 |
| Figure 1. Invisible Man - Invisible Sovereignty http://www.fascinatingpics.com/invisible-mans-shadows-2/ |
For my FPONA studies at Empire State College the current module of study is on Native America from “Reservation to Resurgence”. This is a very rich and diverse timeframe, which covers the mid 1800’s through to the twenty-first century, for America as a whole; there were many resources available to choose from in regards to the role of American Indians during this period. One place the course focused on studying was the way the United States government has crafted law and policy to deal with the “Indian Problem” of sovereign nations operating inside of United States territory.
Trying to sift through the myriad of subjects and authors I came across a few articles by Peter d’Errico. Throughout his work, he references sovereignty, which is the basis of any nation to have legitimate authority, legal proceedings and the work of other scholars to discuss Native issues. The work of one article in particular was very useful while preparing my efforts for other assignments.
 |
Figure 2. Cantino Planisphere http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cantino_planisphere_(1502).jpg |
In American Indian Sovereignty: Now You See it, Now You Don’t d’Errico lays out how he sees the foundation of the United States policy towards Native Americans. I have to be honest and say that everything that I know about sovereignty, outside of its definition, has been developed and learned during my course of study on the First Peoples of North America; having said that, the viewpoint of d’Errico makes sense to me. His viewpoint is basically that all decisions revolving around sovereignty have been based on the Papal decrees that spilt the world between Spain and Portugal (represented by the vertical blue line on Fig.2). In these authoritative documents, set forth in 1493, the Pope sought to allow Christians the right to “invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all… pagans whatsoever”.
Throughout the article d’Errico is methodical at tying Supreme Court decisions, United Nations declarations, and other Federal Indian law together into a firm foundation which presents the reader with his view that the decisions are all based on centuries old prejudices and religious bias. For as long as I can remember, in history courses the issues revolving around Native America were never really discussed. By getting the opportunity to read articles like this and tie them in with firsthand accounts of Euro-Native interaction, I have been able to form a MORE complete idea of how things have been shaped the way they are. The question that will always remain when discussing how to make up for the past or how to work equitably for the future is:
“Which way should the will of justice tip?”
 |
Figure 3. Scales http://www.ps3hax.net/2011/06/new-class-action-lawsuit-filed-against-sonyscea/scales-justice/ |
Hi Jason,
ReplyDeleteInteresting post. I found d' Errico's viewpoint interesting with regard to Sovereignty and Papal decrees. If the early settlers had a chance to try and understand the Natives, they would have seen that they believed in GOD (The Great Spirit) as well, but just wasn't as orthodox as the white settlers were used to.
Wouldn't it be interesting to go back and see the conversations that led to the policies and laws that have been established? Watching the thought process play out would be much better than reading about it, or speculating. I believe that had the various missionaries and Christian folks that attempted to convert the indigenous peoples of North America been more consistent in their message, and decidedly less violent, their message would have been received well and likely assimilated into a culture that was known for adoption of strong beliefs and rejection of weak ones.
ReplyDeleteInteresting points. It would be difficult to see how historic figures would respond to the knowledge we have today, sadly, without it, the same histories would occur. You can see in different parts of the Americas were religious conversion took various forms. In Latin America particularly, there were less Christians sent during the initial conversion process (12 to be exact!) This led to religions syncretisms that did not occur in the much later Christianize North America. This is an interesting subject area, one that many researchers (including myself) enjoy writing about.
ReplyDeleteHere is one of my articles on the subject, if you are interested:
Rhianna C. Rogers, “The Resilience of Aztec Women: A Case Study of Modern Aztec Myths,” Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences: Scientific Journals International, Online publication, Vol. 1, Issue 2, June 2007 http://www.scientificjournals.org/journals2007/articles/1160.pdf
The way kids were treated, especially in institutions, during that time period is so different than today.
ReplyDeleteI have done research on (non-native) orphanages during that same time period. Kids who became orphans were treated like criminals, even called inmates. I have read of similar treatment of these children - abuse, having their belongings destroyed or just taken, having their past taken from them.
It is so sad how children were treated. We have learned so much in a century about child development.
The native children sent to the boarding schools suffered horrible trauma that certainly left and impact on their lives. How much do you think it affected the native american culture overall?
When the children who are at the school come back and feel like they don't belong, and that they have no skill to help their people, it is a HUGE blow to the culture. I think the main issue was that while attempting to eradicate the native cultures of America, we were simultaneously wiping out the history of our region. How many times in this class has anyone of us said, "I didn't know it was like this..."? Simply tragic that our learning about Native America is reduced to almost nothing...
ReplyDelete