tle regard for the Indian populations they displaced.
With the exception of a few enlightened colonial
leaders such as Roger Williams and William Penn,
British settlers generally viewed Indians with con-
tempt. They took whatever land they wanted
without its inhabitants’ consent and without of-
fering any sort of compensation. When met with
Indian resistance, they fought back with unequaled
ferocity. Their aim in such conflicts as the Pequot
War and King Philip’s War was not just victory but
the total annihilation of their Indian enemies.
Increased contact with whites did not just
bring Indians into conflict with the newcomers. It
also created new rivalries or inflamed old ones be-
tween Indian groups. The Pueblo and the Apache
had long had a contentious relationship. But when
the Spanish refused to provide the Apache with the
Pueblo corn they needed, the Apache had to resort
to attacking and raiding Pueblo villages to steal the
food they previously had obtained through trade.
Competition in the fur trade similarly pitted the
Huron tribes against the mighty Iroquois Con-
federacy. As allies of the French, the Huron grew
wealthy as middlemen, trading food to interior
tribes for furs, which they in turn traded to their
French partners. Armed by the Dutch, the jealous
Iroquois set out to destroy their Huron rivals. In
a brutal 1649 attack, they killed huge numbers of
Huron and drove the survivors from their lands,
forever destroying the unity of the tribe.
By the beginning of the 18th century, In-
dians were increasingly drawn into the conflicts
between the English and French, who had emerged
as the primary non-Indian competitors for lands
in the east. A series of wars fought on European
and North American soil culminated in what was
called in North America the French and Indian War
(1754–63)—so named because most Indian groups
involved in the conflict chose to fight on the side
of the French. England’s victory in the war proved
disastrous for all eastern Indians. In the peace treaty,
France was forced to relinquish nearly all its land
claims in North America. Indians were stunned by
these concessions: accustomed to playing the two
European powers against one another, they now
had to deal with the British only, leaving them in a
far more vulnerable position than ever before.
The Indians’ fears about the English were
quickly borne out. General Jeffrey Amherst, the
commander of British troops in North America,
abandoned the European practice of distributing
gifts to ingratiate Indians and solidify allegiances
with them. Many groups had come to rely on the
goods they had routinely received from the French,
so Amherst’s policy posed a dire threat to their well-
being. Indian fury at the British exploded in a series
of attacks on Detroit and other English forts. The
conflict became known as Pontiac’s Rebellion, after
the Ottawa leader who helped instigate the attacks
by translating the anti-British religious movement
of the popular Lenni Lenape (Delaware) prophet
Neolin into military action.
Although the rebellion was short-lived, it im-
pressed upon the English government the need to
court Indian favor. The Crown responded by estab-
lishing the Proclamation Line of 1763, a boundary
stretching along the crest of the Appalachian
Mountains. The king declared that all land west of
the line was for Indian use and forbade all colonists
from entering it. The declaration, however, did
little except fuel the growing anger of the colonists,
who resented royals an ocean away dictating where
the colonists could and could not settle. These ten-
sions would only become more intense and would
eventually draw Indians into still another non-
Indian war.1607 to 1775