While it took almost half of the class period to reach this point, I can still hardly convey the great pleasure I felt upon actually having prior knowledge of subject matter discussed in our first day of class. Until that moment, I could only describe my experience in History 353 as a cross between humbling and embarrassing. But, alas, I had finally stumbled upon something I recognized, something I could hang my hat on. Yes, we had finally begun discussing Inuits.
Pride swelled in me as I browsed through my wealth of knowledge on this subject. I noted to myself that Inuits were better known as eskimos; our ice fishing, igloo dwelling neighbors to the far, far north. Needless to say, the smug grin that had plastered across my face soon gave way to the more familiar humble and embarrassed frown. Copper mining? Seasonal movements? Grass huts? We may as well have been talking about an alien species.
Now, with my pride already thrown out the window, I can look at this class and be aware of my own ignorance. I am now a sponge, soaking up knowledge like grime and soap suds. At least that's what I'd like to think.
Saturday, June 7, 2008
Friday, June 6, 2008
Words and Clans
This week Tai had mentioned words such as: myths, nomadic and collapse, and how that these words should not describe the Native American. When we talked about the Hohokam and Anasazi and thier cities collapsed ,I believe that they dispersed into smaller bands, such as families moved else where. I believe today that there are tribes out there that have Hohokam, Anasazi and Cahokia blood lines.
We also talked about political formations, I would have added "Clans" under this title. I'm enrolled in the Winnebago(Ho-chunk)Tribe of Nebraska. This means that clan membership is determined through the father. Clan membership is important because the twelve Winnebago clans served both ceremonial and social functions. In Winnebago society, the clans were grouped into two major groups, an Upper Sky group with four clans, and a Lower Earth group consisting of eight other clans. Clan membership was also extremely important among the Winnebago tribe for political reasons. The Winnebago’s Chiefs governed the tribe with the aid of a Tribal Council composed of a principal member of each individual clan. Traditionally, the Thunderbird and Bear clans were the most important groups in Winnebago society because the hereditary Chiefs of the tribe were always chosen from the Thunderbird (Upper) and Bear (Lower) clans. The Upper Chief of the Thunderbird clan was the tribe’s representative of peace. Despite the tribe’s apparent emphasis on war, the Upper Chief could not go to war, or participate in any of the tribe’s war ceremonies. He was responsible for pleading for clemency for an accused criminal, and for providing refuge to prisoners in order to maintain their safety. His lodge was a sacred asylum, and no one dared violate it. The Lower Chief’s duties, on the other hand, were a sharp contrast from those of the Upper Chief. He was associated with the policing of the tribe, as well as responsible for disciplinary and war functions. The Lower Chief was charged with inflicting punishment on criminals, housing prisoners, and guarding the village (radin). This is just one example of how clans work in one tribe, every tribe is different on what thier own clan does.
We also talked about political formations, I would have added "Clans" under this title. I'm enrolled in the Winnebago(Ho-chunk)Tribe of Nebraska. This means that clan membership is determined through the father. Clan membership is important because the twelve Winnebago clans served both ceremonial and social functions. In Winnebago society, the clans were grouped into two major groups, an Upper Sky group with four clans, and a Lower Earth group consisting of eight other clans. Clan membership was also extremely important among the Winnebago tribe for political reasons. The Winnebago’s Chiefs governed the tribe with the aid of a Tribal Council composed of a principal member of each individual clan. Traditionally, the Thunderbird and Bear clans were the most important groups in Winnebago society because the hereditary Chiefs of the tribe were always chosen from the Thunderbird (Upper) and Bear (Lower) clans. The Upper Chief of the Thunderbird clan was the tribe’s representative of peace. Despite the tribe’s apparent emphasis on war, the Upper Chief could not go to war, or participate in any of the tribe’s war ceremonies. He was responsible for pleading for clemency for an accused criminal, and for providing refuge to prisoners in order to maintain their safety. His lodge was a sacred asylum, and no one dared violate it. The Lower Chief’s duties, on the other hand, were a sharp contrast from those of the Upper Chief. He was associated with the policing of the tribe, as well as responsible for disciplinary and war functions. The Lower Chief was charged with inflicting punishment on criminals, housing prisoners, and guarding the village (radin). This is just one example of how clans work in one tribe, every tribe is different on what thier own clan does.
