Historiography by Liam, 2016 - 2017
Violence - Richard Maxwell Brown According to Richard Maxwell Brown, the West's violent element can be best analyzed through the mental attitude of westerners. Such mental qualities included The elimination of English common law, by which one must expend all possible options of escape before using violence as a means of defense in exchange for the principle of no duty to retreat, where by an individual may defend themselves using force in any situation that threatens loss of life of serious harm. This was encompassed within the Code of the West, along with a reckless and violent sense of vengeance. Brown also references the Homestead Ethic, the right to enjoy a homestead without fear of violence, in effect solidifying the right to defend the home. In contrast, the Ethic of Individual Enterprise enabled men of business to use violent measures to ensure the success and security of their business endeavors. Vigilantism was another key principle that promoted a sense of lawless promotion of justice across the West, often with a revolver acting as judge, jury, and executioner. Later Brown discusses the interactions with the Native American population in the West. In general, Brown notes that the Natives primarily attempted to positively interact with the invading whites, but mentions occasional violent raids on towns in which whites were slaughtered. More often than not though, it was whites slaughtering Amerindians. Brown overall supports the idea of a violent American West. How The West Got Wild - Stewart L. Udall Stewart L. Udall on the other hand views Western violence in a different light. In his work How the West Got Wild, Udall explains that the American West was not actually the unruly epicenter of violent bloodbaths that it has been portrayed to be. Although obvious historical exceptions exist, namely the Alamo and O.K. Corral, the picture of a region embattled by gun duels and violent bravados, according to Udall is a result of inflated media coverage and the result of extortion by more modern media such as television and hollywood films. One specific example used by the author is the infamous Dodge City, a supposed hell on earth of lawlessness and violence. Udall explains that there were few years of moderate violence that were simply blown out of proportion by media outlets, which quickly subsided following the implementation of sheriffs and other law entities, but still the violent image of Dodge City persisted as it was an easy story for newspapers. Udall links any major acts of violence as equivalents to modern day gun violence, not as something unique to the West. The Frontier Sheriff's Role in Law and Order - Larry D. Ball Larry D. Ball explains the exceptional importance of lawmen in the American West, particularly the sheriff. Ball explains that the sheriff was simply the most representative figure of government for citizens in the expansive Western territories. The position was one of great prestige in the eyes of the people as sheriffs provided the most direct government services to the people, and the most important: protection, and the enforcement of the law. Other government officials for these territories also often called on Sheriffs for assistance with representing citizens and the needs of the territories. Sheriffs often had to construct and maintain government buildings being the only available government workers in a certain locality. Sheriffs also often had to curb mass violence prominent in many areas of the West in the post Civil War period. Many ex confederates found pay through crime against the prevailing Union. Sheriffs were the local military official as far as alerting the army of major situations of instability, and calling for their assistance. Sheriffs also often had the job of collecting taxes from citizens, a painstaking role. Sheriff's also were responsible for conducting the U.S. census. Quantifying the Wild West - Robert R. Dykstra Robert Dykstra discusses the controversy over how violent the West truly was, explaining that may records and statistics prove above average violence, however he goes on to do an in detail, yet fair investigation into additional statistics that put the American West in a new light. Dykstra explains how authors such as Mark Twain drew an exaggerated violent picture of the west to appeal to urban Eastern citizens. The author then presents contrary accounts from an Army officer detailing a gunslinger travelling two hundred miles to challenge another of equal talent to a duel, strictly over pride and bravado. As also stated by Stewart Udall, Dykstra brings the accounts of the embellishment of violence in Dodge City forward as further evidence of exaggerated violence in the west. Some sources blatantly fabricated stories of murders and lawlessness in and around Dodge City. One investigation into violence in three major Colorado towns concluded a homicide rate of roughly 1.5 murders annually, far less than previous assumptions. The author counters a lack of law enforcement, noting how a murder spike in Texas resulted in a greater law enforcement presence and less tolerance for illegal activities. Dykstra also counters statistics attempted to inflate western murder rates by utilizing the FBI's system of calculating murders per population. This system used to back claims of mass violence, creates inflated numbers due to the great population differences between the late 19th century and modern times. Question 1) According to the authors this week, how violent was the West? What specific evidence do these authors use in their debates about the presence of violence on the American frontier? Richard Brown writes of the West as perceived by most Americans: a tough place, full of tough, violent men who used an