WHEN CRACKER CAME THEY FOUND? #EMPIREOFBROWNYTRANTS
Native Americans argue there is plenty of room for our world refugees and for brown world immigrants. this was not always the case. In 1630s , the same ancestral natives said no whites allowed, so they killed 110 colonists and enslaves seven survivors forcing them to pound copper until they die. That was the first early modern instance, despite the French New York colony of 1524, which also disappeared. Issues are lying brown people of the lands of the #dragon = Americas , all hemispheres.
Roanaok the first English Settlement, where 117 English colonist were found upon a supply mission return trip to be totally missing, including the total cleanup of their forts and homes by the native brown slave plantation Indians. New evidence demonstrates that native browns took the surviving white colonists after a trick by the natives turned into a surprise, back stabbing ambush, only four adult males, two young boys and a maid were not killed and taken to a copper mine to pound copper. Most of this knowledge was recorded by three separate individuals for three separate purposes and do not fit the made up legends that began post 1937 A.D.
The new evidence that the maid made a carving in the stone which relates these findings were scientifically lab tested for authenticity and found reliable. This then produces a script by the James Town to early puritan colonists that the Native Americans were a warmongering slave trade race and ran a quasi-civilization based upon the limits of dna intelligence. They were stronger and bigger and captured our captains and beheaded the lucky ones and scalped the unlucky ones. These people own vast quantities of land in the U.S.A. are billionaires and own massive gambling institutions that brings in billions per year just for their people. Whites are left to fight wars, get no medical help and get no privilege and die all over planet earth because of the big bodies brown people of barbarianism lifestyles.
Native Americans today are academics, government workers, private sector business management all sorts of professional people. Today, the Native Americans are ultra-leftists and believe in globalism and voting strictly Democrat which are supre neoliberal globalists. These hurt white people at the U.S.A. the Native American argue against whites saying, please import browns, there is plenty of space ( yes there is) but this was a hypocritical position to their ancestors. The slave owning brown crap called Pequot or the natives of North Carolina. Today, native Americans cry, “ We have room, plenty of Room.” But the 117 ( 110 slaughtered) and seven enslaved for life demonstrated that native Ame3ricans are brown liars and always have been liars. There people later on abducted 10,000s of colonists for rape, slavery , cannibalism and all sorts of evil works, citing there is not enough room on the Continent for your 117 people. So we take you native Americans off the Earth because you do not know God.
Cooper Mines Where Brown Native Americans enslaved other tribes because brown are evil beings and blamed whitey or cracker innocently for 100s of years now Every Native American I ever met said white countries and white people invented slavery and these are our #PROFESSIONALS. so the world is over folks. zombies cannot run our world. They can only destroy it one-way or another.
updated new info, amazing evil by brown Nazi crap.
also native Americans in Arkansas and Oklahoma at school with NAZI regalia on personal textiles, the entire team.
Miss'tuk Origins of Colonial Wars
pequot and puritan wars 1630s
Topic: First European and Native American War
By Michel Johnthan McDonald
06102009 Not edited.
This is not complete, but a file for later completion.
Refounding of Northern America by Europe
Refounding of Northern America Since the Nordic Expositions c. 1,000 ADE.
