Rachel Mangels Module 2 Blog Post
The source that I reviewed from the Module 2 online resources can be found at http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/Indian.html and is part of the Library of Congress’ digital reference section.
For those of you who did not review this source of have not read specific details about the Indian Removal Act- primary points are summarized below.
Indian Removal Act
-Signed into law by President Andrew Jackson on May 28,1830
<< Despite the fact that he is known for the “Trail of Tears” (discussed further below) President Andrew Jackson is still honored by being featured on the $20 bill.)
-It essentially authorized the President to designate specific areas west of the Mississippi that wee unsettled as new Indian territory so that control could be taken of the land that Indians were already living on (and had been living on for a very long time)
-In a message to Congress a few months later in December he described the Act as something that was moving along smoothly and would be a benefit to the natives “Two important tribes have accepted the provision made for their removal at the last session of Congress, and it is believed that their example will induce the remaining tribes also to seek the same obvious advantages."<br>
-The majority of tribes resisted the relocation resulting in natives being forcibly moved West by the United States government
-A relatively well-known example is the “Trail of Tears” when the Cherokees were forcible relocated in the fall/winter of 1838 and 1839- resulting in the death of approximately 4,000 Cherokees
-At an additional source that I jumped to from the teacher’s resources at the bottom of my source I read that initially when reservations were established that tribes were approached as separate nations. However, this was then viewed as giving them too much pride and slowing down the progress that the United States wanted to make. The Cherokees were denied Foreign Nation status in the case of The Cherokee Nation vs. The State of Cherokee in 1831 just 7 years before their forced migration.
I think that the source that I reviewed was meant to be informative while presenting the facts but also to fairly represent the plight that the natives endured which also created sympathy. A specific example would be the fact that the migration of the Cherokees could have been worded very differently such as the “U.S. government assisted the Cherokees in the migration to their new land. Sadly, however 4,000 natives passed away to severe weather conditions (or another explanation). However, the information was truthfully represented with the source stated that they were forcefully relocated by the U.S. Government.
I feel that this was a fairly good academic website because it included specific dates and statistics and an excerpt from a real speech. In addition, it provided links to additional resources that went more in-depth.
I found the source informative because I recalled the “Trail of Tears” but had forgotten specific details and not previously read President Andrew Jackson’s address to Congress.
Questions:
Do you think that less deaths would have occurred during the migration if they were not done forcibly?
Do you think that President Jackson genuinely believed that his plan was beneficial for both natives and colonizers?
What would possible benefits be for natives?
This is an interesting topic because it shows the depth that the colonial government went to in order to get what they wanted. They completely disregarded the rights of the Indian nations and used a sort of eminent domain to take their land. “Early in the 19th century, while the rapidly-growing United States expanded into the lower South, white settlers faced what they considered an obstacle. This area was home to the Cherokee, Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaw and Seminole nations. These Indian nations, in the view of the settlers and many other white Americans, were standing in the way of progress. Eager for land to raise cotton, the settlers pressured the federal government to acquire Indian territory” (PBS).
ReplyDeleteTo put this into perspective, in 1814, under the command of Andrew Jackson, the U.S. military took 22 million acres of land from the Creek nation in Georgia and Alabama. When we look at it in terms of millions of acres, from one single nation, it’s hard to imagine the total amount of land that was confiscated from all Indian nations. Then when we think about the amount of people who were displaced, the number must be staggering.
The thing that’s most bothersome about this is that these actions were completely based on greed, and there was no sense of humanity or compassion for the people whose lives were destroyed. This is a really sad time in American history, and what makes it worse is that things like this are still happening today.
You presented a good post and I enjoyed reading it.
PBS. (n.d.). Indian Removal. PBS. Retrieved July 1, 2014, from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4p2959.html
I'm glad you enjoyed the post! I agree that what is most saddening about the actions that were taken to acquire more land is that it was entirely based on greed and a constant need for what settlers felt was "progress". America has become home to so many different people groups with different ethnicities, backgrounds and believes so I wonder if America could have become as diverse as it without the expansions that took place. Anybody have any thoughts on what America would look like today if Euro-Americans hadn't pushed so hard to constantly expand their territories?
DeleteThis is a very good topic to choose. The "Trail of Tears" was such a horrible event. The name it was given is a good representation of what it truly was. The U.S. government probably thought that the Native's were mobile and that they would be fine. Their thinking was careless and naive. The Native American's wanted to hold onto their land. They did not want to leave the area in which their relatives were buried, Even if the government gave them time to leave they did not want to give up without a fight. They tried to fight it and were forcibly moved. This was depicted in the 500 nations video on you tube. The army would force them to leave by quickly evacuating families from their homes. They did not even allow children to take a toy or allow people to take food or supplies. The treatment was very inhumane. It is hard to believe that it was acceptable to treat people this way. Yet, the government did not see a problem with it.
ReplyDeleteThe whole situation is very saddening. Similar situations can be seen in modern day in which families are forced to move with very minimal belongings due to their home areas becoming war zones.
DeleteI actually do think Jackson thought removal was best for everyone. He actually adopted an American Indian boy after slaughtering his tribe. Complicated time and a complicated man. I don't think it was lawful that the American Indians were removed nor did the Supreme Court. What saddens me about the situation goes beyond the deaths of 4000 Cherokee. Many had assimilated, done just what was asked of them for naught. Some did protest the removal, but were ignored.
ReplyDeleteHi Nicole!
DeleteThank you for your response! I was not aware that Jackson had adopted a native child- that is very interesting and definitely shows a different side to him and the decisions that he made.
That is very sad that so many Cherokee people died. I remember growing up in the early seventies and hearing that song "Cherokee People" with the verses and meanings within the song promoting deep thought for me who was only like 5 or 6. So many disputes and fights have been a theme within history and even today with fighting wars among men who disagree, and the unfortunate deaths that are the outcome as a result of human beings seeing the world as vastly different we no willingness to find a middle ground. It's there way or the highway mentality.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it is tragic that so many Cherokees passed away during the Trail of Tears. As you said- any life lost is tragic but even more so when it is simply among those who are unwillingly to find a middle ground. Accidents and poor health take enough lives without adding deaths as a result of violence and disputes among people groups.
DeleteI think all tribes suffered when being "herded to their reservations" from their original homes. My people had suffered the same loss when the Army Corp of Engineers moved us from "old 17" to the two relocation areas that we live on today. In 1964 we were forced to leave our homes because the government said that our lands would flood due to the construction of the Kinzua Dam. During this time many of our older people passed on. I can remember my mother telling me the story of the removal and that people actually stayed in their homes until the last moment. This was a move that no one wanted to make and left many people heartbroken. Today there are to "relocation" ares, one is where I live which is Jimersontown and the other is Steamburg. I think the best way to learn about it is to listen to the song "As Long As The Grass Shall Grow" by Johnny Cash. I mean you can always read up on but to have it sung to you is far better, especially by that voice lol!!!
ReplyDelete