|
Post by sparrow on Jan 26, 2004 18:36:27 GMT -5
While Blackhawk's tribe was being slaughterd at the Battle of the Bad Axe he escaped to Lacrosse to join the Chippewas. Why didn't he stay and fight for the women and children?
|
|
|
Post by Robert Braun on Jan 27, 2004 9:01:14 GMT -5
While Blackhawk's tribe was being slaughterd at the Battle of the Bad Axe he escaped to Lacrosse to join the Chippewas. Why didn't he stay and fight for the women and children? Hello and welcome to the Black Hawk War Discussion Board! Please sign your real name to postings--- it's one of our board rules. You can set up an automatic signature by adding it to your "Profile" and saving any changes. By way of answering your question, here's Black Hawk's translated account, from the 1880's edition of his autobiography: Now some questions to ponder: - The Battle of the Mississippi was a two-part engagement: August 1 with the encouter with the steamboat Warrior, and the shooting battle on the morning of August 2. Too many sources and websites combine these actions into a single engagement. Both day's actions were shooting affairs. Since Black Hawk suspected a terrible end for his followers, he held a final council with his surviving head men on/about the evening of August 1. Why wasn't his advice to retreat north followed?
- While noone disagrees that a dreadful massacre occured on the beaches at the Mississippi and at what has become known as Battle Isle, many modern writers make it sound like all 1,200 of BH's followers were killed. Such was not the case, as several competent chroniclers place the native dead at around 150 (not counting the persons killed by the Sioux later on.) Now approximately 150 dead is bad enough... however the tendency over the years has been to magnify the horror by intimating or suggesting that the numbers killed were much higher. Why do you think this is tendancy has occured?
- Black Hawk was quoted as saying, "I had determined to go and join the Chippewas; but reflecting that by this I could only save myself, I concluded to return, and die with my people, if the Great Spirit would not give us another victory." However, a compilation of the accounts--and BH's own statements later in his autobiography-- makes it pretty clear that BH did not return to his followers along the Mississippi River. Why do you think this statement by Black Hawk has generally gone unchallenged for about 170 years?
Bob Braun, Moderator.
|
|
|
Post by sparrow on Jan 27, 2004 9:44:40 GMT -5
Reading your account several times it appears Blackhawk returned only to hide in the thicket and not attack to help his people. While hiding in the thicket why not attack those whites that came so close? He did not return to the fight as he relied on the account from a brave that fought through the battle and survived by hiding under the river bank. Are there any other accounts of BlackHawk's actions during this massacre? He would be a hero if he had died with his people or maybe been captured. I have a large painted portrait of Blackhawk above my computer desk is he a hero or did he run? Thanks Tom Peters
|
|
|
Post by Robert Braun on Jan 27, 2004 11:22:00 GMT -5
Reading your account several times it appears Blackhawk returned only to hide in the thicket and not attack to help his people. While hiding in the thicket why not attack those whites that came so close? He did not return to the fight as he relied on the account from a brave that fought through the battle and survived by hiding under the river bank. Are there any other accounts of BlackHawk's actions during this massacre? He would be a hero if he had died with his people or maybe been captured. I have a large painted portrait of Blackhawk above my computer desk is he a hero or did he run? Thanks Tom Peters Hello again, Tom. I think the record, and particularly Black Hawk's own account of the Battle of the Mississippi, is rather illuminating as to the final hours of the band that otherwise followed him dutifully despite wounds, starvation and depredations for many weeks and hundreds of miles. Many persons admire BH for his stand against the onrush of American settlement and questionable treaty policy. His actions remain topics of lively debate to this very hour. With your statement of criteria: "He would be a hero if he had died with his people or maybe been captured" might you have already answered your own question? Feel free to expand on your own thoughts and reasonings... Regards, Bob.
|
|
|
Post by Larry Koschkee on Jan 27, 2004 12:00:37 GMT -5
Least we forget...'discretion is the better part of valor."
I am truly amazed at the neat and tidy package we have framed for Black Hawk here. Hero or coward, no alternatives. Here we are sitting in our climate controlled homes and offices, with full stomachs, "bells and whistles" at our finger tips and passing judgement on a man's actions under circumstances we know absolutely nothing about.
This Modern psychonalysis recreational history is hardly enlightened. It is just an attempt to stick a sword into the gut of yet another American Indian icon.
