History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedMovies about Native Americans

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3456>
Author
King John View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 01-Dec-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1368
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote King John Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-May-2009 at 16:56
Have you two been to the US and seen how Americans act towards Amerindians, it's hardly bigotry.
Back to Top
GökTürk View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 18-May-2009
Location: Manisa/Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 47
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GökTürk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-May-2009 at 19:29
Also We can see 4 cheyenne people in "Twilight" LOL
TENGRİ TEG TENGRİDE BOLMIŞ TÜRK BİLGE KAĞAN-
TURK WISE KHAN WHO BECAME IN SKY LIKE SKY-GOD
---
tengir ordo(people of Tengri-God-)                 
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 2775
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-May-2009 at 19:50
Thunderheart film is a favorite of mine
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-May-2009 at 20:22
Discrimination. Of course. Just imagine if the rest of the Americans would live like this:
 
 
 
 
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 137
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-May-2009 at 18:33
Actually, Penguin, the great majority of those living in poverty in the U.S. are White. I saw worse houses in the Florida swamps in the 1960s, but most of those have been replaced by trailers. I also lived a short part of my youth in a house with no running water, though it did have electricity. The only heat we had was supplied by wood in a single fireplace. Again, your paradigms are flawed. I can introduce you Native Americans living in very large, well apportioned homes in Salt Lake City. And one of Salt Lake's better restaurants in 1989 was owned by a Ute Indian. 
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 15-May-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 609
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-May-2009 at 19:18
Been to a Hard Rock Cafe, lately? That enterprise is the sole property of Florida's Seminole Nation, and is but a tip of their portfolio iceberg. By the 1990s, each individual Seminole was receiving an annual income of some $200,000 as their share of tribal income! Yes, one can find examples of rural poverty associated with life on the "reservation", yet often it is also a conscious decision in efforts to maintain traditional practices.
 
 
As lirelou pointed out in terms of Florida, it is quite dangerous to generalize. I am still familiar with some Miccosukee who prefer the traditional chiki.
 

Per Florida Statutes, Chickee / Chiki huts are treated differently in the review process than all other Open-Air Pavilions. A Chickee / Chiki hut is defined as an open-sided wooden hut with a thatched roof of palm or palmetto or other traditional materials, devoid of electric, plumbing or other non-wood features, and constructed by either the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida or the Seminole Tribe of Florida.

 
Far from positing that there are no inequities among the individual Amerind nations, I instaed am asserting that much of what appears as "poverty" derives from efforts at maintainig social identity. Hence one must tread carefully when walking the sands of generalization.
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 479
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-May-2009 at 22:01
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Carcharedon, do you have a vocabulary problem? You go on incessantly about "opression" and then define it in the most off-the-wall manner. "Can" the Marxist nonsense and stop trying to falsify history so as to force it into the model. In terms of imperial legislation, the objective of the Spanish crown was the protection of the Amerind. Hence, you would be hard put to provide an example of "opressive" actions as policy. Besides, failure to recognize the intricacies of Amerind societies on their own so as to demonize an historical epoch is also a denial.
 
It´s no vocabular problem to call things with their right name. Invasion, stealing of land, slavery, opression. That is things that actually happened.
 
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

 Ask yourself were the Incas "opressors"? Likewise, the Tlaxcalans were not exactly buddy-buddy with the Tenocha, but I suppose one must "tidy up" history so as to suit contemporary prejudice. If educators can construct their own myths (as did Vasconcelos), why not cinematographers. Lrt's keep in mind that in order to have a drama, it is essential to have conflict...how about those nasty Vikings!?! Say, didn't they wander out of your neck-of-the-woods?Evil Smile 
 
That the indigenous peoples have fought each other doesn´t justify stealing their land, enslave them or opress them in other ways.
 
There is always risks at showing negaitve and stereotyped images of peoples who are already in a situation where they are being discriminated. They are not especially helped by that.
 
And who said the vikings were any saints?
Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 137
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2009 at 03:46
Carcharodon;  In re: "That the indigenous peoples have fought each other doesn´t justify stealing their land, enslave them or opress them in other ways."

From my perspective, you have failed to sustain your allegations that Native Americans are "oppressed' in the U.S.. You could use a trip here too. I'd suggest you start in Minnesota, a state that some Norse may have actually visited prior to Colombus' voyages. First, the state has a large percentage of Norwegians, Finlanders, and Swedes, and second, it is home to the Chipewa, many of whom can be found throughout the state. They have a reserve up in Red Lake. I don't think you'll find any evidence that the Chipewas were ever "enslaved", though there were times when some were badly treated by their neighbors. As for oppressed? Well, you'll have a chance to ask them. I'm sure that they have their percentage of "red power" advocates.

