View source for Week 2 Questions/Comments-327 09

== Cross-reading Questions -- These are particularly important... ==

Just and observation I've made: '''the readings in Woloch about the rules and conduct that men and women should follow is a striking resemblence to social rules set forth by Confucius and his followers in China several hundred years prior to this.''' It just seems interesting to me that although the Europeans at this time always thought of themselves as superior to other peoples and cultures, that people in China hundreds of years before had already discussed and implemented these social rules. - Will Hechmer

For the readings this week I came up with a question that related throughout all of the texts:
1. '''Why did Native American women's roles offend the Europeans and do we think it still would today?''' Or have the perceptions the Europeans had of women shape women's traditional roles today?

---I believe that the Europeans were offended primarily due to the differences in marital practices. First, the Native Americans had sexual relations with "potential" spouses BEFORE they were to be married. This violated a religious practice of pre-marital abstinance that Europeans followed. Christians in particular beleive that a woman should be pure and virginal at the time of marriage. Second, it offened Europeans that the Native Americans could "divorce" or change partners so readily. As John Heckwelder notes, "Marriage among the Indians are not, as with us, contracted for life" (MP pg. 30).--[[User:Mturner|Mary Turner]] 05:24, 3 September 2009 (MDT)

'''A common feature I noticed within the captive stories and whether they were able to adjust to their new lives appears to be their age and the roles in which they assumed.'''  As with Mary Jemison and also John Tanner, they were both young without attachments, and could easily adapt into their new lives as made easier by being fully adopted into the tribe as a sister / daughter and son / brother.  In the case of Mary R, she was a middle aged woman, set in her ways, having a husband back home as well as a church, friends, and a role within American society in which she was part of. These differences appear to have an effect on how the captives adjust to their new lives or not in these particular sources, and makes me wonder if this could be common to others as well or if there are other factors that were missed. – Elyse Lawrence

== Roger Williams Remarks on Narragansett women – 1643 ==

After reading the Roger Williams little excerpt about him and his findings on the language and the people on the Narragansett women, I am left wondering how does he seem to have such a different view than other Europeans of his time.  He believes that the land belonds to the Native Americas; he even tries to live and learn from them, to study them, even going so far as to publish a dictionary on their language arranged topically.  '''What makes his perspective so different from the other European documentations and studies?'''  - Christine Leckner

While reading Roger Williams' Narragansett Women, I noticed that his description of the labor that the females did was, in his mind, much more challenging than described by John Heckewelder and Mary Jemison. I also noticed a parallel between Mary Rowlandson and Williams opinion that as Williams put it, "Indian women has escaped Gods curse on Eve." Of course Rowlandson described these feeling in a negative light but the idea was certainly the same. - Caryn Levine

== John Heckewelder’s 1819, Women’s Lives among the Delaware ==

John Heckewelder describes the Native American women in Delaware. He comments about the differences and some of the aspects of lives between the Native Americans' lifestyles and the Europeans'. Among them are marriages: marriages among the Indians are not contracted for life. He also mentions the varying work men and women have. Men construct the house in which they are to live in, hunts, traps. Women take care of the home, sometimes become their husband's helpmate while he is hunting, tills the ground, gets the firewood, and pounds the corn in mortars. '''I think this group of Native American women followed the same kind of pattern that most European women followed at the time and would not offend most outsiders.''' Heckewelder's notes may prove that because most of the duties of the Native American women were similar to that of European women, there was no real reason to be shocked or offended. -Amy Van Ness


John Heckewelder’s description of Women’s Lives Among the Delaware is a much different account than from what other colonizers have described. While many Europeans have a biased view through ethnocentric eyes, Heckewelder seemed to empathize with the Native American way of life. Though I do think that he viewed his way of life as better and more civilized, he sees Native American way of life as understandable for a less civilized group.  While he believes that Native American women’s work is difficult compared to women’s work in the civilized world, it is nothing compared to the work of the men. Heckewelder’s description of the women’s work as well as marriage practices seems much nicer than other descriptions from onlookers of the time who had a cynical view. The Native American family/societal structure seems like a nice way for women to live, to work cheerfully, to raise families, and to have the ability to leave when unhappy. I wonder if it is because John Heckewelder was able to live among the Indians for 15 years that he was able to see the true side of Native American life, rather then traders whose observations were short lived and distant. --Erin Sanderson

