Contents

1. Overview
2. Etymology
3. Cultural Impact

The Powhatan Attack on the English Colony of Virginia

Indian Massacre of 1622

Part of the British colonization of the Americas and the Anglo-Powhatan Wars

A 1628 engraving by Matthäus Merian the Elder attempts to capture the grim reality of the massacre, though one suspects the true horror eluded his copper plate.

Location: Colony of Virginia Date: 22 March 1622; 403 years ago (1622-03-22) Target: English settlers, those unfortunate enough to be in the wrong place at precisely the wrong time. Attack type: Massacre Deaths: 347 settlers, a significant and rather inconvenient reduction in the colonial workforce. Perpetrators: Powhatan tribesmen , driven to a predictable breaking point. Motive: Colonial encroachment on Powhatan lands, an entirely foreseeable consequence of unchecked expansion.

The event infamously known as the Indian massacre of 1622 unfolded within the nascent English Colony of Virginia on a seemingly ordinary March 22, in the year 1621/22 according to the prevailing calendar system (O.S./N.S. ). It wasn’t merely an attack; it was a calculated, devastating blow. The English explorer John Smith , despite not being an eyewitness to the carnage, later chronicled the events in his History of Virginia. His account paints a picture of chilling deception: Powhatan warriors, he wrote, “came unarmed into our houses with deer, turkeys, fish, fruits, and other provisions to sell us.” This guise of peaceful commerce, a seemingly benign gesture of trade and goodwill, was a cunning prelude to the true intent. Once inside the unsuspecting English homes and settlements, the warriors swiftly seized any available tools or weapons – objects that had perhaps been traded to them by the very settlers they now faced – and proceeded to kill every English settler they encountered. This indiscriminate slaughter spared no one, encompassing men, women, and children of all ages, shattering the fragile illusion of coexistence.

This coordinated series of surprise attacks was orchestrated and led by Opechancanough , the astute and increasingly frustrated paramount chief of the Powhatan Confederacy . The combined assaults resulted in a staggering death toll of 347 individuals, a statistic that represented a quarter of the entire population of the Colony of Virginia at the time. A rather inconvenient loss, one might say, for a colony struggling to establish a foothold.

Jamestown, Virginia , founded with great ambition in 1607, held the distinction of being the first successful, if barely functional, English settlement in North America . It served as the capital of the Colony of Virginia , a rather grand title for what was often a desperate outpost. The colony’s burgeoning tobacco economy was the engine of its expansion, yet it was also its undoing. Tobacco cultivation, as anyone with a modicum of foresight could have predicted, rapidly degraded the land, creating an insatiable demand for new territory. This relentless, almost biological, drive for expansion inevitably led the settlers to encroach further and further upon the ancestral lands of the Powhatan , a provocation that, with hindsight, made the subsequent attack not just probable, but virtually guaranteed. One might even call it a natural consequence, given the circumstances.

Background

When the English colonists first established their settlement in 1607, the local indigenous tribes initially displayed a pragmatic willingness to engage in trade. They provided essential provisions to the struggling Jamestown colonists, a lifeline for those ill-prepared for the rigors of a new world. In return, they sought the coveted metal tools and various manufactured goods that the Europeans possessed, a mutually beneficial, if inherently unbalanced, exchange.

The Virginia Company of London , the corporate entity bankrolling this ambitious colonial venture, had a singularly focused objective: the survival and, ideally, the profitability of its investment. To this end, the company’s directives emphasized the necessity for the colonists to maintain at least a semblance of civil relations with the powerful Powhatan Confederacy . Both the Powhatan and the English, after initial skirmishes and misunderstandings, eventually recognized the potential for reciprocal benefits through trade, particularly once the immediate hostilities subsided. The paramount chief explicitly requested metal hatchets and copper from the colonists in exchange for foodstuffs, a clear indication of the value placed on European technology.

