"In the long run, the Indians didn't stand a chance. They were pushed back and pushed back until no room was left for them."
-Jean Fritz, The Double Life of Pocahontas
The Jamestown settlers were not the only people to have conflict with Native American tribes in North America. Thinking about what we've learned in social studies and the books we've read together, answer the following questions:
1. Why was there so much conflict between Native Americans and Europeans?
2. Who is most to blame for the conflict that occurred? Why? Be specific!
3. What could the Native Americans or Europeans done differently so that conflict didn't happen?
Remember that your paragraph needs to include an introduction sentence and a conclusion sentence.
I really think that it would have made it alot easier for all the Ueropean explorers if they made friends with the Natives that were there. I think there was so much conflict between the Native Americans and the explorers because the explorers were basically walking into there land and claiming it for England! The explorers are the ones to blame for all the conflict. Because they were just inruding on the Natives land. If the Explorers would have asked the Natives if they could share the land, the Natives would have been alot more friendly. Also if the Explorers didn't do mean things at the start they would have had alot better relationship. I really think that the Explorers weren't the smartest at strategizing there colonies, and they could have done a lot beter job!
ReplyDeleteThere was so much conflict between the Natives and the settlers because the settlers would do unfair trades like giving worthless beads for corn. Also, the settlers would steel and start fighting the Natives and then the Natives would fight back and Powatan kept telling them to steal the settlers’ guns.
ReplyDeleteI think that the settlers should be most blamed because they started to steal food and supplies and would fight the Natives. The settlers also kidnapped Powatans daughter, Pocahontas.
The Natives and Europeans could have done a more fair trade; the Europeans could have not kidnapped Powatans daughter, and the Natives should not have stolen weapons from the settlers to have a better relationship.
- #7
There were so many conflicts with the Native Americans because the Europeans would trade worthless beads for corn and other types of food. The settlers would not give any weapons like guns and swords to the natives so Powhatan tried to steal the cannons, guns, and swords.
ReplyDeleteI think the settlers are the ones to be blamed for, because they would start most of the fights and they kidnapped Pocahontas and other natives. The settlers also wanted them to convert to Christianity.
The Europeans could of done fair trading and shared weapons with the natives. Also, the natives should of not stolen the weapons in the first place. Then the Natives and settlers would have a better relationship.
-25
There was so much conflict between the europeans and the natives because the eropeans were giving the natives worthless things for weapons and food. I think that mostly the europeans are to blame because the natives aren't that dumb, they figured out what was going on and they stopped it. After that the eropeans tried to make the natives do a christian prayer and they were banished and now the natives' enemies. I think partly the natives because they overeacted a little bit. What they could have done better is that the english could have made fair trades. The natives could have not overeacted to what was so little. If all of this happened it could have stopped most of the deaths of all of the people. Then it would have been one of the most succesful and one maybe with the greatest population back then.
ReplyDelete#6
I think there is so much confliction between the Native Americans and the Europeans because the Europeans thought they were better than the Native Americans so they did bad things like kill or kidnap the Natives. Like how the People of Roanoke kidnapped the chiefs son and the people of Jamestown kidnapped the chiefs daughter. So because of that behavior the Native Americans treated the Europeans bad. I think the Europeans were to blame for this because it was them who started the confliction by settling any where they chose and thinking “oh we’re better than them so we can do anything we want”. Then the Europeans captured and killed the Native Americans. If they didn’t do anything like that the two cultures could have had a more peaceful relationship like the people of Plymouth. So this wouldn’t have happened the Europeans could have settled a little farther away from the Native Americans and not start out by kidnapping any Native Americans, again like the people of Plymouth. By doing this the two cultures could have gotten along a lot better.
ReplyDelete#14
There was so much conflict because Powhatan and the natives couldn’t trade fairly with the English settlers. Either the natives got more or the settlers got more. Also, Powhatan wanted the guns that the English had but the English would not let him have them. This is because the settlers thought that the natives were “savages” and didn’t know how to use guns. After a while, this annoyed Powhatan. The English were frustrated that the natives did not accept them as their superiors. Eventually, they both got angry with each other for these different reasons and decided to fight each other. I don’t agree with the need to fight in this situation. If they were angry with each other, they should talk to one another and try to resolve the differences. This way they would avoid a lot of innocent people dying for nothing.
