Unsurprisingly, Columbus made friends with some of the …show more content…
native tribes in Hispaniola, although many of his comrades resented his relationship with the native people. Those tribes did not show any antagonism or aggression towards the new arrivals in the beginning. Yet, the situation between the natives and the Europeans took a turn for the worst; the Europeans ordered them to relinquish all gold metal and to supply women from their tribes (Baym, 2008, p. 24). As time passes, Columbus resurfaced in 1494 scrutinizing the untenable state of affairs of the natives forcefully submitting to an unruly and disagreeable group of settlers. This on-going problem with the Europeans brought no hope for the natives to establish a friendly and equal long lasting relationship. However, Columbus discussion of the problems in Hispaniola, were alike in various ways compared to Bradford’s account of the natives.
Similarly, Bradford discussed their encounter with the Native American as fleeting in the beginning.
Their search for other people like themselves proved unsuccessful because no other Europeans were in the surrounding area other than nearby Natives. Some Native people kept hiding or running away from Bradford and his party most likely having to do with earlier problems with infectious diseases (Baym2008, p. 64). As things began to progress for the Separates, some of their tools were stolen by the natives and was unable to retrieve them back until they met with a native that spoke a little English (baym, 2008, p. 68). This native was known as Samoset, who came directly into their place of dwelling and spoke have hearted English to communicate with the Pilgrims. Thereby, establishing an open relationship with the Natives, which brought a new beginning for “Thanksgiving” between the Pilgrims and native people through sharing and thanking God (Baym, 2008, p. 71). Nonetheless, the contrast was quite different in the “Contact and Conflict section” compared to Bradford and …show more content…
Columbus.
Moreover, many Native Americans communicated and formed friendships with prominent leaders in the military.
Military leaders such as Sir Jeffery Amherst and Henry Gladwin did not honor the same alliance the Natives had with the French because of their personal hatred (Baym, 2008, p. 207). However, this interpretation of the “Native American Contact and Conflict” (baym, 2008, p. 206) does differ from Columbus first contact and Bradford’s friendship with the natives. Despite the conflict with some of the high officials among the British military, the natives continued to remain friendly and neutral. Yet, the natives began conforming to the ways of the Europeans by reading and writing through Samson Aukom.As a result, he believed this would help his people to communicate effectively and have a closer relationship with God (Baym, 2008, p. 210). However, Pontiac dreamed his people had left their old ways and their French brothering for the new way of the British
people.
In Conclusion, the deceit and deception against the natives were not among all Europeans. A select few did not want the Native American people to live on the land the British wanted for the crown. Even the mutinous Spaniards tried forcing natives to submit, as slaves did not hold well with Columbus. Additionally, Bradford’s account reveal many times the native people could have been attacked, but later they were openly embraced to form long lasting friendships. Based on Nina baym’s account of the natives, not all native people were mistreated, but other Spaniards did mistreat some of the people. It was a time of curiosity and new territory for both sides, although they worked very hard to maintain their bond. Nonetheless, the relationship between the Native Americans has been rectified, although many died during a time of exploring and creating new foundations on both sides.