During the clash of any two cultures, there will always be disaccord in major ideologies and ways of thinking which eventually leads to reform or sometimes regression. Concepts of morality and cultural practices can create dissonance when there are opposing views, causing a shift in ethics in order to protect their original way of existence. At times, this conflict can birth efforts at positive social reconstruction, however during specific instances it causes severe destruction and loss of ethical direction. Both in the 16th and 19th century in the landscape of the New World, there was a plethora of contact that occurred between the Euro-Americans and Indigenous peoples that was an instigator in various conflicts as well as social and moral …show more content…
When stumbling upon the Indigenous peoples, it was slowly evident that the two cultures were vastly different in religion and cultural norms. In Steve Inskeep “Jacksonland” he discusses the variety of political and cultural changes that originated as a result of these clashes.The two groups thought to once be able to live side by side one another after the formation of America was quickly going down hill. They met in a head on collision, coming from opposite sides of the spectrum in terms of language and education, creating a huge distortion in understanding each others way of life . Without an effective means of understanding and fear of the unknown, the first conflicts began to occur which set the stage for much of the cultural and moral clash that followed. The Euro-Americans intentions were clear; “Cherokees were attracted by opportunities of trade with the British. The British were attracted by the possibility of gaining powerful allies against less cooperative nations.” Differences in purpose of life and the Euro-Americans desire to capitalize on any resource made …show more content…
The Euro-Americans were characteristically of Christian or Catholic descent, adhering to the morals and code of conduct outlined by this extremely structured and at times political religion. The indigenous peoples on the other hand practiced a more free form of religion, concentrating on stewardship, spirituality and various rituals. Andrew Resendez’s “A Land So Strange” provides many examples of how religion played a role in the encounters between the two groups; the Spanish and Indigenous peoples. Resendez wrote about the Euro-Americans; “Although motivated by material considerations and at a times engaged in distinctly unchristian activities such as killing Indians, these pioneers were nonetheless persuaded that their exploits served to further God’s aims.” This warped perception of carrying out god’s will through colonial efforts only increased the tension between the two cultures, and resulted in retribution. Another example of using religion for personal gain was Narvaez from A Land So Strange. He sought after any excuse to get money to go on his second expedition and urged the emperor that faith would play a major role. “In another petition, almost a threat, Narvaez urged the emperor to avoid delays, for it would ‘weigh greatly on your royal conscience if it
In Jamestown, the settlers had to deal with the Powhatan Indians. The relationships with them were unstable. John Smith, whom was the leader of Jamestown, was captured by these Indians while he was on a little trip with some of his men. As he left two of his men, he came back to find them dead and himself surrounded by two hundred members of the tribe, finding himself being captured. “Six or seven weeks those barbarians kept him prisoner…” 87). After this event, the relationship only grew worse and there was constant fighting between the settlers and Indians. The Indians practiced many methods in capturing settlers such as “scalping” and other dreadful techniques. The settlers did many negative practices also which is the reason they fought so many wars and battles against each other. Later on, the Indians killed the English for their weapons that were rare to them. In contrast to the Plymouth colony, these settlers dealt with the Pequot Indians and the relations were much more peaceful for a certain time frame. At one point, one Indian was brave enough to approach them and spoke to them (in broken English). He taught them the ways of the land, and developed a peace with the man. The settlers from the Plymouth colony learned many ways to grow food from these Indians. “He directed them how to set their corn, where to take fish and to procure other commodities, and was also their
They are spatial versus temporal in orientation; attachment to versus ownership of particular lands or territory; community focused versus individual gain; and a consistent notion of the interrelatedness of humans with versus stewardship over the rest of creation. (p. 7) Tinker states, “these four cultural identifiers are so interconnected that any damage to one cultural aspect extends the damaging effect to the other three.” (p. 9) His focus is obviously on the first peoples, although this phenomenon can arguably be true for both cultures. In fact, it is the clash of these bi-polar stances that have inflicted the most genocidal damages. For instance, the temporal view of Euro-American culture kept greed, in all its forms, alive. Ownership of lands and territory took center stage due to a combination of the theology of stewardship over the untamed west and the need for more land and resources becoming more obvious in the eyes of the colonizing. Thusly, the individual attainment of land followed suit. These cultural elements of the Euro-Americans led to years of genocidal attacks on the Native
Cabeza de Vaca’s Adventures in the Unknown Interior of America shows that while Christians thought themselves superior to natives, both sides were diverse and could commit good, bad, or neutral behavior towards each other. Therefore, the Indians and the Christians were much more similar than different. This is apparent in de Vaca’s accounts of Indian to Indian behavior, Christian to Christian behavior, and Indian to Christian behavior (and vice-versa). Indian to Indian relations could be positive, negative, or neutral. On the positive side, de Vaca notes that in the case of intra-tribe quarrels, “[if] the quarrelers are single men, they repair to some neighboring people, who, even if enemies, welcome them warmly and give so much of what they have” (95).
