Uncategorized – Page 13 – U.S. to 1877

October 2, 2013

The Island of California, Spanish hysteria, and Russian Oppression

Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126

Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127

A major theme in this week’s reading is the presence of paranoia among the Spanish and their uneasy feelings toward British (Hudson Bay Company) as well as the Russians. By the early 1600s, the Spanish had built a true empire in North America with its core centered in Mexico. With such a large empire and vast amount of territory, the Spanish had been stretched relatively thin and decided not solidify their presence in California despite multiple explorations in the 1540s. They did, however, create New Spain as a buffer zone between their crown jewel of Mexico and other foreign nation establishments. Contrary to Spanish beliefs, the British and Russians were much further away from Spanish settlements and did not seek to significantly expand their western territories. In fact, the Russian settlements were confined to a small portion of Alaska and the British owned Hudson Bay Company had not surpassed the Rocky Mountain area. In response to this invented pressure, the Spanish established permanent settlements in California in order to solidify power via religious missions with the first one being constructed in 1697. Also, Taylor points out that during the 18th century Enlightenment, the Spanish were even skeptical of the efforts made by European nations to explore western territories to create maps and discover new wildlife. I find the sense of suspicion that swept through the Spanish Empire in North America unwarranted and entertaining in a way.
The most interesting aspect of the reading to me was the way Taylor includes information of Russians persecuting Siberians as well as other foreign groups throughout their conquest of eastern Asia and settlement of Alaska. Over the course of the semester, we have read and discussed numerous accounts of Spanish and English persecution of native peoples (such as the Aztecs, various Native America groups, and slaves). Taylor, for once, provides information (although scant) suggesting that other power hungry groups oppressed people when possible. Although I appreciate Taylor’s decision to include Russian mistreatment of Siberians, I am disappointed that he did not elaborate on it further. Taylor has gone into great and even gruesome detail when describing the living conditions of slaves, massacring of Aztecs, or systematic persecution of the Indians by the Spanish conquistadors or English colonizers. However, Taylor fails to give the Siberians or Aleutians comparable attention in this reading.
Lastly, I would like to discuss the Spanish’s absence of knowledge of western North America and their stellar map-making in regard to California. As my classmate JaNewton pointed out, the Spanish’s true motivation for settling California was not in the name of Catholicism but in fear of Russian colonization in the Pacific Northwest. Along with labeling California as a desolate wasteland filled with wilderness, the Spanish decided to make it an island as well. The actions of the Spanish empire in western North America and especially California truly convey their paranoia and unrest during the 17th century.

October 2, 2013

Maybe the Spanish Really Are a Black Legend

In Chapter 19, Taylor again portrays the Spanish as much worse than the British. As Janewton mentioned, the Spanish brutality appears to be a recurring theme. Similar to their earlier colonization, the Spanish focus on converting the natives more than any other imperial power. I found Taylor’s description of Fray Junipero Serra on page 457 interesting. Serra practiced self-mutilation as a means of furthering his faith: “He wore rough hair shirts augmented with metal wire points, periodically flagellated his bare back until it was bloody, and burned the hair on his chest with a lighted candle.” Furthermore, he refused treatment of a wound on his leg. I think that having Serra as a leader of a mission helps to explain why the Spanish were so brutal to the natives. If Serra despised his own mortal body to this extent, he must have had much less respect for the lives of natives who were not even Christian.

On the other hand, Taylor presents a stark contrast between the Spanish missions the British explorer James Cook. Taylor says, “Cook was no conquistador come to plunder, conquer, enslave, and convert” (469). Instead, Cook appeared to hold himself to the higher standards of the Enlightenment. He treated the natives with respect, but inadvertedly could not avoid infecting them with disease. Earlier in colonization, the British used “The Black Legend” to describe the Spanish brutality and minimize their own damages. But this sentiment does not seem to be held by the British alone. Throughout the book, Taylor portrays the Spanish as consistently more devastating to native life and culture. Perhaps the British were right, and the Spanish were truly more cruel than the other countries.

October 2, 2013

An Interesting Goodbye

Although I’m saddened to be done with Taylor (I’m only being somewhat sarcastic), his conclusion, like much of his work, challenged traditional historians’ conceptualizations of colonization in North America. Although most of the blog posts this week have already extensively covered how interesting it is to conclude with stories of island colonization, I found Taylor’s descriptions of Spanish and Russian interests in California even more compelling.

Both Sperry and Wells discussed the differences between Spanish and Russian practices in “civilizing” locals; however, I think it’s important to further examine the modes of brutality that both nations enforced. There seems to be an understanding that the Russians were significantly more brutal in their efforts to colonize than the Spanish. However, Taylor never claims such a bias, rather he describes the atrocities that both nations contributed to and allows readers to take a stance.

