The Sand Creek Massacre

The discovery of gold in the Territory of Colorado in 1858 attracted thousands of prospectors and miners whom settlers called "Pike's Peakers." The sudden influx and blatant encroachment of such a large number of whites during the early 1860s irritated and troubled Cheyenne and Arapaho leaders. It also widened the gap between Indians who favored peace and those who favored war. Meanwhile, Governor John Evans was aware of events unfolding in Minnesota and Dakota Territory. When Indian leaders in eastern Colorado refused to cede land, Evans viewed their decision as veiled hostility. When the governor decreed that all Indians were to remain in their villages, Arapahos and Cheyennes mostly complied. Still, anxiety among Evans's constituents about a growing alliance of hostile Indians, all evidence in Colorado to the contrary, made preemptive war seem attractive. Cheyenne leader Black Kettle, an advocate of peace, clearly understood the stakes and did what he could to calm white fears. But by the late summer of 1864, there was nothing more he might have done. Colorado had already called up a special Third Cavalry whose members would serve for just one hundred days and whose only mission was to fight Indians. Their commanding officer was the former Methodist minister Colonel John M. Chivington, "the Fighting Parson" (pictured here). Given the relatively peaceful conditions in Colorado, Chivington's first challenge was to find something to do. As weeks turned into months, and with the end of a hundred days drawing closer, the local press ridiculed the idle Third Cavalry and their commander. With pressure growing, Chivington brought his troops to Fort Lyon in southeastern Colorado, from which he staged an attack.[1] 

In the early morning of November 29, 1864, the Third Cavalry and new enlistees of the First Cavalry, seven hundred men in all, charged into Black Kettle's camp at Sand Creek. The night before, five hundred Cheyenne men, women, and children had fallen asleep, confident they were safe. Yet they were attacked without warning and without mercy. Upon spotting the approaching troops, Black Kettle quickly raised an American flag and a white flag at his tent. White Antelope, another peace chief, "stood with his arms folded in a peaceful gesture as the whites advanced, but to no avail."[2] He was shot down in the opening volley. The panicked Cheyennes scattered and looked for cover, while cavalrymen killed men, women, and children, sometimes scalping and mutilating the victims. By the end of the day, between one hundred and fifty and two hundred Cheyennes, most of them women and children, lay dead in the valley of Sand Creek. The residents of Denver celebrated and the Rocky Mountain News announced, "Colorado soldiers have again covered themselves with glory."[3]

Notes

[1] Francis Paul Prucha, The Great Father: The United States Government and the American Indians (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1984), 1:457-59; Robert Utley, The Indian Frontier, 1846-1890, rev. ed. (Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press, 2003), 85-92; Roger L. Nichols, American Indians in U.S. History (Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 2003), 134-35.

[2] Prucha, The Great Father, 1:459.

[3] Ibid. Prucha estimates the number of victims at "about one hundred and fifty." Utley, The Indian Frontier, 92, says "some two hundred."

The Minnesota Sioux War of 1862

Around the time Meta Chestnutt was born in 1863, several early stories of the so-called "Indian wars" made their way east, horrifying many American citizens. In Minnesota during the summer of 1862, hungry and desperate Dakota Sioux Indians, frustrated by callous treatment from the U.S. government, killed hundreds of white settlers. Governor Alexander Ramsey quickly summoned the state militia. But before the fighting came to an end that year perhaps a thousand on each side had been killed. In the aftermath, U.S. military courts issued a death sentence to 303 Indians. President Lincoln insisted on a review of the legal proceedings in each case, and finally issued a pardon to most of the condemned. Still, when the army hanged thirty-eight men on December 26, 1862 at Mankato, Minnesota, it was the largest mass execution in American history. Sporadic warfare between the two sides spilled over into Dakota Territory to the west and dragged on during the years that followed.[1]

Note

[1] Francis Paul Prucha, The Great Father: The United States Government and the American Indians (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1984), 1:437-447; Robert Utley, The Indian Frontier, 1846-1890, rev. ed. (Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press, 2003), 76-81; Roger L. Nichols, American Indians in U.S. History (Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 2003), 133-34. For a map detailing the Sioux wars from 1862 to 1868, see Utley, 119.

Taking the Land It Claimed

1929 U.S. postage stamp
marking the 135th anniversary
of the Battle of Fallen Timbers

After winning its War for Independence, the new United States of America claimed all of the land between the Appalachian Mountains and the Mississippi River.[1] But claiming land is not the same as controlling it. So, how did the nation take charge of the territories west of the Appalachians, then inhabited by tens of thousands of Indians?

