The Black Legion
Black legion
Fun should have just settled for beating her with a healthy stick instead! I guess you could say she got her spite to the last! HUH? Bill 
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
A Stick In Time
Bill,
That's a pretty good observation. A good beating is actually the first option that was available to Fun.
The leaders would have tried to calm him down, but the final decision would have been his. Mutilation or death would also have been acceptable to the tribe. The man involved could be killed as well.
The Apache took their "fun" seriously.
Respectfully,
Joe
That's a pretty good observation. A good beating is actually the first option that was available to Fun.
The leaders would have tried to calm him down, but the final decision would have been his. Mutilation or death would also have been acceptable to the tribe. The man involved could be killed as well.
The Apache took their "fun" seriously.
Respectfully,
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Freed Warriors
LDM,
You said:
"When freedom finally came to the Apache at Fort Sill none of the living warriors were allowed to leave, only their families and those who did not fight were allowed to go. After the freedom came it is said that some of the warriors remains who had been hidden, secretly made it back to their homeland and places of spirit power, taken there by family members and friends of the old warriors."
I am not sure what your source is for that information, but I believe it is in error.
The law, releasing the Apache, "was passed by Congress August 24, 1912". I don't believe there was any provision for keeping the surviving Apache warriors captive.
The following is from "Geronimo" by, Angie Debo:
"The personal property of the Mescalero party-horses, mules, wheeled vehicles, household goods-was shipped to the reservation. They themselves were taken there on a special train under the escort of an army officer, arriving on April 4, 1913. Among them was Geronimo's widow with her young grandnephew, Paul Guydelkon, and his father.
All the surviving warriors of the last holdout band that surrendered to Miles were in the party with their familes. There were Naiche, his wife, Ha-o-zinne, and five of his children......Geronimo's "brother" Perico also went there with his stolen wife....." (emphasis in bold by Joe)
I believe there are other sources for this information, but Angie Debo was the first that came to hand.
Respectfully,
Joe
You said:
"When freedom finally came to the Apache at Fort Sill none of the living warriors were allowed to leave, only their families and those who did not fight were allowed to go. After the freedom came it is said that some of the warriors remains who had been hidden, secretly made it back to their homeland and places of spirit power, taken there by family members and friends of the old warriors."
I am not sure what your source is for that information, but I believe it is in error.
The law, releasing the Apache, "was passed by Congress August 24, 1912". I don't believe there was any provision for keeping the surviving Apache warriors captive.
The following is from "Geronimo" by, Angie Debo:
"The personal property of the Mescalero party-horses, mules, wheeled vehicles, household goods-was shipped to the reservation. They themselves were taken there on a special train under the escort of an army officer, arriving on April 4, 1913. Among them was Geronimo's widow with her young grandnephew, Paul Guydelkon, and his father.
All the surviving warriors of the last holdout band that surrendered to Miles were in the party with their familes. There were Naiche, his wife, Ha-o-zinne, and five of his children......Geronimo's "brother" Perico also went there with his stolen wife....." (emphasis in bold by Joe)
I believe there are other sources for this information, but Angie Debo was the first that came to hand.
Respectfully,
Joe
Black legion
To All ; A few years back in the 70,s or 80,s The apache,s at the fort sill reservation got to talking about their ancestral tribual lands in arizona! They even dug up the last remaining CAPTIVE apache woman who was with the captives when geronimo surrendered. They all started caterwalling about how they wanted to go back to their lands. So they agents said alright if that,s want they wanted they could do that too. BUT he said they should look and think it over first. So they had some big buses chartered for them and off to arizona they went to their tribual home lands. They had the camaras on them and all they were so happy. The camara,s followed them around in arizona too and they were so happy to see their home lands. They stayed a week or two and then come back to their homes in Oklahoma. The bellowing over moving back to their homelands died a quit death. As one said we were not ready for the dry heat and we really have pretty nice homes here where we are. So much for their moving to arizona.... Bill
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Errors
LDM,
I said "I believe it is in error". That makes it an opinion. It is not unfounded.
"Joe, I will let Sam Kaywaykla know he should pick up a copy of Angie Debo's book right away so he can correct the mistakes his grandfather made right away, thanks."
I believe that would be a good idea. I could be wrong, no time right now to provide other sources, but believe your source could also be wrong.
It is not impossible.
If I am wrong, I will probably be the first to find out for sure, and the first to say so. I have no doubt you would do the same.
Respectfully,
Joe Ribaudo
I said "I believe it is in error". That makes it an opinion. It is not unfounded.
