3 ms·

Well, technically, it was an accurate description of how the Indians fought.

eesmith 8y ago
Wasn't it an equally true description of how the English settlers fought? As a reminder, and quoting from, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_massacres https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_massacres . >English colonists and Creek allies under former Carolina Governor James Moore launched a series of brutal attacks on the Apalachee villages of Northern Florida. They murdered 1000 Apalachees and enslaved at least 2000 survivors. > In the Pequot War, English colonists commanded by John Mason, with Mohegan and Narragansett allies, launched a night attack on a large Pequot village on the Mystic River in present-day Connecticut, where they burned the inhabitants in their homes and killed all survivors, for total fatalities of about 600–700. > Colonial militia and Indian allies attacked a Narragansett fort near South Kingstown, Rhode Island. At least 40 warriors were killed and 300 women, children and elder men burnt in the village.
- loco5niner 8y ago
  Well, it's true that they killed a lot of indians, I'm not convinced that means the settlers, in general, were a bunch of merciless savages. It's interesting that in each of your examples it mentions that they were attacking along with their "Indian allies"... perhaps that has something to do with it.
  - eesmith 8y ago
    And I'm not convinced that the Native Americans, in general, were a bunch of merciless savages. What do you mean by "it" in "something to do with it"? The first example I gave was the Apalachee massacre. Quoting from the Wikipedia page: > In 1703 ex-Governor Moore presented to the Carolina assembly and his replacement, Nathaniel Johnson, a plan for an expedition against the Spanish towns in Apalachee Province.[17] He promised that, unlike the St. Augustine expedition, the colony would not have to pay for anything; he expected its costs to be recovered by the taking of loot and slaves. On September 7, 1703, the Carolina assembly approved the plan, asking Moore to go "to the Assistance of the Cowetaws and other our friendly Indians, and to attacque the Appalaches." How do "friendly Indians" become "merciless savages"? Why is is that the Indians around the Great Lakes region, who had amicable relationships with the French, rebelled under the new British rule after the French and Indian War? Eg, quoting from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac%27s_War#Amherst's_policies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac%27s_War#Amherst's_poli... : > Amherst and officers such as Major Henry Gladwin, commander at Fort Detroit, made little effort to conceal their contempt for the Native Americans. Native Americans involved in the uprising frequently complained that the British treated them no better than slaves or dogs.

Wasn't it an equally true description of how the English settlers fought? As a reminder, and quoting from, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_massacres https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_massacres . >English colonists and Creek allies under former Carolina Governor James Moore launched a series of brutal attacks on the Apalachee villages of Northern Florida. They murdered 1000 Apalachees and enslaved at least 2000 survivors. > In the Pequot War, English colonists commanded by John Mason, with Mohegan and Narragansett allies, launched a night attack on a large Pequot village on the Mystic River in present-day Connecticut, where they burned the inhabitants in their homes and killed all survivors, for total fatalities of about 600–700. > Colonial militia and Indian allies attacked a Narragansett fort near South Kingstown, Rhode Island. At least 40 warriors were killed and 300 women, children and elder men burnt in the village.

loco5niner 8y ago
Well, it's true that they killed a lot of indians, I'm not convinced that means the settlers, in general, were a bunch of merciless savages. It's interesting that in each of your examples it mentions that they were attacking along with their "Indian allies"... perhaps that has something to do with it.
- eesmith 8y ago
  And I'm not convinced that the Native Americans, in general, were a bunch of merciless savages. What do you mean by "it" in "something to do with it"? The first example I gave was the Apalachee massacre. Quoting from the Wikipedia page: > In 1703 ex-Governor Moore presented to the Carolina assembly and his replacement, Nathaniel Johnson, a plan for an expedition against the Spanish towns in Apalachee Province.[17] He promised that, unlike the St. Augustine expedition, the colony would not have to pay for anything; he expected its costs to be recovered by the taking of loot and slaves. On September 7, 1703, the Carolina assembly approved the plan, asking Moore to go "to the Assistance of the Cowetaws and other our friendly Indians, and to attacque the Appalaches." How do "friendly Indians" become "merciless savages"? Why is is that the Indians around the Great Lakes region, who had amicable relationships with the French, rebelled under the new British rule after the French and Indian War? Eg, quoting from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac%27s_War#Amherst's_policies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac%27s_War#Amherst's_poli... : > Amherst and officers such as Major Henry Gladwin, commander at Fort Detroit, made little effort to conceal their contempt for the Native Americans. Native Americans involved in the uprising frequently complained that the British treated them no better than slaves or dogs.