Part A How did the experience of witnessing the “white men, who came, year after year, to cheat [Native Americans] and take away
their lands” shape Black Hawk’s viewpoint? It created a sense of apathy, leading him to believe that nothing can be done to reverse the damage. It encouraged him to embrace his own death so he can serve as a moral beacon to guide fellow Native Americans. It led him to believe that violent resistance to white people is both necessary and justified. It solidified his prior belief that Native Americans are good and incorruptible at their core. Part B How does Black Hawk use rhetoric in this excerpt to advance the viewpoint selected in Part A? Things were growing worse. There were no deer in the forest. The opossum and beaver were fled; the springs were drying up, and our squaws and papooses without victuals to keep them from starving; we called a great council and built a large fire. He uses allusion, referencing an event, person, or literary work that justifies his actions by demonstrating precedent. He presents an antithetical statement, making a connection between two opposite ideas to use contrast as a means for justification. He appeals to emotions and sentiment to distract his audience from the need for justification in favor of angering them so they agree with his actions. He uses ethos, suggesting his behavior was an ethical and just reaction against the deceitful and immoral behavior of the white men.
1. I would say the correct answer is C. <span>It led him to believe that violent resistance to white people is both necessary and justified. The problem was not just the taking away of Native American lands; the problem was that the white men cheated. Black Hawk was a famous war leader in more than one conflict, aligning even with the white men from Britain and Canada against their common enemy.
2. In my opinion, the correct answer is D. </span><span>He uses ethos, suggesting his behavior was an ethical and just reaction against the deceitful and immoral behavior of the white men. He isn't trying to manipulate his audience's opinion. He appeals to ethos, relying on their capability to recognize the right and justified cause. When the land where they lived was devastated, of course they were right to do something about it.</span>
