 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| Non-fiction and essays |
||||||||||||
| University essays |
||||||||||||
| American Studies Second Year |
||||||||||||
| Native American History 228 |
||||||||||||
| What were the consequences of the Lewis and Clark expeditions for American Indians? (AMST 228, Spring 2003) After the purchase of the Louisiana Territory from the French, President Thomas Jefferson wished to discover exactly what he had bought for the United States. In accomplishing this, he authorised several expeditions to explore the new territory west of the Mississippi River; the most famous of which was the expedition led by Merriweather Lewis and William Clark. The effects of this expedition, which took place between 1804 and 1806, were wide-ranging, for both the people of the newly expanded United States and the American Indian populations on both sides of the frontier. Attitudes towards the natives had always been mixed, and this was no different at the beginning of the nineteenth century. Writing on the issue of American Indians in 1803, Jefferson claimed that: “While they are learning to do better on less land, our increasing numbers will be calling for more land, and thus a coincidence of interests will be produced between those who have lands to spare, and want other necessaries, and those who have such necessaries to spare, and want lands.”# Jefferson was referring to the American Indians still residing in the East, but following the Lewis and Clark expedition, this idea of Indians giving up their land would apply to the tribes in the West as well. For, as the American Indian historian Clifford Trafzer has noted: “American Indian policy was the domain of white men, not Indians, and it functioned for the welfare of the United States and white people, not Native Americans.”# This attitude would be reflected repeatedly in the period of white expansion that was the inevitable, though not immediate, consequence of the opening up of the path to the West. For the American Indians living on the Great Plains, the coming of the white man to their lands had been prophesised. For instance, among the Nez Perce tribe prophecy “spoke of the coming of strangers who would straighten the curvy places of nature and make them straight (highways, railroads, and tunnels) and who would bring buffalo with no beards to their country.”# The Lewis and Clark expedition itself was not of immediate concern to the native tribes, the explorers were actually reasonably respectful of Indian practices on their trek, and relied upon the hospitality of tribes to complete the expedition. Indeed, Lewis and Clark received the support of a Shoshoni guide, Sacájewea, who could speak both Shoshoni and Sioux, and acted as an interpreter for the Americans. Sacájewea’s husband, the half-French, half-Indian Charbonneau, also aided them. However, while offering no direct threat to the natives, the purpose of the Lewis and Clark expedition remained the charting of potential new lands for white settlement. They had been charged with noting “exploitable resources and Native American people and populations, with close attention to tribal alliances and enemies.” This meant that while offering peace medals to the various tribes they encountered, and talking of the “Great White Chief” in the East who was now watching over them, Lewis and Clark were also marking the region for future white settlers. They “encouraged whites to venture west to trade and trap furs, lay claim to these ‘virgin lands’, and make new lives for themselves.” # The influx of whites into the region newly explored by Lewis and Clark would be tentative at first, but would soon expand into a veritable flood. The first whites to take advantage of the lands west of the Mississippi were traders, most notably the fur trappers. Indeed, many of the native tribes living on the Great Plains and in the Rocky Mountains had some experience in trading for manufactured goods and most “welcomed the opportunity for further trade with white men.”# As had been the case in the colonial period in the east, it was the fur trade that flourished in the early days of the westward expansion of the United States following the Lewis and Clark expedition. The northern Rocky Mountains area had been noted as containing “plentiful beaver in the streams”, and thus saw an invasion of fur trappers soon after Lewis and Clark’s report reached the East.# Initially, the Indians favoured this vigorous interest in fur trading. There were gatherings for trading, or “rendezvous” that took place between the fur trappers and Indians, as well as traders from St. Louis who came with “firewater and trinkets, powder and lead.”# While trade with white men had only really taken off after the Lewis and Clark expedition, there was a fairly developed trading system that took place among the various tribes of the Great Plains and a handful of white traders. One of the more influential tribes was the Western Comanches trading along the Missouri River. In the late eighteenth- and early nineteenth centuries, this trade involved “corn, horse, manufactured goods, and luxuries,” which served to attract “Indians and Euro-Americans from all directions, creating one of the busiest trading hubs in Native North America.”