Land of the Sky Blue Waters. Come on over.
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 479
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2009 at 12:16
Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:

From my perspective, you have failed to sustain your allegations that Native Americans are "oppressed' in the U.S.. You could use a trip here too. I'd suggest you start in Minnesota, a state that some Norse may have actually visited prior to Colombus' voyages. First, the state has a large percentage of Norwegians, Finlanders, and Swedes, and second, it is home to the Chipewa, many of whom can be found throughout the state. They have a reserve up in Red Lake. I don't think you'll find any evidence that the Chipewas were ever "enslaved", though there were times when some were badly treated by their neighbors. As for oppressed? Well, you'll have a chance to ask them. I'm sure that they have their percentage of "red power" advocates.
Land of the Sky Blue Waters. Come on over.
 
I haven´t talked so much about US in this thread but it seems that some Native Americans themselves feel that they are discriminated against. When one reads articles written by them or read what some of them writes in letters, or listen to voices from their own channels many of them feel that they are not treated equally as others in the American society.
 
But the situation for Native Americans varies of course by region and by country. So the situation can be different in different parts of US, and it´s also different between US and Canada, or Mexico or Brazil, or all the other countries.
 
And the situaition has also varied a lot over time.
 
One big common denominator though, is the stealing of Native American land. How many native Americans today have still full access to all the land where they once lived?
 
Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 137
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2009 at 20:09
Carcharodon, in re: "One big common denominator though, is the stealing of Native American land. How many native Americans today have still full access to all the land where they once lived?"

Like everything else, that varies on a case by case basis. The Navajos certainly had quite a large chunk left. The Hopi, Zuni, and countless Pueblos along the Rio Grande river are still inhabited by the descendants of the original owners. The only tribes to have land really "stolen" from them were the five "Civilized Tribes", The Cherokee, Choctaw, Chikasaw, Creek, and Seminole.  Yet you can find some of their descendants still living in their original areas, though many were removed to Oklahoma. That was a theft, under color of law via the Indian Exclusion Act. As for the nomadic plains tribes, they could hardly expect to retain the territory they roamed over when the buffalo covered the plains. In most cases, they got "displaced". White settlements grew up in areas they had crossed, and White economic activities (the cattle industry, the railroads, etc) reduced the great buffalo herds their society depended upon to a memory. So what should have been done? Should we have prohibited settlement of the Great Plains, so that today modern tourists could travel out to this "world park" and watch Native Americans ekeing out their survival with no intrusion from any government? In essence, making the Great Plains some form of "human zoo"? Where life for its human inhabitants would be brutish and short?

The settlement of the Americas was to the benefit of the greater part of mankind, and that included Native Americans. 
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 479
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2009 at 23:15
Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:


Like everything else, that varies on a case by case basis. The Navajos certainly had quite a large chunk left. The Hopi, Zuni, and countless Pueblos along the Rio Grande river are still inhabited by the descendants of the original owners. The only tribes to have land really "stolen" from them were the five "Civilized Tribes", The Cherokee, Choctaw, Chikasaw, Creek, and Seminole. 
 
 
Also other peoples have to leave their homes, as for example the Lenapes who originally lived in Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and New York. Another people who lived in those areas were the Susquehannocks who were more or less exterminated.
 
Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:

Yet you can find some of their descendants still living in their original areas, though many were removed to Oklahoma. That was a theft, under color of law via the Indian Exclusion Act. As for the nomadic plains tribes, they could hardly expect to retain the territory they roamed over when the buffalo covered the plains. In most cases, they got "displaced". White settlements grew up in areas they had crossed, and White economic activities (the cattle industry, the railroads, etc) reduced the great buffalo herds their society depended upon to a memory. So what should have been done? Should we have prohibited settlement of the Great Plains, so that today modern tourists could travel out to this "world park" and watch Native Americans ekeing out their survival with no intrusion from any government? In essence, making the Great Plains some form of "human zoo"? Where life for its human inhabitants would be brutish and short?
 
Even if the plain tribes would have kept much more of their native land and if the relations with US had been somewhat different they would probably also adapted to the modern world and it´s circumstamces, maybe just in another way. Noone says that their only alternative would have been living short and brutish lives. Many other nations round the world still have their own territories and still they don´t live short or brutish. Development can occur in different ways.

