Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz's book An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States has received a lot of praise for how thoroughly it covers the genocide, land theft, and settler-colonialism that are at the heart of U.S. history. But the text's most important contribution is not the content of its analysis or its challenge to national myths; it is that it is a project of decolonial historiographical processes. Dunbar-Ortiz's placement of the narrative, her point of storytelling, her repositioning of land and indigeneity as frames of the history, her deliberate naming of genocide and conquest, and her explicit disavowal of American myths and of "disappearance" as a story of Indigenous resistance all disrupt the structures of historiography as it grounds U.S. cultural power on territorial sovereignty. This represents not a specific revision of history, but a decolonial method of historiography that can be transposed to other contexts. This paper looks at how Dunbar-Ortiz effectively creates a historiographical model flexible enough to be instructive to other settler-colonial contexts and modes of knowledge production, asking what ethical historiography looks like and why language, narration, chronology, author positioning, and complicity are crucial issues not only in historical description (which is never neutral, unbiased, or decontextualized), but also in the naming of theory, in the creation of social notions about what the West means, and even in the cliché short and long answer to the question, What happened?