First Week Blog
I found many aspects of class this week interesting especially the demise of some civiliations that were more advanced than I was under the impression that they would be. I already did not believe in most of the stereotypes surrounding Native American culture because I had taken an American History class prior to this and knew how false the majority of them were but the advanced nature of the societies we discussed this week was extremely interesting, especially the architecture. I hope that I am able to visit some of those sites one day.
Another aspect of class that I found interesting was the creation stories, especially the Navajo emergence story that is given in our book. I had recently been studying the creation stories of some of the major religious groups in this country and the misogynistic overtones in them (some more blatant than others) on my own. I was suprised to note that there are some slight similarities. Not to say that Native Americans are misogynistic because that would be untrue but the story had some similar features. For example, in certain religions the first woman is blamed for most or all of the downfall of humanity. In the Navajo story we were assigned to read, the females creatures are left alone and begin acting what the story calls lazy and wicked. It is also the first woman behind the plot to kidnap the water buffalo's children because she is supposedly bored ("troubled by the monotony of life"), which is the catalyst for the great flood of the third world. I enjoyed the story a great deal because I have a very good friend that is Navajo. I simply thought it was very interesting to read when I had just been studying other creation stories. I would be interested in reading the other Navajo stories and creation stories of other Native American groups to compare.
Another aspect of class that I found interesting was the creation stories, especially the Navajo emergence story that is given in our book. I had recently been studying the creation stories of some of the major religious groups in this country and the misogynistic overtones in them (some more blatant than others) on my own. I was suprised to note that there are some slight similarities. Not to say that Native Americans are misogynistic because that would be untrue but the story had some similar features. For example, in certain religions the first woman is blamed for most or all of the downfall of humanity. In the Navajo story we were assigned to read, the females creatures are left alone and begin acting what the story calls lazy and wicked. It is also the first woman behind the plot to kidnap the water buffalo's children because she is supposedly bored ("troubled by the monotony of life"), which is the catalyst for the great flood of the third world. I enjoyed the story a great deal because I have a very good friend that is Navajo. I simply thought it was very interesting to read when I had just been studying other creation stories. I would be interested in reading the other Navajo stories and creation stories of other Native American groups to compare.
Civilizations
I found the size and structure of the three civilizations that we discussed that "collapsed" very interesting. I had always wondered why the native civilizations of South America were able to build such large structures and maintain large cities, while I wondered why the Native Americans in our area or near our area seemed to be more of a "nomadic" civilization. After hearing about the mound building civilizations that existed in places like modern day St. Louis I can see that my earlier pre-conceptions about Native Americans in this area not having large population centers was incorrect.
I think the climate change, specifically the drought that took place was major the cause for those large societies not being able to stay with their structures, and caused them disperse into the tribes that I was more familiar with hearing about that lived in our region. After hearing about the mound builders and seeing the artist's rendering of them on the power point in class I can't help but wonder how much more advanced the civilizations would have become had the drought not affected them so drastically. I also wonder how differently the Europeans that eventually settled in North America would have perceived the natives if they would have seen such large structures and cities.
I think the climate change, specifically the drought that took place was major the cause for those large societies not being able to stay with their structures, and caused them disperse into the tribes that I was more familiar with hearing about that lived in our region. After hearing about the mound builders and seeing the artist's rendering of them on the power point in class I can't help but wonder how much more advanced the civilizations would have become had the drought not affected them so drastically. I also wonder how differently the Europeans that eventually settled in North America would have perceived the natives if they would have seen such large structures and cities.
That's so offensive!
My friend and I once had a conversation where he told me that when I say I’m going to call him and I wind up not calling, that he gets offended. I was confused by this, but I boastfully acknowledged that I never get offended. He, of course, told me that probably wasn’t true. That was about 3 or 4 years ago. I’ve had time since to think about what it means to be offended and what exactly constitutes offensiveness to me.
Flashback to 1998, I’m sitting in my Driver’s Ed course and my teacher points out that the first driver to arrive at a 4-way stopsign, has the right of way. Well, what happens when 2 drivers arrive from different directions at the same time, you ask? The driver to the right has the right of way. Interesting. For some reason, this little piece of information has stayed with me and every single time I find myself arriving at a 4-way intersection as somebody else, that person inevitably just goes when they’re to my left, or they wait for me to go when I am to their left. It drives me crazy and I would go so far as to say that it offends me.
