King Philips War Essay - 825 Words

King Philips War (Essay Sample) Content: NAME:PROFESSOR NAME:COURSE NUMBER:DATE:KING PHILIPà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬S WARKing Philipà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s war was the bloodiest war in the Americaà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s history. It took place in 1675 in the New England. Metacom was the leader of the Pokanokets which was a tribe within the Wampanoag Indians Federation. Ironically, King Philip was the son of Massasoit who had aided the survival of pilgrims in the new world. The war broke on the arrival of Mayflower when the English had prospered and expanded their settlements. However, nativesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬ number was declining as a result of diseases introduced by the Europeans (Malone).By 1675, Philip took stage and in a prophetic moment signaled warning to the whites about his plans. He said, "I am with determination about to not living until I have no country" (Malone) The war actually began after Wampanoag braves killed some cattle owned by the English near their tribal headquarters in the presently, Bristol, Rhode Island. English livestock wa s ever the source of friction as cattle now and then trampled the Indian corn. A farmer made a retaliation of killing an Indian, an action that set forth a trigger effect that would eventually threaten to wipe out of existence Plymouth Bay and Massachusetts Bay Colonies (Malone).Nipmucks Indians joined forces with Philipà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s Wampanoag and raided and staged an attack on Brookfield turning its siege into a most dramatic incidence in the entirety of the war. The natives made ambush and killed eight soldiers in the snare making the rest of the company barely making it back to the Brookfield garrison (Malone). They pursued the surviving soldiers and burned every building within the town. They strategized on surrounding the wooden garrison where survivors and settlers huddled and watched the building being on fire. The settlers used their drinking water to succeed in slowing the blaze (Rowlandson).In autumn of 1675, the Nipmucks and Wampanoagà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s got joined on the warpath by the Norwottocks and the Pocumtucks Squakheags. They ranged attack on the Pioneer Valley and Deerfield town leading to the abandonment of the town by the English (Malone). After the attack on the Deerfield, Captain Lothrop retrieved any remaining grains and brought them to Hadley garrisons. In October, Indians, with hostility, struck again with raids on the town of Hatfield, Springfield and Northampton where thirty houses were torched. As winter set in, the attacks diminished. The English feared the powerful Narragansett tribe might enter the war. They had lived peacefully with the followers of Roger Williams but meant little in the Colonial New England (Malone).In 1675 December, the colonialists made a preemptive hit against the neutral Narragansett tribe. The result would become what is known as the Great Swamp Massacre. In this, a thousand soldiers from Massachusetts Bay Colony, Connecticut Colony, and Plymouth Colony marched into Narragansett territory in the Southern Rhode Is land and celebrated an Indian Fighter, Benjamin Church (Malone).An Indian traitor conspirator betrayed his people and informed the English the location of a large number of Narragansett winter camp which led to a massacre of many soldiers (Malone). The Narragansett, however, feared worse as over five hundred people were killed in the Great Swamp Massacre with many wigwams put to the torch (Malone).The surviving Narragansett warriors entered the war on the side of Philip and raided attack and burned down towns. On February of 1676, the Indians invaded Lancaster garrison where settlers had taken refuge (Rowlandson). Among those inside was Mary Rowlandson, who gave this account: "At length they came and beset our own house and quickly it was the dole fullest day that my eyes have ever seen. The house stood upon edge of a hill. Some of the Indians got behind the hill, others behind anything that would shelter them, from all which places they shot against the house, so that bullets seeme d to fly like hail " (Rowlandson).Inside the house, "some were fighting for their lives, others wallowing in their own blood, the house was ablaze above our heads, and the bloody heathen was ready to knock us on the head if we stirred out. Now might we hear mothers and children crying ... King Philips War Essay - 825 Words King Philips War (Essay Sample) Content: NAME:PROFESSOR NAME:COURSE NUMBER:DATE:KING PHILIPà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬S WARKing Philipà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s war was the bloodiest war in the Americaà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s history. It took place in 1675 in the New England. Metacom was the leader of the Pokanokets which was a tribe within the Wampanoag Indians Federation. Ironically, King Philip was the son of Massasoit who had aided the survival of pilgrims in the new world. The war broke on the arrival of Mayflower when the English had prospered and expanded their settlements. However, nativesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬ number was declining as a result of diseases introduced by the Europeans (Malone).By 1675, Philip took stage and in a prophetic moment signaled