DOCSLIB.ORG

137 the First Maine Indian

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
137 the First Maine Indian 137 THE FIRST MAINE INDIAN WAR: INCIDENT AT MACHIAS (1676) Frank T. Siebert Penobscot Nation The First Maine Indian war of 1675-1678, the first hostile engage­ ment of the Abenakis with the white settlers of New England, has been considered by most annalists to be only an episode of King Philip's War of 1875-1676, which was waged in southern New England. In reality they were separate conflicts with unrelated causes and were connected only by a delicate thread of sequence. Although some writers have not committed themselves very strongly on this point they have allowed this impression to remain as a tacit conclusion. Among those who have presented the First Maine Indian War either openly or by implication as a part of King Philip's War are Williamson (1832(1)499, 516-519), Hutchinson (1768(2)27-31), Bailey (1969:30), Day (1981:18,21), Leach (1966:59-61); and Eckstorm (1919:53). Alvin Morri­ son (1977:209) considered the First Maine Indian War as the "Northern Front" of King Philip's War. William Willis (1831:136-156) was almost alone in not equating the conflict in Maine with the war in southern New England. The confusion has been created by misleading comments found in the early accounts, by over-reaction among the white New England populace, and by some contemporary writers who imagined that the French abetted the war and that all New England Indians were either allied with or sympathetic to Philip. These beliefs were contrary to fact or without adequate supporting evidence. The Puritans were of a suspicious frame of mind and greatly ex­ aggerated notions of plots against themselves and the effectiveness of Indian political and military organization. Ancient feuds among the Indian nations of New England and a fragmented political organiza­ tion precluded the fulfillment of any really efficient pan-Indian mili­ tary organization. King Philip, the son of Massasoit who in friendship had greeted, feasted, and aided the earliest English settlers, must be regarded as a great Indian patriot who clearly foresaw the result of English land hunger and of the escalating conflict between European and Amerindian cultures, namely the eclipse of Indian peoples in the land of their forefathers. The conversion to Protestantism of many In- 138 Frank Siebert dians and the establishment of numerous "praying towns" through the efforts of John Eliot and the Mayhews; the awe created by superior Eu­ ropean sophistication and technology, which impressed many Indians unfavourably about themselves and promoted negative self-images; and Indian dependence upon Europeans in trade and in obtaining firearms, all contributed to Indian divisiveness. In contrast, the Puritans were united by unanimity of purpose in the face of a hostile challenge, had achieved ideological uniformity, and, despite jurisdictional individual­ ism, maintained political cohesiveness. Philip was foredoomed to be a loser, but fatalistically pursued the only course which he perceived to be available to him that accorded with Indian views of self-determination and cultural preservation. His retaliation came too late to sustain In­ dian hegemony, casting him in a tragic role. He very probably realized this himself toward the end of the war when he was reported to have been found often in pensive moods of reflection. King Philip's War began on June 14, 1675, and ended with Philip's death on August 12, 1676, in a swamp near his residence at Mount Hope in present Rhode Island. The exultingly worded description of his antagonist, Capt. Benjamin Church, reflected the Puritan spirit toward a fallen enemy. Philip "ran directly upon two of Capt Churches Ambush," and the Englishman missed fire, but an Indian mercenary who was a former subject of Philip "sent one Musket Bullet thro' his heart, and another not above two inches from it; he fell upon his face in the Mud & Water his Gun under him." Some English and Indians "drew him thro' the Mud into the Upland, a doleful, great, naked, dirty beast, he look'd like" (Church 1716:44-45). King Philip's adherents included most of his Wampanoags, the Nar- ragansetts, and the Nipmucks, although some few of each of these groups did not join his forces. The Nausets of Cape Cod and the na­ tives of Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard remained for the most part neutral. Only a few Massachusett Indians supported Philip, but many assisted the English. Most of these were Eliot's converts from Natick and Punkapog. Job Nesutan of Natick, who had been Eliot's chief assistant in his translation of the Bible, was killed in July 1675 in an abortive raid on Philip's headquarters at Mount Hope. The Niantics remained neutral, and many of the Mohegans and a remnant of the Pe- quots aided the New Englanders. The Pocumtucks and other Connecti­ cut River Indians, who appear to be mostly divisions of the Nipmucks, Incident at Machias 139 united with the other Nipmuck villages in actively supporting Philip in the war. There were frequent defections of converts from the Nipmuck praying towns. The Sokokis of Squakheag, at present Northfield, Mas­ sachusetts, also supported Philip. The Abenakis of New Hampshire and Maine, however, were not allies of Philip, and did not partici­ pate in King Philip's War. The Western Abenakis, in fact, remained neutral. They were commonly called Penacooks, from their principle village of Penacook at present Concord, New Hampshire. Their other villages were