{"title":"切断之路:1500-1800 年北美东部的土著战争》,作者 Wayne E. Lee(评论)","authors":"David J. Silverman","doi":"10.1353/soh.2024.a932558","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>The Cutting-Off Way: Indigenous Warfare in Eastern North America, 1500–1800</em> by Wayne E. Lee <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> David J. Silverman </li> </ul> <em>The Cutting-Off Way: Indigenous Warfare in Eastern North America, 1500–1800</em>. By Wayne E. Lee. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2023. Pp. xii, 287. Paper, $29.95, ISBN 978-1-4696-7378-3; cloth, $99.00, ISBN 978-1-4696-7377-6.) <p>The title of Wayne E. Lee’s excellent <em>The Cutting-Off Way: Indigenous Warfare in Eastern North America, 1500–1800</em> comes from his argument that the primary goal of Indian warfare in colonial-era eastern North America was “to cut off” individuals, small bands, and even entire villages (p. 3). The attacking party would usually retreat if it lost the element of surprise or sustained too many casualties, or if defensive reinforcements arrived. Native people’s reasons for war were various. They included quests for captives and plunder, the negotiation of tributary relationships, fights for control of territory or trade routes, blood revenge, and more. Lee argues convincingly that understanding these patterns must begin with deep ethnography, addressing Indigenous forms of subsistence, social organization, labor, governance, and cultural beliefs about war. He contends that a combination of decentralized polities, economies that required men to hunt and that produced meager horticultural margins, and limited means of transportation and storage did not permit Indians to form large armies that could conquer and hold territory in concentrated campaigns. Instead, wars involved hounding the enemy with usually small-scale seasonal strikes, sometimes for years. War was endemic. Sometimes, but only rarely, was it catastrophic.</p> <p>This book is remarkable in its depth and breadth. Chronologically, it ranges from first contact through the Revolutionary era, addressing practically every significant intertribal and Indian-colonial conflict east of the Mississippi River on record. Lee has a firm command of every major published primary and secondary source on the subject. He also draws on archaeology, environmental history, gender history, geography, material culture, political theory, and demographic history. This is old-fashioned ethnohistory in the best sense of the phrase.</p> <p><em>The Cutting-Off Way</em> is written and designed for a wide audience. Lee’s prose is crystal clear and refreshingly jargon-free. The University of North Carolina Press deserves praise for the book’s numerous carefully designed and placed maps. Though Lee engages in several historiographical debates <strong>[End Page 598]</strong> (including with this reviewer), he is never too technical. One of Lee’s interventions is his criticism of the longtime standard in the field, Patrick M. Malone’s <em>The Skulking Way of War: Technology and Tactics among the New England Indians</em> (Lanham, Md., 1991), for posing too stark a transition between Native tactics before and after European contact and for downplaying the strategic reasons for Native warfare in favor of emphasizing revenge. By contrast, Lee sees great continuity between ancient and colonial-era Indian ways of war. First, large-scale ritualized warfare coexisted with “the cutting-off way of war” in both periods (p. 2). Second, he cites ample archaeological evidence that precontact Indian warfare was terribly lethal, sometimes on a grand scale. Finally, he stresses political and economic considerations as drivers of Indigenous conflict. Such critical interventions should contribute to this book’s becoming a standard title on the syllabi of undergraduate and graduate courses and the reading lists of military history enthusiasts.