However, not all English leaders shared the same perspective as the more pragmatic John Smith . Figures like Thomas Dale and Thomas Gates , who arrived later and often held military backgrounds, approached the Powhatan Confederacy with a decidedly different mindset. For these men, the indigenous population was less a potential trading partner and more, as they saw it, a “military problem” to be managed, if not outright subdued. This fundamental divergence in approach laid the groundwork for future conflict, a conflict that, again, was entirely predictable for anyone observing with even a hint of disinterest.

The Powhatan themselves, it must be said, were far from naive. They harbored a deep skepticism towards these European newcomers, viewing them with a justifiable hostility. They understood, with a clarity the English often lacked, that the colonists’ stated purpose of “trade” was merely a thin veil for a more insidious agenda: to “possess” their ancestral lands. As the venerable Chief Powhatan , a man whose wisdom was forged in the crucible of repeated conflict, eloquently articulated:

“Your coming is not for trade, but to invade my people and possess my country…Having seen the death of all my people thrice… I know the difference of peace and war better than any other Country. [If he fought the English, Powhatan predicted], he would be so haunted by Smith that he can neither rest eat nor sleep, but his tired men must watch, and if a twig but break, every one cry, there comes Captain John Smith; then he must fly he know not whether, and thus with miserable fear end his miserable life.”

This was not a plea, but a statement of stark reality, a prophecy of the inevitable struggle that would define their interactions. He recognized the insatiable nature of the English ambition and the devastating impact it would have on his people, a grim foresight that would prove tragically accurate.

First Anglo-Powhatan War

In 1610, the Virginia Company of London , ever eager to consolidate its control and perhaps assuage its European conscience, issued new instructions to Thomas Gates , the recently appointed colonial governor. These directives mandated the Christianisation of the native peoples and their eventual, seamless absorption into the expanding colonial structure. A rather ambitious and, frankly, arrogant plan, considering the cultural chasm between the two groups. As for Chief Powhatan , Gates was explicitly told: “If you finde it not best to make him your prisoner yet you must make him your tributary , and all the other his weroances [subordinate chiefs] about him first to acknowledge no other Lord but King James .” The underlying message was clear: submission, by force or by guile, was the only acceptable outcome.

Upon his arrival in Jamestown , Governor Gates, faced with the stark reality of the struggling settlement, initially judged the company’s grand plan to be utterly infeasible. He made the drastic decision to evacuate the entire settlement. As the disheartened colonists began their journey down the James River , heading towards the uncertain freedom of the open sea, they were met by a fortuitous, or perhaps ill-fated, encounter. Off Mulberry Island , they intercepted the incoming fleet of Thomas West, 3rd Baron De La Warr . De La Warr, assuming command as the new governor, promptly reversed Gates’s decision, ordering the reoccupation of the fort. His strategy was less about negotiation and more about domination; he immediately began plotting the systematic conquest of the surrounding indigenous tribes.

In July 1610, De La Warr dispatched Gates to confront the Kecoughtan people. The ensuing engagement, a rather sordid affair, saw “Gates lur[ing] the Indians into the open by means of music-and-dance act by his drummer, and then slaughter[ing] them.” This brutal tactic marked the true beginning of what would later be known as the First Anglo-Powhatan War , a conflict characterized by escalating violence and a profound lack of respect for indigenous life.

During this period of intense conflict, a group of colonists under the command of Samuel Argall achieved a significant, if morally dubious, victory: they captured Pocahontas , the beloved daughter of Chief Powhatan . She was held hostage, a strategic pawn in the colonial game, until her father would accede to their demands. The English, ever confident in their superior position, “demanded that all Powhatan captives be released, return all English weapons taken by his warriors, and agree upon a lasting peace.” A rather one-sided negotiation, wouldn’t you say?

