“In the history of the Revolutionary War, perhaps no single incident is recorded which, at the time of its occurrence, created more intense sympathy, or aroused a spirit of more bitter indignation, than the massacre of Jane McCrea.”
David Wilson, 1853
On July 27, 1777, in Argyle, New York, north of Saratoga, John Allen’s family was attacked and brutally murdered by a party of Native Americans aligned to British General ‘Johnny’ Burgoyne. Husband John, his wife Eva Kilmer, their three small children; daughters Eva and Elizabeth and baby John, and Eva’s younger sister Catherine Kilmer, were killed. So too were three African American slaves on loan to the family; Tom, Sarah, and another whose name is lost to history. Nine in all. That same day, a young women was taken by a pair of Native Americans who so too were allied with the British. Shortly thereafter, Jane McCrea was shot and scalped. Two terrible atrocities. Yet the first was instantly forgotten while Jane’s death horrified a nation. It solidified the Continental Army’s determination to stand firm while stirring thousands of revengeful militiamen to march north and drive out the British army along with their hoard of ‘savages.’
Not to lessen the terror all victims experienced before a painful death, but the question arises… Why was McCrea’s murder so different than the hundreds of settlers who, throughout the American Revolution, died at the hands of both whites and Native Americans. How could one life impact an entire nation when hundreds of others who succumbed to the same fate did not? Perhaps the answer is instinctive, emotions that one could argue stem back to the time when humanity lived in caves. Within weeks of Jane’s demise, an embellished take on the story had already spread throughout the colonies.
An young and attractive innocent woman with long braids of golden blonde hair, braved the wilds of the wilderness alone to rejoin her betrothed, some say while in her wedding dress. She was attacked and torn from civilization by two half naked ‘savages’. As she pleaded for her life, she was brutally raped and scalped before her naked, lifeless body was left lying in the woods. Soon after, her scalp was presented to a British officer who readily paid for the gruesome trophy.
Or so the story goes. Jane’s death would prove to be a ‘spin doctor’s’ dream come true. As this version was artfully woven, told and retold both verbally and in print, more ‘details’ emerged, becoming all that was needed to doom an entire British army.
The few settlers who found Jane McCrea’s body had no clue that they were burying a martyr, one whose death would tilt the colonial rebellion towards the struggling Americans and be a defining factor leading up to the Battle of Saratoga. The first casual reports of her unfortunate killing were glossed over. There were many refugees caught between British General John Burgoyne’s advancing troops towards Albany, New York and the Continental Army’s haphazard attempts to stop them. Jane was just another non-combatant casualty of the war. Besides, frontier settlers have been paying the price for forging into the wilderness for decades; brutal attacks and massacres were old news. By August and into September, all that changed. References to Jane’s murder began to appear in newspapers and in taverns. Details emerged that heightened the horror of her last moments. Each telling of the story did one better than the previous one, embellishing circumstances surrounding her death and adding new particulars that shocked the reader or listener. The story sold papers, but it did more, it was pure gold, ripe for propaganda and it was played to the full.
Over a short time, Jane’s tragic tale would overwhelm mainstream thought. It became clear. The young, innocent girl was targeted for capture then mercilessly murdered by Indian ‘devils’ employed by amoral British officers. Sharp minds saw the potential of Burgoyne’s blunder in setting his Native American allies against settlers. Major General Horatio Gates, commander of the American Northern Army, sent a searing letter to Burgoyne, which of course he ordered copies sent to newspapers. He claimed that Jane had been in route to meet her fiancé and had been murdered in her wedding dress. Each time her fate was related, a more intricate story emerged. She became more beautiful, her hair was suddenly blonde with long flowing locks, her figure, divine and subtle. Saintly, she was the symbol of white angelic purity and her attackers were dark savage monsters, stirring racial hatreds. The Native Americans were fierce, predatory warriors who had been entrusted to escort Jane to her lover, Lt. David Jones, a Tory officer at Fort Edward. The two Native Americans, Kiashuta and Wyandot Panther, had argued over who would receive the larger portion of rum as their reward for delivering her. Greed turned to lust as Wyandot Panther ripped Jane’s clothing from her trembling body while she prayed on her knees for mercy. Kiashuta became the ‘noble savage’, as he tried to stop his friend, but failed. Wyandot Panther raped Jane before a tomahawk caved in her skull and her scalp lifted for the usual payment by Burgoyne’s agents. Jane’s long golden tresses were presented to her fiancé who recognized his lover’s hair, but fulfilled his duty and paid the ‘heathens’ their nefarious reward.
