History Midterm
Both Cabeza de Vaca and Rodrigo Rangel, De Soto's secretary, critique Spanish colonialism in some way. Identify and explain their critiques.
Cabeza de Vaca disapproves of the way the Spanish treat the Native Americans. During his time living with the Indians, he has become quite fond of them. He has a paternalistic view of them, calling them "adaptable" and very willing to serve Christians who are kind to them. After Cabeza de Vaca is reunited with other Spaniards, he encourages the Indians to return to their villages and take up their lives again. He seems to believe that colonization should occur through incorporating the Natives into the new culture and treating them as friends. Conversely, he describes the other Spaniards as selfish, violent, and greedy. He criticizes their treatment of Native Americans, and tries (unsuccessfully) to prevent them from taking his Indian companions as slaves. It would be interesting to compare his opinions of Spanish colonialism before and after the years he spent living with the Indians. It seems quite likely that his time among them may have shifted his perspective. Rodrigo Randel is also highly critical of Spanish Colonialism, especially of De Soto, who he describes as greedy, violent and licentious. He criticizes De Soto for leading so many men into a life of sin and his indiscriminate capture and killing of thousands of Indians. While Randel shows some sympathy for the Indians suffering under De Soto, his main concern seems to be with the inherent evilness and treachery of De Soto himself. De Soto's greed is demonstrated when he demands hundreds of tamemes and women from the cacique of Athahaci, and then turns around and demands even more (horses, etc.) when the cacique agrees. When the fighting starts, Randel is quick to point out that some among the party fought and died nobly. However, he notes, the cause they died for and the man they laid down their lives protecting were quite ignoble indeed. - De Vaca criticizes Spanish treatment of Natives, becomes anti-slavery crusader (believes that Spanish should missionize and colonize, but not take slaves). Having lived with Native people, believes Europeans and Natives can live together. - Spanish call themselves "Christians" - gives divine justification of what they are doing, claim moral authority - they are doing God's work (spreading the word of God). Concepts of race are still forming, not "whites" yet, not even really "Europeans" (no feeling of unitedness between nations) - Rangel is highly critical of de Soto, sees him as a tyrant that is villainizing other Christians. His main concern is with Spaniards, morality, and the Christian church. He thinks what de Soto is doing is wrong because it is immoral, not because of the suffering of the Natives. Doesn't really care about the welfare of Indians in their own right. - Not writing historical accounts, writing adventure stories. Education in Greek and Roman culture - draw from that their ideas of civilization and how to record history
Why are first encounters between Indians and Europeans so culturally important? Why does popular culture continue to dwell on them 500 years later?
Captures the imagination, what happened during first encounter may effect what happens later, a "birth" story for American identity
Based on what you've seen of Aguirre so far, what parallels can you draw between the primary accounts (Cabeza de Vaca and De Soto) and the film? What scenes are particularly memorable?
Although it occurs before the film begins, we know the Spanish conquistadors in the film have captured and enslaved hundreds of Indians, much as De Soto did. The theme of conquest is as strong in the film as it is in the readings, as is the search for El Dorado. Much like de Vaca, when the conquistadors become stranded in "Aguirre," they build rafts hoping to strike out for better land. This attempt proves even more unsuccessful than de Vaca's, as everyone aboard the raft dies (or, in the case of Aguirre, is doomed to soon die), while at least a handful of people from the de Vaca expedition survived.
Compare and contrast the accounts of Cabeza de Vaca and the De Soto Expedition.
Both expeditions started out as attempted conquest. However, de Vaca's fortune took a turn for the worse, and soon became a struggle for survival. He was saved by Native Americans and lived for a number of years among them, causing him to develop feelings of respect and (somewhat patriarchal) care for them. De Soto's expedition was much larger, and though they also faced struggles, they retained a critical mass of militarized men. Instead of attempting to live in harmony with the Indians and colonize them through incorporation, he burned and pillaged Indian towns and villages, taking the surviving inhabitants as slaves. - Both Spaniards, both in same part of the world - Subjective accounts - Encounter some of the same Indians, but the expeditions have very different experiences. - War and death are common themes - de Vaca became healers - Indians believe that since the disease came from Europe, Europeans can heal it. The Spaniards didn't want to do this, but needed to be fed. So they combine Catholic rituals with what they see the Natives doing to heal. - In contrast to the healing and accommodation in the de Vaca account, the de Soto expedition was raping and pillaging. - Cabeza de Vaca spends a lot more time with the Indians, is adopted, learns the language, gets to know the Indians on a personal level. This is shown in the detail with which he describes Indian practices, and the sympathy he shows to them. - Rangel also criticizes de Soto and his slaughtering ambitious ways, but he makes a point to laude the fighting and nobility of the other members of his expedition. Indians are not given the value and respect that de Vaca grants them. - Different focuses in the expeditions. de Soto was always focused on finding gold. De Vaca's priorities shift, after they crashed and were stranded, he was just trying to survive. - Even at their worst, de Soto had 300 men with him, a certain amount of power and ability to get food. De Vaca was down to four people, and completely reliant on the Indians.