"Joe, I will let Sam Kaywaykla know he should pick up a copy of Angie Debo's book right away so he can correct the mistakes his grandfather made right away, thanks."
I believe that would be a good idea. I could be wrong, no time right now to provide other sources, but believe your source could also be wrong.
It is not impossible.
If I am wrong, I will probably be the first to find out for sure, and the first to say so. I have no doubt you would do the same.
Respectfully,
Joe Ribaudo
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Mistaken?
LDM,
I have no idea what Debo's being an "anglo" has to do with the truth or falsity of her statements, or the quality of her research, but will leave that for others to decide. Your short Bio leaves out a great deal about the woman, especially her qualifications as a scholar in Indian history.
I admit, the high praise from the "Journal of Arizona History, "American Indian Quarterly" and the "Journal of American History" for the book in question, convinced me she was not far off the mark. It's true, none of them mentioned she was an "Anglo".
"Where can I find the accounts of Geronimo, Naiche, Mangas, Yanhzona, Tisnolthsos, Chatto, Tisneah, Perico, Toclanay, Dakluge and the others returning to their homeland in Arizona and taking part in their most important of rituals the return to the place of their birth where they would, for 4 days, perform their spirit clensing ceremonies ?"
Since Peter has not replied, as yet, I would like to address this question.
When speaking of these warriors "homeland", why are you leaving out New Mexico? How many of the warriors you listed were born in Arizona?
I don't believe anyone characterized the Apache as being "free as birds".
The conversation was about the Apache warriors being freed from Ft. Sill and being allowed to return to the reservation in New Mexico. The right or wrong of the situation was not in question. You seem to be taking it in another direction entirely.
"For many years the Apache were free to raid at their discretion anybody crossing their territory. Finally, the Apache were herded into small reservations and forbidden to have public gatherings. This effectively stopped Mescalero tribal ceremonies from 1873 until 1913. The ban on public gatherings was lifted in 1912, but the Mescalero wanted to wait until their Chiricahua brothers (remnants of Geronimo's band held prisoner until this time) joined them at the Mescalero reservation. This was both to show respect for the Chiricahua and to have time to gather money and resources for a proper cermony." The source for this was,
Claire R. Farrer.
As Peter stated, Naiche went to the Mescalero Reservation in 1913. He settled at "Whitetail" and lived there until his death in 1921. He died in the hospital of influenza.
I am not saying your source is a liar. What I am saying, is that it's possible he is mistaken. For that matter, we could all be mistaken.
Peter,
If you mean Perico when you say "The other warrior mentioned", I believe you are mistaken. I won't look through every book on the shelf, but will give you a few sources.
Around 1934, Perico, along with "Marion Simms, Yanosha, and Kanseah."
left the Mescalero Reservation and went into Mexico looking for a treasure. Well known story. Two sources are: "The Apache Diaries" and "Apache Voices". I believe the source in both books is Sam Kenoi.
After being freed from Ft. Sill, the Apache often left the reservation.
There are many sources for the fact that Perico was at the Mescalero Reservation.
Respectfully,
Joe Ribaudo
I have no idea what Debo's being an "anglo" has to do with the truth or falsity of her statements, or the quality of her research, but will leave that for others to decide. Your short Bio leaves out a great deal about the woman, especially her qualifications as a scholar in Indian history.
I admit, the high praise from the "Journal of Arizona History, "American Indian Quarterly" and the "Journal of American History" for the book in question, convinced me she was not far off the mark. It's true, none of them mentioned she was an "Anglo".
"Where can I find the accounts of Geronimo, Naiche, Mangas, Yanhzona, Tisnolthsos, Chatto, Tisneah, Perico, Toclanay, Dakluge and the others returning to their homeland in Arizona and taking part in their most important of rituals the return to the place of their birth where they would, for 4 days, perform their spirit clensing ceremonies ?"
Since Peter has not replied, as yet, I would like to address this question.
When speaking of these warriors "homeland", why are you leaving out New Mexico? How many of the warriors you listed were born in Arizona?
I don't believe anyone characterized the Apache as being "free as birds".
The conversation was about the Apache warriors being freed from Ft. Sill and being allowed to return to the reservation in New Mexico. The right or wrong of the situation was not in question. You seem to be taking it in another direction entirely.
