Created page with "Go-Betweens 1. History- In the stories of Indian-white relations in the colonial era, the Indian headmen and the colonial governors are given a prominent role. And they..."
New page
Go-Betweens
1. History- In the stories of Indian-white relations in the colonial era, the Indian headmen and the colonial governors are given a prominent role. And they were key figures. They were the players who signed the treaties, and they were the people who had to persuade their communities to abide by the agreements reached.
In the shadows behind these chiefs and governors were other individuals who were equally essential to the success of the relationship between these two very different peoples. In eighteenth-century documents, they are called interpreters because they literally translated the speeches of each into the language of the other. But they did much more. They guided colonists to Indian villages and escorted Indian delegations to colonial capitals such as Williamsburg. They carried news from place to place. They would advise both sides of the cultural divide on what would be acceptable to the other. In other words, they were cultural go-betweens, brokers, mediators, and negotiators. The go betweens basically were negotiators whose parents were born on both sides of the sides that had a disagreement and they had to help decide what the
problem was and see what the easiest way was to figure it out. Go betweens were needed desperately because they were the children who were able talk to languages and could be able to communicate with the Englishmen and Native Americans.
Go betweens have been around since the beginning of time and we do not have definitive answer to when they were around but we know they have played a big role in the growing of societies. My first example comes from Medieval Go-Betweens and Chaucer's Pandarus by Gretchen Mieszkowski. For she says “she finds that Pandarus is a courtly go-between indebted to
romance mediators” . Also she says “Mieszkowski's study of go-betweens raunchy and refined promises to be a valuable resource for initial forays into scholarship on the subject and for teaching.” What she is saying that if we had more information about go-betweens that it would be some good information about that teachers would able to use and it would be useful for them to teach students of the future. For the first quote, Mieszkowski is saying that Pandarus was a go-between who was basically used for romantic endeavors. As you can see that go-betweens were used for more than help figuring things out but sometimes they were used for romantic endeavors.
Next, Go-betweens had a big role in the colonization of Brazil. They were basically the foundation of Brazil and they had many different roles in Brazil. For example, in Go-Betweens and the Colonization of Brazil, “Go betweens are three types: “physical/biological, those who create material links between worlds, carriers of things.” In reading this essay, Metcalf describes that go-betweens were mainly use for three things. Finally, we can see go betweens also played a huge role in the colonization in brazil but we will also see that they play a huge role in other places. Also there were some important people who were go between.
Important Go betweens- Hans Staden is an example of a go between who was an important person. He was a German soldier and explorer who voyaged to South America in the middle of the sixteenth century, where he was captured by the Tupinambá people of Brazil. He managed to survive and return safe to Europe. In his widely read account describing his travel and captivity, he claimed that the native people that held him captive practiced cannibalism. Surekha Davis really goes into detail about Hans Staden. For example, from the return of Hans Staden: A go between in the Atlantic World, “ Staden as a transactional and representational go-between, mediating between cultures on the ground, and subsequently representing and translating the culture of the Tupinambá people of Brazil to literate Europeans via the words and images of his
True History The reader is invited to consider travel accounts as artifacts that “help to reintegrate the traveler into the community. ” She is saying is that Hans Staden was an important person because he able to mediate between two worlds and he was able to represent and translate the culture of the Tupinamba people of Brazil and was able to really show what go betweens were about. Staden also proved that go-betweens had a hard job. Staden also had to prove that he had to escape capture. However, Staden allegedly won the favor of the Tupinamba Chief Cunhambebe by translating between the Tupinamba and European traders as well as predicting a Tupinikin attack on the tribe, thus his life was spared.[4]:38 Furthermore, when Staden later claimed to have cured the tribal king and his household from illness through the power of prayer and Christianity, the Tupinamba embraced him and called him "Scheraeire," meaning "Son, do not let me die."[5]:88–89 The Portuguese tried several times to negotiate for Staden's ransom, but the Indians declined all overtures. At last he made his escape on a French ship, and on 22 February 1555, arrived at Honfleur, in Normandy, and from there went immediately to his native city
Another important go between was John Montour. He was born in 1744. His father was Andrew Montour, a well-known métis who had Iroquois and French ancestors. His mother was a Delaware, the granddaughter of Sassoonam. Andrew Montour married twice and possibly three times. His was a large family. Late in the Revolutionary War, reports indicated that John was one of seven brothers or half-brothers. The English names of two are known: Debby, who was schooled in Philadelphia, and Thomas, who was killed during the Revolution. John Montour also had at least two sisters. Kayodaghscroony, or Madelina, was living with the Delaware in 1756, and Polly was cared for in Philadelphia in the late 1750s and early 1760s. John’s father , Andrew Montour, was one of the most important interpreters and negotiators in the Virginia and Pennsylvania backcountry in the 1750s and 1760s. Authorities in New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia employed his services. In the 1750s, Andrew Montour believed it was possible for go-betweens such as himself to truly live in both the Indian and white worlds, and he hoped that his children could too. He was important because he was able to live a white life style and a native American life style.
In conclusion you can see that go betweens were the main factor that kept places intact were able to trade for good and were able to keep the place in line. They were not only able for keeping the peace but it other times they were also used for sexual pleasures. Also some of the go betweens were used to carry plants. Some of the go betweens were very sacred. Also the go betweens were very personal to the colonies that they belonged to and they were some of the most important people in the place they belong to. Also it is believed that sometimes that these people were very spiritual. If you look into history you can see that go betweens were the backbones of many places.
James H. Merrell, Into the American Woods: Negotiators on the Pennsylvania Frontier (New York, 1999), 19-41.
Gilles, Sealy. 2008. Speculum 83 (1). [Medieval Academy of America, Cambridge University Press, University of Chicago Press]: 218–19. http://www.jstor.org.proxylib.csueastbay.edu/stable/20466183.
Gilles, Sealy. 2008. Speculum 83 (1). [Medieval Academy of America, Cambridge University Press, University of Chicago Press]: 218–19. http://www.jstor.org.proxylib.csueastbay.edu/stable/20466183.
Coates, Timothy J.. 2007. The American Historical Review 112 (2). [Oxford University Press, American Historical Association]: 559–59. http://www.jstor.org.proxylib.csueastbay.edu/stable/4136716.
Surekha Davies. 2014. The William and Mary Quarterly 71 (3). Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture: 467–70. doi:10.5309/willmaryquar.71.3.0467
Pennsylvania Archives, 8 th ser. (Phildelphia, 1852-), 7:58, 53 (Hereafter, PA); Earl P. Olmstead, Blackcoats among the Delaware: David Zeisberger on the Ohio Frontier (Kent, Ohio, 1991), 228; Pa. Col. Recs., 7:95; PA, 8 th ser., 5:48, 59-60, 7:58, 53.
Merrell, Into the American Woods, 75-77. In 1756, the reason given for sending Montour’s children to Philadelphia was that they could “be independent of the mother.” In Delaware society it was the mother’s family who was responsible for raising the children. Removing the children from the mother clearly implies that Andrew Montour did not want his wife’s Delaware brothers instructing his children. See Pa. Col. Recs., 7:95.