Burmese Days

Even though there are many articles show us much information at these times, the details may be so different from each other that the Colonial Era is still in mystery for most of us today. For instance, some of us may know the Native Americans as brutal and cruel people without understanding deeply about their life. Baily describes their life before the arrivals of the Europeans as a peaceful life and rich culture. He tells us that they have their own civilization from the organization of family and the country 1. The author also explores the foundation of new societies as bloody and costly ways when the Europeans from many countries came to Indian land. The evidence is that there are many terrifying encounter among these countries because of the conflict in building their own society

Mary Rowlandson was captured from her home in Lancaster, Massachusetts by Wampanoag Indians during King Phillip’s War. She was held captive for several months. When she was released she penned her story, A Narrative of the Captivity and Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson. During much of her story she refers to the Indians as savage beasts and heathens but at times seems admire them and appreciate their treatment of her. Mary Rowlandson has a varying view of her Indian captors because she experienced their culture and realized it was not that different from Puritan culture.

He creates tension and division between the Natives and the Napikawans (whites) to illustrate the relationship and encounters between the colonizer and colonized. He breaks the traditional stereotypes that Natives are savage by limiting the perspective to the Natives. From the Natives’ point of view, the reader is able to understand that the Napikawans formed treaties with the Natives, introduced new diseases, and scam a majority of their land. Fools Crow incorporates Pikuni’s words and theology with English vernacular to represent the intermingling of cultures. Welch deliberately excludes the translations of the Pikuni’s words to represent the resistance and rebellion of the Natives against European ways. It also illustrates the struggle on Napikawans to communicate and understand the colonized’s culture. On the other hand, Welch, a Native American, writes Fools Crow in English to depict mimicry and altering one’s culture to adapt to European standards. Welch uses oral storytelling to preserve the Pikuni’s culture as the Napikawans oppress the Blackfeet way of life. Welch effectively shows the first encounter between Napikawans and Natives from the indigenous perspective. As a descendant of Natives, I felt Welch brought awareness of Native life pre and post European contact. In Western society the indigenous people are viewed as savage and wild creatures who only smoke tobacco and

Beginning in the sixteenth century, Europeans made the voyage to a “new world” in order to achieve dreams of opportunity and riches. In this other world the Europeans came upon another people, which naturally led to a cultural exchange between different groups of people. Although we commonly refer to European and Indian relations as being between just two very different groups of people, it is important to recognize this is not entirely true. Although the settlers of the new world are singularly referred to as Europeans, each group of people came from a different nation and with different motives and expectations of the new world. Similarly, the Indians were neither a united group nor necessarily friendly with each other. Due to the

The crown depicted the Indians as intractable, only to find that settlers resorted to violence against the Indians precisely because of their supposed intractability. Indigenous peoples, for their part, fought among themselves and against advancing settlers. All groups sought to “territorialize” their societies to secure themselves against competitors. In the final chapters, Langfur extends and qualifies this complicated story. In the later eighteenth century, settler pressures grew, stressing crown policies and threatening indigenous social orders, until all-out war broke out after 1808. For Langfur this was no Manichean battle between European invaders and indigenous victims. To a dominant narrative of violence he juxtaposes a “parallel history of cooperation” among Europeans, Africans, and Indians, and he concludes that war itself must be understood in terms of “the relationship of cooperative enemies.”

The reader gets a rare and exotic understanding of a totally foreign and ancient culture experiencing the growing pains of colonial expansion during the British domination

Looking throughout the overwhelming events the American Revolution had on everyone involved, allows us to examine how the governments’ policies toward the Indians changed over time. It shows how the policy changes effected the Indians as well as the Americans’, their attitudes toward each other as the American’s pushed westward and the Indians resisted. Then the actions on both sides which lead up to the final removal of all Indians to west of the Mississippi in 1830’s.

India was under imperialistic rule by the British Empire or the “Bristish Raj” from 1858 to 1947.The region under British control—commonly called “India” in the British period included areas directly administered by the United Kingdom as well as the “princely states” ruled by individual rulers under the paramount of the British throne. In my recent visit to London precious jewels and Indian made goods are displaced in Windsor castle under high security. Most of the goods accumulated from India were under Queen Victoria’s reign; the other monarchs who were reigning during this imperialistic time were Edward VII, George V, Edward VIII, and George VI. W.E.B Dubois writes in “the Souls of White Folks,” “We see Europe’s greatest sin precisely where we found Africa’s and Asia’s,—in human hatred, the despising of men; with this difference, however: Europe has the awful lesson of the past before her, has the splendid results of widened areas of tolerance, sympathy, and love among men, and she faces a greater, an infinitely greater, world of men than any preceding civilization ever faced.” England took advantage of its darker counterparts by showing superiority through color, religion, and technological advances.

