The New World: How it is perceived

Colin Calloway’s approach to the concept of the new world is one which differs from traditional views. This is mainly because, instead of focusing mainly on the European context, he creates a balanced focus on the manner through which Native Americans and European settlers were able to interact and create a vibrant new culture. For the most part, traditional conceptions of the new world tend to attribute the establishment of history as well as organized society to European settlers and often disregards the Native Americans as being individuals who lacked history because none of their histories was written, but instead transmitted orally. As a result, the history of the new world has come to be recorded from the time of European settlement and the contribution of the Native Americans to the development of the new society have been totally forgotten because of the Eurocentric view of them as being savages. However, Calloway is able to bring together the histories of both European settlers and Native Americans in such a way that promotes the idea of their having interacted and each having affected the lives of the other. The American culture, according to Calloway, did not just come up as a result of European settlement, and instead, it came about because both Europeans and Native Americans made their contributions to it; bringing about a unique culture that has become dominant in the whole country. Thus, Calloway considers Native Americans to have been advanced enough both socially and culturally to have an influence on the Europeans who ended up settling amongst them; in contrast to the traditional meaning of the new world.

One of the most significant aspects of the interactions between European settlers and Native Americans, covered by Calloway, is that it led to the spread of diseases that were prevalent in Europe into Native American populations. The spread of these diseases was not done intentionally, but instead, it came about as a result of the interaction between a small number of Native Americans and settlers, mainly through trade (Calloway, 2013, p.50). These diseases were most prevalent in trade routes and this is the main reason why the first people to get infected were often the Native Americans who lived close to these routes or in whose settlements Europeans travelled through. These individuals would in turn, as a result of other Native Americans further into the interior, end up infecting the latter; thus resulting in massive deaths from diseases which traditional Native medicine could not cure. The large number of Native Americans throughout the Americas who ended up dying did not do so because of direct interactions with European settlers, because a majority of them had not set eyes on a European before (Calloway, 2013, p.50). Instead, the diseases spread because of interactions between those Native Americans who had interacted with Europeans, and those who had not. The depopulation of some areas which came about as a result can be considered to be based, not on malice on the part of European settlers, but on the ignorance between the latter and the Native Americans concerning the dangers of European diseases. In this way, Calloway seems to blame disease, rather than the violent interactions between Europeans and Native Americans in the form of wars that would come up in later years, as the case of the loss of large populations of Native Americans.

According to Calloway, the peaceful interactions that took place between the Native Americans and European settlers tended to be based on the self-interest of the latter. This is because in their settlement of a new land, of which they were unfamiliar, they needed the Native Americans more than the Native Americans needed them (Calloway, 2013, p.53). Europeans considered Native Americans to be potential trade partners, and they actively sought to establish trade links aimed at bringing the latter into the economic system that had been established by the Europeans. Furthermore, European missionaries were eager to convert Native Americans to Christianity and these often sought to ensure that this objective was accomplished by going directly to their villages and ministering to them (Calloway, 2013, p.53). The result was that there was a significant growth of contact between these populations to such an extent that they were able to achieve a high level of cultural exchange. Thus, while some Europeans went to settle among the Native Americans, and even adopted some of their customs, some of the latter also chose to discard their own lifestyles and settle among Europeans. In this way, such scenarios as Europeans having tattooed their faces like Native Americans and Native Americans drinking tea became quite common. The creation of a hybrid society which involved the adoption of elements of both European and Native American cultures took place. Through the analysis that he makes concerning the interactions between Native Americans and Europeans, Calloway ensures that he disputes the prevalent narrative about the often hostile interactions between the settlers and the natives, and instead brings out a more positive outlook of these interactions.

