William Penn Beliefs

On October 9, 1806, Joseph Bird Joquips, a 70 year old Native Indian from the Mohegan Tribe, petitioned the State of Connecticut General Assembly for a portion of the land in Connecticut that was divided among Natives in the Mohegan tribe. He emphasized his devout military career that began in 1758 during the Seven Years’ War to convince members of the General Assembly to allot him a portion of land that belonged to the Mohegan Indians. While Joquips had already rightfully possessed a piece of the land because he had lived on it prior to European presence, the Europeans did not recognize his authority to the land; and thus, forcibly seized control of Native lands so that they could distribute it as they saw fit. It was not important for Joquips to possess a piece of land, but to have the Europeans recognize that the land belong to him. Thus, this petition represented Joquips manipulation of the European system to secure a piece of his tribe’s land with hopes to collect the land for the Mohegan tribe piece by piece.

In 1862 Penn met with the Native Americans again as purchased hundreds of acres of the land that is directly north of Philadelphia. During this time William Penn established a working relationship with the American Indians. As history books and articles reflect the settlers and Indians lived in peace with one another for a number of years. In 1718 another treaty to purchase more land was negotiated. Only this treaty was created and negotiated by Thomas Penn almost 19 years after the death of his father William Penn.

Signed on August 25th 1737 was one of history 's most disreputable treaties in the records of native-white relations. The agreement involving the Founder of Pennsylvania 's sons and the Delaware or Lenape was determined by “as far as a man could walk in a day and a half”. Unlike their father, William Penn, who had earned his reputation for being fair and respectful towards the natives, Richard, John and Thomas Penn had a different mindset. After his death, his sons faced problems with their father’s debt. In order to pay off the loans, the Penn brothers and their agent James Logan made an agreement with Lenape leaders known as The Walking Purchase.

In 1742 the chief of Onondaga of the Iroquois Confederacy knew that his land that the people shared would become more valuable than it has ever been. (Doc B)The reason for this was because the “white people” also known as the Americans wanted the land of the chief. The feelings of the Chief result in complaining to the representatives of Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia,

Being the first two well-known places in which the English would set out to colonize in 1607 and 1620, Jamestown, Virginia and Plymouth, Massachusetts hold very separate set of beliefs, standards, and outlooks on life then and the future to come. While paving the way for things such as slavery, taxes, ownership of land, inclusion of women, tobacco and government assemblies, John Smith and the people of Jamestown became a classical foundation for new life and economic growth for the new world that is, the United States. On the other hand, William Bradford and his people began to realize the intentions of the Church of England were unholy and had strayed away from God’s teachings from the Bible. With this in mind, the Pilgrims set on a voyage to the new world to seek religious freedom. As we know it, the Pilgrims sought for peace and a new way of living that was fair, just and free from religious corruptions.

Throughout the seventeenth century, conflict between Europeans and Native Americans was rampant and constant. As more and more Europeans migrated to America, violence became increasingly consistent. This seemingly institutionalized pattern of conflict begs a question: Was conflict between Europeans and Native Americans inevitable? Kevin Kenny and Cynthia J. Van Zandt take opposing sides on the issue. Kevin Kenny asserts that William Penn’s vision for cordial relations with local Native Americans was destined for failure due to European colonists’ demands for privately owned land.

The Great Land Rush and the making of the Modern world, 1690-1900, written by John C. Weaver, discusses the distribution of land, its changing process, and the introduction of property rights in a market economy throughout various parts of the world – North America, South Africa New Zealand, and Australia among others. This essay will discuss the definition of property right, how it was implemented by the settlers onto new territories and the development there after. Through the analysis of Weavers dissertations, the essay will also draw similarities and difference of the way various colonial government treated indigenous people and other settlers; along with how settlers treated aboriginals and one another. The book takes into consideration how the Neo-Europeans gained and distributed land that they discovered.5 The process of how a land comes into ownership and the legislation around it is called property rights.5 Property rights where developed after it was realized that Neo-Europeans where excessively violent with natives over their land.5 Europeans would discover new lands and would use their native beliefs, and legislation as a tactic to gain control of the niche.5 this would harm the native people of that land as these practices of land taking where violent between settlers and natives.5 The settlers used property rights within their own people but had aggressive beliefs with the natives that resulted in gruesome wars between the two parties for the land.

