| Book Review | The Journal of American History, 92.3

You have not been recognized as a subscriber to JAH online. About 173 words from this article are provided below; about 416 words remain.

If you are a individual member of the Organization of American Historians, you may:: • login here if you have already registered for online access.; • Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.
• Set up your online account for the first time.
If you are not a member of the Organization of American Historians, you can:: • Join the OAH and receive many member benefits including print and electronic issues of the Journal of American History.
• Purchase a research pass to gain two-hour access to the entire History Cooperative web site. You will have full access to current issues of the Journal of American History (86.1-present). Note: the Research Pass does not provide access to JSTOR's holdings of the Journal of American History.
Instititutions can:: • Subscribe to this journal and receive print and electronic issues.
• Activate your existing subscription so that we recognize your IP number ranges.

| Book Review | The Journal of American History, 92.3 | The History Cooperative

Book Review

Creatures of Empire: How Domestic Animals Transformed Early America. By Virginia DeJohn Anderson. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. xiv, 322 pp. $37.50, isbn 0-19-515860-1.)
Did domestic animals transform early America? Virginia DeJohn Anderson illuminates the role played by livestock in the encounter between Indians and English in the seventeenth-century Chesapeake and New England colonies.	1
Anderson begins with different ways of thinking about animals, which Indians understood as powerful creatures deserving respect but available as game. Lacking domesticates of their own, they did not know what to make of livestock—which the English saw as property and a mark of the superiority of civilized agrarian culture.	2
But, ironically, when the English arrived in America they lost control of their animals. Finding abundant land that was (in their eyes) largely unused but having little spare labor, the English allowed their beasts to run loose. Their animals—particularly the hogs—went almost as wild as deer. The crucial difference was that the English still insisted upon ownership of the stock.	. . .

There are about 416 more words in this article. Please log in (or, if you are not yet an authorized user, please go to the User Setup page) to gain full access rights. Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.