Chief Seattle's Oration to Governor Stevens

My name is Robert Coxswain.  I am a citizen of Boston , whether the tallow catch’s of that whiffle-waffle believe I’m a citizen or not is the opinion of them.  I have picked up my quill today to state the opinions I hold on the matter involving Hester Prynne.  I would also take the time to give thoughts on what should happen to Mrs. Prynne’s daughter.                                  Mrs. Prynne having sinned and committed such a sornering act, such as adultery, should not be purged of her daughter Pearl.   Governor, how would woud taking the young one help the situation?  Pearl is a skelpie limmer, who is still the daughter of the very person who brought great controversy to the area.  Sir, I do not believe it is

In this text, Chief Seattle ponders whether or not to sell his land to the president of the United States, George Washington. Chief Seattle is trying to appeal both to his tribal members and to the white settlers offering to buy the tribal land. Seattle’s speech is a mix of placatory language and of bitter remarks about the differences between whites and natives. Chief Seattle uses logos to convince both sides of the validity of his claims, he uses pathos to garner support from his own people Chief Seattle employs logical arguments quite strikingly throughout his speech.

The crown depicted the Indians as intractable, only to find that settlers resorted to violence against the Indians precisely because of their supposed intractability. Indigenous peoples, for their part, fought among themselves and against advancing settlers. All groups sought to “territorialize” their societies to secure themselves against competitors. In the final chapters, Langfur extends and qualifies this complicated story. In the later eighteenth century, settler pressures grew, stressing crown policies and threatening indigenous social orders, until all-out war broke out after 1808. For Langfur this was no Manichean battle between European invaders and indigenous victims. To a dominant narrative of violence he juxtaposes a “parallel history of cooperation” among Europeans, Africans, and Indians, and he concludes that war itself must be understood in terms of “the relationship of cooperative enemies.”

The relationship between the English and the Native Americans in 1600 to 1700 is one of the most fluctuating and the most profound relationships in American history. On the one side of the picture, the harmony between Wampanoag and Puritans even inspires them to celebrate “first Thanksgiving”; while, by contrast, the conflicts between the Pequots and the English urge them to antagonize each other, and even wage a war. In addition, the mystery of why the European settlers, including English, become the dominant power in American world, instead of the indigenous people, or Indians, can be solved from the examination of the relationship. In a variety of ways, the relationship drastically alters how people think about and relate to the aborigines. Politically, the relationship changes to establish the supremacy of the English; the English intends to obtain the land and rules over it. Socially, the relationship changes to present the majority of the English settlers; the dominating population is mostly the English settlers. Economically, the relationship changes to obtain the benefit of the English settlers; they gain profit from the massive resource in America. Therefore, the relationship does, in fact, change to foreshadow the discordance of the two groups of people.

In 1800’s following the American Revolution, the new American Government and the indigenous Native American people had to learn how to coexist. In order to successful work with together, there was a need for translators and mediators. One of these mediators was named Red Jacket, a chief and orator for the Seneca Tribe in New York. For his leadership and efforts in maintaining peace, Red Jacket was recognized by President George Washington. In 1805, the U.S government sought to proselytize, convert the Native Americans to Christianity, the Seneca tribe which was met by opposition from Red Jacket and his people. In the speech, Red Jacket Defends Native American Religion, 1805, Red Jacket builds an argument to persuade his

When examining early American history it is commonplace, besides in higher academia, to avoid the nuances of native and colonizer relations. The narrative becomes one of defeat wherein the only interaction to occur is one of native American’s constant loss to white colonizers. It is not to say that the European colonizers didn’t commit genocide, destroy the land and fabric of countless cultures, but rather when looking at history it is important to take a bottom’s up approach to storytelling. We must examine in what ways the native Americans fought English colonization, not just through war, but also through the legal system that was established after the area was colonized.

In, A Severe and Proud Dame She Was, Mary Rowlandson recounts the treatment she received as prisoner of war from Natives in the Wampanoags and Nipmuck tribes written in her perspective. In 1675, Mary Rowlandson found herself and children held captive in the hands of Massachusetts Native Americans. Mary writes with a bias that seems to paint the Native Americans as a species different than her own, but her tone suggests she tried her best to understand their tribe. The purpose of this article appears to be written with the intent of persuading the masses on account of personal experience; that is the interaction among Natives and their customs to be seen in a light of hypocritical behavior. Through the lens of the captured author, she details the experience of her captivity with merciful gestures on the Native’s behalf, despite them keeping her for ransom. Rowlandson suggests traditional Native warfare surrounds a central recurring theme of manipulating mind-games; psychological warfare.

