Are you aware it's been a dozen or so posts since anyone added anything new to the discussion when Crowfriend mentioned Archeologist Deni Seymour? An internet search in her name shows some interesting things. Some Apache legends say they came across the Bering Strait along w/ a gwazillion other "Indians" from Asia but other legends tell of coming across the Pacific or the atlantic or coming out of the underground. The Bering Strait must have been 1 very busy place w/ Injuns going all the way to South America! And then they all chose a spot to land away from all the others. Some "Asians descendants" went all they way to the jungles before they suddenly stopped to built pyramids while others just became buffalo hunters in the prairies. It never seems to occur that people could have come from more than 1 single spot... or by boats... or the continental drift theory or... all of the above. You guys can keep chattering like a bunch of little girls about who was the biggest, baddest, most meanest warriors & trade insults if you want but you're getting repetitious to the point of boredom. I've got other things to read & other forums that are more interesting. If you get back to the subject maybe I'll drop in to chat.
The Apache of the Southwest of the States and northern Mexico...
- Thread starter Interested Party in UK
- Start date
Crowfriend
Full Member
- Apr 29, 2015
- 213
- 610
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
From D. Seymour:
"The most cutting-edge research is using a systematic dating methodology to ascertain the age of sites, and in doing so is showing that ancestors of the
Apache (early Athapaskans) were present in southern Arizona and New Mexico by the 1300s, perhaps earlier (see date table in Platform Cave Cache
article; also see Despoblado or Athapaskan Heartland download below). Multiple chronometric dates (using annual-species-based AMS and
luminescence dating) found in association with Athapaskan rock art (mountain spirit figures), distinctly Athapaskan feature types, and diagnostic flaked
stone and pottery on a number of sites provide support for this statement."
"The most cutting-edge research is using a systematic dating methodology to ascertain the age of sites, and in doing so is showing that ancestors of the
Apache (early Athapaskans) were present in southern Arizona and New Mexico by the 1300s, perhaps earlier (see date table in Platform Cave Cache
article; also see Despoblado or Athapaskan Heartland download below). Multiple chronometric dates (using annual-species-based AMS and
luminescence dating) found in association with Athapaskan rock art (mountain spirit figures), distinctly Athapaskan feature types, and diagnostic flaked
stone and pottery on a number of sites provide support for this statement."
cactusjumper
Gold Member
Injunbro,
I have been quoting Deni J. Seymour for years now. I have Seymour's "A Syndetic Approach to Identification of the Historic Mission Site of San Cayetano del Tumacacori". That paper is a direct refutation of the location for the mission by Charles C. DiPeso in his massive and well researched "The Upper Pima Of San Cayetano Del Tumacacori". I have the Leather bound first edition of Di Peso's book and have studied both conclusions. I believe Seymour was correct.
I also believe she only wrote one book concerning the Apache, which I also have.......somewhere.
Good post.
Joe Ribaudo
Last edited:
cactusjumper
Gold Member
IPUK,
The "Apache" name is very similar to many tribes in the Southwest's word for "enemy". That says something for the Athabascans. The fact that they were the last immigrants crossing the Bearing Straight to Alaska is hardly speculation.
"These Apache invaders might have settled down peacefully in the Southwest if this had been virgin country. But it wasn't the case. These deserts and mountains and plateaus were already occupied by other Indians, most of whom had lived there for at leas several thousand years."
I have dozens of books about the Apache. Not all written by their foes. Anyone who has been to my home can attest to the fact that I have a wide variety of books on Native Americans.
Good luck,
Joe Ribaudo
Crowfriend
Full Member
- Apr 29, 2015
- 213
- 610
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
"The "Apache" name is very similar to many tribes in the Southwest's word for "enemy". That says something for the Athabascans."
It shows how difficult it was for non-indians to grasp the subtlety of what they were told.
