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:
The settlers and O’odham involved were hailed as heroes by many newspapers. The group said that they were simply retaliating for stolen cattle and a few dead settlers, whom the Apache had supposedly killed.
Who supported Version One?
This version, the “Camp Grant Affair”, was supported by the local western settlers, including the Mexican-Americans, and the O’odham people.
Version Two of the Event:
Version One of the Event:
The settlers and O’odham involved were hailed as heroes by many newspapers. The group said that they were simply retaliating for stolen cattle and a few dead settlers, whom the Apache had supposedly killed.
Who supported Version One?
This version, the “Camp Grant Affair”, was supported by the local western settlers, including the Mexican-Americans, and the O’odham people.
Version Two of the Event:
This view was from the perspective of Lieutenant Whitman of the U.S. Army, and the commander of Camp Grant. He said it was an unjustified attack from the settlers, and an slaughter of innocent women and children.
Who supported Version Two?
Who supported Version Two?
This view was supported by the U.S. government and reformers throughout the country. They began to call it the “Camp Grant Massacre.”
2. Why was the trial that took place after the attack significant?
After months and months of pressure, officials in the Camp Grant area put the leaders of the Camp Grant Attack on trial. This was the first time ever that a non-Apache was arrested for killing an Apache. However, only representatives from the U.S. government, Mexican-American settlers, U.S. settlers, and one O’odham testified. With no view from the Apache standpoint, the defendants were acquitted.
3. Whose views were absent in the accounts of this attack that were told in the United States?
2. Why was the trial that took place after the attack significant?
After months and months of pressure, officials in the Camp Grant area put the leaders of the Camp Grant Attack on trial. This was the first time ever that a non-Apache was arrested for killing an Apache. However, only representatives from the U.S. government, Mexican-American settlers, U.S. settlers, and one O’odham testified. With no view from the Apache standpoint, the defendants were acquitted.
3. Whose views were absent in the accounts of this attack that were told in the United States?
Anglo-Americans were able to contact newspapers throughout the country; they could get their side of the story to the outside world very easily. Mexican-Americans, Apache, and the O’odham, on the other hand, were essentially cut off from the rest of the country. Therefore, in every part of the country, everyone heard the side of the Anglo-Americans and never the perspective of the Mexican-Americans, Apache, or O’odham.
4. Why have Native American views been excluded from the story of U.S. expansion that is told in the United States?
In the telling of the story of westward expansion, the Anglo-Americans wanted to portray themselves in the most positive light possible. This was easy for them, since they were the dominant people throughout the United States. Since most interactions with Native Americans would put a negative shade on the account of westward expansion, often these stories just weren’t told. Native Americans were completely omitted from many accounts.
5. What were the two parts of the U.S. government's assimilation plan in the late nineteenth century?
a. Pack all of the Indians onto tight, barren lands under U.S. control. The government wanted them in high concentration so they could
b. erase their culture completely. They wanted them to be Christian, speak English and farm on small independent lands. Once this was achieved, they could become a normal part of American society.
6. Give two examples of how U.S. policy makers forced Indian groups to give up their cultures?
a. Indians were banned from practicing their own religion and cultural ceremonies on the reservation. This was a way of integrating Christianity rather than their individual religions.
b. Thousands of Indian children were sent to boarding schools and forced to act like American children, with short hair and speaking English. This was a way of getting rid of their Indian culture early, so that they could make normal citizens within a generation.
7. What effect did the railroad have on U.S. settlement of the West?
With the advent of the transcontinental railroad, Americans had the ability to make larger towns and some cities, rather than settling in small pockets of the desert. They were able to get supplies from the eastern factories, and were able to send back the minerals they mined and make money more easily of their mining ventures. As a result of it becoming more profitable to live out west, the U.S. had to take even more of the Indians land and force them onto reservations in an even more violent manner.
8. How did westward expansion fuel U.S. industrialization?
4. Why have Native American views been excluded from the story of U.S. expansion that is told in the United States?
In the telling of the story of westward expansion, the Anglo-Americans wanted to portray themselves in the most positive light possible. This was easy for them, since they were the dominant people throughout the United States. Since most interactions with Native Americans would put a negative shade on the account of westward expansion, often these stories just weren’t told. Native Americans were completely omitted from many accounts.
5. What were the two parts of the U.S. government's assimilation plan in the late nineteenth century?
a. Pack all of the Indians onto tight, barren lands under U.S. control. The government wanted them in high concentration so they could
b. erase their culture completely. They wanted them to be Christian, speak English and farm on small independent lands. Once this was achieved, they could become a normal part of American society.
6. Give two examples of how U.S. policy makers forced Indian groups to give up their cultures?
a. Indians were banned from practicing their own religion and cultural ceremonies on the reservation. This was a way of integrating Christianity rather than their individual religions.
b. Thousands of Indian children were sent to boarding schools and forced to act like American children, with short hair and speaking English. This was a way of getting rid of their Indian culture early, so that they could make normal citizens within a generation.
7. What effect did the railroad have on U.S. settlement of the West?
With the advent of the transcontinental railroad, Americans had the ability to make larger towns and some cities, rather than settling in small pockets of the desert. They were able to get supplies from the eastern factories, and were able to send back the minerals they mined and make money more easily of their mining ventures. As a result of it becoming more profitable to live out west, the U.S. had to take even more of the Indians land and force them onto reservations in an even more violent manner.
8. How did westward expansion fuel U.S. industrialization?
As more and more people moved west on the railroads, more materials were being mined by them. These materials were being sent back to the growing factories in Eastern cities. Food farmed in the west was being sent to the East as well as Europe, and eventually these two areas became dependent on this food. This availability of goods spurred rapid growth of the United States economy and encouraged industrialization.
No comments:
Post a Comment