The north star state, the gopher state, and the land of ten thousand lakes – Minnesota. All of these are names for a piece of land, with invisible boundaries, in the Midwestern United States. It is within those invisible boundaries that a complex and diverse history unfolds. Established in 1858 as a state, Minnesota’s history starts long before then. Before Minnesota was Minnesota, this land was inhabited by Native Americans, specifically the Dakota, Ojibwe, and the Ho-Chunk. In time, the European settlers started to move into Minnesota, drastically changing the course of history. Although there is a long history before this point, this book will begin telling Minnesota’s history starting at this point in time. Throughout this book, five themes …show more content…
This means that the diverse people began to adopt and adapt a Minnesotan/ American culture. For some, this was done willing like, but for others, like the natives, assimilation was forced upon them. This forced assimilation did not happen at the first contact between the Natives and the European settlers. Instead, the opposite happened, fur traders adopted aspects of the Native culture. Specifically, the European fur traders adopted the dress of Native Americans For example, the majority of the fur traders wore moccasins (Lahlum, 23 Jan 2017). As time moved forward, the relationship between Europeans and Natives started to change, and with this change came forced assimilation. For the Natives, the Europeans saw the forced assimilation as there way of civilizing them (Lahlum, 22 Feb 2017). One of the main features of forced assimilation was Indian Boarding schools. In these schools, they teach the Native children English and Christianity (Laliberte, Natives, Neighbors, and the National Game, 2010). On the other hand, the immigrants from Germany and Scandinavia willingly adapted there culture to include aspects of Minnesota/ American Culture. In the Norwegians, the assimilation can be seen in the changes in farming, and in the clothing they wore (Lahlum, 22 Feb 2017). In addition to this, the article “Triple Jeopardy: The Muus v. Muus Case in Three Forums” portrays that …show more content…
From the time of first contact to the 1880’s, the relationship between the Natives and settlers was continually changing. During the fur trade, the relationship that developed between the natives and the traders was a one without major issues. But as the fur trade began to decline, the relationship between the Natives and the settlers started to decline as well. A catalyst for this change were the treaties that the Natives signed that sold their portions land to the settlers. These treaties, the Treaty of Traverse de Sioux and Mendota, were supposed to establish the permanent homes of these natives, but this did not happen (Treaty of Mendota, 1851; Treaty of Traverse de Sioux, 1851). Instead, these treaties were the start of settlers pushing Natives onto small reservations or out of the state completely. In addition to signing the treaties, the Natives were coerced into signing the Traders’ Papers. The Traders’ Papers stipulated that any payment that was made to the Dakota for their land would first go to the traders to cover their debts (Lahlum, 23 Jan 2017). When the Dakota signed these papers, they were never translated, so they did not know what they were signing (Lahlum, 23 Jan 2017). These treaties and the traders’ papers were a turning point in the relationship between the Natives and the settlers. Before them, the relationship was peaceful and without
Before the 1860’s the native americans were living in peace until the Colonists attacked. The Western Expansion of 1860-90 greatly affected the lives of Native Americans, due to the powerful role
Throughout the seventeenth century, conflict between Europeans and Native Americans was rampant and constant. As more and more Europeans migrated to America, violence became increasingly consistent. This seemingly institutionalized pattern of conflict begs a question: Was conflict between Europeans and Native Americans inevitable? Kevin Kenny and Cynthia J. Van Zandt take opposing sides on the issue. Kevin Kenny asserts that William Penn’s vision for cordial relations with local Native Americans was destined for failure due to European colonists’ demands for privately owned land.
