Colonial Virginia's Relations with the Indians | Mises Institute
Relations with Native Americans in Jamestown. SR Powhatan Flint Points found within the historic contexts of Jamestown Super Model. English colonists who had settled in Jamestown () were at first strongly motivated by their need of native corn (maize) to keep peace with the Powhatans, . The relationship between the white settlers and the natives started out The “ Indians” that greeted the English were known as the Powhatans.
So it is, that some ten years ago being in Virginia, and taken prisoner by the power of Powhatan their chief King, I received from this great Salvage exceeding great courtesy, especially from his son Nantaquaus, the most manliest, comeliest, boldest spirit, I ever saw in a Salvage, and his sister Pocahontas, the Kings most dear and well-beloved daughter, being but a child of twelve or thirteen years of age, whose compassionate pitiful heart, of my desperate estate, gave me much cause to respect her On Good Friday inhe led an attack that nearly finished the Jamestown colony.
Relationship between Native Americans and Jamestown Settlers
Three hundred forty-seven settlers were killed before the situation stabilized. Fighting continued between the Algonquian peoples and the English until Opechancanough was captured and executed. The English forced the tribes of the warring confederacy to cede land and recognize English authority.
No-Man's-Land As illustrated by Victor Nehlig's painting Pocahontas and John Smith, the story of Pocahontas was glorified not only in literature, but in historical painting as well.
Many cultural differences separated the Native Americans and the colonists. The most important contrast was each side's differing view of land ownership.The Natives and the English - Crash Course US History #3
According to Powhatan's people, land was owned by no one; rather, it was collectively used by the tribe. Because land could not be owned, it could not be sold or yielded in treaty. Selling land was the equivalent of selling air. The English view of individual land ownership was completely foreign to the Powhatans, who could not understand being pushed off tribal lands so it could be sold to individuals.
To the Powhatans, the loss of their land was a matter worth fighting for. Smith's Map of Virginia Maps, maps, and more maps! This page is not the most visually pleasing, but it contains several links to detailed maps. The first link leads to a full, elaborately illustrated map of Virginia drawn by Captain John Smith in It shows the locations of many Indian villages as well as the Jamestown settlement. The other links point to details on the same map. Ironically, the old trade monopolist Abraham Wood, now a colonel, was charged with the enforcement of this prohibition.
The next year, Captain Giles Brent, one of the leading planters of the Northern Neck, hauled the chief of the Potomac Indians, Wahanganoche, into court on the false charges of high treason and murder. And even though Wahanganoche was acquitted and his false accusers forced to pay him an indemnity for the wrongs suffered, the Assembly arrogantly proceeded to require the Potomac and other northern tribes to furnish as hostages a number of Indian children to be enslaved and brought up by whites.
It is no wonder that under this treatment the Indians of Virginia began to get a bit restive, a restiveness due also, as the Assembly admitted, to "violent intrusions of diverse English" into Indian lands.
But this was only the beginning of white aggression. In —66 the Assembly set further arbitrary bounds to Indian settlement, pushing back the Indians once more. It also prohibited any white sales of guns and ammunition to the Indians, and decreed that the governor select the chieftains for the Indian tribes. Militarism was imposed on the white settlers by ordering them to go armed to all public meetings, including church services.
Relations with Native Americans in Jamestown by Shannon Reilly on Prezi
Even collective guilt was imposed on the Indians, it being provided that if an Indian murdered a white man, all the people of the neighboring Indian town would be "answerable for it with their lives or liberties. During the same yearGovernor Berkeley declared war on the Doeg and Potomac tribes, as an even more massive form of collective guilt and punishment for various crimes committed over the years by individual Indians against individual whites.
But since this act of slaughter was called "war," even its far greater magnitude did not evoke the reproofs of conscience following upon the collective punishment of the previous year. By the end of the '60s, the Indians had been so effectively cowed and suppressed that the administration believed the situation well in hand.
In the words of Berkeley, "The Indians … are absolutely subjected, so that there is no fear of them. Particularly aggrieved was the Doeg tribe, which had been attacked and expelled from its lands by the Berkeley administration. The Doegs found new compatriots in the Susquehannocks, a powerful tribe that had been expelled from its lands at the head of the Chesapeake Bay by the Seneca nation, and had then settled on inadequate lands on the Potomac River in Maryland.
In July the Doegs, who had also settled across the Potomac, found that a wealthy Virginia planter, Thomas Mathew, refused to pay them a debt, which they were not allowed to collect in the Virginia courts. They decided therefore to collect the debt themselves, and a party of Doegs crossed the river and took some hogs from Mathew. The Virginians immediately pursued the Indians upriver and not only recovered the hogs but killed the Indians. Again, the Indians had no recourse against this murder in the Virginia courts, and so they decided to exact punishment themselves.
They raided and devastated the Mathew plantation — rough if inexact justice — in the course of which one of Mathew's herdsmen was killed. Arrant self-righteousness and a flagrant double standard of morality are often characteristic of the side with the superior weapons in any dispute, for its one-sided version of morality can be supported by force of arms if not by force of logic. Such was the case with the white Virginians: When the razing of the Mathew plantation became known, Major George Brent and Colonel George Mason — leading persecutors of Chief Wahanganoche a decade before — gathered an armed force and invaded Maryland.