</p> <p>Specialists will benefit not only from Lee’s convincing thesis but also from his innumerable pointed insights. For instance, he submits that the geographically distributed villages within tribal territories allowed Indians to come to each other’s defense in the event of a siege. Likewise, the purpose of palisades was less to hold off attackers indefinitely and more to buy time for reinforcements to arrive. Those palisades became far less useful and less often employed with the advent of steel axes, European siege guns, and lengthy sieges by colonial armies. When on the offensive, Native people’s need to provide for the sustenance of warriors, the favored tactic of ambush, and the goal of taking prisoners led attacking groups to set up base camps in enemy territory. Hunters and small ambushing parties would fan out from there, stash captives and...</p> </p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Cutting-Off Way: Indigenous Warfare in Eastern North America, 1500–1800 by Wayne E. Lee (review)\",\"authors\":\"David J. Silverman\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/soh.2024.a932558\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>The Cutting-Off Way: Indigenous Warfare in Eastern North America, 1500–1800</em> by Wayne E. Lee <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> David J. Silverman </li> </ul> <em>The Cutting-Off Way: Indigenous Warfare in Eastern North America, 1500–1800</em>. By Wayne E. Lee. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2023. Pp. xii, 287. Paper, $29.95, ISBN 978-1-4696-7378-3; cloth, $99.00, ISBN 978-1-4696-7377-6.) <p>The title of Wayne E. Lee’s excellent <em>The Cutting-Off Way: Indigenous Warfare in Eastern North America, 1500–1800</em> comes from his argument that the primary goal of Indian warfare in colonial-era eastern North America was “to cut off” individuals, small bands, and even entire villages (p. 3). The attacking party would usually retreat if it lost the element of surprise or sustained too many casualties, or if defensive reinforcements arrived. Native people’s reasons for war were various. They included quests for captives and plunder, the negotiation of tributary relationships, fights for control of territory or trade routes, blood revenge, and more. Lee argues convincingly that understanding these patterns must begin with deep ethnography, addressing Indigenous forms of subsistence, social organization, labor, governance, and cultural beliefs about war. He contends that a combination of decentralized polities, economies that required men to hunt and that produced meager horticultural margins, and limited means of transportation and storage did not permit Indians to form large armies that could conquer and hold territory in concentrated campaigns. Instead, wars involved hounding the enemy with usually small-scale seasonal strikes, sometimes for years. War was endemic. Sometimes, but only rarely, was it catastrophic.</p> <p>This book is remarkable in its depth and breadth. Chronologically, it ranges from first contact through the Revolutionary era, addressing practically every significant intertribal and Indian-colonial conflict east of the Mississippi River on record. Lee has a firm command of every major published primary and secondary source on the subject. He also draws on archaeology, environmental history, gender history, geography, material culture, political theory, and demographic history. This is old-fashioned ethnohistory in the best sense of the phrase.