 |
October 1st, 2012, 12:47 PM
|
#1 | | The great fool
Joined: Jun 2012 From: Hippy town U.S.A.! Posts: 3,434 | Best native american leaders
Who do you think deserves the reward of best? It doesn't necessarily have to be based off of their military skill, but their leadership skills in general.
| | |
| |
October 1st, 2012, 01:04 PM
|
#2 | | Archivist
Joined: Jul 2012 From: Toronto Posts: 197 | Tecumseh all the way! He's the only cool thing about the war od 1812 (being Canadian, I'm really sick of that war). | | |
| |
October 1st, 2012, 01:11 PM
|
#3 | | Epicurean
Joined: Mar 2009 From: Texas Posts: 23,945 |
I'll toss another name onto your list: John Ross.
| | |
| |
October 1st, 2012, 01:13 PM
|
#4 | | Spiritual Ronin
Joined: Aug 2009 From: Minnesnowta Posts: 19,015 |
I voted Sitting Bull. His leadership abilities amassed a large following of disparate groups after many had already settled on reservations. The large numbers of his camp were probably the principle reason for the sound defeat of Custer's 7th cavalry.
| | |
| |
October 1st, 2012, 01:26 PM
|
#5 | | Spiritual Ronin
Joined: Aug 2009 From: Minnesnowta Posts: 19,015 | Quote:
Originally Posted by tjadams I'll toss another name onto your list: John Ross. | Good call TJ.
| | |
| |
October 1st, 2012, 01:27 PM
|
#6 | | Lecturer
Joined: Aug 2012 Posts: 490 |
I guess they must be from what is or what was to become the US.
So the answer is Po'Pay the Pueblo Native from New Mexico.
Read this - American Journeys Background on Revolt of the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico and Otermn's Attempted Reconquest, 1680-1682 [volume 9--excerpt]
and this Po'pay, A True American Hero Popay
The importance of this was the Spanish gave land grants and recognized the Pueblo Natives rights to these land grants. Pueblo natives even had the right to go to Spanish court to defend their rights. When Mexico tossed Spain out they accepted the Pueblo Natives land grants. When the US tookover Mexico made sure in the treaty that all property rights were protected. Which explains why of all natives in the US, the pueblo natives have managed to hold on to much of there original lands.
| | |
| |
October 1st, 2012, 01:33 PM
|
#7 | | OBLIVIOUS
Joined: Dec 2011 From: Ohio Posts: 5,286 |
I chose Tecumseh. He truly was a born leader, and was able to put together a powerful confederacy. I think his arch-rival, William Henry Harrison, said it best: Quote: "The implicit obedience and respect which the followers of Tecumseh pay to him is really astonishing and more than any other circumstances bespeaks him as one of those uncommon geniuses, which spring up occasionally to produce revolutions and to overturn the established order of things. If it were not for the vicinity of the United States, he would, perhaps, be the founder of an Empire that would rival in glory Mexico or Peru. No difficulties deter him."
Source: Tecumseh (Tecumtha) ( Tribe : Shawnee ): story, pictures and information - Fold3.com | | | |
| |
October 1st, 2012, 03:34 PM
|
#8 | | Man in the Box ¤ Blog of the Year ¤
Joined: Oct 2009 From: Baltimorean-in-exile Posts: 16,680 |
Tecumseh was most impressive in regards to his ability to unite disparate tribes.
| | |
| |
October 1st, 2012, 03:42 PM
|
#9 | | Making Dennis Leary Proud
Joined: Jul 2010 From: Georgia, USA Posts: 5,226 |
I voted Red Cloud. Author of the only recognized war defeat of the US Army by Native Americans. He was also formidable politically for many years until he could do no more against the lies and broken promises of the wasichu, which undermined his authority with his people.
| | |
| |
October 2nd, 2012, 01:38 AM
|
#10 | | Historian
Joined: Feb 2012 Posts: 1,331 | Quote:
Originally Posted by Rasta I voted Sitting Bull. His leadership abilities amassed a large following of disparate groups after many had already settled on reservations. The large numbers of his camp were probably the principle reason for the sound defeat of Custer's 7th cavalry. | However that isn't such a clear cut result. I'm not doubting Sitting Bull's part in bringing the Sioux together, but it's worth realising that the status of chief among plains indians wasn't as absolute as is often imagined. A chief was less of a ruler than a trusted advisor in a specific field - a tribe could have more than one chief with each of them taking responsibility for different endeavours (though there are cases of single chiefs in charge). Also, a failure could result in a chief being removed - in the case of one non-Sioux chief, his tribe were ambushed and as a result he was cold shouldered and ignored from that moment on. What I'm getting at is that diplomacy is not the same as leadership on the field amiong the Sioux.
| | |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.
|  |