Jane McCrea was born at Lamington, Bedminster Township, Somerset County, New Jersey, about the year 1757 [some accounts state 1752]. Her father, James McCrea (1711-1769) , a native of Scotland, was a Presbyterian clergyman. He was married twice (Mary Graham & Catherin Rosbrugh) with whom he had twelve children in total; Jane being one of the youngest. During the American Revolution, seven of his sons fought for the Americans and two for the British with the Loyalist regiment Queen’s Rangers. There is very little in print about Jane McCrea. Common thought is that when her father remarried, she left home to live with her brother John McCrea, who settled in the Albany area about three miles south of Fort Edward, north of Saratoga. However, several historians believe that it was upon the death of her father that she joined her brother. She had fallen in love with, David Jones, whose family had previously moved north from New Jersey and was known to Jane as a child. They became reacquainted and were to be married. When war broke out, her fiancé remained loyal to the crown and fled to Canada were he enlisted with a Tory regiment in Burgoyne’s army. When Burgoyne invaded in the summer of 1777, Jane’s brother, now a colonel in the militia, moved his family to Albany. Jane refused to go. Instead, she went further north to Fort Edward, expecting to meet her lover when he arrived with Burgoyne. The fort was nearly abandoned, however an old woman, a Mrs. McNeil, lived in one of the cabins close by and took Jane in. On July 27th, two days before Burgoyne’s army took over the fort, there was a skirmish with a group of British Indian scouts. Mrs. McNeil and Jane were captured and were being taken back to Fort Ann when accordingly, a dispute arose as to who should be her guard. Jane was shot, scalped, and clothing stripped from her body. Her scalp was sold to British officers at Fort Ann and supposedly, Jones recognized his fiancé’s hair.
In 1822, the year that the remains of Jane McCrea was moved to the Union Cemetery at Fort Edward, James McCrea, brother of Jane, corresponded with the publisher of the Mohawk Herald. On July 1st, 1822 he responded, “It is with no small degree of diffidence, I undertake to commit to paper that which is known in our family concerning the fate of Jane McCrea”. Jane was staying with Mrs. McNeil when a party of Native Americans captured them. Mrs. McNeil and Jane were separated and later McNeil was brought to the British camp for exchange. James relates, to his knowledge, what happened to Jane. He wrote:
“They [the party that captured Jane] had gone but a short distance when they met another party of Indians, returning from Argyle, where they had killed the family of Mr. Barnes [this proved to be the Allen family]. This party disapproved of taking Miss McCrea to the British Camp, and one of them struck her with a tomahawk, and tore off her scalp. It was said, and generally believed, that she was engaged in marriage to Capt. David Jones, of the British army. Capt. Jones survived her only a few years.”
As to Jane’s stunning and saintly beauty, a local ‘self-proclaimed gentleman’ wrote of the Native American attack on the fort: “yesterday, during the skirmish… a young lady of the name of Miss Jenny McCrea, of a good family, and some share of beauty, was by some accident at Fort Edward when the enemy attacked the picket guard; she and an old woman, who she was with, were taken by the savages… they butchered the poor innocent girl, and scalped her.” Captain James Wilkinson, aide to General Gates, later described Jane simply as “a country girl of honest family in circumstances of mediocrity, without either beauty or accomplishments.” Of what we know, she was of average complexion whose hair was “darker than a raven’s wing,” though some primary sources state it was reddish-brown. Other accounts describe her as “not lovely in beauty of face,” but “graceful in manners.” More complementary is a description by a Mrs. Neilson, of Bemus Heights, who was her friend and neighbor. He stated that the time of Jane’s death, she was “of middling stature, finely formed, dark hair, and uncommonly beautiful.” Not entirely a testament to Jane’s stunning and godlike, saintly beauty. Nor do any firsthand accounts speak of the events that surrounded her death; her clothing, her lover employing Native Americans to seek her out, her reported rape, details of an argument. We only know that there was an attack on the fort. She was captured and that after a disagreement, she was murdered. Ultimately, none of that mattered once her story gained mythical proportions.