ReplyDeleteI think that the settlers are really the ones to blame. If you look closely, you’ll notice that whenever settlers and the natives got angry with each other, it was because of something that the settlers did. In Jamestown, they didn’t trade fairly and kidnapped Pocahontas. In Roanoke, the settlers kidnapped the chief’s son. The Natives just decided to fight fire with fire. After a while, I would think that some of the settlers should have wondered why they did such terrible things in the first place.
In order to avoid conflict, the settlers and the natives could have made a peace treaty. This treaty would say that the natives could not fight the settlers and vice versa. The treaty would also state the boundaries within which they could trade and interact with one another peacefully. However, they would need a person who had lived in both England and Werowocomoco to act as a mediator in order to be fair to both sides. Had this happened, life would have been easier on every person living in Jamestown or Werowocomoco at the time. This is what I would try to do to help resolve the conflict.
#16
I think there was so much conflict between Native AMericans and settlers because THe settlers treated the Americans very poorly after the Native Americans gave them food and other supplise, after a while of being treated terribly, I suppose the Native Americans got sick of it and attacked the settlers.
ReplyDeleteI think the settlers were to blamefor the conflict that occured because they went into their relationship with the Native AMericans "knowing" they were stupid and not as good as them. Even after being helped several times by the Native Americans the settlers' image of Native Americans did not change. This negitive attitude twoards Native Americans was realised shortly after their relationship began when they were denied fair trade and other royalties they diserved. After the negitive attitude was uncovered the Native Americans attacked. I think the Native Americans were right to start conflict if you ask me, the way they were treated was unforgiveable.
A way that conflict could have been avoided is:
-THe settlers could have come into their relationship with the Native Americans more optomisticly then they did.
And
-The Natives could have thought of a better strategy to make their feelings known then attacking.
#1
I think that there was so much conflict between the settlers and the Native Americans because the settlers thought they were the best. They considered the natives savages who had no religion. The settlers did not do a lot of FAIR trading either. If the settlers had done more fair trading and had not tried to convert the Native Americans to Christianity, there would not have been as much conflict. I think that both groups of people were to blame for the conflict. If the settlers had not come to America, none of it would have happened. Also, the settlers should have been more fair to the Native Americans if they did not want to be attacked. Though, it was partly the NAtive Americans' fault because they probably could have thought of a better response to their problems, rather than attaching the settlers. The way that the conflict could have been prevented was that the settlers could have treated the natives like people, rather than savages, the settlers could have also been more fair. A way that the NAtive Americans could have prevented conflict would have been to find a better way to express how they felt without attacking.
ReplyDeleteAshley #4
I think one reason there was so much conflict between the Natives and the settlers was the Natives immediately attacked the settlers because they came into their territory. Another reason there was so much conflict was the settlers tried to take the upper hand on the Natives. In my opinion, the settlers were most responsible for the conflict. I think it was mostly their fault because they barged in to the natives home and tried to take it from them. They didn't care if anybody died they just wanted money and land. Something the Natives and Europeans could've done to prevent conflict is the settlers could've treated the Natives with respect, but instead, they treated them like savages.
ReplyDelete~Nolan
The conflict between the Native Americans and the European settlers were that they were trading unfairly and they didn't even try to become friends.Also the settlers just came and took over the Natives territory right away. I think the settlers caused the conflict. They just came right in and took away the life the Natives had and loved , life was never the same for the Native Americans.Also everything was just fine until the English came. The Native Americans and the English could have tried to become friends and help each other out. They treated each other with no respect and I think that could have made a difference too.
ReplyDelete-Brooke #8
There was a lot of conflict between the Native Americans and Europeans because like in Jamestown, when the Europeans came to America the Native Americans and Europeans traded. The Europeans always got what they wanted but the Native Americans didn't get what they wanted. The Native Americans chose to steal the Europeans swords and guns which caused battles.
ReplyDeleteThe people who were most to blame for the conflicts were the Europeans because if they had never come to America then there would not have been conflict. Another reason the Europeans are to blame is if they had given the Native Americans something they wanted then they would have never had the urge to steal the Europeans weapons.
