1. Cabeza de Vaca thinks that the natives are good people and that they treated them fairly. They also had the same believe as us when it comes to children. As stated,” at a house where a son or brother may die, no one goes out for food for three months, the neighbors and other relatives provide what is eaten (48). As is sometime done today went someone in the family dies. Although it may not be for three months but it is most likely a few days to a week. I feel that Vaca respects and accepts the native’s culture. He lived with many natives tribes and he said that he was treated as if he was one of them. Hernán Cortés believes that the Natives were very civilized in things such as trading. There are street squares were people would come to …show more content…
Cortes does not respect or accept the native’s culture. He went in and tried to convert all the natives. The ones that resisted him, he would later wage war with them and kill them in the thousands. Ben Franklin believed that the natives were civilized like Hernan Cortes but for a different reason. Ben Franklin though of the natives as being civil because of there politeness. However, he also thinks that the natives take being polite to far because it keeps them from denying the truth presented in their presence P.G. (478). Ben Franklin respected the native’s culture because he explains that they are savages to us, but we are savages to them. He accepts their culture in a roundabout way. Because he upholds them but he did not experience it firsthand like Vaca. Samson Occom believed that the white man had honorable intentions in coming to their home. Occom accepted the religion of the white and were converted. He says on P.G. (446-447) that after he was converted that he would go on and learn the English language and then he would teach native children the white man religion and language. He respected and accept the white man culture enough to be voluntarily …show more content…
Edward Taylor and Anne Bradstreet’s poems explain the how the times were in diseases. Edward Taylor’s poem is much longer than Bradstreet’s because Taylor’s poem is more full of grift because he had only had half children live to maturely both that lived were boys. He chose to talk about his children in order of their birth: Samuel Taylor lived to maturity, Elizabeth died two days before her first birthday in 1677, Then James was born on 10-12-1678 and lived to maturity, and Abigail was born on Aug. 6, 1681 and died on Aug. 22, 1682. A life were there was a high chance of children dyeing before they were 2 years old would have been a terrible life. Taylor uses images of flowers blooming to represent the birth of his children. Taylor used the cropping of the flowers as the death of his children. Although Taylor would have been full of anguish for the loss of his two daughters. He was glad that two of his sons would have lived to maturity. The rhyme scheme that was used is that the first and third lines rhyme the second and fourth lines rhyme and the fifth and sixth lines in each stanza rhyme. The meter used by Taylor was slower and more heartfelt than Bradstreet’s meter. Taylor was a cup half-full kind of person. He believes that god had a reason to take his flowers not long after their birth. The theme of this poem is that God always has a plain no matter how bad your situation may appear. Anne Bradstreet uses flowers to represent her grandchildren and the fragility of
Admittedly, these men are responsible for much of the exploration of the America’s, but to focus on so few of the explorers ignores how reactive their actions were, and the larger narrative of the world at that time (4). For example, Columbus is praised and idolized for discovering the America’s, however it was only by luck that he arrived on those shores. Moreover, there were many other explorers at the time who could have reached the America’s if Columbus had not done so first (9). Another man who is seen as the key figure in the actual Conquest is Cortes. Cortes’ campaign in the America’s is commonly viewed as the standard to strive for, yet it is also the exception to a typical conquest (19). He is viewed as some above-it-all conquistador idol, when in all actuality he merely followed the standard protocol of the Conquest (19). This does not mean that Cortes’ actions were any less inspirational, merely that they were not uncharacteristic acts that he created (19). Both Columbus and Cortes were merely following standard procedure of the time, yet they are written about as if they were heroes of their time, bravely going and doing what none had done before. And in some sense, they were the first to discover and conquer, but it is foolish to assume that just because they were the first to be in the America’s
The source of the first passage that I read was History of the Indies written by Bartolome de Las Casas written in 1528. Bartolome was a 16th century Spanish historian, social reformer and Dominican friar/priest, who condemned the treatment of Indians in the Spanish empire. Bartolome widely disseminated History of the Indies and helped to establish the Black Legend of Spanish cruelty (Give Me Liberty, 28). The source of the second passage that I read was the “Declaration of Josephe” which was created by Josephe on December 19, 1681, and Josephe was a Spanish-speaking Indian questioned by a royal attorney in Mexico City investigating the Pueblo Revolt, which is the revolt of the indian population, in 1680, which temporarily drove Spanish settlers out of present day New Mexico
In his letters, Cortés also gave justification and explanation of the actions he took in Mexico. He attempted this primarily through his portrayal of Montezuma’s system of governance as brutal and his people as disloyal to him. He described the apparent willingness of the peoples he encountered to abandon the Aztecs and swear allegiance to the King of Spain, “Although they were subjects of Montezuma. they had been reduced to that condition by force.and when they had obtained through me some knowledge of your Highness.
...ything and everyone that were there. At times they would work with the Natives at other times they would be at war with the natives. The Spanish had been engaged with the natives longer and over time felt the best way to control them would be to convert them or put them into same locations where they could “keep an eye on them”. The Pueblo Revolt of 1680 was proof that no matter what they tried, when one man, country, or society tries to oppress another, war is almost always inevitable.