Although Russian abuse sounds more damaging, as it’s characterized by ransom and rape, that doesn’t mean that Spanish abuse was any less significant. It seems like we are forgetting that the destruction of landscape, culture, language, and lifestyle has just as harsh of an effect as more direct brutality – even if it doesn’t immediately jump out at a reader.

In discussing disparities between brutalities, I am reminded of the “Black Legend,” which I described in more detail in an earlier blog post. Any instance whereby we try and rationalize brutality by saying that one country was worse than another does history a great disservice. Almost every European countries interested in North America had some lasting, damaging effect, which was brutal and significant, although perhaps in different ways.

October 2, 2013

Mutual Fear Ignites Western Exploration

Taylor, in his last chapter of American Colonies, provides several interesting points. First, Taylor brings in another interesting viewpoint to the table that he has spoken little about before–the Russians. In this chapter Taylor explains how the Russians, in search of new lands as well as animal hides, encountered many native peoples. The Russian fur traders, known as promyshlenniki, “became notorious for their brutality to native peoples” (Taylor 447). As these fur traders moved south-eastward, they destroyed any rebellion in their path. I find it interesting that Taylor only brings up the Russians in the last chapter of his book, as almost insignificant, when in fact, the Russians brutality paralleled that of the Spanish conquistadors. Perhaps, Taylor could have placed more emphasis on this treatment as he did with most of the other great massacres in early North American History.

Secondly, Taylor states that the main cause for the exploration and attempted colonization of the Pacific coastal area was because of mutual fear of the opposing European countries’ colonization–mainly Spanish fear of the British fur traders (Taylor 454). This claim has only some partial truth. As ROMANGONE http://sites.davidson.edu/his141/winning-the-west/ expressed earlier, the reasons for expansion have greater motives than simply to beat the British or Russians to the land. Spanish Missions contributed to a large part of the expansion, which was ultimately funded by the Catholic church instead of the Spanish government. If the government wanted to truly prevent British conquering, then a more concrete plan of action funded by the Spanish government would have been appropriate and probably more effective. However, because the Spanish and Natives relied upon each other for survival, the colonization attempts prevented further British colonization (if there ever was a serious attempt west during this time). The fear of British expansion certainly created an interest in further exploration in the West, but overall the driving exploration force rested in the Spanish missions.

October 2, 2013

New Coast, Old Practices

Colonization in the “New” World could only stay on the Atlantic seaboard for so long, and this was exactly the case. Eventually the West Coast and Pacific area was the hot commodity and it was the Spanish who took first interest in the area. Although, the Spanish “toured” or investigated the land of what is now California they saw nothing of interest and returned to their central location of colonization in the Mexico area. Accompanying the Spaniards on the Pacific coast were the Russians who were very few and much further North. The Russians primarily looted the Pacific Coast in the frigid waters near Alaska hunting sea otter pelts for trade.
EVFARESE makes a claim in their blog post pointing out the vast lack of knowledge in the Pacific Coast of North America. This lack of knowledge is alluding to the fact that the Spanish were fearful of other groups in this region; such as, the Russians in what is known as Russian America. Therefore, the Spaniards were fearful of a group so distant that they began to reinvestigate California in order to quickly claim land as they always had when first arriving in the Americas. By quickly claiming land the Spaniards hoped it would act as a buffer to their central location in Mexico, which is where their economic prosperity derived from. The Spaniards created what is known as “Alta California” as well as “Baja California” by simply dividing California into a Northern and Southern Hemisphere. Why did the Spaniards believe the Russians were much closer and larger posing more of threat than they actually were? Communication was not very easily accessible and it took time for word to be passed along especially between two different colonial powers let alone within one colonial power. Therefore, the Spanish began to colonize in a land they once deemed as unsuitable for their needs in order to provide a buffer.
The Spanish began to colonize and this once again brought them in contact with the Natives. The Spanish were infamous for their brutal treatment of the Natives in colonial history; and although this was a different region their attitude did not change. The “Black” Legend existed for a reason. The Spaniards sought to convert those native to California, and labeled them as “gente sin razón,” the Spaniards thought they were the only ones who possessed reason (Taylor 460). The missions led to an inevitable outcome and that was tension and violence that the Spaniards thrived off of. In light of all the madness the Spaniards still felt as if they had established a successful buffer against a colonial power that quite realistically had little power in the grand scheme of things and whose presence was barely felt except to the Spaniards.

October 2, 2013

What In The World Is Russia Doing Here?

