The Japanese Journal of American Studies, No. 24 (2013)

Herman Melville’s “Pequot Trilogy”:
The Pequot War in Moby-Dick,
Israel Potter, and Clarel

Yukiko Oshima*

Introduction
Herman Melville (1819–91) makes recurring use of a Connecticut
Valley Native American tribe, the Pequot, who were declared extinct after
the Puritan-Pequot War of 1636–37. (The official declaration of the war
was in 1637. The appellation of the tribe used in the nineteenth century
was the Pequod, but it is now the Pequot.) In the following essay, I discuss
what I term Melville’s “Pequot trilogy”—consisting of two novels, MobyDick and Israel Potter, and a lengthy poem, Clarel—in which, I argue, thehistory of the Pequot is embedded.
In part 1, I begin by discussing how the Pequot War virtually set thecourse of later events between whites and Native Americans. In part 2, I
show how some aspects of the retributive violence that marks this historyof encounter between the two races are transposed in Moby-Dick andClarel, and I show how Israel Potter affords not only collateral evidence
Copyright © 2013 Yukiko Oshima. All rights reserved. This work may be used, withthis notice included, for noncommercial purposes. No copies of this work may be
distributed, electronically or otherwise, in whole or in part, without permission fromthe author.
*Professor, Fukuoka University

47

48

Yukiko Oshimaof Melville’s knowledge about the Pequot but also his unconventional
sympathy toward them. In part 3, I compare Melville’s view of thePequot with that of a few of his contemporaries. In part 4, I argue that
Melville analogizes the Pequot with the Typee, another indigenous people
discursively demonized by whites due to their hostility toward whites,and propose that Melville’s outlook might be a reason for his mistrustof official narratives. On the basis of the above discussion on the themeof being “possessed” by the Pequot in Moby-Dick and Clarel, in the lastsection of part 5, I review how the “ghost” of the Pequot seems to find
fit agents in characters such as Captain Ahab in Moby-Dick and Nathan
in Clarel and hijacks the main plots of those narratives to fulfill thetribe’s desire for vengeance. In these two works, what at first seems likepersonal enterprises on the parts of Ahab and Nathan might actually havea larger, national aspect on another level, thereby indicating these works’relationship with American Gothic literature.

I. The Pequot War
Though a small war in terms of scale—and bearing in mind that Native
American tribes were anything but monolithic—the symbolic import of
the Pequot War is in fact immense. The tribe was massacred at the earliest
stage of its contact with whites. It was not just the first such massacre
but one that marked the beginning of the United States’ later westward
expansion through the initial genocidal intentions of the English colonists,1
and it “may have been the first example of total warfare in New England.”2Contemporary Native American author/critic Gerald Vizenor likens theattack on Mystic Fort during the Pequot War to other notorious instances of
genocide against Native Americans: “Killing Indians was once sanctionedby the military of this nation. Who can forget the slaughter of tribal people
at Mystic River and Sand Creek and Wounded Knee in South Dakota?”3
The preemptive strike on the Pequots’ major fort/settlement, Mystic
Fort on the banks of the Mystic River in southern Connecticut, opened thePequot War. The English colonists set the fort afire in a predawn surprise
attack, an unprecedented incident for Native Americans: “The fort was aneffective shield in the limited scope of New England aboriginal warfare,
where such a weapon as fire was considered too horrible and deadly touse.”4 So, although the Pequots have no written history, the fire attack
must have been regarded as unfair. The attack has been typically describedas follows:Herman Melville’s “Pequot Trilogy”

49[The sleeping Pequots] had no chance once the fort/settlement was
set fire and the shooting started. In the early hours of May 26, 1637,
Captain John Mason had quietly deployed his troops. He positioned
some ninety Englishmen from Connecticut and Massachusetts, andseveral hundred Narragansett and Mohegans—around a Pequot
settlement on the banks of the Mystic River.5
Acknowledging that there has historically been controversy surrounding
the attack, for the purposes of this essay, I regard it as a massacre: two
English soldiers out of eighty lost their lives whereas around four hundred
to eight hundred of the Pequots died within an hour. Losing their tribal
base in this way, the Pequot were defeated in skirmishes in the marshes,
and the survivors were hunted down and sold as slaves, mainly to theWest Indies, though some became slaves of the rival tribes allied with theEnglish colonists.
The Pequot War had a complex set of causes. Politically, the Pequot
were regarded as dangerous, because, having rare foresight into whites’
drive for expansion, they tried to make alliances with other tribes tokeep the English colonists in check. Economically, not until the settlers’demands for agricultural land became keener and the importance of tradedisappeared as the beaver population neared extermination, did an allout war initiated by the whites break out as the Pequot War.6 Rhetorically,
the Puritans’ deftness has importance. The contemporary spiritual crisis
caused by the Antinomian controversy, which was about individual faithversus socially established morality, partly triggered the war to “redefine
and adjust New England’s proclaimed mission”;7 or, put another way,“the events of 1637 established the legitimacy of genocidal war against
nonwhite peoples.” 8 The following passage, written by the abovementioned Maj. John Mason who attacked the fort, exemplifies how the
Christian God’s power was deployed to justify the massacre: “And indeed
such a dreadful Terror did the Almighty let fall upon their Spirit, thatthey would fly from us and run into the very Flames, where many of them
perished. . . . But God was above them, who laughed his Enemies and theEnemies of his People to Scorn, making them as a fiery Oven.”9II. Melville’s Pequot Trilogy
A. Moby-Dick: Namesake of the Pequod10

