A relationship built on misunderstanding
After the United States took control of the Southwest following the war with Mexico, which ended in 1848, American officials, soldiers and settlers began dealing with Apache leaders who had been negotiating with Spain and Mexico for generations. Apache leaders were not strangers to diplomacy, and many of them sought peace on terms that would protect their families and land. The agreements that followed were shaped by several problems that recur throughout the record: officials who assumed a leader could speak for all Apache people, promises made by one agency that another ignored, settlers who ignored boundaries, and interpreters whose accuracy is hard to judge.
This article covers general, well-documented patterns and a few examples. It is not a full chronology.
Early agreements
In the early 1850s, US officials made treaties with several Apache groups, including an 1852 agreement associated with Mangas Coloradas and other leaders. Senate action on treaties of this era was often slow or negative, and in many cases the terms were not carried out as the Apache signers understood them. The history of Apache treaties and negotiation shows that the written text, the spoken explanation and the later actions of the government often diverged.
Apache Pass, 1861
One of the best-known breakdowns of trust came in February 1861 at Apache Pass in southeastern Arizona. A young army officer, Lieutenant George Bascom, summoned the Chokonen leader Cochise to a meeting at which he accused Cochise’s people of kidnapping a boy and stealing cattle. Cochise denied it, escaped the tent, and was wounded. Hostages were then taken on both sides, and several people were killed, including relatives of Cochise. Many historians connect this episode, the Bascom affair, to a long period of renewed fighting between Cochise’s people and the United States. Historians generally conclude that Cochise’s group was not responsible for the original raid.
Mangas Coloradas, 1863
In January 1863, Mangas Coloradas, then an elderly and influential Chihenne leader, approached US soldiers in southwestern New Mexico, apparently to talk. He was taken into army custody and died that night. The official account said he was shot while trying to escape, but other accounts, including those of soldiers who were present, raised serious doubts, and many historians consider it a killing in custody. The incident deepened mistrust among Chiricahua people for years.
Camp Grant and the peace policy
In 1871, Aravaipa people led by Eskiminzin who had come to Camp Grant for protection were attacked by a group of civilians. The massacre helped push the federal government towards a new approach known as the peace policy. A special commissioner, Vincent Colyer, toured the territory in 1871, and General Oliver O. Howard visited in 1872. In October 1872, with the help of Tom Jeffords, a non-Apache man who had a relationship with Cochise, Howard reached an agreement with Cochise that created a Chiricahua reservation in southeastern Arizona. Cochise died in 1874. By 1876 the reservation had been closed and the people moved to San Carlos, a decision that many Chiricahua experienced as a broken promise.
Concentration at San Carlos
During the 1870s, US policy sought to gather many Apache groups onto a small number of reservations, with San Carlos as the main site. The Rio Verde removal of 1875 moved people from their home area across country to San Carlos, an episode that Apache and Yavapai communities remember with sorrow. Leaders from different groups were placed together, often with agents who controlled rations and who sometimes appointed spokesmen of their own choosing. This reservation system undercut the traditional ways leaders gained and held a following.
Leaders such as Victorio and later Geronimo left reservations at various points. Their reasons, according to many accounts, included the loss of home country, hunger, fear of arrest and anger at repeated relocations. It is important not to reduce these decisions to a single motive.
The end of the campaigns
In March 1886, Geronimo and Naiche met General George Crook in northern Mexico and agreed to terms, but Geronimo left again before the party reached the border. Crook was replaced by General Nelson Miles. Geronimo and Naiche surrendered to Miles in September 1886 at Skeleton Canyon in southeastern Arizona. The terms were disputed afterwards, and what the Apache leaders had understood differed from what the army did. The Chiricahua, including many who had remained at peace and scouts who had served the army, were sent to Florida as prisoners of war. Their imprisonment lasted until 1913, and the Chiricahua prisoners of war years left a lasting mark on the community.
Patterns worth noting
Looking across these cases, the documented record suggests several recurring themes:
- Agreements were often made with leaders who could not bind everyone.
- US officials changed policy frequently, and local commanders sometimes contradicted agency promises.
- Peace-seeking leaders were sometimes harmed when they trusted the process.
- The costs fell heavily on families, including those who had never been in conflict.
After the wars
Apache leaders continued to deal with the US government through the twentieth century, as councils, tribal governments and legal advocates. Today, each Apache nation has its own government that deals directly with federal and state authorities. For current information, the official websites of the nations are the best source.