Dubois And The Apache Indians: A Comparative Analysis

In every culture as time progresses things change. These changes can be linked to globalization, acculturation, or just the need to adapt to a constant change in environment and it's sociological platform.

An interesting point to be made is that according to Dubois, before the colonization and influence of Westerners and their ways of thinking, the Apache had no single leader. Dubois states that, “The Mescalero word for leader is glossed he who speaks” (Dubois). This shows that there wasn’t anyone who was appointed to a position, but instead it was whoever had the greatest contribution and input. It is said that groups of the Navajo would only choose a leader who never came out as wanting to be a leader, and a person who was actually apprehensive about it. They believed that if you “campaigned” for a leadership role, you were least deserving of it. It was the ones who never self proclaimed themselves to be a leader; they were the ones who were placed in the

leadership role. I think this was a brilliant idea for the Apache. When the leadership is “one who speaks,” it allows equal input from everyone contributing. Just imagine if the people of the United States voted this way. Whoever campaigned more was automatically denied from the position.
Although the Apache would have done better without foreign influence, they were able to slightly adapt to these people. “During the 1850s to the 1880s, Apache bands were rapidly losing their hunting grounds to encroaching American settlers” (qtd. Southwest Crossroads Spotlight). Because of this, some Apache groups Scouted for the US army against other Apache bands. They did this because they felt as though this would help them be able to stay on their land and protect their way of life.
Also, contrary to what most may think, the Apache viewed the colonization of the Spanish more so as a resource and not something to completely exterminate. The Apache had always raided neighboring tribes for food and livestock. Once the Spanish settled in nearby lands, the Apache viewed them as one more place to raid from. Along with food and livestock, they would also take weapons and children, which they would then accept them as their own. This raiding is what caused a major conflict between the settlements of the West and the Apache Indians, and one of the main reasons the Apache were looked at as savages.
Along the lines of adaptation, “The Apache survived and prospered outside the Spanish colonial system primarily because they adapted to the changing ecosystems of the Southwest” (American Indian Originals). With all this change coming, the Apache created new methods of manufacturing and they expanded their trade with others, which would be considered globalization. So their goal was to contract social and political factor structures to ensure that they would be able to meet the new economic demands placed upon them. One of the main changes was their modified form of pastoralism. The apache were known more as the hunter-gatherer people before the colonization of the west, but due to the new lack of land and resources they began to resort to raising livestock.
Another thing to change once western colonization came about was patrilocal marriages.

Contrary to traditional Apache culture of matrilocal marriages and endogamy, the Apache now switched to patrilocal marriages and practiced exogamy. In layman’s term, they went from marrying into ones social group and residing at the wife’s parents home, to instead, marrying outside the social group and residing at the husband’s parents home. Although they didn’t necessarily change these marriage traditions based off of what was learned from others, this change could still be considered acculturation since it was learned from an unknown, outside force. They modified to this way of life to create stronger social ties with outside cultures in a way to strengthen themselves against western culture. They felt that marrying people from other Apache tribes would strengthen relationships between different tribes. In doing this, it built more connections for resources as well as a better security because it multiplied their

numbers.
Like stated before, the Apache culture was one that held kinship at high importance. The main way of learning for the younger generation was by observing the elders of the tribe as well and listening to stories that had been past down from generation to generation. At a very young age, boys were taught to fight and fend for themselves. Young girls were taught by their mothers to forage for food, cook, and be the kin keeper of the house. Comparing the Apache culture of kinship to today’s kinship is something that I feel is incredibly different. One in three kids in the US live without a father; so right from the start they are being short handed in knowledge that should be passed down from a fatherly figure. With many mothers playing the role of both mom and dad, they are often limited in time to interact with their kids. This shortened interaction also cuts down on the knowledge that should be passed from both parents to children. We are not only becoming a “fatherless nation,” but to some degree also a “parentless nation.” Mothers are working 2 plus jobs just to try to financially take care of their kids and all that extra time is taking away from the development that kids should be getting that are not. The Apache understood that in order to have a strong band of members, they had to all be on the same page, and all learn the same things that have been passed from generation to generation. Many families today seem to not understand that.
Another thing I found very interesting in dealing with the Apache is their gender roles and values. They value the upbringing of their kids, but they also value women more than any culture I can even think of today. “At marriage a man goes to the camp of the girl’s parents to live” (qtd. in Sharp). They do this because to the parents of the daughter, the women (daughter) are worth more to the family, or any family, oppose to the man. The women of the tribe also go through a puberty ceremony that signifies they are growing up and able to marry. The men on the other hand, do not have any kind of ceremony. As the woman matures she is also able to go to meetings and share her input on the matter. At times even, she is able to hold tribal meetings herself. The whole premise on Apache life is revolved around the women in terms of motherhood and kinship. This is something that is very different from many cultures today. Even in the most industrialized country in the world, the United States, women still earn lower wages, and we still have this “Feminist” movement going on because women feel oppressed. We are one of the most prosperous nations and we still cannot get equality for women like the Apache has done for hundreds of years before us. Their gender roles suited the male and female biology better (ie. men more muscular so they went out to hunt. Women were more nurturing so the tended to young at home) but they still had equality when it came to political matters within the tribe.
After studying the Apache it leaves me to wonder about how such a simplistic (in the eyes of the industrial world) people with hardly any material things seemed to have such a fulfilling and happy life. To add, how such a simple people had so much order and social structure when they never had any real form of government. It then dawned on me that everything they did fell together so perfectly because right from birth, they were being taught how to act. There were not so many distractions as there is today, that it allowed parents to actually parent without industrialized products distracting them. The Apache knew the importance of kinship and upbringing, and what that did, was it formed an incredibly strong bond between the tribe. From the kids all the way up to the oldest of the elders, there was a known norm that was followed by all.