Larry K
|
|
|
Post by sparrow on Jan 27, 2004 13:10:18 GMT -5
Don't misunderstand me I want BlackHawk to be a hero, I mean he stood up to the whites when they told him to get out of his village and move to Iowa. Keokuk took the rest of the tribe and did as they were told and I don't know how well they were treated but at least they weren't massacred. On tne other hand Blackhawk had the courage to say no this is our land and your treaty is no good and we are going to stand up for our rights. So up to this point he was a hero. I'm just confused over his actions at Battle Island it just seems he would have stayed with his people instead of going to Lacrosse. And I'm looking for accounts that might tell me why. If I didn't admire Blackhawk I wouldn't have a portrait of him on my wall in front of me now.
|
|
|
Post by Robert Braun on Jan 27, 2004 13:28:29 GMT -5
Least we forget...'discretion is the better part of valor." I am truly amazed at the neat and tidy package we have framed for Black Hawk here. Hero or coward, no alternatives. Here we are sitting in our climate controlled homes and offices, with full stomachs, "bells and whistles" at our finger tips and passing judgement on a man's actions under circumstances we know absolutely nothing about. This Modern psychonalysis recreational history is hardly enlightened. It is just an attempt to stick a sword into the gut of yet another American Indian icon. Larry K Hmmm..... now where have I heard this before? When we compare Black Hawk's own translated statement: I had determined to go and join the Chippewas; but reflecting that by this I could only save myself, I concluded to return, and die with my people, if the Great Spirit would not give us another victory. with the historical record, what is the finding? Bob.
|
|
|
Post by Jeffrey on Jan 27, 2004 23:01:21 GMT -5
I would think we have to read Black Hawk's translated statements as being apologetic and perhaps shamefaced. He wasn't there when 150-250 of his people were killed; certainly that's hard for a self-professed warrior to deal with. But I would agree with Larry K.'s notion that it may be fruitless for us to evaluate this incident from the perspective of whether he was a hero or coward. I imagine the situation as follows. The British Band by the time they get to Bad Axe has been under incredible strain from moving a lot of people through difficult terrain. There has been serious attrition from the original 1000 or so members. It seems to me that often people view Black Hawk as some sort of absolute dictator in his role with this group, perhaps because of his notoriety and the auto-biography. However, I wonder if command and control wasn't a whole lot looser than a model of one strong, dictatorial leader. Black Hawk might have said "let's go North to the Chippewas" and only three or four lodges agreed to follow him. Supposedly Sauk tribal councils went on for long periods of time when decision making was on order. On the night of August 1st, after a serious battle with the "Warrior," they may have not had time to achieve consensus. The majority may have wanted to try the crossing of the river and perhaps safety; maybe another faction thought surrender would be in order. We can only imagine how chaotic that evening was. The Sauk and Fox themselves were not sure that the next day would bring a massacre, they had avoided catastrophe for four months. I'm not sure they knew the Sioux were across the river waiting for them. I am sure part of the horror of the whole situation was that they were about to fight a battle with a lot of women, children, and old people in harm's way, far from their home. It doesn't seem like an incident where we should go looking for heroes or cowards. ---Jeffrey
|
|
|
Post by Robert Braun on Jan 28, 2004 9:01:57 GMT -5
Very interesting perspective.
When we compare the commentary here vs. the four pages of commentary regarding Henry Dodge elsewhere on this board, it begs the question...
Why do we shrink from a rigorous analysis of Black Hawk?
|
|
|
Post by sparrow on Jan 28, 2004 9:55:37 GMT -5
Go to www.lansingiowa.com/ this site to view The Black Hawk Bridge crossing the Mississippi at Lansing Iowa. It is located about 5 miles downstream from Battle Island. Think I have answered my own question, Black Hawk was a Hero. I was really looking for more accounts of the Battle of the Bad Axe. One of the problems the writings don't provide a lot of detail for instance I assume Black Hawk's wife Singing Bird went with him but I'm thinking I read where she died trying to swim the river. And what about Black Hawk's son/s I know he had one called Thunder. I also read where he told the Winnebago on the Steamboat Warrior to tell the Pilot they wanted to surrender. The Winnebago were enemies of the Sac and I believe he lied to the Pilot and that is a reason they fired on the Sacs. That screwed everthing up.
|
|
|
Post by Robert Braun on Jan 28, 2004 10:16:46 GMT -5
Go to www.lansingiowa.com/ this site to view The Black Hawk Bridge crossing the Mississippi at Lansing Iowa. It is located about 5 miles downstream from Battle Island. Think I have answered my own question, Black Hawk was a Hero. I was really looking for more accounts of the Battle of the Bad Axe. One of the problems the writings don't provide a lot of detail for instance I assume Black Hawk's wife Singing Bird went with him but I'm thinking I read where she died trying to swim the river. And what about Black Hawk's son/s I know he had one called Thunder. I also read where he told the Winnebago on the Steamboat Warrior to tell the Pilot they wanted to surrender. The Winnebago were enemies of the Sac and I believe he lied to the Pilot and that is a reason they fired on the Sacs. That screwed everthing up. Tom... some questions and comments: 1. You wrote: Think I have answered my own question, Black Hawk was a Hero. If I might inquire--what drew you to this conclusion? 2. You stated: I was really looking for more accounts of the Battle of the Bad Axe. There are many accounts of the action, a number of them preserved in a book by Crawford Thayer of the same name. You are also invited to start new threads in the section of this discussion board dealing with the so-called Battle of the Bad Axe. 3. You wrote: I also read where he told the Winnebago on the Steamboat Warrior to tell the Pilot they wanted to surrender. The Winnebago were enemies of the Sac and I believe he lied to the Pilot and that is a reason they fired on the Sacs. In truth, Winnebago people helped both Black Hawk and his band AND American militia and Regulars. I don't know whether or not a Winnebago guide lied to Captain Throckmorton. What I do know is that there is much more to the story of the August 1 encounter with the Warrior than the cannon firing on BH's followers on shore. Bob Braun.
