For at least a decade or so 3 out of 4 settlers died in the Jamestown colony. The Powhatan Nation was powerful and had numerous warriors. The Powhatan Indians chose not to attack the colonists because they believed they would eventually die out from starvation and disease. What destroyed the Powhatan Nation was not from violence, but because of ecology. The Powhatan Indians had a sophisticated farming system in balance with the forest's ecological system. The colonists tobacco farms and wild pigs destroyed that system which eventually, along with European disease, destroyed the Powhatan.

Betty, Lakewood, California

In 1650 one of my ancestors, Bertha Frost, and her daughter were murdered by Abenaki indians in Maine. Now I guess I have to find the current leader of the Abenaki tribe and ask for an apology.

David Caselman, Berkeley, USA/California

Loretta,
It seems you are spoilt for choice, Africa, North America or Europe, wherever you feel most comfortable, the choice is yours.

Perhaps you would care to spare a thought for those worse off than Americans, such as the descendants of those left behind in Africa.

jasper, chelmsford,

the Indians killed off the two previous colonies at that site, a Spanish Jesuit mission and the earlier English colony. Fortunately for Jamestown, Powhaton's wars of conquest (he expanded his kingdon to five times the one he inherited from his father) depleted the number of available warriors, and he was forced into a stand-off.
Pocahontas was enthusiastic about all things British and--when her father held six Brits captive to try to force them to reveal the secrets of British technology to him and she (who hung around the British camp) was held captive as a hostage for the Brits' safety--converted from her father's religion of using ritual torture to appease the gods to the Anglicanism of the Metaphysical Poets.

It's also politically incorrect to mention that she did have a teenage crush, at 11 to 14, on 25-to-28-year-old John Smith; when she found out that Smith was still alive while visiting England, she turned to the wall and refused to speak to him until he pleaded with her.

Don Schenk, Allentown, PA, USA

The clash between Native Americans and Europeans did not begin in Nova Scotia but in Greenland, which was uninhabited when the Vikings settled there around 950. Around 1150, Inuits crossed from North American and began attacking the Viking settlements. The last Viking settlement disappeared about 200 years later. Historians are divided over whether plague, starvation or the Inuits wiped out the last Viking settlement.


As a percentage of population, casualties were low on both sides in warfare between Native Americans and Europeans. Native Americans killed more Europeans than Europeans killed Native Americans. About 7,193 (not “tens of millions”) Native Americans died in conflicts with European and their allied Native American forces. Native Americans killed about 9,156 whites. These figures cover nearly 400 years and include all the famous massacres such as Sand Creek and Wounded Knee. The combined death toll is about the same a three days of fighting between Union and Confederate forces at the Battle of the Wilderness in 1864. Assuming that the Native American population north of Mexico was about 5 million—a mid-range estimate—the number of Native Americans killed in combat against Europeans would have amounted to less than one half of one percent of the Native American population. This is not a genocidal figure.

Genocide is a crime of intention. No mainstream historian supports the assertion that Europeans waged biological warfare against Native Americans. Smallpox probably had a more devastating impact on the Native American population of North America than the bubonic plague, or “Black Death,” had on Europeans a few centuries earlier, but there is no evidence that Europeans intentionally infected Native Americans with smallpox. Some minor tribes did suffer a 90-percent death rate and a few a 100-percent death rate, but the overall death rate, judging from Native American oral histories, probably ranged from 40 percent in some areas to 60 percent or higher in others. Since battle deaths are well documented, activists pushed up the smallpox death rate to as high as 90 percent or even higher percent to accommodate upper-range estimates of the size of the Native American population prior to European contact. The smallpox pandemic that did the most damage spread north from the Valley of Mexico to Pueblo villages along the Rio Grande in New Mexico around 1750. Plains Indians trading with the Pueblos took the virus home with them. From the plains, the virus spread west over the Rockies and east across the Mississippi. Most Native Americans who died of smallpox probably never encountered a European.

Blair, El Paso, El Paso/Texas

As a percentage of population, casualties were low on both sides in warfare between Native Americans and Europeans. Native Americans killed more Europeans than Europeans killed Native Americans. About 7,193 (not “tens of millions”) Native Americans died in conflicts with European and their allied Native American forces. Native Americans killed about 9,156 whites. These figures cover nearly 400 years and include all the famous massacres such as Sand Creek and Wounded Knee. The combined death toll is about the same a three days of fighting between Union and Confederate forces at the Battle of the Wilderness in 1864.

Smallpox probably had a more devastating impact on the Native American population of North America than the bubonic plague, or “Black Death,” had on Europeans a few centuries earlier. Some minor tribes did suffer a 90-percent death rate and a few a 100-percent death rate, but the overall death rate, judging from Native American oral histories, probably ranged from 40

Blair, El Paso, El Paso/Texas

I understand that the point of view is that this happened decades ago, and while the crimes were perpetrated by their ancestors, they themselves had no role in them, so there is no need for an apology.

