Looking For Handwoven Sarees Or Unique...
Shopping & Style1 min ago
The Other Side Of The White Man's Suppression Of The Native American?
57 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
However sad this was undoubtedly, it doesn't surprise me much. But overall, the worst atrocities were committed by the invasive "White man" -- not so much in Native American Indians, but we did essentially enslave almost the entire population. If some of them met fire with fire, well... that is always a part of the response to what was a threat to their very existence. Horrible, but true. And it probably felt necessary at the time. I hope very much that people do not use this as some sort of excuse for the horrors our ancestors committed against the Native peoples of the Americas.
I don't care; Tonto was innocent of all killings, whatever tribe he was from !
Hollywood rewriting history is nothing new but it's kind of the Daily Mail to educate us in the history of the Comanche. Must get the book they refer to. Does the film deny the history or does it merely misdescribe Tonto as Comanche?
I bet that the score still comes out with the settlers being ahead on killings and, perhaps, atrocities, but the Daily Mail doesn't give us that information, unfortunately
Hollywood rewriting history is nothing new but it's kind of the Daily Mail to educate us in the history of the Comanche. Must get the book they refer to. Does the film deny the history or does it merely misdescribe Tonto as Comanche?
I bet that the score still comes out with the settlers being ahead on killings and, perhaps, atrocities, but the Daily Mail doesn't give us that information, unfortunately
During the mid-1800's, when 100,000's of settlers were heading West, it was said that the imprint alone of a Comanche moccasin in the dust was enough to make them turn around and go back in blind panic.....the Comanche were that feared.
Most of the Plains tribes were only defending themselves against an invasion, as any other race would have done in their place, but the Comanche did appear to take the greatest trouble to be as cruel as it was possible to be. It should also be noted that they were just as cruel and unforgiving to other Native American groupings, regularly killing and taking others as slaves.
They appeared to be invincible but they met their nadir with European diseases, most devastating of which was smallpox.
Read "Bury my Heart at Wounded Knee" for a good account of Native Americans and their struggle against the white settlers.
Most of the Plains tribes were only defending themselves against an invasion, as any other race would have done in their place, but the Comanche did appear to take the greatest trouble to be as cruel as it was possible to be. It should also be noted that they were just as cruel and unforgiving to other Native American groupings, regularly killing and taking others as slaves.
They appeared to be invincible but they met their nadir with European diseases, most devastating of which was smallpox.
Read "Bury my Heart at Wounded Knee" for a good account of Native Americans and their struggle against the white settlers.
AOG
This is known!
I knew this about forty years ago.
In fact, I would be very surprised if anyone truly believed that th warrior races of North America simply rolled over and accepted the wholesale slaughter and annexing of ancient tribal lands by invading forces.
It's good that the Daily Mail have printed this.
Looking forward to their exposé on African tribal leaders colluding with slave traders and how the Chinese actually wanted heroin foisted on them during the poppy wars.
This is known!
I knew this about forty years ago.
In fact, I would be very surprised if anyone truly believed that th warrior races of North America simply rolled over and accepted the wholesale slaughter and annexing of ancient tribal lands by invading forces.
It's good that the Daily Mail have printed this.
Looking forward to their exposé on African tribal leaders colluding with slave traders and how the Chinese actually wanted heroin foisted on them during the poppy wars.
The other side of the coin, fighting for their way of life.
The US began efforts in the late 1860s to move the Comanche into reservations, with the Treaty of Medicine Lodge (1867), which offered churches, schools, and annuities in return for a vast tract of land totaling over 60,000 square miles.
The government promised to stop the buffalo hunters who were decimating the great herds of the Plains, provided that the Comanche, along with the Apaches, Kiowas, Cheyenne, and Arapahos, move to a reservation totaling less than 5,000 square miles of land.
However, the government did not prevent slaughtering of the herds.