Giovanni da Verrassano (his brother and shipmates), commissioned by François I of France set sail in 1524 and in late winter to early spring surveyed the coasts between South Carolina and Newfoundland. Verrassano made three stops, the second at New York Harbor, in which he named the land surrounding modern day New York, as Angoulème. He also explored deep into the bay of what would become known as the Hudson Bay, named after explorer Henry Hudson ( Sept. 1565-1611) who was commissioned by the first modern international trading company, the English-Muscovy Trading Company (founded in 1555), in 1607. He also at his last stop, explored the Narragansetts Bay. This knowledge, as well as other settlements such as James Town, set up the course for the English Separatists to follow, better known as the Pilgrims, from South Hampton, England, to travel aboard the famous Ship the Mayflower which reached the fish-hook portion of Cape- Cod Bay in March of 1621 and in April the passengers took to the shores, founding the Plymouth, Massachusetts Bay Colony—by the signing of the Mayflower Compact. Plymouth became the capital of the Massachusetts Bay Colony
In the 1620s (mainly 1629) many ships from England carrying various Europeans headed on an adventure to the New World. These ships carried many Europeans who did not know of Native Americans or if they did they did not think anything of it about the interrelationships between cultural traditions. These were Protestant radicals who sought a life of religious reform – thus the purification of the Church –and so called themselves The Puritans. The Anglican Church, a break-away Christian denomination from the traditional medieval age monolithic Roman Church, created a more autonomous political entity in England in which upset certain traditional groups in England. The Anglican Church became more structured and politicized and these certain groups sought a self-agency to purify or bring back spiritual living – thus breaking away from the state-run Anglican Church. Eventually a solution to the English problem was to send these disheartened religious persons to a new land where they could forge their destiny in relationship to their maker – in a non-threatening atmosphere. This destination was the New World.
InterRelationships between the Native Americans and European Colonists
According to current members of the Pequot tribe today, the translated meaning of Pequot (an Algonquian term) is ‘warlike.’ However, there is no consensus on the actual meaning. The term Paquatauoq, intends, “the destroyers;” the word often associated to the derivative Pequot. Nevertheless, as a synchronicity, turmoil as the connotative verbal application for this term pertains to the historical events, none-the-less.
The English colonists brought Christianity that was supposed to be devoid of politics and intrigue which devastated life of the English and in the European continent during the Wars of Religion (later decades of the sixteenth century). By 1633, an English Puritan settlement at Plimouth (also spelt Plymouth) and Massachusetts Bay Colonies began to expand themselves to search for cultivated land in what they described as a wilderness. In what is today called southeastern Connecticut, there lived the Pequot (appx. 500-700 members) and the Mohegan Tribes, indigenous to Northern America for possibly hundreds of years, where their culture starkly contrasted the hierarchal structures of the English tradition.
The Pequot tribe represented gender equality, and to some extend female superiority. Pequot adult females tilled the soil, planted the crops, prepared the food, cooked the food, took care of the young, and provided many manual labor tasks to the Pequot community. The adult males, on the other hand, spent their days in the wilderness either hunting or training for war. Adult males of the Pequot tribe did not till the soil or produce the agriculture, make tents, build dwellings all by themselves, or prepare the foodstuff. This was in stark contrast to the colonial English and Dutch who first began colonies in New England. European cultural tradition proclaimed that men were the manual laborers, and that women were to be sheltered from the hard realities of the daily outside workplace.
When English persons searched the wilderness, often getting lost for a few days and dying of exposure, the Pequot or other Indian tribes would carry them back to the English settlements. Pequot and English settlers were destined to intermix in cultural toleration.
First, trading attracted the Pequot to the English commodities of finished fur products, iron-cast tools and basic technology. In return, the Pequot traded the sea-shell jewelry, in what is known as their currency. These basically bands of shaped sea-shells were a value labor, understood by the American native Indians, and carried sacred and value meaning in exchange. The colonist quickly understood this and accepted their ornaments. The shaping of beads from sea shells consisted of a long and laborious process, therefore understanding the time and effort to create such a display of worth as value. According to the sources, the Pequot and other local tribes traded in peace and settlements were not fortified.
Land disputes. As with other primitive civilizations, including early Keivan Rus’ settlers, often abodes were built around farming of lands until the soil depleted and the communities moved and built another abode on-down the line. This meant that cities were never contracted, and towns were only temporary, per say, in as much as a span of decades. The Pequot operated the same way, using small enclosed villages with semi-temporary living spaces. Thus were crops were harvested and the produce tasted and acted well, the tribe remained. But when the soil depleted, the tribes would relocate down the coast or inland or even upland to where the next patch of earth for growing produce was idea. The colonist faced the same dilemma. The colonists were not armed with modern technology or understanding of farming- field procedures. Therefore, land became a competition. As was understood at the beginning the Pequot distrusted the cultural conditions of male superiority over the Pequot tradition of female equality or dominance. Therefore, little understanding happened, and rather a breakdown of common affiliation restricted a greater community aspiration.
