Religion and the Colonial Encounter: The Massacre of Native Americans as an Instance of Religion Destroying Culture
Cultural and religious differences had been part of the landscape of the New World, later called America, long before the Europeans arrived and settled in the region. Indigenous people native to the American continent were divided based on language, landscape, rituals, and cultural practices. Salisbury (14) observes that some native tribes such as the Iroquois and Hurons were entrenched in a historical rivalry despite being geographical neighbors. Others, such as the native groups that would form the coalition of the Iroquois League, had developed forms of government that fostered harmonious coexistence despite the prevailing cultural differences between one another. Much remained the same until the arrival of the Europeans, whose religious influence would later motivate the mass murder of native tribes to the detriment of their culture (Salisbury 22). Cultural identity is a significant reason for rivalry among the native American tribes.
Cultural identity is not a birthright; instead, it is acquired through continuous conditioning by the entire group on the behaviors and decisions expected of an individual. For one to identify with a culture, they must make judgments that members of the society deem appropriate; they must also assess their decision-making process in comparison with the values of others (Lincoln 51). An essential concept is that coherence must exist between individual and group values; this is what leads to cultural integration. No society in the world depicts perfect assimilation with its members; inevitably, factions always arise. These divisions usually indicated differences in geography, socioeconomic, or political affiliation. Despite the lack of ideal integration, unity still exists within cultures as long as core values are flexible, and disagreements occur within an acceptable range. These are the differences which the settlers utilized to create disunity among the tribes.
The impact of Europeans on the lives and culture of all Native American peoples started as they traded and interacted over the years with European traders. This impact is captured in the Natives’ mythological stories, which colonizers who arrived later altered to justify the existence of European populations. Creation stories, for instance, were modified to claim that Mother Earth had created people of different colors as opposed to that of the people native to America (Salisbury 16). The Creek, a native tribe, claimed that the difference in skin color resulted from the Creator undercooking the Europeans to the extent that their skins became fairer, and cooking the next people he created such that they were browner, like all natives. The early encounters between the natives and Europeans were generally friendly and harmonious. The relations would, however, denigrate with the subsequent arrival of Christian missionaries, and later Spanish colonialists (Salisbury 18). Culture can refer to both a community or shared customs and habits. It requires participation in group mediated activities, and not only dictates what to do but how to do it. Whether it is eating, dancing, talking, or even clothing, all the behaviors are conditioned directly or indirectly by culture. A community’s language is also an essential factor in this, as it not only constitutes spoken words but the non-verbal symbols or communication patterns practiced by a group (Lincoln 50). Languages represent the myths, stories, and tales told to express a belief or to teach life lessons to the youth. By altering the myths of the native peoples, the Europeans were directly changing native culture.
Historical analysts believe that the early traders and missionaries contributed significantly to the arrival of colonialists who would destroy the culture of the native peoples. On their part, the traders sold goods to the Natives on credit and even allowed them to overbuy. When the latter could not pay, they were often obliged to settle their debts by ceding land their land, which was held in high cultural and spiritual regard (Podziba 385). The traders would subsequently welcome and sell the acquired land to other settlers who arrived en masse towards the 17th century. Some new arrivals reached the new-found-lands with a colonialist agenda. The new visitors were less interested in participating in trade with locals – as the Europeans called them – and more absorbed in acquiring their land by whatever means necessary (Marincic 24).
Religion is an aspect of culture. It serves to provide a stable foundation, lessening the effects of change over time (Lincoln 54). Faith works by elevating human preference to transcendent status and establishes them as revealed truths. For instance, many cultures have family values as their core beliefs, which are contrary to many human sexual desires. Hence, Christian notions, such as ‘thou shall not commit adultery,’ curbs these sensual cravings. Religion formulates strict principles or rules for all members of the group. Since the regulations are divine, they apply to everyone and offer dire consequences to those who do not adhere.
One of the means which the colonialist agenda employed to acquire more land and subjugate natives was through conversion to Christianity. To initiate their plan, the colonial enthusiasts first sent missionaries from Europe to convert the local population. Some natives, such as the Cherokee, turned voluntarily. Those who converted willingly were, according to Matta (7), motivated by similarities between the native religion and Christian religions. For example, the Christian narrative about Moses receiving the ten commandments on Mt. Sinai resonated with the Cherokee traditional belief that Thunder gods resided in the mountains. The story of Jesus fasting in the desert on a spiritual journey also resonated with the local tale of a sick Cherokee warrior who faced a monster in the woods on a similarly spiritual journey (Matta 16). These and other commonalities between the Christian religion and the local culture made it easier for the Europeans to convert native Americans to the Christian faith. The converts were henceforth required to denounce traditions which conflicted with the Christian values (Salisbury 22). Even those who did not convert wholly into Christianity did so partially so that they could at least retain some elements of their cultural practices that were incompatible with the new religion. In this manner, the Europeans set the blueprint for the colonization process, with conversion to Christianity playing a central role (Salisbury 24).