</p> <p><em>The Cutting-Off Way</em> is written and designed for a wide audience. Lee’s prose is crystal clear and refreshingly jargon-free. The University of North Carolina Press deserves praise for the book’s numerous carefully designed and placed maps. Though Lee engages in several historiographical debates <strong>[End Page 598]</strong> (including with this reviewer), he is never too technical. One of Lee’s interventions is his criticism of the longtime standard in the field, Patrick M. Malone’s <em>The Skulking Way of War: Technology and Tactics among the New England Indians</em> (Lanham, Md., 1991), for posing too stark a transition between Native tactics before and after European contact and for downplaying the strategic reasons for Native warfare in favor of emphasizing revenge. By contrast, Lee sees great continuity between ancient and colonial-era Indian ways of war. First, large-scale ritualized warfare coexisted with “the cutting-off way of war” in both periods (p. 2). Second, he cites ample archaeological evidence that precontact Indian warfare was terribly lethal, sometimes on a grand scale. Finally, he stresses political and economic considerations as drivers of Indigenous conflict. Such critical interventions should contribute to this book’s becoming a standard title on the syllabi of undergraduate and graduate courses and the reading lists of military history enthusiasts.</p> <p>Specialists will benefit not only from Lee’s convincing thesis but also from his innumerable pointed insights. For instance, he submits that the geographically distributed villages within tribal territories allowed Indians to come to each other’s defense in the event of a siege. Likewise, the purpose of palisades was less to hold off attackers indefinitely and more to buy time for reinforcements to arrive. Those palisades became far less useful and less often employed with the advent of steel axes, European siege guns, and lengthy sieges by colonial armies. When on the offensive, Native people’s need to provide for the sustenance of warriors, the favored tactic of ambush, and the goal of taking prisoners led attacking groups to set up base camps in enemy territory. Hunters and small ambushing parties would fan out from there, stash captives and...</p> </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/soh.2024.a932558\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/soh.2024.a932558","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
以下是内容的简要摘录,以代替摘要:评论者 断头路:1500-1800 年北美东部的土著战争》,韦恩-E-李著,大卫-J-西尔弗曼译。作者:韦恩-E-李。(教堂山:北卡罗来纳大学出版社,2023 年。第 xii、287 页。纸质版,29.95 美元,ISBN 978-1-4696-7378-3;布质版,99.00 美元,ISBN 978-1-4696-7377-6)。韦恩-E-李(Wayne E. Lee)出色的《切断之路:1500-1800 年北美东部的土著战争》(The Cutting-Off Way: Indigenous Warfare in Eastern North America, 1500-1800 )一书的标题来自于他的论点,即殖民时代北美东部印第安人战争的主要目标是 "切断 "个人、小部落甚至整个村庄(第 3 页)。如果失去了出其不意的因素或伤亡过大,或者防守援军到来,进攻方通常会撤退。土著人发动战争的原因多种多样。其中包括寻找俘虏和掠夺物、商谈部落关系、争夺领土控制权或贸易路线、血债血偿等等。Lee 令人信服地指出,要理解这些模式,必须从深入的人种学研究开始,研究土著人的生存形式、社会组织、劳动、治理以及关于战争的文化信仰。他认为,分散的政体、需要人类狩猎和生产微薄园艺产品的经济、有限的运输和储存手段,这些因素加在一起,不允许印第安人组建大规模军队,在集中的战役中征服并守住领土。相反,战争需要通过通常是小规模的季节性打击来追击敌人,有时甚至长达数年。战争是地方性的。战争有时是灾难性的,但很少发生。本书在深度和广度上都非常出色。从时间上看,本书从最初的接触一直写到大革命时期,几乎囊括了密西西比河以东所有重大的部落间冲突和印第安人与殖民地的冲突。李牢牢掌握了有关这一主题的所有主要已出版的原始和二手资料。他还借鉴了考古学、环境史、性别史、地理学、物质文化、政治理论和人口史等方面的知识。这是一部最经典的民族史学著作。切断之路》的写作和设计面向广大读者。李的散文清晰明了,没有专业术语,令人耳目一新。北卡罗来纳大学出版社为该书精心设计和放置了大量地图,值得称赞。虽然李参与了多场史学辩论 [第 598 页末](包括与本评论员的辩论),但他从未过于技术化。李的干预之一是批评该领域的长期标准--帕特里克-马龙(Patrick M. Malone)的《潜行的战争方式:新英格兰印第安人的技术和战术》(Lanham, Md., 1991 年)--在与欧洲人接触之前和之后的土著战术之间提出了过于鲜明的过渡,并且淡化了土著战争的战略原因,转而强调复仇。相比之下,李认为古代印第安人的战争方式与殖民时代的印第安人的战争方式之间有很大的连续性。首先,在这两个时期,大规模的仪式化战争与 "割据战争方式 "并存(第 2 页)。其次,他引用了大量考古证据,证明与外界接触前的印第安人的战争非常致命,有时甚至是大规模的。最后,他强调政治和经济因素是土著冲突的驱动力。这些批判性的干预应有助于本书成为本科生和研究生课程大纲以及军事史爱好者阅读书单上的标准书目。专家们不仅会从李的令人信服的论点中获益,也会从他无数尖锐的见解中获益。例如,他认为,部落领地内按地理位置分布的村庄可以让印第安人在被围困时相互支援。同样,设置栅栏的目的与其说是为了无限期地阻挡进攻者,不如说是为了给增援部队的到来争取时间。随着钢斧、欧洲攻城炮和殖民军队长时间围攻的出现,这些栅栏的作用和使用频率都大大降低。在进攻时,原住民需要为战士提供食物,他们喜欢采用伏击战术,并以抓获俘虏为目标,这使得进攻集团在敌方领土上建立了大本营。猎人和小型伏击队会从那里出发,藏匿俘虏和...