Migration into the South Eastern Connecticut Region ruled by the Pequot
In the 1630s, after the great English migration of the later 1620s to the New World, a search for cultivatable land, as mentioned, brought Dutch and English settlers into the Connecticut Valley. This valley was controlled by the Pequot. The migration was not preempted by the expanding trade with the American Indian tribes, but for the cultivatable land. Much of New England’s land is un-cultivatable. Hard earth and rocky sections as well as thick forests prevented easy solutions for the pre industrial Europeans. Therefore, the Connecticut Valley became the contention between inhabitants and newcomers. The Pequot in competition for arid land sought to harass the encroachers. Native American Indians already pre disposed to new types of commodities understood the dilemma of kicking out the migrating colonists. The Pequot understood they needed land, but conflicts within their own communities over encroachment remained a contentious issue. When the Dutch and English set up their small colonies in the Connecticut Valley, a different type of living space emerged. Now a fortified colony with walls to keep out harassing Native American insurgents emerged within the colonists living quarters.
Yet, the story of the Pequot and Puritan is more complicated that it appears. The Dutch did not get along with the English. Therefore, they set up competing traders and formed alliances with different Native Indian American tribes. For example, The Pequot were the dominant New England tribe, but their closest rivals in power were the Narragansett tribe. What this meant was that there was never a unified Native American Indian presence in the 1630s in New England. There were also the Mohegan Tribes, and these tribes had family-named sub tribes. As with any ethnicity or race, the dominate organ is targeted by the have-nots or under-powers. Both the Dutch traders and the English settlers quickly understood this, because it was evident in western civilization historicism. Therefore, the question arises if the Native American Indians are actually any different than the European groups who came into conflict at this time. In class warfare, there is exactly no difference in tradition. Both the European and Northern American Indians had traditions of rival factions and periodic warfare. What separated the differences, were cultural pregiven structures of social conditioning.
1620-1630s Puritan Christianity and Pequot and other Indian spiritual pregiven structures.
The Pequot (and other tribes) used spiritualism as a form of connecting with natural phenomena, through the use of dynamics such as of contemplating eternal living, such methods as of meditation; communing with spirits of the otherworld to seek healing and advice; or communal spiritualism as sometimes practiced collectively or selectively through the use of various tobaccos, or personal contemplation on the meaning of life itself. As tradition, contacting the spiritual forces resulted in rituals (not unlike a Sunday Church ritual), which were annual planned and actualized. In ancient Mesopotamian history, festivals and holidays played a major theme to release the burdensome of the daily struggle to survive year-in-and-year-out. The Northern American Indians were of no difference in attitude, character or evolvement. What differentiated the Pequot to the Europeans were the prescriptions of banned practices in Protestant Christianity.
Protestant Christianity outlawed spiritualism, and fomented materialism and destiny prided upon wealth and material success. Pre-Reformationist laid the groundwork on individual interpretation of living the spiritual life, of how one did interpret their religious texts; the Protestant Reformation Proper lead to the eventual codification of individualism as the prescription of acceptance in a wide community of believers. This allowed an individual to replace spiritualism for materialism and base self-worth upon the physical property on acquires and communicates to their kin. The clash of cultures were bound to happen between the similar Dutch Protestants (some atheists too, in private beliefs) and English Puritans, against the Pequot and the regional New England and Connecticut Native American Indian tribes.
Block Island, The Trigger Point
The murder of John Oldham (20 July 1626), possibly by a rival colonist ( or a rival faction of the Pequot, called the Narragansetts, from Block Island) in regards to trade access to Native Indians, resulted in the blaming of a Pequot individual by the colonists. However, this event did not lead to the Pequot war of 1637, as has been speculated or affirmed in recorded history. It is simply a nine-year span in which many more events led up to the decision process of some the English leaders to make an example to the other tribes and the Pequot in particular that the colonists were there to stay and expand in the New World. In 1634, for uncertain reasons, a western Niantics, a sub-group of the Pequot, was blamed in the killing of Capitan John Stone.