The Spanish colonialists arrived in America after the missionaries and utilized Christianity to destroy the culture of the Native population. On their part, the Spanish the excused their colonization – or deculturization – effort because they were using Christianity as a means of integrating the natives into the superior European culture (Vallgarda 868). They were only keen on eliminating the native culture. The Spanish hence resorted to massacring vast numbers of natives who refused to convert to the Christian religion. Geertz (6) explains that this colonial massacre and many other colonial massacres were a result of faith as a cultural system. The paper will explore further the slaughter of native culture and religion by colonists who tried to impose their social order on the ‘locals’ that they encountered as they arrived in America.
Culture, as Geertz sees it does not have “any unusual ambiguity” (Geertz 89). Geertz considers culture as a pattern of meanings that symbols have and that are transmitted historically over time so that people can communicate (Breault: Geertz’s Definitions PowerPoint). Geertz sees religion as a system of symbols that are a powerful and long-lasting motivator of people and their moods (Breault: Geertz’s Definitions PowerPoint). Sacred symbols are an example of something that provides people with their character and tone, their ethos (Geertz 89). Duran (n.d.) documents the way that the Spaniards and Cortes destroyed Aztec temples and idols.
The way that colonists destroyed the Native American culture was not the only instance of a cultural and religious massacre. The Spaniards brought the religion of ‘His Majesty’ (Duran 558). The Spaniards then forced their theological system on the Aztecs, destroying their cultural history. Was it because the symbols that the Native American culture possessed somehow threatened the colonists? Indeed, many colonists felt that their very religion is threatened by the ‘wild Indians’? Was this simply a lack of understanding or a fear of the unknown? Or was it something far more sinister, a purposeful and wholesale slaughter of Native American religion and culture in the name of the King?
I believe that Geertz would agree that the colonist’s religion was a cultural system that the colonists used against Native American groups that they encountered to change and, if necessary, defeat or even kill them. The colonists used their system of symbols to try and change the pervasive, powerful, and long-lasting moods and motivations of the Native Americans (Geertz 90). Native American symbols, often religious, were part of their general order of existence (Geertz 92). It was this general order of life that colonists must have seen as they observed these indigenous groups from afar? Were there any scientists or anthropologists in the group? Instead of observing, studying, and learning from these different groups that were encountered by the colonists.
The colonists engaged in activities that aim to strip the ‘locals’ in America of all sense of identity. The colonists used religious symbols, in the King’s name, as a weapon. The colonists also interpreted the religious traditions and symbols of the Native Americans as bad or evil. Rituals and symbols having to do with things like totemism, shamanism, and ancestor worship were perceived as going against proper religious order. The anger that certain native American religious symbols provoked in some colonists was extreme. The colonial response, in many instances, was a massacre of any native American religious or cultural symbol insight.
Some colonists to the Americas brought with them a colonial massacre in the name of religion. Some colonists massacred the native American people because they saw them as an obstacle to a greedy land grab. Some colonists likely brought religion to the native American’s in a genuine and honest attempt to spread the word of God through Christianity and Christian charity. In Winthrop’s A Model of Christian Charity, it appears as though some Christian colonists truly cared about all humankind and wanted to bring the word of God to those who were nonbelievers. It seems that a primary driving force behind the colonialists engaging in a Native Americans cultural massacre that occurred in the Americas was Christianity.
Ultimately, the relationship between Native Americans and European traders set the stage for eventual colonialism that would strip the former of their cultural identity. Their contact with missionaries and the Spanish colonialist effectively sealed the demise of their culture with unprecedented massacres. In summation, it is apparent that the colonial contact indeed had adverse effects on the native Americans. It is no wonder why the native American people remain protective and guarded of whatever little they have remaining of their beliefs and practices.
As evidenced above by the Spanish conquest of native Americans, religion is indeed a powerful tool that can be manipulated to vanquish entire cultures. This sentiment is perhaps illustrated best in Naylor’s (251) work in which he captures the mantra of the 1863 Parliament of Religion. For the organizers of the meeting, the prevailing mantra was that religion was “like the white light of heaven,” which had been split into multiple colors and hence needed to be reassembled “back into the white light of heavenly truth.” This philosophy is indeed reminiscent of the Spanish superiority complex that led them to believe that the native culture and religion was rather insignificant. Arrogant religiosity indeed portends profound danger for cultures it considers threatening to its existence.
The European settlers utilized culture as an instrument, a tool for mobilization, identity construction, exclusion of outsiders, and the establishment of an internal hierarchy (Lincoln 51). It enables the formation of leadership hierarchies; this can take shape through group elders or ethnic leaders, with a governance position assigned to individuals who greatly adhere to cultural values. From the leadership structure comes the concept of hegemony, the notion that the elite within the group will seek to dominate its discourse. These adherents determine what values the culture should hold dear while at the same time, suppress dissenting voices. Settlers actively replaced existing leadership hierarchies by establishing colonial administration.
The vibrant aspects of culture are ethics, aesthetics, and religion. Ethics deals with the question of morality, while aesthetics is an evaluation of sensory experience (Lincoln 54). Ethics provides the basis for making moral judgments on varying situations; for example, how to treat a criminal, or whether one can lie to protect themselves. Aesthetics, on the other hand, deal with what is pleasing and provides members with the opportunity to evaluate what is beautiful. For successful evaluation, followers must take into account all their experience, what others describe as being right, and its relation to the current object. After making an assessment, others judge, to determine the effectiveness of analysis. The settlers did not value native culture hence did not find its destruction as a compromise of ethics.
Religion plays a vital role in preventing the erosion of any social ethos by putting forward commandments, rules, or rituals for believers to follow. The move from aesthetic and ethics to religion creates a transformation where human logic, guidelines, and preferences are misrepresented as divine, more than human; this insulates them from criticism (Lincoln 56). In effect, a Muslim woman wearing a scarf is not merely patriarchal dominance or a human decision, but a sacred duty. Hence, communities are more stable when cultural preferences are encircled within the confines of religion. It offers other cultural aspects such as ethics and aesthetics as a means of securing themselves by being grounded in culture; this is a reflection of religion’s desire to colonize all other aspects of culture.
Since the era of enlightenment, the place that religion holds, especially in Western societies, has grown smaller. In this period, philosophers, such as Kant, made the argument that philosophy and reason should replace religion (Lincoln 59). The world has since become more secular, although capitalism, instead of philosophy, took the place of faith. In the pre-enlightenment era, religion was the central theme in culture and stabilized culture through the grounding of morals. In contemporary times, the economy is the primary domain of culture and religion. Some view the modern society as corrupt and immoral, hence the rise in groups, both Islamic and Christian, seeking to restore religion to a culturally controlling position in society. The colonizers of the Americas were mainly driven by the prospect of economic gain in the new world. Destroying native culture and the spread of Christianity was merely a convenience in achieving their financial goals.
Religion can be viewed both as a belief and as an identity marker (Beyers 5). As an identity marker, it offers individuals a social and personal distinctiveness, and this provides them with a sense of belonging, a feeling of order, and meaning in life. Christianity played this role for the European colonizers in America. A person can assimilate into a particular cultural group and still retain their religious identity. The Spaniards could have assimilated with the native Americans to lessen conflict. The result, however, is that they may not be deemed as socially equal to the group they have joined (Beyers 6). For example, the modern-day United States allows immigration of Middle Eastern citizens into the country, despite a vast majority of them ascribing to a minority religion in that nation. American born citizens, however, will not fully recognize these immigrants as equal members of society. For this to happen, they must subscribe to the American culture, which includes food, clothing, language, and to some extent, the predominant belief system. In such a situation, the foreigners’ religion acts as their identity marker and not the American culture. In effect, faith no longer resides within the minds of believers, but in a culture where societies construct religion. In this regard, harmony between different religious groups can be achieved by recognizing border differences of the belief systems and respecting them.
Conclusion
A relationship exists between religion and culture as Europeans utilized Christianity to destroy native American culture. On its own, religion seeks to dominate other cultures and eradicate non-conforming belief systems. Hence, this could also serve as a motivating factor for missionaries to focus on converting Native peoples. There is a strong reason to suggest, however, that colonization is about economic exploitation. Hence, spreading Christianity to the native population made it easier for settlers to prosper under a familiar cultural and religious background. A better alternative than adapting to the culture of the native Americans.
Works Cited
Beyers, Jaco. “Religion and Culture: Revisiting a Close Relative.” HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies, vol. 73, no. 1, 2017, pp. 1–9., doi:10.4102/hts. v73i1.3864.
Breault, E. (n.d.) Geertz’s Definitions PowerPoint
Duran (n.d.). Excerpt from Histories of the Indies of New Spain
Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures: Religion as a cultural system.
Lincoln, Bruce. Holy Terrors: Thinking about Religion after September 11th. University of Chicago Press, 2010.
Marincic, Amanda M. “The National Historic Preservation Act: An inadequate attempt to protect the cultural and religious sites of Native Nations.” Iowa L. Rev. 103 (2017): 1777.
Matta, Emily. “Rejecting Eve: Reception of Christianity Among Cherokee and Iroquois Women.” Fairmount Folio: Journal of History 17 (2016).
Naylor, Keith D. “The Black presence at the World’s Parliament of Religions, 1893.” Religion 26.3 (1996): 249-259.
Podziba, Susan L. “Mediating conflicts over sacred lands.” Conflict Resolution Quarterly 35.4 (2018): 383-391.
Salisbury, Neal. “The Indians’ old world: Native Americans and the coming of Europeans.” Colonial America and the Early Republic. Routledge, 2017. 1-24.
Winthrop, J. (1630). A Model of Christian Charity