The Native Americans and Europeans could have had peace so the conflicts didn't happen. They also could have traded fairly for things they wanted. They didn't have to kidnap Pocahontas and convert her into a European. If the Native Americans and Europeans had peace they would never have had conflict.
Max #21
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think the Natives and the Europeans had so much conflict because the Europeans were so greedy and wanted the Natives land even though they have been living there for a long time. I think the greediness caused a lot of conflict, and the Pilgrims were not greedy, so they were friends with the Natives. Powhatan was greedy because he wanted their guns and other artifacts. The colonists were greedy because the whole point they came here was for gold.
ReplyDeleteI think you should blame both sides for the conflict because as I said before they were greedy. I think you should blame the colonists more because they were always fighting, while Powhatan just wanted weapons, especially guns.
I think that there would have been practically no conflict if they would of not traded because that really started it. Both sides got unfair trades and so they wanted to get back at each other.
#22
I think it was mostly the Europeans fault! I think there were so much conflicts between the natives and the Europeans because the English settelers just came into the natives land and almost stole it. The natives were already living peacefully and the English just came and trashed their life. I think the English were the ones to blame because they were being really mean to the natives. I also think that the natives over reacted but that is only my opinion. I think the English were to blame because It was the natives land in the first place and they took Pocahontas captive just for religous reasons. I think the natives over reacted because they made some of the English starve only because they were mad. I think they could have made a peace tready earlyer in the settelment to prevent fighting. They could have also had a rule that any one that broke the peace treedy would be killed! That is what I think about the natives and English relationship.
ReplyDelete-Cory #11
1. There was so much conflict between the natives and the Europeans because the Europeans made unfair trades to the natives. The unfair trades were for worthless beads for corn (which is much more valuable).Also the Europeans would steal items which then lead them to a war/conflict. Then the natives would steal guns from dead Europeans which caused more conflict. That is why there was so much confict between the natives and Europeans.
ReplyDelete2. The person to blame is John Smith because he thought the natives would never quite understand the trades were unfair. But, he was wrong the natives knew they were unfair which lead the Jamestown settlers without food or resources. He also killed natives and acted as they were savages. That is why I think John Smith was to blame to have started the conflict.
3. I think the Europeans should have made fair trades to the natives so they would become more successful and peaceful. Unlike unfair trades and no success and no peace. The natives could have said no in the first place when the trades got unfair. Also they could have not become greedy and stole guns to cause the conflict to become bigger. That is what the Europeans and the natives could have done to not have caused a conflict.
The last conflict was number #10
ReplyDeleteI think there was a lot of conflict between the Native Americans and the Europeans because the Europeans just moved in to Virginia and the natives just didn't know what to do. So when the Europeans decided they were not going to have peace with the settlers all the natives could think of was to just go with what the Europeans did. The Europeans started to get greedy and traded worthless beads for lots of corn. This caused lots of conflict.
ReplyDeleteI think the Europeans are to blame for the conflict because they were the ones who decided to come to Powatan's land. If they haven't come, there wouldn't be any Europeans in the first place to fight with.
I think that the natives and the Europeans could have avoided conflict if they had just stayed out of each others way. I believe this because the best times for the settlers were when they stayed out of the Native Americans way.
-18
The Double Life of Pocahontas is just one of many histories that happened when the Europeans came to America to get more power and claim land to their countries. So I think this was the main problem between them. Because the land wasn't for the Europeans to keep, and they tried to take everything from the Native Americans even without caring about killing them. The Europeans settlers are the most to blame because they took advantage of the Native Americans when they were trading. Also they thought they were more intelligent and didn't show too much respect about the beliefs of the Native Americans.
ReplyDeleteI believe a conflict weren't occurred if both of them had been more friendly and helped each other. Also the could trade knowledge in different topics and made good businesses between them. But on that time they had different points of view, knowledge and beliefs. I think some times the ones with more power have the best part and they don't notice the suffering of the less fortunate.
