Why the Native Americans ultimately lost America
91
What caused the downfall of the American Indian?
HOW GODS OF WAR PAVED THE TRAIL OF TEARS.
Centuries without exposure to war or epidemic diseases led to the developmental inequalities which caused the downfall and conquest of the Native American Indians at the hands of the European settlers.
From the time of Columbus’s first expeditions in the New World, the indigenous population which had been masters of the American continent for 14,000 years began fighting a losing battle which would ultimately end in the destruction of their culture. It was their inexperience at war, plus the fact that they’d never developed formidable weapons, combine with their lack of immunity to the diseases introduced by the Europeans, which led to the Indians—who were initially far superior in number— meeting with ignominious defeat.
One obvious reason for the Euro victory over the Indian tribes was their superior weaponry. They had war technology which the locals could not compete with. But why did the colonists have such superior arms? A sensible guess would be that the Europeans were an older culture. The earliest traces of European ancestry goes back over 100,000 years, compared to 14,000 for the Indians. That head start would logically allow for the superiority of development. Yet, history doesn’t support this theory. For example, sentient life existed in African over a million years earlier than in Europe, and yet the Europeans had guns long before the African people ever imagined such a thing. So, if time is not the key factor, what is?
A reason that the Europeans had weapons beyond the Indians was due to their long history of warfare and violence. Countries on the continent of Europe routinely fought over territory or religion. Even when they set out to colonize, they knew they would also have to deal with rival nations that would be claiming their own share of this vast new land. There had long been animosity between Spain, France, England, and the Dutch. These were opponents who would be difficult to overcome. The Europeans were armed and ready, tempered by years of bloodshed.
Native Americans, on the other hand, knew little of all-out war. Despite their mythical image as savages, they were actually much more civilized in the way they settled their tribal disputes. Battles at the time were ritualistic. Intermittent violence did occur, but the nature of pre-contact Indian war was far different from the wars known in Europe. Both in scale and in duration, their skirmishes were minuscule compared to Europe. The Indian natives could not conceive of the multi-year conflicts that dogged Euro history. Indians fought in small forays, with limited numbers of warriors. Their battles were often a game of ‘chicken’ where one side or the other backed down in the face of the fiercer opponent. They tried not to kill other Indians if it was not necessary and so had no need for guns or cannons. All this caused the American tribes to be very primitive in their weaponry, whereas the Europeans were veritable Gods of War.
For instance, when the Spanish conquered the Incas, they not only brought guns, but had the advantage of armor as well. The Inca’s fought with blunt clubs and had no armor at all. Further, the Incans did not have domesticated animals, and so the Spanish gained a tremendous advantage by charging in on horseback.The psychological effect of seeing men riding on horses had as powerful an effect on the Incans as the Spanish swords did. Soon, Incan leader Athhuallpa fell at Cajamarca and the Spanish claimed their land. Cortes would go on to do the same to Montezuma and the Aztecs, winning for similar reasons. Earlier, they had Slaughtered the tribes of the West Indies, gaining the Conquistadors a scathing indictment from a Spanish Friar in 1542.
Up in North America, the Native American people alternately became allies and enemies of the newly arrived settlers from Europe. Surely there was a sense of dread among the local tribes concerning these mysterious people who arrived by ship, bringing strange animals and stranger weapons? What did they think would happen in the long run?
The Native American tribes were not accustomed to visitors in their lands. These new arrivals confused and frightened them. Therefore, they made some mistakes which exacerbated hostilities with the colonists. A Chesapeake Indian tribe ambushed the first arrivals making landfall in Virginia. Things didn’t start off well and the settlers became very suspicious of the indigenous people. And the Indians surely felt the same, but some had their own motivations for contact.
Powhattan, leader of the powerful Algonquian tribe of Indians, was a clever man. He saw the newcomers as a potential source of power. They had things of value, like guns and gunpowder. Powhattan was in the process of consolidating his power in the region. Weapons would be invaluable to him. To this end, he became a friend and benefactor to the new settlement. Although their presence was a potentially destabilizing element, he felt they were worth the risk. He brought them food to help them survive their first long, cold winter.