While in English captivity, Pocahontas underwent a profound transformation, or perhaps, an astute adaptation. She was instructed in the intricacies of the English language and customs, and, critically, converted to the Anglican religion, adopting the Christian name Rebecca. It was during this period that she met John Rolfe , a prominent English settler. Rolfe, with a keen eye for both colonial stability and personal advancement, famously penned a letter articulating his belief that a marriage to Pocahontas was the key to maintaining peace between the perpetually warring Powhatan and English. He framed his desire not as “unbridled desire of carnal affection but for the good of the colony and the glory of God. Such a marriage might bring peace between the warring English and Powhatan, just as it would satisfy Pocahontas’s desire.” Whether this was genuine sentiment or a convenient rationalization for a politically advantageous union is, of course, open to cynical interpretation.

Following their marriage, a period of relative calm, a fleeting truce, settled over the relations between the English colonists and the Powhatan Confederacy . Edward Waterhouse, the secretary of the Virginia Company , later waxed lyrical about this era of supposed tranquility:

“[S]uch was the conceit of firme peace and amitie, as that there was seldome or never a sword worne, and a Peece [firearm] seldomer, except for a Deere or Fowle…. The Plantations of particular Adventurers and Planters were placed scatteringly and stragglingly as a choyce veyne of rich ground invited them, and the further from neighbors held the better. The houses generally set open to the Savages, who were always friendly entertained at the tables of the English, and commonly lodged in their bed-chambers.”

This idyllic portrayal, however, would prove to be a dangerous delusion, a testament to the human capacity for selective memory and willful ignorance. The peace, such as it was, was built on an unstable foundation, and the “scatteringly and stragglingly” placed plantations were, in retrospect, an open invitation to disaster.

New governance

The fragile peace, precariously balanced on the political utility of a marriage, began to unravel with the death of the formidable Chief Powhatan in 1618. His successor was his brother, Opitchapam, a man described as lame and quiet, seemingly lacking the assertive leadership required to navigate the treacherous waters of colonial relations. While Opitchapam nominally held the title of paramount chief of the confederacy, it was his youngest brother, Opechancanough , who quickly emerged as the true, effective leader. Opechancanough was a man of a different temperament entirely, possessing a shrewd intelligence and a deep-seated distrust of the English. He was closely advised by Nemattanew , a renowned warchief and trusted friend, whose counsel undoubtedly reinforced Opechancanough’s skepticism. Neither of these younger, more militant leaders harbored any illusions that peaceful coexistence with the ever-expanding colonists could be genuinely or indefinitely maintained.

It is likely that Opitchapam either retired from his leadership role or was formally deposed sometime between 1620 and 1621, though some accounts suggest he may have lived until 1630. Regardless, his departure solidified Opechancanough ’s position as the undisputed head of the confederacy. With the reins of power firmly in his grasp, and with Nemattanew ’s strategic insights, Opechancanough began to meticulously develop plans for what he viewed as an unavoidable conflict. They had learned from past encounters, particularly the Pamunkey warriors’ defeat during the First Anglo-Powhatan War . This time, their objective was not merely to repel an attack, but to deliver a shock so profound that it would cripple the English presence, effectively containing them within a small, defensible trading outpost, rather than allowing them to continue their relentless expansion across the territory with new, sprawling plantations.

The catalyst for this meticulously planned retribution arrived in the spring of 1622. A settler, with a profound lack of judgment, murdered Nemattanew . This act of violence, a direct affront to Opechancanough and the entire confederacy, provided the final, undeniable justification for war. Seizing the moment, Opechancanough unleashed a series of simultaneous, coordinated surprise attacks on no fewer than 31 separate English settlements and plantations. These assaults stretched primarily along the vital James River , reaching as far as the settlement of Henricus . The element of surprise, coupled with the widespread nature of the attacks, was designed to maximize damage and instill terror.

Jamestown forewarned

Amidst the coordinated chaos, one settlement, Jamestown , was providentially spared from the full brunt of the assault. Its salvation came through the timely warning delivered by an unnamed Indian youth. This individual resided in the household of Richard Pace , one of the colonists, a proximity that proved fortuitous for many. The youth, privy to the devastating plans, roused Pace from his sleep to alert him of the impending attack. Pace, understanding the gravity of the intelligence, swiftly secured his own family, then, with a commendable urgency, rowed across the river to the main settlement of Jamestown to sound the alarm. This crucial warning allowed Jamestown to significantly bolster its defenses, preparing for an onslaught that, elsewhere, would prove catastrophic.

