When first asked to review Captive Histories: English, French, and Native Narratives of the 1704 Deerfield Raid, a primary source reader on the 1704 Deerfield raid in Western Massachusetts, I was skeptical about the utility of a book focused on one attack. As there are countless published captivity narratives from both the colonial and postcolonial periods in North America, what could a book focused on narratives from a specific instance, the 1704 raid, elucidate about captivity in general? Or even simply captivity in New England? Captive Histories responds to both of these initial criticisms and suggests that there is yet work to be done in the field. By including native oral traditions and less well-known English accounts, Evan Haefeli and Kevin Sweeney aim to illustrate the diversity of captivity experiences in Deerfield and suggest new ways to approach captivity studies in general.

Captive Histories is a follow-up to the author's well-received Captors and Captives: The 1704 French and Indian Raid on Deerfield (Amherst, MA, 2003) and, like it, aims to bring to light the complex and often competing perspectives in colonial New England. The Deerfield raid was one of many combined French and Indian attacks on New England in the first half of the eighteenth century, yet it is unique because of the breadth of primary source material as well as the inclusion of several different Indian groups in the attack. Alongside the English and Native narratives the authors include two French documents relating to the raid.

The authors note in their introduction that many of the lesser-known narratives contained in the volume have remained so because they do not follow the proscribed Puritan redemption model prevalent in other captivity narratives, like John Williams's “The Redeemed Captive” or Mary Rowlandson's “The Narrative of the Captivity and Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson.” The more well-known narratives, which usually fell under the hand of clerical editors before publication (Cotton Mather in John Williams's case), focus more on explaining the hand of God in both the fortunes and misfortunes of the captives, while excoriating the hand of Satan in the works of the captors. The lesser-known narratives, however, contain more anecdotal and ethnographic information, which, for the authors, separates them from the more well-known works and illustrates the diversity of opinion on captivity experiences in colonial New England.

This diversity of opinion becomes evident when reading the narrative of Stephen Williams alongside his father’s, John Williams. While the senior Williams's account differs from other narratives in that John spends more time discussing his French captors than his Native ones, his narrative is clearly religious in scope and carries heavy anti-Catholic overtones. The younger Williams, in his early to midteens at the time of his capture, describes his general resentment at his predicament rather than purporting a spiritual message. Yet, interestingly, the authors argue that Stephen's resentment was not the result of a general hatred of Indians, but rather the bitterness of a child in an uncomfortable situation. They note that while “Stephen's depiction of his [Pennacook] master lacked the vitriol of Mary Rowlandson's captivity narrative, he clearly did not want to stay with them” (160). From the inclusion of these competing narratives we get a more complex view about ideas of captivity and about captivity experiences as well.

The inclusion of Native narratives of the raid is perhaps the most innovative and exciting portion of the volume. As noted in the introduction, five different groups of Indians took part in the raid, and in this volume we get the perspective of two of those groups: Mohawks and Abenakis. From the Mohawks comes a retelling of the raid as a mission to recover a bell that was to be delivered to the Mohawks for a church at Kahnawake (near present-day Montreal). The bell was stolen en route to Canada and purchased by John Williams, who had it brought to Deerfield. In the Mohawk tradition, the raid was an attempt to return the bell to its rightful owners. The volume also includes a Mohawk retelling of the captivity of Eunice Williams, daughter of John Williams, who, unlike her father, remained “unredeemed” and lived most of her life as a Mohawk. In this narrative, the replacement of a lost family member by Eunice is stressed over the details of her captivity. In both this and the story of the bell, the authors argue that recovery and replacement, that is, the mourning war complex, and community are at the heart of Mohawk renderings of the Deerfield raid.

While many of the specific claims in these oral traditions have been challenged by historians, what is perhaps more important are the cultural cues we can discover in these traditions. Haefeli and Sweeney draw out some of these themes by analyzing the cultural similarities in the Native narratives (recovery and replacement in the Mohawk traditions) in lieu of focusing on factual inaccuracies. While we may not be able to know exactly the motivation of the Mohawks who participated in the raid on Deerfield in 1704, we do know from the oral traditions what would have been a culturally acceptable motivation for their participation.

Captive Histories challenges traditional notions about captivity in New England. By combining English, French, and Native narratives in a single volume on a single attack, the authors make an implicit call to scholars and students not only to investigate the actions of all the groups involved but to try to understand their perspectives and perceptions as well. Professors of upper-level undergraduate and graduate seminars will find this book useful in discussions about methodology, specifically in reference to the use and usefulness of different kinds of evidence. The inclusion of several helpful maps throughout the text and useful tables in the appendix adds to an already impressive volume.