Native American History, Malintzin, and Pocahontas

Introduction. This chapter begins with a discussion of Native American history, including some of the methodological challenges we face when studying this history, including A. how history gets told, and B. cultural baggage. We then turn to the Spanish conquest of the Aztec empire, which many later colonizers would attempt to use as a model for their efforts. The chapter explores the life of Malintzin, translator and advisor for the Spanish conquistador Hernán Cortés. The final section of the chapter discusses early English efforts to colonize Virginia, and the role Pocahontas played in those efforts; a comparison of the lives of Malintzin and Pocahontas, reveals how both women have been remembered and mythologized in the histories of Mexico and the United States, respectively.

Reading this chapter will enable you to:

  • understand and discuss some of the methodological issues involved in studying Native American history, including the sixteenth and seventeenth century histories of European contact and conquest
  • explain the events of the Spanish conquest of the Aztecs, including the role of Malintzin
  • describe the role of Pocahontas in the early years of English colonization of Virginia
  • compare and contrast the Spanish conquest of the Aztecs and the English colonization of Virginia
  • analyze the mythological portrayals of Pocahontas in historical context

1. “We Are Still Here”: Native Americans in History, Memory, and Today

Freewriting: How much do you know about Native American history? Where did you learn what you know? Why do you think you know what you know, and don’t know what you don’t know? What might you like to know more about?

How much do you know about Native American history? If you were educated in the United States, the chances are not very much. A 2015 study of how the histories of the indigenous peoples of North America are taught in kindergarten through the twelfth grade found that Social Studies textbooks “often present Indigenous Peoples in negative ways” and “minimize Indigenous Peoples’ culture and history in favor of preserving a Eurocentric narrative.” Meanwhile, state social studies standards (the framework used by each state to assess educational progress in schools) “overwhelmingly present Indigenous Peoples in a pre-1900 context and relegate the importance and presence of Indigenous Peoples to the distant past.”1

However, as Native American books, music, and movies tell us, “we are still here.”2 There are over seven million Native American people living in the United States today, meaning that, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, as of the 2010 census, “1.7 percent of all people in the United States identified as American Indian and Alaska Native, either alone or in combination with one or more other races.”3

Americans need to learn about Native American history so that the stories of these Americans can be included in the national narrative and to give all Americans crucial context for the world we live in today. For example, Saint Francis University is located in Loretto, Pennsylvania, on land that was once a borderland where the peoples of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy overlapped with the people today called “Susquehannock.” If “the name “Haudenosaunee” is unfamiliar, you may know this confederacy of Native peoples better as the Iroquois. However, “Iroquois” was never a term the peoples of that confederacy used to refer to themselves. The name “Susquehannock” may be familiar to Pennsylvanians because of the Susquehanna, a major river, which is named after the Susquehannock, who were encountered by Captain John Smith (of Virginia/Pocahontas fame) in 1608 during his travels. We do not know what the Susquehannock, also referred to by the English as Conestoga, called themselves.4

The names that many Native American peoples are known by today are quite often not the names they used to refer to themselves. For example, the people of largest Native American nation today, the Navajo Nation, called themselves “Diné,” meaning “the people” in their language. Spanish missionaries learned to call “Navahu” (meaning, “those who farm in the valley”) from their neighboring Tewa Pueblo peoples; in turn, the name “Navajo” became what they were known by, and that many continue to use today.5 Today there are about 400,000 members of Navajo Nation, making it the largest of the 574 federally recognized tribes in the U.S. today, in terms of population and land mass (the Navajo Nation encompasses over sixteen million acres in Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah).6 There has been a debate within the Navajo nation regarding whether or not to continue to use the term “Navajo,” which is commonly known and used today, or to change the Nation’s name to “Diné.” As one Navajo Nation delegate argued in 2017, ““The term is not a part of our traditional language. The Spaniards and the federal government gave us that identity as ‘Navajo.'” On the other hand, the name “Navajo” has been used for hundreds of years – including, often, by the people themselves.7

