Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
jacobtowne
Samurai
Joined: 24-Sep-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 102
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Your favorite Native American Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 12:56 |
This is not about a favorite American Indian, since I don't really have
one. It is about the first major war between Natives and American
colonists, and was fought here in New England.
King Philip's War of 1675-1676.
The two cultures (Native and European) different
ways of life and concepts of land use
had caused tension for many years. A continuing problem was the trampling of
Native cornfields by colonists livestock. While colonists were legally
responsible for damage, such laws were difficult to enforce in remote areas.
Increased competition for resources (particularly land for planting, hunting
and fishing) caused friction between the two groups. Changes in the regional
economy, such as collapse in the fur trade, led many Native people to support
themselves by selling their land.
Metacomet, called King Philip by the settlers, was
the son of Massasoit, chief of the Wampanoags, who had made a treaty of
friendship with the Pilgrims of Plymouth. It was
Philip who led the Indian forces against the colonists.
In 1675, hostilities broke out in the town of Swansea, and the war spread as far north as
New Hampshire, and as far southwest as Connecticut. Not all Native people,
however, sided with Philip. Most Natives who had converted to Christianity
fought with the colonists or remained neutral. The colonists, however, did not
always trust these converts and interned many of them in camps on outlying
islands. Also, some Native communities on Cape Cod and
the Islands did not participate in the war. Native soldiers fighting
on the side of the colonists helped turn the tide of the war, which ended in
1676 when Philip was killed by a Wampanoag fighting with Captain Benjamin
Church.
King Philips War was one of the bloodiest and most costly in the history of America. One in ten soldiers on both sides was injured or killed.
It took many years for Plymouth and the other colonies to recover from damage to property
The outcome of King Philips War was devastating to the traditional way of life for Native people in New England.
Hundreds of Natives who fought with Philip were sold into slavery abroad.
Others, especially women and children, were forced to become servants locally.
As the traditional base of existence changed due to the colonists victory, the
Wampanoag and other local Native communities had to adapt certain aspects of
their culture in order to survive.
JT
Edited by jacobtowne - 12-Nov-2006 at 12:58
|
|
Hellios
Arch Duke
Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 17:14 |
Nice pic of Crazy Horse Pinguin, you posted it in another thread, you seem to know about him, thanks again.
Pinguin, would the Oglalan Tasunka Witko have taken on Custer at Little Bighorn without Pizi and Tatanka Iyotake?
Edited by Hellios - 12-Nov-2006 at 17:17
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 17:39 |
Crazy Horse is one of my heroes!
I hope its monument it's finished during my lifetime, though. It will be the biggest monument in the Americas, in honor to a Native and all the Native Americans...
That's the way it should be!
Pinguing
|
|
Omar al Hashim
King
Suspended
Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 17:51 |
Originally posted by Paul
4 generations per century. That's 20th century 16, 19th
century 256, 18th century 4000, 17th century 32,000, 16th 256,000. So
every person in the Americas has around a quarter of a million great
great...... grand parents since Columbus..... Can you account for the
background every single one of these 256,000 ancestors for each and
every single person in Mexico? |
Nice idea but not quite true. You see the 234 great-grandparent and the
217 are actually sisters. Also the 145 and the 109 are the same
person.. etc etc.
That would only work if people knew all their ancestors and
specifically went out of their way to marry people they weren't in
someway related to.
|
|
Hellios
Arch Duke
Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 18:25 |
Pinguin, would you say they're the majority in Mexico?
Edited by Hellios - 12-Nov-2006 at 19:20
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 18:55 |
It depend of what you mean by majority. In Mexico people is not segregated by races, so the admixture is widespread and old.
The average Mexican family is diverse. Now, these people below are not Ethnic Native Americans but average Mexicans. This thread is about Native Americans, isn't?
