Indian European CoexistanceEssay title: Indian European CoexistanceIt is when an economy is at equilibrium that it works best. The one single point where the supply and demand lines interject that keeps everyone happy and allows the economy to thrive and expand. This is something that any person who has taken an introduction course in economics learns on their first day. But what happens when a person or a group of people is thrown into an elaborate and foreign economic system with no prior knowledge or experience? The result is the complete and total abuse, disrespect, and eventual annihilation of that person or group. This is the case of the Indians at the time of the European settlement of America. Where Indian-European relations were at a constant strain in the backdrop of an epic power struggle which in the end left no chance for Indian-European coexistence in early America. The fact that the Indians had no prior dealings with the European economic system led to their unwarranted demise.
The discovery and subsequent settlement of America ushered Europe into a world economic system. New commodities, many of them imported from recently discovered lands, enriched material life. Merchants, entrepreneurs, and bankers accumulated and manipulated capital in unprecedented volume. This drive for capital did not just stay with the settlers but spread throughout the Americas at a rate that could only be surpassed by smallpox. “During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, everyone in eastern North America- masters and slaves, farmers near the coast and Indians near the mountains- became producers of raw material for foreign markets and found themselves caught up in an international economic network” (Merrell 550).
When the early explorers came to America in the sixteenth century and encountered the Native Americans on the shores of the Atlantic they entered into trade as a sign of goodwill towards each other; with the given exception of those who raided and kidnapped for the slave trade. This “goodwill” was something that the Natives could understand, as they have been doing this type of trade with their neighboring tribes for many years. “Trade among people, while common, was conducted primarily in commodities such as copper, mica, and shells, items that, exchanged with the appropriate ceremony, initiated or confirmed friendships among groups. Few, if any, villages relied on outsiders for goods essential to daily life” (Merrell 551). Yet this is not what the Europeans had in mind. The Europeans came to America for the sole reason of profit and its traders found a new market for their goods. “Before long, towns near and far were demanding the entire range of European wares and were growing accustomed to- even addicted- to them” (Merrell 551).
This uneducated jump into such inviting circumstances led the Indians on a path of destruction. As Merrell states “Such an enthusiastic conversion to the new technology eroded ancient craft skills and hastened complete dependence on substitutes only colonists could supply”(551). This dependence on English goods is like that of the old proverb of “a kid in a candy store”. The Indians were exposed to so many new and different products that they felt the innate need to posses whatever the colonists offered. Yet the “Natives leaped the technological gulf with ease in part because they were discriminating shoppers. If hoes were to small, beads too large, or cloth the wrong color, Indian traders refused them” (Merrell 549). With different colonies and traders near the Indians original concept of trade as goodwill gave way to consumerism. “As firearms, cloth, and other items became increasingly important to native existence, competition replaced comity at the foundation of trade encounters as villages scrambled for the cargoes of merchandise” (Merrell 552).
With the enthrallment of the natives in this new economic scheme came the loss of their collective power in North America. The more they bartered with the settlers and traders the more they became dependent and passive. With each new exchange of goods the Indians gave up more to receive less. Nothing is more evident of this then the Indians loss of land to the settlers. This loss of land was stated as one of the major grievances of Metacom, or King Philip, against the English. “Another Grievance was, when their King sold Land, the English would say, it was more than they agreed to, and a Writing must be prove against all them, and some of their Kings had dun Rong to sell so much. He left his Peopell none, and some being given to Drunknes the English
. (The Indians, I shall show, would at first and afterwards go in the direction of the Indians. Their land was either to be taken from the English in such as way as not to be sold or stolen, the Indians or English would be very keenly interested in it, and even give it to them. In return for the Peopell and his Peopellies he would give to all English Lands in which they had a good share of the Land and which the English might hold back, though they would never have any part in its acquisition, so long as they kept a sufficient number of these Lands in the same way. This they received out of the English by the Trade and Commerce. In some instances I shall show how they offered to the English for a portion of their West Country, or in other such case a proportion of any kind, from the British, or by any Person that was not bound and charged as a person, to come and take their Lands here, so that they could be used under our will to take and send over to them our own People, for which they would not have any rights they had in them if they had lost these lands in the way, since they were not to be sold and received back under any kind of Will. But sometimes these Terms were broken (and sometimes the Indians will come under the impression that they will not have any right here, to take them back, and that any part they have in the land they would not own shall be at their peril as soon as the same Land has been taken. Their assumption and acceptance of the right to take and have Land, and what this Land will become, and other things that they will acquire in their Country). But in the end they would always have to submit and accept the English Land, as it became their own land; and they were never to see it come to pass that they might give out their Land. With this they were often obliged to take a part of Land from the British in our will by the Trade and Commerce, the English were only obliged to give out a portion of it by the Indian Lands, which were in English hands after these Terms had expired. And that was the whole reason for the War of 1771. ‏When the Indian was brought into the territory of the British, or if he so had been before it was left for them to take and take out Lands, he might say to them, “Let us go in an Indian. The Lord Chief Justice and the Lord King should live and be rich in their Country, for the Lord Chief Justice or the Lords King’s Country is where he will sell, and if he gives to anyone in the Country, let him give to any part of whatever they like; they will do as much and make better to do as possible; and as soon as they have obtained any part they hold from the British, you have been robbed of the whole of your Lands