This issue of nomenclature reflects a broader discussion about names, words, and history. Sometimes students ask what the “right term” is for the Native peoples of what is now the United States. As discussed in Chapter Two, the name “Indian” came from a mistake on Christopher Columbus’ part. Some today argue that the term “Indian” should continue to be used because it has been used for so long, including as a legal term. For example, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, originally established in 1824, still exists today under the umbrella of a federal entity known as “Indian Affairs” which serves approximately 1.9 million native people in the 574 federally recognized tribes.8 Many believe, however, that the term “Indian” should no longer be used. The native peoples of Canada (who were often the same people as those of the northern United States, insofar as the border between the two nations did not exist until the 1800s) are often referred to as First Nations or indigenous people.9 The terms “Indigenous” or “Aboriginal” are used in Australia. In the United States, “The appropriateness of such naming terms as Aboriginal, Indian, Native American, American Indian, Amerindian, Indigenous, First Nations, or First Peoples largely depends who you ask.”10 In most cases, Native experts advise to refer to Native peoples by the specific termthe people in question use for their group, tribe, or nation.

As we move into our discussion of the first two centuries of contacts between Europeans, Africans, and Native Americans, and of the colonization of North America, keeping in mind that Native Americans “are still here” reminds us, first, that we are studying the history of actual, lived people, and, secondly, of some of the methodological problems with the discipline of History – problems which have contributed to the erasure of Native histories.

Studying the History of Contacts and Conquests: Methodological Considerations

As discussed in Chapter Two, there were perhaps fifty million Native people living in North, South, and Central America prior to the arrival of Europeans (recall that “low counters” and “high counters” disagree about this number). That number declined precipitously over the course of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (1500s and 1600s). It is difficult to tell the story of early contacts between Europeans and Native peoples without slipping into Eurocentric ways of thinking, in part because the vast majority of sources of information we have today about these events were written by Europeans, who were encountering completely new cultures with completely foreign languages and thus often themselves not fully aware of what they were seeing. Students of history face two methodological problems when we study these time periods, that of A. how history gets told and B. cultural baggage.

A. How history gets told. In Chapter Two, you were asked to freewrite on the statement “history is written by the winners.” In the case of the history of colonization, this has quite often literally been true. The academic discipline of History, as it arose in its modern, professional form in the nineteenth century (at the same time as many other academic disciplines), has generally relied on written documents. This alone privileges the perspectives of literate people – who, for much of world history were a small percentage of all people. Consider, too, which documents get saved – often those connected with the events or people who at the time are considered significant. Have you, for example, ever seen any letters written by your great-grandparents or their ancestors? Maybe, but maybe not. On the other hand, letters written by famous figures like Christopher Columbus or George Washington are not only extant but also readily available to read on the internet today (link).

History as a discipline often worked with the same assumptions about the world that informed the colonialism which it both documented and justified. “It is accepted in many disciplines that in the past, assumptions regarding racial and civilizational hierarchy informed a lot of thinking about how the world worked, what was worth studying in it and how it should be studied. Such assumptions also informed and justified the expansion of colonial rule in Asia, Africa and the Middle East until the mid-twentieth century.”11 (This could be expanded to include the Americas as well). Some argue that “historical thought itself, or at least its dominant academic mode, has thus become an agent of Eurocentrism.”12

B. Cultural baggage. Another methodological problem when studying the first two centuries of European colonization in the New World connects, again, to the sources of information available and used by historians. Most (though not all) of these sources were created by Europeans, who lived in societies that told them that European ways of doing things were superior, more advanced, and the only correct way. This was the “cultural baggage” that Europeans brought with them to the New World. For example, when European men encountered Native agricultural societies, they were often shocked and dismayed to find that Native American women were primarily responsible for farming. For example:

“In 1644, the Rev. John Megalopensis, minister at a Dutch Church in New Netherlands, complained that Native American women were ‘obliged to prepare the Land, to mow, to plant, and do every Thing; the Men do nothing except hunting, fishing, and going to War against their Enemies. . .’ Many of his fellow Europeans described American Indian women as ‘slaves’ to the men, because of the perceived differences in their labor, compared to European women. Indian women performed what Europeans considered to be men’s work. But, from the Native American perspective, women’s roles reflected their own cultural emphases on reciprocity, balance, and autonomy. Most scholars agree that Native American women at the time of contact with Europeans had more authority and autonomy than did European women.”13

Freewriting: Sources and Native Americans.  Consider the paragraph quoted above. Answer these questions:
-Who do you think wrote this paragraph?
-Which parts of the paragraph contain excerpts from a primary source? How do you know?
-How does the scholarly analysis of the quoted primary source differ from what the primary source says? Why? What is the author's reasoning? 

