Skip to comments.No, It Wasn't French vs. Indians
Posted on 01/01/2005 6:44:12 AM PST by Pharmboy
click here to read article
Yes, I've read about it. The British attacked St. Louis which was Spanish territory then and were repulsed.
Not much of a battle compared to Yorktown or Bunker Hill.
OK, I will when in the vicinity, although Syracuse is not my favorite place (in fact the whole state is not either)
-btw Are you familiar with the term 'Drawing and Quartering' ? It was quite popular in Europe around the same time period, as was the practice of placing heads on spikes, and burning folks at the stake.
And, it's not that far from Schenectady.
And, good luck at the casinos. Even though the Oneidas were (and are) our friends, I don't mind if you take some of their coin...
And let's not forget "The XYZ Affair", also under President Adams. When the American deligation to France was told, in increasingly less and less uncertain terms that if they wanted any business started/continued/concluded the Americans had better wake up and pony-up more than a few,er, "inducements".
Wasn't the old film "Drums Along the Mohawk" (when I lived in Utica, NY they would have special showings) set in that period, not to mention "Last of the Mohicans"? It was indeed completely pivotal to English speaking America becoming more than a North American version of Chile, and for a host of reasons the "Seven Years War", "French and Indian War", or whatever anyone wants to call it led directly to our Revolution.
The same is true of the British Raj in India as well: Better technology and ancient, deep rooted hatred between not only tribes/princelings, but between religious groups as well.
Eminent domain?? Did you mean Manifest Destiny or, perhaps, The Monroe Doctrine?
The full sentence passed upon those convicted of High Treason up to 1870 was as follows: That you be drawn on a hurdle to the place of execution where you shall be hanged by the neck and being alive cut down, your privy members shall be cut off and your bowels taken out and burned before you, your head severed from your body and your body divided into four quarters to be disposed of at the Kings pleasure. So not for the feint hearted then!!
As you will see from the sentence it should properly be called drawing, hanging and quartering as the condemned was drawn to the place of execution tied to the hurdle which was dragged by a horse. This is confirmed by contemporary law books. Drawing does not refer to the removal of the intestines in this context and remained part of the sentence for High Treason long after the disemboweling and dismemberment had ceased. The hurdle was similar to a piece of fencing made from thin branches interwoven to form a panel to which the prisoner was tied to be dragged behind a horse to the place of execution. Once there, the prisoner(s) were hanged in the normal way (i.e. without a drop to ensure that the neck was not broken) but cut down whilst still conscious. The penis and testicles were cut off and the stomach was slit open. The intestines and heart were removed and burned before them. The other organs were torn out and finally the head was cut off and the body divided into four quarters. The head and quarters were parboiled to prevent them rotting too quickly and then displayed upon the city gates as a grim warning to all.
At some point in this agonising process the prisoner inevitably died of strangulation and/or haemorrhage and/or shock and damage to vital organs."
Perhaps after dismembering and filleting their prisoners the English lost their appetite to eat them.
Honesty is fine. Better that bigots come right out and say what's on their minds. Then no one is guessing.
Familiarize yourself with Edward Sheriff Curtis, Floyd, then come back and tell me Twain's Indian sounds anything like the culture documented in photographs by this remarkable man - whom I dare say immersed himself in American Indian culture far more than Mark Twain ever could have.
I have yet to view a Curtis photograph of a scrawny, dirty Indian holding his pants up with one hand, wearing a belt made of sardine cans.
P.S. Did you know the Iroquois developed their own constitution that influenced the content of ours?
You should be used to this sort of commentary on FR. I sure am.
Oh, I'm used to it, my friend. I just refuse to let it go unchallenged.
Yep I understand.
bump...i just love history.
The community was named after Douw Fonda, settler who was scalped in an Indian raid
Maybe not a new ancestor but a derivative of the spelling of Dowd
Still cool just the same.
One of my early ancestors was killed by Indians in the Shenendoah. Also, a grandson of his fought at what some consider to be the first battle of the Revolution at Point Pleasant, VA (WV) against them in 1774.
The story is that this group of indians, lead by Chief Cornstalk, were sponsored by the Tory Gov. of VA, Dunmore, to take on the Virginia colonists. Dunmore and the colonist General Lewis, lead two columns up toward the Ohio to engage the Indians. At some point, the columns split-up with Dunmore taking a northern route.
Sometime after this, Lewis discovered that Dunmore was meeting with Cornstalk, ostensibly to hammer out a treaty.
Gen Lewis smelled a rat and disobeying Dunmore's orders to stand fast, advanced his column. At Point Pleasant they were attacked by Cornstalk's force.
Lewis' men won the battle. Supposedly, if they had not, then VA would have spent the Revolutionary War tied-up on her western frontier with Inidan attacks and thus unable to contribute troops to fight the British in the east.