The thing I do not understand is why as a Muslim living in the West am I supposed to spend 24hrs a day, 7 days a week repenting for the Holocaust, tragic as it was, when it is historically well documented that the Holocaust happened many decades ago in Germany and Germans are European and Christian. Why as Muslims are we expected to pay the crimes committed in Germany by Germans.

Another thing that is not clear is why Muslims need to continually apologize for 9-11 when again it is quite clear that those that perpetrated the crime are dead gone. Specially when one keeps in mind only 3000 people died in the event, in sharp contrast to the genocide in the Americas in which an entire civilization was destroyed, and like all white crimes, simply swept under the rug.

Dr Mahmood, New York,

ISW, Okemos, MI, USA; "I'm sorry Mr. Lines, but the genocide of Native Americans did not take place "after independence" by any means."

gen·o·cide –noun the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

Hope that clears it up for you, ISW. No charge....

Dan, Hampton, UK

Well, um, actually, and please correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the royal family German?

Steve Evans, Kowloon, Hong Kong

History is correct and incorrect as printed. It is absolutely true that the purpose of the English and later the Americans had on many occasions the intent to annihilate the Indians. If one reads the writings of Percy at Jamestown that will be understood. Those who attempt to excuse that with talk of disease doing the killing cannot excuse the fact that many tribes were wiped out with guns.
And that is an ablosute fact.

Ken , newport news,

Jasper,

I was born of mixed hertigage. Native American, African slaves and Anglo slave owners relatives. So which country would you have me return to?

Loretta Carlson, Palm Desert, United States, California

I'm sorry Mr. Lines, but the genocide of Native Americans did not take place "after independence" by any means. European diseases wiped out up to 90% of the indigenous population before there was much contact between whites and Native Americans, simply through the introduction of alien pathogens into the Americas. As one noted historian has said, America wasn't so much a 'virgin land' as a 'widowed one' by the time of Jamestown and the settlement of the east coast. This process began as early as the late tenth century when the VIkings made landfall in what is now Nova Scotia, and picked up steam in the late 15th century (and before Columbus) with voyages of exploration in the 1470s. While the systematic plans of extermination that was the Plains Wars were overseen by the US in the mid-19th century, the process of extermination, not only by disease but enslavement and simple murder as well, was well under way prior to the American Revolution.

SW, Okemos, MI, USA

The remarks of the person from Palm Desert are typical of the crazed left-wing effrontery of "political correctness" which is actually the old Nazi concept of "gleichschaltung" so that should give you an idea of the freedom-denying core of PC. You can't apologise for others' deeds and I find itoffensive to qualify anyone's nationality: 'African-American' is a meaningless phrase and a pandering to the notion that what divides peoples (races, for example) is more important than what unites them: in this case, America's values and beliefs. America ended slavery in 1865 and while racism itself still exists (as everywhere), the USA is way ahead of Europe where anti-semitism, for example, now receives sotto-voce official sanction in conflating the Israeli and phony 'palestinian refugees' with Jew-hatred. As for moslem countries, the Koran actually mandates FOR SLAVERY and Moslem slave trade over 1400 years accounts for hundreds of millions enslaved. Any Moslems apologising?

K Taylor, london,

Colonists were not agents of the crown, but merchants after a profit. If anyone should apologise it's those that profited from the action, both of UK and American heritage.

Silas, Solent, UK

There is not anything Queen Elizabeth 11 can do about what happened in Jamestown and Virginia back in the early 1600's. She was not in Virginia at that time!

She may well, if she wishes to do so, express concern about the suffering the American Indians suffered at the time.

W. Royce Hamby , San Francisco, California/ USA

The continued request from one group of people or another for an apology for event(s) which took place decades ago, has rendered the word 'apologise' meaningless. Her Majesty has no reason to apologise. How dare Mr. McEachin suggest such a thing. If the Virginians want to make apologies for whatever reason,- let them. A good start would be to apologise to the families of the murdered students, and to make the apology meaningful, enanct laws to stop gun sales.

Janet McGrail, Cuba, USA

I recall a history professor pointing out to me years ago that the English learned how to treat "native" peoples in their dealings with the Irish in particular, which is to say that history isn't just history. History has ripples that continue in cultures over time. Britain's history in Iraq in the early 20th century is still part of the current situation. One of the great and endearing anecdotes of the late Queen Mother's life was when she replied to a South African of Dutch ancestry who complained against the British... "Oh yes, we Scots quite understand." Apologies and regrets count... which is something those who've historically been the underdogs quite understand, and the heirs of privilege often don't.

Kenneth Cuthbertson, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA

Her Majesty has NOTHING to apologise for, period. This is yet another case of political correctness run amok. One cannot change history or second guess the motives or intentions of those who preceded us hundreds of years ago. Learn from history, don't repeat it and MOVE ON.

Peter LeTourneux, Courtenay, BC, Canada

Why do only the English need to apologise, the native american indians were running slave trades before we arrived, they did not have prisoner of war camps so traded in captured prisoners from their inter tribal wars.

steve, Murcia, Spain

It is past time we get past the guilt and be proud of our accomplishments. No need to apologize, it only compounds guilt and makes some justified in playing the victim.