This led to both sides understanding they could not control their own peoples. Therefore, the Pequot leadership sent envoys of reconciliation to the Connecticut Valley, in the form of tribute. This act was customary in that while the leaders knew they were not involved they took responsibility for their community’s actions – the greater Native American Indians at large. Thereby, 23 October of the year 1634, the Pequot sent a messenger to Deputy Governor Roger Ludlow of Massachusetts Bay Colony. About two weeks later, on 7th of November of the year 1634, the Pequot sent an embassy to sign a Massachusetts Bay- Pequot treaty. This treaty confirmed the guilt of the tributary tribesman who killed Captain John Stone and consisted on an indemnity of equal value of ₤250 sterling wampum (beads as discussed before). Yet, the treaty had another stipulation. That was to cede trading rights in regions of Connecticut to exclusively cut-off Dutch access and to and reaffirm the Massachusetts Bay Colony’s monetary dominance. The English also had disputes with the Pequot‘s opposition factions of the Narragansetts, who were second in power in the region. The complication of the crack-down on the Indians as a whole resulted in the complex disunity of the Indians themselves. Narragansetts harassed the Pequot and visa versa, and this affected peaceful trade relations with the English colonists who were themselves fighting the Dutch as well as the two factions of Indian competitors. One individual began to be found dead, and no-one could be identified as the murderer positively, the stress-levels escalated to the planning stages of the War against the Pequot. The Pequot are ultimately blamed by the colonists because they did subsume the respect of other tribes, and were defacto rulers of the Connecticut Valley. Therefore, if the Narragansetts or some lesser tribe sabotaged relationships between the English and the Pequot, it was to the advantage of the Narragansetts tribes. It is empirical of the events of 1637 that Narragansetts took an advantage of this possible sabotage and acted upon it by allying with Capitan John Mason of Connecticut and Captain John Underhill from Massachusetts for the assault on Miss’tuk (Mystic) dwelling of a faction of the Pequot from May 25 (attack 26)—28 of May in the year of 1637. In all intensive purposes of understanding modern warfare terminology, this is considered a genocide attempt to leave a visual impression on the other factions of the Pequot to not step out of line, or in fact leave the region for good.
John Oldham (1592-1636), born in Derbyshire England, was a follower of the Puritan movement in England from an early age. He immigrated to Plymouth Colony with his wife, children, and sister in July of 1623 aboard the Anne. His sister Lucretia Oldham Brewster married Jonathan Brewster, son of William Brewster, a signatory of the Mayflower Compact. He became curator of shot and powder and the government granted various family members land in 1623. Oldham had a talent for trade, and his increased wealth entangled him in conspiracies to oust the government at Plymouth – which garnered him exile from Plymouth. He sailed for business to Virginia and England, but in 1630 he was back in Massachusetts Bay. In 1633 or 1634, Oldham settled ten men, including Robert Seeley, along the Old Connecticut Path to establish Wathersfield, Connecticut ( the place where the Native American would kill some settlers on a settler farm) At the Massachusetts Bay Colony he held a representative position from 1636 to 1634. He set up residence on an island in the Charles River and was a member of the church at Watertown. Oldham represented Watertown in the colony’s first General Court or assembly in 1634. Yet, he continued his Indian trade, sailing the coasts of Maine to New Amsterdam. En rout to trade with Block Island is where the narrative of the pre-Pequot War takes a surprising twist. Oldham and his crew had sailed to Block Island on a normal trade mission.