According to archivist and author Carl Waldman, American citizens and the U.S. government tended to follow a pattern that ultimately achieved the displacement of many indigenous peoples. Typically, the cycle began with trade and the making of treaties. These often provided for Indian land cessions in exchange for money or goods, or the promise of such. Sometime after the new boundaries were established, white settlers, new to an area, would appropriate land on the native side of the line. When one or more tribes retaliated, Americans issued dire warnings about "savages" along the frontier. Not accidentally, the Declaration of Independence had complained that King George III of Great Britain had "endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions."[2] Fear, resentment, and the prospect of acquiring land generated military action against Indians. These campaigns often led to the establishment of wilderness forts whose presence offered security for prospective settlers. Overwhelmed, native peoples would sue for peace, negotiate a new treaty--which routinely included a new land cession--and move.[3]

The American conquest of the Ohio Valley region matches the pattern Waldman describes. In 1785, U.S. negotiators demanded and won treaty concessions from several tribal leaders gathered at Fort McIntosh on the western edge of Pennsylvania. The westward push by American settlers, encouraged by their government, inevitably led to clashes. In 1787, Delawares, Mingos, Miamis, Wyandots, and Shawnees sometimes fought pioneers in present-day West Virginia and Kentucky. As the 1790s unfolded, the United States, under the leadership of President George Washington, increased the size and strength of its army. In August 1794, at the Battle of Fallen Timbers in far northern Ohio near the western end of Lake Erie, federal troops proved they were able to defeat the Indians of the Old Northwest. The next year, representatives of several tribal groups signed the Treaty of Greenville by which they ceded much of present-day Ohio as well as parts of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan.[4]

Monument to the Battle of Fallen Timbers in Ohio

As white pioneers entered the Old Southwest, news of the Battle of Fallen Timbers signaled to Indian leaders that the United States was both able and determined to defeat native resistance. This led to a number of new treaties like the one signed by thirty-nine Cherokee leaders at Tellico, Tennessee, in 1798. Due to anxieties about warfare, and by means of tough deliberations, the U.S. and southern Indians were able to avoid major battles like those fought in the Ohio Valley.[5]

Finally, during the decade that followed the War of 1812, as white settlers continued move west, some Native Americans simply moved further west. Others, assuming that they were or would be accepted by the United States, continued to acculturate.[6] By that point, the United States had come to truly dominate the land between the Appalachians and the Mississippi.[7] It was also around this time that Americans began to adopt the view that Indians were both unchanged and unchangeable. In the eyes of many U.S. citizens, the first Americans had not sufficiently conformed, and it was not likely they ever would.

Notes

[1] Roger L. Nichols, American Indians in U.S. History (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2003), 81.

[2] "Declaration of Independence: A Transcription," National Archives, accessed May 9, 2020, https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript.

[3] Carl Waldman, Atlas of the North American Indian, 3rd ed. (New York: Facts on File, 2009), 213. Waldman's assertion that relations between U.S. citizens and American Indians began with trade finds corroboration in Robert M. Utley, The Indian Frontier 1846-1890, Rev. ed. (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2003), 15-18. Utley indicates that in the mid-nineteenth century, the first white person an Indian ever saw was likely a trader. For a good discussion of Indian "voluntary removal," see Nichols, American Indians in U.S. History, 102-104.

[4] Nichols, American Indians in U.S. History, 82-86.

[5] Ibid., 86-88. For the treaty between the United States and the Cherokee Indians signed at Tellico, Tennessee, in 1798, see Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America, ed. Richard Peters, vol 7, Treaties between the United States and the Indian Tribes (Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1846), 62-65.

[6] Nichols, American Indians in U.S. History, 102-104.

[7] Daniel K. Richter, Facing East from Indian Country: A Native History of Early America (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001), 7.

The Historic Conferences at Lake Mohonk, NY

Beginning in 1883, Albert and Alfred Smiley, twin brothers and devout Quakers, hosted the "Lake Mohonk Conference of Friends of the Indian." These annual gatherings met at the brothers' Mohonk Mountain House, a 259-guestroom resort nestled in the mountains west of the Hudson River in upstate New York. There, white middle-class Protestant reformers delivered speeches, shared ideas, refined their plans, and issued recommendations. Their goal was to lift up and civilize the American Indian. Their plans always assumed the vitality of education and the necessity of schools.

Many of the attendees held membership in the Indian Rights Association, the greatest such organization of the time, founded and led by Henry Welsh. Many of them had read Helen Hunt Jackson's 1881 book, A Century of Dishonor, which sought to do for Indians what Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel, Uncle Tom's Cabin, had done for slaves. In the words of historian Francis Paul Prucha, the conferences at Lake Mohonk "had tremendous impact on formulation of federal policy."[1]

Note

[1] Francis Paul Prucha, ed., Documents of United States Indian Policy, 3rd ed. (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2000), 161. For an excellent overview of the origins, activities, and legacy of the conferences at Lake Mohonk, see Robert M. Utley, The Indian Frontier, 1846-1890, rev. ed. (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2003), ch. 7. Theda Perdue and Michael D. Green, North American Indians: A Very Short Introduction (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), ch. 5, esp. p. 90, note the significance of the Mohonk conferences to the period that emphasized assimilation and allotment.