It shows how difficult it was for non-indians to grasp the subtlety of what they were told.
cactusjumper
Gold Member
Crowfriend,
Can you explain the subtlety? It seems more than a coincidence that the Zuni word for enemy, which they applied to the Navajos, was Apachu. It's also claimed that the Yuman-speaking Yavapais used the word Apatieh Apadje. It's also claimed that the Ute Indians of southern Colorado called the Athbascans Awatche. I think the Zuni had them pegged.
Good luck,
Joe Ribaudo
Crowfriend
Full Member
- Apr 29, 2015
- 213
- 610
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
Euro man: "Hey Mr. Zuni man, What you call that group of people who just left?"
Mr. Zuni man: "Apaches"
Euro man: "Hey everybody, they're called Apaches!"
And-
Euro man: "What do you call yourselves?"
Absoroka man: "Absaroka"
Euro man: "What that name mean?"
Absaroka man: "dark wing bird"
Euro man: "Hey everybody, they're Crows!"
Columbus: "What you people call yourselves?"
Arawak Man: "Arwak"
Columbus: "Never mind that, now you're Indians!"
And-
Euro man: "Hey Pima man, what you call them people south of here?"
Pima Man: "Papagos" (bean eaters")
And on and on...
cactusjumper
Gold Member
Crowfriend,
Thanks for that explanation of the subtlety concerning the naming of the Apache. I'm afraid it goes over my head. Probably the surgery on my brain has something to do with that.
Thanks again,
Joe Ribaudo
Spaniard: "What do you people call yourselves?"
Native: "Ma yam?" ("I have no idea what you're saying")
Spaniard: "Hey everybody, we just discovered the Mayan Indians!"
Real of Tayopa
Bronze Member
Injun bro, one must clear up one point before you move on to another. Course the Mohicans were a purer race than the Apache, also more civilized. As for the OIRISHERS they are in a class by themselves.
Incidentally you are correct, in fact in Az and Mexico every mesqite tree, Hecho, and Pitaya had an owner, it was just that hard to eke out a living.
I found that out in the Yucatan jungles where my Partner were living of the jungle. The animal and plant reproduction life / rate has to be taken into consideration. You have to move every month or so. That was just for the two of us.
no wonder the natives were constantly at war, With the women, the life was so hard that the attrition rate necessitated that they be replaced / augmented every chance possible. They were not necessarily picked for beauty, but usefulness.
Incidentally you are correct, in fact in Az and Mexico every mesqite tree, Hecho, and Pitaya had an owner, it was just that hard to eke out a living.
I found that out in the Yucatan jungles where my Partner were living of the jungle. The animal and plant reproduction life / rate has to be taken into consideration. You have to move every month or so. That was just for the two of us.
no wonder the natives were constantly at war, With the women, the life was so hard that the attrition rate necessitated that they be replaced / augmented every chance possible. They were not necessarily picked for beauty, but usefulness.
Real of Tayopa
Bronze Member
Ouch.
women worked back then?...you've actually seen this?..lol
torie517
Sr. Member
- Jul 11, 2015
- 269
- 216
- Detector(s) used
- Do not
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
my granddaughter is tall with blue eyes the water here did damage to my DNA took my kids to eye Doctor a long time ago he said it was a apache eye problem he finished his study's to find it being Chiricahua eye problem from the water here so my kids could go blind one is almost blind there is still apaches up there you can hear them at night the one they call little foot friended my best friend only to ask questions about me I know were they are all buried in a tunnel here I might have proof who Cochise's father might be, and how the puraltas came to mine here. there are a lot of stone carvings here and then the crazy heart thing up there. my videos on utub under Thomas clark the lost dutchmen are from here I was not going to put any one of them there but got a
ghost on one so hell I put the rest .there is the stone maps I found right near there is the triangle and the cross its laying down now .
ghost on one so hell I put the rest .there is the stone maps I found right near there is the triangle and the cross its laying down now .
