allowed to explore for oil on the shore rapidly follow bid shell. the american oil firms followed after that. when the army rolled into downtown on september 18, 1988, the nation's foreign exchange reserve had been less than $10 million. now they were between $200 and $300 million. type sur security prevented any demonstrations to mark the anniversaries of the great uprising. or the military crack down of the following month. meanwhile, in a further sign of america's approach, the generals and coke can will signed a deal to bottle the drinks drinks in burma. ..

but surely bring them around. so confident were the generals that they began to relax a little. a handful of foreign journalists and television news crews to watch the burmese wind up and vote. as polling day approach martial

law restrictions were partially lifted. the soldiers were temporarily replaced by police in plain clothes. army and uniformed police disappeared from the streets. it was the usual burmese vanishing trick as seen on the day of suu's mother's funeral. the zero some attitude to power where the army is either overwhelmingly present or totally absent but even absent everyone knows they're not far away. the n l b to good advantage of the full back to take to the streets in pickup trucks in flooring of the people to be sure to give them their vote. in the end the people needed no in pouring. the lines began forming outside schools and government offices where voting was to take place early. where voting was to take place early on the morning of

may 27th. the army again was conspicuous by its absence. the voting was overseen by civilians. dermott's conversion to civilian rule happen by magic overnight. people put on their sunday best to perform 's conversion to civilian rule happen by magic overnight. people put on their sunday best to perform this important and extremely rare -- chain in the at the party was symbolized by an icon depicted on the voting slips. a beach ball leaders lake home, an umbrella, reebok of symbols such as a peacock which is now a symbol in the present election were banned but they had cannily chosen to come out from a straw hat to symbolize their party. making it easy to indicate their preference while appearing to wear normal rustic costume.

nationwide, twenty million people were eligible to vote. in seven constituencies where the army was fighting insurgents polling was canceled altogether. in many border areas only a fraction of registered voters managed to vote because of the violence but in most of the country the turnout was heavy with some 72% casting votes in total. late on the night of polling the chinese news service was the first for news agency to report a first result of burma's first election for thirty years. the hayworth 1 candidate, a woman called san san >> reporter: half of the votes cast. that result was followed by a flood more. to the shock and horror of the military the overwhelming majority of results went the

same way other-they didn't care for the army's favorite. the party was sweeping the board. thank you. [applause] >> thank you and welcome. thank you for the introduction and thank you, peter, for joining us today. i have many questions and i will be mindful of the time because i know you do too and i want to get as many in as possible. let's begin with the obvious, what everyone wants to hear about. the meeting on aung san suu kyi. the first meeting was in 2002. c h a upton released from house arrest and most recently met her

march of 2011. a decade span in between. was there anything that struck you in that time period that change that? and secondly, described the meetings in general but also when you told her you were writing a biography about her how did she react? >> she wasn't remotely interested. she didn't want to know. to my surprise and slight disappointment she did want to help. subsequently after the book was published i got a copy of the books to her by the british embassy and she wrote me a gracious e-mail thanking me for my efforts but it was part of her remarkably non egotistical characters that she doesn't care if people like books about her and she doesn't want to read them and doesn't want to endorse them. that was the message i took away

unfortunately. >> any difference between then and now? >> 2002 was a bit like last august when things started to shift rapidly. it seemed that things were really on the move in 2002. she was released and there was a dynamic -- ishmael was facilitating negotiations to have some imagination. to bring the nld into a dialogue. i ran around although i had a tourist visa talking to lots of people, some close to the regime. my impression was they were going to do a deal in the offing and she and the party would going to the constitutional

process and the whole thing would stop. this was derailed in the 90s and start again. >> her diaries provided a key source. she was one of the chief's closest confidantes who reportedly was turned by military intelligence and many now see her as a traitor to the nld. tell us how you obtained the diaries to the extent that you can tell us and you have met her. how did she react to the fact that you had the diaries and reusing them? >> she was quite relaxed. i met her through the wife of one of my best friends. still in close contact with

her. i had a privilege introduction to her and a person in london gave me the diaries. i can't reveal the person's name but when i told ma fonagy i got these books she was pleased. her story is she was a fluent english speaker. the divorced wife of a diplomat. and brought up in international schools and a very good writer and she became suu's close companion during the campaign for is in 1989 and she went everywhere with suu often sleeping in the same room, the same cabin, the same boat, being with her all the time and taking care of her needs and so on. at the request of suu's husband she was writing a daily diary of