The Europeans invaded America with every intention of occupying the land, the bountiful natural resources as well as the complete domination of the native people. The Europeans desire for the land created an explosive situation for the native peoples as they witnessed their land and right to freedom being stripped from them. They often found themselves having to choose sides of which to pledge their allegiance to. The Europeans depended upon Indian allies to secure the land and their dominance as well as trade relations with the Indians. The Indians were in competition with one another for European trade causing conflict among the different tribes altering the relationships where friends became enemies and vice versa (Calloway, 2012, p. 163). These relationships often became embittered and broke into bloody brawls where it involved, "Indian warriors fighting on both sides, alongside the European forces as well as against European forces invad...
Each European country treated the Native Americans distinctively and likewise the diverse Native Americans tribes reacted differently. The vast majority of the tribes didn’t wish to overtake the Europeans, but to rather just maintain their status quo. Moreover, Axtell mentions that during the inaugural stages of the encounter, the relationship between the two parties was rather peaceful since the Europeans were outnumbered by the natives. Axtell depicts that unlike the Europeans, the Native Americans treated the strangers equally or superior to themselves. The Indians would welcome the Europeans into their towns and shower them with gifts and blessings. The relationship between the two factions was going serene until the cultural differences became a burden on both
The essay starts with the “Columbian Encounter between the cultures of two old worlds “ (98). These two old worlds were America and Europe. This discovery states that Native Americans contributed to the development and evolution of America’s history and culture. It gives the fact that indians only acted against europeans to defend their food, territory, and themselves.
One point of collision was seen in the differences the religious practices by the Native Americans and the Europeans. For instance, the native inhabitants of Savannah in Georgia were continuously urged to accept Christianity as a true faith and to apply the gospel of Jesus Christ in all that they did (Whitefield par 4). At one point the Native Americans were promised eternal life in Christianity, but at the other point they were warned of existing eternal death if they continued practicing their “earthen” religions. This was confused them more as the missioners argued to have been taken by the natives for granted (Whitfield par. 10). Christianity was not
American Indians shaped their critique of modern America through their exposure to and experience with “civilized,” non-Indian American people. Because these Euro-Americans considered traditional Indian lifestyle savage, they sought to assimilate the Indians into their civilized culture. With the increase in industrialization, transportation systems, and the desire for valuable resources (such as coal, gold, etc.) on Indian-occupied land, modern Americans had an excuse for “the advancement of the human race” (9). Euro-Americans moved Indians onto reservations, controlled their education and practice of religion, depleted their land, and erased many of their freedoms. The national result of this “conquest of Indian communities” was a steady decrease of Indian populations and drastic increase in non-Indian populations during the nineteenth century (9). It is natural that many American Indians felt fearful that their culture and people were slowly vanishing. Modern America to American Indians meant the destruction of their cultural pride and demise of their way of life.
Conflicts between the Native American Indians and English settlers was inevitable. James Axtell wrote the article, “After Columbus,” which explains the Powhatan Empire’s conflicts and wars with the English settlers in Virginia. Virginia Dejohn Anderson wrote, “King Philip’s Herds: Indians, Colonists, and the Problem of Livestock in Early New England,” which illustrates the issue of English customs, such as livestock, which was new and alien to the Native Americans. William L. Ramsey’s article, “’Something Cloudy in Their Looks’: The Origins of the Yamasee War Reconsidered,” was about the cultural and political differences between the Native Americans and the English settlers. The one thing these three articles have in common is that they consist of conflicts and wars between the Native Americans and English settlers and how it was inevitable for both sides due to two opposite cultures colliding without compromise.