50

Yukiko Oshima

Melville names the whaler Pequod in his novel on whaling, Moby-Dick:or, The Whale (1851). The novel’s first person narrator, Ishmael, introduces
the whaling ship to the reader in the following manner: “Pequod, you will
no doubt remember, was the name of a celebrated tribe of Massachusetts
Indians, now extinct as the ancient Medes.”11
In a famous quarterdeck speech, Captain Ahab of the Pequod reveals to
his crew that the true purpose of their circumnavigatory whaling voyage
is to pursue and kill a white sperm whale, Moby Dick, which bit off his
leg in the previous voyage. Ahab mesmerizes the crew by describing how
he feels imprisoned by a metaphorical “white wall” shoved near to him
and how he is being driven toward a deadly struggle with the giant whaleby saying, “If a man will strike, strike through the mask! How can theprisoner reach outside except by thrusting through the wall? To me, thewhite whale is that wall, shoved near to me” (164). Ahab also demands fairplay, saying, “I’d strike the sun if it insulted me. For could the sun do that,then could I do the other; since there is ever a sort of fair play herein” (164),or, later, stoically prohibiting the use of lightning rods in the middle of atyphoon off the coast of Japan, “let’s have fair-play here, though we be theweaker side . . . out on privileges!” (505).
There seems to be some rapport between Ahab and his nonwhite
harpooners, particularly between Ahab and the Native American harpooner
Tashtego. The other harpooners, Queequeg from Polynesia and Daggoo
from Africa, are former princes who came to the United States of theirown free will and thus can relish their pride. For them, the legendary
white whale vaguely embodies the white man’s power. For Tashtego, on
the other hand, the same “white wall” analogy would appear to symbolize
the land confiscation and genocide that characterize the Native American
experience, in which the white wall overlaps with the line of the frontierthat is ever pressing in on them. The Native Americans had been pushed
into territories west of the Mississippi by the Indian Removal Act, which
was advocated by President Andrew Jackson and passed by Congress in
1830, and the removal of the Native Americans was virtually completed
by 1850. Tashtego—from “the last remnant of a village of red men” (120)in the westerly point of Martha’s Vineyard Island—is a fit representativeof his “vanishing race.”12 Tashtego has generally been considered a minor
character, but it is notable that it is he who sights the voyage’s first whale,
and then Moby Dick (though a split second later than Ahab).
Tashtego is the first person to respond to Ahab’s speech, and then isfollowed by the other two harpooners. Ahab, reversing the power hierarchy

Herman Melville’s “Pequot Trilogy”

51of the ship, makes the reluctant white mates serve the harpooners as “cupbearers to my three pagan kinsmen there—yon three most honorable
gentlemen and noblemen, my valiant harpooners” (166). This is a point
attested to, much later, when the other crew members come to fear Ahab’s
growing monomania, “a certain magnetism shot into their [i.e., theharpooners’] congenial hearts from inflexible Ahab’s” (518), and again,
when the frenzied hunt for Moby Dick embarks on its final stage, Ahab
“seemed distrustful of his crew’s fidelity; at least, of nearly all except the
pagan harpooners” (538).
Metaphors abound in the sinking of the Pequod, as the Native Americanpresence claims visibility in conjunction with the name of the ship,
the plaid cloth, red flag, and “red arm” of the red man. Ahab’s heart isembodied in the captain’s flag: unlike a company flag chosen by the ship’s
owners, this one is his own choice. This flag wraps around Tashtego likea patterned plaid blanket, which was often worn by Native Americans todisplay their tribal identity in the nineteenth century, and it “streamed itself
straight out” (570) from him. In addition, Tashtego’s “forward-flowing
heart” (570) is set against the passive renunciation of the white mates.
Hearing Ahab’s final words to a human being, Tashtego, at the mainmastof the sinking Pequod, nails the captain’s flag to the main-mast while theenraged Moby Dick charges the ship. Only the uppermost mainmast is outof the water, and Tashtego’s red arm hovers backwardly uplifted in theair, in the act of nailing the captain’s red flag faster and yet faster to thesubsiding spar:
A sky-hawk that tauntingly had followed the main-truck downwards
from its natural home among the stars, pecking at the flag, andincommoding Tashtego there; this bird now chanced to intercept
its broad fluttering wing between the hammer and the wood [i.e.,the mainmast] and simultaneously feeling that ethereal thrill, thesubmerged savage beneath, in his death-grasp, kept his hammer
frozen there; and so the bird of heaven, with archangelic shrieks, andhis imperial beak thrust upwards, and his whole captive form foldedin the flag of Ahab, went down with his ship, which, like Satan, would
not sink to hell till she [i.e., the Pequod] had dragged a living part ofheaven along with her, and helmeted herself with it. (572, emphasismine)This sky-hawk can be interpreted as a variant symbol of America’s

52

Yukiko Oshima

Engraving depicting the attack on the Pequot fort, published in
Capt. John Underhill’s News from America in 1638 (courtesy of
Massachusetts Historical Society)imperialistic ambitions, for “the bird of heaven” can be seen as theAmerican national bird.13 As described above, Tashtego’s blow captures
the bird and takes it to the bottom of the ocean. It is also the same kindof hostile bird that had previously taken Ahab’s hat, which he had beenwearing daily, as well as his flag on the same day. We can interpret that, inthe passage quoted above, Melville ceremonially “helmeted” the Pequod/
Pequot with a feathered war bonnet of the Native Americans.
When Moby Dick staves in the ship and the Pequod sinks in a huge
whirlpool of the whale’s making, it seems that on a certain level thehistory of the destruction of the Pequot people is being reenacted. As
Ishmael spins around, being pulled toward the bottom of the ocean while
witnessing Tashtego’s last act, he compares the whirlpool to the wheel offire that Ixion was fastened to in Greek mythology—“at the axis of thatslowly wheeling circle, like another Ixion I did revolve” (573). Melvilleanalogizes Ixion’s wheel of fire with the burning, circular Mystic Fort.14
And Ishmael alone survives out of some thirty crew members—much as ahandful of the Pequot survived.
B. Israel Potter: Sympathy toward the Pequot15
In Israel Potter: His Fifty Years of Exile (1855), which Melvillepublished four years after Moby-Dick, the eponymous white protagonist’s