What experiences or media shaped early English ideas about foreign peoples?
Early English ideas about foreign people were shaped by the writings of colonists and explorers. In order to justify their conquest, they would describe foreign people as savage and uncivilized, desperately in need of civilizing by the English. These writings would then be distributed in pamphlets and newspapers, shaping the ideas of the English public (who in reality, would have very little contact with foreigners).
What factors led to the development of the Ignoble Savage myth?
Ignoble savage myth developed during conflict with Indians. War and violence become justified when your enemy is evil. Used to justify colonization.
Use the Deloria reading to reflect on how Native Americans experienced collegiate and professional sports. What opportunities did sports offer? What prejudices did Indians encounter?
Indian themes and mascots are popular in American sports due to the stereotypes they invoke. As Deloria states, "Indian athletes fit neatly into the nostalgic, antimodern image often attached to professional and collegiate sports." Indians are viewed as great natural athletes due to their racial heritage. Sportswriter Grantland Rice wrote that an Indian's heritage was "all outdoors... his reflexes are sharp. He takes the game - in fact every form of life as it comes to him. He rarely gets excited or off balance . . . given the same chance, he has the white man lashed to the Post." Indians are prized for their natural athleticism and calm disposition - their ability to stay focused in the midst of chaos. At the same time, they are also invoked as "savages" - brutal warriors that will skin their opponents alive. While there may be few Native Americans currently playing sports at the professional level, these are the images that continue to be evoked by the use of Indian themes and mascots.
Why are Indian themes and mascots so popular in American sports? Cite evidence from Deloria in your answer.
Indian themes and mascots are popular in American sports due to the stereotypes they invoke. As Deloria states, "Indian athletes fit neatly into the nostalgic, antimodern image often attached to professional and collegiate sports." Indians are viewed as great natural athletes due to their racial heritage. Sportswriter Grantland Rice wrote that an Indian's heritage was "all outdoors... his reflexes are sharp. He takes the game - in fact every form of life as it comes to him. He rarely gets excited or off balance . . . given the same chance, he has the white man lashed to the Post." Indians are prized for their natural athleticism and calm disposition - their ability to stay focused in the midst of chaos. At the same time, they are also invoked as "savages" - brutal warriors that will skin their opponents alive. While there may be few Native Americans currently playing sports at the professional level, these are the images that continue to be evoked by the use of Indian themes and mascots. - Native American warrior / savage stereotype is drawn upon by sports teams, invokes reckless courage. - Sports are transformative, athletes take on characteristics of Ignoble savage, aspects of primitivism - Whites feel constrained by civilization, need an outlet for aggression, find that in sports by "playing Indian" - Picking and choosing elements of Indian-ness to imitate; colonizers often have an ambiguous attitude towards the colonized - combination of admiration and fear - Warfare is highly analogous to sports, clashing of two teams is like clashing of two different groups of people / cultures - reminiscent of whites vs. Natives - Colonization is not only paired with oppression, but with appropriation. Once fear of oppressed is gone, a clear shift in the power dynamic, appropriation takes over. - Lacrosse - sport that originated with Native Americans, but now viewed as an upper class sport. Connection between Indians and lacrosse is glossed over.
What aspects of the Ignoble savage do you see in Crockett's narrative?
Indians are prone to violence, irrational, of lower intelligence (pidgin English used in film), a lot of attempt to create binary between whites and Indians (when in fact, most fighting on both sides was done by Indians. Indians as animals. A lot of nature in the film, Davy is one with nature, but also constantly fighting it. Man vs. Nature. Davy easily beats alligators, snakes, etc. shows how easily he will beat Indians. Indians equated with animals.
Why does the film use the term "Injun"? What point is it trying to make by using it?