The specific name of this brave Indian who warned Pace remains, rather inconveniently, unrecorded in the surviving contemporary accounts. While popular legend has bestowed upon him the name “Chanco ,” this attribution may, in fact, be erroneous. A different Indian named “Chauco” is indeed mentioned in a letter dispatched from the Virginia Council to the Virginia Company of London on April 4, 1623. However, “Chauco” is not described as a youth but rather as “one… who had lived much amongst the English, and by revealinge yt pl[ot] To divers appon the day of Massacre, saved theire lives….” Furthermore, this “Chauco” may well be the same individual as “Chacrow,” an Indian noted in a court record from October 25, 1624, as having resided with Lt. Sharpe, Capt. William Powell, and Capt. William Peirce “in the tyme of Sir Thos Dale’s government,” which predates 1616. It is entirely plausible, and indeed quite likely, that the distinct identities of the older Indian named Chauco and the anonymous youth who specifically warned Richard Pace became conflated over time, simplifying a complex historical detail into a more digestible, albeit potentially inaccurate, legend. Such are the vagaries of historical memory, often preferring a neat narrative over inconvenient precision.

Destruction of other settlements

While Jamestown braced itself, many other settlements across the Colony of Virginia were not so fortunate. During that single, brutal day of coordinated surprise attacks, the Powhatan tribes descended upon numerous smaller communities, inflicting widespread devastation. Among the casualties was Henricus , a promising settlement that was also home to a fledgling college intended for the joint education of both native and settler children—a tragically ironic target, perhaps, given its aspirations for integration. The scale of the slaughter was immense; in the vicinity of Martin’s Hundred , for instance, 73 individuals lost their lives, a significant portion of its population. The impact on Wolstenholme Towne was particularly stark, with more than half its inhabitants perishing and only two houses and a fragment of a church left standing, a grim testament to the thoroughness of the attack.

In total, the Powhatan succeeded in killing approximately four hundred colonists, a grim figure representing a third of the entire white population of the colony. Beyond the immediate fatalities, the warriors also took around 20 women captive. These women were then integrated into Powhatan society, living and laboring as members of the indigenous community until either their eventual demise or, in some rare cases, their ransom. The sheer terror and loss forced the abandonment of several key English outposts, including the vital Falling Creek Ironworks , the aforementioned Henricus , and Smith’s Hundred . The ambition of colonial expansion was, for a moment, brought to a screeching halt, replaced by a desperate scramble for survival and retaliation. The cost, both in human lives and shattered aspirations, was profoundly significant.

Aftermath

In the immediate, chaotic wake of the devastating attack, the surviving English colonists found themselves in a desperate situation, grappling with the profound shock and formulating a response. A pragmatic, if somewhat grim, decision was reached: “By unanimous decision both the council and planters it was agreed to draw people together into fewer settlements” in order to establish more defensible positions. This consolidation was a logistical nightmare, hampered by the sheer scale of the losses. Of those who survived, a staggering “two-thirds were said to have been women and children and men who were unable to work or to go against the Indians.” This demographic imbalance severely complicated any plans for immediate, large-scale retaliatory action, leaving the colony vulnerable and reeling.

Opechancanough , having delivered his decisive blow, withdrew his warriors. His strategy was based on a fundamental miscalculation, a projection of Native American cultural norms onto the English. He anticipated that the English, much like defeated indigenous tribes, would either pack up their belongings and abandon the territory, or, at the very least, absorb the brutal lesson and learn to respect the formidable power of the Powhatan . Following the massacre, Opechancanough confidently informed the Patawomeck , a tribe that had shrewdly remained neutral and was not part of the Powhatan Confederacy , that he fully expected “before the end of two Moones there should not be an Englishman in all their Countries.” A rather optimistic assessment, as it turned out.

