the last of the mohicans book review

• Trail Insights
• Destination Weddings
• National Parks
• Adventure Travel
• Train Journeys
• Islands & Beaches
• Ski & Snow
• Destination Guides
• Places To Stay
• Men’s Shirts
• Men’s Shorts
• Men’s Pants
• Men’s Fleece Jackets
• Men’s Jackets & Vests
• Men’s Rain & Wind Jackets
• Men’s Hoodies & Sweatshirts
• Men’s Activewear
• Men’s Swimwear
• Road Running
• Trail Running
• Hiking Clothing
• Hiking Footwear
• Backpacking Packs
• Technical Daypacks
• Hydration Packs
• Travel Packs
• Kid Carriers
• Water Bottles
• Trekking Poles
• Trail Runner’s Haven
• Tents & Shelters
• Sleeping Bags
• Sleeping Pads
• Camp Chairs
• Camp Tables
• Stoves & Grills
• Pots & Pans
• Roof Racks & Accessories
• Rooftop Tents
• Batteries & Solar Power
• Water Storage & Purification
• Storage Solutions
• Off-Road Recovery
• Exterior Accessories
• Interior Accessories
• Performance
• Wheels & Tires

Book Review: The Last of the Mohicans by James Fenimore Cooper

September 1st, 2024

Brian Hamilton

See all posts

Skyblue Overland may earn a small commission from affiliate links in this article.

Our comprehensive “The Last of the Mohicans” book review delves into its historical significance, cultural themes, and the development of the hero archetype, making it a timeless classic in American literature and historical fiction.

James Fenimore Cooper’s The Last of the Mohicans , first published in 1826, is an enduring work of early American literature that combines historical events, adventure, and themes of cultural conflict. Set during the French and Indian War (1754–1763), the novel follows the journey of several characters through the wilderness of the American frontier. At its heart is the tale of the two Mohican warriors—Chingachgook and his son Uncas—along with the valiant white frontiersman Natty Bumppo, also known as “Hawkeye.” Cooper’s novel is significant not only for its depiction of colonial America but also for its role in shaping the hero archetype in American literature.

Plot Overview

The Last of the Mohicans is part of Cooper’s Leatherstocking Tales , a series of five novels featuring Natty Bumppo. The narrative is set in 1757 during the French and Indian War, a period when British and French colonial forces, along with their Native American allies, fought for control of North America. The story begins as Major Duncan Heyward is tasked with escorting two young women, Cora and Alice Munro, to Fort William Henry, where their father, Colonel Munro, is stationed.

On their journey, they are joined by a mysterious Native American guide named Magua, who is revealed to be an enemy intent on revenge against Colonel Munro. Magua leads the group into danger, but they are rescued by the Mohicans, Chingachgook and Uncas, as well as Hawkeye, who becomes the story’s central figure of moral righteousness and frontier bravery. The novel weaves themes of cultural conflict, wilderness survival, and heroism as the characters navigate the perilous frontier, encounter tribes with shifting alliances, and engage in climactic battles. In the end, the story reaches its tragic conclusion as Uncas, the last of the Mohican bloodline, dies, leaving behind a sense of cultural loss and inevitability amid the tides of history.

Historical Significance of The Last of the Mohicans

One of the most critical aspects of The Last of the Mohicans is its place in American literary history as one of the earliest novels to explore the unique landscape, cultures, and conflicts of the New World. At the time of its publication, the United States was still a relatively young nation, and Cooper’s work offered American readers a narrative that reflected the burgeoning national identity. By setting the novel against the backdrop of the French and Indian War, Cooper tapped into a moment of significant historical importance, when the future of North American colonization hung in the balance.

Cooper’s portrayal of Native Americans and the American wilderness also reflects broader trends of the early 19th century, particularly the Romantic movement’s fascination with nature and the idea of the “noble savage.” While The Last of the Mohicans has been criticized for its stereotypical depictions of Indigenous characters, it also reveals Cooper’s attempt to grapple with the complexities of Native American-European relations. The novel’s tragic ending, with the death of Uncas and the fall of the Mohican tribe, serves as a lament for the inevitable displacement of Native American cultures as European colonization advanced.

Cooper’s novel also participates in the mythologizing of the American frontier. In The Last of the Mohicans , the wilderness is not just a backdrop for the action but a living, breathing entity that shapes the characters’ experiences. The dense forests, rushing rivers, and towering mountains become symbols of both the promise and the danger of the American frontier. This portrayal of the wilderness would go on to influence countless works of American literature, from the works of Henry David Thoreau to Mark Twain and beyond, helping to solidify the idea of the American wilderness as a defining feature of the national character.

The Role of the Novel in Developing the Hero Archetype

One of the most lasting contributions of The Last of the Mohicans is its development of the hero archetype, particularly through the character of Hawkeye. Natty Bumppo is often seen as the quintessential American hero—a rugged individualist who thrives in the untamed wilderness, guided by his own moral compass rather than societal rules. Hawkeye represents a unique fusion of European and Native American traits, embodying the frontier ideal of a man who can navigate both worlds but fully belongs to neither.

Hawkeye is portrayed as a protector of justice and loyalty, especially toward his Native American companions, Chingachgook and Uncas. Though a white man, Hawkeye rejects many of the prejudices of his contemporaries, forming a deep bond with the Mohicans. This allegiance is central to the novel’s exploration of the complexities of race and culture in early America. Hawkeye’s ability to blend into the wilderness, his knowledge of Indigenous customs, and his expertise in survival and combat all contribute to the creation of the “frontier hero” archetype that would become so influential in American culture.

Cooper’s portrayal of Hawkeye influenced the development of later American literary heroes, such as Herman Melville’s Captain Ahab, Mark Twain’s Huck Finn, and even modern-day characters like Indiana Jones and John Wayne’s various cowboy figures. The traits associated with Hawkeye—resourcefulness, bravery, moral righteousness, and a deep connection to the natural world—continue to be central to the American hero archetype.

