 Further Explanation: The file below contains two passages. One is written by someone who met with King Philip himself in 1675 and wrote down what the chief claimed were the causes of the war. The second passage was written by an Englishman who claims a very different set of reasons that a war with the natives started. Who is right? Or rather, who do you believe more? Which side is more persuasive to you? There are two sides to this story; which side are you on, and why? 
45 Comments
Aras Gokce
10/2/2019 05:32:11 pm
I think the pilgrims were wrong because of their offensive actions towards the Natives and their King, Philip. The Pilgrims were also stealing the natives' land and ruining their harvest using their own cattle, spoiling the corn. They were stealing the Natives' land and resources by ripping them off by making them sign official papers whilst drunk, therefore making unfair deals and stripping the natives' more of their land.
Victor Dumois
10/4/2019 03:24:40 pm
I think the Indians perspective is more persuasive because the Pilgrims did bad trades with the Indians and they made the Indians drunk so they would give them things. The Pilgrims also stole more and more territory from the Indians so they could have more and more colonists settlement locations and they did it knowing that the territory they stole belonged to the Indians and that is why I think the indians perspective is more persuasive.
Gabriel
10/6/2019 08:17:45 am
I think the Pilgrims are more to blame, here is why. First, the Pilgrims were fencing there land and the Pilgrim’s cattle were eating the native’s corn. Second, the English were making un-fair trades with the natives. Third, the English were also stealing the native’s land. Those are some reasons I think the Pilgrims are more to blame then the natives.
Raaz Jasani
10/6/2019 01:03:39 pm
In my eyes, the English were more to blame because the Indians were against war. They wanted to negotiate peacefully and thought fighting was the worst idea. Indians were not given a fair chance in court because they always listened to the testimonies that went against the Indians.
Beau
10/7/2019 04:46:10 pm
I think the Indians perspective is more persuasive because the pilgrims did bad trades. I think that because the pilgrims were not good traders and took advantage of them when they were drunk and took there land. I also think the pilgrims weren’t good traders because they took there crops.
Collin Mackey
10/8/2019 01:35:21 pm
I feel that King Philip is more persuasive because the English and puritans didn’t have enough good reasons for why the war started. On the other hand the Natives had a lot of better and more reasons why the war started. King Philip seemed more honest. He felt the English cheated, lied, and didn’t do what they said they were going to do.
Jake A.
10/8/2019 02:31:14 pm
I think the Colonists are more to blame for starting King Philip's War based on the argument presented by John Easton. John Easton explained the English were not treating the Indians fairly and took advantage of them often. The Indians gave the Colonists land and taught them how to raise cattle and farm. They felt like the Colonists gave them nothing in return. In conclusion, it seems like the Indians would have been upset with the Colonists so I think John Easton’s argument is more persuasive.
Kate Swetmon
10/8/2019 04:37:27 pm
So, what side am I on? The colonists side or the Indians side? For me, I think that it would be pretty obvious that I'm on the Indian side. I'm on the Indians side because they are the ones that told the colonists how to make crops, how to fish, and how to live. The colonists are the ones who took the first shot. They started to trade them poorly. The made more land and people. Their farm animals like pigs, cows, and chickens always ate the Indians crops and they didn't put up a fence. So there are my reasons that I'm on the Indians side, because they helped them live, make crops, and fish. The colonists take land, make the first shot, trading them poorly, more people, and the colonists' farm animals always ate the Indians crops and didn't even put up a fence. So there you go. And those are the reasons why I am on the Indians side.
Ender Keating
10/8/2019 05:09:42 pm
I believe the English are more to blame because their beliefs were wrong. They thought the Indians were savages, not as smart or hygienic as they were, and that they were lower class than them. I think the first argument from King Philip’s perspective is more persuasive because they state all the things that the English did that were bad towards the Indians. For example, English did bad things to the Indians like stealing land, spoiling their crops and getting them drunk before making deals with the Indians.