"For many years the Apache were free to raid at their discretion anybody crossing their territory. Finally, the Apache were herded into small reservations and forbidden to have public gatherings. This effectively stopped Mescalero tribal ceremonies from 1873 until 1913. The ban on public gatherings was lifted in 1912, but the Mescalero wanted to wait until their Chiricahua brothers (remnants of Geronimo's band held prisoner until this time) joined them at the Mescalero reservation. This was both to show respect for the Chiricahua and to have time to gather money and resources for a proper cermony." The source for this was,
Claire R. Farrer.
As Peter stated, Naiche went to the Mescalero Reservation in 1913. He settled at "Whitetail" and lived there until his death in 1921. He died in the hospital of influenza.
I am not saying your source is a liar. What I am saying, is that it's possible he is mistaken. For that matter, we could all be mistaken.
Peter,
If you mean Perico when you say "The other warrior mentioned", I believe you are mistaken. I won't look through every book on the shelf, but will give you a few sources.
Around 1934, Perico, along with "Marion Simms, Yanosha, and Kanseah."
left the Mescalero Reservation and went into Mexico looking for a treasure. Well known story. Two sources are: "The Apache Diaries" and "Apache Voices". I believe the source in both books is Sam Kenoi.
After being freed from Ft. Sill, the Apache often left the reservation.
There are many sources for the fact that Perico was at the Mescalero Reservation.
Respectfully,
Joe Ribaudo
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Right
Peter,
It's good to know that.
Did Naiche go to Mescalero?
Joe
It's good to know that.
Did Naiche go to Mescalero?
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: "Yup"
Peter,
So.....Was Naiche the only warrior who was allowed to return to New Mexico? If so, do you know why he was singled out?
How do you know that Perico did not return as well?
"When freedom finally came to the Apache at Fort Sill none of the living warriors were allowed to leave, only their families and those who did not fight were allowed to go."
This was the statement that I questioned originally. Was James Kaywaykla mistaken, or did none of the warriors at Fort Sill choose to return to the reservation in New Mexico? Were they all forced to stay at Ft. Sill, somehow?
"I am not sure what your source is for that information, but I believe it is in error."
That seemed like a reasonable statement at the time, but it seems to have spawned unreasonably passionate replies. Perhaps you guys would like to explain why I need to "walk on eggs here". The Indian Wars are over. It's just history for most of us.
Interesting thread but I don't mean to step on anyones feelings.
Joe Ribaudo
So.....Was Naiche the only warrior who was allowed to return to New Mexico? If so, do you know why he was singled out?
How do you know that Perico did not return as well?
"When freedom finally came to the Apache at Fort Sill none of the living warriors were allowed to leave, only their families and those who did not fight were allowed to go."
This was the statement that I questioned originally. Was James Kaywaykla mistaken, or did none of the warriors at Fort Sill choose to return to the reservation in New Mexico? Were they all forced to stay at Ft. Sill, somehow?
"I am not sure what your source is for that information, but I believe it is in error."
That seemed like a reasonable statement at the time, but it seems to have spawned unreasonably passionate replies. Perhaps you guys would like to explain why I need to "walk on eggs here". The Indian Wars are over. It's just history for most of us.
Interesting thread but I don't mean to step on anyones feelings.
Joe Ribaudo
Last edited by Joe Ribaudo on Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
More On Perico
Peter,
Between the years of 1931-35, Morris Opler had numerous meetings with Chiricahua Apaches, including Perico. Those talks took place at Mescalero, according to Opler.
Perico was one of the sources for the books: "An Apache Life-Way" and "Myths and Tales of the Chiricahua Apache Indians".
Joe Ribaudo
Between the years of 1931-35, Morris Opler had numerous meetings with Chiricahua Apaches, including Perico. Those talks took place at Mescalero, according to Opler.
Perico was one of the sources for the books: "An Apache Life-Way" and "Myths and Tales of the Chiricahua Apache Indians".
Joe Ribaudo
Last edited by Joe Ribaudo on Wed Oct 12, 2005 3:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
Black legion
pete; Yup is a self satisfied reply to the affirmity! Bill
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Short Answers
Peter,
One of the things I have noticed over the years, is that when you are "passionate" in a response, it is usually short.....very short. Some people show their feelings on a topic with profuse eloquence, like LDM, others say less and less, until silence is the only response they have left.
I am left with the empression that I have tightened some jaws here, and for the life of me, don't know why. I don't get excited when someone tells me I may be mistaken or, as in this case, that my sources may have made up their history as they went along.