Herman Melville’s “Pequot Trilogy”

53

exile in London is compared to the experience of a postwar Pequot slave
who was made to a slave by his rivals, the Narragansett, who were alliedwith the English colonists in the Pequot War. The novel is based on an
actual Revolutionary War veteran who experienced adventures as anintrepid soldier and a spy and who was sometimes made use of by famous
historical figures such as Benjamin Franklin, John Paul Jones, and Ethan
Allen. For these services, however, far from receiving any financial reward
or commemoration, Israel has to lose himself in the crowd for the sake ofsheer survival in London until his dream of a homecoming materializes
fifty years later.
There are a few moments in which this novel deviates from recounting
a mere adventure story and achieves a different tone. For instance, in a
famous scene, the Man-in-the-Moon sneers down on the battle between
the Serapis and the Bonhomme Richard. Here, however, I would like tofocus on a scene near the ending of the novel that has escaped the attentionof critics. It comes when Israel works for one day at St. James’s Park in
London. His isolation in an oasis-like space triggers a suppressed memoryof his beloved New England; expressions such as “fenced in with ironpailings between whose bars” or the word “cage” underscore his bondagelike exile. Then the novel abruptly compares the “imprisoned” Israel to a
fictitious “trespassing Pequod” on the former tribal homeland that is now
occupied by the Narragansett:It was a little oval, fenced in with iron pailings, between whose bars
the imprisoned verdure peered forth, as some wild captive creatureof the woods from its cage. And alien Israel there—at times staring
dreamily about him—seemed like some amazed runaway steer, or
trespassing Pequod Indian, impounded on the shores of Narraganset
Bay, long ago.16 (emphasis mine)
Here, more explicitly than in Moby-Dick, the Pequot seem to havefigured prominently in the author’s mind as the epitome of people unfairly
subjugated. In addition, Melville’s placing of the “Pequot” Israel at St.
James’s Park can be seen as being relevant to the Mystic Fort massacre
because St. James is related to the burning of heathens. The New
Testament says that St. James “suggested fire from heaven to consume”
the pagans and Samaritans (Mark 10:38–40).
The preeminent animal imagery of a fox as representative of Israel
seems to further connect Israel to the Pequot. Unlike in the primary source

54

Yukiko Oshima

for this novel, fox imagery is repeatedly used by Melville to describe theprotagonist; for instance, Israel was “hunted from food and sleep, driven
from hole to hole like a fox in the wood.” Also, we read of “the hunted fox[i.e., Israel] still to elude apprehension” or, later, “the same instinct which
impels the hunted fox to the wilderness” (29, 32, 153). We should note that
the Pequot were called the “fox people.”17Thus, judging from the use of the Pequot in Israel Potter, Melville not
only knows much about their tribal history but also sympathizes withthem. The novel’s preface professes that the author has refrained fromoffering “artistic recompense of poetical justice” to Israel “though sorely
tempted” (viii) to do so.
Melville might have confirmed his views on the Pequot had he read
William Apess (1798–1839), who was of Pequot and African ancestry, and
who identified himself with the officially extinct Pequot. Apess had thehonor to give an encomium on King Philip, war leader of the Wampanoag,at Boston’s oldest theater in 1836. However, after a short period of
preaching as a Methodist minister and activist, Apess disappeared into
obscurity. Similarly, Melville’s Israel Potter goes into exile in London:“What befell Israel during his forty years’ wanderings in the figurative
London deserts, surpassed the forty years in the natural wilderness ofthe outcast Hebrews under Moses” (161). For Melville, Israel’s exile
might have recalled Apess’s essay, “The Indians: The Ten Lost Tribes,”in which Apess laments that the Pequots’ “history has been blotted out
from among the nations of the earth.”18 Another link between Apess andIsrael Potter is that, like some of the tribes who fought on the Americanside in the Revolutionary War, the Mashpee with whom Apess lived forsome years were put into bondage by Massachusetts law from the timeof the American Revolution until 1834. It appears as if Melville intended
to show that roughly half of the Pequots and twenty-five out of twentysix Mashpees died in the war, and that, like Israel Potter, despite theircontribution to the war their claims were denied by the United States
government.19 Had Melville known about Apess’s messages, he might wellhave reconfirmed the nullified Pequot’s desire to protest.
C. Clarel: Reenactment of the Hostility toward the Pequot20
The Pequot theme reappears yet again twenty years later in Clarel:
A Poem and Pilgrimage in the Holy Land (1876). The major body ofthe poem Clarel concerns a young American named Clarel who listensHerman Melville’s “Pequot Trilogy”