The American version of history blames the Native people for their ‘savage ' nature, for their failure to adhere to the ‘civilized norms ' of property ownership and individual rights that Christian people hold, and for their ‘brutality ' in defending themselves against the onslaught of non-Indian settlers. The message to Native people is simple: "If only you had been more like us, things might have been different for you.”
Overall, There were so many differences between Native Americans cultures And the Europeans. Some of the examples are, the ideas of the lands owner, religion, and the gender. Their differences are more than the similarities. The impact of their cultures it still remains in today’s society. The cultural differences and the religions differences led to a bloody was that remains for 500 hundreds
During the 16th and 17th centuries, when the Europeans started to come over to the new world, they discovered a society of Indians that was strikingly different to their own. To understand how different, one must first compare and contrast some of the very important differences between them, such as how the Europeans considered the Indians to be extremely primitive and basic, while, considering themselves civilized. The Europeans considered that they were model societies, and they thought that the Indians society and culture should be changed to be very similar to their own.
“Pontiac, chief of the Ottawa Indians, is trying to take Detroit, and the neighboring Indian groups join in and help. They have become disenchanted with the French, plus the French aren’t really there anymore. They hate the English. They want their land back. Starting to succeed and the British negotiate and reach a settlement. In order to keep Pontiac happy, no settlement allowed in the Frontier region. An imaginary line is drawn down the Appalachian Mountains, colonist cannot cross it. This doesn’t last long, in 1768 & 1770, Colonists work with the Iroquois and Cherokee and succeed in pushing back the line and send in surveyors. Colonists begin to settle. So, despite this line, colonists push west anyway” (Griffin, PP4, 9/16/15). During the Revolutionary War, “Native Americans fought for both sides, but mostly for the British, thought they stood to be treated more fairly by British than colonists. Those that fought against the colonists were specifically targeted to be destroyed during battles. There were no Native American representatives at the treaty meetings at the end of the war” (Griffin, PP8, 9/21/15). Even the Native American’s thought of their women, because they believed “an American victory would have tragic consequences: their social roles would be dramatically changed and their power within their communities diminished” (Berkin,
The Native Americans or American Indians, once occupied all of the entire region of the United States. They were composed of many different groups, who speaked hundreds of languages and dialects. The Indians from the Southwest used to live in large built terraced communities and their way of sustain was from the agriculture where they planted squash, pumpkins, beans and corn crops. Trades between neighboring tribes were common, this brought in additional goods and also some raw materials such as gems, cooper. seashells and soapstone.To this day, movies and television continue the stereotype of Indians wearing feathered headdresses killing innocent white settlers. As they encountered the Europeans, automatically their material world was changed. The American Indians were amazed by the physical looks of the white settlers, their way of dressing and also by their language. The first Indian-White encounter was very peaceful and trade was their principal interaction. Tension and disputes were sometimes resolved by force but more often by negotiation or treaties. On the other hand, the Natives were described as strong and very innocent creatures awaiting for the first opportunity to be christianized. The Indians were called the “Noble Savages” by the settlers because they were cooperative people but sometimes, after having a few conflicts with them, they seem to behaved like animals. We should apprehend that the encounter with the settlers really amazed the natives, they were only used to interact with people from their own race and surroundings and all of this was like a new discovery for them as well as for the white immigrants. The relations between the English and the Virginian Indians was somewhat strong in a few ways. They were having marriages among them. For example, when Pocahontas married John Rolfe, many said it has a political implication to unite more settlers with the Indians to have a better relation between both groups. As for the Indians, their attitude was always friendly and full of curiosity when they saw the strange and light-skinned creatures from beyond the ocean. The colonists only survived with the help of the Indians when they first settler in Jamestown and Plymouth. In this areas, the Indians showed the colonists how to cultivate crops and gather seafood.The Indians changed their attitude from welcome to hostility when the strangers increased and encroached more and more on hunting and planting in the Natives’ grounds.
Cultural Appropriation versus Multiculturalism In today's society, there are many different cultures that individuals identify with. Culture is very important to many people and is something that helps define who we are. When different cultures are respected and appreciated, it is a beautiful thing, it can bring individuals in society closer to one another. Ideally, this understanding of one another’s cultures can lead to multiculturalism.