Last edited:
Interested Party in UK
Hero Member
- Mar 2, 2013
- 729
- 1,825
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
- Thread starter
- #234
Don,
Some say the Apache didn't 'arrive' in the Southwest/northern Mexico area until the 1500s, the Spanish didn't get to that area until nearly the middle of the same time period, how on earth could the Apache have been raiding missionaries in the 1400s...?
But you also fail to take into account when you say the "victor writes the history", that there is much documentation from others who had no leanings towards one side or the other..., scientists, engineers, travellers etc..., from Europe who merely wrote what they saw and delved that little bit deeper. Obviously there was some bias towards the Apache - whitey never understood their motivations or thought processes, but most human and liberal folk did comment on the fact that they, the Apache, had been treated abysmally and let down time and again from authorities on both sides of the border...
IPUK
cactusjumper
Gold Member
IPUK,
There were some "whitey" writers who had great respect and fondness for the Apache. Many lived among them for decades. You might read "The Social Organization of the Western Apache" by
Grenville Goodwin. There are also two good books written by his son, Neil. They are based on his fathers notes, and Neil's following the trail from Grenville's diary into Sonora. There is also a pamphlet
written by Grenville titled " The Characteristics and Function of Clan in a Southern Athapascan Culture". That was written in 1937, and I have a signed copy of it. Grenville died in 1940, and some Apache believed his death was caused by his getting to deep into Apache religious beliefs.
There are many other accounts of Apache history told to the writers by the elders of the people. If you read them, I believe you will come away believing they tell true stories. One such book is "Apache Mothers and Daughters". It was written by Ruth McDonald Boyer, from the accounts of Narcissus Duffy Gayton. The book was written over a 35-year period where Narcissus Gayton related her remembrances to Ruth Boyer.
There are plenty of these kinds of books which give a pretty accurate account of Apache life.
Good luck,
Joe Ribaudo
Real of Tayopa
Bronze Member
Getlemen, you must distinguish between the so called wild Apache and the domesticated one, It s true that the innocent suffered along with the wild or adventurous ones, How do the Authorities distinguish between those that leave the reservation for a fling at adventure, loot, and an escape from the boredom of reservation life
They can't, so go by the mantra o f a good Apache is a dead one,, this was flavored by viewing the remains of the whiteies that were tortued for a few days before dying. I understand they tried that technique in viet \nam on
aptured soldiers. It is a very effective tech utilized ever since Cain and Able.
It is a simple case of the many paying for the sins of the few A good example of that is your view of the OIRISH and the rebels. the IRA.
--- tea honest.
They can't, so go by the mantra o f a good Apache is a dead one,, this was flavored by viewing the remains of the whiteies that were tortued for a few days before dying. I understand they tried that technique in viet \nam on
aptured soldiers. It is a very effective tech utilized ever since Cain and Able.
It is a simple case of the many paying for the sins of the few A good example of that is your view of the OIRISH and the rebels. the IRA.
--- tea honest.
Azquester
Bronze Member
- Dec 15, 2006
- 1,736
- 2,596
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
View attachment 1375991
Off to Florida Geronimo!
The other river tribes referred to the Apache as lazy "Coyoteros" eaters of Coyote as they were to lazy to hunt and would just shoot a Coyote eating it rather than actually hunt for real game. Or steal other Indian tribes food through raids while killing or stealing children for sex slaves. This name stuck and the Pinal Apaches were named "Coyoteros Apache" after that Indian slang. Noble Apache my butt! Most were brutal murderers. They were lucky to get reservations.
Very generous of "Whitey".
Off to Florida Geronimo!
The other river tribes referred to the Apache as lazy "Coyoteros" eaters of Coyote as they were to lazy to hunt and would just shoot a Coyote eating it rather than actually hunt for real game. Or steal other Indian tribes food through raids while killing or stealing children for sex slaves. This name stuck and the Pinal Apaches were named "Coyoteros Apache" after that Indian slang. Noble Apache my butt! Most were brutal murderers. They were lucky to get reservations.