understood not written justice system to enforce and maintain order, primarily through violence. Brown gives multiple examples of Western Justice carried out by the individual (see above). Stewart Udall perceives the West's violent nature as a falsehood perpetuated by various media outlets, both during the period and in more recent history. Udall focuses his argument on the relative safety of notoriously dangerous places in the American West. Question 2) According to the authors this week, how has the media incorrectly portrayed the West? Why has it been portrayed this way? Please provide specific examples from the articles in your response. Brown is the main author to analyze for this question. Brown argues that the media found benefit in portraying the West as a place of violence and anarchy, when in actuality it was no such place. Dodge City's misrepresentative title as a bloody city is his primary example. Question 3) What arguments do our authors make about law enforcement and its role in frontier law & order? Using examples from the readings, explore the various layers of frontier law enforcement. How does the role of sheriff differ from your prior thoughts about western lawmen? Larry D. Ball explains how sheriffs in the American West were far more than law enforcement officers, but rather were the embodiment of government on a local scale, fulfilling a grand list of duties and responsibilities. Sheriffs had to collect taxes, represent the needs of citizens to higher government officials, and much more. The role of sheriff was clearly far more tasking and important as a measure of local government than I had previously thought. Question 4) Were Native Americans treated fairly in the US judicial system? Using examples from this week’s readings Brown brings attention to the slaughter of Amerindians at the hands of the white man. Brown also notes while discussing the Ethic of Individual Enterprise, the involuntary seizure of native lands, even those set aside by the U.S. government. In many cases these natives were not given an opportunity by the judicial system and even if were typically shot down without serious review.
15 Comments
Jazmine Evans, Question 2
4/3/2017 05:33:53 pm
I think that the overall violence in the West may have been exaggerated. WIth stories traveling hundreds of miles back to the Eastern cities, they could have very easily be altered along the way, either purposefully, unintentionally, or because of different dialects and slang that existed in different regions. The excitement of the frontier life and the ease at which people survived and thrived was clearly exaggerated to people in the east to encourage settlement in the West. IT was portrayed that the frontier lifestyle was an easy, calm way of life for a simple farmer. In reality, life in the West was burdened with many hardships and incredible instability. This ploy was used to draw families into the West and it draws an interesting parallel between the romanticizing of Western violence. This portrayed life of adventure and excitement may have been a way to appeal to young men and encourage them to move West where they were needed as ranch and farm hands. Overall, I think that it is perfectly feasible that this extremely high crime rate was exaggerated to make like in the West appear better than it really was.
Reply
Rose
4/3/2017 05:54:29 pm
That's a really interesting point you brought up about how the American West was portrayed by the media in two extremely different manners to appeal to different audiences and for different purposes. It isn't one I had thought about before and I find it really interesting to think about.
Reply
Rose
4/3/2017 06:18:55 pm
The media portrayed the American West as a violent and rough place full of gunslinging and bloodshed. The exaggeration and romanticization of the violence and lawlessness in the American West continues to be perpetuated today in modern films and novels set in the American West during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The exaggeration of the crime rate of cities such as Dodge City in Kansas likely provided newspapers in the Eastern United States with easy and sensational stories. These stories of violence and lawlessness in the “Wild West” provided a sense of adventure, especially when compared to relatively urbanized Eastern United States. While life in the American West was certainly rougher than one in the Eastern United States, it is highly plausible that the media exaggerated and continues to exaggerate the violence in the American West for profit.
Reply
Katie
4/3/2017 08:08:24 pm
The West wasn't all that wild like the movies portray it. The Natives were not as big of a threat as they are often portrayed. Only about 4%(about 300-400) of all trail fatalities can be attributed to Native Americans. Also, during this same period, settlers only killed about 400 Native Americans. The violence between Natives and settlers is portrayed much differently from this in movies and westerners. Also, the myth of bank robbing outlaws running rampant all over the West is not true—shocker! Research proves that there is only evidence of about 8 true bank robberies in 15 states within 40 years. Another myth, that I actually find surprising to be false, is that guns were something everyone had, needed, and used. The public’s perception of gun control laws in the West are false. Gun control laws might have actually been stricter back in the 19th and early 20th century than they are now, especially in the West. Although there was some gun violence in the beginning, the need and tolerance for handguns started to decline as towns began to form. Even in places like Dodge City, infamous for outlaws and gunfights, signs were hung enforcing the prohibition of carrying fire arms.
Reply
Kevin Willis
4/3/2017 08:11:11 pm
In The Frontier Sheriff's Role in Law and Order, by Larry D. Ball, the argument is made that the Sheriff was the most representative form of government for the citizens of the west. This argument is supported by telling the reader all of the sheriff’s duties. Some examples of which are, protect, collect taxes, call upon the United States military in times of need, and even conducting the U.S.’s census. All of the mundane duties that were listed challenged my prior understanding of the role of the sheriff in the fact that I believed they were only there to protect the citizens and uphold the law. Whereas they also did many of the smaller jobs that I figured would’ve been delegated out to other offices of the local government. What this passage has put into perspective for me is that resources were limited, including people, so the society made due with what they had and prevailed through the challenging times.
Reply
Emma Booker
4/3/2017 08:32:37 pm
Each of the authors seem to revolve around a central point that the West was not nearly as violent as common beliefs over time have made it out to be. The overall center of these beliefs are, as Udall explained, the media. The original taboo of the movie and television industry was the wild gunslingers of the West that left parents appalled and youth intrigued. Such a mindset of the West held steady to this day with robbers fighting the sheriffs, tense showdowns in town square, and constant danger throughout each person’s life. Although not entirely exaggerated as there was a brief period of violence in isolated areas, especially California during the Gold Rush when there was minimal governing bodies leaving everyone to fend for themselves, such violence was not nearly as rampant throughout the region as media has made the era seem.Overall, though the lack of governing body and loose defensive morals provided a climate for unrestrained violence, there was much less actually occurring than the western genre makes it seem.
Reply
Olivia Kellam
4/3/2017 08:40:31 pm
The sheriffs of the American West seemed to have more jobs then probably anyone else in their town. The job entailed more work then one man could have probably done, or at least done well. This could have been the reason the West was portrayed as such a bloody and reckless place. The sheriff did not have time to fight crime while “collecting taxes from citizens” and other duties to serve the people of the town. If the town had a whole police department, which would have been pretty advanced for the time and for the West, then perhaps the amount of shootings and robberies could have been lower. However, if the crime decreased in the West, then it would have been portrayed totally different. It would not be seen as an interesting and adventurous place to live. It would have been a place that did not have as much excitement.
Reply
Anna Sexauer
4/3/2017 09:01:25 pm
Although the media portrayed the West as more violent than it was, the West was still a violent and relatively lawless place. Because people were so spread out, robbery and other crimes could be carried out with no witnesses. The lack of law enforcement and courts not only led to more criminals escaping, it also led to abuse of power. Criminal bands also made a living from robbing banks and train cars. Although this was highly exaggerated, it was still occurring way more than in previously settled areas. When trains were being built throughout the West, crime rates ran rampant. Punishment was up to the railroad officials and men often disappeared with little to no questions asked. Violence with Natives was also a huge problem. Natives primarily wanted a friendly relationship with the settlers but were met with violence. Settlers fearing the reputation of Natives often committed heinous crimes that went completely unpunished.
Reply
Robby Parker
4/3/2017 09:35:04 pm
In regards to the fist question I agree with the information you have stated; however I believe it's important to also include the last passage by Robert R. Dykstra in Quantifying the Wild West. This passage gives evidence of how the statistics and records may have proved to be above average violence; however, futher investigations that were conducted more fairly proves to shine a new light on the true West. He explains how authors of the time over exaggerated the reality of the West, especially authors like Mark Twain. Dykstra proves that the "Wild" West may not have been truly portray in history because of fabrications in stories like the Dodge City incident. The information that he provided gives ample evidence to the claim that the West was not as Wild as it has been portrayed. Another author, Stewart L. Udall backs the evidence explained by Dkystra by saying that the result of the portraying of the West was caused by the media.
