How to Approach “The Cherokees Resist Removal, 1830”
All 10 questions, walked through — what each one is really asking, what to look for in the document, and how to write an answer that goes beyond surface-level description.
Document analysis assignments look simple on the surface — read a source, answer some questions. But the questions your professor is asking aren’t trivia questions. They’re asking you to think historically: about who spoke, why they spoke, who was listening, and what those words reveal about the power dynamics of 1830 America. This guide walks through each of the 10 questions for Document Analysis #3 and tells you exactly how to approach them.
The PDF contains two documents. Document #1 is John C. Calhoun’s 1825 War Department Indian Policy statement. Document #2 — the one this assignment is about — is “The Cherokees Resist Removal, 1830.” Your assignment sheet flags this explicitly. Make sure you’re analyzing the second document, not the first. The opening line — “We are aware, that some persons suppose it will be for our advantage to remove beyond the Mississippi” — is how Document #2 begins.
What This Guide Covers
Understanding the Historical Context Before You Write a Word
You can’t analyze this document well if you treat it as an isolated text. The year matters. The political situation matters. Here’s the short version.
In 1830, President Andrew Jackson pushed the Indian Removal Act through Congress. The law gave the federal government authority to negotiate treaties that would relocate eastern Native American tribes — including the Cherokee — to lands west of the Mississippi River. The Cherokee had spent decades actively trying to assimilate into American civic life. They had a written constitution, a newspaper (the Cherokee Phoenix), and established farms and institutions. They were not a “vanishing” people. They were a politically organized nation watching the U.S. government prepare to forcibly move them.
This document is their response. It’s a formal appeal — essentially a petition — directed at the U.S. Congress. Everything about how it’s written, what arguments it makes, and what language it chooses is shaped by that audience and that moment.
Questions 1 and 2: Date and Authorship
These two are the most factual questions on the sheet — but they still require more than a one-word answer for full credit.
When Was the Document Created?
The answer is right in the title: 1830. But don’t just write “1830” and move on. Think about why that date is significant and work it into your answer. 1830 is the year Congress passed the Indian Removal Act. The appeal was written in direct response to that legislative threat — or in anticipation of it. Noting the context around the date shows your professor you understand this as a historical document, not just a text floating in time.
How to answer it: State the year. Then in one sentence, connect it to the political moment — the Indian Removal Act of 1830. That’s all you need. This is a short-answer question, not an essay.Who Created the Document?
Your assignment sheet has already given you the answer here — and told you exactly how specific to be. The author was a representative of the Cherokee tribe. The specific individual is not identified in the excerpt. Notice the document uses “we” throughout — “We are aware,” “We think otherwise,” “We wish to remain.” This collective voice is intentional. The author is speaking not as an individual but as a voice for the entire Cherokee nation.
Key detail to mention: The use of “we” throughout the document signals that this is a collective statement on behalf of the Cherokee people, even though a single representative wrote it down. That’s worth noting — it tells you something about how the author wanted the document to be read.Question 3: Summarizing the Document
This is the most writing-intensive question on the sheet, and it’s doing three things at once: asking for a summary, asking for the main claim(s), and asking for the evidence used. Don’t blend them together. Address each part separately, even if you write it as a flowing paragraph.
Keep your summary to two or three sentences. The document is a formal appeal by the Cherokee people to the U.S. Congress arguing against forced removal from their ancestral lands. It argues that the Cherokee have both a moral and a legal right to remain, that removal would cause immense suffering, and that agreeing to move would leave them permanently vulnerable to future dispossession. That covers the document without reproducing it.
There are really two core claims running through the document. First: the Cherokee have a legal right to their land, backed by formal treaties with the U.S. government. Second: removal would cause severe, unjust suffering — and agreeing to it would only invite future exploitation. You can present these as two claims or fold them into one overarching argument about justice and legal obligation.
