After reviewing the information on the website,, we, as a group, have come to the conclusion that the events occurring on April 28th to May 3rd, 1864 was indeed a war and not murder; due to the organization of the attacks, the context in which they took place, and an eyewitness claiming to over hear the plan of attack.

In the days before smallpox and muskets, war was not carried out on a grand scale. It was undertaken by small groups of men.[1] This is defined as a pre-war assault by the indigenous peoples, whereas the white settlers viewed these early attacks as murder. According to a excerpt from Mr. Waddington’s petition referring to the attacks as “murders”[2], we know that there was a biased attitude towards claiming an all out war took place in the white communities, and this is reflected in the lack of information on the website to suggest otherwise.

However, this was not a shared view of the indigenous peoples as Chief Lhatsasin confessed before he was killed “IT WAS WAR, NOT MURDER”[3]. This shows the massive difference in opinion between the indigenous people and the white settlers who came into their land. Due to this conflict of historical miscommunication it is nearly impossible to determine whether or not these attacks were in fact war.

Moreover, it must be determined whether or not a war is decided by the victims or the aggressors under such circumstances; and who, in this situation, the victims were. Though, because the indigenous people can be considered both the primary victims and aggressors our group determines that this was a war as that was their apparent intention. The trouble is a difference between cultures and how each different culture defines what war is.

For the most part our group had a pre-conceived notion that the events laid out on the website were acts of war. Whereas Jared and Priscilla thought that the initial acts of the indigenous people were murder and not war. However, after consulting with the group and examining the documents further our group agreed that these were acts of war. The whole group had not done any prior research on the subject so we all came into it with no prior intentions.

It was reaffirmed to our group that for the most part history is entirely one sided. However, there were limited sources that showed the other side of the story. Based on the information gathered we can see an oncoming shift in the way that we document history.

Annie: I would look at my email. Bring my computer to class and gather a base of knowledge to bring to the discussion.

Andreas: I would have done more preparation. The amount of sources I had to read was overwhelming.

Shannon: I feel as though I was not fully prepared for the task at hand. As a result I would have looked into the assignment deeper in order to be a more valuable contributor to the team.

Priscilla: I would have looked more into the topic although I had little knowledge it was a very interesting topic to look into.

Jared: I would have spent more time researching the website and forming a more concrete opinion. I would also have brought more sources to the group to help support our thesis statement.


[1] Henry Solomon, “War and Magic”, Nemiah:The Unconquered Country, Terry Glavin, October 25as retrieved from

[2] Alfred Waddington, “Excerpts of the notes accompanying Mr. Waddington’s Petition,” Klatsassin and the Chilcotin War, 1865 retrieved on October 25, 2016 from

[3] “1864 Tsilhqot’in Chiefs Memorial”, Klatsassin and the Chilcotin War, October 25, 2016 Retrieved from /726en.html