Pinguin
.
|
|
Hellios
Arch Duke
Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 19:22 |
Originally posted by pinguin
It depend of what you mean by majority. |
Majority as in more than half of the total population of the entire country.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 19:32 |
Do you got the racial statistics of Canada?
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 19:37 |
Originally posted by pinguin
The figure that was really Native American is Benito Juarez. He was a lawyer and brillian politician in the "white" society, although he was a Zapotec Amerindian. Benito Juarez (1806-1872) was President of Mexico in two term 1861-63 and 1867-72, and is one of the most beloved figures of that country. He rejected the French invasion and is the only full blood indian that has governed Mexico. |
Something I always wondered: Benito Jurez was a Zapotec indian, who didn't speak Spanish until he started learning the language aged 12, so I think we can safely assume his parents didn't speak Spanish either. However both Benito and Jurez are very Spanish names. How is that possible?
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 19:45 |
Originally posted by Mixcoatl
...Something I always wondered: Benito Jurez was a Zapotec indian, who didn't speak Spanish until he started learning the language aged 12, so I think we can safely assume his parents didn't speak Spanish either. However both Benito and Jurez are very Spanish names. How is that possible?
|
It was called Christianization. Catholic priests started very early to speak Native tongues. In fact, those priest and theirs Native associates where the ones that created the chronicles and the first dictionaries of Nahualt and almost all Native American languages. They even compossed classical Baroque music with lyrics in Native languages!
To enter the "mainstream" Natives were convinced to become christians, and in the ceremory of baptism they received "Christian" or European names. It is important to notice that a Native American that becomed Christian was considered a human being like the European, and that have many rights before the crown. They could marry Europeans, own lands, and put theirs complains before the King representatives.
Only the most rebelious tribes keep theirs original last names. Moreover, the law of the Latin countries allow people to change theirs last names if they feel they suffer discrimination because of that, and in recent times many native americans have addopted western last names too.
Pinguin
Edited by pinguin - 12-Nov-2006 at 20:08
|
|
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 20:26 |
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
Originally posted by Paul
4 generations per century. That's 20th century 16, 19th century 256, 18th century 4000, 17th century 32,000, 16th 256,000. So every person in the Americas has around a quarter of a million great great...... grand parents since Columbus..... Can you account for the background every single one of these 256,000 ancestors for each and every single person in Mexico? |
Nice idea but not quite true. You see the 234 great-grandparent and the 217 are actually sisters. Also the 145 and the 109 are the same person.. etc etc. That would only work if people knew all their ancestors and specifically went out of their way to marry people they weren't in someway related to. |
That is of course true and this fact will reduce the number. Not noticeable to begin with, but as the numbers get into tens and hundreds of thousand more times than not. However it doesn't change the basic principle everyone's mixed.
There are no 100% spaniards in the Americas, in fact there are no 100% Spanish in Spain. All Spanish have some native American genes brought back from the time of colonialism and all Spanish have Moorish genes too. Subsequently all native Americans have Moorish genes. These spreads maybe small but they exist.
Edited by Paul - 12-Nov-2006 at 20:29
|
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 20:33 |
Originally posted by Paul
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
Originally posted by Paul
4 generations per century. That's 20th century 16, 19th century 256, 18th century 4000, 17th century 32,000, 16th 256,000. So every person in the Americas has around a quarter of a million great great...... grand parents since Columbus..... Can you account for the background every single one of these 256,000 ancestors for each and every single person in Mexico |
Nice idea but not quite true. You see the 234 great-grandparent and the 217 are actually sisters. Also the 145 and the 109 are the same person.. etc etc. That would only work if people knew all their ancestors and specifically went out of their way to marry people they weren't in someway related to. |
That is of course true and this fact will reduce the number. Not noticeable to begin with, but as the numbers get into tens and hundreds of thousand more times than not. However it doesn't change the basic principle everyone's mixed. |
[/QUOTE]
Yes. That reasoning make sense. However, the analysis of genetic markers is more scientific at the time of detect admixture. For those interested, in all countries of the Americas, Including the U.S., Canada, the Caribbean, Brazil and Hispanic America, the percentage of Native blood is important, varying from 10% to the 60% of the melting pot, depending on the country.
