Leon__Cleveland_HIS_200__Applied_History Module 7 Short Responses
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Columbia Southern University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
200
Subject
History
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by MajorDangerWolf35
Module 7 Short Responses – Question 1 Name three historical lenses that you could apply to gain a fuller picture of the relationship between Natives and white settlers. Be sure to respond to this question in no more than one sentence, using proper grammar.
The connection between white settlers and native people is depicted through the lenses of social history and military. Social lenses are the interactions, such as religious and cultural practices between Native Americans and White colonists. Analyzing history through the lenses of native people and white colonists allows for a variety of viewpoints. The political leaders who ruled over both white settlers and Native Americans are the final lens.
Module 7 Short Responses – Question 2 Revise the thesis statement at the top of this page to reflect a more complex view of the relationship between Natives and white settlers. Your revised thesis statement should be
longer than one sentence.
Large tracts of land in the United States during the 19th century were the root of conflict between Native Americans and White colonists. White colonists were hungry to gain control of the resources on Indian Land.
Module 7 Short Responses – Question 3 Name three historical lenses that you could use to look at the events described in the video you just saw.
The event could be viewed through a political lens because President Abraham Lincoln celebrated Thanksgiving. the viewpoint from a military person, such as a colonel or private, through a military lens. The interactions between the Pilgrims and the natives can be analyzed through Social Lens.
Module 7 Short Responses – Question 4 Massasoit's decision to approach the Pilgrims about an alliance was contingent on what previous event or events? (Name one or two.)
The Pilgrims shared a common threat with the Rhode Island Narragansett people, which led to Massasoit's decision. The terrible sickness that claimed many Native lives is another choice.
Module 7 Short Responses – Question 5 Name one short-term consequence and one long-term consequence of the alliance between the Wampanoag and the Pilgrims.
One short-term outcome of the Wampanoag-Pilgrim alliance is a treaty signed on March 22, 1621. This treaty was quickly broken when English settlers arrived and changed the political landscape in New England. This was the reason behind the murders and enslavement of numerous Native Americans.
Module 7 Short Responses – Question 6 How has your understanding of the historical event in your essay changed as a result of your research? Describe one instance of a misconception or a wrong idea you had about
your topic that has been corrected after researching and writing about it.
Researching the Trail of Tears, I realized that the reason behind the government forcing the Native Americans of their land was to gain access to the rich resources of their ancestral land.
It was simply about white man's greed. Module 7 Short Responses – Question 7 Name four historical lenses through which you could analyze the events of the Cherokee
Removal. Specify one aspect of this event for each lens that you cite.
The Cherokees' interactions with the US government through a social lens. The 1835 Treaty of New Echota.
The United States and white settlers prospering on the lands they took after the Cherokees were driven out are the economic lens.
The Cherokee Native Indians were expelled from the United States of America's government through the application of military lens. From a political perspective, the government is driving the Cherokee Native Americans from their ancestral lands and into uncharted territory.
Module 7 Short Responses – Question 8 Agree or disagree with the following thesis statement: "The Treaty of New Echota was invalid, and the National Party was correct to oppose it." Cite at least three historical
facts that support your position.
I believe that the Treaty of New Echota was unconstitutional. Although they were hundreds of Cherokee Native Indians were present when the Treaty of New Echota was signed. Regarding the treaty, Chief John Ross wrote "A spurious Delegation" to Congress (Ross, J., 1836). According to Ross there were no Chiefs or even highly-ranking men among the Cherokee Native Indians. Because of the minority of Native Americans who signed and ratified the Treaty of New Echota, the Chiefs and many Cherokee men rejected this agreement. The majority of Cherokee Native Indians were not represented by these minorities.
Ross, J., 1836 September 28, Chief John Ross Protests the Treaty of New Echota, Retrieve from http://home.nps.gov/articles/000/protest-treaty-of-new-echota.htm
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help