Oh, of course, because the original settlers were just soooo nice. If you can name one instance where American Indian tribes used biological warfare against the settlers (such as the english did by deliberately providing indians with blankets as gifts, not mentioning that the 'gifts' were used by smallpox patients) or if you can name one time where an American Indian nation had a specific governmental policy of eradication of the settlers, then maybe I'll buy your version of events...
However, you'll never find any instance of genocide on the part of indians... and there is nothing more savage than that.
Thanks for playing.
Ok, so what. Mark Twain was well known as a writer of fiction. There are far more documented examples from far more credible sources that disagree with Twain.
American Indians are far from perfect, certainly - after all, we are human, too - but what Twain had to say was bulls**t.
When you say massacres, are you referring to Wounded Knee, or maybe the Washita River, or maybe Chivington or maybe one of any of dozens of other instances? Or are you speaking of inter-tribal warfare, which was pretty much just like it was throughout Europe for centuries?
Actually, we might be better off if the French had conquered New York.
So, I'm guessing that no innocent indians, who just wanted to live in peace and be left alone, were ever killed by the white man, then?
FR is not a good place to try and revise history.
I'm not revising anything. YOu just seem to have some vested interest in denying that Whites could be just as "brutal" as American Indians. Why is that?
And just out of curiosity, did they get caught up in that whole Leech Lake thing? Ya know, where the whites spend several years daming up the mississippi and missouri rivers, flooding indian villages and destroying their crops, causing some violent encounters? Or was it something else?
I don't remember particularly learning about it in school. I've read books and seen movies since then that have given me the info. It's a fascinating time in the pre-history of our country.
I really can't believe how scrawny and dirty this cowardly man (Chief Joseph) is. Probably just got back from the saloon, or from begging (along with all his relatives) for some white guy's food. The question is, where is his sardine can necklace, and which hand is he holding his pants up with? < /extremesarcasm >
P.S. Some people have a perceived score to settle, it seems.
They really have done a terrific job with the museum. We got a really great lunch at the restaurant too, and what a gorgeous view :)
Me too. Drives me nuts. Several ancestor names that are the same in my tree:
Still, it's fun.
Thank you for posting this article. The Seven Years War is one of the most important and overlooked periods in our history.
Truly a man of Providence! He came through battles with numerous bullet holes through his coat, had multiple horses shot out from under him in a single battle; and even his "mistake" in opening fire on the French without provocation, initiated a series of events that led to the French losing their grip on the future U.S. and the American Revolution.
Also, as a true measure of the man's intellect, he learned lessons from this war that the British failed to grasp during the next. Washington had no military experience when his half-brother, Lawrence, died. Washington was 20 at the time, rode to Williamsburg to meet the governor, and talked his way into filling Lawrence's post as the adjutant-general of the colony's militia. He read any books available and interviewed any military man he could find, and basically taught himself without any formal military training. During the Seven Years War Washington learned the lessons of continental-scale warfare and put them to use during the Revolution. So, even though he only won three of the nine major battles he commanded our army in, he was able to keep the army together and lead us through a grueling war of attrition against the most powerful army in the world.
Thanks fer the link...I'd never really given the F&I War much thought, but this was interesting...MUD
I worked with a Texas physician who is a direct descendant of Gen. Benjamin Lincoln...after we finished the job we gave her a framed print of Lincoln taking the sword.
I would call them freedom fighters. The year 1492 was the Native american's 9/11. Before you go calling Indians names, just remember your ancestors were the same way. They were barbarians who just had an edge in organized violence. As a matter of fact, every people group had cannibals too. Just reference the Donner part and Jefferey Dahmer. Have a nice day.
Your history books were written by white men. Indians did not write their side of the story down. There is a bias by the authors of your books. Books can be made to say anything.
I'm (more or less) on your side on this one. French and Indian atrocities have been remembered and nursed in America.
English/American atrocities against the other two groups have been forgotten.
The same thing is true of Indians, of course. They tend to remember the atrocities committed against them, not those they committed.
I believe it's called human nature.
Okay, so he was prejudiced. At least he was honest.
So, the Indians would have no bias?
Besides, which Indians? The ones who sided with the French or the ones who sided with the English?
Or the ones who wanted to stay out of it?
So, which ones are you referring to?
Or do you eman the fictional Indian who never went to war or ever did anything wrong and ate clean, pure water and was at one with nature?
I can't speak for any of the other American Indians around here, but my people remember both those we committed, and those against us...
Good God, I hope not!!!
Never said we didn't have a bias.It is human nature. Just pointing out the fact that the books of which you are so fond of is slanted toward the English point of view.
Take your pick of any group.Whichever one you pick, the end results are the same. The history books are written by the white man.
Of the books I have read, I dont remember any cases of canibalism by Amrican Indians.
Gross stuff, sure, but I dont remember any canabilism.
Concerning bio-warfare, how many times?
Jeffrey Amherst is a singular incident, while the attacks on New England farmhouses were in the hundreds.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.