The Dawes Severalty Act of 1887

The Dawes Severalty Act of 1887 opened a tragic new chapter in the history of Native America. This federal legislation sought to end tribal land ownership and allot parcels of land to individuals. In the words of historian Wilcomb E. Washburn, the law was nothing short of "an assault on Indian tribalism."[1] It was named for U.S. Senator Henry L. Dawes of Massachusetts, pictured at left, the champion of severalty for Indians. For this reason, the Dawes Act was sometimes called the General Allotment Act. Writers often use the two terms interchangeably.

The law was a central component of the federal government's plan to "detribalize" Indians, to "individualize" them. Ideally, each allotment of land would become a family farm or ranch. In essence, the Dawes Act sought to turn Native Americans into American homesteaders. As historian Robert M. Utley explains, many federal officials believed that "once the individual had broken free of the tribal heritage," he would then be free to "leap into the mainstream of American life." Eventually, "all Indians could be submerged in the body politic of America."[2] But a minority of leaders claimed that all such rhetoric was overly-optimistic at best, and cynical at worst. During congressional debates, Senator Henry M. Teller of Colorado noted that, according to the proposed legislation, all unassigned Indian lands would then be deemed surplus. "The real aim of this bill," he concluded, "is to get at the Indian lands and open them up for settlement."[3]

Meanwhile, Native Americans did not simply resist the allotment scheme. They found it difficult to understand the very concept of private ownership of land, or of land as capital. Much less did they appreciate these novel ideas. This had been the case, for example, in the struggles between English colonists and indigenous peoples of what became New England during the seventeenth century.[4]

Notes

[1] Wilcomb E. Washburn, The Assault on Indian Tribalism: The General Allotment Law (Dawes Act) of 1887 (Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1975).

[2] Robert M. Utley, The Indian Frontier 1846-1890, rev. ed. (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2003), 204-05.

[3] Roger L. Nichols, American Indians in U.S. History (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2003), 164-67.

[4] William Cronon, Changes in the Land: Indians, Colonists, and the Ecology of New England, rev. ed. (New York: Hill and Wang, 2003), ch. 4.

Assassinations, American Indians, Van Halen, and More! My 17 Favorite Books of 2017

I spent the first week of 2018 sick. The next thing I knew, we were halfway through January! So, a little later than I had meant to post it, here's my annual list of "best books." I'd love to hear about what you read last year. So please leave a note about some of your 2017 books, and why you liked them, or didn't.

U.S. Presidents

1. Destiny of the Republic: A Tale of Madness, Medicine,and the Murder of a President, by Candice Millard (2011). A well-written, easy-reading book about President James A. Garfield, his assassin, and the political world they lived in. From the bibliography, it's clear that Millard knows much more about Garfield's religious life, and how it made him the great man he was. But for some reason, she neglects this vital theme. Why?

2. The Kennedy Assassination--24 Hours After: Lyndon B. Johnson's Pivotal First Day as President, by Steven M. Gillon (2009). Take the TV series "24" and make it about the first day after the Kennedy assassination. That's what Gillon does in this interesting, detailed book. Gillon provides plenty of insight for those who want to understand Kennedy, Johnson, their politics, and their presidencies.

American Indians

3. The Chickasaws, Arrell M. Gibson (1971). The old acknowledged masterwork on the subject. Gibson often cities interesting primary sources. Still, Richard D. Green, the current historian of the Chickasaw Nation, notes that Gibson produced this book without interviewing a single Chickasaw. Since then, of course, a newer day in the historiography of American Indians has dawned.

4. American Indians in U.S. History, by Roger L. Nichols (2003). An engaging, brief survey by an expert. Longer and, in my opinion, more useful than the introduction by Perdue and Green (see next entry). Like them, Nichols takes a chronological approach. His text is not accompanied by reference notes, but each chapter ends with a brief list of “Suggested Readings” that represent the classic titles for that historical period.

5. North American Indians: A Very Short Introduction, by Theda Perdue and Michael D. Green (2010). More serviceable than most of the other volumes in the Very Short Introductions series that I’ve read. Chapter 4, “Indians in the West,” corresponds closely to Robert M. Utley, The Indian Frontier, 1846-1890, listed below.

6. The Indian Frontier, 1846-1890, by Robert M. Utley (2003). An interesting survey. The author essentially says, “For the moment, let’s hold onto the Frederick Jackson Turner thesis, but include Indians along that all-important frontier.” Just after I finished reading Utley, I posted a full summary of his book.

Mostly Just for Fun

7. Van Halen Rising: How a Southern California Backyard Party Band Saved Heavy Metal, by Greg Renoff (2015). Renoff begins with the early lives of the original members of Van Halen, and ends with the 11-month world tour that followed the release of their first album in 1978. The book is mostly about Van Halen before hardly anyone outside of Southern California knew who they were. I read it just after passing my qualifying exams, which made the experience that much better. Anyway, if you're interested here's a bit more about it.

8. Ford County: Stories, by John Grisham (2009). This book is Grisham's only published collection of short stories. Not many people like short stories anymore. I've always liked them. With novels, you sometimes don't know if you're going to like them until you're several pages in. With a short story, by that point you're done, and you know not to necessarily trust that author. For one thing, Grisham tends to write long short stories. I know, that's a weird description. But for comparison, check out one of the really-short short stories by Raymond Carver.

9. Bound for Glory, by Woody Guthrie (1943). Woody Guthrie's unique and colorful descriptions of early-twentieth century America will sometimes make you smile and laugh. At other times, his recollections of personal struggles--a family ravaged by disease, financial disaster, house fires, and destitution--might just make you cry. Through it all, you will admire and appreciate Guthrie's unbreakable spirit. Here we have on full display the mind and heart of a creative genius who never took himself too seriously.

Restoration Movement History

10. Among the Early Evangelicals: The Transatlantic Origins of the Stone-Campbell Movement, by James L. Gorman (2017). This is the most significant monograph dealing with the Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement to be published in the last several years. In this revision of his doctoral dissertation, Gorman reveals the transatlantic, pre-American roots of the Campbell Movement in America. A signal achievement, Gorman's work breaks new ground and resets the agenda for studying "Campbellism" in America.

11. The Sun Will Shine Again, Someday: A History of the Non-Class, One Cup Churches of Christ, by Ronny F. Wade (1986). The subtitle says it all: “A History of the Non-Class, One Cup Churches of Christ.” The author, Ronny F. Wade, is a long-time, widely-regarded preacher within this group. As one might expect, the history he writes is characterized by advocacy. He is much like the sports announcer who, while calling the game, always cheers for his team. Sometime back, I posted a brief review of Wade's book.

12. Oklahoma Christians: A History of Christian Churches and of the Start of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) in Oklahoma, by Stephen J. England (1975). England was a great biblical scholar, teacher, and leader within the Disciples denomination during the 20th century. Because he spent so much of his career serving as a professor and school administrator in Oklahoma, he took an interest in the history of his people in the Sooner State. For that particular topic, this book is a unique resource.

Still Other Sorts of History

13. Albion's Seed: Four British Folkways in America, by David Hackett Fischer (1989). The pick of the litter. This book, all by itself, is an education in several broad streams of American history. Fischer is one of those force-of-nature historians, and Albion's Seed is a delightful masterpiece. You'll never think of the various regions of the U.S. the same way after reading it.

14. Contesting the Reformation, by C. Scott Dixon (2012). Dixon has done a great service to students of the Protestant Reformation. A true expert on the literature, he writes each chapter as a detailed historiographical essay on some aspect of this massive topic. I found it to be an indispensable resource, especially as I prepared for qualifying exams on the Reformation! So, if you're getting ready for exams, or you just want to get a handle on the secondary literature about, say, Calvinism or the Radical Reformation, Dixon's book should be your first stop. It is both thorough and detailed. At least in English, there's nothing else quite like it.

15. Heading South to Teach: The World of Susan Nye Hutchison, 1815-1845, by Kim Tolley (2015). An outstanding new example of microhistory American style. By closely examining the life of an ordinary woman who did extraordinary things, Tolley is able to identify something of how the early U.S. changed especially as a result of the Second Great Awakening.

Texas History

16. Gone To Texas: A History of the Lone Star State, by Randolph B. Campbell (2003). This is likely the very best general survey of Texas history. Campbell relates the story of Texas "from prehistoric times to the beginning of the twenty-first century" (ix). The book is easy-reading, and is complemented by dozens of maps and illustrations. The history of the Lone Star State has often been told according to the traditional, great-people-and-events model. Some readers, especially Texans, might argue that given the topic, this approach is only natural. Either way, Campbell's book is no exception to the rule. Immigration, politics, and conflict, often violent conflict, are major features of the coverage. Neither footnotes nor endnotes accompany the text. Instead, each chapter has its own selected bibliography.

