Connecticut Unscathed: Victory in The Great Narragansett War (King Philip’s War), 1675-1676 Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Major Jason W. Warren, M.A. Graduate Program in History The Ohio State University 2011 Dissertation Committee: John F. Guilmartin Jr., Advisor Alan Gallay, Kristen Gremillion Peter Mansoor, Geoffrey Parker Copyright by Jason W. Warren 2011 Abstract King Philip’s War (1675-1676) was one of the bloodiest per capita in American history. Although hostile native groups damaged much of New England, Connecticut emerged unscathed from the conflict. Connecticut’s role has been obscured by historians’ focus on the disasters in the other colonies as well as a misplaced emphasis on “King Philip,” a chief sachem of the Wampanoag groups. Although Philip formed the initial hostile coalition and served as an important leader, he was later overshadowed by other sachems of stronger native groups such as the Narragansetts. Viewing the conflict through the lens of a ‘Great Narragansett War’ brings Connecticut’s role more clearly into focus, and indeed enables a more accurate narrative for the conflict. Connecticut achieved success where other colonies failed by establishing a policy of moderation towards the native groups living within its borders. This relationship set the stage for successful military operations. Local native groups, whether allied or neutral did not assist hostile Indians, denying them the critical intelligence necessary to coordinate attacks on Connecticut towns. The English colonists convinced allied Mohegan, Pequot, and Western Niantic warriors to support their military operations, giving Connecticut forces a decisive advantage in the field. Connecticut’s native population chose to remain neutral or to actively assist the colony’s English colonists, a point often obscured by historians. A small number of Connecticut colonists adopted ii Indian tactical methods, and conducted successful raids that disrupted the hostile coalition’s war effort. King Philip’s initial coalition did not target Connecticut immediately and then only as a secondary objective. When the Narragansetts dominated the war effort later in the war and sought to attack the colony, Connecticut forces killed the tribe’s primary war leader. Moreover, the colony had reconstituted its defenses upon the trace of its former frontier fortifications. Although enemy groups operated throughout the colony, by utilizing elements of European-style fortresses that had emerged from the Military Revolution of Early Modern Europe, Connecticut became a hardened target invulnerable to traditional Native American martial skills. The population density and settlement pattern of Connecticut’s colonists also aided in the defense of the colony, rendering more effective reconstituted defenses in key population areas. The colony abandoned outlying settlements, which were indefensible. Connecticut’s War Council also more effectively managed the war than the other New England colonies. With historians focused on the terrifying events in Massachusetts Bay, Plymouth and Rhode Island, historians have relegated to the margins and distorted Connecticut’s success story. Both the colony’s English and native populations, however, emerged victorious, defeating and disrupting the hostile coalition as well as remaining unscathed compared to the remainder of New England. This dissertation refocuses Connecticut’s role in the Great Narragansett War—the latest episode in near-continuous Indian against Indian warfare in southern New England since the arrival of Europeans—and its victory over the hostile native groups. Further, it calls into question traditional interpretations of iii warfare in early colonial America, and proposes a new paradigm for considering local relations between colonists and Indians as a major factor in successful war fighting. iv Dedication Dedicated to the memory of the members of the West Point Class of 1999 who have given their lives since 9/11 in service to the nation. Grip Hands. v Acknowledgments A loving thank you to my wife Lisa, son William and daughter Alice, for their gracious and enduring support that made this project possible. I would like to recognize my dissertation committee, Profs. Geoffrey Parker, Alan Gallay, and Peter Mansoor, whose expertise illuminated the path to success. I would like to particularly thank my advisor Prof. John Guilmartin, who has guided this dissertation since its inception. I appreciate Prof. John Brooke’s encouragement in pursuing this topic. Thank you to Prof. Wayne Lee, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, who provided invaluable assistance for this project. Thank you to Ms. Joby Abernathy, who steered me through the administrative process during my time in the Ohio State history department. I would especially like to acknowledge the assistance of Lieutenant Colonel Sean Judge, who in my absence represented me at the department and graduate school. I would like to recognize all of those who assisted in the collection of sources for this paper. I am indebted to Prof. Kevin McBride and his Mashantucket Pequot Museum and Research Center team, especially Ms. Ashley Bissonnette, for their invaluable assistance in providing historical sources as well as expert advice and data on archaeological and anthropological matters. Without their tremendous assistance, this dissertation would not have been possible. Expert mapmaker Mr. William Keegan, vi Heritage Consultants, LLC., generously has provided many of the maps that highlight critical ideas in this dissertation. Dr. Bruce Stark and staff at the Connecticut State Library proved instrumental in facilitating my acquisition of sources. I sincerely appreciate the Omar N. Bradley Historical Research Fellowship (2010), granted from the Omar N. Bradley Foundation, which funded numerous research trips for this project. I would like to acknowledge the support of my colleagues at West Point, particularly Profs. Clifford Rogers, Matthew Muehlbauer, Jacqueline Whitt, Jonathan Gumz, Majors Joshua Bradley, Josiah Grover and Casey Doss, as well as Ms. Sara Jones, all of whom provided feedback on various chapters. Thank you to Major Sean McCafferty for his expert and timely formatting assistance. I would especially like to thank Associate Professor and Military History Division Chief, Colonel Kevin Farrell, whose continued mentorship and expert advice have allowed this dissertation to come to fruition. I sincerely appreciate the support of my parents, Jim and LouAnn, who nurtured my passion for history at an early age. I would like to remember the late Rev. James Burke, who first introduced me to the topic of King Philip’s War in 1988, as well as my 7th grade teacher, the late Mrs. Pat Duplin, who first exposed me to the subject of the Indians of Connecticut. I would like to acknowledge Mrs. Patty Panetta, Brother Lawrence Nyhan, Mr. John Darrow, COL Christopher Kolenda, and the late Prof. John Fitzimmons all influential teachers in my life. A special thank you to Prof. Larry Tritle, close friend and mentor, who has been instrumental in my academic development. vii Finally, thank you to the cadets that I have taught at West Point. If they gained even a fraction of the knowledge that they imparted to me, then my classes have been a success. The mistakes, omissions, and oversights of this dissertation, remain my own, as do the arguments herein, which do not reflect the views of the United States Military Academy, West Point, the United States Army or the Department of Defense. viii Vita 1999……………………………………….B.S. European History, West Point 2009……………………………………….M.A. History, The Ohio State University 2009 to present…………………………….Assistant Professor, Department of History, West Point Publications 1. Captain Jason W. Warren, “Beyond Emotion: The Epidamnian Affair and Corinthian Policy, 480-421 BC” Ancient History Bulletin 17.3-4 (Fall 2003): 181-194. Fields of Study Major Field: History ix Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................... ii Dedication ............................................................................................................................v Acknowledgments.............................................................................................................. vi Vita ..................................................................................................................................... ix List of Figures .................................................................................................................... xi Chapter 1: Introduction, Background, and Historiography .................................................1 Chapter 2: Forging an Alliance: The Pequot War and the Interwar Years, 1636-1674 .... 59 Chapter 3: A Brief Narrative of King Philip’s War .......................................................... 83 Chapter 4: The Hostile Threat to Connecticut During the Great Narragansett War ........ 95 Chapter 5: Puritan Outlier: Connecticut Colonists and Local Native Groups ............... 133 Chapter 6: Defending Connecticut: Influences of the Military Revolution on the New England Frontier ......................................................................................... 161 Chapter 7: “To Prosecute the Enemie With All Vigor”: Connecticut’s Offensive Operations ....................................................................................................