romero_making_war_and_minting_christians
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| romero_making_war_and_minting_christians [2026/01/23 15:29] – 199.111.65.35 | romero_making_war_and_minting_christians [2026/01/23 21:57] (current) – jjardine | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| Native masculinity was something these men had to earn rather than inherit; this was achieved through physical skills, spiritual progress, and community recognition. They would prove and gain their manhood by completing spiritual quests, competing in games or warfare, showing spiritual discipline, and showing their devotion to their community. Masculinity depended on the action and continued proof of manhood and dedication, rather than being given automatic respect based on title or status. (Callie McAleese) | Native masculinity was something these men had to earn rather than inherit; this was achieved through physical skills, spiritual progress, and community recognition. They would prove and gain their manhood by completing spiritual quests, competing in games or warfare, showing spiritual discipline, and showing their devotion to their community. Masculinity depended on the action and continued proof of manhood and dedication, rather than being given automatic respect based on title or status. (Callie McAleese) | ||
| + | A major theme throughout this piece is how differing conceptions of masculinity between Native Americans and the English led to misunderstandings. A primary example of this is how hunting and games were perceived in both cultures. Hunting was the man's role to provide for the community in Native culture, whereas it was a leisure activity for the English. Thus, when the Puritans saw the Native men hunting frequently, they considered them to be lazy. (Ezra Carper) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Something this piece addresses that we discussed in class as well was how you can't impose your culture' | ||
| ===== Religion ===== | ===== Religion ===== | ||
| Puritan customs determined how good of a man someone was by seeing how they conducted themselves in accordance with their religion. Similarly, Native Americans in the area put importance on religion to determine manliness by partaking in rituals and daily activities. These rituals and daily activities these men performed where all an effort to achieve the physical and spiritual traits found in the ideal version of a native man. (Henry Prior) | Puritan customs determined how good of a man someone was by seeing how they conducted themselves in accordance with their religion. Similarly, Native Americans in the area put importance on religion to determine manliness by partaking in rituals and daily activities. These rituals and daily activities these men performed where all an effort to achieve the physical and spiritual traits found in the ideal version of a native man. (Henry Prior) | ||
| Line 18: | Line 21: | ||
| In the Indigenous Northeast, the line between the " | In the Indigenous Northeast, the line between the " | ||
| + | |||
| + | English Christians sought to have their practice of Christianity associated with their masculinity. The Church as a concept/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | This reading shows a lot of the major differences between Native and Puritan religions and masculinity. In the Native culture, masculinity was drawn on perfect physical skill as well as supernatural ability. There was not much difference between the spiritual and physical accomplishments, | ||
| ===== Manhood as an Accomplishment ===== | ===== Manhood as an Accomplishment ===== | ||
| Line 25: | Line 32: | ||
| In both Colonial and Native society, spirituality was an important part of acquiring manhood. Native society placed value on rituals and physical capabilities. Boys were expected to be able to prove themselves in fields of hunting, running, sports, games, and swimming. Demonstration of these skills proved that a Native boy had become a man. Colonial men still used spirituality as a marker of who is a man, but in a different sense. Men were not made by a ritual, but they were maintained by piety and adherence to the word of God. One who strayed from the righteous path was deemed less manly. (Tanner Gillikin) | In both Colonial and Native society, spirituality was an important part of acquiring manhood. Native society placed value on rituals and physical capabilities. Boys were expected to be able to prove themselves in fields of hunting, running, sports, games, and swimming. Demonstration of these skills proved that a Native boy had become a man. Colonial men still used spirituality as a marker of who is a man, but in a different sense. Men were not made by a ritual, but they were maintained by piety and adherence to the word of God. One who strayed from the righteous path was deemed less manly. (Tanner Gillikin) | ||
| + | |||
| + | This piece presents not only the views of masculinity of the puritans into light but also by touching on the native ideals of manhood and the behaviors that go along with it, it serves as a window into seeing the relationships that would form between these two groups. How the differences between them create social friction in some instances like the role of games and sport in Native culture clashing with European puritan values, whilst also creating some semblance of similarity for instance through the emphasis on public speech in both cultures views of masculinity. (J.D.J) | ||
| + | |||
| + | This piece lays out many of the cultural differences between the “accomplishment” of manhood, specifically, | ||
| + | |||
| + | As others have stated, both Native American and Anglo-American colonist cultures portrayed manhood as something that must be accomplished, | ||
| Line 32: | Line 45: | ||
| This article also discusses in relation to power; the importance of oratory skills in proving manhood. In the case of native men, they needed to be not only great speakers, but there was also value in displaying wit. It is interesting to see that native and colonial manhood was partially determined in this way because they seem to be two sides of the same coin, as well as being seen a proof of the importance of a man needing to be influential in order to prove manhood. (Hannah Covin) | This article also discusses in relation to power; the importance of oratory skills in proving manhood. In the case of native men, they needed to be not only great speakers, but there was also value in displaying wit. It is interesting to see that native and colonial manhood was partially determined in this way because they seem to be two sides of the same coin, as well as being seen a proof of the importance of a man needing to be influential in order to prove manhood. (Hannah Covin) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Romero’s article shows masculinity not as a series of nested hierarchies, | ||
| + | |||
romero_making_war_and_minting_christians.1769182167.txt.gz · Last modified: by 199.111.65.35