# Western Comanche camps were the centre of this wide-ranging trading system in the southern Great Plains. In the north there was a trading system among the Cree and Blackfoot, that reflected their military alliances. However, it would be the coming of the white man following Lewis and Clark that spelled the end of Native dominance in trade on the Great Plains. In the case of the Western Comanches, it was the establishment of Bent’s Fort on the Arkansas River, which replaced the Western Comanche camps as the centre of trade. As well as the large, infrequent gatherings, Indians took their goods to white settlements and trading posts that were beginning to creep westward. Here Indians could trade furs for white goods, such as “bright ribbons, calico and broadcloth, coffee, sugar, and liquor.”# Yet despite the initial enthusiasm for white manufactured goods, the small scale trade of the years immediately following the Lewis and Clark expedition was gradually replaced by a much more developed trade system. This fostered by the increasing demand placed on white goods by the natives. It was this demand for white manufactured goods that led to more white traders coming westwards to exploit the demand, and also changed Indian patterns of trade. As Underhill has noted: “hunting gradually changed from a subsistence activity to a business, and some of the ceremonies which had sanctified it dropped away.”# Fur trappers had been an initial consequence of the Lewis and Clark expedition, but other consequences followed them. Most, if not all, were damaging to the native populations: liquor, disease, and white settlers. To say that the Lewis and Clark expedition, and the ensuing westward march of the American people were solely responsible for the diseases and alcohol that would ravage native populations in the West would be a misstatement. For instance, Lewis and Clark encountered tribes in the Pacific Northwest in 1805 where the effects of alcohol and disease were already apparent.# However, it was with the initial influx of fur trappers and traders followed by white settlers that created significant problems for the Indian populations. In the case of the Mandans, prior to Lewis and Clark, there were nine villages on the Missouri, by 1805, three, and twenty years later, only one remained inhabited.# The chief reason behind this decline was disease. The Mandans’ further decline was attributed to the small pox epidemics between 1837 and 1840, which swept through many of the tribes on the Missouri River. Other tribes to suffer included the Arikarees and Blackfeet.# Estimates for the devastation wrought by small pox among the Blackfeet run into the thousands, with the loss of life among all the Plains tribes resulting from the epidemic of 1837 ranging between three- to five thousand.# In effect, disease among the native populations formed the vanguard of the advance of the white settlers, as disease often reached areas where white settlement was not yet fully underway. During the epidemic of 1837, small pox had reached tribes west of the Mississippi via a fur company steamboat.# Another vanguard of the white advance, and no less destructive to the Indians, was alcohol. Indians regularly traded furs with the whites coming into the new territories, and often received liquor in exchange. Alcohol, especially whiskey, rapidly became one of the most sought after commodities among the native tribes, and its effects were detrimental to the well being of many tribes. Disregarding arguments over why it had such a destructive effect on native populations, what is clear is that following greater exposure to white traders, alcohol became common among the tribes west of the Mississippi. Dippie wrote of the unfortunate consequences: “upon contact with the white race, the Indian exchanged his virtues for civilised vices. Against these vices, the Indian had no defence. The government, try as it might to staunch the flow of spirits into Indian country, was doomed to failure. The Indian wanted liquor.”# Trade, disease, and alcohol were direct results of the Lewis and Clark expedition for American Indians. However, probably the most long-lasting and devastating effect was the gradual expansion of white settlers into the newly explored lands. This process of white settlement took several decades to get into full flow, but its coming was inevitable, as were the consequences for the native populations. By the 1840s, the advance was increasing apace. Ferris described the clash of civilisations: “Frontiersmen, eager for land and gold, considered the Indians as ‘uncivilised’ obstacles in their path. The decency and integrity demonstrated by Lewis and Clark in their dealings with them gave way to disrespect and dishonour.”# Although some further surveys had concluded that there were inhospitable areas in the newly opened west, the white population did not necessarily believe the reports. Maps of the Great Plains from explorers such as Major Stephen H. Lang in the 1820s described it as “almost wholly unfit for cultivation, and of course uninhabitable by a people depending on agriculture for their subsistence.”# While some though these areas could be suitable for unwanted American Indians in the East, it seemed unreasonable that land should be wasted on natives when white Americans could possibly use it. This has been suggested by the “failure of Congress to authorise by legislation a permanent Indian state or territory, though the idea was proposed and debated more than once.”