Telling New Stories

1. What were the two versions of the Camp Grant attack that existed among the U.S. public, and who supported each view? 
Version One of the Event:  A group of U.S. settlers, Mexicans, and O'odham attacked the Apache living near camp Grant for revenge on them because they raided the settlement and killed some settlers.  

Who supported Version One?  Most of the Settlers supported this because they wanted revenge.  Also, once the rumors started, others also started to believe this, and supported the attack on the Apache.  

Version Two of the Event:  Lieutenant Whitman, the commander of the fort, thought that the attack was a violation of the U.S. peace agreement with the Apache, and it was a slaughter of innocent women and children.

Who supported Version Two?  The Government and the reform had believed the second version of events.  Public views became split between the settlers account and the forts.  

2. Why was the trial that took place after the attack significant?
     It was the first time in history of a western territory to defend Apaches and prosecute settlers instead of the other way around.

3. Whose views were absent in the accounts of this attack that were told in the United States?
     The Apache were not present at the trial, but the U.S. settlers, Mexicans, U.S. officials, and an O'odham leader were there. 

4. Why have Native American views been excluded from the story of U.S. expansion that is told in the United States?
     Only the anglo American settlers had access to national newspapers.  The Mexicans, Apache, and O'odham did not have the same access that the settlers had and therefor did not have the same opportunity to let outsiders hear their perspectives.  The Anglo Americans had only shown their side of the story and excluded or downsized much of what had really happened between Indians and american settlers.

5. What were the two parts of the U.S. government's assiimilation plan in the late nineteenth century? 
a.  Gather all of the indians and put them onto reservations.
b.  Make sure they spoke English, were Christians, and could farm small plots of land.  Then they could become citizens of the U.S.

6. Give two examples of how U.S. policy makers forced Indian groups to give up their cultures? 
a.  They banned indians from practicing their religions and ceremonies.
b.  They also took away the indians children and sent them to boarding school to "...conform to U.S. society voluntarily."

7. What effect did the railroad have on U.S. settlement of the West?
     The railroads brought more and more people streaming into the west.  Because of the Railroads, the journey that once took months only took a few days.  The western economy grew very fast.  The west was transformed from small farms, to ranches and cities and lots of industrialization.

8. How did westward expansion fuel U.S. industrialization?
     The west made all sorts of things for the rest of the world.  Because it was new to explore and mine, there was a lot of much needed materials, like minerals, and timber.  The ranches in the west also feed the East side of the U.S. and some of Europe also.  The west was a major help in a lot of ways to the rest of the world.

Experiencing U.S. Expansion: Southern Arizona - Part II

6. What two threats did Mexico face in its northern frontier in the mid-nineteenth century?
a.  One of the conflicts that became a problem for northern mexico was that they started fighting again with the native indian groups that they had tried to make peace with before.  Some mexican leaders wanted to exterminate the Apache.
b.  The second conflict was from the north.  The U.S. wanted to settle on the northern part of the Mexican territory.  They thought that they could use the natural recourses that were in the northern part of mexico better than the mexicans could. 

  7. Why did the Gadsden Purchase have such a great impact on northern Mexicans?

  The Gadsden Purchase had a great impact on northern mexicans because when the U.S. bought the land, there were still towns from mexico living there.  Those mexican towns then became U.S. towns.  Most of the mexicans living in those towns didn't want to become citizens of the United States.


  8. List two ways that cultural misunderstanding contributed to a growing conflict between U.S. settlers and Apache groups.
a.  Both the U.S. and the Apache misunderstood each other.  The U.S. keept accusing the Apache for raiding their settlements, when they were not the same group that the U.S signed a treaty with.  The United States usually confused the groups they had made treaties with.  Also, they thought that when they signed with a group of Apache, it ment multiple groups rather than just that group.
b.  The Americans also made problems worse because when they started attacking Apache groups, they destroyed food sources and encouraged further raiding..

 9. How did the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the Gadsden Purchase spark a civil war in...
a. Mexico?  The mexican citizens were angry that they lost so much land.  They thought that because they had lost land, that they might look weak and  some even said that their government, economy, and society need to start over again.
b. the United States?  Because the United States had gained so much land, there were arguments over wether the territory should be a slave state or a free state.

10. a. What did many U.S. settlers want U.S. policy towards the Apache to be?

  Most U.S. settlers wanted to exterminate the Apache.  The government "turned its energies towards pacifying Indian groups in the West U.S."


b. In what ways did this clash with the federal government’s Peace Policy?
  If there were to be reservations for the indians, the settlers gathered that it would provide resources for the Apache but it would not punish them for the raiding that they had done previous to the reservations.  The reservations would also do nothing to stop them from raiding, or help them understand why they shouldn't raid.

11. Why were the Apache hesitant to move onto reservations?

  The Apache were cautious to trust the U.S. because they thought it was a hoax to exterminate them.  Also, they could no longer live their normal lives because it prevented them from taking their yearly migrations.  

Experiencing U.S. Expansion: Southern Arizona

1. What were the two broad groupings of Native Americans in southern Arizona when the Spanish arrived?
Broad Group 1   Name for Self: O'odham [Akimel, Hia-Ced, Tohono] Spanish Name(s): Pima/Papago
Broad Group 2   Name for self: Western Apache/Chiricahua Spanish Name(s): Apache

2. How did the O’odham show their unwillingness to fully embrace the Spanish missions? 
      The O'odham used many lies to try to get away from the villages so that the father would not stop them from doing rituals and other non christian rituals.

3. Why did Apache groups raid Spanish settlements?  
     They raided spanish settlements because they needed the suplies that the spanish brought.  In the harsh environment that they lived in, it was hard for them to find food, and they found that raiding spanish settlements was much easier for getting suplies.

4. What was the cycle of violence? 
      The cycle of violence is set up so that after the Apache raided the spanish settlements, the spanish would have the O'odham attack the Apache and steal women and children to give to the spanish as slaves.  The Apache would then attack the O'odham to make up for the people killed by the first O'odham attack, and they would also take spanish people as a means to try to get back their old members of the group.  Then the spanish would get mad again and the circle of violence would start all over.

5. How did Spanish and Apache views of the peace created by the establicimientos de paz differ? 
     The spanish and most of the Apache had come to a means of peace because of the establicimientos de paz.  The spanish had fewer Apache attack and raid their settlements, while the Apache got rations of grain, meat, sugar, tobacco, and other goods if they started settling near spanish settlements.  

New Settlers in the West

1. Read pages 10 - 18  List three reasons why people in the United States moved west.

a. People were looking for new land to settle.  The land had rich soil and other recourses like timber.
b. There was also an increase in population durring the early ninetieth century.  The new immigrants all wanted to participate in the land promotions and the chance to become rich.
c. Also there was the opportunity to begin a new life in the west.  Colored people didn't have the oppressive laws put upon them, and women finally got the right to vote in the Wyoming Territory.

2. How did westward expansion contribute to sectional tensions in the United States?
     The tensions in the U.S. started increasing when the country expanded to the west.  The reason for this was the different views that the north and south had about slavery.  Right before we expanded west, the congress was even, 11 slave states and 11 non slave states.  Once territories started becoming states, there was the question of becoming a slave or non slave state.  The north and the south competed to become the stronger side of the congress so that they could pass laws to help their economic interests.


3. What was the Peace Policy?
     The Peace Policy was a policy that was issued by Ulysses S. Grant and was suposed to put all Indian groups on reservations scattered across the country.  This policy was for exterminating Native Americans, but to help them follow the customs of U.S. society.

Indian Removal Act

1. Read pages 10 - 12 (Stop at "Settlers Move West"). Why did the United States fight or negotiate with dozens of Indian groups for the lands in the Louisiana Territory? 
     The United States wanted the indians off of the Louisiana Territory because, after what they thought was going to permanently be indian territory, they found out that settlers were moving into the Louisiana Territory anyways and it then became clear to the U.S. government that they needed this land and that people were violating the treaties with the Native Americans anyways.
2. In what ways did the Cherokees assimilate U.S. values and customs?

     Durring the 1820's The Cherokees had adopted a republic similar to our own.  The Cherokee farmers also took part in selling cotton like other farmers and some even had slaves to work on their plantations.  In 1827, the Cherokees actually decided to create a constitution, and they declared themselves an independent nation inside of the United States.

The Transformation of a Continent

1. Read pages 1 - 2. How does the term "the West" mask the different perspectives of people at the start of the nineteenth century? (Keep in mind the discussion at the beginning of class today - "Eastward Expansion")
     The term "the west", isn't always the case for all people looking at the how the americans expanded.  To the Spanish colonists, they viewed this move as the Northern expansion.  To the Russians, they saw it as the Eastern expansion.  And native american groups at the time did not understand why the americans were fencing off land because to them, no one owned the earth.  To different people, their perspective of what happened has different names.

2. Read page 5. Summarize the three major areas of differences and misunderstandings between the Europeans and Native Americans.
Trade: In the beginning, indians thought of trade as helping to make and keep alliances, while the Europeans believed that trade was mostly to gain prophet.  The Indians learned that Europeans valued the material rather than making friends.  The Indians had killed to many of the animals for trade instead of food and the necessities they needed, and soon they became dependent on what the settlers had to trade, like alcohol, guns, clothes, and tools.