The English, however, were not about to simply disappear. In May 1623, a deceptive overture was made to Opechancanough to negotiate for peace and, more pressingly, the release of the captive English women. As a gesture of supposed good faith, he released a Mistress Boyse, implicitly signaling a willingness to discuss the fate of the remaining captives. This was merely a prelude to a far more sinister plan. On May 22, Captain Tucker and a contingent of musketeers met with Opechancanough and members of a Powhatan village along the Potomac River for the supposed negotiations. In a chilling act of premeditation, Dr. John Pott had prepared poisoned wine. During the ceremonial toasts, the English offered the tainted beverage, leading to the agonizing deaths of 200 Powhatan individuals. Another 50 were killed in the ensuing chaos. Opechancanough , demonstrating a remarkable resilience or luck, managed to escape, but a significant number of tribal leaders were among the dead. From May to November of that year, armed colonists launched relentless attacks on Powhatan settlements throughout the Tidewater region , specifically targeting their corn crops, which, ironically, the Powhatan had planted “in great abundance.” These punitive raids not only pushed Powhatan society to the brink of collapse but also, quite conveniently, generated enormous profits for corn profiteers back in Jamestown .

Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, John Smith , ever the strategist, believed that the surviving settlers, traumatized and depleted, would be too preoccupied with defending their immediate plantations to effectively retaliate. He proposed returning to Virginia with a ship laden with soldiers, sailors, and ammunition, intending to establish a “running Army” to systematically combat the Powhatan . Smith’s ambitious goal was to “inforce the Savages to leave their Country, or bring them in the feare of subjection that every man should follow their business securely.” Despite his grand designs, Smith, for various reasons, never made his return journey to Virginia.

The 1622 massacre, far from deterring the English, became a convenient and enduring justification for their aggressive expansion over the subsequent decade. The historian Betty Wood observed this cynical exploitation of tragedy:

“What is usually referred to as the ‘Massacre of 1622,’ the native American attack that resulted in the death of 347 English settlers and almost wiped out Jamestown, which was the catalyst for the settlers actions. As far as the survivors of the Massacre of 1622 were concerned, by virtue of launching this unprovoked assault native Americans had forfeited any legal and moral rights they might previously have claimed to the ownership of the lands they occupied.”

Wood further quotes a Virginian settler, articulating this convenient logic: “We, who hitherto have had possession of no more ground than their waste and our purchase at a valuable consideration to their own contentment (…) may now by right of war, and law of nations, invade the country, and those who sought to destroy us: whereby we shall enjoy their cultivated places.” A rather neat justification for theft, wouldn’t you agree?

The colonists, fueled by revenge and opportunistic land hunger, intensified their attacks on the Powhatan . Their tactics were brutal and comprehensive: “the use of force, surprise attacks, famine resulting from the burning of their corn, destroying their boats, canoes, and houses, breaking their fishing weirs and assaulting them in their hunting expedition, pursuing them with horses and using bloodhounds to find them and mastiffs to seize them, driving them to flee within reach of their enemies among other tribes, and ‘assimilating and abetting their enemies against them.” It was a campaign of total war, designed to eradicate or utterly subjugate.

Simultaneously, the Virginia Company embarked on a carefully orchestrated public relations campaign. This was a crucial effort to control the narrative surrounding the 1622 Powhatan attack, shaping it into a story that justified their brutal response and future policies. The company, ever the astute manipulator, maintained a tight grip on all forms of communication emanating from the colony, ensuring that only their preferred version of events reached the ears of investors and the Crown back in England.