Jill Lapore explores the concept of literacy and the means of transmitting history in the context of the new world. She states that the history of Native Americans has been for the most part disregarded because they did not maintain written records (Lapore, 1994). This disregard began to take place during the early European settlement of the Americas and has continued to the twenty first century where written records are considered to be the means through which history can be recorded. However, the disregard of Native American history does not take into account the fact that unlike European history, which was written down, Native American history, was kept through oral tradition. These oral traditions have instead come to be regarded as myths because there are no contemporary written records to verify their authenticity. Lapore points out that in the seventeenth century, there were a significant number of literate Native Americans who lived in European settlements and who could have written the oral histories of their people (Lapore, 1994). However, not record is made of any attempt having been made to put down these histories. Lapore suggests that the main reason behind this lack of written history of the Native Americans is that in order to achieve literacy, Native Americans were required to completely discard the traditions of their own people and instead adopt the Europeans lifestyle. This meant having to adopt Christianity, speak English, and live in European settlements. The result was that many of these individuals ended up losing touch with their own people; instead living at the periphery of Native Americans and Europeans since they were no longer fully accepted by either (Lapore, 1994). These individuals could therefore not write down the oral histories of their people for fear of being rejected by the Europeans whose culture they had adopted.

Another aspect of Native American and European interaction is discussed by William Cronon who considers this interaction from the European standpoint. For most Europeans who settled in the new world, the vastness of the land and its wilderness was incomprehensible because in Europe most of the land had been utilized and the wilderness that remained was in private hands (Cronon, 2003, p.33). When they considered the Native Americans and the simple life that they led surrounded by such abundance, they came to believe that the Native Americans were lazy. Furthermore, this concept of laziness was further enhanced because it was the women, rather than the men in Native American communities who farmed while the men hunted. In Europe, it was the men’s task to farm the land; enforcing the belief that Native American men were lazy. Cronon points out that these perceptions by Europeans were wrong because Native American societies were organized differently. Native Americans often sought to use the land according to their own needs rather than using it abundantly in order to create a surplus, the way the Europeans did (Cronon, 2003, p.122). Additionally, they often sought to make sure that they utilized what they had effectively, especially in winter months when, in situations where there was impending scarcity, these people tended to choose to go hungry in order to utilize the remaining food for as long as possible. These were customs that Europeans failed to understand and would make them enforce their dominance in society in a bid to promote their own way of life, which they thought was superior.

The common perceptions concerning American history, especially its origins, should be changed. This is because despite eventual European dominance over America, American history was not made up only by the European settlers. Instead, Native Americans also made significant contributions while they too were influenced by European culture. American history can be considered as an amalgamation of these two distinct cultures, which brought about a new culture that was adapted to a new environment as a result of interactions between Native Americans and Europeans. A full understanding of American history cannot be achieved without the inclusion of the peaceful interactions that took place between Native Americans and Europeans, because the contributions of the former is one of the main factors that brought about the success of settlements, which in turn brought about American history.

References

Calloway, C.G. (2013). New Worlds for All: Indians, Europeans, and the Remaking of Early America. Boston: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Cronon, W. (2003). Changes in the Land: Indians, Colonists, and the Ecology of New England. New York: Hill and Wang, 2003.

Lapore, J. (1994). Dead Men Tell No Tales: John Sassamon and the Fatal Consequences of Literacy. American Quarterly, 46(4): 497 – 512.

Banned From The Bible - The Stories That Were Deleted From Biblical History

The Influence of the Myth of Napoleon and the Napoleonic years on the Development of Romanticism

The myth of Napoleon has been found to have played a significant role in the development of the second wave of French romantic poetry. Such poets as Hugo and Musset were greatly influenced by the events that were considered to have been irrevocably tied to Napoleon, and it is to these myths that some of their greatest works can be attributed. While this may be the fact, the outside world seems to know very little concerning this remarkable man who is often considered to have been the villain in the stories concerning him outside of France itself. In Britain, for example, the fact that Napoleon was considered an enemy of the British civilisation has continued to be the view in the current world and this has affected the way that they view the French ruler. It is said that he was short in stature and that because of his height; he felt that everyone looked down on him, making him want to achieve greatness in compensation. Despite the stereotypes that have developed concerning Napoleon in some countries, the fact remains that he was the greatest ruler that France had ever had since Charlemagne.