2. Malintzin, The Aztec Empire and Hernán Cortés

In order to understand European colonization of what is now the United States of America, it is necessary first to travel a bit farther south, to Mexico, and learn about the first Spanish conquest of the major Native American empire today known as the Aztec Empire. Why, you might ask, and what does this Mexican history have to do with U.S. history?

From the European point of view, the discovery of the new lands began a period of competition among European nations – many of which were themselves just consolidating into nations at this time period – for access to trade routes, lands to colonize, African and Native American sources of labor, and Native American souls to save (through conversion to Christianity). Political, social, and religious conflict within England meant that English colonization of North America, including the thirteen colonies that later formed the basis of the United State of America, occurred later than Portuguese, French, Dutch, and, especially, Spanish incursions into the Americas (North, Central, and South).

By the time that the English began to make serious attempts to colonize what is now the United States, English colonists had a firm blueprint that they tried (unsuccessfully) to re-enact. That blueprint was provided by Hernán Cortés and the stories that he and his supporters told about his conquest of the Aztec Empire, 1519-1521. What we know about the history of this conquest faces the same methodological problems mentioned above. We remember the name of the empire that Cortés conquered because of what the Spanish conquistadores called it – Aztec – when in fact, the people within this empire called themselves by multiple names, including Mexica (prounounced Me-SHEE-ka. This is where the name “Mexico comes from) and called the city that was at the center of their power Tenochtitlán (pronounced Tay-no-teekt-LAN), which in their language (Nahuatl) means “the place of prickly pear cactus.”14 Over 200,000 people lived in Tenochtitlán by the early 1500s.

Recent scholarship based on documents created at the time or shortly of the Spanish conquest of the Aztecs and drawn from both Native and Spanish perspectives tells us that this was no fast, easy defeat of “backwards” Native peoples by “advanced” Europeans. In fact, it took years, between the landing of Cortés’ forces on the Mexican coast in 1519 and the final defeat of the Aztecs in 1521. The Spanish conquistadores were supported by reinforcement troops – who had originally been sent from Spain after Cortés disobeyed royal orders not to proceed inland toward Tenochtitlán, but who had been incorporated into Cortés’ forces after Cortés defeated their leader.

Even more importantly, the Spanish gained significant number of Native allies in their struggle against the Aztecs. This may seem counterintuitive today – why would Native peoples ally with Europeans to fight one another? Remember, though, that Tenochtitlán sat at the center of an empire. Throughout world history, empires have been established not through peace and goodwill but through military force and economic and cultural exploitation. Many of the peoples of central Mexico had been subjugated by the Aztecs through warfare, forced to pay tribute, and even to send people to be ritually sacrificed at the great Templo Mayor in Tenochtitlán. For these Native peoples, therefore, it made sense to ally with the Spanish and these indigenous allies “proved to be a critical and necessary addition to the Spanish cause” though they are often forgotten in the telling of this history, leading one historian to call them “invisible warriors.”15

Perhaps the most important indigenous ally to Cortés and his forces, though, was one person – an enslaved Native American woman, Malintzin (also historically known as “La Malinche” and “Doña Marina.” The native peoples of Mexico, and of many of the Americas, did practice slavery, although this slavery did differ from European enslavement of Native Americans and Africans in some important ways which will be discussed later in the text. Malintzin was one of twenty women slaves given to the Spanish by another Native group in 1519. As an enslaved woman from a subjugated people, it probably made sense to Malintzin to help the Spanish. Her help proved invaluable – she served as a translator for Cortés, as well as a crucial advisor on matters such as geography and the cultures of the Native peoples of Mexico. Later, she was also Cortés’ mistress and mother of his child, one of the first children of mestizo or “mixed” (Native and European) heritage born in Mexico.16 She converted to Catholicism, took the baptismal name “Marina,” married one of Cortés’ officers, and died before reaching age 30.17 That an enslaved Native American woman played such a crucial role in history reminds us that those who have made history include men and women of all races and all socioeconomic backgrounds.

