The Marriage of Pocahontas: Creating an American Myth

Our 2026 Burke Intern, Lillian Steinhaus, spent part of her summer here at the Alice taking a deep dive into "The Marriage of Pocahontas," an 1855 engraving by John McRae after a painting by Henry Brueckner. As Lillian learned, this mid-19th century depiction of the 1614 marriage of Pocahontas and John Rolfe has a lot to tell us about what Americans at that time thought about their own past and the role of Native Americans in United States history.

The Artist

John McRae was born in Scotland around 1816. He later moved to the US where he lived in New Jersey and ran a publishing company based in New York. His career as a print publisher and engraver spanned the mid 19th century, and he specialized in engravings of historical scenes and portraits. He was married twice to two sisters, Elizabeth and Henrietta White, and had a total of seven children, five of whom survived. He died in 1892.

Very little is known about the original painting or its artist, Henry Brueckner. The painting is believed to have been owned at one time by the former New York State Governor, Nelson Rockefeller, and donated to him by the state.

The Medium

Line engraving was invented in the late 15th century in both Germany and Italy and was based on Roman and Greek decorative engraving techniques. Two engraving traditions emerged in the 17th century, which included printable reproductions of paintings and portraiture printing. “The Marriage of Pocahontas” is an example of a print reproduction of a painting; demand for this type of engraving, which made art accessible to a mass audience, grew throughout the 18th century. In the 19th century there was a focus on large plate prints of popular paintings which were able to be produced by a variety of techniques.

Line engraving was created using a steel rod with a sharpened tip to cut into the metal, removing sections little at a time. The plate could then be inked and wiped, which would leave the ink only in the grooves so it could be impressed on the desired surface. In the 19th century artists developed a technique of coating the copper plate with steel which was then engraved on. This allowed for the durability of steel with the relative ease of engraving on copper.

The Content

McRae produced a “Key to the Marriage of Pocahontas” to help viewers identify the individuals depicted in the engraving.

Marked as number 1 on the key are the halberdiers. A halberd is a close combat weapon that consists of a sharp axe blade on a long pole. Becoming a halberdier typically required a certain amount of training and was mainly reserved for officers. By the 17th century, halberds were used ceremonially and were carried by the bodyguards of important people. In Jamestown, 50 halberdiers served as guards of the new governor, Thomas West, in 1610.

The second person identified is Sir Thomas Dale, who can be seen sitting in front of the halberdiers with his hand on his sword. Dale was deputy governor of Virginia between 1611 and 1616 and was also a member of the Council of State from 1612 to 1616. The Council of State was a small body of appointed men who served as the Virginia Company’s governing body in managing day-to-day affairs. Dale was known as being a strict disciplinarian in Jamestown, issuing harsh military and civil regulations as well as leading many campaigns against the Indigenous tribes of the region. He began his military career serving in the English army in the Netherlands, and he became a captain by 1594. Dale was knighted by King James I in 1606 and received a three-year post in Virginia in 1611. He was the acting governor of Jamestown at the time of the marriage between John Rolfe and Pocahontas in 1614. He returned to England in 1616 with Rolfe and Pocahontas and died three years later leading an English army on the coast of India.

Third is the priest Alexander Whittaker (1585-1616). He settled in Jamestown in 1611 where he established two churches. He was known as the “apostle of Virginia” and was responsible for the conversion and baptism of Pocahontas. In this engraving he is depicted presiding over the marriage of Rolfe and Pocahontas, yet some accounts suggest it was Richard Buck, another Jamestown minister, who officiated the wedding.

Number 4 is “Mrs. John Rolfe and Child.” John Rolfe’s first wife, Sarah Hacker, accompanied him on the 1609 trip to Jamestown aboard the ship ‘The Sea Venture’. This ship was the third supply of colonists to Jamestown, and they were shipwrecked off the islands of Bermuda. It was there that Hacker gave birth to their daughter who was baptized by Reverend Richard Buck in February of 1610. The child died soon afterwards, quickly followed by Hacker either en route to, or just after arriving in, Virginia on May 24, 1610.

Number 5, “Mrs. E^d  Easton and Child,” have not been identified. Sixth are “choristers,” who appear to be two young English children, reading from a book of song.

Seventh are the “bridesmaids” in imagined Native American dress, with feathers in their hair. They are followed by Pocahontas (8) and John Rolfe (9). He points and faces upwards, as she looks down. She appears to be wearing a white dress with a long veil and a peacock feather in her hair. This could possibly be interpreted as an artistic rendering of the supposed blending of white and Indigenous cultures that Pocahontas came to represent. 