Relationship between Native Americans and Jamestown Settlers | dayzjahdorsey
Upon finding the Indians, Brent asked for a peace parley, at which he seized and then shot the Doeg chief thus continuing a white tradition of treachery in dealing with Indians. Brent followed this up by shooting ten other Indians who had then tried to escape. Mason's party shot 14 other fleeing Indians, many of whom were Susquehannocks, up to now wholly friendly to the whites, and who had not participated in Doeg actions. The Susquehannocks were now naturally embittered.
The treachery at the peace parley and the murdering of 24 Indians only began the massive white retaliation. Berkeley completely ignored the protest of the Maryland governor against the Virginian invasion of its territory and the killing of innocent Indians.
Instead, on August 31,Berkeley called together the militia officers of the Northern Neck counties, led by Colonel John Washington, and armed them with powers to organize the militia and to "demand satisfaction" or take any other course necessary against the Indians.
This could include "attack and such executions upon the Indians as shall be found necessary and just. A full-fledged war of aggression against the Indians was then unleashed by Virginia and Maryland.
On September 26, the joint Virginia-Maryland force besieged the main fort of the Susquehannocks on the Maryland side of the Potomac, and sought to starve the Indians into submission. An army of 1, whites surrounded Indian braves and their women and children. On the invitation of Major Thomas Truman, head of the Maryland force, five of the Susquehannock chiefs came out to parley and seek peace.
When the chiefs asked what the army was doing there, Major Truman declared that they were retaliating for various outrages, and he proceeded to murder them on the spot.
Even a silver medal held up by one chief, a token of a supposedly permanent pledge of protection by a former governor of Maryland, was of no avail in saving his life. The starving mass of Indians finally escaped their tormentors by rushing out at night in a surprise breakout, and fled into Virginia, where during January they retaliated against many of the frontier plantations.
One of the plantations raided was that of Nathaniel Bacon, Jr. Grateful for a chance to stop the spiraling bloodshed, Berkeley disbanded his new army. But when Berkeley categorically rejected the peace offer as violating honor and self-interest, the Indian raids continued.
Instead of peace, Berkeley and his Assembly decided on an uneasy compromise: However, Berkeley also decided to fight a defensive rather than an offensive war by constructing at great expense ten forts facing the enemy at the heads of the principal rivers, and by not attacking the Indians unless they were attacked themselves.
The large force needed to garrison these forts was financed by burdensome new taxes, which aggravated Virginia's grievances against the Berkeley regime. It is another common rule that militarization of a society ostensibly to bring force majeure against an enemy often succeeds also or even only in bringing that force against the very society being militarized.
Thus, soldiers, conscripted into the garrisons, were to be subject to highly rigorous articles of war: Public prayers were to be read in the field or garrison twice a day, and any soldier refusing or neglecting to attend the prayers or the preaching or to show proper diligence in reading homilies and sermons was to be punished at the whim of the commander.
A great many Virginians, driven forward by war hysteria, by ingrained hatred of the Indians, and by the desire to grab Indian lands, began to accuse Berkeley of being soft on the Indians. The softness was supposed to be motivated by economic interest, as Berkeley's monopoly of the fur trade was supposed to give him a vested interest in the existence of Indians with whom to trade.
The common expression of the day was that "no bullet would pierce beaver skins. At any rate, in deference to these charges, the Assembly took the Indian trade from Berkeley and his licensees and transferred the authority for licenses to the county justices of the peace. The middle-of-the-road policy of defensive war, however, was probably the most unpolitic course that Berkeley could have taken.
If he had concluded peace, he would have ended the Indian raids and thus removed the constant sparkplug for war hysteria among the whites. As it was, the expensive policy of constructing mighty defensive forts prolonged the war, and hence the irritant, and did nothing to end it. The only result, so far as the Virginians were concerned, was a highly expensive network of forts and higher taxes imposed to pay for them.
Furthermore, Berkeley reportedly reacted in his usual tyrannical fashion against several petitions for an armed troop against the Indians, by outlawing all such petitions under threat of heavy penalty. With peace still not concluded, the frontier Virginians found themselves suffering Indian raids and yet being refused a governmental armed force by Berkeley. They finally determined in April to raise their own army and fight the Indians themselves.
While three leaders of this effort were frontier planters on the James and Appomattox rivers, they were hardly small farmers; on the contrary, they were among the leading large planters in Virginia.
The chief leader was the eloquent, year-old Nathaniel Bacon Jr. The other leaders were William Byrd, founder of the Byrd planter dynasty, and Captain James Crews, another large planter and neighbor of Bacon.
The effort quickly emerged, however, not as a new armed force, but as a mutiny against the Virginia government. When the three founders and their friends went to visit a nearby force of militiamen at Jordan's Point in Charles City County, the soldiers decided to mutiny and follow "Bacon! The massacre was also seized as one of the Crown's excuses for dispossessing the Virginia Company. Some writers attribute to this incident Bacon's hostility to the Indians.