In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

2010Book Reviews40g setdement on a reservation in western Oklahoma in the nineteenth century, where most tribal members still reside today. Although Elam became a professor and academic administrator at SuI Ross State University, it took him nearly four decades to turn his dissertation into a book, following his retirement and relocation to Hillsboro , where he is now a historian and editor in the Texas Heritage Museum at Hill College. In die updated version of his dissertation, Elam has narrowed the scope of his study, concentrating on the Wichitas from their participation in the attack on die Spanish mission at the San Saba River in 1758 to their forced removal from Texas to Indian Territory in 1859. Elam's new account of the Wichitas is very reminiscent of his dissertation, providing a straightforward narrative history of their relations with Euroamericans and other Indians based mainly on published primary sources in English or translated from Spanish. Whereas forty years ago, his dissertation was groundbreaking since no other work on the Wichitas existed, Elam's new book is rather outdated, as a number of scholars have written innovative studies of the tribe in the last decade that employ unpublished primary sources in Spanish and French. Elam has neglected to consult any of these works, all of which reflect the new trends in the writing of Native American history. As a result, Elam's book on the Wichitas seems rather old fashioned, a relic from an earlier, much different historiographical era. Nonetheless, the book does have its virtues. Taking its title from the Wichitas' name for themselves, Kitikiti'sh, meaning "raccoon eyed" because of their penchant for facial tattoos, Elam narrates the diplomatic history of the various groups in great detail. The Wichitas were a Caddoan-speaking people who by the mideighteenth century, lived in sedentary agricultural villages south of the Red River between the Trinity and the Brazos. Tied to French traders from Louisiana, the Wichitas made peace with the Spaniards in Texas in the late 1700s before being wooed by the United States after 1803. Following Mexican independence, the various Wichita tribes clashed violendy with Mexican troops and Anglo settlers. After 1836, most of the Wichitas were driven north of the Red River to United States controlled Indian Territory. In the 1840s, a few Wacos and Tawakonis returned to Texas and eventually settled at the Brazos Reservation. In 1859, however, hostile Texans forced them—along with the Caddos, Tonkawas, and Comanches—to return to Oklahoma, where they setded near present Anadarko. Elam experdy chronicles these migrations, using a wide range of sources, and employing a number of interesting contemporary quotes. This solid book will appeal to non-academic historians and students who are seeking to learn the basic history of the Wichitas without having to deal with the latest theories and interpretations. University ofNorth TexasF. Todd Smith Borderlines in Borderlands: James Madüon and the Spanish American Frontier, 1776— 182 1. ByJ. C. A. Stagg. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009. Pp. 320. Maps, notes, index. ISBN 9780300139051, $50.00 cloth.) In diis well-written and meticulously researched book, J. C. A. Stagg seeks to refute the idea that the Madison administration was either incompetent or ruth- 410Southwestern Hutorical QuarterlyJanuary lessly aggressive in its policy toward the Spanish borderlands. The author sets the stage by analyzing Madison's approach to U.S.-Spanish relations from the Revolutionary War through his years asJefferson's secretary of state. Stagg shows how deeply Madison resented Spain for withholding recognition ofU.S. independence during the War of Independence and for opposing both American expansion beyond the Appalachians and U.S. navigational rights on the Mississippi. Stagg is mostly on solid ground here. His analysis would be strengthened by more fully explaining Spanish claims to British West Florida, especially Natchez, not only by wartime conquest but also by the British-Spanish treaty of 1783, which conflicted with the U.S.-British peace of diat year. There was no common international understanding fixing the U.S. Southern boundary at the 3 1 st parallel at the Mississippi (26-27). Stagg contends that too many historians have misunderstood the degree to whichJefferson, Madison, and Monroe believed the United States...

pdf

Share