55

attentively to his fellow pilgrims’ discussions with an open mind. It is
hard to summarize this poem, which is the longest in American literature;
however, Clarel’s outline is as follows: the titular protagonist, Clarel,
tormented by religious doubts, has arrived in Jerusalem. Falling in lovewith a Jewish girl, Ruth, Clarel soon becomes engaged to her. However,her father, Nathan, a farmer-immigrant from America, is killed by Arabraiders, whom the poem’s narrator compares with the Pequot. Clarel,
forbidden by Jewish custom from seeing his fiancée, Ruth, during hermourning period, joins a pilgrim group and visits biblical sites. On his
return ten days later, he finds that Ruth and her mother have died of afever that was caused by grief. The long poem soon closes, leaving the
dejected Clarel alone again. By examining the poem’s framework, as
outlined above, we may see that Nathan is a pivotal character, and that themain plot is put in motion by the “Pequod,” because the hostile Arabs who
murder Nathan are compared with the tribe. Thus, although the poem is
set in Palestine, it also reflects the Pequot theme in a significant way. The
background of the poem reveals a cyclical revenge pattern between white
American settlers and Native Americans.
Criticism on the Native American theme in Clarel has been centeredon the figure of Ungar, another pilgrim, who is an ex-officer of theConfederacy and who lives in self-imposed exile in foreign countries.
Ungar indicts American “democracy” and materialism from the vantage
point of his Native American heritage. Acknowledging the importanceof Ungar, I propose that the Pequots’ curse seems to be embedded in
Nathan’s paternal lineage. Nathan is given the longest canto in Clarel,and his background, which reaches back three generations, is presented inseemingly excessive detail. Another white American character, Nehemiah
from Narragansett, becomes the first spiritual guide for the newly arrived
Clarel. As Nehemiah explains to Clarel, Nathan regards the Arabs as
being like the Pequot and this causes Arab hostility. This leads to his
cruel murder by Arabs. Nathan’s sensibility of hating the Pequot-likeracial Other has its roots in New England, going back a few generations
when the farmer-uncle of Nathan’s father died in a massive landslide in
the White Mountains. Nathan’s father interpreted this incident not as amere natural disaster but as a “havoc from the heaven,”21 which occurredbecause his people had dispossessed the region’s Native Americans. This
peculiar interpretation of Nathan’s father seems to expose a fear of white
settlers concerning the unfairly dispossessed indigenous people. After thedeath of his uncle, Nathan’s father, who spoke in “blunt straightforward

56

Yukiko Oshima

Saxon tone” (58) befitting his Puritan lineage, moved to Illinois. In
Illinois, because of this view about sin, Nathan’s father was haunted by the
Native Americans who were buried in the landscape until his mind became“unhinged” (57). Such an obsession, tinged with a sense of ancestral sin,seems to be passed down to his son Nathan. Thus, the hidden motive
for Nathan’s immigration to Palestine seems to be to escape from theAmerican landscape that drove his father insane.
Nathan’s overzealousness is his “tragic flaw,”22 but it is also comical.
Before his marriage, Nathan had a period of inner turmoil during which he
was “a spiritual window-shopper” who tried various faiths.23 He marriesa Jew and becomes an extreme Zionist. In spite of such a drastic change,
his internal restlessness is only intensified until Nathan finally settles on
Sharon plain. At the same time, however, he comes to appear “as little
more than a cartoon figure of Zionist monomania”;24 his “zeal to be abetter Jew than the Jews, is as close to humor as Clarel gets.”25
The consequences of his ancestral racism have not yet run their course.
In Palestine, Nathan maintains that he has a natural right to convert themarauding Arabs into Christians who follow an agricultural livelihood.
The Arabs do not obey. Nehemiah compares the way in which theinterracial relationship worsens to the Puritan-Pequot hostility: “Himself
and honest servants three / Armed husbandmen became, as erst / His siresin Pequod wilds immersed. / Hittites—foes pestilent to God / His fathers
old those Indians deemed: / Nathan the Arabs here esteemed / The same—
slaves meriting the rod; / And out he spake it; which bred hate / The moreimperiling his state” (63, emphasis mine). On the basis of this crucial
passage, Laurie Robertson-Lorant, though only sporadically, relates thisNathan-Arab hostility to the Pequot-Puritan hostility: “Nathan, whose ‘siresin Pequod’s wilds’ regarded the Indians as ‘foes pestilent to God,’ treats
the Arab tribesmen as ‘slaves meriting the rod,’ and shortly after Clarel
and Ruth become engaged, Arab raiders ambush Nathan and kill him.”26
Nathan thus reacts as his Puritan ancestors had done—regarding the Other
as the Judeo-Christian God’s enemy. Extending Robertson-Lorant’s lineof thought that connects Nathan’s fall to his ancestors’ view of and deeds
against the Pequot, and given my above interpretation of Moby-Dick andIsrael Potter, I see much significance in Nathan’s lineage and proposethat the Pequot in fact activate Clarel’s main plot. Otherwise, why did
Melville take such pains by writing the poem’s longest canto—book 1,
canto 17, “Nathan”—to delineate Nathan’s lineage in such a seeminglydigressive manner, while offering so little background information on theHerman Melville’s “Pequot Trilogy”

57

vast majority of other characters? In addition, the Arab raiders’ burningof Nathan’s corpse and the shreds of Nathan and his servants can beanalogized to the Pequots’ Mystic Fort settlement being set afire.
Furthermore, in view of the American situation during the years when
Melville was writing Clarel, the poem’s Arab raiders on horseback
are also analogous to Plains Indians. As Hilton Obenzinger points out,
quoting from Clarel, “the band of Arab robber-sharks, ‘Swart, sinuous
men on silvery steeds,’ reappears; like the Plains Indians, and revelsin their horsemanship.” 27 (The theme of Jewish cowboys versus Arabraiders is still valid today, in which Native Americans and Palestinians
are presented as if they are interchangeable.28) Thus, Nathan’s murder canbe said to overlap with the contemporary situation involving the Sioux(Lakota) in the 1870s. The US government policy by the mid-1860s wasto confine Native Americans to reservations, allegedly to force them toabandon their nomadic lifestyle and “civilize” them. Those Sioux living
off the reservation in the unceded territory complained when the federal
government permitted the Northern Pacific Railroad survey crews onto
their land in violation of the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty. Starting in 1853
many battles took place such as Red Cloud’s War (1866–67) until they
culminated in the Battle of Little Bighorn (1876). Also, the Sioux werean important tribe for Melville, not just because of their prominent rolein history but as seen in his views expressed his critical book review ofFrancis Parkman’s nonfiction work, The California and Oregon Trail(1849), appeared in the magazine Literary World in May 1849.29
Thus, what is at issue here is settler culture. A dichotomy presented
in the foreground of Clarel is the conflict between the immigrant
Nathan versus the native Arabs in nineteenth-century Palestine, whereas
embedded in the background are the Puritan settlers versus the Pequot inseventeenth-century America and the frontier settlers versus the Plains
Native Americans in the nineteenth century. Subtle writer that Melvillewas, this roundabout way of portraying cyclical revenge in Clarel willremind the attentive reader of Melville’s indirect way of recounting thefamous phrase “The Metaphysics of Indian-Hating” in his earlier work,
The Confidence-Man: His Masquerade (1857). The Nathan story in
Clarel and “The Metaphysics of Indian-Hating” in The Confidence-Man
present the way in which the encounter between the two races, whichstarted in hostility in a far corner of the “civilized” world, nonetheless set
the course for the future. In The Confidence-Man, Indian-haters, who areusually those whose beloved have been killed by Native Americans in the