But the question remains, why do we get offended and why do things as simple as words, offend us? I’ve always thought of mythology as stories about life that get passed down. There are things such as creation myths, Roman mythology, and Christian mythology. Many people believe these stories as true historical accounts. So, evidently, the word “myth” symbolizes something that is not true. So, even if something is not true, I guess it is unwritten in our culture that it is not okay to believe in something that is not true. Hence, someone must resort to being offended if something that they believe to be true is referred to as not true.
Why is it offensive to refer to a pre-historic Indian tribe as having “collapsed”? When I think collapse, I think that something or someone was taken over, died out, or merely ceased to exist. The Anasazi Indian tribe collapsed. I mean, I guess they weren’t taken over, died out, or ceased to exist. However, do any Anasazi Indians still exist today? No, so doesn’t that mean they collapsed? I think I’m going to stop now, the philosophical side of my brain is starting to hurt.
Flashback to 1998, I’m sitting in my Driver’s Ed course and my teacher points out that the first driver to arrive at a 4-way stopsign, has the right of way. Well, what happens when 2 drivers arrive from different directions at the same time, you ask? The driver to the right has the right of way. Interesting. For some reason, this little piece of information has stayed with me and every single time I find myself arriving at a 4-way intersection as somebody else, that person inevitably just goes when they’re to my left, or they wait for me to go when I am to their left. It drives me crazy and I would go so far as to say that it offends me.
But the question remains, why do we get offended and why do things as simple as words, offend us? I’ve always thought of mythology as stories about life that get passed down. There are things such as creation myths, Roman mythology, and Christian mythology. Many people believe these stories as true historical accounts. So, evidently, the word “myth” symbolizes something that is not true. So, even if something is not true, I guess it is unwritten in our culture that it is not okay to believe in something that is not true. Hence, someone must resort to being offended if something that they believe to be true is referred to as not true.
Why is it offensive to refer to a pre-historic Indian tribe as having “collapsed”? When I think collapse, I think that something or someone was taken over, died out, or merely ceased to exist. The Anasazi Indian tribe collapsed. I mean, I guess they weren’t taken over, died out, or ceased to exist. However, do any Anasazi Indians still exist today? No, so doesn’t that mean they collapsed? I think I’m going to stop now, the philosophical side of my brain is starting to hurt.
"Collapsing" Civilizations
In discussing the disappearance of entire civilizations and indigenous populations, I found it interesting the distinction Tai was trying to make between calling this a "collapse" and simply acknowledging that tribes such as the Hohokam simply disbanded. She mentioned that in her oppinion she thought a collapse in its truest form constituted failure. Though I am sure thier had to be some within these societies (most likely leaders) who thought they had failed in some regards, I also believe that the word collapse may be a misguided attempt at trying to understand the depth and consequence of these civilizations' demise.
This error in labeling might stem from one of the most tried and true obstacles to true historical study, a subjective and generalized point of view. Historians who had studied the "collapse" of many other great Western civilizations (Romans, Greeks, Carthaginians) tried to then translate this, without fully understanding the structure of Native American society, to explain the disappearance of such indigenous civilizations as the Hohokam. In the first two days of taking this class I have already realized how easy it is to want to compare these civilizations to others that flourished at roughly the same time, but how imperative it is that I not let my understanding of other Western societies influence my learning in regards to the Indigenous peoples. Thus, I thought Tai made a very good point when she stressed that these so-called collapses might not be just that, but rather mutual acknowledgements that it was time to pack-up and head down the road.
This error in labeling might stem from one of the most tried and true obstacles to true historical study, a subjective and generalized point of view. Historians who had studied the "collapse" of many other great Western civilizations (Romans, Greeks, Carthaginians) tried to then translate this, without fully understanding the structure of Native American society, to explain the disappearance of such indigenous civilizations as the Hohokam. In the first two days of taking this class I have already realized how easy it is to want to compare these civilizations to others that flourished at roughly the same time, but how imperative it is that I not let my understanding of other Western societies influence my learning in regards to the Indigenous peoples. Thus, I thought Tai made a very good point when she stressed that these so-called collapses might not be just that, but rather mutual acknowledgements that it was time to pack-up and head down the road.
