The Separatists
The Separatists, or Independents, were English Protestants who occupied
the extreme wing of Puritanism. The Separatists were severely critical
of the Church of England and wanted to either destroy it or separate
from it. Their chief complaint was that too many elements of the Roman Catholic Churchhad
been retained, such as the ecclesiastical courts, clerical vestments,
altars and the practice of kneeling. The Separatists were also critical
of the lax standards of public behavior, citing widespread drunkenness
and the failure of many to keep the Sabbath properly.
Referring to themselves as the Saints, the Separatists believed that they had been elected by God for salvation (see Calvinism)
and feared spiritual contamination if they worshiped with those outside
of their congregations, often referred to as the Strangers.
In 1608, a community of English separatists decided to escape
persecution by moving to Holland, an area long known for its toleration.
Dutch society was so welcoming that the Pilgrims, as they had come to
be known, eventually feared that they were losing control over their
children. In 1620, they set out for a more remote location that would
allow them to protect their community. This effort resulted in the
founding of Plymouth Colony.
Other contemporary religious dissenters, the Puritans, believed that the Church of England was badly in need of reform, but could be salvaged.
Plymouth Plantation 1620
The portrayal of Native Americans throughout the establishment of
Plymouth Plantation stands in curious relation to Braford's narrative.
First of all, there is the initial landing party, with its description
of the men led by Captain Miles Standish, firing shots into the darkness
at "a hideous and great crie." This they mistook for a "companie of
wolves, or such like wild beasts," until the next morning's
skirmish--when the "arrowes came flying" and one "lustie man, and no
less valiente" who "was seen shoot .3. arrowes" and "stood .3. shot of a
musket..." (Wheelwright, 25-26). This is hardly the humble servant
offering up the corn at the mere sight of the Pilgrim's arrival (see
the Rotunda fresco). And when Samoset, the first representative of the Indians, comes to speak (in "broken English") with the Pilgrims, "he came bouldly amongst
them" (emphasis added); and having had previous contact with Europeans,
he presumably knew as much or more about the Pilgrims than they about
him. Squanto, who had been to England and could communicate well with
the colonists, and who taught them "how to set their corne, wher to take
fish, and to procure other commodities," is understood by the Pilgrims
as "a spetiall instrument sent of God for their good beyond their
expectation" (Wheelwright, 41). Regardless of the sense of utility in
such an expression (all things being for them the effect or instrument
of God), there is an undeniable gratitude, and even the sense of
dependence that those must have before one who would provide aid and
instruction.
The treaty with Massasoit was initiated not by the Pilgrims but by the sachem himself, who had already made an equivalent pact with earlier explorers. The success of the treaty during Massasoit's lifetime suggests an equality, fairness, and tolerance that would be idealized and wistfully re-presented in various remembrances of the overall colonial experience. It allows both the positive exemplar of the 'Indian' in Massasoit, and reassurance of European good-faith in dealing with him. It follows:
The treaty with Massasoit was initiated not by the Pilgrims but by the sachem himself, who had already made an equivalent pact with earlier explorers. The success of the treaty during Massasoit's lifetime suggests an equality, fairness, and tolerance that would be idealized and wistfully re-presented in various remembrances of the overall colonial experience. It allows both the positive exemplar of the 'Indian' in Massasoit, and reassurance of European good-faith in dealing with him. It follows:
.1. That neither he (Massasoit) nor any of his, should injurie or doe hurt to any of their peopl(e)..2. That if any of his did any hurte to any of theirs, he should send the offender, that they might punish him.
.3. That if any thing were taken away from any of theirs, he should cause it to be restored; and they should do like to him.
.4. If any did unjustly warr against him, they would aide him; if any did warr against them, he should aide them. He should send to his neighbours confederates, to certifie them of his, that they might not wrong them, but might be likewise comprised in the conditions of peace.
Puritans 1630
Although
there was little difference in the base religious belief between the
Pilgrims and Puritan's, the Pilgrim's in general, treated with the
Native American's on a more "humanitarian" level after the initial
encounters. After the Puritan's arrival 10 years later, the treatment of
the Indian's became that of conquer to ignorant savage, and they were
regarded as property to be acquired, killed, captured and sold as slaves
to pay for the expense of colonization.
Edited Appletons Encyclopedia, Copyright © 2001 VirtualologyT
Slavery in the New Puritan America
In 1607, English settlers established Jamestown as the first permanent English colony in the New World.[4]Tobacco became the chief crop of the colony, due to the efforts of John Rolfe in 1611. Once it became clear that tobacco was going to drive the Jamestown colony, more labor was needed. At first, indentured servantswere used as the needed labor.[5] These
servants provided up to seven years of free service and had their trip
to Jamestown paid for by someone in Jamestown. Once the seven years was
over, the indentured servant was free to live in Jamestown as a regular
citizen. However, colonists began to see indentured servant as too
costly, and in 1619, Dutch traders brought the first African slaves to
Jamestown.[6]
Most Native American tribal groups practiced some
form of slavery before the European introduction of African slavery into
North America; but none exploited slave labor on a large scale. Indian
groups frequently enslaved war captives whom they used for small-scale
labor and in ritual sacrifice. Most of these so-called Indian slaves
tended to live, however, on the fringes of Indian society. Although not
much is known about them, there is little evidence that they were
considered racially inferior to the Indians who held power over them.
Nor did Indians buy and sell captives in the pre-colonial era, although
they sometimes exchanged enslaved Indians with other tribes in peace
gestures or in exchange for their own members. In fact, the word "slave"
may not even accurately apply to these captive people.
Once Europeans arrived as colonialists in North
America, the nature of Indian slavery changed abruptly and dramatically.
Indians found that British settlers, especially those in the southern
colonies, eagerly purchased or captured Indians to use as forced labor
in cultivating tobacco, rice, and indigo. More and more, Indians began
selling war captives to whites rather than integrating them into their
own societies. And as the demand for labor in the West Indies became
insatiable, whites began to actively enslave Indians for export to the
so-called "sugar islands."
Until late in the 18th century, Indian slaves worked on English plantations along side African slaves and even, occasionally, white indentured servants. Women and children frequently were used as menial laborers or domestic servants. By 1720, most whites in the southeastern British colonies preferred enslaved Africans to Indians for obvious reasons. Indians could, for one thing, more easily run away into the wilderness. Also, Europeans always feared the possibility of a coalition of enslaved Africans and enslaved Indians, aided by free Indians on the frontier. What’s more, English settlers played the Indians off against one another in the various Indian wars or wars of empire fought between European colonial powers, using them as allies or as paid mercenaries. Additionally, Europeans commonly believed that Native American men, culturally conditioned to be hunters, considered fieldwork to be women’s work, and that Indian warriors would not adapt easily to agricultural labor in comparison to enslaved Africans. Most importantly, the demand for enslaved labor in the tobacco and rice plantations came to far exceed the potential supply of Indian captives, especially once European diseases began to decimate Indian populations and once the Indians began to more effectively resist European powers.
The Indian slave trade lasted only until around 1730, and it was characterized by a series of devastating wars among the tribes. Those Indians nearer the European settlements raided tribes farther in the interior in the quest for slaves to be sold, especially to the British. Before 1700, the Westos in Carolina dominated much of the Indian slave trade until the English, allied with the Savannah, who resented Westo control of the trade, wiped them out. The Westo tribal group was completely eliminated; its survivors were scattered or else sold into slavery in Antigua.
A similar pattern of friendly and then hostile
relations among the English and Indians followed in the southeastern
colonies. For example the Creek, a loose confederacy of many different
groups who had banded together to defend themselves against
slave-raiding, allied with the English and moved on the Apalachee in
Spanish Florida, destroying them as a group of people in the quest for
Indian slaves. These raids also destroyed several other Florida Indian
tribes, including the Timucua. Indeed, most of the colonial-era Indians
of Florida were killed, enslaved, or scattered. It is estimated that
English-Creek raids on Florida yielded 4,000 Indian slaves between 1700
and 1705.
A few years later, the Florida Savannahs (or
Shawnee) raided in similar fashion the Cherokee. In North Carolina, the
Tuscarora, fearing among other things that the English planned to
enslave them as well as take their land, attacked the English in a war
that lasted from 1711 to 1713. In this war, Carolina whites, aided by
the Yamasee, completely vanquished the Tuscarora, taking thousands of
captives as slaves. Within a few years, a similar fate befell the Yuchis
and the Yamasee, who had fallen out of favor with the British.
In Mississippi and Tennessee, the war-like Chickasaw
played both the French and British off against each other and preyed on
the Choctaw, traditional allies of the French, as well as the Arkansas,
the Tunica, and the Taensa, establishing slave depots throughout their
territories. A single Chickasaw raid in 1706 on the Choctaw yielded 300
Indian captives for the English. In response, the French armed the
Natchez, who lived on the banks of the Mississippi, and the Illinois
against the Chickasaw. By 1729, the Natchez, along with a number of
enslaved and runaway blacks who lived amongst them, rose up against the
French and were massacred in turn by an army composed of French
soldiers, Choctaw warriors, and enslaved Africans.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment