Karen Kuckerman Analysis
In “ENGLISH PERCEPTIONS OF TREACHERY, 1583-1640: THE CASE OF THE AMERICAN 'SAVAGES”, Karen Kupperman analyzes what it means to be treacherous in the eyes of the English colonists, and explores the idea that, “treachery in Virginia was most often on the side of the ‘whites’, “(Kupperman, 1977, p.285). She discusses that the natives were viewed as treacherous due to their so-called uncivilized nature. Kupperman is a historian that studies colonial history in the 1600’s. She is experienced in her field and can therefore provide correct analysis on the subject.
Native Indians were described by many colonists as, “[churlish]”, and … “dignified”, (Kupperman, 1977, p.263). Kupperman’s purpose for initiating the article with the colonists’ views was …show more content…
When presenting her argument, Kupperman only gave accounts based on English perspective. For example, she writes, “he further argued…or, “Smith recorded”, basing most of her conclusions from colonists (Kupperman, 1977, p.276). It would have been more advantageous for her had she provided accounts from the Natives themselves; this piece does after all talk frequently about them. Another issue present is Kupperman’s failure to discuss in depth about the effects of mistreating the Natives. Initially she writes, “In practice… severity, was found to be more useful”, describing the process in which Englishmen, “[dealt] with the salvages” (Kupperman, 1977, p.267). She was vague in providing details of what happened after the said mistreatment.
In final analysis, it is clear that Kupperman provided a technical examination of the true “savages” in the New World. She writes to emphasize the importance of knowing the distinction between the English’s perception of treachery and what treachery truly is. Kupperman does this by providing accounts of what occurred in the New World. This article appeals to readers interested in knowing more about contradicting views of treacherous savagery. Kupperman’s article is an excellent read, worthy enough to be considered “research material” that can help historians and
Native Indians were described by many colonists as, “[churlish]”, and … “dignified”, (Kupperman, 1977, p.263). Kupperman’s purpose for initiating the article with the colonists’ views was …show more content…
When presenting her argument, Kupperman only gave accounts based on English perspective. For example, she writes, “he further argued…or, “Smith recorded”, basing most of her conclusions from colonists (Kupperman, 1977, p.276). It would have been more advantageous for her had she provided accounts from the Natives themselves; this piece does after all talk frequently about them. Another issue present is Kupperman’s failure to discuss in depth about the effects of mistreating the Natives. Initially she writes, “In practice… severity, was found to be more useful”, describing the process in which Englishmen, “[dealt] with the salvages” (Kupperman, 1977, p.267). She was vague in providing details of what happened after the said mistreatment.
In final analysis, it is clear that Kupperman provided a technical examination of the true “savages” in the New World. She writes to emphasize the importance of knowing the distinction between the English’s perception of treachery and what treachery truly is. Kupperman does this by providing accounts of what occurred in the New World. This article appeals to readers interested in knowing more about contradicting views of treacherous savagery. Kupperman’s article is an excellent read, worthy enough to be considered “research material” that can help historians and