Mary Rowlandson describes her experience of being captained by a group of Native Americans. Rowlandson’s account of the trek is subjective, and it reflects both her personal beliefs and the values of that time. This is particularly evident in Rowlandson’s descriptions of Native Americans’ practices and beliefs. Rowlandson paints Native Americans in uncivilized terms, claiming no right to the land they claim. Rowlandson accomplishes this by making Native Americans look primitive and unworthy. This is an obvious reflection of her religious beliefs. One can infer from Rowlandson’s descriptions that she believed the Puritan belief system was “true” and that Native Americans were not allowed to participate in “civil” society.
Rowlandson metaphorically casts Native Americans in wild animals and thus dehumanizes them. Rowlandson describes “…soma Christians being covered in blood. All of them were stripped naked and raped by a gang of hellhounds. This passage is a reflection of Rowlandson’s religious beliefs and society. From this section of her narrative, it can be deduced that Rowlandson sees herself and others as a domestic family of peaceful, tranquil animals, or, more specifically, as God’s chosen flock. Native Americans, however, are seen as the Wolf responsible for the destruction of these innocent sheep. Further down, she calls the Native Americans “hell-hounds” in her quote and shows a chaotic and horrific picture of what happened to the village. It’s striking that this passage portrays Native Americans as ungodly people while dehumanizing them. This happens on two levels. It dehumanizes the Indians, comparing them with wolves, and subtly it uses biblical language to emphasise the fact Rowlandson is God’s creature and the Natives are hellhounds. This reinforces the belief that Native Americans do not belong in civil society. They are violent and savage people, who would kill God’s chosen people. Rowlandson uses numerous instances of dehumanization of Indians based on religious beliefs throughout her narrative. Another example is in her account of her first encounter with the Indians. Rowlandson’s portrayal of the natives in this passage is another example. The language emphasizes that these people do not practice civil ceremonies. Instead, they act like savages. Her comparison of the entire scene with hell is striking. She basically says that Native American ceremonial is like her religion’s notion of hell. Rowlandson cannot see beyond the puritan values she holds and see the Indian tradition. She cannot accept other religions and cultures without comparing them to her own beliefs. This confirms both how important these beliefs are to her society but also shows how un-accepting of her society’s values.
Rowlandson may argue that Natives are “savage” and horrible because they just destroyed her village. Rowlandson could also be arguing that Rowlandson was referring to her friends as the Natives. This is a valid reason for her outrage. It seems that her anger at Indians isn’t just about the physical violence. She also believes they are an inferior race. This can be seen in her dehumanization of the Indians, as well as her constant reminder that they are a heathen nation. She once again affirms that she views herself as a better moral person than Native Americans.
She believes her society is God’s chosen and morally superior. This belief becomes evident when she observes “the strange providence God in preserving heathen ” (79). She is truly surprised that God would keep a people group that she views as “savage.”
It is clear that Rowlandson believes the Puritan people are the only ones who have a legitimate claim to this Earth. This is because God chose them. Rowlandson’s views become even more clear when she recounts some “remarkable paragraphs of providence ” in her story. She again shows her disbelief at the fact that God “forced [the Indians] into being a scourge for His People” (104105). The fact that her puritan society, unlike the Natives, is orchestrated by God reminds us once more. Rowlandson’s society and others believed that they were superior civilisations and that any deviation from these beliefs made Rowlandson unfit for civilized society. It is also evident that the Puritans believed that Natives were a scourge to society. Rowlandson is not able to see the idea that everyone is God’s person and has equal rights to the land. Instead, he views the Indians as “savages”.
This account has one problem: it can’t offer any alternative perspective. Rowlandson can’t see past the events of the day and place the capture within the context of them. Rowlandson only sees that the Natives have committed atrocities to her people. But she does not consider the European atrocities that were committed against Natives. This could be due to her inability to see Indians as equal citizens. She is therefore unable feel any sympathy for their situation. Her narrative shows that Native Americans are just as determined to thrive and survive as her society, but it is impossible to see the truth. Rowlandson uses a religious lens to view this issue. She only concludes that Indians are suffering because they have not been “civilized” enough and are therefore not Godly. The story does not address why the natives attacked her village. One would assume that the natives attacked the village without any warning. However, the contrary is true. Rowlandson appears to be trying to present this as a fight between the Native Americans who are “heathen”, and her civilized, religiously pure society. She is able to frame the “battle” in a religious context that tests her faith and those of the colonists, which completely ignores the core issue. This shows her and her society’s Puritan beliefs about European colonization and their responsibility for the expansion of the country. They believed that the land was theirs and that the natives must be displaced or forcibly expelled to ensure that Puritans can develop it.
Rowlandson, upon capturing the native, cannot recognize her benevolence. This makes the story even more Puritan. She is well-treated, even though she is a captive. Shortly after her capture, she describes how Natives helped her by giving her two spoon-fulls each of Meal and half a pint …”. These are not comforts for her but acts of kindness and generosity on the part of natives in need. Rowlandson cannot look at these acts of kindness objectively and believes that Indians are an inferior, uncivilized race. As she returns to her husband, Rowlandson recollects how grateful she is that she is no longer “hemmed in” with the cruel and merciless Heathen …[, but with compassionate, pitiful Christians (108). In her recollection, she is unaware of how well she was treated. She is grateful only for being back with Christians.
Rowlandson’s narrative demonstrates the subjective nature of history. It does not always offer accurate information. It is possible to perpetuate false assumptions about Native American culture by reading this kind of history without critical thought. It is crucial to understand how accounts like Rowlandson were created.
To critically analyze the facts and to understand the complexity of historical moments, s was held.
