Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

mikekohr

(2,312 posts)
108. PILGRIMS, PURITANS, CHRISTIANS, COLONISTS:
Mon Feb 25, 2013, 02:59 PM
Feb 2013

In 1636, eager to appropriate land belonging to the Pequot people, an alliance was formed with the Narragansett People. Surrounding a Peqout village on the site of present day Mystic, Connecticut, this force promptly set fire to the village and put to the sword all those that attempted escape. In an hours time seven were taken captive, seven escaped and between 600 to 700 lay dead. 31). 77).

William Bradford described the slaughter in these words, "It was a fearful sight to see them thus frying in the fire, and the streams of blood quenching the same, and horrible was the stink and stench thereof; but the victory seemed a sweet sacrifice and they gave praise thereof to God." 1)

The Narragansetts were mortified at the slaughter and pleaded in vain to Captain John Underhill, "It is naught, it is naught, because it is too furious and slays too many men." 1) The humanitarian concerns of the Narragansetts were rebuked. And in their witnessing the slaughter of the Pequot, the Narragansetts saw a portent and vision of what would befall their people in a few short years at the hands of the rapidly expanding colonies.

Underhill would later justify the killing of women and children by quoting the Holy Bible, "Sometimes the Scripture declareth women and children must perish with their parents." 31)

It was not enough to merely slaughter the Pequot people . Hoping to wipe their memory from history, laws were passed making it a crime to even utter the word Pequot. These efforts to shape history have only been partially successful. There are those that remember and are aware.

On December 19th 1675, six days before the celebration of Christmas, an armed force was lead into battle against the once friendly Wampanoag people, at the place that was to become known as, "The Great Swamp Massacre."

The Wampanoags, .were no longer willing to yield land to the rapidly growing colonies. This transgression would be dealt with forcefully. In the early morning hours this army attacked a sleeping village of mostly women, children, and old people. Setting fire to the village homes, and burning the Wampanoag people to death. Over 2000 Wampanoag People were slaughtered at this place.

One Christian soldier, sickened by the stench of burning flesh and horrified by the screams of the dying,, asked of his commander, "Is burning alive, men, women, and children, consistent with the benevolent principles of the Gospel?" 12).

Increase Mather rejoiced in his writing, that when survivors of this massacre "....came to see the ashes of their friends, mingled with the ashes of their fort.... where the English had been doing a good day's work, they Howl'd, they Roar'd, they Stamp'd, they tore their hair,.... and were the pictures of so many Devils in Desperation." 31)

The leader of the Wampanoag, Metacomet, a man the colonists called King Phillip, was killed shortly afterward. The body of Metacomet was drawn and quartered. Metacomet's severed head, was impaled on a iron spike which was driven into the ramparts of a bridge. This ghastly trophy remained upon the bridge for the next twenty years, a warning to those that might oppose the will and wishes of the Colonists. 12)

Those Wampanoag, unfortunate to be captured alive, were placed on a slave ship bound for the Bahama's and sold into slavery, yielding a handsome profit for the colonies. Metacomet's wife and children were among those sent into slavery. They were never to see their homeland again.

Many rationalize the wars between the colonists and their Native neighbors as conflicts that resulted from two cultures that did not understand one another. This thinking is often stated along with the idea that if the Native People would have just adapted to the "superior" culture of the European people then all conflict would have been mitigated. Examination of the "Blue Laws," refutes this thinking.

The "Blue Laws" were designed not to "elevate" the Native People to the European concept of civilization but rather to reduce Native People to a level less than human. Among the various "Blue Laws" were statutes whose intent was to reduce social association of White and Native People.

Many within colonial communities, found the Native way of life more desirable than that of their own. These "converts" lived with and adopted the dress and life-ways of their Native neighbors. To eliminate this threat from within, the "Blue Laws" forbade the wearing of Native dress, they forbade the practice of Native spiritual belief by both White AND Native Peoples, it was forbidden to wear ones hair long in the fashion of the Native People. Those that were convicted of violating these laws could expect the death penalty. 31) 1)

But perhaps most telling of all, in part as a result of the legacy of the "Blue Laws", the Massachusetts legislature in 1789 passed a law that forbade the teaching of reading and writing to the Native People. Violators of this law were also subject to the penalty of death. 1)

Today America recoils in horror as it examines the religious extremism and intolerance of the Taliban legacy in Afghanistan. But we forget that we once had a Taliban in America, they were called Pilgrims, Puritans, and Colonists, and we honor and feast their memory each year at the holiday of Thanksgiving.

It is an ironic facet of the American Myth that the Pilgrims and Puritans are popularly held forth as an example of a people setting out in search of religious tolerance and cultural freedom. In truth these Europeans set out for a place were they would ultimately enforce their own version of religious, cultural and political correctness upon others.