Injun" is pidgin English - makes fun of Indian inability to speak proper English (stereotype, not true). o Injun is an abstraction - the Hollywood version of Native Americans, not actual INDIANS. o Native tribes often called themselves "The People", trying to get back to their realness.
Why was the Noble Savage myth useful in the era of colonization?
Justified colonization - Indians were not using the resources at their disposal, they were not materialistic, they were very eager to give things away for nothing in return. Therefore, it was up to the Europeans to make use of them. Indians are childlike, need European colonists to be their paternal caretakers
How would you describe pre-Columbian North America?
Less nomadic, more sedentary lifestyles. Urban spaces. Culturally diverse - extremely diverse in economies, lifestyles, > 300 languages (8 language families). Native Americans did not think of themselves as one group of people, but identified by their tribal affiliations. Many societies were matrilineal. Rich pre-Columbian history - dynamic change (e.g. farming). History includes conflict (wars) and inequality (different ranks, slaves).
What forces or practices linked different Native American societies before colonization?
North America was extremely diverse with culturally distinct regions and many language families. Most Indians would have been farmers, meaning they would have to stay in one place. There were urban centers like Cahokia and Chaco City where thousands of Indians would live in close proximity. Native American societies were linked by war and trade. Cities played a role in bringing large numbers of people together.
How would you describe pre-Columbian Europe?
Patriarchal, bilateral kinship; shared identity across cultures through language and religion, agriculture common; many people migrate from farms to cities (40,000 in Montpellier); history includes conflict (wars) and inequality (vassals, different ranks, etc.). Defined by disease - Black Death killed 1 in 3.
How did the English define "savagery"? How did they treat "savage" peoples?
The English identified certain nationalities as "savages" in order to justify their treatment and colonization. In the case of the Irish, English invaders went to great lengths to label them as "barbaric," oftentimes picking and choosing aspects of Gaelic culture that would suit their definition. They believed that a people could be civilized without being Christian (e.g. the Romans), but that they could not be Christian without first being civilized. To this end, they determined that the Catholicism practiced by the Gaelics was not truly Christianity, but thinly veiled paganism. In this way, they denied the Irish both the stature of Christian faith as well as being a civilized nation. By naming the Irish pagans, the English were well on their way to labeling them as barbarians and justifying their indiscriminate slaughter. The English defined savagery as a lack of civilization, lack of Christian faith, and participation in barbaric acts. They accused the Irish of licentiousness, murder, incest, thievery, and a whole host of other immoral acts. Savages like these were people that needed to be tamed and "brought to the light". It was popular at this time to reference the ways the Romans had civilized the English centuries prior, and many saw it as their God-given duty to do the same for other savage cultures. Of course, because of their status as savages, these people's lives were also less significant, so killing those who did not agree to the forced colonization of the English could be killed without quandary - as could the killing of those who did not resist in the name of expediency. In reality, the label savage was applied wherever the English saw fit to use it - a justification for colonization and widespread killing used to mollify the English's conscious. Justification for colonization is similar in Ireland and Americas: savage people that need civilizing. Allows them to commit atrocities, exploit lands, resources, and people. A lot has to do with propaganda - selling colonization to the public. The English thought they knew something about Indians before they even got to the Americas based on their pre-conceived ideas of "savages"
Why was the Ignoble Savage myth useful in the era of colonization and westward expansion?
The Ignoble savage myth was useful because it justified colonization and westward expansion. The Indians were savages, Godless violent creatures that were little more than animals. Thus, it was the Europeans God-given right to colonize America and exterminate any Indians who might cross their path.
How did English colonialism in Ireland affect their later ideas about American Indians?
The Irish were classified as savages, so that the use of brute force and slaughter of innocents was justified. American Indians were treated similarly due to their "savage" status. Both the Irish and Indians were described as lazy, dirty, idle, and licentious. Both groups were frequently feared or perceived to be cannibals as cannibalism was considered to be the "ultimate hallmark of barbarism"--stemming perhaps from human's deepest, most innate fears. Cultural and religious diversity averting from Christianity was described as pagan and simplistic. Nomadic lifestyles were described as unsettled and not making use of the land. Conversion and civilization were the thinly veiled pretenses to justify colonization, oppression, and extermination. The colonists in the Americas were using the same pretexts to justify their brutality as their counterparts has used against the Irish. An illusion of wanting to civilize and convert became the hallmark of the concept of the "White man's burden" when, in reality, the natives were usually "dismissed and put to the sword. This denial of reality painted a convenient picture that would allow moral respectability for the colonizers of the New World. By viewing Indians either as meek savages or cannibalistic tyrants, the English were able to more conveniently work towards their own goals of acquiring land and labor.