All the treaties that were signed were either broken or a loophole was found to go around the treaty. The treaties were meant to fix the problem and not cause more problem for the Lakota
Sadly, in the 1850s and the 1860s when newcomers started streaming into Minnesota they didn’t find any common ground with the Dakota, as there was no need for it. Due to the treaties made, the Dakota lost their hunting grounds and had to strictly rely on Government goods. The Dakota had a big problem
The Black Hills War, also known as the Great Sioux War of 1876, was a series of battles fought from 1876 through 1877, between the forces of the United States and their allies (Shoshone, Pawnee, and Crow) and the Sioux (Lakota, Dakota, Cheyenne, and Arapaho). Taking place under two presidencies and resulting in hundreds of casualties on both sides, The Black Hills War made great impacts that would continue to affect Natives for generations. The United State’s extensive relationship with the Native Americans has its intricacies to say the least. With the arrival of English settlers at Jamestown in 1607, there were undoubtedly uncertainties amongst the Native people as to whether or not these settlers would resemble the Spanish settlers who
The Indian Removal Act In the beginning, The United States recognized Indian tribes as separate nations of people entitled to their own lands that could only be obtained from them through treaties. Due to inexorable pressures of expansion, settlement, and commerce, however, treaties made with good intentions were often perceived as unsustainable within just a few years. The Indians felt betrayed and frequently reacted with violence when land promised to them forever was taken away. For the most part, however, they directed their energies toward maintaining their tribal identity while living in the new order. The United States under the leadership of President Andrew Jackson dealt with settling the Indians the most humane possible way, for
These sacred places that the Dakota held so dear, were taken from them through legalized theft and deceit. For these reasons, the Dakota should receive a large portion of southern Minnesota untouched by the government, as it is largely uninhabited and farm land. In addition,
Due to this involvement with each other, both sides were more easily influenced by the other in terms of speech, dress, behaviour, than in an urban environment. Some natives were forced to move out of their homes due to the Europeans moving in and taking over. Once the indigenous population migrated to a different region of Latin America, they began an attempt to integrate their own culture into their new environment, resulting in future transculturation in those areas
Native Americans flourished in North America, but over time white settlers came and started invading their territory. Native Americans were constantly being thrown and pushed off their land. Sorrowfully this continued as the Americans looked for new opportunities and land in the West. When the whites came to the west, it changed the Native American’s lives forever. The Native Americans had to adapt to the whites, which was difficult for them.
Merrell’s article proves the point that the lives of the Native Americans drastically changed just as the Europeans had. In order to survive, the Native Americans and Europeans had to work for the greater good. Throughout the article, these ideas are explained in more detail and uncover that the Indians were put into a new world just as the Europeans were, whether they wanted change or
Many tribes had cultural ties to the environment itself. When the Americans established the Indian Removal Act, the Native Americans were forced to leave these cultural grounds. Those who refused to leave their original homeland had to conform to the ways of colonial life instead
This treaty was between the Dakota and Pike/US. Through signing treaties with the US government, the Dakota lost the majority of their land. The Dakota became very dependant on Government goods since they lost their hunting lands. The U.S Government kicked out the Native Americans for room for the white settlers. Minnesota became a territory until it took
First of all, Native Americans were settled on a hotbed of natural resources which included oil and precious metals such as silver and gold. There was also much fertile land that would entice farmers and frontiersmen to move out west. On this land there was so much potential economic opportunity for farmers, cattle drivers, miners and many other occupations. The government developed the popular public misconception that the indians were misusing the land and that Americans had the right to take advantage of the opportunities that lie in the west. These ideas led to the Dawes Severalty Act of 1887 which authorized encroachment of Indian lands by the US government in order to divide up reservations and control Indian activity.
Americanization and Indian Boarding School The history of Native Americans was full of violent, cheats and sadness. From Spanish conquerors, English settlers to U. S Government, Native Americans lost their battles against these parties with greater power. As a result, their home lands, people and culture were consistently threatened by different societies.
My third new concept comes from the “Treaties Matter” online link from D2L. The piece that stood out to me that most was the tab on the left home screen titled U.S.-American Indian Treaties in Minnesota. This tab highlights on the idea of who gave what to whom which was very eye opening to me. I have always thought until I read this portion that the U.S. government was being nice to the Native Americans by giving them specific land to live on but that is not the case because the opposite is true. The Dakota and Ojibwe leaders gave up larger portions of their homelands to in return receive small reservations. The only reason that these leaders signed these treaties to receive back very little land is because they believed that this was the only way to keep their people alive.