|
|
|
Post by sparrow on Jan 28, 2004 11:14:23 GMT -5
I could see the futility at Battle Island with the militia firing on everyone. Just the fact he tried to defend his home makes him a hero. There are so many conflicting stories out there it is hard to know which to believe. One book I read said the Winnebagos were Sac enemies. The same book tells of many times BlackHawk would not kill an enemy and this other book that he himself helped write he almost brags of how many scalps he took in different battles. Did you go to Lansing and see the Black Hawk Bridge, built in 1931?
|
|
|
Post by Dan Brunner on Jan 28, 2004 14:24:39 GMT -5
Might as well weigh in here as well. I do not think Black Hawk was a coward at all. I think he could be considered somewhat of a hero for some parts that he played in defying the Americans and the questionable Treaty of 180_? (forgot the year). I also think he had issues with Keokuk's leadership of the tribe and was a little gullible in his belief in the "Prophet". Was not he a Winnebago? In any event, Black Hawk's return to Rock Island and his susbsequent retreat thru Wisconsin could be looked upon as exceptional leadership on one hand or very poor leadership of the pursuers on the other hand. Upon reaching Bad Axe I think Black Hawk and what was left of his followers were in total chaos. History shows that in the culture of Native Americans that extreme bravery was common but harnessing the tribes or bands collective power under one leader was extemely difficult. Even exceptional leaders like Teumseh had their plans blown apart by the individualistic culture that prevailed among the Native Americans. Command and Control within a "war party" or tribe was usually tied to success. When things soured people could and would just cut the strings with little fear or consequence. I do not think Black Hawk leaving his people at the critical juncture carried the same stigma with his own people as it does through our eyes.
I guess my vote is he was not a coward and an unfortunate hero. Especially for allying himself with the fence riding Winnebagos.
|
|
|
Post by Jeffrey on Jan 28, 2004 22:16:32 GMT -5
I too would like to see the "rigorous analysis" of Black Hawk that Bob calls for, but it's difficult to do when his identity is so invested in myth. Lest we think this is a recent phenomenon, I'd like to quote a passage from Richard Slotkin's "Regeneration Through Violence," on page 359: "The editor of (Black Hawk's) autobiography in his 'Advertisement' or foreword, presents Black Hawk in the character of hero and patriot: 'It is presumed no apology will be required for presenting to the public, the life of a Hero who has lately taken such high rank among the distinguished individuals of America. In the following pages he will be seen in the characters of a Warrior, a Patriot, and a State-Prisoner--in every situation he is still the Chief of his Band, asserting their rights with dignity, firmness, and courage.' It had taken King Philip nearly a century and a half to receive sympathetic treatment by an American biographer. Black Hawk received not only sympathy but an accolade and a place in the pantheon of American heroes within a year of his strife with the Americans. The speed with which the frontier experience was assimilated into the national mythology had, by this evidence, accelerated so fast that there was hardly a break between the event and the mythologizing of the event. Moreover, the writer or editor engaged in composing the legend or mythologizing the facts could now take the Indians' point of view as his own." I think our need to judge Black Hawk as hero or coward comes from this same impulse to mythologize that Slotkin is talking about. When I think about Black Hawk I always wonder about whether he was this charismatic mastermind who with the help of a few others persuaded 1000 people to cross the river, or whether there was a significant dissatisfaction in the Sauk-Fox population that made the young hot-heads go looking for a senior chief whom they could put up as the figure-head leader of the band for an aggressive challenge to white supremacy in Illinois. I think Dan's point about Indians not having the same sort or rigid chain of command that whites had is well taken. Another hypothetical question we'll never get answered is what if Antoine Leclaire and Patterson had gotten Keokuk to sit down for a few days and tell his life story. How would that have affected our heroizing Black Hawk? --Jeffrey
|
|
|
Post by Robert Braun on Jan 29, 2004 14:08:18 GMT -5
I am finding myself in agreement with numerous statements in this thread... I agree with Dan regarding the modern misconception of the amount of command and control actually in place among the "Britihs Band" and other followers. And I agree with Dr. Jeff's insights that indicate, among other observations, that BH is heavily invested in mythology... a mystique that began almost as soon as the guns stopped shooting.
Given that the Patterson/LeClaire 1834 translation is probably colored with some of their own words and interpretation... and unquestionably positive towards BH, I think any reasonable analysis has no choice to begin with BH's remarkable autobiography.
Stripping the emotional response out of the question, one starting point might be: "How does BH's autobiography compare with the body of information concerning the 1832 BHW?"
Such an inquiry might prove very illustrative of the man and his nature... and a deeper look at some of the inexorable forces that gripped his world.
|
|