What forces or practices linked different European societies before the colonial era?
War, trade, media (written alphabet, printing press), and cities. Shared identity from similar languages and religion (Christianity).
Why does Crockett oppose Indian Removal?
o "I have always viewed the native Indian tribes in this country as a sovereign people. I believe they have been recognized as such from the very foundation of the Government; and the US were bound by treaty to protect them; it is our duty to do so." o This shows how nuanced views about NAs actually were. Autobiography was somewhat simplified, popular culture version (Disney film) simplified even more.
What previous expectations or experiences did Indians and Europeans carry into their first encounters?
o Europeans had met and colonized other "savages" already, had preconceived notions from those experiences. Many of the first people to arrive in America were adventurers and colonists that had already traveled to other "savage" lands. Europeans didn't know about the Americas, and certainly didn't know about all the people living in the Americas - it was quite populous, not vast virgin wilderness that it is often described as. o Columbus was not the first European to come to America; Vikings came to Newfoundland in 1000 AD, and stayed for 1-2 generations - many starved to death, others moved back to Iceland and Greenland. While most Indians had never met Europeans before, they had experience dealing with other Indian tribes, which would have differed culturally, language, etc.
How are first encounters portrayed in primary sources and in film?
o Language/Communication is difficult - misunderstanding, hand gestures o Cultural differences: e.g. food; Europeans deem these differences as inferior o Fear: disease and war o Technology: e.g. ships o Gender: Europeans originally brought no women with them - mostly soldiers and missionaries. Lack of women alarmed Native Americans, made Europeans seem like war party. o Physical differences: interesting to note, skin tone was not defining difference, first noticed things like hairiness
What is myth? How do you see myth at work in how Americans remember Davy Crockett?
o Myth: symbolic tales, usually believed to be true, set in the past; often focused on a hero who is used to mediate dualities, reconcile us to reality, or establish enduring patterns; historical myths are a simplified version of the past used to explain important values or aspects of a culture's worldview o Crockett mediates dualities by taking on Indian traits - he is a white man, a Christian settler, but he is also close to nature, dresses in buckskin, a skilled huntsman. He brings Indian and white qualities together to form a new identity - that of the American frontiersman. o The Davy Crockett that Americans remember is a greatly simplified version, lacks the nuance of the historical character, and is more closely related to the caricature portrayed in the Disney film. Layers of myth - the historical Crockett vs. the autobiographical, the autobiographical vs. Disney.
Identify and Explain 3 major differences between Crockett's autobiography and the Disney adaptation
o Nuance of Crockett's view on Indians is lost: in the Disney adaptation, Indians are portrayed consistently as bad guys - violent and heathen, at least until they are won over by Crockett's charm. In reality, Crockett had more complicated feelings toward them, while he did fight against the Red Sticks, he also opposed the Indian Removal act, as he felt that Indians were the sovereign people of the US, and it would recant on all of the treaties the US had previously made to remove them. Meanwhile, whites did savage things - ate potatoes cooked in human flesh o The Disney adaptation portrays the Red Stick war as a fight between Indians and white US citizens, when in fact it was a civil war among the Creek Nation. The US army only got involved after the massacre at Fort Mims. o Show is hyper-masculine, in autobiography there is a Native woman who takes part in the battle at Tallahassee. Her killing of a soldier starts the massacre. o Autobiography includes massacres and extreme violence, but Crockett is portrayed in film as peace-maker (one on one combat).
What factors led to the development of the Noble Savage myth?
o Print revolution: invention of printing press and increased literacy during the renaissance allowed for stories of Natives Americans to be widely spread and consumed (revolution occurred at same time as early American colonization) o Wild Man: pre-existing stereotype of Noble Savage; hairy naked club-wielding men, driven by instinct and lust instead of knowledge. Savage, lack Christianity and culture. NAs were grouped w/ WM as "primitive". o Myth developed in response to increasing materialism and capitalism in Europe: during renaissance, many believed that civilization had gone too far & corrupted man's natural state - primitive people reflected a "pure" past (humans in their natural state).
