mod 7 short response
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Southern New Hampshire University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
200
Subject
History
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by DoctorBadgerMaster492
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 three historical lenses political history, social history, and cultural history could be applied to gain a fuller picture of the relationship between Natives and white settlers.
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.
The complex relationship between Natives and white settlers in the early 19th century cannot be simply attributed to one cause, as conflicts stemmed from a multitude of factors. This includes disputes over land, cultural differences, clashes in political systems, economic disparities, and religious divergences, all of which contributed to the complexities and tensions of their interactions.
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 three historical lenses that could be used to gain a fuller picture of the events described in
the video are political history, cultural history, and military history.
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.)
Massasoit's decision to approach the Pilgrims about an alliance was contingent on the devastation of the Wampanoag and the threat posed by the Narragansett people, both of which were consequences of disease and territorial conflicts.
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 consequence of the alliance between the Wampanoag and the Pilgrims was the establishment of a mutual defense against common enemies.
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.
My misconception about the Trail of Tears is that it was a single event that occurred at one point in time. Through research, I learned that the Trail of Tears refers to a series of forced removals, primarily between 1830 and 1850 when Native American nations were forcibly relocated from their ancestral lands in the southeastern United States to Indian Territory (present-day Oklahoma).
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.
1. Political Lens: One aspect to consider is the federal government's decision-making process and power dynamics between different branches in enforcing the Indian Removal Act of 1830.
2. Economic Lens: For the Cherokee Removal, an important consideration is the economic motives and interests of white settlers, particularly in relation to the desire for land and resources held by the Cherokee Nation.
3. Social Lens: In the context of the Cherokee Removal, one aspect to examine is the interplay between the Cherokee Nation and the American public, including attitudes of racial superiority, cultural misunderstandings, and stereotypes that influenced public sentiment and policies toward Native American tribes.
4. Legal Lens: In the Cherokee Removal, a key aspect to explore is the Supreme Court case Worcester v. Georgia (1832), which involved the question of tribal sovereignty and the legality of Georgia's efforts to remove the Cherokee from their ancestral lands, providing insights into the clash between state and federal laws as well as implications for Native American rights.
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.
Agree. The Treaty of New Echota was invalid, and the National Party was correct to oppose it.
Lack of Cherokee Consent: The Treaty of New Echota, signed in 1835, was negotiated and signed by a faction of Cherokee leaders known as the Treaty Party. However, this group did not represent the entirety of the Cherokee Nation.
Violation of Treaty Process: The Treaty of New Echota was negotiated and signed without following proper procedures outlined in previous agreements between the United States and the Cherokee Nation.
Opposition and Protests: The signing of the Treaty of New Echota sparked widespread opposition and protests among the Cherokee population.
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