NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
... exported that some of the Pequot warriors taunted the English that if one of the Pequot warriors "could kill but one of you more, he would be equal with God, and as the Englishman's God is, so would he be. "[ 60 ] When we consider the willingness of Massachusetts Bay to execute troublesome Quakers for violating banishment orders, the Pequot blasphemies help to explain the bloody results of the Pequot War. Both Indians and Englishmen believed in the powers of the supernatural. Roger Williams warned Governor Winthrop in September of 1636 that, The Pequots heare of your preparations etc. and comfort themselves in this that a witch amongst them will since the pinnaces by diving under water and making holes etc. as also that they shall now enrich themselves with store of guns but I hope their dreams (through the marie of the Lord) shall vanish, and the Devill and his lying Sorcerers shall be confounded. [ 61 ] The current generation may find this a laughable threat, but to understand the level of fear provoked by such concerns, consider the psychological effect of Hitler's threats of new "secret weapons" during World War II -- and how psychologically destructive it was when the V 1 and the V 2 first started to deliver their cargoes of death to Britain.
Fear of such supernatural attack may explain the willingness to use fire against Fort Mystic, and the actions taken by the English soldiers to assure themselves of being right with God. As an example of this spiritual concern, the Massachusetts soldiers were delayed by the discovery "that some of the Officers, as well as of the private Soldiers, were still under a Covenant of Works; and that the Blessing of God could not be implored or expected to crown the Arms of such unhallowed Men with Success. "[ 62 ] The greater the English fear, the greater their willingness to use all means within their power to destroy Pequot resistance. Another cause of the level of blood shed in the attack on Fort Mystic on May 26, 1637, may have been the relative numbers of soldiers on each side. The colonial army that attacked the Pequot fort consisted of 77 Englishmen, 60 Mohegans, and 400 Narragansetts and Niantics (the last two among the least reliable allies). [ 63 ] Mason's eyewitness account asserts that immediately before the battle began, many of the Indian allies had fled, being "exceedingly afraid. "[ 64 ] Underhill expressed concerns about Mohegan fidelity, because of the common origins of Pequots and Mohegans, and feared that once the battle was under way, the Mohegans might suddenly change sides. [ 65 ] This meant that the effective fighting force was reduced to perhaps only the 77 Englishmen.
Nor should we consider that the English regarded themselves as clearly superior soldiers. While Mason appears to have held Indian fighting skills in low regard, [ 66 ] Edward Winslow complained shortly before the battle that Gardener "much discourage common men by extolling the valor" of the Pequots. [ 67 ] Even Mason, however, once confronting a larger force, might have reconsidered his views. Underhill, attacking the other side of Fort Mystic, may have been in considerable fear as well, for he regarded the English soldiers as "un expert in the use of their arms, " and the Pequots as brave fighters. [ 68 ] There are conflicting descriptions of the number of Pequots the Englishmen were confronting. Gardener claimed that at least 300 Pequots died in Fort Mystic, and that "many prisoners" were taken. [ 69 ] William Bradford's second-hand account claimed 400 Pequots died. [ 70 ] Mason's eyewitness account claimed 600 - 700 Pequots were killed, with only seven taken prisoner, and seven escaped. Mason's account also describes another fort, some distance off, that contained an additional 150 Pequot warriors. This means that the English expedition was outnumbered at least 4. 5: 1, and if we believe Mason, as much as 11: 1, although it is clear that many of the Pequots were not warriors.
Captain Mason was well aware that, "Their Numbers far exceeded ours. " The possibility of losing the battle -- with potentially torturous consequences for prisoners -- must have weighed heavily on the mind of Captain Mason, who made the decision, once the battle was underway, "We must burn them. "[ 71 ] The Pequots had already made clear their acceptance of the notion of total war -- or so the English thought. Gardener describes an encounter before the battle at Fort Mystic in which one of the Pequots boasted: "We are Pequots, and have killed Englishmen, and can kill them as mosquitoes, and we will go to Conectecott and kill men, women, and children... "[ 72 ] To the colonists, such boasts were doubtless good reason for taking no chances of leaving any Pequot braves alive to carry out such threats against their loved ones at home. Roger Williams also informed Governor Winthrop in late August of 1636 that, "the Pequots and [Niantics] resolve to live and die together and not to year up one... "[ 73 ] Yet evidence was available that suggested the Pequots view of war did not match their boasting. Edward Winslow's letter to Governor Winthrop shortly before the battle of Fort Mystic observed, "The Pecoats follow their fishing and planting as if they had no enemies. "[ 74 ] Underhill's description of battle between Pequots and the Indian allies of the English, shortly after the burning of Fort Mystic asserted that, "This fight is more for pastime, than to conquer and subdue enemies. "[ 75 ] The Indian tradition of proud boasting was nothing more than a vigorous attempt to intimidate one's enemies; traditionally, New England Indians "saw little logic in spilling oceans of blood over matters of largely symbolic importance. "[ 76 ] It appears that the English played for keeps, and even when they saw that Indian warfare was fought at a very restrained level, it appears not to have significantly impacted English thinking about the limits of warfare. Finally, the Old Testament model of extermination must be considered. When the Israelites captured Canaanite cities, they killed every inhabitant, so that proximity would not lead the Israelites into worshipping Canaanite gods. [ 77 ] Did the English colonists subscribe to this model?
