|
|
Post by Daniel Kogan on May 21, 2016 15:36:59 GMT
Response to question 2 People have always faced conflicts and challenges when it came to settling in different parts of the world. Whether it was a conflict with the native people or a conflict with challenging landscapes. One challenge discussed by William White is the challenge of instituting diplomacy between Native Americans and European settlers. Diplomacy, done correctly, can be a beautiful thing that prevents conflicts and bloodshed. It can settle disputes in a civilized matter where both parties come out of the deal happy. White also discussed how the European settlers tried to get some Native Americans to go to their schools to learn about the Europeans and to help settle disputes. This came in handy a couple of times according to White. The European settlers had great motivations to have attempt colonization. They wanted a new place to live and raise their families as a new start. The diplomacy also could come into play when trying to set up colonies along the eastern seaboard where both parties could discuss areas for colonies to set up and what areas were not to be used to set up a colony. The settlers faced all of the challenges that were in front of them to simply be able to survive. The three necessities that humans need to survive are; food, water, and shelter. One challenge was how were they going to eat? Another challenge also concerning food was how are they going to cook what they hunt? Where can a settler make a home that has access to water whenever they need it is another challenge that they needed to face. The last challenge settlers faced was, where am I going to build a home and how. Maintaining food, water, and their home is another challenge that Response to jpetonak2's post: I really enjoyed the way you introduced diplomacy into your response because you essentially took the question to the next level. By doing so, you initially acknowledged that such a characteristic in the society was deficient, answering the main proposed inquiry by our professor. You then moved on to explain that when applied correctly, diplomacy “can be a beautiful thing that prevents conflicts and bloodshed.” Meaning, though establishing diplomacy was a challenge between the Native American and European settlers, you referred to as a potential solution mentioned by William White. I thought this was very constructive. Nonetheless, I agree with you in the sense that controlling disputes and tensions was difficult. Not only were political nuances of the essence, but people simply also needed to survive. |
|
|
|
Post by chelseaw on May 21, 2016 16:05:10 GMT
Response to Question 1 According to the parallels spoken about in the podcast, “City Upon a Hill: A History of Exceptionalism” the idea of exceptionalism has shifted drastically throughout time. The experts within the podcast touch upon the ideal saying that American Exceptionalism is now viewed as our country being the leader and the one that other countries should strive to be like; being exceptional. In the past exceptionalism was viewed differently; in John Winthrop’s sermon, City upon a Hill, he described our great nation as a target, that colonists were now vulnerable to enemies and should be hesitant before wanting to truly commit. What was once hesitation transformed into elitism. We have considered ourselves the leaders of the free world for a long time because we are the leading nation in booming capitalism and democracy so therefore we believe everyone should be like us but not better than us. Certain actions and ideals in the seventeenth century began this exceptionalist shift in thought. Superiority and greed are concept that can be seen in Greene’s reading that has been carried throughout time and even into modern society. White people believed that their lives were superior against blacks. They saw them as commodities, property that can be owned and siphoned for money and power. White people were better in their minds and therefore they were to control everything. Slaves were laborers within a mass industry in which their owners made profit. In the earlier times of settlement, the Virginia Company intended on having a “Spanish experience” in America by maximizing wealth and power. The country soon was based off of these ideals which is what John Winthrop saw as detrimental to the country because everyone was watching us. Exceptionalism is driven mainly by superiority and greed and we can still see the effects it has today. This country is seen as a superpower and guard dog of sorts and because of this, we believe it is our duty to make other countries better and more like us. This can either be interpreted as a positive or negative way depending on how you look at it; it was partially the reason behind trying to eliminate Communism, colonization with other nations, and helping out struggling countries. Reply This is a great summary of the readings. The idea of being exceptional has definitely changed our way of thinking. Even if we dont realize we are doing it, we unconsciously base everything we do on the image it would project of us. Our ideas have shifted over the years, and now we believe that being exceptional is the greatest thing, but in the past it was seen as a hindrance. Maybe this is the idea that we should start thinking again. It is no secret that America has a poor image in other countries, becuase we seem arrogant. If we changed our idea of excellence maybe other countries would like us more. |
|
|
|
Post by chrisdigi on May 21, 2016 17:26:26 GMT
Response: I agree, I think our ability to push on through struggles and challenges is hardwired into our brains through thousands of years of evolution. I also believe humans naturally have a desire to come out on top of whatever or whoever they are facing. The forest concealed predators to both the settlers and their livestock. In order to come out on top, the settlers destroyed the forest and built their farms. They could grow crops, raise livestock, and destroy the predators' home at the same time. Or for instance, After Logan's raids in Pennsylvania and Virginia, there was an outcry for action from the settlers. With a desire to not curl up in defeat, the PA governor and Lord Dunmore sent militia to fight the Mingo and Shawnee. This results in the Native tribes being pushed farther west and having to relinquish their hunting grounds in Kentucky. The whole idea is that we'll fight the hardships until either we come out on top or we just cannot continue to fight. Response to Discussion Question #2: Alan Taylor’s, “Wasty Ways: Stories of American Settlements,” discusses the hardships that were faced on the eastern seaboard by settlers. In the eighteenth century the settlers in upstate New York faced the issue of how to deter carnivorous mammals from destroying the domesticated livestock and plants that the settlers introduced to the land. As this occurred in the eighteenth century the settlers did not have another way of obtaining food to eat. Their only option to obtain food was from the crops that they grew, the animals that they domesticated and hunted. With carnivorous animals threatening their livestock and plants the settlers needed to figure a way to fix the problem. The option was to remake the dense forest that housed the mammals into a farm. The problem was that the settlers only had hand tools to tackle the project. This is just one of the many problems that settlers faced during this period of time. William White’s, “The Colonial Virginia Frontier and International Native American Diplomacy,” introduces the topic of diplomacy between different tribes and cultures. Most cultures thought of the Native Americans of Virginia to be savages. In the 1700’s young men were sent to an Indian School in Virginia to be educated as Christian Englishmen. Providing the education was in hope of the young men returning to their nations and encouraging civilization. The motivation for doing this was to in some nations was to create negotiators so that there was a line of communication between other nations. Creating this overlying civilization was a way to provide a form of structure between the nations. If everyone is on the same page and can communicate in the same language then things would be easier for the settlers. I believe that settlers decided to face the challenges in front of them for numerous reasons. First, if settlers did not face the challenges such as creating farms, building homes and materials then how would they have survived? The challenges may not have been ideal, but they were essential for living. Even today the same logic applies, people do not want to go to work five days a week, but they do because it needs to be done to survive. Money buys food, water, and housing, which are essential for living. Chopping down a forest to create land for a farm and wood for a shelter is what was essential for living in the past.
|
|
|
|
Post by rheajain on May 21, 2016 17:31:47 GMT
Response to Question 2 The new world offered opportunities and resources such as acres of woods containing various timbers so dense the settlers saw these forests as problems, but profitable. Along with the fur pelts of newly discovered animals, these settlers had drained many existing animals in the newly established towns and cities putting several breeds of animals into extinction. Once on the Eastern shores the colonist faced the Native Americans not realizing that they had their own culture, economics and political norms already recognized. The pioneers came due to overcrowding of prisons, poverty, sickness, and opportunity. In the seventeenth century, an average citizen in London especially a commoner or unskilled laborer had no opportunity for growth or expansion due to lack of availability of land or funds. This was primarily the reason that made the new immigrants and colonists attempted the long and dangerous trip across the ocean. As an American today we face a similar situation where we are no longer the main producers for dry goods or agriculture any more. We have contaminated our water supplies and have been black listed to sell our agriculture goods outside of the U.S. due to the GMO’s we use as growth accelerators and insect repellants. We have become a service industry country, which makes us a less self-sufficient country. Because these factors exist, there are countries that will educate our college students for free of charge as long as they are willing to stay in that country for a certain amount of years to repay their debt. This sounds a little like being an indentured servant in my opinion especially in an area like Tokyo, where China is the mother country. There is room for growth in the third world countries that have not yet become service industry driven economy. I never thought about their profits as problems to the environment, like the extinction of animals that they were killing for fur and meat. I can see how that would affect not only the colonization of the European settlers by hurting the environment, but also it hurts their relations with the Native Americans who used those animals for years before the European settlers came. Additionally, I like how you compared this with Tokyo and China because I didn’t think of that as I was reading the articles. It opened my eyes to relate it back to last weeks articles by Thomas Andrew and Finnnelly Burke about the 5 C’s of history. |
|
|
|
Post by jpetonak2 on May 21, 2016 18:01:09 GMT
Question 2: When any major step is taken, there will be challenges and conflicts. William White wrote about the conflict between the Native Americans and the European settlers along the eastern seaboard. Additionally the settlers faced challenges like attacks from animals and Native American tribes (who were also attacked by the settlers), no food, and salty or poisonous drinking water, according to Jack Greene. However, this is where diplomacy comes into play. The European settlers used it to their advantage by asking the Native Americans to come to their schools. This tactic was used to create solutions to problems and settle disputes between the two groups of people there. This was one way the European settlers tried to colonize the land. The settlers had many reasons and motivations to colonize the land. The most obvious of all that is they needed somewhere to live now that the Civil War is over. After the war, the settlers were independent for the first time, therefore they were starting from scratch For example, finding ways to make money was difficult. Some thought that agriculture was the right way to go, others sought out easier methods. The way the settlers used the diplomacy and to have Native Americans go to their schools was all used for the settlers advantage. They really used the Native Americans when they came to their schools and to educate them in their ways in hopes of the Natives to change theirs. The settlers also did not realized that each tribe is its own individual "country" with different customs and different ways in doing things. The settlers treated each tribe the same and thought they were exactly the same. Now we do know that the settlers had many different challenges and many different difficult choices to make, but it seems careless to think that all Native American tribes were the same. Many of the difficult decisions made by the settlers were done with the best intentions. Making the hard decisions is sometimes the hardest challenge when going to a new place and trying to survive. The main goal after the Civil War was the create a lifestyle that the settlers would be able live with no problems and ways to support their family. This may have been one of the hardest challenges as well. |
