|
|
Re: Amerind an offensive term (was: Early Amerind assimilation
Eric Brunner (brunner@mandrake.think.com)
5 Aug 1996 14:42:18 GMT
Bryant (mycol1@unm.edu) wrote:
: In article <4u0mck$9fs@bone.think.com>,
: Eric Brunner <brunner@mandrake.think.com> wrote:
: >
: >: Um, does this include the Navajo "squatters" on "pueblo" lands, or the
: >: Apache "squatters" who displaced desert tribes before them? Or only
: >: squatters who were more efficient in their brutality and (slightly) more
: >: bound by law?
: >
: >Of course not, however, if you do have a factual grasp of the Dine-Hopi
: >(alt: everbody vs. Peabody & the US) dispute, then you'd know why.
: You misconstrued what I was alluding to. The Dine arrived (as evidenced
: by archaeological evidence) after the Pueblos, in the Southwest. As did
: the Apache.
OK, your choice of protagonists isn't derived from the single most complex
and thought about international conflict interior to the boundaries of the
US. Instead you appear to allude to events which took place no later than
the 16th century (Spanish historical sources assert the existance of both
Athabaskan groups, Dine and Apache, contemporanious with the earliest of
Spanish contact in the Four Corners region, as do Dine, Apache, Hopi, and
Pueblan sources). As both Steve Russel and I are members of triballaw, to
what litigation do you refer? Neither of us appear to be privy to the sort
of conflict you allude to.
Let us know what your issue is and where you are going with this.
: Bryant
--
Kitakitamatsinohpowaw,
Eric Brunner
|