what happened. when i found this it was gold dust because part of the problem writing about suu is we know the bare facts of her life. everyone knows. but greater details. ma fengi provided this detail with humor and interesting insight and charm. it puts her in a new and charming light bringing out the human dimension of suu. in july 1989 when suu was putting house arrest, ma fengi and all the people close to her in the party, suu -- ma fengi wasn't in the party but they were taken to in sane prison and put in jail and she didn't get

out for three years and she told me while she was there she had all night in derogations. i was informed by two sources i think of as very trustworthy that she was prevailed on to change sides and sins 1995 when suu came out of house arrest she became a voluble critic of sanctions and she never missed an opportunity to talk to -- i met her the first time in 2002 and -- a piece about her partially about her in the new yorker in which she said the same thing. sanctions are all wrong. suu is stubborn and driving burma into poverty and must be stopped.

what had been a beautiful friendship turned into a very ugly amity in fact. >> as she read your book? >> she has. i made sure she had a copy and received a number of rather hostile letters from her. >> one other thing i want to address on aung san suu kyi. a lot of the previous biographies and biographical accounts of her fell into one of two categories even seeing her as this divine being like almost superhuman and others that critiqued her for being stubborn, focused on the sanctions, coming under criticism for so-called abandoning her family. sir young sons to pursue a

career in politics. really presents the complex picture as close to reality as we have seen so through this journey of writing this book having access to diaries and meeting her yourself, what are the key characteristics about her that you think people just don't know. >> people are confused by her. the question of stubbornness is relevant in my opinion. extremely, totally inexperienced when she got into politics and made lots of mistakes as a result. is also true she is not a natural politician. she was never involved in politics of any sort before 1988. but one could look back on the

past 23 years of her extraordinary life and sees that she wouldn't be where she is today without some quite remarkable qualities. the quality which i identified is from quite an early age she knew who she was and what she wanted and cultivated the will power to achieve it. she came to england to study in oxford in 1964 and there was a ten year. the between arriving in england and getting married. having been under the thumb of her fierce mother throughout her childhood she came to study politics, philosophy and

economics and didn't like it. tried twice the personal ones to english and once to forestry. both times she was refused share she got a very poor degree. not a thing to be proud of. she never showed any signs of being ashamed. i only steady when i am interested. she fell in love with a student who was the pakistani and the relationship continued after she graduated and ends in tears and she fell in love with the man who became her husband. i can envision her receiving these letters from suu and reading them with mounting anguish as she saw the strange decisions suu was taking.

conventional and an imaginative, beautiful daughter of that family would graduate with a good degree and 5 back to burma and marry a suitable boy or something like that. instead she often graduating she flew to new york to live with a friend, an older lady who was a former pop singer before the war and she stayed in new york three years. she was doing what she wanted and said i want to do this. was sorry that her mother wasn't happy about it. this was her life. i see this quite early on she got her own compass and what she followed. >> another key point you make is

she is so important to burma for many reasons but one of them is hurt in assistance from the first days of involvement in the uprising in 1988 of nonviolence and without her insisting on it you think perhaps the burmese revolution may have taken a different course and even up to now may be seen a different course and you make the point that because of this is not only important to burma but the world. this value or this point of view or philosophy of nonviolence approach to democracy. talk a little bit about that. >> she lives in india three or four years in adolescence when her husband was the burmese ambassador and she stole a lot from the indian environment.

particularly the writings -- this only surfaced in her scholarly work many years later before she went back to burma. but as you say she was very clear about non-violence, right from the outset and it was very important because the students at the cutting edge of the uprising were by no means non-violent. terrible atrocities were committed in the early months of the uprising. people had their heads cut off and a lot of nasty blood shed. the role model for many students at the time was when was happening on the borders. these long insurgencies that were raging -- and the burmese army.