While there was a degree of cultural misunderstanding between the colonists and their Native benefactors, the understanding that did exist was far more complete than many would have us believe. But one conclusion is inescapable. The colonists understood that Native People stood in the way of their appropriation of land needed for expansion of the growing colonies. The Pilgrims, the Puritans, and their compatriots, like the other European people that followed them to America, would use any excuse, any method conceivable to take the land they desired.
http://www.brotherhooddays.com/HEROES.html#The Pilgrims

reprinted here with permission of author, Mike Kohr

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

K/R. Also, there was not such thing as "property", as we know it. NYC_SKP Feb 2013 #1
There most certainly WAS property as we know it. It was owned, allocated and protected by the tribe. KittyWampus Feb 2013 #27
That's actually not true. Matariki Feb 2013 #51
And gold was considered to be useless... Veri1138 Feb 2013 #81
So who's really the more "civilized" race? Brigid Feb 2013 #2
You see malaise Feb 2013 #6
didn't the league of Iriquois predate the white man coming to America? dsc Feb 2013 #3
I think it did. white_wolf Feb 2013 #5
Old and wise men were their politicians Warpy Feb 2013 #8
They also had the wisdom to give representation to the 7th generation regarding all decisions Dragonfli Feb 2013 #24
you speak truth. BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2013 #57
kind of like every other pre-industrial culture. HiPointDem Feb 2013 #67
Yes, it remains the second oldest representative parliament in the World mikekohr Feb 2013 #110
Part true, for some groups of NA, lots of bullshit too. NA had slavery Exultant Democracy Feb 2013 #4
" there was not a thief, nor a vicious man, nor an adulteress, nor was a bad woman ..." Coyotl Feb 2013 #7
We Indians are Latin America's moral reserve. We act according to a universal law that consists of mikekohr Feb 2013 #116
Right on! Coyotl Feb 2013 #120
Talking to Owls and Butterflies Octafish Feb 2013 #9
Reminds me of "Black Elk Speaks." Beartracks Feb 2013 #19
True but they would have, eventually treestar Feb 2013 #10
not much advantage in being a thief when you depend on your tribe for everything, so you're HiPointDem Feb 2013 #68
So no other tribes were ever involved in one's life? Bandit Feb 2013 #98
what is your problem? i'm obviously talking about within one's own tribe. and. fyi. there are HiPointDem Feb 2013 #105
I got to visit Uluru treestar Feb 2013 #104
That part is total BS dbackjon Feb 2013 #99
Whatever did they do without Walmart? nm rhett o rick Feb 2013 #11
Of all the people thoughtout history the American Indian is my favorite madokie Feb 2013 #12
They lived their lives in tune with mother nature. AlbertCat Feb 2013 #15
Yes they had wars and conflict just like all humans do zeemike Feb 2013 #32
Counting coup was limited to a few Plains nations, and developed long after contact with whites Recursion Feb 2013 #34
"developed long after contact with whites" zeemike Feb 2013 #36
This book is a good start Recursion Feb 2013 #39
I am sure that is a good book zeemike Feb 2013 #52
Thank you! cabot Feb 2013 #40
Another tidbit that is often neglected to be mentioned is... Javaman Feb 2013 #85
Columbus noted in his journals that young girls of the ages 9 to 10 were the most desired by his men mikekohr Feb 2013 #111
They hunted every mammal larger than the bison to extinction Recursion Feb 2013 #35
Including horses... Peter cotton Feb 2013 #43
LOL! Killed off the dinosaurs too, I reckon. Maybe even caused the ice age with all those campfirea! Zorra Feb 2013 #62
No, the dinosaurs were 65 million years before humans Recursion Feb 2013 #64
I don't think you know what you're talking about madokie Feb 2013 #83
Really? Recursion Feb 2013 #84
Really madokie Feb 2013 #88
It is easier to justify the disposession and near extirmination of a People when you marginalize mikekohr Feb 2013 #103
Or perhaps massive climate change was the culprit, but let's blame the Indians anyway mikekohr Feb 2013 #86
The earliest evidence found is 18kya. Where are you getting 28k-38k? Recursion Feb 2013 #87
Monte Verde site in Chile may date to 33,000 BP mikekohr Feb 2013 #101
I love how you assume I haven't read Mann Recursion Feb 2013 #102
You asked for a source and now you turn the posting of the source mikekohr Feb 2013 #106
What animal, at that time, was bigger than a bison and savannah43 Feb 2013 #94
Bison are clearly not bigger than the bison Recursion Feb 2013 #96
Bison are far larger than Caribou, even Sarah Palin knows this mikekohr Feb 2013 #107
The megafauna of the North American continent included mammoths, giant ground sloths, mastodons... Ikonoklast Feb 2013 #97
Before the white man came, there were no horses. hobbit709 Feb 2013 #13
Well, that certainly makes the demise of the NA Indian all worthwhile, doesn't it? nt. OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #14
Just pointing out that horse were an invasive species, just like many others that came with them hobbit709 Feb 2013 #16