At the same time, Hawkeye’s character is tinged with a sense of melancholy, as he exists in a world that is gradually disappearing. As European civilization encroaches on the frontier, Hawkeye’s way of life is increasingly threatened. This tension between civilization and the wilderness, between the Old World and the New, is a recurring theme in American literature and speaks to the cultural anxieties of Cooper’s time. Hawkeye, in many ways, is a tragic hero—caught between two worlds, belonging fully to neither, and ultimately witnessing the destruction of the very wilderness and way of life he holds dear.

Cultural Representation and Controversy

While The Last of the Mohicans is celebrated for its adventurous spirit and historical significance, it has also faced criticism for its representation of Native Americans. Cooper’s portrayal of Indigenous characters reflects the limitations of his time, relying on stereotypes that would later be challenged by more nuanced understandings of Native American cultures. Characters like Uncas and Chingachgook are often idealized as “noble savages,” while antagonists like Magua are depicted as treacherous and bloodthirsty. These depictions simplify the complexities of Native American societies and contribute to a romanticized, and at times problematic, vision of Indigenous people.

However, it is important to note that Cooper’s work was one of the first in American literature to treat Native Americans as central characters rather than mere background figures. In an era when Indigenous people were often marginalized or ignored in literature, Cooper’s decision to place them at the heart of his narrative was groundbreaking. The novel’s tragic conclusion, with the extinction of the Mohican line, reflects Cooper’s awareness of the profound losses suffered by Native American tribes during the colonial period.

In modern times, readers and scholars have revisited The Last of the Mohicans to explore its historical and cultural significance, both as a reflection of early 19th-century attitudes and as a precursor to later representations of Native Americans in literature and film. The novel’s lasting influence can be seen in its numerous adaptations, including the famous 1992 film starring Daniel Day-Lewis, which brought the story to a new generation of audiences.

James Fenimore Cooper’s The Last of the Mohicans remains a cornerstone of American literature, offering readers a thrilling adventure set against the backdrop of a formative period in the nation’s history. Its portrayal of the American frontier, its exploration of cultural conflict, and its development of the hero archetype have left an indelible mark on American storytelling. While the novel’s depiction of Native Americans is not without its flaws, The Last of the Mohicans continues to be a valuable text for understanding the early development of American identity and the ways in which literature has shaped national myths.

At its core, The Last of the Mohicans is a story about the clash of civilizations and the individuals caught in the crossfire. Through characters like Hawkeye, Uncas, and Chingachgook, Cooper invites readers to reflect on themes of loyalty, honor, and the inevitable passage of time. Even nearly two centuries after its publication, the novel’s exploration of heroism and cultural loss resonates with contemporary audiences, making it a timeless work of historical fiction.

Shop James Fenimore Cooper’s The Last of the Mohicans

More Adventures

Beneath a broken sky – chapter 8: the….

The Long Winter’s Trial: As winter tightens its grip on the Sawtooth Wilderness, the Fosters and their allies face dwindling supplies, growing tensions, and hard decisions. Together, they prepare for a risky journey toward the promise of Ketchum.

Read More →

Beneath A Broken Sky – Chapter 7: The…

In Chapter 7, the Foster family narrowly escapes a deadly ambush by raiders in the Colorado. Forced to flee through treacherous terrain, they find temporary refuge in the Salmon-Challis National Forest, but the danger still looms ahead.

Beneath a Broken Sky – Prelude

In the near future, a family embarks on a perilous journey across a dying land, facing unimaginable challenges as they search for hope and survival beneath a broken sky.

Mission Viejo Library Teen Voice

Teens tell you what's what.

The Last of the Mohicans by James Fenimore Cooper

This novel is truly my favorite novel that I have read so far, so my review might be a little long since I have so much to say. I’m not calling this a perfect novel, but the themes are very meaningful and important to Americans and people around the world today. Please bear with me and I promise you that you won’t be disappointed.

On the surface, this novel looks like a chivalric romanticism, but in essence, the first thing it tells the reader is that English and French colonialists are the root of all evil. They waged war to plunder this Indian land, and together they carried out a policy of fraud, brutality and even appalling genocide against the Indians. They bought the scalps of the Indians at high prices, anestheted their morale with “fire and water” and the Bible, deceived and coerced the Indians into using them as cannon fodder, and viciously incited the Indian tribes to kill each other to the death. Chingachgook was the great chief of the Mohican tribe, whose tribe was destroyed by the guns and treachery of white settlers. Unfortunately, even Uncas, his only heir, died by the sword of Magua, also an Indian. Like the Mohicans, the Wyandotte, who were exploited by the French colonial authorities, were completely wiped out in the last great battle on the shores of Lake George. This makes readers see vividly that the history of the development of the North American colonies is actually such a history of blood and tears of the Indians. America was originally the home of the Indians, but the white people killed and drove them away, and they found sufficient reason for themselves, that they represented God, to civilize this wild land. The author’s heart is heavy with deep sympathy and indignation over the killing of Indians and the extermination of Indian tribes. Through Hawkeye, he repeatedly admits the sins of the white men in his novels. He named the novel “The Last”, and with a sad tone describes Uncas’s heroic sacrifice and sad and touching funeral, which expresses his infinite sympathy and sorrow for the tragic fate of the Indians.

The death of the just and brave Uncas and the beautiful and good Cora is not without a deeper meaning: with their death, the virtue and purity of their hearts also died, leaving only the greed and the cruel malice and the evil thoughts that covered the land of America. Although Cooper realized the tragic fate of the Indians, he failed to break through the ideology at that time. He sympathized with the unfortunate experience of the Indians and partly attributed their tragic fate to their own ignorant backwardness. While describing the cunning and greed of the colonists, the author also makes no secret of the ignorance and savagery of the Indians. This seemingly contradictory description not only shows to the reader that the author advocates realism, but also reveals the author’s ambivalent feelings towards the Indians. In the author’s eyes, the conflict between the white people and the Indians is not only the struggle between colonization and anti-colonization, but also the conflict between different civilizations and religious beliefs. Especially in the novel, Hawkeye has a contradiction: he has a deep friendship with the “good” Indian, Uncas, and at the same time has a sense of superiority. He sympathizes with the Indians but ignores their lives. The advantage of Hawkeye in morality, knowledge and ability is also the historical necessity of whitewashing to swallow the Indian civilization. Faced with the dilemma of sympathy and disgust, reason and emotion, Cooper finally chose to use the law of the jungle to explain the miserable fate of the Indians who were almost exterminated. He called Hawkeye and the Indians forest dwellers, and the hunters living in the jungle were natural persons far away from society, who could not escape the natural law of “survival of the fittest”.

