I'll do it again. Here is a picture of Taza- Son of Cochise

[penjady]

In 1876, John Clum was to be married to his future bride in Ohio. One problem. He was in Arizona (San Carlos to be exact). And she was in Ohio.

To make his trip "paid for" he came up with an idea to bring Apaches to Washington D.C. It would be to meet with the Commissioner of Indian Affairs.

Along the way, his "group" participated in several Wild West Shows to also pay for his trip east. Those shows, although semi-profitable, took a long time and took a toll on the Apaches. So they just continued on their trip.

In this group of Apaches were several noted leaders of the San Carlos, Chiricahua and Aravapai Apaches. The Chiricahuas were represented by Taza, son of Cochise, and of Cullah, possible Lt. The Chiricahuas went to plead with Washington to return to their old reservation located in SouthEastern Arizona. The US Government removed them and placed them at San Carlos in 1874.

There are only but a handful of photographs taken at Washington DC with the group. Several more participated in individual photographs during the same session. Within one of those pictures is Taza.


In this picture is Cullah (Chiricahua Apache) second from left standing.  Around him are other members of the other Apache tribes.  This picture is at SIRIS- the picture search engine of the Smithsonian.


Here is his "profile" picture taken later on. It must be noted that the group photo above is informal.



Here is the "formal" photograph of the group.  L-R, Napashgingush, Eskiminzin, Hautushnehay, Unknown, Marlijildo Grijavla, John Clum, Pinal, Eskinilay, Eskayela, Skellegunny, TAZA, Cushshashado.

This "formal" photograph is not on the SIRIS image search.



<img src="http://twoyearpromise.com/taza5.jpg" alt=""><br><br>Taza is in this picture. Upper Right.  Thats him.  His Chiricahua Apache name is N'ta'zaan. Which means... Big Guy. And of course, english took over the shorter version of his name, Taza. <br><br>So lets look at some comparison photos.  I know history say thats Cullah and thats end of the story.  People just state it again and later it becomes truth.  Just like my identification of the "Capped Warrior" (Who is Ulzana, by the way).

So we will look at Cullah/Taza comparison first....



Cullah-Taza-Cullah. The Cullah photos are definately the same man. However, the middle individual is not the same person.

Here is a comparison with Naiche, his younger brother. Age should have been around the same.



The high-cheek bones of Cullah makes the different.  Naiche and Taza both dont have pronounced cheekbones.  Cullah and Taza are wearing different styles of shirts.  It may not mean much in 2013 but in 1876, you did not have several shirts to chose from.  It was usually one shirt and you made it last.

Taza was shorter than Cullah.  It has been romanticized that Chiricahua men were tall and lengthy.  They were not.  Naiche, (who is said to be one of the tallest apaches at the time) was only 5'8".  They were just tough as nails and had the right build to run all over the place.



I know there will be a continued discussion of what this books says versus that book.  As Mithlo has done numerous times, is heck with that book, im telling you right now.  I am doing the same.  I will stand by this.  

Also a quick note- the Chiricahuas, even to this day, know that Taza was poisoned and killed in DC.

There you have it. The only known photograph of Taza.

[penjady]

This new formatting and board is horrible!

Anyways.. Here is the "supposed only photograph of Taza"



This is in fact Scout Noche. This photo was taken in 1886. Not Taza.

[Mithlo]

Listen-up folks.....He's speaking the truth!!!!

[coeurrouge]

Thanks a lot Penjady !

I think you are right. In comparaison of the photo of Dos-te-seh, the mother and her sons, if you look under the right eye of the three, you can see the same round eye, begining of the nose base (family mark?)
For the man with the cape, I still thinking he was not Ulzana but Nezulkide, the last warrior to surrender in 1884. I do not have other photo of Nezulkide to compare.