Thus, the second generation began to lose sight of the morals and ways of their parents. The previous generation of English maintained peace by treating the Natives with fairness and respect. The second generation of English began to see the Indians as getting in the way of acquiring wealth and no longer felt that they needed the help of the Pokanokets for survival. Therefore, the English began treating the Pokanokets with less respect “But as was becoming increasingly apparent, the children of Pilgrims had very short memories. Now that their daily lives no longer involved an arduous and terrifying struggle for survival, they had begun to take the Indians for granted.” (Philbrick 215). In other words, as the English began to believe that they did not need the Pokanokets as much for survival, they lost respect for the boundaries of the Pokanokets. Nevertheless, instead of treating the Pokanokets fairly and with respect the English did the opposite. By the 1630’s, the ideas of land ownership had changed in ways that would have great effects on the relationship between the Pokanoket Indians and the second generation of English settlers. The English proposed

The Indian-White relationship had long been breaking down, due to a developing question between the pioneers and the Indians. One of the reasons of this doubt was that the pilgrims were exploiting the positive attitude of the Indians. The King Phillip's war was a contention between the Native Americans and the pilgrims. This contention was the aftereffect of numerous abuses toward the Indians executed by the homesteader. The King Phillip's war was an advocated war. Numerous elements added to the flare-up of this war, for instance numerous Indians felt that they did great to the pioneers and that the settlers were the first doing incorrectly. Another variable was that Englishmen were exploiting the Indians when arranging land; the pioneers were

Mr. Cook makes a strong case in his attempt to understand the causes and contributing factors behind the segregation along race, class and gender lines which were so prevalent in British ruled India, but also strictly observed within Britain and her other colonies. In “Conflicting Ideologies in British India, 1875-1900” he cites factors both specific to India, in particular the suppressed revolt of 1857, and those more external, like the “hardening racism” in Europe. The substantial losses, both financial and in human lives, associated with the revolt of 1857 resulted in a significant decline in trust and an increasing hesitancy to risk “antagonizing Indian sensibilities”. Since the revolt was viewed as retaliation for British attempts to Westernize India, this fearful reluctance to continue along the path previously envisioned by some which ultimately resulted in Britain’s empowerment, modernization and civilizing of the native Indians to a place of independent governance and administration, became less appealing but also served as additional justification for European society’s changing perception of race. The elite Anglicized Indians had not only dared to challenge British authority and administrative processes, but they had dared to utilize their Western teachings to do so. This clearly barbaric application of treasured knowledge, which the British perceived they had bestowed upon the fortunate Indians as a gift, was viewed as further proof of the inability to

We know with four centuries of insight into the past all the dismal fallout, however it is pivotal to The New World that it does not recognize what history holds (Ebert, 2006). These individuals respect each other in complete oddity, and now and again with a sure lowliness forced by nature. The Indians live in light of the fact that they submit to the substances of their territory, and the English about pass on the grounds that they are unmindful and egotistical (Veoh, 2015).

According to the text, the author believes that the enmities between European settlers and Indians are unavoidable even if they seem to be friendly to each other at first. In my opinion, I agree with the author’s argument because from the historical events and trends, we can tell the excessive conflicts, especially beliefs on certain issues, lands and religion especially, and the external diseases, which reveal a radical age.

Since the beginning of the colonial process, Indigenous bodies have been seen as disposable. The dehumanization of the Indigenous body and the creation of the other, has allowed for the destruction of Indigenous Femininity. A system rooted in epistemic violence created by the colonial era. Continues to affect how Indigenous women are treated in modern societies. The demotion from “Indian Queen”, an exotic and powerful presence in colonial societies, to the “Dirty Squaw”, a figure depicted as lazy, and troublesome. Indigenous women have struggled to be seen as human people, rather than sexual object in the minds of the white settlers. A systematic dehumanization though through the process of epistemic violence. Which continues to affect how Indigenous women are treated today.

The character in the essay even says “Theoretically- and secretly, of course- I was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British.” (Orwell Elephant 1) Throughout the essay there is also a tone of pity when speaking about natives. For example, “he was only an Indian and could do nothing” (Orwell Elephant 3), the tone that this is written in makes the reader sympathize with the natives far more than the British. The author does a brilliant job at using the authority figure to convey a sense of remorse for those living under imperialism.