One myth that has often been propagated concerning Napoleon was his height, which many stated that was quite short. This myth has turned out not to be true and this has been mainly because of the fact that he was 5’7”, which was about the average height of a Frenchman in the nineteenth century. In addition, Napoleon was a genuine believer in a united Europe which united all the European peoples under one state, despite their nationalities and ethnicities, so that there could be lasting peace between them. During this period, it was the British, not Napoleon, who did not want a peaceful settlement to the dispute concerning the dominion of the French empire over Europe, because the French empire was believed to be a potential threat to the prosperity of British trade and security both on land and at sea. An example of the reluctance of the British to reach a peaceful settlement with Napoleon was seen through the British breaking the treaty of Amiens, which resulted in war. In the resultant war, Napoleon only went to war because he wanted to retain his crown and not because he was in any way antagonistic towards the British. It is a fact that unlike other rulers in Europe who after defeat could still simply remains in power, this was not the case with Napoleon and this was because he was considered by the other rulers in Europe to be an upstart, who had taken the crown that legitimately belonged to the Bourbons. Thus, Napoleon could not afford to lose a fight because if he did, then all would be lost for him, an example of this being when in 1812, rumours spread that he had been killed in the Russian campaign, the British worked towards the restoration of the Bourbons, overlooking Napoleon’s son’s claim to the throne.

The romantic poets garnered their inspiration from Napoleon, whom they praised considerably in their works while comparing him to his less liked nephew, Napoleon III, who was the French emperor at the time. The image of Napoleon as a hero was not reflected in countries outside France, especially Britain, where the government worked tirelessly to ensure that the reputation of Napoleon was damaged beyond repair. There was the use of widespread propaganda which included the distribution of pamphlets and newspaper articles which stated that Napoleon was a usurper to the French throne who had murdered the rightful monarchs of other European states. In addition, it was stated that Napoleon was an invader of free nations whose aim was to ensure that Britain was brought under his control. The British population was of the belief that their country was about to be invaded by Napoleon worked in the increasing of the negative public opinion of him. However, the dread of Napoleon’s invasion of Britain was not apparent, especially when one considers the fact that during the peace of Amiens, he allowed tourists from Britain to flock to France. These tourists showed a grudging admiration and fascination for the achievements of Napoleon in France, which were quite considerable when compared to his contemporaries. Even after his defeat at Waterloo, when Napoleon was shipped to British waters, it is stated that a large number of small vessels approached the ship in which he was being held so that they could catch a glance of the man who many feared yet admired in equal measure. Napoleon was so popular that people travelled from far in Britain to see him, and this was a cause for panic for the British government, which feared that Napoleon’s popularity would influence a popular uprising within Britain itself. This is the reason why he was exiled on St. Helena Island, far from Britain, because he was considered a direct threat if he were to step on British soil.

The charisma of Napoleon is one of the factors which have contributed to the development of the Napoleonic myth. He is probably the only ruler in modern world history who, after being ousted from power and sent into exile, returned to his throne without a single shot being fired. When news of his returned reached the French, they immediately accepted it and their soldiers flocked to his banners in a show of support. The people cheered his return, looking upon it as a return to the peace and prosperity that they had enjoyed under his rule. The fact that the Bourbon king was quickly forgotten with the return of Napoleon is a testament of his charisma as well as the popularity that he enjoyed among the French people. The ability of Napoleon to move the masses can only be considered to be remarkable, because it showed just how much he was favoured by them. The return of Napoleon to Paris and his throne captivated the political and academic elites all over Europe because such an event had never happened before, thus totally unexpected.

During the period of the romantic poets, the fascination over Napoleon and his legacy was still at its peak, with the man’s achievements being so diverse that they created a wide array of myths that bred confusion concerning him. Romantic poets like Hugo, for example, were extremely influenced by the Napoleonic myth especially when one considers that he was born in the period under Napoleon’s rule. In addition, Hugo’s father was a general under Napoleon and he taught his son to have immense reverence and admiration for Napoleon; an admiration which Hugo carried all his life and which he often compared to that of Napoleon III, whom he considered to be a pale shadow of his glorious uncle. Among the most enduring aspects of the Napoleonic legacy were the wars which he fought in order to achieve a united Europe under French dominion. Where Louis XIV had failed, Napoleon succeeded because he managed to bring most of Europe under French rule and to spread the seed of the revolution over the borders of France to other European nations. Because of his achievements, the period under Napoleon’s rule was considered by the romantic poets to be the greatest in French history since he had led the country not only to greatness but also to almost uninterrupted peace and prosperity. The leadership ability of Napoleon was often praised in French romantic poetry and this also played a role in the further development of the Napoleonic myth to what it is in the current age. The myth of Napoleon’s political genius was often stated through his actions after he decided to get directly involved in the government of France. He made popular political marriage to one of the most famous women in France at the time, Josephine de Beauharnais, which further enhanced Napoleon’s image as the national hero. A few years after this, Napoleon was able to gain power in France, in the period which came to be known as the consulate. His political genius then came into play as he had the constitution revised, making him the most powerful man in the country, and with this new power, he was able to have the authority to appoint all the people who were to occupy strategic positions. With Napoleon’s rise to power, it can be said that while the French Revolution officially came to an end, his actions showed that he was indeed a child of the revolution. He swiftly reformed all the crucial sectors in the government, making them more efficient than they had ever been before. Reforms were carried out in such sectors as the economy, the judicial system, as well as the education system.

