The Difference Between Red and White
Throughout the history of colonization, there have always been questions raised about the differences between indigenous peoples and the colonizing nation. Historian Nancy Shoemaker gives a very concise, yet complete argument as to why the British and Indians had such a complicated engagement during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. In her book, A Strange Likeness, she examines how the similarities between the British and Indians were on a much more substantial and relevant level than the superficial differences they saw in one another. This paper will examine how real these similarities were and how many of the differences we study were manufactured by both groups in the encounter.
Shoemaker categorizes the broad spectrum of factors into several components. Some of the more essential ones are that of race, writing, gender, alliances, and land. She quickly acknowledges the existence of racial differences between both parties and this can be argued to be fabricated, at least by the Indians. The British had the idea that every Indian was born white and it was only because they were exposed to the environment more regularly and they lived closer to nature that their skin gradually took on a red hue. Whereas the Indians accepted the difference in race between the two, but in no way categorized it as factor in determining their right to the land.
This point was pivotal for humanity in general. Never before had a group of people, especially Europeans, identified themselves as “white.” Prior to this age of globalization, we have seen identities describes based on one’s nationality or religious affiliation, but never skin color. In North America, we see the tense coexistence of people of white, black, and red skin colors. Black people consisted nearly entirely of African slaves. The practice of this started in the Caribbean during the onset of the African slave trade in the Western hemisphere. This was adopted because it allowed anyone to identify a slave quite easily if they were to escape. Europeans of all religions and nations were self-labeled as white people, and the Indians were described as being red.
The spirituality of both groups can be factored into a number of occasions where the British deemed themselves as superior, simply because they were Christians. During this period of colonization and expansion, the word “civilize” became synonymous with converting a group of people to Christianity. The British saw it as their duty to help save the Indian people. Fundamentally, however, the differences were not as vast as predicted. It is revealed that both groups believe in the same supreme-being as their Creator.
Their spiritual beliefs had fundamentally influenced their societal norms by instituting very different policies for land use. The Indians practiced more of an animism philosophy where everything living and spiritual would be returned to the Earth. Because of this, there was greater respect shown for natural things. The Europeans believed in the Christian God; a God who reigned from Heaven and was the Creator of Earth, not its custodian. The Europeans were therefore more willing to cultivate, develop, and abuse the land they inhabited.
One of the largest contributing factors which ultimately put the Indians at a huge disadvantage was that of communication, specifically the art of writing. It was common for Indian tribes to pass down tradition and laws orally. When a peace deal would be brokered between two warring tribes, it was always an oral agreement, and this practice occurred for an unknown amount of time. The British however, followed the more European approach when it came to legal and diplomatic agreements, and that was to agree to something in writing and secure either the signature or seal of all parties involved on the document.
The Indians reluctantly followed the way of the Europeans and engaged in all diplomacy with written documents. This proved to be problematic, because although the difference in how both groups conduct diplomacy is rather unsubstantial as long as a mutually agreed resolution is concluded, the Indians and British had different meanings to their words. Both groups would speak and write in English, but the vernacular of words would produce two separate agreements as far as the Indians were concerned. This proved to be of little concern since they would only retrieve the written document from the council bag when they needed to challenge the British on their agreement.
The similarities between Indians and the colonizing British are in fact quite stunning. It is also quite interesting to see how the Indians adopted more European methods to counter the invading force of white men. The Indians had maintained a sense of primitive pride amongst their nations. They felt that their existence was to coincide with that of the Earth and that the land was to be respected, not owned. I believe that the Indians reserved their fundamental values in order to compete for the land that they had inhabited for ages. Although their similarities with the British were stronger than their differences, it was the latter that ultimately led to the suppression of Indian culture during the nineteenth century.
Sources:
Nancy Shoemaker, A Strange Likeness: Becoming Red and White in Eighteenth Century north America, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004)
Shoemaker categorizes the broad spectrum of factors into several components. Some of the more essential ones are that of race, writing, gender, alliances, and land. She quickly acknowledges the existence of racial differences between both parties and this can be argued to be fabricated, at least by the Indians. The British had the idea that every Indian was born white and it was only because they were exposed to the environment more regularly and they lived closer to nature that their skin gradually took on a red hue. Whereas the Indians accepted the difference in race between the two, but in no way categorized it as factor in determining their right to the land.
This point was pivotal for humanity in general. Never before had a group of people, especially Europeans, identified themselves as “white.” Prior to this age of globalization, we have seen identities describes based on one’s nationality or religious affiliation, but never skin color. In North America, we see the tense coexistence of people of white, black, and red skin colors. Black people consisted nearly entirely of African slaves. The practice of this started in the Caribbean during the onset of the African slave trade in the Western hemisphere. This was adopted because it allowed anyone to identify a slave quite easily if they were to escape. Europeans of all religions and nations were self-labeled as white people, and the Indians were described as being red.
The spirituality of both groups can be factored into a number of occasions where the British deemed themselves as superior, simply because they were Christians. During this period of colonization and expansion, the word “civilize” became synonymous with converting a group of people to Christianity. The British saw it as their duty to help save the Indian people. Fundamentally, however, the differences were not as vast as predicted. It is revealed that both groups believe in the same supreme-being as their Creator.
Their spiritual beliefs had fundamentally influenced their societal norms by instituting very different policies for land use. The Indians practiced more of an animism philosophy where everything living and spiritual would be returned to the Earth. Because of this, there was greater respect shown for natural things. The Europeans believed in the Christian God; a God who reigned from Heaven and was the Creator of Earth, not its custodian. The Europeans were therefore more willing to cultivate, develop, and abuse the land they inhabited.
One of the largest contributing factors which ultimately put the Indians at a huge disadvantage was that of communication, specifically the art of writing. It was common for Indian tribes to pass down tradition and laws orally. When a peace deal would be brokered between two warring tribes, it was always an oral agreement, and this practice occurred for an unknown amount of time. The British however, followed the more European approach when it came to legal and diplomatic agreements, and that was to agree to something in writing and secure either the signature or seal of all parties involved on the document.
The Indians reluctantly followed the way of the Europeans and engaged in all diplomacy with written documents. This proved to be problematic, because although the difference in how both groups conduct diplomacy is rather unsubstantial as long as a mutually agreed resolution is concluded, the Indians and British had different meanings to their words. Both groups would speak and write in English, but the vernacular of words would produce two separate agreements as far as the Indians were concerned. This proved to be of little concern since they would only retrieve the written document from the council bag when they needed to challenge the British on their agreement.
The similarities between Indians and the colonizing British are in fact quite stunning. It is also quite interesting to see how the Indians adopted more European methods to counter the invading force of white men. The Indians had maintained a sense of primitive pride amongst their nations. They felt that their existence was to coincide with that of the Earth and that the land was to be respected, not owned. I believe that the Indians reserved their fundamental values in order to compete for the land that they had inhabited for ages. Although their similarities with the British were stronger than their differences, it was the latter that ultimately led to the suppression of Indian culture during the nineteenth century.
Sources:
Nancy Shoemaker, A Strange Likeness: Becoming Red and White in Eighteenth Century north America, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004)
Read more!
posted by Shawn Niemann | 7:25 PM
|
0 Comments