Very generous of "Whitey".
Old
Hero Member
IPUK,
Be careful of what you read and what you think you know. Not everything, in fact, most of what is written as history is wrong. Its written by folks based on what they “think” happened.
Giving them the benefit of the doubt that they truly believe what they write, doesn’t make it true. The folks that lived it know what happened and why. What really happened is often a very different story. And; I would say, a much more interesting story.
I don’t know Apache history. But I do know a thing or two about real First Nation history. At least what happened around my part of the world.
Let me give you an example.
Conventional “history” and book knowledge tells you Chief Powhatan, high chief of the Powhatan Confederacy, had a daughter, Pocahontas, who as a young maiden threw herself over the body of John Smith to save him from the tomahawks of tribe elders. History will tell you she was love smitten by Smith and couldn’t see her hero and love interest slaughtered. Then only to be forsaken in love by Smith and later courted by and her hand won by the charm of another colonist, John Rolfe. Hogwash! All of it.
First up, the stories don’t even get the names right. The chief’s name was Wahunsenaca. His title was Powhatan. His young daughter’s name, at the time, was Matoaka. She was a child of around 10 years old. Her mother’s name was Pocahontas. Her mother having died in childbirth when young Matoaka was born. Matoaka means “flower between two streams”. Considering the marriage of Wahunsenaca and his first and primary wife, Pocahontas, were of the two river tribes, Pamunkey and Mattaponi, it’s a fitting name. Only when Matoaka came of age did she at her powwow of passage take her mother’s name of Pocahontas as she is known today.
The event of Smith’s capture and extended “visit” with Wahunsenaca culminated in Wahunsenaca’s plan to “adopt” the Colony as an allied tribe under the Powhatan Confederacy and install Smith as its subordinate chief. It was a strategic and political alliance. Thus the reason for the ceremony which either Smith misrepresented in his later writing or never understood as it unfolded.
Regardless, young Matoaka would NOT have been in attendance. It was a spiritual as well as a political affair and children would not have been in attendance. It never happened. It does not appear in Smith’s considerable writings at the time, and only appears years later when he recounts the adventure, much embellished, long after Matoaka (Pocahontas) and Wahunsenaca’s death.
Don’t even get me started on the “love affair” with Rolfe. The real truth is a much more sordid and sinister tale. I often think of Pocahontas buried in your neck of the woods at Gravesend. I know her spirit longs for the shores of Tsenacomoca. A true American princess abandoned in a foreign land.
And; why would Wahunsenaca, Powhatan of all of Tsenacomoca, want to adopt the fledging English Colony? To form a military alliance against the Spanish. And; what did Wahunsenaca know of the Spanish? Quite a lot. He was most certainly not the back woods savage many would have you believe.
Ever hear of Don Luis de Velasco, formerly known as Paquiquineo. I doubt you have and I seriously doubt you know the significance of the connection. Few do. Except the ones who lived it, and recounted it in oral tradition where its passed down and still told today. Its an inconvenient truth that gets in the way of the “history” folks (especially British folks) want you to believe.
Yes, to the victors goes the right to write the history. But; It’s the stuff of dime novels and revisionist. Doesn’t make it true.
This photo of a current descendant, I believe, accurately reflects what Pocahontas would have looked like at John Smith’s coronation ceremony.
Be careful of what you read and what you think you know. Not everything, in fact, most of what is written as history is wrong. Its written by folks based on what they “think” happened.
Giving them the benefit of the doubt that they truly believe what they write, doesn’t make it true. The folks that lived it know what happened and why. What really happened is often a very different story. And; I would say, a much more interesting story.
I don’t know Apache history. But I do know a thing or two about real First Nation history. At least what happened around my part of the world.
Let me give you an example.