Just as Christopher Columbus became an important symbol of American, particularly Catholic and Italian American, national identity in the United States in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (discussed in Chapter Two), Malintzin/La Malinche/Doña Marina became a symbol associated with Mexican identity in the nineteenth century. After Mexican independence from Spain in 1821, some Mexican authors sometimes portrayed Malintzin as a traitor to the Mexican people. Others, later, called her “the mother of the cosmic race,” la raza cosmica, which is to say, the mother of the mixed-race, mestizo, people of Mexico.18

3. Pocahontas, the Powhatan empire, and John Smith

Freewriting: before reading onward, consider: what do you know about Pocahontas and/or the founding of Virginia and where did you learn it?

Over eighty years elapsed between the time when Malintzin translated for Cortés as he conquered the Aztec empire and the early 1600s, when the English finally began to successfully colonize parts of what is now the United States of America (there had been a failed attempt at what is today known as “the lost colony” of Roanoke, in the 1580s).19

European colonization of Virginia “arose out of European attitudes that had changed, in part, because of Spanish actions in the New World.”20 The English and Spanish were enemies at this time, and the English often justified their colonization of the New World as “saving” the Native inhabitants from the ill effects of Spanish colonization. In part this justification was religious – many English believed that their Protestant Christianity was the true way to save the souls of Native Americans, and that Catholicism was as bad or worse than Native spiritual practices.21

The first permanent English site established in what is now the United States of America was Jamestown, founded 1607, in the colony the English named Virginia. The name “Virginia” was picked, probably by the English explorer and privateer Sir Walter Raleigh in honor of Elizabeth I, the “Virgin queen,” probably around 1584, when she gave Raleigh permission to attempt to explore and colonize the area. Of course, the Native peoples living in Virginia had their own names for the land.22

The English person today most associated with early Jamestown is John Smith. Born in 1580, Smith had already led a colorful life well before arriving in Jamestown. He had fought in France for Dutch independence from Spain, sailed in the Mediterranean, joined Austrian forces to fight the Turks, and, while fighting in Transylvania, had been captured and sold as a military slave to a Turk; he escaped somehow (the circumstances are unclear because Smith was not always the most accurate chronicler of his own life), and traveled through Russia, Poland, Europe, and Northern Africa before returning to England in 1604-1605. He was not the leader of the for-profit English expedition that founded Jamestown, but he thought he should be. By the time the three English ships charged with colonizing Virginia made landfall in April 1607, Smith was a prisoner due to a failed mutiny attempt that he led. When the colony leaders opened sealed orders from the Virginia Company, though, they discovered that Smith was supposed to be on the governing council.23 As the colony struggled to survive, Smith was valuable because he was successful at trading with the nearby Native Americans, part of the powerful Powhatan Chiefdom, which included at least thirty different tribes ruled by Wahansunacock, the mamanatowick (paramount chief), who the English called and who has been remembered as Powhatan.24

Eventually, though, John Smith did something (again, for much of this we only have sources that depict the English point of view) that caused the Powhatan people to take him captive. Eventually, the Native people released him. Smith later would claim that the events which today make up the “Pocahontas myth” took place: that the chief threatened to take his life, but that the chief’s young daughter, enamored with Smith, successfully begged her father to spare Smith. There are several reasons to doubt the veracity of this version of events. First, Pocahontas would have been only about 12 years old at the time of these events. Secondly, John Smith told an almost identical story (a captor’s daughter “fell in love” with him and convinced her father to spare his life) about how he became free when enslaved earlier in his life. This same story was also the plot of a Scottish ballad that was popular at the time. Thirdly, he never told this story about Pocahontas “saving” his life until much later, when he wrote his autobiographies, despite regularly writing reports about events in Virginia at the time. Fourthly, there is evidence that, even if something like the Pocahontas myth happened, it may have been a ritual kinship ceremony. Powhatan/Wahansunacock was the leader of an empire of over thirty Native American tribes. Scholars believe that the chiefs of tribes who were forced by military might to submit to Powhatan/Wahansunacock may have had to go through a ritual whereby Powhatan “threatened to kill them” (never actually intending to do so) until a female relative (such as a daughter) ritually “begged” him to “show mercy.” This ritually demonstrated the power of Powhatan over the now subsidiary tribe.25 Powhatan might have been enacting a similar ritual with John Smith; if so, after the ritual Powhatan would have considered the English newcomers as under his rulership.

