Native American Oratory

According to the introductory materials in the “Native American Oratory” section of your Norton, a common theme of the speeches of many orators was land, and this we can easily detect in the speeches delivered by Cochise, in 1872, and by Charlot, in 1876.

Cochise:
Chiricahua Apache, b. 1812, d. 1874

We discussed the genesis of Chocise’s speech and the circumstances of its transcription. According to the Norton, the speech was delivered during the negotiations for the movement of the Apache to a reservation; the first suggested site was Fort Tularosa, in New Mexico, and the ultimate reservation agreed upon by the parties was “along Apache Pass, in southeastern Arizona” (1461). In the context of these negotiations, Cochise gave the speech that bears the title “I am Alone.”

The Norton describes that the oration was recorded in “three important collections of Native American oratory.” One individual who was present at the “parley between Cochise, Granger, and Jeffords” was a young soldier named Henry Stuart Turill. His account of Cochise’s speech in the one included in the Norton, as the editors felt it effectively communicated the “historical and political basis” of Cochise’s speech.

Please describe the historical and political context of Cochise’s speech. He describes his people’s history, so as to account for his people’s arrival at their present state. His people, at the moment of his speech, are a “feeble band that fly before your soldiers as the deer before the hunter” (1463). How does this description correspond to his initial description of the Apache as a “hunting people,” “a strong people,” and a “simple people”?

Please comment on Cochise’s request: “I have come to you, not from any love for you or your great father in Washington, or for any general regard for his or your wishes, but as a conquered chief, to try to save alive the few people that still remain to me” (1463). Discuss Chochise’s description of himself and his people; from where does the power of his oration stem?

Charlot:
Kalispel Band of Flathead Indians, b. 1831-1900

The context for Charlot’s speech was a request for “reservation Indians of Montana” to pay taxes, in 1876. Charlot’s speech was delivered in the Salish language and was translated for publication in the Missoula Missoulian newspaper.

Based on your reading of Charlot’s speech, and the tone that permeates the text, in what ways it is surprising that it appeared in print on the pages of a newspaper, presumably read predominantly by white Montanans?

Charlot proclaims, regarding the white man: “To take and to lie should be burnt on his forehead” (1464). His words concerning the avarice and shamelessness of white men are direct. He proceeds to insert defamatory comments regarding the “white man’s religion,” Christianity, is the middle passages of his speech. He describes that the white man’s story – his religious faith – is based on a claim that “man was rejected and cast off” and that “one of his virgins had a son nailed to death on two cross sticks to save him” (1465). “Were all of them dead then when that young man died,” Cochise declared, “we would all be safe now and our country our own” (1465). In a proclamation against taxation, Charlot lays blame on white Americans for many social and political ills that have befallen Native people. What is his purpose in indicting the white man’s religion in the way he does above? Or is it not even really an indictment, but a wish? What do you make of his statement above?

How does Charlot’s tone differ from Cochise’s? Describe also the complexities of Charlot’s speech. In what ways does he shift topic, insert religious or cultural references, reintroduce historical events, and describe lessons drawn from tradition?