Land: Indians and Europeans looked at land differently.  The Native American groups thought of different portions of the land as spiritual and cultural reasons, the Europeans had always believed that one must buy the land to own it.  The Europeans insisted on buying the land.

Treaties: Treaties were a source of conflict for the Indians and Europeans.  Europeans thought that when they signed a treaty, they were signing it for many tribes across a portion of land.  The indians believed that when they signed an agreement, it was only for their tribe or group of people.  Also when they had a discusion about where or what the treaty was about, the Indians thought that the spoken part of the meeting was more important than the written document, and the Europeans used this to change the amount or how much land the indians actually got.

3. Read pages 3 - 7 (stop at U.S. Westward Expansion). How did the arrival of Europeans transform life in the West? (Feel free to bullet point your answer. But use lots of key details!)

• Horses became a major part of life, for the Indians and the Europeans.  They completely changed some tribes way of life.
• Bringing guns to the new world also changed the way Indians and European settlers interacted.  They became necessary for survival
• The settlers also brought deseas that killed many Indians, and the native americans suffered because of this.

4. Read pages 7 - 10. In a paragraph, explain this sentence from the reading (which is the first paragraph under the heading of "US Westward Expansion."): "The new country's treatment of native people would contrast sharply with the ideals it set for itself."
     The founders of the new country thought that ownership was the key part to preserving freedom and equality, yet they took away Native American land for their own uses.  They said that owning land was the highest form of civilization, and yet they did not respect the lands of the Native Americans when they came to colonize the new country.  We have broken what was said by the leaders of the U.S. had said were our most important.  When we dont even respect our own laws and principles, how can we say we are here to suport liberty and equality.

Myths as Historical Sources

1. Summarize this legend in 2 - 3 sentences.
     Saynday, a member of the Kiowa Tribe, is walking in the fields and notices that there are white peoples houses, and that they are ruining the land.  When he looks to the East, he sees a black figure coming towards him, and when he encounters this person, he finds out that his name is Smallpox and he is following the white people to bring death and despair. Smallpox wants to bring death to Saynday's tribe, but Saynday is smart enough to decline Smallpox's requests, and instead tricks him into going to the Pawnee tribe.
2. What changes does Saynday notice when he looks at the landscape?
     When Saynday looks at the land around him, he sees that white men have settled on the wild plains.  Their cattle graze on the grass that buffalo have once eaten.  They have polluted the water with their building and have scared all of the animals that had once lived there away.
3. What is the relationship between Smallpox and white men?
     Smallpox says he is one with the white settlers.  He follows them where ever they go and is always with them, in their houses and camps.  Smallpox brings destruction to whom ever he breaths on.  Misfortune to whoever looks at him.  He is good friends with the white men.  He traveled with them from the other side of the East Ocean (Atlantic)
4. According to this legend, in what ways do the Kiowas see themselves as different from white people?
     Saynday says that unlike the white people, the Kiowas do not count living things like the white people, who count people, men, women and children, like cattle.  The Kiowas count only the enemies they touch. 
5. What do you think was the relationship between the Kiowas and the Pawnees?
      The Kiowas and the Pawnees are not very friendly towards each other.  In the legend, it says that the Pawnee are the ones who almost wiped out the Kiowas.  The Kiowas would run away from a stranger because they thought that it could be a Pawnee tribesman.

Origins and Evolution of Terrorism

1. Why was the hostage crisis at the Munich Olympics a turning point in terrorism? 

     Science had advanced during the Olympics and satellite technology became more advanced.  Because of this, most of the world, or whoever was watching the Olympics, could see the terrorists and what they were doing.  All of this developed what terrorism is all about, to frighten or terrorize people not specifically kill masses. 

2. The reading says that state-sponsored terrorism increased after the U.S. hostage crisis in Iran. What did many governments learn from that event?

     Other governments saw that in supporting terrorists, they could efficiently strike stronger states using weaker states.

3. The past fifteen years have seen a sharp rise in religious terrorism. What motivates these terrorists? 

    Religious terrorists are motivated by their beliefs and what they want to change.  They usually think something has gone very wrong in the world.  religion can give a person physical or spiritual safety against governments and politics.  Some say that they were told by their God to do what they did. 

4. How have these new terrorists changed the way terrorism is carried out? 
     Terrorists now attack things that have symbolic meaning and the timing is also a major part of when terrorists strike.  terrorists choose people and symbols that they believe represent the ideas and things that they are fighting against.