In a previous posting I wrote about one of the earlier wars,
the Pequot War, between the European colonists and the Native Americans (*1).
This took place between 1636 and 1638. But this did not totally resolve the tensions
between the colonists and the Native Americans. Nearly 40 years later, in 1675-1678,
an even larger war broke out in New England, one that came to be known as King
Philip’s War (*2).
Like the Pequot War, the historical context and the causes
for this war were fairly complex:
·
While the Dutch had been forced to surrender
their territory in New Netherlands in 1662 so there was no longer rivalry between
the English and the Dutch, they had been supplanted by a government loyal to
the Duke of York and New Netherlands was now known as New York. There was still
tension between the governor of New York and the New Englanders with each
claiming land rights that overlapped. So the governor was resistant to groups
moving westward into “his” territory.
·
The epidemic that was a consequence of the
Native Americans being exposed to new types of germs brought by the Europeans
had continued, thus further reducing their numbers to approximately 10,000. (As
noted in *2, this included 4,000 Narragansetts in western RI and eastern CT, 2,400
Nipmucks of central and western MA, 2,400 in the Massachusett and Pawtucket
tribes around Massachusetts Bay and southern ME and fewer than 1,000 in the
Wampanoag and Pokanokets of Plymouth and eastern RI).
·
The number of Europeans in New England had
continued to increase during the intervening four decades. Where the number of
colonists had been perhaps 10-15,000 in 1636 (there were roughly 20,000 who
came to the Massachusetts Bay Colony during the period 1628-1640), by the 1670s
they numbered roughly 80,000. They had continued migrating out of the Massachusetts
Bay into other parts of NE and had established 110 towns.
·
As I had noted in an earlier posting (*3), there
were cultural differences in the understanding and meaning of “land ownership”
and “treaty” between the colonists and the Native Americans. (See below
footnote for some further information on this.)
It was into this historical context that King Philip’s War
occurred. I won’t go into all the details of who attacked who when and for what
reasons – you can read that in the referenced article (*2). But you can see the
impact of the above factors in the number of colonists who took part in this
war (over 1000), the way that they could overwhelm their foes, the rejection of
Metacomet when he tried to escape to NY and being sent back to New England,
etc. You can also read a short version of this in (*5). As noted there, “Thousands
of Indians were killed, wounded or captured and sold into slavery of indentured
servitude. The war decimated the Narragansett, Wampanoag and many smaller tribes
and mostly ended Indian resistance in southern New England, paving the way for
additional English settlements.”
There is an excellent reference book written in 1891
entitled “Soldiers in King Philip’s War” (*6). It lists many of the groups of
individuals who enlisted and fought in that war. With so many participants, I do
not have sufficient time to check each one out to see if they are one of my
ancestors. (Since I have such deep roots in southern New England, I suspect
that I could find over 100 of them if I had the time.) But I have found a few
who are related to me just by looking for surnames that I am familiar with.
These include such names as: Pierpont, Russell, Hartwell, Newell, Rogers,
Johnson, Atkins, and Davenport.
This was one of the bloodiest times in the history of our
country. While one can feel a certain amount of shame for the way that the
colonists treated the natives, we also have to be aware of the historical
context in which this war was fought and the fact that much of the initial
aggression was not on the part of the colonists. It’s too easy for us, living
in the 21st century, to project our own cultural context back to
those times of 350 years ago and be critical of the actions of others. But we
need to recognize that those were different times and, given the context of the
time, we might have acted in the same way.
Footnote on Cultural Differences
The European colonists brought with them European value
systems and concepts of things like land ownership and the meaning of treaties.
But these values and meanings were not the same as those of the Native
Americans.
As I noted in an earlier posting (*3) about the Tunxis tribe
who had lived in my hometown of Wolcott, CT:
The Tunxis tribe were the ones who “claimed” the area in what is
now Wolcott, although the word “claim” may be misleading. These tribes were
essential communists in that all lands were held in common. It was because of
this that the concept of buying and selling land was a difficult one for them
to understand.
Nonetheless, in the late 1600’s (1674-1684) [the same period as
when King Philip’s War was going on] a series of deeds were executed between
some men who were living in Waterbury (then called Mattatuckoke which was the
Indian name) and the Tunxis Indians. The sachem of the Tunxis, who primarily
lived in the Farmington area, was Neashegon. The land was actually purchased
multiple times over that period in order to satisfy the tribes. Even after this
“sale”, the Indians retained their original rights to hunt on these lands.
The concept of a “treaty” is another cultural issue. In the
mind of the colonists, this meant that the Native Americans would leave the
colonists alone as they expanded their territory into what they viewed as
unoccupied lands. But to the Native Americans, it was interpreted as we will
leave each other alone and they would have viewed the expansion of the
colonists into the interior of New England as a violation of their hunting
lands. An interesting example is in the name for Lake Webster which is on the
border between Massachusetts and Connecticut. As noted in (*4):
Late Webster, in Nipmuc [the language of one of the tribes
mentioned above], is said to mean “Fishing Place at the Boundaries – Neutral Meeting
Grounds”. A longer name is “Lake
Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg” which has
been humorously translated, “You fish on your side, I’ll fish on my side, and
no one shall fish in the middle”.
Notes
No comments:
Post a Comment