How does Crockett complicate the Ignoble Savage myth?
o The Ignoble savage myth is complicated by Crockett's taking on of Indian traits. Crockett mediates dualities - he is the new American hero, a frontiersman - close to nature, wears buckskin, etc. (Indian-like traits), but also clearly white. While Indians are violent and stupid, and other whites are foolish and out-of-tune with nature, Crockett takes the both from best and leaves the rest behind. Creates a new identity of American masculinity. o In autobiography, Crockett recalls burning of an entire Indian village. Afterwards, they find potatoes in cellar cooked in human fat and eat them, essentially cannibalism. Perhaps meant as a critique of Jackson and the extremes he drove his soldiers to.
Describe and explain the disjuncture between the real Pocahontas and the legendary Pocahontas.
o The real Pocahontas was only about 11 when she met John Smith, the rescue story likely never happened (it is based in folklore, Smith told a lot of tall tales), and if it did it was likely an adoption ceremony, not an act of love. No evidence of any romantic relationship between the two. Pocahontas married Kocoum in 1610, was taken prisoner in 1613, married Rolfe in 1614, had a son and traveled to England, died in 1617. o The legendary Pocahontas is rooted in the hyper-sexualizing of Indian women and the Noble savage and Indian Princess stereotypes (Disney also draws heavily on the ecological Indian). She is an object of romantic and sexual attraction for both Johns, and plays an important role in helping the colonists succeed. She sacrifices her own identity (and eventually life) for the happiness and well-being of white men.
What three major factors shaped Pocahontas' life? Discuss these in the larger context of early colonization.
o Warfare: Anglo-Powhatan wars - 1. 1609-1614, ends w/ marriage of Pocahontas and John Rolfe; 2. 1622-1632, due to expansion of English colonists into interior Virginia, kicking out Indians, creating plantations; 3. 1644-1646, also about land - by end of 3rd war, Powhatans had been reduced to a minority in their homeland, make agreement they can stay in confined areas of Virginia (1st reservations), where the descendants of Powhatans still live today o Captivity: alternative to death in warfare - a taking of life and transferring it to your own community. Person may be adopted, enslaved, etc. Indians took white captives (Mary Rowlandson, Mary Jamison; portrayed in films "Dances w/ Wolves) and whites took millions of Indian captives (2-4 million as slaves). Pocahontas' status as a princess allowed her to be adopted into the English. As a young woman, she was viewed as less threatening and more malleable to a new culture (experience shaped by status and gender). o Disease Europe and Africa: smallpox, typhoid, measles, malaria, yellow fever, bubonic plague, whooping cough, influenza Americas: tuberculosis, treponematosis, Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, Lyme disease European diseases are much more numerous and contagious. RMSP and Lyme disease are less easily transmitted (tick-borne). Tuberculosis and Treponematosis are urban diseases (would only occur in American cities). American diseases were less fatal. Native Americans lacked acquired immunity to Old World diseases. o Combination of disease, warfare, and displacement led to wipeout of Native American populations. Populations under stress are more likely to die. Before 1491, Native population of the US was probably 10 million. By 1776, only about 1 million.
What is the role of gender in stereotypes about Native Americans?
o Women: hypersexualized, viewed as sexual conquest for white men, less threatening than Indian men (more easily converted to white ways). Positive and negative sides of sexualization represented in the Princess vs. Squaw stereotypes. o Men: more dangerous, more likely to be violent. While one might convert or enslave an Indian woman, it was probably safest to kill an Indian man outright. There were exceptions - noble savages like Squanto.
What are the effects of stereotypes on Native people? Draw on film and Deloria.
o stereotypes affect treatment of Natives: drunk Indian, sexualizing of Indian women o "It was a dandy excuse to raise hell and get away with it" - NA pro athlete. They didn't buy into these stereotypes, but had a good type playing them for fun. o Distortion of native history / identity - i.e. NAs playing "chief" for tourists cheapens the concept of chieftans o Some were happy to play into them for money, fame, travel, education, etc. o Can lead to self-loathing, loss of cultural identity - NA children watching westerns identify with the cowboys
There were many Indian directors and actors in the silent movie era, but they were pushed out in the 1910s. What factors, according to Deloria, contributed to this decline?
o white actors were often cast in Indian roles (especially leads) - as studios had limited budgets, white actors could put on red-face or black-face and play many different races, while Indians were constrained to playing just Indians o Some critics argued that white actors who had studied Indian life made better Indians than real Indians because real Indians regressed before the camera and were prone to plotting (sneaking real bullets onto set, etc.)