Mesa Verde
I have been very interested in the sheer size of the cities that these indigenous peoples made. These cities were larger than Paris and the same size of London. This is an incredible feat that can be compared with the ancient pyramids of Egypt. I knew the Aztecs had giant structures that they used for many ceremonies, rituals, and ritual sacrafices. I had no idea that there were structures that large in the States. I visited Mesa Verde when I was a kid and did not think anything of it then, but now knowing what I have just learned in a week, I am blown away. The size of the place was incredible and there were still wood ladders that were left that we used. I can definitly see how it would be a fortress against invaders. Also, I knew that it was believed that the earliest people came over from Asia with the walkway from Russia to Alaska where the crab grounds are at now. However, it was really cool to hear about how they indegenous peoples came along the coast on kelp essentially. That was incredible within itself.
first week
Up until now, as a history major, I have concentrated mainly around the World War II and Holocaust era. I am glad now that I have decided to take classes that are centered closer to home. I took Rita Napier's history class on the plains indians and that was where I first learned about the Kennewick Man. Of course we have all learned about the white man's mistreatment of the Native Americans and their culture, but after taking that class and learning what I am now in this class, it's unfortunate to know that the mistreatment is still going on today to a certain extent. The battle over the Kennewick Man is a big example of how the U.S. government seems almost indifferent to the beliefs and wishes of Native Americans. In Napier's class we watched a great video which brought up a lot of different instances of the battles that are currently going on to get the bones of native people from museums so they can be properly buried. Of course scientists and other researchers want to run tests to learn more about the people who first inhabited North America, but we need to think about who those tests are affecting. I feel almost a little disappointed in myself for not being more educated on topics such as these earlier in life. Controversies such as this will continue on for years to come, if they are ever solved at all.
Cahokia Mounds
As is the case for others in the class, I too have been intrigued by what we have learned so far about the Native Peoples of North America. Much of the information lectured over has been new to me, especially that of the Cahokia Mounds. Prior to the lecture, I had not even heard of such a large civilization existing in North America, which is a disappointment, considering its close proximity to home.
I would venture to guess the reason we learn so little, or nothing at all, about such past civilizations as Cahokia Mounds is simply that, they are past. For this reason, greater effort needs to be exercised in creating awareness of such places among the general public. Perhaps if more people were to visit the contemporary Cahokia Mounds, a greater interest could be cultivated for the people that created them. Since learning of the Cahokia Mounds, I now have an interest in visiting them, and plan to in the near future.
I would venture to guess the reason we learn so little, or nothing at all, about such past civilizations as Cahokia Mounds is simply that, they are past. For this reason, greater effort needs to be exercised in creating awareness of such places among the general public. Perhaps if more people were to visit the contemporary Cahokia Mounds, a greater interest could be cultivated for the people that created them. Since learning of the Cahokia Mounds, I now have an interest in visiting them, and plan to in the near future.
Chaco Canyon
Jacob Thibodeau
A few years ago I took a trip with a boy’s home in Lawrence to Chaco Canyon. I had never heard of the place before, but was excited to see the place. I had always been interested in Native peoples and history in general and was excited to share this with the boys that I was in charge of. For most of them this was an experience that they would never have had if it wasn’t for the teaching parents that they lived with because they came from broken homes and impoverished backgrounds. This was a long trip because we drove in a fifteen passenger van. Many of the boys had behavior issues so one can imagine how fun it was to all be placed in a van for the long drive out into the desert in New Mexico. For the most part the trip there was uneventful. To get to the site we had to drive on a poorly maintained road in the middle of the desert for what seemed like hours. When we arrived at the site it was getting dark so we had to make camp and eat before going to bed. We were not able to see the ruins yet but the place we camped was beautiful. It was in a valley with large bluffs all around. The next morning we woke up and walked into the site where the remains were. I was surprised at the level of access that we were given. There were park rangers here and there, but for the most part we had complete access to walk and climb all over the ruins. Of course we were careful not to disturb any of the ruins, but it was really interesting to be able to walk in the same places that the indigenous people walked hundreds of years before us. The structures were settled at the bottom of these high cliffs for protection from the elements. They also used the bluffs for rain collection and as lookout spots. We climbed to the top of the bluffs and were able to see the divots that they had carved in the rock to collect rain water. Finally, we toured the museum and learned about the time piece that they created I think called the Sun Dagger. It is thought they used this time piece to determine planting seasons. Overall, a very good experience and I think the boy’s appreciated being able to do something that they ordinarily wouldn’t have done.
