Howard Zinn's Book Report

May 26, 1637 was a fateful day in the history of America. The actions of Major John Mason and his Puritan men set a precedent for the next two hundred years of European and Indian relations. On that clear May night near the Mystic River of New England, hundreds of Pequot Indians were killed by the Europeans and their allies, most of the victims being the elderly, women, and children. This massacre was a massive turning point in the Pequot War, effectively ruining the tribe. Already weakened by disease and by competing native tribes, the Pequot were quickly routed and by September 21, 1638 the war ended with the Treaty of Hartford. The treaty

What is Gordon S. Wood’s argument and what is Howard Zinn’s argument on the nature of the American War for Independence and what evidence do the two historians present to support their interpretations? Who do you think presents the better case?

The Pequot War was the first brutal war on the North American continent, and the first war fought between the Native Americans and the English settlers. The whole war began, because the Englishmen, like always, became greedy and wanted more land and more profitable trade. The homeland of the Pequot tribe, was modern day Connecticut. The tribe had an estimated population of 2,200 members, and they based their everyday lives off of maize, hunting, and even fishing (Pequot, 2012). For a period of time, the English settlers and the Native American tribe lived peacefully with a fair-trading system and they helped each other, but that did not last long. One reason for the Englishmen coming to the North American continent, was to spread the faith of Christianity. Believing that God had given the English settlers the right to settle in the new-found land, they saw great opportunities to convert the “savages” to their Christian ways (Pequot, 2012). The English settlers began invading the Pequot’s territory, and almost completely pushed them off of their land. “There were disputes over property, livestock damaging Indian crops, hunting, the selling of alcohol to Indians, and dishonest traders” (1636- The Pequot War, n.d.). Not only did the Pequot’s have issues with the English settlers, they were always on bad terms with the Narragansett tribe as well. The tribe separated into two parts, the “pro-English and pro-Dutch” (Colonialwarsct.org). This event made the Indians very weak,

Throughout recorded human history, authors, leaders, and researchers, have documented the past from many different perspectives, and viewpoints. Not every historian has the same stance on a certain issue, therefore, differences in point of view occur in almost every writing. In the textbook The American Pageant, A People’s History of the United States by Larry Schweikart, and Michael Allen, and Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States, the reader can see many different perspectives throughout each reading. The infamous explorer known as Christopher Columbus, has been documented in many different ways. Depending on the reading, Columbus has be called everything from a “[...]symbol of the new age of hope”, to an inhuman tyrant who captured Indians and turned them into slaves.

An Indigenous People 's’ History of the United States. A history book claimed to go above and beyond what has been stated in text before it. Every page is packed with details and references to other accredited historians, or examples of the mindset that has been historically infused. At first glance you think you already know about the history of the Native Americans. How we saw it fit to take their land, put them on ever shrinking “gifted” lands that would never allow them to strive again. How they are simply a conquered people who fought back and lost. Alas this book takes what you thought you knew and makes it more real, focusing on the unnecessary genocide. Admittedly this book was very difficult for me to read, I found myself trailing off, being confused with the connections. There were however quite a few spots that stuck out to me, especially those we have covered in our race lectures.

What is the Pequot war? How did it begin and what was the aftermath? The Pequot War could have also been known as a massacre. The Pequot war was on May 26, 1637. The Pequot war was a war between the Europeans and the Pequot Indians. The English Puritan settlements had begun expanding into the Connecticut River Valley. The only major problem with expanding the settlement was the Pequot Indians. Though, the feud had also involved other Indian tribes including the Mohegans; the Mohegans, however, shared close relation to the Pequot Indians because they were once apart of their tribe and had later split off. The Pequots and the Indians had disputes involving property, livestock damaging Indian crops, hunting, the selling of alcohol to Indians,

Zinn argues that the perspective of indigenous people should not be omitted and argues that their perspectives are as significant as any other. He provides insight and perspectives of the Indians to describe how the heinous acts of the Europeans were unjustified. He also discusses that the Europeans had a continual motive of exploring during that time which was to increase the power/authority of the Spanish Crown by whatever means necessary, usually leading to violent wars.

When the first colonists landed in the territories of the new world, they encountered a people and a culture that no European before them had ever seen. As the first of the settlers attempted to survive in a truly foreign part of the world, their written accounts would soon become popular with those curious of this “new” world, and those who already lived and survived in this seemingly inhospitable environment, Native American Indian. Through these personal accounts, the Native Indian soon became cemented in the American narrative, playing an important role in much of the literature of the era. As one would expect though, the representation of the Native Americans and their relationship with European Americans varies in the written works of the people of the time, with the defining difference in these works being the motives behind the writing. These differences and similarities can be seen in two similar works from two rather different authors, John Smith, and Mary Rowlandson.

The history of the United States with regards to its native population is inaccurate and assumes that the history of this country began when the Pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock (Richter, pp. 4-5). With regards to the native people’s

As all authors are undeniably guilty of, James Axtell has a bias, and not one shamefully swept underneath the rug. The enlightening article Axtell has published remains not only as informational; it stands convicting in a sense. Unfortunately, the reader may find themselves lumped into the assemblage of Americans that regard the Native Americans as “pathetic footnotes to the main course of American History” (Axtell 981). Establishing his thesis, Axtell offers plentiful examples of how Native Americans contributed to Colonial America,

Why acknowledge history? The solution is because we essentially must to achieve access to the laboratory of human involvement. In the essay “Haunted America”, Patricia Nelson takes a truly various and remarkably gallant stance on United States history. Through the recounting of the White/Modoc war in “Haunted America,” she brings to light the complexity and confusion of the White/Indian conflicts that is often missing in much of the history we read. Her account of the war, with the faults of both Whites and Indians revealed, is an unusual alternative to the stereotypical “Whites were good; Indians were bad” or the reverse stand point that “Indians were good; Whites were bad” conclusions that many historians reach. Limerick argues that a very brutal and bloody era has been simplified and romanticized, reducing the lives and deaths of hundreds to the telling of an uncomplicated story of “Good Guys” and “Bad Guys”.

Zinn Chapter One Questions: 1. What is Zinn’s thesis for pages 1-11? Zinn's thesis for pages 1-11 is to prove to us and show us in many ways that Christopher Columbus is not the hero that everyone thinks he is. He never fulfilled his promises to those that had promised. Zinn proved to us that he was a dishonest and heartless person toward those who supported him and his journeys.

Regarding the article, “Columbus, the Indians, and Human Progress, Dr. Howard Zinn argues that there is another perspective to consider as to Christopher Columbus’ adventures. Dr. Howard Zinn’s position is that history books have omissions of slavery, death and innocent bloodshed that accompanied the adventures of Christopher Columbus. In the following statements Dr. Howard Zinn describes his perspective; “The writer began the history, five hundred years ago, of the European invasion of the Indian Settlement in the Americas. That beginning, when you read Las Casas- even if his figures are exaggerations (were there 3 million Indians to begin with, as he says or 250,000, as modern historians calculate) is conquest, slavery, and death. When

crime of sorts. It is a crime because it distorts the truth rather than advances it and justice

This book has proven to be an enlightening read. It both teaches and inspires. Howard Zinn has offered us a perspective of the real story of American history heretofore unavailable to us – history from the perspective of real people – immigrant laborers, American women, the working poor, factory workers, African and Native Americans.