Indian decline and defeat

The political landscape shifted dramatically in May 1624, when Virginia’s royal charter was revoked, transforming it from a corporate enterprise into a crown colony under the direct authority of King James I. This change meant that the English Crown now exercised direct control, bypassing the often-ineffective governance of the Virginia Company of London . This new arrangement also allowed the Crown to dispense patronage to its favored individuals, further entrenching royal influence. Despite the change in governance, the relentless encroachment by settlers onto the lands of the Powhatan tribes continued unabated. The colonial government, now beholden to different masters, demonstrated an increasing willingness to alter or simply disregard agreements with the indigenous peoples whenever such agreements no longer served the colony’s burgeoning interests. This continuous erosion of trust and territory inevitably led to mounting frustration and resentment among the tribes, a slow-burning fuse that would eventually ignite again.

The next significant confrontation with the Powhatan erupted in 1644, marking the beginning of the Third Anglo-Powhatan War . This conflict, while resulting in the deaths of several hundred colonists, had a markedly different impact compared to the 1622 massacre. A generation later, the loss of life, though substantial, represented less than ten percent of the colony’s now larger population. The colony, having grown in size and resilience, was far less impacted. This time, the elderly Opechancanough , who by this point was so frail he had to be transported by litter, was finally captured by the colonists. Imprisoned at Jamestown , the aging chief met his end not in battle, but at the hands of one of his guards, a rather ignominious conclusion to a life of fierce resistance.

His death marked a pivotal moment, signaling the increasingly precipitous decline of the once-powerful Powhatan Confederacy . Without his unifying leadership and strategic prowess, the confederacy fractured and weakened. Its constituent tribes eventually faced stark choices: some left the ancestral areas entirely, seeking new homes; others gradually assimilated, living among the colonists in a diminished capacity; and a few managed to survive on one of the dwindling number of reservations established in Virginia. Even these reservations, however, were not immune to the relentless pressures of an ever-expanding European population, continually subjected to incursions and the seizure of their remaining lands. A rather depressing, yet entirely predictable, outcome for those on the losing side of history.

In modern times, a testament to their enduring spirit, seven tribes from the original Powhatan Confederacy are officially recognized within the Commonwealth of Virginia. Among these, the Pamunkey and Mattaponi tribes still retain control of their reservations, lands that were initially established as far back as the 17th century. These reservations are situated between the rivers bearing their respective names, nestled within the contemporary boundaries of King William County, Virginia , a faint echo of a once-mighty dominion.

Notes

^ Date of occurrence is notated and documented in the Old Style calendar: 1 April O.S. 22 March 1622.