Up to this point, the entire focus of this class has been on the colonization of America. That is logical considering that this is American history, but the history thus far has not really been American. Rather, it has been a conglomerate of European explorations, European politics, and European settlement. Chapter 19 was no different, but this final chapter ended the colonial period in an intriguing way.

Spain had played a role in the colonies up to this point, but they started to get worried. Spain “owned” a lot of land towards the west coast. I say “owned” because technically they claimed the land and it was theirs, but the Spanish really had no idea how much land was actually their. So when rumors spread that Russia and Britain were coming after their landed, they assumed that “the Russians and British were closing in on California and would soon outflank New Mexico and attack precious Mexico” (Taylor 445). First off, what in the world is Russia doing in this book? Russia was definitely not a country I expected to hear, or had ever heard, in connection to colonial history. Also, it always amazes me how little they knew about the layout of the country, as seen by the map of the island of California (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:California_island_Vinckeboons5.jpg). However, the Spanish did expand with their missionaries up the coast of California. They claimed the land by establishing little missionaries scattered up the coast of a vast territory.

Somehow Russia decides to rear its ugly head in the colonies. Now considering I had never heard of Russia being in America this early, I was intrigued to see what they brought to the table. I very quickly learned two major themes. The first is that the Russians are just like every other country that settled near natives. They were brutal, cruel, and effective in dealing with natives. They used natives to get the goods they needed and took advantage of them, just like every other society we have studied thus far. Secondly, Russia created a sense of urgency for the Spanish. Sarah Funderburg puts it eloquently in her most recent post, “the rumor that the Russians were rapidly expanding their land-holdings (or establishing them at all) motivated the Spanish to increase their aggressive expansion.” The Russians, to me, did not add much to the conversation about colonization. It seems as if they were another card in the deck.

Russia, Spain, Britain, France, etc. all seem to go the same way about colonization. As our talk of American colonization comes to end it is very clear. Now, just as Taylor does I will conclude with a brief mention of Revolution. Now, it is time to revolt against the British crown and become the United States of America.

October 2, 2013

The Westward Expansion

After reading so much about the British colonial conquests of the 17^th and 18^th century along the east coast of the United States, I had almost forgotten about anything in America at the time that existed west of the Mississippi. During this era, the Spanish took it upon themselves to maintain their superiority in North America by conquering most of the western United States, securing themselves as the most important colonizers on the continent. In this chapter we are also introduced to another player, the Russians, and their colonization of Alaska.

Throughout all of the North and South American colonies of the 17^th and 18^th century, one common theme that unites all of the settlements (with the possible exception of New France) was the use of excessive violence when conquering new territories. As Alan Taylor writes in his history American Colonies, the Spanish “heard alarming rumors of Russian and British advances towards the West Coast of North America” (Taylor, 445), which prompted them to colonize at a faster, more violent rate. I believe this shows a deep insecurity on the part of the Spanish colonial exploits, who were determined to demonstrate their superior colonizing skills through any means necessary, even if that resulted in them “rap[ing] Quechan women and brutally whipp[ing] native men who protested” (Taylor, 459).

I was surprised with Taylor’s devoted a portion of the chapter to Russian settlements in North America (particularly Alaska), as I was unaware they conquered any land. I enjoyed reading WEKING’s analogy where he compared the Russian promyshlenniki to Spanish conquistadores in terms of violence of cruelty to the local Indian population. Taylor writes that “the promyshlenniki became notorious for their brutality to native peoples and for the rapidity with which their operations harvested wild animals to local extinction,” (Taylor, 447), showing a complete disrespect for not only the native peoples, but for their land too. Through reading all the chapters devoted to different European colonies, it seems as though most Europeans believed they were automatically a more sophisticated group of people than their native counterparts, and it was almost their duty to “save” them by forcing their practices on the Indians. The Russians were apparently no different.

The intertwined nature of religion and Spanish colonial conquests has always been an interest of mine. Religious conversion played an important role in the conquering of Spanish Latin America and continued to be important as the Spaniards colonized out west. As EVFARESE noted, it was clearly in the best interest of the Catholic Church to fund these overseas expansions, as they had the potential to gain many more followers. Overtime, the Indians eventually became dependent upon the missions, as Taylor writes, “by introducing free-range livestock [among other resources], the Hispanics narrowed the Indian’s ability to live outside the missions,” (Taylor, 461), detailing the full extent of Spanish control in America.