A few years ago I took a trip with a boy’s home in Lawrence to Chaco Canyon. I had never heard of the place before, but was excited to see the place. I had always been interested in Native peoples and history in general and was excited to share this with the boys that I was in charge of. For most of them this was an experience that they would never have had if it wasn’t for the teaching parents that they lived with because they came from broken homes and impoverished backgrounds. This was a long trip because we drove in a fifteen passenger van. Many of the boys had behavior issues so one can imagine how fun it was to all be placed in a van for the long drive out into the desert in New Mexico. For the most part the trip there was uneventful. To get to the site we had to drive on a poorly maintained road in the middle of the desert for what seemed like hours. When we arrived at the site it was getting dark so we had to make camp and eat before going to bed. We were not able to see the ruins yet but the place we camped was beautiful. It was in a valley with large bluffs all around. The next morning we woke up and walked into the site where the remains were. I was surprised at the level of access that we were given. There were park rangers here and there, but for the most part we had complete access to walk and climb all over the ruins. Of course we were careful not to disturb any of the ruins, but it was really interesting to be able to walk in the same places that the indigenous people walked hundreds of years before us. The structures were settled at the bottom of these high cliffs for protection from the elements. They also used the bluffs for rain collection and as lookout spots. We climbed to the top of the bluffs and were able to see the divots that they had carved in the rock to collect rain water. Finally, we toured the museum and learned about the time piece that they created I think called the Sun Dagger. It is thought they used this time piece to determine planting seasons. Overall, a very good experience and I think the boy’s appreciated being able to do something that they ordinarily wouldn’t have done.
Kennewick Man
Coming from Texas, we are not given very much information about native peoples, except for the fact that they were treated terribly throughout history. The United States broke every treaty that they ever made with the Native Americans. What is interesting to me is the situation with Kennewick man. I feel like the US government cannot hold there promises when they give it to the Natives.
I dont know if it is just a really big coincidence or if we dont keep our promises to them because they have no collateral to give to the US government, like military alliance or services. The US was supposed to give the body over and instead they gave the body to the scientists for examination. Sure the Native Peoples were going to get the body back, but that is not what the law says. If the law can be bent to please people in this situation, then why cant the law be bent for other things. I just dont get why we always screw these people over!
I dont know if it is just a really big coincidence or if we dont keep our promises to them because they have no collateral to give to the US government, like military alliance or services. The US was supposed to give the body over and instead they gave the body to the scientists for examination. Sure the Native Peoples were going to get the body back, but that is not what the law says. If the law can be bent to please people in this situation, then why cant the law be bent for other things. I just dont get why we always screw these people over!
Week 1
The first week of class piqued my interest in why people have such a large lack of knowledge of Native American culture. Most people don't have the knowledge because they never learned about Native American culture. Since elementary school I was taught that Native Americans arrived from Asia by means of the Bering Strait/land bridge; my teachers never mentioned costal migration or that Native Americans might have always lived in America. This is due to a general lack of knowledge and the emphasis on post-Columbus history in America. Many people view pre-Columbus history with little importance, I mean everything before 1492 doesn't really matter, right? Learning about Native American culture will only help increase our knowledge and demonstrate how much we don't know. Until this week I had never heard of Cahokia Mounds, I find this amazing because it was a city that rivaled Paris and the length of time it existed. Native American history is a valuable piece of American history that is overlooked and I believe this is unacceptable.
I also find the agriculture techniques used by peoples that lived in the SW was incredible. The Hohokam's canal system demonstrates the intelligence and ingenuity of the people. Irrigating the Sonora Desert is no small feat and it amazes me that an engineering accomplishment that rivals European technology of the same period is little known by so many people.
It is also amazing to me how much history is not taught in high schools. As a kid, you were taught that the English settled the New World and discovered America. You weren't taught about the native cultures that built canals, apartment like structures and had extensive trade with other peoples.
I just read "Lies Across America" for another class, and James Loewen often mentions the lack of historical markers for Native American cultures, and how the ones which are up, aren't always correct. There is a marker for Jeffrey Amherst in New England, and how he settled the New Hampshire area, but it doesn't tell how he almost killed out a native culture by bringing small pox to the tribes.
After taking classes in college, you being to realize a lot of what you were taught in high school is only partially correct. There are two sides to every story, but we are only taught the one which makes our ancestors and our country look good, a patriotic history.
I just read "Lies Across America" for another class, and James Loewen often mentions the lack of historical markers for Native American cultures, and how the ones which are up, aren't always correct. There is a marker for Jeffrey Amherst in New England, and how he settled the New Hampshire area, but it doesn't tell how he almost killed out a native culture by bringing small pox to the tribes.
After taking classes in college, you being to realize a lot of what you were taught in high school is only partially correct. There are two sides to every story, but we are only taught the one which makes our ancestors and our country look good, a patriotic history.
Off to a good start!
As a future teacher, most of the time I feel a mixture of empowered and overwhelmed when I think about teaching history content specifically, and this class is continuing those feelings. It is so frustrating to think about my own education, and usually many of my peers, and realize how miss-informed most of us are, especially about Indigenous Peoples. Like everyone has said, I am already very interested in what we have learned in just two days. The canal systems of the Hohokam are so amazing to me. I have a lot of questions about this tribe after hearing an overview of their accomplishments. Mainly, what was the building process of the canals? I wonder how exactly they came up with this building process and applied it so well to meet all of their farming needs. I also wonder if these canal systems influenced any other tribes, or if the canals were unique to the Hohokam.
At the same time, I am interested in all of the so-called stories of "collapse". I felt really disappointed to hear that for my whole life I have lived so close to an ancient civilization in the Cahokia and never known anything about it. Mainly, I am really interested in learning about what happened when this tribe dispersed and in turn transformed into several other tribes like the Osage, Omaha, and numerous others. I would think that if they dispersed, people would stay true to their original ideals and practices, but obviously that is not always the case. How did these "new" tribes come to be? Were there existing tribes that simply welcomed new people and the two melded together? Or did each group simply modify to their new surroundings and create their own set of belief systems? I can't help but compare this situation to refugees around the world (which may be totally off base) and I wonder if they did combine with existing groups, how successful that transition was...
At the same time, I am interested in all of the so-called stories of "collapse". I felt really disappointed to hear that for my whole life I have lived so close to an ancient civilization in the Cahokia and never known anything about it. Mainly, I am really interested in learning about what happened when this tribe dispersed and in turn transformed into several other tribes like the Osage, Omaha, and numerous others. I would think that if they dispersed, people would stay true to their original ideals and practices, but obviously that is not always the case. How did these "new" tribes come to be? Were there existing tribes that simply welcomed new people and the two melded together? Or did each group simply modify to their new surroundings and create their own set of belief systems? I can't help but compare this situation to refugees around the world (which may be totally off base) and I wonder if they did combine with existing groups, how successful that transition was...
Week one: New impressions
Like a lot of other class members mentioned, I am also astonished at the lack of previous knowledge I had on the class's subject matter. I couldn't believe that after being in school for 16 years, I had never learned about the history of people's who created civilizations that, in so many ways, shaped the U.S. history that we are used to studying. I feel that if the history of indigenous peoples was taught alongside typical U.S history, the view of modern-day native peoples would be different, and stereotypes may not exist today.
I was most impressed with the discussion of the Hohokam tribe. Their extensive canal systems intrigued me because I couldn't believe how advanced their structures were. How did they learn those building techniques? Did they affect those of other tribes? And in terms of their "downfall", I struggle to understand how their eventual separation and end could be called a downfall. Their skillsets left an impression that still exist today, thousands of years later.
I was most impressed with the discussion of the Hohokam tribe. Their extensive canal systems intrigued me because I couldn't believe how advanced their structures were. How did they learn those building techniques? Did they affect those of other tribes? And in terms of their "downfall", I struggle to understand how their eventual separation and end could be called a downfall. Their skillsets left an impression that still exist today, thousands of years later.
Week One Learning
The first week is done and already I feel like there some things that I thought I had a grasp of when it comes to Indigenous peoples of North American that after going this week has changed my ideas towards the subject. I found the migration theories to be very interesting and while I was aware of the land-bridge theory the other theories such as earlier migrations to areas where it was thought that people hadn't settled, for example in South America. My understanding of the different levels of political formation was mostly new knowledge to me. It's amazing to think that amongst all the diversity of the tribes that many of them used some form of political formation whether it be classified as the state, chiefdom, tribal confederacy, bands or a combination of any of the two.
I also found the "collapse" part of lecture to be very interesting as well. Hohokam, Anasczi, Cahokia where just some the the many tribes that probably diminished and it was interesting to note that while they were supposed to be collapsed, many of the peoples branched off to form other tribes that we currently know such as the Osage, Omaha, Hopi, Zuni, Pueblos. It was even more interesting to learn that the decline of each of these three major civilizations could all be tied together through environmental aspects such as drought and climate change.