58

Yukiko Oshima

antebellum period, devote themselves to killing as many Native Americans
as possible, while the frontiersmen of the Great Plains imbue their children
with racial hatred.
Taking the theme of a passion for revenge into consideration, I proposethat Nathan in Clarel might have been named after another Indianhater, the protagonist Nathan Slaughter (nicknamed Nick) in Dr. RobertMontgomery Bird’s novel Nick of the Woods: Wild Man of the Forest(1837). Though it depicts a racial conflict that occurs at a Kentucky
frontier settlement in the 1780s, the popularity of Nick of the Woods at
the time of its publication was mainly because it was published only
several years after the Black Hawk War (1832) that took place on the Iowa
frontier. After his wife is massacred and his own scalp is taken by Native
Americans, the title character Nathan of Nick of the Woods turns into
an Indian killer. He makes it a rule to mark a cross on each slaughteredenemy’s bosom with his knife, as if to self-represent the Christian world.
As Richard Slotkin points out, “Nathan Slaughter had been a fanatical
Quaker, who sought license for his hyperintense religiosity in the isolationof the forest.”30 Not unlike the case of Nathan in Clarel, religiosity causes
the protagonist to be an excessive character, one who is harsh toward the
racial Other. And not unlike the case of another Indian-hater, Col. John
Moredock in “The Metaphysics of Indian-Hating” in The ConfidenceMan, Nick of Nick of the Woods is a gentleman when he is in a town,
whereas his fanaticism is intensified in a wild and isolated environment.
Again, not unlike the dubious “authentic” historian Judge James Hall in“The Metaphysics of Indian-Hating” in The Confidence-Man, the author of
Nick of the Woods, as a physician, conveys authenticity in his voice as hepresents to the reader what Native Americans are like.

III. Melville’s Mistrust of Official Narratives
If my above supposition is correct, the next question would be why awhite writer like Melville, whose ancestors on both sides of his family
fought in the Revolutionary War, came to see the other side of the national
imagination. I would propose that Melville might have analogized thePequot with another tribe that remained hostile to the encroachments ofwhites, the Typee. From 1842 to 1844, during his early twenties, after
deserting his whale ship with his friend, Melville ended up living for fourweeks with the allegedly cannibal tribe, the Typee, on the island of Nuku
Hiva in the Marquesas. There, in the Taipi Valley, he was treated with

Herman Melville’s “Pequot Trilogy”

59

hospitality, though he could not get rid of the fear of being tattooed (thatis, “going native”) or of being eaten by members of this tribe. Drawing
on this experience, Melville later wrote his first novel, Typee: A Peep at
Polynesian Life (1846).
Frequently recurring expressions found among the various writings
on the Typee and the Pequot are so similar that it is as if they areinterchangeable. First, in Timothy Dwight’s epic poem “Greenfield Hill”(1794) it is observed that “long held the Pequods an extensive sway; /Bold, savage, fierce, of arms the glorious pride, / And bidding all thecircling realm obey.”31 Second, Captain David Porter’s journal on theattack of the Typee villages (1815) includes the following: “Unhappy andheroic people! The victims of your own courage and mistaken pride.”32
Third, in Catharine Maria Sedgwick’s novel Hope Leslie (1827), it isstated that “the Pequod race, a name at which, but a few years before, allwithin the bounds of the New England colonies, English and Indians, ‘grew
pale.’”33 Fourth, in Melville’s three works, similar expressions appear: In
Typee it is remarked that the Typee are “reputed the most ferocious in theSouth Seas” (170).34 In Moby-Dick are found the words, “Pequod, youwill no doubt remember, was the name of a celebrated tribe” (69), and in
Clarel appear the words, “His sires in Pequod wilds immersed. / Hittites—
foes pestilent to God” (63). The Typee and Pequot are similar in their
domination of neighboring tribes, alleged bellicosity, and, as a result of
this, the white writers’ attribution to their tribes of violence and arrogance.
The two tribes might be connected, as well, in terms of cannibalism.
Though the Pequot were not cannibals in the literal sense, they wererepresented in this way by whites. In introducing the whaler, Ishmael
describes the Pequod’s decoration of whale bones as “a cannibal of a craft,tricking herself forth in the chased bones of her enemies” (70).
Writings on Polynesia had been popular in Europe and America;
however, the authors who wrote on this subject were usually famous
voyagers or military officers who observed the indigenous people froma superior position, whereas the young Melville in the Pacific was acommon sailor/deserter who saw the world from the lowliest perspective.
As T. Walter Herbert, Jr. notes, “His beachcomber perspective permitted
Melville to notice aspects of Marquesan life that had been invisible toWestern observers who enjoyed official backing, and to identify the sourceof certain false impressions they had broadcast.”35 Indeed, worse still, as
a guest/captive Melville could have been eaten by the Typee, or, he could
likewise have been killed by whites because, while he was there, French