Conventional “history” and book knowledge tells you Chief Powhatan, high chief of the Powhatan Confederacy, had a daughter, Pocahontas, who as a young maiden threw herself over the body of John Smith to save him from the tomahawks of tribe elders. History will tell you she was love smitten by Smith and couldn’t see her hero and love interest slaughtered. Then only to be forsaken in love by Smith and later courted by and her hand won by the charm of another colonist, John Rolfe. Hogwash! All of it.
First up, the stories don’t even get the names right. The chief’s name was Wahunsenaca. His title was Powhatan. His young daughter’s name, at the time, was Matoaka. She was a child of around 10 years old. Her mother’s name was Pocahontas. Her mother having died in childbirth when young Matoaka was born. Matoaka means “flower between two streams”. Considering the marriage of Wahunsenaca and his first and primary wife, Pocahontas, were of the two river tribes, Pamunkey and Mattaponi, it’s a fitting name. Only when Matoaka came of age did she at her powwow of passage take her mother’s name of Pocahontas as she is known today.
The event of Smith’s capture and extended “visit” with Wahunsenaca culminated in Wahunsenaca’s plan to “adopt” the Colony as an allied tribe under the Powhatan Confederacy and install Smith as its subordinate chief. It was a strategic and political alliance. Thus the reason for the ceremony which either Smith misrepresented in his later writing or never understood as it unfolded.
Regardless, young Matoaka would NOT have been in attendance. It was a spiritual as well as a political affair and children would not have been in attendance. It never happened. It does not appear in Smith’s considerable writings at the time, and only appears years later when he recounts the adventure, much embellished, long after Matoaka (Pocahontas) and Wahunsenaca’s death.
Don’t even get me started on the “love affair” with Rolfe. The real truth is a much more sordid and sinister tale. I often think of Pocahontas buried in your neck of the woods at Gravesend. I know her spirit longs for the shores of Tsenacomoca. A true American princess abandoned in a foreign land.
And; why would Wahunsenaca, Powhatan of all of Tsenacomoca, want to adopt the fledging English Colony? To form a military alliance against the Spanish. And; what did Wahunsenaca know of the Spanish? Quite a lot. He was most certainly not the back woods savage many would have you believe.
Ever hear of Don Luis de Velasco, formerly known as Paquiquineo. I doubt you have and I seriously doubt you know the significance of the connection. Few do. Except the ones who lived it, and recounted it in oral tradition where its passed down and still told today. Its an inconvenient truth that gets in the way of the “history” folks (especially British folks) want you to believe.
Yes, to the victors goes the right to write the history. But; It’s the stuff of dime novels and revisionist. Doesn’t make it true.
This photo of a current descendant, I believe, accurately reflects what Pocahontas would have looked like at John Smith’s coronation ceremony.
Real of Tayopa
Bronze Member
Don"t you ever sleep, my grick friend ? < [[[ Grick coffee
< [[[ Grick coffee
sdcfia
Silver Member
- Sep 28, 2014
- 3,655
- 8,879
- Primary Interest:
- Other
Good post, Old. I just finished a great book that provides facts - not simplistic sound bites - detailing the early years (up to the French-Indian War) east of the Ohio River, based primarily on contemporary documents and family diaries. Our pilgrims, pioneers and heroes didn't have an easy time of it, but neither did they leave a particularly proud legacy during their expansion. The current events unfolding along the upper Missouri River are not hard to understand, but merely a 400-year national policy.
What struck me most about the book is the sophistication of the Native peoples, particularly in regards to their care and use of the land - a situation that degraded beginning with the first invasions. What surprised me the most was the Natives' centuries-old relationships with the Basques, who had fished the cod schools for centuries prior to the English/French/Dutch arrivals. This of course confirms your highlighted statement above.
https://smile.amazon.com/First-Fron...qid=1477834357&sr=1-1&keywords=first+frontier
Top Member Reactions
-
2413 -
1122 -
1119 -
910 -
823 -
807 -
764 -
728 -
644 -
520 -
477 -
466 -
457 -
429 -
411 -
407 -
O
369
-
361 -
358 -
351