Piscataqua, Wamesit, and Pawtucket, the latter two near present Lowell, Massachusetts. Their famous chief was Passaconaway, who died about 1664, to be succeeded by his eldest son, Wonnalancet. As soon as Philip's War broke out, Wonnalancet "withdrew himself into some remote place, that he might not be hurt by the English, or the Enemies" (Hubbard 1677:9). The Eastern Abenakis, consisting of the Pigwackets of the Saco Val­ ley, the Aroosagunticooks of the Androscoggin, the Canibas of the Ken­ nebec, and the Penobscots, were not allies of King Philip, and were not involved in his attacks on southern New England towns. The Abenakis took up arms against the English frontier settlements at a later date for entirely different causes and the hostilities lasted until April 1678, long after King Philip was dead. Furthermore, the Abenakis confined their warlike activities to their own territory within present Maine and directed them chiefly against the specific groups of settlers who had unjustly provoked them. One major cause, never described by any previous writer, and the main events of this separate war will now be discussed in some detail. Incident at Machias In July 1676, while King Philip's War was still in progress, an out­ rage was committed against the small peaceful band of Indians at Machias who were affiliated with the Penobscots. By some undescribed stratagem Henry Lawton and William Waldron of Boston kidnapped 32 unoffending Indians from Machias with the intent of selling them as slaves. Machias was about 120 miles east of the St. George River, and far within the bounds of French Acadia as determined by the Treaty of Breda. However at this time, there was no active French rule in Acadia, and Massachusetts had not yet acquired jurisdiction. Much of the coast of Maine was in a state of anarchy. There was indignation in Boston, and Governor John Leverett issued 140 Frank Siebert an order for the arrest of Lawton and Waldron. Lawton was taken into custody and placed in jail in Boston, but Waldron eluded capture with his cargo of Indian slaves. On August 23, 1676, at Boston, Edward Rawson, the Secretary of the colony had issued a warrant for the ar­ rest of Lawton and Waldron "for seizing and carrying away 30 Indians where one Sagamore & his squaw to ye Eastward" (Baxter DHMe 6:120). Leverett's motives were probably threefold: partly humanity and jus­ tice; the desire to avoid any more trouble with the Indians of which he already had plenty; and partly to circumvent any protest from the French. Apparently the French took no note of the affair. Waldron took the 32 Abenakis to Fayal (modern Faial Island), the westernmost of the Azores. At that time the islands were not subject to any government, and Faial was the haunt of freebooters, slavers, cutthroats, and unsavory outlaws from half a dozen European nations. Situated in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean where the sea lanes crossed and the sailing routes between Europe, America, and Africa converged, Faial was a communication centre during the three centuries of horror of the African slave trade. Governor Leverett persuaded a kind-hearted English sea captain, Bernard Trott, to try to rescue the Indians. Trott sailed to Faial and secured the release of the chief and his wife, but the other 30 Abenakis had disappeared into the cruel oblivion of slavery. In June 1677 Captain Trott petitioned the governor for payment of 62 pounds due him for the expenses of his voyage and redeeming the two Indians, "a sagamore & his squaw stolen away from the eastward by one Waldron & 13 [error for 31?] Indians more & carried to Fyall and sold for slaves which made the first Indian War In those parts." He submitted new petitions in August 1703 and again 1704, but apparently Massachusetts never paid him the 62 pounds (Baxter DHMe 23:1-2). The 32 Indians taken from Machias must have represented about half the population of the village, for 12 years later a census revealed 26 Indians in nine wigwams, with 10 men, 10 women, and 6 children in the Machias band (Gargas 1688). Because of the raids of the Dutch pi­ rates and English under Thomas Cole there were apparently no French inhabitants of Machias in 1676.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Chapter in Penobscot History
    The Rebirth of a Nation? A Chapter in Penobscot History NICHOLAS N. SMITH Brunswick, Maine THE EARLIEST PERIOD The first treaty of peace between the Maine Indians and the English came to a successful close in 1676 (Williamson 1832.1:519), and it was quickly followed by a second with other Indians further upriver. On 28 April 1678, the Androscoggin, Kennebec, Saco and Penobscot went to Casco Bay and signed a peace treaty with commissioners from Massachusetts. By 1752 no fewer than 13 treaties were signed between Maine Indians negotiating with commissioners representing the Colony of Massachu­ setts, who in turn represented the English Crown. In 1754, George II of England, defining Indian tribes as "independent nations under the protec­ tion of the Crown," declared that henceforth only the Crown itself would make treaties with Indians. In 1701 Maine Indians signed the Great Peace of Montreal (Havard [1992]: 138); in short, the French, too, recognized the Maine tribes as sov­ ereign entities with treaty-making powers. In 1776 the colonies declared their independence, terminating the Crown's regulation of treaties with Maine Indians; beween 1754 and 1776 no treaties had been made between the Penobscot and England. On 19 July 1776 the Penobscot, Passamaquoddy, Maliseet and Micmac Indi­ ans acknowledged the independence of the American colonies, when a delegation from the tribes went to George Washington's headquarters to declare their allegiance to him and offered to fight for his cause. John Allan, given a Colonel's rank, was the agent for the Passamaquoddy, Maliseet and Micmac, but refused to work with the Penobscot, ..