The author uses several types of evidence. There’s the treaty evidence — pointing to existing legal agreements guaranteeing Cherokee land rights. There’s the practical evidence — describing the human cost of removal for infants, the elderly, the sick, and the vulnerable. And there’s the rhetorical evidence — the near-universal opposition among Cherokee adults who submitted memorials to Congress. Identify at least two types of evidence in your answer to show you’ve actually read closely.
Question 4: The Opening Statement
The question quotes the document’s opening: “We are aware, that some persons suppose it will be for our advantage to remove beyond the Mississippi. We think otherwise. Our people universally think otherwise.”
Why include that? Think rhetorically. The author is doing something specific here, and your job is to name it.
Why Did the Author Include This Opening Statement?
The author is preemptively addressing a counterargument — the paternalistic claim made by removal supporters that moving the Cherokee would actually benefit them. By naming that argument at the very start and rejecting it firmly (“We think otherwise. Our people universally think otherwise”), the author does two things at once. First, it shows the Cherokee are aware of how their opponents frame the issue — they’re not ignorant of the debate. Second, it immediately establishes that this is a matter of Cherokee self-determination. The Cherokee aren’t confused about what’s good for them. They’re being overruled.
What to emphasize: This opening is a deliberate rhetorical move. It seizes the frame of the debate. Rather than waiting to be told removal is “for their own good,” the author heads that argument off at the start and replaces it with a clear, unified Cherokee voice. “Universally” is a word worth noting — it signals the author wants Congress to understand this is not a divided opinion.Question 5: The Strongest Argument Against Removal
This question asks for your opinion — “what do you think” — but your opinion needs to be supported by reasoning from the document. Don’t just pick something and assert it. Explain why that argument is stronger than the others.
What Was the Cherokee’s Strongest Argument?
There are two main candidates, and your answer should engage with both before landing on one. The first is the treaty rights argument: the author states plainly that treaties with the U.S. government “guarantee our residence and our privileges, and secure us against intruders.” This is a legal argument. The U.S. would not be asking the Cherokee to relocate — it would be breaking binding agreements it had already made. The second is the human suffering argument: the author describes the devastating physical and psychological toll of forcibly relocating an entire community — infants, the elderly, the sick, the blind.
Which is stronger and why: Most historians consider the treaty argument the most legally and logically potent — it held the U.S. to its own word. The Supreme Court eventually agreed in Worcester v. Georgia (1832), though Jackson famously ignored the ruling. For your answer, make a case for one and explain your rationale. Don’t just list both and leave it there. Your professor wants you to take a position and defend it.The National Archives documents the Cherokee Nation’s legal challenges extensively. In 1832, the Supreme Court ruled in Worcester v. Georgia that Georgia had no authority over Cherokee lands and that federal treaties protected Cherokee sovereignty. Jackson reportedly refused to enforce the ruling. That outcome — the government ignoring both treaty law and Supreme Court precedent — is exactly what the 1830 appeal was warning about.
Question 6: “Victims of a Future Legalized Robbery”
This is a quotation interpretation question. The phrase appears in the document when the author argues that complying with removal wouldn’t protect the Cherokee — it would only make them easier to exploit again later.
What Did “Legalized Robbery” Mean?
Break the phrase into its parts. “Robbery” is the taking of something that belongs to someone else. “Legalized” means done through the apparatus of law — made to appear legitimate by passing a statute or using legal language, even if the underlying act is unjust. So “legalized robbery” is theft that the government calls legal. And “victims of a future legalized robbery” — that future tense matters. The author is making a forward-looking argument: if we move once because the government applied enough legal pressure, we will move again. Compliance doesn’t create safety. It creates precedent.
What to include in your answer: Explain what the phrase means in plain terms, then explain what the author’s point is — that agreeing to removal once would not secure the Cherokee’s future. It would signal to the U.S. government that legislative force is all it takes to displace them. There would always be another removal waiting.Question 7: How the Cherokee Were Described — and How They Responded
This question has two parts. Don’t answer only one of them. “How had the Cherokee been described by others” and “how did the author respond” are separate things, and both need to appear in your answer.
How Others Described the Cherokee
The author directly addresses the characterizations used to justify removal. The Cherokee had been called “a poor, ignorant, and degraded people.” These labels were used by removal supporters to argue that the Cherokee were not capable of self-governance, that their land was wasted on them, and that displacement was practically a favor. It’s worth noting that this language — “degraded,” “ignorant” — was standard in the political vocabulary used to dehumanize Native peoples and rationalize dispossession. The author knows this and names it head-on.
How the Author Responded
The response is sharp and specific — not a blanket denial, but a concession on minor points followed by a firm rejection of the conclusion. The author acknowledges: “We certainly are not rich; nor have we ever boasted of our knowledge, or our moral or intellectual elevation.” But then: there is not a man among them so ignorant as not to know he has a right to live on the land of his fathers — a right acknowledged and guaranteed by the United States. The author is saying: even if you accept every negative thing said about us, it changes nothing about our legal rights.
Don’t just list the labels. Explain what they were being used to do — to justify removal by making the Cherokee seem undeserving of their land. And when you explain the author’s response, show that it was a two-part move: acknowledge the criticism on its own terms, then pivot to the legal argument that makes the criticism irrelevant. The author doesn’t get defensive. The response is strategic.
Question 8: The Intended Audience
Who Was the Intended Audience?
The document states this directly — the Cherokee “almost to a man sent their memorial to congress.” Congress was the primary intended audience. More specifically, the appeal was directed at the members of Congress who were debating and voting on the Indian Removal Act in 1830. But think one level further: Congress in 1830 was itself an audience of white male landowners, many with economic interests in expanding settlement into Cherokee territory. The author’s choice of language — legalistic, formal, invoking constitutional principles — is calibrated for that audience. This was not an appeal to public sentiment. It was a legal brief addressed to the lawmakers who held the Cherokee’s fate.
Go beyond just naming Congress: Note that the appeal was also, in a broader sense, directed at any sympathetic American public that might pressure Congress — missionaries, religious societies, anti-removal advocates like those who circulated petitions. The document was meant to persuade, and persuasion requires knowing your audience. Discuss how the document’s formal register fits its congressional audience.Question 9: Why Was the Appeal Written?
The Motive Behind the Document
On one level the answer is obvious: the appeal was written to stop removal. But “motive” in document analysis means something more specific. What did the author believe this document could do? The Cherokee leadership believed, at this moment, that legal and political argument could still work — that Congress could be persuaded, that treaty obligations would be honored, that the rule of law meant something. The appeal was an attempt to work within the American political system using the system’s own logic. It’s not a cry of despair. It’s a calculated legal and moral argument directed at people the authors believed still had the power to act differently.
The deeper layer: The appeal was also a document for the historical record. Even if Congress didn’t listen in 1830, the Cherokee were creating a formal, written record of their objections, their legal claims, and their humanity. That has proven to be historically significant regardless of the immediate outcome.Question 10: What Indian Removal Revealed About Government Attitudes
This is the biggest-picture question on the sheet. It asks you to move from the specific document to a broader historical claim about U.S. governmental attitudes toward Native Americans. Use the document as your evidence, but zoom out for your answer.
What Did Indian Removal Highlight About Government Attitudes?
Several things, and your answer will be stronger if you name more than one. First, it revealed that the U.S. government prioritized white settler expansion over its own treaty obligations. The treaties guaranteeing Cherokee land rights were not abstractions — they were formal, signed agreements. Ignoring them when they became inconvenient showed that legal commitments to Native nations were conditional, not binding. Second, removal revealed a fundamental denial of Native sovereignty. The government treated the Cherokee — a nation with a constitution, a legislature, a court system — as subjects to be managed, not as a sovereign people with rights of self-determination. Third, the use of state laws (particularly Georgia’s laws stripping Cherokees of legal standing) showed how the machinery of law could be weaponized to dispossess people while maintaining the appearance of legality. That’s what “legalized robbery” meant.
How to frame your answer: Don’t moralize — analyze. Your job isn’t to tell your professor that removal was wrong. It’s to identify what attitudes and assumptions it exposed. Think about what the government had to believe — about Native people, about land, about treaty law — for removal to seem justified. Those assumptions are the attitudes the question is asking about.The National Archives’ teaching resources on federal Indian policy provide primary sources, timelines, and context directly relevant to this question. Looking at how the Indian Removal Act was framed in official government documents — compared to how the Cherokee framed their appeal — gives you a concrete sense of the gap between stated governmental values and actual governmental priorities. That gap is exactly what Question 10 is asking you to discuss.
Mistakes That Cost Points
Analyzing the Wrong Document
The PDF includes Document #1 (Calhoun, 1825) and Document #2 (Cherokee Removal, 1830). Your assignment is about Document #2. If you accidentally analyze Calhoun’s policy statement, your answers will be wrong for every question. Check your opening line — it should start with “We are aware.”
Confirm the Right Starting Line
Before writing anything, locate the line “We are aware, that some persons suppose it will be for our advantage to remove beyond the Mississippi.” That’s the beginning of Document #2 — the one this assignment covers. If you see that, you’re in the right place.
Writing Without Complete Sentences (Q3–10)
The assignment sheet explicitly says “for questions 3 through 10, please use complete sentences.” This isn’t optional. Bullet points, fragments, or one-word answers for those questions won’t earn full credit regardless of whether the content is correct.
Write in Full, Substantive Sentences
Even if your answer is short — two or three sentences — make sure each one is a complete thought with a subject and verb. “The audience was Congress” is a fragment. “The intended audience for this document was the United States Congress” is a complete sentence that shows you’re taking the assignment seriously.
Summarizing Without Identifying Claims and Evidence (Q3)
Question 3 has three sub-parts: a summary, identification of the main claim(s), and identification of evidence. Students frequently write a summary and call it done. That’s one-third of the answer. Address all three parts.
Structure Q3 as Three Distinct Parts
You don’t need to use headers, but organize your answer so it’s clear you’ve covered all three: what the document is about (summary), what the central argument is (claim), and what specific evidence the author uses to support that argument (evidence). A reader should be able to see all three parts in your response.
Treating Q5 as a Summary Instead of an Argument
Question 5 asks what you think the strongest argument was — and to explain your rationale. Many students just list the arguments without taking a position. That’s not what the question asks. You need to pick one argument, state why you think it’s the strongest, and defend that view.
Take and Defend a Position
Pick the treaty rights argument or the human suffering argument — whichever you find more compelling — and explain your reasoning clearly. “I believe the treaty rights argument was strongest because…” is the right structure. A position without a rationale, or a rationale without a clear position, won’t earn full marks.
Question 3 asks you to summarize in your own words — not to copy sentences from the document and slightly rearrange them. Every answer should be in your own language. When you do need to reference specific language from the text (like the “legalized robbery” quote in Q6), put it in quotation marks. For guidance on how to write about primary sources and paraphrase correctly, see the citation and referencing guide.
Frequently Asked Questions
Need More Help With This Assignment?
From primary source analysis and essay drafting to full assignment support — our history specialists work across U.S. history survey courses at all levels.
History Homework Help Get StartedWhy This Document Still Matters
The Cherokee appeal of 1830 is not just a historical footnote. It’s one of the clearest examples in American history of a group of people using the U.S. government’s own stated principles — rule of law, treaty obligations, individual rights — to argue against their own destruction. And it failed. That failure tells you something too.
When you answer Question 10, you’re not just describing what happened to the Cherokee. You’re identifying the gap between the principles the United States claimed to hold and the priorities it actually acted on. That gap — between stated values and actual policy — is one of the central tensions in American history. This document sits right at the heart of it.
Read it closely. The answers to most of these questions are in the text itself — you just have to know what you’re looking for.