Scholar Kristina Downs notes the similarities between Pocahontas and Malintzin, who, as discussed earlier in this chapter, played such a crucial role in the Spanish conquest of the Aztec empire: “As teenagers they played pivotal roles in early contact between European and indigenous American cultures. Both mothered sons that became among the first documented children of mixed European/Indian ancestry. Neither is believed to have survived until age 30 and most remember these women by names that were not, in fact, their own.”26

“Pocahontas” was the Algonquian-language nickname (meaning “playful one” or “ill-behaved child”) given to the person who grew up as “Amonute,” with the private name “Matoaka.”27 (Here I will refer to her as “Pocahontas” for ease of comprehension). As with Maltinzin, Pocahontas did not leave behind any first-hand accounts of her experiences in her own words – both women were illiterate, as were most people in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Therefore, we must rely on accounts of their lives by European men; in the case of Pocahontas these men were John Smith and another colonist, William Strachey. Only one image of Pocahontas, commissioned by the Virginia Company, survives.

We know that Pocahontas was born around 1595. In 1607 and 1608, she began to befriend the English, including John Smith, and learn the English language. She may have been married to a Native American man named Kocoum in 1610. In Algonquian cultures, women generally chose their marital partners, and could also choose to leave their marriages at will; although we do not know what happened to this first marriage, if it even existed. In 1613, Englishmen kidnapped Pocahontas, hoping to ransom her for some English held captive by Powhatan. The English, however, were surprised when Powhatan chose not to ransom his daughter – this may have been because Powhatan had many children by different wives, and that in the matrilineal Algonquian society of Powhatan, Pocahontas could not have inherited her father’s power. Also in 1613, Pocahontas was baptized into Christianity, at which point she took the Christian name Rebecca. In 1614, Pocahontas married the Englishman John Rolfe. The could had a child, Thomas. In 1616, the family went to England. There, Pocahontas was introduced to the English court of King James I. She and John Rolfe intended to return to Virginia and establish a school to help teach her people about Christianity. However, at the beginning of that voyage, in 1617, at the age of about 21, Pocahontas died (possibly of pneumonia or smallpox) and she is buried in England.28

The myth of Pocahontas has been told and re-told, from her lifetime, to the Civil War era, “when both sides attempted to incorporate her into their own versions of an American national myth,” to the Disney movies of the late twentieth century.29 This chapter’s Reflection assignment asks you to examine some of the visual retellings of this myth, with the historical context and methodological considerations you’ve learned about this chapter in mind.


This chapter has covered some of the challenges and opportunities involved in studying the history of Native Americans. Next, it discussed the Spanish conquest of the Aztecs and Malintzin’s role in those events and in Mexican national memory. Then, the chapter turned to the early history of the Virginia colony and Pocahontas’ role in those events and in American national memory. The next chapter delves into European colonization in North America in the seventeenth century.

Reflection Assignment: Look at and read about the different images of Pocahontas compiled here: . Write a reflection of at least one full page (double spaced) that addresses some or all of the following questions; you may choose which questions to answer.

  1. In general, historians consider primary sources to be any source created at the time of the events at hand. Pick at least two depictions. Which of these depictions are primary sources and which are not? Explain your answer.
  2. How have depictions of Pocahontas changed over time? How have they stayed the same?
  3. Pick at least two depictions from different time periods. How do you think each depiction reflects the time period in which it was created?
  4. Reflect on the lives and myths of Pocahontas and Malintzin. What are some similarities and what are some differences?
  5. Review the section of this chapter entitled “Studying the History of Contacts and Conquests: Methodological Considerations.” Which considerations can you apply to the history of Pocahontas?
  6. Any other thoughts or reflections about Pocahontas in history, myth, and memory?

1 Sarah B. Shear, Ryan T. Knowles, Gregory J. Soden & Antonio J. Castro, “Manifesting Destiny: Re/presentations of Indigenous Peoples in K–12 U.S. History Standards,” Theory & Research in Social Education, 43:1 (2015), 68-101, DOI: 10.1080/00933104.2014.999849,

2Rebecca Nagle, “’We are still here’: Native Americans fight to be counted in U.S. census,” The Guardian, January 15, 2020,; Traci Sorell, We Are Still Here: Native American Truths Everyone Should Know (2021).

