Invasion of America
October 9, 2023 12:23 PM Subscribe
Invasion of America "Between 1776 and 1887, the United States seized over 1.5 billion acres from America's indigenous people by treaty and executive order. Explore how in this interactive map of every Native American land cession during that period."
YouTube: The Invasion of America
Via Slate, "Interactive Time-Lapse Map Shows How the U.S. Took More Than 1.5 Billion Acres From Native Americans"
YouTube: The Invasion of America
Via Slate, "Interactive Time-Lapse Map Shows How the U.S. Took More Than 1.5 Billion Acres From Native Americans"
While the time-lapse function is the most visually impressive aspect of this interactive, the “source map” option (available on the map's site) offers a deep level of detail. By selecting a source map, and then zooming in to the state you’ve selected, you can see details of the map used to generate that section of the interactive. A pop-up box tells you which Native nation was resident on the land, and the date of the treaty or executive order that transferred the area to the government, as well as offering external links to descriptions of the treaty and of the tract of land.The map was produced by University of Georgia historian Claudio Saunt to accompany his new book West of the Revolution: An Uncommon History of 1776.
There is a version of this animation in the Gateway Arch Museum in St Louis and it was very striking. The museum is surprisingly good at covering the impact of westward expansion on Native communities.
One thing that I had not understood until recently is that the land granted to land grant universities was more than just campus and where it came from until I saw this site that tracks specific parcels and their disposition.
posted by theclaw at 1:00 PM on October 9, 2023 [7 favorites]
One thing that I had not understood until recently is that the land granted to land grant universities was more than just campus and where it came from until I saw this site that tracks specific parcels and their disposition.
posted by theclaw at 1:00 PM on October 9, 2023 [7 favorites]
There was an unusually fascinating article I read today related to this, tying together both the "Pioneer Woman" food star and the upcoming KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON. The upshot is that her family was accused of owning a lot of land taken from the Osage - but they get into some detail and it's not quite as straightforward. Like - there are many levels of ownership of land. Grazing rights, farming, mining - it all is different.
And I actually wonder if ANYONE came out ahead, or whether it was just all the lawyers.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 1:38 PM on October 9, 2023 [1 favorite]
And I actually wonder if ANYONE came out ahead, or whether it was just all the lawyers.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 1:38 PM on October 9, 2023 [1 favorite]
This is amazing. I love GIS data. I also find it important to learn about the native people who lived on the land we have colonized. There's a road called Treaty Line on my drive home from work, and sure enough I can see the two treaties that defined the boarders which nearly runs through my neighborhood, and the weird curve of Treaty Line Road.
posted by slogger at 1:55 PM on October 9, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by slogger at 1:55 PM on October 9, 2023 [3 favorites]
One thing that I had not understood until recently is that the land granted to land grant universities was more than just campus and where it came from
The Land Grant system is a mark against US Higher Education, and one that we don’t do a great job of addressing. Or, rather, the intent of the Land Grant system was fine, it’s just that Congress decided to pay for it with stolen land. And while a lot of Land Grant institutions are making efforts to build better relations with the local indigenous communities, I don’t know of any who have approached the people who were displaced to make any kind of restitution/reputation.
posted by GenjiandProust at 2:51 PM on October 9, 2023 [4 favorites]
The Land Grant system is a mark against US Higher Education, and one that we don’t do a great job of addressing. Or, rather, the intent of the Land Grant system was fine, it’s just that Congress decided to pay for it with stolen land. And while a lot of Land Grant institutions are making efforts to build better relations with the local indigenous communities, I don’t know of any who have approached the people who were displaced to make any kind of restitution/reputation.
posted by GenjiandProust at 2:51 PM on October 9, 2023 [4 favorites]
Seems slightly odd that it doesn't start in 1697, but I guess they're being technical about "the United States." Still, there were pre-Revolutionary takings by the colonies and Native nations who fought with the British were penalized by Washington and other leaders during the war itself.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 3:11 PM on October 9, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 3:11 PM on October 9, 2023 [3 favorites]
I'd propose that native American tribes take over ownership of football stadiums at land grant institutions.
posted by jeffburdges at 3:14 PM on October 9, 2023 [13 favorites]
posted by jeffburdges at 3:14 PM on October 9, 2023 [13 favorites]
Still, there were pre-Revolutionary takings by the colonies and Native nations who fought with the British were penalized by Washington and other leaders during the war itself.
One of the aspects of the French and Indian War (and a subplot of The Last of the Mohicans) is allying with the French was better for Native Americans than allying with the British and colonists because the French were less exploitative. (Partly/mostly because there were fewer French people in North America.)