He continued to trade with them afterwards, supplying food in exchange for weapons.It was, quite likely, this dependency on the Indians that increased the settler’s distrust of the locals. They needed Powhattan to get through the winter and were very much afraid that he would exploit their weakness. They expected the local Indians to take advantage of their weakness and double cross them. The settlers kept waiting for the other shoe to drop, and their increasing paranoia evolved into hostility against the native tribes.
When a misunderstanding between the two sides caused Powhattan to break ties, the settlers immediately assumed this was the double cross they had waited for and started to take food from the Indians by force. Powhattan struck back but he was overwhelmed, and the Indian wars began in earnest in North America. As the Colonial population increased, they began to take what they wanted and enforce their ways upon these people they thought of as merely “primitive barbarians”. They felt they had a God given right to depose those whom they saw as little more than animals. The pattern of “Indian removal” continued until the 19th century, when the last Indian resistance was gone.Thus, the Europeans practiced their time honed art of war, something they had much more experience in than the Indians. They had the better armaments, as well as one other unexpected secret weapon.
A surprise advantage that the Europeans had was that the Native tribes had lived isolated from epidemic diseases. Nor did they have herd animals, which often acted as conduits of infectious diseases. Bacterial infections such as smallpox, diphtheria, measles, whooping cough, scarlet fever and others were introduced to the Indians who had no natural immunities to them. Cortes’ 1521 victory over the Aztecs was aided by a terrible smallpox epidemic that cut the Aztec population in half. The devastating release of these germs was so catastrophic to the native people, it eventually killed 90% percent of the indigenous population. With their best warriors dead, and the rest demoralized, thinking their Gods had deserted them, the surviving Indians were no match for the growing number of Europeans.
Indian power faded steadily and by the 19th century, they were no longer a military threat to the established government of the United States of America. Steps were taken to “civilize” and indoctrinate the conquered Indians tribes into the culture of the victors. The curse of developmental inequality left them with nothing.
Societies evolve to exactly where they need to be to survive in the time and place. The Indians were well suited for life on the American continent, but that didn’t prepare them for the intervention of an unexpected predator or disease. European settlers and their guns, along with smallpox and other diseases, were outside the scope of what they were prepared to deal with.
The Indians also had no domesticated herd animals. Ironically, they were culpable in the killing and making extinct of large mammals rather than domesticating them, as when the Paleo-Indians killed off the Mastodons. If they hadn’t, could they have used them as the Indians of India do? As transportation and as beasts of burden? Would it have made a difference? And would these herd animals have produced germs that allowed the native population to develop immunities to European diseases? If large mammals still existed during the Euro invasion, would the result have been any different? I believe that this mistake made during their early hunter/gatherer days may have ultimately added a nail to the coffin of Indian culture.
I maintain that centuries of life without war curtailed the Indian ability to develop the technology to defend themselves. And further, that their isolation, the lack of pack animals and the extinction of the Mastodons caused the Indians to have insufficient natural defenses against epidemic diseases. These combined reasons destroyed any chance that the Indians, despite their vastly superior numbers, may have had to drive off the settlers and retain the land of their birth.
vote upvote downshareprintflag
- Useful (7)
- Funny (2)
- Awesome (3)
- Beautiful (2)
- Interesting (4)
CommentsLoading...
Thanks very much for reading, HH. I'm so glad you found it interesting.
I enjoyed the hub, but I as a historian I do question some of your explanations and sources. When looking at something as broad as the extermination of the Native Americans you need to break it down a littler further. While their were some peaceful tribes, the Mayans, Incans, and Aztecs were long-time fighters. It was in their religion. In many ways, this hindered them because they wanted prisoners to sacrifice while the conquistadors just wanted to win. In addition, you leave out many social factors such as the affinity for whiskey and their intratribal disputes and lack of unity. Even today these effects are still seen. The elimination of the Native American culture is a travesty (one of my favorite topics), but we cannot blame everything on the "white man" as society is so apt to do. Overall, there were several combining factors that culminated in their loss.