Napoleon’s greatness was further seen when he restored those basic freedoms which the French people had been denied. One of these freedoms was the freedom of religion, which Napoleon reinstated by inviting the Catholic Church back to France, but while this was the case, however, he did not give the Church the absolute authority it once had, and instead, its activities were placed under the supervision of the state. Very few people in the history of France during the age of the romantic poets had received the approval and admiration of the French people like had Napoleon. The fact that he was extremely popular with the French public, especially after the restoration of the empire under Napoleon III, the romantic writers wrote a great deal, not only because they admired him themselves, but also because of the fact that they were writing for an audience that was fairly pro-Napoleon and was nostalgic for the days of greatness that he had made possible for them. Even during the romantic age, there had been written many books and accounts concerning Napoleon and these were read widely by the learned elites in French society. The accounts of the life of Napoleon may have played a significant role in the characterisation of this man in the poems influenced by romanticism. The myths surrounding the life and achievements of Napoleon had a great deal of influence on the poetry that was written during the age of romanticism and this is because of the fact that they inspired the works of the romantic writers, who wrote all that was positive concerning the life of this man. In most of the works of the romantic writers, one will find that there is heavy criticism of the rulers that came after Napoleon and these were often compared unfavourably with him; this being in part a further development concerning the Napoleonic myth.

Napoleon was among the people who were most admired during the age of romanticism, not only as a leader of men, but also as a man devoted to his family. This admiration does not just stem from the fact that he is one of the greatest men to have ever lived in France, but it also came from the way he conducted himself throughout his life. For many French people, Napoleon was a unique man, who rose from extremely humble origins and became the emperor of France at its most powerful in history. His life was the subject of numerous literatures, with some writers supporting his deeds while others have condemned them. Despite these disagreements about Napoleon, one thing, which all writers agreed upon, was that he was indeed an extraordinary man. Most romantic poets considered Napoleon to have been one of the foremost, military general in world history. Within a few years after becoming the French emperor, he had brought most of continental Europe under his rule. Furthermore, he had created a unique system of government, the like of which had never been seen in Europe. To the romantic poets, the achievements of this man were far superior to those of his successors, none of whom proved to be as capable as he had been. It can therefore be said that the Napoleonic myth influenced romantic poets because it also included the sense of nostalgia for the time of Napoleon, which was the greatest in French history.

Napoleon Bonaparte

Napoleon Bonaparte is one of the people who I admire the most in the world, not only as a leader of men, but also as a man devoted to his family. This admiration does not just stem from the fact that he is one of the greatest men to have ever lived in the Western world, but it also comes from the way he conducted himself throughout his life. Napoleon was indeed a unique man, who rose from extremely humble origins and became the emperor of the most powerful nation in Europe at the time. His life has been the subject of numerous literatures, with some writers supporting his deeds while others have condemned them. Despite these disagreements about Napoleon, one thing, which all writers agree upon, is that he was indeed an extraordinary man. Most historians consider Napoleon to have been one of, if not the foremost, military general in world history. Within a few years after becoming the French emperor, he had brought most of continental Europe under his rule. Furthermore, he had created a unique system of government, the like of which had never been seen in Europe. For the first time in the years after the French Revolution, the Catholic Church returned to France under his guidance. In addition, Napoleon was a man unique in his time because of the immense love he had for his family. He was also a man who was not afraid to take any path to satisfy his ambitions. It is because of all these distinctiveness and a lot more, which make him the person I have a high regard for.