'''John Heckewelder's description of a woman's role in society is still seen through a Europeans eyes''' though I agree with Erin that it was less so then other European observers it is still bias. He still believes that women have no power where men have all the power in society. I liked that he grasped the fact that the women did not think they were being worked like slaves by farming. I would also like to note that Heckewelder when talking about marriages only mentioned that women will please her husband so that he will not leave her but said nothing about men pleasing their wives. - LeAnn Taggart

John Heckewelder wrote of the differences in the daily lives of the men and women of the tribe he saw. '''What struck me most was particularly the word choice “The husband may put away his wife whenever he pleases, and the woman may in like manner abandon her husband.” Despite the fact that divorce was incredibly uncommon in Europe, he spoke of the men leaving their wife as if it was no big deal. Yet, he used the word /abandon/ when describing the wife leaving the husband which has a harsher connotation in my opinion.''' Another interesting thing I noticed was that Heckewelder said that the men’s job was to build the house which shows the Delaware tribe he was familiar with was not matrilocal- Megan Mc.

== Pierre de Charlevoix, 1721, “Iroquois Women in Government” ==

Pierre de Charlevoix's "Iroquois Women in Government" seemed on the surface to glorify the hierarchy which held women at the top but unraveled into an explanation of how Iroquois men only allowed the women to seem powerful. I wonder how much of Charlevoix's account was true and how much was a biased opinion based in Western ideals of the Patriarch Royalty. '''This piece prompts me to wonder if Charlevoix felt challenged by the reversal of gender empowerment and the implication and influence that could have on western women. ''' - Caryn Levine

In this article  Pierre de Charlevoix writes about how Iroquois women had a substantial role in their government. Even though it was rare for women to rise to the position of chief, the role of chief was inherited through the matrilineal line.  As we discussed in class the older women of the tribe could unseat male chiefs.  The Iroquois women had a lot more political opportunities than their European and fellow Indian counterparts. After reading the article I wonder why Native American Women had less political opportunities than the Iroquois. Nick Jesionka

== Mary Rowlandson’s account (1681) and Mary Jemison’s account (1824) ==

Also a topic I found important between the articles written by both "Mary's" were the differences/similarities of the women's experiences with the Eastern Woodland Native Americans. How each woman's experience varied based off tribe/age of capture/and release date (if released). -Megan

'''I was particularly interested in the role religion played in their experiences, especially Mary Rowlandson.'''  Her faith seemed to justify her experience, which in turn strengthened her sense of righteousness in the face of perceived barbarism.  The topic of Christianity shaping the colonists' interactions with the native Americans seems important when looking at the overall experience.  --Erin B.


Mary Jemison provided an interesting point of view in which she is not entirely dis fond of living with the Indians. She was captured and lived with the Seneca Iroquois tribe for many years. '''I think this is an interesting example of another way that Europeans, especially European men, were shocked with the Native Americans and their lifestyle.''' Many white female captives were treated humanely, took up the duties of the women of the tribe, and may have been treated more equally than if they returned to white society. This decision was confusing to most white men. -Amy Van Ness


I really enjoyed reading both of these accounts. They were both so varied that it was interesting to see the differences and similarities among the captive's situations. The main issue that caught my eye in the Rowlandson account was the employ of God during her whole captive experience. She would quote the bible and see situations through a very thick religious lens. I particularly liked how she commented on page 18 that "strangely did the lord provide for them." Essentially, wondering why, if God was on her (and the English peoples) side then why was he letting the "heathens" live? It is something that she brings up a couple of times through her account. But, what I found interesting was that she believed her God was watching over the Natives, even though they were not Christians. (at least that was how it seemed to me)
In the Jemison account, I really liked how she talked about the benefits for women living among the Seneca tribe. And how she even compared, on the bottom of page 21, the Native woman’s life to that of an English woman’s.-Kristia S.

