- This topic has 40 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Yes, they were more into agriculture than some of the others who were more hunters and gatherers. The Iroquois had it together as Five Nations (then later, 6).
But remember their union woirked rather like Poland, of old, all tribes had to agree or it wasn't a done deal and then everyone for themselves.
Was probably a tad worse than that, Wally. If you didn't agree you died slowly from torture if you were a man, and if a woman or child, you might just be enslaved if lucky.
I think it is very interesting that they incorporated captured children into their tribe and assimilated them in order to make up their losses in battle. But it was not the Iroquois who were the main combatants in King Philip's War. The spark that set the war off was rumors that several Indian tribes were preparing to attempt to wipe out the colonists presence in an effort to stave of further colonization. There was also plenty of brutality to go around on both sides, it was seen as a war of survival. It didn't help that the English were still living on the ragged edge of survival and had a justifiable fear of the Indians. The natives were not all sweetness and light as the current narrative would have us believe.
Not sure, but I don't think the Iroquois were involved at all in King Philip's War other than very indirectly. We're just going on a diversion here. 😀
scout, I concede. This wasn't a war so as much as it was an insurgency or insurrection. And IF it can be called war, it would be more a civil war among the various Indian tribes of southern New England-those who were voluntarily subject to colonialist laws and those who refused. About these modern historians who like to think the Indians blameless and one who even compares the Puritans to the Nazis and uses the word genocide, I just read three journals that completely anihilate that theory.
Are you starting to believe me about the post-modernists and their hold on the academy? ;D The more you get into it the more frustrated you will become if you are hoping to get the truth out of contemporary history books.In most wars there is plenty of blame to go around on all sides. Nobody is innocent and everybody is seeking an advantage, otherwise war would not be considered a legitimate option in the first place. You only go to war if you think you can win. The Indians thought they could win; the colonists proved them wrong.
We only disagree about the word “war”. ;D I don't think I ever disagreed with you about the post-modern Leftist hold on academics. Even Carey said something about that when I mentioned my opinion of Brown.
King Philip's War in the news:Settlers-vs.-Indians board game rankles tribes
She said she was initially concerned about the game, but has since discussed it with the creator and believes it can be a proper educational tool if it adequately incorporates the viewpoint of tribal members.
Yeah, maybe she should tell about all the wars between the tribes before and during KPW.
Hey, I'm not trying to argue or win an argument, most historians have labelled it a war, so a war it is.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