Differences between cultures are not something new. Many of us can still see it in our daily lives. Four hundred years ago two very distinctly different cultures clashed in what we call the American Southwest. The Spanish presence brought new ideas, new culture, and new way of life to the new found Americas much to the demise of the already settled native tribes. Already having controlled much of Mexico and South America, problems were rising in the outskirts of New Spain. Secular and religious authorities were in conflict and the ever growing animosity of its aboriginal tribe made it difficult to maintain Spanish control. Though, for four generations the Spaniards had begun to feel successful in their endeavors of New Mexico. In early August, the sedentary and nomadic tribes banned together and overthrow the Spanish authority. There are many angles needed to be addressed in order to see why this happened. Historians and anthropologists have been trying to go beyond the bias history to uncover what happen. In the book “What Caused the Pueblo Revolt of 1680”, historians try to answer this question, some theories hold more pull then others in terms of what and why. Through reading this anthology I believe the revolt happened for cultural and religious reasons because the Spaniards were threatening the indigenous people’s very way of life through violence, exploitation of land/resources (food), and demoralization of their old ways and practices.
Both of them had to keep their societies together so in order to do so, laws, religion, and even just making the community aware was something always being done. Natives although did turn to their tribes for help, opinions, and even beliefs. Meanwhile, the Spanish worked more individually for themselves, and wasn’t exactly trying to be as diversified as the Natives were.
She writes a letter to husband, almost instructing him on what to do after her death. Unlike other demure housewives of her time, she acknowledges the risk birthing her child brings by saying, “And when thy loss shall be repaid with gains / Look to my little babes, my dear remains” (107). Bradstreet also approaches a taboo subject by acknowledging that her husband might remarry. Bradstreet does not tread lightly on this subject either by writing, “And if thou love thyself, or loved’st me, / These o protect from step Dames injury” (107). In this poem, Bradstreet faces the possibility of not only the loss of her life but the loss of her husband’s love. Bradstreet challenges Puritan beliefs by showing that she will still be concerned with her earthly life after her
Bradstreet also made it appoint to compare the sudden death of her grandchild to nature stating, “But plants new set to be eradicate, / And buds new blown to have so short a date, / Is by His hands alone that guides nature and fate”( lines 12-14). Conversely, Edward describes his loss of his child as a honor from God. Taylor states, “ Lord take’t. I thank Thee, Thou tak’st ought of mine: / It is my pledge in glory, part of me / Is now in it, Lord glorified with Thee” revealing his honor to have his child sitting with the lord (Edward lines 28-30). Both authors took their faith into great consideration when speaking of the loss of a family
The main point Hernando Cortés was trying to get through while writing his second letter was that he is dutiful and working for the King and for God. He also tries to tell of how the Indians are the ones forcing the Spanish to press attack because they do not want to conform to Cortés and convert to Catholicism. The quote “ I endeavoured to admonish them and treat them with peaceable words, the more fiercely they attacked us” describes how Cortés is basically saying convert or die. In his writing, Cortés describes the Natives as “a great multitude of people of such fury and skill in war” but says their skills are outmatched because God was fighting on the side of the Spanish. He claims his work is justified because “demands and protestations
... hardships he must face. Differing from other Spanish explorers Cabeza does not use violence as a means of spreading his word and eventually gains utter respect from the Indians he interacts with and even the respect of Indians that he has never met. Toward the end of the sixteenth century, Spanish explorers spread a wave of bloodshed and disease through the New World killing almost all of the natives indigenous to the land. Cabeza de Vaca stands apart from his counterparts in the fact that he used peace and kindness to win the hearts of the natives and successfully converted the Indians he met into Christians.
The accounts provided by Hernan Cortés and Captain James Cook about their encounters with the indigenous people in the area they were exploring, have multiple similarities and differences; they both describe in detail the local resources while Cook takes a more scientific approach than Cortés.
God; whereas Taylor wrote solely on his love for God. Bradstreet was a pioneer in the idea of writing about loving your husband and self. This was one of her greatest achievements and also greatest gifts to the world, even though it was not appropriate to write about such subjects she did anyway. The combination of Bradstreet and Taylors poetry about love prove to the world that love can exist in any part of life and should be appreciated and
Edward Taylor’s Upon Wedlock, and Death of Children and Upon a Wasp Chilled with Cold are similar in their approach with the illustration of how beautiful and magnificent God’s creations are to humankind. However, each poem presents tragic misfortune, such as the death of his own children in Upon Wedlock, and Death of Children and the cold, enigmatic nature of human soul in Upon a Wasp Chilled with Cold. Taylor’s poems create an element of how cruel reality can be, as well as manifest an errant correlation between earthly life and spiritual salvation, which is how you react to the problems you face on earth determines the salvation that God has in store for you.
In “Written at the close of Spring,” Smith’s second sonnet, she focuses on the wonderful ability nature has in rejuvenating itself each year. Smith personifies Spring in the way it “nurs’d in dew” its flowers as though it was nursing its own children (“Close of Spring” 2). While it creates life, Spring is not human, because it has this ability to come back after its season has passed. Human beings grow old and die; we lose our “fairy colours” through the abrasive nature of life (“Close of Spring” 12). Smith is mournful that humans cannot be like the flowers of Spring and regain the colors of our lives after each year.
When Bradstreet’s next grandchild, Anne, passed away, she was unable to resist it. She lost her control and become disappointed. She wrote a poem under “In Memory of My dear Grandchild Anne Bradstreet, Who Deceased June 20, 1669.”5 The poem starts with the speaker