Metacom's War (King Philip's War, 1675-1678) was an armed uprising in which Metacom, a Wampanoag leader, united New England Native peoples against English colonial expansion. In AP World, it's a CED-listed example of local resistance to growing state power in Topic 4.6.
Metacom's War, which the English called King Philip's War, was a conflict from 1675 to 1678 between a coalition of Native American peoples in New England and English colonists. Metacom (whom the English nicknamed "King Philip") was the leader of the Wampanoag. As colonists kept seizing land, pressuring Native peoples to convert, and undermining Indigenous self-rule, Metacom pulled together several tribes to push back by force. The result was one of the deadliest conflicts per capita in American history, with towns burned on both sides and devastating losses for Native communities.
For AP World, the war is less about New England details and more about the pattern it represents. The CED names Metacom's War as an example of local resistance to expanding state power between 1450 and 1750. Empires and colonial states were centralizing and spreading in this era, and groups on the ground fought back. Metacom's War is the New England version of a story playing out worldwide, from the Pueblo Revolt in New Spain to the Cossack revolts in Russia to Ana Nzinga's resistance in West Africa.
This term lives in Unit 4: Transoceanic Interconnections (1450-1750), specifically Topic 4.6, Internal and External Challenges to State Power. It directly supports learning objective AP World 4.6.A, which asks you to explain the effects of the development of state power from 1450 to 1750. The essential knowledge for that objective says state expansion triggered resistance from social, political, and economic groups at the local level, and it lists Metacom's War by name alongside the Pueblo Revolts, the Fronde, the Cossack revolts, the Maratha-Mughal conflict, and Ana Nzinga's resistance. In other words, the College Board hands you this example. Your job is to know what it shows: European colonial expansion in the Americas wasn't unopposed, and Indigenous peoples organized real, coordinated military resistance to defend land and sovereignty. It also ties into the Governance theme, since it's a case of state power provoking pushback.
Keep studying AP World Unit 4
Pequot War (Unit 4)
The Pequot War (1630s) came a generation before Metacom's War in the same region. Together they show escalation. Early colonial wars destroyed individual Native nations, and by 1675 Metacom understood that only a multi-tribal coalition had a chance against the colonists.
Pueblo Revolt (Unit 4)
The Pueblo Revolt of 1680 is Metacom's War's twin on the CED list, just against the Spanish instead of the English. If an MCQ or essay asks for local resistance to colonial state power in the Americas, these two are interchangeable evidence, and pairing them makes a stronger comparison.
Colonial Expansion (Unit 4)
Metacom's War is what colonial expansion looks like from the receiving end. Land seizures, settler population growth, and pressure on Native sovereignty were the direct causes of the war, so the two concepts are cause and effect.
Anti-colonial resistance (Units 6-7)
Metacom's War is an early link in a chain that runs through the whole course. The pattern of Indigenous and colonized peoples resisting imperial control shows up again in Unit 6 (think the Boxer Rebellion) and beyond, which makes this a great continuity-over-time example.
Metacom's War almost always shows up as an illustrative example, not as a deep-dive topic. On multiple choice, expect stems like "Which of the following is an example of local resistance?" where Metacom's War is the correct answer (or a tempting distractor next to events from other periods). You don't need battle-by-battle detail. You need to identify it as Indigenous resistance to English colonial expansion in the Americas, 1450-1750. On free-response questions, it's strongest as evidence. For an LEQ or DBQ about challenges to state power, resistance to European expansion, or effects of colonization in the Americas, naming Metacom's War with one sentence of context (Wampanoag-led coalition, 1675-1678, fighting English land encroachment) is exactly the kind of specific evidence that earns points. Comparing it to the Pueblo Revolt can also power a comparison essay.
Both were Native-colonist wars in 17th-century New England, so they blur together easily. The Pequot War (1636-1638) was earlier and targeted one nation, the Pequot, who were nearly destroyed. Metacom's War (1675-1678) was later, larger, and featured a multi-tribal coalition under Metacom's leadership. Remember it this way: Pequot came first and hit one people; Metacom's War was the big coordinated pushback decades later. Only Metacom's War is named in the AP World CED.
Metacom's War (1675-1678), also called King Philip's War, was an uprising of allied Native American peoples led by the Wampanoag leader Metacom against English colonists in New England.
The CED lists it under Topic 4.6 as an example of local resistance to expanding state power between 1450 and 1750, supporting learning objective AP World 4.6.A.
The war was caused by English colonial expansion, including land seizures and threats to Native sovereignty, making it a direct effect of colonization in the Americas.
It belongs to a worldwide pattern in this period that includes the Pueblo Revolt, the Fronde, the Cossack revolts, the Maratha conflict with the Mughals, and Ana Nzinga's resistance.
Despite fierce resistance, the war ended in devastating defeat for Native peoples in New England and accelerated colonial control of the region.
On the exam, use it as specific evidence that European expansion provoked organized Indigenous resistance, not passive acceptance.
Metacom's War (1675-1678), also known as King Philip's War, was a conflict in which Metacom, leader of the Wampanoag, united several Native nations to fight English colonial expansion in New England. In AP World, it's a CED-listed example of local resistance to state power in Topic 4.6.
No. Despite early Native successes and one of the highest casualty rates of any American war, the coalition was defeated, Metacom was killed in 1676, and Native power in southern New England was largely broken. The war matters on the exam as an example of resistance, not victory.
The Pequot War (1636-1638) was an earlier conflict that nearly wiped out a single nation, the Pequot. Metacom's War (1675-1678) was a much larger, later war fought by a multi-tribal coalition under Wampanoag leadership. Only Metacom's War appears by name in the AP World CED.
English colonists nicknamed Metacom "King Philip," so colonial sources called the conflict King Philip's War. Both names refer to the same 1675-1678 war; the AP CED lists it as "Metacom's War (King Philip's War)," so either name works on the exam.
Yes, it's named in the CED's essential knowledge for learning objective AP World 4.6.A as an example of local resistance to state expansion. Expect it in multiple-choice questions about resistance and as usable evidence in LEQs or DBQs about challenges to state power from 1450 to 1750.
Connect this key term to the AP exam workflow: review the course, practice questions, and check related study tools.
Review units, study guides, and course resources.
Check this vocabulary in multiple-choice context.
Apply key concepts in written AP responses.
Estimate the exam score you are working toward.
Review the highest-yield facts before practice.
Put the full course together before test day.