However, This thread was about important Native American figure of Native American culture and ancestry, and not about theirs mixed descendents. We should open another thread to talk about them, if you wish.
For now, let's get into absolute Native American figures.... please
Pinguin
Edited by pinguin - 12-Nov-2006 at 20:34
|
|
Hellios
Arch Duke
Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 20:54 |
Originally posted by pinguin
Do you got the racial statistics of Canada? |
Changing the subject ?
Note: Canada's record in human rights & the fight against racism is better than your country's record, come back to Canada and act racist; you'll see what happens to you by public & authorities.
Edited by Hellios - 12-Nov-2006 at 20:55
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 21:09 |
Originally posted by Hellios
Changing the subject ?
Note: Canada's record in human rights & the fight against racism is better than your country's record, come back to Canada and act racist; you'll see what happens to you by public & authorities.
|
I know Canada, so I won't go back. Ask the next Indian Nation where are you from about how good is the record of Canada fighting racism against natives.
But I insist. Find the racial demographics on Canada before studying Mexico. Simple.
Pinguin
|
|
Hellios
Arch Duke
Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 21:15 |
That's a problem most (if not all) countries had (or have) and you're trying to use that to make it look like it's a bigger problem here than elsewhere - nice try.
Edited by Hellios - 12-Nov-2006 at 21:16
|
|
Hellios
Arch Duke
Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 21:21 |
Originally posted by pinguin
But I insist. Find the racial demographics on Canada before studying Mexico. Simple. |
What's the argument about Mexico? I recall only asking a question and then answering your question about what majority means.
Edited by Hellios - 12-Nov-2006 at 21:22
|
|
Hellios
Arch Duke
Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 21:34 |
Originally posted by pinguin
I know Canada, so I won't go back. |
Despite having lived in the Prairies, your knowledge about the overwhelming majority of Canadians seems quite limited.
Think twice about those invitations to ask Canadian natives about how Ottawa generally treats them compared to how natives are treated in most other countries.
Edited by Hellios - 12-Nov-2006 at 21:36
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 21:46 |
In the Praries live most of Native Americans of Canada.
Yes. The Canadian government makes every effort possible to stop racism and improve the living of all the people. I know that. The bigots are in between the common people
Yes, you can show statistics and lost of things, but the fact is in many of those "primitive" countries you know, you can find Amerindian professionals and even PRESIDENTS. That will never happens in Canada, for sure.
Well, could we return to the topic now?
Omar
Edited by pinguin - 12-Nov-2006 at 21:51
|
|
Dan Carkner
Baron
Joined: 07-Nov-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 490
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 21:53 |
Well considering Canada killed most native people except the ones in the most remote quarters, beggared the current day survivors, and recently voted against the UN motions that would benefit native peoples, I don't think our "record" is that good.. Anyways I wouldn't say he's my favorite but I'm gonna put in a word for Joseph Brant, since my ancestors supposedly fought under him against the Americans ;)
|
|
Hellios
Arch Duke
Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 23:52 |
Hey, he was Mohawk!
His words:
"Our wise men are called Fathers, and they truly sustain that character. Do you call yourselves Christians? Does the religion of Him who you call your Savior inspire your spirit, and guide your practices? Surely not.
It is recorded of him that a bruised reed he never broke. Cease then to call yourselves Christians, lest you declare to the world your hypocrisy. Cease too to call other nations savage, when you are tenfold more the children of cruelty than they.
No person among us desires any other reward for performing a brave and worthwhile action, but the consciousness of having served his nation.
I bow to no man for I am considered a prince among my own people. But I will gladly shake your hand."
Edited by Hellios - 13-Nov-2006 at 00:47
|
|