Hi FreedomChic;
I would agree that there were many contributing factors that were at play in the downfall of Native American culture. But I'd maintain that these elements led to the conquest of the American Indians, not to their natural dissolution as a culture. My position is that, if left alone, the Native American culture would have ultimately thrived, but they weren't sufficiently prepared to deal with outside forces, such as new predators (the Europeans settlers) and new diseases.
To put it in Darwinian terms, they couldn't adapt to outside influences. They were well suited for life in their native continent as things existed before the Eurpoeans settlers--the outside influence that led to their downfall-- arrived. But they weren't able to deal with the new forces brought down on them so unexpectedly.
And I won't deny that the Indians, especially those in South America and Mexico, had a history of combat before the Europeans came. But I think the scope and severity of those conflicts paled in comparison to the history of war that the Europeans had. The inter-tribal battles of the indigenous population never led to an arms race the way European wars did. Indian-on-Indian violence was done on the skirmish level when juxtaposed to the wars in Europe, which led to cannons and gunpowder.
If the Native Americans had indulged in the massive, multi-year wars that the Europeans frequently fought, they would have developed war technology. But they didn't. They were amateurs in the art of war.
The good news is they are regaining their culture, ideals and way of life all over the nation. I just visited Wounded Knee Memorial and have had the opportunity to work closely w/ Native American leaders and there is a renaissance amongst this great Nation within a nation.
This is one of the most interesting, entertaining and illuminating articles I have read in this directory. Despite the reported savagery of the American Indian, their lives, history and ultimate demise have always been a fascination, coupled with a disgust at the way invading forces have butchered and robbed of land many indigenous tribes across the world down through history. Man has little to be proud of in this matter. The points you make about superior weaponry, lack of immunity to diseases and the thoughtless extinction of a beast whose name I have never come across before, are all real eye-openers.
Great job!
Chad; I hope you're right about a Native American renaissance. What kind of work do you do with the American Indians?
And Linton, thanks for the kind words. You're right that its a disgusting situation and we have little to be proud of in the way we've treated certain cultures.
Yeah it's really sad to see what the Native Americans live like right now. I grew up next to 3 Indian reservations in the area and it is not the way of life meant for them. It's too bad we (Europeans) thought our way of life was superior. I am glad that Indians kept some of their past; their stories, beliefs, and many traditions. You are right about many of your points.
You're right, izetta. This is not how a proud people should be forced to live. Thanks for reading.
Good hub Robwrite. Rated up! Have you read "Guns, Germs, and Steel"? It posits a lot of what you are saying but its explanation of the disparity between the New and Old Worlds includes geographic and agricultural, as well as (as you mentioned) technological advantages. It also impugns the racist argument very well.
Thanks Jambo87. I have read Jared Diamond's "Guns. Germs and Steel". Its an excellent book. I learned much of what I wrote here from Diamond. I appreciate the comments.
Native Americans ulimately lost ground because ,primarily , of their lack of worldly intelligence , They're cultures were far less developed in the interacting with other cultures, War , although they knew how effective guirilla fighting was, was not one of their strong points. Their lack of intelligence was effectively used against them, constantly. Today it is politically correct to blame the victors , but ultimately they were a defeated society in a world and a time of extreme geographic national and world expansionism. Manifest destiny! We now ,as a society, are uncomfortable with that , but thats the way it is. Nice hub .
The native Americans weren't prepared to deal with what was essentially an invasive species. Thanks for reading.
Thats true , they seemed unable to change enough to assimilate to the cultural flood zone that rose from their borders. Even between Native indian tribes alone , there was little cooperation. We , in effect today , could offer far more than we do , as a nation , to raise the levels of poverty on reservations . I often find , in observations , that I'm not sure they have the drive ,personally or culturaly to assimalate ,even today. I'm not sure they do all they can to even help themselves. It's one hell of a tragedy of difffering cultures , unable to mix .