horse were an invasive species, AlbertCat Feb 2013 #18
Humans on the earth are like bacteria on the surface of an orange.... OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #20
par·a·site iamthebandfanman Feb 2013 #23
"The earth is an organism, and that organism has a skin; that skin has diseases... alterfurz Feb 2013 #89
Before the white man came, there were no horses. AlbertCat Feb 2013 #17
To put it that way, no. But there is a great deal of respect for their close relationship with gtar100 Feb 2013 #63
So don't lay out falsely narrow choices. AlbertCat Feb 2013 #115
Haha Like all Americans today are the same. gtar100 Feb 2013 #117
There were horses in NA until around the time that the natives crossed over from Siberia. cemaphonic Feb 2013 #74
Over-romanticized twaddle. Peter cotton Feb 2013 #21
Would One Want To Elaborate On The Profundity Of "Over-romanticized twaddle"? cantbeserious Feb 2013 #22
Over-romanticized twaddle lacks profundity by definition. Peter cotton Feb 2013 #41
A Recursive Definition - Not Very Illuminating cantbeserious Feb 2013 #59
On the contrary. Peter cotton Feb 2013 #78
We Will Have To Agree To Disagree cantbeserious Feb 2013 #80
Welcome to DU. I look forward to more of your posts. nt msanthrope Feb 2013 #118
Thanks! Peter cotton Feb 2013 #121
This message was self-deleted by its author datasuspect Feb 2013 #79
Couching some essential truths... Orsino Feb 2013 #93
Weren't there 500 nations? Did all of them have the same laws and way of life? Did all of them get lunamagica Feb 2013 #25
IIRC, most if not all Native American tribes were essentially matriarchal. kestrel91316 Feb 2013 #30
There were a few, but most were patriarchal and practiced a warrior cult Recursion Feb 2013 #33
PILGRIMS, PURITANS, CHRISTIANS, COLONISTS: mikekohr Feb 2013 #108
no such generalization can be made. there's a wide variation in time and space. HiPointDem Feb 2013 #71
Before individual property rights, property belonged to tribes. You'd no choice but adhere to tribal KittyWampus Feb 2013 #26
"Don't romantize tribal life." - Seems to work pretty well for the wealthy. n/t jtuck004 Feb 2013 #28
Did they have plumbing, sewerage and heating systems? Nye Bevan Feb 2013 #29
Yes, see Central Mexico circa 1400, as to the theft of Manhattan mikekohr Feb 2013 #109
The First Nations practiced genocidal warfare, slavery, and hunted species to extinction Recursion Feb 2013 #31
Shh, the noble savage, in perfect harmony with nature and each other shall not be questioned. X_Digger Feb 2013 #47
I like the drift of this Democracyinkind Feb 2013 #37
Ah, I read your post after writing my own Matariki Feb 2013 #50
Great Post. nt mikekohr Feb 2013 #114
Well I dated this beautiful Seminole, DeadEyeDyck Feb 2013 #38
A reminder moondust Feb 2013 #42
The Matrix? Peter cotton Feb 2013 #44
LOL moondust Feb 2013 #54
Thank you for this. ananda Feb 2013 #45
How to Write the Great American Indian Novel CBGLuthier Feb 2013 #46
Very nice. Matariki Feb 2013 #49
That's a very romanticized view. Matariki Feb 2013 #48
I don't romanticize Native Americans ismnotwasm Feb 2013 #53
most tribal societies are socialistic. it's kind of a feature. HiPointDem Feb 2013 #72
What I see in this thread City of Mills Feb 2013 #55
Lame Deer wasn't around at the time either Recursion Feb 2013 #56
I think it's ironic that you say so, considering that Lame Deer spent most of his life living HiPointDem Feb 2013 #70
Where, pray, would I find indian history but in books - written by "red", "white", "historian" and Democracyinkind Feb 2013 #76
I'm confused Matariki Feb 2013 #77
well, I'm getting an education from this thread. BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2013 #58
A lot of imperialist nostalgia here. Nolimit Feb 2013 #60
so true. white people just love indians -- now. HiPointDem Feb 2013 #73
They recieved their spiritual enlightenment from Aliens and Bigfoots Demo_Chris Feb 2013 #61
Desmond Tutu: "When the white man came, they had the Bible, and we had the land. And they said, struggle4progress Feb 2013 #65
not original to tutu. e.g. here's a book from 1976: HiPointDem Feb 2013 #75
thanx! struggle4progress Feb 2013 #100
Tecumseh on the white man's religion: alterfurz Feb 2013 #91
Tecumseh's Creed mikekohr Feb 2013 #113
absence of locks, private property, prisons, etc isn't specific to native americans; it's the usual HiPointDem Feb 2013 #66
I was once informed by an african immigrant quakerboy Feb 2013 #69
Ronald Reagan on Native Americans mikekohr Feb 2013 #82
Unless you belonged to another tribe. Brickbat Feb 2013 #90
The quote is romantic - a longing for a heritage that was torn, instead of let to evolve. toby jo Feb 2013 #92
thank you niyad Feb 2013 #95
This was posted By Randy Isbister, my Native friend from Saskatchewan, on my Facebook Page mikekohr Feb 2013 #112
This is the kind of sentimental tripe that appeals to people who didn't pay attention in their msanthrope Feb 2013 #119
You should read "Lame Deer, Seeker of Visions." from which the lead post was taken mikekohr Feb 2013 #122
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"Before our white br...»Reply #108