Bacon's Rebellion Essay

Why was Bacon's rebellion important on how Native Americans were treated? Many different factors contributed to the outcome of the rebellion. The conflict of race in Bacon's Rebellion was accredited to the colonists believing they were superior.

Bacon never failed to publicize his views on the Indians. “ ‘[We must defend ourselves] against all Indians in generall, for that they were all Enemies.’ This was the unequivocal view of Nathaniel Bacon…”5 His approach to the situation is all wrong, causing the whole rebellion to be unorganized. If he would start by approaching the situation that way, then it should be expected and known that he was going to unjustly murder many Indians. He had already stereotyped all Indians to be immortal creatures, or as he would put it, “Enemies.” Nathaniel Bacon states himself, in the declaration he wrote in 1676, “For the prevention of civil mischief and ruin amongst ourselves while the barbarous enemy in all places did invade, murder, and spoil us, his Majesty’s most faithful subjects.”6 It is a common trait of his to undermine what caused the Indians to begin these attacks, but focus on the attacks themselves and not give any information about the role he played in the Indians rebellions. This leads one to believe that Bacon constantly embellished the truth. If this is the case, then he can’t be accredited for conveying the truth. Bacon’s murders show no sympathy or connection to the Indians, which can demonstrate how he seen them as inferior or immortal because he can kill them with it having no effect on him, regardless of whether they were friendly or not. It seems he didn’t make the attacks personal. He just knew that he was going to retaliate against Indians, and that was all that mattered to him. The cause of the whole situation at Thomas Mathews’ plantation also confirms how natives were treated. The situation explains how the colonists didn’t see the Indians as equal because they would try to short end them or not give them the decent respect they would give to their fellow colonists. This shows they feel they are superior to the Indians.

The whole rebellion was based off retaliatory actions. The colonist were frustrated with many things during the time, and the coincidental raid by the Doeg Indians on the plantation of Thomas Mathews, gave colonists reason to vent their frustration.1 The dispute began in July 1675, over the unfortunate nonpayment of some of the tribe’s items obtained by Mathews, which resulted in the deaths of several Doegs.1 The Native Americans had a legitimate reason to raid Mathews’ plantation. He can’t expect to just obtain objects from them without paying for them in some sort of way. A group of men mistakenly charged the Susquehannocks with the outrages of the Doegs.1,2 This only enflamed the whole situation because the Susquehannock chiefs were killed during a flag of truce by the Maryland and Virginia militia, which only gave the Indians the right to retaliate by killing many planters in Virginia.3 The Indians have all the right to do what they did. If anything, the Virginians should have been understanding of the Indians actions. Not to forget that, “Berkeley had worked to establish peace with the tribes and successfully negotiated a settlement in which lands east of the Blue Ridge Mountains were reserved for the white settlers. However, during the 1640s and 1650s, the burgeoning population began to spill over into Indian lands west of the mountains.” 4 The Indians have every right to attack the colonists and all their attacks were justified with legitimate reasons. The colonists came over to their land, and were fortunate enough that the Indians didn’t run them out of their land when they first arrived. The Indians were very generous with letting the colonists occupy some of their land. But as with most cases, the colonists became greedy and tried to take advantage of the Indians by starting to cross the border into Indian territory. This was the Indians land, and of course they’re going to do whatever they can to defend and protect the little bit of land that wasn’t occupied by the colonists, it’s only realistic. That is a means of survival implanted within all of us. The Indians were already irritated because of the violations of the treaty, and to make the situation worse, colonists were retaliating on whatever tribe they could, not necessarily basing their retaliation on what that tribe did to them.

