When one considers the actions of the famous Christopher Columbus or Amerdigo Vespucci, one is normally opted to recall one or both of them as the man who discovered the United States of America. However, as history clearly shows, this is not the case for either one of these famous explorers; the lands that would become the United States had been discovered and inhabited long before either of their voyages. The Native Americans, ironically misbranded as Indians by Columbus, can trace their history of this land back much further than the colonists are able. It is no surprise, therefore, that the Native Americans are a popular subject among colonial authors. Three authors who write extensively concerning these original settlers of American Land
…show more content…
Rowlandson describes them as bloodthirsty heathens, while Franklin presents an opinion suggesting they are simply a people of different customs. Bradford simply describes their actions from a historical point of view. Despite leading similar lives, each author provides a unique viewpoint on the Native Americans that culminate in a complete picture, allowing people an honest glimpse of what colonial and Native life was truly like in the early days of this nation. Mary Rowlandson’s experience with the Native Americans is clearly the most traumatic of the three stories from beginning to end. David L. Green says in his article concerning Rowlandson, “the fame of the Rowlandsons grew out of the Indian attack on Lancaster on 10 February 1675-1676 during King Philip’s War” (p 24). One might assume that the captivity of Rowlandson is grounds enough for a traumatic story. However, …show more content…
He opens his article entitled “Remarks Concerning the Savages of North America” with the statement, “savages we call them, because their manners differ from ours, which we think the perfection of civility. They think the same of theirs” (p 244). This reads as a criticism of those colonists who refer to the Natives Americans as savages, suggesting instantly an equality that he believes exists between them. In the next sentence of his article, he suggests, “Perhaps if we could examine the manners of different nations with impartiality, we should find no people so rude as to be without rules of politeness, nor any so polite as not to have some remains of rudeness” (p 244). Mr. Franklin’s experience with the Native Americans is clearly nowhere near as terrible as Rowlandson’s. As he describes in his work, he spoke and visited with the Natives on their terms as a guest instead of a captive. Therefore, it makes sense that his view would not be as severe as that of Mary Rowlandson. His exposure of the Natives originates not from a fearful, militant experience, but a polite, mutually respectful encounter. It is discovered not in a spirit of pain, but of curiosity. While Rowlandson uses negative, religious phrases to describe the Natives, Franklin calls them, “hunters, warriors, counselors and sages” (p 245). He praises their ability to listen and hold official meetings without
Rowlandson describes them as bloodthirsty heathens, while Franklin presents an opinion suggesting they are simply a people of different customs. Bradford simply describes their actions from a historical point of view. Despite leading similar lives, each author provides a unique viewpoint on the Native Americans that culminate in a complete picture, allowing people an honest glimpse of what colonial and Native life was truly like in the early days of this nation. Mary Rowlandson’s experience with the Native Americans is clearly the most traumatic of the three stories from beginning to end. David L. Green says in his article concerning Rowlandson, “the fame of the Rowlandsons grew out of the Indian attack on Lancaster on 10 February 1675-1676 during King Philip’s War” (p 24). One might assume that the captivity of Rowlandson is grounds enough for a traumatic story. However, …show more content…
He opens his article entitled “Remarks Concerning the Savages of North America” with the statement, “savages we call them, because their manners differ from ours, which we think the perfection of civility. They think the same of theirs” (p 244). This reads as a criticism of those colonists who refer to the Natives Americans as savages, suggesting instantly an equality that he believes exists between them. In the next sentence of his article, he suggests, “Perhaps if we could examine the manners of different nations with impartiality, we should find no people so rude as to be without rules of politeness, nor any so polite as not to have some remains of rudeness” (p 244). Mr. Franklin’s experience with the Native Americans is clearly nowhere near as terrible as Rowlandson’s. As he describes in his work, he spoke and visited with the Natives on their terms as a guest instead of a captive. Therefore, it makes sense that his view would not be as severe as that of Mary Rowlandson. His exposure of the Natives originates not from a fearful, militant experience, but a polite, mutually respectful encounter. It is discovered not in a spirit of pain, but of curiosity. While Rowlandson uses negative, religious phrases to describe the Natives, Franklin calls them, “hunters, warriors, counselors and sages” (p 245). He praises their ability to listen and hold official meetings without