Was Conflict Inevitable between the English and the Powhatan?

In the 17th century, the Native Americans had been living peacefully in their own little world, until suddenly, the British come upon this land. Little did the British know, tribes of natives already lived there. The countenance of the Native Americans did not go over very well. There was tension between the English and the Native Americans. For example, they fought over the land of the “New World”. As expected, the Natives were fearful and angry when foreigners showed up and proposed new religious beliefs. The British and the Native Americans’ relationship changed due to those coming over for religious freedom and economic prosperity.

Chapter one, entitled Two Worlds, opens with the Wahunsonacock and his brother, Openchancanough. The two were considered the “great Powhatan chiefdom”. Many raids and clashes arose between the different Native groups. The different groups began to spread around the Americas, but the Powhatans usually settled on or near rivers and small estuaries, preferably on higher ground, which gave the Powhatan a great advantage in seeking their enemies and preventing floods. The Powhatan community was designed for war and had

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.”

From the moment Jamestown was founded, John Smith and his men fought the Powhatan Chief and his people, and there were constant battles and skirmishes as time went on and the colonies expanded. Seventy years after Jamestown was founded fights with Indians on the border of Virginia continued, and since the Virginian Governor Berkeley refused to fight back, it prompted Bacon’s Rebellion. This intolerance of Natives not only kept the southerners from forming alliances with the Natives, it set them against the others in fear and prejudice that only led to more fighting. Contrastly, the first New Englanders, the Pilgrims who landed in Plymouth, made peace with the Indians. Instead of intermittent skirmishes, they were given shelter when needed and agricultural methods that would help them survive, along with important trade alliances. This help allowed the Pilgrims to survive and prosper in this new land. Though their relations with the Native Americans went south in what led up to King Philip’s War, the former cordiality with them helped the colonists lay the foundation of New England. Since they were kinder to the Natives, the colonists of New England traded information and goods and create relationships with them that helped them establish their colonies, which the Chesapeake colonists never

The colonial empire of England may have the most different story between the three of them. Although it eventually became a place to escape religious persecution Jamestown, the first colony of the English territory in the “new world”, was developed as an opportunity for economic growth, and was expected to turn an immediate profit. Jamestown was created right in the middle of Powhatan territory. At first relations between the Powhatan and the English were bearable, but eventually their relations,

The leadership strengths and weaknesses of John Smith evoked a profound effect on the Jamestown colony. The fact that Smith actually arrived in the colony as a common prisoner and was able to achieve the leadership role that he gained is amazing. His creativity and knowledge in certain areas actually saved the colonists from attack and starvation in the early days. Some of the rules he enforced as a leader were actually instrumental in saving the colony. His skill in dealing with the natives allowed him to gain their support and continue trade that resulted in the survival of the colony.

The arrival of the ‘foreigners’, as referred to by the Native Americans, turned a new stone in Native American diplomacy. No longer did they have to only deal with neighboring tribes, as they were forced to endeavor into politics with strangers who were looking to take their land. The first relationship between the pilgrims and the Native Americans began with the Wampanoag tribe. The relations between the two groups paved the view that the pilgrims had towards the Indians. The decently friendly relationship that stood between the two groups was short lived as the pilgrims felt that the indians were getting in the way of their expansion; and shortly after the friendship ceased to exist (Bell, 37).

Indian problem to prevent another uprising like Pontiac's. Mercantilism also added to the tension between Britain and America. Tension arose from mercantilism because

With such a disparity between the groups of people, there was bound to be conflict on a large scale. This conflict, however, extended beyond the colonies; in fact, French Canada and Spanish Southwest were greatly affected by the Native American and colonist conflict. Along with the major conflicts between the Spanish and the natives and several skirmishes among New England settlers and Native Americans, limited trade and prosperity did prove to exist during this time period as well as a series of conflicts, due to the arrival of European

Firstly, the relationship changes in the politics in many ways. To begin with, the European settlers, the English, crave so much land

