he says, "Man i s not the same creature here as i n other countries. He i s more f e t t e r e d by reason and le s s by laws, than i n any other section of the globe; consequently, while he enjoys a greater p o l i t i c a l l i b e r t y , he i s under a greater moral r e s t r a i n t than his European brother". My attention was drawn to t h i s by Arvid Shulenerger, Cooper's Theory of F i c t i o n , (Lawrence: U n i v e r s i t y of Kansas Press, 1 9 5 5 ) , p. 1 6 . 12 In more than one hundred paintings of "Peaceable Kingdom," Cooper's contemporary, Edward Hicks ( 1 7 8 0 - 1 8 4 9 ) , had made a c l e a r connection between these verses from Isaiah and Indian-white r e l a t i o n s i n America. The l e f t side of one of these paintings shows William Penn and other whites making a treaty with Indian people; the r i g h t side of the painting shows an overgrown c h i l d playing with both wild and tame animals. Many of these paintings were done i n the 1830's. ( A l i c e Ford, Edward Hicks: Painter of  the Peaceable Kingdom £ P h i l a d e l p h i a : U n i v e r s i t y of Pennsyl-vania Press, 1 9 5 2 J , p. 4 1 ) . 13 McWilliams, P o l i t i c a l J u s t i c e i n a Republic, p. 2 8 0 . 14 This statement by Hurry Harry and a s i m i l a r one by Deerslayer that "'The country i s claimed by both Mingoes 172 and Mohicans, and i s a sort of common t e r r i t o r y to f i s h and hunt through,'" (Deerslayer, I, 8), contradict Mohegan's statement i n The Pioneers, "'The land was owned by my people; we gave i t to my brother, i n c o u n c i l — to the F i r e - e a t e r ' " (The Pioneers, XXVI, 299). CHAPTER IV Rev. of Manners and Customs of Several Indian Tribes, by John D. Hunter, North American Review, 22 (January, 1826), 67. James Grossman comments, "We can appreciate the severity of the Western standard of Indian naturalism when we consider that t h i s ^Cass's s a r c a s t i c remarkj i s apparently a reference to poor drunken John Mohegan of The Pioneers, whose only romantic q u a l i t i e s were his flowery r h e t o r i c and his death i n the f i r e , and not to the characters of The Last of the Mohicans which had been published only i n February of that year"--the month following Cass's a r t i c l e . James Grossman, James Fenimore Cooper (New York: William Sloane Associates, 1949), pp. 47-48. 2 Rev. of Travels i n the Central Portions of the M i s s i s s i p p i V a l l e y , by Henry R. Schoolcraft, North American Review, 27 ( A p r i l , 1828), 376. 3 Transactions of the H i s t o r i c a l & L i t e r a r y  Committee of the American Ph i l o s o p h i c a l Society, Held at  Phi l a d e l p h i a for Promoting Useful Knowledge (Philadelphia: 173 Abraham Small, 1819), I, 1-348. 4 Narrative of the Mission of the United Brethren  among the Delaware and Mohegan Indians, (Philadelphia: M'Carty & Davis, 1920). 5 North American Review, 27 ( A p r i l , 1828), 373. ^ In another place Heckewelder says that c h i l d r e n were taught to look to a "great, good and benevolent S p i r i t " who had given them game, and "that by one of his i n f e r i o r s p i r i t s he had also sent down to them from above corn, pumpkins, squashes, beans and other vegetables f o r t h e i r nourishment; a l l which blessings  t h e i r ancestors have enjoyed f o r a great number of ages" (History, p. 99; i t a l i c s mine). CHAPTER V 1 George Dekker, James Fenimore Cooper: The Noveli s t (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1967), p. 93. 2 Dekker, pp. 74-75. 3 Kolodny, pp. 108, 112-114. See also Robert H. Zoellner, "Conceptual Ambivalence i n Cooper's Leather-stocking," i ^ e r i c a J i J A ^ 31 (1959-60), 403, 418-19. 4 Pearce, The Savages of America, p. 132. Pearce i s quoting from Lewis Henry Morgan (1818-81), League of the Iroquois (Rochester: 1851), p. 143. 