many students saw that as the way to go. and she insisted that nobody in her party could use violent means that she successfully prevailed. they became famous for their good humor and lack of any disturbance. >> i know you wrote this book, finish it before her re-emergence into the political world and certainly before she announced her candidacy as for parliament and as you mentioned the election will take place on sunday. throughout the course of study in her life did you ever imagine that it would take a turn like this? and with the erection is to be held on sunday, fed how do you

see your future unfolding? >> i don't think you're right out the possibility it could change again. it seems unlikely but as i said in 2002 there was an opening to start negotiations. we need to get the strong man out of the picture. >> is he really out of the picture? >> i believe so. we were discussing this before. hard to believe that the countenance of what is happening now -- he tried to assassinate her in 2003 and nearly succeeded. didn't see it coming. everyone was stunned and amazed and delighted when things started to move in august and

september last year. it was a shock and a delightful surprise. >> in terms of rejoining politics as an opposition leader it is clear that she had taken a calculated risk by joining the very system and people who confined her in the first place. but making a wheat of faith by being on the inside she has a better chance of pushing democratic leaders and economic, social reform than working from the outside. do you think that is the right decision that led to this decision and led many to criticize her? some think she should stay

outside government and remained a staunch critic. >> herbal is not to be an icon of democracy but to change for her country. at the age of 66 i don't think she had any serious alternative than plunging in. certainly senior people in her party thought it was a very for idea. many people would say the same thing. i think she was confronted by the desperate need to get things moving in burma and she saw with the president as a person who she said i can trust and he is a good listener. however flawed and however limited this was the opportunity to be grabbed. she was right to do so. >> i want to take a quote from a recent op-ed by thomas fuller. he writes by entering politics at this delicate stage aung san suu kyi is importing legitimacy on a government run by the same

generals she battled for two decades. if the reform in me and mark falters she coushe could be hel responsible. it seems hard to put the weight of the world on her shoulders. in terms of reform themselves you have written recently in the new york times a piece and expressed some skepticism about the extent of the reform saying at this stage there mostly symbolic although wellcome but still needed to go a bit further. i but still needed to go a bit further. e but still needed to go a bit further. ilcome but still needed to go a bit further. i wanted to get your thoughts needs to happen to make those --

in your mind you say oh, this is really something different. >> the key thing that needs to happen is constitutional reform. the election of 2010, the election this week is on the basis of the 2008 constitution which gives the military 25% of seats in parliament without any election and puts military council with enormous unspecified powers above parliament and able to declare martial law any time. suu has declared constitutional reform to be her first priority. what you can see is likely to happen because too many people have a vested interest in the constitution. but we know crazy things have happened in the last nine month. let's hope she knows something

we don't and that is the next stage. >> have there been any reforms that come as more of a surprise to you. clearly the political reform. back on messines in burma but economic reform seems to be signaling a change with new investment laws, currency, but one criticism people have is reforms have not extended into the field of human rights for addressed significantly the ethnic conflicts. has anything surprise you? what do you see as the most significant and biggest challenge? >> human-rights have been given prominent. a new human rights commission is supposed to be doing some work.

the economy is critical. friends of mine who returned from burma the other day, all of their friends are out of jail. say what you like. no longer fooled around on the streets. like a different country. the economy is dead in the water. there are no new jobs and reforming the economy is an enormous task. that is where lifting sanctions comes in. we enter delicate territory because as i am sure sanctions are the only lever we have on burma. so lifting the sanctions with great care. it is clear for the burmese to flee get behind the reforms they need to see some improvement in

their standard of living and that has not happened. >> let's talk sanctions. obviously in washington people will be watching this election very closely and many people have argued if the election is conducted in a reasonably open and fair way and i say reasonably because there will be instances of irregularities. they're already have been but some advocates once we get over this election and she is in parliament that it is time to start lifting investment sanctions. what do you think? do you think that goes far enough? more prisoners need to be released or is this a process that has to unfold gradually? >> friends of mine who came back said the great majority of prisoners had to be released. there are some locked away for

stranger reasons including members of the king's on raj who were locked up in 2004. those are the things that have been done to a large extent. in a way, these are relatively easy things to do once you decide to make these gestures. people come out onto the street. the easy thing is to change the constitution leap in pacific and reform should remain in place until indication of movement toward a more genuine democratic constitution in burma. >> let's stay on u.s. policy for second. some critics have said u.s. policy is too dependent on aung

san suu kyi and what she says and what she thinks and the time has come for the u.s. to reach out to others in civil society to help inform that decision. what is your take on that in terms of the fact that it does seem that she has extraordinary and rightfully so, extraordinary important on how lawmakers in washington decide what and what not to do on burma policy. >> it does seem anomalous. one person should hold the fate of her country in her hands when there are plenty of other opposition politicians with plenty of experience, many with greater political experience who are around. in the last nine months, sins her release in november of 2010 she has justified the faith that western leaders put in ce

