ther Strachey was uninformed, or Pocahontas was married to an
Indian--a not violent presumption considering her age and the fact
that war between Powhatan and the whites for some time had cut off
intercourse between them--or Strachey referred to her marriage with
Rolfe, whom he calls by mistake Kocoum. If this is to be accepted,
then this paragraph must have been written in England in 1616, and have
referred to the marriage to Rolfe it "some two years since," in 1614.

That Pocahontas was a gentle-hearted and pleasing girl, and, through her
acquaintance with Smith, friendly to the whites, there is no doubt; that
she was not different in her habits and mode of life from other Indian
girls, before the time of her kidnapping, there is every reason to
suppose. It was the English who magnified the imperialism of her father,
and exaggerated her own station as Princess. She certainly put on no
airs of royalty when she was "cart-wheeling" about the fort. Nor
does this detract anything from the native dignity of the mature, and
converted, and partially civilized woman.

We should expect there would be the discrepancies which have been
noticed in the estimates of her age. Powhatan is not said to have kept
a private secretary to register births in his family. If Pocahontas gave
her age correctly, as it appears upon her London portrait in 1616,
aged twenty-one, she must have been eighteen years of age when she was
captured in 1613 This would make her about twelve at the time of Smith's
captivity in 1607-8. There is certainly room for difference of opinion
as to whether so precocious a woman, as her intelligent apprehension of
affairs shows her to have been, should have remained unmarried till the
age of eighteen. In marrying at least as early as that she would have
followed the custom of her tribe. It is possible that her intercourse
with the whites had raised her above such an alliance as would be
offered her at the court of Werowocomoco.

We are without any record of the life of Pocahontas for some years.
The occasional mentions of her name in the "General Historie" are so
evidently interpolated at a late date, that they do not aid us. When
and where she took the name of Matoaka, which appears upon her London
portrait, we are not told, nor when she was called Amonata, as Strachey
says she was "at more ripe yeares." How she was occupied from the
departure of Smith to her abduction, we can only guess. To follow her
authentic hist