5 Charles Boewe, "Cooper's Doctrine of G i f t s , " Tennessee Studies i n L i t e r a t u r e , 7 (1962), 30. ^ I disagree at t h i s point with Zoellner (p. 409), 174 who emphasizes the Indian characters* "consciousness of being part of a s o c i o - t r i b a l t r a d i t i o n s t r e t c h i n g back f a r beyond the memory of the oldest warrior." My point i s that most of the Indian characters i n the Leatherstocking Tales are alienated from t h e i r own t r a d i t i o n . 7 Roy Harvey Pearce, "The Leatherstocking Tales Re-examined," South A t l a n t i c Quarterly, 46 (1942), 525. At t h i s point an examination of Beard's "Index to Volumes I-VI" of The Letters and Journals of  James Fenimore Cooper (VI, 355-460) i s i n s t r u c t i v e . There are no e n t r i e s f o r such important Indian t r i b e s , or t r i b a l groupings, as the Delawares, Mohicans, Hurons, Onondagas, Senecas, Oneidas, Cayugas, Six Nations, Pequods, Naragansetts, Creeks, Cherokees, Chickasaws, Choctaws, or Seminoles. There are no references to Indians such as Black Hawk (1767-1838), or Osceola (1804-38) who led unsuccessful attempts to h a l t f r o n t i e r expansion into t h e i r t r i b a l lands. There are single e n t r i e s for each of the following: Mohawks, Osage, Sioux, and Omawhaw; none of the l e t t e r s to which these e n t r i e s r e f e r show any s o c i a l or p o l i t i c a l concern f o r the Indian people. This lack of i n t e r e s t i n Indians can be contrasted with index e n t r i e s showing Cooper's p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l concern f o r such subjects as the United States Navy, the 175 Bank of the United States, and the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l powers of President and Congress; other s i g n i f i c a n t entries are those dealing with his involvement i n the French Finance Controversy, h i s active p a r t i c i p a t i o n on behalf of P o l i s h democracy, and h i s growing concern with American slavery. 9 G. Harrison Orians, "The Romance Ferment Af t e r Waverley," American L i t e r a t u r e , 3 (1931-32), 409. 176 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Beard, James F r a n k l i n . "James Fenimore Cooper," F i f t e e n  American Authors Before 1900: B i b l i o g r a p h i c Essays on  Research and C r i t i c i s m . Eds. Robert A. Rees and E a r l N. Harbert. Madison: U n i v e r s i t y of Wisconsin Press, 1971, pp. 63-96. Berkhofer, Robert F. J r . Salvation and the Savage: An  Analysis of Protestant Missions and American Indian  Response, 1787-1862. Lexington: U n i v e r s i t y of Kentucky Press, 1965. Boewe, Charles. "Cooper's Doctrine of G i f t s . " Tennessee  Studies i n L i t e r a t u r e , 7 (1962), 27-35. Cass, LewisJ. "Documents and Proceedings Relating to the Formation and Progress of a Board i n the C i t y of New York, f o r the Emigration, Preservation, and Improvement of the Aborigines of America. July 22, 1829." North American Review, 30 (January, 1830), 62-121. Authorship a t t r i b u t e d to Cass by Cushing. Indian Tribes, Located West of the M i s s i s s i p p i , Including Some Account of the S o i l , Climate and  Vegetable Productions; and the Indian Materia  Medica; to which i s Prefixed the History of the  Author's L i f e during a residence of Several Years  among Them, by John D. Hunter; and H i s t o r i c a l Notes "Rev. of Manners and Customs of Several 177 Respecting the Indians of North America, with  Remarks on the Attempts Made to Convert and  C i v i l i z e Them, by John Halkett." North American  Review, 22 (January, 1826), 53-108. Authorship att r i b u t e d to Cass by Cushing. J . "Rev. of Travels i n the Central Portions of the M i s s i s s i p p i Valley; Comprising Observations on  i t s Mineral Geography, Internal Resources, and  Aboriginal Population, by Henry R. Schoolcraft; and A V i n d i c a t i o n of the Rev. Mr. Heckewelder's  History of the Indian Nations, by William Rawle." North American Review, 27 ( A p r i l , 1828), 357-378. Authorship a t t r i b u t e d to Cass by Cushing. Chase, Richard. The American Novel and I t s T r a d i t i o n . Garden C i t y , New York: Doubleday & Company, Anchor Books, 1957. C l a v e l , Marcel. Fenimore Cooper and his C r i t i c s : American, B r i t i s h and French C r i t i c i s m s of the Novelist's E a r l y  Work. Aix-en-Provence: Imprimerie U n i v e r s i t a i r e de Provence, 1938. Clemens, Samuel L. "Fenimore Cooper's L i t e r a r y Offences." 