17. Sleuthing the Alamo: Davy Crockett's Last Stand and Other Mysteries of the Texas Revolution, by James E. Crisp (2005). In this delightful, unusual little book, a native Texan combines memoir and original research as he takes up two specific questions about the Texas Revolution. First, was Sam Houston, a president of the Republic of Texas, an anti-Mexican racist? Or, did someone else put words in his mouth? Second, did Davy Crockett really go down fighting at the Alamo, or did he surrender to Santa Anna's troops? Along the way, Crisp uncovers long-lost evidence, detects mistranslations, reveals secrets, and teaches the reader some of the deeper significance of history. He concludes that when, for whatever reason, we attempt to bury and silence the past we just wind up diminishing ourselves.

The Indian Frontier, 1846-1890, by Robert M. Utley

Robert M. Utley, The Indian Frontier, 1846-1890. Revised Edition. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2003. Pp. xix, 325.

First published in 1984, The Indian Frontier, 1846-1890 was revised and then reissued in 2003. The revised edition is part of the Histories of the American Frontier Series published by the University of New Mexico Press. The rich narrative is supplemented by 99 illustrations and 12 useful maps.

According to the back cover, author Robert M. Utley is "a retired Chief Historian of the National Park Service and has written over fifteen books on a variety of aspects of history of the American West." In his Foreword, the eminent historian Howard R. Lamar called Utley "one of the most popular and productive historians of the American West" (xiii).

Of course, no historian who writes about the American frontier can avoid Frederick Jackson Turner's thesis first presented in 1893. In his Preface, Utley explains that as Turner saw things, experiences on the frontier--"a trader's frontier, farmer's frontier, rancher's frontier, miner's frontier"--are what made Americans and America exceptional. Turner did not completely neglect the Indians on the American frontier. However, he did treat them merely as "an influence in shaping the special American character" (xv). In other words, as Turner described things, Indians were not characters on the stage that was the American West. They were more like props in a drama that kept the spotlight on whites who were moving west. Nevertheless, unlike some other historians who regard "frontier" as just another f-word, Utley refuses to reject the Turner thesis. He prefers instead to treat it as "a conceptual framework, however simplistic, within which to develop themes of western American history" (xv). By design, Utley's work revises, qualifies, and supplements Turner's outlook. That is the book's most prominent feature from the standpoint of theoretical perspective. How could anyone move west in nineteenth-century America without encountering and dealing with Indians? Utley brings the obvious answer to that question into this exploration of the American frontier. Hence the title of his book.

What follows here is my summary, chapter by chapter. I made fuller notes for some parts more than for others. So, some chapter summaries are quite long, while others are much more concise.

Chapter One: The Indian West at Midcentury

Utley begins with the growing presence of white people in the Indian country during the 1840s. With the annexation of Texas in 1845 and the ensuing U.S.-Mexico War, American citizens moved further west into newly acquired lands. "[T]he United States at midcentury boasted a population of more than 20 million, a counting utterly beyond the comprehension of the western natives. By 1860, 1.4 million would live in the West; by 1890, 8.5 million" (4). The author discusses various influences that forever changed the Indian frontier: European diseases, the horse, and the gun. Dependence upon the gun changed balances of power and, of course, meant that Indians were dependent on the white man for gun "powder, lead, and repairs" (14). And, all such impact meant environmental change, what William Cronon has called Changes in the Land.

First contact between Indians and white men was almost always due to the arrival of a trader. This created new tastes and wants, especially liquor. The trader was most often the first white person an Indian ever saw, as opposed to a missionary. Utley summarizes a central point of this chapter as follows: Many natives of the Trans-Mississippi West had changed in response to the arrival and presence of white people "in or near their world." However, until the 1840s, "the changes had been evolutionary and mostly within the bounds of traditional culture. Henceforth they would be revolutionary and finally destructive of traditional culture" (26).

Chapter Two: Foundations of a New Indian Policy, 1846-1860

White imagination saw Indians in basically two ways: There was the good Indian, the noble savage, to be destroyed by civilizing him. Then, there was the bad Indian, the ignoble savage, to be destroyed by killing him. Either way, as part of the landscape of the frontier, Indians would have to be conquered (29-31).

When push came to shove, possessing Indian land was more important, more pressing than the question of how to civilize Indians (31). The making of treaties with Indians often ascribed to chiefs an authority that did not match up with tribal realities. Chiefs were not elected officials with constitutional authority. Indian politics operated much more by consensus. A chief's leadership utterly depended on a group that was willing to follow.

Founded in 1824, by 1890 the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs "was the most powerful force in the lives of Indians" (37). "The Indian Bureau had two purposes: to extinguish Indian land titles and to grapple with the vexing problem of what to do with people whose title had been extinguished. . . . Only in Texas was there no immediate question of title; on entering the Union, the state had retained jurisdiction over all its vacant land and refused to concede that the Indians owned any of it" (38). "Besides the army and the Indian Bureau, a third institution of government dominated Indian relations: Congress" (41).