Carlton Cash, Hong Kong,

Gotta laugh. The British have not controlled parts of the easten seaboard of the USA for 220 years. In that time perhaps the Revolutionaries should have aplogised.
Furthermore, part of the problem in the first place was the desire of the Revolutionaries to advance into native lands further still and not pay for the troops to do it with. Where the British did retain control (Canada) the experience has been less bloody.
I want the Queen to aplogise to me (an Anglo-Saxon) for her Norman ancestors who have robbed me of my country.
Re-arrange these words ' a get life'.

eddie reader, birmingham, uk

Loretta, rubbish. Are the native Americans (Indians) going to get an apology for the way that they were treated after the Indian Wars and the re-settlement of it's tribes ?. It's history, get over it

kirk, Rotherham, UK

It's worth remembering that archaeological evidence suggests that the influx of people via the Bering land bridge some 12,000 was at best the second settlement of the Americas, and quite possibly the third.

The people now bizarrely referred to as "Native" Americans (are white Americans all born somewhere else?) rapidly exterminated the previous settlers, as well as all the megafauna, and turned millions of square miles of forest into poor grassland, capable of supporting a mere handful of species.

What happened to them after Columbus was bad and by modern standards would be inexcusable, but it was not significantly worse (if at all) than what they did to each other and to the continent. They were assuredly _not_ in harmony with nature.

Ian Kemmish, Biggleswade, UK

The genocide of the native American, took place after independence, not before it.

R Lines, Ilminster, Somerset

Yet another apologetic stance by the poor down-trodden people. How can the Queen be accountable for the deeds of ancestors way before her time. Are the gun lobby of America going to apologise for all the recent shoootings?
Will America apologise for invading Iraq and causing the dearths of 100's of thousands of Iraqi civilians.
Come on live in the real world.

M Gisicki, staffordshire,

Maybe, when the Queen returns home, she will apologise for the Norman conquest.
Once that wrong corrected, we can demand the Pope apologises for the Romans.
Next, call for a UN inquiry to establish which of Norway, Sweden and Denmark should apologise for the Viking raids.
After that we can demand any person with the name Kahn apologises for the Mongol Hoards.
Finally, I demand that Loretta Carlson, together with most US residents, remove themselves from stolen territory forthwith and return to their ancestral homeland.

jasper, chelmsford,

What a world! What have we come to? We have become looser-obsessed!
Perhaps we should dig up the Greks and Romans too, and have them
apologise for those opressed in the name of civilisation. This last
century, the world hasn't been turning. The stomach has.

Eugene, Heidelberg, germany

It's the least the Queen can do ,to make amends for her ancestors treatments of The Native Americans and Africans in the 1600's. We are all humans and one day we will realize this fact. The color of our skin has nothing to with our brains and spirit, Perhaps, a visit of outerspace beings, will let us know how it feels to be taken over and suppressed by another country. Our country is still following in the motherlands footsteps of taking over a country's people and natural produce and wealth of land. Only now we call it Democracy!

Loretta Carlson, Palm Desert, United States, California

What pure, unadulterated rubbish! Do we see one Indian tribe apologizing to another for the documented atrocities they committed on one another? Of course not. Do we see the American North apologizing to the American South for its atrocities at Northern prisons? Of course not. History moves on, and so must people. To wallow in the self-pity of the past does nothing to improve mankind.

Bob Evans, Anaheim, California

Thus speaks history. All the colonizing countries could go on apologizing for things that have happened in the past. It is more important that the history is learned and appreciated, and more importantly, that we try to see that certain acts never occur again. As a global community we seem to be really good at the last bit don't we!!

Kevin Morgan, Pontypridd, Wales, United Kingdom

Perhaps the descendents of the Britons in Brittany, France can demand the Anglo-Saxons apologize for pushing them off the Island, the modern Romans should apologize to all of us Western European for enslaving many of our family members after their conquests, and likewise the descendents of the Spartans for enslaving their fellow Greek Helots, and the Egyptians to the Jews, and so on.

Also, 1619 did not mark the beginning of slavery for British North America. Many people came over as indentured servants during the first 60 years of colonization and widespread slavery did not commence until the beginning of the 18th century, though that doesn’t excuse it. In fact, the first settler in my region (Adam Thoroughgood) came over in 1618 as indentured servant and after his period of servitude became one the region's leading citizens. The first case that set the precedent for slavery didn't occur until 1661 (in England), and the "master" was actually a black man.

Shaun, Norfolk, Virginia

Good Lord, should we demand that the French Government, and the descendants of King Louis XIV apologize for the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes and the treatment of the Huguenots? Where do we stop?

H.M. the Queen may not be aware of the fact, but almost all of the foremost families of Virginia (the so call FFV) are descendants of Thomas Rolfe, son of Thomas Rolfe and Pocahontas. Therefore if the Queen would like to meet descendants of Wahunsunacock (the Chief Powhatan)
perhaps she should meet Bollings, Lees, Randolphs, Carters, and Byrds.

EAG, Maine, USA