When did relations between Native Americans and white settler/travellers

>>1376449
rape, disease, alcoholism, enslavement and forced conversion/denigration of indigenous culture

>>1376449
Both things always coexisted from pretty much the first second.

reading the early settler accounts and diaries (george catlin and columbus' documentations), they seemed to have a pretty chill relationship with each other to start. i was wondering if there was a specific 'flash point' where the violence kicked off, or whether it was an evolving toxic relationship for decades

Colonist's greed

>>1376488
colombus literally wrote after meeting them that they'd make excellent slaves

>>1376499
Did you read his post? He said settlers. Fishermen and the French had long had peaceful relations with indians before the first full settlements and for the first part of pilgrims settling, the tribes and english got along very well

>>1376505
>diaries (george catlin and columbus' documentations)

I read it did you?

Really depends on the tribe. A lot of tribes peacefully co-existed with white men right up to the point that they were relocated west to make their land available for white settles.

The plains Indians were generally more war-like than many of the eastern tribes.

>>1376488
It really depends on what area you're talking about. Things got violent basically from the start with the Spanish, but the English, French, and Dutch colonies has a longer history of more peaceful interaction.

>>1376516
this is revision

>>1376526
That's essentially what happened to the "Five Civilized Tribes".

>>1376513
yes, im just stupid senpai

>>1376499
Wasn't that in the Caribbean?

>>1376547
still native american, still set precedent for later encounters throughout north america
>>1376536
it wasn't good relations, it was fucking horrible. you need to read more about this before you say peaceful and co-exist because it was not that at all especially with the "civilized" tribes

>>1376449
The day they met.

Relations were always mixed at best, anon

>>1376449
Natives were extremely hostile from very early on.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ratcliffe_(governor)

They were always violent. Peaceful trade was an anomaly.

>>1376619
Even further back, the vikings got chased off of Newfoundland by the local tribes.

>>1376469
This.

>>1376449
As soon as whites had the advantage in power

File: Crying-Indian.jpg (106KB, 1000x744px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1000x744px

>>1376449
Day 0. It helps to not think of American natives as a monolith, but rather dozens to hundreds of groups with their own unique power structures and diplomacy.

>The very first European settlers were vikings that got involved in a blood feud and were BTFO the continent.
>The next set were pretty much pirates who murdered and raped at will.
>More nuanced conquests involved manipulating the diplomatic situations in America (Inca, Aztecs, etc.)
>North American relations were usually better, but natives got bodied by disease, and political conflicts usually ended badly for them after Europeans found their footing in the colonies.

I'm not an expert, but anytime I look into the subject I'm really entertained. The mindset behind most of the Indian Wars in North America mirror the war on terror in a lot of ways.

>>1377011
It's funny that in the scandinavian failure to colonize North America, they paved the way for European invasion. They brought disease which led to untold deaths. By the time settlers were really coming and going 90% of the Coastal native were dead. Entire villages, and even what could be called cities devoid of people. I wonder how things would have turned out if not for the diseases brought by Europeans.

>>1377098
Forgive me if I'm wrong but I've always been told the Vikings had too brief of an encounter with the Native Americans to transmit and epidemic-like diseases and the majority of the diseases that killed off most of the Natives were introduced by the Spanish

>>1377098
>>1377124
Spanish, English, etc.

Scandinavians encountered the Thule from Canada/Greenland. For 100% understandable reasons, nobody tried to colonize those parts for hundreds of years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thule_people

>>1377098
Funnily enough the Vikings don't seem to have introduced much, if any, plagues to North America. Which is unsurprising because there were probably less than 150 total vikings in North America, and they were in a relatively isolated region and the settlers themselves were from already isolated Greenland and Iceland. (as compared to the Spaniards coming from mainland Europe and landing in densely populated areas in central America)

As I understand it, what happened was that there was a long period of drought and disease between 900-1000 and 1300-1400 that, combined with over-farming/lack of farming space and overpopulation, caused the collapse of most/all of the native cultural groups. So by the time the Spaniards show up, everybody is only just starting to recover from the apocalypse and then the get hit by the European diseases.

>>1376452
>>1376494
>>1376499
>>1376526
>>1376556
>>1377079
>claim to be against revision
>claim white guys were 100% evil 100% of the time and native americans were like the naavi from avatar

>>1377141
Also there's a rumor/legend that the Basques secretly discovered North America around 1200-1300 while in search of whales and cod. This is based off of claims that Basque fishermen always returned with large cargoes of cod during that period but were never seen in traditional cod fishing grounds in the North Atlantic and off Iceland, and that by the time European explorers reached New England and Newfoundland there were already "thousand" of Basque fishing boats in the area.

Probably just a legend though, but one could easily see a insular community keeping some really great fishing grounds super secret.