Number 10, the “Indian attendants,” are depicted in the background and only their faces can be seen. They are both wearing feathered headdresses, and one is holding a long spear with what appears to be feathers attached at the end. Number 11, Captain George Percy, was a settler in Jamestown from Sussex England, who was president of the Council of State from 1609 to 1610, and deputy governor in 1611.

Number 12 is “Brother to Pocahontas” but does not specify which of her brothers this is supposed to represent. Number 13 is labeled as Henry Spitman. No such person has been identified but a Henry Spelman, who sailed to Jamestown as part of the Third Supply in 1609 at the age of 14, was an early interpreter and documenter of Jamestown. Number 14 is William Spence. He was an early colonist in Jamestown who arrived on the first supply mission in 1608. He was a tobacco farmer/inspector and member of the local militia as well as the first assembly of the Virginia House of Burgesses in Jamestown.

Next to Spence is 15, Thomas Savage (sometimes spelt Salvage or Savadge). He was an English interpreter for the colony. He arrived with the First Supply of Jamestown in 1608 at the age of 13 and was supposed to work as a laborer. Instead, he was given to Powhatan chief of Tsenacomoco (a political alliance of Algonquian-speaking Virginia tribes that occupied the area the English took as Jamestown), by Captain Christopher Newport. He lived there for three years, learning the language and customs. As Anglo-Indian relations began to deteriorate, Powhatan laid siege to James Fort, which created a famine in the colony. Fearing for his safety, Savage fled to Jamestown where he played a crucial role negotiating between the two powers to end the fighting between the English and Pamunkey tribe in March of 1614. He may also have been present when Captain Samuel Argall kidnapped Pocahontas in 1613.

Little is known about “Master Sparkes,” number 16, or “Thomas Powell with wife and child,” number 17. A pamphlet issued with the key states that Sparkes “had been co-ambassador with Rolfe to the court of Powhatan,” and Thomas Powell appears on a list of settlers from the Third Supply (August 1609).

Number 18, “Mrs. Horton and Grandchild” appears on the list of settlers from the Third Supply. Nineteen is Sir Thomas Gates, who served as governor of Virginia in 1610, and then as Lieutenant Governor from 1611 to 1614. He was born in southwest England and served in the English army in the West Indies and was knighted in 1596. He was an original investor in the Virginia Company of London, which was a joint-stock company chartered by King James I in 1606 in order to establish a colony in North America.

Opachisco, an uncle to Pocahontas and brother to Chief Powhatan, is number 20. Number 21 is marked as “a younger brother to Pocahontas.” He is holding a spear. Both have cloth draped around their waists, with their upper bodies bare, and two feathers in their hair. Opachisco has an earring, and a pipe lies on the ground between his legs. A bow and a sheath of arrows lay at their feet.

Implications of the Stereotype of "The Indian"

To understand the meaning and implications of the depictions of the people in this engraving, it is important to understand the larger framework within which they were produced. Historian Robert Berkhofer, in his 1978 book The White Man’s Indian, discusses how the concept and term “Indian” is a white invention that perpetuates stereotypes and flattens very diverse sets of people. He discusses how the first images of the Indian came from Christopher Columbus, who believed he was in Asia and so called all people he encountered “los indios.” Berkhofer describes how Europeans, including the Spanish, English, and French, all had similar worldviews, and viewed Native Americans in terms of their society. They compared native peoples to their standards of civilization and religion (Christianity), by which their value was determined, “conceiving of Indians in terms of their deficiencies according to White ideals rather than in terms of their own various cultures.” By the time of the founding of Jamestown in 1607, the English had preconceived notions of what “the Indian” was going to be like based on descriptions from figures like Columbus. But to what extent did these early portrayals from Columbus and other such figures influence and confirm the settler’s beliefs about Indigenous people, influence their actions towards, and cement stereotypes about “the Indian”? 

Berkhofer describes how two common images of “the Indian” came to prevail: that of the “good Indian” and of the “bad Indian.” Both were used to stress or justify certain actions. The “bad” depictions usually relied on comparing native people or their actions to barbarity, the devil, hostility, or savagery. The “good” depictions emphasized the naivety of the native people, describing them as docile or ignorant. The dual use of the good and bad image of “the Indian” were implemented to achieve certain ends. For example, the bad image was used to show the need for Indigenous conversion to Christianity, and the good image was used to show their capability of such conversion. The dual imagery was also used to justify removal and extermination of Indigenous people.

