Pepperbelly and Cody, thanks for your kind words:
First a comparison of the English/American approach to the "Native problem" with that of the French.The English were interested in the expansion of white settlement regardless of the welfare or rights of Natives.As one of my Choctaw brothers put it, "The English look through us as they would a pane of glass; they do not see us they see only our forests,our game,and our lands".Treaty after treaty was broken by them but there is no record of Natives breaking treaties.The English accepted Native assistance in the Revolutuionarry War but abandoned them afterwards although some went to Canada.The Americans were no better and those Natives who had either remained neutral or supported the Americans saw their lands lost and found themselves treated as adversaries and shipped westward. The Cherokee who reached a level of civilization superior to many Whites were rewarded with the Trail of Tears by a Government to appease the whites' insatiable thirst for land and in Georgia,gold.
The French,on the other hand,viewed Natives as trading partners and encouraged social interaction and even intermarriage between the French Canadiens and Natives.It is very interesting to note that after the Great Peace of August 1701 that there was virtually no fighting between the French and the Natives except for an occasionable encounter between a few individuals.Last year Karl Kostner of Wisconsin or Minnesota who is very knowlegeable on the fur trade remarked to the stunned disbelief of many of us including me that the Voyageurs manning the freight canoes for the Montreal and Quebec traders did not carry guns on their way to and from the high country and that the few guns that were carried belonged to the agents of the traders in charge of the canoes and were intended for hunting to provide meat.I now see the wisdom of his statement which shows clearly the relationship between the French and their Native trading parties.For those who are interested in this part of Canadian history and the early fur trade in general I recommend two excellent books which have recently been published:
"The Great Peace" by Alain Beaulieu and Roland Viau with original illustrations by Francis Back
"ADVENTURERS IN THE NEW WORLD The Saga Of The Coureurs Des Bois by Georges-Hebert Germain, Original illustrations by Francis Back
Both are available in French and English and can be ordered from The Canadian Museum of Civilization,100 Laurier Street Hull,Quebec, Canada J8X 4H2 and I believe both are available from the Museum of the Fur Trade in Chadron, Neb.
As to the movies mentioned, I agree as to Dances With Wolves which, as far as I can tell based my limited knowlege of plains Indians,did a great job showing the hunman side of the Lakota.As to "The Patriot"I viewed it as "Mad Max in the Rev.War.The church burning alone showed an abysmal lack of historical knowlege. NO British officer would have burned a church full of non combatants. The British officer corps was primarily Anglican{Episcopalian}although a few were Presbyterian;{ probably Major Patrick Ferguson}.South Carolinians were virtually all members of those two denominations. Although the movie does't tell us which, the table shown with a cross suggests Anglican and if so Tavington/Tarleton would never have burned it.
Last of the Mohicans was enjoyable and to some degree followed the book.Although I did read{suffer through}the book some years ago my more literate friends bemoaned the fact tht the movie didn't follow the book too closely.A friend calls this movie the"John Wayne F&I movie"The best way to enjoy this movie is to imagine you are in the era of Errol Flynn pirate movies and ignore the 18th century hockey stick,the early 19th century Lehigh Valley rifle and all the other historical discrepancies and have some escapism fun.
Thanks again
Tom Patton :thumbsup:
