>

I can’t afford to read an article about native pups
"In addition, the bones from all three showed cut marks indicating that they had been butchered and eaten by colonists, said Michael Lavin, director of collections at Jamestown Rediscovery.
Jamestown’s settlers ran out of food in the winter of 1609-1610 — what was known as the “starving time” — and in desperation ate dogs, rodents, snakes and boots. There is also one account of cannibalism."
Well wasn't expecting that they ate the dogs.
"According to the European colonial records, dogs up and down the Eastern seaboard … were reported to howl and not to bark, giving rise to the term, ‘barkless dogs,’” he wrote.
In two cases, dogs were found buried along with a severed right human forearm.
The reason is a mystery. Blick speculated that the arm may have been a war trophy, buried with the dog “to symbolically keep the enemy at bay in the afterlife"
Pretty metal. >

That was version 1.0 of Jamestown, before the massacre in 1622. >

My wife and I visited Jamestown a few months ago. My cousin works there. She didn't tell us about the cannibalism. >

Very interesting. I never knew about native dogs. Thanks for posting. >

The tribes of the Pacific Northwest had a little white dog that they would use the shed hair from to weave warm clothes.  White settlers put a permanent end to that. Woops, the article did mention the dog! >

So we stole their land and ate their dogs. >

Yeah and Jamestown bought Irish women as slaves. Then the Dutch brought in kidnapped black folk.  Fkn white euros were ruthless monsters all around. >

Doesn’t really seem like the Irish slaves are monsters in this scenario, so not sure what you mean by “all around”