Some native North American clans were offered rewards (food, cloth, alcohol, etc.) to help defeat other clans who they traditionally considered their enemies, anyway.
Of course, after they helped Europeans defeat other natives they were no longer needed or, generally, valued.
Same old, same old.
But those were different times. Depending on their skin colour, among other factors, some races were thought to be not quite human even by some of the most liberal thinkers of that time.
It was very unfortunate for indigenous natives, everywhere, but that's how people were taught even in their schools & churches.
Humans are much more advanced now. We now know that our ancestors should have been kinder and gentler. We know that it's wrong to steal resources and land from indigenous residents, although some world size corporations still seem to be doing that, in South America, anyway.
But I don't think we should be putting the values we have today onto the people who came from Europe hundreds of years ago.
We were not the same people then.
Thanks for the feedback, awfeckit. Those were indeed different times. Still, its not a bad idea to look on the past with a critical eye (If not a judgmental one) and acknowledge the mistakes we made so we don't make them again. We did a huge injustice to the American Indians and its good to remind ourselves of it so that we don't do the same thing again. People who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
Thanks for reading.
Great Hub Rob and you could just about write the same Hub about how the 'explorers' some might call them 'invaders', treated our own indigenous people here in Australia. I'm sure that superior weaponry and more seasoned and sophisticated tactics certainly went a long way to the conquering of the 'natives' of each country. We only said our 'sorry' a little while back :-)
You're right, agvulpes. There are a lot of similarities between the way the indigenous people of Australia and the Native American Indians were treated. Both cases are very sad. Thanks for Reading.
Each and every country in the world has a history of pushing aside previously settled populations [even indigenous populations ] ,in Canada , The US , Russia , a good part of Europe , latin America etc. , What we as Americans need to do is figure out why the native Americans can't seem to assimalate culturally , poverty, deseases , addictions to alcohol and drugs dominate reservations every where. There is little economic developement , manufacturing , etc. on reservations . Why? Perhaps because this nations treaties allowed them to remain separate countries ,within a country! Wouldn't they be better off being a part of America ? Does allowing this reservational seperation only hinder progress? A lot of questions need to be answered , a lot of judging the pasts by todays excellent hindsight only serves to devide an already suffering issue. Will Americans pull out of this continant and go find another land , No. Can possitive steps be taken to help these populations come up to speed in todays advanced cultural progress, Yes. Re-living the mistakes of the past only fuel divisions already inflamed . Peace and progress will bring success.
Good write Rob. :] Although the raw materials were readily available to the indigenous people of the Americas, the age of metals never materialized.
The Aztecs had knowledge of soft metals but nothing durable, just as the other great civilizations of the Yucatan. They opposed the Spaniards with beautiful, obsidian edged, wooden broad swords, spear points and arrow tips referred bird points, up to one inch long. Obsidian points were able to pierce the armor of the invaders,a fact.
Prophecy also had a major role in a reluctance for hostility on the part of the great nations south of the border. They were violent though. Earlier Olmec and Toltec civilization display glyphs characterized by warfare. The great Sioux nation pushed westward from the east... and pushed or warred with everything in front of them.
The Maya were able to erect magnificent limestone temples without a metal cutting tool at hand. They might have benefitted from them but they just never needed them.
The Inca built great works of art in their buildings with a most unusual stone block cutting technique that has us baffled today. They carved ten ton stone block and did it without metal. The stone age as we refer to it in western civ was at its peak in perfection when the europeans arrived.
The Bronze and iron Age in Europe and Asia was absolutely revolutionary in advancement of those cultures. The magnificent weapons that could be produced made killing easy, the double edged sword was the super power weapon of mass destruction its day when it was introduced. roughly five thousand years ago the bow and arrow sprang up all over the planet. all at once it seems. all were equal, then...guaranteed the discovery of metallurgy was an accident. An accident that didn't take place anywhere else.
