In virginia, i assume you mean mainly jamestown, first successfull english colony in america
they had their friends among the indians, but indians had their enemies too
the colonists cant be friends with all the tribes
eventually the colonists would be drawn into fighting between tribes
many indians also saw the settlers as the end to life as they new it, and they were right to think so.
Native Americans were doomed as soon as colonists came over to the Americas
as a few others said, land was one of the main causes of tensions between the two, but religion was another important factor
the colonists for some reason always tried to convert indians, many times when the natives didnt want to be converted
2007-09-21 15:42:36
·
answer #1
·
answered by 105846 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
People competing for the same land space and food
resources often wind up with frictional relations.
I suspect the English settlers behaved rather badly overall since they would have viewed the natives as inferior people. Sooner or later an individual or group from one side would steal something or injure or murder someone on the other side, and warfare would be the inevitable result. This has happened repeatedly throughout history as people with differing cultures try to share the same land.
2007-09-21 15:37:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by Spreedog 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I saw a program on PBS about Pocahontas; excavations in Roanoke, Virginia and tree ring studies suggest there were drought conditions around 1607Transcripts include the following:
about seven months at most: from January, 1608, into the summer. With the approach of autumn, the Indians stopped providing food.
HELEN ROUNTREE: English people went around trying to buy corn from the Indian people, but the Indians didn't want to sell.
NARRATOR: More months of starvation and misery followed for the struggling colony.
Many historians have wondered why the Indians stopped providing food for the English, why, too, the English couldn't have found their own food. Today, Virginia teems with edible plants and wildlife.
DAVID STAHLE (University of Arkansas): You can definitely fall flat on your face here in the swamp, if you're not careful.
NARRATOR: Archaeologists at Jamestown asked Dr. David Stahle to find out if Virginia was as lush and fertile in 1608 as it is today.
DAVID STAHLE: Well, we're at Blackwater River, Virginia. This is an impounded bottomland hardwood bald cypress swamp. Maybe only a thousandth of one percent of the original forested bottomland hardwood region remains today, and so that's how precious it is. It's extremely precious.
NARRATOR: David Stahle is a world renowned expert in tree ring dating.
DAVID STAHLE: You know the trees preserve, in their annual growth rings—which can be dated to the calendar year in which they were formed—they preserve a natural archive of environmental history, if you will. They tell us about wet years and dry years.
...got the Swedish increment borer, it's a forestry tool, been around for over a hundred years for testing the growth rate of trees. And here I'm coring through the center of the tree, in order to extract out the ring sequence, gorgeous, gorgeous.
I can say that, roughly, these are about 100 year time blocks, you know, so like 1900, 1800, 1700, 1600, so this would be the late 1500s, the late 16th century if you will, and Jamestown will probably be in that general area.
NARRATOR: Stahle and his colleagues examined core samples under microscopes, carefully counting rings and measuring their widths.
DAVID STAHLE: In drought years, these trees would put on a narrow ring, and the stronger the drought, the more narrow the ring.
NARRATOR: The findings solved the mystery: growth rings from 1606 to 1612 were narrower than the surrounding rings.
DAVID STAHLE: A seven-year episode that was drier than any other seven-year episode that we know of in this region of the Carolinas and Virginia in the last 800 years.
NARRATOR: This seven-year drought would have affected everyone in Virginia.
DAVID SILVERMAN: The Indians simply didn't have enough of a surplus of corn, beans and squash to trade to the English and feed themselves at the same time.
Smith's primary response is simply to take what he and the English wanted. The English then begin burning down Indian villages and shooting up Indian populations. What we have, in essence, are the beginning stages of a war.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/3407_pocahont.html
2007-09-21 16:09:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
More than likely, the settlers arriving and immediately damming up the streams, clearing the land, chopping down trees to build houses and fences, and declaring their land off limits to the natives, who had never dreamed of parceling any of it. It must have been a real shock to the natives to see land that had been untouched for generations suddenly denuded, rerouted, and divided up, with people shooting at them for simply standing and staring.
2007-09-21 16:45:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jess 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Settler's kept demanding land which was sacred to the native americans
2007-09-21 15:35:01
·
answer #5
·
answered by thinking444 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Looking to promote negative stereotypes?
2007-09-21 15:30:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