The use of both images can be seen in the writing of Alexander Whitaker, the priest who is portrayed in the engraving. When talking about the need to convert Indigenous people to Christianity he emphasizes their nakedness as the “shame of their sinne,” their evil character which prompted them to “lie, deceive and steale” claiming they have learned such things from “their master the divell.” This characterization serves to convince a European population that white intervention is necessary in order to correct these misguided people as seen through the lens of Christianity. To prove that all hope is not lost, that the Indigenous people are capable of such reconfiguration, he alludes to the “good” image of “the Indian.” He writes, “let us not thinke that these men are so simple as some have supposed them: for they are of bodie lustie, strong, and very nimble.” By appealing to their strength and hardworking nature he is trying to convince his audience that efforts for conversion would be successful and are therefore necessary. He calls them “a very understanding generation, quick of apprenehsion […] subtile in their dealings, exquisite in their inventions, and industrious in their labour.” He thinks them misguided, but also thinks them receptive to new teachings. From this example it can be seen how the stereotypes created about indigenous people were utilized and controlled in such a manner as to manipulate political outcomes and garner public support for certain actions, such as the Indian Removal policy of 1830. 

Romanticism and the Noble Savage

The 19th century saw the rise of the Romantic movement in art and literature, which sought to evoke emotion and sentiment in the viewer or reader. The Romanic movement originated in Europe, and for the American author and artist there was a desire to portray distinctly American subjects which would mirror what they felt was the great social and political achievements of the American nation. Much of the art created during the Romantic era sought to portray the beauty and nostalgia evoked by nature. In Europe, this included things such as old ruins. For the American artist, the Noble Savage was an ideal subject. There was a general conception that “the Indian” was rapidly extinguishing before the onslaught of white civilization. This created nostalgia and pity around the “dying race,” and the general portrayal of “the Indian” shifted from the bloodthirsty to the noble savage. It was easier to romanticize “the Indian” once he no longer posed an active threat, and after Indian removal of the 1830’s the east was able to go about doing so. Even though native people still existed and lived in all parts of the country, there was, and still is, a belief that Indians only existed outside of white civilization, which at the time meant the far untouched West. 

The narrative that “the Indian” was dying before the expansion of White civilization was a popular one amongst the Romantics and promoted a sense of urgency to capture the Noble Savage before his disappearance. Despite the sympathy, it was seen as an inevitable conclusion. Because of this, there was a lot of art produced during this time period depicting Native Americans. However, because it was created through a lens of what white artists thought the Noble Savage should be, it should not be interpreted as an accurate depiction of what Native Americans looked or lived like. Additionally, the notion that Indians cannot coexist with white civilization promotes native erasure, and suggests that Native Americans  are a group that is historically stagnant.

“The Marriage of Pocahontas” was created during this period of 19th century Romanticism, when attitudes towards Native Americans were different than those in the time period it is depicting. So, it is interesting to see the interaction of the two ideologies in one image.  

Tropes in the Story of Pocahontas

The stories that have come to be told about Pocahontas are integral to an American foundational myth. Her story has become one of the first love stories of the “new world” which made the foundation of America possible.The romanticized story of Pocahontas and her encounters with the English has been retold and refigured many times throughout the history of America. The story of Pocahontas is often told in two parts: her friendship and saving of John Smith, and then her conversion to Christianity, marriage to John Rolfe, and trip to England.

Her conversion and assimilation to White society is seen as approval of White colonization and Indigenous erasure. It serves to justify and conceal the hostility of Indigenous-white relations behind an eroticized myth of encounter. The story of Pocahontas is told as a love story between colonizer and colonized, excluding the notion of rape, genocide, and cultural destruction. By portraying it in such a way, it makes the foundation of America particularly romantic and lessens the weight of colonial guilt. In the stories told, Pocahontas is situated between societies: too civilized for the natives, and too native for the whites. She is represented as a noble savage who sacrificed herself to save white civilization from the “hostile savagery” that Indigenous people represented. It also served to justify white colonization and expansion as inevitable.

The “new world” is largely represented as a feminized space both in language and depictions. The continent was something that could be conquered and penetrated by the Europeans. The conquest and dominance of the American land is represented or mirrored by the conquest and control of the indigenous female body, which is seen in the story of Pocahontas.

If white society and “Indianness” are seen as mutually exclusive, Pocahontas represents an in-between state of the two cultures. Under this belief, assimilation marks a different kind of death. This is why her assimilation is seen as a success and reflective of the larger colonization of the continent. This ideology is reflected in later policy of the early 20th century in the US with the residential school system that sought to “kill the Indian and save the man.” The notion that Indians cannot coexist with white civilization promotes native erasure and suggests that Native Americans are a group that is historically stagnant or ahistorical.  