3 Tina Norris, Paula L. Vines, and Elizabeth M. Hoeffel, “The American Indian and Alaska Native Population: 2010,” 2010 Census Briefs, The U.S. Census Bureau, January 2012,

4David J. Minderhout and Andrea T. Frantz, Invisible Indians: Native Americans in Pennsylvania (Cambria Press, Amherst, NY: 2008): 53-56.

5“The Origins of the Name ‘Navajo,’” Peoples of the Mesa Verde Region, Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, 2014,

6“Navajo Nation Government,”; Felicia Fonseca, “Navajo Nation tops Cherokee to become largest tribe in U.S.,” Associated Press, May 19, 2021,;

7“Navajos Weigh Return to Old Name: Diné,” New York Times, December 17, 1992,; “Navajo Nation Council rejects bill to change tribe’s name to Diné Nation,” Indianz, April 19, 2017,

8“About Us,” U.S. Department of Interior: Indian Affairs,

9Marie-Céline Charron, “No perfect answer: Is it First Nations, Aboriginal or Indigenous?” National Public Relations, March 6, 2019,

10 Sarah B. Shear, Ryan T. Knowles, Gregory J. Soden & Antonio J. Castro, “Manifesting Destiny: Re/presentations of Indigenous Peoples in K–12 U.S. History Standards,” Theory & Research in Social Education, 43:1 (2015), 68-101, DOI: 10.1080/00933104.2014.999849,

11“Decolonising the Curriculum: What’s all the fuss about?” SOAS Blog,SOAS, University of London, January 18, 2017,

12Michael Hardt, “The eurocentrism of history,” Postcolonial Studies (2001) 4:2, 243-249, DOI: 10.1080/13688790120077533,

13“American Indian Women,” Teaching History, National History Education Clearinghouse,

14Camilla Townsend, “We Learned About the Aztecs from Their Conquerors – But New Research Is Letting Them Speak for Themselves,” Time, November 1, 2019, . See also David Bowles, “Not Aztecs and Probably Not Mexica,” Medium, May 29, 2017, and Thomas J. Brinkerhoff, “Reexamining the Lore of the ‘Archetypal Conquistador’: Hernan Cortes and the Spanish Conquest of the Aztec Empire, 1519-1521, The History Teacher 49:2 (February 2016), 169-187,

15Thomas J. Brinkerhoff, p. 176 and 177.


17Kristina Down, “Mirrored Archetypes: The Constrasting Cultural Roles of La Malinche and Pocahontas,” Western Folklore 67:4 (Fall 2008), pp. 397-414: 397,

18Ann McBride-Limaye, “Metamorpheses of La Malinche and Mexican Cultural Identity,” Comparative Civilizations Review 19:19 (Fall 1988), available at; “Latinos: The Cosmic Race,” Latino USA, April 25, 2014,; José Vasconselos, “La raza cósmica: Misión de la raza iberoamericana/Notas de viajes a la América del Sur” (Madrid: Agencia Mundial de Librería, 1925), available at

19Livia Gershon, “Pottery Fragments May Hold Clues to Roanoke Colonists’ Fate,” Smithsonian Magazine, November 9, 2020,

20Kristina Down, “Mirrored Archetypes: The Constrasting Cultural Roles of La Malinche and Pocahontas,” Western Folklore 67:4 (Fall 2008), pp. 397-414: 397,, p. 402.

21“The Black Legend,” Encyclopedia Britannica,

22“Questions about Virginia,” Library of Virginia,

23“John Smith,” Historic Jamestown: Jamestown Rediscovery,

24“Chronology of Powhatan Indian Activity,” Historic Jamestowne, National Park Service,

25Camilla Townsend, “The True Story of Pocahontas,” Smithsonian Magazine, March 23, 2017, See also Camilla Townsend, Pocahontas and the Powhatan Dilemma (New York: Hill and Wang, 2005) and Ethan Schmidt, Review of Camilla Townsend, Pocahontas and the Powhatan Dilemma, AmIndian, H-Net Reviews, January 2009,

26Kristina Down, “Mirrored Archetypes: The Constrasting Cultural Roles of La Malinche and Pocahontas,” Western Folklore 67:4 (Fall 2008), pp. 397-414: 397,

27Camilla Townsend, “The True Story of Pocahontas,” Smithsonian Magazine, March 23, 2017,

28“Life Portrait of Pocahontas,” Virginia Museum of History and Culture,

29Down, p. 405