# While the effects of traders’ alcohol and disease were detrimental to the Indians, these were really unintended consequences. The traders relied upon the Indians as a market for their goods, and therefore, for their livelihoods. The settlers, on the other hand, had little use for the Indians, who often stood in the way of white Americans searching for a suitable place to settle. Settlers were often protected by the US Army, with “neither group understanding or appreciating the position of the Indians as the traders had done.”# The immigrants into the Mississippi valley numbered approximately ten thousand in the time of the Lewis and Clark expedition, with another four thousand coming in the following three years. Many of these new immigrants would seek to push further westwards in pursuit of more land, often forcing the displacement of tribes on lands they desired.# The white population found the movement westward relatively easier in this period than in prior times. As well as the paths that had been scouted by Lewis and Clark, and subsequently developed by traders, there were other factors that aided their advance. Christine Bolt described how “westward migrations were further fed and facilitated by a growing white population, improved transport, enhanced awareness of the desirability of Indian lands, and Indian military and treaty defeats.” For instance, it was the death of the Shawnee war chief, Tecumseh that allowed greater expansion of whites in the north.# As more whites entered the territory, they were forced to take action against native populations on the lands they desired, often leading to conflict. As conflicts increased, the United States Government was forced to step in and deal with the Indians, which led to further hardships for the native populations. There was conflict between the American Indians and the white settlers, over land and resources. Indeed, as Washburn notes: “incidents between emigrants and Indians multiplied as the game utilised by both decreased. The Indians were perfectly aware that their resources of game, wood, and water were being usurped by the emigrants.”# As well as providing competition for game, the Indians offered whites an obstacle in travelling across the Great Plains, something they were much more comfortable attempting following the success of the Lewis and Clark expedition. For instance, the Santa Fe Trail and Platte River Trail cut across Indian hunting grounds, and as they became better traversed, troubles intensified: “Indians were shot by whites as so many mad dogs, and whites suffered burned wagons and coaches, mutilated corpses, and occasionally humiliating captivity.”# With whites making further incursions into Indian hunting grounds, there was ample cause for further conflict. There was not just Indian-white conflict to affect the native populations, as intertribal rivalries often resulted in bloodshed. As whites moved westward, the traditional hunting grounds of many Indian tribes were usurped, forcing the Indians to look elsewhere, or resort to poaching from their neighbours. This could lead to conflict between the Indian tribes, which only furthered their perilous position in the land where white intruders were increasing rapidly.# Whatever the nature of conflict, whether intertribal or against white intruders on their lands, the effect was the same; the further weakening of the native populations. A principal cause behind the conflict between Indians and whites had been the effect white hunters had on the buffalo populations. This was a serious indirect consequence of the Lewis and Clark expeditions, which probably did more to bring about the perilous situation of the Indians on the Great Plains by the mid nineteenth century than the conflicts it caused. The importance of the buffalo to native populations cannot be understated. As Mary Sandoz described: “The buffalo was almost the sole subsistence of the Plains Indian – his shelter, clothing, food and fuel. The buffalo furnished most of the amusement and entertainment too, and was involved in many of the Indian’s tests of courage and character, and a large part of his ethics and religion.”# However, despite this, the buffalo would suffer from the introduction of white men with horses and guns on the Great Plains. It was not just the white men who contributed to the virtual annihilation of the buffalo population, for Indians too had discovered the benefits of using guns and horses in their buffalo hunts. Indeed, with raised prices for buffalo skins and repeater rifles introduced in the 1830s, the Indians embarked upon a “ferocious assault on the herds.”# Despite attempts at some kind of regulation, “their existed no government strong enough, no incentive impressive enough, to halt the slaughter until the buffalo became so rare that the hunters had for the most part entered other fields of endeavour.” Loss of the buffalo had such a great effect on the native peoples, that General Sherman described the killing of the buffalo as the best way to subdue the Indians: “starve him into submission.”