The Comanche under Isa-tai (White Eagle) retaliated by attacking a group of hunters in the Texas Panhandle in the Second Battle of Adobe Walls (1874).
The attack was a disaster for the Comanche, and the US army was called in to drive the remaining Comanche in the area into the reservation.
Within just ten years, the buffalo were on the verge of extinction, effectively ending the Comanche way of life as hunters.
In 1875, the last free band of Comanches, led by Quahada warrior Quanah Parker, surrendered and moved to the Fort Sill reservation in Oklahoma.
The US began efforts in the late 1860s to move the Comanche into reservations, with the Treaty of Medicine Lodge (1867), which offered churches, schools, and annuities in return for a vast tract of land totaling over 60,000 square miles.
The government promised to stop the buffalo hunters who were decimating the great herds of the Plains, provided that the Comanche, along with the Apaches, Kiowas, Cheyenne, and Arapahos, move to a reservation totaling less than 5,000 square miles of land.
However, the government did not prevent slaughtering of the herds.
The Comanche under Isa-tai (White Eagle) retaliated by attacking a group of hunters in the Texas Panhandle in the Second Battle of Adobe Walls (1874).
The attack was a disaster for the Comanche, and the US army was called in to drive the remaining Comanche in the area into the reservation.
Within just ten years, the buffalo were on the verge of extinction, effectively ending the Comanche way of life as hunters.
In 1875, the last free band of Comanches, led by Quahada warrior Quanah Parker, surrendered and moved to the Fort Sill reservation in Oklahoma.
I should have guested, that appearing to some of your answers, it was always the white man's fault.
In those far off days of discovery and exploration, the white man when finding a 'new' land he would not have set out immediately to slaughter anyone he came across just for the fun of it.
But that is not the real fact, what about such people as Captain Cook slaughtered by the Hawaiians, and the huge number of missionaries that went to Africa, and I am sure that the original settlers who landed in America were similarly attacked by the indigenous population of that huge continent.
Yes in most cases it was all about this is our land and you are not welcome (territorialism/tribalism) the same kind of thing happens now, but of course not in the violent way that those in the past acted, it is now classed as being anti immigration or racist if one opposes others coming to one's land.
And remember if it hadn't been for those brave men who set out to discover/explore and map out large proportions of the world lands, and then go on to introduce our inventions and technology to those lands, we would most likely still consider that the world came to an end at the far reaches of the Mediterranean.
In those far off days of discovery and exploration, the white man when finding a 'new' land he would not have set out immediately to slaughter anyone he came across just for the fun of it.
But that is not the real fact, what about such people as Captain Cook slaughtered by the Hawaiians, and the huge number of missionaries that went to Africa, and I am sure that the original settlers who landed in America were similarly attacked by the indigenous population of that huge continent.
Yes in most cases it was all about this is our land and you are not welcome (territorialism/tribalism) the same kind of thing happens now, but of course not in the violent way that those in the past acted, it is now classed as being anti immigration or racist if one opposes others coming to one's land.
And remember if it hadn't been for those brave men who set out to discover/explore and map out large proportions of the world lands, and then go on to introduce our inventions and technology to those lands, we would most likely still consider that the world came to an end at the far reaches of the Mediterranean.
AOG - Much as it pains me to admit, we were not the benign, paternalistic bringers of a better way of life that we like to picture, when we think back to those men and women who forged an Empire.
That the 'indigenous' peoples of countries could be every bit as cruel and inventive as we had been (hanging, drawing and quartering, etc) when it came to the treatment of their enemies should come as no surprise.
And it is not unpatriotic to say so, either!
That the 'indigenous' peoples of countries could be every bit as cruel and inventive as we had been (hanging, drawing and quartering, etc) when it came to the treatment of their enemies should come as no surprise.
And it is not unpatriotic to say so, either!
-- answer removed --
Latest Posts
ChatterBank3 mins ago
Jobs & Education3 mins ago
So Lets Shaft Our Farmers.....
News8 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles9 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.