|
|
|
Post by blweaver215 on May 21, 2016 18:06:38 GMT
Question 2 Response: Most large groups of people who have tried to relocate and settle in a completely new area usually faced many obstacles and conflicts in order to eventually settle and survive in these new areas and the colonists and the eastern seaboard were no different. They came to this new land not really understanding the environment, people, land, and everything else that went along with moving to a whole new place that you know nothing about. Because of all these challenges and different practices the settlers had to undertake they may have done some things with some groups that they could have done better. One of the problems that William White discusses is the amount of Native Americans that were living in Virginia and along the eastern seaboard. Some of the problems with the Native Americans is that each tribe is actually considered its own nation; with independence, political autonomy, and ways to deal with other American Indians. These native nations were all very different and separate but to the colonists coming to this land they were just one large group of savages who must be moved. The native Americans along with adjusting to the land, livestock, and crop season for the colonists were all major problems they had to face. There were many reasons that these colonists were coming to this new world and most of them had to deal with looking for a better life and sometimes to avoid persecution in their own countries. In order for people to make this arduous journey to the new world they must have had it not great to begin with and these people wanted an opportunity to succeed in a new place. These people who began to colonize the eastern seaboard were tired of how their lives had been going and they wanted to make their lives better not only for them self but for future generations after them. I believe most people are always looking to improve their lives and situation and the colonists were no different, they were looking for a better life for the future and at the time they thought the best way to do that was to come to the new world even with all the unknowns and challenges that awaited them. Response: I liked that you brought up the point of how the colonists most likely viewed the Native Americans. Instead of seeing them as separate tribes with their own rules and policies, the settlers most likely saw them as savages who were all against them. This idea of a group of people against you, just when you left your own home to get away from conflict, most likely did not sit well with the settlers. This feeling of pressure and isolation that the colonists felt in the beginning of their settlement must have been tremendous. A foreign land with foreign territory, environment, weather, animals, etc. must have been very hard to adapt to in the beginning. I also liked how you saw the colonists as trying to improve their lives. I also agree that they were trying to get away from struggles and start new somewhere else. This feeling of a new beginning was important to the colonists and they were able to find this feeling in North America. |
|
|
|
Post by micathcart on May 21, 2016 18:36:47 GMT
Question #1 Between the readings of John Winthrop's "City Upon a Hill Sermon," the podcast, and Greene's "Pursuit of Happiness," there is a recurring theme of religion. Belief in God was a very prominent aspect of people's life in the beginnings with colonization-believing God would bless them in their loyalty. Winthrop urges people to keep Him adamant in their lives, so that He will walk with them and dwell amongst them. If they were to turn to other gods and pleasures, they would perish and not prosper. He reminds the people that they are a city upon a hill, with the eyes of people upon them, if they were unfaithful to God, he would withdraw his help for them. A similar concept is seen in a line from Berkley on Bacon's Rebellion, "I call the great God Judge of all things in heaven and earth to wittness, that I doe not know of any thing relateive to this Country wherein I have acted unjustly, corruptly, or negligently in distributeing equall Justice to all men, and takeing all possible care to preserve their proprietys, and defend the from their barbarous enimies." There is a heavy emphasis on religious beliefs, and that depending on their faith would bring good things to their country. An unusual twist is taken to this with the BackStory podcast on "City Upon a Hill." The idea of "American Exceptionalism" is discussed of the unique American ideology and what makes it so different from other nations. Is it the faith put in God that our nation was built upon? Was it the repetition of this idea in the readings, that the leaders considered us better than other nations because of this trust put in him. Did they consider us "superior"? Lincoln even touches this concept saying that in America there is a duty to see that "government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." Greene begins with reminding us of a quote our country was started upon saying "all men are created equal" and that the founding of our nation was "the most important step in the progressive course of human improvement." However, the course of slavery that flooded the south was quite ironic for the statement. This emphasizes that hidden agenda of "superiority" that Americans have demonstrated in their quest to be "close to God". Its a dangerous concept and overall negative, in my opinion. It's a concept that has been stressed from our origins as a country and that our ancestors have continuously believed. As Americans, we are different. We have religious freedom, freedom of speech and much more that our Amendments offer. They are freedoms, but not freedoms that are supposed to make us better than