Reply
Jackson Rose
4/3/2017 09:37:47 pm
I agree with Stewart L. Udall because the West was greatly exaggerated by the media and generalized as a violent and lawless place because of a few incidents. While there were instances of violence and people taking the law into their own hands, such as Billy the Kid, there were sheriffs, and there were a lot of law-abiding citizens who didn’t go around killing people who trespassed on their property or stole a cow or the like. The West was a tough place to live though, and some people did end up turning to a life of crime. However, most people were cattle ranchers and were too busy to really be violent. Hollywood films and the media played the biggest part in portraying the West as violent because violence was exciting, and it made for a good story. A newspaper was more likely to publish an article about a shootout than a cattle rancher bringing cattle to the market. It was more about what people wanted, and they wanted exciting stories with outlaws, violence, and showdowns at high-noon.
Reply
Samantha
4/3/2017 09:48:21 pm
The media during this time period embellished the idea that the Wild West was very violent because it would attract more viewers, which would help the sales of papers. It was also easier to embellish this idea because photography was not commonly used during that time period, so it was harder to prove or disprove what the journalists were reporting. It is not like today where you can take a photo or a video. A good example of this was when the authors were talking about Dodge City in Kansas. They portrayed it as a city with very high crime rates and lots of violence occurring there, when in fact the numbers showed this was not the case.Once again it only proved that the media exaggerated the idea of the Wild West being a violent, rough place to live or visit, just so their viewing rates would go up.
Reply
Madison Wessells
4/3/2017 10:18:59 pm
The media has portrayed the West as a place of turmoil and violence, but it was not at all as lawless as suggested. For example, people on the westward bound wagon trains established a list of rules and regulations that were to be followed, and violators were either threatened with isolation or exile from the train, rather than violence. The thought of being cut off from the group and left alone usually made the wrongdoer see the error of his ways. Rather than take matters into their own hands, cattlemen set up associations and hired professionals to deter rustlers. Knowing that these hired guns were on the lookout, made rustlers think twice about trying to steal cattle, and shots seldom had to be fired. Mining camps operated under behavioral contracts, and there was seldom any violence or theft because the miners themselves enforced the guidelines by taking the violator’s claim away from him or by making him go mine elsewhere.
Reply
Courtney Floyd
4/3/2017 10:29:58 pm
In the fourth question and answer, the subject of the treatment of Native American and their treatment in the United States judicial system is addressed. I agree with Liam's argument that the Native Americans suffered an unfair treatment in the majority of aspects in the West. As stated by Brown, the majority of Native Americans primarily tried to peacefully interact with the white people in the West, aside from the few raids that occurred, during which some white people were killed by Native Americans. These raids, or rather stories of raids, could have been an effect of the exaggerated stories of violence in the West at this time. Regardless, Native Americans very often faced injustice in their treatment in the judicial system. They were not given the same opportunity or respect as white people in the judicial system in areas of crime such as murder and the seizure of native lands by whites, even those lands that were set aside by the US government.
Reply
Palmer Smith
4/3/2017 11:15:14 pm
I agree with Richard Maxwell Brown and Larry D. Ball that the West used to be a violent place and laws and law enforcement like sheriffs needed to be put into place but I also agree with Stewart L. Udall and Robert R. Dykstra that the violence could of been more exaggerated due to the presence of media. The stories and news had to travel pretty far to reach the Eastern part of the United States so stories could have been manipulated and details added along the way. Especially back then they would of believed everything they heard because they didn't know any better and when an influential and popular writer, Mark Twain, wrote about Western violence, they were convinced. I also agree with Larry D. Ball that the West did need some sort of law enforcement, in their case sheriffs. Although statistically the crime rate went up, it benefitted the West more than it harmed it.
Reply
Daniel
4/4/2017 07:59:41 am
Robert Dykstra's discussion about how the West was viewed and that it may have not been as violent as people today view it, is very interesting. In the movies people in the west are shot day and night but Robert says that in some towns there are only 1.5 murders a year. Robert suggests that the media exaggerated the amount of violence in the west in order to get better reviews. Plus people hired professional shooters to kept the towns free of raids and shootings. The media portrays that there were always raids on banks but that didn't happen as much throughout the West as movies make it appear.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWelcome to Liam's Blog. Liam is participating in an independent study of history this year part of which requires him to interpret historical arguments. Archives
April 2017
Categories |