 
Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:


The settlement of the Americas was to the benefit of the greater part of mankind, and that included Native Americans. 
 
Noone really knows how the world would have looked like today if the Americas hadn´t been settled. Maybe it would have looked better or worse, it´s impossible to say.


Edited by Carcharodon - 30-May-2009 at 23:26
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2009 at 23:28
If the Europeans hadn't come it would like like Phillipines: a native people that got modernized, but that preserve its roots.
 
Colonization was unavoidable. However, what destroyed the Americas was the settlement of outsiders from Europe and Africa in larger number than local populations. That broke the backbone of a continent that had the right to live by its own: like Africa and Asia did.
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 137
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-May-2009 at 02:14
Penguin, In re:  "Noone really knows how the world would have looked like today if the Americas hadn´t been settled. Maybe it would have looked better or worse, it´s impossible to say."

First, continents don't have any rights. People have rights. Second, your "No one really knows how the world would have looked today" is irrelevant. The fact is that the Americas got settled by Whites, Blacks, and Asians, in addition to Indians, and it was Europeans, or European-Americans who made the important decisions. They not only built the modern world, they invented the concept of rights that is your sense of righteous injustice at the fate opf the Amerindian civilizations. Generally, when two cultures come into contact, it is the dynamic culture that wins out over either a static or an underdeveloped culture. Cultural relativity is a myth. Cultures are like sports teams. There are superior teams, mediocre teams, and inferior teams, and the superior teams come out on top. And they last only as long as they can maintain the skill sets that put them there, or they too pass into history.
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 479
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-May-2009 at 02:30
Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:


They not only built the modern world, they invented the concept of rights that is your sense of righteous injustice at the fate opf the Amerindian civilizations.
 
Many other cultures than the western one has concepts of right and wrong, they have etics and moral. That is not specific for the western culture. And many times in US history sence of right, ethics, moral and similar haven´t been the first priority.
 
Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:

Generally, when two cultures come into contact, it is the dynamic culture that wins out over either a static or an underdeveloped culture. Cultural relativity is a myth. Cultures are like sports teams. There are superior teams, mediocre teams, and inferior teams, and the superior teams come out on top. And they last only as long as they can maintain the skill sets that put them there, or they too pass into history.
 
Many times the "winning" culture is not superior in anything else than just raw power and military technology. It can enforce it´s values on others but it doesn´t have to be superior in any other way.
 
 


Edited by Carcharodon - 31-May-2009 at 02:31
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-May-2009 at 02:49
Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:

Penguin, In re:  "Noone really knows how the world would have looked like today if the Americas hadn´t been settled. Maybe it would have looked better or worse, it´s impossible to say."

First, continents don't have any rights. People have rights.
 
Indeed. People has the right to keep theirs lands, to not beeing invaded or killed in genocides.
 
Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:

Second, your "No one really knows how the world would have looked today" is irrelevant.
 
False. That's very important, indeed. The invasion is the more important event in the history of the Americas. That was the time when all the developments on this continent were stopped by an allien and violent people who robbed as much as they could.
 
 
Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:

 The fact is that the Americas got settled by Whites, Blacks, and Asians,
 
Invaded, you mean. Americans Indians were here first and they didn't invite anyone to come
 
Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:

in addition to Indians, and it was Europeans, or European-Americans who made the important decisions. They not only built the modern world, they invented the concept of rights that is your sense of righteous injustice at the fate opf the Amerindian civilizations.
 
Nobody asked them to come. They should have stayed in Europe and developed theirs social inventions there.
 
Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:

Generally, when two cultures come into contact, it is the dynamic culture that wins out over either a static or an underdeveloped culture.
 
There is also people that hate the colonizers up to the times they leave, or the time when the historical memory is restored and the history rewritten. We are in that process in the Americas right now.
 
Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:

Cultural relativity is a myth. Cultures are like sports teams. There are superior teams, mediocre teams, and inferior teams, and the superior teams come out on top. And they last only as long as they can maintain the skill sets that put them there, or they too pass into history.
 
European culture superior? I bet the culture of the New World and East Asia is a lot more dynamic. Be aware that today Europe is a mediocre team and a inferior team, and that probably will be replaced by Islam.
 
If that Ever happens to Europe, you will understand what Europeans did to the Americas. Lucky Phillipines that survived after all.
 