Pocahontas’s situation between cultures can be seen in the engraving. Her white dress and veil are in the European tradition which signifies how she has been Christianized. However, her dress does not seem to be as proper or traditional as the clothing of some of the white women depicted in the engraving. This informality in dress may correspond to the wilderness that she represents. This notion is furthered by the presence of what appears to be a peacock feather in her hair. This accessory, which is donned by all of the other Indian figures featured, ties her to the Indianness from which she can never fully divorce herself. This inclusion of Anglo and Indian features in the portrayal of Pocahontas cement her between the two cultures, never fully belonging to either. While less formally dressed than some of the English figures, she is more clothed than the other Indigenous people depicted. The two indigenous men in the foreground, previously identified as Opachisco and Pocahontas’s brother are seen crouched down, with minimal clothing. They embody a lot of the stereotypes that are classic to depictions of Native Americans: minimal dress suggesting a lack of civility, feathers worn in their hair, a bow at their feet, spears, and a pipe can be seen on the ground next to Opachisco. All of these items are prevalent in many depictions of Native Americans, but not necessarily accurate to the group of people or time period depicted. In this engraving, the other native people depicted embody the “uncivilized” state to which Pocahontas is the exception.

The tropes that are present in the mythologized stories about Pocahontas can be seen in literature and film throughout the 20th century with the trope of the Indian Princess. Across many different examples and forms of media this trope is present with key features. In her book, Killing the Indian Maiden: Images of Native American Women in Film, author Elise Marubio identifies serval key aspects to the archetype of the Indian Princess. She describes her as a young native woman who is situated between her own culture and that of the European or American. This positioning makes her a symbol of the possibility of merging between the two cultures. She often has qualities such as innocence, beauty, virtue, and a connection to nature which draws the white characters to her. She is in stark contrast to the rest of the Indian characters who are depicted as cruel and untrustworthy. She embodies the Noble Savage, serving as a bridge between the two cultures, yet is unable to entirely divide from the one to integrate into the other. The film normally ends with her death, which signifies the notion that the Indian must die in order for white civilization to prosper.  

All of these tropes are present in the common stories surrounding Pocahontas. With centuries of reiteration and reproduction, it is no wonder how deeply embedded these tropes and stereotypes are in the mythologization of America and to our understanding of its history. It is clear how the stories of Pocahontas that often get told both laid the groundwork for, as well as exacerbated, these tropes in popular media. Pocahontas may really be seen as the original and ultimate “Indian Princess.”

Who Was the Real Pocahontas?

It can be difficult to disentangle the real Pocahontas from the layers of myth that have been built up around her. Various sources suggest Pocahontas (originally named Amonute and also known as Matoaka) was somewhere between ten and fifteen years old in 1610 and was married to a man named Kocoum of the Potomac tribe, who is described by colonist Willian Strachey (1575-1621) as a “private Captaine.” Some evidence also suggests she had a son prior to her capture by the English. It is unclear whether Kocoum was murdered after her capture, or if this marriage was considered pagan and thus illegitimate in the eyes of the Europeans, allowing her to marry an Englishman.

Captain Samuel Argall of the Jamestown colony succeeded in kidnapping Pocahontas by tricking her into taking a tour of a British ship, the Treasurer, in 1613 accompanied by native people she thought she could trust. His goal was to use her to leverage negotiations with her father Powhatan. Argall’s own account states that “she grew ‘pensive and discontented’” Following her capture. Oral history accounts state that she was raped while being held captive, potentially by Sir Thomas Dale, and that her son Thomas was not fathered by John Rolfe. This is supported by the birth date of Thomas Rolfe not being recorded while the marriage date of Pocahontas and John Rolfe is recorded in accordance with the Christian custom.

Pocahontas was converted to Christianity, baptized by Reverend Whitaker, and given the name Rebecca around 1613, prior to her marriage to John Rolfe. She gave birth to her son Thomas in 1614 or 1615, and they traveled to England in 1616 to promote Jamestown, where she met the Rolfe family as well as Queen Anne. She died in 1617, possibly from a lung issue, en route back to Virginia.

The famous story of Pocahontas saving John Smith by throwing herself in harm’s way was only recounted years after her death. John Smith wrote about the instance in his 1624 Generall Historie of Virginia, over fifteen years after the supposed incident, despite having written several other accounts during that time period in which it was not mentioned. Accounts from other early colonists do not mention such an event either. Scholars have debated how much of that story is true. Some think it never happened and was a fabrication or was written to achieve different political or legacy goals. Others think it was not a fabrication, but a misinterpretation of a sort of adoption ritual.