an other citizen or country. It's meant for equality, but I feel its a concept that has been misconstrued throughout our history. Response: You mentioned both the consistency of Christian identity in the United States and the hypocrisy of many American tenants. These two factors of American ideology I find to be worthy of note as well. As you stated, a fundamental principle of the early United States was the adage, “all men are created equal.” Yet, also as you stated, the legacy of slavery casts a very ugly shadow upon that political principle. Many of the same people who decried monarchial power and advocated for equality and freedom also held humans as property. Four of the first five presidents owned slaves. Hypocrisy seems to be a constant in American political history, even into today. The Christian identity that still dominates many American communities has been a constant in the United States. From John Winthrop’s sermon/warning to the early colonists (despite it being unclear whether they ever truly heard it) to follow Christian law and their God would protect them. This idea of divine protection for the United States has also been quite constant, at least in the first two centuries of United States history. Specifically, Manifest Destiny was the belief that it was American’s god given “responcibility” to civilize the North American continent. This Christian ideology has remained a large part of American politics into the modern era. Particularly on the right of the political spectrum, Christianity remains a powerful influence on people’s voting habits. |
|
|
|
Post by hausmann on May 21, 2016 18:46:13 GMT
Question 2 Response: Most large groups of people who have tried to relocate and settle in a completely new area usually faced many obstacles and conflicts in order to eventually settle and survive in these new areas and the colonists and the eastern seaboard were no different. They came to this new land not really understanding the environment, people, land, and everything else that went along with moving to a whole new place that you know nothing about. Because of all these challenges and different practices the settlers had to undertake they may have done some things with some groups that they could have done better. One of the problems that William White discusses is the amount of Native Americans that were living in Virginia and along the eastern seaboard. Some of the problems with the Native Americans is that each tribe is actually considered its own nation; with independence, political autonomy, and ways to deal with other American Indians. These native nations were all very different and separate but to the colonists coming to this land they were just one large group of savages who must be moved. The native Americans along with adjusting to the land, livestock, and crop season for the colonists were all major problems they had to face. There were many reasons that these colonists were coming to this new world and most of them had to deal with looking for a better life and sometimes to avoid persecution in their own countries. In order for people to make this arduous journey to the new world they must have had it not great to begin with and these people wanted an opportunity to succeed in a new place. These people who began to colonize the eastern seaboard were tired of how their lives had been going and they wanted to make their lives better not only for them self but for future generations after them. I believe most people are always looking to improve their lives and situation and the colonists were no different, they were looking for a better life for the future and at the time they thought the best way to do that was to come to the new world even with all the unknowns and challenges that awaited them. Response: I liked that you brought up the point of how the colonists most likely viewed the Native Americans. Instead of seeing them as separate tribes with their own rules and policies, the settlers most likely saw them as savages who were all against them. This idea of a group of people against you, just when you left your own home to get away from conflict, most likely did not sit well with the settlers. This feeling of pressure and isolation that the colonists felt in the beginning of their settlement must have been tremendous. A foreign land with foreign territory, environment, weather, animals, etc. must have been very hard to adapt to in the beginning. I also liked how you saw the colonists as trying to improve their lives. I also agree that they were trying to get away from struggles and start new somewhere else. This feeling of a new beginning was important to the colonists and they were able to find this feeling in North America. My response: There's a lot of truth to the idea that some colonists saw Native Americans as undifferentiated "savages" but some recent research has shown that lots of colonists, especially on the east coast in Massachusetts, recognized that Indians were extremely well adapted technologically to their environment. This is why many English colonists started using things like the canoe to traverse New England's rivers and were also in awe of native skills with the bow. One historian has gone so far as to argue that English colonists saw Indians as racially superior for a time until outbreaks of smallpox began to challenge this notion. That's a bit of an extreme argument if you ask me but it's worth noting that the development of an "us vs. them" mentality between Europeans and Indians did not develop overnight and was certainly not inevitable. |
|
|
|
Post by hollie on May 21, 2016 19:10:20 GMT
Response to chelseaw week2
Chelsea seemed to be voicing her observations of “American exceptionalism “which is just that and done very well. I have a different opinion, which is as a manufacturer of architectural fiberglass. I have seen how a thriving business of over fifty-four years has come to a virtual stop due to environmental codes that are put in place for a reason and with no argument for those laws and ordinances. My question then goes out and asks how I am supposed to compete with third world countries that do not have any environmental rules and can produce the same product for a quarter of the price? What makes the other countries products exceptional nothing, at a quarter of the price. Does the world consider those products exceptional when they fail under extreme conditions? The entire idea of “American exceptionalism “seemly infuriates me and should not even exist.