Napoleon was born in the town of Ajaccio in Corsica, in 1769, to a local Corsican minor nobleman, and his birth coincided with the time when the French were trying to enforce their rule on Corsica, an island which had recently been ceded to them by an Italian ruler. Napoleon was born just a year after the French had acquired Corsica, and this occurrence ensured that he was born a French national. This ensured that while he was growing up, he did not share the same resentment as older Corsicans did towards what was locally termed as a French occupation. Instead, napoleon grew up with a great admiration for the French, something which would eventually guide him towards the path of becoming their ruler. Because his father had collaborated with the French from the early days of the occupation, he was given a particularly powerful position in the government of Ajaccio. This ensured that his family remained well off, and because of the influence his office carried, two of his sons, Joseph and Napoleon, were sent to the prestigious College d’Autun in France, where they were to be educated. It is thus that Napoleon came to France for the first time; little knowing that he would one day come to rule this country. His father passed away while he was still at a military college, and he was forced to act as the head of his family, despite his being a younger son. This was because his older brother, Joseph, was exceedingly incompetent and tended not to take his responsibilities seriously. This is one of the characteristics displayed by Napoleon that are most admirable. He was not afraid to take up responsibility, no matter how hard they seemed to be at first.

It was soon after he left the military college that he and his family permanently relocated to France, where Napoleon’s career would begin in earnest. For a person so young, he showed his ambitions early by joining a political group soon after relocating to France. Furthermore, he took up military service in the French army which was based in Nice. The tumultuous events, which were taking place in France during this time, gave Napoleon the opportunity to satisfy his ambitions. He got his first successful break when he saved the government of the time from a coup attempt by a rival group. This act ensured that he got the attention of the committee which ruled France at the time, who promoted him to the position of commander in the army. His new found influence earned him the command of the French army in Italy; a position, which he had coveted. This is where his martial ability came to be exhibited for the first time. When he was given command, he found the men to be disgruntled and underfed. His charismatic nature and organizational and military brilliance soon changed that as this became the best wing of the French military. Not only was there a complete turnaround in the men’s morale, Napoleon managed to gain victories over the Austrians which were crucial to the French cause. These actions vastly enhanced his image in France, and when he returned, he was a national hero. With his return to France, Napoleon truly started his political career.

This man’s political genius can be seen through his actions after his return to France from the war in Italy. He made what one could term a political marriage to one of the most famous women in France at the time, Josephine de Beauharnais. This turned out to be a tremendously popular marriage in the country, and it further enhanced Napoleon’s image as the national hero. Within a few years, Napoleon came to gain power in France, as one of the three men who ruled the country. His political genius then came into play as he had the constitution revised, making him the most powerful man in the country. This new power enabled him to have the authority to appoint all the people who were to occupy strategic positions. With Napoleon’s rise to power, it can be said that the French Revolution officially came to an end. His actions show that he was indeed a child of the revolution, as he used to say. He swiftly reformed all the crucial sectors in the government, making them more efficient than they had ever been before. Reforms were carried out in such sectors as the economy, the judicial system, as well as the education system. Napoleon’s greatness can further be seen when he restored those basic freedoms which the French people had been denied. One of these freedoms was the freedom of religion, which Napoleon reinstated by inviting the Catholic Church back to France. However, he did not give the Church the absolute authority it once had, and instead, its activities were placed under the supervision of the state. This ensured that the Church did not abuse its powers as it had done previously.

One of the most admirable things about Napoleon is his dedication to his family. When he rose to greatness, he made sure that members of his family also shared in it. He was exceedingly generous to them, often giving his siblings powerful positions in his empire. In fact, all of his siblings, except one, became monarchs of various parts of the continent during his rule. Even Joseph, the brother who had abandoned his responsibility as the oldest son, was made a king of Spain. This just shows the true nature of Napoleon; he was a loving man who did not hold grudges. Napoleon had one known illegitimate son, Alexandre Walewski, whose mother was a Polish noblewoman. While many men in that period tended to ignore their illegitimate children, Napoleon recognized his son and took responsibility for him. This can be said to be an example of his loving and caring nature. Despite the many wars which took place under his rule, the French people did surprisingly well. Their government was for the first time highly efficient, and the bureaucracy whom Napoleon had put in place worked far better than previous governments. It is because of all these achievements, made by a man from such humble origins, that I consider Napoleon to be one of the greatest and most admirable, men in history.