Humans have a natural macabre fascination with the symbology of death. As the events that day became more and more exaggerated, the interest and subsequent rage rose to a pitch. What sort of animals were the British to unleash such barbarity against such pure innocence? There was only but one response and that was action. A call to arms rose throughout New England to destroy the devils and drive Burgoyne’s army back to Canada. But the reasons for such intense outrage was far deeper than mere revenge. Those who sought after incidents to heighten and nourish so to fulfil a greater purpose used Jane McCrae’s martyrdom to its full effect. They used elements in propaganda that had been present for centuries to persuade the masses to rise as one. And by 1777, Americans had become experts.
Egyptians realized the power of propaganda. But it was in the legends of classical Greece that we see the mythological influence on modern history. In this case, McCrea became a goddess. Her attractive features and horrendous fate were exaggerated with each telling. As such, she became immortal; cast into legend. So too, the Greeks knew the importance of significant events. Propaganda symbols that tied targeted subjects together so they would act as one. McCrea’s case was just such a classic event. Her brutal murder by ‘savages,’ burst upon the emotions of simple farmers and merchants who joined together to march north to Albany to stop General Burgoyne’s army.
Imperial Rome employed systematic propaganda techniques that used all available forms of communication and symbology. They created an extremely effective and extensive network that retained control of their vast empire. Afterwards, the Catholic Church continued to define and apply the power of persuasion inherent to control the passions of their flock. Indeed, the name propaganda originated in the missionary efforts of the Catholic Church. During the 1620’s, the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith was created by Pope Gregory XV. They were charged with spreading the faith and regulating the church in ‘heathen lands.’ The priests and their administrators recognized and developed two basic ideas—the transmission of a particular agenda, in Jane’s case supplying the American army with the means to stop Burgoyne, and the regulation of behavior, Jane’s tragic ending which resulted in militiamen surging north to reinforce the Continental Army. Both basic ideas of human persuasion became the two guiding principles of propaganda that remain true throughout history to this day.
By the eighteenth century, the technology of printing and paper making had improved dramatically; so too the efficiency and speed in the transportation of newspapers and pamphlets to an ever-widening audience. At the highest point of the American Revolution, seventy newspapers, both Tory and Whig, flourished. The demand for news during the war increased newspaper readership to forty thousand households. This did not include multiple readers. Each copy would be passed on or further disseminated by word of mouth. This availability of printed materials provided an impetus to increase the rate of literacy among the general population. This was aided by a growing American economy that provided many colonials with the time and money to advance their education. Written propaganda messages, particularly among learned pamphlets printed under classic pseudonyms like Alexander Hamilton’s and James Madison’s Publius, became quite sophisticated in their appeal to avid readers. But of particular note – that which saw its refinement in American print – was the use of cartoons and visual messages. This new visual language established a direct communication with the audience and reached an even wider clientele, particularly among the illiterate.
Passions and emotions which could be recognized and exploited by propaganda techniques had, by the start of the American Revolution, already been honed to a fine skill. Benjamin Franklin unleashed his manipulative skills in his publications at the dawn of the French and Indian War. On May 9th, 1754, he printed the image of a snake cut in nine sections, each one a colony [New England representing one colony] with the words in large print, Unite or Die. Once French and British muskets ceased firing at each other and England demanded colonists help pay for a war that started in America, Franklin turned his genius against the mother country. The illustrious doctor was responsible for a fake issue of the Boston Independent, in which the British appear to be boasting of scalp hunting, a practice that was particularly repugnant to American colonials. This of course later fit nicely into the vial hatred toward England as McCrea’s fate continued to spread. George Washington was keen to twist the truth when he thought it was warranted by the greater good. He wanted to instill into the colonists a belief that not only was their cause just but that their “native” skills were also more than a match for the trained soldiers and mercenaries of the British army. To this end, they became skillful propagandists by manipulating (and even creating) information to their advantage or making appeals to their emotions.