1895. Reprint. The Shock of Recognition: The  Development of L i t e r a t u r e i n the United States  Recorded by the Men Who Made I t . Ed. Edmund Wilson. 2nd Ed. New York: The Modern Li b r a r y , 1955, pp. 582-594i. 178 C o l l i e r , John. Indians of the Americas: The Long Hope. Abridged E d i t i o n . New York: The New American Lib r a r y , 1948. C o l l i n s , Frank M. "Cooper and the American Dream." PMLA, 81 (1966), 79-94. Cooper, James Fenimore. The American Democrat, or Hints on the So c i a l and C i v i c Relations of the United States of America. Ed. with an Introduction by George Dekker and Larry Johnston. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1969. . Correspondence of James Fenimore Cooper. 2 v o l s . Ed. James Fenimore Cooper. New Haven: Yale U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1922. . The Deerslayer: or, The F i r s t War-path. The Works of James Fenimore Cooper. Mohawk E d i t i o n . New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1895. . Home As Found. Introduction by Lewis Leary. New York: Capricorn Books, 1961. James Fenimore Cooper: Representat-ive Selections, with Introduction, Bibliography, and Notes. Ed. Robert E. S p i l l e r . New York: American Book Company, 1936. . The Last of the Mohicans: or, A Narrative of 175 7. The Works of James Fenimore Cooper. Mohawk E d i t i o n . New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1895. 179 . The Last of the Mohicans. Introduction by Van Wyck Brooks. New York: C o l l i e r Books, 1962. . The Letter s and Journals of James Fenimore Cooper. 6 v o l s . Ed. James F r a n k l i n Beard. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press, 1960-68. . Notions of the Americans: Picked up by a T r a v e l l i n g Bachelor. Introduction by Robert E. S p i l l e r . New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., 1963. . The Pathfinder: or, The Inland Sea. The Works of James Fenimore Cooper. Mohawk E d i t i o n . New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1895. . The Pioneers: or, The Sources of the Susquehanna. The Works of James Fenimore Cooper. Mohawk E d i t i o n . New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1895. . The P r a i r i e . The Works of James Fenimore Cooper. Mohawk E d i t i o n . New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1895. . The Wept of Wish-Ton-Wish. The Works of James Fenimore Cooper. Mohawk E d i t i o n . New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1896. Cunningham, Mary E., ed. James Fenimore Cooper: A Re-Appraisal . Cooperstown, New York: New York H i s t o r i c a l A ssociation, 1954. 180 Clashing, William. Index to The North American Review, Volumes I-CXXV: 1815-1877. Cambridge, Mass.: John Wilson and Son, 1878. Darnell, Donald. "Uncas as Hero: The Ubi Sunt Formula i n The Last of the Mohicans." American L i t e r a t u r e , 3 7 (1965-66), 259-66. Dekker, George. James Fenimore Cooper: The N o v e l i s t. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1967. F i e d l e r , L e s l i e A. Love and Death i n the American Novel. 2nd, ed., New York: Del, 1969. . The Return of the Vanishing American. New York: Stein and Day, 1969. Forbes, Jack D., ed. The Indian i n America's Past. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , Inc., 1964. Foreman, Grant. The Last Trek of the Indians. Chicago: Uni v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1946. Frederick, John T. "Cooper's Eloquent Indians." PMLA, 71 (1956), 1004-1017. F u s s e l l , Edwin. F r o n t i e r : American L i t e r a t u r e and the American West. Princeton: Princeton U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1965. Gardiner, W. H.^ j "Rev. of The Pioneers, or the Sources of the  Susquehanna; a Descriptive Tale; and The Last of the  Mohicans; a Narrative of 175 7." North American Review, 23 (July 1826), 150-197. Authorship a t t r i b u t e d to Gardiner by Cushing. 181 Grossman, James. James Fenimore Cooper. New York: William Sloane Associates, 1949. Heckewelder, John. "An Account of the History, Manners, and Customs, of the Indian Nations who once Inhabited Pennsylvania and the Neighbouring States." Trans-actions of the H i s t o r i c a l and L i t e r a r y Committee of  the American Ph i l o s o p h i c a l Society, Held at P h i l a d e l -phia for Promoting Useful Knowledge. P h i l a d e l p h i a : Abraham Small, 1819. . Narrative of the Mission of the United Brethren among the Delaware and Mohegan Indians, From  It s Commencement in the Year 1740, to the Close of  the Year 1708: Comprising A l l the Remarkable  Incidents Which Took Place at t h e i r Missionary  Stations During That Period. Interspersed with  Anecdotes, H i s t o r i c a l Facts, Speeches of Indians  and other I n t e r e s t i n g M a t e r i a l . P h i l a d e l p h i a : M'Carty & Davis, 1820. Photocopy: Cleveland: B e l l and Howell, Microphoto D i v i s i o n s , 19 71. House, Kay Seymour. Cooper's Americans. Columbus: Ohio State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1965. Horsman, Reginald. The Origins of Indian Removal: 1815-1824. The C l a r a M. Burton Memorial Lecture f o r 1969. East Lansing: Michigan State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1970. 182 The State of the Union Messages of the Presidents: 1790-1966. Volume I; 1790-1860. Ed. Fred L. I s r a e l with an Introduction by Arthur M. Schlesinger J r . New York: Chelsea House, 1966. Jackson, Helen Hunt. A Century of Dishonor: The Early Crusade f o r Indian Reform. 1881; r p t . Ed. Andrew F. Rolle. New York: Harper & Row, 1965. Josephy, A l v i n M. J r . The Indian Heritage of America. New York: A l f r e d A. Knopf, 19 70. . The P a t r i o t Chiefs: A Chronicle of American Indian Resistance. New York: Viking Press, 1958. Keiser, A l b e r t . The Indian i n American L i t e r a t u r e . New York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1933. Kolodny, Annette. The Lay of the Land: Metaphor as Experience and History i n American L i f e and L e t t e r s . Chapel H i l l : The U n i v e r s i t y of North Carolina Press, 1975. Lawrence, D. H. Studies i n C l a s s i c American L i t e r a t u r e . 1923; rpt.. Garden C i t y , New York: Doubleday & Company, 1951. Lewis, R. W. B. The American Adam: Innocence Tragedy and  T r a d i t i o n i n the Nineteenth Century. Chicago: The Unive r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1955. 183 Lounsbury, Thomas R. James Fenimore Cooper. Boston: Houghton, M i f f l i n & Company, 1883. Loveland, Anne C. "James Fenimore Cooper and the American Mission." American Quarterly, 21 (1969), 244-58. McWilliams, John P. J r . P o l i t i c a l J u s t i c e i n a Republic: James Fenimore Cooper's America. Berkeley: U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1972. Mencken, H. L. Supplement I: The American Language: An Inquiry i n t o the Development of English i n the  United States. New York: A l f r e d A. Knopf, 1945. Morse, Jedediah. A Report to the Secretary of War of the  United States, on Indian A f f a i r s , Comprising a  Narrative of a Tour Performed i n the Summer of 1820, under a Commission from the President of the United  States f o r the Purpose of As c e r t a i n i n g , f o r the Use  of the Government, the Actual State of the Indian  Tribes i n our Country. New Haven: S. Converse, 1822. Muszynska-Wallace, E. S o t e r i s . "The Sources of The P r a i r i e . " American L i t e r a t u r e , 21 (1949), 191-200. Nye, Russel B. This Almost Chosen People: Essays i n the  History of American Ideas. Toronto: The Macmillan Company of Canada Limited, 1966. Orians, G. Harrison. "The Romance Ferment a f t e r Waverley." American L i t e r a t u r e , 3 (1931-32), 408-431. Paine, Gregory. "Cooper and The North American Review." Studies i n Philology, 28 (1931), 267-77. 