October 2, 2013

Stretched Too Thin

Alan Taylor’s final chapter explains the colonization procedures performed in the West. Both Russia and Spain attempted to colonize this vast and generally unknown expanse of land during the mid to late 1700s. During this process, both nations partook in oppressive behavior towards the natives. Russians kidnapped women and children for ransoms as well as raped many of the native women during the affair. The Spanish took a different course by creating missions throughout California. In his recent blog post, Well’s describes these missions as “forced assimilation.” (http://sites.davidson.edu/his141/the-other-cold-war-imperial-paranoia-in-pacific-north-america/) I completely agree with his terminology. Not only did Spanish make the natives adapt to most facets of their lifestyle, but they didn’t give them any choice in the matter. It didn’t make matters any better that the Spanish destroyed the native land with their farming procedures and abused many native women.

But the question that arises is why did the Spanish create these missions? The answer relates back to why the Spanish settled California in the first place. Because of substandard communication in the 18^th century, Spain believed the Russians were a danger to their small settlements on the west coast. The fear of losing settlements made Spain send more people to colonize California. The only problem was that Spain did not have many people to send. The Spanish citizens were generally happy with their lifestyles in both Spain and Mexico and did not want to travel many miles to a place they knew virtually nothing about. So, instead of forcing people to migrate, Spanish authorities did the next best thing: they converted Indians into Spanish colonists. This way the land could have Spanish support and would protect against Russian interaction.

The Spanish mass conversion was a desperate maneuver to colonize a vast land with very few colonists. This was an example of a nation wanting to expand more so than the colonists who inhabited the land. This process seems quite foolish but it was one of the reasons why the Spanish failed to successfully keep much of their land in the New World. They claimed too much land and thus, could not develop their settlements as effectively as other nations.

October 2, 2013

Paranoia in the Pacific

Taylor began his assessment of the west in a unique fashion: focusing on Russian imperialism in Alaska. Despite initial intent to “acquire them [native peoples] through kindness,” (448) Russian colonists (promyshlenniki) tremendously mistreated and disrespected the native peoples. The disrespect was particularly unfounded, as the Aleut people were talented and innovative, aptly demonstrated by the baidarka, a small boat which facilitated fishing. Despite the skills of these people, they were vulnerable when it came to dealing with firearms, and the Russians ruthlessly exploited and intimidated them. However, Taylor’s main reason to include Russia in his narrative was to provide a frame for the geographical anxiety felt by the Spanish. Taylor noted that Russia’s population consisted of only 400 members in 1800 (456), and considering the vast distance between them and the Spanish, the Spanish took preventative action to secure the Pacific.

The Spanish first explored California’s coast during the middle of the 16th century (456); however, factors such as the apparent lack of mineral wealth and the distance and difficulty in accessing it led to minimal Spanish interest in the land. This changed in 1768 due to misleading reports of Russian and British encroachment (457). A lack of Spanish colonists interested in the area led Spanish to attempt a cultural conversion of native people. This practice, known as missions, assumed that with the cultural and particularly religious conversion would allow the native peoples to essentially become equal to the Spanish (461). However, the soul-saving missions had an extremely significant and damaging impact on the natives, as the missions virtually rendered them incapable of living on the outside in their accustomed ways. Contrary to Spanish belief at the time, the native peoples had chronically shaped the land, and the Spanish influence destroyed that.

I want to build off of and challenge Wells’s comparison of Spanish and British imperialism (http://sites.davidson.edu/his141/the-other-cold-war-imperial-paranoia-in-pacific-north-america/). I find his points of similarity regarding intimidation and forcefulness to be convincing and well-supported. However, the similarities only apply to Puritan praying towns, while Spanish missions consisted of a much greater portion of colonization in general. The comparison of the two imperial powers ignores the overall focus of the European countries. Many Spaniards colonized with the primary goal of soul-saving, while only a very minuscule faction of the British focused on it at all.

October 2, 2013

What is this, Europe?

For real, though.

I’ve scrolled through the other blog posts and I see I might be the first to write about this so here’s my chance to bias everyone’s opinion! (Just like Thomas Paine)

The stance which the author of The Rise of American Democracy Wilentz takes on the American Revolution can almost be classified as Marxist. He prefaces his talk on the American Revolution with outlining of both the country and urban democracy, and defines the development of both as class struggle, with in each respective case the Rural farmers struggling against the aristocratic landowners or the Urban working class and petty merchants struggling against intelligentsia, Enlightenment era political leaders. Wilentz essentially outlines the causes of the American Revolution in the same manner that one would outline a revolution in Europe, with an extremely focus not on The British domination of Americans, and draws attention to the socio-economic conditions which existed within the colonies at the time. He makes his case by citing famous writings like Thomas Paine’s Common Sense as driving factors which increased antagonism towards both the British and the ruling elite as a whole.

So far I’m finding the new perspective very interesting and I’m honestly very excited to read on and see where Wilentz is going with this.