But the true master of American propaganda would set the stage for all others to follow. Unemployed Bostonian Samuel Adams found his calling when he grasped upon the principles of propaganda to breath fire into a cause that by the mid 1770’s, blossomed into rebellion. He naturally understood what worked and what didn’t. He attacked the British in which the facts of the event were blown out of proportion or exaggerated, thereby emphasizing British tyranny; a prescription that was evidenced in the retelling of Jane’s murder. Adam’s most artful masterpiece, The Boston Massacre, earned him the title as ‘Master of the Puppet.’ Adams learned early on that molding the masses opinion was more destructive than an entire army and so too, the multitude could be ultimately armed with destructive potential to be hurled at one’s enemy. Adam’s five main objectives or needs that determined his actions could be considered a blueprint for modern political PR experts:
- The aim of the rebellion needs to be justified.
- The advantages of the victory, or manipulated victory, needs to be advertised.
- The masses need to be roused to action by creating hatred for the enemy.
- Logical arguments from the opposition needs to be neutralized.
- All issues need to be stated in clear black-and-white terms to ensure that even the common laborer could understand.
Missing from above was the disregard for factual truth. Referencing Adam’s masterpiece, the March 5, 1770 Boston Massacre, we also see his use of visual manipulation. He used Paul Revere’s engraving which masqueraded as a realistic portrayal of the event. In fact, it was a political cartoon deliberately created as propaganda for patriot consumption. Revere’s engraving included a sign ‘Butcher’s Hall’ above the British customhouse. Adams and Revere also knew their target audience’s racial prejudices, evidenced in Revere changing the race of one of the victims. Crispus Attucks, a towering black man who played a lead role in the fatal protest, was depicted as being white.
The left image below is the original etching by Paul Revere. The second was done over eighty years later. It is the earliest known depiction of Crispus Attucks as a person of color participating in the Boston Massacre. The 1855 drawing is by William L. Champney (fl. 1850-1857), which J. H. Bufford made into the chromolithograph Boston Massacre, March 5th 1770.
Jane’s murder occurred during war. Political propaganda and war propaganda, in many ways, are similar, however going to war and maintaining support for that war is fraught with consequences. Leaders understand that the battle for public opinion must be fought from the first shots of aggression to the signing of the peace accords. The rhetoric of war becomes paramount to keep the masses in line. Not only to garnish new recruits and maintain bodies as cannon fodder at the front, but at home, where supplies and money could be poured into the ongoing struggle.
The manipulation of the death of Jane McCrea relied on four typical aspects of propaganda:
- Charismatic Figures. A beautiful young woman, two heavily muscled Native Americans deemed savages, a weak and despised suitor who was the reason for his lover’s death.
- Heavy Symbolism. Jane represented purity and the innocence of American women. The ‘savages’ corrupt and evil. Saintly was pitted against the devil. She was an archetype of home representing that which needed protection. So too the natives employed by a British empire symbolized power and control. The rape of Jane represented the rape of America.
- A Simple and Incessant moral philosophy. Killing a defenseless woman was wrong. Righting that wrong through revengeful actions was right. England was immoral and sinful. America was chaste and ethical. Heaven was pitted against hell.
- An understanding of the audience’s needs. Settlers feared that which they didn’t know. In this case the assumed demonic atrocities practiced by all Native Americans. Colonials desired protection for themselves and their families. So too the need to protect one’s family was strong as was seeking ways to do so. Jane was every militiaman’s daughter, wife, girlfriend. Her fate would not be shared by those the settlers loved, and they would do whatever it took to make sure.
What are the basis of propaganda’s needs? How did they fit into this singular death of a young woman at the hands of Native Americans. And how were colonial males so aptly targeted and manipulated by the telling and retelling of Jane’s murder?
The battle for men’s minds is as old as history. From Greeks to the Crusades and Camelot to the Fields of Flanders, propaganda has been aimed at patriarchal societies. It is the noble male who straps on the sword, grasps his spear, primes his musket, and shoulders his weapon as he marches to do battle before his loving parents, wife and children. Men need to be stirred to action. Base emotions must be stoked. There has to be a reason to go to war. To that means, propaganda serves a variety of purposes: recruitment of soldiers, encouraging social responsibility, vilifying the enemy, and arousing patriotism and nationalism. Stories of war present both the glory and shame of not answering the call to arms. And what better way to stir up emotions for a call to action than the story of a defenseless young girl who is raped and butchered by a vilified enemy in which so too race is a factor.