Olivia youngs
10/8/2019 05:09:55 pm
These are some causes of king philip's war.the pilgrims had about all died so they
rhys dellinger
10/8/2019 05:41:12 pm
I think the colonists are to blame for King Philip's war. I agree with King Philip's perspective First, the English made the natives drunk and made land trades that were not fair. Next, no one believed the Indians. If one bad Indian testified that the Indians did wrong, that would do a lot of damage, but, if 20 good Indians testified that the English did wrong that would do no damage. Last, the English horses and cattle spoiled their crops. I do not agree with the Colonist’s perspective. I do not agree that the Indians were too rude and uncivilized. That is why I think the colonists are to blame for King Philip’s war.
Victor Dumois
10/9/2019 08:21:55 am
The most persuasive sentence was the Indian´s perspective because they showed what the colonists did to them. The colonists would make the Indians slaves and they would sell them for money and also they would kill them. The colonists would rip the Indians off by making bad trades with them and they killed 3 of King Philip's best friends. The colonists killed 3000 Indians and after killing 3000 Indians they started treating the Indians very badly. The Indian's perspective is more persuasive because they said that the colonists would make them slaves, sell them for money as slaves, the colonists would kill them, the colonist ripped the Indians off by making bad trades, killed 3 of King Philip's best friends, killed 3000 Indians, and after killing 300 Indians the colonists treated the Indians very badly.
Kareena
10/9/2019 04:17:29 pm
I think the English are more to blame because they took advantage of the Indians. For example, the English would get the Indians drunk and take advantage of them. The Indians helped the English and the English took most of their land. Also, the English only believed the Indians when it was in their best interest. Lastly, the English didn’t fence in their horses and cattle and they were destroying the Indian’s corn. The first argument was more persuasive because it told you King Philip’s side.
Henderson Rentz
10/9/2019 05:08:02 pm
I believe the Indians and the English are to blame. The Indians were treated unfairly by the English. At trial, they accused the Indians unfairly and did not do the same with the English. The English were taking the Indian's land from them and stealing their cattle and horses. King Philip's perspective is more persuasive because it came from King Phillip.
Emma Piazza
10/9/2019 06:28:21 pm
I agree more with King Philip because the English were being rude to the Indians and Massasoit was trying to teach them to grow crops and now they are treating them badly. The English took the Indian’s land and built fences around Plymouth. The English also killed 3 of King Philip’s best friends and still King Philip was trying to negotiate instead of going to war. He only decided to go to war when there was no other choice. The Indians even waited for one of the settlers to kill an Indian before they started the war. This is why I am more on the side of the Indians.
Caleb
10/10/2019 06:17:00 am
These are some of the causes of King phillps war. One was to many "NEW PILGRIMS" becuse there were thousands of them. A nother one is Massassoit dies because he was leader for 60 years.. Also, Bruce gets frozan in a lake by the Wapanoag tribe. Those were some of the causes of King Phlilps war The Pilgrims are the ones to blame beacuse in King Philips argument he spicificly states that the Pilgrims had been cheating on them and being disrespectful.The most purswasive writing is King Philips beacause he states that th Pilgrims have been disrespectful to them and made them drunk so they could not keep land.
Noah Kelly 5-F
10/13/2019 02:59:48 pm
After reading the two different views on what started the King Philip’s War, I believe that the view from King Philip and the Indians is more convincing. I'm on the Indian’s side because when King Philip became leader, the English treated King Philip badly because he was young and inexperienced. Also, the English were taking advantage of the Indians during trading. King Philip said that the English did not trust him and his people. In addition, the Indians taught the Pilgrims how to fish, hunt, and grow crops and the English turned around and stole land from the Indians as well as horses and cattle. One more reason why the English were to blame for the war was because they were cutting down trees when they knew that the Indians believed there was a god in every tree. This is why I believe that the English were to blame for the King Philip’s War.