There are so many variables but you have given a good overview of the situation. sorry for the rant Rob. Pre columbian civilization and native american studies intrigue me. Perhaps it is my mixed blood, I also worked in Archaeology for two years unearthing a large Creek indian village "Fusihatchee" (means bird on the water)in the south east. They too had found the trade goods were replacing their way of life. The stone tools became primitive and rough in execution.
peace my friend ~ great write ~ greg
I appreciate the educated insight, GG. Thanks for all that additional information.
Namaste, my friend.
thank you , that is being useful
Glad you found it useful, damon. Thanks for reading.
The Native, true american's downfall was because of a selfish people, with a power trip and no heart would keep taking what they wanted no matter who or what got in there way. This has never stopped!The killing will never end
I hope it will one day, rochelle. Maybe we'll learn someday.
Thanks for reading.
I think their downfall was that they did not accept the immigrants flooding over their borders.
Yeah, if the native Americans had had a better immigration policy, we'd be in the United States of native Americans.
All people from all tribes from the very beginning have been warring on each other, since time began. The teaching of the wise ones, is that we all are to live in harmony with each other. It has been prophesied, that the Native Americans will rise again..The anger and violence must end for all nations or we will destroy ourselves. Squanto, Cochise and many others were wise..in their own lifetimes, and Geronimo finally gave up the fight He had a vision that lead him him to an understanding.
Thanks for commenting Donna. Anyone who believes in peace has great wisdom. I'd like to believe that the native americans will rise again as a culture one day but I really doubt it.
Thanks for reading.
No, the Indians should have welcomed the immigrants. They were just looking for a better life. They weren't bad people, just folks who wanted a job and a place to live.
WOW Rob! You should be writing for a major company somewhere. I would love to run an idea or two by you. I am sure you have that kind of talent. You have some of the best articles I have seen on this site, especially considering your writing skills, your in a class of your own. Much respect.
Hi Richard; I really appreciate the kind words. Thank you. I'd be happy to discuss ideas with you.
Thanks for the nice comments;
Rob
I keep wondering if nicomp is having some fun. Immigration is what destroyed the Indian way of life. Europeans taking over the land and resources of the america continent. I do agree you make some valid points.
True, ruffridyer. The immigration of so many foreigners was something the Native Americans couldn't handle.
Thanks for reading and commenting;
Rob
I like the piece. However, not all Native Americans were peaceful. The Sioux and Tetons in the Plains, for example, were very antagonistic. Nonetheless, the Europeans and later Americans used their rivals to gain land in the continent.
Yes, they weren't all peaceful. As I said, they were just amateurs in war as compared to the Europeans.
Great read! Kept my interest all the way through...of course I love history... :)
My great uncle used to regale my brothers and I with oral stories of times before the white man came to Cherokee lands. We were glued to our seats. Every little kid loves a great Indian story, and it's so much better when it's about a tribe of one's ancestors. Reading this brought back so many of those memorable times. Thumbs up!
Hi Terri; Glad I could bring back some nice memories for you. Thanks so much for the kind words.
Rob
...an essential definitive hub subject by you Sir Rob - your hubs are like a big treasure hunt - there are so many goodies here - waiting to be had - and with all due respect to the Indian people - if the white man had not come over at all they would still be hunting buffalo and living in teepees - and no MacDonalds or 9-11 - now that's a life of purity and just good clean living.
lake erie time 10:03pm
Hello epigramman; We can only wonder how life would have developed on the American Continent if the Europeans hadn't arrived. What sort of culture(s) would have ultimately developed. We'll never know. (But a world without McDonalds doesn't sound like such a bad thing.)
Thanks you very much for your kind comments. They are appreciated.
Rob
Nice job, Rob
I'm the author of AP US History for Dummies. Just wanted you to know that your perspective is going into a lecture I'm delivering this week at the University of California, Davis. Keep up the good work
Hi Greg. Wow, I feel so intelligent now. Thanks for telling me.