Although white European settlers and the native Indians had existed moderately peaceful for around 40 years pressures rose in the mid-seventh century. Conflict arose due to decline in Indian territories, population, and their cultural integrity. These differences ultimately lead to conflicts in which collectively became known as King Philip’s War. What types of complaints did the Indians have against the settlers? How were the Indians expected to survive if the settlers kept taking their land? The primary sources in this collection of source documents touch upon on what each group (Indian or white settlers) did to survive: an excerpt from a narrative written by John Easton, a second hand account written by Thomas Church, a report written to the English leaders by Edward Randolph, a petition written by an Indian named William Nahton, and an excerpt of an account from a book written by Mary Rowlandson. These documents illustrate the main causes that sparked the war between the Native Indians and the white English settlers, narratives written by both sides to find peaceful solutions, and actual accounts of people who survived the conflict. The second hand account written about Benjamin Church’s meeting with the Indian group known as the Sakonnet Indians displays that the Indians knew their only chance of survival was to fight while the report written to English leaders by Randolph suggest that the settlers who viewed the Indians as uncivilized had ultimately forced the Indians

The resulting white, indian conflicts often took a particularly brutal turn and ultimately resulted in the near -de- struction of the indigenous peoples.Warfare between Europeans and Indians was common in the seventeenth century.In 1622 the Powhatan confederacy nearly wiped out the struggling Jamestown colony.In New England Puritan forces annihilated the Pequot’s in 1636-1637, a campaign whose intensity seemed to foreshadowing the future.

In the early 1600’s, when the European settlers arrived in Jamestown, there were already around 15,000-25,000 Indians living around the area. The leader of the most prominent tribe in the area, Powhatan, stayed in a neutral relationship with the English in the area for the first couple of years after Jamestown following the start of the colony. During the time the Indians

Chief Powhatan begins to address his statement by using rhetorical questions in order to support his claim of peace. For example in lines 5 through 7 Powhatan says “ Why should you take by force that from us which you can have by love? Why should you destroy us who have provided you with food? What can you get by war? ” Obviously Powhatan doesn't expect Captain John Smith to answer his questions but he uses this in order to create a growing tension that drives a questioning mentality about whether using force is the best method when “love” is another alternative. He also recounts on how it is unwise and unethical to break ties with the people who have fed and given shelter to the settlers. Without them the settlers would be starving and freezing to death turning to barbaric methods of survival. In line 9, he continues to support his claim by saying “what is the cause of this jealousy?” , this is important because the settlers became envious of how the Tsenacommacah were so well developed, having shelter, and food. Having these benefits over the settlers Powhatan came to the conclusion that the settlers would attempt to pilfer all that the Tsenacommacah had acquired. With this in mind Powhatan decides to express his desire for peace so that neither side would eventually aim for violence from lines 9 through 15.

In his essay, “Peaceable Kingdom Lost: The Paxton Boys and the Destruction of William Penn’s Holy Experiment” Kevin Kenny argues that conflict between Europeans and Native Americans was indeed inevitable. William Penn, the founder of Pennsylvania, attempted a sort of “holy experiment”; a utopian land of equality and peace. Kenny argues that, despite the fact that “…Penn purchased land from Indians fairly and openly,” he did not do so for the Natives’ sakes (29). He had an agenda to sell the land to settlers and pay off prior debts. Still, Pen did want harmony and peace with the neighboring tribes and his legacy endured through hundreds of years (30). Despite William Penn’s efforts in creating a peaceful land with equality for settlers and natives alike, it all came to an end in a massive collapse eighty years later when the Paxton Boys entered the scene. The Paxton Boys were made up of a group of 50 or more “frontier militiamen” who went around to Native American villages, massacring whole tribes and then seizing and claiming the Natives’ lands for themselves (Kenny 29). Because these “Irish ruffians” or “squatters” weren’t really punished for killing entire Native American villages, other colonists started to follow suit and violent seizure of Native American lands became the norm. Kevin Kenny’s argument states that any chance of peace through William Penn’s vision was condemned by “…European colonists’