military conflict – American History to 1877

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

Throughout chapter 18, Taylor discusses several different aspects of this short time period leading up to the American Revolution. While one could explore any one of the differing narratives, it seems that the one of the most appealing—and one that has often been left out of the “romantic” tale of American independence—is the role of the native peoples. As articulated in “The Changing Role of the Indians,” the conflicts between European powers often directly affected the Indians (for better or worse). Just as both Taylor and the aforementioned post note, the Indians were a respectable foe, and for this reason, all other groups attempted to “win” over their allegiance. An English trader observed in 1755, “the importance of the Indians is now generally known and understand. A Doubt remains not, that the prosperity of our Colonies on the Continent will stand or fall with our Interest and favour among them” (Taylor 424). This statement cannot be over emphasized because it indicates that (at one point) the French considered the Indians to be the sole key to their own success. In fact, even the governor-general of New England believed, “the Iroquois are more to be feared than the English colonies” (426). Taylor’s effective use of observations from the time period gives us insight into the then-typical opinions of the people. Clearly, as the quotes imply, the might of the Indians (especially that of the Iroquois Nation) was respected and feared.

Taylor goes on to observe that the native peoples benefited from a balance of power between the French and British because it “kept presents flowing, preserved competition in the fur trade, and held invading settlers at bay” (426). However, the situation soon deteriorated for the Indians. As Taylor notes, “the collapse of New France was dreadful news to the Indians of the interior. No longer could they play the French and the British off against one another to maintain their own independence, maximize their presents, and ensure trade competition” (433). The changing dynamics of power also led to the mass-killings of native peoples because “the settlers [soon] treated all Indians, regardless of allegiance, as violent brutes best exterminated” (436). Ultimately, in the midst of the precursor to the American Revolution, the Indians became inferior to colonists because the “vision of white liberty” necessitated the “systematic dispossession of native peoples” (443).

I appreciate the attention that Taylor gives to the Indians in this chapter. While we are all aware of the stereotypical absence of Indians in American history, it seems that this unjust portrayal (or lack thereof) becomes particularly true when discussing the beginning of colonial independence. However, Taylor carefully incorporates crucial details regarding the native peoples and their interactions with the European powers. In the end, all other groups unfortunately ignore the human dignity of the Indians and only use them in order to accomplish the ulterior end of control—a motive that Taylor rightfully stresses and articulates throughout the reading.

One of the major aspects that we have focused while discussing American Colonies has been the type of narrative Taylor tells and how it differs from the ways history has traditionally been told. In general Taylor focuses more on the social narrative than other history textbooks, analyzing events from both perspectives and looking for non-linear causation. Chapter 18 “Imperial Wars and Crisis, 1739-75” is the first chapter we have read of American Colonies that primarily chronicles military efforts and conflicts; other chapters focused on land claims, settlement, the establishment of political systems and religion. Alex argues, in the post “Britain’s Rise to Power” that in chapter 18 Taylor “forsakes his previous style of a social narrative for more of a direct military history”. Alex was not the only one to make such a claim, with many of our peers expressing appreciation for the perceived shift in focus and argument. Though it is apparent that Taylor has chosen to focus this chapter on military events and conflicts, I disagree with the claim that he forsakes the social narrative. I would argue that it is not the events that are discussed, but the approach and perspectives taken in analyzing those events, which makes Taylor’s writing a social narrative.

In his post “The Changing Role of The Indians” Dana does a thorough job of summarizing and analyzing Taylor’s discussion of Native Americans in Chapter 18. Taylor’s focus on Indian rebellions as well as the impacts of imperial wars on Indian societies and life styles demonstrates that Taylor is not writing a traditional military history. Though he acknowledges that Europeans played Indian nations against each other, he makes efforts not to victimize them. Taylor acknowledges that Indians were not passive subjects of European colonialism when he writes, “To maximize their advantages, after 1701 the Iroquois cultivated a neutrality meant to preserve the balance of power between the French and the British […] A rough balance of power kept presents flowing, preserved competition in the fur trade, and held invading settlers at bay” (Taylor 426). This is the type of social commentary and depth that many historical textbooks lack.

Furthermore, in the second half of the chapter Taylor focuses on the imperial crisis and the United States as an “Empire of Liberty”. These sections analyze the sociological and psychological the impacts of the military conflicts and events detailed in the first part of the chapter. Taylor examines notions of liberty and slavery, arguing that “free colonists intently defended their property rights because property alone made men truly independent and free” and “Broadly defined, ‘slavery’ meant to labor for a master without reaping the rewards” (Tayor 442). By exploring these social themes, Taylor takes chapter 18 beyond a timeline oriented military history to a thorough examination of the significance of these military events in how they impacted society.

Works Cited:
Alan Taylor, American Colonies (New York: Penguin Books 2001), 421-443.
Dana Harvey, “The Changing Role of The Indians”, http://sites.davidson.edu/his141sp2014/the-changing-role-of-the-indians/
Alex Palinski, “Britain’s Rise to Power”, http://sites.davidson.edu/his141sp2014/britains-rise-to-power/

Tag: military conflict

The Indians’ Role before the American Revolution