her release in november of 2010 she has justified the faith that western leaders put in her. her statements and moves have been carefully calculated and she is proving an extremely useful and effective interlocutor between them and the western world which is the role he marked out for her and the role of the west is happy for her to perform. as long as she retains this enormous support from the burmese masses she still has a pretty good claim to play that role. >> i still have many questions but i want to make sure we get the audience involved and even our online viewers if they have any questions. if you have a question just raise your hand. i see question in the back. just wait for the mike to come

get you. end if you don't mind just introducing yourself as well. >> my name is sean king of park strategies. i mispronounced the name but i heard the former singapore ambassador to the un on this very stage say sanctions against burma were a tragedy of the west because it made us feel better about ourselves but didn't result in any change. i think i know your answer but how do you think his comments stack up? >> many people who would like to do business with burma have been chomping at the bit for many years. it is one of the last remaining large tly unexploited corners o

asia. as you saw from the passage that i read the oil companies had very little kick for the human rights situation when they started on shore exploration in burma. one simply has to decide whether they human-rights situation in the country is significant or not. when you have got the sort of appalling human rights situation in burma ever since the 1988 and long before that, does the west have a duty to stand up and change that behavior or not? it is a crucial kind of debating question. the fact that we are now where we are and be massive birdies can read what newspapers they want and vote for who they want

in the elections. in a year or two they will have some jolts. thanks to what the west has done, i don't think it is a mistake. >> yes. wait for the microphone please. >> i am a writer. i want to get your take on why you think the generals are making this change at this time. seems too good to be true. >> it is extraordinary, isn't it? there are various reasons but the most interesting one is burma in the absence of much of a trading relationship with the west found itself in a closer embrace with china which has

taken too close. it is just over the border and very the burmese proper, unpleasant burmese proverb that reads when china sits burma swims. burma is like other southeast asia countries. it is prone to feeling endangered from china. in danger of being colonized, taken over. the dam project came to crystalize those fears. the chinese dam on the river which is a symbol of the country. not only were the chinese building the dam but we're going to import 90% of the electricity back into china. burma has appalling provisions. one of the clearest signs that the president has his head screwed on was he announced the

suspension of that dam project in the middle of last year. i think that is a very significant factor in what is happening. >> in the blue. >> i am wondering what you think in the near future what the country will be as far as foreign journalists. in the last few months for reporters from western news organizations have not only pretended to be tourists but go in with a journalist visa for a few weeks. passion for another era and get out. as far as president journalists who sins from cells into the country will the government allow that. >> it is happening already. democratic voice of burma based in oslo and stayed there is

setting up an office. certainly burmese nationals are able to practice or believe they will be able to practice free journalism inside the country. for foreigners the picture remains very hazy and hard to pin down. a friend of mine apply for a journalist these up months ago and received no feedback of any sort which is not typical of burmese embassies. my own papers correspondent got in under a fake name. always used to have to function. with regard to foreigners. with particular politicians. brought in a bunch of journalists and they were able to work but doesn't seem to have

decided what to do about it. there is this zeno phobic elements in the military psyche which cannot be underestimated. >> across the aisle. >> i have burmese friends in burma and here. given the case of reforms that the complete about face there has been criticism that the motive of the honda and generals are suspect. i heard this from burmese friends in new york. all those years that perhaps relevance for any change the original one might -- any change

so far. i wonder if you could comment on those two aspects? >> what they say about -- commenting on it. she was out of the picture for ages and ages. was like rumpelstiltskin. she never used a mobile phone and had no idea what it was. she has been working hard to catch up. working hard is one thing she knows how to do. the only thing one could say clearly is if one person is going to emerge, plausible democratic opposition leader, they haven't emerged yet. >> any other questions? all the way in the back.