60

Yukiko Oshima

men-of-war were about to take possession of Nuku Hiva. Even after hefled from the Typee, as a deserter who escaped from two whalers, Melville
was afraid of being arrested in Hawaii until he found his way back home
in a man-of-war. The perspective from the other side of the “civilized
world,” fostered for three years, must have been one reason why Melvillecame to doubt the savage/civilized binary that had been maintained by the
majority of whites to justify their violence. Besides this lowly perspective,
because the young Melville had experienced the hospitality of the Typee, it
is only natural that he came to doubt the validity of the historical discoursethat had demonized indigenous tribes, whether the Typee or the Pequot.
Melville famously writes in Typee, “These things are seldom proclaimed
at home [i.e., the United States]; they happen at the very ends of the earth;they are done in a corner, and there are none to reveal them” (26–27).
Because of this sort of outlook, Melville would not draw a hasty inference
that any tribal hostility was an automatic verification of Native American
devilishness. On the other hand, far from boasting of an authoritarian
stance, as the subtitle of Typee, A Peep at Polynesian Life proclaims,
Melville admits that his observation was just a peep and that he understoodonly a little about the Typee—only a little, yet a tremendous amount for anineteenth-century American.

IV. The American Gothic: Stories of Possession
Susan Sheckel in The Insistence of the Indian maintains that a Native
American “ghost” haunts America and its narratives.36 Similarly, Renée L.
Bergland writes in The National Uncanny: Indian Ghosts and American
Subjects that Native Americans can possess white Americans’ imagination:“Although Native Americans can be said to have taken possession of theAmerican imagination, this means that they have vanished into the mindsof those who have dispossessed them.”37
The Pequot “ghosts” are not safely dead for whites. In Clarel we see thepersistence of the white man’s sense of guilt in the national imaginationand how the unfairly subjugated Native Americans enact a type of wishfulfilling counterattack against Nathan through the Arab raiders.
In Moby-Dick Melville creates a framework that makes it appear that
Captain Ahab, despite his strong ego as a self-made man, is manipulated
by someone above him because of his doubly anti-Christian signifiers,
Ahab of the Pequod. First, his crazed mother names him Ahab after anaccursed Old Testament king who provoked God more than any king

Herman Melville’s “Pequot Trilogy”

61

before him (1 King 16:33). Second, Captain Ahab is also enticed by the“ghost” of the Pequot people through the name of his ship.
We shall now reexamine Ahab’s quarterdeck speech scene that grabs
the crew’s hearts. Right before Ahab ceremonially makes everyone drink
and swear “Death to Moby Dick!,” hints are abruptly and obliquely giventhat the novel’s main plot of the chase are under control by “the Indian”
and that no one notices this. Ishmael narrates, “But those wild eyes met
his [i.e., Ahab’s], as the bloodshot eyes of the prairie wolves meet the eyeof their leader, ere he rushes on at their heads in the trail of the bison; but,alas! Only to fall into the hidden snare of the Indian” (165). An easily
detectable analogy here is that Ahab, the leader of the wild crew, is theleader of a pack of wolves who are to chase Moby Dick, a “bison,” for theocean is often compared to the prairie by Melville. Yet when it comes tothe signification of “the hidden snare of the Indian,” in which “the Indian”
instead of “the wolves” eventually get the reward, the snare analogy would
break down unless we accept that the novel’s whole main plot, seemingly
controlled by Ahab, is in fact hijacked by “the Indian.” At least that is
the understanding of Ishmael at the point of his narrating Moby-Dick,
presumably years after his experience on the Pequod.
Because of the namesake of the Pequod, and because of Ahab’s
eloquent demand for fair play, the “ghosts” of the Pequot choose Ahab as atarget of their possession to make him lead the crew into again fighting animpossible fight against whiteness par excellence, the giant white whale.
Ahab indeed seems to be a fit agent for the Pequot. He suffers visitationsof whiteness in an unbroken succession. Some years earlier, he was hit bywhite lighting and was branded with a livid lash-like scar, presumably fromhead to toe, as Ahab bellows to the corposant fire “in the sacramental act
so burned by thee” (507). Then, in the previous voyage, he was deprivedof his leg (and, most likely, his sexual potency) by Moby Dick. In chapter
119, “The Candles,” opposing the corposant flames, whose whiteness isredundantly stated, Ahab bellows, “The white flame but lights the way to
the White Whale!” (507). Even though the attempt to kill Moby Dick fails,
as it inevitably does, Melville at least offers a symbol of Manifest Destiny,that is, “the bird of heaven” (572), to the sinking Pequod. As the voyagenears its end, Ahab has to repeat that he is made to do what he would not
do. For instance, Ahab asks Starbuck, “Is Ahab, Ahab? Is it I, God, or who,that lifts this arm?” (545), disclosing an uncanny hunch that he has been
manipulated by someone outside himself. Though it seems as if Ahab ismerely complying with the false prophet Fedallah, a representation of the

62

Yukiko Oshima

Orient, the fact that it has been prophesized that Fedallah himself will die
before Ahab betrays that someone else presides over Fedallah as well. And
in the context of my argument, that someone else can be speculated to be“the Indian” in general and the Pequot in particular.
I have shown this to be the case in Clarel, in which the agents are
Arab raiders who mirror the Pequot and the Sioux and who kill Nathan.
Again, on the surface, Nathan seems to have chosen his course through his
adamant will; however, the poem’s narrative voice emphasizes that Nathan
is only led by fate to his early death: “And Fate, which from her ambush
springs / And drags the loiterer soon or late / Unto a sequel unforeseen; /These doomed him and cut short his date” (64). Thus, judging from theway in which Native Americans are deployed in Moby-Dick and Clarel,
it seems that the main plots are constructed by the Pequot “ghost” to takerevenge against whiteness through the appropriate agents, thereby showingthat these works can be read as phantasmagoric examples of the American
Gothic, which is deeply seated in white Americans’ sense of guilt.