I also found the "collapse" part of lecture to be very interesting as well. Hohokam, Anasczi, Cahokia where just some the the many tribes that probably diminished and it was interesting to note that while they were supposed to be collapsed, many of the peoples branched off to form other tribes that we currently know such as the Osage, Omaha, Hopi, Zuni, Pueblos. It was even more interesting to learn that the decline of each of these three major civilizations could all be tied together through environmental aspects such as drought and climate change.
WEEK 1
In the lectures this week I was surprised about the amount of knowledge that had been left out of my previous historical education. Especially when it came to the mound building groups in the Mississippi Valley. That part of history took place in an extremely close geographical proximity and over a vast amount of time but I have heard so little about the civilizations themselves. The population being the same as London at the time which I have learned so much about was extremely shocking, not to mention that the Cahokia populated the largest city in the United States up til the revolution. I am interested in learning more about the extensive trading networks between groups in the area and how far the trade networks reached between the cultures with different political structures.
The idea of the "collapse" of these civilizations is something I would have liked to discuss further. It is obvious that there was not a distinct collapse in many cases. Perhaps a better word for it would be an evolution and this is something that our society should consider. These people seem to have seen that their lifestyle was no longer sustainable and chose to adapt to their surroundings and begin again in different areas with different structures. It also seemed to take a much longer amount of time for these civilizations to get to the point where they needed to change, possibly showing that these ancient groups of people that we refuse to include in our common knowledge of history were more civilized and knowledgable than our society today.
The idea of the "collapse" of these civilizations is something I would have liked to discuss further. It is obvious that there was not a distinct collapse in many cases. Perhaps a better word for it would be an evolution and this is something that our society should consider. These people seem to have seen that their lifestyle was no longer sustainable and chose to adapt to their surroundings and begin again in different areas with different structures. It also seemed to take a much longer amount of time for these civilizations to get to the point where they needed to change, possibly showing that these ancient groups of people that we refuse to include in our common knowledge of history were more civilized and knowledgable than our society today.
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Nick
All of the content covered until today's class period which was when we covered societies that have "collapsed" was more of a review due to the fact that I took an anthropology class where the teacher was obsessed with Native American history and we would talk about that more than anthropology. I also read all of the first chapter which provided greater details to each subject than what was covered during lecture. The material that I learned today which looked at Hohokam (800-1400 A.D.), the Anasazi (900-1300 A.D.), and the Cahokin Mounds (700-1400 A.D.) was all new to me, but I knew that North America had numerous prosperous societies around this time period. I enjoy hearing about large societies that were important in history, especially before Columbus, but are often excluded from history classes. I also found the climactic change that occurred between the 12th and 14th centuries to be intriguing.
Other than the content which covered the "collapsed" societies, I just had a few general questions about the class. I have seen that one other person wondered this, but after today's lecture I was curious if we would learn any more details about this drought that was one of the major influences in the dispersement of the inhabitants of the three societies we examined. One other question I had dealt with the Maritime Theory. How was it was believed that people were able to travel from Chile to Australia. Even the Native Americans from NW and NE which were advanced with wood working didn't have that advanced of boats which would allow for more extensive ocean traveling. Other than these two questions, I feel comfortable with the material.
Other than the content which covered the "collapsed" societies, I just had a few general questions about the class. I have seen that one other person wondered this, but after today's lecture I was curious if we would learn any more details about this drought that was one of the major influences in the dispersement of the inhabitants of the three societies we examined. One other question I had dealt with the Maritime Theory. How was it was believed that people were able to travel from Chile to Australia. Even the Native Americans from NW and NE which were advanced with wood working didn't have that advanced of boats which would allow for more extensive ocean traveling. Other than these two questions, I feel comfortable with the material.
Jesse
I think for me the most interesting thing we talked about in class was the political setups the different tribes and regions had. I knew that some tribes had been broken down into bands like the Apache. But I did not know there was a difference between bands and chiefdoms. I would almost argue that there really isn’t any difference between the two. In a chiefdom there is a person or a group of elites that hold the power. Could you not also say that the leaders of the different bands were the elites of their group? For example, each different Apache band had their own chief/leader. Doesn’t that put them in a chiefdom setup? Maybe this just goes back to the whole “word” problem and how we define things.