By the way, this new formating was disturbing, I can not put attachement and can see updated photos

[pullingup]

If I could see a photo of both Cullah and the purported Taza in it, I might be convinced. The side by side photos showing Cullah on each side with the purported Taza between give me the impression that the purported Taza looks an awful lot like Cullah. Cullah has wavy hair that is unusual and is also in the central photo, and the shape of the mouth and chin seems to be the same. The photo of Noche has long been misidentified as Taza, to the extent that it was used as a model for the image on Taza's gravestone that was put on Taza's grave in the Congressional Cemetery in D.C. (by the local Indian Society sometime in the 1970's, I think)

[gregor]

Jul 12, 2013 15:32:08 GMT -5 pullingup said:

If I could see a photo of both Cullah and the purported Taza in it, I might be convinced. The side by side photos showing Cullah on each side with the purported Taza between give me the impression that the purported Taza looks an awful lot like Cullah. Cullah has wavy hair that is unusual and is also in the central photo, and the shape of the mouth and chin seems to be the same. The photo of Noche has long been misidentified as Taza, to the extent that it was used as a model for the image on Taza's gravestone that was put on Taza's grave in the Congressional Cemetery in D.C. (by the local Indian Society sometime in the 1970's, I think)

Hi,
here are two photographs of Noche, which have been shot about 1886:





Both captions say "Notchi" (aka Noche), Chiricahua.

greetings from germany

Gregor

[naiche]

Well I have a few points here...
I'm not saying that there's anything wrong, Im here to learn with all of you guys, just observations.
And I'm really glad to finally see a photo of Taza.
1 - As far as I know Naiche was 5'11, and according to Chiricahua Apache Enduring Power,
he was 6'2. I don't know from where this last information came but he seems to be clearly far from having only 5,8,
with those long bones. Anyway here it is:
"At six feet two inches, with a slender build and dignified bearing, Naiche bore a strong resemblance to his father, Cochise.
Everyone who met him commented on his physical similarity to Cochise (...) In contrast, Naiche's older brother Taza (...) carried 200 pounds on a 5'10 frame and had a pleasant, smiling face."

2 - Naiche's high cheekbones:

[jeroen]

I am with pullingup on this one...
I always understood that Taza came from Daza, meaning stout or well built, close to Big Guy. If his name means Big Guy, then one would expect him to be bigger than Cullah... but the purported Taza picture shows a smaller man. Also, both images show only part of the delegation which numbered 22 Apaches.
Also, like Naiche points out, Naiche was taller, Geronimo was 5,8 and in all photographs Naiche is clearly much taller. Lt. Davis, who knew Naiche, states he was about 6,1.
It would make sense for Taza to be in the pictures for he was among the most prominent members of the delegation. However, I don't recall exactly where, but I think I once read that the photographs were taken near the end of their trip (when Taza was ill/ already passed away)... Knowing exactly when the pictures were taken would certainly help...

[penjady]

I had a long discussion with an historian friend of mine recently.. I told him to put things in context of 1880s to get a good idea of life. The ideals, thoughts, nature, and human interaction was barbaric compared to 2013! Since we are still continuing as a culture, our ideals are similar to what was in 1880s. As much as it is the same, things are different.

in 2013,the average height of a man is only 5'8". In 1880, the avg height was 5'6" for all men. Now account for apaches living in their environment, their nutrition was not maxed out so they didn't reach the full height spectrum! In 1880' the average age expectancy was only 40 years. Do you think the apaches exceeded those numbers? Sure there are few that exceeded those figures but law of averages has to be looked at.

Some will question the name taza... Yes it means big guy. But when you think of it it terms of 2013, you think of 6'4" 260 lbs. well when u think of it in 1870, it was for a big guy in terms of weight. There were only a few large size individuals especially apaches who had to run daily as part of daily culture. Apaches are very descriptive with their names. You must ask yourselves, do the apaches have a word for tall guy in their language? You darn right they did. And they have a word for big. They have a word for fat. They have a word for skinny. Every imaginable description, they had a word for it. But i guess don't take my word for it. What do i know about the language.