 
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-May-2009 at 02:56
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

... 
Many other cultures than the western one has concepts of right and wrong, they have etics and moral. That is not specific for the western culture. And many times in US history sence of right, ethics, moral and similar haven´t been the first priority.
 
Indeed. Even more, the Western Culture didn't have concept of right and wrong. The greek were a homo-phedophile society and Roma a culture that killed people for fun. Those are the western values? Nope, the so called Western values come from the Jewish culture, and particularly from Chirstianism, and are not Western in its origin at all.
 
With respect to natives, only people that ignores the history of the Americas can say such wild claims about a supossed lack of values in native cultures and civilizations.
 
 
Originally posted by lirelou lirelou wrote:

Many times the "winning" culture is not superior in anything else than just raw power and military technology. It can enforce it´s values on others but it doesn´t have to be superior in any other way. 
 
Fortunatelly, the culture of the Americas is not European, but a new culture that was derivated from settlers and local custums. That's why people of the Americas are so different from Europeans.
 
 
 
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 15-May-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 609
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-May-2009 at 03:09
Here we go again!
 
Carcharedon wrote:
"Another people who lived in those areas were the Susquehannocks who were more or less exterminated."
 
Your implication fails to complement the inference since the Iroquois were responsible for the elimination of most Susquehannock villages by 1675.

Almost completely forgotten today, the Susquehannock were one of the most formidable tribes of mid-Atlantic region at the time of European contact and dominated the large region between the Potomac River in northern Virginia to southern New York. Little is known about them, since they lived some distance inland from the coast, and Europeans did not often visit their villages before they had been destroyed by epidemic and wars with the Iroquois in 1675. The Susquehannock have been called noble and heroic. They have also been described as aggressive, warlike, imperialistic, and bitter enemies of the Iroquois. They may also have warred with the Mahican from the central Hudson Valley. When he first met the Susquehannock in 1608, Captain John Smith was especially impressed with their size, deep voices, and the variety of their weapons. Their height must have been exceptional, because the Swedes also commented on it thirty years later. The constant warfare between Iroquian-speaking tribes gave the Susquehannock a military advantage over their more peaceful Algonquin neighbors to the east and south. Using canoes for transport, Susquehannock war parties routinely attacked the Delaware tribes along the Delaware River and travelled down the Susquehanna where they terrorized the Nanticoke, Conoy, and Powhatan living on Chesapeake Bay.

 
Guess those nasty white guys had to settle for what was left, eh Carch?
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 15-May-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 609
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-May-2009 at 03:33
Carcharedon, as I have incessantly iterated, your contentions lack historical substance in terms of the colonial history of Spanish America. Your intent to blacken the canvas of history through glittering generalities and colored adjectives lead to little more than displays of ignorance.
 
"That the indigenous peoples have fought each other doesn´t justify stealing their land, enslave them or opress them in other ways."
 
Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the oft-quoted, by me, Leyes y ordenanzas nuevamente hechas por su magestad para la gobernación de las Indias y buen tratamiento y conservación de los indios (Barcelona, 1542). This decretal of the Emperor Charles V, began a long and repetitive legislative narrative whose sole intent was the protection of the Amerinds' essntial liberty and the integrity of their communities. That individuals would often perpetrate abuses is one thing but to assign your colorful adjectives as official policy is a historical travesty. Or have you forgotten that one of the reasons Columbus was brought back to Castille in chains was as result of the charge that he had sought to enslave the Amerinds of Hispanola?
 
The colonial history of the Americas is a rich amalgam of Amerindian and Spanish cultures, no more visiible than in the splendid patrimony of colonial art that criscrosses the continent. Time and place must always be respected and not prostituted for the sake of facetious argumentation. As for the "movies", a theme we have long strayed from, they can be just as vicious in their caricature of the new cultures that formed in the Spanish Americas...
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-May-2009 at 05:02
What you say about Spaniards it is true. Many Spaniards got concern about Amerindians. However, Carcharedon is right when he said Europeans didn't have any right to settle in the Americas and bring African slaves with them. They should have stayed back home in Iberia.
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 479
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-May-2009 at 12:32
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Your implication fails to complement the inference since the Iroquois were responsible for the elimination of most Susquehannock villages by 1675.
 
It was actually the policies of the Europeans to divide and conquer that escalated the wars between the different tribes in the east.
 
And the final blow against the Susquehannocks was delivered by whites (the so called Paxton boys) in 1763.


Edited by Carcharodon - 31-May-2009 at 22:04
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3456>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.