Conclusion
Though rendered in an oblique manner and within an especially large
framework, which can hinder the reader from seeing an overall pattern in
Moby-Dick and Clarel, it is worth examining the Pequot theme to explore
how what at first may seem to be a sporadic pattern comes to resonate as
we reconfirm Melville’s sympathy toward the tribe in Israel Potter. I haveexamined how tropes related to the Pequot take possession of Melville’s
authorial imagination. Even after the actual disappearance of the tribes
from their ancestral lands, dispossessed Native Americans haunted theAmerican imagination, from such far-flung places as off the coast ofJapan in Moby-Dick, London in Israel Potter, and Palestine in Clarel.
Chronologically rearranged in relation to the Pequot War, Clarel makes
use of the cause of the war, Moby-Dick, the massacre at Mystic Fort, andIsrael Potter, the postwar bondage.
As a coda, we can ascertain Melville’s concern about an America that iscaught in a cycle of interracial violence, this time through art that portrays
the frontier. One of the two works of American art that survive in thecollections that Melville is known to have owned is an engraving by W. G.
Jackman of an oil painting entitled The Death Struggle (1845) by Charles
Deas.38 In The Death Struggle, a mountain man on a horse is locked incombat with a Native American just as both are about to fall off a precipiceHerman Melville’s “Pequot Trilogy”

63

and into an abyss. The two races are intertwined in a death struggle whose
import would have been familiar to Melville.

Notes
An earlier version of this article was read at the International Melville Conference
held at the University of Rome in July 2011 and at the symposium at the general
meeting of the American Literature Society of Japan held at Nagoya University in
October 2012.
1
Richard Drinnon, Facing West: The Metaphysics of Indian-Hating and EmpireBuilding (1980; repr., Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1997), 43–44.
2
Patrick M. Malone, The Skulking Way of War: Technology and Tactics among the
New England Indians (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991), 102.
3
Gerald Vizenor, Native Liberty: Natural Reason and Cultural Survivance (Lincoln:
University of Nebraska Press, 2009), 39.
4Malone, Skulking Way of War, 14.
5
H. Gregory Nobles, American Frontiers: Cultural Encounters and Continental
Conquest (New York: Hill and Wang, 1997), 19.
6
Laurence M. Hauptman, “The Pequot War and Its Legacies,” in The Pequots inSouthern New England: The Fall and Rise of an American Indian Nation, ed. Laurence
M. Hauptman and James D. Wherry (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1990),
69; Ian K. Steele, Warpaths: Invasions of North America (London: Oxford University
Press, 1994), 89–94.
7
Neal Salisbury, Manitou and Providence: Indians, Europeans, and the Making of
New England, 1500–1643 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1982), 220.
8
Ann Kibbey, The Interpretation of Material Shapes in Puritanism: A Study of
Rhetoric, Prejudice, and Violence (London: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 120.
9John Mason, A Brief History of the Pequot War (New York: Readex Microprint,1966), 809. For Melville’s view on the Pequot War, see Michael Paul Rogin, Subversive
Genealogy: The Politics and Art of Herman Melville (Berkeley: California University
Press, 1979), 122–24. Rogin places the Pequot War in the framework of America’s
expansion: “The Puritans justified the Pequod War as the elimination of those idolatrous
tribes who occupied the Promised Land before God’s chosen came from Egypt. Theline from the Pequods through Fort Stanwix [at which Melville’s ancestor was honored]
pointed forward—by way of Andrew Jackson, New Orleans, and Indian removal—to
the war against Mexico” (123).
10
A version of this section appears in Yukiko Oshima, "The Red Flag of the Pequod/
Pequot: Native American Presence in Moby-Dick," in Melville “Among the Nations”:
Proceedings of an International Conference, Volos, Greece, July 2–6, 1997, ed. Sanford
E. Marovitz and A. C. Christodoulou (Kent, OH: Kent State University Press, 2001),
254–66.
11
Herman Melville, Moby-Dick: or, The Whale (Evanston, IL: Northwestern
University Press and the Newberry Library, 1988), 69. Here, purposely or not, Melvillemistakes the Pequot as a Massachusetts tribe, rather than a Connecticut one. Further
citations of this work are given in the text.
12
A full-blooded Tashtego was a rare case, because Native American mating with
African slaves and English colonists had been common. Melville’s description of
Tashtego’s Gay Head tribe is historically correct. See William S. Simmons, Spirit of the