|
|
|
|
Post by robgallagher on May 21, 2016 20:00:07 GMT
Question 2 Response: Most large groups of people who have tried to relocate and settle in a completely new area usually faced many obstacles and conflicts in order to eventually settle and survive in these new areas and the colonists and the eastern seaboard were no different. They came to this new land not really understanding the environment, people, land, and everything else that went along with moving to a whole new place that you know nothing about. Because of all these challenges and different practices the settlers had to undertake they may have done some things with some groups that they could have done better. One of the problems that William White discusses is the amount of Native Americans that were living in Virginia and along the eastern seaboard. Some of the problems with the Native Americans is that each tribe is actually considered its own nation; with independence, political autonomy, and ways to deal with other American Indians. These native nations were all very different and separate but to the colonists coming to this land they were just one large group of savages who must be moved. The native Americans along with adjusting to the land, livestock, and crop season for the colonists were all major problems they had to face. There were many reasons that these colonists were coming to this new world and most of them had to deal with looking for a better life and sometimes to avoid persecution in their own countries. In order for people to make this arduous journey to the new world they must have had it not great to begin with and these people wanted an opportunity to succeed in a new place. These people who began to colonize the eastern seaboard were tired of how their lives had been going and they wanted to make their lives better not only for them self but for future generations after them. I believe most people are always looking to improve their lives and situation and the colonists were no different, they were looking for a better life for the future and at the time they thought the best way to do that was to come to the new world even with all the unknowns and challenges that awaited them. Traveling to the new world was probably one of the hardest decesions these people had to make. Because they faced uncertainty in an unfamilar world. But i have a lot of respect for them. If they didn't come to the new world and overcome these challenges, then i wouldn't be here today. If I were them in that period, i probably wouldn't have made the journey. Yes all the indian tribes were considered their own nation. It wasn't right for the settlers to consider them savages. they were honestly just protecting their land and their way of life. They had a right to defend themselves from these people that were invading their land. While i don't condone violence, if i was there, i would have probably looked for a diplomatic solution so all the groups could co exist in peace. While im happy with the ways things turned out, the indians had the right to the same land we were taking to them. |
|
|
|
Post by tburckh1 on May 22, 2016 16:34:03 GMT
Question 3
Environmental history tells people how man and nature interacted with each other over time. Historians have found that man has changed the environment since the first settlers to fit their needs. Sometimes the environment worked with the settlers, while other times it went against them. When the settlers pushed nature, nature pushed back. Alan Taylor recalls this 'settlers verses nature' battles during the post-Revolution. The New York settlers had to endure dense and untamed forest for farming; while the Connecticut settlers had to endure heavy rainstorm, summer droughts, and "the blast". Both settlements had to not only battle the elements and nature, but also the wild animals that threaten their livestock and crops. For ever tree that was cut down by the settlers, nature would hit them hard. By killing or pushing the big wild animals away from settlements, little wild animals would just take their place making farming and raising livestock difficult. Rough hillsides and unbearable winters took its toll on the settlers leading to death by starvation or the elements. Eventually, the settlers would overcome these dangers and hardships by simply surviving and learning from their mistakes. Taylor wrote that by the settlers telling stories of their endurance and heroism the elements, nature, and wild animals they ensured that their children would live on and other settlers would know that their way of life was earned.