The existence of the two heroines in the book also reflects the complexity of the white hero image. On the surface, the book focuses on the capture and rescue of the two heroines. Almost all men’s actions point to them, and the book praises their nobility and grace to the utmost. On the other hand, the characters often use demeaning language. This contradiction helps to explore the meaning behind it. First, Cooper places two noble women in the wilderness, forest and battlefield. It is their “fear” and “shivering” that reflect the hero’s masculinity, though it is unrealistic. The value of heroines in the text can be said in a sense that they are the tools to express the myth of the white male. This overzealous promotion of masculinity is, so to speak, part of the whole white male myth. The author also described the Indians’ ability to survive and track in the wild in a commendable manner, but Hawkeye’s wise analysis and correct judgment always helped them to get out of danger in critical moments. In the plot arrangement, the author also fails to get rid of the influence of racial prejudice and social status on the concept of hierarchy. In dealing with Major Duncan Heyward and the Cora sisters, this thought is particularly evident. When Major Duncan Heyward learns that Cora is Munro’s child by a woman of black descent, he immediately turns to Cora’s sister, Alice. In comparing Cora with Alice, the author actually raises the question of how the white civilization views such fine qualities as intelligence, courage, perseverance, calmness and eloquence in women. By placing these qualities in Cora and arranging for her to be killed by her enemies, Cooper is likely to give the answer that in women, all these good qualities mean nothing.

After all, although Cora’s firmness, bravery, and perseverance set her apart from her vulnerable sister, on the battlefield, Cora and Alice could only be women, and both sisters were equally “defenseless.” When Magua considered exchanging Cora for the scout, the scout cautiously backed away, saying that a promising young warrior, even the best girl on the border, would not be equal. For the two sisters, it is conceivable that the surviving sister will live a happy life, because she is not only a woman, but also more white. Some even quipped that, using Cora’s special background, Cooper managed to keep Uncas from crossing racial lines to love the daughter of a British officer. Perhaps for the author, he pays attention to the status of female figures in the society, and also gives some consideration to the value of women under the domination of patriarchal culture. But he never broke through the cultural stereotypes of his own patriarchal standard, revealing his patriarchal values, believing that in the white world, a woman’s weakness is her strength, because it inspires men to fight for her. Women should give up the dangerous dream of an independent self and exist as a protectorate and appendage of men, and only in this way is there any value. The author is very good at using indigenous languages. On the one hand, he vividly embodies the characteristics of indigenous languages such as barbarism, vulgarity and non-standard. But at the same time, he also shows the vivid and multifigurative features of the native language. As the preface says, the Indians are good at snatching metaphors from the clouds, seasons, birds, beasts, and plant world. The flower symbolized the Mohican, which meant that Indian life had blossomed like a flower.

The withered leaves symbolized the death of the Mohicans. His inability to prevent his preordained fate is emblematic of the human tragedy of his inability to control his own destiny. Indians, for example, often refer to their companions by nicknames, such as Uncas, who is often called a fast-legged deer for his speed, and Chingachgook, who is called The Great Snake because he is as agile as a snake when he is lost in the jungle. Uncas with excellent reconnaissance and tracking ability, was dubbed Hawkeye. It is also argued that the frequent use of metaphors in indigenous languages reflects the lack of expressive power of the language. Cooper has succeeded in making every detail audible in a special way, through the description of native languages and gestures. Of course, this kind of combination will have some limitations, which are reflected in the incongruity of style and content, incoherence before and after speech, and incongruity of style. Hawkeye, for instance, often spoke in terms and phrases that did not coincide, and gave the impression that his speech had changed from elegance to vulgarity. Cooper has always been known for describing thrilling scenes and natural scenery, and “nature” has a special meaning here. It is the pronoun of “freedom” and “individuality liberation”; It is also the boundary of the ideal pursued by romantic writers.

In “The Last Mohicans,” he makes full use of the dense forests that threaten the unknowable and the mysterious ways of Native Americans for romance. In his writing, the forests and prairies infested by the Indians are richly colored, thus combining the romantic imagination with the material of the wild regions of America. Between the areas occupied by the English and French sides lay a vast, seemingly impenetrable forest frontier. It often takes months to climb mountains and wade through rivers, going through hardships to find a chance to play in a more intense battle. The forested frontier became the first object to be confronted, beyond the British and French belligerents. In Cooper’s works, the natural environment often plays a role of independent value. In the novel, there are high mountains, deep valleys and forests that swallow people. Nature has a majestic and fearsome sublime beauty. The grotesque branches and jagged tops of the trees dimly covered the stars, and everything below them was in a gloom. Behind them the river was winding and hidden from view by the dark trees. But ahead, a little way off, the river seemed to rise into the sky, and the water poured down into the cave. These descriptions construct the naturalness of the American frontier, where there are few people, in contrast to colonized, domesticated societies. Nature can make people feel small rather than confident in the omnipotence of civilization. When people feel fear, they will also have a sense of reverence for nature. But the description of the bleak nature of the American frontier also highlights America’s characteristic toughness, roughness and grandeur. The United States does not have a long history.

