When the English arrived in Massachusetts in the 1700’s colonists were excited to see acres upon acres of open land. They saw great opportunity in this land, as they would be the first to farm and cultivate it. They also came upon Native Americans. These Indians, having different relationships with animals than the English, did not believe in owning livestock. When the colonists came, they tired to implement their values of owning livestock and transform New England into a civilized colony.
The document “Colonists Encroach on the Stanwix Line”, records a speech made by a Native American, John Killbuck to the governors of three separate English Colonies. He tells of the English and other European Settlers invading Naive American lands base on their own greed and compete against one another. The English haven’t always agreed on bringing about peaceful compromises on the lands they and other European Nations have conquered, instead, wars erupted and whoever were the victors reaped all the rewards, land that consisted of Native American tribes. The Native had tried to make a peaceful compromise of a land dispute by setting a boundary between Native American tribes and the English Colonies. However, with the increase of Europeans flooding
Discovery of land brings with it the right to obtain title either by purchase or conquest, subject to the Indians’ right of occupancy. However, the treaty ending the American Revolutionary War transferred sovereignty and power of the lands under such transfers from the British to the United States. The land conveyance to Johnson in this case was made under English rule. The land came under American rule and thus the transfer to Johnson became invalid under American law after the American Revolution,. Additionally, the Indians had a right to annul the agreement with Johnson and reserve the land for themselves in the treaties between the Indians and the United States,.
“Changes in the Land: Indians, Colonists and the Ecology of New England” was published in 1983 by historian William Cronon. The book focuses on environmentalism and history of New England. Cronon describes the shift from Indian to European dominance, the European’s view of nature through an economic lens, and the anthropogenic changes to the environment that occured. Throughout the book, Cronon argues that the European colonists used various tactics to assert dominance over the Indians.
For example, why would a female Native want to own a hunting knife if her job was to harvest the corn fields? The Natives also worked as a community, willingly giving away objects and tools that no longer served a purpose to them to others that needed them. The lack of desire for ownership confused the English colonists greatly, but also allowed them to easily take advantage of the Native Americans since they were not aware of the land they were sitting on. The only way that an English colonist could own land was if it was given to him by the Crown or if it was purchased from the Natives, which led to colonists making ridiculously unfair deals with Native Americans for monumental amounts of land. For example, one
In 1742 the chief of Onondaga of the Iroquois Confederacy knew that his land that the people shared would become more valuable than it has ever been. (Doc B)The reason for this was because the “white people” also known as the Americans wanted the land of the chief. The feelings of the Chief result in complaining to the representatives of Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia,
As the Europeans settled, they focused on entitling the land to themselves. The Indians began to shift their view as the Europeans started to do whatever with “their” land plots. Animals began to be seen as property as well. They used to, “pray for the spirits of the animals they hunted,” and had close relations to the spirits that embodied them. These relations rapidly changed native culture and soon enough, “they had forgotten most of their traditions because ‘their Old Men are
Throughout the seventeenth century, conflict between Europeans and Native Americans was rampant and constant. As more and more Europeans migrated to America, violence became increasingly consistent. This seemingly institutionalized pattern of conflict begs a question: Was conflict between Europeans and Native Americans inevitable? Kevin Kenny and Cynthia J. Van Zandt take opposing sides on the issue. Kevin Kenny asserts that William Penn’s vision for cordial relations with local Native Americans was destined for failure due to European colonists’ demands for privately owned land.
One Man’s Vision Against a World’s View During the 1600’s the world changed drastically due to the widely held belief that expanding empires would lead to great fortune and world domination. William Penn, an Englishman who was inspired to build a community tailored to his Quaker beliefs (that of the “friendly neighbor), wrote an invitation to his English compatriots regarding the land he saw and his ideas of that land. In “Letters to the Free Society of Traders” (1683) Penn wrote of the land, the plants, and the people favorably.
England began colonizing the Americas in the early 1600’s, the first step in creating the United States we know today. The development of these colonies, historians argue, was most greatly affected by environmental and geographic variations. I support, yet modify, this statement to be that the individual culture of each colony was shaped by the area’s geographical features and surroundings. It was not the people that determined the culture, but the peoples reaction to their geography that molded the culture. Therefore, the main influencer was the geography and natural features of the land.
The Spanish based their colonies on the promise of finding gold and possessing it, while the English Settlers based their colonies on the preaching of Christianity all while believing that the land they possessed and owned was how they would gain their liberty, independence, and ultimately their freedom. The Native Americans believed that the land belonged to not one person, but to a community instead; as long a you showed deep respect for it and cared for it as so mandated by the great spirit. Whether it be by the use of violence, religious education, or respect, every society and every person had different views on how the land and its resources should be
When the Europeans began colonizing the New World, they had a problematic relationship with the Native Americans. The Europeans sought to control a land that the Natives inhabited all their lives. They came and decided to take whatever they wanted regardless of how it affected the Native Americans. They legislated several laws, such as the Indian Removal Act, to establish their authority. The Indian Removal Act had a negative impact on the Native Americans because they were driven away from their ancestral homes, forced to adopt a different lifestyle, and their journey westwards caused the deaths of many Native Americans.
The Natives believed that the Europeans are “edgy, rapacious, and remotely maladroit.” Sure enough, the settlers in Jamestown kenned little about farming and found the environment baffling. It was conspicuous that the colonists needed the avail of the Natives. Despite their inexperience the English dominated the Indians. From “the beginning the Virginia Company indited that the relationship would ineluctably become bellicose: for you Cannot Carry Your Selves so towards them but they will Grow Discontented with Your habitation.”
Ownership of land was the concept of private property that one person or group owned permanent, absolute control of a part of land. This was difficult to understand for many Native Americans because they have practiced a communistic land system for a long period of time. Land was not a product, perceptible, or an inert item that could be sized and sold. The Native Americans never established a structure or civilization of personal land ownership. Their land was not possessed by people and instead belonged to the community as a whole.
The lands that the Native Americans were previously calling their homelands were immediately sold and used for their resources (timber, mining, gold etc.) I like the quote under the Treaty Timeline portion that highlights this best as quoted by Ohiyesa, “The greatest object of their lives seems to be to acquire possessions-to be rich. They desire to possess the whole world” (Why Treaties Matter, How Treaties Changed Lands and Lifeways) I think that this another example of how we have been socialized to believe the Eurocentric perspective that is taught in textbooks.