John Winthrop acknowledged the land of the Native Americans to be possessed by the English Puritans. Through his beliefs, he justifies that the land was meant to be used by the puritans because of his interpretation of “God’s word”, which proceeded them to capture the land from the Native Americans. Winthrop’s consideration of God’s word was to use the land for natural and civil rights to benefit their neighbors with the good of their Christian intent. He believed that the natives had no existing system or bringing forth anything good for the land, which gave him a clear thought that he can make the land better. Furthermore, he also uses an example of biblical references to justify his reasoning for taking the land of the Natives because there

Thesis: The English were a prideful group, entangled in ethnocentrism, that caused a condescending and harsh treatment of the Native Americans, while the Native Americans were actually a dynamic and superior society, which led to the resentment and strife between the groups. P1: English view of Native Americans in VA Even though the English were subordinates of the Powhatan, they disrespected him and his chiefdom due to their preconceived beliefs that they were inferior. “Although the Country people are very barbarous, yet have they amongst them such government...that would be counted very civil… [by having] a Monarchical government” (Smith 22). John Smith acknowledges the “very civil” government of the Natives but still disrespected them by calling them “very barbarous,” which

Rather than forced Native American to leave their land, The president Jackson and the congress could develop some activities to share the outcome of gold with them. They could find and arrangement which could result to leave them on their land and share the outcomes of the exploitations of the gold and others natural resources.

Merrell’s article proves the point that the lives of the Native Americans drastically changed just as the Europeans had. In order to survive, the Native Americans and Europeans had to work for the greater good. Throughout the article, these ideas are explained in more detail and uncover that the Indians were put into a new world just as the Europeans were, whether they wanted change or

In the Massachusetts Bay Colony, the Puritans, at first, established a good relationship with a Native American tribe called the Pequots. These quandaries were compounded by the Puritans' incrementing conviction that the Indians' claims were invalid, because God had bestowed

They are often labeled as uncivilized barbarians, which is a solely false accusation against them. This paper aims to address the similarities between Native American beliefs and the beliefs of other cultures based on The Iroquois Creation Story in order to defeat the stereotype that Natives are regularly defined by. Native Americans are commonly considered uncivilized, savage, and barbarian. Nevertheless, in reality the Natives are not characterized by any of those negative traits, but rather they inhabit positive characteristics such as being wise, polite, tolerant, civilized, harmonious with nature, etc. They have had a prodigious impact on the Puritans

Rachael Goodson Professor Kathrine Chiles ENG & AFST 331 15 February 2018 William Apess In the nineteenth century, America was at one of its peaks of racial debate, with people starting to question whether it was right for the African Americans to stay enslaved, or if it was time to start the process of freeing the slaves and allowing them to live a better life. However, most people did not even question how the Native Americans were being treated or forced to change almost every aspect of their lives to “please,” as if they could ever be, the white people. William Apess’ The Experience of Five Christian Indians is an example of some of the harsh ways that Indians were treated before and even after they were “forcibly” converted to Christianity.

“Columbus, the Indians, and Human Progress”, chapter one of “A People’s History of the United States”, written by professor and historian Howard Zinn, concentrates on a different perspective of major events in American history. It begins with the native Bahamian tribe of Arawaks welcoming the Spanish to their shores with gifts and kindness, only then for the reader to be disturbed by a log from Columbus himself – “They willingly traded everything they owned… They would make fine servants… With fifty men we could subjugate them all and make them do whatever we want.” (Zinn pg.1) In the work, Zinn continues explaining the unnecessary evils Columbus and his men committed unto the unsuspecting natives.