_edited.jpg){kind=small}
A vast difference in the relations between American Indians and colonists exists between the treatment and respect towards American Indians showed by the French and the English and Spanish. Whilst the French and American Indian relations were largely calm and encouraged cultural mixing, the British encouraged strong separation and enforced a strict sense of British superiority over the “inferior” American Indian race. Finally, the Spanish slightly encouraged cultural mixing, although they at the same time looked down upon the American Indians as inferior and built a rigid social hierarchy and encouraged authority over the Native Americans.
The French represent the positive side of colonial treatment of Native Americans. As described in the “Account of the First Contact of the Ho-Chunk,” the French clearly treat the Native Americans with much respect – in fact, at their arrival they “wanted to shake hands with the Indians” symbolising that they were planning to work together with, and not work to exploit, the American Indians. The French colonial model was one dominated by collaboration – the Native Americans and French worked together closely and helped each other. This is evidenced again by the “Account of the First Contact of the Ho-Chunk” in which Nicolet describes that “[the French] taught the Indians how to use an ax and chop a tree down” and that then “The French taught the Indians how to use guns.” In turn, the Indian Americans gave items to the traders and introduced them to the new concept of tobacco. “The Form and function of French-Native American relations in early eighteenth-century French colonial Louisiana” by Joseph Zitomersky also explains this interesting and unique relation between the two vastly different civilisations – “the French are seen to have “possessed a peculiar ability and facility for getting along with Native peoples, a national trait of compatibility,” which contrasted at once with the genocidal repression and authoritarian treatment of Native Americans by the Spanish and the nascent racism and territorial dispossession practiced upon them by the English.” This evidences the tolerant and kind approach the French had towards colonialism which remained unparalleled in any of the other colonial empires. Unlike the English and Spanish, the French were able to collaborate with the Native Americans, treating and keeping them as allies. In fact the two civilisations became so close that intermarriage was strongly encouraged and “the leader of the whites took a liking to a Winnebago girl, the daughter of the chief, and he asked her parents for permission to marry her” (“Account of the First Contact of the Ho-Chunk,” 1).
In their colonial strategy, the Spanish mark between the English and the French. Unlike the English they did not strictly prohibit racial mixing in the form of intermarriages between Spaniards and Native Americans, although they (like the English) believed in the inborn inferiority of the Indian Americans. Unlike the English and French, they felt it was their duty – and in fact refused if this was not done – to convert the Indian Americans to Christianity and exert authority of lives due to what they felt was an inborn superiority. While the English also believed they were superior to the Indian Americans, they didn’t try as methodically to forcibly convert the Indian American population to their belief systems. The idea that the Spanish though of themselves as vastly superior to their Indian American counterparts can be clearly seen in “Coexistence and Conflict in the Spanish Southwest: The Pueblo Revolt of 1680.” Although the Spanish Southwest was previously inhabited by Indian Americans before the arrival of the Spanish, the Spanish instead focus on the fact that they believe the Indian American civilisation to be “uncivilised” and do not understand why they are opposed to what they consider the “only right” faith, Christianity. The treatment of Native Americans in the passage demonstrates how the Spanish looked down upon the Indian American civilisation, terming key spiritual elements of their lives as “very ugly masks in imitation of the devil” and failing to understand how the Indian Americans may think the same of the Spanish God (the Christian God). This shows that although , the Spanish slightly encouraged cultural mixing, they at the same time looked down upon the American Indians as inferior and built a rigid social hierarchy and encouraged authority over the Native Americans.