Block Island, a part of the U.S.A. state of Rhode Island, 41n10, 71w34, is located in the Atlantic Ocean and was inhabited by the Niantic Native Americans. This island becomes paramount to the American narrative in Native American Indian/English and Dutch European relations. To further fear and concern, at Block Island, under the control of Narragansett Sachem, Niantics took control of a British vessel, killed Captain John Oldham and further murdered his five crew members – then pillage the vessel on the 20th of July of the year 1636. This particular episode framed the break-point in decent relations, argued by Axelrod, which eventually annihilated the Pequot from absolute power, the dominant tribe and therefore the prime concern for peace. This would end the feared and unsuspected hostilities toward the English; it was reasoned by the colonists. While the Pequot were not directly the aggressors in this particular attack, it was Sassacus’ powerful and charismatic presence that remained the preeminent fear of the colonists. Pequot were the respected dominate power in the region and these alliances were not going to allow the English settlers to live in peace. The death of Oldhan became the motif of sermons and talk on the Massachusetts’s Bay Colony. As with John Stone’s death, still unclear, and in 1634, this was recorded achieved by the western Niantics tribe, a tributary of the Pequot – so in a sense the entire Native American inter-alliances and dis-alliances remained a rather confused situation for the colonists.
Under Capitan John Mason, he raised a militia of 90 men, and Capitan John Underhill raised a militia of 20 men. They sailed to Block Island and killed 14 Native Americans.
Endicott, with only Connecticut troops, then sailed away from their port to make it appear they were leaving. They sailed to Saybrook, where they demanded reparations from the Pequot at Saybrook and to search for Oldham’s killers. The Pequots fled and Endicott’s men burnt a village and some crops. Over the winter Endicott sent out signals to other competing tribes to form an alliance against the Pequots. The Narragansett, and many small tribes did not want to make an alliance. However, under Uncas, the Mohegan allied to fight the Pequots with the English.
On 16 of June 1636, Jonathan Bewster, a trader from Plimouth, relays a communications to Uncas, chief of the Mohegans, that the Pequots are planning a preemptive strike against the English. Uncas (1588?-1683) was born in a Pequot village but ended up ruling a separate faction of the Mohegan tribe. He rebelled against the Pequot leader Sassacus (1560?-1637), his father in law. Uncas aided the English colonists during a part of the Pequot War of 1637. He also fought separate wars against the Narragansett Native Americans. Mohegan oral tradition holds that the Mohegan-Pequot, part of the Indian peoples of the Algonquian language group, migrated into the region before the Europeans came.
In July of 1636 at fort Saybrook a conference takes place between Connecticut and Massachusetts officials and representatives of the Western Niantics and Pequots try to negotiate reoperations for the murder of John Oldham and other persons presumed killed by Native American Indians. An attempt to halt the hostilities take place: Narragansett sachems Conochet and Miantonomo condemn the murders and promise under threats of violence to ally with the English colonist officials to exact revenge upon Pequots in any problems that arise from business and life.
Therefore, not knowing who murdered one of the colonists, Capitan John Endecott, John Underhill, and William Turner journey to Block Island with 90 men to search for the killers of Stone and Oldham – but find that most of the population had fled under the pretense of premonition. Therefore, the next choice was to make an example to illustrate to all tribes that retribution of grievance by the English felt throughout southeastern Connecticut.
August of 1636 to Saybrook, Pre Miss’tuk
In August of 1636, Endecott sails the ship load of English troops to For Saybrook, where they plan to reload and sail finally behind Pequot borders at Pequot harbor, at the mouth of the Pequot (Thames) River. Once landing there, Capitan Endecott challenges the Pequot faction to a pitch-open battle (European style).
Sassacus was the famous Pequot warrior who ruled over twenty-six sagamores or inferior princes, including territory from the Narragansett Bay to the [Henry] Hudson Bay River (Formally attributed to Francois I d’Angoulème in 1524, upon the first European discovery), and over what we call in the modern day, Long Island. In a sense, the alliance was non-Pequot proper, but a collection of groups that would fight for Sassacus. He, according to the narrative, would not allow the English to settle at Saybrook. Sassacus, under stress tried to form alliances with his former enemies, the Mohegans and Narragansetts. This pitted 250 capable European mean against 2,000 capable Indian men ready for warfare. The Pequots, in this case we will call the coalition, preceded cautiously, but then kid-napped children, and finally they were accused of murdering an Englishman found alone in the forest or the waters, and destroyed or made captive some families on the boarders of settlements. From the European perspective, they were the color of brown, wild-humans, uncivilized, and sought extermination of the whites. This perception brought intense fear to the colonists scattered around Connecticut.
