In Jane Tompkins 1986 essay, "'Indians': Textualism, Morality, and the Problem of History" she describes the issues that come with studying historical events through opinionated works. While studying the history of occurrences between Native Americans and English settlers in the seventeenth-century Tompkins discovered the so called "problem of history." She had been researching different works and events when she began to feel as though something was wrong. Tompkins looked at the works and felt that none of them held credibility since none of them agreed. Driven to make her point, she continued to investigate more works that all ended up being invalid in her eyes. Could it be that there is not one factual account of the history of settlers and Native Americans? The fact of the matter is that Tompkins doesn't know what to think. The beginning and middle of her essay is dedicated to showing the reader that all the passages she had read are false; however, the conclusion of her essay differs from the other two; in fact, it completely contradicts her original statements. Can Tompkins opinions be considered valid? Although her thoughts in the middle of the work may seem convincing, it is also true that Tompkins overturns her opinions in her final section, causing a loss of credibility on her part. She focuses on dismissing every aspect of everything she reads, often times using bias as an excuse to deem a work false. While reading about Englishmen who had been captured by Indians Tompkins stated: "These authors could be presumed to be less severely biased since they hadn't seen their loved ones killed by Indians or been made to endure the hardships of captivity,and because they weren't writing propaganda calculated to prove that God had delivered his chosen people from the hands of Satan's emissaries" (Tompkins 728). Wouldn't it be easier to come to a valid conclusion by reading n...