Mariana#19
The story of Pocahontas is one of the many histories of Native Americans and Europeans. I think the main problem between the two was land. the english wanted land, but, Native Americans were already living in the land that the English wanted. The English wanted taken land that they shouldn't have stolen. The English didn't care for Powhatan's tribe. I think John Smith and the English settlers are most to blames because John Smith appeared and was rude, stingey and selfish. He killed the Native Americans with no problem. He traded valuable things for poor things. There would have been no conflict if John Smith wasn't rude and if the English and Native Americans could fairly split things. I think that the English shouldn't have come because if they never showed up, there would have been no conflict and the Native Americans could have lived in peace. The Europeans could have showed up and not think that they were better than everyone. They should have just left or split up the land fairly. No matter what the Native Americans did, they just kept having to give up their land until there was no more room for them. The English had many people while the Native Americans had less. If the Native Americans and Europeans could have shared, helped and respected each other, they could of had less conflict. I also think that all of them could have reacted in a different way than killing. It just added fuel to the fire. Powhatan, Pocahontas and the Europeans were a big part of Americas history and I diffinately would have been on the Native Americans side. I think that people can learn from this and that people should always show respect to one another.
ReplyDeleteAnnie #2
The Double Life of Pocahontas is a very interesting book. It includes a lot of facts and history about Pocahontas and what happened to her and I am glad we read this book. I think that the problem caused between the Native Americans and the Europeans was because of the land eachother wanted and already had. The English wanted the land that the Native Americans already had and that is why they got so mad at eachother. I think the settlers of Jamestown and John Smith are the most to blame because they were all so cruel ad selfish. John Smith traded unuseful things for useful objects like guns and knifes which wasn't a fare trade. If John Smith wasn't so mean, cruel, and an unfare trader than there would be a lot more peace and happiness in this town. They should of cut up the land fairly so there wouldn't be any argueing. But the Native Americans were the ones with the hard times. The English kept taking over until the Native Americans were gone. They could have acted more respectfuly to eachother besides violintely killing people. If you kill someone it is just adding more conflict and problems to the big problem. So if you don't want a bigger problem than don't cause smaller ones.
ReplyDeleteHannah#12
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think that the conflicts between the NA's and the settlers was mostly the settlers fault. The NA's had lived in the land for thousands of years, and the settlers thought that they could just take it all because the NA's were "savages", "had no religion" and "worshiped a false god". The English believed that only "pure" people should own land and that only Europeans are "pure". The Europeans have the most to blame for the conflicts because they invaded the new world, stole the NA's land, and killed many of the people that had lived there so many years before. If the Europeans had simply left the natives alone, or just made one colony and not try to make the whole land there's, then maybe there would have been less conflict, like the people of Plymouth. They had a non-corrupt government, and made treaties with the NA's, not war. This is how I stand on this argument.
ReplyDeleteR.D.27
There was many different things going on in the book, The Double Life of Pocahontas. I think one of the main conflicts was land. The natives were there first and the Jamestown settlers just came and took up most of their land. The native americans moved back and back until there was no room for them. I think it's the settlers to blame. Another conflict was that they didn't care if they hurt or killed anybody. They were so selfish because all they wanted was gold and land. When the natives told them that they didn't want the settlers her but the settlers didn't listen and kept takin up their property. I think this matter would've been solved easier and faster if the settlers made peace with the native americans earlier so there wouldn't be any war. Everybody could've shared and respected people and helped eachother out. Then they could finally be at peace better and faster.
ReplyDelete~Cameron #9
There was so much conflict because the Jamestown settlers came and took land from the Native Americans. The Native Americans had been living there for so many years. I think the settlers are to blame because the Jamestown settlers got mad when the Native Americans attacked. They only attacked to get what was rightfully theirs. If the Jamestown settlers had signed a peace treaty earlier, like the Plymouth settlers, they would have had a great relationship with the Native Americans.To live in harmony people need to be able to compromise rather than use force.
ReplyDeleteNoah#24
I think the conflict between the native americans and the europeions because of two main resons:
ReplyDelete1. The natives didn't want the settlers to be there.
2. The europions wanted to convert the natives who didn't want to leave their customs.
I think the conflict is sort of 50-50 because they both caused the same amount of damge. for example, the settlers brought desises and the natives killed he settlers. They could have avodid conflict by trading without aroment.
- #3