    [Show full text]
  • (King Philip's War), 1675-1676 Dissertation Presented in Partial
    Connecticut Unscathed: Victory in The Great Narragansett War (King Philip’s War), 1675-1676 Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Major Jason W. Warren, M.A. Graduate Program in History The Ohio State University 2011 Dissertation Committee: John F. Guilmartin Jr., Advisor Alan Gallay, Kristen Gremillion Peter Mansoor, Geoffrey Parker Copyright by Jason W. Warren 2011 Abstract King Philip’s War (1675-1676) was one of the bloodiest per capita in American history. Although hostile native groups damaged much of New England, Connecticut emerged unscathed from the conflict. Connecticut’s role has been obscured by historians’ focus on the disasters in the other colonies as well as a misplaced emphasis on “King Philip,” a chief sachem of the Wampanoag groups. Although Philip formed the initial hostile coalition and served as an important leader, he was later overshadowed by other sachems of stronger native groups such as the Narragansetts. Viewing the conflict through the lens of a ‘Great Narragansett War’ brings Connecticut’s role more clearly into focus, and indeed enables a more accurate narrative for the conflict. Connecticut achieved success where other colonies failed by establishing a policy of moderation towards the native groups living within its borders. This relationship set the stage for successful military operations. Local native groups, whether allied or neutral did not assist hostile Indians, denying them the critical intelligence necessary to coordinate attacks on Connecticut towns. The English colonists convinced allied Mohegan, Pequot, and Western Niantic warriors to support their military operations, giving Connecticut forces a decisive advantage in the field.
    [Show full text]
  • The Uncommon Enemy: First Nations and Empires in King William's War
    The Uncommon Enemy: First Nations and Empires in King William's War By Steven Schwinghamer A Thesis Submitted to Saint Mary’s University, Halifax, Nova Scotia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in History May 2007, Halifax, Nova Scotia Copyright Steven Schwinghamer, 2007 Dr Greg Marquis External Examiner Dr Michael Vance Reader Dr John Reid Supervisor Date: 4th May 2007 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Library and Bibliotheque et Archives Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-30278-1 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-30278-1 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives and Archives Canada to reproduce,Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve,sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet,distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans loan, distribute and sell theses le monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, worldwide, for commercial or non­ sur support microforme, papier, electronique commercial purposes, in microform,et/ou autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in et des droits moraux qui protege cette these.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Acknowledging First Peoples & Traditional Territory
    Guide to Acknowledging First Peoples & Traditional Territory September 2017 CAUT Guide to Acknowledging First Peoples & Traditional Territory September 2017 The following document offers the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) recommended territorial acknowledgement for institutions where our members work, organized by province. While most of these campuses are included, the list will gradually become more complete as we learn more about specific traditional territories. When requested, we have also included acknowledgements for other post-secondary institutions as well. We wish to emphasize that this is a guide, not a script. We are recommending the acknowledgements that have been developed by local university-based Indigenous councils or advisory groups, where possible. In other places, where there are multiple territorial acknowledgements that exist for one area or the acknowledgements are contested, the multiple acknowledgements are provided. This is an evolving, working guide. © 2016 Canadian Association of University Teachers 2705 Queensview Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2B 8K2 \\ 613-820-2270 \\ www.caut.ca Cover photo: “Infinity” © Christi Belcourt CAUT Guide to Acknowledging First Peoples and Traditional Territory September 2017 Contents 1| How to use this guide Our process 2| Acknowledgement statements Newfoundland and Labrador Prince Edward Island Nova Scotia New Brunswick Québec Ontario Manitoba Saskatchewan Alberta British Columbia Canadian Association of University Teachers 3 CAUT Guide to Acknowledging First Peoples and Traditional Territory September 2017 1| How to use this guide The goal of this guide is to encourage all academic staff context or the audience in attendance. Also, given that association representatives and members to acknowledge there is no single standard orthography for traditional the First Peoples on whose traditional territories we live Indigenous names, this can be an opportunity to ensure and work.
