American Indian Hist

The heading of what motivates people more than when they act ethnical priorities, much(prenominal) as theology or tradition, or the supposed rational motivations, such as economics and regime has been wholeness long crusaded on. This debate has been sort of fierce, members of both sides providing valid and puissant argu manpowerts to support their claims. One of the focal points for this spread-and-take be the people kn testify below the blanket term essential Ameri sights. Where did their motivations funda custodyt from? Was it merely pragmatism, a wish to go far the close to turn out of whatever outsiders? Or was nicety and tradition vital to stopping point making?It is doubtless(prenominal) that both of these itemors were picture, however, the question is, which was the initial factor of turn, dominating thinking and action. Scholars assimilate attempted to launch points both ways. I support the side which claims that finale was the primary fac tor. I sh e precise(prenominal) scratch line de make upr counter-arguments to the opposing side, then provide supporting(a) arguments for my admit claim. generator, however, it must be historied that immanent Americans is a truly catchall term, which is employ for lack of a better matchless. As the website of the indigenous American reoceanrch revolve around states, It must be emphasized that no one person speaks for Indian People.There are closely three hundred seeing American Indian Nations in the present United enounces. Each has its sustain dustup and history, its own sacred places and rituals. Each is root in and diverge of the repose out of which it grew. There are dozens of ethnic musics, including rough that are officially considered extinct now, that had quite several(predicate) customs. If we say that at that place were autochthonal Americans and they had one course of culture and, as a consequence, had the uniform customs, we may fair(a) as we ll say that there are Europeans and they view as one culture, entirely losing the obvious distinctions amongst divers(prenominal) nations.The cultures of different tribes of indwelling Americans are really different to deny this would be to unjustly settle their cultural value and yet there are cultural tendencies, and there are exceptions. I ordain attempt to prove that the tendency is to utilise tradition as a guideline, and the occasions where pragmatical reasons rescue been primary are the exceptions verifying the rule. First I shall examine the political argument. It seems very(prenominal) difficult to think that administration in the sense that we understand them now had an regularize on the indispensable Americans.When we think of administration we think of diplomatic traditions, of treaties that are do to be broken, of backstabbing. This, however, was non the dominant homo face with indigen Americans. As Dee Brown wrote in his book Bury My Heart at woun ded stifle, So tractable, so peaceable, are these people, Columbus wrote to the King and tycoon of Spain referring to the Tainos on the is unload of San Salvador, so was named by Columbus, that I swear to your Majesties there is non in the world a better nation.They hit the hay their neighbors as themselves, and their discourse is ever unused and gentle, and accompanied with a smile and though it is true that they are naked, yet their tact are decorous and praiseworthy. This was verified a number of times by different observations, Columbuss report world merely the virtually famous occasion. sentence after time, the settlers used the same tactic. eyepatch officially recognizing the natives as owners of the land, they used any(prenominal)(prenominal) tactic possible to get them to shit the land, up to getting the chief of the tribe drunk.Then, once the treaty which usually went on the lines of There are white men on your lands now anyway, further natural spring us a part of your land, and we will not go on your land without your permission. was signed, in a few old age the expansion continued in the same manner, and new treaties were signed. Despite these circumstances, there have been virtually no instances of the treaties mingled with the Indians and the Europeans being broken by the Indians however, Europeans were breaking these treaties constantly, in 99% of the casesOne would think that if politics were the defining factor in the Native Americans way of transaction they would have changed their tactic after the first few times these treaties were broken they were not fools, and hundreds of days of such tactics would have destroyed plane the most cherubic naivete. So the conclusion must be that there was something more than mere anticipate that the white men would see reason standing behind these promises that forced the Native Americans to keep them. The next common pickaxe for primary motivation is economics.However, despite the fact that the Indians had private property and were no strangers to great deal, this could scarcely be the dominating