warning to the whites about his plans. He said, "I am with determination about to not living until I have no country" (Malone) The war actually began after Wampanoag braves killed some cattle owned by the English near their tribal headquarters in the presently, Bristol, Rhode Island. English livestock wa s ever the source of friction as cattle now and then trampled the Indian corn. A farmer made a retaliation of killing an Indian, an action that set forth a trigger effect that would eventually threaten to wipe out of existence Plymouth Bay and Massachusetts Bay Colonies (Malone).Nipmucks Indians joined forces with Philipà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s Wampanoag and raided and staged an attack on Brookfield turning its siege into a most dramatic incidence in the entirety of the war. The natives made ambush and killed eight soldiers in the snare making the rest of the company barely making it back to the Brookfield garrison (Malone). They pursued the surviving soldiers and burned every building within the town. They strategized on surrounding the wooden garrison where survivors and settlers huddled and watched the building being on fire. The settlers used their drinking water to succeed in slowing the blaze (Rowlandson).In autumn of 1675, the Nipmucks and Wampanoagà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s got joined on the warpath by the Norwottocks and the Pocumtucks Squakheags. They ranged attack on the Pioneer Valley and Deerfield town leading to the abandonment of the town by the English (Malone). After the attack on the Deerfield, Captain Lothrop retrieved any remaining grains and brought them to Hadley garrisons. In October, Indians, with hostility, struck again with raids on the town of Hatfield, Springfield and Northampton where thirty houses were torched. As winter set in, the attacks diminished. The English feared the powerful Narragansett tribe might enter the war. They had lived peacefully with the followers of Roger Williams but meant little in the Colonial New England (Malone).In 1675 December, the colonialists made a preemptive hit against the neutral Narragansett tribe. The result would become what is known as the Great Swamp Massacre. In this, a thousand soldiers from Massachusetts Bay Colony, Connecticut Colony, and Plymouth Colony marched into Narragansett territory in the Southern Rhode Is land and celebrated an Indian Fighter, Benjamin Church (Malone).An Indian traitor conspirator betrayed his people and informed the English the location of a large number of Narragansett winter camp which led to a massacre of many soldiers (Malone). The Narragansett, however, feared worse as over five hundred people were killed in the Great Swamp Massacre with many wigwams put to the torch (Malone).The surviving Narragansett warriors entered the war on the side of Philip and raided attack and burned down towns. On February of 1676, the Indians invaded Lancaster garrison where settlers had taken refuge (Rowlandson). Among those inside was Mary Rowlandson, who gave this account: "At length they came and beset our own house and quickly it was the dole fullest day that my eyes have ever seen. The house stood upon edge of a hill. Some of the Indians got behind the hill, others behind anything that would shelter them, from all which places they shot against the house, so that bullets seeme d to fly like hail " (Rowlandson).Inside the house, "some were fighting for their lives, others wallowing in their own blood, the house was ablaze above our heads, and the bloody heathen was ready to knock us on the head if we stirred out. Now might we hear mothers and children crying ...

The Preference Not To A Study of Passive Resistance in Herman Melville’s “Bartelby the Scrivener” - Literature Essay Samples

Herman Melville uses the concept of identity to highlight certain features of the characters in his short story Bartelby the Scrivener. The character of Bartelby illuminates the narrator’s unexplained feelings of innate compassion and pity through his actions of passive resistance.Bartelby’s mantra, â€Å"I would prefer not to,† suggests powerful implications of blatant defiance while giving the illusion of only a polite refusal. While typically it is unnatural for an employee to have the freedom to exercise personal choice within the workplace and so obviously not conform to the status quo, Bartelby’s outright rebellion is masked by the polite nature of his defiance. On the surface, the scrivener’s repeated use of this phrase seems as non-threatening as the manner in which he carries himself, perhaps being the reason the narrator continuously excuses his complete lack of obedience. The word choice of the repeated refusal also evokes the question as to what Bartelby would prefer to do, if anything at all, further pointing towards a form of blatant defiance rather than one of just simple preference. After Bartelby utters, â€Å"I would prefer not to,† the narrator challenges him by questioning, â€Å"You will not?† which in turn elicits the response, â€Å"I prefer not† (Melville 15). In this instance it is evident that while Bartelby does not specifically decline the narrator’s question, the reaction that it provokes from the narrator holds the same force as it would had he have said â€Å"no.