Summary Of David Henderson's Surviving Genocide

814 Words4 Pages

The American Revolution, celebrated for its ideals of liberty and freedom, stands in stark contrast to the harrowing reality experienced by Indians. Instead of liberation, this period ushered in a time of betrayal and a desperate struggle for survival. One instance of this brutality occurred at the hands of the Paxton Boys, who mercilessly murdered 20 unarmed Conestoga in the town of Lancaster, Pennsylvania. Jeffrey Ostler’s Surviving Genocide states that during their march to Pennsylvania, the Paxton Boys openly announced their genocidal intention to kill Indians. The Philadelphia officials’ reluctance to prosecute the perpetrators can be speculated upon by various factors: dispatching troops was economically inconvenient, and the Paxton Boys …show more content…

This formal authorization offered an additional measure of legitimacy for the actions of the Paxton Boys. David Henderson’s account of the Indian murders also underscores that the boys “have shown a ferocity equal to that of the Savages themselves” and asks the Pennsylvania officials to take action: “I have given you the trouble of this letter, from the only feelings of humanity that you may take such measures as you think proper, & may be in your power to preserve this Land from further guilt.” Henderson approaches from an ethical perspective, and emphasizes that the guilt of the land lies in the officials’ hands. Unexpectedly, the government makes no response, and the Paxton Boys join the history of unaccounted violence perpetrated against Indigenous people. Formal approval or not, the Paxton Boys’s intent to kill a racial group constitutes genocide and reflects a broader tendency to wipe out Indigenous peoples of colonial …show more content…

In a fierce echo of the Paxton Boys’ savagery, 160 militiamen under the command of David Williamson clashed with just over 100 Moravian Indians. After enduring a harsh winter without food, the Indians were quickly rendered defenseless. This tragic event, formally known as the Gnadenhutten massacre, saw Williamson and his men vote for mass execution, accusing the Moravian Indians of espionage before allowing them time to “prepare themselves in a Christian manner.” The irony lies in the frontiersmen’s belief that offering time for prayers and singing would somehow mitigate the atrocity of slaughtering innocent women and children. In the following morning, the militiamen wielded swords, knives, and mallets, ruthlessly killing ninety-two of the ninety-four captives, with two boys surviving, albeit one left scalped and presumed dead, managing to crawl away. In total, the Williamson militia slaughtered a total of ninety-six, but their murderous spree was long over; they later attacked a group of Delawares under US Protection near Fort Pitt and struck Indian villages that had previously raided American settlements. Earning a reputation as the “head murderer,” the Indians sought revenge by capturing the operation’s leader, Colonel William Crawford, subjecting him to a similarly brutal fate: burning and torturing him for at least two hours at the stake. The gruesome massacre serves as yet another chilling testament to colonizers’