There, they also built up a fort for the English settlers in 1636 to stage the battle. The Pequot refuse to engage, probably knowing nothing of the sort of western battle challenges. This set the stage for further planning and the English leaders sought out their loyal Narragansett’s officers. Yet prior too the battle, the Pequot confront their enemies, the Narragansett, to join them against the English, an alliance forming is attempted in the spring of 1637. Time elapses and the Pequots do not know where an attack will take place. Their forts have two openings and no doors, but are surrounded by wooden-stakes with sharp edges consisting of an elliptical fortress.
The decisions also take the form in consulting or ordering the English colonies to financially support this surprise war against the wilderness enemies. The Massachusetts General Court authorizes a tax to anticipate a long and protracted war effort against the Native American Indians. On 23 of April of 1637 an attack on settlers by Native American Indians in a field near Wethersfield, was apparently a retribution attack for the colonists confiscating land of a Sowheag, sachem. Seven to nine settlers are killed. This brings the total of previously two or three Europeans killed to thirteen. By early spring of 1637 (18 April 1637), and as a result of the court’s decision and dissemination of concern and warfare, three separate English colonies form an alliance – Plymouth, Massachusetts and Connecticut. “Massachusetts General Court authorizes levy to raise funds for anticipated costs of war against Pequots.”
Location of the Genocide
Mystic, 41n21’13” and 71W57’46” (modern day New London County, Connecticut, USA), was a prenamed estuary ( misapplied as river) ‘Miss’tuk” by indigenous in which was near the location of the Pequot fort at the southeastern corner of the modern day U.S.A. state of Connecticut. “Pequot Hill, where the fight took place, is about 8 miles northeast of New London, CT.” The estuary’s main tributary is Hyde Pone near the Mystic River Marine Basin. It empties into Fishers Island Sound, dividing the village of Mystic into Groton and Stonington. It became the location for three major ship-yards during the nineteenth century and today is home to the Maritime Museum Mystic Seaport. ‘Miss’tuk,” (variant spl., Misistuck or Missituck) as the indigenous called this place, was applied to the English word, Mystic, and this explains also why many U.S.A. geographical name-places are taken from Native American words or resounded and applied -- thus, the naming of this event in history.
The Scene of the Battle
"Fort Fight" on Friday, 26 May 1637
On 25 of May the year of 1637 “The English and their allies approach Sassacus's Pequot Harbor fort.” They decide, however, to attack fort at Mystic instead. This was because of the complexities and more likely the rather smaller numbers. “English and allies arrive at Mystic at night and make camp.”
At night, the Mohegan tribe lay behind the Colonist and as a group in all they slowly approached a Pequot fort-village, which was on a palisade. The Mohegan tribe laid behind to allow the Colonists to enter the fort. Their instructions were to form a encirclement around the inner circle of colonists. There were about 200 individuals involved. In the fort, estimates were recorded later by the victor as around 400-500 persons. However, this is now in dispute. The weapons used were limited muskets and hand-to-hand instruments, knives, and swords. The Pequots had hand-to-hand weapons, but also bows with arrows. However, at a close distance and at night, these proved rather limited war-tools.