    [Show full text]
  • The Wabanaki Indian Collection
    The Wabanaki Indian Collection Compiled by Mary B. Davis This collection contains items from the Passamaquoddy Indian Papers,#9014 and the Abenaki Language Collection, #9045 Contents … Preface … The Wabanakis, by Nicholas N. Smith … Guide to the Microfilm Text Preface The Passamaquoddy Papers, the Joseph Laurent Abenaki Language Collection, and the Micmac Manuscript comprise the Library's Wabanaki Collection. Dated documents range from 1778 to 1913; much of the material is undated. The condition of all three components of the collection is generally poor. The Passamaquoddy Papers, which document the political life for members of that nation during the 19th century, contain many fragments and partial documents impossible to put into proper context in this collection. Using information from other sources, scholars may be able to identify these materials in the future. The Abenaki Language Collection consists of bound manuscripts (and one unbound document) in the Abenaki language which largely pertain to Roman Catholic religious services. They were obtained from the Laurent family, prominent in Abenaki affairs in Odanak, Quebec, after they had sustained a fire. Many of the hand-written volumes are partially charred, resulting in losses of text which will never be retrieved. The Micmac Manuscript is written in the syllabary (sometimes called hieroglyphics) developed by Father Chretian Le Clerq in the 17th century to aid in teaching prayers to Canadian Indians. The Reverend Christian Kauder later used these same characters in his Micmac catechism published in the 1860s. This manuscript seems to be a handwritten prayer book for use in Roman Catholic services. In poor condition, it remains a link to interpreting the styles and approaches of Roman Catholic missionaries to Canadian Micmac converts.
    [Show full text]
  • Vital Allies: the Colonial Militia's Use of Indians in King Philip's War, 1675--1676
    University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Master's Theses and Capstones Student Scholarship Spring 2011 Vital allies: The colonial militia's use of Indians in King Philip's War, 1675--1676 Shawn Eric Pirelli University of New Hampshire, Durham Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/thesis Recommended Citation Pirelli, Shawn Eric, "Vital allies: The colonial militia's use of Indians in King Philip's War, 1675--1676" (2011). Master's Theses and Capstones. 146. https://scholars.unh.edu/thesis/146 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses and Capstones by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. VITAL ALLIES: THE COLONIAL MILITIA'S USE OF iNDIANS IN KING PHILIP'S WAR, 1675-1676 By Shawn Eric Pirelli BA, University of Massachusetts, Boston, 2008 THESIS Submitted to the University of New Hampshire in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts In History May, 2011 UMI Number: 1498967 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMT Dissertation Publishing UMI 1498967 Copyright 2011 by ProQuest LLC.
