The Address To General Andrew Creek Chief

As it is said, “the victor writes history.” As a student, we believe that we know the history. But this is not true. We do not know African American history beyond the slave trade. Similarly, we know little about the American Indians, now referred to as Native Americans. The history we learnt that glossed over details and left students with the feeling that the immigrants from the United Kingdom and other European countries benefitted the native population. The search for the history of cowboys versus Indians will be challenging. Ethan Hawke and Greg Roth have resolved this challenge through their graphic novel, INDEH: A Story of the Apache Wars. In their collaborative work, Hawke and Roth successfully show readers that they may assume that they know Native American history, they do not. students were taught American history from the viewpoint of immigrants. The cowboy and Indians wars which erupted between Native Americans and the immigrant settlers was a war over territory and over culture and different lifestyles. It was not a war between savages and people from an advanced culture. Hawke and Roth show us that a war over resources and the determination of the settlers and immigrants to rule over what they referred to as the “New World.”

Having little knowledge of the Cherokee removal and the history that took place in this moment in America’s past, the book Trail of Tears: Rise and Fall of the Cherokee Nation by John Ehle, offers an insight to the politics, social dynamics and class struggles the Cherokee Nation faced in the late 1830s. The book was very comprehensive and the scope of the book covers nearly 100 years of Native American History. Ehle captures the history of the Native American people by showing the readers what led to the events infamously known as the Trail of Tears. The author uses real military orders, journals, and letters which aid in creating a book that keeps

The Natives felt oppressed by the white man because they had no say in politics and faced lots prejudice by the American people. The Choctaw people didn’t feel free in their own home, according to Harkins, as he addressed the white man. On behalf of himself and his people Harkins responded with sadness, “We were hedged in by two evils, and we chose that

Andrew Jackson was one of the most controversial presidents that the United States had in that time. When discussing his presidency many people have different views on if Jackson was a good or bad president and if he had benefitted for this country. Most opinions over Jackson was that he wasn’t a good president since of the decisions he made affecting other citizen but he also was a good president since of how he handled situations as the US debt. One of the most major events that Jackson had caused was the Trail of Tears and how Jackson killed thousands of Native Americans in the process of transportation. This paper will discuss about the wrong-doing from Andrew Jackson to the Native Americans and how this affected our history and this affected people’s views on the Native Americans.

Why acknowledge history? The solution is because we essentially must to achieve access to the laboratory of human involvement. In the essay “Haunted America”, Patricia Nelson takes a truly various and remarkably gallant stance on United States history. Through the recounting of the White/Modoc war in “Haunted America,” she brings to light the complexity and confusion of the White/Indian conflicts that is often missing in much of the history we read. Her account of the war, with the faults of both Whites and Indians revealed, is an unusual alternative to the stereotypical “Whites were good; Indians were bad” or the reverse stand point that “Indians were good; Whites were bad” conclusions that many historians reach. Limerick argues that a very brutal and bloody era has been simplified and romanticized, reducing the lives and deaths of hundreds to the telling of an uncomplicated story of “Good Guys” and “Bad Guys”.

The whites tried to colonize the Natives land, and they Natives didn’t know how to handle it. They also couldn’t handle all the diseases, and illnesses that the white people brought with them as said in the background “europeans brought with them measles and smallpox, against which natives americans were not immune”. This started to kill the Native Americans, but not all things that the white’s brought over to the new land, weren't so bad. The Native Americans started running out of food, this lead them to start relying on Europeans goods or food and other necessary items as stated in the background “The Cherokees were losing their self-sufficiency and becoming increasingly dependent on European goods”. In Document 5 it says “your mothers, your sisters ask and beg of you not to of our land, We say ours. You are our descendants; take pity on our request.” This quote emphasises how much the cherokee women didn't want the whites colonizing Their land anymore, because they wanted the land passed down to the next generation for them the thrive and live. This later took a turn when the Native americans and the white started to realize that they couldn't live with the whites anymore, The two different races were to different in culture as said in document 4 “Indians cannot flourish in the neighborhood of the white population”. This later became an issue with the whites and later became the Indian Removal

When one hears the name Andrew Jackson, there are many feelings that are conjured up by an individual. Some of these emotions include fear, disgust, and comedy. These sentiments are of reason for substantial evidence exists to prove these emotions plausible. Andrew Jackson was the seventh president under the Constitution of the United States of America who presided from 1829 until 1837. However, he was the first president to be impeached. With his controversial presidency, Andrew Jackson implemented many policies that continue to impact the United States in the modern era. His most controversial contribution was the Indian Removal Act. The Indian Removal Act prompted the infamous Trail of Tears that killed many Cherokee Native Americans and moved them westward to confined reservations. Of course, to implement such grand policy, Jackson had to unduly convince Congress of those actions. In Andrew Jackson’s speech given February 22nd, 1831 entitled “Message Regarding Indian Relations,” he tries to vindicate the Indian Removal Act, outline the benefits of such legislation, and explain why such it was indeed important. Rhetorical strategies such as ethos, pathos, and logos are effectively utilized by Jackson to persuade Congress to believe in the merits of upholding the Indian Removal Act which then lead to westward expansion and Native American migration from their homelands.

It is easy to see that current events and issues of the world around them have had an impact on authors and what they have written from the stories in this time period. The Native American authors wrote stories describing life during and after white man came to America. We read Oratory’s by two Native American’s COCHISE and CHARLOT. They gave heart-wrenching speeches, giving great details into the history of the tribes and the devastating effect the white man had on them. Author Zitkala Sa gave us a powerful interpretation of her life as a Indian and how the white’s coming to America affected her life.

This first hand account by John G Burnett, a member of the 2nd Regiment, 2nd Brigade, Mounted Infantry, was written in 1890 as a letter to his children and paints a descriptive picture of the brutality of the Trail of Tears (“Two Accounts of the Trail of Tears”). The Trail of Tears was a tragic event, but was unavoidable due to the circumstances of the time. Many factors preceding the Trail of Tears have been proven to be catalyst for the tragic event. The Trail of Tears was when the United States Army forced the Cherokee indians from their home and made them move west of the Mississippi. There were people who were for the Trail of Tears and those who were not. Some factors which made the Trail of Tears inevitable were the growing population of America, the attitude of Americans toward natives, and the president of the time.

Beginning hundreds of years ago, Native Americans experienced an invasion. Perpetrated first by European explorers, then conquerors, and, finally, colonists, the first people to inhabit the Americas experienced a devastation of their land, culture, and dignity from people who hungered for their land and resources. Despite these tribulations, the Native American identity could never truly be destroyed. The novels Black Elk Speaks by John G. Neihardt and Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee by Dee Brown explore this truth by recounting the oppression of Native Americans and illustrating the incoming of the white man through the indigenous

The War of 1812 was brought about by a multitude of factors including international trade restrictions, the capture of American sailors by the British Royal Navy, and the United States attempts at expanding its territory. The various parties involved in this war are the Americans, the British, the Canadians (then a british colony), the Native Americans, and the Africans. While the main conflict of this war was between White America and the British, the Native Americans and African slaves found themselves lodged somewhere in between in regards to which side they would identify with. There were attempts on both sides to recruit these two ethnic groups of peoples’ in order to increase the overall manpower of each side’s forces. Two important British documents that attempted to recruit these peoples are Admiral Alex Cochrane’s “A Proclamation Issued on 2 April 1814” and Col. Edward Nicolls’s “Order to the First Battalion of Royal Colonial Marines.” The first of these two documents aims to recruit people who desire to “withdraw” from the United States and the latter of these is a progressive speech aimed at giving Indians and people of color fair treatment and equality for deciding to join the British cause. Both of these speeches were meticulously written to take full advantage of the logos, pathos, and ethos trio that is explored by nearly all eminent persuasive documents.

The Narrative was a very interesting Article explaining the Trail of Tears through the point of view of a white privileged soldier. He first explain his personal relationship with the Cherokee how his relationship with then connected him to the atrocity. This also falls into comparison with the ideological mindset of Eurocentric soldier this one different soldier was purposely used within the context of the narrative to appeal to the reader’s moral and ironic symbolism of what the soldier meant. He explained the events taking place post extraction because he was the messenger in which they spoke from, with having talent of speaking to them in their native tongue, witnessed the doom of the Native Cherokee Indians being taken from the village and into the Trail of Tears. He then slants the entirety of his narrative by expanding the psychotic images he saw since he was so close to the Indians he understood the true horror of the incident. So this article

When people hear about the Trail of Tears, the only thought to really pop up in their mind is a bunch of Indians died while being forced to emigrate from their homes. Many people believe that the Trail of Tears revolves only around the Cherokee Indians because the name came from their language. Of the Cherokee who made it to the west without death taking them, they called this forced removal, “Nunna Daul Isunyi—The Trail Where We Cried” (Langguth, 311). The Trail of Tears is a blackspot on American history; it is purposely brushed over quickly in American classrooms. This event encompasses so much more than what young Americans are taught. The tribes put on these trail went through punishing trials; multiple diseases, insufficient resources, extreme weather, and finally death from being starved and fatigued. There were countless tribes affected, emigrated, and annihilated by white settlers such as the Seminoles, Choctaws, Creeks, Chickasaws, and Cherokees; it was the final chapter for natives in the east.

The defeat of the first United States army by a coalition of Native Americans is the focus in Collin Calloway’s The Victory with No Name. In this historical account, Calloway addresses what occurred on November 4th, 1791, when an Indian army consisting of a variety of Indian tribes, led by Little Turtle and Blue Jacket, ambushed the first American army near the Wabash River to protect themselves from American expansion of the Northwest Territory. The American army, led by Revolutionary War veteran Arthur St. Clair, was ill-equipped with men, horses, and weaponry, and ignorant about Indian whereabouts and tactics. Calloway organizes his argument by describing America’s desire for land, the invasion and settlement of Indian land, and the resistance formed by Native Americans. Calloway continues by illustrating the defeat of the American army and the aftermath of the battle between Native Americans and the U.S. By drawing on extensive historical evidence that illustrated the events before, during, and after the battle, Calloway presents a detailed historical narrative that challenges the idea that “winners write the history…even when they lose” and offers a narrative that shows both the Native American and the U.S. perspective, ultimately giving credit to the Indians for their victory. However, Calloway provides information that is irrelevant to his argument and the book, which makes it difficult to follow along throughout the story.

In the Last Stand, written by Nathaniel Philbrick he discusses a big leader in the Civil War, George Armstrong Custer and how he led his troops with reckless courage. Philbrick wrote this book which can be viewed in many ways: a bloody massacre that is a big part of American history, or a tale of crazy arrogance and even unmatched bravery. One way that this book can be viewed as is the Last Stand being viewed as an account of a well-known battle that encapsulates the treatment of Native Americans during the “Indian Wars.” The next option is that the Last Stand is a retelling story of a history that does not glorify the United States Army in the Indian Wars, but shows the hubris and reckless of the leaders and army. Finally, the Last Stand can be viewed as a double meaning, both the last stand for Custer and the Last Stand for the Sitting Bull and the Lakota Sioux. In this essay, I’m going to discuss the ways in which Custer leads his troops and how he was a powerful leader during this time.