The evidence is contradictory. In 1630, John Cotton articulated this view of the relationship of the Puritans to the Indians, quoting Psalms 44: 2, "Thou didst drive out the heathen before them. "[ 78 ] Similarly, Underhill compares the deaths at Fort Mystic to the Old Testament wars: Sometimes the Scripture declared women and children must perish with their parents. Sometimes the case alters; but we will not dispute it now. We had sufficient light from the word of God for our proceedings. [ 79 ] Winthrop's views, on the other hand, seem to be subtly different. Winthrop, in 1630, argued that "if we leave them sufficient [land] for their use we may lawfully take the rest. "[ 80 ] A letter from Winthrop to John Endecott in 1634 argues that the widespread death of the Indians from infectious diseases demonstrated God's support for the Puritan expansion in the new land. [ 81 ] There is a large difference between taking advantage of the gradual dying out of the Indians, and intentional extermination. Winthrop's claim does not justify extermination, but Cotton's does, and Underhill's statement may be honestly read as supporting extermination, or death to all the warriors.
The colonists already regarded their actions as establishing a "city on a hill" of purified Christianity in the New World; the analogy to the Israelites, who purified Canaan by exterminating the Canaanites, would have been obvious. If evidence for intentional extermination of the Pequots down to the last man, woman, and child were present, this would tend to argue that John Cotton's Old Testament view influenced the actions taken during the Pequot War. What restraints were present during the Pequot War? Initially, the unnecessary killing of non-combatants restrained both sides. The Pequots were used to a style of warfare that left few dead, and the initial expedition by Endicott caused few Pequot deaths. But once the colonists perceived that the Pequots intended to do them great harm, there was no logical alternative but complete defeat of their enemies.
It appears that the Pequots failed to understand one important European attitude about warfare: it was not a game, and if fought at all, it was to be as total a victory as could be achieved. [ 82 ] There seems to be some question about the extent to which the English regarded women, children, and the elderly as "non-combatants. " Hirsch asserts that "atrocities committed during the Thirty Years War... elicited universal condemnation, " arguing that the English actions during the Pequot War did not reflect the prevailing European notions of fair play. Instead, he sees the breakdown of the notion of non-combatants as a result of the fears engendered by the isolated and dependent position of the English colonists, in conjunction with the Pequot raids on frontier settlements, where the deaths of English women must have seemed evidence of Pequot barbarism. At the same time, Hirsch points to a number of modern writers on this subject who claim that non-combatants were perfectly acceptable victims under prevailing European standards, and therefore, the slaughter at Fort Mystic is unsurprising. [ 83 ] Finally, in examining the restraints which operated on the Puritans, we must consider the very high standards to which they felt themselves obligated. This does not mean that every Puritan always lived up to these standards, but most people seek to justify -- or rationalize -- the actions which they take. In the case of Governor Vane's orders to Endicott's expedition, the instructions were very clear -- that war was a last resort, if the Pequots would not turn over the offenders for trial. [ 84 ] The actions and statements of various English colonists after the Pequot War suggest remorse consistent with a belief that the matter had gone beyond a point where all, participants and spectators, could be completely comfortable with the results, in spite of an overwhelming victory.