From the very beginning, the ghosts of the past linger in this country, namely the expulsion of Indians during white colonization and the enslavement of blacks brought by slavery. This pattern of hostility leads to paranoia about persecution and a loss of security. It was not only strange lands and mountains that were in danger, but nature concealed invisible enemies. The novel vividly depicts the fear of the white people through the natural environment. Even during the day, they need to tread carefully. For deep in the forest, behind every tree there might be Indians ready to hunt for their lives. The glistening wild fruit may be the glistening eyes of the natives. The wind whistling through the trees was probably an Indian gathering. The description of the natural environment in the novel is not only a nostalgia for the natural frontier. More important is the author’s historical representation of the relationship between white Americans and Indians. By this time, though, the Indians had disappeared from view, along with the jungle wilderness. However, the white people’s fear of nature and Indians in the unique frontier landscape of The United States conveyed the anxiety and uneasiness that they felt in the face of the original sin of history and overstepping, stealing and tampering. Through this description of the sufferings of the people living in this land, the landscape depicted in the novel is rather bleak. Bloody pools of water, dark skies, all bleak images remind the reader of a nightmarish world of pain. The main function of this style of writing in the novel is to reveal the uncertainty that afflicts the white man in a new and terrible environment.

They are inexperienced, insecure about their inability to understand and master the world around them, and their misunderstandings and misconceptions only bring fear, and they are the most vulnerable victims in the story. Even though the setting is an American wilderness, not a haunted castle, the enemy is a savage Indian, not a supernatural being. The fear of the Indians is the equivalent of the fear of the demons and ghosts of Gothic fiction, suggesting that Cooper has adapted the model thoroughly to the American environment. It also shows that without the vicissitudes of history, the castles and temples of European Gothic writers, the American landscape can produce Gothic works as well. The representation of American history and reality through gothic scenes and techniques is of great significance to Cooper’s creation and American literature. Cooper’s cultural system originated from the European continent. Although he tried hard to break away from it, he could not set the main characters and their destinies according to the established cultural cognition in his novels. For example, David Camus, the teacher of chants, gives readers the impression that he is a dispensary. There was a sense of incongruity in his appearance. There was no particular deformity in the figure, but it was very asymmetrical. It is not difficult to see from this that David is extremely ugly in both appearance and costume, and he is basically unable to play any active role in the development of the story. However, in literature, the composition of a narrative object, no matter how abnormal or unusual it is, is still a kind of social behavior and reflects the society behind or content of it, while what David embodies is the representative of Western culture — the Bible.

In the Indian tribe, the native people have the most primitive totem worship, each Indian warrior has the animal pattern closely related to their life to distinguish the different tribes. To the highly educated white eye, these images were ignorant, even terrifying. Cooper uses the words and deeds of David to describe the social life under the colonial environment in an acceptable and established way, and this cultural penetration in the way of Bible or hymn runs through the whole novel. In the whole work, David seems to stand outside the hero and heroine, observing the social norms of the Indian tribes and judging the people living in them according to established ways and principles. He used hymns to indoctrinate those in the “subcultural” system. After David had formally introduced his profession, Cooper praised the Bible as noble and irreplaceable. He never said anything but the thoughts and wishes of the king of Israel. This translation in the New England colonies greatly exceeds all others, and in its richness, correctness, and doctrinal purity approximates to the original greatness of the inspired writer. After expressing the worship of the Bible, in the novel, whenever there are scenes of blood or violence, the author tries to use the words of David to call these ignorant people in order to eliminate the evil nature of the wilds, as if no force can tame them except the omnipotent God. When he and the sisters fell into Magua’s hands, though the Hurons could not understand what he was singing about, out of awe of the madman, he was never in real danger and was treated better than any other captive with the right to free to move. After he and Hawkeye set Uncas free, the man in charge of Uncas found that the prisoner had been transferred and had not touched him at all.

It’s not hard to see the author’s own cultural inclinations in this far-fetched plot, and how they affect the whole book. Some of the details in the novel touch on key issues, some of the assumptions are too bold, some of the plots too stiff or quirky. For example, at the critical moment when father was defeated and captured, the sisters Cora and Alice went to visit him and gave him comfort and encouragement. It was a far-fetched assumption, but one could argue that they were motivated by father-daughter affection. But it is perverse to allow two weak women to be separated from the army and left to act alone in a wild and dangerous area, and the author does not provide a compelling motive or reason for doing so in the novel. In fact, if it weren’t for this “time travel,” there would be no novel, because the whole story is caused by it. In addition to the far-fetched coincidences and adventures, there are also many idealized factors in the characterization, such as the perfection of the positive characters and the cruelty, stupidity and malice of the negative characters. There are also some problems with character description, such as the vast majority of characters’ personalities, words and deeds are static and unchanged. They had desires, they had ideals, they had concerns, but they all stopped there. It is not because their desires and ideals, once satisfied and realized, change the things they care about and cause changes and development in their own character or words and deeds. The main character, Hawkeye, seems to be the same cool, brave “prince in the forest” from beginning to end. The novel was composed in 1826, the third year of the Seven Years’ War between Britain and France for the colonies in North America.

Britain and France expelled the Indians by force and carried out a cruel policy of genocide against them. The title of the work, “The Last”, has a strong practical significance, highlighting the theme of the extinction of Indian tribes. Cooper tells the reader the tragic fate of the native Indians. As the Native Americans who immigrated to North America, the Indians who created the glorious civilization of America became homeless due to the invasion of a large number of Europeans. They were forced to move west. Their culture is likely to wither away as external shocks dilute it. Rewriting history, Cooper expressed his sympathy for the plight of the Indians and gave them, and the world, a warning to Indians and other tribes or countries that were becoming assimilated into foreign cultures, languages, and customs. Today’s rise of the Mohican in some parts of the world may also be a reflection of the culture’s disappearance. The degree of civilization of the Indians lags far behind that of European nature, but they have formed a special coexisting relationship with nature in their long-term development. They saw the land as a common mother, and over time evolved a kind of nature worship, a worship of the mother earth that arose from the hunting and eating of the land. Like a fish swimming across the water or a bird flying through the blue sky, the Indians pass through the wilderness without leaving any trace. This harmonious relationship with nature and the Indian’s awe and worship of nature is also of significance for human civilization to deal with industrial development and environmental damage today.