The accounts of Mary Rowlandson and Mary Jemison who were captured by Native Americans were the most interesting things I read. '''I though it was fascinating in Rowlandsons account how one minute they were going to bash her head in and the next her master was giving her water to wash with and being kind.''' Mary Jemison had a more positive account of Native Americans and I liked how she said Native Americans were only cruel to their enemies but to their friends they were wonderful. That is not so different from the Europeans who were also cruel to their enemies. --LeAnn Taggart

== Samuel de Champlain, 1616 ==

The Champlain and Heckewelder readings provide as interesting contrast in the interpretations by Europeans regarding Native Americans. About a hundred years separates their accounts. Champlain was, of course, an explorer, and Heckenwelder was a missionary trying to convert the Indians to Christianity. Champlain comments on the figures of the Indians, with a special interest in the women’s appearances, including the fact that “their breasts hang down hardly at all.” Truly an important thing to note. He also tends towards the idea that the men are lazy and the women do most of the work. Heckewelder doesn’t bother commenting on appearances, perhaps due to his being a missionary, but he labels the women’s work as “quickly and easily performed.” Their fatigue is not comparable to the tireless work of the hunting men. Though the interpretations differ on the view of labor and gender roles (which may be a result of the particular tribe they visited and at what time of the year), both accounts are influenced by European thinking. Champlain writes the men off as lazy and unmanly because they appear to lie around while the women do the farming. Heckewelder completely dismisses women’s work, putting forth that the families depend solely on the men’s hunting. --Taylor Brann

The article that Samuel de Champlain writes about Huron Women is good account of Native American Women. In the article he discusses the roles of women and men and how to him they women do a lot more work then the men do. He called the men lazy and described the women as really hard working and having most of the responsibilities. Overall it was a good account of the Huron tribe. Nick Jesionka

Samuel de Champlain seemed to focus quite a bit of his attention on the courtship of the Natives. It was a big change compared to Europeans after all. He spoke of men and women running from cabin to cabin at night, enjoying whoever’s company they please. Then in the next paragraph he brings up the point of how the husband cannot be sure the child his wife bears is actually his. We talked about this in class, this is astonishing to Europeans as the “need” a male heir to carry on the family name or be the next in line to the throne (if they are royal.) –Megan Mc.

== Mary Musgrove assists the Georgians in Dealing with the Choctaws, 1734 & Mary Musgrove Seeks aid for past service from GA, 1747 ==

I can't say that I was surprised to read the 1747 letter written by Mary Musgrove, as historical evidence often shows that, the European settlers and traders often "went back" or renigged on promises, treaties, and debts that were made to the Native Americans. However, I did find the format of her letter interesting. Instead of just coming right out and asking for what she wants, she diligently lists all of the qualifying reasons why she is owed respect and currency first, and then she gets around to asking for what she wants secondly. It all sounded like something I would imagine a lawyer to do. Perhaps just saying "hey you owe me money" would not have sufficed. It's tragic that all of that explanation and justification was warranted, to seek out something that she and/or the people she represented were due anyways.--[[User:Mturner|Mary Turner]] 05:36, 3 September 2009 (MDT)

== Captive John Tanner in 1830 ==

The major thought that came to my mind while reading this was how multiple Native American women wanted a young white son.  I feel that if the roles were reversed and a white woman had a male Native captive, there wouldn't be any other woman who would want him or any hostility regarding it.  I find it interesting that he was so valued that Net-no-kwa was so interested in having him. Did they find the whites valuable or was he simply filling the role of a son?  - Christine Leckner

== Father Le Jeune on necessity of teaching native women, 1633 ==



== Native women resist Jesuits, 1640 ==


== Wamponoag women of Martha’s Vineyard, 1727 ==

The readings provided some thoughtful insights into changing Native American lifestyles as colonists worked towards converting them to Christianity. Particularly interesting to me was determining the reasons why some women were easily converted (at least outwardly) and some women were very resistant. In one reading a women runs away, not “wishing to obey her husband” in his desire to convert, risking harsh retribution, while in another reading the women were more receptive and more pious than the men. The second reading also gives some possible reasoning why these women were easier to convert. I think the biggest factor was that many of the women were young and unlikely to be set in their ways, and therefore more receptive to conversion. Sarah Ahhaton's story provides support for this, as there were older women who were seemingly more traditionalist and subversive in their approach towards the English. --Taylor Brann