Rob
What do you think of the correlation between settled agriculturalists and prolonged warfare? Hunter gathers skirmish -- agriculturists seem to create empires
Amerindian failed against to European was mainly because they were ISOLATED from the Euro-Asia continent. The European was exchanging knowledge (and disease) with other major civilizations on the East side. Gun powder, Cannon, cheap paper book were invented by Chinese centuries before European. North Amerindian quickly learned and reformed to match with New Comers, but a bit too late, while war became a matter of advanced weapon, no more a matter of bigger population with cold weapon.
1500 years ago, Japan learnt everything from China while it was still very primitive.
It was the first nation to industrialized in Asia. It was the only Nation capable to against the West during war time.
I felt so sad, the Amerindian did have great civilization and great contribution to the whole world, but with very bad geographical location. No chance to learn. They ended up lose almost all their land :(
I saw up close and personal the sadness of those on reservations in one state...it was heartbreaking...but the American Indians I encountered retained their dignity and conviction even though they had been treated so unfairly. time has a way of equalizing events...who knows...one day we may read a whole new chapter about those from whom so many of us claim ancestry. so glad you shared this...
Hi Chimak; Thanks for the detailed input.
.......
Hi Pstraubie; It is heartbreaking, I agree. It's laudable that they've managed to retain their dignity despite being conquered. I hope in the future, the story of the American Indians will have a happier ending.
Thanks for reading,
Rob
what year was this done? i would like to include your work in my bibliography :)
What a trajedy with the disease that hit the indians eventually killing 90% of them. I don't see the bulk of native America tribes to be as noble as you do. From what I understand there was tremendous cruelty with many of the tribes. They would abandon the old and imfirmed to starve to death, they would torture and kill for fun, they rountinely took slaves and the chiefs greatly exploited thier own poeple. We're the shoe on the other foot the indians would likely have been more than the Europeans.
Hello Dee; This was done in 2010.
Thanks for reading,
rob
Wba: It is a tragedy about the diseases wiping them out.
As for the rest, this is not about them being more noble than anyone else, its about the inequities that led to their downfall. They were primitive in many ways but not as savage as their reputation would indicate. Certainly they could be ruthless, but I don't think they ever tortured just for fun.
The Native Americans weren't saints but that doesn't mean they weren't victims.
rob
I understood that the aztecs used to capture torture and sacrifice about 20,ooo poeple yearly. Before they sacrificed them they cut open thier chest and tore tore out thier heart and ate them! You don't hear much about this but the spaniards understandably had cause to believe they were savages.
Yes, the Atecs believed in ritual human sacrifices to their Gods. Things done in the name of religion are, sadly, not rare. Think of what the Europeans have done in the name of religion. As I said, the Indians were not saints, but they were still victims.
Victims of history
The Europeans were victims too, a mongrel group of survivors
Of centuries of invasion. Spain had barely pushed back the Moors,
England still paid tribute to the Danes, our word slave comes from Slav,
a popular source of victims in Roman times
Indeed, the downfall of Indian culture may be tied to their very lack of previous
victimization. They had not before been swept away by the world currents of guns, germs and steel.
The difference is that some Indian identification was able to survive.
In Europe, where are the Jutes, where are the Celts? There are no native European tribal reservations or casinos.
Yes, some Europeans have been victims, too. I'm not denying it. But that's another topic.
ill accept that europeans were an older society. But implying that they are superior, with the wole african thing. No. europeans were being dominated by arabs in eurasia and were not allowed to trade with the chinese or others along the silk road. The way they try to solve this is sail around the world to china to bypass the arabs, if possible. Then they discover america. Tainos gave europeans gold as a gift, they didnt value it like eurasia did. Spanish then invade bringing guns.. Did europeans invent guns or gunpowder. No! The chinese did. Dont try and say europeans were soo mighty They brought technology from eurasia. It could have been any society or race from eurasia that did that! European wealth was stolen from america, then used to create false superiority on the rest of the world. White "Americans" have no right to be called American! They should be called European-American just like Africans are African-American and Native-Americans should be the only ones called American because they are the only acctual Americans!