Share this:

Leave a comment cancel reply.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

• Book Reviews
• Bookshop.org Shop
• Amazon Shop
• Toggle the search field

Book review: “The Last of the Mohicans” by James Fenimore Cooper

The Last of the Mohicans : A Narrative of 1757 by James Fenimore Cooper Recommended Ages: 12+

Forget about the 1992 movie starring Daniel Day-Lewis, and based on this book published in 1826. All these years later, I still remember a lot of things about that movie. Very few of them faithfully represent things in this book. It turns out to be not so much a film adaptation of the novel, as a piece of original entertainment based on characters and situations in the novel. Oh, well. I still like the 2002 film The Count of Monte Cristo , even though I now know it resembles its source book even less. It’s a trial to be both a bookworm and a movie buff. You really have to grow up a lot, and accept that the two art forms work in different ways and can never, even at their very best, reflect each other very accurately. Don’t let the fact that this book doesn’t resemble that terrific movie stop you from reading it, however. Particularly now that there are audio-book editions, such as the 1989 recording by Larry McKeever that entertained me during a week’s worth of business miles, one can painlessly enjoy this historical romance, in spite of its old-fashioned language and the sometimes ridiculously flowery diction of its speaking characters.

Whether one can do so guiltlessly, with its perhaps embarrassing racial and sexual stereotypes, is entirely up to you. As a rule, I would suggest reading it anyway, and thinking for yourself, and letting the voice of an earlier period of cultural history speak for itself. I don’t think we do ourselves or our culture a service by censoring the past, or by consigning our own society’s arts and letters to the damnation of memory. Speaking of which, a living example of what we mean by the phrase “damnation of memory” is depicted in this book, along with several other American Indian customs that Cooper, at a time when the native races of North America seemed destined for extinction, felt it was his mission to preserve for posterity. These rich details fire the imagination, while the tragic romance of the last noble warrior of dying tribe, and of a British gentlewoman taken captive by his most savage enemy, pull at the heart-strings. These ingredients add up to a masterpiece of American literature that has inspired and influenced creative minds around the world.

It is, in fact, acknowledged as the masterpiece of its maker. James F. Cooper (1789-1851), while popular in his time, is today remembered mostly for this one book. Nevertheless, it is worth knowing that it is the second book in a series of five, known as the Leatherstocking Tales. Leatherstocking is one of several nicknames of the character known in this book as Hawkeye, the Scout, the Long Rifle, and La Longue Carabine . His real name, barely mentioned in this book, is Natty Bumppo; so it’s no wonder that he goes by a variety of other names. Hawkeye is a white man who has lived among Indians all his life and adopted many of their ways, with certain refinements such as his trusty rifle, affectionately known as Killdeer. His most trusted companions are Chingachgook and his son Uncas, the last surviving chiefs of the fictitious Mohican tribe, which Cooper based on a combination of two or three tribes, some of whom survive to this day.

This trio of hunters, scouts, and warriors, come to the aid of an old Scottish general and a young British major, who have survived a horrible massacre by Indians allied with the French forces in the pre-American-Revolution conflict now known as the French and Indian War. Together with a silly, psalm-singing music teacher named David Gamut, they fly from one ambush, battle, or ordeal to another while trying to recover the general’s two beautiful daughters, who have been taken captive by the Lenape tribe, and by one particular villain named Magua. Apart from this, you don’t need to know anything in preparation for reading this book, other than to expect an almost unceasing series of exciting battles, suspenseful standoffs, daring ruses, dangerous rescues, and desperate negotiations. It all comes to a terrific climax in which Cooper does something even better than the expected “kill all the bad guys and leave all the good guys alive and well for the next installment.” It’s a fascinating document of how Native American culture was understood by Anglo-Americans, a captivating romance that will leave you longing for a (mostly) lost way of life in the once wild woods of long-ago New York, and a piece of literary entertainment that easily stands up alongside such classics as Walter Scott’s Ivanhoe and Dumas’s The Three Musketeers .

Although it is neither the first book in the Leatherstocking series in publication or in canon order, this is probably the best place to start reading Cooper’s work. If it really hooks you, you’ll be interested to know the titles of the other books in the series: The Pioneers, The Prairie, The Pathfinder, and The Deerslayer . Here is a more complete list of Cooper’s books. His novels and non-fiction works of naval adventure also come highly recommended; that may be the first area I explore after this.

Related Posts

Book review: “the wanderer” by sharon creech.

Book Review: “Mean Girls” by Micol Ostow (Based on the Screenplay by Tina Fey)

Book Review: Lost in a Good Book by Jasper Fforde

Book Review: Walk Two Moons by Sharon Creech

James Fenimore Cooper’s ‘The Last of the Mohicans’: book vs. movie

• 23 Comments

Apart from Jules Verne’s books, The Last of the Mohicans by James Fenimore Cooper was the book that deeply marked my early teenage years. I first read it in Romanian , in an abridge form, and many years later, in 1992, when I saw Michael Mann’s 1992 The Last of the Mohicans film adaptation (starring Daniel Day-Lewis in Hawk-eye’s role) I promised to myself that I would get my hands on the original text in English.

In the meantime, I read The Deerslayer , the book that chronologically precedes the action of The Last of the Mohicans . Funnily enough, The Deerslayer was the last book Cooper wrote in “Leatherstocking Tales” pentalogy which includes: The Deerslayer – The First War Path (1841), The Last of the Mohicans – A Narrative of 1757 (1826), The Pathfinder – The Inland Sea (1840), The Pioneers – The Sources of the Susquehanna; A Descriptive Tale (1823), and The Prairie – A Tale (1827).