Atrocity Propaganda demonizes the enemy through barbarous acts. British World War I posters depicted German soldiers raising their bayonets high with infants impaled on the long blades. However, this form of propaganda almost exclusively portrays women as principle sufferers of violent acts. A woman’s gentle nature and vulnerability renders them both as objects of men’s affections and casualties of the enemy’s barbarous behavior. Vivid imagery is described in writing, artwork, or word of mouth. The more horrid the image, the stronger it effects emotions that rise to the desired level. The hatchet is raised over Jane, her arms are thrown upward, she pleads for mercy, the hatchet plunges and crushes her skull, the knife slices her long golden locks from her scalp. The main components of this propaganda used graphic details of Jane’s murder, whether real or exaggerated, that built fervor among the targeted militiamen to achieve its goal. General Gage needed reinforcements to stop Burgoyne’s advance. Thousands of men were part of militias with a week’s march. The brutal victimization of Jane inflamed militiamen compelling many state regiments to send a portion of or their entire regiment north. Eventually, one sixth of all New England militiamen heeded the call and marched to join the Northern Army.
Defense of the Home Front is a call to action. It portrays the idea of family at home— mothers, wives, sisters and daughters —including male children – all could be potential victims of war unless the male population adhered to the threat posed by the enemy. The home must be defended at all costs and examples of the enemy attacking and butchering women and children who are similar to the target audience, plays on emotions of affection, responsibility, manhood, and possessive territory. Jane pleading before her death called for solidarity of the male population to come together to assure that that could not happen to any member of their family. American militia General Nicholas Herkimer needed to draw his regiments together to reinforce Fort Stanwix and ward off British Lt. Colonel Barry St. Leger’s invasion of the Mohawk Valley. He implored upon his men not to let that happen to their own wives and daughters at the hands of the Iroquois. The message New Englanders heard loud and clear: if you stop Burgoyne, your home is secure, your mother, wife, and children will be safe.
Later illustrations of Jane’s murder
Use of Racism. In telling Jane’s murder, strong racial and sexual connotations enhanced the image of half-naked savages tearing the clothes off a young white woman before raping and mutilating her. British officers who allowed dark skinned savages to violate white women are no better than the dark savages under their protection. This struck a racial bias among white militiamen that enflamed many with the report that she had been raped. It inferred that if the enemy allowed their native allies to do that to Jane, so too the same awaited the militiaman’s women and children, unless the militiaman took action.
Moral imperatives. This is another strongly-felt principle that is a call to action. It states simply that one must take the proper steps to deal with a situation as it is the right thing to do. It is based on pure reason in the most practical aspect. It follows the moral law and if the individual did not do so, by not taking action, they it would be seen as self-destruction and contrary to reason. Images of violence against women, who are pure, chaste, the mother of one’s children, is an irrefutable moral imperative. Jane’s murder was wrong and the morally correct thing to do was to avenge her death by personal sacrifice. Rushing off to war motivates the sacrifice of not just individuals, but resources; money, food, equipment and parent’s sons to fight.
Shame is a strong tool used by leaders to propel men to war. Woman are guardians of the home and it is the obligation of the male population to join together to protect that home. So too, like atrocity propaganda, it depicts women as passive, helpless and natural victims of brutality. Not only is the male to feel shame for not taking action to protect his home and women, so too the women are required to highlight their actions by shaming them. Why, during World War I, women of the White-feather organization handed out feathers to men in the street who were not in uniform. Once hearing or reading about Jane’s brutal murder, militiamen who shirked from marching north to fight Burgoyne’s army may have felt the weight of shame by community members.
Exaggeration. This is a key aspect of propaganda. Events as they actually happened, if reported as such, would rarely achieve the desired emotional response from the targeted audience. Jane was not gorgeous. Nor was she a saintly goddess with long golden locks that draped to the floor. In fact, her hair was described as black. As to saintly, she had what was considered good disposition, but no more or less than the next person. She was not wearing her wedding dress. The only reason she was captured, was by ‘some accident’ that she was at Fort Edward. Her suitor did not send Native Americans to capture her. There was no drunken argument over rum leading to her death. No one present stated in the British camp gave evidence that Jones recognized his fiancé’s hair when the scalp was brought to Fort Anne for payment by British agents. As to rape, there was no report of such occurring. Jane’s death would have been but another regretful tragedy of war, like so many hundred other settlers caught up in the conflict, had it not been for these exaggerations that fed into the male psyche.