Robert Seely was one of the first to enter the fort, the Pequot, alerted by a barking guard dog, hurried to place brush against the two openings to the fort. The colonists plan A was to fight hand-to-hand within the fort itself. Robert Seely was wounded in the eye by an arrow, leaving a scar for the rest of his life, Captain Mason related in his report. The colonists quickly found out that the Pequot could fight equal to them within the confines of a limited space. Therefore, the colonists, understanding the European style military tactics of siege, attack and conquer, exited the fort but before lighting flammable material on fire. The Mohegan tribes’ duty, before plan B, in which they knew not of, was to capture or kill the warrior men who could escape while the English were inside fighting the battle. Now that the English retreated to the outside perimeters of the fort, they awaited escapees from the smoke and fire. Women and children, as well as old men were slaughtered on their way out. The Mohegan threw up their hands and shouted Owanux! Owanux! (Englishman, Englishmen), why? This was in light that Native American warriors had a tacit understanding that conflict involved only adult men of warrior age. Under the tense situation, and at night, the English fought as Europeans did – and that was to kill all who were their enemies.
Stats: The fort consisted of about 150 persons (polemically stated by the victors as (180 warriors killed, and the total number between 400-800—which consisted of non-warriors, consisting of women, elders and children) within the fort. In 2006, this view has been challenged by anthropologists, and for good measure. The report concluded that the battle was over within one hour. These numbers were possibly inflated to appease the fearful colonists who had been subjected to homicide attacks on the open farms.
Until the Treaty of Hartford, 21 September 1638, the Native American tribes allied with the English to track down each surviving Pequot. The remaining Pequots held out in swamps, and tried to hide with other tribes before being identified by tribal leaders who alerted the colonists. This empirical evidence is rather shocking. In fact, one of the last round-up of Pequots took place by swamp near New Haven. The English allowed the women, old men, and children to escape and shooting of arrows by surviving Pequot warrior aged males ensued. This type of rationalization allowed the other and former competing tribes to achieve permissible compliance with the Europeans. The figure of the number 180 comes up again in the record books. At the signing of the treaty of Harford, “[S]urvivors of swamp siege [were] divided as slaves among Indian allies: 80 to Uncas and Mohegans, 80 to Miantonomo and Narragansetts, 20 to Ninigret and Niantics; The Treaty also concluded that “[N]o Pequot may inhabit former Pequot territory; [ The] Name [of] Pequot [ is] to be expunged; [ and] Pequot slaves must take name of tribes to which they are enslaved.” Another stipulation was if any did exist they had to remove themselves from the region. A surviving group of Pequots settle at Pawcatuck.
“Mason sent with 40 English soldiers and 120 Mohegans under Uncas to clean them out.” As well, the “Narragansetts attack Uncas as he is plundering the wigwams, but refuse to fight the English.”
The cultural clashes are more complicated than the simplistic narrative of ‘good’ against ‘bad.’ The Native American Indians warred with each other, traded and held slaves of each other and had their own spiritual traditions. To the Native Americans, in general, the white Europeans were spiritual forces of negative consequences. To the Europeans, the Native Americans were also in like, the same, being wild and untamed to them. The Pilgrims (1607), then the Puritans (late 1620s) were persecuted by a stronger entity, and in turn became the stronger entity in the New World and became the suppressor.
One of the most polemics of rationales, put forth by some historians, was all so evident. John Underhill, on his report to the colonists and as a justification for the acts at Mystic, proclaimed that the Bible allowed the slaughtering of women and children. This is evident in the Old Testament of Samuel 1 & 2. King Saul is reprimanded by the spiritual leader of Israel for not killing all the men, women and children of the enemies that warred against Israel for land, logistics, and wealth. The later King David would fulfill these recommendations by the spiritual leader, claiming a direct affirmation from the voice of God to kill all and do not even save the animals of the enemy. The Protestant justification, put forth by one of its supreme leaders Martin Luther, claimed that the Old Testament was just as important to follow, read, know, and act upon, as the New Testament. Unfortunately, Luther had difficulty reading the Bible correctly, which explains why he had to use another’s translation ( Desiderius Erasmus’ translation out of Greek into late-medieval Latin) in order just to read it in Latin. Jesus claimed to bring the New Covenant and do away with many of the old laws, put forth by Moses and precursors of Christ. Since this was God, speaking as himself, it is a wonder why Luther heeded not God’s words. The justification for slavery in antebellum America sought justification solely upon the Old Testament scriptures – put forth by Protestants. The polemic of Christianity or established religion itself is framed around this polemic. There is no evidence in scripture or tradition that Jesus Christ supported or advocated human bondage. The message should have been clear to historians if they only opened up the Bible, read it, and opened up historiographies dedicated to understanding the Christian traditions. Unfortunately, John Calvin, Martin Luther, and other Protestant – breakaway—Christian sects, that so dominated modern history, failed to interpret the Bible correctly. The blame was put on the Jews, and not on the actionaries – the ones that participated in human bondage. Since the Native American Indians had their own spiritual traditions, their justification for human bondage was of itself qualified as comparable to the Europeans. The romanticizing of each side, a non-postmodernistic approach, renders the truth – a valuable tool—incomplete. The Native American Indian and European War began as a complex set of inter-relationship circumstances in which many actors played various roles, some mischievous, such as sabotage in order for power-grabbing.