Although Cooper was a popular American writer whose books are still dissected in schools and university courses, his prose is very difficult to read due to elaborate descriptions and slow action. Mark Twain tackles these issues (and many more) in his famous essay, Fenimore Cooper’s Literary Offenses , in which he claims that “Cooper has scored 114 offenses against literary art out of a possible 115.” Regardless of all the faults one can find in Cooper’s fiction, his masterpiece, The Last of the Mohicans , remains one of the most praised books of fiction about Native Americans.

To be honest, I completely forgot what I had read in my abridged edition of The Last of the Mohicans and remembered the book mostly by what I had seen in the 1992 movie. I knew there were major differences between the book and the movie, but I couldn’t remember any of them. So, I set out to read Cooper’s The Last of the Mohicans with a clear memory of what the characters and the setting looked like as I remembered them from Mann’s movie.

As the subtitle of the novel suggests, the story takes place in 1757, during the French and Indian War, and sees Hawk-eye and his Red Indian friends come to the rescue of Cora and Alice, the daughters of a British colonel fighting the French and their Native American allies for control over the North American colonies.

I think that the most shocking difference between the book and the movie is the relationship between Hawk-eye, the scout, and Duncan, the major . If in Mann’s movie there’s hatred between La Longue Carabine (aka Hawk-eye) and Duncan Heyward, in Cooper’s book their relationship is based on respect and both are willing to give their lives in order to save the other’s.

Another difference is the relationship between Hawk-eye and Chingachgook and, respectively, Uncas . The movie makes it clear that Hawk-eye is Chingachgook adopted “white son,” and thus Uncas’s step brother, but actually Cooper portrays Hawk-eye as a man much older and more experienced than the movie suggests. As the youngest of the three, Uncas is the one who looks up to both Hawk-eye and Chingachgook for advice and guidance, while Hawk-eye considers Chingachgook his friend.

Mann’s movie was both a critical and financial success, but the Hollywood version of the book has more in common with the George B. Seitz’s 1936 film adaptation of The Last of the Mohicans than Cooper’s book. In the book, there’s no amorous rivalry between Hawk-eye and Duncan and nobody engages in sexual intercourse. The movie has Hawk-eye and Cora making love in Fort William Henry, right after Cora refuses Duncan’s marriage proposal. Actually, in the book, Duncan fancies Cora’s younger sister, Alice, and there is not even the slightest suggestion that Hawk-eye is after Cora. On the contrary, their relationship is more like that between a father and a daughter, as Hawk-eye was old enough to be her father.

One of the major differences regarding characters is David Gamut, who was not just altered from the original character (like Hawkeye was) but removed entirely. Whether this difference from the novel is all that problematic is debatable. He was a weak character, one who was poorly suited to that lifestyle. This is a good example of thinning a book out to improve the film version. Did the film miss David Gamut? No. He added very little to the novel so removing him was probably for the best.

During the film, we frequently see white homesteaders throughout the countryside. This is rather strange considering there was no mention of white homesteaders at any time during the novel. This unnecessary sub-plot storyline is disingenuous to not just the source material but to historical accuracy. There are many instances of the movie creating big historical inaccuracies, but one could argue that makes it a better movie. Facts are not as entertaining (sometimes).

The storyline of white settlers rejecting the idea of being conscripted into the British Army was unnecessary. You can see where they were coming from, and why they thought that might drive the story forward and build an emotional connection to the characters for the audience, but it just comes across as pandering politically. Did the American audience truly need a, “Yeah, go America!”, moment in the movie for it to be enjoyable. Probably not. This movie, as the novel itself, did not need to be this politically motivated. It begs the question of who settled on that change. The director, or the people funding the film?

The false representation of settlers in the movie goes further than just how those settlers looked, ie their skin tone, but how they would behave. The movie portrays the settlers as people of virtue, they lived alongside the native populace in harmony. The time spent pursuing this storyline took too much focus away from the main trio. It arguably contributed to the weakness of the two Native Americans of the group. More time spent focusing on them, rather than the “saintly” settlers would have driven the story better.

The book is somehow more politically correct than the movie, despite being so much older. In the book, we see balanced contributions from our three protagonists. But, in the movie, it is only Hawkeye who takes center stage. Uncas is arguably the most heroic of the group, yet he is put on the back burner. This difference between the book and the movie not only weakens the story but is marginally racist.

Why has the story changed from three heroes to one white hero and his two sidekicks? This did not need to happen to drive the story, so was the change made to pander to the audience? Perhaps. Uncas and Chingachgook barely contribute to the group’s progress as a whole. They don’t speak as much, make decisions, or play a major role at any point. In the book, Hawkeye is an older man who is not likely to risk his life freely, he is quite conservative in many regards. In the book, he is the group’s headstrong leader.

There are many more minor differences between the movie and the book, especially regarding to the focus of the story and the minor characters that help build up the narrative. Nevertheless, without the movie, I could have never visualized the scenery, the costumes, and the warfare the way I did while reading the book after watching the movie. In this respect, the movie also brings great value to understanding the geography surrounding the Hudson River and, why not, adds visual images to Cooper’s lengthy, and sometimes tiring, description. Having said all these, there are quite a few lines in the movie taken straight from the book, which I feel gives the movie the authority it needs.

Although the title of the book refers to Chingachgook, who remains the last of the Mohicans after the death of his son, Uncas, I feel that the story is more about how he became the last of his kind, rather than about Chingachgook. (Apparently, Cooper was wrong, and the line of the Mohicans has survived until today!)

The title is referred to on two different occasions:

• once by Chingachgook who, while Uncas was still alive, says “[W]hen Uncas follows in my footsteps, there will no longer be any of the blood of the sagamores, my boy is the last of the Mohicans.”; and
• by Tamenund, the eldest member of the Lenape (a Native American tribe also referred to as the Delaware, from which the Mohicans branched off), who, at Uncas’s funeral, says, “I have lived to see the last warrior of the wise race of the Mohicans.”

The Last of the Mohicans by James Fenimore Cooper remains a classic of American and world literature and, although it is not an easy read, I believe it is one of the books that everyone should read in their lifetime.