motivation. First of all, the Indians were in all self-supporting. Even if they did require something essential they could not produce themselves which was fairly rare early(a) Native American tribes principally proven untold better business partners, generally being more honest than the Europeans. Consequentially, all the Europeans could offer them were luxuries. This, by nature, should not be underestimated as a lure in any way.However, a trade which truly entails unaccompanied luxuries is perpetually small by necessity. In any case, trade relationships were not nearly so large-scale as in the Old World. They could not have been the drive motivation Also, we have numerous documents that breaker point the interaction between Native Americans and European settlers. The initial reply to the abovementioned land-selling treaties was nearly always quit e similar. For instance, an excerpt from the 1752 Abenaki convention between Captain Phineas Stevens and the St.Francis Indians shows the Indians side to these treaties 4 But we will not cede one star progress of the lands we tarry beyond what has been answerd at once by our fathers. 5 You have the sea for your share from the place where you reside you can trade there but we expressly forbid you to kill a star Beaver, or to take a single stick of timber on the lands we inhabit if you want timber well sell you some, but you shall not take it without our permission. And there exists a number of other documents revealing a similar multitude strength.Could this, in truth, merely be screening that the Indians merely wanted a better deal? One could naturally gain a leeway in trade by keeping the land and selling its resources. However, it is a basic legal philosophy of economics that one wishing to trade must meet the demand. Had this trade in itself been a factor of dire sizeableness to the Indians, they would have put forth an suit to convince the Europeans that trading would prove profitable. However, the attitude that prevails in documents is one of indifference. It seems like the Indians did not care for the presence of Europeans.If the white men wished a trade, then they would get a trade. If they did not, the Indians seemed perfectly content to let them live without making any more link than absolutely undeniable. Trade was not of grandeur it influenced the relationship between the natives and settlers when it was present, but it was by no way of liveliness the most main(prenominal) factor. On the other hand, tradition and culture was of extreme importance, influencing entire tribes behaviors especially such a part of culture as righteousness. For Native Americans religious belief was of utmost importance.Even the Canadian Jesuit missionaries remarked that the Native Americans were highly religious and not in the Sunday Christian se nse, every, but with thick roots and a great influence of each aspect of their lives. This is a trace feature of most tribal societies, where belittled distinction is made between the sacral and the mundane. However, for Indians religion had special relevance, as it was one of the things that allowed them to cling on to their cultural identity, deliverance them from assimilation. Yet even earlier this was a relevant factor, religion permeated nearly every aspect of Native American life.Their religion was (and remains) one of pure personal experience, not leaving any room for dogma. The Native American worldview is mythological. For all practical purposes, this means that religious factors such as run rituals and their theoretical results are the perceived as being absolutely as strong-armly real as an arrow dismissed into an animal, having the same kind of cause-and-effect that a physical event exponent. A deal with a spirit, for instance, is treated as seriously as a treat y with a human. A spirits warning was heeded as much as a humans would, with absolutely the same kind of discretion.And magical means of solving problems were taken as absolutely valid. One of the most well known incidents was in 1876, before the battle at Little-Big-Horn when the famed seated Bull performed a three-day shamanic ritual to decide what to do with the white men, staring at the sun and wounding himself until he dismiss unconscious. After he came to, he proclaimed that the white men were there for the Indians to take, because he saw white men pop off into the Indians camp headfirst, losing their hats, inwardness they would be the killed by the Indians.Also he inform that They had no ears, i. e. they were deaf to reason, giving the Indians a moral right to attack. This is not the solo incidence of religion influencing political activity. The ghost Dance religion can be cited as another famous example, showing how Native American religion changed with the times, h ow it fitted to the flow of time and adopted unknown quantity cultural notions and yet survived without losing all of its cultural value, keeping the spirit, though changing the form.One might say that this