Gardener's retrospective description of the Pequot War has a mournful tone to it, and apparently not just for the English casualties of the war: Thus far I had written in a book, that all men and posterity might know how and why so many honest men had their blood shed, yea, and some flayed alive, others cut in pieces, and some roasted alive, only because Kichamokin... a Bay Indian killed one Pequot... [ 85 ] Similarly, Roger Williams, who had played a major part in organizing Indian allies against the Pequots, expressed concern "that some innocent blood cases at Qunnihticut, " and pointed to 2 Kings 14: 5 - 6 as evidence that guilt did not extend to children. [ 86 ] Two weeks later, he clarified that his concern was that the Pequot women and children should not be enslaved, or at least, not permanently. "If they have deserved Death, tis Sinn to spare: If they have not deserved Death, then what punishments? Whether perpetual slaverie. "[ 87 ] There is evidence that the New England colonists did, at least occasionally, recognize an obligation to provide color-blind justice -- at least in peacetime. In 1638, four Englishmen participated in the robbery and murder of a Narragansett. One escaped English jurisdiction; another died as a result of wounds suffered when the Narragansetts took him captive; and the two remaining Englishmen were tried, convicted, and executed for a crime against an Indian. While the motivations included concern about Narragansett retaliation if no justice was done, Bradford emphasizes that those who expressed opposition "that any English should be put to death for the Indians" were of a "rude & ignorance sorte. "[ 88 ] On a less severe scale, Massachusetts Bay had whipped one of the colonists "for soliciting an Indian squaw to incontinence" some years before the Pequot War. [ 89 ] These incidents suggest that the English concern for justice included justice for crimes against Indians.
Thomas Shepard's sermon, "The Parable of the Ten Virgins, " delivered before 1640, suggested that the Pequot War was an event sent by God for the purpose of awakening the Puritans from spiritual slumber: "The Lord awakened us by the Pequot hornet, yet what use is there made of it?" [ 90 ] This is another reminder that the Pequot War was regarded not merely as an unpleasant event, but perhaps an indication of God's displeasure with the Puritans. This is suggestive that feelings of guilt were present about the war, and that at least some English colonists recognized that justice had not been done. There is one piece of evidence that suggests the decision to burn Fort Mystic may not have been completely made on the spur of the moment, and it has apparently been missed by Jennings, who, one would think, would leave no such evidence out of Invasion of America. Underhill's description of Captain Mason setting fire to Fort Mystic describes Mason's use of a firebrand on the west side, and "myself set fire on the south end with a train of powder. " Unfortunately, it is impossible to tell if Underhill is referring to a "train" hundreds of feet long, or simply the result of emptying his powder horn and lighting it. Yet even on the same page, Underhill reported, "Mercy did they deserve for their valor, could we have had opportunity to have bestowed it. "[ 91 ] This suggests, though does not prove, that Underhill's actions with the "train of powder" were an impulsive act, not a premeditated act of extermination. The evidence suggests that the massacre at Fort Mystic was not premeditated, but the actions of a commander who had stumbled into a battle prematurely, found himself suddenly outnumbered, afraid that this problem was going to get dramatically worse if he fought the Pequots in a traditional way, in terror of torture if captured, and who saw an immediate tactical solution to his problem: fire.
This does not mean that a plan could not been hatched in advance for the extermination of women and children, but the evidence for such a plan is simply not present. Was genocide the intent of the English, as some modern historians have claimed or implied? Genocide is a very emotionally charged word. It is a word that evokes images of gas chambers, bulldozers burying mountains of rotting corpses, and crematoria. It is the nuclear weapon of accusations. Strong language should be held in reserve for circumstances that unambiguously call for it, or we are at risk that the word will cease to have any real meaning, much as "fascist" was used in the 1960 s by some political activists and academics to refer to any political opinion to the right of Eugene McCarthy.
Genocide is a term of recent origin, coined in 1943 by Raphael Lemon to describe the actions of National Socialist Germany and its allies in establishing a Judenrein Europe. In the strictest sense, it refers to the intentional effort to achieve the complete physical extermination of an identifiable ethnic or national group. Katz observes that the term "genocide" has been recently used "by American historians and others to describe various persecutions past and present... "[ 92 ] Such overheated rhetoric was readily audible during the recent Columbus quin centennial, in spite of its general inapplicability, except in a sense so broad as to render the term "genocide" meaningless. Can we apply the term to what happened to the Pequots?
While many Pequots died in battle, and at least 30 male prisoners were killed by the English shortly after the burning of Fort Mystic, [ 93 ] there is abundant evidence that the English did not intend the extermination of the Pequots. Mason describes the taking of Pequot prisoners in subsequent battles, who were turned over for absorption into Indian tribes allied with the English. [ 94 ] Bradford's account of their disposition differs from Mason's, with Bradford asserting that the prisoners were divided "some to those [Indians? ] of the river, and the rest to us. " The male children were sent to Bermuda, presumably into slavery, and "the women and maid children are disposed about in the townes. " Bradford's account is not clear whether the Pequot females...
Free research essays on topics related to: women and children, english colonists, roger williams, indian allies, governor winthrop
Research essay sample on Women And Children Governor Winthrop
