Firstly, I will discuss what the argument is about, it is clear even from the opening line that the article is about the issue of the invention of scalping. This is clear as the article is called, 'The Unkindest Cut, or Who Invented Scalping?'. This introduces that the article is going to be about scalping and who invented it. It also shows that the article is going to be more of a favorable argument rather than a balanced one. This is due to James Axtell wanting to put his point across and give his side and view to the issue of the invention of scalping. The …show more content…
Axtell argues that the Native's were the ones who invented scalping as he discusses the traditional view of it being the "savage Indians" who invented scalping. He disagrees with the new view held by Cornplanter, we know this as in the article he discusses the new version and says, "the new version about scalping would not warrant scholarly attention if it were only an intellectual fad", what he is saying here that it is a "fad" this word plays down his respect and belief in the new version. By, calling it a fad he makes the view seem obsolete and rather idiotic to believe. In the next paragraph, he goes on by calling the new version the "new myth" this completely shows the lack of care for this new belief by Axtell. By calling it a "myth" he is making it seem made up and rather