It seems, that you agree with me that LDMs original statement was in error, although you did not say so directly. Having anyone else do that was not the point of the conversation. Questioning my sources, as well as LDMs was the entire point. It's really a matter of degrees. LDMs original statement may be correct, to a certain degree. It would appear that the word "none" may be the degree to which he and his source were mistaken.
He, later, clarified his statement by inserting a date range. That was the reason I have left Chatto out of the mix.
Once again, I feel that the point of the conversation was to not change history with a thousand cuts. I know that LDM would agree with that reasoning.
If it turned out I was mistaken in my original replly to LDM, I would be the first to say so, but would need something stronger than "I am not mistaken" and "Yup".
Other than leaving out Perico, your list seems good. I believe I can find plenty of evidence for his being at Mescalero, if you like. Since you have provided no source for your belief, it may be impossible to find anything you would accept.
Joe Ribaudo
One of the things I have noticed over the years, is that when you are "passionate" in a response, it is usually short.....very short. Some people show their feelings on a topic with profuse eloquence, like LDM, others say less and less, until silence is the only response they have left.
I am left with the empression that I have tightened some jaws here, and for the life of me, don't know why. I don't get excited when someone tells me I may be mistaken or, as in this case, that my sources may have made up their history as they went along.
It seems, that you agree with me that LDMs original statement was in error, although you did not say so directly. Having anyone else do that was not the point of the conversation. Questioning my sources, as well as LDMs was the entire point. It's really a matter of degrees. LDMs original statement may be correct, to a certain degree. It would appear that the word "none" may be the degree to which he and his source were mistaken.
He, later, clarified his statement by inserting a date range. That was the reason I have left Chatto out of the mix.
Once again, I feel that the point of the conversation was to not change history with a thousand cuts. I know that LDM would agree with that reasoning.
If it turned out I was mistaken in my original replly to LDM, I would be the first to say so, but would need something stronger than "I am not mistaken" and "Yup".
Other than leaving out Perico, your list seems good. I believe I can find plenty of evidence for his being at Mescalero, if you like. Since you have provided no source for your belief, it may be impossible to find anything you would accept.
Joe Ribaudo
Black legion
Yes I have enjoyed it! bill
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Correct
LDM,
It's no problem. You are correct, as usual.
The problem now lies with the idea that they should ever have been allowed to travel without permission and the knowledge of the authorities.
In those days the warriors were considered to have killed (murdered) many innocent people - women, children, old people and even whites who were their friends. Today, we would call them "Palestinians" or the "Al-Qaida".
Should Americans, today, fight back in the manner that many did back then, they would be tried and convicted of murder. It was a different time and the people were much harder than we can imagine.
The Apache Warriors would be considered mass murders today, and would never see the light of freedom, or they would be executed. I find no fault with the fear the populace had should they be given complete freedom. If Timothy McVey had been sentenced to life in prison, would we have given him complete freedom when he was in his 80s? Will Charles Manson one day walk the streets unfettered? He did not even hold the weapons of death in his own hands. He was the "leader".
Were the Apache in the right, and the whites in the wrong? I suppose that depends on who's ox was being gored at the time. We can't give them back what they once had, but I believe we have tried to make amends. We have fallen short of what we could do.
All of the above is opinion, so I could be wrong.
Respectfully,
Joe Ribaudo
It's no problem. You are correct, as usual.
The problem now lies with the idea that they should ever have been allowed to travel without permission and the knowledge of the authorities.
In those days the warriors were considered to have killed (murdered) many innocent people - women, children, old people and even whites who were their friends. Today, we would call them "Palestinians" or the "Al-Qaida".
Should Americans, today, fight back in the manner that many did back then, they would be tried and convicted of murder. It was a different time and the people were much harder than we can imagine.
The Apache Warriors would be considered mass murders today, and would never see the light of freedom, or they would be executed. I find no fault with the fear the populace had should they be given complete freedom. If Timothy McVey had been sentenced to life in prison, would we have given him complete freedom when he was in his 80s? Will Charles Manson one day walk the streets unfettered? He did not even hold the weapons of death in his own hands. He was the "leader".
Were the Apache in the right, and the whites in the wrong? I suppose that depends on who's ox was being gored at the time. We can't give them back what they once had, but I believe we have tried to make amends. We have fallen short of what we could do.
All of the above is opinion, so I could be wrong.
Respectfully,
Joe Ribaudo
Black legion
What took place back then has and is still taking place all over the world and has been with us since the begining of time. It,s just nature taking place, the weak must go and the strong survive. I mean did the apache not push the pima off their ground? bill