Rhetoric 1315 Questions

I like how a few troops from Sibley's militia inadvertently found the Indians who were planning to invade the forces at Big Lake while looking for food because they were hungry. This to me is luck.

It seems to me as if the Indian tribes really never had a very good chance, they just didn't unite themselves like they should have. Instead some of the Indians commited useless raids on the lone settlers.

I enjoyed the part where Mrs. Wakefield was writing about the the Sioux "parade": "I could not keep from smiling at times to see how ridiculously [these objects] were used by the poor savage creatures..." (pg. 181) They were probably wearing what they were, how they were to make a statements to the whites, "YOU look ridiculous, THIS is how you look to us."

I don't understand how the upper and lower could have been so divided. How could the upper not see where the lower were coming from? The whites only provided the Sioux with those things because they took so many other things away.

It was extremely interesting to see the break-up of the Sioux. On page 205 it is evident that the younger warriors did not agree with Little Crow's strategy. 75 of Little Crow's men left, led by Walker. 36 remained loyal, but Little Crow stepped down and no longer led his people in battle. They were instead led by White Spider. I found Little Crow's act to be very honorable. He realized that "When men no longer follow a chief, he is no loner a chief." This is very true. One can't lead people if they don't listen or respect the leader.

Of the entire story, the fact that I felt was maybe most disturbing was through the middle portion of the book when the white families couldn't even mourn the loss of lives because there was no time. The Sioux kept attacking. I felt that chapter was very telling of the dishearting effects of the uprising.

Also, to comment on Jamie's post, I think we saw a bit of bickering and uncertainty amongst the Sioux. But Jamie - is it more honorable to step down once you seem to have lost some of your warriors or continue fighting shorthanded until the end?

It was too bad Little Crow had to die in the manner that he did. I at least think he deserved to die in battle. He should have died with his people, when they were loyal to him. However, I think Little Crow was ready. He went home, to where he grew up, and accepted that he would die there. He wanted to die there. His giving of the medicine bundles to his son foreshadowed that his death was soon to come. It's just too bad he was killed by hunters, not heroically in battle.

So, I'm not done yet. However, I do have a couple things to say but they aren't from the end of the book.

First of all, this Earle guy mentioned during the uprising seems like a terrible guy. I don't know if anyone else noticed, but the book said that he left his family behind, told his son to shoot to protect him, which ended up killing the boy and overran some other kids who died because he told them to stop. He seems like a nasty guy.

I also wanted to mention that H. Sibley was a confusing man. He seemed to be the biggest spokesperson of Indian welfare in the book. He tried to gain equal rights for the Indians which is far more than anyone else tried to accomplish for their sake. On the other hand, however, the book mentions how he was a trader and made his fortune by exploiting the Indians. This is very confusing, but because of these things, I am surprised he didn't win the governor race against Ramsey.

I thought the indians were supposed to be brave, seems the only time they are is when they are in large numbers... and futhermore even then they still manage to be defeated by lesser forces.

The land has changed a lot, many of the women and children survivors had to travel long distances to even find roads. If someone walked across Minnesota now, they would see a road every ten minutes at least.

The different styles of war are very interesting to me. The white people aren't sure of how to fight the Indians because of their brutal ways of battle. Had the white people retaliated agains the Indians in the same way the Indians were killing the whites, what would the story say then?

Little Crow is definitely put in a tough situation most of the time. It was clear that he didn't want to fight the white people, but didn't want to let his warriors down. By leading them into battle, not only was he going against his own best judgment, but also lost the respect of many elders. For example, on page 238, Chaska's mother refers to Little Crow "that 'bad man' who has caused us so much trouble."

My first question is where the many more raids than were mentioned in this book. According to the local history, Lester Prairie (near where I grew up) was nearly destroyed be the uprising of 1862 while the Winsted (just a few miles north) was left untouched. Could have this been the work of the two chiefs that after instigating the war went and plundered on there own?

The second thing that amazed me was the human will to survive. Justina, Helen, Lavina, Uncle Tommy Ireland... they all went through such horrible circumstances and survived. I couldn't even imagine been shot eight times as Ireland was and, after having been left for dead twice, walking all the way to (was it Mankato?) to get help. And Justina who survived for two months with just a few potatoes and cucumbers. Unbelievable.

One thing I found interesting was the total lack of information on both sides. The only time any side knew what was going on was at the very beginning when the Dakota knew they were going to attack a few white settlements. After that, the Indians nor the whites knew where the other was, or their own kind. There may be a large battle group over that hill, or they may be 20 miles away. Nobody knew anything and was blindly feeling around. I just find that interesting in contrast to today's world where I found out Kirby Puckett was dead in Arizona less than an hour after he died. Another comment I have has to do with the author and his confusing writing style. Many times he speaks of traveling in certain directions or descriptions of locations that don't seem to make sense. An example is when a band of settlers are up by the Upper Agency and travel northwest to St. Paul. There is no mention of looping around, are we just to assume so?

Was it customary for the Indians to kill women and children when they were at war with other Indians, or was this a special exception for the whites?

I think Justin and Jamie have good points about Little Crow stepping down. To us, I think this is dishonorable in that, although you don't have all the support, you should still finish what you started. But to them, having the support of the other Indians leads to honor, not the battle itself.

On page 254, when the author talked about the caravan of Indian prisoners being attacked by the townspeople, he made it sound as if it was unjust and that the townspeople were out of place to do such a thing. In their defense, they were collecting dead bodies of family members who had just been killed from Indian attacks. I think that they have the right to be upset. On the other hand, these Indians were said to have helped protect the white people from the Indians. I am curious to know if all of the townspeople knew that these Indians were "good"?

I also found Sarah Wakefield's story to be astonishing. She had to go back past where she was originally captured, she saw a friends dead body , and realized she was heading straight back to where she came from. How someone can have the strength and courage to go on after such terrible events?

Little Crows way of fight resembled the white man and did not look like the kind of fighting the Indians were used too. The Indians also could not unite all of the tribes, and refused at time to listen to what others had to say even if they were telling something that made more sence than their opinion. The Indians were very split in their ideas and dealings with the whites.

Some of the settlers had very interesting and grueling stories about how they had survived and about how some of the Indians protected them with their lives to save them. The survivers were able to survive in the wilderness without food or water at a major expense to their physical and mental health.

I found it interesting that Little Crow's warriors outnumbered the soldiers four to one and they still lost the battle at Fort Ridgely.

I thought it was interesting how the Indians decided to attack by going through the town in 2 waves. The first to alarm everyone, and the second to suprise everyone when they thought nothing would happen. But the whites had built places to go for protection and were just one step ahead of the Indians.

oh shit!

I think this book showes the igronace that whites have. I also belive our country would be more diversified and cutlured if whites did not treat other culters with disrespect. This book reflects my opinion every well, on how whites treated other races unhuman like. It is very disapointing.