I am going to be frank here and say it straight. If i upset you, so be it. I aint here to be your friend. i am trying to help you understand Chiricahua culture, the true history. I am an Chiricahua Apache. As for several others on the board also. We have an upward battle dealing with books and hollywood stereotyping on our culture. 75% of gibberish on chiricahua apaches out there is nonsense! There are fake indians, other indians and people of color trying to be us. Trying to be me. Im upset with it. Its full of baloney! As i told a german "historian" this month that came to mescalero... Do you want to know the truth or are you going to continue to feed me some book? As asa daklugie told eve ball, do you want to hear it from me or you want to believe some second hand writer? Ive been biting my tongue for a long time on this... But i believe enough is enough.

Just as with the courts of law, you want to find the best supporting evidence to help you. If ONE document has that support you may need, its off to the races and their is no changing your mind.

90% on this board knows apache from what they have read whether it be one book or 100 books. 5% know apaches because they have been around the culure such as a trip. The other 5% are true blooded apaches trying to help you understand. I am tired of hollywood trying to tell me and my family how i should be. I am tired of books trying to make me someone else. I am not a bloodthirsty savage hostile with killing on my mind day and night!

There are wonderful sources on this board... Mainly Mithlo, that will help you out. Not because he is a nice guy(i have never met him) but because he wants it right for the future. He knows his stuff. This new book by alicia... Has many wonderful names as sources, many of these people i knew of personally. Not a name in a book. I know of thier children and childrens children.

As avid historians on apaches as anyone in the world, you might consider to open your mind up just a little bit on what we are sharing with you because what chirichauas share with you now is for a purpose. To help you better understand the chiricahua. And we dont share it very often with everyone. Especially with randam people on the internet.

Respectfully,

Penjady

[jeroen]

You do not upset me at all, I like you being frank and open. You do not need to be my friend either, as I did not ask you to. But I am not your enemy either, in fact I agree with all you say. You pour out a lot of irritations and I can imagine it is frustrating to see and read so many so called facts and statements about your own people, your own family. Speaking five languages and having lived in many places, in different countries and continents, I have learned the meaning of the word identity. I am no 'historian', I am not an Apache, but I am sincerly interested in Apache culture and history and, like you, I like to have the facts straight. Again, I do agree with you.
But that does not change the fact that I don't think the picture actually shows Taza. History, all history, is a matter of interpretation. You can stand by your opinion (as you write in your first post) and that is fine, but I am simply not convinced. Nothing wrong with having a different opinion on the id of an 1876 photograph now is there?
all the best,
Jeroen

[penjady]

Fair enough. Thank you Jeroen.

[ulzana]

Well, Penjady, thank you for  sharing your knowledge with us, in fact we need to understand Chiricahua world, and i think that all of us want a better knowledge of your people

[dT]

"5% know apaches because they have been around the culure such as a trip"

I am Nd'aa. I do hope to make the trip to Mescalero. But my only time available right now is August, and Arizona is far too hot in August. I know that Mescalero is in NM, but I have to cross Arizona to get there :-) I made that mistake last year - temperatures around Phoenix and Tuscon were really hot! This year I am just going to retreat into the high mountains of California and rest during my vacation in August. But I hope to come out to Mescalero and see you some day Penjady.

good luck. it's hard fighting stereotypes. but you make progress little by little.

and by the way you are right. the whole culture was very different back in the 1880's. Nd'aa culture was very much different. No doubt Nde culture was also much different. I realize it when I see old places. For example, there is a ghost town called Bode in Northern California. It has not changed much from a long time ago. If you look at the beds and the furniture - those people were tiny. Really small compared to people today. In fact, I am even surprised that their average height was 5ft 6 inches. If you asked me, I would have guessed shorter than that!! So yes, you cannot judge the past by our modern views. We forget how different that whole world was.

dT

[jasper4]

Jul 12, 2013 0:25:06 GMT -5 Mithlo said:

Listen-up folks.....He's speaking the truth!!!!

roger that cuz

[RomsD]

Brilliant Penjady, I think you are correct.
You can find J.P. Clum's version of the trip to Washington DC here, in his article on Es-kim-in-zin:

www.google.com/search?q=Arizona+Historical+Review+Vol2%2F1929+nr+2%3A+Es-kim-in-zin&rls=com.microsoft:no:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7ADFA_no