Frontier: the word carries the inevitable scent of the West. But before Custer or Lewis and Clark, before the first Conestoga wagons rumbled across the Plains, it was the East that marked the frontier - the boundary between complex Native cultures and the first colonizing Europeans.Here is the older, wilder, darker history of a time when the land between the Atlantic and the Appalachians was contested ground - when radically different societies adopted and adapted the ways of the other, while struggling for control of what all considered to be their land.
The First Frontier traces two and a half centuries of history through poignant, mostly unheralded personal stories - like that of a Harvard-educated Indian caught up in seventeenth-century civil warfare, a mixed-blood interpreter trying to straddle his white and Native heritage, and a Puritan woman wielding a scalping knife whose bloody deeds still resonate uneasily today. It is the first book in years to paint a sweeping picture of the Eastern frontier, combining vivid storytelling with the latest research to bring to life modern America’s tumultuous, uncertain beginnings.
©2012 Scott Weidensaul (P)2012 Audible, Inc.
Yes, but it was not as enjoyable as I had anticipated (I was really looking forward to it). However, it was well worth it.
Fred Anderson's The War that Made America, which covers some of the same period and events. In fact, if I hadn't listened to Anderson's book first, I would have a even higher opinion of this one, but Anderson often is more to the point and presents things in a clearer way. For instance, it was quite clear in Anderson's book why Washington became an aide to Gen. Braddock, but it wasn't in Weidensaul's account.
It was OK, but I found myself falling asleep more often than usual. His reading is somewhat flat, but not bad.
Immediately! Couldn't wait.
While I hate PC as much as anybody, I do not agree with another review's criticism. This book did not seem to me to present the Indians in a particularly PC way; to me, the presentation seemed fair and objective. The Indians were no saints, they could be treacherous and cruel, and the book does not hide this. What it does do is make us understand the complexity of the Indians' world when the Europeans started to wreak havoc. We tend not be be insufficiently aware of how many they were before the Europeans came, and how complex the relationships were between different tribes. The great interest of this book is to give us a better sense of how things must have looked to Indians, and of the tragic misunderstandings between Indians and Europeans in addition to the Europeans' rapacity and prejudices. And even apart from inadvertently killing off nine-tenth of the native population with the germs they brought, on the whole the Europeans certainly behaved worse than those they considered inferior, often to their own detriment.
I'm giving this book good marks because of the thorough content. The book was well researched and will give you a good glimpse of the chaos of the frontier settlements. However, I had to hold my nose half a dozen times when listening to the book. The author is a bedwetting liberal who finds it easy to blame "Whitey" first for most provocations along the frontier - often (not always) omitting information that the attacks were retaliations, ie. Paxton Boys, almost as if the frontier settlers just woke up one day and decided to raid an Indian village for no apparent reason.
The author tip toed around any historical reference which had the potential of offending Indians.
When describing attacks by the whites he uses the words ruthless, slaughter, massacre, etc. but when mentioning attacks by the Indian "Braves" and "Warriors" they just "killed" "Attacked" or captured the settlers - emphasizing that the "prisoners" were well treated and easily assimilated into the Indian Life.
Report Inappropriate Content