lack of dissemination between regular life and religious life simply brings more factors into the political games. ghostlike leaders are used as figure heads for power play, and spirits are dealt with in the same manner universe are dealt with if, indeed, the shamans who contact the spirits even believe in them and not use them as a means of their own power and control This is, however, hardly the case, as there are numerous arguments against this spatial relation in the study of tribal societies as a whole.Firstly, their religion was always very personal. Every single Indian had their own religious experience and, as with any religion that requires its neophytes to work out their own niche clergy being needed only in extreme cases it is always very strong. The strength of this experience makes it difficult to give anything that is lower than it is a higher priority. The Native Americans did not believe in their gods notice over them they knew the gods were there as much as they knew that their teepee was still standing.And eon white men were considered a interim nuisance, guests or invaders at best, and were treated that way, the gods were almost like family, and treated with necessary think of and given due priority. Second, as the phenomenon of the jot Dance shows, the acts done out of religion were not necessarily the wisest politically such as the sending out of search parties to look for the Messiah said to be an incarnation of Jesus, and this at the time when men were crucial to survival so faking comprehend inspiration for political power is control out.So, if the leaders genuinely believed in what they saw, the plenty of hundreds and thousands rested within religion more than enough to define it as one of the crucial influenci ng factors. It can be seen that politics and trade simply not as much of an influence on life, plot of ground religious and cultural activity was always extremely important, guiding the life of every Indian to a certain extent. This was the source of much misunderstanding, since for Europeans politics often took the direct role when religion failed to provide the necessary support and guidance.This made both sides misunderstand the others actions, resulting in a long and fucking(a) war that spanned generations. The Native Americans in addition had also led wars between each other in the past they were no strangers to military tactics. However, their wars had rules ones that the settlers naturally broke, thus spelling charge for the natives. This also shows just how big a role does tradition play in Native American society had they adapted to the way of war which the Europeans brought to them, they would have survived losing less than they did.In conclusion, it can be said th at, as we have seen, purely empirical endorse proves that the Native Americans did not use either politics or economics as the prime guideline for building the relationships either among themselves or between them and Europeans. These factors were not considered primary in any crisis situation, and even 370 years of war against the Europeans did not put them very high on the list of priorities. However, morality and religion made quite an pertain on the decisions made by the Native American people, and remain influential factors in their thinking to this day.This was the true motivation of most Native Americans, and remains so up to modern times. Works cited. 1. American Indian Culture Research Center http//www. bluecloud. org/dakota. hypertext mark-up language 2. Dee Brown, Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee An Indian History of the American West, Henry Holt & caller Reprint edition (February 1, 1991) 3. Terry L. Anderson, Dances with myths truths virtually American Indians e nvironmental ethics, Reason, February 1997. 4. suggestion Dance morality http//www. bgsu. edu/departments/acs/1890s/woundedknee/WKghost. hypertext mark-up language 5.Cultures of jointure America http//www. mnsu. edu/emuseum/cultural/northamerica/index. shtml 6. Cultures of North America http//www. mnsu. edu/emuseum/cultural/northamerica/index. shtml 7. David Stannard, The American final solution, Oxford University Press, 1992. 8. The Massacre at Wounded Knee http//www. hanksville. org/daniel/lakota/Wounded_Knee. html 9. The Wampum Chronicles Mohawk grunge on the Internet http//www. wampumchronicles. com/index. html 10. George E. Tinker, Religion http//college. hmco. com/history/readerscomp/naind/html/na_032600_religion.htm 11. NativeWeb http//www. nativeweb. org/ 12. Indian personal matters Laws and Treaties. Compiled and edited by Charles J. Kappler http//digital. library. okstate. edu/kappler/Vol1/HTML_files/toc. html 13. Abenaki Conference with Phineas Stevens. Documents Re lated to the Colonial History of the State of New York Vol. X. pg. 252-254. Donated by Jeffery Miller executive of Fort 4. http//www. avcnet. org/ne-do-ba/doc_1752. html 14. The Manataka Oath, Creed and canon of Conduct http//www. manataka. org/page182. html