And immunity. The diseases in europe had between 5-60% death rates in europe now hit any european community with all of those diseases at once I guarantee the death rate will be almost identical. Ill admit that they may be slightly more immune but in evolutionary words at max there will only be a 3% difference. It is also used as a way to imply false superiority
Marcello; I think you either misread or misinterpreted what this article is about. Its not about European superiority. That is neither stated nor implied here. Reread it and you'll see that it's about the historical, geographical, meteorological, chemical and psychological conditions that led to the downfall of Native American culture.
It is not stated, but it is implied. 90% of this hub is right on. But I just dont like half truths that have been passed on each generation. It wasnt european weaponry vs american. It was eurasian weaponry vs american. And disease was not simply disease. It was basically biological warfare. Diseases in europe came 1 by 1 for centuries. And moved at at a normal rate. Europeans used this to and spread every and all diseases to americans absolutely shocking every aspect of it. The only difference there would be if they cultivated animals is they would have introduced new diseases that would have had an effect on both americans and europeans. its not so much your fault that it comes out like that, its the fact that thats the way were all tought. I mean come on if any disease were to pop up now would we give europeans a lower death rate? Psycological conditions I agree the morale must have been low. Eurpeans threw the rest of the world at the americans. After they killed most of em' they try to impose their culture on them, and destroy their dignity(they pretty much succeeded). SOME native tribes were far superior warriors than europeans. It was weaponry that did it though. Its quite sad.
Thank you for your input.
By the way, ahorseback is ignorant! Very narrow minded his comments are quite uneducated and obnoxious. Just saying
I found this hub article by searching 'why couldn't we live peacefully amongst the Native Americans?' and actually found my answer. I am reminded here that it was a different world with different mindsets. Colonization equaled subjugation, not just of peoples but of resources, which of course was not unique to European colonizers.
I'm trying to grasp the deeds of my ancestors who fought against the Native Americans with Dunmore and Clark. My father thumps his chest proudly over (5x) Great Grandpa Abraham Thomas who "fought the Indians", while my chest constricts with shame and sorrow. The guilt has become more than passive since learning more about native ways from a close friend who now walks the native path of her ancestors, but all I can do is educate myself and those around me. I cannot change the past, only learn from it.
Thank you for writing this thoughtful and informative piece.
(Addition to my above comment as Deborah)
I can embrace your proposal that the cultural advancements of the Europeans (from whichever source their advancements were derived) afforded a powerful advantage over the isolation that stunted the advancements of the Native American cultures. It is simply logical that any group of people evolves in the manner in which it needs to in order to survive and/or satisfy their curiosity. Native Americans had a culture that worked for them. They had no need for the advancements that Europe and Asia had because they were not needed for survival until it was too late. This was by no means a matter of intellectual inferiority or superiority, it was just a fact of life.
It makes so much sense that I just sit here, smack my forehead and say 'wow'!
Thank you!
Hi Deborah; thanks for the thoughtful, detailed comments. I appreciate your reading this. As you say, the fall of the American Indians was not about intellectual inferiority. The Native Americans, like most species, evolved to survive in a particular time and place, under a particular set of geographic circumstances. On thier own, they would have thrived. But they were at a stage of development where they weren't prepared (biologically or technically) for the arrival of an invasive species. (The Europeans.)