The environmental impact of white westward travel and immigration was considerable. The arrival of white traders, and especially U.S. agents with their desire to establish treaties that favored the whites, treaties that Indian leaders often did not understand, led to a radical decline in Indian population (48-49).

Unlike the situation in the rest of America, Texans were having none of the treaty business. Texas never acknowledged Indian right to or ownership of any land in the state (52). Part of the "solution" to Indians in Texas was to drive them north of Red River into the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, where the Texas government leased land from those nations for the incoming Indians (esp. 52).

Chapter Three: When the White People Fought Each Other, 1861-1865

Apache leaders in places like New Mexico began to having violent interactions with whites in 1860-61. Much of this was precipitated by the discovery of gold in old Spanish copper mines and the subsequent influx of miners (66). Following deadly encounters, the Apaches noticed soldiers marching away to the east. The Indians assumed that the whites were giving up and going away. Of course, what they did not realize was that whites were now mobilizing for the Civil War. But the whites were not gone for long. They soon returned to the Indian frontier due to "Abraham Lincoln's need for western gold and silver and western political support for the prosecution of the war." This "dramatized how little the war slowed the pace of the western movement" (72).

"No Indians experienced more trauma than the Five Civilized Tribes of the Indian Territory. Many of those people owned slaves and felt a natural affinity for southerners. Also, geographical proximity gave the Confederacy an edge over the Union. The Choctaws and Chickasaws went overwhelmingly with the South" (73).

Utley describes troubles in Minnesota, New Mexico, Colorado. He details the Sand Creek Massacre in Colorado. "By 1865 military force as the solution to the Indian problem had achieved virtually unchallenged supremacy. In Indian matters President Lincoln had shown himself a humanitarian, but the struggle with the Confederacy ruled his White House years, and he left Indian affairs almost entirely to Congress and the Indian Bureau" (92).

Then, in 1864, U. S. Grant put John Pope in charge of the Great Plains. Pope basically regarded all Indians in that huge swath of territory as hostile. Many were, thanks to incidents like Sand Creek. Pope's policy was essentially war against all plains Indians, all the time. Many Indians fled north. Some of them were looking merely to escape. But others looked to join up with tribes of the northern plains in order to take the fight to the white man.

Utley tells the story of Adobe Walls in 1864. The War came to an end. Stories about Sand Creek horrified many Americans. So, there were new attitudes regarding Indian policy. Some argued for a policy of "conquest by kindness" (96-97). Thus, sometime around 1865, the U.S. political leaders spoke in terms remarkably different from previous years. Whereas the earlier times had been bloody, beginning in 1865 the language was rhetoric of peace, which was confusing to the Indians.

Chapter Four: War and Peace: Indian Relations in Transition, 1865-1869

This chapter describes a post-war period during which mistrust and atrocities on both sides led American federal policy in the direction of "the rifle" as opposed to "the peace pipe"; this, in spite of the peace rhetoric that became popular at war's end. In other words, by fits and starts U.S. policy towards the Indian became more aggressive and hostile. Thus, the years that immediately followed the war were characterized by broken treaties, ambushes, massacres, and the failure of the treaty policy. It is no coincidence that leaders of the U.S. Army at this time were battle-hardened veterans of the war.

Chapter Five: Grant's Peace Policy, 1869-1876

Grant began his presidency with the promise of a Peace Policy. At the same time, he said, "Those who do not accept this policy will find the new administration ready for a sharp and severe war policy" (128). So, although the official rhetoric emphasized peace, it seems that Grant's effective policy had two sides. Grant appointed Ely S. Parker, a full-blooded Seneca, Commissioner of Indian Affairs (130). Again, this was part and parcel of a dedication to "conquest by kindness." Still, Grant's policies were enacted by dozens of army officers, not to mention that the Indian Bureau was part of the War Department. Nonetheless, there were sometimes genuine attempts at kindness and justice (132).

Utley describes the frustrations for both Indians (in his specific example, Apaches) and U.S. representatives to Indians. The Great Father was slow in making decisions and providing the promised means of survival. Frequently, after a long wait, the Indians would be delivered a unsatisfactory message. However, some officials like Vincent Colyer and General Oliver Otis Howard did well as advocates of the Indians and made good decisions.

Utley turns to the Fort Sill Agency in the western Indian Territory. Kiowas and Comanches were the tribes of interest here. Lawrie Tatum, a determined Quaker, became agent. Tatum tried to get the Kiowas to stop raiding in Texas. Colonel Benjamin H. Grierson at Fort Sill was the military complement to Tatum's agency. Grierson was devoted to the peace policy, even though that meant that some of his military peers looked down on him.