# As buffalo and other game were killed in greater numbers, the Indian tribes that had relied upon the furs and skins for trade were further imperilled. The Plains could barely support the diminished Indian populations who struggled to adapt to white patterns of life, and this situation would be worsened as the United States Government sought somewhere to relocate unwanted eastern tribes. The vast tracts of land uncovered by the Lewis and Clark expedition offered an enticing prospect for the government officials engaged with the Indian ‘problem’ in the east. With white population expanding, and wishing to make more profitable use of the land that was occupied by Indians, a ‘dumping ground’ for unwanted natives was sought. The exploration of Lewis and Clark offered a solution; move the Indians west of the Mississippi. This idea was made on the basis that there would be a limit to white expansion westward, and beyond this imaginary line there could be an “Indian Country,” where the eastern and Plains Indians could be located. Subsequently, this idea would be applied to those tribes already west of the majority of white settlement. The desire of whites to ‘civilise’ the Indians was a major factor in this policy: “removal to the west of the Mississippi seemed to be the only expedient that would both satisfy the whites and give the Indians the time they needed to effect a saving transformation in their ways.”# This policy was doomed to failure, however, as the chairman of the House Committee on Indian Affairs reported in 1853: “The whites can no longer be kept out of the Indian country.”# Thus the policy of removal and relocation needed to be rethought, eventually leading to the reservation system, which has been a very questionable ‘solution’ to the Indian ‘problem’. The Lewis and Clark expedition, seemingly innocuous in its immediate effects, had much more significant impacts for American Indians in the long term. While the first to follow the trail blazed by Lewis and Clark were traders and fur trappers, the more important followers were waves of white settlers, hungry for the Indians’ lands. In the vanguard of the white advance were the twin evils of disease and liquor. Alcohol, a ‘civilised vice’ was sought after by the natives, albeit for misguided reasons. Disease was not sought, yet the destructive effects of both are evident. The fur trappers brought both with them, but it was the later advance of white settlers that caused the more significant problems for native populations. They took over Indian lands, especially hunting grounds, where they contributed significantly to the demise of the buffalo, and forced a radical reshaping of the Plains Indian lifestyle. In 1822 Chief Sharitarish of the Pawnee went to Washington and described the effects of white expansion. “Before our intercourse with the whites, who have caused such a destruction in our game, we could lie down to sleep, and when we awoke we would find the buffalo feeding around our camp – but now were are killing them for their skins, and feeding the wolves with their flesh, to make our children cry over their bones.”# The idea of the United States Government to create a defined “Indian Country” was never officially confirmed, and this area gradually shrank before the advance of more whites coming westwards. Therefore the policy of removal of eastern tribes only caused further hardships for both the Indians moved and those living on shrinking territories that were forced to cope with the burden of more people. The long-term effects of the Lewis and Clark expedition had served to irrecoverably alter the way of life for dozens of Indian tribes. It also reinforced their position as being obstacles in the unstoppable advance of white civilisation across the Great Plains. A two-year expedition, remembered as a triumph of the white American people, can be remembered as a death knell for the Indian way of life on the Plains. Bibliography Bartlett, R. A., The New Country: A Social History of the American Frontier, 1776-1890, (Oxford, 1974). Billington, R. A., The Westward Movement in the United States, (New Jersey, 1959). --------------------, Westward Expansion: A History of the American Frontier, (New York, 1967). Bolt, C., American Indian Policy and American Reform, (London, 1987). Dippie, B. W., The Vanishing American: White Attitudes and US Indian Policy, (Lawrence, Kansas, 1982). Ferris, R. G. (ed.), Lewis and Clark: Historic Places Associated with Their Transcontinental Exploration (1804- 1806), (Washington, 1975). Hurtado, A. L. and P. Iverson, Major Problems in American Indian History, 2nd Edn. (New York, 2001). Johansen, B. E. and D. A. Grinde Jr., The Encyclopaedia of Native American Bibliography, (New York, 1998). Milloy, J. S., The Plains Cree: Trade, Diplomacy and War, 1790-1870, (Manitoba, 1988). Prucha, F.P., W.T. Hagard and A. M. Josephy Jr., Indiana Historical Society Lectures 1970-71 American Indian Policy, (Indianapolis, 1971). Sandoz, M., The Buffalo Hunters: The Story of the Hide Men, (Lincoln, Nebraska, 1978). Trafzer, C. E., As Long as the Grass shall Grow and Rivers Flow: A History of Native Americans, (Fort Worth, Texas, 2000). Turner, F. W., The Portable North American Reader, (New York, 1975). Underhill, R. M., Red Man’s America: A History of Indians in the United States, (Chicago, 1953). Van Every, D., The Final Challenge: The American Frontier 1804-1845, (New York, 1966). Washburn, W. E., The Indian in America, (New York, 1975). |
||||||||||||
| Non-fiction |
||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |