Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Pennsylvania, 1931. / Bibliography: p. 84-86.

Indian Key Historic State Park is a small island located on the Atlantic Ocean side of the Florida Keys, near Islamorada. Before it was bought by the state of Florida in 1970, Indian Key had been the setting for a number of historically significant activities. The most well known of these is the 1840 raid on the people and buildings that made up a small wrecking village, established on the island by Jacob Housman in the early 1830s. The limestone foundations of these structures are the main attraction to today's visitor to the park. There is more to the story of Indian Key, though, than the Housman period and the structural remains left behind from this stage of the island's history. Almost immediately after the near destruction of the island in 1840, the Florida Squadron of the Navy took over, constructing their own buildings, and re-using some of the previously constructed foundations. This cycle of rebuilding and re-use continued for another hundred years, with families and fishers trying to inhabit and profit from Indian Key. The focus of this thesis is to examine the foundations and associated archaeological features of Indian Key in order to determine better periods of use and re-use for the buildings that have been identified through archaeological investigations. This research was conducted in order to examine the site's architecture through an archaeological perspective; it is by no means an attempt at a complete architectural study of the site. Rather, it is an effort to examine the entire island of Indian Key, by focusing on the history of the buildings that helped make it an important piece of Florida's past.

Title from PDF of title page. / Document formatted into pages; contains 130 pages. / Thesis (M.A.)--University of South Florida, 2003. / Includes bibliographical references. / Text (Electronic thesis) in PDF format. / ABSTRACT: Indian Key Historic State Park is a small island located on the Atlantic Ocean side of the Florida Keys, near Islamorada. Before it was bought by the state of Florida in 1970, Indian Key had been the setting for a number of historically significant activities. The most well known of these is the 1840 raid on the people and buildings that made up a small wrecking village, established on the island by Jacob Housman in the early 1830s. The limestone foundations of these structures are the main attraction to today's visitor to the park. There is more to the story of Indian Key, though, than the Housman period and the structural remains left behind from this stage of the island's history. Almost immediately after the near destruction of the island in 1840, the Florida Squadron of the Navy took over, constructing their own buildings, and re-using some of the previously constructed foundations. / ABSTRACT: This cycle of rebuilding and re-use continued for another hundred years, with families and fishers trying to inhabit and profit from Indian Key. The focus of this thesis is to examine the foundations and associated archaeological features of Indian Key in order to determine better periods of use and re-use for the buildings that have been identified through archaeological investigations. This research was conducted in order to examine the site's architecture through an archaeological perspective; it is by no means an attempt at a complete architectural study of the site. Rather, it is an effort to examine the entire island of Indian Key, by focusing on the history of the buildings that helped make it an important piece of Florida's past. / System requirements: World Wide Web browser and PDF reader. / Mode of access: World Wide Web.

No description available.

This dissertation considers how gendered discourses shaped the US Army’s culture during the Second Seminole War of 1835-1842 and the Mexican-American War of 1846-1848. Historians have increasingly understood these years as the regular army’s formative era but focus on officers. Yet, while native-born West Pointers came to dominate the officer corps, foreign-born recruits filled the enlisted ranks. Little scholarship considers what it meant for the army to be increasingly led by West Pointers and manned by foreign-born soldiers. Officers left the military academy with deeply held beliefs regarding what it meant to be an officer in the army family—a stern father to enlisted men and the Native peoples whom the army considered its wards, and a committed protector of supposedly harmless women. Their paternalistic ideals encountered the complexities of war in Florida and Mexico, where officers both sought to accomplish their missions and condition enlisted men to their authority. Through these wartime experiences, a shared army culture emerged. It was animated by the figure of the soldier as a protector of women and tested in interactions between the army and enemy—Native and Mexican—women. This previously unacknowledged development lent army culture an internal coherence that guaranteed officers’ control over soldiers and an external coherence characterized by a reputation for paternalism. This enabled the army to secure a respected position as an American institution. One consequence was that soldiers were unable, or unwilling, to understand women as enemies. As a result, such authors largely erased or ignored female combatancy from their records—a process typical of many wars. The key to uncovering women’s contributions is to look more critically at official military documents. Methodologically, this project proposes a feminist approach to military history that considers how army leaders constructed women’s presence in, and absence from, military records in specific, deliberate ways. Grasping that process matters—it legitimized the regular army and its officers. Attention to discourses about women, the prototypical outsiders in histories of war, can help historians consider the discursive processes at work within the genre of army writing. The army’s erasure of women’s wartime activities succeeded so well that according to most accounts of the 1830s and 1840s, women—whether Mexican, Native, or American—had no military history. Yet, the army’s relationships with enemy women shaped it in meaningful ways. The regular army's paternalism, well developed by 1848, used men’s control over and obligations to women to reify the superiority of regular soldiers to other men and of officers to enlisted men. The protection of women sometimes served as a common language between officers and enlisted men, sometimes as a path for enlisted men to challenge officers’ claims to moral superiority, and sometimes as a justification for changes to military policy. By 1848, these workings cohered into an engine of army paternalism, a deep-seated logic whose machinations were sometimes overt, sometimes submerged, and underlay the army’s choices. I call this the logic of protection.

This study examines in depth the most common interpretation of the opening of the Third Seminole War (1855-1858). The interpretation in question was authored almost thirty years after the beginning of the war, and it alleges that the destruction of a Seminole banana plant garden by United States soldiers was the direct cause of the conflict. This study analyzes the available primary records as well as traces the entire historiography of the Third Seminole War in order to ascertain how and why the banana garden account has had such an impactful and long-lasting effect. Based on available evidence, it is clear that the lack of fully contextualized primary records, combined with the failure of historians to deviate from or challenge previous scholarship, has led to a persistent reliance on the banana garden interpretation that continues to the present. Despite the highly questionable and problematic nature of this account, it has dominated the historiography on the topic and is found is almost every written source that addresses the beginning of the Third Seminole War. This thesis refutes the validity of the banana garden interpretation, and in addition, provides alternative explanations for the Florida Seminoles' decision to wage war against the United States during the 1850s.

This study demonstrates that both government officials‟ and the settlers‟ perceptions of the Seminoles and Black Seminoles in Florida were highly influenced by their paternalistic and Jeffersonian world views. These perceptions also informed their policies concerning the Seminoles and Black Seminoles. The study is separated into three sections. The first chapter covers the years of 1820-1823. This section argues that until 1823, most settlers and government officials viewed the Seminoles as noble savages that were dependent on the U.S. Furthermore, most of these individuals saw the Black Seminoles as being secure among the Seminole Indians and as no threat to white authority. The second chapter covers the years of 1823-1828 and demonstrates that during this time most settlers began to view Seminoles outside of the reservation as threats to the frontier in Florida. This reflected the Jeffersonian world view of the settlers. Government officials, on the contrary, continued to believe that the Seminole Indians were noble savages that were no threat to the frontier because of their paternal world view. Both groups by 1828 wanted the Seminoles and Black Seminoles separated. The final chapter covers the years of 1829-1836. It argues that by 1835 both settlers and government officials believed that the Seminoles and Black Seminoles were clear threats to the frontier because of the fear of a slave revolt and the beginning of Seminole resistance to removal. Most of the shifts in the perception of the Seminoles and Black Seminoles by government officials and the settlers were the result of their white gender and racial world views that then in turn affected their policies towards the Seminoles and Black Seminoles