“You can’t make peace with terrorists.” – Interview with Gary Dale Cearley

Author V.M. Simandan

is a Beijing-based Romanian positive psychology counsellor and former competitive archer

Join the discussion 23 Comments

Voicu M. Simandan

excellent job pointing out the major differences between the Book and the movie. I can appreciate the time contraints that a movie must conform to and the resulting difficulty for extensive character development. Typically the movies move in fast foward..for instance the film version of war and Peace…..they just cant include everything the movies would be 4 or more hours. What was done to the LAst of the Mohicans was well beyond reasonable. Changing the characters that live or perish and who slays who…..thank heavens Cooper has long since passed and didnt have to see the film. I would hope if there are any Cooper decendants they will speak out.

@ Ken: There are very few movie adaptions that, in my opinion, are better than the original book. One of them is “The 13 Warrior” (the movie) starring Antonio Banderas vs Michael Crichton’s “The 13th Warrior” (the book).

also, add the fact that “hawkeye” in the movie was actually called “Natty Bumpo” in the novel.

@Doug: In the book he was referred to with both names (plus a few more)!

I must admit that I was younger when the movie came out and though I had tried to read the book, I had found it a bit boring in my immaturity so I never progressed past a few pages. I ended up watching the movie and thought it was a wonderful film full of passion and featuring an excellent cast of characters that delivered a riveting performance. I had thoroughly enjoyed the movie. A few years ago I ended up grabbing a copy of Cooper’s Last of the Mohicans from a friend since I knew my maturity would allow me to read through the story which indeed I did and I found myself captivated. I, for one, enjoy descriptive literature. It is the only way to really experience the storyline first hand. After I read the book I found myself disappointed in the movie. Hollywood is well known for leaving details out of a movie and perhaps even making slight changes. However, once I realized that there were several key elements that had been changed in the movie I was more than just a little upset. I felt that it was unfair for filmmakers to destroy such a classic piece of literature the way that they did and while I still think the movie was excellent, it was no where near how they should have filmed it in accordance with the book. Shame on Hollywood for doing what they did rather than honoring such the classic writing of Cooper.

this was a wonderful website. it helped me in writing a great paper about the book ( and not the movie thankfully ) & i referenced you appropriately.

Good job on this one. Loved the movie and the book, though they are certainly different from each other in “who loves who,” “who dies”, major themes, etc. Great site I found that details the book, characters, themes (you realize how much the movie changes the novel’s character interactions, plot and even over-arching themes) is: http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/mohicans/section1.rhtml . Check it out.

this movie was awsome the book was ok but i personally liked the movie

I have just finished the book and have seen the movie a couple of times. Surely the movie helped imagine the look and feel of most of the characters with the exception of Hawkeye who was obviously an older man in the book. I agree with the difficulty in reading Cooper’s prose but once I was 50-odd pages deep, I feel into a rhythm and from then on it was no problem. I compared reading the book to reading Shakespeare: at first it is terribly hard figuring out what is going on but suddenly, the footing becomes manageable.

I also watched the movie before reading the book and once I had the read the book I found myself disliking the movie. I have since grown up a little and learned to enjoy the movie as long as I don’t try to compare it too much to the book.The differences are quite drastic and I still don’t understand why the characters were changed so much, or who lived and died. I will always remain a huge fan of the book, although it is a difficult read, I love the adventure of it.

Worth pointing out that the movie is based on the earlier film version as muc has on the book – and this is credited at the end. It was the original movie which made the changes. The 1992 film closely follows the plot of the 1930s version. Not that this makes it right – just worth pointing out.

I read the book prior to seeing the movie and am now quite famous for my dislike of the movie. I agree with you that the film characters and story lines are all mixed up and make no sense if you have read the book. I disagree with you that the book helps to visualize the setting of the Hudson Valley. A great deal of the movie was shot in North Carolina…. so it is that scenery that you now know–not the northern Hudson Valley. Imagery from my imagination as I was reading the book was good enough for me. Thanks for the article..at least I know that I am not the only person who has had this reaction to the butchering of the book.

I made the mistake of choosing to watch the movie AFTER I had read the book, only in so far as I fell in love with the book and because of that, I felt that the movie was a disappointing cheap knock-off. Now, that being said, the movie, if looked at as a completely different story all together, is good in it’s own right, however, I do wish they would direct a more- in keeping vesion for those of us who fell in love with Coopers origial work ^_^ The first time I read that book was with my mother in 9th grade and as my reading skills have become more comprehensive, I get even more out of the book than I did then.

2 things: The movie was filmed in N. Carolina, so it gives a somewhat innacurate portrayal of the surroundings. Secondly, “the last of the Mohicans” refers to Uncas. The two quotes you provide say as much. Although theoretically Chingachgook is the last one, he’s old and won’t have any offspring. It is Uncas who was “the last”. Chingachgook is old and is “retiring” and doesn’t see himself as a warrior any more. Furthermore, there are no Mohican women Uncas can have children with.

Finally, both the book and film are wrong about the Mohicans itself. This tribe never existed. It seems to be a fusion of two different tribes, the Mohegans and Mahicans.

I think your analysis of the divergence between the novel and movie is spot on. I had seen the movie many times before attempting to read the book. At first I found the book tedious, but after several attempts, I have come to see the true beauty of Cooper’s writing. The beauty is in the detail for me. What the film makers did is what they did…They produced a beautiful movie, but even the beauty of the movie doesn’t over shadow the genius of writing.

J’ai lu étant gamin une version très résumée et adaptée pour le jeunesse française du dernier des Mohicans, avec des images d’un maître de l’illustration qui s’appelait Le Rallic qui m’avaient marqué autant que l’histoire même de ce coureur des bois. Par la suite, j’ai eu entre les mains différentes versions du roman, certaines allégées de ses longues descriptions et considérations philosophiques de Cooper. Il est vrai que de se plonger dans le texte intégral réclame au départ un certain effort, mais une fois dedans, on éprouve un certain plaisir de lecture, comme si on était transporté à la fois dans le temps historique des événements relatés, mais aussi dans le temps où cette œuvre a été écrite et lue par les contemporains de Fenimore Cooper.

The star, the hero of Cooper’s book is Uncas. It’s obvious the reason Hollywood changed the main character is because American public is not ready to accept an American Indian as the hero. Especially since in the book there’s an undenial chemistry between Uncas, an Indian, and Cora, a white woman. The way Hollywood switched the hero from an Indian to a white man is simply ridiculous. Especially since the switch required a total transformation of Hawk Eye character from an eldery, nearly 60 years old father like figure into a young hot dude! Hawk Eye, as described by Cooper’s book does not exist in the movie. It’s totally a different person with the same name. Sorry, but for me the reason why the movie is completely different from the book is simply racism.

I have enjoyed all these comments as I agree with many of them. I vaguely remember a tv series when I was a kid (the 70’s) and specially the name of Chingachgook sticked from there, but not much more; I’d love to see it again. As many apparently, I loved the movie, which made me read the book, which made me dislike the movie. With all those resources and the possibility of actually making a great really new movie (not a remake of a previous movie from the 30’s) with a version closer to the great Cooper’s original, they didn’t; it could have been just great. It just puzzles me why? As Rosa points out, they enlarged the focus on Hawk eye so much, and reduced it so much on Uncas. Hawk eye is the central character in other Cooper’s books, but not so much in this one (although still very important). Uncas’ role in this book is amazing and the movie just trashes it. The only thing he does by himself is to stupidly get killed for trying to take on (by himself) all of Mawa’s warriors AND Mawa; the Uncas in the book was way more clever than that, and did a lot more than in the movie. Racism is a potential explanation as Rosa suggests but hey, this was the nineties, some interracial love as portrayed in the book was not going to kill a blockbuster if well made; a reversed Pocahontas…

I just saw again some scenes on YouTube and they are really moving, I just wished I had not read the book, or seen the movie, or they had called it something else…

Hmmm, not one comment here on the dignified approach to Magua (and Indians in general) in the movie vs. Magua the cartoon villain of the book. Ok, I will make it. The “Hurons” in the book (perhaps they are Wyandots?) are portrayed as sadistic baddies deserving death, like Japanese caracitures from a second-rate World War Two film. In the 1992 movie, they are not “Others,” but human beings under stress making choices and facing the consequences. Y’know, just like us. As for the “respect” between Heywood and Poe/Bumppo, I much preferred the ambiguity in the movie. Heywood was a liar and a tool, as Hawkeye points out in the 1992 film, so how much respect can you have for that? Yet, they both were willing to die “for” the other at the Huron village, so obviously it was a complex relationship. The book is considerably more pro-British and pro-militarist than the film. Hawkeye refuses to enlist in the war in the film, taking pride in his independence, though of course he is dragged into it anyway. In the book and the 1936 movie, he joins up with the Brits; in the 1992 film, the British are as much an enemy to the proto-Americans as the French are. Once again, this is more complex and true to life, if you have studied the fraught relations between the British and their colonists during the French and Indian War. This is one of those rare cases when the movie outdoes the source material. Michael Mann preserved the best of Cooper’s ideas while ditching the morally retrograde ones. His Indians are dignified, Cora is tough and admirable, and even Alice finally takes charge of her own life (by ending it on her own terms).

You forgot to mention the death of Alice. She commits suicide in the movie but there is not such an event in the book.

Having read the book as a 13 year old, I have to preface much of my critique through the lens of a child. Nevertheless, it stayed with me, and I agree the movie and book are two very different things. Hawkeye was a much older man attempting to survive in a frontier rent by violence and greed. He had no time for romance or petty jealousy. The movie’s love story deflected the energy of what Cooper was attempting to describe, and ruined the story, imo. Though I will admit the two actresses did a remarkable job….

Local pride: I was raised in Glens Falls, NY. The cave, the Falls as well as the Hudson River that Cooper describes are all quite accurate. The cave was locally named Cooper’s Cave a long time ago. One can walk down near it, but you can’t go in it. A viewing platform was erected and it impedes your ability to go down in it. It has plaques with text about its history and references to Cooper’s book. It is quite unremarkable and would be boring to most people except For ‘Last of the Mohicans’ fans. I saw the 1992 movie several times. I always had in mind to read the book and I was finally motivated to start reading the book after revisiting Cooper’s Cave a month ago with my sister. The imagery by JM Cooper was vivid in my mind as I read it – this despite today there is a four lane-wide automobile bridge overhead and 2 paper factories; one on the north and one on the south sides of the Hudson River banks. Fort William Henry still stands at the south end of Lake George – a rebuilt replica open to tourists. And Fort Edward, where General Webb was stationed, was the home to yet another paper factory where my father worked as a blue collar factory worker for many decades. A locally famous 13 x 10 foot painting of Cooper’s Cave by Griffith Baily Coale with Hawkeye and other characters standing at the cave entrance hangs up at the historic and iconic Queensbury Hotel lobby in Glens Falls. The area in general still has much natural beauty; rivers, lakes and mountains that are gorgeous. Even though the 1992 movie was filmed in North Carolina, the scenery is quite similar to the Adirondack mountains of upstate NY. I have lived in NC for the last 25 years and I have visited and hiked many of the NC scenic areas used in the 1992 movie (not because of the movie, but just for hiking and local convenience). The Adirondacks and the Blue Ridge and Smoky mountains of NC share the same long Appalachian chain of mountains and a somewhat similar geologic history. However, I must say the Adirondacks are just a little more gorgeous than the Blue Ridge and Smoky mountains of NC. No offense to the NC mountains.

Thanks for your contribution.

Leave a Reply

Currently you have JavaScript disabled. In order to post comments, please make sure JavaScript and Cookies are enabled, and reload the page. Click here for instructions on how to enable JavaScript in your browser.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Support Romanian Hub

Recommendations.

Toy Train Center

Simandan.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com .

Copyright note

Copyright (c) 2009-2023 Voicu Mihnea Simandan