Adrian Toro-Leon
10/13/2019 06:35:07 pm
After reading both arguments, Who is More to blame? I think the Colonists are more to blame for starting King Philip's War. The Indians wanted to work with the English because they didn't want to start a war. Also the Indians thought that war was the worst way. Indians were not given a fair chance and most of the testimonies in court went against them. The English Made them drunk so they could sign contracts and have more land. Also the English were making bad trades, and kept taking land from the Indians. The argument on King Phillips’s Perspective was more persuasive since it exposes all the complaints from the Indians on how the Colonists benefited from them. In conclusion, I continue to blame the Colonists for all the misfortunes against the Indians, due to unfair negotiations, unfair trial, and taking land.
Sydney Wilson
10/14/2019 01:04:56 pm
I think the English are to blame for starting the King Philips's War not the Indians. The Indians said they did not want war and they would help the colonists by giving them land and helping them grow food.Helping the colonists and then starting a war they said they didn't want doesn't make sense. The King Philips perspective is more persuasive because it said exactly what the colonists had done wrong to the Indians. The English perspective blamed what happened on religion and God, not the what bad things the colonists had done to the Indians. This is why I think The English are to blame for the King Philip's War.
Liam Cockayne
10/14/2019 04:46:00 pm
After reading these two view points , I am on the colonists side. I feel this way because the colonists may have ripped off the Indians, but the Indians burned down the colonists homes, crops, and killed their cattle. In addition, the Indians disobeyed the treaty they made with the colonist for peace by trading with other tribes that were not friendly with the colonists. That is why I can relate to the perspective of the colonists and I think their argument is more persuasive.
Talia M.
10/16/2019 04:09:51 pm
In my opinion, I think the Indians were more innocent than the pilgrims. The pilgrims kept ripping off the Indians with bad trades and taking advantage of them. They also didn't acknowledge the fact that the Indians had helped their ancestors survive, so the pilgrims wouldn't have even been alive if the Indians hadn't helped the pilgrims' ancestors. However, I sort of think that Massasoit, the sachem of the Wampanoagh, should have seen that the new pilgrims weren't being fair to them and fought back.
Preston Roberts
10/16/2019 04:32:35 pm
I think that King Philip’s argument is more persuasive and that the Colonists are more to blame for the war. This is because the Colonists treated the Indians poorly in many ways. For example, the Colonists had the Indians do unfair trades and negotiations, and the Indians lost all their land. Also, the Colonists had cattle and horses that spoiled the Indians’ corn because the Colonists didn’t put up any fences. The Indians didn’t want to start a war, and they believed that fighting was the worst way. In conclusion, I think the reasons for the war stated by King Philip are more believable, and that the Colonists were wrong in the way they treated the Indians.
Claire Morsi
10/16/2019 05:05:12 pm
I think the English people are more to blame ,because they took a lot of King Phillip’s land and made bad trades with the Indians. For example, the Englishmen made them drunk so they could just take the Indians land without making a trade. The Indians were so nice to the English men, like showing them how to live in the survival world and the Englishmen gave them nothing good in return, and weren’t even nice to them. The Englishmen also forced them to be Catholic, which is wrong. The Englishmen also said they were rude and uncivilized, this is not true and they know it. These are some reasons why the Englishmen are to blame.
Madelynn M.
10/17/2019 02:14:22 pm
I think the Pilgrims are wrong. They did many terrible things to the Natives. Such as stealing crops, live stock, supplies, or riches. They hung three natives for killing one of the Pilgrims. They also were unfair in trading and didn't follow their agreement.
Henry Heidt
10/17/2019 02:21:20 pm
I think that the indians perspective is more convincing because you can't just make people drunk and steal stuff. Also you can't disobey the rules and assault the indians that why I think the indians are right.
Rebecca
10/17/2019 05:09:58 pm
After reading everything I think the Natives are right. The colonists were trying to change their religion to Christian. I mean everyone gets to choose their religion we are all free weather were Christian or Catholic and forcing them to look at laws. The English also made the Natives drunk and cheated them. When everything increased the English cattle and horses kept spoiling corn a main food to the Natives. That’s why I think that Natives are right.