Bacon discovered the tribe of friendly Mannakins while in the wilderness.2 They were cordial towards each other until the third evening when one of Bacon’s men was killed by a shot from the side of the river the Mannakins were on. “Bacon stormed the fort, burnt it and the cabins, blew up their magazine of arms and gunpowder, and, with a loss of only three of his own party, put to death one hundred and fifty Indians.”2 This wasn’t smart on his behalf. He wasn’t sure if the Mannakins were responsible for the murder of his man. It could have easily been Berkeley and his men, but because he already had it set in his mind that mostly all Indians were “bad,” he assumed it was them and retaliated. It also wasn’t one of his better judgments because the Mannakins were one of the friendly tribes. By killing off one of the friendly tribes, his actions probably made other friendly tribes turn against him, making his task even harder. Bacon also, “at the head of a thousand men, marched against the Pamunkies, killing many and destroying their towns,” and, “surprising the Appomattox Indians,…burnt their town, killed a large number of the tribe, and dispersed the rest.” Bacon killed ruthlessly as if these people he were killing weren’t actually people, but animals. Out of all the accounts, his actions toward the Occaneechee Indians had the most effect on me. Bacon and his followers, “…marched to a fort held by a friendly tribe, the Occaneechees, and convinced them to capture warriors from an unfriendly tribe. The Occaneechees returned with captives. Bacon’s men killed the captives. They then turned to their ‘allies’ and opened fire.”5 This act of Bacon’s displays his passion to retaliate against all Indians. He really wasn’t in touch with his emotions or sympathetic to any other race other than his own. Bacon lacking those common human characteristics puts him in a category of his own, which could actually justify his actions because it had no effect on him. Even though I totally disagree with the actions of Bacon and his men, I will admit that his strategy in this attack of the Occaneechees was brilliant on a sinister level. Although all the attacks may not be in the same order in the sources, the sources don’t fail to sugarcoat his devious ways.

Bacon’s Rebellion didn’t really have a real resolution. The resolution was that once Nathaniel Bacon died, the rebellion fizzled out. There was no one that stepped up to replace him and keep the spirit of the rebellion alive. Bacon was one of the few extremely passionate and brave enough to lead the rebellion that most during that time thought about, but never carried through. This illustrates the end of the rebellion was destined to happen soon because if people were still fully devoted to the rebellion, then it wouldn’t have ended just because the leader died, someone else would have replaced him and carried out his legacy. Once the rebellion ended, peace was somewhat restored back to the Chesapeake society. Of course there were still some outbreaks, but none as largely a scale as in the rebellion. Indirectly, these accounts could have contributed to the African slave trade largely coming to the southern colonies of North America. With all the Native Americans dying of foreign diseases and the attacks by the Virginians, the colonists needed a new group of people for purposes of agriculture. Hence, the Africans coming to America.

The topic of Bacon’s Rebellion highly relates to what happens today in American society. When I was in eighth grade I had a similar experience to the Native Americans, just without the mass murders. A couple of my friends and I experienced a teacher that seemed had no reason to treat us the way she did. She had been rude to us on numerous occasions so we weren’t very partial of her. One specific day, she made a comment that was directed towards us, using the words, “those light brights.” This really angered us because she used the term in a derogatory sense, which was confusing because she was African American as well. She would put us through hell and make us go the extra mile, doing more than most students. As human beings, we felt disrespected and returned the favor using the theory, if you respect me, I’ll respect you. There was never a real resolution. When we moved onto high school it ceased, only because we didn’t have to see her on a day-to-day basis. Even to this day when I see her, she still isn’t very fond of me. Having experienced that, when I hear of someone rebelling, the first question that comes to my head is what caused them to do those actions?

Bacon's Rebellion was the first of its kind and set the stage for many similar situations in the future. Race wasn't an important issue before the rebellion, but after, it caused tension between races, leading into what is now racism.


1 Pike, John E. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/bacon.htm 2000-2007.
2 Love to Know, Inc. http://www.publicbookshelf.com/public_html/The_Great%20_Republic_By_the_Master_Historians_Vol_I/nathaniel_dj.html 2002-2003.
3 National Register of Historic Places. http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/travel/jamesriver/gentry.htm
4 Avery, Steve.http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h521.html 2002-2005.
5 WGBH Educational Foundation. www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part1/1p274.html 1998,1999.
6 Bacon, Nathaniel. http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5800 1676.