Let none slander the name Uncas.
Something that rubs we at Pioneer Valley Dissidence the wrong way is the narrative framing of the plight of the poor Red Man. He is depicted as childlike and innocent, possessed of a naive desire to aid his fellow man, destined only for betrayal. This is not only false, but actively insulting to their memory. The Native American was of a proud warrior race, with all the austerity and fortitude of the greatest Spartan. They knew well the universal law of an eye for an eye, they practiced ultima ratio regum and vae victus. They had a mastery of economics that would make Adam Smith blush, with a consummate understanding of inflation, supply and demand, and traded amongst themselves using a currency that required productivity from human capital to be generated. To portray them as some poor wounded dog to be rehabilitated in memory rather than as equals who ultimately lost their martial contest is a shameful mark upon the honor of any who knowingly perpetuate that myth. Let us [revise] this.
The idea that the Amerindian tribes knew nothing of warfare is false. It is based upon the presupposition that, as a consequence of the European Military Revolution of the 16th and 17th centuries, no non-European force could possibly contend with her standing armies and the accompanying logistical and adminstrative advantages. How strange, then, that the Abenaki dealt a resounding defeat to the English Colonists and forced them to sign a treaty of tribute [!] in 1678. How odd indeed, that an uncivilized and peaceful people could maintain a massive frontline and push the Europeans back roughly 250 miles without the logistical and technological advantages of their enemies. [Eurocentrism is very cool, but we must acknowledge that it has the ability to blind us. To not acknowledge the sophistication of Amerindian asymmetrical warfare is an example of Eurocentrism's shortcomings.] This is a Red and White example. What happened in the early colonial era when two Amerindian States clashed?
In 1643, the Narragansett and Mohegan Tribes went to war. The Narragansett fielded an army of 1,000 men which, to put into proper context, was equal to the entire population of the Connecticut Colony at the time. It is important to highlight this fact, simply to shed some light on the European point of view. These were still very much native lands; the colonies' ultimate ascension as masters of the northeast were by no means preordained. The very survival of the Europeans relied on 'playing ball' with the true movers and shakers of the realm. The clash between these two Red nations threatened to destroy the status quo established at the conclusion of the Pequot War, so the colonists decided to back the Mohegan Sachem Uncas [who we remember as a great friend and stalwart ally of Major John Mason] in the conflict. At this stage of history, a century before the colonies of New England rose to supremacy, it was necessary for their very survival that the colonists play the role of pawn in a war between tribes.
These two historical events, we believe, paint a very different picture of the Amerindian Man than the one many see today. It is both easy and incorrect to look at the state of the natives now and suppose that the unstoppable White wave flooding their shores drowned the poor diseased First Peoples. This point of view discounts the fact that for the first century of Colonial European existence, there loomed the ever-present threat of a Red landslide from the dark parts of a continent they dared not traverse.
Sources:
No comments:
Post a Comment