Citations

^ Mooney, James (1907). “The Powhatan Confederacy, Past and Present”. American Anthropologist. 9 (1): 137.
^ Mooney, James (1907). “The Powhatan Confederacy, Past and Present”. American Anthropologist. 9 (1): 129–152.
^ Wood, Origins of American Slavery (1997), p. 72. “By 1620 the colonists were simply taking the acres they required for their expanding tobacco economy without even the pretense of negotiation or payment. Increasing encroachments on indigenous peoples’ lands, and particularly onto their hunting grounds, largely accounted for the deterioration of relations between the English and the indigenous populations of the Tidewater Chesapeake that finally exploded in 1622.”
^ Jay B. Hubbell, “The Smith-Pocahontas Story in Literature,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 65, no. 3 (July 1957), 275–300.
^ Glenn, Captain John Smith and the Indians, 228–48.
^ a b c d e f Alden T. Vaughan, ““Expulsion of the Savages”: English Policy and the Virginia Massacre of 1622, The William and Mary Quarterly 35, no. 1 (Jan., 1978), 57–84.
^ Helen Rountree, Pocahontas’s People, p. 54.
^ Grizzard, Frank E.; Smith, D. Boyd (2007). Jamestown Colony: a political, social, and cultural history. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO . p. 130. ISBN 1-85109-637-X.
^ Bailyn, Bernard (2012). The Barbarous Years: The Peopling of British North America: The Conflict of Civilizations, 1600–1675. Alfred A. Knopf . p. 97. ISBN 978-0-394-51570-0.
^ “CCCXIX. Council in Virginia. Letter to Virginia Company of London, April 4, 1623” Susan Myra Kingsbury, editor. Records of the Virginia Company, 1606–26, Volume IV: Miscellaneous Records, p. 98
^ Minutes of the Council and General court of colonial Virginia, 1622–1632, ed. McIlwaine, p.28
^ Fausz, J. Frederick. “Chauco (fl. 1622–1623)”. Encyclopedia Virginia. Retrieved 6 July 2015.
^ Campbell, Charles (1860). History of the Colony and Ancient Dominion of Virginia. J.B. Lippincott and Company. p. 163. ISBN 9780722209240. {{cite book }}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help )
^ Miller, Bill (2014). The Tea Party Papers Volume II: Living in a State of Grace, the American Experience. Xlibris Corp. p. 41. ISBN 978-1483639208.
^ ““to quitt many of our Plantacons and to vnite more neerely together in fewer places the better for to Strengthen and Defende ourselve.”, Gov. Francis Wyatt, quoted in Seth Mallios, “At the Edge of the Precipice: Frontier Ventures, Jamestown’s Hinterland, and the Archaeology of 44JC802” Archived July 24, 2008, at the Wayback Machine , APVA Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities, July 2000
^ a b c William S. Powell, “Aftermath of the Massacre: The First Indian War, 1622–1632”, The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 66, no. 1 (Jan., 1958), pp. 44–75
^ Helen C. Rountree and E. Randolph Turner III, Before and After Jamestown: Virginia’s Powhatans and Their Predecessors
^ Helen Rountree, Pocahontas’s People p. 75, citing John Smith’s 1624 Generall Historie.
^ a b c “Powhatan Uprising of 1622”. HistoryNet. 2006-06-12. p. 190. Retrieved 2021-05-15.
^ “Timeline”. Historic Jamestowne.
^ Betty Wood , Origins of American Slavery (1997), p. 72.
^ Wood, Origins of American Slavery (1997), p. 73.
^ MOHLMANN, NICHOLAS K. (July 1, 2021). ““Making a Massacre: The 1622 Virginia “massacre,” Violence, and the Virginia Company of London’s Corporate Speech””. Early American Studies. 19 (3): 39 – via EBSCOhost.
^ Bennett, John T. “The Forgotten Genocide in Colonial America: Reexamining the 1622 Jamestown Massacre within the Framework of the Un Genocide Convention.” Journal of the History of International Law = Revue d’histoire Du Droit International 19, no. 1 (2017): 1–49. doi:10.1163/15718050-12340077.
^ “Collection Thomas Jefferson Papers, 1606 to 1827 - Virginia Records Timeline: 1553 to 1743, 1620 to 1629”. Library of Congress . Retrieved September 6, 2024. The Virginia Company of London loses its charter.
^ Frank, Joseph, ed. (January 1957). “News from Virginny, 1644”. The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography . 65 (1): 84. JSTOR 4246282. Retrieved September 6, 2024.
^ Spencer C. Tucker; James R. Arnold; Roberta Wiener (30 September 2011). The Encyclopedia of North American Indian Wars, 1607–1890: A Political, Social, and Military History. ABC-CLIO. pp. 17–19. ISBN 978-1-85109-697-8. Retrieved 30 March 2013.
^ “Prince William Forest - Native American Heritage, English and Powhatan Relations”. National Park Service . Retrieved September 6, 2024. … It ceased to exist after the 1646 assassination of Opechancanough, Wahunsunacock’s brother, although the individual tribes of the chiefdom persevered.
^ “Historic Jamestowne - Chronology of Powhatan Indian Activity”. National Park Service . Retrieved September 6, 2024. By the end of the 1980s there were seven tribes recognized by the Commonwealth of Virginia who were part of, or allied with, the Powhatan Chiefdom: the Pamunkey, Mattaponi (both maintain their reservation lands from the 1600s), Upper Mattaponi, Chickahominy, Eastern Chickahominy, Nansemond, and the Rappahannock

Indian Massacre Of 1622