As shown in the Pious Wampanoag Women of Martha’s Vineyard and the Adultery Trial of Sarah Ahhaton, the Europeans seem to be pushing their own ideas of woman morality upon the Native Americans that can be compared to as was made example by Eve from the bible.  As is with the Adultery Trial and some of the conversions, women appear very susceptible to have a lapse in judgment where their passionate natures take them over.  However they are being held accountable for their actions in ways that men are not due to the notion of woman’s virtue and their job of upholding and demonstrating social morals.  I think it is possible that the hope of the Europeans is that should the women at least be successfully converted, the society and future generations will then follow suit and could be as believed half of the battle being already won such as was with the husband of Hannah Tiler who “overcame his evil by her goodness” (MP- Christianity p. 24). – Elyse Lawrence

== Sarah Ahhaton’s trial, 1668 ==
 
The story of Sarah Ahhaton, a Native American woman, is one that shows the dynamics of the old, pre-colonization, ways of life and the new, Christian way of life. In looking at the French Explorer Samuel de Champlain’s description of the lives of Huron Women and Men in 1616, he describes the marriage practices of the Huron. In this pre-colonized society, marriage is much different than the “civilized” Europeans. Women and men were able to be intimate with different individuals without jealousy it was the standard practice. By 1668, when Sarah Ahhaton told her story of adultery, there was a change in marriage practices due to the influence of European colonizers and the spread of Christianity. The change in women’s roles in such a short period of time must have been difficult, and often confusing. In a society were women were highly regarded, their role shifted to one of subordination. –Erin Sanderson 

== Ann Marie Plane's essay ==
In the account of Sarah Ahhaton’s adultery, I was really struck by the double standard for men and women. The rift in her marriage began when her husband, William, was not treating her very well and possibly having an affair of his own. Sarah turned herself in for her crime, but William’s position as an interpreter and Christian minister meant it would not have been difficult for English officials to investigate or correct his behaviors. This response is likely a result of English culture, which viewed women as lascivious and unable to control their desires.  -Allison Luthern

I like how Plane described Native American women as the group whose lives were possibly the most radically changed by European contact. Before contact, Native American gender relations involved a certain amount of give and take. Men may have held leadership positions, but much of their power depended on the support of women. After contact, the power held by men increased and the power held by women decreased. This deprived women of the means to defend themselves, for example, against an abusive husband, as in Sarah Ahhatan’s case.  -Allison Luthern


I found the account of Sarah Ahhatons adultery to be extremely poignant. It truly showed in my opinion some of the negative effects the colonists had on the native americans. In many Native American societies women were highly respected and held a firm place in society and were allowed more freedoms within marriage. Yet Sarahs treatment exhibited none of that kind of treatment. It was evident the influence that the Europeans had on there culture at that point was a negative one. I found the part of the essay where the author discusses the negative aspects of european culture that the Native Americans picked up extremely interesting. Although the protestant marriage was supposed to be a well founded joining of two people in the faith in a happy marriage, women were often treated poorly by there husbands. So even though the Native Americans are being taught by the Christian doctrine they picked up the bad habits of the Europeans instead of the good habits. Also the double standards between men and women were particularly evident in her account of the trial because Joseph who was also married and had committed adultery presumably faced no punishment whatsoever. In addition the claims of adultery that were supposedly committed by her husband didn't seem to have been investigated any further. -Emma Peck

I also found the double standard in the way Sarah Ahhaton was treated compared to both her husband and Joseph interesting -- and, not surprising. So, why did this happen? How did the change in the way Native American women and men viewed marriage occur? Were there some tribes who were more resistant to this than others? If so, why? -Nancy Lee