Finally, the English had once again a unique approach to colonial strategy in the New World. Unlike the Spanish they very strongly believed that races should be completely separated and under most circumstances refused to communicate and interact with Native Americans other than looting them and taking the members of tribes as slaves. ““Why Shall Wee Have Peace to Bee Made Slaves”: Indian Surrenderers During and After King Philip’s War” looks at how even the Indian Americans who surrendered following rebellion which was against acts from the British such as stealing they were treated extremely harshly “facing execution, overseas enslavement, local limited-term enslavement and forced relocation.” Even though the British had encroached on the land of the Native Americans and had stolen from them, they have done this under the impression that the Native Americans are inferior to them, which they felt also gave them the right to enslave Native Americans, something which they punished the Native Americans for when they retaliated. In the “Narrative of the Captivity and Restoration of Mrs Mary Rowlandson” we hear firsthand from an English woman about her opinions and treatment of the Indian Americans. The attitude which Mrs Rowlandson has towards the Indian Americans make the reasons of their revolt clear. She describes that she sees “fields of wheat and Indian corn… to be food for our merciless enemies [the American Indians].” The description of the American Indians as enemies and also describes that “another time, if any Indian had come to the door, they [the dogs] were ready to fly upon him and tear him down.” This aggressive attitude towards the Indians and expressions which show their apparent “inhumanity” are shown throughout the passage, although incidents in which the Indian Americans are treated badly by the English are never seen in a light with remorse. Although Rowlandson mentions many negative aspects of the Native Americans, she also makes remarks that seem to point towards kindness shown by the Native Americans. This includes when she describes that “the [American Indian] squaw laid a skin for me, and bid me sit down, and gave me some ground nuts, and bade me come again; and told me they would buy me, if they were able, and yet these were strangers to me that I never saw before.” She also describes that she begins to enjoy eating food to an extent which she previously thought was brutal and inhumane, such as eating bear. Although she does describe her positive treatment, she constantly also describes the Native Americans badly and attributes all of their positive qualities to God showing mercy on her. For example, when she is in a large crowd of Native Americans and none of them does any aggressive act towards her she does not attribute it to her kindness but instead claims that “I [Mrs Rowlandson] have had the goodness of God.” The constant belief that all of the positive aspects of the Indian Americans are only due to God saving her, and the bad aspects are only from the Indian Americans represents a large bias against the Indian Americans. This shows how the British encouraged strong separation and enforced a strict sense of British superiority over the what they believed to be an inferior Indian American race.
In conclusion, the various central colonial powers ruling in the New World each used different strategies of varying effectiveness and humanity in their treatment of the Native Americans. While the French represent collaborative colonial powers who worked together peacefully and respectfully with the Native Americans, the English are on the other extreme as they strongly discourage any intermarriage and treat the Native Americans as strongly inferior. Finally, the Spanish represent a point between the poles – although they allow intermarriage they still treat the Native Americans as inferior and enforce authority over them as they feel it is their duty to civilise the local indigenous tribes.
Works Cited
1. Paul Radin, Thirty-Seventh Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, 1915-1916 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1923) (account of Jean Nicolet), 67–69, http://archive.org/stream/annualreportofbu37smit/annualreportofbu37smit_djvu.txt.
2. Joseph Zitomersky, “The Form and function of French-Native American relations in early eighteenth-century French colonial Louisiana,” Michigan State University Press, accessed September 10, 2021, https://shibbolethsp-jstor-org.stanford.idm.oclc.org/start?entityID=urn%3Amace%3Aincommon%3Astanford.edu&dest=https://www.jstor.org/stable/42952226&site=jstor
3. Pedro Naranjo, "Coexistence and Conflict in the Spanish Southwest: The Pueblo Revolt of 1680," Digital History, accessed September 10, 2021, http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtid=3&psid=651.
4. Mary Rowlandson, Narrative of the Captivity and Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson (1682), Project Gutenberg e-book, 2009, http://www.gutenberg.org/files/851/851-h/851-h.htm
5. Linford D. Fisher; “Why Shall Wee Have Peace to Bee Made Slaves”: Indian Surrenderers During and After King Philip’s War. Ethnohistory 1 January 2017; 64 (1): 91–114. doi: https://doi-org.stanford.idm.oclc.org/10.1215/00141801-3688391