Karissa C
10/17/2019 05:35:05 pm
I believe that the Pilgrims are to blame, and the Indians did pretty much nothing wrong. For example, when King Phillip became the leader, the English disrespected him. Another reason why, is that some Pilgrims killed Bruce!! They also ripped the Indians off in trades. Remember that little boy that shot the Indian? That's definitely a big reason for the war. I mean, at first the Pilgrims were a small amount, and the Indians were fine. But when the English started over populating, that annoyed the Indians. How would you feel if some Pilgrims came over to your land, and just started growing? The Pilgrims did not start the war because of one thing, it was because of multiple reasons,
Phillip Hall
10/19/2019 08:45:06 am
I feel the colonists are to be blamed for the conflict for the following reasons. The English were taking advantage of the Indians by getting them drunk so they would make bad decisions regarding their land. They didn’t keep their cattle fenced in which made the cattle eat the Indians corn. The Indians wouldn’t have as much food to eat. King Philip was imprisoned multiple times by the colonists and made him look like he was doing something bad. Although there were many reasons to blame the colonists, but I think those were main reasons that caused the King Philip’s War.
Tyson LaGrow
10/19/2019 09:07:26 am
The Colonists were more to blame for starting King Phillip's War. According to John Easton's document, the Indians didn't want to start the war. I also think the Indians were just reacting to bad things the English Colonists were doing to them. For example, the Indians got upset the English tried to Christianize them and make them use their laws. The English also taught them how to use guns. If they hadn't done these things, the Indians wouldn't have gotten upset.
Sophia Gottschall
10/19/2019 10:02:21 am
I think the Pilgrims are to blame. The Natives argument is more persuasive, I believe, and here are my reasons why. First, the Pilgrims did anything just to get the Natives land like making the Natives drunk then ripping them off by making them sign their land away. Second, the Pilgrims were very cruel to the Natives by controlling where Natives could walk on the land. Can you imagine you weren't allowed to walk in your own backyard? Lastly, the Pilgrims let their cattle and horses roam around and eat the Natives crops which spoiled their food. There are many more reasons that I think the Pilgrims were wrong.
Simoni Kyriakou
10/19/2019 05:41:23 pm
After I read these two paragraphs I think that the English were more to blame. I think this because In the paragraph the Native Americans say that they did not want to be in war . They think this because they believed that war was a bad thing ( which they are right about). I also think that the English are more to blame because even though the Native Americans taught them how to do stuff ( fish, plant, ecs. ) the new English treated them badly. So now you know why I think the English were more to blame.
Raaz Jasani
10/20/2019 08:04:01 am
In my eyes, the English were more to blame because the Indians were against war. They wanted to negotiate peacefully and thought fighting was the worst idea. Indians were not given a fair chance in court because they always listened to the testimonies that went against the Indians.
Kai Plummer
10/20/2019 08:23:23 am
After I read both of the documents I went more to the Indians side because they had more reasons than the colonists. I also thought the colonists were to blame because they made the Indians drunk and ripped them off, and also the colonists stole land. The colonists also let their own cows go on the Indians’ land.
Jenny Glushakov
10/20/2019 08:36:09 am
These are some reasons why I think the Pilgrims are to blame for starting King Philip's War and I think the Indians had a more persuasive argument. One reason why I think the Pilgrims are to blame is that they treated the Indians poorly and that they didn’t respect them as they should. One reason that I think the Indians argument was more persuasive was that the Pilgrims did start doing good things first, but they were also the first to doing bad things as well. Another reason was that the Pilgrims took their land because they needed more land and by negotiating the Indians lost land. Also, the children of the original Pilgrims did not really follow the Mayflower Compact and some just forgot about it. Those were my thoughts and reasons why I think the Pilgrims started the war and that the Indians had a more persuasive argument.