How can the red man understands the white man’s “dreams” and “visions” when according to Chief Seattle in " Letter to President Pierce," the white man thinks of them as “savages”; therefore, the white man's dreams are hidden from them? The red man do not understand why the white man is expanding into his territory. They do not understand why they are killing the buffaloes that the red man uses for survival. In the essay, Seattle describe how the value of the land is seen differently among both the Indians and the white. Whereas, the red man sees the land to be sacred place that is to be lived on and cherished, the white man just sees it as being the same land wherever he goes; where he can used it and leave it like is nothing of

Henry Clay, known as “The Great Emancipator” and a tough political opponent versus Andrew Jackson in the 1832 election, made his opinion on Native American removal known in 1829 during his “State of the Union Address” (Biography.com Editors). Clay was in a position of great power, as he was one of the “first modern politician who had carefully create an image for himself”, which boosted his popularity in office, even against a famous opponent, such as Jackson. To convey his audience, he uses literary devices, such as logos, by comparing the Indians as a lower form of life. Despite his powerful position, he lost the electoral college 's presidential vote by a large margin, 219-49 (Courier). In Clay’s speech “On Native Americans,” where he addresses his plans of Indian removal west of the Mississippi, he uses ethos, logos, and others opinions to take a stand against Native Americans.

Chief Seattle challenges the religious argument by stating, “Your God loves your people and hates mine; he folds his strong arms lovingly around the white man … but has forsaken his red children” (paragraph 5). He asks how there can ever be peace between his people and the white man if, in fact, it is only the white man who is loved and protected by the Almighty. He also effectively challenges the white man’s inherent claim to the land by expressing his tribe’s positive reverence for it, “Our dead never forget the beautiful world that gave them being” (paragraph 6). Certainly, his people would be a much better custodian of the land, “Every part of this country is sacred to my people” (paragraph 9).

In the text "Black Hawk's Speech, 1832" the author uses a variety of rhetorical devices. He informs his audience that his people, the indians, were innocent in the war that involved the white men, also known as Europeans. Hawk disguises his facts by using similes and describing the atmosphere of the scene. First, the author expresses his response to the involvment of the Europeans between the lines of a simile.

No one is born hating another person because of the color of his skin, or his background, or his religion. People must learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate, they can be taught to love, for love comes more naturally to the human heart than its opposite.” Unfortunately Native Americans have deep roots with racism and oppression during the last 500 years. “In The Lone Ranger and Tonto Fist Fight in Heaven,” Sherman Alexie tries to show racism in many ways in multiple of his short stories. These stories, engage our history from a Native American viewpoint. Many Native Americans were brutally forced out of their homes and onto Reservations that lacked resources. Later, Indian children were taken from their families and placed into school that were designed to, “Kill the Indian, save the man.” In the book there are multiple short story that are pieces that form a larger puzzle that shows the struggles and their effects on Native Americans. Sherman Alexie shows the many sides of racism, unfair justice and extermination policies and how imagination is key for Native American survival.

In Chief Seattle oration, he attempts to convince Governor Isaac Stevens and the white people that they should be treated fairly despite their condition... Through the use of rhetorical devices like organization, figurative language, tone, and diction, Chief Seattle implies that though they are small, they are not powerless.

“My people are few. They resemble the scattering trees of a storm-swept plain...There was a time when our people covered the land as the waves of a wind-ruffled sea cover its shell-paved floor, but that time long since passed away with the greatness of tribes that are now but a mournful memory.,” Chief Seattle Speech of 1854. The culture of the Native American people has been deteriorating ever since the Europeans arrived in the Americas. The impactful and immense loss of lifestyle that they faced is one that can never be recovered, what the United States has given them are generations of trauma and blatant suffering. However, the U.S. did not stop there, a multitude of cultures have been broken to help keep America pure. For instance, one of the most significant cultures that have been dismantled by the U.S. other than the Natives and their music were the languages and music of the African slaves. The apparent likeness of these two cultures in the ways in which their deconstruction impacted them is in more of an abundance, such as the dominating influence of the Christian religion and the gravely vital role of maintaining what little heritage they could through language. In contrast to this, the two groups had an opposing difference pertaining to how the Natives and slaves tried to compensate the immense loss of their culture through the generations.

I also feel like these series of speeches addressed the white people in general and purposefully included pathos to appeal to their emotion. To start off with, Chief Red Jacket mentioned that “it was the will of the Great Spirit that we should meet together this day” (Red Jacket 53). This seemed to mean that Chief Red Jacket felt like their meeting at that destined time and place was a sign from God, and, due to that, I feel like it gave him a sense of purpose. He also mentioned that they are finally able to “stand upright before you and can speak what we think” (Red Jacket 53). Since expression of ideas was not as common before, I feel like the Indians were happy to finally get this chance to proclaim what they believed in. Then, Chief Red Jacket proceeded with his speech and stated “there was a time when our forefathers owned this great island” (Red Jacket 53). Chief Red Jacket started this speech off by reminiscing on the past and how everything that they currently own belonged to someone else. By doing this, he was referencing to the ancestors that came before them. Then, he proceeded by mentioning that the white people’s forefathers “crossed the great water and landed upon this island” (Red Jacket 53).