A line from the Huron Chief in The Last of the Mohicans movie (1992) that's always stuck with me:
One of the aspects of the French and Indian War (and a subplot of The Last of the Mohicans) is allying with the French was better for Native Americans than allying with the British and colonists because the French were less exploitative. (Partly/mostly because there were fewer French people in North America.)
A line from the Huron Chief in The Last of the Mohicans movie (1992) that's always stuck with me:
The white man came and night entered our future with him.posted by kirkaracha at 3:28 PM on October 9, 2023 [4 favorites]
What's the deal with the various places within the current USA that start brown or yellow, even well before they were actually part of the USA?
posted by Flunkie at 3:31 PM on October 9, 2023
posted by Flunkie at 3:31 PM on October 9, 2023
"I actually wonder if ANYONE came out ahead, or whether it was just all the lawyers."
Wonder no more! The Drummonds came out ahead. If you question that and continue to believe that after all it may have been "just all the lawyers," you have but to read the cited Slate piece.
The Drummonds own a portion of Oklahoma worth $275 million. One of the Drummonds is "The Pioneer Woman." Another one is the Attorney General of the state of Oklahoma (so at least one of the lawyers, I guess). So they own a lot of land; a bunch of them are rich as Croesus; some of them are famous, and some of them are politically powerful. They have officially come out ahead: that is not in question.
"...her family was accused of owning a lot of land taken from the Osage - but they get into some detail and it's not quite as straightforward. Like - there are many levels of ownership of land. Grazing rights, farming, mining - it all is different."
What was the pioneer woman's family "accused of" that there is any question about? They do own a lot of land taken from the Osage. Per the article you linked, they sold 400 acres of used-to-be-Osage land to Ted Turner a while back, but the amount of land they still own that used to be Osage land is equivalent to nine percent of the state of Delaware. Maybe what's "not quite as straightforward" is how they took the land from the Osage? Perhaps the argument is that because the Osage kept the "head rights" (mineral rights) and the Drummonds only owned the "surface land" and because they came by that land lawfully and didn't commit murder of their indigenous "wards" to get their land and their oil money, too, then it's the "taken from the Osage" part that is not straightforward? They acquired the land in a manner that did not constitute a taking? Sure, they prospered mightily from that acquisition but so what, continue to follow The Pioneer Woman's dumpmeal recipes in peace and comfort because the Drummonds followed the law? Well, maybe we should interrogate that a teensy. Because the law the Drummonds followed by scrupulously avoiding murdering so much as a single native American person under their guardianship was not fair and square law. From the Slate article:
"...what we were able to see is really that this family was able to amass so much wealth relatively quickly, in a place that had all been entirely owned by the Osage Nation just a decade or two earlier.
It’s important to go back to their original business in Osage County, when the three brothers’ father, Frederick Drummond, first came to Oklahoma. This was before statehood, and he got into the trading business. He would sell goods to Osages. When their oil wealth took off, these trading posts run by white settlers were able to take advantage of that. They started charging more and more, and Osage families started shopping more and more, just like you’d expect any wealthy person to do. But these places weren’t really like a store, like we think of today. They sold farming supplies and food and clothes and even caskets. In fact, the undertaking business was probably one of the most lucrative parts.
So you just had a tremendous amount of money coming through the door. Because there were all these restrictions by the U.S. government on how Osages could spend their own money, a lot of them wound up in debt, because they would have to buy things on credit at the store. What we can see from congressional testimony is that some families would be thousands of dollars in debt, which at the time was a tremendous amount of money, to the Drummonds’ store in Hominy. In some cases, we saw while a family was in $2,000 to $3,000 of debt, their land would be deeded over to a member of the Drummond family for what we can tell was a very low price. But again, it’s impossible to know for sure whether that land was used to settle that debt."
posted by Don Pepino at 3:37 PM on October 9, 2023 [14 favorites]
Wonder no more! The Drummonds came out ahead. If you question that and continue to believe that after all it may have been "just all the lawyers," you have but to read the cited Slate piece.
The Drummonds own a portion of Oklahoma worth $275 million. One of the Drummonds is "The Pioneer Woman." Another one is the Attorney General of the state of Oklahoma (so at least one of the lawyers, I guess). So they own a lot of land; a bunch of them are rich as Croesus; some of them are famous, and some of them are politically powerful. They have officially come out ahead: that is not in question.
"...her family was accused of owning a lot of land taken from the Osage - but they get into some detail and it's not quite as straightforward. Like - there are many levels of ownership of land. Grazing rights, farming, mining - it all is different."