It was not until King Philip II’s War that Native American Indians understood warfare tactics of alliances against the immigrating European colonists.
Pequot War: 1634-38, between an alliance of the Massachusetts Bay and Plymouth colonies, with the Native American allies (The Narragansett and Mohegan tribes), against the Pequot tribe ( the most dominant Native American Tribe in Southern New England of this time.)
Sources: History Channel, “10 Days that Unexpectedly Changed America.” A ten-part series that aired on the History Channel from April 9th through April 13th, 2006. Part one of the series was “The Mystic Massacre of the Pequot War.” This took place on 26 of May of the year 1637. This is recommended by me, and well done.
1637 – The Pequot War, in “The Society of Colonial Wars, In the Sate of Connecticut” ( 2007), available from http://www.colonialwarsct.org/1637.htm ; Internet. n.b. chronological break-down. However, the History Channel disputes the attack casualties referenced in this website. Also the illustration shows that the total number inside the fort is a closer estimate to about 100-150 persons, and not the 500-700 members as construed by other references in historical books.
Stats: The Attack took only one hour, and the real estimates are about 150 persons in total form the Pequot fort. The statistic of 500-700 members that had vanished from the Pequot tribe in the region, most likely were totals of killed enslaved (to the Caribbean islands, Bermuda) and/or escaped over a four-year period.
 1637, The Pequot War, in “The Society of Colonial wars, In The State of Connecticut” ( Online, accessed, 9 June 2009), available from http://www.colonialwarsct.org/1637.htm ; Internet. et. al., quotes by Roy Seelye, Newington, CT, May 2001.
 Roy Seelye, regarding Robert Seely, 1637, The Pequot War, in “The Society of Colonial wars, In The State of Connecticut” ( Online, accessed, 9 June 2009), available from http://www.colonialwarsct.org/1637.htm ; Internet.
 Ibid., Seelye, quoted as , "Lieutenant Seeley was a valiant soldier. I myself pulled the arrow out of his eyebrow."
 Mystic Voices: The Story of The Pequot War, in “Pequot War: The History” (Mystic Voices, LLC, 2004, accessed 9 June 2009), available from pequotwar.com; Internet.
 Ibid., The contemporary victory report intends, “English fire a volley at dawn, then storm the fort. Mason enters at northeast, and Underhill enters at southwest. Pequots fight fiercely. Mason abandons plan to seek booty and sets fire to 80 huts housing approximately 800 people (men, women, and children). 600-700 Pequots die in an hour. 7 are taken captive, and 7 escape. Two Englishmen are killed, with 20-40 wounded. English march toward their ships, burning Pequot dwellings along the way,” 1637, The Pequot War, in “The Society of Colonial wars, In The State of Connecticut” ( Online, accessed, 9 June 2009), available from http://www.colonialwarsct.org/1637.htm ; Internet.
 Ibid., 1637, The Pequot War.
 Ibid., Ibid., 1637, The Pequot War.
corrections and technical inquiries to
Please direct news submissions to Here