Women depicted as heroes. Jane knew the dangers of Native American attacks. She could have retreated with most of the American army or to Albany with her brother’s family. Instead, she braved the wilderness alone, bravely putting love for her chosen man before her own safety. The romantic spin that puts loyalty to another before one’s self to give herself fully to her future husband put Jane on a moral pedestal, worthy of respect and praise. The image of a woman as succor, angel, moral lover, and caregiver is one of power. Jane was empowered by those drawn into her story to demand that her fate be avenged.
Jane represented the country as a whole. This symbolic use of women is one of the most prevalent images in wartime propaganda. Jane became America. She, like the nation, was assaulted and viciously attacked by all powering forces. As such she was forced to knell and plead for her life before fate struck. The parallel was profound for even in death, Jane proved that her ghost would never yield. She rose as a godlike image that brought the masses together. Her spirit led the thousands of New Englanders who saw Jane embodying all that is good and righteousness in America. Like Jane, the people of a just nation would never yield to a greater power. They would fight on, giving their all for a moral and just cause.
Foundation Myth: The propaganda value of such “foundation myths” is an essential part of nation building and is found in every country. These myths form the “core of culture” and are revived when needed to remind the population “what this society and its values are all about.” Jane achieved mythical proportions. Her heavenly, godlike visage was enlarged to include all that was good and just about America. Long after the Revolution War ended, her story lived on as more and more historical scholars relived the terrible day when she was struck dead. But so too, they continued Jane’s legend in colorful descriptions and romantic tragedy.
Jane’s story didn’t end with the destruction and surrender of British General Burgoyne’s army. Long after the American Revolution ended, Jane (Jenny) McCrae’s death would be immortalized by countless authors and artists. Time and again, in future conflicts with other nations and particularly Native American conflicts, her demise would resurface and once again, fan the heated rhetoric that drove men to action. As early historian David Wilson wrote in 1853, a year after Jane’s body was moved but again, this time buried with Mrs. McNeil who died in 1799. “The poet has made it the theme of his touching ballad; the artist has essayed to mold her supplicating form and features, as she knelt beneath the uplifted tomahawk of the savage; while thousands have lingered long at the fountain, overshadowed by the venerable pine, near which the sanguinary scene was enacted.”
Jane’s body, minus her skull which is believed to have fallen prey to 19th century grave robbers, was moved one last time in 2003. She and McNeil have since been buried separately.
For Further Reading, Check out these Previews of Great Books on Amazon
Check out these other article on Revolutionary War Journal
Fort Ticonderoga: Americans Abandoned The Gibraltar of the North Without a Fight
General Simon Fraser: England Lost an Army & Their Best Wilderness Warrior at Saratoga
Battle of Oriskany and Siege of Fort Stanwix– Brutal Civil War that Helped Save a Nation
RESOURCE:
Edgerton, Samuel Y. “The Murder of Jane McCrea: The Tragedy of an American Tableau d’Histoire.” The Art Bulletin. Vol. 47, No. 4 (Dec., 1965), pp. 481-492.
Engels, Jeremy & Goodale, Greg. “Our Battle Cry Will Be: Remember Jenny McCrea!” A Précis on the Rhetoric of Revenge”. American Quarterly. Vol 61, No. 1 (Mar., 2009), pp 93-112.
Jowett, Garth S. and O’Donnell, Victoria J. Propaganda & Persuasion. 2012: Sage Publishing, New York, NY.
Reed, Stacey. “Victims or Vital: Contrasting Portrayals of Women in WWI British Propaganda.” University of Hawaii at Hilo Hohonu. 2015, Vol. 13.
Ward, Christopher. The War of the Revolution. 2011 Reprint: Skyhorse Publishing, New York, NY.
Wilkinson, James. Memoirs of My Own Times, Three Volumes. 1816: Abraham Small, Philadelphia, PA.
Wilson, David. Life of Jane McCrea with an Account of Burgoyne’s Expedition in 1777. 1853: Baker Goodwin & Co., New York, NY.