Ultimately, the Salt Creek Prairie Massacre of 1871 frustrated Tatum and set off William Tecumseh Sherman. Satanta, a Kiowa chief, was proud and unrepentant. Like most tribes, encroachment by whites and U.S. federal policy divided the Kiowas. The Kiowa war chief was Lone Wolf. Kicking Bird led the Kiowa peace faction (see photos pp. 144-45).

The final paragraph of the chapter reads, "But in essence Grant's Peace Policy was chiefly about peace, and peace it did not achieve. The public could thus hardly be faulted for failing to note the persistence of the Peace Policy when war so dominated the Indian news. Indeed, the era of the Peace Policy featured some of the bitterest warfare in the history of Indian relations" (154).

Chapter Six: Wars of the Peace Policy, 1869-1886

" 'The campaigns in Arizona did not owe their ultimate success to any particular Waterloo-like victory, as much as they did the covering of a great deal of ground by a comparatively small number of men, permitting the Indians no rest and rendering any and every hiding place insecure.' " (155, quoting a report from 1890).

Utley relates the army's Walter Schuyler and his troops tracking down Apaches in Arizona in 1873 (155-58). The freedom of the Kiowas and Comanches came to an end in 1875 (160). The general rule was: Those Indians on the reservation are friendly and the federal Indian Bureau is responsible for them; Those off the reservation are hostile and the army must be responsible for them (161). This made sense, but the realities were never quite that simple (162-63). When war was brought to Indians, it tended to be the "total war" made (in)famous by the likes of Sherman and Sheridan during the Civil War (164).

"Man for man, the [Indian] warrior far surpassed his blueclad adversary in virtually every test of military proficiency; but unit for unit--however great the numbers--the Indians could not come close to matching the discipline and organization of the army. When Indians made the mistake of standing and fighting on the army's terms, they usually lost." However, the west was not won as a result of military conquest. Instead it was "an aggressive and highly organized society" (166).

Events like the Modoc War on the west coast in 1872-73 and especially "Custer's Last Stand" in 1876 marked the demise of the Peace Policy (171). Utley also tells of the Red River War of 1874-75.

Finally vanquished, the Nez Perces wound up in I.T., just like the Modoc had before them, in spite of promises made to the Nez Perces by the army. By 1881, only the Apaches "had not yet been made to face the truth that the reservation represented their only possible destiny" (187). Their leaders were Victorio and Geronimo. The reservation designated for them was a terrible place to live: no game, lots of snakes, etc. Eventually, Geronimo and other Apaches gave up and "the Indian Wars of the United States came to a close in Skeleton Canyon, Arizona, on September 4, 1886" (196). The Apaches were loaded up on trains that took them to Florida.

Chapter Seven: The Vision of the Reformers, 1865-1890

The chapter begins by describing the Mohonk House resort in upstate New York. The Smileys, Quaker twin brothers, were the owner-operators. Beginning in 1883, this was the cite of an annual Mohonk Conference of reform leaders and organizers, self-appointed friends of the Indians. The conference did not include Catholics, nor groups who fought for the right of Indians to simply be Indians. The official name of the gatherings was the Lake Mohonk Conference of the Friends of the Indians.

The emphasis of virtually all of these reformers was education. Utley tells the story of how in the 1870s and 80s especially, it seems, various crusaders, leaders, and reformers fighting in behalf of their visions for Indians were active and influential in American politics. For example, Helen Hunt Jackson, who published A Century of Dishonor in 1881, hoped that her book would do for Indians what Uncle Tom's Cabin did for slaves. Another factor that promoted reform interest were the stories about and statements from Indians themselves. These "aroused public sympathy and reinforced what the crusaders were saying" (201).

Such interest in Indians led to cooperation. The greatest organization of the time was the Indian Rights Association, founded and led by William Welsh. Groups like this one set out to "civilize" Indians. "This vision of the ideal Indian sharply delineated the paramount self-image of American society in the late nineteenth century. It was a vision of an 'Americanized' American Indian. By the 1880s and 1890s, despite conventional platitudes about separation of church and state, 'Americanism' represented virtually a fusion of nationalism and Protestantism" (203).

According to reformers, the first step was to "detribalize" Indians, that is to "individualize" them. "Once the individual had broken free of the tribal heritage, the reformers' program would power the final stage, the leap into the mainstream of American life" (204). Eventually, "all Indians could be submerged in the body politic of America" (205).

"In the Indian reform crusade of the 1880s, four issues overshadowed all others, both in their potential consequences for the Indians and in the zeal with which the reformers attacked them: land, education, law, and purification of the Indian Bureau. Give the Indians fee ownership in their own plot of land. Educate them in preparation for citizenship and self-support. Extend law for their protection against whites and other Indians. Upgrade reservation management to speed the civilization process and the dissolution of the reservations" (205).