>> i am and author and journalist, bill mccallum. i wrote a book about political buddhism in sri lanka. going back to burma after 20 years. i am curious. when i go back will i find a group of monks, sayinga more politicized less so? >> i spent a lot of time in sri lanka in 2010 after getting expelled from burma. the situation in sri lanka's makes a fascinating contrast because as you are aware they have a similar variation of buddhism and they're quite devout countries but the burmese saying --sanga.

large portion had a great sins and great rhythm to avoid being politicized. that might sound strange because you have the revolution with hundreds of thousands of monks marching through the streets of the city's. but a lot of buddhism called ingrid george abbott-this is a spiritual manifestation manifesting their disapproval of the refusal to apologize for beating months of. it did not have an overtly political dimension and is interesting to see in the recent

election campaign that the sega has been nowhere to be seen. in sri lanka you have a desperate situation for where there is an extreme chauvinist buddhist party. burma is free of such an abomination. >> any other questions from the audience? you have a second question? >> curious for the common citizen if you live in rangoon, what are the living conditions? do they have power 24 hours a day or not? do they have access to western media? even in china you can read the new york times online. as far as being if they are fluent in english understanding for news for daily living conditions? >> they have had internet for a long time.

cable-tv. this is one of the reasons the place has unchanging in the past ten years. all of this has come in. very brave -- managed to get the film out. cnn put it all over there in news broadcasts. i was in burma in an outdoor cafe in the south of the country and there were two television screens. one had a japanese samurai drama on. the other had the burmese months moving like a great see through the streets of rangoon and the burmese and the coffee shop were walking like this without saying anything. if you go to rain did try to connect to the internet it will drive you insane because the government is always trying to

make it more difficult. people have the ingenuity to do it in internet cafes all over the place. >> i was in burma in january and went through all the subversive websites and got through. the real problem was -- i called the new york times subversive. the real problem was more the tactical -- the technical aspect for, getting a reliable connection. when you did you access anything and everything. >> last time i was there you couldn't get anything. >> i was only in the center. [talking over each other] >> in the two weeks i was there power went out twice but only for several moments at a time which i understand is quite good and is improving. >> i think rangoon is much

better than country town which was very unpredictable. it reminds me a lot of 4 indian states like west bengal which is over the border. similarly ill-gotten. >> a follow-up question? >> i made my first trip to burma in 2001 and my second in 2004. i see my friends on the first trip only basically twice in all these years and i communicated with them during the last 11 years by internet. i get e-mails from them and they send me photographs of their kids. there have been times especially when there has been under arrest in burma that i won't hear from them and they say there were problems with the internet connection. they are very good as i gather

other people are at maneuvering around official internet service providers. i have regular contact with them. in terms of the power the two trips i made there were periods of time where power did go out for a number of hours. most people had generators in their homes or at their place of business so that this was an ongoing problem. but again they were very resourceful. they prepared for it. >> question in the front? wait so the recording can get you. right here in the blue shirt. >> do you feel the nld participation is forcing these truthss? >> i don't think it is that way around.

it is clear with the cease-fire, the first official ceasefire ever that this was a quite serious push by the government to bring a resolution. you have this very nasty war going on. i haven't been to the insurgency harry and i cannot pronounce with any authority on the situation except to say that aung san suu kyi knows that unless there's a serious the settlement involving the minorities burma's future will remain cloudy. [inaudible] >> that is right.

as you know there are so many complicated commercial interests, interests of war lords and smuggling and each situation is different which is why bringing peace to the ethnic area is the biggest challenge. >> i think there's a question in front. >> i was in burma in the summer of 2010. cynthia was with me and we had what i call a young dissident guide. he had a lot of fear. he and his brother were in university. his brother had been arrested and for a long time was released but in no shape at all. he was beaten senseless. so our guide was very interested in our news from the west.

this was five months before aung san suu kyi was released. he took us by the leg and bought a pack of cigarettes and we stood in the foreground and moved all around. the question i have is i don't think we know so much that the university's, these universities have been moved 150 miles south and given what has been going on in the arabs spring the reason the generals did this is they did not want any useful uprisings. i wonder if you could speak to that point. are the universities still out in stupid buildings or -- >> as far as i know yes. one of the many tragedies that have be fallen burmese education is the destruction of what were ramshackle but still serious

institutions way out in the middle of nowhere. whether that is going to change i don't know. it would be good if it did but it would not be a priority. the regime's convenience to have students a long way away. >> the same can be said about the movement of the capital and having visited that capital, that clearly made so that there are no protests for people gathering. it is impossible. it is an important question and the bigger question is what will happen to the capital as countries are not setting up embassies there. maybe a few are now. bangladesh and a couple others. after finish way dies will the capital returned or not? >> or start another one? the old burmese way? a little bit wasteful.