Thanks for reading and commenting,
Rob
There is no question that the Europeans were far more intellectual but physically inferior...Let's call a spade a spade...European homes were built stronger; our sailing vessels were far superior; our weapons were far superior; our organizational and governing skills were far superior; our education system was far superior; our agricultural capabilities were far surperior (eg. crop rotation); our domestication of animals (which goes under organizational abilities) was far superior; our military tactics was far superior...Let's face it, when millions of people over centuries of time could only develope a home built out of branches and animal skin (called teepees)that shows very little intelligence and innovative capabilities...Lack of crop rotation and metal technology was there downfall and both of these comodities was right in front of them all along. I dont see any long term plan. They lived more day to day; not very smart..The only reason they lasted as long as they did was because of their isolation...Huge oceans on both sides would deter alot of outside forces...As soon as white man tamed those boundaries...It was over..
it took awhile to read everyone comment but i done and they were most helpfull to me thank you everyone XD
took me like 5mins to read all this lol comments included :P.
i have to agree,my ancestors lost everything due to their lack of exp in these matters.though for mine it wouldnt be a first time(if no1 knew the taino were driven to the west indies by the persueing kalinago or caribb tribe)
i also agree that the state these reservations are in is worth crying about: gangs,drugs,abuse...nice way to take care of your true forefathers america(i mean the powers not regular civilians).
i read a comment above that stated something as 'why dont they (NA's) join the USA..-well why doesnt the usa give us its big chair nd it joins US?... this continent is OUR home,NA's spoon fed this gov. in its early days.
but i want to comment on that on a personal note and heres how i c it:
im a citizen life in New York or anywhere is no different from that of a rez.drugs,gangs,abuse and corruption.wtf would be the difference? let alone the point?other than to start giving back to this planet on a global scale using americas strings.
its a pride thing in my heart,ask todays black man tobe a slave for those that took everythng away.
white america(i say white becuz its a euro power['american' my ass]) is so pompous and backwards success at anothers expense,i wont front like i know anythng about the past since with no1 to talk to-WHO CAN?
but todays amerindians dont belive in this last man standing theme.our downfall has ='d a more cohesive community.tribes that fought in the past have become best friends today.clans seperated by mls of land are today very well connected and in contact with one another.powwows help make this contact constant and active while providing entertainment and a place to bring the old culture out to the open for everyone on earth to see.(like at a superbowl where u root for ur team we at powwows scream and shout,with a smile and pure hearts,for our combined ancestry that keeps us rooted to this land we call earth.
that comment i commented on stood out to me becuase weaather or not it was intended tobe-sounded completely colonialistic and just heartless..pissed me off lol.i apologize to the person though this is not to target you at all in anyway,just saying what if ur family was murdered and everythng lost then i come along and say 'hey man forget it its in the past now' the longest history book written is not a book but ur DNA no matter how many generations past,if i were to live through them,id never forget or forgive what this government did to my ppl and what they failed to do for them afterward.some will say that holding on to such a thing is bad for ur health..well then hey stop telling eachother to learn from ur mistakes.forget the wrongs your lover caused u and go make happy with them.
i dont HATE whites or anyone(except racists,feck those guys)i dont even HATE the USgov. but if it ever agreed to unhinge from this continent and go back to europe id be very pleased.im sure alot of us would.
alot of european concepts and influence is at had for past and present NA issues but becuz we'r indian we get ignored.ugh and we'r not even 'indian' lol thats another problem this 'meh it is what it is' mentality that european power has.
some also say that since most of our nations are solo that we should fix our own problems,forgetting that the larger portion of us didnt want a rez and that it was a choice of survival/death.
i feel im ranting on and losing focus.
my point is america is a place that likes to 'throw it in your face' (Mt.Rushmore?) and we dont want anythng todo with that.we offered our conquerors an open hand and were instead conquered becuz of european greed.
our 2 versions of governnace need work but america has alot of soul searching todo befor any native can heartfully consider becoming an 'american'.
aw my guest name is misspelled :( lol its supposed to read LASTofDTaino,like tht movie last of the mohican :P
this last comment is just to identify myself,my name on paper is Chris,im taino indian,in my tribe im called Xieti Ch'Nex (the blackfeather).im puerto rican born in NYC,USA.i have alot of growing up todo myself and further soul searching.
and i liked this article :] 9000xKudos!
Hello, hello, 2 years ago
Thank you for a well written and in depth written hub. It is an eye opener because of your explanations. Very interesting.