† Despite Bartelby’s passive word choice, it is clear that he is ultimately in control of his own free will by saying â€Å"no†, simply through a form of politeness. The narrator exudes initial feelings of anger and confusion when Bartelby passively refuses to conform to his demands. Unused to an employee so unenthusiastically refusing a simple request, the narrator is baffled when Bartelby replies, â€Å"I would prefer not to,† to his every request. While confusion would be an appropriate emotion to describe the initial reaction of the narrator upon hearing Bartelby’s courteous refusal, fast approaching emotions of anger and irritability were quick to replace any previously existing bewilderment. The narrator, himself, admits â€Å"The passiveness of Bartelby sometimes irritated me,† (14) further adding â€Å"Nothing so aggravates an earnest person as a passive resistance† (13). This display of passive resistance challenges and quite obviously overpowers the narrator’s authority, causing immense emotional turmoil within the narrator, seen initially as anger and confusion. The fact that Bartleby is able to bring forth any hostile emotions from the narrator at all is significant in itself, considering the narrator introduces himself as a â€Å"man of peace† who â€Å"seldom loses [his] temper† (4).While these emotions of exasperation only occur for a short period of time, the reactions which Bartelby elicits from the narrator by uttering his phrase of passive resistance are noteworthy in that they exhibit the narrator’s emotional range in relation with the scrivener’s actions throughout the story.Bartelby’s vacuous, non-threatening manner masks the colossal power he is able to exercise over the narrator. One of the reasons the narrator is so oblivious to Bartelby’s blatant defiance is due to his mild and almost ghost-like, yet mechanic characteristics. Bartelby poses no threat to the narrator, so in this way he is able to gain power and control over the narrator by slipping under the radar, predominantly in the way of not receiving any form of punishment from the narrator. The narrator appears to touch on this notion when he remarks, â€Å"Had there been the least uneasiness, anger, impatience or impertinence in his manner; in other words, had there been any thing ordin arily human about him, doubtless I should have violently dismissed him from the premises† (11). Bartelby’s escalation of power ultimately ascends to the point of him taking residence in the narrator’s law chambers, and upon discovery, Bartelby suggests to the narrator that if he left and went for a walk, by the time he returned he would â€Å"probably have concluded his affairs† (16). Abiding by the scrivener’s request, the narrator notes that Bartelby’s utterance was said with a â€Å"cadaverously gentlemanly nonchalance, yet withal firm and self-possessed† (16) manner, accentuating the ultimate control Bartelby was able to obtain over the narrator. Further acts of Bartelby’s control are evident when the narrator notes that â€Å"every added repulse of this sort which I received only tended to lessen the probability of my repeating the inadvertence,† (16) a form of power comparable to that of positive reinforcement. Whil e Bartelby’s words and manner may be passive in their nature, they ultimately serve to render complete control over the narrator, illuminating characteristics within him that we would not typically see under the influences of another character. The narrator displays an almost immediate change of heart, quickly transitioning from feelings of anger to those of pity, suggesting a deeper connection between him and Bartelby. Countless refusals from Bartelby cause unexplained feelings of compassion and empathy to immediately engross the narrator. After Bartelby’s usual monotonous statement, the narrator reasons that â€Å"he means no mischief; it is plain he intends no insolence,† (12) strangely going on to further discuss what a valuable asset he is to the business. The very fact that the narrator is so quick to provide a reason as to why Bartelby refuses to obey any orders shows a protective, almost father figure-like quality about the relationship between the two m en. The narrator reinforces this idea of a deeper connection then when he acknowledges that â€Å"both [he] and Bartelby were sons of Adam† (17) and the unexplainable melancholy he was experiencing must have been of a fraternal nature, a connection so strong between the two that the narrator was feeling these intense emotions of compassion and melancholy â€Å"for the first time in [his] life† (17). The men’s relationship, on the surface, appears to simply be one of employer and employee, but with further analysis it is evident that the narrator’s unexplained feelings of pity in reaction to Bartelby’s passivity are perhaps explained through a deeper connection not entirely visible upon initial examination.With his actions of passive resistance, Bartelby’s character serves to highlight qualities of compassion and pity within the narrator that we would not typically see, while also suggesting a more deeply rooted connection between the two cha racters. The implications of this topic are significant in that it puts the inscrutable character of Bartelby in a different light, revealing aspects which lead us to a deeper understanding of him through the narrator’s own emotional journey of self-discoveries. A more in-depth analysis of each character could, perhaps, shed some light on Melville’s intentions behind creating such an unspoken connectivity between Bartelby and the narrator. Work CitedMelville, Herman. â€Å"Bartelby the Scrivener.† Melville’s Short Novels. Ed. Dan McCall. New York: W. W. Norton Company, 2002. 3-34. Print.