>> it was quite a scene. quite unbelievable city to be in. >> one of the most enjoyable moments of this burmese election campaign has been suu taking her wagons and holding campaign meetings which i thought showed typical fund -- spunk and in-your-face attitude. >> she is elected she will spend a lot of time there. >> i was told a friend of mine who was a former ambassador said and ps are basically hostages. they cannot leave until they have a letter of permission from the senior authorities. whether that would apply to suu i don't think it will.

>> another question? >> i lived and worked in burma in 2002, and 2003. my question comes from a recent experience in afghanistan. very different country in transition. one of the things we heard about donor countries supporting changes in burma with proposed or actual development increases and when the well-meaning effort happens if it is not directed well it can have unintended negative consequences. do you have any comments on what will be the best way for donors to support the changes? would it be through the government or supporting local ngos? >> very important but difficult

question. there has been a number of international ngoss working in burma particularly although the government was obstructive at the time in 2008, a number of organizations got their feet on the ground and began to develop some presence and start doing good work and that is a good place to start. one of the tragedies in burma is civil society was he raced for most of the year, last 20 years and that is coming back into shape slowly and fitfully. it is a good place to start. >> i think we have come to the end of our program. we thank peter. i want to call your attention to the book signing that will happen behind us and i do urge you to stay and meet peter and

purchase the book. of great read as would make a great gift. >> you are very generous. thank you. she has the british one. [talking over each other] >> we were discussing this before. i have to say the publisher in the room, the american one is much better. >> i agree. michael told you a little about the upcoming programs we have. let me say that is the tip of the iceberg of what is happening here. i have been working here five years and it still stuns me how much happens in this building. not only in the area of our museum but agricultural performance curated by my colleague rachel cooper. events like this. the policy events.

go to our web site, asiasociety.org. see for yourself if you don't know already. the best way to stay in touch and to know about everything we are doing is to join us as a member. please talk to any of the staff and we can help you. let us give peter a big round of applause. >> every weekend booktv offers 48 hours of programming focused on nonfiction authors and books. watch it here on c-span2. >> james buss, author of "winning the west with words" describes how the use of narrative language shaped the historical memory of the westward movement. oklahoma city was first settled on april 20 third, eighteen eighty-nine as part of the land run when 10,000 homesteaders' moved to the area. >> the premise of the book is historians have long looked at indian removal, physical removal

of native people from either the american se for the great lakes and when i was interested in was looking beyond physical removal, how those individuals had written the story of those places. in the case of this book the lower great lakes. present-day ohio, indiana and illinois and i found through parades', books, paintings, great lakes leaders the white settlers in the great lakes you raised native people from the landscape long before they attempted physical removal and when the physical removal was in complete they did so through literary works. there was pressure for native communities to remove from places east of the mississippi river to places west of the mississippi river and after the indian removal act of 1830 that

pressure reprised the increased and many were fractured by pressure put on them by the american government. they were physically removed as well. little work has been done on a complicated story of what happened and the aftermath. for many communities elements of those communities are -- entire communities stayed in those areas rather than be removed and that is the story i was trying to get at. what story did white settlers or occupants of the land tell themselves about that in complete removal? and people living among them for the following decades or centuries. in the years and decades leading up to the indian removal of a tight of rhetoric white settlers evoked to justify removal, indians could not assimilate or favorite two stock different communities that would never be

able to live among one another. when that story became embedded in the history or the story they told themselves about their lives in those places, when indian removal was not complete instead of changing that story they simply adopted it in different ways and that is by convincing themselves indians had been removed even as they live among them. one thing i'm interested in is celebrations and commemorations in terms of in the case of the lower great lakes particularly centennial celebrations. from the early 20th century ohio, indiana and illinois celebrate their state centennial and the centennial as a way to reflect and remember and look back. for the white community of ohio, and illinois in was about forgetting. in indiana in 1916 the state posted an enormous outdoor pageant by riverside park in

indianapolis. there were 2,000 actors that outlined the entire history of the state from a precontract history through 1916. tens of thousands of people gathered to watch this pageant or performance where they reenacted that history and there is a moment where white settlers and it was really quite individuals playing william henry harrison and american soldiers fighting against white actors playing the shawnee prophet and native american warrior, to the battle typical new --tippecanoe. it marked a clear concise breaking point between the an indigenous landscape and one that was white state development and state driven.

next -- despite the fact in 1916 they knew that miami communities of indiana still lived among them many of them attended the pageant itself and were hosting pageants of their own in northern indiana that challenge that. most