Henry L. Dawes, U.S. senator from Massachusetts, was the champion of severalty for Indians (206). His leadership generated the Dawes General Allotment Act of 1887 (207).

Beginning in the 1880s, the U.S. began appropriating funds for the establishment and operation of schools among the Indians. By then, of course, church groups had been conducting educational work for many years, especially Roman Catholics. Various denominations had conducted virtually all formal schooling among the Indians. Thus, they received much of the funding that the federal government had appropriated. This was true because government schools could not set up and start running as fast as the money was becoming available. The churches were more than willing to accept any surplus funds. This situation naturally generated religious contests for government money.

Captain Richard Henry Pratt was founder and president of the Carlisle School, Pennsylvania, the greatest of the off-reservation boarding schools for Indians. Pratt spoke of a sudden and total immersion "in our civilization" (211).

"Not amid the cushioned comforts of Lake Mohonk, but on the reservations, where spoilsmen ran the programs, were the theories of the reformers put to the test. Lake Mohonk provided the perfect setting for spinning the theories, for it so perfectly mirrored the life and values of the reformers themselves, and therefore the life and values considered ideal for the Indians. But the polished lobby of Mohonk House differed from the hard environment and society of the reservation as night differed from day, and what seemed so ideal and attainable at Mohonk proved considerably less so on the reservation. There, to their pain and sorrow, several generations of Indians were fated to grapple with the legacy of Mohonk" (217-18).

Chapter Eight: The Reservation, 1880-1890

Utley narrates the obliteration of the buffalo in the 1870s and 80s. This "doomed the Plains Indians' way of life and forced them to settle on the reservations." How? Because going off reservation was for the purpose of hunting buffalo. The animals also provided the means of survival when Indians killed one. So, the demise of the buffalo basically took all the fun out of going off the reservation.

Utley distinguishes between nonprogressives (traditionalists) versus progressives among the Indians (223). A third distinction can be described as those who resisted when they could, but who gave in when they had to (225).

The Sioux began to experience the confinement of the reservation, and agents discouraged the hunt because hunting, it was said, perpetuated in the Indians "all the cruel and wicked propensities" (226). The vision quest was directly related to the hunt and to warfare. So, due to reservation life, the vision quest fell into irrelevance (230). It was much the same story for the sun dance as well (230-31).

" . . . the main explanation for the spread of Christianity lay in the nature of the Indian spiritual belief, which did not bar the new from living comfortably next to the old--so long as the Christian holy men did not demand too insistently that the old be cast aside. The Indian spiritual life centered on a quest for personal power. The white man visibly possessed power. Therefore, his God might also be petitioned for power along with the traditional Sioux deities" (231).

"Like Christianity, education elicited ambivalent reactions from the Sioux. On the one hand, they sensed its importance in helping them to cope with the white people in the new world forced on them. On the other hand, they feared what it would do to the hearts and minds, indeed the Sioux identity, of their children. On both counts, of course, they were right" (231).

Federal officials pressed individual homesteads and farming on the Indians (232). Major General George Crook to the leaders of the Sioux Indians: "It strikes me that you are in the position of a person who had his effects in the bed of a dry stream when there was a flood coming down, and instead of finding fault with the Creator for sending it down, you should try and save what you can" (236).

In 1890, President Harrison announced that the land ceded by the Sioux was now open to settlement, news which came as a shock to the Sioux (239).

Chapter Nine: The Passing of the Frontier, 1890

The "spoils system" had one of its most abusive manifestations at the Pine Ridge reservation in Dakota. Two incompetent, desperately in-debt government agents were there: Royer and Gleason. Around this time, a desperate attempt by the Sioux and other tribes showed up in the form of the Ghost Dance. The dance had apocalyptic dimensions. Its participants hoped for the emergence of a world of bliss. And, it promised protection from the white man's bullets and cannon balls. In the standoff between the two sides, Sitting Bull was killed. Then, there was a melee in which 150 more Indians were killed, and 50 wounded. "Instead of armed challenge to the reservation, the Ghost Dance was a desperate bid for divine salvation where all else had failed. It ended in violence because of an incompetent Indian agent and a tragic accident born of mutual distrust, misunderstanding, and fear" (248-49).

Utley relates the histories of Indian Territory, Oklahoma Territory, and early statehood. There was no Indian warfare in Alaska. There just weren't many Indians there, and the land was so vast.

The Dawes Act succeeded in only one of its goals: it moved Indian land into white ownership. All of the other idealistic goals of the act never came true for Indians. Still, Utley insists that it is unfair to refer to 19th reformers "racists."