64

Yukiko Oshima

New England Tribes: Indian History and Folklore (Hanover, NH: University Press of
New England, 1986), 24–28.
13
Alan Heimert, “Moby-Dick and American Political Symbolism,” American
Quarterly 15 (Winter 1963): 504, 507–8; Carolyn L. Karcher, Shadow over thePromised Land: Slavery, Race, and Violence in Melville’s America (Baton Rouge:Louisiana State University Press, 1980), 89.
14
For the circularity of the Mystic Fort, see David R. Wagner and Jack Dempsey,
Mystic Fiasco: How the Indians Won the Pequot War (Stoneham, MA: Digital
Scanning, 2004), 2, 90–91.
15
A version of this section appears in Yukiko Oshima, “Reading Israel Potter as
National Amnesia: What to the ‘Impounded Pequod’ Slave is the Fourth of July?,” SkyHawk (Japan Melville Study Center) 22 (2006): 5–14.
16
Herman Melville, Israel Potter: His Fifty Years of Exile, ed. Harrison Hayford,
Hershel Parker, and G. Thomas Tanselle (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press
and the Newberry Library, 1982), 164. Further citations of this work are given in thetext.
17
The name of the present-day Foxwoods Resort Casino run by Pequot survivors
can be seen as the Pequot having fulfilled their revenge to a certain extent. See Kim
Isaac Eisler, Revenge of the Pequots: How a Small Native American Tribe Created theWorld’s Most Profitable Casino (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2001)
18
William Apess, “The Indians: The Ten Lost Tribes,” in On Our Own Ground:
The Complete Writings of William Apess, a Pequot, ed. Barry O’Connell (Amherst:
University of Massachusetts Press, 1992), 113.
19
William Apess, “Indian Nullification of the Unconstitutional Laws of
Massachusetts Relative to the Mashpee Tribe; or, The Pretended Riot Explained,” in On
Our Own Ground, 239–40; Melville, Israel Potter, 166.
20
A version of this section appears in Yukiko Oshima, “Kurareru no Nyu Palestina to
Hokubei Senjumin” (“New Palestine and Native Americans in Clarel”), ed. Katsunori
Takeuchi and Tsutomu Takehashi. Kan-Taiseiyo no Souzouryoku: Ekkyou Suru
Amerikan Runessansu Bungaku (Transatlantic Imagination: Reconceptualizing theAmerican Renaissance as Literary Border Crossing). Tokyo: Sairyu-Sha, 2013, 283–
300.
21
Herman Melville, Clarel: A Poem and Pilgrimage in the Holy Land, ed. Harrison
Hayford, Hershel Parker, and G. Thomas Tanselle (Evanston, IL: Northwestern
University Press and the Newberry Library, 1991), 57. Further citations of this work
are given in the text. Similarly, Andrew Delbanco links Nathan’s obsession with Native
American mounds in the Midwestern landscape to his abandonment of Christianity:“[Nathan] was haunted by the sight of Indian mounds that ‘Dim showed across theprairie green / Like dwarfed and blunted mimic shapes / Of Pyramids at distanceseen,’ and began to drift away from the cold ancestral creed that had never satisfied hisneed for a vital faith.” Andrew Delbanco, The Puritan Ordeal (Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1989), 283.
22
Stan Goldman, Melville’s Protest Theism: The Hidden and Silent God in “Clarel”(DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1993), 82.
23
Ibid., 82.
24
Lawrence Buell, “Ecoglobalist Affects: The Emergence of US Environmental
Imagination on a Planetary Scale,” in Shades of the Planet: American Literature as
World Literature, ed. Wai Chee Dimock and Lawrence Buell (Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press, 2007), 227–48, quote at 244.
25
Delbanco, The Puritan Ordeal, 284.

Herman Melville’s “Pequot Trilogy”

65

26
Laurie Robertson-Lorant, Melville: A Biography (New York: Clarkson Potter,
1996), 546.
27
Hilton Obenzinger, American Palestine: Melville, Twain, and the Holy Land Mania(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999), 109.
28
Steven Salaita, The Holy Land in Transit: Colonialism and the Quest for Canaan(Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2006), 13–81, esp. 57–61.
29
For his criticism of Parkman’s racism, Melville wrote a letter of apology tothe editor, Evert A. Duyckink. Herman Melville, Correspondence, ed. Lynn Horth(Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press and the Newberry Library, 1993), 149.
30
Richard Slotkin, The Fatal Environment: The Myth of the Frontier in the Age ofIndustrialization, 1800-1890 (1985; rpt., Norman: University of Oklahoma Press,
1994), 129.
31
Timothy Dwight, “Greenfield Hill,” in Early American Poetry: Selection from
Bradstreet, Taylor, Dwight, Freneau, and Bryant, ed. Jane Donahue Eberwein (Madison:
University of Wisconsin Press, 1978), 181. It was natural for the nationalist Dwight,
who was a Congregationalist minister and later a president of Yale University, to praisethe development of white settlements in the area taken from the Pequot in part 4 of“Greenfield Hill,” entitled “The Destruction of the Pequods,” though Dwight explainsthat the “jealous” colonists coveted the Pequot’s fertile land and started an invasivewar.
32David Porter, Journal of a Cruise Made to the Pacific Ocean (Philadelphia, 1815),
quoted in T. Walter Herbert, Jr., Marquesan Encounters: Melville and the Meaning ofCivilization (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1980), 110.
33
Catharine Maria Sedgwick, Hope Leslie: or Early Times in the Massachusetts(1827; rpt., New York: Penguin, 1998), 359. Further citations of this work are givenin the text. Though the preface praises the Pequots’ pride and patriotism, the novel asa whole values white “civilization.” The Pequot survivors, like heroine Magawisca’ssachem father, who are hostile to whites, have to leave for the unknown West. Since she
refuses to convert to Christianity, even Magawisca, who fosters a sense of sisterhoodwith the titular white heroine and even sacrifices herself to protect a white boy, Everell,
is no exception. We can confirm the Pequots’ desires not just from Magawisca’s
vengeful sachem father but Magawisca as well, as she tells, “[W]hen the vengeancecomes, if it should come, remember it was provoked [by the English colonists]” (48).
Magawisca is revealed as yet another noble vanishing Indian, when she blesses theunion of Everell and Hope Leslie and disappears forever from their sight.” (Susan
Castillo, American Literature in Context to 1865 [New York: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011],
109.) There is a similarity between Dwight’s depiction of the tribe and Sedgewick’s:in spite of their relative sympathy toward the tribe, in their celebration of the progressof Christian civilization, there is no room for the Native Americans, especially such a
prideful tribe as the Pequot.
34
Herman Melville, Typee: A Peep at Polynesian Life, ed. Harrison Hayford, Hershel
Parker, and G. Thomas Tanselle (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press and theNewberry Library, 1968), 170. Further citations of this work are given in the text.
35
Herbert, Jr., Marquesan Encounters, 152.
36
Susan Scheckel, The Insistence of the Indian: Race and Nationalism in NineteenthCentury American Culture (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998).
37
Renée L. Bergland, The National Uncanny: Indian Ghosts and American Subjects(Hanover, NH: Dartmouth College, 2000), 3.
38
Robert Wallace, “William Reese Donation,” Extracts (February 2005): 14–15, n.
128.