Throughout my research I’ve been trying to find an answer to the question about why violence was a socially acceptable means of action between United States and Sauks tribe in 1832.  I’ve searched through websites, books, and archives to try and find the answer.  I started with Wisconsin Historical Society’s website; this informed me on what happened in the Black Hawk War. This source gave me a better idea about what the war was about, but didn’t help me understand why violence was a socially acceptable means of action. The next source that I researched was a primary source, which contained a series of letters in a newspaper article that has several recollections of settlers who knew Black Hawk at the time of the war and after. I gained a better understanding of who Black Hawk was during the war. To learn more about Black Hawk and why he thought violence was acceptable means of action against the United States, I read a firsthand account that he had on a major battle. This enabled me to get into Black Hawks head during a battle and allows me to understand why he thought violence was acceptable.

When I started my research I thought that the war started because of the Native Americans, but throughout my research I realized they weren’t the cause of the war.  From these sources I’ve gained a better understanding of Souk’s reason on why they thought violence was needed, but I still cannot answer my question. The reason I can’t answer my question is because I don’t have a clear understanding about why the United States thought violence was socially acceptable means of action against the Sauks. In order for me to answer this question I need to look at more sources that show me the United States perspectives on the Sauk tribe (specifically the ones affected by the 1804 treaty). Once I do this I believe I will be able to answer my research question.