    [Show full text]
  • Interpreting Penobscot Indian Dispossession Between 1808 and 1835 Jacques Ferland
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Maine Maine History Volume 43 Article 3 Number 2 Reconstructing Maine's Wabanaki History 8-1-2007 Tribal Dissent or White Aggression?: Interpreting Penobscot Indian Dispossession Between 1808 and 1835 Jacques Ferland Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/ mainehistoryjournal Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Ferland, Jacques. "Tribal Dissent or White Aggression?: Interpreting Penobscot Indian Dispossession Between 1808 and 1835." Maine History 43, 2 (2007): 124-170. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mainehistoryjournal/vol43/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Maine History by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. John Neptune served as Lieutenant-Governor of the Penobscot Nation for over fifty years. He, along with Tribal Governor John Attean, presided over the tribe during a period of turmoil in Penobscot history — a time marked by land dis- possession and subsequent tribal division in the first part of the nineteenth cen- tury. The portrait was painted by Obadiah Dickinson in 1836 and hung in the Blaine House for many years. Courtesy of the Maine Arts Commission. TRIBAL DISSENT OR WHITE AGGRESSION?: INTERPRETING PENOBSCOT INDIAN DISPOSSES- SION BETWEEN 1808 AND 1835. BY JACQUES FERLAND “I now come to the time when our Tribe was separated into two fac- tions[,] the old and the new Party. I am sorry to speak of it as it was very detrimental to our tribe as there was but few of us the remnant of a once powerful tribe.” So spoke Penobscot tribal leader John Attean, re- calling the 1834-1835 breach in tribal politics that shook the edifice of community and cohesion among the Penobscot people.
    [Show full text]
  • Linguistic Notes and Ethnographic Terms for Abenakis Wôbanakiak
    Malian’s Song – Linguistic Notes and Ethnographic Terms for Abenakis By Marge Bruchac Wôbanakiak = Abenaki Indians Wôbanakiak – Abenaki Peoples – Wabanaki Confederacy Abenaki is a common generic term for the Native American Indian peoples of northern New England, southeastern Canada, and the Maritimes. These peoples are also known as Wabanaki (Eastern Abenaki – Maine and the Canadian Maritimes) or Wôbanakiak (Western Abenaki – New Hampshire, Vermont, and southeastern Canada). In the Native language Wôbanakiak roughly translates to mean “People of the Dawn.” The name Wôbanakiak, is created from the morphemes for dawn (wôban), and land (aki) combined with the animate plural ending (-ak) to indicate those people who dwell in that place. (The nasalized “ohn” sound in Abenaki is variously spelled as ô or 8.) During the 15-1600s, English, French, and Dutch mispronunciations of Wôbanakiak resulted in the variant spellings found in colonial and contemporary records. These include the English/Dutch Abnaki (with a hard “a” sound), the English/French Abenaki (also with the hard “a” and stress on the first syllable), and the French Abénaquis (pronounced “Ah-behn-ah-ki” with a flat “e” and stress on the second and final syllables, following French conventions). All of these variant pronunciations are still in use today. The Wabanaki Confederacy today includes two tribes of the Passamaquoddy Nation, one tribe of the Penobscot Nation, several tribes of the Malecite Nation, over 20 tribes of the Mi’kmaq or Micmac Nation, the Wolinak Abenaki, the Abenaki Nation and several other groups of Western Abenaki. The Abenaki Nation includes the St. Francis Sokoki Band or Abenaki Nation at Missisquoi based in Swanton, VT, as well as the Abenaki Nation at Odanak, historically called the St.
    [Show full text]
  • King Philip's Ghost: Race War and Remembrance in the Nashoba Regional School
    King Philip’s Ghost: Race War and Remembrance in the Nashoba Regional School District By Timothy H. Castner 1 The gruesome image still has the power to shock. A grim reminder of what Thoreau termed the Dark Age of New England. The human head was impaled upon a pole and raised high above Plymouth. The townspeople had been meeting for a solemn Thanksgiving filled with prayers and sermons, celebrating the end of the most brutal and genocidal war in American history. The arrival and raising of the skull marked a symbolic high point of the festivities. Many years later the great Puritan minister, Cotton Mather, visited the site and removed the jaw bone from the then exposed skull, symbolically silencing the voice of a person long dead and dismembered. There the skull remained for decades, perhaps as long as forty years as suggested by historian Jill Lepore. Yet while his mortal remains went the way of all flesh, Metacom or King Philip, refused to be silenced. He haunts our landscape, our memories and our self-conception. How might we choose to live or remember differently if we paused to learn and listen? For Missing Image go to http://www.telegram.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?NewTbl=1&Site=WT&Date=20130623&Category=COULTER02&Art No=623009999&Ref=PH&Item=75&Maxw=590&Maxh=450 In June of 2013 residents of Bolton and members of the Nashoba Regional School District had two opportunities to ponder the question of the Native American heritage of the area. On June 9th at the Nashoba Regional Graduation Ceremony, Bolton resident and Nashoba Valedictorian, Alex Ablavsky questioned the continued use of the Chieftain and associated imagery, claiming that it was a disrespectful appropriation of another groups iconography which tarnished his experience at Nashoba.
