A correction first
The title pairs two different peoples. The Ancestral Puebloans (sometimes called Anasazi, a term many Pueblo people avoid) were the ancestors of today’s Pueblo nations, such as the Hopi and the Zuni and the Rio Grande pueblos. They built the cliff dwellings and large villages of the Four Corners region, and their descendants are living Pueblo peoples.
Apache peoples are a separate group. Their languages belong to the Southern Athabaskan language family, a family whose other members lie far to the north, and the usual scholarly view is that Apache ancestors arrived in the Southwest later than the major Ancestral Pueblo centers flourished. The Apache did not descend from the Ancestral Puebloans, though the two sets of peoples later traded, fought, and sometimes lived near one another.
Timeline in broad strokes
Dates in early Apache history are estimates, and sources differ. The sequence below is a general outline.
Before about 1500: arrival and settlement. Athabaskan-speaking ancestors of the Apache moved into the Southwest and southern Plains over a long period. Scholars debate when, by which routes, and in how many waves. Oral tradition accounts from Apache communities describe how their people came to their homelands, and many researchers respect these as history.
1500s to 1700s: Spanish contact. Spanish expeditions and then colonists entered the region. Over the following centuries the Apache, Spanish and Pueblo peoples traded, formed alliances, raided and negotiated. Horses spread through the region and changed how many groups lived.
1821 to 1850s: Mexican rule and US claims. Mexico’s independence in 1821 was followed by years of warfare in the borderlands. The war between Mexico and the United States in the 1840s then shifted the claim over Apache homelands to the United States.
1860s to 1886: the wars. Decades of conflict with US forces and settlers, usually grouped as the Apache Wars, ended in the surrender of Geronimo’s band in 1886. This label covers many separate episodes with different causes, and it is a convenient but incomplete summary.
1870s onward: reservations. The federal government set up reservations, including San Carlos in Arizona and the Mescalero reservation in New Mexico, and moved many communities by force. After 1886 the Chiricahua were held as prisoners of war until 1913.
Late 1800s to mid-1900s: assimilation pressure. Federal policy included boarding schools, mission activity and restrictions on ceremonies, alongside land-ownership changes.
1930s to today: tribal government. The Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 and later laws gave tribes more formal structures and, in time, more control over their affairs.
The idea of “leaders”
Historical accounts often center on famous individuals, and names such as Cochise, Mangas Coloradas, Victorio and Geronimo are widely known. It helps to know how Apache leadership worked. Many groups did not have a ruler over the whole nation. Local group leaders typically held influence through reputation, ability and family ties, and people followed them by choice. Geronimo, for instance, is often called a chief in popular accounts, a common Geronimo chief misconception, since he is generally described as a respected fighter and spiritual figure of the Chiricahua, and not a hereditary or elected chief.
Modern tribal governments
Today there are federally recognized Apache nations in Arizona, New Mexico and Oklahoma. They include communities such as the San Carlos Apache and White Mountain Apache in Arizona, the Mescalero Apache and Jicarilla Apache in New Mexico, the Fort Sill Apache Tribe in Oklahoma, and the Apache Tribe of Oklahoma, whose members are Plains Apache. Each has its own government, constitution or governing documents, and leadership selected by its own processes. Councils and elected officials today deal with services, enterprises, education, land and water, and cultural programs.
These are not interchangeable. Each nation has its own history and its own priorities. For current leaders, programs and policies, the nations’ official websites are the reliable source, and this site does not list current office-holders.
Why the distinction matters
Treating Apache and Pueblo history as one story erases real differences, including different languages, economies, homelands and relationships to the land. Both are living peoples. Reading about each on its own terms gives a clearer sense of how the Southwest’s history actually unfolded, including the long record of Apache and Pueblo relations, which ranged from trade to conflict across the centuries.