184 "The Indians of the Leather-Stocking Tales." Studies i n Philology, 23 (1926), 16-39. Jl?arkman, Francisj. "Rev. of The Works of James Fenimore Cooper." North American Review, 154 (January, 1852), 147-161. Authorship a t t r i b u t e d to Parkman by Cushing. Parrington, Vernon L. Main Currents i n American Thought. Vo l . I I : The Romantic Revolution i n America, 1800-1860. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Company, 192 7. Pearce, Roy Harvey. "The Leatherstocking Tales Re-examined." South A t l a n t i c Quarterly, 46 (1942), 524-536. . The Savages of America: A Study of the Indian and the Idea of C i v i l i z a t i o n . Revised ed. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1965. . "The S i g n i f i c a n c e of the C a p t i v i t y Narratives." American L i t e r a t u r e , 19 (1947), 1-20. P h i l b r i c k , Thomas. "Cooper's The Pioneers: Origins and Structure." PMLA, 79 (1964), 579-593. Prucha, Francis Paul. American Indian P o l i c y i n the Formative Years: The Indian Trade and Intercourse Acts, 1790-1834. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1962. Ringe, Donald A. James Fenimore Cooper. New York: Twayne Publishers, Inc., 1962. Routh, James. "The Model of the Leatherstocking Tales." Modern Language Notes, 28 (1913), 77-79. 185 Schlesinger, Arthur M. J r . The Age of Jackson. Abridged ed. New York: New American L i b r a r y , 1949. Smith, Henry Nash. V i r g i n Land: The American West as Symbol and Myth. 1950; r p t . New York: Random House, Vintage Books, 1961. Shulenberger, A r v i d . Cooper's Theory of F i c t i o n : His Prefaces and t h e i r Relation to his Novels. Lawrence, Kansas: U n i v e r s i t y of Kansas Press, 1955. S n e l l , George. "The Shaper of American Romance." The Yale Review, 34 (1945), 482-494. S p i l l e r , Robert E., and P h i l i p C. Blackburn. A Descriptive Bibliography of the Writings of James Fenimore Cooper. New York: R. R. Bowker Company, 1934. S p i l l e r , Robert E. Fenimore Cooper: C r i t i c of His Times. New York: Minton, Balch & Co., 1931. . James Fenimore Cooper. U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota Pamphlets on American Writers, No. 48. Minneapolis: U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota Press, 1965. Turner, Frederick Jackson. The Fron t i e r i n American History. 1920; r p t . New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1962. Vogel, V i r g i l J . , ed. This Country Was Ours: A Documentary  History of the American Indian. New York: Harper & Row, 19 72. 186 Washburn, Wilcomb E., ed. The Indian and the White Man. Documents i n American C i v i l i z a t i o n S eries. Garden C i t y , New York: Doubleday & Company, 1964. . "Indian Removal P o l i c y : Administrat-ive, H i s t o r i c a l and Moral C r i t e r i a f o r Judging Its Success or F a i l u r e . " Ethnohistory, 12 (1965), 274-2 78. . "The Moral and Legal J u s t i f i c a t i o n s f o r Dispossessing the Indians." Seventeenth Century  America: Essays i n C o l o n i a l History. Ed. James Morton Smith. Chapel H i l l : U n i v e r s i t y of North Carolina Press, 1959. . "A Moral History of Indian-White Relations: Needs and Opportunities f o r Study." Ethnohistory, 4 (1957), 47-61. Zoellner, Robert H. "Conceptual Ambivalence i n Cooper's Leatherstocking." American L i t e r a t u r e , 31 (1959-60), 397-420. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0093795/manifest

Comment

Related Items