    [Show full text]
  • King Philip's War in Maine
    The University of Maine DigitalCommons@UMaine Electronic Theses and Dissertations Fogler Library 1-1970 King Philip's War in Maine John O. Noble Jr. Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Noble, John O. Jr., "King Philip's War in Maine" (1970). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 3256. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd/3256 This Open-Access Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. KING PHILIP’S WAR IN MAINE By JOHN O. NOBLE, JR. A THESIS Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts (in History) The Graduate School University of Maine Orono January, 1970 KING PHILIP'S WAR IN MAINE By John 0. Noble, Jr. An Abstract of the Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts (in History). January, 1970 A study was made of the Indian war in Maine, which started in the late summer of 1675 and continued until the spring of *1678 The causes and consequences of the war are presented as they relate to the situation on the Northern colonial frontier (Maine), and as they contrast to the war and social situation in southern New England. The two major campaigns of the war in Maine are examined in detail. Three political questions are discussed as related to the war: (1) the legal control of Maine (2) the support of the war effort by the United Colonies of New England; and (3) the pacification effort of Massachusetts and New York to subdue the Maine Indians.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Are the Abenaki and Where Do They Live Today?
    Who are the Abenaki and Where Do They Live Today? Abenaki is the name of a Native American Tribe that can be classified into two categories: the Western and Eastern Abenaki. Historically the Western Abenaki people lived in what is today known as Eastern New York, Northern Massachusetts, parts of Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire and north toward Quebec, Canada. As members of the Seven Nations and Wabanaki Confederacy, Abenakis interacted with their Native American neighbors to the North, South, East and West on a regular basis. Families and tribal members moved across these areas at their own will, long before any of the political boundaries created by the governments of the United States or Canada. The map on the right depicts the locations of contemporary Abenaki groups. The pink squares represent the Canadian Abenaki Reservations. The orange squares represent the four Abenaki tribes that make up the Vermont Abenaki Alliance: the Elnu, Nulhegan, Missisquoi and Koasek Abenaki Tribes. Notice how these lines divide the Koasek territory in half. Families and tribal communities are easily separated by these imaginary and often randomly assigned state lines. State Recognized within Vermont, means that each tribe has proven their ancestry to the Vermont government. Many other Abenaki groups and individuals exist but remain unrecognized because they have yet to apply for Recognition. Because of this, they cannot legally say they are Native American. Do you think that it’s fair for tribes to be required to prove their ancestry to the government? Circle your answer. YES NO Briefly explain your answer. ______________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ For more information visit abenakiart.org/education © Vermont Abenaki Artists Association.
    [Show full text]
  • Centerpiece of Research on the Penobscot Experimental Forest: the U.S
    CENTERPIECE OF RESEARCH ON THE PENOBSCOT EXPERIMENTAL FOREST: THE U.S. FOREST SERVICE LONG-TERM SILVICULTURAL STUDY John C. Brissette and Laura S. Kenefic Abstract.—Established between 1952 and 1957, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service experiment comparing several silvicultural treatments is not only the centerpiece of research on the Penobscot Experimental Forest in Maine, it is also one of the longest-running, replicated studies of how management techniques influence forest dynamics in North America. Ten treatments representing even- and uneven- aged silvicultural systems and exploitative cutting are replicated twice on operational- scale experimental units averaging 21 acres in size. Treatments are applied uniformly to experimental units in accordance with prescriptions designed to direct both stand structure and composition. In some treatments harvests are scheduled at intervals (e.g., 5, 10, or 20 years); in others, harvests are triggered by stand conditions. Each experimental unit, or compartment (most recently termed management unit), has an average of 18 permanent sample plots (PSPs) for measuring attributes of trees ≥0.5 inches in diameter at breast height. Tree regeneration and other vegetation are measured on multiple subplots within each PSP. Measurements are taken before and after harvests and, in many treatments, at intervals between harvests. Over the past 60 years, this long-term experiment and associated short-term studies have generated fundamental knowledge about forest ecosystems and silvicultural guidelines for the northern conifer forest type, and, in a more general sense, have contributed to our understanding of mixed-species forest science and management. INTRODUCTION research has proceeded on the PEF with periodic harvests and regular re-measurement of treatment Between 1952 and 1957 the U.S.
    [Show full text]