Throughout the process of reading the letter, I thought the whole time that it was sort of an ironic affair. Dinwiddie claims that the French "unjustly invaded lands on the Ohio," but did Dinwiddie's ancestors if not he himself "unjustly" invade the land the Native Americans were living on and force them off of it? Then Dinwiddie, representing the British, who less than 100 years previous had an outright war with the natives, referred to them as "brethren" and Dinwiddie continues by saying the natives "can be assured of our sincere friendship." Since we as living people know the events that happened even after the letter was written regarding the Native Americans and the British, the letter almost has a sarcastic tone to it, and made me wonder if there was even an ounce of sincerity and authenticity behind Dinwiddie's claims of alliance after the war would end. However the lack of clarity is a good segway into what could make the primary source even more enlightening.
Despite letting the readers have an in depth look at the rhetoric of a colonial governor, the letter would be so much simpler and interesting if we had the response to it, if the Native Americans ever even bothered to respond that is.But further research has shown me that a year later, Dinwiddie sent another letter to different Native American tribes asking for their help in the war as well.

This is great! It seems like you really got a true and deep analysis of this particular letter. It's one I would like to read - BUT YOU DIDNT GIVE ME A LINK!!! So I can't really critique this without having read the source. However, this does seem like a source i would be completely interested in.
ReplyDeleteI believe you did an amazing job- I especially like the question of what the reply would have been. In my opinion- it's actually shocking that the British won this war. I also love the addition of the visuals.