What was the pioneer woman's family "accused of" that there is any question about? They do own a lot of land taken from the Osage. Per the article you linked, they sold 400 acres of used-to-be-Osage land to Ted Turner a while back, but the amount of land they still own that used to be Osage land is equivalent to nine percent of the state of Delaware. Maybe what's "not quite as straightforward" is how they took the land from the Osage? Perhaps the argument is that because the Osage kept the "head rights" (mineral rights) and the Drummonds only owned the "surface land" and because they came by that land lawfully and didn't commit murder of their indigenous "wards" to get their land and their oil money, too, then it's the "taken from the Osage" part that is not straightforward? They acquired the land in a manner that did not constitute a taking? Sure, they prospered mightily from that acquisition but so what, continue to follow The Pioneer Woman's dumpmeal recipes in peace and comfort because the Drummonds followed the law? Well, maybe we should interrogate that a teensy. Because the law the Drummonds followed by scrupulously avoiding murdering so much as a single native American person under their guardianship was not fair and square law. From the Slate article:
"...what we were able to see is really that this family was able to amass so much wealth relatively quickly, in a place that had all been entirely owned by the Osage Nation just a decade or two earlier.
It’s important to go back to their original business in Osage County, when the three brothers’ father, Frederick Drummond, first came to Oklahoma. This was before statehood, and he got into the trading business. He would sell goods to Osages. When their oil wealth took off, these trading posts run by white settlers were able to take advantage of that. They started charging more and more, and Osage families started shopping more and more, just like you’d expect any wealthy person to do. But these places weren’t really like a store, like we think of today. They sold farming supplies and food and clothes and even caskets. In fact, the undertaking business was probably one of the most lucrative parts.
So you just had a tremendous amount of money coming through the door. Because there were all these restrictions by the U.S. government on how Osages could spend their own money, a lot of them wound up in debt, because they would have to buy things on credit at the store. What we can see from congressional testimony is that some families would be thousands of dollars in debt, which at the time was a tremendous amount of money, to the Drummonds’ store in Hominy. In some cases, we saw while a family was in $2,000 to $3,000 of debt, their land would be deeded over to a member of the Drummond family for what we can tell was a very low price. But again, it’s impossible to know for sure whether that land was used to settle that debt."
posted by Don Pepino at 3:37 PM on October 9, 2023 [14 favorites]
One of the weirdest-to-unpack, hardest-to-unwind parts of resolving land claims is the fact that the current US government is a *revolutionary* government that forcibly overthrew British rule. (yep, yep, I get it, the US of A did plenty of horrible things to Indigenous people and stole land *after* 1776, but it's still an interesting legal question - is the current US government liable for claims prior to 1776? Anyone know?) A goodly number of unanswered land claims in New England stem from events 150-200 years prior to the Revolutionary War... I'd love any links or insights if there are any experienced constitutional/real estate folks on here...
posted by metametamind at 6:58 PM on October 9, 2023
posted by metametamind at 6:58 PM on October 9, 2023
I suspect that “legally liable” differs from “morally/ethically liable” in this case. Especially given that many of the same people who held political and economic power and were actually living in the American colonies pre-independence were also in charge post-independence.
posted by eviemath at 7:15 PM on October 9, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by eviemath at 7:15 PM on October 9, 2023 [1 favorite]
Which is, of course, entirely an artifact of the legal systems created by those selfsame people.
posted by eviemath at 7:16 PM on October 9, 2023
posted by eviemath at 7:16 PM on October 9, 2023
"I suspect that “legally liable” differs from “morally/ethically liable” in this case. "
Well yeah, that's the whole point. Why aren't we asking Britain, France, Spain, and the Dutch to chip in for reparations?
posted by metametamind at 7:37 PM on October 9, 2023 [1 favorite]
Well yeah, that's the whole point. Why aren't we asking Britain, France, Spain, and the Dutch to chip in for reparations?
posted by metametamind at 7:37 PM on October 9, 2023 [1 favorite]
I'd propose that native American tribes take over ownership of football stadiums at land grant institutions.
I don't know why they would even want the damn things, but hey, it's a start.
posted by BlueHorse at 8:12 AM on October 10, 2023
I don't know why they would even want the damn things, but hey, it's a start.
posted by BlueHorse at 8:12 AM on October 10, 2023
California is so striking switching from the 1840s to the 1850s.
posted by Captaintripps at 10:50 AM on October 10, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by Captaintripps at 10:50 AM on October 10, 2023 [1 favorite]
« Older The 2023 Nobel Science Prizes | Airlines Are Just Banks Now Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 12:40 PM on October 9, 2023 [24 favorites]