Evie Knight
10/20/2019 09:25:53 am
I think that the pilgrims are to blame, and the reasons that I think this are quite clear. First, if 20 honest Indians went against an unfair Englishman in court the Englishman would always win because the English treated the Indians unfairly. Second, the English made them drunk and then made them sign over all their land to them. Finally, The English's cattle kept ruining the Indians corn, but the English didn't care and wouldn't even put up a fence. These reasons are why the Pilgrims are responsible for King Philip's war.
Emma Aiken
10/20/2019 11:49:51 am
I think both sides are equally guilty for the cause of King Philip’s War. The Natives may have been there first, but the English didn’t know anything about the land the Indians were living on. The English had no idea if these new people were friendly or not, what could be grown, what not to eat, what to eat, where to find fresh water, and who to be friends with. At the time, the English didn’t know that they were doing something wrong, they were just doing what they always did, taking land, practicing religion, and more. As for the Natives, they were pretty upset that the English were taking the land they had lived on for generations. They were being pushed out of their homes, being put off with bad trades, and treated horribly in some areas. It is understandable why the Natives would want to fight back. This is an example of what can happen when two different groups of people meet, and sometimes it results in a conflict.
Serena Mehta
10/20/2019 12:50:45 pm
After reading the two primary sources of the causes of King Phillips War. I think the English people are to blame. Here are a few example, the English people made bad land negotiations with the Indians which made them lose many square miles of land. The English made the Indians drunk and cheated them. The English also would not fence the land they stole and their cattle and horses kept spoiling the Indians crops. The English also thought the Indians were rude and uncivilized. They tried to push the Christian faith and their laws onto the Indians. These are just a few reasons that I believe that the English are to be blamed.
Charlotte Scott
10/20/2019 01:55:35 pm
I think the natives are to blame. The natives killed cattle and burnt down houses because they were trying to tempt to make the pilgrims kill.King Philip tried to make the pilgrims kill so they wouldn't be blamed for starting a war. The pilgrims probably wouldn't kill if the natives didn't do these things.
Frank Jones
10/20/2019 03:22:30 pm
I believe King Philip is more right. I believe he is more right because he never wanted harm, but he had to because they Puritans were killing his men and they didn’t want to talk it out to the Indians. He is also more right because why have a war about something that can be fixed without a war. King Philip also is more right because the Puritans kept taking their land and kept growing and growing until the Indians had to fight for their land. The most persuasive one was the English one but I know they were wrong. These are three reasons I believe King Philip is right and which one was the most persuasive.
Leila Raden
10/20/2019 05:34:20 pm
I think that the English were to blame for King Phillips War. They made many wrong acts towards the Indians and King Philip. Even though the Indians were very kind and helpful to the English, they still did them wrong. For example, they spoiled their corn and stole their land. The English cheated the Indians. I think the English did many bad things to the Indians and I think they started the King Philips War.
I believe it is the Colonists' fault. The Colonists took advantage of the Indians' kindness. The Colonists got the Indians drunk and they Indians thought war was the worst way to work out a problem. The Colonists also didn't use their corn and cattle wisely because they didn't put up fences to keep the cattle in the land they had been given. Also, it only took one Indian to say something bad about another Indian for the Colonists to agree that the Indians had wronged the Colonist.
Jorge Cadena
10/20/2019 06:44:44 pm
I think that the British are more to blame for the war. I think this because the English gave small bad reasons for why the Indians were to blame. The first argument is more persuasive because it shows the difference for the reasons for the war.
Carrie S.
10/23/2019 07:28:08 am
I believe the English were more to blame, and here's why. First off, they sailed on a ship here, claimed the land, chopped down a bunch of trees, when the Indians believed that every thing was a god. They believed that there was gods inside of trees, and under the ground. Secondly, the were ripping off the Indians with the trades they were making. Lastly, the English were disrespecting King Phillip and many other natives. Those are the reasons why I think The English are more to blame. Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
About this blogYou may earn bonus points in SS by answering the blog question of the unit in a complete 5th grade paragraph. Post in a comment on this blog. Archives
April 2020
Categories |
||
RSS Feed
Proudly powered by Weebly