Jack Heinlen
08-30-2005, 06:10 AM
This is a review of what sounds like an interesting book.
http://www.cleveland.com/entertainment/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/entertainment/112513545637091.xml&coll=2
Living in Massachusetts and looking a bit at King Phillip's war I'd become aware of some of it. The natives had large, organized, settlements and cities, and were not simple hunter gatherers as we tend to imagine.
Massachusetts is chock full, from east to west, with modern towns that end in "field." The reason is that large areas of land had been cultivated and had had towns for centuries.
As is pointed out in the review, in MA it was often a matter for 17th century Europeans of just moving in, because small pox et al had decimated the locals.
One wonders how King Phillip's war might have worked out differently if his civilization hadn't been decimated by disease. The conflict spread from Connecticut to the Penobscot, and was a relatively close thing; the English foothold still tenuous.
On my winter reading list.
http://www.cleveland.com/entertainment/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/entertainment/112513545637091.xml&coll=2
Living in Massachusetts and looking a bit at King Phillip's war I'd become aware of some of it. The natives had large, organized, settlements and cities, and were not simple hunter gatherers as we tend to imagine.
Massachusetts is chock full, from east to west, with modern towns that end in "field." The reason is that large areas of land had been cultivated and had had towns for centuries.
As is pointed out in the review, in MA it was often a matter for 17th century Europeans of just moving in, because small pox et al had decimated the locals.
One wonders how King Phillip's war might have worked out differently if his civilization hadn't been decimated by disease. The conflict spread from Connecticut to the Penobscot, and was a relatively close thing; the English foothold still tenuous.
On my winter reading list.