Something else that I did not quite understand was all the migration theories. The land bridge from Asia to Alaska is ok. And the idea that they traveled along the North American coast makes sense too. But how the heck did they get to Chile BEFORE North America? The map in class had a route going from Australia to Chile. I know the continents move a little, but still, that is a LONG way to be traveling. Maybe we should listen when the Natives say they have been here all along. One other thing I thought was interesting from the book was it mentioned a village in Washington that had been totally covered my a mudslide- the North America Pompeii. I would like to know some more about that.
Something else that I did not quite understand was all the migration theories. The land bridge from Asia to Alaska is ok. And the idea that they traveled along the North American coast makes sense too. But how the heck did they get to Chile BEFORE North America? The map in class had a route going from Australia to Chile. I know the continents move a little, but still, that is a LONG way to be traveling. Maybe we should listen when the Natives say they have been here all along. One other thing I thought was interesting from the book was it mentioned a village in Washington that had been totally covered my a mudslide- the North America Pompeii. I would like to know some more about that.
Week 1 - Potlatches!!!
One thing we learned this week that piqued my interest was the differing structures that existed in Native American societies. I found this interesting because while many of the societies were egalitarian, others were quite stratified; however, these societies were not stratified in the same sense that we in modern capitalist societies are accustomed to. The societies had many methods of wealth redistribution that prevented exuberant wealth and crippling poverty. Included in these methods was the Potlatch. Potlatches were festivals celebrated by American Indians from the Northwest. In a potlatch, which I discovered is translated as “give away” or “gift,” a wealthy citizen would invite their neighbors to partake in the several day festival, where they would receive gifts. These gifts were given under the agreement of reciprocity. Any who accepted gifts would have to reciprocate, at a later date, a gift to the potlatch host. While this was not like being in debt to the mob, it was a great method of wealth redistribution and encouraged all citizens, even the poorest, to engage in trade and societal interdependence.
Kyle
Most of the information in this class thus far is brand new information. The clarifying of how people were formed into groups and in which ways these groups lived and breaking of the stereotypes of the people is really new. Things such as the land bridge theory was old knowledge but the fact that most schools present this knowledge as the only way that people came to America is definitely false. The fact that people lived in the southwest is most amazing. I assumed that this area was much different than it was today. According to the text and to the lecture, this does not seem to be the case. People had technology to carve their life out of a place that is hostile to life.
In this class, it seems that there is going to be a complicating evidence not only in what we think but also in what others think. Most people want to give simple answers just so that people understand. Unfortunately, life is seldom simple. The fact that there were so many people that lived closed together but had so many different ways of living is just amazing. The trade systems and the religious beliefs of groups helped people to improve their ways of life but the ability of the people to keep their own identity is just amazing to me.
In this class, it seems that there is going to be a complicating evidence not only in what we think but also in what others think. Most people want to give simple answers just so that people understand. Unfortunately, life is seldom simple. The fact that there were so many people that lived closed together but had so many different ways of living is just amazing. The trade systems and the religious beliefs of groups helped people to improve their ways of life but the ability of the people to keep their own identity is just amazing to me.
Week 1
Although this week was short it was full of useful information that I had no previous knowledge about. Our first lecture pointed out some items that enhanced previous knowledge that I had about the Land Bridge Theory, the Coastal Migration Theory, and the Kennewick Man Controversy. The first two were familiar but i was not aware of the details of Clovis and Folsom as well as Mt. Verde, Chile. I found it interesting that the site in Mt. Verde was almost perfectly preserved by nature! There was tons of "new" information for me. Being unfamiliar with the subject I am learning all sorts of things. The different regions of peoples: Northwest, Far North, Southwest, Plains, Eastern Woodlands, and the Northeast. The diversity and cooperation was paramount to the success of many of these civilizations. The differences even within regions are lessons that should be learned for use today!
I have a few questions about the order of the hierarchy of things for the different groups. I am confused about the difference between single-hierarchy and chiefdom's. Are Bands included in these groups or are they on their own since they frequently move with the seasons? Another question is whether we are going to learn more about this apparent drought that wiped out many of these groups of people, forcing them to disband in some places (not collapse ;) and others how they coped with it and survived? Thanks.
I have a few questions about the order of the hierarchy of things for the different groups. I am confused about the difference between single-hierarchy and chiefdom's. Are Bands included in these groups or are they on their own since they frequently move with the seasons? Another question is whether we are going to learn more about this apparent drought that wiped out many of these groups of people, forcing them to disband in some places (not collapse ;) and others how they coped with it and survived? Thanks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)