The Cutting-Off Way: Indigenous Warfare in Eastern North America, 1500–1800 by Wayne E. Lee (review)
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:
Reviewed by:
The Cutting-Off Way: Indigenous Warfare in Eastern North America, 1500–1800 by Wayne E. Lee
David J. Silverman
The Cutting-Off Way: Indigenous Warfare in Eastern North America, 1500–1800. By Wayne E. Lee. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2023. Pp. xii, 287. Paper, $29.95, ISBN 978-1-4696-7378-3; cloth, $99.00, ISBN 978-1-4696-7377-6.)
The title of Wayne E. Lee’s excellent The Cutting-Off Way: Indigenous Warfare in Eastern North America, 1500–1800 comes from his argument that the primary goal of Indian warfare in colonial-era eastern North America was “to cut off” individuals, small bands, and even entire villages (p. 3). The attacking party would usually retreat if it lost the element of surprise or sustained too many casualties, or if defensive reinforcements arrived. Native people’s reasons for war were various. They included quests for captives and plunder, the negotiation of tributary relationships, fights for control of territory or trade routes, blood revenge, and more. Lee argues convincingly that understanding these patterns must begin with deep ethnography, addressing Indigenous forms of subsistence, social organization, labor, governance, and cultural beliefs about war. He contends that a combination of decentralized polities, economies that required men to hunt and that produced meager horticultural margins, and limited means of transportation and storage did not permit Indians to form large armies that could conquer and hold territory in concentrated campaigns. Instead, wars involved hounding the enemy with usually small-scale seasonal strikes, sometimes for years. War was endemic. Sometimes, but only rarely, was it catastrophic.
This book is remarkable in its depth and breadth. Chronologically, it ranges from first contact through the Revolutionary era, addressing practically every significant intertribal and Indian-colonial conflict east of the Mississippi River on record. Lee has a firm command of every major published primary and secondary source on the subject. He also draws on archaeology, environmental history, gender history, geography, material culture, political theory, and demographic history. This is old-fashioned ethnohistory in the best sense of the phrase.
The Cutting-Off Way is written and designed for a wide audience. Lee’s prose is crystal clear and refreshingly jargon-free. The University of North Carolina Press deserves praise for the book’s numerous carefully designed and placed maps. Though Lee engages in several historiographical debates [End Page 598] (including with this reviewer), he is never too technical. One of Lee’s interventions is his criticism of the longtime standard in the field, Patrick M. Malone’s The Skulking Way of War: Technology and Tactics among the New England Indians (Lanham, Md., 1991), for posing too stark a transition between Native tactics before and after European contact and for downplaying the strategic reasons for Native warfare in favor of emphasizing revenge. By contrast, Lee sees great continuity between ancient and colonial-era Indian ways of war. First, large-scale ritualized warfare coexisted with “the cutting-off way of war” in both periods (p. 2). Second, he cites ample archaeological evidence that precontact Indian warfare was terribly lethal, sometimes on a grand scale. Finally, he stresses political and economic considerations as drivers of Indigenous conflict. Such critical interventions should contribute to this book’s becoming a standard title on the syllabi of undergraduate and graduate courses and the reading lists of military history enthusiasts.
Specialists will benefit not only from Lee’s convincing thesis but also from his innumerable pointed insights. For instance, he submits that the geographically distributed villages within tribal territories allowed Indians to come to each other’s defense in the event of a siege. Likewise, the purpose of palisades was less to hold off attackers indefinitely and more to buy time for reinforcements to arrive. Those palisades became far less useful and less often employed with the advent of steel axes, European siege guns, and lengthy sieges by colonial armies. When on the offensive, Native people’s need to provide for the sustenance of warriors, the favored tactic of ambush, and the goal of taking prisoners led attacking groups to set up base camps in enemy territory. Hunters and small ambushing parties would fan out from there, stash captives and...