The environmental change that was brought forth by the settlers affect the Native Americans greatly. Not only were Native Americans pushed off their lands by the settlers, they also had to deal with disease and wars from other Native American tribes. The Native Americans saw that they were in a 'lose-lose' situation. Environmental historians know this due to writing from not only the European settlers, but also the Native Americans themselves. William White wrote that we get the history of Native Americans mainly from oral European stories and written documents. Historians are now discovering the real stories of Native Americans from their own speeches which was eventually written down. We now have the other point of view of how life was like post-Revolution.
|
|
|
|
Post by tburckh1 on May 22, 2016 17:19:54 GMT
I agree with your statement that the settlers came to the new land not understanding its environment, people, and the land. Due to the fact that they pretty much went in blindsided, challenges soon started to happen. The environment was against them from the start and the wild animals and Native Americans didn't make the situations any better. Having most of the settlers to be unskilled in labor didn't help their situation either. The odds were against from the very beginning. I also agree that the settlers could had dealt with their challenges any better. There wasn't a need to start killing off wild animals or destroying the forest. They came to the new world without a plan. Question 2 Response: Most large groups of people who have tried to relocate and settle in a completely new area usually faced many obstacles and conflicts in order to eventually settle and survive in these new areas and the colonists and the eastern seaboard were no different. They came to this new land not really understanding the environment, people, land, and everything else that went along with moving to a whole new place that you know nothing about. Because of all these challenges and different practices the settlers had to undertake they may have done some things with some groups that they could have done better. One of the problems that William White discusses is the amount of Native Americans that were living in Virginia and along the eastern seaboard. Some of the problems with the Native Americans is that each tribe is actually considered its own nation; with independence, political autonomy, and ways to deal with other American Indians. These native nations were all very different and separate but to the colonists coming to this land they were just one large group of savages who must be moved. The native Americans along with adjusting to the land, livestock, and crop season for the colonists were all major problems they had to face. There were many reasons that these colonists were coming to this new world and most of them had to deal with looking for a better life and sometimes to avoid persecution in their own countries. In order for people to make this arduous journey to the new world they must have had it not great to begin with and these people wanted an opportunity to succeed in a new place. These people who began to colonize the eastern seaboard were tired of how their lives had been going and they wanted to make their lives better not only for them self but for future generations after them. I believe most people are always looking to improve their lives and situation and the colonists were no different, they were looking for a better life for the future and at the time they thought the best way to do that was to come to the new world even with all the unknowns and challenges that awaited them. |
|
|
|
Post by emiliar29 on Jun 21, 2016 16:12:58 GMT
Question #3:
I have been thinking a lot lately about how colonization and wars bring about great changes to natural environments. I always kind of let the question drift away and don't continue to put much thought into it. Luckily, Alan Taylor's "Wasty Ways" allowed my thoughts to stay on track and observe more on the topic. Early in the essay, the author references James Fennimore Cooper's novel discussing settlers reaching his town and over-fishing, over-hunting, and causing sheer wastefulness, just for the enjoyment of it. However, reading further, we learn that before settlers had the chance to launch a massive assault on the environments that they had moved into, the natural environment was actually more of a hindrance to them. No one was used to the level of wilderness that they initially encountered. People who had come from Europe had not had to deal with certain predatory animals that had been long wiped out overseas. Hearsay had also become a factor in settlers' fear of the wild and instilled the desire to conquer it in their minds.
The environmental changes brought about by white settlers had a huge effect on the Native Americans who were already here. One example is how the Iroquois were affected in Upstate New York. They had very specific settlements near rivers, and had limited their farming plots only to what was needed to sustain them, leaving the majority of forests untouched so that they could hunt and gather. When settlers arrived with their privately owned livestock, they wanted to create a space for their animals that was safe from the perils of the wild. So not only did they push the Iroquois onto reservations, but they destroyed the environment in which the Iroquois had traditionally hunted, and destroyed the animals that they lived off of.
Settlers regarded the forests of North America as a hindrance to their farming practices - the forests themselves and the animals which resided in them were obstacles that the settlers wanted to eliminate. The rambling forests that had flourished for thousands of years were nothing more to settlers than shelter for beasts that threatened their domesticated crops and livestock. There were times of struggle in these settlers' lives in which their crops and livestock were compromised by plant diseases, etc. It was then that they took advantage of the wilderness that they had left intact in order to sustain themselves by hunting and gathering.
|
|
